Stonehenge mathematics

[Hal.]

I noticed that the fireplace where I live has an inner arch shaped geometrically like the inner arch in Stonehenge and the mantle piece standing on two side columns is shaped geometrically like two columns with a crossing stone of the outer circle of Stonehenge . Is Stonehenge in some way an ancestor , architecturally speaking , of the modern household fireplace .

[michel123456]

I noticed that the fireplace where I live has an inner arch shaped geometrically like the inner arch in Stonehenge and the mantle piece standing on two side columns is shaped geometrically like two columns with a crossing stone of the outer circle of Stonehenge . Is Stonehenge in some way an ancestor , architecturally speaking , of the modern household fireplace .

 

Yes.

You first have to figure that architecture do not begin with stone buildings. Usual early shelters are made of wood, mud, vegetation, animal skin, leather and others. Stone buildings appear because of the need of a longstanding structure, that is for spiritual (secular or religious)or defensive purpose, or "other". The fireplace comes under "other".

 

The simplest way to build a structure that will let some place inside, something that would look like a modern building (opposed to a pyramid where the space inside is minuscule) is to put 2 large stones upward and place a 3rd one above. The dimension of the internal space depends on the size of the stone above. This rudimentary way of building is encountered all over the world for thousands of years. Egyptian temples were build on this principle, even classical greek temples have partly the same basic structure.

The bad thing about it is that the internal space you obtain is very narrow. The good thing is that it stands for centuries*.

-----------

*note. The Parthenon temple on the Athens Acropolis would probably be intact today if it weren't blowed out by Morisini in 1687.

----------

note b: Stonehenge "mathematics" were surely influenced by the available dimension of the covering stones.

Edited June 1, 2011 by michel123456

[Sitemaster]

I just tend to be sceptical about the general expectation that ancient peoples were much more advanced than we have assumed. At one time people were amazed to find that many lengths of buildings made by the Ancient Eqyptians were multiples of pi, thus indicating that they had discovered this mathematically sophisticated value before the Ancient Greeks. It was later discovered that the Egyptians measured large distances over land by using a cycle on a pole and counting the number of cycles, thus making distances a mulitiple of pi, even without the Egypticans knowing the number.

 

The point is that the recent research shows that the 'math’s' at Stonehenge was not advanced, it was however the principle behind its design, They simply used rope and peg surveying, e.g. they could lay out an accurate circles, squares, hexagons and octagons (consider the Stonehenge Station Stones, the two surviving stones, and the pits for the missing pair – they are set on the vertices of two opposing facets of an octagon). Also when you look at near contemporary early Bronze Age artefacts, such as the 'Bush Barrow' and 'Clandon Barrow' lozenges, it’s self evident that these prehistoric communities had a sound working knowledge of geometry; nothing 'advanced or sophisticated, just empirical, but given the date for western Europe simply remarkable.

 

 

[Sitemaster]

If you mean Pytheas of Massalia's trip, it was much much later, around 325 BC.

 

 

 

Where do the gold come from? are there gold mines around?

 

OK there was gold to be found in Wales, Devon, and Ireland, as for the tin used in early Bronze Age artefacts: Cornwall, Copper too (Also from North Wales)