It seems they had become very proficient at it and they hold up far better than most other historical structures. Im still amazed by Peru and of course the pyramids. Supposed 100,000 people in 20 years, 2 million blocks. Absolutely incredible and it doesnt even compare to the 3 million pound blocks in Lebanon.
Gobekli Tepe is interesting too. Another quick unrelated question, why were more ancient carvings usually embossed whereas later its more common to see inscriptions.
If it was too difficult and not worth it then they wouldn't have done it in my opinion. Why did it stop for the most part? Last question, sorry, what was the last megalithic structure built? The pantheon columns are up to 120 tons, is that the most recent?
I'm a little confused and hoping you could clarify so that I (or someone else) can give a clear answer. Why do you think people stopped building megalithic structures? Or maybe better, what defintion of megalithic structure are you using. If you're counting the Roman Pantheon as a megalithic structure, then there are modern monuments that also fit the criteria. For instance, the World War II memorial in Washington, DC was finished in 2004 and is made of granite blocks that would seem fit the criteria of a "megalith" if it had been built 3000 years ago.
