
Stonehenge 1875 family photo may be earliest at monument - bauc
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-50743523
======
ggm
[https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn310-concrete-
evidence...](https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn310-concrete-evidence/)

 _Most of the one million visitors who visit Stonehenge on Salisbury Plain
every year believe they are looking at untouched 4,000-year-old remains. But
virtually every stone was re-erected, straightened or embedded in concrete
between 1901 and 1964, says a British doctoral student._

These photos may be good evidence of realignment and alteration since the big
sarsen falls in the eighteenth century.

~~~
jajag
It's true of a lot of ancient sites; Newgrange in Ireland is essentially a
modern reconstruction, complete with a reinforced concrete substructure:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newgrange#Modern_conservation,...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newgrange#Modern_conservation,_archaeological_investigation_and_reconstruction)

------
8bitsrule
That's pretty early. This supposedly realistic watercolour from the 1570s was
created by a Dutch artist.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stonehenge_Lucas_de_Heere...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stonehenge_Lucas_de_Heere.jpg)

There's another drawing here from ~1740.

[https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/stonehenge-
souvenirs](https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/stonehenge-souvenirs)

~~~
blotter_paper
> The earliest known photograph of Stonehenge, not featuring a family, is
> thought to date from 1853 - 22 years earlier.

------
fortran77
What a difference between the set of photos! The dignified, prim, well-dressed
families in the early days, and the more recent photos they showed at the
bottom of the piece.

~~~
jghn
It is likely that the people in the earlier photos were more well to do than
the people in the later photos.

