Some Key Works that Guided my Engineering and Quantitative Analysis on Stonehenge
Question on Moving the Bluestones and Sarsens
Methods for moving the Bluestones and sarsen Stones on log rollers (image left) are supported via ethnographic examples of megalith construction and movement, especially as seen through communities IN New Guinea. It is also likely heavier stones like the Sarsens were pulled on lubricated tracks (Image Below). These two methods are the prevailing theories for the overland movement of the stones.
the measurements recorded on the right are from Dr. Barney Harris's PHD Thesis titled Landscapes of labour: a quantitative study of earth-moving and stone-shifting in prehistoric northern Wessex. All this data belongs to Dr. Barney Harris of the University college London. The data comes from Calculations where various Numbers of people (and thus Pull Force) try and haul various size concrete blocks Using the two main methods described above. This data can be placed in a python script and can be compared to experimental data.
Richard Atkinson and other early researchers proposed a method of floating the Bluestones for part of their journey from the Preseli Hills in Wales. The setup would comprise of 2-3 neolithic dug-out canoes tethered together and have the stone be placed on top of that on a platform, as shown on the left. While some modern prominent researchers such as Mike Parker Pearson reject the idea of floating the stones on various river routes, analysis on the friction effects and labor required in the alternative land route suggests that this was a likely alternative to ease the labor (minimally trending away from ethnographic methods that don't emphasize efficiency).
It's fitting to see this method as a creative combination of some of the methods we already talked about. But this is not just a modern innovation with little archaeological background. In fact, it is very likely that other methods involved in stone pulling Process and other aspects of the construction underwent a lot of frictional effects, and methods similar to this may have been some alternatives the Builders may have tried to reduce those frictional effects.
Richard Atkinson briefly proposed a method of rolling stones in a cylindrical container up a ramp as a possibility in raising the Lintels. Modern day engineer Gary Lavin has proposed a method wear this system is like a cylindrical wicker basket, and experiments have shown that a 20-member rugby team was able to roll a 4-ton stone in such a manner as shown on the left.
Question on Erecting The Trilithons
Traditional Proposed Methods involve positioning each of the Uprights individually and then raising the Lintel on top. In this scheme, raising the two uprights are done in a relatively straightforward Manner (dragging the stone into a a ditch, allowing gravity to tilt most of the stone in and using a sufficient labor force to pull the Stone in an Upright Position. Raising the Lintels Up upon the Uprights is a more complicated Process in this scheme, and several methods have been proposed, one of which involves using a tilted wooden track to drag the lintel up to the top, as shown on the left.
The top of many uprights consist of spherical projections that appear to be used to fit the uprights with the lintels on top of them. However, the tremendous weight of the lintels don't require this type of security. It is therefore likely that these projections were used to fit the trilithon arrangement on the ground first (assisted with a lot of rope and harness) and then raised together as a system, using the same methodology as raising a single upright. Calculations for such a process will be developed afterward.
The image to the left is from Dr. Barney Harris's PHD Thesis Titled Landscapes of labour: a quantitative study of earth-moving and stone-shifting in prehistoric northern Wessex. All credit goes to Dr. Barney Harris of the University College London. It shows the way in which stones were placed into the stone holes, which had a slanted side and indicates that stones were tipped halfway before the pullers would hall them into an upright position, reducing the required pull force by allowing gravity to do most of the work.
Unlikely due to the lack of evidence, some propose the lintel was hauled up a Dirt Ramp.
The image on the right is taken from Richard Atkinson's 1956 work on Stonehenge. All credit to the image goes to Richard Atkinson. In this method, the lintel is raised on one end and a wooden block or rod is placed under the elevated side. Then, the same process is performed on the other side, and this is continued in an alternating process, gradually elevating the lintel.
Analysis of Pulling Methods
