

New Theory on Why Stonehenge Was Built - daegloe
http://news.yahoo.com/theory-why-stonehenge-built-175025432.html

======
richardjordan
One of my old Physics teachers was an expert on Stone Henge. Did a lot of
original research in the 1980s. From what I recall Stone Henge is actually
multiple sites on top of each other, so when someone says "this is what Stone
Henge was for" I am skeptical because we're talking an enormous span of time
and several re-buildings with no guarantee that all were for the same reason.

This article title is slightly misleading. The migration route of Aurochs
theory certainly gives an explanation as to why ancient people gathered in
this location. But it doesn't give reason for why the specific structures at
Stone Henge were built, as people might assume from the title.

What I recall from my old teacher, and his work, was that you can pretty
clearly demonstrate that the structures were there for observing the sun
cycles, as was typical of many megalithic monuments - sun & moon cycles. Most
of the other claimed observations can be explained away as statistical
artifacts. Given the evidence of burial and the fact such observations would
have had religious significance I haven't seen much to challenge the existing
understanding of the site.

As an aside, I have visited many megalithic sites in the British Isles (many
years go). I find them fascinating. One thing that people often remark on is
how they're often in the middle of nowhere, but when they were built they were
often in clearings in dense forests, but over time as we domesticated animals
that would feed on the bark, killing the trees, then eat the new shoots, over
many centuries - millennia - we deforested, for example the moors, and the
megalithic sites became elegant monuments to a forgotten age, standing proud
against a bleak landscape.

~~~
simonh
I'm wondering how you could accurately observe the rising and setting of the
sun and moon from inside a forest clearing.

~~~
jacquesm
With the help of a hill?

~~~
richardjordan
Right - if you look at a lot of the locations they're on relatively high
ground and in hill country so the rising and setting of the sun relative to
hills or other landscape elements was what they did, and they marked off quite
sophisticated cycles. Given that a 22 year cycle needs multiple observations
to track, and given that the life expectancy was probably somewhere in the 40s
the achievements are pretty amazing.

~~~
tome
If life expectancy was in the 40s, survivors of childhood could probably
expect to live significantly longer than that. Child mortality skews life
expectancy downwards.

~~~
brazzy
Which is why life expectancy at birth was actually in the 20s:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy#Life_expectancy...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy#Life_expectancy_variation_over_time)

------
nfg
> "Researchers think the giant boulders came from a quarry near Marlborough
> Downs, just 20 miles (32 kilometers) from the iconic site…"

One can't help but smile at the "just" there! Perhaps if the author tried
moving them they might have chosen a different word.

~~~
arethuza
The bluestones of Stonehenge come from 250 miles away in Wales - either
transported by the builders or carried by glaciation:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluestone#Bluestone_of_Stonehen...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluestone#Bluestone_of_Stonehenge)

------
beneth
It doesn't seem like this is a new theory explaining why it was built as much
as a theory explaining why there were people in the area to begin with.

------
netcan
I'm not sur if its me noticing things or the zeitgiest, but ancient history
seems to be really interesting right now.

There were people here a long time ago. They were doing stuff. We have no idea
what or why. A tiny fraction of their stuff was big and stone and durable
enough to last thousands of years and let us know they were there and doing
interesting things. But, we don't have any context. It would be like future
generations finding a gigantic open pit mine in one place an airport runway in
another place and a giant statue of Kim Jong Un and speculating about out
society.

BTW, If there where stonehenges & Pyramids from 20k years ago, would they have
lasted till now? We tend to assume not much was going on during the
paleolithic. If city states trade & large structures existed during those
times, would we know about it?

------
huhtenberg
> _the site, which was occupied continuously for 3,000 years_

Gives you a pause, doesn't it?

~~~
uchi
More time has passed between the building of the ancient pyramids and queen
Cleopatra, than queen Cleopatra and now.

~~~
arethuza
I think most people forget that Cleopatra was of Greek ancestry (being a
Ptolemy) and a player in the relatively recent classical world.

~~~
acheron
I think if someone knows anything at all about Cleopatra beyond "something to
do with Egypt", they'd know she was a contemporary of Julius Caesar and Mark
Antony (thanks to Shakespeare at least), even if they don't know anything
about the Ptolemaic dynasty.

The thing I do think a lot of people forget is just how old the Pyramids are.
I do know it but often have trouble really putting it into perspective.

Also note the Great Pyramid at Giza was the tallest building in the world for
almost 4000 years. And some buildings that later took the title were actually
shorter than the Great Pyramid originally was at construction, but the Great
Pyramid eroded over the millennia.

~~~
arethuza
I'm going to Orkney in a few weeks - one of the places we are going to visit
is Skara Brae:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skara_Brae>

I find it amazing that this wee village was roughly 2000 years old when Troy
fell.

[The Knap of Howar, also on Orkney is even older:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knap_of_Howar>]

------
ysapir
New? The story was already reported a year and a half ago and published last
year.

    
    
      [1] http://www.independent.co.uk/student/news/open-eye-you-never-know-what-you-might-unearth-2365369.html
      [2] http://www.academia.edu/2488263/Vespasians_Camp_Cradle_of_Stonehenge

~~~
daegloe
Resurfacing just in time for the BBC documentary, it appears.

------
moomin
Not saying there isn't good research here, but if your explanation doesn't
cover woodhenges, you've got a way to go on "why".

It may help address "where".

------
rehashed
Stonehenge is clearly the outside of the asylum.

~~~
rehashed
Some further clarification:

Henges have a ditch with an outer bank. At Stonehenge it is reversed, with a
ditch OUTSIDE the bank - effectively making the world around it the structure
for which it is named.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henge>

