The Altar Stone Outline based on Atkinson.
Richard Atkinson in the 1979 revision of his "Stonehenge" book addressed the question of whether the Altar Stone was erected or not:
"During the work of restoration in 1958 a small excavation was made round the Altar Stone in order to settle its exact shape, and thus to decide, if possible, whether it had ever formerly stood upright on one end.
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, 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,"
Leaving aside that no stone hole at either end was found where it could have fallen from his logic seems to me to be very weak. And his squared off end doesn't appear to be so in his photo, below.
His belief is that an oblique end to a stone indicates it was a buried end, whereas I think that monoliths with a sloped top are more common than with a squared end.
I don't think the angles of the ends of the Altar Stone tell us anything about whether it was ever vertical. The absence of evidence that was, however, give us a reason to believe it was placed prone deliberately in its present position.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments welcome on fresh posts - you just need a Google account to do so.