39 replies to this topic

[henge]

Hi Maju - your questions are the right ones to be asking about megalithic engineering. With most aspects of archaeology tests are run to match the original artifact against a replica to check if it's the right process, so if we take flint knapping experiments can be run to match each phase of working to match the originals and many processes have been found - no problems, all correct. So if we run a scientific experiment on flint knapping, we have; objective, equipment, test method, results and conclusion, normal school science experiments.

Now if we take megalithic engineering, we have experiments or data in books where we have objective - artists impression - 'experts untested comments' - conclusion. Which normally show some hairy chaps dragging rocks to build megaliths using quite impossible untested methods.

Or we have had many TV experiments  starting with objective, but for neolithic equipment that includes heavy lift modern cranes, computor designed steel reinforced concrete blocks, factory processed wooden beams and a few people pulling to give the right image for a conclusion.

Now we have to include alignments to the whole solar/lunar cycle and the night sky, but no surveying system. To most the whole show is little better than 'romantic fiction' but there is worse, to many they see Neolithic methods that don't work - followed by modern methods that do work plus the alignments. So they conclued that megaliths must have been built with modern equipment and as there was no modern equipment around 4,000 yrs ago - then the megaliths must have been built by 'Aliens'.

Ever wondered why many archaeologists won't touch anything about Stonehenge construction - its a mine-field, many books skip the part on construction.

So to sort out this mess we must use strict science in our experiments, for this I also use quality assurance this gives tracability for every stage of every process back to the archaeological record.

So to start with neolithic dolmans we have structures with capstones up to 100 tonne and the only equipment available being flint axes, so that one must be solved first but there is a problem, due to the laws of physics levering increases at a linear rate but the mass of a rock increases at a cubic rate to its end dimension ( see earlier note ). This limits direct levering to say 20-30 tonne, then you can't get enough levers into place.

It's the equivelent of the 'Neolithic sound barrier' to lift 100 tonne and the only tool you have is a flint axe - and thats my objective, to find the system used.

Scroll on many years, and I changed process, instead of working from applying my experience to the Dolman, I worked from the dolman outwards. Eventually finding a method that instead of giving me a lift ratio of 15 - 1 with wooden levers, I fouund a system that gave 100-1 with wooden levers, so 100 tonne could be lifted by as few as 10 men although a few more would be useful. With the largest stone lifted being 400 tonne its now possible, to match the evidence with a traceable system. No A-frames, no hords of hairy men (or women), no cheating.
From finding the lift system I could now extact stones, load sledges and erect dolman, which I built in quarries to test the system using 1-man lifting but 5 tonne was too small, so I lifted 9 tonne rocks on the Welsh coast. From this I worked on transport and the erection of standing stones. When a group of Druids wanted a large stone circle building of about 300 tonne of portland stone dumped into a field, it was the perfect test ground. I erected many stones for them to get them started then left them to finish.

Now I had the construction system of dolman and large standing stones I could move onto finding the surveying system for Stonehenge - again I worked from the stones(not applying any theory) and found and field tested the system that match the original tolerances.

From this I can conclude that all the dolmans, standing stones, Stonehenge was built using axe based technology with a system traceable to the archaeological record - so the 'Aliens' can get into their spaceship and 'go-home'.

Comparing steel to flint axes - many of my friend are good flint knappers and have found flint axes just as good but a but slower to use

[henge]

Just a P.S. to the last post. I don't claim to have solved all megalithic sites just the ones I have checked out, mainly Stonehenge, Avebury, Woodhenge, main smaller stone circles inc the Rollrights and quite a few Welch dolmans. With most of these I have found basic fundermental errors in there assessments, which makes it alot easier. The good news is that megalith engineering can be a reliable credable subject that can tell us alot about the skills of our ancestors.

There are many mainly French megalithic experiments that are highly credable but they lack the means to build larger megaliths, a few friends worked on a larger British TV project and they were sworn to keep secret the use of very large cranes. On another TV project I was doing the whole job by axe with real bluestones with the other team were using a designer concrete block with blue dye, machined timber and a very large fork-lift truck. The other engineer claimed he 'didn't have access to a bluestone - so he had to make one' but his experiment was carried out on a mountain made of bluestone - I kept the video as proof.

I had the Surveying of Stonehenge published in ' 3rd Stone' issue 34 apr-jun 1999 p38-40, hopefully this protects my work.

[Maju]

Sorry, I didn't visit in the last days.

You claim to have found a simple tech that allows to multiply levering power (from what's normally acknowledged) and that being the key to dolmen construction. Yet, what I miss is a clear explanation of which is that tech. I'd like to know, so I can both marvel at it and understand.

If you have solved as you claim how the Stonehenge capstones were put in place, you have potentially solved the how each and every dolmen was built, as those are sort of the skyscrappers of the Copper Age. But I need to know how.

So which is the trick?  

[Jimit]

Yes Henge, please put us out of our misery and explain clearly your techniques.  
I gave a talk yesterday here in Winchester about Stonehenge and the Stonerowing experiments and I would love to go back and say that there is a much better way of doing this.

BTW Have you been to the probable sources for the sarsens for Stonehenge and Avebury? Lockridge Dean, Mothers Jam and Fyfield Down spring to mind. How on earth did they move huge rocks out of these places where the sarsens are so closely spaced that at one time (it is said) you could travel for miles just jumping from one to another? Rollers could not be used.
Jim.

[Pete G]

Jimit, on 24 January 2008, 10:54, said:

I gave a talk yesterday here in Winchester about Stonehenge and the Stonerowing experiments

you kept that quiet Jim!
Let me know if you do another...
PeteG

[Jimit]

A mate of mine runs a small history group for people with mental health problems, especially depression and asked me to have a chat. 2hr discussion with a few photos and no notes. Apart from a bit of background I tried to put over the amazing skills of the people that built it. Overheard comment was that it was the best meeting they'd had.  
Jim.
BTW Any news of the replica?

[Pete G]

Jimit, on 24 January 2008, 19:16, said:

BTW Any news of the replica?

Land has been bought near Wilton, planning has been given, stones are on the way from all over the world.
There should be a major press release in the not too distant future.
The Stonehenge fiasco has helped the project move along no end!
PeteG

[shiny]

Land has been bought near Wilton, planning has been given, stones are on the way from all over the world.
There should be a major press release in the not too distant future.
The Stonehenge fiasco has helped the project move along no end!
PeteG



  Nice one Pete. I'm looking forward to it very much.

[henge]

Quick note for now - I will put on alot of detail later today but as its an open forum I don't want to give too much away, but thanks for the interest as I said at the start 10 yrs ago knowbody was interested in a solution.

Your Stonehenge project sounds interesting  

[Maju]

henge, on 25 January 2008, 9:29, said:

Quick note for now - I will put on alot of detail later today but as its an open forum I don't want to give too much away, but thanks for the interest as I said at the start 10 yrs ago knowbody was interested in a solution.

That's the impression I was starting to get: that you are immersed in some sort of copyright paranoia. Guess you expect to make millions or something from such discovery. I can't know for sure but I guess you are just wrong.

Whatever the case, all I've seen in your pics is a rock on a rustic sledge and knee-high dolmen that could well have been levered with simple methods (not that I could see the methods but it doesn't sound sooo hard in any case). I am not interested in your self-praise nor in the millions you might dream to make, I am just interested in the how (but not as much as to pay for it, much less in advance).

I am really not enjoying this game of "I know but I'm not telling you". Either you speak or your shut up but what's the point on going around making a claim you just don't seem willing to justify?

[Maju]

Jimit, on 24 January 2008, 11:54, said:

BTW Have you been to the probable sources for the sarsens for Stonehenge and Avebury? Lockridge Dean, Mothers Jam and Fyfield Down spring to mind. How on earth did they move huge rocks out of these places where the sarsens are so closely spaced that at one time (it is said) you could travel for miles just jumping from one to another? Rollers could not be used.
Jim.

I'd like to see pics of such places. Nevertheless, I don't think that should be any impossible problem, as long as you use oxen to haul them and choose the rocks that are accessible (not the ones that are impossible to reach).

For me a bigger problem is how to ease hauling. In the Basque sport ("idi probak") they use one or two oxen, with a traditional forehead yoke (some claim it's more effective) but they always slide the rocks on a pebble-paved trail, not on grass or bare earth. Another trick they use is to carefully feed the oxen in a way that they have to defecate more often and more liquidly (without the animal losing strength because of that nor the referee noticing it - as it's kind of the "doping" of the rural sport), so the rock slides more easily on the pebbles. I suspect (though I'm not sure in any way) that they might have used similar tricks: creating paved ways ex-professo for the hauling work and probably oiling them with some stuff  - not animal manure, logically, but some sort of oil or fat being poured as the rock moved ahead; maybe even just water would make the pebbles slippery enough probably (and it would be a lot cheaper than oil). Of course they would have used large trails of oxen (not just two) for the larger stones and probably changed the animals by fresh ones now and then, so they could keep advancing without exhaustion.

Now, if they used pebble trails, they should have left archaeological remains, even if they may be difficult to detect.

The other, maybe the huge problem, is how to lift the capstones. I don't know what Henge has in mind but so far the best I can think is some sort of wooden crane on an andamiage. Obviously the stones did not fly nor were carried by mythical giants... but the construction of such an artifact, without apparently the knowledge of polleys looks very difficult, specially for the highest monuments. Normal dolmens could have made use of the mounds created around them as ramparts... but that would not explain Stonhenge (and maybe others).  

[henge]

OK it's not a game I'm just busy with work and family + helping out on a large country estate - NO 'freetime'. Plus I don't want to see it distorted in some glossy book.

Warning - don't try this out on large rocks. Rocks, axes and large timbers is extreamely dangerous.     I have been doing this type of work for many years and have the experience and skill to make it safe to experiment lifting large stones.


Basics - to start with I have covered the problems of lifting large stones earlier, so I looked at dolmans for an answer. They suggested from appearance that the final part of construction used the rear support stone as part of the construction - but as I planned to build a full size one it looked too dangerous. After alot of failure I came back to the idea and tested it - and it  worked, but it was too unsafe. So worked on the idea and devised a safe working system of working the capstone near to balance to give me compound lifting. I now had a lift system that gave 100-1 against normal levering at 15-1, due to the cubic mass gain of the stone against its dimensions this now allowed me to lift 100+ tonnes.

note, to look at it appears that it's simply using a normal wooden lever but its far more complicated to work large stones safely near balance

We found a quarry that was not too strict on H&S borrowed a load of wood  for stacking and a few levers and started work with a 5 tonne capstone and built the first dolman. It may look a knee high dolman but if anybody has doubts try lifting a 5 tonne slab with only x1 man and a 3.5 m wooden pole - its impossible, using normal lifting with wooden levers - trust me its my pet subject. To build the dolman we lifted the capstone and placed the support stones underneath, and lower the capstone by hand - this takes alot of skill - yep dangerous work.

Replica Tombs have been built in France with capstones of 10 tonne and they had problems levering the capstone across the top so to me this sets the limit to 10 tonne, with my system its possible to build 100 tonne dolman (if not 200 tonne it may be possible but I would like to have the chance of lifting 100 tonne first).

This gave a lift system that could be used to extract rocks of 50-100 tonne, load and transport them and erect.

Loading was using the same system to lift the rock and build the sledge underneath - then lift both rock and sledge to fit the rollers - all field tested - see photo of the sledge.

Transport - to give a large mass to the testing we used a 2 tonne rock loaded onto a sledge by hand and pulled it around a quarry with my transit van - with rollers we got into second gear. There was alot of development to perfect the system, later field tested in Wales with a 3 tonne bluestone but I'm confident it could go to 100 tonne.

We erected a few 4 tonne stones by hand in the quarry with x1 man lifting - again impossible using normal lifting.

The Druid project gave me time plus people problems to solve but everything was tested and we reduced it from 60 people pulling on ropes to say 6 people. From this I had a few more ideas, so the the bluestone project I used the sledge as a raised platform and rigged it so the stone could be tipped into the hole. This also tested placing full sized dolman support stones underneath large capstones - its rough tough work.

From this work I could take a fresh look at Stonehenge with erecting large stones not requiring alot of space or man power, from examining the stones they suggest the inner trilithon sarcens were erected last. With the tops leveled after erection and the capstones lifted on top using large timber stacking and outer wooden scaffolding.

For surveying stonehenge I needed the construction system to know the limits possible by axe based skills.

To start I didn't use 'Greek maths' and found I could layout large circles by projecting circles up to 2 km in diameter - no center. Then from beach testing found I could layout the whole of stonehenge using 'estimated bisecting' to lay it all out in construction order them place the sarcen circle inside.

The hard part was to lay the trilithons out inside the sarcen circle but again by using a plain site map with all lines removed I found the system used - again straight forward and practical to apply.

Field testing the surveying was done in a large field on a cloudy day using 60 cattle fence posts and pacing - it took most of the day to make a good job of it. The following day I used triangulation points to measure over 300 measurements, for plotting out on a large scale plan to see if I could match the orinnal errors - they did.

Stonehenge is not layed out perfect it has errors. I drew out a perfect Stonehenge and the trilithins needed to move to match the slots but both mine and the original have simular errors and both matched the trilithon slots. (I could layout a pyramid but it uses a totally different system). The later bluestone and x-y stone holes can be ploted by working from the sarsens outwards.

The problem over the years is people have seen it as a 'mystery' and have over complicated the whole technology by 'hanging their ideas onto the problem' and made it impossible to replicate. I discarderd all previous work and started from basics using traceable 4,000 year old axe based technology this way I avoided 'inventing anything for them'.

To put Stonehenge in context there are standing stones in Ethopia 27 m high with full carving.


Remember the people who build Stonehenge never went to tech college, just good practical highly skilled people - we are more technical knowledge but lack many of their skills.

Be carefull trying out any of the construction systems without training - rocks can kill.

Hope it clears up a few problems, although may look simple it took years to find a total system that matched the archaeology.

Dragging rock up mounds, again impossible despite the 'artists impressions' and as for 'alignments' when I laied out Stonehenge fullsize - walking around inside can make hundreds of alignments - none of any use in laying out the site. If you want an alignment with the planet Zog then I can find you one. ( this may upset a few, I was into alignments 30 yrs ago but I needed a practical system of laying out stonehenge and using alignments simply didn't work out.

the bottom line if there is an aspect you may think could be done different - bring an axe along and show me.

[Jimit]

Pictures of Mother's Jam here.. http://www.themodern...others_jam.html
and Lockeridge Dene.. http://www.themodern...ridge_dene.html
and other sites here.. http://www.themodern...an.com/site/256
and this is after at least 5,000 years of quarrying.
I still haven't found any suggestion that oxen were used. If anyone can point me to sources where information to confirm/deny this theory, I would be grateful.
Jim.

[henge]

The idea for Oxen is purely practical but is often taken as extra power for an inefficient system. On my field tests for large sledges it only needed 20 people so extra power is not a problem, but what I did prove was my system left no marks or any ground evidence for passing over it with say 5 tonnes in total because the weight was so well distributed. So if a site has no approach marks for transport evidence then this must be the system used. In fact even the grass wasn't flattened during my field tests, so in this case; no transport evidence = evidence of a system. Whereas dragging sledges would leave ruts and although it works on smaller systems I have my doubts for a long distance hauling system but saying that there are places on route to stonehenge where it could be used and leave no evidence -  but I need to do more tests and check the route again.

Rollers were not my system of choice but the one that worked well when upgraded enough to be upgraded to carry 50-100 tonne., and match the evidence.

The idea of self lubricating Oxen is a bit wet and windy for me to test, but the only problem is when the oxen can't get a good ground grip. Many old tricks are still awaiting to be found.

I looked at using mud - and filed tested it for sledges in the quarry with 2 tonne loads,  it worked very well for running sledges and the chalk mud around the stonehenge area would give low frictionl, but would leave ruts in some places as evidence if used and the mud would also cause a traction loss for men &/or oxen pulling.

A problem for dragging sledges is the increased down pressure of heavy loads, which must have a limit.

[henge]

Just to update the last entries after some thought.  Oxen - theories, to me the problem is not theories but evidence not of Oxen but of any aspect of stone transport. From most megaliths all we can say is,' this is the sourse of the stone and this is where the stone is now' but no evidence exists of any transport system in between. So by accepting theories with full load test data only - limits it as most tests are not authentic throughtout using axed based technology, or only short distances are covered not practical for long distance transport. Moving a rock is not proof of a transport system.

To look at Oxen pulling large roller sledges would work very well as we all know that oxen are powerfull and very slow ideal for sledge hauling over rollers and the old imperial unit of 1 furlong 1/8 mile (say a few hundred metres )was the max distance Oxen would work without a rest. This makes it ideal as a section of rollers could be laid out for 1 furlong - pulled and start again. With oxen dragging rollers end on ( field tested using men to pull end-on, better than rolling) to setup the next stage. So lets say one 1 furlong section could be completed per/day so it's  8 days per mile and say  160 days plus a few rest day to transport 50 tonne 20 miles, so 2 or 3 stones per year/ per team to stonehenge as an estimate so say 20 teams and the job could be completed in just over 1 year allowing for bad weather and there are always problems say 2 years to transport the sarsens to stonehenge using oxen teams - not bad. As with all estimates add a bit and without more testing its only a loose estimate. Dressing stone on site is always a bit slow and erection time is not that bad if you know what you are doing, so the whole project for the sarsen phase could be completed in only  a few years. Not exactly a mystery, certianly the local 'big chief' will want the job completed for him/her to see the results of his investment - no change there.