Who Created Stonehenge?

There's a show on Nova right now about the ancients building various large things such as the obelisks, pyramids, the Colosseum, etc. Tonight, it's the obelisk. The shows have been around for quite awhile and besides all the blood, sweat, and tears expended in the process, the point is that all of these things are possible for low-tech humans, given adequate materials, manpower, and ingenuity, with a big emphasis on ingenuity.

The fact is that we are surrounded by feats of equal and greater magnitude every day. Look at your computer, your automobile, the internet. Are Saturn's built on Saturn? Do aliens make Alienware? Who built the space shuttle? Who put a man on the moon? Humans? No. We don't have the technology.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
the point is that all of these things are possible for low-tech humans, given adequate materials, manpower, and ingenuity, with a big emphasis on ingenuity.
The fact is that we are surrounded by feats of equal and greater magnitude every day

Age is a high price for maturity, but if age brings maturity why are there so many seniors who are immature and some children who are so mature? Maturity is more like a labrynth, and the only way out is to die. Some people never get very far their whole lives, while others get a long way through quickly. But, to me, no one is mature, everyone has room for growth.
As for stonehenge, the story I like is that Merlyn the magician used his magic to get the bluestones the 300 miles from the quarry to stonehenge.
I also think that, as great as all our feats are, some ancient ones are still unequaled. They may all be possible, but how we could exactly duplicate something like the great pyramid is still not irrefutably explained.

Originally posted by princeea
How about the ones found in Miami circa 98? Very similar. I think humans could have built them but those stones are HEAVY! Maybe lost technology based on simple principles.

The "ring" found in Miami had nothing to do with megalithic structures like Stonehenge. It was basically a series of holes, dug in a circular pattern, that probably held upright posts that had since rotted away. They found a few talismanic objects in the area, and the entire thing is well explained and well understood.

Romans, Gauls, Celts, Druids and Nephilim. These are the theories?

Stonehenge predates the first two peoples. Possibly it was built by Celts, depends on what you mean by "Celt" (Druids were like priests in Celtic society.) There is no single type of "Celtic peoples" or anything. Celt is a catch-all name for the people that were in britannia when newer people got there and started the slaughter.

The Nephilim, since they never existed, also probably didn't build Stonehenge either, just a hunch.

Stonehenge was started by neolithic tribes about which we know very little. The whole thing begain with a wooden structure constructed within a circular earthwork. This wooden portion of the structure has been dated to around 2950 BCE. This early portion of Stonehenge was likely not built by people we would think of as Celts.

The stone part of the construction was done over a long period of time, and in two major phases (if I recall correctly.) This portion was done by what's called the "Beaker People," named after the distictive pottery beakers found in their graves, and completed around 2,000 BCE. The Beaker People are thought to have migrated to Britain around 2,500 BCE. It's also thought that they are the first people to have brought metallurgy to Britain. They apparently got along with the neolithic farmers they found there, if you know what I mean. Together, they eventually formed what we today call the "Wessex Culture."

This time period of completion, 2,000 BCE, corresponds with what many researchers say is the beggining of the Celtic period, so if you wanted to call them Celts instead of Beaker People, I doubt anyone would fuss too much.

I find it unlikely that they were Nephilim. Their graves are kind of smallish.

Harte

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Age is a high price for maturity, but if age brings maturity why are there so many seniors who are immature and some children who are so mature? Maturity is more like a labrynth, and the only way out is to die. Some people never get very far their whole lives, while others get a long way through quickly. But, to me, no one is mature, everyone has room for growth.

I'm not quite sure what you're attempting to say here, but since you're commenting on my signature, I might suggest that you google Tom Stoppard and get some idea of whom he is and why he says some of the things he says. And while you are on the subject of developmental theories of personality, you might explore the work of Erik Erikson.

Maturity, Wisdom, and Intellect are qualities which aren't awarded on the basis of time served. Sometimes an individual will express more of all three by the time they are twelve years old than another will at seventy. That was all I meant. I do agree that age is a high price to pay for maturity, and I want to know where I can get a refund. After 41 plus years invested, looking back, up until somewhere between 32 and 39 years old, my shipment of the first two must have been on backorder.

Don't sell yourself short. Everything is cumulative and not all of us experience everything the same way at the same time.

I may have lacked in maturity and wisdom, but I have had a surplus of the third one all my life. In my post, I was being pretty honest in my view, as to my late blooming in those two areas. But, I can't complain. Better late than never. I came up with a theory about people that is also a little tongue in cheek but comforts me in a way. Everybody is a liar, and lazy, and stupid. So, although I could be wrong, and Mother Teresa is certainly an anomaly that defies that theory, for the most part, I have seen that I am not at all alone in my condition.
And, I wouldn't trade any of it, even the real traumatic stuff, cuz overall my fortunes have been much better than I could have imagined.

the calander functions of Stonehenge do indeed have a practical value. They link ancient Europe with South America and Polynesia for planting crops. After the flood survivors made an agreement to live the Earth way (remember these survivors witnessed great wars that are the reason for sunken cities all over the world)

Great topic. I've studied the documentaries, I've read several archaeological conclusions, I've seen many charts and maps with lines all over them created by Stonehenge enthusiasts attempting to rationalize astrological motivations, and spiritualistic reasons for it's creation. But nearly every one of those findings can be deduced to coincidence and biased directed discovery. It all falls very flat. Much conjecture. Archeologists in the UK becoming intellectual enemies over the main question: why did they do this seemingly absurd task, this incredibly labor intensive project?

The most profound epiphany I have realized about Stonehenge was that I clearly see a project done in great haste. Then I learned that the tremendous stones were transported 19 miles, where the only near location of the second heaviest stones on the planet (Sarsen) were located. I realized the neoliths did not want stone that was easy to cut (they were very difficult to cut), or stones they could carve upon ornately, or to even scratch drawings or symbols upon. They wanted one thing, they wanted weight, the greatest weight they could find to hold down something underneath the soil and rock of the Salisbury Plains, underneath the first "henge" the stone henge.

No gods indicated. The Britons at the time of this experience had no single god, and no supernatural feelings turned into a religion. The Druids had nothing to do with the creation of Stonehenge, they came upon the scene approximately 300 b.c.. (perhaps 2,000 years later!) I'll bet a fish n chips lunch that if the Britons of Stonehenge creation did have a god and a religion they certainly would have been inspired to reinforce their beliefs using artwork devoted to the subject, like the evidence left by all early gods believing people. But perhaps they really wanted to draw the story of Stonehenge but were forbade by their leaders to draw the story, and later afraid of terrifying lore warning the survivors of the Stonehenge story not to ever draw anything.

I could go on with many explanations of deduction which run counter to much of the Britons think about the rock assembly. But I have decided to place on hold a science fiction novel in progress (Destiny the Story of the End of All Suffering endallsuffering.org) to write Massacre on Salisbury Plain. Here's a teaser to spark thought. Please respect my ownership of these ideas as this will be a science fiction novel perhaps.

"Was Stonehenge constructed solely to conceal an over two-hundred foot diameter flying metal beast and the bodies of it's crew from discovery by allies of the beast certain to come and seek retribution? Is Stonehenge the result of a cover-up of an accidental massacre of aliens at Earths' first contact? Are the overly massive stones actually deceptive weights of imprisonment? Were Stonehenge and the Durrington Walls built to deceive the public? Did the propulsion system on the saucer fire and shake the ground during it's burial in an attempt to retrieve the ship, causing the nearly completed assembly to be quickly abandoned? Was the saucer first concealed by the Durrington Walls then dragged two miles in a straight line between all hills to it's position under Stonehenge? Were the people who created Stonehenge in great fear of telling it's story, or drawing the saucer, or drawing even Stonehenge itself anywhere in Britain, for fear that doing so would bring the saucer's comrades to Earth? Has the British government deterred archaeological studies deep under the monument? Is Stonehenge a local galactic memorial to the danger of contact with humans, and does this explain the great number of UFO sightings in proximity to Stonehenge and the Salisbury Plains? Did the neolithic peoples actually save all of the early Britons from early extinction by angry vengeful aliens by successfully burying and disguising the UFO as Stonehenge?"


Great to be here you guys! I am going to try to take more time to involve myself in forum structured disscussion - because I love this site (so far)!
a reply to: The_Truth_Seeker

a reply to: The_Truth_Seeker

The creators of the original Stonehenge had very sophisticated mathematics in mind. They built it as part of a global array of structures, thus built by people with the ability to travel to all corners of the globe. This math is something they were flaunting, not experimenting with. As demonstrated by Carl Munck, youtu.be... the exact coordinates of Stonehenge were built as a code in the structure itself. (The Prime Meridian must be adjusted to the Great Pyramid of Giza.) 60 stones in the outer circle X 360 degrees of Arc = 21,600. 51 degrees 10 minutes and 42.35 seconds is the latitude of Stonehenge. 51 degrees 10 minutes and 42.35 seconds multiplied together = 21,600. This explains everything in further detail. www.greatdreams.com... Basically it all boils down to a time around 13,000 years ago when man-kind was at the peak of civilization when something disasterous occured and we nearly went extinct. The last 13,000 years have been a rebound, not a dawning.

As the bluestones came from what is now Wales, I would say that the ancient Cymry built it. Nobody would have came and stolen the stones from them to take them to where they now stand.

originally posted by: urbanghost
As the bluestones came from what is now Wales, I would say that the ancient Cymry built it. Nobody would have came and stolen the stones from them to take them to where they now stand.

Can you hear yourself, there was no wales then, no border, no armed militia. The same culture occupied the entire country

We know who built Stonehenge, it was the beaker culture
en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Marduk

What makes you think that the British Isles was "one unified" group of people c. 2500 B.C.E. ???

There is no archeological evidence to support that. There are different burial types, suggesting different origins of different groups. There's cremation burials, excarnation burials, and different styles, sacred styles, of inhumation burials spanning 7000 BCE to 2000 BCE. within the British Isles.

That means different groups of different origins living side by side in the British Isles. Some intermixing-mating, while some warring.

As for the "beaker culture" allegedly building Stonehenge, beaker culture refers more to a pottery style. That pottery style is found throughout Europe from Poland to Spain. Are you really suggesting that the Polish, who also had beaker style pottery, built Stonehenge???

I always figured that it was an ancient mariner group who built Stonehenge. That the bluestones from Wales were taken by boat through the Irish Sea and up the southern coast, river Avon.

The circular monolithic stones of Stonehenge resemble temples on Malta. Usually Malta temples are in duos or triads.

A duo circular temple complex on Malta is usually a Demeter-Persephone temple. The larger circular temple for a Demeter-style agriculture goddess functions as a calendar to calculate planting-farming seasons. The 2nd temple is for Persephone, Demeter's daughter, or Hecate, Demeter's sister.

A triad temple complex on Malta has the large circular temple for a Demeter-style agriculture goddess, which calculates the farming seasons. The two additional temples for Persephone and Hecate.

So far, Stonehenge is a duo temple site. The large one calculating the farming seasons, most likely a Demeter-style goddess. Then they found a 2nd Stonehenge nearby on the west bank of river Avon.

However, there appears to be a lack of the British equivalent of Persephone. There's all kinds of Demeter-style agriculture goddesses among the Welsh, Gaelics and other older cultures. There is a Hecate-style goddess among the Welsh and Gaelics.

Just a lack of a Welsh Persephone or a Gaelic Persephone.

Therefore it was probably a pairing of Welsh/Gaelic Demeter and her circular temple to calculate the farming seasons, paired up with a Welsh/Gaelic version of Hecate, her sister.

Origin.. One of the many ancient mariner groups who settled Malta and the British Isles.

The British Isles was a melting pot of different groups settling by boat 7000 BCE to present. There never was a "unified" single race on the British Isles. Even those crossing the Landbridge from France to England, at the Last Glacial Maximum, some of them may have come from different places.

Just to let you in on a little secret about the first agricultural crops in the British Isles...

The FIRST wheat crop planted in the British Isles was einkorn wheat. Specifically the subspecies aegilopoides. That's very important because it is NOT a native plant to the British Isles.

Triticum monococcum subspecies aegilopoides is a WARM-WEATHER form of einkorn. It is found wherever boat groups migrated in the Aegean, Mediterranean, Adriatic.

All einkorn wheat originates from Turkey. The two other einkorn subspecies are cold weather species. Triticum monococcum monococcum and Triticum monococcum boeticum.

Its not the cold weather species found in the British Isles as the first wheat crop. It's the warm weather aegilopoides einkorn wheat that was a crop of the Stonehenge builders. It was an ancient mariner group who settled the British Isles and brought the warm weather wheat crop with them.

originally posted by: MapMistress
It's the warm weather aegilopoides einkorn wheat that was a crop of the Stonehenge builders. It was an ancient mariner group who settled the British Isles and brought the warm weather wheat crop with them.

Right.
So they sailed there, sat around for 35,000 years, then decided to plant.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

We had to wait a while for the weather to warm up. Hence the henges. Once we'd figured out 'seasons' as the foreigners called them with their clever calendars and all, life was a breeze.

a reply to: beansidhe
But , beansidhe, your calenders predate those darn foreigners by a several thousand years

Maybe they couldn't afford new calendars.

Harte

a reply to: punkinworks10

I was being a bit cheeky - Harte's post made me laugh.

I should write a kinder response.

Earliest calendar so far is from my very own Aberdeenshire, dating from about 10,000 years ago a good couple of thousand years before the Beaker/ Celts/ whatever appeared with their swirly stuff. A lovely Mesolithic fireplace and group of tools was unearthed recently on Islay, dated to around 12,000 years ago. Probably for cooking oats, as we're hearing now from Italy.

So from the available evidence, it looks rather like Scotland taught the pesky foreigners about calendars.