Stonehenge may have been first erected in Wales

[Anudder Oik]

Neither is there evidence of peaceful collaboration to move the stones, then.

 

[DotCommunist]

Neither is there evidence of peaceful collaboration to move the stones, then.

actually the network of sites and things like eg seahenge and the debris of ages do suggest co operation. Thats precisely it. Nothing suggests your conquest.

 

[Anudder Oik]

actually the network of sites and things like eg seahenge and the debris of ages do suggest co operation. Thats precisely it. Nothing suggests your conquest.

How does that work? I mean how does it disprove conquest and also, how is it a network?

 

[DotCommunist]

How does that work? I mean how does it disprove conquest and also, how is it a network?

I refuse to write you an essay or pecise a documentary for you- your also thinking about tribe in a modern, nation state existing context.
If we know the route from the site of the stones to destination, we know how long and arduos it is, we know this was pretty much all the labour a hunter gatherer society had to spare. Now do the route through hostile territory. Plus through shared socio cultural things like a shared language nd mythic framework etc, the tecchnologies we have to identify periods etc, 'foriegner' wasn't likely a concept as we would use it today.

 

[Gromit]

actually the network of sites and things like eg seahenge and the debris of ages do suggest co operation. Thats precisely it. Nothing suggests your conquest.

Things can be misinterpreted. Romans building roads sounds like co-operation and to enable trade and commerce and nice things like that. Its how we use roads.

Not the Romans, they used them for fast troop movements for war. That was their purpose a tool of war.

 

[DotCommunist]

and we know that because the archeological evidence backs up the written records. Here no archeological evidence backs up oiks neolithic imperialists. Its proper ludicrous

 

[butchersapron]

tacitus!

 

[Anudder Oik]

and we know that because the archeological evidence backs up the written records. Here no archeological evidence backs up oiks neolithic imperialists. Its proper ludicrous

It is not ludicrous because it isn't proven. The whole motor behind, say, human expansion from out of Africa could fairly be the desire to avoid conflict with other groups.

In Britain at the time of Stone Henge you have agriculture, and the historical hierarchical developements that accompany that.

The proliferation of stone circles must surely be proof of a growing population and therefore the possibility of competition for resources.

Wars cannot be ruled out.

 

[DotCommunist]

they wouldn't have known war the way you and I think of it. In any case your conflict theory here is based on nothing other than what you recon. So I'm leaving it at that. Theres a good 3 part docu on the stones and its associated sites and settlements, fairly recent. Used new subterranean imaging techniques to discover how extensive the network of sites and settlements was, lots of new discoveries ringo might remember the name of it as I can't! BBC, earlier in the year.

 

[Anudder Oik]

The removal of standing stones (from a sacred site) to be taken to another, for what at the time would have been deemed very far away must surely have been a shocking historical event to whoever lived near them.

If the local group hadn't fallen into decadence or disappeared they would surely have opposed the removal of such important symbols from their territory. How could there be unity between Wales and Salisbury plain when people never travelled further than the other side of the hill outside their village?

Or was this network a bit like the railway network but you had to walk?

 

[Epona]

Well clearly people did go further than the other side of the hill outside their village.

Also if the monument/a monument using the stones had been there for 500 years, good chance no-one around remembered why it had been built in the first place, and there was some young welsh lad sniggering that he just sold that useless old pile of stones to some tourist.

 

[JimW]

The culture that built Skara Brae are referred to as the Grooved Ware people from their pottery: this style of pot has been found up and down Britain including at Stonehenge coinciding with its construction (or relocation as we now learn) yet among people with very different burial practices suggesting distinct social groups. Goods from the south have similarly been found in Orkney, so we have a network of trade. The paucity of weapons found on Orkney for this period suggests they weren't in regular conflicts. There's plenty to suggest links and cooperation and much less to suggest conflicts.

 

[fredfelt]

Is there anything in the history of the british isles to support this "unification" theory?

It is much more likely, imo, to have been taken from it's original site in Wales as a trophy after some form of conquest. The possession of such a thing would have meant power.

In regard to the motivations behind Stonehenge I don't think we will ever know for sure. I expect they are varied, and also changed throughout the history of the monument. From different time scales and perspects unification and conquest can be seen to be one and the same.

One of the things I enjoy about the various theories about the Stones is what they tell us about ourselves. For instance there was a presumption among most that the Pyramids were built by slaves, and then archeological remain were found pointing to a different story. Any interpretation of history comes through a contemporary filter, and is often used to prop up some perspective or another - deliberately or otherwise.

 

[friedaweed]

Is there anything in the history of the british isles to support this "unification" theory?

It is much more likely, imo, to have been taken from it's original site in Wales as a trophy after some form of conquest. The possession of such a thing would have meant power.

You can see why The Ashes Urn is a good idea on that basis.

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

Actually the unification theory is somewhat supported by testing of minerals from animal bones in rubbish pits from feasting associated with the area (around woodhenge i belive). some of the bones had mineral content that indicated that the animals had come from as far afield as scotland and indicated tribes driving animals down to major festival sites form communal feasting.

 

[Anudder Oik]

Actually the unification theory is somewhat supported by testing of minerals from animal bones in rubbish pits from feasting associated with the area (around woodhenge i belive). some of the bones had mineral content that indicated that the animals had come from as far afield as scotland and indicated tribes driving animals down to major festival sites form communal feasting.

Although this theory seems the most likely, for now, it is still not completely proven. There is evidence of animals from scotland but not of people. There could have been a market town somewhere in the centre of the land where cattle was taken and exchanged. A recent documentary I watched was quick to reach the conclusion of unity of peoples while giving scant exposure to a military historian's theories.

One interesting idea is that this unity and the ancient beliefs/burial ceremonies were undermined by the arrival of copper and gold to the Island, brought by more warlike peoples. A time of peace was corrupted, so to speak, by the arrival of "bling".

We see here modern influences working on the minds of historical analysts.

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

The mass transport of animals for sale seems odd. Why transport an animal that distance when you have local markets? Also why transport through potentially hostile environments?
Any long distance trade implys peaceful coexistence and unity.

 

[ringo]

Long distance trade has frequently included travelling through very dangerous areas. Don't suppose there was a ever a point when the Silk Road was 100% peaceful and safe. Long distance trade is an indication that there is a profit to be made, safety is one of the risk factors which determines whether that profit is pursued.

I'd have thought the best reason to transport animals is for their meat. Easiest way to move a cow is to make it walk rather than kill it and then carry it while it rots.
They could provide food whilst on the road, could be traded, or could be gifted upon arrival as a dowry or as a contribution to a community or feast.

 

[DotCommunist]

We see here modern influences working on the minds of historical analysts.

you yourself are projecting 'modern influences' back onto a culture so far back as to be virtually unknowable save from what remains tell us. And referencing the iron age to back it up.

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

Long distance trade has frequently included travelling through very dangerous areas. Don't suppose there was a ever a point when the Silk Road was 100% peaceful and safe. Long distance trade is an indication that there is a profit to be made, safety is one of the risk factors which determines whether that profit is pursued.

I'd have thought the best reason to transport animals is for their meat. Easiest way to move a cow is to make it walk rather than kill it and then carry it while it rots.
They could provide food whilst on the road, could be traded, or could be gifted upon arrival as a dowry or as a contribution to a community or feast.

That works for unique goods that can't be locally sourced such as silk or spices but driving animals across the UK is like shopping tea to China.

Driving them great distances for comunal feasting makes more sense than economic reasons iny opinion.

 

[Duncan2]

That works for unique goods that can't be locally sourced such as silk or spices but driving animals across the UK is like shopping tea to China.

Driving them great distances for comunal feasting makes more sense than economic reasons iny opinion.

No doubt they were hardy beasts but yeah not sure how appetising they would be after being driven overland (no M6 I guess) from Skara Brae to preselli hills.Much more likely to have transitted in some stone-age equivalent of a lunch-box surely?

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

actually given lack of overland routes i can imagine they were probably shipped most of the way.

 

[Epona]

Although this theory seems the most likely, for now, it is still not completely proven. There is evidence of animals from scotland but not of people. There could have been a market town somewhere in the centre of the land where cattle was taken and exchanged. A recent documentary I watched was quick to reach the conclusion of unity of peoples while giving scant exposure to a military historian's theories.

One interesting idea is that this unity and the ancient beliefs/burial ceremonies were undermined by the arrival of copper and gold to the Island, brought by more warlike peoples. A time of peace was corrupted, so to speak, by the arrival of "bling".

We see here modern influences working on the minds of historical analysts.

I think though that the reason there could be evidence of animals from Scotland but not people, could be that animals were herded south and then killed, whereas the people were not - the people would have started on their journey back home - so there is evidence of animal remains here from further north, but much evidence of human remains. The people that herded them would not likely have just sat there and died, they'd most likely have headed back.

 

[Anudder Oik]

I think though that the reason there could be evidence of animals from Scotland but not people, could be that animals were herded south and then killed, whereas the people were not - the people would have started on their journey back home - so there is evidence of animal remains here from further north, but much evidence of human remains. The people that herded them would not likely have just sat there and died, they'd most likely have headed back.

Yes, I'm beginning to see how much weight the unification theory has. If there were already similar animals found locally why would they have brought them so far down from Scotland. A peregrination and an offering at such a special place seems more likely.

It's kind of spooky how the stonehenge causeway leading to the site, which consists of two parallel straight lines created by nature, point directly to the winter solstice, and so became a powerful sign for where the people of the time would choose to build (or relocate) their monument.