The bluestone with the scale in Mike's first post is 1958 Excavation, Unidentified Bluestone. https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/photos/item/P51121. I have seen the two photos of it in the archive and it looks like Spotted Dolerite to me and it is labelled as being at Stonehenge, with what looks like a chalky pile behind it. But I must admit I can't see it in any other photos of the excavations. If it isn't Stonehenge though where would it be, where else would Atkinson have dug up such a stone? And that then got mislabeled? That the scale only appears in these couple of photographs isn't a worry, it also appears in two other Stonehenge photos https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/photos/item/P51898 and https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/photos/item/P51899 .We can also see that the archive numbering indicates that these photographs are in the series of Stonehenge ones.2 The stone in the marked face does not look like the little we know of that end of the Altar Stone, which appears to be smoothly dressed (note other end is rough, suggests how it might have stood upright?)
— Mike Pitts (@pittsmike) October 3, 2024
3 Mark down the centre of the stone face looks like steel drilling
2/2 pic.twitter.com/S9JgXXvbHO
The only other photo that shows the eastern end of the Altar stone is https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/photos/item/P51908:
Richard Atkinson in the 1979 revision of his book Stonehenge described the ends of the Altar Stone: "The north-western end of the stone was found to have been heavily battered and defaced by former souvenir-hunters; but enough remained to suggest that in its original form it had been squared off at right-angles to the length of the stone.
The other end, (The one we are discussing) however, was better preserved, and had clearly been dressed to an oblique bevelled outline, very much like the bases of some of the sarsens (e.g. stones 57 an d 58).
The purpose of these obliquely pointed bases seems to have been to facilitate the final adjustment of the stone after it had been raised to vertical position. The occurrence of the same form, deliberately worked, at one end of the Altar Stone suggests that it too was a pillar, and one which, in view of its exceptional size among the bluestones, probably stood on the axial line.
My opinion is that the photo of the engraved stone matches both the description and the other photo of that end of the Altar Stone.
As to whether it is a quartz vein or a drill hole I am undecided and I don't think either indicate whether or not it is at Stonehenge.
The stone in the photograph is a sedimentary rock with its layers lying in the natural position with worked sides and a rougher top. It is about 50cm thick, according to the scale and lying in a dark chalky soil. All of this is also a description of the Altar Stone. I can point out similar areas in it on other photos of the Altar Stone but I accept they are not definitive.
The other area that looks very similar is the middle section where it is exposed between 55b and 156 and the edges are worn down. And if the soil hadn't been removed under the overlying fallen stones the section would look similar to the photograph. The caption says it is taken from the North East but if it was taken towards the North East then it would be of the excavated southern side that we have no photographs of.
So I am sure the engraving photographs were taken at Stonehenge, where else could they be of?
To suggest it is from an excavation anywhere else would need to be supported by photographs and documentation of the other site.
And that it is of the Altar Stone. I think it is very likely to be eastern end but it could be on the southern side. In the two pictures of the scratched stone I notice the section edge showing on the right which is coming back towards the camera. That end of the stone hasn't been excavated. I can't square that with the other photos of his excavation, though of course it might be during the dig. However I think it does match with the middle section looking north east where the soil under 55b doesn't appear to have been excavated. And the top of the stone matches the curve. So this is an alternative part of the Altar Stone they might be on. Or even at the eastern end of the south side.
UPDATE - I am now sure it is the middle of the stone as shown below - https://www.sarsen.org/2024/12/the-location-of-altar-stone-engravings.html
Which makes the indecipherable note with an arrow pointing at the South side on Atkinson's plan intriguing. I am trying to track down the original.
Click to enlarge.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments welcome on fresh posts - you just need a Google account to do so.