6 ms·

Is 150 miles a big deal because of the time period or because it's the UK? For some reason they seem to make a big deal about distances that are a day trip in

Is 150 miles a big deal because of the time period or because it's the UK? For some reason they seem to make a big deal about distances that are a day trip in the US.

matte_black 8y ago
Probably took about 10 days to cover those 150 miles one way.
- ianai 8y ago
  Why? Is the terrain tough or they just would have been on foot? (Having no knowledge of the geography)
  - matte_black 8y ago
    Probably the dead body was a tough logistics problem. Gotta haul a casket, and also feed the party over the course of the days, while also watching out for roving highwaymen. Perilous days.
    - Alupis 8y ago
      The California missions are spaced approximately 30 miles apart, which was considered a days journey with the intention one could travel from mission to mission. This was, of course, with horses and wagons, etc... So about 10-15 miles a day back then is a reasonable assumption I think.
    - kathe-rine 8y ago
      The scientists in the article suspect that the bodies were cremated elsewhere, and the ashes transported to Stonehenge.
    - chrisseaton 8y ago
      > highwaymen You're about four-and-a-half thousand years out there...
      - matte_black 8y ago
        Perhaps they would be more like roving barbarians.
    - cptskippy 8y ago
      They seemed to manage moving the several ton blue stones from Wales to the site, a dead body seems trivial by comparison. That's assuming the body was dead prior to arrival. For all we know they could have been part of the group delivering stones and died on arrival.
  - chrisseaton 8y ago
    > they just would have been on foot? What era do you think we're talking about? This is about five-thousand years ago. It's the Neolithic Age. There were no cars and probably very few domesticated horses. Yeah... they would have been on foot.
fao_ 8y ago
> For some reason they seem to make a big deal about distances that are a day trip in the US. The terrain in the UK is much, much more dense than in the US. I live in Wales, UK. My train to the nearest city takes (almost exactly) an hour and 10 minutes to travel less than 24 miles distance because of the local geography, it takes the same via car and bus. To contrast, one of my ex-colleagues traveled daily to the same location from 72 miles away via the car, and it took them only 40 minutes because of the variation in geography. EDIT: This isn't to mention the extremes in weather that both the position of the entire island, and the local geography creates. We kept away the Romans for a long time simply through our geography, and weather.
- delinka 8y ago
  Did you perhaps mean “72km away”? If you did mean miles, that’s some very fast driving.
  - fao_ 8y ago
    According to Google the exact driving route is 72.6 miles, it is along several motorways.
    - AaronFriel 8y ago
      There are motorways where people (safely) drive 175km/hr in the UK?
      - ggm 8y ago
        I used to hitch rides in the UK. The number of travelling salesmen who drive continuously at over 90 miles/hr freaked me out (lorry drivers didn't speed nearly as much. They have tachometers) So whilst this is the upper edge, from personal experience I can believe it.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
GlennS 8y ago
The people who built Stonehenge probably didn't have wheels or domesticated horses. Also, Wales is hilly [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=wales&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=wales&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images...], and there is a the choice of a either rather dangerous river [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=severn+bore&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=severn+bore&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=...] or the Irish Sea [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=wales+south+coast&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=wales+south+coast&t=ffab&iar=image...] to get past to get from Wales to Stonehenge. On the other hand, all that water probably helped when they had to get the stones there.
- singularity2001 8y ago
  Sledges were a thing before 4000BC, the wheel became widespread by 3000BC, so at least the later structures sure had some wheel tech involved.
  - TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
    In fact no one knows how the stones were moved. You will not find an archaeologist willing to put money down with a definitive statement - even for the sarsens, which are relatively local. Whatever the tech used, it was beyond a Moon shot in neolithic terms.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
untog 8y ago
In addition to what others have said, this is also one part of a larger mystery. The stones that make up Stonehenge also came from Wales, and people have been trying to work out for a long time how on earth people transported rocks that size.
chrisseaton 8y ago
> Is 150 miles a big deal because of the time period or because it's the UK? For some reason they seem to make a big deal about distances that are a day trip in the US. Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not... but Stonehenge was built before there were cars or widespread domesticated horses in Britain. 150 miles is not a day-trip on foot.
- cptskippy 8y ago
  I wasn't implying that 150 miles was a day trip when Stonehenge was built. I was questioning more why the distance was significant in the original title. Assuming the bodies were brought from Wales, 150 miles wouldn't be a remarkable distance to transport a body. I say that because the stones in Stonehenge came from Wales and are orders of magnitude more difficult to transport than a body would have been. And that's assuming these are people who died in Wales when it's entirely possible these might have been the people moving the stones or constructing the monument who died on site. On the other hand, people in the UK today seem to make a much bigger deal about travel distances than people from other countries.
cup-of-tea 8y ago
You do understand that people 5000 years ago didn't have cars, right? I suggest going for a long walk some time. It gives you a proper understanding of geography.
- alkonaut 8y ago
  Still, 150 miles on foot seems like noting in this context considering the stones are from what 30 miles away? That is hard to fathom.
- cptskippy 8y ago
  The original title implied the 150 mile distance was significant. Consider however that the stones for the monument came from Wales too and are much much heavier than a corpse. Also it's entirely possible the "corpse" was alive when it left Wales and died en route or at the monument. Perhaps they were involved in transporting the rocks. So my question was, what's the significance of the distance here? Doesn't seem like there's much and that it's just British people being British about their distances.

Is 150 miles a big deal because of the time period or because it's the UK? For some reason they seem to make a big deal about distances that are a day trip in the US.

matte_black 8y ago

Probably took about 10 days to cover those 150 miles one way.

ianai 8y ago
Why? Is the terrain tough or they just would have been on foot? (Having no knowledge of the geography)
- matte_black 8y ago
  Probably the dead body was a tough logistics problem. Gotta haul a casket, and also feed the party over the course of the days, while also watching out for roving highwaymen. Perilous days.
  - Alupis 8y ago
    The California missions are spaced approximately 30 miles apart, which was considered a days journey with the intention one could travel from mission to mission. This was, of course, with horses and wagons, etc... So about 10-15 miles a day back then is a reasonable assumption I think.
  - kathe-rine 8y ago
    The scientists in the article suspect that the bodies were cremated elsewhere, and the ashes transported to Stonehenge.
  - chrisseaton 8y ago
    > highwaymen You're about four-and-a-half thousand years out there...
    - matte_black 8y ago
      Perhaps they would be more like roving barbarians.
  - cptskippy 8y ago
    They seemed to manage moving the several ton blue stones from Wales to the site, a dead body seems trivial by comparison. That's assuming the body was dead prior to arrival. For all we know they could have been part of the group delivering stones and died on arrival.
- chrisseaton 8y ago
  > they just would have been on foot? What era do you think we're talking about? This is about five-thousand years ago. It's the Neolithic Age. There were no cars and probably very few domesticated horses. Yeah... they would have been on foot.

fao_ 8y ago

> For some reason they seem to make a big deal about distances that are a day trip in the US. The terrain in the UK is much, much more dense than in the US. I live in Wales, UK. My train to the nearest city takes (almost exactly) an hour and 10 minutes to travel less than 24 miles distance because of the local geography, it takes the same via car and bus. To contrast, one of my ex-colleagues traveled daily to the same location from 72 miles away via the car, and it took them only 40 minutes because of the variation in geography. EDIT: This isn't to mention the extremes in weather that both the position of the entire island, and the local geography creates. We kept away the Romans for a long time simply through our geography, and weather.

delinka 8y ago
Did you perhaps mean “72km away”? If you did mean miles, that’s some very fast driving.
- fao_ 8y ago
  According to Google the exact driving route is 72.6 miles, it is along several motorways.
  - AaronFriel 8y ago
    There are motorways where people (safely) drive 175km/hr in the UK?
    - ggm 8y ago
      I used to hitch rides in the UK. The number of travelling salesmen who drive continuously at over 90 miles/hr freaked me out (lorry drivers didn't speed nearly as much. They have tachometers) So whilst this is the upper edge, from personal experience I can believe it.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]

GlennS 8y ago

The people who built Stonehenge probably didn't have wheels or domesticated horses. Also, Wales is hilly [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=wales&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=wales&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images...], and there is a the choice of a either rather dangerous river [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=severn+bore&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=severn+bore&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=...] or the Irish Sea [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=wales+south+coast&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=wales+south+coast&t=ffab&iar=image...] to get past to get from Wales to Stonehenge. On the other hand, all that water probably helped when they had to get the stones there.

singularity2001 8y ago
Sledges were a thing before 4000BC, the wheel became widespread by 3000BC, so at least the later structures sure had some wheel tech involved.
- TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
  In fact no one knows how the stones were moved. You will not find an archaeologist willing to put money down with a definitive statement - even for the sarsens, which are relatively local. Whatever the tech used, it was beyond a Moon shot in neolithic terms.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

untog 8y ago

In addition to what others have said, this is also one part of a larger mystery. The stones that make up Stonehenge also came from Wales, and people have been trying to work out for a long time how on earth people transported rocks that size.

chrisseaton 8y ago

> Is 150 miles a big deal because of the time period or because it's the UK? For some reason they seem to make a big deal about distances that are a day trip in the US. Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not... but Stonehenge was built before there were cars or widespread domesticated horses in Britain. 150 miles is not a day-trip on foot.

cptskippy 8y ago
I wasn't implying that 150 miles was a day trip when Stonehenge was built. I was questioning more why the distance was significant in the original title. Assuming the bodies were brought from Wales, 150 miles wouldn't be a remarkable distance to transport a body. I say that because the stones in Stonehenge came from Wales and are orders of magnitude more difficult to transport than a body would have been. And that's assuming these are people who died in Wales when it's entirely possible these might have been the people moving the stones or constructing the monument who died on site. On the other hand, people in the UK today seem to make a much bigger deal about travel distances than people from other countries.

cup-of-tea 8y ago

You do understand that people 5000 years ago didn't have cars, right? I suggest going for a long walk some time. It gives you a proper understanding of geography.

alkonaut 8y ago
Still, 150 miles on foot seems like noting in this context considering the stones are from what 30 miles away? That is hard to fathom.
cptskippy 8y ago
The original title implied the 150 mile distance was significant. Consider however that the stones for the monument came from Wales too and are much much heavier than a corpse. Also it's entirely possible the "corpse" was alive when it left Wales and died en route or at the monument. Perhaps they were involved in transporting the rocks. So my question was, what's the significance of the distance here? Doesn't seem like there's much and that it's just British people being British about their distances.