50% i am sure it is stone, the other 50%, henge.
Maybe we should be calling it “Stone/Henge” then
Or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, Stone plus Henge. Henge is not a prehistoric megalith unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning Stone system made useful by the Stone corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full megalithic structure as defined by neolithic hunter-gatherers.
I will never get sick of this ridiculous copypasta
That’s exactly how I’ve always pronounced it, too.
Something I learned from QI
Stonehenge is not a true henge, as its ditch runs outside its bank, although there is a small extant external bank as well.
The article you keep linking disagrees.
Although having given its name to the word henge, Stonehenge is atypical in that the ditch is outside the main earthwork bank.
An atypical example of something is still a “true” example of the thing, especially given that the very term derives its origin from Stonehenge itself.
I keep linking…?
An atypical example of something is still a “true” example of the thing, especially given that the very term derives its origin from Stonehenge itself.
I think the article is a bit confused in both defining the “henge” and saying if it is a henge or not. It sets a definition that Stonehenge doesn’t follow, calls it “atypical”, says it’s not “true” henge (whatever that means) and so on. And all of those seem to be not directly sourced. One of the sources makes the confusion even worse:
Ironically, even though Stonehenge has an earthwork circle around it (the earliest phase of the monument), it isn’t officially a ‘proper’ henge, as the main ditch is external to the main bank. It has to make do with being a ‘proto-henge’.
I guess in this use it a “proper” (“true”?) henge is a henge and “proto-henge” is not a henge but a thing that precedes them. That’d explain some of the confusion. Could also be that “proto-henge” is counted as a form of a henge, but I’m not sure. Other examples seem to consider it preceding actual henges.
It would help if there was one definition for henge but there seems to be some that define it like in the article, with the ditch inside and others that just include a ditch.
especially given that the very term derives its origin from Stonehenge itself.
Terms can change over time, it could be the definiton of “henge” has changed.
They reached this conclusion after they found a bunch of papers and scissors laying about
So true!
Wtf is wrong with people
but they weren’t destroying the rock, right? they were just splitting it up into smaller rocks. I bet they’d have a heck of a time actually destroying that rock.
pretty undestructible if you ask me? /s
Ah, the “stick vs.1000 us marines” conundrum
look i know a sure bet when i see one, and someone said that about the lewis light machine gun and 20,000 emus. I’m betting on the stick.
It can only be destroyed by throwing it into the heart of Mount Doom. Or other volcano.
Bonus fun fact: Stonehenge is not a true henge!
Stonehenge did nothing wrong. Henge is the imposter here. Henge came by and just decided to define itself differently to discredit Stonehenge. Henge will never succeed in its sick plot.
if we’re defining it by the ditch, then what is it?
Oh my God, now we’re gatekeeping henges…
Based on the title for The Hill, is it even stone?
Oh damn you had already mentioned this!
The druids designed Stonehenge in inches, but there was a mix-up and the contractor delivered the stones measured in feet.
aLiEnS
alien druid-engineers, foreseeing british hooliganism: yeah, can’t use sandstone here, folks. 👷♀️
…uh, your link is just to a stupid image.
Basalt is pretty tough I hear
No it’s cake!
Is this Loss? This is Loss isn’t it
