Some off topic posts moved from the History subforum.
-Biologista
possible. i, for one, think it may date back to the pre-flood civilization (possibly like th esphynx) but i do not want to turn this into a religious discussion.Stonehenge predates druids by a great deal. The theory is that it was (mostly) built somewhere between 3000 and 2000 BC. That means it was up and gathering moss before the Greeks ever marched on Troy. Long before Rome was a city. Long before there even Greek tribes
since we know of ancient trade, it is not impossible for the ancient world to learn of the blue stones on one of their voyages and traded for them.We can't simply dismiss all the legends associated with Stonehenge, there are too many coincidences. It’s a fact that there are exotic stones at Stonehenge (the bluestones) that came from the west; nobody in the middle ages could have known this. Also not enough is made of the fact that some of the bluestones re-used in the surviving arrays were once part of an earlier lintelled structure, and one that may have stood somewhere other than Stonehenge (the spacing of the early Q and R holes would not accommodate them as ‘trilithon structures’).
i have yet to read anything that says 'the east' refers to africa. usually it meant mesopotamia, persia and that area of the globe.As early as the 17th century Aylett Sammes suggested that the knowledge to build Stonehenge may have come from the east, for which we can say meant to some ‘Africa’.
considering that we have not discovered all the books and writings of the ancient world, i would say this is an assumption that should not be made.In fact, it mostly predates writing and literacy