Fancy some behind the scenes shenanigans? Join this channel to get access to perks: ua-cam.com/channels/JV1EC8Mf87PpQYo9eUfd3Q.htmljoin OR Patreon: www.patreon.com/PaulandRebeccaWhitewick
Paul "the invisible man" Whitewick. How did you turn invisible in that video about the round baseball size stones, Paul? I still can't figure out what kind of camera or editing glitch could cause that. You know, the part at 3: 15 where you walked behind a tree and turned invisible. Did you purposely fake that, and if so how and why? Seems an odd thing to put in the middle of an otherwise ordinary video, you walking along a path in a forest and becoming invisible.
@@OttoNomicus well.... one doesn't just give away trade secrets... 😉. To be honest... I just felt like learning a new trick. It took longer than I care to admit
It would be wild if someone found a Neolithic era shipwreck off the East Coast of Scotland/England with stones like the altar stone inside. I can imagine that they might have chosen more than one of these, just to ensure that at least one made it all the way to what is now known as Stonehenge.
Thank you Paul for another interesting article. As a professional seaman and boatbuilder I hear the usual 'landlubber' attitudes from your quoted experts. There were certainly sea going craft at that period with highly skill crews who had generations of experience in navigation and, almost certainly, carrying heavy and valuable cargoes. Remember, this is considerably later than the people who arrived by sea in Kilmartin Glen as the last of the ice melted in the West Highlands, since there is no evidence of any post glaciation human habitation to the south or any other direction at the time of their arrival. Also, I have read Brian John's books and met him personally. As with many scientists who have espoused a particular theory to the exclusion of others (the Preseli Bluestones were moved to Stonehenge by glaciation) he is adamant that any opposing theories are false. Again, as a seaman and boatbuilder, I have no hesitation in my conviction that that competent seafaring race would see no value in the gruelling overland route from the Bluestone 'quarry' in Pembrokeshire to the Plains of Wiltshire. However, it is only a few short miles from that quarry to the Nevern estuary, and, allowing that our current patterns of land drainage were centuries ahead of them, waterborne cargo access either up the now drained wetlands of the Avon from Christchurch or the Test from Southampton water would leave only 1.5 miles or 15 miles, respectively, for the challenge of hauling the blocks overland. Broad and sea-minded thinkers such as Tim Severin have shown conclusively that known ancient craft types are capable of outstanding ocean voyages. Compared with these, coast hopping when the tides are fair would be a quite reasonable achievable project for the culture at the period of Stonehenge's construction. Note that the earliest explorers of Australia somehow crossed 90 km of open ocean 60,000 years ago with the hundreds or thousands of settlers needed to provide a viable colony. Similarly, the first firm evidence of population on Crete is 7th millennium BCE and, geologically, they can only have arrived there by sea.
@@simoncolverson9469 The evidence is in the logic as stated in the cases of the migrations to Crete (from whichever mainland you consider most likely) and again with the example of Australasian colonisation, as in my comment. No one is going to swim 90 of open sea with their supplies, wives, children and livestock. They must have used some seaworthy transport. Any vessel constructed at that time would be distinctly biodegradable, so who would sensibly expect any archaeological evidence of such craft? To even attempt such a crossing would need well developed construction techniques and well honed sea skills. Would you tackle it in a modern sailing yacht?
I’m not a professional seaman only an amateur sailor but I have long felt that the literature is dominated by landlubbers. They show routes that religiously trek round the inside of bays instead from point to point, and the constant refrain that early sailors couldn’t travel out of sjght of land. How do they think the Mediterranean islands were populated? I’m sure the Phoenicians went straight across from Brittany to Cornwall. And there’s the case of Australia as you point out. I often wish someone who knows about navigation would do some research into plausible techniques of wayfinding that could have been used at an early period.
@@rocktapperrobin9372 Thank you, a man after my own heart! As you say, it frustrating to hear learned professors so confidently displaying their ignorance of seamanship. boatbuilding and the drive to travel, explore and simple be on the sea. I recall hearing that there were Polynesian shell traders who sailed between islands every year but the 'profit' they made was only ever enough for food and the upkeep and maintenance of their craft. That's a motivation I can relate to!
@@surfskiwales so no evidence just a personal hypothesis, thing is it ain't true if we can't prove it, and there have been canoes found 6 to 7 thousand years old and that is all anyone needed in the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods, lots of land bridges and islands that have since gone, a sail ship is depicted on a Egyptian cup around 3500BCE but the atlantic wasn’t conquered until about the 9th or 10th century.
I'm just picturing some Neolithic tribe somewhere in the middle of Britain, and some people arrive on the northern edge of their territory with a 6 tonne rock. "Hey, would you help us take this on south?" "It's a rock." "Yeah but a very special one, see?" "Are you mad?" This would make a good Monty Python script I think.
Exactly. The economics and logistics of transport over land just doesn't work out. Who's going to sustain the haulers over the decades? They got to eat too over those tens of thousands of days. The stone(s) had to be near Stonehenge within a couple of months, I'd guess. The operation wouldn't be sustainable otherwise.
I read or heard somewhere that Stonehenge is lined up on celestial alignments which only form a circle at that latitude. As you head north they turn into an ellipse which becomes and EW line at the latitude of Orkney where we find such a line of stones, and southwards the ellipse elongates the other way until it becomes a line at the latitude of Carnac in France, where we also find lines of stones. This seems to point to a unified culture which stretched from at least Orkney to Carnac who were pretty handy at moving big stones, and worked out where to put Stonehenge so that it was circular. It doesn't surprise me that they used some stones from other sites, to increase the magic of Stonehenge, or the holiness or however you'd like to describe it, and all I'm waiting for is for them to find Carnac stones at Stonehenge too, or maybe Stonehenge stones at Carnac. Of course my original sources may be nonsense, and the evidence that the stones aren't from Orkney also speaks against this theory. But very interesting stuff Paul, I really enjoyed the video. Keep up the good work.
Your thoughts reek of men carrying a staff - which reacted to supposed ley lines, which were followed by those who had an affinity with the microVolts emitted from said lines of electrostatic? Force to guide them (almost , maybe) unerringly to the next important site of {worship}? Thankyou for your own thoughts, they are well reasoned.
I dont think that the "fragments cannot be proven to be from the atler" is very compelling. The fragments look the same and are way out of place geologically. Opponents should propose a better theory rather than rail against something that cannot be proven with a 100% degree of certainty.
I don't understand why it can't be a glacial erratic. Case in point, the 'Baggy Point Erratic' near Woolacombe in north Devon is from Scotland. However I'm not an expert on such things and I guess experts have decided it's impossible. I'm not suggesting a glacial ice sheet brought it all the way to Wiltshire - but could have brought it some of the way. Modern humans love erratics, seeing them as anomalies in the landscape, sometimes perched precariously on other stones or on a narrow edge, balanced (such as the Bowder Stone in Borrowdale) so I think that early humans could have found a venerated balanced stone and brought it a shorter distance to Stonehenge. Just a theory.
makes more sense, i am sure the builders would have had better things to do than drag the thing across the country . also across multiple tribal lands .
@rosifervincent9481 Because it is a possibility that can't be ruled out, so dismissing it in favor of the idea that someone dragged it there from Scotland means they did not consider it. Not objectively anyway.
The information that geologists can glean from a stone sample is mind boggling. I think some people dismiss geology as boring or not innovative, as if we've learned everything there is to know about it. Granted, much of this research was probably funded by the fossil fuel industry, and that has its own problems, but the science is solid. We can learn so much by just accepting that we do _not_ know everything, and being open to new understanding and information. 💙
I wouldn’t say Stonehenge is “the only place that gets researched”. It may be fair to say that it’s the most famous place, or that Stonehenge gets more research resources than many other similar locations …. But it’s not “the only place” surely? And clearly many ancient sites would have been very impressive but very few, if any, have been so fully protected in such an impressive and accessible vista.
😊 Your unsolicited advice,absolutely made me chuckle. As a Canadian, that is one of the first things that you learn when playing or hiking in the woods in autumn and winter. You squat, or fold your scarf as a seat, or….. find a log to rest on. 😅 I thoroughly enjoy your videos, and the way you present them. You may only consider yourself a storyteller, but (speaking from Celtic heritage), the storytellers and singers, are the most revered and appreciated. Keep it the good work, and videos. Cheers!😊
I come from a slightly different field and it's soil science but what I can tell you is the XRF is more than adequate to find out about the origin of something what it will determine is the mineralogy in precise quantities so long as the device's calibrated well you should be able to find a location in which those materials appear in the same quantities
I agree totally with the idea of the stone taking generations to get to Stonehenge. Our modern outlook is to do everything as quickly as possible. We live by the clock, the Henge people lived by the changing seasons. It was the journey that was important on how quickly it was done. The altar stone may have been a special monument to more than one tribe for centuries before reaching Stonehenge.
Hi Paul, thanks for braving the cold!! Here's a thought, could it have been moved over ice if not by ice i.e. they made ice tracks in the winter? Its a fascinating subject that will keep running for a very long time. Thanks for bringing all these reports together. All the best!!
@@Tugela60 They had winters, tho. And they were colder and longer back then. Here in norway moving heavy stuff in the winter time, aka on snow/ice, was the only practical/easiest method for thousands of years.
And as thousands of animals were killed at stonehenge in winter they could have dragged it over the ice / snow or even wet ground, and they would have been too busy farming through spring and summer so winter was the only time when they would have had the free time to do this.
I agree with many comments here, much of Britain was under glaciers 27,000 years ago. Glaciers move huge stone often, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
What a video! You’ve done an amazing job balancing out both sides of the aisle. One thing that’s rarely mentioned about that study, is the rock samples they used against the Altar Stone sample, came from a rock shop in Whitby (I believe they have scientific samples). It’d be good to see them do some more fieldwork to grab primary samples from the areas the stone is supposedly from. Also, like you mention, why did this not influence the construction of the hundreds of megalithic sites in between? Weird! Add it to the pile of mysteries Stonehenge throws up, but rarely resolves…
Thanks Adam, appreciated. I do feel that qualifying certain aspects of Stonehenge would be in English heritages best interest. We only know the true location of the megaliths source because the American dude that took a core was having a clear out. Instead we are reliant on Rock Shops in Whitby! (nice though they are i am sure).
Thank you Paul ( yet again 😁 ), for another great video, I think the main thing we tend to forget about our ancient forbears is that they lived and worked within their limits so moving any large item was a practical exercise not a technological one. Therefor we are most likely "overthinking" their methodology.... ( keep it simple guys 😛 )
Indeed , this is the explanation for much staged MAGIC. And likely how much of the mystery of Stonehenge was created and then venerated of thousands of years. After all they had a product to sell, this was the ritual driven religion, a centre of power controlled by the chosen few. Even in our modern times we recognise the attraction of theatrical spectacular sites and events. There fore shroud the easy explanation in stories and enhance the reputation of the place.
@@gwyn2 a worship raft sounds rad too XD though its only one mistake from having to get it back out of at best shallow water and possibly quite soft underground while having it being rolled over a couple hundred meters one can prepare ahead of time sounds like a ton of work, but scalable and less likely to just go awry vOv how much force is needed to flick it over the water?
Not mentionned in the vid, but there were Preselli Blue Stones and barges found on the seabed between Wales and the South West of England.. Transport by Sea would certainly be far easiest than overland, while Rivers could also have easily enough been altered / dammed, etc; in places where distance enough of the stone barges would make the water option workable. The same surely would have been applicable to the Stonehenge 'Altar Stone' and having been identified as sourced from the North East area of Scotland and around.. The much easier water transport where water was available, makes uncertain overland routes more likely where they link up with sea and coastal routes..
I've seen several television documentaries from the 2010s puzzling over the impossibilities of the bluestones and the terrain between their source and their location. The maps on the screen showed obvious sea routes and rivers to get them most of the way, but werent mentioned beyond possible transport across the bay. I thought that a silly oversight, if I'm moving something that large without modern equipment, Im going to float it as far as I can first. This is the first Ive heard of actual barge finds. I'm excited to find out more on that!
I really like the idea that travelling through the different lands for people to see end engage with was more important to them than speed and efficiency!
There is a hypothesis (not sure if it's backed up by evidence) that building stone circles began in the north and migrated southwards. If that's the case then it's plausible that the altar stone was used several times as the practice advanced. Another comment noted that the Maui of Easter Island "walked" - those that are in their final location have flat bases whereas those found "in transit" have bevelled bases. This allows the Maui to "walk" as rocking from side to side makes them move towards the upper part of the bevel. I've seen videos where a few dozen individuals using ropes to either side are able to move a full sized Maui. I've been installing concrete gate posts weighing about 300kg and these also have a bevel on their base, once upright (a bit of a feat!) they are quite easy to walk/waddle along, you just have to keep them balanced. As a society we also tend to think in projects that last a few years at most - there's no evidence either way that this was true in the distant past. Just 50m per day equates to a total transit time of 14000 days or 38 years. That's plenty of time to get proficient at it! We also look back at the finished product, horse saddles as an example, without seeing any of the evolutionary steps that led to that.
Why. Why why why would they move such stones any distance at all? What the heck were they thinking? What motivated them to do such a thing? Weren't they busy just surviving back then?
In Cornwall there are a number of legends of saints arriving here from Ireland having floated over the sea on a millstone. This makes sense when you remember that millstones were used as ballast in coracles, the main form of water transport back then. So I can well believe that the alter stone was used as ballast on a vessel. Maybe one bringing things from Orkney to Durrington for one of the feasts. If it's then not needed for a return journey (we've eaten all the cargo) then why not leave it behind? I can also believe there was some sort of pilgrimage with the stone staying in places en route. We have that analog with things like Charing Cross. But, to me, all the evidence suggests Stonehenge (in it's sarsen phase) was a bit of a rush job. So it seems inconsistent with that level of planning and foresight. It would be interesting to know exactly when the alter stone arrived on site compared to the other stones.
That is a fascinating idea, that it may have been just ballast. But perhaps the ballast stone wasn't 'just' ballast to those people. By keeping the boat upright, perhaps they may have come to feel they owed their lives to it. This would be in keeping with people who worshipped stone as I've heard megalithic people did. There's also the matter of drogue stones. These were stones which weren't just ballast. In a storm, they'd be put over the sides of the boat, held by ropes so they dragged in the water. They were inscribed with symbols of protection.
I did wonder if you would cover this when the story was first reported. Mind blowing to consider this as a concept. Huge distance to move such a big rock.
Nice video with a good explanation. Thank you. Transporting a 6-tonne stone by sea would be faster and generally easier than a land route, but as far as we know, the sail was not present in Northern Europe in the Neolithic. Such a boat would have been likely paddled, and it would have to have been rather large and highly stable. There are some watercraft from that period, namely the Brigg Raft and the Ferriby boats that you may want to look at for this.
You don't use _a_ boat. You use _two_ boats, and sling the stone on ropes between them. Being submerged, its weight is lessened, it's much easier than loading it _on_ to a boat, and it doubles as an anchor in shallow water. If a storm threatens (Neolithic sailors were doubtless good weather watchers) you just run it up a beach at high tide and wait for better weather - a six-ton block isn't going to be washed away!
"the sail was not present in Northern Europe in the Neolithic" How do you KNOW that? We don't even have solid evidence what ships there(in general) looked like halfway from the viking age to neolithic looked like. "Such a boat would have been likely paddled" Oars or paddles, not a problem. "and it would have to have been rather large and highly stable" I think you overestimate just how LITTLE 6 tons actually is when it comes to moving something by ship. Especially if you do it suspended between 2 boats rigged together, same or similar how the Egyptians did it when shipping stones for their big building projects, like pyramids. I don't know the density of the stone in question, but suspended into the water, instead of 6 ton, it will weigh somewhere between 2 and 4 tons instead. Compared to the Egyptian's 50+ ton blocks, that's nothing.
Excuse the armchair observation/guess and feel free to pick holes in it. But if stone henge is built around the winter solstice, and winters were colder for longer back around the time of construction, is it too much of a leap to assume that activity and building of the henge were done during the winter. Could it have been cold enough to use sledges over ice to transport heavy stones?
Slide it through your territory and hand over to the next. Perfect for binding people together over distance. After all, who would be prepared to say no halfway down the line lol😅
Or how about those stones were already there. Deposited by glacial action thousand of years earlier? The UK is littered with such boulders, called erratics.
A stoney problem - or set of problems! As your fascinating video indicates, there seem to be many loose ends, not least in the scientific methodology used and the constraints imposed by English Heritage in taking samples for rigorous testing and analysis. I think your video highlights some of the problems to be addressed in reaching a definitive answer as to the origins of the Altar Stone. Perhaps it's wise to remember, that in archaeology, as in most other disciplines, results are almost always, provisional and subject to the weight of further evidence and investigation. Great stuff. Thank you.
@GordonDonaldson-v1c Re: a plastic carrier bag would do. A thin plastic carrier bag won't act as much of a thermal barrier, the problem was heat being conducted-away by the cold Sarsen. A closed-cell polymer foam cushion would be ideal. Any other thermally insulating barrier would work. A thin plastic carrier bag would be fine to protect from a wet surface.
years ago i was sitting on cold concrete, for only about 20 minutes, i might add, and was warned that it would give me piles. oh boy, didnt it! i'd never had them before. more than 30 years later i still fear sitting on a warm brick fence.
Ice age glaciers could also carry boulders for many kilometers. Thus, for example, stones that came from Finland have been found in Germany and Poland.
You mean large ice sheets? I think the ones that would have picked up and moved large boulders great distances date significantly earlier, perhaps 12-18k years ago.
@tripledprojects During the several Ice Ages, there was repeatedly many kilometers thick layer of ice that covered Northern Europe and the British Isles.
The Scottish Highlands were part of the Central Pangean Mountains formed around 340 million years ago. When Pangea separated, some of these mountains went to the Appalachians in America. Thus, you could probably find a match in Tennessee. Now, explain THAT journey!
It's very annoying when modern day Appalachians (the name is a Native tribe called the Appalachicola) claim that because their ancestors emigrated from overseas 200 years ago, that "supercontinent" which happened 340 years ago essentially makes them somehow "indigenous" to what is now the North American continent where Native tribes had been living for over 15,000 years and that these immigrant people living around the Appalachian mountains are somehow the only "true" Americans.
I'm confused why people have such a hard time believing they could move a stone 700 km. but they have no problem believing that the stones where placed there. If you can move an object 1 meter, you can also move it 700.000 meters, just repeat your action enough times.
@@pwhitewick I alone could raise a stone like that to ten feet height in week or so just for the fun of it, but it would take so many people so many years to move it 700 km. Possilbe? Yes. Likely? No, Glaciers did it and the it was used because it was there and more likely than not the stones resting place decided where this 'temple' was built.
@@pwhitewickOr the rock was dropped there by a glacier a hundred thousand years ago, and then it was used by the builders as a special stone because it was different from the local rock. That seems to be a more likely explanation to me. They may not have moved it far at all.
moving 25km throw wilts seems relatively easy comparted to moving a stone from NE Scotland overland to the modern border, there's a lot less geography in Wiltshire than Scotland.
Great video Paul, I love the idea of the stone gradually making its way south over generations, accruing significance and sacredness along the way. Wouldn’t it be amazing if more accurate tests could show it was originally part of the rings at Brodgar or Stenness.
I remember reading about the altar stone being possibly one of a pair. The other one was taken to Berwick St James village, where it was broken into two, and is now beside the road.
A very interesting account. Speaking with no knowledge at all, I seem to recall that pit have been unearthed around Stonehenge containing the bones of cattle from the Orkneys. Now someone with a better knowledge than I (a low bench mark to be sure) will tell me that the pits are much later etc. However, my point is that they were moved an enormous distance. No mean task, they had to be fed , watered , rested and follow established routes through forested land. Presumably, there weren’t dropped at Stonehenge by glacier. Given that the journey also involved a sea crossing, I struggle to see the problem in a sea bourne route. In the comments above someone has written a very persuasive note concerning marine possibilities. It , seems to be the clear answer.
I still think the altar stone and the bluestones are all glacial erratics. View the sources used by the paper that discount the glacial origin hypothesis. To cut a long story short, they can’t model ice movement direction for older glaciations because the most recent glaciation churned up the sediment. They also fail to mention a study from a few years ago that shows ice movement from the Orcadian basin southward into England during the last glaciation, and this is based on a study of erratics in England. The whole thing is a bit of a joke. They can’t discount a glacial origin and because that seems like the most likely origin, the whole subject of how it got to Stonehenge becomes a little pointless in my opinion, because we can’t model ice movement in older glaciations, such as the Anglian.
Thx for the update on this mystery ! I wonder why the builders would want to use the different stones anyway ? I guess the priests who know when to start planting would also be believed when selecting the materials and source locations. Obviously a big commitment of time, resources and manpower. Shame we dont know that story !
One of the quotes you mentioned regarding glaciation: I have read other papers that indicated glacial movement from northeast Scotland towards the Midlands; I still think it could have been a glacial erratic: such would have stood out as being different from the surrounding bedrock. It would still have required people to choose it then transport it from the east coast towards Salisbury, but wouldn’t have been as daunting of a task. (It’s also possible it’s twice an erratic: maybe one episode of glaciation movement took it from one place to another, then a second phase took it from there to a hypothetical end point in the Midlands. )
Good job. That stone has been everywhere, the Senni beds off Milford Haven, the Cosheston Beds also in South Wales, somewhere near Abergavenny and now the Orcadian basin. The monoliths in 2001 A Space Odyssey could not attract more speculation if they were found to be real. I would bet the truth is that stone 80 was the one and only stone to exist precisely at the spot in which it resides and everything else was built around it
@@mavisemberson8737 I would like to see all the fallen stones raised and the broken ones reassembled. It's a fantasy, not based in reality but the place would look spectacular
Applying Ockham's Razor, and being from Denmark, where we have lots of very big stones moved by the Ice from Norway, it might be worth mapping the distributions of rocks with similar origins in the British landscape to see if it is really a uniquely transported stone.
My family is from Caithness and Orkney and so I was brought up visiting Skara Brae, Tomb of the Eagles, Ring of Brodgar and The Grey Cairns at Camster. I distinctly remember (in fact I believe I have a kids history book about the neolithic people of the area saying so -probably in my mother’s house somewhere) being told that there was evidence that the people of the Far North and people from the South were mixing, perhaps for religious reasons, perhaps for trade. I don’t personally think the sea transport theory is too out there. Sea travel around the British Isles was the norm of the time. It would have been the safest and easiest method of travel. I was actually a professional seafarer and I don’t think 6t would be a particularly hard cargo to move safely in open boats or barges that we know were used. In deed, the short crossing from Caithness to Orkney (that the people in question would make regularly)was, and still is, far more treacherous than a summertime voyage down the East Coast to the Thames or Solent.
It is interesting and a good video. I want the stones to have been moved on early bronze age sledges, like the first ice road truckers, so have looked up how possible that might have been. Not impossible for them over a few winters, is where I left it.
Great summary of all the latest on this, Paul. Do we know if Parker Pearson has finally given up on his idea that the stone circle was moved from Wales?!
This throws so many unanswerable questions in the air. Why this rock? How did the southern tribes know to go north to get the rock or why did the northern tribes go south with the rock? Where the whole of mainland Britain (at that time) in full communication with each another and not trying to kill each another? Who's idea was it to dedicate the time to do this instead of hunting and gathering? etc. I just keep coming back to why?
I see a few comments along this line, but the glacial erratic explanation is the most sound. I certainly would not rule out a fantastic origin of the stone per se, but it seems like it would be on the larger side of known erratics and would have stood out in a landscape where it had been deposited only a few thousand years before (as opposed to today, where many erratics are buried under 10,000 years of soil).
The idea of it taking decades, generations even, to move those stones is a very interesting idea! Quite alien to the modern mind with out timetables, schedules and JIT delivery of goods. Modernity has created in us a sense of instant gratification that would have been alien to folks thousands of years ago.
Always interesting, thank you. FWVLIW: If an object can be moved at all the distance is immaterial as long as the will exists to move it... So what was the will..? What was the significance of the start and finish locations to make the journey? What was the connection? Was the 'alter stone' significant for the place it came from, or in it's own right? If the former then transport by sea makes most sense, being by far the easiest method. If the latter then over land might make more sense for people to see it and maybe to avoid possible loss at sea. PS: On the subject of moving the Sarsens, who knows? But I suspect they were moved on the Avon as again that would have been by far the easiest option, and there is a little-known 'henge' / landing site on the Avon at the spot it comes closest to Stone Henge, which if I remember correctly lines up with the avenue kink and all. Again, suspicion without proof: But if the Egyptians could move truly enormous stones along the Nile in vast numbers I see no reason why neolithic Britons couldn't do the very same thing at the same time with far fewer and smaller stones - never underestimate human ingenuity, especially where the desire to avoid hard work is concerned.
It's nice that Stonehenge has components from Wales, England and Scotland. It must have been a hugely important centre for the people of the Neolithic living in the British Isles.
I just watched a UA-cam channel called Mystery History. There's an American guy who thinks how he worked out how the upright stones at Stonghenge were lifted in. It's amazing how one guy did it all by himself by inserting a 20 ton stone into a hole.
Another great video, Paul! Thank you for your passion! My 2 cents: I am skeptical of this theory that the stone was specifically brought from Scotland for use in Stonehenge. I am skeptical more in a “I can’t wrap my head around it!” since that “I don’t believe it’s conceivable!” since. I DO believe that ancient people could move large stones over a distance without assistance from the aliens! The stone may very well be from Scotland, but did a team from Salisbury travel there to bring it back or a team from Scotland purposely quarry it and carry it to Salisbury? Today, many of use are familiar geologically, biologically, botanically, culturally, historically, etc. with areas 700km away from where we currently live. Even if we are not familiar with the area, we have maps, atlases and navigation apps to help us find these places. What I have a hard time wrapping my head around is 5000+ years ago how did they know to go 100km to Wales for those stones, let alone 700km to Scotland? I really am posting this as a question because I have never studied anything about it so I would love to learn if I am missing something from those that have studied it.
@@pwhitewick👍 Like I said, it’s so hard wrapping my head around it. It’s almost like we are talking about an alien civilization because of how long ago it was compared to what we think of as “a long time”. For what it’s worth, I’m American so 300 years is a REALLY long time ago!🤣
Probably took the altar stone down the A9/A90 then onto the A1 stopping off at the Devils Arrow's at Boroughbridge? Great presentation thanks for sharing.
Glaciers. My own small lot,1/4 hectare, when the house was built, excavations, gradings,, and many stones were turned. I travel a great deal and have an interest in geology. Just and only in my yard I turned up stones from 1,000 kilometers away, and as large as a meter plus and 800 kilograms. Britain has been covered in ice many times,, even the last reached as far south as the Midlands. ANY single stone could, and likely is, an erratic.
@@pwhitewick There may be many,, but dispersed and underground. The fact it is a single, and from far away, and not terribly large,, In my small bit of heaven, there was a single rock 700 or 800 kilos, a bit flat,1.5 meters across, and I know where it came from. It is a rock unique to an area about 700 kilometers north. It came from there. Interestingly, the final glaciation in my area came from the SE. So that one stone traveled in different glacial epochs. I believe the paper, as to where the stone came from. If there were two stones,, or certainly if there were three stones I would tend toward the human agency moving them. But a single? Occam's Razor. My first guess would be humourous, that stone was found right there. It is the original stone that located Stonehenge.
. During the Last Glacial Maximum, the flow from the center of the ice sheet over northeastern Scotland would have carried erratics into the North Sea, not to southwest England.
@@patricknorton5788 There have been at least three ice advances in the past 500,000 years, and several lesser. In Michigan, very similar. Multiple advances, The Sudbury stone in my driveway was delivered by the last advance that came from the SE,, but Sudbury is nearly due north. The likely mechanism is one or more advances delivered that stone to some location SE of me, and only the final advance ferried it to the north and west to arrive here. I certainly did not pick it up and transport it neither do I believe that the native Americans brought the stone to my yard, but here it is. I would guess one of two possibles,, thinking aloud, first is that the stone looked different, unique in a culture 5 thousand years ago, that recognized the differences in stone much more than we might today. It was note worthy. So the stone was found locally and brought to the site,, or perhaps where it is today is where it was 6,000 years ago. Of all the stones, the altar stone has been in place since before Stonehenge. The Henge was built around it. Oooorrr someone went on an ocean voyage , found one cool stone and brought it home.
XRF Stands for x-ray fluorescence. Firing röntgen beam at a sample to ‘light it up’. The reflected / absorbed wavelengths are measured and are indicative of the type of elements and their quantities. It is a somewhat unique ‘fingerprint’ of the material being analyzed. (worked a few years as an engineer that develops and produces that kind of equipment)
It's easier for me to imagine that the stone was significant to a smaller group of people, who in the course of magration brought the stone along with them over many years, than to suppose that there was a plan supported by people all along the route to bring it to one specific location.
This is science at its' finest. Paper is published, people in the field attempt to poke holes in it and come up with their own ideas. Rinse & repeat. Eventually either the truth comes out or we're left with the best guesses given what we really know. There is a risk in making assumptions about what the Neolithic people felt was time pressure or transportation risks. After all we don't know what the land looked like, exactly, back then. What the sea and sea shores were then. Or even conflict or cooperation with people between Stonehenge and the quarry that could color opinions on where or how to move that rock. In the end. Too many variables, too many questions- fun stuff!
It's rather frustrating that the British heritage authorities will not allow taking of a core sample. Preservation of the structure is obviously of paramount importance but in the absence of that key data, it feels like they are requiring the field's researchers to operate in something of an input vacuum? Doesn't preclude sheer speculation, but given how much time & money goes into getting this academic work correct, it must be frustrating for the researchers as well I imagine? Destructive mini-sampling for date confirmation is standard in archeology, with the acceptance that sacrificing a very small piece of an artifact is a fair trade to acquire essential data, so disallowing this in a 6-ton object seems rather weird?
@@pwhitewick IKR! btw - loving your channel and adventures! I grew up on the slopes of an iron age hill fort in Kent and LOVE all this archaeology malarkey!
Taking a very long time to make the journey is a good theory. I think it was by sea personally just because to me, it sounds like the most comfortable explanation. No other reason. I’m not an archaeologist. 😊
Many hands make light work. The Shirehorse has an enormous capacity for pulling weight. In 1924 at a British exhibition, a pair of horses was estimated to have pulled a starting load equal to 50 tonnes.
As an American, this land vs sea debate gives me an image of a neolithic stonemason telling the other craftsmen that he'll put up one torch if the stones come by land and two torches if they come by sea. That night, he ran through the village shouting "the stones are coming, the stones are coming!"
I understood that some feasting bones in the area were found to have been from Scotland,so they would have been brought to specific feasting events . If you consider the settlement of Shetland and the tidal waters around Orkney are some of the strongest in the world then clearly they must have been extremely competent mariners. Stonehenge appears to be a project to bring groups together and if so then there must have been persons who could instruct and order across tribal groups ensuring co operation and completion of projects.
That was fascinating, thank you. Triggered some thoughts as well. When we have the Olympics the torch travels through the various countries and is celebrated enroute! Maybe the stones for these monoliths were used in the same way a celebration and a testing place for the stone masons. Then my thoughts went to the people who use Stonehenge today, the druids! Were/ are they the descendents of the original culture who turned practicality into a religion over time. Then my thoughts went to the Welsh eisteddfods and that wherever an diversified is held they have the crowning of the bard and a small stone circle is set up. I wonder if there is an older link between these things than we understand today.
Great video as always. I'm intrigued as to why they chose to use a stone from so far away, when there appeared to be a ready souce of serviceable stone only 25 miles away. It seems an awful lot of extra effort. It must be a very special stone for some reason.
It's possibly a way of taking a bit of land from one place to another as a declaration of ownership. Like placing a flag on the moon. Granted the flag was a bit lighter but they did go to an incredible amount of trouble to place it there.
Sounds like they're pretty sure it came from Scotland, but just not sure exactly how it got there. Every answer raises a new question! Great fun! Thanks for your research, sharing your passion for the history of Britain, and your engaging presentations.
That would imply not only a trading system but also a common communication language amongst people from different tribes. The distance involved would take months for someone from e.g. Wiltshire (who has an idea) to for no obvious reason head north to find some stones that differ from what is locally available and then agree for the extraction and transportation. Not impossible but also not likely. Or for the northern tribe to decide to bring something something in their own accord
@@apb3251Communication and trade yes, and not unlikely, but the rest of your comment is not necessarily true. Language need not be a barrier, people can learn other languages, and would have then. Neighbouring groups would communicate too and either have mutual intelligibility or bilingual members. There's also many reasons that it could have moved which don't fit your comment. Off the top of my head it could have originated as spoils of war (like kidnapping your enemy's god). Or maybe there was a tradition of moving around with sacred stones to different communities. We'll likely never know, but more research into other monuments across the country might give some insight. Or maybe it was a neolithic Stone of Scone at some point in its journey (all three could be true at different times). The timeframe of Stonehenge is so long that there are many options and timeframes for this to happen, there's nothing saying the altar stone was intended for there when it was quarried. Ultimately English Heritage need to allow more research, but the current treatment is one exclusively of preservation.
@@tristanmills4948 but you now suggest tribal wars in an empire stretching nearly the length of the island. With such sparse and small population it’s difficult to see how that would work.
Could the Romans have been involved moving the Scottish stone. Is there proof that all the stones were all laid out in same time period. Were some stones added much later than the first ones. Decades later or even centuries? Who knows !
It wasn't so long ago that stonehenge was though to be so huge that only giants could build it, then that only galciers could move the stones, now that sea transport would have been 'impossible'. we consistently underestimate several things about 'stone age people': 1) their skills and intelligence 2) the importance of these projects to them in terms of meaning and purpose (and therefore the costs and risks they were prepared to bear) and 3) the extent of their travels and perhaps most importantly 4) the TIME they had available to complete them. Several of your other comments point out that people who have no practical experience of boating have ... no practical experience of boats. They 'voyage' could have been done very slowly and carefully in stages over a number of years.
It's possible, I would imagine building a giant raft of 20+ large tree logs... using all kinds of animal leather straps, tree bast fibres and other stabilisers and use a large crew of people, both on raft/ canoe and even beach guides to slowly - agonisingly slowly - pull the raft gently in shallow water as close to the beaches as possible... completely parking and resting the raft at wild water days on a beach break... and just carefully take it yard by yard... day by day... for months, perhaps an entire year...
@@GordonDonaldson-v1c Almost all cliffs on the English Eastern Coast have a little strip of rubble/ pebble beach at their base... especially when the tide is low. Steep vertical cliffs directly into the deep are more common on the Atlantic Ocean facing coasts of Scotland and Ireland.. Although there will be at least a couple steep cliffs between Scotland and South England.. it's never easy
Alterative theory: The was a large trading network all along the sea coasts of western Europe at that time, including around Scotland and Orkney. The stone was ship ballast, and the builders of Stonehenge, needing a fancy piece of rock for the altar, visited a trading post on the River Avon and bought it off a ship captain. He could easily replace the ballast with other rocks. This explains otherwise unlikely events - firstly knowing enough about the geology of Britain to identify a specific type of rock to use and secondly, deliberately transporting a 6 tonne chunk of rock that distance.
It's possible, but a single 6 tonne chunk seems over large for a ballast stone. I'd expect ballast to consist of multiple pieces in the 10-20kg range (convenient one man lift) so it could be easily removed and adjusted depending what cargo was carried. I do think that if they had to move a single 6 tonne object a boat would be the way they would do it, but I don't think they'd routinely use stones that big as ballast.
All we know for sure from that time period, is that roads did not exist, and they had footpaths at best. Water ways were the dominant form of transport until the steam engine took over from canals in the 19th century. So given that Avon-mouth is a natural harbour, it seems likely the stone was taken around the coast by sea, and brought up the Avon to Amesbury. The weight of an item on water is not important, it is the displacement. They used to make canal barges from solid concrete.
Paul, if you haven't already have a read of "Scenes from Prehistoric life" by Francis Pryor. There is a chapter on Stonehenge and others on transport, farming etc in Bronze age. 100% recommend.
One of the most puzzling questions, for me anyways, is why? Why that particular stone? Did they perceive it to have special properties? Was it maybe a gift from some tribe? Seems a hell of a lot of hardship for a particular type of stone.
I have no relevant expertise in archaeology or similar, like you and many others here, but I can't see a land routes being remotely likely! People like Sir Barry Cunliffe are convinced that people and cultures moved from the Mediterranean via the Atlantic coast of present day Portugal, Spain and France to the British Isles. Certainly land routes existed along the great European river valleys, like the Rhone, Rhine and Seine, but they were of much more minor significance. So water transport of significant weights of goods was happening along the coasts - ie great amounts of tin was shipped from Cornwall to the Levant by the Phonecians 3000 years ago - by sea, not land. Undoubtedly tonnes at a time, as found in, yes, shipwrecks. South along the eastern coast of Great Britain and then west to the Christchurch area where they then followed the Avon north to Stonehenge. But what do I know?
Heavily wooded landscape, maybe plenty of natural 'anchors' for pivots ( and ropes? ). Just a case of weaving through the trees, picking a suitable course. Not sure how this could've worked for the distance involved.
Some thoughts: 1. A six ton piece of sandstone is heavy, but not as dimensionally large as one might think. An intelligent natural engineer could easily figure out how to move it either across land or on/off of a raft or boat. Especially those guys, who built structures with much larger stones than 6 tons. Basically, if they can move those huge stones 26 miles (or whatever it was) then they can move a 6 ton stone much farther. 2. I think the biggest issue with the long overland journey is "politics". Will they meet with hostile people along the way or will they be welcomed wherever they go? Since this was no small undertaking, I assume they had that all figured out before they started. I mean, these weren't just a bunch of frat-boys deciding to move a stone on the spur of the moment. 3. The thought of it being an ambassador for all of those much larger and harder to transport stones is intriguing and evocative. I like it. And it might have helped with the diplomacy required to pass through so much settled territory. 4. The water journey might not have been any more risky than an overland journey. There are a lot of opportunities to drop and break the stone on a long overland journey. Going by water you need to get it on the raft or boat at the beginning, off of it at the end, and the rest is the luck of the weather. If they lost one on a previous attempt, we'd never know, would we? If they meant to have three stones and only one of them made it we'd never know, either. Etc. But when you consider that humans somehow navigated to Luzon (Philippines) about 700,000 years ago - and that was pre-Homo sapiens, probably Homo erectus - then ancient people obviously had the capacity to build craft that could successfully navigate in the ocean.
I`ve long held the romantic notion that one of the main reasons for the location of Stonehenge is it`s siting on the great and ancient migration and trade route from Dorset to Norfolk, A place where the peoples from the east met the peoples from the south west. A celebration of their union.
Fancy some behind the scenes shenanigans? Join this channel to get access to perks:
ua-cam.com/channels/JV1EC8Mf87PpQYo9eUfd3Q.htmljoin OR Patreon: www.patreon.com/PaulandRebeccaWhitewick
Paul "the invisible man" Whitewick. How did you turn invisible in that video about the round baseball size stones, Paul? I still can't figure out what kind of camera or editing glitch could cause that. You know, the part at 3: 15 where you walked behind a tree and turned invisible. Did you purposely fake that, and if so how and why? Seems an odd thing to put in the middle of an otherwise ordinary video, you walking along a path in a forest and becoming invisible.
@@OttoNomicus well.... one doesn't just give away trade secrets... 😉. To be honest... I just felt like learning a new trick. It took longer than I care to admit
Great😊 but you need Robert Langdon on as guest so you can debate him..that will be worth watching!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!❤❤❤❤❤❤
It would be wild if someone found a Neolithic era shipwreck off the East Coast of Scotland/England with stones like the altar stone inside. I can imagine that they might have chosen more than one of these, just to ensure that at least one made it all the way to what is now known as Stonehenge.
It took our builders decades to get the stone to finish our patio, so I fully appreciate the frustrations of the time.
LOL
if it had been a traveller builders they would still be taking the stones from Avebury
😂
Classic.
Thank you Paul for another interesting article.
As a professional seaman and boatbuilder I hear the usual 'landlubber' attitudes from your quoted experts. There were certainly sea going craft at that period with highly skill crews who had generations of experience in navigation and, almost certainly, carrying heavy and valuable cargoes. Remember, this is considerably later than the people who arrived by sea in Kilmartin Glen as the last of the ice melted in the West Highlands, since there is no evidence of any post glaciation human habitation to the south or any other direction at the time of their arrival.
Also, I have read Brian John's books and met him personally. As with many scientists who have espoused a particular theory to the exclusion of others (the Preseli Bluestones were moved to Stonehenge by glaciation) he is adamant that any opposing theories are false. Again, as a seaman and boatbuilder, I have no hesitation in my conviction that that competent seafaring race would see no value in the gruelling overland route from the Bluestone 'quarry' in Pembrokeshire to the Plains of Wiltshire. However, it is only a few short miles from that quarry to the Nevern estuary, and, allowing that our current patterns of land drainage were centuries ahead of them, waterborne cargo access either up the now drained wetlands of the Avon from Christchurch or the Test from Southampton water would leave only 1.5 miles or 15 miles, respectively, for the challenge of hauling the blocks overland.
Broad and sea-minded thinkers such as Tim Severin have shown conclusively that known ancient craft types are capable of outstanding ocean voyages. Compared with these, coast hopping when the tides are fair would be a quite reasonable achievable project for the culture at the period of Stonehenge's construction. Note that the earliest explorers of Australia somehow crossed 90 km of open ocean 60,000 years ago with the hundreds or thousands of settlers needed to provide a viable colony. Similarly, the first firm evidence of population on Crete is 7th millennium BCE and, geologically, they can only have arrived there by sea.
So if Neolithic people had been seafaring for generations where is your proof of this statement?
@@simoncolverson9469 The evidence is in the logic as stated in the cases of the migrations to Crete (from whichever mainland you consider most likely) and again with the example of Australasian colonisation, as in my comment. No one is going to swim 90 of open sea with their supplies, wives, children and livestock. They must have used some seaworthy transport. Any vessel constructed at that time would be distinctly biodegradable, so who would sensibly expect any archaeological evidence of such craft? To even attempt such a crossing would need well developed construction techniques and well honed sea skills. Would you tackle it in a modern sailing yacht?
I’m not a professional seaman only an amateur sailor but I have long felt that the literature is dominated by landlubbers. They show routes that religiously trek round the inside of bays instead from point to point, and the constant refrain that early sailors couldn’t travel out of sjght of land. How do they think the Mediterranean islands were populated? I’m sure the Phoenicians went straight across from Brittany to Cornwall. And there’s the case of Australia as you point out. I often wish someone who knows about navigation would do some research into plausible techniques of wayfinding that could have been used at an early period.
@@rocktapperrobin9372 Thank you, a man after my own heart! As you say, it frustrating to hear learned professors so confidently displaying their ignorance of seamanship. boatbuilding and the drive to travel, explore and simple be on the sea. I recall hearing that there were Polynesian shell traders who sailed between islands every year but the 'profit' they made was only ever enough for food and the upkeep and maintenance of their craft. That's a motivation I can relate to!
@@surfskiwales so no evidence just a personal hypothesis, thing is it ain't true if we can't prove it, and there have been canoes found 6 to 7 thousand years old and that is all anyone needed in the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods, lots of land bridges and islands that have since gone, a sail ship is depicted on a Egyptian cup around 3500BCE but the atlantic wasn’t conquered until about the 9th or 10th century.
I'm just picturing some Neolithic tribe somewhere in the middle of Britain, and some people arrive on the northern edge of their territory with a 6 tonne rock.
"Hey, would you help us take this on south?"
"It's a rock."
"Yeah but a very special one, see?"
"Are you mad?"
This would make a good Monty Python script I think.
We'll definitely be mad if you don't help us.
rock off haggis eater.....ya bampot
We need a Monty Python sketch
Exactly. The economics and logistics of transport over land just doesn't work out. Who's going to sustain the haulers over the decades? They got to eat too over those tens of thousands of days. The stone(s) had to be near Stonehenge within a couple of months, I'd guess. The operation wouldn't be sustainable otherwise.
"Where are you taking it?"
"To a sort of rock concert?"
Paul. You never fail to bring something new EVERY week to entertain and inform us and get us asking for more information.
Thank you SO MUCH.
😊😊😊😊😊
Thanks as always Pauline. Appreciate your support. 😊
I read or heard somewhere that Stonehenge is lined up on celestial alignments which only form a circle at that latitude.
As you head north they turn into an ellipse which becomes and EW line at the latitude of Orkney where we find such a line of stones, and southwards the ellipse elongates the other way until it becomes a line at the latitude of Carnac in France, where we also find lines of stones.
This seems to point to a unified culture which stretched from at least Orkney to Carnac who were pretty handy at moving big stones, and worked out where to put Stonehenge so that it was circular. It doesn't surprise me that they used some stones from other sites, to increase the magic of Stonehenge, or the holiness or however you'd like to describe it, and all I'm waiting for is for them to find Carnac stones at Stonehenge too, or maybe Stonehenge stones at Carnac.
Of course my original sources may be nonsense, and the evidence that the stones aren't from Orkney also speaks against this theory.
But very interesting stuff Paul, I really enjoyed the video. Keep up the good work.
Interesting! :D I've heard that megalithic people worshipped stone. That could explain a lot about why they moved stones long distances.
Your thoughts reek of men carrying a staff - which reacted to supposed ley lines, which were followed by those who had an affinity with the microVolts emitted from said lines of electrostatic? Force to guide them (almost , maybe) unerringly to the next important site of {worship}?
Thankyou for your own thoughts, they are well reasoned.
I dont think that the "fragments cannot be proven to be from the atler" is very compelling. The fragments look the same and are way out of place geologically. Opponents should propose a better theory rather than rail against something that cannot be proven with a 100% degree of certainty.
@@michaelday8459 magic? What a load of twaddle.
I don't understand why it can't be a glacial erratic. Case in point, the 'Baggy Point Erratic' near Woolacombe in north Devon is from Scotland. However I'm not an expert on such things and I guess experts have decided it's impossible. I'm not suggesting a glacial ice sheet brought it all the way to Wiltshire - but could have brought it some of the way. Modern humans love erratics, seeing them as anomalies in the landscape, sometimes perched precariously on other stones or on a narrow edge, balanced (such as the Bowder Stone in Borrowdale) so I think that early humans could have found a venerated balanced stone and brought it a shorter distance to Stonehenge. Just a theory.
makes more sense, i am sure the builders would have had better things to do than drag the thing across the country . also across multiple tribal lands .
If you read the paper mentioned in the video, it will tell you why the authors don’t think it is an erratic.
Not impossible, the "experts" just didn't consider the possibility that the rock ended up there by natural processes! 😂
@@Tugela60 The experts did consider it.
Why would you say they didn’t?
@rosifervincent9481 Because it is a possibility that can't be ruled out, so dismissing it in favor of the idea that someone dragged it there from Scotland means they did not consider it. Not objectively anyway.
The information that geologists can glean from a stone sample is mind boggling. I think some people dismiss geology as boring or not innovative, as if we've learned everything there is to know about it. Granted, much of this research was probably funded by the fossil fuel industry, and that has its own problems, but the science is solid. We can learn so much by just accepting that we do _not_ know everything, and being open to new understanding and information. 💙
Still puzzled why Stonehenge is the only place that gets researched -yet equally impressive landscapes remain undisturbed
Completely agree. Adam Morgan Ibbston did an amazing video on that actual topic
Because it is unique, simple as that.
I wouldn’t say Stonehenge is “the only place that gets researched”. It may be fair to say that it’s the most famous place, or that Stonehenge gets more research resources than many other similar locations …. But it’s not “the only place” surely? And clearly many ancient sites would have been very impressive but very few, if any, have been so fully protected in such an impressive and accessible vista.
Arbor Lowe in Derbyshire is a very impressive stone circle though all the stones are fallen
@@chrish1657I doubt that it is unique, just better known.😊
😊 Your unsolicited advice,absolutely made me chuckle. As a Canadian, that is one of the first things that you learn when playing or hiking in the woods in autumn and winter. You squat, or fold your scarf as a seat, or….. find a log to rest on. 😅
I thoroughly enjoy your videos, and the way you present them. You may only consider yourself a storyteller, but (speaking from Celtic heritage), the storytellers and singers, are the most revered and appreciated. Keep it the good work, and videos. Cheers!😊
I come from a slightly different field and it's soil science but what I can tell you is the XRF is more than adequate to find out about the origin of something what it will determine is the mineralogy in precise quantities so long as the device's calibrated well you should be able to find a location in which those materials appear in the same quantities
5:38 This is very good advice, and very 'dad' advice. 😂💚💚 I'm glad you kept that, it's a nice aside.
I agree totally with the idea of the stone taking generations to get to Stonehenge. Our modern outlook is to do everything as quickly as possible. We live by the clock, the Henge people lived by the changing seasons. It was the journey that was important on how quickly it was done. The altar stone may have been a special monument to more than one tribe for centuries before reaching Stonehenge.
Hi Paul, thanks for braving the cold!!
Here's a thought, could it have been moved over ice if not by ice i.e. they made ice tracks in the winter?
Its a fascinating subject that will keep running for a very long time.
Thanks for bringing all these reports together.
All the best!!
In the US + Canada, pre-machinery logging was often done by cutting trees in the summer, and hauling them on ice roads. Seriously heavy logs.
What ice? These places were built after the ice age.
@@Tugela60 They had winters, tho. And they were colder and longer back then.
Here in norway moving heavy stuff in the winter time, aka on snow/ice, was the only practical/easiest method for thousands of years.
And as thousands of animals were killed at stonehenge in winter they could have dragged it over the ice / snow or even wet ground, and they would have been too busy farming through spring and summer so winter was the only time when they would have had the free time to do this.
@TimPaul-c1t The didnt drag it anywhere. It is a glacial erratic that was found locally.
I agree with many comments here, much of Britain was under glaciers 27,000 years ago. Glaciers move huge stone often, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
What a video! You’ve done an amazing job balancing out both sides of the aisle.
One thing that’s rarely mentioned about that study, is the rock samples they used against the Altar Stone sample, came from a rock shop in Whitby (I believe they have scientific samples). It’d be good to see them do some more fieldwork to grab primary samples from the areas the stone is supposedly from.
Also, like you mention, why did this not influence the construction of the hundreds of megalithic sites in between? Weird!
Add it to the pile of mysteries Stonehenge throws up, but rarely resolves…
Thanks Adam, appreciated.
I do feel that qualifying certain aspects of Stonehenge would be in English heritages best interest. We only know the true location of the megaliths source because the American dude that took a core was having a clear out. Instead we are reliant on Rock Shops in Whitby! (nice though they are i am sure).
Also we know nothing about the sociocultural i.e. political landscape of Neolithic Britain, which might explain a lot.
I’m always impressed with the effort Paul puts into his research and his fieldwork to cover his topics. Thank you Paul.
Thank you Paul ( yet again 😁 ), for another great video,
I think the main thing we tend to forget about our ancient forbears is that they lived and worked within their limits so moving any large item was a practical exercise not a technological one. Therefor we are most likely "overthinking" their methodology.... ( keep it simple guys 😛 )
Yup, fair point. Its difficult to step outside of the thinking of the world we live in now!
Indeed , this is the explanation for much staged MAGIC. And likely how much of the mystery of Stonehenge was created and then venerated of thousands of years. After all they had a product to sell, this was the ritual driven religion, a centre of power controlled by the chosen few. Even in our modern times we recognise the attraction of theatrical spectacular sites and events. There fore shroud the easy explanation in stories and enhance the reputation of the place.
Limited technology = maximum ingenuity.
Its an evocative picture with the wandering stone over generations
Certainly a past worth exploring
Absolutely
Then it could also be viewed as having been moved on water along the coast over generations.
@@gwyn2 a worship raft sounds rad too XD
though its only one mistake from having to get it back out of at best shallow water and possibly quite soft underground
while having it being rolled over a couple hundred meters one can prepare ahead of time sounds like a ton of work, but scalable and less likely to just go awry
vOv
how much force is needed to flick it over the water?
Amazing content! Thanks
@@garethvaughan3420 thank you
Not mentionned in the vid, but there were Preselli Blue Stones and barges found on the seabed between Wales and the South West of England.. Transport by Sea would certainly be far easiest than overland, while Rivers could also have easily enough been altered / dammed, etc; in places where distance enough of the stone barges would make the water option workable.
The same surely would have been applicable to the Stonehenge 'Altar Stone' and having been identified as sourced from the North East area of Scotland and around..
The much easier water transport where water was available, makes uncertain overland routes more likely where they link up with sea and coastal routes..
Oooh. I was unaware. Do we have a paper on this you could point me to?
Yes please! That would be faskin ating.
Where can I find out about Blue Stones and barges found on the seabed, please?
I've seen several television documentaries from the 2010s puzzling over the impossibilities of the bluestones and the terrain between their source and their location. The maps on the screen showed obvious sea routes and rivers to get them most of the way, but werent mentioned beyond possible transport across the bay. I thought that a silly oversight, if I'm moving something that large without modern equipment, Im going to float it as far as I can first. This is the first Ive heard of actual barge finds. I'm excited to find out more on that!
I can't find mention anywhere of bluestone found on the seabed.
I really like the idea that travelling through the different lands for people to see end engage with was more important to them than speed and efficiency!
There is a hypothesis (not sure if it's backed up by evidence) that building stone circles began in the north and migrated southwards. If that's the case then it's plausible that the altar stone was used several times as the practice advanced.
Another comment noted that the Maui of Easter Island "walked" - those that are in their final location have flat bases whereas those found "in transit" have bevelled bases. This allows the Maui to "walk" as rocking from side to side makes them move towards the upper part of the bevel. I've seen videos where a few dozen individuals using ropes to either side are able to move a full sized Maui. I've been installing concrete gate posts weighing about 300kg and these also have a bevel on their base, once upright (a bit of a feat!) they are quite easy to walk/waddle along, you just have to keep them balanced.
As a society we also tend to think in projects that last a few years at most - there's no evidence either way that this was true in the distant past. Just 50m per day equates to a total transit time of 14000 days or 38 years. That's plenty of time to get proficient at it! We also look back at the finished product, horse saddles as an example, without seeing any of the evolutionary steps that led to that.
50 metres a day? HS2 would be proud of that rate of progress!
bobwightman1054: ". . . migrated southwards". Ex Orcadia Lux. Civilization started in the Orkneys.
Hmm.. technique not strength - as a child I remember 'walking' the milk churns...
Thank you , a pleasure listening to you every time🎉
Thank you too!
Why. Why why why would they move such stones any distance at all? What the heck were they thinking? What motivated them to do such a thing? Weren't they busy just surviving back then?
In Cornwall there are a number of legends of saints arriving here from Ireland having floated over the sea on a millstone. This makes sense when you remember that millstones were used as ballast in coracles, the main form of water transport back then.
So I can well believe that the alter stone was used as ballast on a vessel. Maybe one bringing things from Orkney to Durrington for one of the feasts. If it's then not needed for a return journey (we've eaten all the cargo) then why not leave it behind?
I can also believe there was some sort of pilgrimage with the stone staying in places en route. We have that analog with things like Charing Cross. But, to me, all the evidence suggests Stonehenge (in it's sarsen phase) was a bit of a rush job. So it seems inconsistent with that level of planning and foresight. It would be interesting to know exactly when the alter stone arrived on site compared to the other stones.
That is a fascinating idea, that it may have been just ballast. But perhaps the ballast stone wasn't 'just' ballast to those people. By keeping the boat upright, perhaps they may have come to feel they owed their lives to it. This would be in keeping with people who worshipped stone as I've heard megalithic people did.
There's also the matter of drogue stones. These were stones which weren't just ballast. In a storm, they'd be put over the sides of the boat, held by ropes so they dragged in the water. They were inscribed with symbols of protection.
I did wonder if you would cover this when the story was first reported. Mind blowing to consider this as a concept. Huge distance to move such a big rock.
Yup, I fully intended to do this sooner, but ran out of time. Then the new paper came out I was quite pleased!
Not sure why this channel popped up but I’m glad it did. Wonderful video. Subscribed and looking forward to going back to previous episodes.
Nice video with a good explanation. Thank you.
Transporting a 6-tonne stone by sea would be faster and generally easier than a land route, but as far as we know, the sail was not present in Northern Europe in the Neolithic. Such a boat would have been likely paddled, and it would have to have been rather large and highly stable. There are some watercraft from that period, namely the Brigg Raft and the Ferriby boats that you may want to look at for this.
You don't use _a_ boat. You use _two_ boats, and sling the stone on ropes between them. Being submerged, its weight is lessened, it's much easier than loading it _on_ to a boat, and it doubles as an anchor in shallow water. If a storm threatens (Neolithic sailors were doubtless good weather watchers) you just run it up a beach at high tide and wait for better weather - a six-ton block isn't going to be washed away!
@@terryhunt2659 Indeed, and we already know that the Egyptians did move large stones by suspending them in the water between 2 ships.
"the sail was not present in Northern Europe in the Neolithic"
How do you KNOW that?
We don't even have solid evidence what ships there(in general) looked like halfway from the viking age to neolithic looked like.
"Such a boat would have been likely paddled"
Oars or paddles, not a problem.
"and it would have to have been rather large and highly stable"
I think you overestimate just how LITTLE 6 tons actually is when it comes to moving something by ship.
Especially if you do it suspended between 2 boats rigged together, same or similar how the Egyptians did it when shipping stones for their big building projects, like pyramids.
I don't know the density of the stone in question, but suspended into the water, instead of 6 ton, it will weigh somewhere between 2 and 4 tons instead. Compared to the Egyptian's 50+ ton blocks, that's nothing.
Another great video, which raises all sorts of interesting questions. Even though I’m from NZ, love you guys content.
Excuse the armchair observation/guess and feel free to pick holes in it. But if stone henge is built around the winter solstice, and winters were colder for longer back around the time of construction, is it too much of a leap to assume that activity and building of the henge were done during the winter. Could it have been cold enough to use sledges over ice to transport heavy stones?
Now that's a good theory 👍
MUSH!
Slide it through your territory and hand over to the next. Perfect for binding people together over distance. After all, who would be prepared to say no halfway down the line lol😅
@richardclegg7846 yeah that's probably what happened.
Or how about those stones were already there. Deposited by glacial action thousand of years earlier? The UK is littered with such boulders, called erratics.
A stoney problem - or set of problems! As your fascinating video indicates, there seem to be many loose ends, not least in the scientific methodology used and the constraints imposed by English Heritage in taking samples for rigorous testing and analysis. I think your video highlights some of the problems to be addressed in reaching a definitive answer as to the origins of the Altar Stone. Perhaps it's wise to remember, that in archaeology, as in most other disciplines, results are almost always, provisional and subject to the weight of further evidence and investigation. Great stuff. Thank you.
Paul, you may find it advisable to carry a small foldable seat pad for comfortable rock sitting during cold winter days. Doesn't have to be fancy.
Very good shout!
Or a peg loomed wool mat, made from found tresses of sheep's wool, drawn from hedges. Way more fitting, easier to carry and more comfortable!
@@UsualYaddaYadda -- Heck, a plastic carrier bag would do.
@GordonDonaldson-v1c
Re: a plastic carrier bag would do.
A thin plastic carrier bag won't act as much of a thermal barrier, the problem was heat being conducted-away by the cold Sarsen. A closed-cell polymer foam cushion would be ideal. Any other thermally insulating barrier would work.
A thin plastic carrier bag would be fine to protect from a wet surface.
years ago i was sitting on cold concrete, for only about 20 minutes, i might add, and was warned that it would give me piles. oh boy, didnt it! i'd never had them before. more than 30 years later i still fear sitting on a warm brick fence.
Amazing video. Amazing history.
Thanks so much for the video and info.
Ice age glaciers could also carry boulders for many kilometers. Thus, for example, stones that came from Finland have been found in Germany and Poland.
Indeed they can, but not in that direction, quite the opposite in fact.
You mean large ice sheets? I think the ones that would have picked up and moved large boulders great distances date significantly earlier, perhaps 12-18k years ago.
Exactly, it's the obvious answer. These transported rocks are called "Glacial Erratics".
@tripledprojects During the several Ice Ages, there was repeatedly many kilometers thick layer of ice that covered Northern Europe and the British Isles.
@@pwhitewickNonsense. Do you know anything about glaciation?
Another amazing video! I love having new topics to go down rabbit holes with.
The Scottish Highlands were part of the Central Pangean Mountains formed around 340 million years ago. When Pangea separated, some of these mountains went to the Appalachians in America. Thus, you could probably find a match in Tennessee. Now, explain THAT journey!
Easy!
Lizards.
In spaceships.
You just did.
It's very annoying when modern day Appalachians (the name is a Native tribe called the Appalachicola) claim that because their ancestors emigrated from overseas 200 years ago, that "supercontinent" which happened 340 years ago essentially makes them somehow "indigenous" to what is now the North American continent where Native tribes had been living for over 15,000 years and that these immigrant people living around the Appalachian mountains are somehow the only "true" Americans.
@@UsualYaddaYadda ..........YYEESSS
this was so interesting again Paul , really well done and thank you😊
Many thanks!
I'm confused why people have such a hard time believing they could move a stone 700 km. but they have no problem believing that the stones where placed there.
If you can move an object 1 meter, you can also move it 700.000 meters, just repeat your action enough times.
Absolutely.
@@pwhitewick I alone could raise a stone like that to ten feet height in week or so just for the fun of it, but it would take so many people so many years to move it 700 km. Possilbe? Yes. Likely? No, Glaciers did it and the it was used because it was there and more likely than not the stones resting place decided where this 'temple' was built.
Yes, but why would anyone do it?
@@pwhitewickOr the rock was dropped there by a glacier a hundred thousand years ago, and then it was used by the builders as a special stone because it was different from the local rock. That seems to be a more likely explanation to me. They may not have moved it far at all.
moving 25km throw wilts seems relatively easy comparted to moving a stone from NE Scotland overland to the modern border, there's a lot less geography in Wiltshire than Scotland.
Great video Paul, I love the idea of the stone gradually making its way south over generations, accruing significance and sacredness along the way. Wouldn’t it be amazing if more accurate tests could show it was originally part of the rings at Brodgar or Stenness.
Thanks
Thank you
I remember reading about the altar stone being possibly one of a pair. The other one was taken to Berwick St James village, where it was broken into two, and is now beside the road.
A video from 1957 shows the giant boulders of Stonehenge being erected by cranes - photos from 1914 reveal a previous installation.
I rebuilt my fence last week when it blew down. Guess that makes my fence one week old.
@@pwhitewick You might look at the evidence - instead of laughing it off
Exactly, but that does not fit the marketing and new age nonsense.
@@WhirledPublishingthey never want to acknowledge it, better the tourists and gullible think its been stood as it is for 1000s of years.
Plus in the 1800s.
I so enjoy your presentations.
Thank you so much!
Here's the "g" that dropped out at 0:54 😘
Another great informative vid
Haha... I have been looking for that!
A very interesting account. Speaking with no knowledge at all, I seem to recall that pit have been unearthed around Stonehenge containing the bones of cattle from the Orkneys. Now someone with a better knowledge than I (a low bench mark to be sure) will tell me that the pits are much later etc. However, my point is that they were moved an enormous distance. No mean task, they had to be fed , watered , rested and follow established routes through forested land. Presumably, there weren’t dropped at Stonehenge by glacier. Given that the journey also involved a sea crossing, I struggle to see the problem in a sea bourne route. In the comments above someone has written a very persuasive note concerning marine possibilities. It , seems to be the clear answer.
I still think the altar stone and the bluestones are all glacial erratics. View the sources used by the paper that discount the glacial origin hypothesis. To cut a long story short, they can’t model ice movement direction for older glaciations because the most recent glaciation churned up the sediment. They also fail to mention a study from a few years ago that shows ice movement from the Orcadian basin southward into England during the last glaciation, and this is based on a study of erratics in England.
The whole thing is a bit of a joke. They can’t discount a glacial origin and because that seems like the most likely origin, the whole subject of how it got to Stonehenge becomes a little pointless in my opinion, because we can’t model ice movement in older glaciations, such as the Anglian.
@@AncientArchitects yes this is what I believe too, it's far more realistic than manual labour
great video - very informative as always.
Glad you enjoyed it
However all those stones arrived and set up it must have been with very strong people 💪. Very interesting Paul and well researched. Thank you.
Thx for the update on this mystery ! I wonder why the builders would want to use the different stones anyway ? I guess the priests who know when to start planting would also be believed when selecting the materials and source locations. Obviously a big commitment of time, resources and manpower. Shame we dont know that story !
One of the quotes you mentioned regarding glaciation: I have read other papers that indicated glacial movement from northeast Scotland towards the Midlands; I still think it could have been a glacial erratic: such would have stood out as being different from the surrounding bedrock. It would still have required people to choose it then transport it from the east coast towards Salisbury, but wouldn’t have been as daunting of a task. (It’s also possible it’s twice an erratic: maybe one episode of glaciation movement took it from one place to another, then a second phase took it from there to a hypothetical end point in the Midlands. )
Good job. That stone has been everywhere, the Senni beds off Milford Haven, the Cosheston Beds also in South Wales, somewhere near Abergavenny and now the Orcadian basin. The monoliths in 2001 A Space Odyssey could not attract more speculation if they were found to be real. I would bet the truth is that stone 80 was the one and only stone to exist precisely at the spot in which it resides and everything else was built around it
that is a good theory. The henge monument was built there because of this 'magic stone' I wish they could raise it .
@@mavisemberson8737 I would like to see all the fallen stones raised and the broken ones reassembled. It's a fantasy, not based in reality but the place would look spectacular
The most important consideration is Why would they need to go that far to obtain the stone we probably will never know.
Applying Ockham's Razor, and being from Denmark, where we have lots of very big stones moved by the Ice from Norway, it might be worth mapping the distributions of rocks with similar origins in the British landscape to see if it is really a uniquely transported stone.
My family is from Caithness and Orkney and so I was brought up visiting Skara Brae, Tomb of the Eagles, Ring of Brodgar and The Grey Cairns at Camster. I distinctly remember (in fact I believe I have a kids history book about the neolithic people of the area saying so -probably in my mother’s house somewhere) being told that there was evidence that the people of the Far North and people from the South were mixing, perhaps for religious reasons, perhaps for trade.
I don’t personally think the sea transport theory is too out there. Sea travel around the British Isles was the norm of the time. It would have been the safest and easiest method of travel. I was actually a professional seafarer and I don’t think 6t would be a particularly hard cargo to move safely in open boats or barges that we know were used. In deed, the short crossing from Caithness to Orkney (that the people in question would make regularly)was, and still is, far more treacherous than a summertime voyage down the East Coast to the Thames or Solent.
It is interesting and a good video. I want the stones to have been moved on early bronze age sledges, like the first ice road truckers, so have looked up how possible that might have been. Not impossible for them over a few winters, is where I left it.
Great summary of all the latest on this, Paul.
Do we know if Parker Pearson has finally given up on his idea that the stone circle was moved from Wales?!
Cheers, Darren. I'm not actually sure where we are with that. I think, as you imply, we are back to Quarry, direct to the site. As for MPP, who knows.
@ I think he ended up being accused of that most heinous of things: interpretive inflation!
This throws so many unanswerable questions in the air.
Why this rock?
How did the southern tribes know to go north to get the rock or why did the northern tribes go south with the rock?
Where the whole of mainland Britain (at that time) in full communication with each another and not trying to kill each another?
Who's idea was it to dedicate the time to do this instead of hunting and gathering?
etc. I just keep coming back to why?
Thanks for this. Fascinating :)
I see a few comments along this line, but the glacial erratic explanation is the most sound. I certainly would not rule out a fantastic origin of the stone per se, but it seems like it would be on the larger side of known erratics and would have stood out in a landscape where it had been deposited only a few thousand years before (as opposed to today, where many erratics are buried under 10,000 years of soil).
The idea of it taking decades, generations even, to move those stones is a very interesting idea! Quite alien to the modern mind with out timetables, schedules and JIT delivery of goods. Modernity has created in us a sense of instant gratification that would have been alien to folks thousands of years ago.
Wow that was great timing - not sure if I sent Paul the latest report about this subject a few weeks ago
Don't recall an email.
Always interesting, thank you. FWVLIW: If an object can be moved at all the distance is immaterial as long as the will exists to move it...
So what was the will..? What was the significance of the start and finish locations to make the journey? What was the connection?
Was the 'alter stone' significant for the place it came from, or in it's own right? If the former then transport by sea makes most sense, being by far the easiest method. If the latter then over land might make more sense for people to see it and maybe to avoid possible loss at sea.
PS: On the subject of moving the Sarsens, who knows? But I suspect they were moved on the Avon as again that would have been by far the easiest option, and there is a little-known 'henge' / landing site on the Avon at the spot it comes closest to Stone Henge, which if I remember correctly lines up with the avenue kink and all.
Again, suspicion without proof: But if the Egyptians could move truly enormous stones along the Nile in vast numbers I see no reason why neolithic Britons couldn't do the very same thing at the same time with far fewer and smaller stones - never underestimate human ingenuity, especially where the desire to avoid hard work is concerned.
It's nice that Stonehenge has components from Wales, England and Scotland. It must have been a hugely important centre for the people of the Neolithic living in the British Isles.
I just watched a UA-cam channel called Mystery History. There's an American guy who thinks how he worked out how the upright stones at Stonghenge were lifted in. It's amazing how one guy did it all by himself by inserting a 20 ton stone into a hole.
Another great video, Paul! Thank you for your passion!
My 2 cents: I am skeptical of this theory that the stone was specifically brought from Scotland for use in Stonehenge. I am skeptical more in a “I can’t wrap my head around it!” since that “I don’t believe it’s conceivable!” since. I DO believe that ancient people could move large stones over a distance without assistance from the aliens!
The stone may very well be from Scotland, but did a team from Salisbury travel there to bring it back or a team from Scotland purposely quarry it and carry it to Salisbury?
Today, many of use are familiar geologically, biologically, botanically, culturally, historically, etc. with areas 700km away from where we currently live. Even if we are not familiar with the area, we have maps, atlases and navigation apps to help us find these places.
What I have a hard time wrapping my head around is 5000+ years ago how did they know to go 100km to Wales for those stones, let alone 700km to Scotland?
I really am posting this as a question because I have never studied anything about it so I would love to learn if I am missing something from those that have studied it.
All very valid questions and points. I feel the answer lies in the vast periods of time we are talking about. We see our lives as they are.. short.
Ice age, glaciers.
@@pwhitewick👍
Like I said, it’s so hard wrapping my head around it.
It’s almost like we are talking about an alien civilization because of how long ago it was compared to what we think of as “a long time”.
For what it’s worth, I’m American so 300 years is a REALLY long time ago!🤣
Ive always thiught the stones that have "moved" were just moved by ice sheets instead of people
Yes. See my comment that suggests a timeline re-visit is warranted.
Probably took the altar stone down the A9/A90 then onto the A1 stopping off at the Devils Arrow's at Boroughbridge?
Great presentation thanks for sharing.
Glaciers. My own small lot,1/4 hectare, when the house was built, excavations, gradings,, and many stones were turned. I travel a great deal and have an interest in geology. Just and only in my yard I turned up stones from 1,000 kilometers away, and as large as a meter plus and 800 kilograms. Britain has been covered in ice many times,, even the last reached as far south as the Midlands.
ANY single stone could, and likely is, an erratic.
Just one stone though. Absolutely no others in this region and it just so happens to be the Altar?
@@pwhitewick There may be many,, but dispersed and underground. The fact it is a single, and from far away, and not terribly large,, In my small bit of heaven, there was a single rock 700 or 800 kilos, a bit flat,1.5 meters across, and I know where it came from. It is a rock unique to an area about 700 kilometers north. It came from there. Interestingly, the final glaciation in my area came from the SE. So that one stone traveled in different glacial epochs.
I believe the paper, as to where the stone came from. If there were two stones,, or certainly if there were three stones I would tend toward the human agency moving them. But a single? Occam's Razor. My first guess would be humourous, that stone was found right there. It is the original stone that located Stonehenge.
@@Sailor376also I'm with your hypothesis 100%, such a simple and workable solution.
. During the Last Glacial Maximum, the flow from the center of the ice sheet over northeastern Scotland would have carried erratics into the North Sea, not to southwest England.
@@patricknorton5788 There have been at least three ice advances in the past 500,000 years, and several lesser. In Michigan, very similar. Multiple advances, The Sudbury stone in my driveway was delivered by the last advance that came from the SE,, but Sudbury is nearly due north. The likely mechanism is one or more advances delivered that stone to some location SE of me, and only the final advance ferried it to the north and west to arrive here. I certainly did not pick it up and transport it neither do I believe that the native Americans brought the stone to my yard, but here it is. I would guess one of two possibles,, thinking aloud, first is that the stone looked different, unique in a culture 5 thousand years ago, that recognized the differences in stone much more than we might today. It was note worthy. So the stone was found locally and brought to the site,, or perhaps where it is today is where it was 6,000 years ago. Of all the stones, the altar stone has been in place since before Stonehenge. The Henge was built around it. Oooorrr someone went on an ocean voyage , found one cool stone and brought it home.
XRF Stands for x-ray fluorescence. Firing röntgen beam at a sample to ‘light it up’. The reflected / absorbed wavelengths are measured and are indicative of the type of elements and their quantities. It is a somewhat unique ‘fingerprint’ of the material being analyzed. (worked a few years as an engineer that develops and produces that kind of equipment)
It's easier for me to imagine that the stone was significant to a smaller group of people, who in the course of magration brought the stone along with them over many years, than to suppose that there was a plan supported by people all along the route to bring it to one specific location.
Another though-provoking video ❤
This is science at its' finest. Paper is published, people in the field attempt to poke holes in it and come up with their own ideas. Rinse & repeat. Eventually either the truth comes out or we're left with the best guesses given what we really know.
There is a risk in making assumptions about what the Neolithic people felt was time pressure or transportation risks. After all we don't know what the land looked like, exactly, back then. What the sea and sea shores were then. Or even conflict or cooperation with people between Stonehenge and the quarry that could color opinions on where or how to move that rock. In the end. Too many variables, too many questions- fun stuff!
It's rather frustrating that the British heritage authorities will not allow taking of a core sample. Preservation of the structure is obviously of paramount importance but in the absence of that key data, it feels like they are requiring the field's researchers to operate in something of an input vacuum? Doesn't preclude sheer speculation, but given how much time & money goes into getting this academic work correct, it must be frustrating for the researchers as well I imagine? Destructive mini-sampling for date confirmation is standard in archeology, with the acceptance that sacrificing a very small piece of an artifact is a fair trade to acquire essential data, so disallowing this in a 6-ton object seems rather weird?
Rob Ixer and Peter Turner (two of the authors) were my geology professors at Birmingham Uni in the early 90's. Great guys, both.
Haha... small world!
@@pwhitewick IKR! btw - loving your channel and adventures! I grew up on the slopes of an iron age hill fort in Kent and LOVE all this archaeology malarkey!
where could i find the Sarsen and Puddingstone map that appears around 6:16 please
Another very interesting video, thank you 😊
My pleasure!
Some serious Bovril required me thinks Paul! 😁⚔️😎⭐️👏
...and some
Taking a very long time to make the journey is a good theory. I think it was by sea personally just because to me, it sounds like the most comfortable explanation. No other reason. I’m not an archaeologist. 😊
Still could be. I just like the... taking your time theory.
Has anyone considered comapring the altar stone to the Stone of Scone? I wonder if there is some link possibly?
Many hands make light work. The Shirehorse has an enormous capacity for pulling weight. In 1924 at a British exhibition, a pair of horses was estimated to have pulled a starting load equal to 50 tonnes.
As an American, this land vs sea debate gives me an image of a neolithic stonemason telling the other craftsmen that he'll put up one torch if the stones come by land and two torches if they come by sea.
That night, he ran through the village shouting "the stones are coming, the stones are coming!"
Cool 1min in im hooked n subbed 😎
Welcome.
I understood that some feasting bones in the area were found to have been from Scotland,so they would have been brought to specific feasting events .
If you consider the settlement of Shetland and the tidal waters around Orkney are some of the strongest in the world then clearly they must have been extremely competent mariners.
Stonehenge appears to be a project to bring groups together and if so then there must have been persons who could instruct and order across tribal groups ensuring co operation and completion of projects.
That was fascinating, thank you. Triggered some thoughts as well. When we have the Olympics the torch travels through the various countries and is celebrated enroute! Maybe the stones for these monoliths were used in the same way a celebration and a testing place for the stone masons. Then my thoughts went to the people who use Stonehenge today, the druids! Were/ are they the descendents of the original culture who turned practicality into a religion over time. Then my thoughts went to the Welsh eisteddfods and that wherever an diversified is held they have the crowning of the bard and a small stone circle is set up. I wonder if there is an older link between these things than we understand today.
Great video as always. I'm intrigued as to why they chose to use a stone from so far away, when there appeared to be a ready souce of serviceable stone only 25 miles away. It seems an awful lot of extra effort. It must be a very special stone for some reason.
Absolutely. I think it tells us simple how important that Stone was.
It's possibly a way of taking a bit of land from one place to another as a declaration of ownership. Like placing a flag on the moon. Granted the flag was a bit lighter but they did go to an incredible amount of trouble to place it there.
Thank you, Paul.
Sounds like they're pretty sure it came from Scotland, but just not sure exactly how it got there. Every answer raises a new question! Great fun! Thanks for your research, sharing your passion for the history of Britain, and your engaging presentations.
Pretty much yup. If only we had a core, we coukd probably pin it down some more
That would imply not only a trading system but also a common communication language amongst people from different tribes. The distance involved would take months for someone from e.g. Wiltshire (who has an idea) to for no obvious reason head north to find some stones that differ from what is locally available and then agree for the extraction and transportation. Not impossible but also not likely. Or for the northern tribe to decide to bring something something in their own accord
@@apb3251Communication and trade yes, and not unlikely, but the rest of your comment is not necessarily true.
Language need not be a barrier, people can learn other languages, and would have then. Neighbouring groups would communicate too and either have mutual intelligibility or bilingual members.
There's also many reasons that it could have moved which don't fit your comment.
Off the top of my head it could have originated as spoils of war (like kidnapping your enemy's god). Or maybe there was a tradition of moving around with sacred stones to different communities. We'll likely never know, but more research into other monuments across the country might give some insight.
Or maybe it was a neolithic Stone of Scone at some point in its journey (all three could be true at different times).
The timeframe of Stonehenge is so long that there are many options and timeframes for this to happen, there's nothing saying the altar stone was intended for there when it was quarried.
Ultimately English Heritage need to allow more research, but the current treatment is one exclusively of preservation.
@@tristanmills4948 but you now suggest tribal wars in an empire stretching nearly the length of the island. With such sparse and small population it’s difficult to see how that would work.
Could the Romans have been involved moving the Scottish stone.
Is there proof that all the stones were all laid out in same time period.
Were some stones added much later than the first ones.
Decades later or even centuries?
Who knows !
It wasn't so long ago that stonehenge was though to be so huge that only giants could build it, then that only galciers could move the stones, now that sea transport would have been 'impossible'.
we consistently underestimate several things about 'stone age people': 1) their skills and intelligence 2) the importance of these projects to them in terms of meaning and purpose (and therefore the costs and risks they were prepared to bear) and 3) the extent of their travels and perhaps most importantly 4) the TIME they had available to complete them. Several of your other comments point out that people who have no practical experience of boating have ... no practical experience of boats.
They 'voyage' could have been done very slowly and carefully in stages over a number of years.
It's possible, I would imagine building a giant raft of 20+ large tree logs... using all kinds of animal leather straps, tree bast fibres and other stabilisers and use a large crew of people, both on raft/ canoe and even beach guides to slowly - agonisingly slowly - pull the raft gently in shallow water as close to the beaches as possible... completely parking and resting the raft at wild water days on a beach break... and just carefully take it yard by yard... day by day... for months, perhaps an entire year...
Yup. I think you could almost do some experimental archaeology here.
@@pwhitewick already looking forward to this collaboration ep
Cliffs?
@@GordonDonaldson-v1c Almost all cliffs on the English Eastern Coast have a little strip of rubble/ pebble beach at their base... especially when the tide is low. Steep vertical cliffs directly into the deep are more common on the Atlantic Ocean facing coasts of Scotland and Ireland.. Although there will be at least a couple steep cliffs between Scotland and South England.. it's never easy
Alterative theory: The was a large trading network all along the sea coasts of western Europe at that time, including around Scotland and Orkney. The stone was ship ballast, and the builders of Stonehenge, needing a fancy piece of rock for the altar, visited a trading post on the River Avon and bought it off a ship captain. He could easily replace the ballast with other rocks.
This explains otherwise unlikely events - firstly knowing enough about the geology of Britain to identify a specific type of rock to use and secondly, deliberately transporting a 6 tonne chunk of rock that distance.
It's possible, but a single 6 tonne chunk seems over large for a ballast stone. I'd expect ballast to consist of multiple pieces in the 10-20kg range (convenient one man lift) so it could be easily removed and adjusted depending what cargo was carried. I do think that if they had to move a single 6 tonne object a boat would be the way they would do it, but I don't think they'd routinely use stones that big as ballast.
All we know for sure from that time period, is that roads did not exist, and they had footpaths at best. Water ways were the dominant form of transport until the steam engine took over from canals in the 19th century. So given that Avon-mouth is a natural harbour, it seems likely the stone was taken around the coast by sea, and brought up the Avon to Amesbury. The weight of an item on water is not important, it is the displacement. They used to make canal barges from solid concrete.
Paul, if you haven't already have a read of "Scenes from Prehistoric life" by Francis Pryor. There is a chapter on Stonehenge and others on transport, farming etc in Bronze age. 100% recommend.
Thank you
Great video. Off-topic question are those heated gloves and if so, what brand are they? I’ve never seen anything like that. Thank you for your work.😅
Thanks, oddly they are bicyle gloves and frankly... terrible!
If you're ever in France please do a video about Carnac and their stones.
One of the most puzzling questions, for me anyways, is why? Why that particular stone? Did they perceive it to have special properties? Was it maybe a gift from some tribe? Seems a hell of a lot of hardship for a particular type of stone.
I have no relevant expertise in archaeology or similar, like you and many others here, but I can't see a land routes being remotely likely!
People like Sir Barry Cunliffe are convinced that people and cultures moved from the Mediterranean via the Atlantic coast of present day Portugal, Spain and France to the British Isles. Certainly land routes existed along the great European river valleys, like the Rhone, Rhine and Seine, but they were of much more minor significance. So water transport of significant weights of goods was happening along the coasts - ie great amounts of tin was shipped from Cornwall to the Levant by the Phonecians 3000 years ago - by sea, not land. Undoubtedly tonnes at a time, as found in, yes, shipwrecks.
South along the eastern coast of Great Britain and then west to the Christchurch area where they then followed the Avon north to Stonehenge.
But what do I know?
Excellent video.
Heavily wooded landscape, maybe plenty of natural 'anchors' for pivots ( and ropes? ). Just a case of weaving through the trees, picking a suitable course. Not sure how this could've worked for the distance involved.
Some thoughts:
1. A six ton piece of sandstone is heavy, but not as dimensionally large as one might think. An intelligent natural engineer could easily figure out how to move it either across land or on/off of a raft or boat. Especially those guys, who built structures with much larger stones than 6 tons. Basically, if they can move those huge stones 26 miles (or whatever it was) then they can move a 6 ton stone much farther.
2. I think the biggest issue with the long overland journey is "politics". Will they meet with hostile people along the way or will they be welcomed wherever they go? Since this was no small undertaking, I assume they had that all figured out before they started. I mean, these weren't just a bunch of frat-boys deciding to move a stone on the spur of the moment.
3. The thought of it being an ambassador for all of those much larger and harder to transport stones is intriguing and evocative. I like it. And it might have helped with the diplomacy required to pass through so much settled territory.
4. The water journey might not have been any more risky than an overland journey. There are a lot of opportunities to drop and break the stone on a long overland journey. Going by water you need to get it on the raft or boat at the beginning, off of it at the end, and the rest is the luck of the weather. If they lost one on a previous attempt, we'd never know, would we? If they meant to have three stones and only one of them made it we'd never know, either. Etc. But when you consider that humans somehow navigated to Luzon (Philippines) about 700,000 years ago - and that was pre-Homo sapiens, probably Homo erectus - then ancient people obviously had the capacity to build craft that could successfully navigate in the ocean.
I`ve long held the romantic notion that one of the main reasons for the location of Stonehenge is it`s siting on the great and ancient migration and trade route from Dorset to Norfolk, A place where the peoples from the east met the peoples from the south west. A celebration of their union.