0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
85 просмотров29 страниц
The megalithic "sarsen stones" in England are suggested to have been ballistically transported and emplaced by a meteoritic impact process as evidenced by their enigmatic distribution and shapes as well as geologic, mineralogical and fracture-mechanical observations.
The megalithic "sarsen stones" in England are suggested to have been ballistically transported and emplaced by a meteoritic impact process as evidenced by their enigmatic distribution and shapes as well as geologic, mineralogical and fracture-mechanical observations.
The megalithic "sarsen stones" in England are suggested to have been ballistically transported and emplaced by a meteoritic impact process as evidenced by their enigmatic distribution and shapes as well as geologic, mineralogical and fracture-mechanical observations.
While still working in Brazil and browsing the web for craters, circular structures, megaliths and related topics, I inevitably came around to viewing images of the megaliths and henges of Western Europe, in particular the massive blocks that have gone into the standing stone circles of Avebury and Stonehenge. I became convinced that I could see similar textures and shapes in the megaliths to those in the rocks that I had been examining in the diamondiferous ejecta deposits in Brazil and that are described in the impact-generated deposits of Belize (Figure 2- 14).
Returning to England in 2002, I soon made a beeline to Avebury where unlike at Stonehenge, the sarsen stone megaliths may still be examined close-up. My suspicions were readily confirmed, as the sarsen stones are an incredibly tough quartzite and show abundant annealed fractures, clusters of deep, often perfectly circular (in cross section) tubular cavities, rounded edges, glazing, iron oxide rinds, often confined to one or two faces, Hertzian fracture rings, large hemispherical indentations and intruded foreign matter, all features that are seen in impact ejecta. Some archaeologists and New Agers believe that they can see human faces, replicas of human genitalia and all sorts of wondrous artefacts on the stones, but it is quite clear that the majority of these superficial features are natural, including their overall dimensions as well as the cup marks or cupules of the archaeologists. Artificial shaping of the sarsens at Stonehenge is almost entirely restricted to the crude mortice and tenon jointing of the trilithons and possibly some minor squaring up of the lintels. The sarsen material is simply too tough to carve, even with tools made of modern alloys. In the absence of concentrated hydrofluoric acid rain, the numerous broad hemispherical indentation hollows, the V- shaped cross sections of annealed fractures and the trumpet-shaped flaring of otherwise cylindrical impact cavities, must be attributed to atmospheric ablation during ballistic flight, rather than weathering or human effort. Due to the intense heat created by impact, the sarsen stones actually became malleable, explaining the annealed and often curved fractures, deep penetration by colliding particles and the overall plastic appearance.
Figures 3-1 to 3-5 illustrate most of the features referred to above. It is widely believed that those hollows that are not carved cupules are weathered-out plant roots in the original sand deposits that are thought to have been the origin of the sarsens. While there is some evidence of fossil root-like matter in some of the smaller stones, it may be shown that they were ablated, or burned out during ballistic transportation. However, the larger holes were created by collisions with smaller particles while the hot megaliths were still in flight in the ejecta curtain(s) (Figure 3-6). Figure 3-7 shows two examples of preserved impacted matter. As an example of fossil matter in sarsen stones, Figure 3-8 shows remains of two animal bones that have been largely burned out during ballistic flight.
Figure 3-1. One of the sarsen megaliths of the main circle at Avebury.
Located at the top right of 3-1a, 3-1b shows five impact hollows having various depths of penetration and angles of incidence of colliding particles. Note how the iron oxide crust has largely been flayed off, but still survives in the flared mouths of the hollows.
Located at lower right of 3-1a, 3-1c shows abundant Hertzian fracture rings developed on a surface so smoothed by atmospheric ablation that lichen cannot take hold.
Located at lower left of 3-1a, 3-1d shows faintly rifled impact hollows at varied angles, some surviving iron oxide crust and a generally ragged appearance, believed to represent the trailing edge to the megalith during much of its ballistic travel.
Figure 3-2. Various megaliths of the Avebury monument to show the overall plastic appearance and the V-shaped flaring of fractures due to atmospheric ablation during ballistic flight.
In 3-2d, striations and impact hollows indicating much of the ballistic flight of the stone was with the upper left part being the leading edge. Incidentally, this megalith is known as the Barber Stone, as an itinerant barber-surgeon was squashed beneath it in the early 14 th Century, while helping topple it for break-up for masonry work.
Figure 3-3. Looking NW along the main megalith circle towards the heart of Avebury village. The second stone shows heavy fracturing created in the initial cratering process, yet the coherence of the megalith as a whole indicates that extreme heat flooded the target rocks immediately prior to ejection. Note the curving, discontinuous nature of the fractures in the first stone and the V-shaped flaring of the fractures, the latter caused by in-flight ablation.
Figure 3-4. The wobbly rectangular shapes at Stonehenge stand in strong contrast to the stones at Avebury and, indeed, to any other collection of sarsens seen anywhere. Whereas the shapes are believed to be largely artificial by the archaeologists, close examination shows the same impact hollows caused by mutual interference in the ejecta curtain, the same V-shaped flaring of discontinuous fractures caused by in- flight atmospheric ablation and some faces of the megaliths show thin coatings of secondary iron oxide; all natural features of ejecta blocks. Even in detail, the super square shapes of the lintels of the trilithons may be shown to be natural, probably reflecting jointing and stratification in the precursor target rocks.
Figure 3-5. Several of the recumbent megaliths of Stonehenge, such as the Heel Stone shown here, are far from square and show all of the signs of the impact ejecta origin of other sarsens stones around England. As an aside, try fitting this stone in the minds eye into the scenario on the Martian surface shown in Figure 9-5.
Figure 3-6. Various examples from the Avebury monument and nearby Marlborough Downs to show that the cupules are neither carved nor weathered-out roots but rather were created by mutual collisions of particles in the ejecta curtains, while the now incredibly hard and tough sarsen stones were still hot and malleable. Note radial fractures around the head-sized hole in 3-6c.
In 3-6e, note the double indentations, where spalling of the harder, congealing shell to the megalith has taken place around impacts by relatively small projectiles.
Figure 3-7. Occasionally, impacted particles may be found at the termini of impact pits. 3-7a shows a shattered cobble of flint impacted into sarsen, while 3-7b shows remnants of an iron oxide projectile in the left hole. Beware, though; the used batteries, cheap rings, polished quartz pebbles, chewing gum and wrappers, etc., left by the New Age folk as votive offerings during the summer solstice, should not be confused for the real thing!
Figure 3-8. 3-8a shows a short row of standing sarsen stones in the more southerly of the two inner circles at Avebury. Note the curved, discontinuous fractures, with characteristic V-shaped cross sections, in the first and third stone, as well as the partial iron oxide coatings on the three front stones. In the first stone there are two grooves forming a V-shape. In close-up (3-8b) two separate fossil bones, possibly mammalian rib bones, are seen to have been partially burned out during ballistic flight.
Looking beyond the megaliths stood in circles by ancient people, it is instructive to examine smaller stones in field walls, barns, churches and homes in the villages, towns and farms in those parts of southern England where wild sarsen stone occurrences are noted. In the village of Avebury, for example, there are some stones incorporated into walls dating back to medieval times, that with their iron oxide crusts, deep circular indentations, Hertzian rings and overall rounded appearance (Figures 3-9 and 3-10) could have come from the diamondfields of Brazil or from around some well documented impact craters in Europe.
Figure 3-9. Two mini-sarsens built into medieval walls in Avebury village. Note oxide crusts, Hertzian fracture rings, circular and elongated impact pits, as well as overall rounding.
Figure 3-10. The very numerous tiny pits in 3-10a may well be due to the ablation penetration of fossil root matter, but the deep grooves and striations and the overall iron oxide coating point to this mini-sarsen (the only seating provided at the Avebury bus stop) being a complete ejecta block. The dimples and partial oxide coating in 3- 10b were acquired in ballistic flight.
Many archaeologists who show any interest in the actual origin of the sarsen stones, and who are prepared to think beyond the mystical, suggest that they may be glacially transported erratics. Others tend to promote the explanation favoured by the British Geological Survey (BGS), that the stones are isolated, silicified remnants of a once more or less continuous sand deposit, that in early Tertiary times was draped up-hill and down-dale on top of the Upper Cretaceous Chalk. (Note that the BGS uses the term hardpan silcrete for the sarsen stones see silcrete in Chapter 6.) The provenance of this pure silica sand on top of the pure carbonate uplands is not explained by the BGS. Neither explanation may be supported in the field at any of the several locations in southern England where sarsen stones have been preserved in their original positions, free from the ravages of Ancient Brits and the builders of churches, houses, field walls, gateposts, roads, railways, bridges, sea defences and canals in later times. Figures 3-11 to 3-16 illustrate areas where sarsen stones remain unmolested.
Figure 3-11. Wild sarsen stones preserved to the west of Lockeridge village, 4.5 km SE of the Avebury stone circles. Note the flared hole passing right through the stone in 3-11c, which must be contrasted with the sharp edges at the broken end of the stone.
Figure 3-12. Sarsen stones at the Valley of Stones in Dorset, over 100 km SW of Avebury. The flint-rich material seen in 3-12a and 3-12b is somewhat whimsically named Hertfordshire Puddingstone where found in areas north of London and where it is never found in outcrop just superficial blocks, like the sarsens. In the nearby village of Portesham, large sarsens were simply built over or around; a huge lump lies in the middle of the school playground, on the other side of the street from 3-12c. It is worth noting that the stones shown in 3-12a and 3-12b lie at 185 metres ASL, whereas those in the Portesham village lie at 65 metres, with 1.5 km distance between the two sites. In 3-12a, there is nothing to indicate that the stones have suffered downhill transportation by the freeze-thaw processes so often cited for their local concentration. Indeed, although there appears to be a concentration along the valley floor, the centre of the scene marks a concentration of stones in an ill-defined line coming up the hill towards the viewer. Note also the large hemi-spherical impact hollow in the larger foreground stone in 3-12a.
Figure 3-13. A field of preserved sarsen stones at Fyfield Bottom, 4 km ESE of Avebury village. The stone in 3-13b was certainly not shaped by weathering!
Figure 3-14. Sarsens sitting shallowly on a flat field of dark loam (see mole hills) at Ashdown House in Berkshire, some 23 km NE of Avebury. 3-14b clearly shows relict stratification.
Figure 3-15. The most extensive area of preserved sarsen stones, still resting more or less where they landed following ballistic emplacement, is in an area known as Overton Down, immediately to the east and northeast of Avebury. The megalith in 3- 15a is the size of a small bus. 3-15b shows a variety of shapes and degrees of oxide coating. The plastic appearance of some sarsens is readily seen in 3-15c. It is not uncommon to see a string of sarsen stones as in 3-15d. The rounded plastic nature of the large stone in the foreground should be contrasted with the angularity of the stone just beyond it.
Figure 3-16. Also on Overton Down. Shows the densest cluster of wild sarsens that I have found anywhere. The strange cut-off in sarsen distribution at the break of slope is repeated along a distinct line extending 2 km to the SE. An explanation is still sought.
3-16b shows some differences in lithology within the cluster of 3-16a, with three blocks of more yellow sarsen. There is considerable contrast in the shapes of the stones, with sharp edged stones adjacent to rounded, plastic shapes.
I have collected seven samples of sarsen stones from widely separated locations in southern England and have prepared thin sections for microscopic examination. In all of the samples, shocked quartz (diagnostic of the effects of impact or underground nuclear testing), exhibited by numerous secondary planar laminae, varies from detectable to abundant (Figure 3-17). Some reluctant specialists claim that some secondary planar features in quartz may also be generated by intense tectonic deformation, rather than impact shock. However, such an explanation would hardly serve for lumps of rock sitting lightly on top of the Chalk in this little-deformed terrain.
Figure 3-17. Planar deformation features (most are distorted due to multiple impacting) in quartz grains from various samples of sarsens, indicate moderate shock and are diagnostic of an impact origin. Quartz in thin sections of un-shocked rocks is water-clear. Note that 3-17d and 3-17e represent the same field of view, with 3-17d using cross polarised light and 3-17e using plain polarized light.
So, if the sarsen megaliths of the Avebury stone circles and of Stonehenge may be shown to be artificial arrangements of blocks that were left lying around the countryside by ballistic means, what about the legendary bluestones that make up a lesser portion of the Stonehenge monument? The word bluestone is collectively applied to various volcanic and sedimentary lithologies used in the monument, including 32 spotted and unspotted dolerites, 5 rhyolite tuffs, 2 micaceous sandstones and the single green sandstone block known as the altar stone. As entirely similar lithologies occur in the Preseli Hills of North Pembrokeshire in SW Wales, which lie approximately 225 km to the WNW of Stonehenge there is general agreement that the bluestones came from there. But, how were they transported?
Some archaeologists (and even some geologists) have called for glacial transportation of the bluestones, however, anyone familiar with what glaciers powerful enough to transport morainic material for such distances can do to soft rock formations such as the Chalk would never even dream of such a mechanism.
An alternative mechanism for bluestone transportation; that is by human effort, has been championed for some time now and has been the subject of several popular documentaries and numerous learned papers. However, efforts to replicate heaving the stones overland to the sea coast, humping them onto rafts for sea and river transportation, ready for the long slog up to the Salisbury Plain, have ended in early failure.
I recently paid a brief visit to the Preseli Hills and the surrounding lowlands and I found precisely what I expected to find. Ignoring the finer grade material, there are two types of megalithic occurrences present in the region. Type A are those usually rather angular blocks that are derived from numerous tor-like outcrops and which are confined to the steeper slopes surrounding the outcrops. Gravity can only distribute them so far before they reach their natural angle of repose, that is, in the absence of any fluidisation processes such as tsunamis (tidal waves) or seismic shaking, both of which may have been periodically operative for reasons given below. The second type of megalith, Type B, is strewn all over the place, regardless of topography. These are usually sub-angular to rounded and some have distinctive shard-like or axe head shapes. That some, be they lying on scree slopes of the Type A occurrences or lying in a clump of boulders in a flat field, have significantly different lithologies to their immediately adjoining neighbours, strongly suggests that they are blocks ejected from large impact craters. In many cases, the shapes of these megalithic blocks and their erratic distribution are strongly reminiscent of the sarsen stones.
Figures 3-18 and 3-19 illustrate the distinction between Type A and Type B megaliths.
Figure 3-18. The Pentre Ifan dolmen is built with Type B megaliths as are the bases of all of the boundary hedges between pastures that were once strewn by stones of all sizes. The Type A megaliths are true scree-type material derived by erosion and gravity from such tors or carns seen in the distance.
Figure 3-19. In the foreground pasture in 3-19a there are three cows and two very large Type B bluestone blocks. Smaller stones have been moved aside to form the bases for the boundary hedges. All of the hedges seen on the rolling hills in the background have similar stone bases. These stones and those of the scenes below could not have arrived in position by normal erosional and gravity processes, nor were they glacially transported: 3-19b and 3-19c show nearly level pastures where the Type B stones have been left exactly as they landed following ballistic flight.
What is suggested, then, is that both the sarsen stones and the bluestones ended up on the Salisbury Plain by ballistic means. The location of impact craters responsible for the ejected material will require detailed provenance studies, but there is undoubtedly plenty of room for them in the English Channel, the Bristol Channel, the North Sea and the Irish Sea, in all of which, deep arcuate embayments, underlain by the requisite lithologies, would constitute prime candidates. Returning to the specific problem of the ballistic mixing of sarsen stones and bluestones in the vicinity of Stonehenge, it must be recognised that a great deal of the primary evidence has been modified, because such hard, erosion resistant material was a godsend to earlier builders. However, the rocks have not evaporated and a systematic study of stone walls in a narrow swath of terrain between the Preseli Hills and Salisbury Plain will definitively prove the contention presented here.
Like some of the megaliths in the diamondfields of Brazil, the sarsen stones and the ejected bluestones of Wales show by their superficiality on the landscape that they are of geologically very recent origin. As the sarsen stones, in particular, show abundant signs of having been heated to many hundreds of degrees, it would be reasonable to expect charred vegetation to have been trapped below them. Judicious lifting of some wild sarsens in a variety of locations may well provide carbon for accurate dating by the Carbon 14 method.
Although still a work in progress evidence is emerging from around the margins of the North Sea and on the Isle of Wight that the impacting took place at the end of the Pleistocene and that the sarsen stones are impact- generated spall plates, derived from the Barton Sand unit of Late Eocene age.
If indeed I have shown that there is an impact generated origin for the sarsen stones and the bluestones, then I believe it would be appropriate to re-examine scores of other monumental stone circles, avenues, dolmens and stand-alone monoliths, not only in western Europe, but many other locations worldwide for a similar origin of the stones.
One parting shot, before moving on to other topics: William Stukeley, in his documentation of the Avebury stone circles in the 1720s, presented a panoramic engraving, viewing the scenery of the monuments looking to the North (Figure 3-20). The outer stone circle is shown with the two inner circles, as well as two somewhat serpentine appendages; the southwesterly-trending Beckhampton Avenue and the southeasterly- trending West Kennet Avenue. Roughly centrally disposed between the ends of the two avenues is the conical Silbury Hill, reputedly the largest artificial mound in Europe. Is it just possible (and I admit to being somewhat out of my depth here) that the Avebury stone circles and avenues are monuments to a catastrophic collision of a comet with Earth, the awesome memory of which was verbally passed down the generations, the story originating from a few survivors from distant parts? What is more fitting than a monument made of the very products of the horrific occasion; the ejected blocks that mercilessly rained down upon the people for a brief but highly memorable period? At the time of construction of the monument, the 6 metres deep trench and the outer ring mound were of shining white chalk rock perhaps symbolic of the periodic, then ever-nearing approach of the comet itself. Could the serpentine avenues have represented the comet tails, albeit somewhat embellished by repeated story telling? The only other object in the firmament that was brighter than the comet was the Sun, which could be represented by the conical hill of gleaming white chalk, Silbury Hill. No more fanciful than the icons to and the deification of Japanese and American aircraft by the peoples of Papua-New Guinea, even if a lot more hard work!
Figure 3-20. William Stukeleys engraving of the Avebury scene.
English 11 - Topic: Volunteering & Heritage Sites - Practice Test 1 (Time Limit: 60') Họ và tên học sinh: ………………………… Lớp…………………… GV: Diệu Thúy - 038 693 0968