On 2012-09-17 17:54, Feanor wrote:
Jon,
The Blue Circle represents the extent of the Mound. The Red Dot is its Center, more or less.
Whether its center is exactly where you need it to be or not, this is where it's located. I have a sense that a yard or two wouldn't make a lot of difference in your thinking, since 54 was so heavily chocked on the inside and 154 is so massive.
_______________

Jim,

1) It is thought that there were lulls between the major Phasing, wherein the people employed the edifice as then-currently designed. There is also some evidence, though unconfirmed, that the site may even have been abandoned for a short time at the close of the 1st Phase; after the bewildering posts, but before the Bluestone Crescent and Station Stones.

It is highly unlikely that there was one 'designer'. Like most projects the final work is directed by rational consensus.

The transmission of information across the Generations is thought to have been accomplished by Ritual Song. Each 'Style' of the Culture no doubt had their own Songs.
So the Learned Elite had theirs, the Political Caste had theirs, Farmers and the Rank & File each had theirs.

It is unlikely that the People living during the initial Phase could envision a later design. But later designs incorporated the older constructs into new ideas. The Henge itself was therefore immutable, but, for example, the long-standing Bluestone Crescent of later years apparently survived up to, and even during, the erection of the Sarsens.

2) Song-Transmission is virtually a Universal Method, even today. Many still sing religious songs 300 years after they were written. Many of our well-known children's lullaby's and 'Nonsense Rhymes' are actually scathing political commentary of the 18th & 19th Centuries, and some are even a riff on History. "A ring around the Rosey / A pocket full of Posies ..." is a horrific example of this.

3) The proof is that there is no extant evidence that major changes occurred after the final placement of the Bluestones.
However ... about 3- and 400 years after the Sarsens were erected, a double-ring of 30 pits each, very roughly corresponding to the Sarsens, were gouged out around the circumference of the Monument.
These are known as the 'Y & Z Holes'. Their purpose is a complete mystery, but are generally relegated to a time when the Monument was in Cultural Decline, dug by a people who had forgotten the original Purpose. The accuracy of the Holes is very poor compared to the exactness of the Stone Construct. They date to around 1,500 BC.

4) Obviously, this is a question directed at Jonm. But Tin is far older than Bronze and leaves little trace behind. For his theory to work at the time he asserts, Tin would have to be the metal employed.

Neil

On 2012-09-17 19:48, jonm wrote:
Hi Neil
But where did you get the data for this mound to be able to draw and locate it?
Mound seems very large; perhaps 8 metres radius? Reason for asking is that for my evolution idea, you shouldn't need more than 6 metres radius: So does that 8 metres represent the extent of known mound or does it represent the extent of mound detritis?
Cheers
jon

On 2012-09-18 00:17, Feanor wrote:

Quote:

On 2012-09-17 19:48, jonm wrote: Hi Neil But where did you get the data for this mound to be able to draw and locate it? Mound seems very large; perhaps 8 metres radius? Reason for asking is that for my evolution idea, you shouldn't need more than 6 metres radius: So does that 8 metres represent the extent of known mound or does it represent the extent of mound detritis? Cheers jon

The actual drawing is mine.
The information it's based upon comes originally from a paper on the Y & Z Holes. The Mound data was included because it was a new discovery at the time. c.2005/6 if memory serves. (Though Atkinson may have mumbled something when they righted the South Trilithon 1964)

It's only about 12 inches high at the center and hardly stands out to the casual observer. So, like the big old pit dug in front of 56 and environs, you almost have to know it's there beforehand.

Later, the D&W excavation of 2008 also played in as well, as their dig occurred along the southern edges of it, and had to spade through its overcoat.

My illustration shows the extent of the surface area, though probably up to a meter or so is indiscernible on the surface. So probably 5 or 6 meters is accurate for the main body of it.

Curiously, I have no information that speaks to its origin, e.g. if it's natural or human-made.
Some say it's a natural bump on the slope - others that's it's overthrow from 53 & 54, though I don't buy that.
No doubt George has better sources.

Whatever the case, it's extremely old and laden with Bluestone chips, which makes it at least Stage 4 and perhaps older.

Neil

On 2012-09-20 13:04, Runemage wrote:
Has the area of that mound been excavated? If so, many mounds had a different floor-level material brought in from elsewhere, perhaps that's recorded in dig reports?
Rune