Stonehenge Is A Prehistoric Monument Located In The English County Of Wiltshire, About 3.2 Kilometres (2.0 Mi)West Of Amesbury And 13 Kilometres (8.1 Mi) North Of Salisbury. One Of The Most Famous Sites In The World,
Stonehenge Is Composed Of Earthworks Surrounding A Circular Setting Of Large Standing Stones. It Is At The
Centre Of The Most Dense Complex Of Neolithic And Bronze Age Monuments In England, Including Several Hundred
Burial Mounds.[1] Archaeologists Had Believed That The Iconic Stone Monument Was Erected Around 2500 Bc, As
Described In The Chronology Below. One Recent Theory, However, Has Suggested That The First Stones Were Not
Erected Until 2400-2200 Bc,[2] Whilst Another Suggests That Bluestones May Have Been Erected At The Site As
Early As 3000 Bc (see Phase 1 Below). The Surrounding Circular Earth Bank And Ditch, Which Constitute The
Earliest Phase Of The Monument, Have Been Dated To About 3100 Bc. The Site And Its Surroundings Were Added
To The Unesco's List Of World Heritage Sites In 1986 In A Co-listing With Avebury Henge Monument. It Is A
National Legally Protected Scheduled Ancient Monument. Stonehenge Is Owned By The Crown And Managed By
English Heritage, While The Surrounding Land Is Owned By The National Trust.[3][4]
served as a burial ground from its earliest beginnings.[5] The dating of cremated remains found on the site indicate
burials from as early as 3000 BC, when the initial ditch and bank were first dug. Burials continued at Stonehenge
for at least another 500 years.[6]
Contents
• 1 Etymology
• 2 History
o 2.1 Before the monument (8000 BC forward)
o 2.2 Stonehenge 1 (ca. 3100 BC)
o 2.3 Stonehenge 2 (ca. 3000 BC)
o 2.4 Stonehenge 3 I (ca. 2600 BC)
o 2.5 Stonehenge 3 II (2600 BC to 2400 BC)
o 2.6 Stonehenge 3 III
o 2.7 Stonehenge 3 IV (2280 BC to 1930 BC)
o 2.8 Stonehenge 3 V (2280 BC to 1930 BC)
o 2.9 After the monument (1600 BC on)
o 2.10 16th century to present
? 2.10.1 Neopaganism
? 2.10.2 Setting and access
• 3 Function and construction
• 4 Folklore
o 4.1 "Friar’s Heel" or the "Sunday Stone"
o 4.2 Arthurian legend
• 5 Archaeological research and restoration
EtymologyThe Oxford English Dictionary cites Ælfric's 10th-century glossary, in which henge-cliff is given the meaning
"precipice", a hanging or supported stone, thus the stanenges or Stanheng ("not far from Salisbury") recorded by
11th-century writers are "supported stones". William Stukeley in 1740 notes, "Pendulous rocks are now called henges
in Yorkshire...I doubt not, Stonehenge in Saxon signifies the hanging stones."[7] Christopher Chippindale's
Stonehenge Complete gives the derivation of the name Stonehenge as coming from the Old English words stan
meaning "stone", and either hencg meaning "hinge" (because the stone lintels hinge on the upright stones) or
hen(c)en meaning "hang" or "gallows" or "instrument of torture". Like Stonehenge's trilithons, medieval gallows
consisted of two uprights with a lintel joining them, rather than the inverted L-shape more familiar today.
The "henge" portion has given its name to a class of monuments known as henges.[7] Archaeologists define
henges as earthworks consisting of a circular banked enclosure with an internal ditch.[8] As often happens in
archaeological terminology, this is a holdover from antiquarian usage, and Stonehenge is not truly a henge site as
its bank is inside its ditch. Despite being contemporary with true Neolithic henges and stone circles, Stonehenge is
in many ways atypical - for example, at over 24 feet tall, its extant trilithons supporting lintels held in place with
mortise and tenon joints, make it unique.[9][10]
[edit] History
Plan of Stonehenge in 2004. After Cleal et al. and Pitts. Italicised numbers in the text refer to the labels on this
plan. Trilithon lintels omitted for clarity. Holes that no longer, or never, contained stones are shown as open circles.
Stones visible today are shown coloured
Mike Parker Pearson, leader of the Stonehenge Riverside Project, noted that Stonehenge was associated with burial
from the earliest period of its existence:
Stonehenge was a place of burial from its beginning to its zenith in the mid third millennium B.C. The cremation
burial dating to Stonehenge's sarsen stones phase is likely just one of many from this later period of the
monument's use and demonstrates that it was still very much a domain of the dead.[6]
— Mike Parker Pearson
Stonehenge evolved in several construction phases spanning at least 1500 years. There is evidence of large-scale
construction on and around the monument that perhaps extends the landscape's time frame to 6500 years.
Scholars believe that Stonehenge once stood as a magnificent complete monument. This cannot be proved as
around half of the stones that should be present are missing, and many of the assumed stone sockets have never
been found. Dating and understanding the various phases of activity is complicated by disturbance of the natural
chalk by periglacial effects and animal burrowing, poor quality early excavation records, and a lack of accurate,
scientifically verified dates. The modern phasing most generally agreed to by archaeologists is detailed below.
Features mentioned in the text are numbered and shown on the plan, right.
[edit] Before the monument (8000 BC forward)
Archaeologists have found four, or possibly five, large Mesolithic postholes (one may have been a natural tree
throw), which date to around 8000 BC, beneath the nearby modern tourist car-park. These held pine posts around
0.75 metres (2 ft 6 in) in diameter which were erected and eventually rotted in situ. Three of the posts (and
possibly four) were in an east-west alignment which may have had ritual significance; no parallels are known from
Britain at the time but similar sites have been found in Scandinavia. Salisbury Plain was then still wooded but four
thousand years later, during the earlier Neolithic, people built a causewayed enclosure at Robin Hood's Ball and long
barrow tombs in the surrounding landscape. In approximately 3500 BC, a large cursus monument was built 700
metres (2,300 ft) north of the site as the first farmers began to clear the trees and develop the area.
Stonehenge 1 (ca. 3100 BC)Stonehenge 1. After Cleal et al.
The first monument consisted of a circular bank and ditch enclosure made of Late Cretaceous (Santonian Age)
Seaford Chalk, (7 and 8), measuring about 110 metres (360 ft) in diameter, with a large entrance to the north
east and a smaller one to the south (14). It stood in open grassland on a slightly sloping spot. The builders
placed the bones of deer and oxen in the bottom of the ditch, as well as some worked flint tools. The bones were
considerably older than the antler picks used to dig the ditch, and the people who buried them had looked after
them for some time prior to burial. The ditch was continuous but had been dug in sections, like the ditches of the
earlier causewayed enclosures in the area. The chalk dug from the ditch was piled up to form the bank. This first
stage is dated to around 3100 BC, after which the ditch began to silt up naturally. Within the outer edge of the
enclosed area was a circle of 56 pits, each about a metre (3'3") in diameter(13), known as the Aubrey holes
after John Aubrey, the 17th-century antiquarian who was thought to have first identified them. The pits may have
contained standing timbers creating a timber circle, although there is no excavated evidence of them. A recent
excavation has suggested that the Aubrey Holes may have originally been used to erect a bluestone circle.[11] If
this were the case, it would advance the earliest known stone structure at the monument by some 500 years. A
small outer bank beyond the ditch could also date to this period.
[edit] Stonehenge 2 (ca. 3000 BC)
Evidence of the second phase is no longer visible. The number of postholes dating to the early 3rd millennium BC
suggest that some form of timber structure was built within the enclosure during this period. Further standing timbers
were placed at the northeast entrance, and a parallel alignment of posts ran inwards from the southern entrance.
The postholes are smaller than the Aubrey Holes, being only around 0.4 metres (16 in) in diameter, and are
much less regularly spaced. The bank was purposely reduced in height and the ditch continued to silt up. At least
twenty-five of the Aubrey Holes are known to have contained later, intrusive, cremation burials dating to the two
centuries after the monument's inception. It seems that whatever the holes' initial function, it changed to become a
funerary one during Phase 2. Thirty further cremations were placed in the enclosure's ditch and at other points
within the monument, mostly in the eastern half. Stonehenge is therefore interpreted as functioning as an enclosed
cremation cemetery at this time, the earliest known cremation cemetery in the British Isles. Fragments of unburnt
human bone have also been found in the ditch-fill. Dating evidence is provided by the late Neolithic grooved ware
pottery that has been found in connection with the features from this phase.
[edit] Stonehenge 3 I (ca. 2600 BC)
Stonehenge from the heelstone in 2007 with the 'Slaughter Stone' in the foregroundArchaeological excavation has indicated that around 2600 BC, the builders abandoned timber in favour of stone, and
dug two concentric arrays of holes (the Q and R Holes) in the centre of the site. These stone sockets are only
partly known (hence on present evidence are sometimes described as forming ‘crescents’); however, they could be
the remains of a double ring. Again, there is little firm dating evidence for this phase. The holes held up to 80
standing stones (shown blue on the plan), only 43 of which can be traced today. The bluestones (some of which
are made of dolerite, an igneous rock), were thought for much of the 20th century to have been transported by
humans from the Preseli Hills, 250 kilometres (160 mi) away in modern-day Pembrokeshire in Wales. Another
theory that has recently gained support, is that they were brought much nearer to the site as glacial erratics by the
Irish Sea Glacier.[12] Other standing stones may well have been small sarsens, used later as lintels. The stones,
which weighed about four tons, consisted mostly of spotted Ordovician dolerite but included examples of rhyolite, tuff
and volcanic and calcareous ash; in total around 20 different rock types are represented. Each monolith measures
around 2 metres (6.6 ft) in height, between 1 m and 1.5 m (3.3-4.9 ft) wide and around 0.8 metres (2.6 ft)
thick. What was to become known as the Altar Stone (1), is almost certainly derived from either Carmarthenshire
or the Brecon Beacons and may have stood as a single large monolith.
Plan of the central stone structure today. After Johnson 2008
The north-eastern entrance was widened at this time, with the result that it precisely matched the direction of the
midsummer sunrise and midwinter sunset of the period. This phase of the monument was abandoned unfinished,
however; the small standing stones were apparently removed and the Q and R holes purposefully backfilled. Even
so, the monument appears to have eclipsed the site at Avebury in importance towards the end of this phase.
The Heelstone (5), a Tertiary sandstone, may also have been erected outside the north-eastern entrance during
this period. It cannot be accurately dated and may have been installed at any time during phase 3. At first it was
accompanied by a second stone, which is no longer visible. Two, or possibly three, large portal stones were set up
just inside the north-eastern entrance, of which only one, the fallen Slaughter Stone (4), 4.9 metres (16 ft)
long, now remains. Other features, loosely dated to phase 3, include the four Station Stones (6), two of which
stood atop mounds (2 and 3). The mounds are known as "barrows" although they do not contain burials.
Stonehenge Avenue, (10), a parallel pair of ditches and banks leading 3 kilometres (1.9 mi) to the River Avon,
was also added. Two ditches similar to Heelstone Ditch circling the Heelstone (which was by then reduced to a
single monolith) were later dug around the Station Stones.
[edit] Stonehenge 3 II (2600 BC to 2400 BC)
During the next major phase of activity, 30 enormous Oligocene-Miocene sarsen stones (shown grey on the plan)
were brought to the site. They may have come from a quarry, around 40 kilometres (25 mi) north of Stonehenge
on the Marlborough Downs, or they may have been collected from a "litter" of sarsens on the chalk downs, closer
to hand. The stones were dressed and fashioned with mortise and tenon joints before 30 were erected as a 33
metres (110 ft) diameter circle of standing stones, with a ring of 30 lintel stones resting on top. The lintels were
fitted to one another using another woodworking method, the tongue and groove joint. Each standing stone was
around 4.1 metres (13 ft) high, 2.1 metres (6 ft 11 in) wide and weighed around 25 tons. Each had clearly
been worked with the final visual effect in mind; the orthostats widen slightly towards the top in order that their
perspective remains constant when viewed from the ground, while the lintel stones curve slightly to continue the
circular appearance of the earlier monument. The inward-facing surfaces of the stones are smoother and more finely
worked than the outer surfaces. The average thickness of the stones is 1.1 metres (3 ft 7 in) and the average
distance between them is 1 metre (3 ft 3 in). A total of 74 stones would have been needed to complete the
circle. Unless some of the sarsens have since been removed from the site, the ring appears to have been left
incomplete. The lintel stones are each around 3.2 metres (10 ft), 1 metre (3 ft 3 in) wide and 0.8 metres (2
ft 7 in) thick. The tops of the lintels are 4.9 metres (16 ft) above the ground.
Within this circle stood five trilithons of dressed sarsen stone arranged in a horseshoe shape 13.7 metres (45 ft)
across with its open end facing north east. These huge stones, ten uprights and five lintels, weigh up to 50 tons
each. They were linked using complex jointing. They are arranged symmetrically. The smallest pair of trilithons were
around 6 metres (20 ft) tall, the next pair a little higher and the largest, single trilithon in the south west corner
would have been 7.3 metres (24 ft) tall. Only one upright from the Great Trilithon still stands, of which 6.7
metres (22 ft) is visible and a further 2.4 metres (7 ft 10 in) is below ground.
Graffiti on the sarsen stones. Below are ancient carvings of a dagger and an axeThe images of a 'dagger' and 14 'axeheads' have been carved on one of the sarsens, known as stone 53 and
further carvings of axeheads have been seen on the outer faces of stones 3, 4, and 5. The carvings are difficult
to date, but are morphologically similar to late Bronze Age weapons; recent laser scanning work on the carvings
supports this interpretation. The pair of trilithons in the north east are smallest, measuring around 6 metres (20 ft)
in height; the largest, which is in the south west of the horseshoe, is almost 7.5 metres (25 ft) tall.
This ambitious phase has been radiocarbon dated to between 2600 and 2400 BC,[13] slightly earlier than the
Stonehenge Archer, discovered in the outer ditch of the monument in 1978, and the two sets of burials, known as
the Amesbury Archer and the Boscombe Bowmen, discovered 4.8 kilometres (3.0 mi) to the west. At about the
same time, a large timber circle and a second avenue were constructed 3.2 kilometres (2.0 mi) away at
Durrington Walls overlooking the River Avon. The timber circle was orientated towards the rising sun on the
midwinter solstice, opposing the solar alignments at Stonehenge, whilst the avenue was aligned with the setting sun
on the summer solstice and led from the river to the timber circle. Evidence of huge fires on the banks of the
Avon between the two avenues also suggests that both circles were linked, and they were perhaps used as a
procession route on the longest and shortest days of the year. Parker Pearson speculates that the wooden circle at
Durrington Walls was the centre of a 'land of the living', whilst the stone circle represented a 'land of the dead',
with the Avon serving as a journey between the two.[14]
[edit] Stonehenge 3 III
Later in the Bronze Age, although the exact details of activities during this period are still unclear, the bluestones
appear to have been re-erected. They were placed within the outer sarsen circle and may have been trimmed in
some way. Like the sarsens, a few have timber-working style cuts in them suggesting that, during this phase, they
may have been linked with lintels and were part of a larger structure.
[edit] Stonehenge 3 IV (2280 BC to 1930 BC)
This phase saw further rearrangement of the bluestones. They were arranged in a circle between the two rings of
sarsens and in an oval at the centre of the inner ring. Some archaeologists argue that some of these bluestones
were from a second group brought from Wales. All the stones formed well-spaced uprights without any of the
linking lintels inferred in Stonehenge 3 III. The Altar Stone may have been moved within the oval at this time and
re-erected vertically. Although this would seem the most impressive phase of work, Stonehenge 3 IV was rather
shabbily built compared to its immediate predecessors, as the newly re-installed bluestones were not well-founded
and began to fall over. However, only minor changes were made after this phase.
[edit] Stonehenge 3 V (2280 BC to 1930 BC)
Soon afterwards, the north eastern section of the Phase 3 IV bluestone circle was removed, creating a
horseshoe-shaped setting (the Bluestone Horseshoe) which mirrored the shape of the central sarsen Trilithons. This
phase is contemporary with the Seahenge site in Norfolk.
After the monument (1600 BC on)The last known construction at Stonehenge was about 1600 BC (see 'Y and Z Holes' below), and the last usage
of it was probably during the Iron Age. Roman coins and medieval artefacts have all been found in or around the
monument but it is unknown if the monument was in continuous use throughout prehistory and beyond, or exactly
how it would have been used. Notable is the late 7th-6th century BC large arcing Scroll Trench which deepens
E-NE towards Heelstone, and the massive Iron Age hillfort Vespasian's Camp built alongside the Avenue near the
Avon. A decapitated 7th century Saxon man was excavated from Stonehenge in 1923.[15] The site was known to
scholars during the Middle Ages and since then it has been studied and adopted by numerous different groups.
[edit] 16th century to present
The sun rising over Stonehenge on the summer solstice on 21 June 2005
Main article: Recent history of Stonehenge
Stonehenge has changed ownership several times since King Henry VIII acquired Amesbury Abbey and its
surrounding lands. In 1540 Henry gave the estate to the Earl of Hertford. It subsequently passed to Lord Carleton
and then the Marquis of Queensbury. The Antrobus family of Cheshire bought the estate in 1824. During World War
I an aerodrome had been built on the downs just to the west of the circle and, in the dry valley at Stonehenge
Bottom, a main road junction had been built, along with several cottages and a cafe. The Antrobus family sold the
site after their last heir was killed serving in France during the First World War. The auction by Knight Frank &
Rutley estate agents in Salisbury was held on 21 September 1915 and included "Lot 15. Stonehenge with about 30
acres, 2 rods, 37 perches of adjoining downland." [c. 12.4365 ha][16] Cecil Chubb bought the site for £6,600
and gave it to the nation three years later. Although it has been speculated that he purchased it at the suggestion
of — or even as a present for — his wife, he, in fact, bought it on a whim as he believed a local man should
be the new owner.
In the late 1920s a nation-wide appeal was launched to save Stonehenge from the encroachment of the modern
buildings that had begun to appear around it. In 1928 the land around the monument was purchased with the
appeal donations, and given to the National Trust in order to preserve it. The buildings were removed (although the
roads were not), and the land returned to agriculture. More recently the land has been part of a grassland
reversion scheme, returning the surrounding fields to native chalk grassland.
In 2002 a public poll voted Stonehenge as one of the Seven Wonders of Britain, alongside Big Ben, the Eden
Project, Hadrian's Wall, the London Eye, Windsor Castle, and York Minster.
NeopaganismStonehenge is a place of pilgrimage for neo-druids, and for certain others following pagan or neo-pagan beliefs.
The midsummer sunrise began attracting modern visitors in the 1870s, with the first record of recreated Druidic
practices dating to 1905 when the Ancient Order of Druids enacted a ceremony. Despite efforts by archaeologists
and historians to stress the differences between the Iron Age Druidic religion and the much older monument,
Stonehenge has become increasingly, almost inextricably, associated with British Druidism, Neopaganism and New Age
philosophy. Between 1972 and 1984, Stonehenge was the site of a free festival. After the Battle of the Beanfield in
1985 this use of the site was stopped for several years, and currently ritual use of Stonehenge is carefully
controlled.
[edit] Setting and access
As motorised traffic increased, the setting of the monument began to be affected by the proximity of the two roads
on either side — the A344 to Shrewton on the north side, and the A303 to Winterbourne Stoke to the south.
Plans to upgrade the A303 and close the A344 to restore the vista from the stones have been considered since
the monument became a World Heritage Site. However, the controversy surrounding expensive re-routing of the
roads have led to the scheme being cancelled on multiple occasions. On 6 December 2007 it was announced that
extensive plans to build a tunnel under the landscape and create a permanent visitors' centre had been
cancelled.[17] On 13 May 2009 the government gave approval for a £25 million scheme to create a smaller
visitors' centre and close the A344, although this is dependent on funding and planning permission.[18]
When Stonehenge first became open to the public it was possible to walk amongst and even climb on the stones,
however this ended in 1977 when the stones were roped off as a result of serious erosion.[19] Visitors are no
longer permitted to touch the stones, but are able to walk around the monument from a short distance away.
English Heritage does, however, permit access during the summer and winter solstice, and the spring and autumn
equinox. Additionally, visitors can make special bookings to access the stones throughout the year.[20]
The current access situation and the proximity of the two roads has drawn widespread criticism, highlighted by a
2006 National Geographic survey. In the survey of conditions at 94 leading World Heritage Sites, 400 conservation
and tourism experts ranked Stonehenge 75th in the list of destinations, declaring it to be "in moderate trouble".[21]
[edit] Function and construction
Main article: Theories about Stonehenge
Stonehenge was produced by a culture that left no written records. Many aspects of Stonehenge remain subject to
debate. This multiplicity of theories, some of them very colourful, is often called the "mystery of Stonehenge".
There is little or no direct evidence for the construction techniques used by the Stonehenge builders. Over the
years, various authors have suggested that supernatural or anachronistic methods were used, usually asserting that
the stones were impossible to move otherwise. However, conventional techniques using Neolithic technology have
been demonstrably effective at moving and placing stones of a similar size.[22] Proposed functions for the site
include usage as an astronomical observatory, or as a religious site. Other theories have advanced supernatural or
symbolic explanations for the construction.
More recently two major new theories have been proposed. Professor Mike Parker Pearson, head of the StonehengeRiverside Project, has suggested that Stonehenge was part of a ritual landscape and was joined to Durrington Walls
by their corresponding avenues and the River Avon. He suggests that the area around Durrington Walls Henge was
a place of the living, whilst Stonehenge was a domain of the dead. A journey along the Avon to reach Stonehenge
was part of a ritual passage from life to death, to celebrate past ancestors and the recently deceased.[14] On the
other hand, Geoffery Wainwright, president of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and Timothy Darvill of
Bournemouth University have suggested that Stonehenge was a place of healing – the primeval equivalent of
Lourdes.[23] They argue that this accounts for the high number of burials in the area and for the evidence of
trauma deformity in some of the graves. However they do concede that the site was probably multifunctional and
used for ancestor worship as well.[24]
[edit] Folklore
The Heelstone
[edit] "Friar’s Heel" or the "Sunday Stone"
The Heel Stone was once known as "Friar's Heel". A folk tale, which cannot be dated earlier than the seventeenth
century, relates the origin of the name of this stone:
The Devil bought the stones from a woman in Ireland, wrapped them up, and brought them to Salisbury plain. One
of the stones fell into the Avon, the rest were carried to the plain. The Devil then cried out, "No-one will ever find
out how these stones came here!" A friar replied, "That’s what you think!," whereupon the Devil threw one of the
stones at him and struck him on the heel. The stone stuck in the ground and is still there.
Some claim "Friar's Heel" is a corruption of "Freyja's He-ol" or "Freyja Sul", from the Nordic goddess Freyja and
the Welsh word for way or Sunday, respectively, or the name may simply imply that the stone heels, or leans. The
name is not unique; there was a monolith with the same name recorded in the 19th century by antiquarian Charles
Warne at Long Bredy in Dorset.[25]
[edit] Arthurian legend
Arthurian legendA giant helps Merlin build Stonehenge. From a manuscript of the Roman de Brut by Wace in the British Library
(Egerton 3028). This is the oldest known depiction of Stonehenge.
In the 12th century, Geoffrey of Monmouth included a fanciful story in his work Historia Regum Britanniae that
attributed the monument's construction to Merlin.[26] Geoffrey's story spread widely, appearing in more and less
elaborate form in adaptations of his work such as Wace's Norman French Roman de Brut, Layamon's Middle English
Brut, and the Welsh Brut y Brenhinedd. According to Geoffrey, Merlin directed its removal from Ireland, where it had
been constructed on Mount Killaraus by Giants, who brought the stones from Africa. After it had been rebuilt near
Amesbury, Geoffrey further narrates how first Ambrosius Aurelianus, then Uther Pendragon, and finally Constantine III,
were buried inside the ring of stones. In many places in his Historia Regum Britanniae Geoffrey mixes British legend
and his own imagination; it is intriguing that he connects Ambrosius Aurelianus with this prehistoric monument as
there is place-name evidence to connect Ambrosius with nearby Amesbury.
According to Geoffrey of Monmouth, the rocks of Stonehenge were healing rocks, called the Giant's dance, which
giants brought from Africa to Ireland for their healing properties. Aurelius Ambrosias (5th century), wishing to erect
a memorial to the 3,000 nobles, who had died in battle with the Saxons and were buried at Salisbury, chose
Stonehenge (at Merlin's advice) to be their monument. So the King sent Merlin, Uther Pendragon (Arthur's
father), and 15,000 knights to Ireland to retrieve the rocks. They slew 7,000 Irish but, as the knights tried to
move the rocks with ropes and force, they failed. Then Merlin, using "gear" and skill, easily dismantled the stones
and sent them over to Britain, where Stonehenge was dedicated. Shortly after, Aurelius died and was buried within
the Stonehenge monument, or "The Giants' Ring of Stonehenge".
In another legend of Saxons and Britons, in 472 the invading king Hengist invited British warriors to a feast, but
treacherously ordered his men to draw their weapons from concealment and fall upon the guests, killing 420 of
them. Hengist erected the stone monument—Stonehenge—on the site to show his remorse for the deed.[27]
[edit] Archaeological research and restoration
17th century depiction of Stonehenge
An early photograph of Stonehenge taken July 1877
The monument from a similar angle in 2008 showing the extent of reconstruction
Throughout recorded history Stonehenge and its surrounding monuments have attracted attention from antiquarians
and archaeologists. John Aubrey was one of the first to examine the site with a scientific eye in 1666, and
recorded in his plan of the monument the pits that now bear his name. William Stukeley continued Aubrey’s work in
the early 18th century, but took an interest in the surrounding monuments as well, identifying (somewhat incorrectly)
the Cursus and the Avenue. He also began the excavation of many of the barrows in the area, and it was his
interpretation of the landscape that associated it with the Druids[28] Stukeley was so fascinated with Druids that he
originally named Disc Barrows as Druids' Barrows. The most accurate early plan of Stonehenge was that made by
Bath architect John Wood in 1740.[29] His original annotated survey has recently been computer redrawn and
published.[30] Importantly Wood’s plan was made before the collapse of the southwest Trilithon, which fell in 1797
and was restored in 1958.
William Cunnington was the next to tackle the area in the early 19th century. He excavated some 24 barrowsbefore digging in and around the stones and discovered charred wood, animal bones, pottery and urns. He also
identified the hole in which the Slaughter Stone once stood. At the same time Richard Colt Hoare began his
activities, excavating some 379 barrows on Salisbury Plain before working with Cunnington and William Coxe on
some 200 in the area around the Stones. To alert future diggers to their work they were careful to leave initialled
metal tokens in each barrow they opened.
In 1877 Charles Darwin dabbled in archaeology at the stones, experimenting with the rate at which remains sink into
the earth for his book The Formation of Vegetable Mould Through the Action of Worms.
William Gowland oversaw the first major restoration of the monument in 1901 which involved the straightening and
concrete setting of sarsen stone number 56 which was in danger of falling. In straightening the stone he moved it
about half a metre from its original position.[30] Gowland also took the opportunity to further excavate the
monument in what was the most scientific dig to date, revealing more about the erection of the stones than the
previous 100 years of work had done. During the 1920 restoration William Hawley, who had excavated nearby Old
Sarum, excavated the base of six stones and the outer ditch. He also located a bottle of port in the slaughter
stone socket left by Cunnington, helped to rediscover Aubrey's pits inside the bank and located the concentric
circular holes outside the Sarsen Circle called the Y and Z Holes.[31] Richard Atkinson, Stuart Piggott and John F.
S. Stone re-excavated much of Hawley's work in the 40s and 50s, and discovered the carved axes and daggers
on the Sarsen Stones. Atkinson's work was instrumental in understanding the three major phases of the monument's
construction.
In 1958 the stones were restored again, when three of the standing sarsens were re-erected and set in concrete
bases. The last restoration was carried out in 1963 after stone 23 of the Sarsen Circle fell over. It was again
re-erected, and the opportunity was taken to concrete three more stones. Later archaeologists, including Christopher
Chippindale of the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge and Brian Edwards of the
University of the West of England campaigned to give the public more knowledge of the various restorations and in
2004 English Heritage included pictures of the works in progress in its new book Stonehenge: A History in
Photographs.[32][33][34]
In 1966 and 1967, in advance of a new car park being built at the site, the area of land immediately northwest of
the stones was excavated by Faith and Lance Vatcher. They discovered the Mesolithic postholes dating from between
7,000 and 8,000 BC, as well as a 10m length of a palisade ditch – a V cut ditch into which timber posts had
been inserted that remained there until they rotted away. Subsequent aerial archaeology suggests that this ditch runs
from the west to the north of Stonehenge, near the avenue.[35]
Excavations were once again carried out in 1978 by Atkinson and John Evans during which they discovered the
remains of the Stonehenge Archer in the outer ditch,[36] and in 1979 rescue archaeology was needed alongside
the Heel Stone after a cable-laying ditch was mistakenly dug on the roadside, revealing a new stone hole next to
the Heel Stone.
In the early 1980s Julian Richards led the Stonehenge Environs Project, a detailed study of the surrounding
landscape. The project was able to successfully date such features as the Lesser Cursus, Coneybury henge and
several other smaller features.
More recent excavations include a series of digs held between 2003 and 2008, led by Mike Parker Pearson, known
as the Stonehenge Riverside Project. This project mainly investigated other monuments in the landscape and their
relationship with the stones — notably Durrington Walls, where another ‘Avenue’ leading to the River Avon was
discovered. In April 2008 Professor Tim Darvill of the University of Bournemouth and Professor Geoff Wainwright of
the Society of Antiquaries, began another dig inside the Stone circle to retrieve dateable fragments of the original
bluestone pillars. They were able to date the erection of some bluestones to 2300BC,[2] although this may not
reflect the earliest erection of stones at Stonehenge. They also discovered organic material from 7000 BC, which,
along with the Mesolithic postholes, adds support for the site having been in use at least 4000 years before
Stonehenge was started. In August and September 2008, as part of the Riverside Project Julian Richards and Mike
Pitts excavated Aubrey Hole 7, removing the cremated remains from several Aubrey Holes that had been excavated
by Hawley in the 1920s, and re-interred in 1935.[37] A licence for the removal of human remains at Stonehenge
had been granted by the Ministry of Justice (United Kingdom) in May 2008, in accordance with the Statement on
burial law and archaeology issued in May 2008. One of the conditions of the licence was that the remains should
be reinterred within two years and that in the intervening period they should be kept safely, privately and
decently.[38][39]
Stonehenge is one of the most enigmatic prehistoric monuments in Britain, but it is important to remember that the
stones themselves are only part of a much bigger picture. The landscape around Stonehenge is rich in
archaeological sites of all periods, hundreds of them, including barrows and cursuses from prehistoric times,
Romano-British camps, medieval field-systems and more recently the railways and the remains of the Stonehenge
Aerodrome including some hangar footings, testament to continued use and re-use of the space. It is due to the
internationally recognised importance of this archaeological landscape that UNESCO have designated the area a World
Heritage Site.
The recorded archaeology of the World Heritage Site. Recorded archaeology is shown in purple with the WHS
boundary in red. Major archaeological sites are annotated. Digital data supplied by the English Heritage Centre for
Archaeology. Recorded archaeology based upon Wiltshire County Council Library and Museum Service Sites and
Monuments Record.
Over the years there has been much archaeological work undertaken in the Stonehenge environs. The first
interventions were part of the early antiquarian investigations of barrows in the area, often little more than treasure
hunting escapades, while more recently there has been considerable work undertaken in advance of any proposed
modifications to the A303 trunk road which currently divides the landscape in two. The Stonehenge Environs Project
looked in great detail at the landscape as a whole with programmes of investigation including excavations,
geophysical surveys and extensive fieldwalking (Richards, 1990). In addition to this and previous episodes of
fieldwork, desk-based computer studies have looked at patterns of visibility within the landscape as a means to
furthering our understanding (eg Wheatley, 1995; Batchelor, 1997; Exon et al 2000). Much of the vast corpus of
accumulated knowledge was collated and reinterpreted in the mid-nineties as part of a project involving Wessex
Archaeology and English Heritage, culminating in the publication of Stonehenge in its Landscape (Cleal et al.
1995).
A recent addition to the corpus of data regarding the Stonehenge landscape has also been produced using similar
laser-scanning technology to that used to identify the new carvings: A laser-scanner attached to a helicopter or
aeroplane combined with GPS technology in a system referred to as LiDAR (Light, Distance And Ranging) was
used to produce a detailed terrain model of the World Heritage Site. This dataset can be analysed in a similar way
to the digital surface models of the stones using a three-dimensional analytical system such as Demon from
Archaeoptics or a CAD-based system. In addition, the dataset can be used as a traditional DTM (Digital Terrain
Model) within GIS, providing a variety of map-based analytical functions. The resolution of this data and the relative
ease of capture compares favourably with existing data sources, allowing large areas of landscape to be captured as
three-dimensional surface data facilitating a scientific, analytical approach to the landscape.
Stonehenge LiDAR data, processed into a 3D surface model ready for analysis. Major archaeological features areannotated. Original data supplied by the Environment Agency with additional processing by Archaeoptics and the
English Heritage Centre for Archaeology.
Of course, such an approach to the Stonehenge landscape is not the only one. The Stonehenge landscape and the
stones themselves have been the focus for a number of interest groups over the years, an example of the way in
which a single place can mean many things to many people. While the extensive Hippy festivals of the 1970’s and
1980’s are no more, the Henge is open to the public for the summer solstice celebrations, attracting a wide
diversity of people from all kinds of backgrounds. In this way, the landscape is not a fossilised ‘timeless’ landscape,
as some would have it, but the current outward expression of a continuous dynamic process of interaction between
people and their environment. Arguably, the only difference between our own experience and that of our
predecessors being that our modern compartmentalisation of forms of interaction (into ritual vs everyday, for
example) may not have been at all applicable in the past (eg Gibson et al. 1998). Indeed, the Neolithic and
Bronze ages, when many of the monuments were created, was a time of flux, with a changing social consciousness
(Bradley. 1998), both being exhibited in and controlled/legitimised by various forms of monumental architecture.
To conclude then, Stonehenge is far more than just a henge in isolation: There are in fact three other henges
within the World Heritage Site (Woodhenge, Durrington Walls and Coneybury Henge) and a multitude of other sites.
This represents the surviving outward expression in the landscape of the complex and dynamic patterns of interaction
between people in the past and the landscape in which they found themselves, the physical remains deeply endowed
with meaning and significance gained and lost over time; a process still ongoing today as different interested parties
continue actively engaging with and renegotiating the landscape and its diverse meanings in terms of their own
understandings and intentions.
Stonehenge
Stonehenge is a remarkable monument from our past as far as the astronomical associations with it are concerned.
It proves that our ancestors knew a great deal more about the behaviour of heavenly bodies than we realised,
before our attention was brought to the subject with Hawkins' book "Stonehenge Decoded".
Stonehenge was by far the most elaborate megalithic monument in its area, as the estimated number of man-hours
it took to build suggests: 2,675,000. It took 2,768,000 man-hours to construct all the other megalithic monuments
in a 100 Km2 region around Stonehenge. Clearly, Stonehenge stands above all other such monuments as the most
fascinating and awe-inspiring relic of the past in Great Britain.
Stonehenge has always been a source of wonder at the engineering abilities of Stone Age (Neolithic) peoples.
However, the fact that these people managed to erect such massive stones to create such a structure is only half
the story. They also had a great wealth of knowledge on predicting the motions of heavenly bodies. Stonehenge
provides direct evidence of this, as this section of the Tiverton Astronomy Society site illustrates.
Astro-Archaeology at Stonehenge
The Revd. Edward Duke was the first person to associate astronomy with Stonehenge, describing it as a planetarium
full of significant astronomical alignments - although he named none. Unfortunately most of his ideas on the subject
were rather fanciful and over-imaginative, and not very scientific.
Sir Norman Lockyer (1836 - 1920) was the first person to identify the reason for the orientation of Stonehenge.
He realised that on the summer solstice the sun rose at the end of the main axis (as it would have done in the
second and third millenniums BC). He published these findings in a book in 1906. However, Lockyer made many
errors and incorrect assumptions, which made archaeologists suspicious of the possibility of astronomical alignments.
Therefore, it was not until the second half of the 20th Century that astro-archaeology became a major science in
its own right. Gerald Hawkins, an American astronomer, published the results of an intense study of Stonehenge's
astronomical alignments in Nature in 1963. In the article he described how he had used a computer to prove that
alignments between Stonehenge and 12 major solar and lunar events was extremely unlikely to have been a
coincidence (Castleden, 1993). His book, Stonehenge Decoded, containing the fully developed theory, appeared in
Britain in 1966. He described how he had found astronomical alignments among 165 points of Stonehenge
associated purely with the Sun and the Moon, and not with any stars or the five naked-eye planets (Mercury,
Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn). He discovered that lunar eclipses could be predicted through a system of moving
stones around the circle of Aubrey Holes.
Controversially, he went on to suggest that Stonehenge was an ancient computer. The 1960's were still early in the
computer revolution, and the Harvard-Smithsonian IBM had produced some fantastic results for him. This was merely
Hawkins' way of paying a high compliment to the architects and builders of Stonehenge (Castleden, 1993).
There are indeed a large number of astronomical alignments, prediction and measuring devices, and representative
features to be found among the megalithic stones and holes of Stonehenge. Gerald Hawkins discovered many of
them, and most of his discoveries are commonly accepted.
Stonehenge IIIM. W. Postins wrote a booklet entitled Stonehenge: Sun, Moon, Wandering Stars in 1982. Postins built two scale
models, which he called the 'Temple model' (Stonehenge III) and the 'Enclosure model' (which shows outlying
features such as the Aubrey Holes and Station Stones of Stonehenge I and II). 'Table 1' below outlines the
astronomical alignments from Stonehenge III. (Also see Figure 1.)
TABLE 1: Stonehenge III (Temple) Astronomical Alignments
Astronomical Event Alignment Stones
From... ...to between sarsens
Summer solstice sunrise Altar Stone 30 + 1
Summer solstice sunset Northern Low Trilithon gap 23 + 24
Winter solstice sunrise Eastern Low Trilithon gap 6 + 7
Winter solstice sunset Great Trilithon gap 15 + 16
Summer solstice moonrise, major standstill Southern Intermediate Trilithon gap 9 + 10
Summer solstice moonrise, minor standstill Southern Intermediate Trilithon gap 8 + 9
Winter solstice moonrise, major standstill Altar Stone 29 + 30
Winter solstice moonrise, minor standstill Altar Stone 1 + 2
Winter solstice moonset, major standstill Western Intermediate Trilithon gap 21 + 22
Winter solstice moonset, minor standstill Western Intermediate Trilithon gap 20 + 21
Trilithons
In his booklet, Postins states that the five trilithons represented the planets visible with the naked eye.
Mercury and Venus are the two planets in the sky that keep in closest association with the Sun. The eastern and
northern lowest trilithons have alignments through the sarsen circle relating directly to the Sun (see Figure 1).
Therefore, Postins suggested that these two lowest trilithons represented Mercury and Venus.
The two intermediate trilithons represented Mars and Jupiter because they are associated with lunar alignments. Mars
and Jupiter are associated with the Moon due to their paths through the Zodiac. Because of this they are not linked
to sunrise and sunset events like Mercury and Venus, but may be observed close to the Moon as they all follow
similar paths along the ecliptic. The two intermediate trilithons align with major and minor positions of the Moon,
which the Altar Stone (stone 80) also does through gaps in the sarsen circle (see Figure 1).
The Great trilithon represented Saturn because Saturn moves very slowly across the sky compared to the other four
planets. This stately pace may have indicated to the people who built Stonehenge that Saturn held some sort of
'senior' position in the heavens.
FIGURE 1: Stonehenge III (Temple) Astronomical Alignments
The Sun-aligned low trilithons cannot be differentiated in order to determine which planet (Mercury or Venus) each
represents. The same problem exists with the Moon-aligned intermediate trilithons representing Mars and Jupiter.
Postins speculates that there could have been carvings on the trilithons, now long eroded from existence, which
indicated which trilithon represented which planet.
All of the astronomical alignments within the sarsen circle are present in older parts of the monument, including the
Station Stones, Heel Stone and the numerous holes and posts. See Figure 2, which illustrates all of the
astronomical alignments among the features of Stonehenge.
The alignments are extremely precise, which illustrates the high level of knowledge possessed by the builders of
Stonehenge. Such knowledge must have been gathered over decades or centuries of observations of the sky
(during which the behaviour and interaction of the heavenly bodies was noted), before the idea of Stonehenge was
even conceived.
Station Stones
The four Station Stones (SS), 91, 92, 93 and 94 formed a perfect rectangle, which is remarkable considering that
the long axis of the rectangle is around 300 ft in length. The sarsen ring formed a circle 97 ½ ft across in which
every upright was, on average, less than 3 inches out of position!
This geometric precision was investigated in around three hundred megalithic monuments all over Britain by Alexander
Thom. He deliberately investigated large numbers of megalithic monuments prior to visiting Stonehenge (in 1973) in
order to prevent obtaining a biased view. It would have been easy to see Stonehenge as the perfect example of a
Megalithic monument and then proceed to examine other monuments with this assumption in mind.
During his study of these monuments he came across two standard units of measurement, which he called the
'Megalithic Fathom' (equivalent to 1.6 m or 5.44 ft) and the 'Megalithic Yard' (equivalent to 0.83 m or 2.72 ft -
8 ½ inches short of a standard English yard). Thom found that the Megalithic Yard had been used at Stonehenge,
in the spacing and positioning on the sarsen circle uprights. With these commonly recognised units, it is
understandable how the Neolithic peoples that built Stonehenge achieved such a level of precision - and hence
produce a very accurate astronomical observatory. Figure 2, below, illustrates the many alignments among the stones
of Stonehenge I and Stonehenge III.
FIGURE 2: Stonehenge I and III Astronomical Alignments
Figure 2 shows that an observer looking from SS92 (Station Stone 92) over SS91 would see the summer solstice
sunrise, as he would if standing behind the Altar Stone (stone 80) and looking over stones C and B in the
Avenue, just to the left of the remaining Heel Stone. Many of the alignments are at exact right angles. This is due
to latitude at which Stonehenge was built. The exact rectangle of alignments through the Station Stones can only be
achieved on (or very close to) 51° North. Once again, this demonstrates the astronomical knowledge the Neolithic
populations possessed.
TABLE 2: Stonehenge I Astronomical AlignmentsAstronomical Event Alignment Stones
From... ...to...
Summer solstice sunrise SS 93 SS 94
SS 92 SS 91
Summer solstice sunset Stone G SS 94
Winter solstice sunrise SS 94 Stone G
Winter solstice sunset SS 91 SS 92
SS 94 SS 93
Summer solstice moonrise, major standstill SS 93 SS 92
Summer solstice moonrise, minor standstill SS 93 SS 91
Winter solstice moonset, major standstill SS 91 SS 94
Winter solstice moonset, minor standstill SS 91 SS 93
Most southerly moonrise SS 94 SS 91
Most northerly moonset SS 92 SS 93
Equinox sunrise SS 94 Stone C
Equinox moonrise SS 94 Stone B
[ SS = Station Stone ]
Bluestone Horseshoe
Consisting of 19 stones, the bluestone horseshoe (just inside the 5 sarsen trilithons) had a couple of possible
uses.
They could be used for counting the period from a full moon on a particular day of the year to the next full moon
that falls on that day of the year, which would be 19 years later. Known as the Metonic cycle (after Meton, a 5th
Century BC Greek astronomer), this is correct to around 2 hours. (Postins, 1982)
It could also be used to follow the nodal cycle of the Moon, which has a period of 18.61 years. The extremes of
the Moon's position on the horizon are marked on Figure 1, with the two intermediate trilithons and stones 8, 9,
10, and 20, 21, 22 of the sarsen circle.
The Bluestone Horseshoe (inside the five trilithons) can also be used to predict eclipses. There are 19 of these
stones, which again relate to the 18.61-year cycle of the Moon's wandering rising and setting points on the horizon,
and therefore also eclipses. "Due to the way in which the lunar nodes move around the Zodiac, it takes somewhat
less than a year for the Sun to return to the same position in relation to the nodes. This period is 346.62 days,
and is connected with the repetition of eclipses. It is known as an 'eclipse year'. 19 eclipse years and 223 lunar
months [each of 29.53 days] have the following relationship: -
19 x 346.62 = 6585.78 days,
and
223 x 29.53 = 6585.32 days."
(Postins, 1982)
This means that to predict an eclipse, 223 full Moons must be counted before the Earth, Moon and Sun are again
in the same positions as at the beginning of that time. This period of time is called the Saros, and it is possible
that Stonehenge III people discovered it. However, not all eclipses would be predicted by this method of counting
the bluestones in the horseshoe because eclipses occur quite frequently, except with slightly different positions of the
Earth, Moon and Sun.
Aubrey Holes
Gerald Hawkins' theory on the use of the 56 Aubrey Holes to predict lunar events was workable but imprecise. At
intervals of 9, 9, 10, 9, 9, 10, you could place 6 alternately black and white marker stones around the Aubrey
Hole (AH) circle, and move them clockwise or anti-clockwise around the ring one hole per year. (Castleden,
1993.) Aubrey Holes 51, 56 and 5 were fixed markers. See Figure 3 below, which illustrates the concept.
If a white marker arrived at AH56 the full Moon would rise over the Heel Stone that year. The next astronomical
event would occur when a white marker arrived at AH51. At its extreme declination, in that year the winter solstice
Moon rose over the alignment to hole D from the centre of the monument, along the alignment from SS94 to
SS91, and was framed in the southern intermediate trilithon. The summer solstice Moon rose along the alignment
from SS93 to SS92, and was framed in the western intermediate trilithon. (Castelden, 1993)
Hawkins successfully demonstrated that several important lunar alignments occurred in 1549 BC. He suggested that
the astronomers at Stonehenge knew these alignments would take place when a white marker arrived at AH51 that
year.
FIGURE 3: Gerald Hawkins' Eclipse PredictorEclipses of the Moon occur every 18.61 years. The reason why there are 56 Aubrey Holes is because 18.61 x 3 =
55.83 (or 56 to the nearest integer). Eclipses of the Moon in summer or winter took place when any marker
stone arrived at AH56 or AH28, the two holes that lie on the main axis of Stonehenge. When a white marker
reached AH5 or AH51, equinox eclipses would occur.
There are 30 uprights in the sarsen circle. A full Moon occurs every 29.53 days. A seventh marker stone (a
Moon marker, shown in Figure 3) would be moved once a day around the sarsen circle to keep track of the
phases of the Moon.
In the 1960's many British Stonehenge archaeologists were frustrated that an American astronomer had determined
the reasoning behind the monument's structure, having barely laid a foot in Stonehenge! As Hawkins' highly plausible
ideas went down badly in the British archaeological circles, Glyn Daniel (the editor of Antiquity) sought assistance
from Fred Hoyle, the current Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University. Hoyle studied Hawkins' work, and
produced his own theories on lunar predictions using Stonehenge. In his scenario, Stonehenge became a Solar
System model with Earth at the centre. Rather than seven stones, Hoyle chose 3 stones representing the Sun,
Moon, and one node of the Moon's orbit. The 3 stones were moved around the Aubrey Hole ring at their real
rates relative to each other. When the 3 markers lay close together or almost opposite each other, eclipse seasons
took place. Actual eclipses occurred in these seasons only when the Moon stone moved close to the Sun stone, or
was diametrically opposed to it (i.e. precisely on the opposite side of the Aubrey Hole ring).
Hoyle's method is much more accurate than Hawkins' because the actual day of the eclipse was predicted, as well
as the eclipse season. It is also much simpler to operate on the ground.
Hoyle also studied other astronomical alignments, and came to the conclusion that, surprisingly, Stonehenge I was
much more sophisticated than Stonehenge III, although the later monument was undoubtedly more architecturally
impressive. (Castleden, 1993)
Even after Hoyle's more rational efforts, many archaeologists remained unconvinced. Today it is regarded as
remarkable that Hawkins' eclipse prediction method was seen as such an impressive step towards understanding parts
of Stonehenge. It is believed that his use of the Harvard-Smithsonian IBM computer made his theory 'infallible' at
the time. After all, it is highly unlikely that even the people of Stonehenge I would have been satisfied knowing only
the year in which an eclipse would occur!
Stonehenge's Construction History
Stonehenge, near the village of Amesbury on Salisbury Plain in Wiltshire, has been altered several times in its
history. The various stages in its construction have been termed Stonehenge Ia, Ib, II, IIIa, IIIb, IIIc, IIId, and IV.
The first building on the site took place around 3100 BC, and the last phase was completed in around 1100 BC.
However, in 1966, three totem poles (with pinewood pulp still at the bottom of them) were discovered 253 m
northwest from the centre of present-day Stonehenge. They were dated back to around 8000 - 7000 BC. Many
archaeologists have termed these relics Stonehenge '0'. The dating of the pulp remaining in the three pits suggests
that the poles were not erected simultaneously. They are more likely to have been placed there after each other,
replacing the previous one as it fell into disrepair. Three white circles now mark their positions, as the car park was
built over them.
The following table (edited from Castleden, 1993) shows the main phases of Stonehenge's constuction.
Stonehenge version Date (approx, BC) Developments
'0' 8000 - 7000 3 totem poles
I a 3100 Earth Circle
Heel Stones
A posts
Causeway posts
I b 2910 Aubrey Holes
II 2150 Double Bluestone Circle (abandoned
when just over half complete)
Avenue
III a 2100 Sarsen Circle
Trilithon Horseshoe
Bluestones removed
[ III b ] [ 2000 ] [ Bluestones used to build
Bluestonehenge (location unknown) ]
III c 1800 Bluestones brought back
Bluestone Circle
Bluestone Horseshoe
III d 1500 Y and Z Holes
IV 1100 Avenue extension (to River Avon)
AD 61 Roman troops largely destroy Stonehenge
Stonehenge in southern England ranks among the world's most iconic archaeological sites and one of its greatest
enigmas. The megalithic circle on Salisbury Plain inspires awe and fascination—but also intense debate some 4,600
years after it was built by ancient Britons who left no written record.
Enlarge
The ruins of Stonehenge in Wiltshire, England
Photograph by Jodi Cobb
The monument's mysterious past has spawned countless tales and theories. According to folklore, Stonehenge was
created by Merlin, the wizard of Arthurian legend, who magically transported the massive stones from Ireland, where
giants had assembled them. Another legend says invading Danes put the stones up, and another theory says they
were the ruins of a Roman temple. Modern-day interpretations are no less colorful: some argue that Stonehenge is
a spacecraft landing area for aliens, and even more say it's a giant fertility symbol in the shape of female genitalia.
Archaeological investigation of the site dates back to the 1660s, when it was first surveyed by antiquarian John
Aubrey. Aubrey wrongly credited Stonehenge to the much later Celts, believing it to be a religious center presided
over by Druid priests.
Centuries of fieldwork since show the monument was more than a millennium in the making, having started out
5,000 years ago as a circular earthen bank and ditch. A complicated pattern of wooden posts was replaced in
about 2600 B.C. by 80 dolerite bluestones from Wales that were rearranged at least three times once the larger
sarsen stones were added several hundred years later. These huge sandstone blocks, each weighing around 25
tons, were transported some 19 miles (30 kilometers) to create a continuous outer circle with five trilithons (pairs
of uprights with a lintel on top) forming a horseshoe within. It's been estimated that it took well over 20 million
hours to construct Stonehenge.
Holy Site or Scientific Observatory?Modern debate over the monument's meaning has two main camps: those who see it as a holy site, and others
who believe it represents a scientific observatory. Both camps base their theories on the site's celestial influence,
with alignments to the sun and moon taken as evidence of rituals linked to the changing seasons and the summer
and winter solstices. Alternatively, alignments identified particularly with stars point to a megalithic calendar used for
working out dates or to reflect or predict astronomical events such as solar eclipses.
Recently a radical new theory has emerged—that Stonehenge served as a "prehistoric Lourdes" where people came
to be healed. This idea revolves around the smaller bluestones, which, researchers argue, must have been credited
with magical powers for them to have been floated, dragged, and hauled 145 miles (233 kilometers) from west
Wales. A team lead by Tim Darvill of Bournemouth University, U.K., announced in 2005 that it had located the
quarry the bluestones came from, only for another study to suggest the stones had made the journey earlier,
powered naturally by ice age glaciers. Excavations at Stonehenge co-directed by Darvill in April 2008 may yet
bolster a hypothesis also based on a number of Bronze Age skeletons unearthed in the area that show signs of
bone deformities.
Competing to solve the enduring prehistoric puzzle is Sheffield University's Mike Parker Pearson, co-leader of the
Stonehenge Riverside Project, which is partly funded by the National Geographic Society. Latest discoveries by the
project team appear to support Parker Pearson's claim that Stonehenge was a center for ancestor worship that was
linked by the River Avon and two ceremonial avenues to a matching wooden circle at nearby Durrington Walls. The
two circles with their temporary and permanent structures represented, respectively, the domains of the living and the
dead, according to Parker Pearson.
"Stonehenge isn't a monument in isolation," he says. "It is actually one of a pair—one in stone, one in timber. The
theory is that Stonehenge is a kind of spirit home to the ancestors."
STONEHENGE
Stonehenge is surely Britain's greatest national icon, symbolizing mystery, power and endurance. Its original purpose
is unclear to us, but some have speculated that it was a temple made for the worship of ancient earth deities. It
has been called an astronomical observatory for marking significant events on the prehistoric calendar. Others claim
that it was a sacred site for the burial of high-ranking citizens from the societies of long ago.
While we can't say with any degree of certainty what it was for, we can say that it wasn't constructed for any
casual purpose. Only something very important to the ancients would have been worth the effort and investment that
it took to construct Stonehenge.
________________________________________
The stones we see today represent Stonehenge in ruin. Many of the original stones have fallen or been removed
by previous generations for home construction or road repair. There has been serious damage to some of the
smaller bluestones resulting from close visitor contact (prohibited since 1978) and the prehistoric carvings on the
larger sarsen stones show signs of significant wear.
Construction of the Henge
In its day, the construction of Stonehenge was an impressive engineering feat, requiring commitment, time and vast
amounts of manual labor. In its first phase, Stonehenge was a large earthwork; a bank and ditch arrangement
called a henge, constructed approximately 5,000 years ago. It is believed that the ditch was dug with tools made
from the antlers of red deer and, possibly, wood. The underlying chalk was loosened with picks and shoveled with
the shoulderblades of cattle. It was then loaded into baskets and carried away. Modern experiments have shown that
these tools were more than equal to the great task of earth digging and moving.
The BluestonesAbout 2,000 BC, the first stone circle (which is now the inner circle), comprised of small bluestones, was set up,
but abandoned before completion. The stones used in that first circle are believed to be from the Prescelly
Mountains, located roughly 240 miles away, at the southwestern tip of Wales. The bluestones weigh up to 4 tons
each and about 80 stones were used, in all. Given the distance they had to travel, this presented quite a
transportation problem.
________________________________________
NEW - More information on the Stonehenge Bluestones! Click Here.
________________________________________
Modern theories speculate that the stones were dragged by roller and sledge from the inland mountains to the
headwaters of Milford Haven. There they were loaded onto rafts, barges or boats and sailed along the south coast
of Wales, then up the Rivers Avon and Frome to a point near present-day Frome in Somerset. From this point, so
the theory goes, the stones were hauled overland, again, to a place near Warminster in Wiltshire, approximately 6
miles away. From there, it's back into the pool for a slow float down the River Wylye to Salisbury, then up the
Salisbury Avon to West Amesbury, leaving only a short 2 mile drag from West Amesbury to the Stonehenge site.
Construction of the Outer Ring
The giant sarsen stones (which form the outer circle), weigh as much as 50 tons each. To transport them from
the Marlborough Downs, roughly 20 miles to the north, is a problem of even greater magnitude than that of moving
the bluestones. Most of the way, the going is relatively easy, but at the steepest part of the route, at Redhorn Hill,
modern work studies estimate that at least 600 men would have been needed just to get each stone past this
obstacle.
Once on site, a sarsen stone was prepared to accommodate stone lintels along its top surface. It was then dragged
until the end was over the opening of the hole. Great levers were inserted under the stone and it was raised until
gravity made it slide into the hole. At this point, the stone stood on about a 30° angle from the ground. Ropes
were attached to the top and teams of men pulled from the other side to raise it into the full upright position. It
was secured by filling the hole at its base with small, round packing stones. At this point, the lintels were lowered
into place and secured vertically by mortice and tenon joints and horizontally by tongue and groove joints.
Stonehenge was probably finally completed around 1500 BC.
Who Built Stonehenge?
The question of who built Stonehenge is largely unanswered, even today. The monument's construction has been
attributed to many ancient peoples throughout the years, but the most captivating and enduring attribution has been
to the Druids. This erroneous connection was first made around 3 centuries ago by the antiquary, John Aubrey.
Julius Caesar and other Roman writers told of a Celtic priesthood who flourished around the time of their first
conquest (55 BC). By this time, though, the stones had been standing for 2,000 years, and were, perhaps,
already in a ruined condition. Besides, the Druids worshipped in forest temples and had no need for stone
structures.
The best guess seems to be that the Stonehenge site was begun by the people of the late Neolithic period
(around 3000 BC) and carried forward by people from a new economy which was arising at this time. These
"new" people, called Beaker Folk because of their use of pottery drinking vessels, began to use metal implements
and to live in a more communal fashion than their ancestors. Some think that they may have been immigrants from
the continent, but that contention is not supported by archaeological evidence. It is likely that they were indigenous
people doing the same old things in new ways.
As Legend Has It
The legend of King Arthur provides another story of the construction of Stonehenge. It is told by the twelfth century
writer, Geoffrey of Monmouth, in his History of the Kings of Britain that Merlin brought the stones to the Salisbury
Plain from Ireland. Sometime in the fifth century, there had been a massacre of 300 British noblemen by the
treacherous Saxon leader, Hengest. Geoffrey tells us that the high king, Aurelius Ambrosius, wanted to create a
fitting memorial to the slain men. Merlin suggested an expedition to Ireland for the purpose of transplanting the
Giant's Ring stone circle to Britain. According to Geoffrey of Monmouth, the stones of the Giant's Ring were
originally brought from Africa to Ireland by giants (who else but giants could handle the job?). The stones were
located on "Mount Killaraus" and were used as a site for performing rituals and for healing. Led by King Uther and
Merlin, the expedition arrived at the spot in Ireland. The Britons, none of whom were giants, apparently, were
unsuccessful in their attempts to move the great stones. At this point, Merlin realized that only his magic arts would
turn the trick. So, they were dismantled and shipped back to Britain where they were set up (see illus. at right)
as they had been before, in a great circle, around the mass grave of the murdered noblemen. The story goes on
to tell that Aurelius, Uther and Arthur's successor, Constantine were also buried there in their time*.
Present Day Stonehenge
Situated in a vast plain, surrounded by hundreds of round barrows, or burial mounds, the Stonehenge site is truly
impressive, and all the more so, the closer you approach. It is a place where much human effort was expended for
a purpose we can only guess at. Some people see it as a place steeped in magic and mystery, some as a place
where their imaginations of the past can be fired and others hold it to be a sacred place. But whatever viewpoint is
brought to it and whatever its original purpose was, it should be treated as the ancients treated it, as a place of
honor .
The modern age has not been altogether kind to Stonehenge, despite the lip service it pays to the preservation of
heritage sites. There is a major highway running no more than 100 yards away from the stones, and a commercial
circus has sprung up around it, complete with parking lots, gift shops and ice cream stands. The organization,
English Heritage, is committed to righting these wrongs, and in the coming years, we may get to see Stonehenge in
the setting for which it was originally created. Despite all its dilapidation and the encroachment of the modern world,
Stonehenge, today, is an awe-inspiring sight, and no travel itinerary around Britain should omit it.
Stonehenge Stonehenge is a serious feat of engineering. Built in three phases over a period of 1,400 years, it
was undertaken by a massive and motivated workforce who had a clear definition of what they wanted to achieve,
and the necessary skills to construct it.
The first Bronze Age engineers broke ground around 5,050 years ago, with excavating tools made from deer
antlers and cattle bones. The original development featured circles of wooden posts surrounded by an arrangement
of banks and ditches.
Around 500 years later, the first stones were erected – still two millennia before the Romans invaded. These
bluestones, weighing up to five tonnes each, were brought 400km from the Prescelli Mountains in South Wales.
The stones were probably transported on enormous rafts along the coast of Wales and up the River Avon. They
were then dragged overland to Stonehenge, only to be abandoned for a century or so before the really serious
work began…
The 30 giant upright stones that formed the outer circle – 17 of which survive today - weighed as much as 50
tons each. They are evenly spaced, 1.4m apart, towering 4m (13ft) above the ground. At around 2m wide and
1m thick, they taper towards the top and originally supported 3m lintels which formed a continuous circle.
The lintels were fitted end-to-end using tongue-and-groove joints. They were held in place with mortice and tenon
joints, fashioned with stone hammers. Researchers estimate that teams of up to 600 men would have dragged
these stones over rough terrain from the Marlborough Downs, 32km (20 miles) away.
STONEHENGE - The Marriage of the Sun and Moonby Robin Heath
Ed. N.: Robin Heath is a full-time consultant astrologer in West Wales. He presents here a resume and the results
of his chief book, Sun, Moon & Stonehenge. In appendix, an other text, "Exploring Preliterate Sources of Astrology".
I thank him for his participation to C.U.R.A.
It is well established, because it is objectively true, that the axis of Stonehenge aligns approximately to the
midsummer rising sun azimuth. In addition, also objectively true, the station stone rectangle is constructed
perpendicular to the axis and has a ratio of 5:12. In Megalithic yards, this is 40:96, i.e. the units of the
rectangle's ratio are expressed in 8 MY 'quanta'.
A rectangular structure may align to extreme sunrises and opposite extreme moonrise azimuths (the 'lunstices') only
within half a degree of the latitude of Stonehenge. A 5:12 rectangular structure further aligns to the quarter day
sunrises and sets - those days lying between the two solstices. Finally, from station 94 through stone 'B' on the
axis, we find an equinoctial alignment to the rising sun. (Figure 4.3, Sun, Moon & Stonehenge, page 64)
The secret of the calendar (and eclipse prediction) is to be able to find the exact number of lunar months in the
solar year. (Psst! - it's 12.368, almost 7/19ths). The over-run is 0.368 of a lunation, which is 10.875 days. It
is objectively true that the two main features of Stonehenge are built to the ratio 7/19. The Aubrey circle is 104
MY in diameter (283 feet), whilst the Sarsen circle has an outer diameter of 104 feet. The fraction is 0.367.
This same fraction may be found from a rope marked with 30 equal divisions. Peg out a 5:12:13 triangle, divide
the '5' side into '3' and '2'. At this 3:2 point, a constructed hypotenuse to the apex has a length of 153, which is
12.369 units. One could even use the station stone rectangle, where the divisions are eight Megalithic yards. I have
called the construction the Lunation Triangle, as it appears not to have been discovered and named previously by
modern culture. However, there appears to be a story containing the lunation triangle in the last chapter of St
John's Gospel.
The plot now thickens. When using this triangle with units as Megalithic yards or multiples thereof, the 0.368
fractional component will automatically fall out as one foot (12") or multiples thereof. Thus it is true that the
Megalithic yard splits into a foot and a Royal cubit (20.64 inches). If the Megalithic yard is understood to
represent the time elapsing between 12 and 13 lunations (full moons), i.e. between 354.367 days and 383.89
days, then where the foot meets the cubit is found to be 365.2 days - the solar year, or 12.368 lunations.
(Table 5.1, Sun, Moon & Stonehenge, page 85)
I have, for years, used Stonehenge to calibrate ropes whereby I can subsequently derive a soli-lunar calendar for
years in advance and predict eclipses ( see later). I have termed 0.368 ( very nearly 7/19) the Silver Fraction.
Of course, astronomically, 12.368 is the metonic cycle expressed as an annual figure. [Metonic cycle: In nineteen
years there are exactly 235 lunations. 235/19 is 12.368. Named after a 4th century AD astronomer, it appears
that the phenomenon was known about by the builders of Stonehenge, i.e. before 2500 BC]
Some Thoughts on Moving Stones
The Sarsen Stones were moved over 20 miles from the Marlborough Downs, adjacent to Avebury. The smaller
bluestones came originally from Carn Menyn in the Preseli Mountains of West Wales. Some think they came by
glacier, others that they were lugged to Milford Haven, then rafted. Recent Chlorine 36 analysis (Bowen, UCW
Cardiff) favours human transport, and the glaciation of southern Pembrokeshire suggests it unlikely that the
bluestones would have been carried towards the south-east. However, my argument is that the large altar stone at
Stonehenge is made from a sparkly sandstone found adjacent to the Haven (at Cosheton) - did a glacier then
transport it from sea level uphill to Salisbury Plain? It is thought very unlikely that glaciation reached to the Haven.
Whatever this debate brings in the future, it is objectively true that the sarsens were moved by human effort and,
as we shall now discover, it is not actually very improtant how the bluestones got to Stonehenge but why they
assumed such importance.
The original latitudes for the bluestones and the sarsens is 364/7 and 360/7' degrees respectively. The centre of
the henge at Avebury is placed exactly at 360/7 degrees, i.e. at one seventh of a circle as latitude. So exact is
this figure that I suggest it was no accident or coincidence. The builders had a technique to calculate latitude to
seconds of a degree.
It is of note that the Sarsen circle may be precisely placed by constructing a seven sided star ( heptogram) from
the Aubrey circle. The star-arms cross at 100.8 feet, the mean diameter of the Sarsen circle. (Figure 7.11, Sun,
Moon & Stonehenge, page 137) Of course, we all know that the midsummer azimuth of sunrise is approximately a
seventh of a circle and that Stonehenge's actual latitude is within 15 minutes of a degree of a seventh of a circle.
Geomantics
The large Lunation Triangle, shown incorporated into a huge cardinally aligned 5:12 rectangle, includes the location
of the bluestone site, and the exact north-south and east-west lines complete a right angled triangle via Lundy and
Caldey Island. In Old Welsh, Lundy is called Ynys Elen, the 'island of the elbow, or right-angle'. I suggest that this
may be the reason why Stonehenge is located where it is - as the only man-made construction in this geomantic
message about calendar wisdom? (Figure 5.2, Sun, Moon & Stonehenge, page 76)
Eclipse PredictionAnyone who has ever tried to make a model of how the Sun and Moon move around the Zodiac will end up, most
simply, with a circle of 28 markers around a central earth. Moving a 'Moon-marker' one position per day and a
'Sun-marker' once every 13 days, provides a calendar accurate to 98%. (Figure 3.3, Sun, Moon & Stonehenge,
page 52)
Every year, for about 34 days, the full and new moons occur near the Sun's path (the ecliptic) and eclipses
result. These two times, which are 173 days apart, move backwards around the calendar taking 18.6 years to
complete a revolution. The precise two points where the moon crosses the apparent path of the sun through the
zodiac ( the ecliptic) are called the lunar nodes.
By doubling the sun-moon calendar to 56 markers, we can obtain an accuracy of 99.8%, and meet the handy
convenience that 18.6 x 3 is almost the same as 28 x 2. Now a 3:2 ratio enables eclipses to be predicted to
high accuracy, as the picture shows. (Figure 3.6, Sun, Moon & Stonehenge, page 58)
APPENDIX: Exploring Preliterate Sources of Astrology
All of our astrology originated from astronomical observation. Similarly, the derivation of a mythology concerning the
interactions of planetary gods can only come about when the cycles of those gods are understood by a culture. For
example, correlations of the orbital behaviour of Mars with events on Earth can only be integrated after Mars has
been observed for a considerable length of time. Thus, the corpus of information linking Mars and what we would
call "Martian events" and "Martian behavioural patterns" can be "read" from a direct and non-abstracted table of
observations, which, presumably, has been compared side by side with contemporary events. From such things,
astrology was almost certainly born.
In the Sumerian cultures, we can trace these former tables of planetary motion back to almost the third millennium
B.C.E., along with other tables, also inscribed on clay tablets, which cover the essential mathematical functions -
reciprocation, squares, square roots, cubes, and so on.[1] Here we can discover records for hundreds of years
concerning the orbital placements of the luminaries and the visible planets.[2] This correlation and this historical
record are not in doubt simply because the culture involved - from which we derive nearly all of our astrological
root sources - possessed two advantages. The first was earned. The Babylonian culture wrote things down - they
were literate. The second advantage was fortuitous. In addition to writing, they were lucky enough to use as a
writing medium something that has withstood over 4,000 years of aging without rotting away or severely deteriorating
- clay tables that have endured the passage of time very well indeed. Bark books and papyri have not.
Many Eggs and Many Baskets
Historical commentary tells us that other contemporary cultures probably were not literate at this time; therefore, no
one bothers to look very hard for any vehicle that would have preserved the cultural artifacts and traditions of these
cultures. Thus, it is widely believed that they never wrote anything down because they could not write. And so we
go on believing that Western culture began with writing, and therefore, began with the clever lot in Mesopotamia,
thence via Egypt to Greece and Rome.
This is a pretty and cozy myth, and one that is obviously wearing thin. Long before 2,000 B.C.E., there was a
complete cultural flowering in Northwestern Europe that built enduring stone monuments instead of writing on clay
tablets. These monuments have been shown to relate to astronomical alignments, particularly of the Sun and Moon
cycles. Yet, so far, hardly anyone has taken the trouble to read what this unusual form of "writing" is telling us.
Western astrologers still prefer to look eastward for their cultural parenting; the rest of the world also prefers to
remain comfortable with the other cultural and biblical remnants of the Middle East. We all go on measuring time
using Babylonian sexigesimal (60-based) arithmetic. We all measure angles using Babylonian degrees (which tell
us that there are 360 days in the year). And we all use calendars based on a Roman design that produces
irrational numbers all over the place when one attempts to divide weeks of seven days into it, twelve months into it,
or four (seasons or weeks in the month, take your choice) into it.
As a form of preserving or pickling important cultural information, we forget with ready amnesia that there was an
oral tradition that was ever so strong in Britain, Ireland, and along the Celtic seaboard. Clay tablets are obviously
hardware (to use our contemporaneous term for such things), and more so are megalithic monuments, whilst the
myths and legends of Celtic and proto-Celtic history are software. It is suggested that we can rerun the original
program only through the interface of someone who understands how to load this software into the original
computer. Whilst today we prefer silicon semiconductor slices to define our hardware, putting Intel Inside our
software-recall machines, there is not one of us who would not recognise the importance of the software in making
the machine perform. Yet how many astrologers ever break free and search for the nuggets of gold that lie within
the oral traditions and stone circles of those first astronomers of Northwest Europe? Before 3,000 B.C.E., these
astronomers had erected huge monuments that show they understood all the salient motions of the Moon, including
the 18.62-year nodal period and the 9-minute declination wobble. What can these monuments - this colossal
hardware - and these oral traditions tell us about astrology? Shall we try and run some of this ancient program?
The Myth of the Solar Hero
There are many myths that deal with the myth of the solar hero, and our psychological astrology has embraced the
Sun in this context. As one positive consequence, we are now all encouraged to be heroes, whose chart placement
of the Sun by sign, house, and aspect can tell us much about the kind of journey and territory our heroic quest
will take. We use the twelve-sign, allegedly Sumerian, zodiac. Our houses are usually mortgaged with the Placidean
Building Society, and our aspects are all based on the division of the year-circle by whole numbers. Only this latter
technique may be found demonstrated within the megalithic cultures - indeed they were apparently obsessed with
such things. Their geometry appears to have been more important to them than writing. So, what can we possibly
glean from looking at their hero myths? Quite a lot!
The very ancient stories of the Tuatha de Danaan in Ireland tell us that the first battle of Mag Tuired was fought
by their saviour-hero Lug and 32 other leaders. Alongside this, we may also read of the company of 33 men, all
apparently 32 years of age, who sit at the tables in the other-world island castle in Perlesvaus. In the same vein,
Nemed, another hero, reached Ireland with only one ship, having lost 33 on the way; Cuculainn slays 33 of the
Labriads in the Bru battle, whilst a late account of the second battle of Mag Tuired names 33 leaders of the
Fomore - 32 plus their highest king.
This material contains one clear and obvious common theme. Repeatedly, it hammers home what was an originally
oral message, which told the knowing listener to look to the number 33 as something relevant to a hero, a saviour.
In the analysis of the Welsh White Book of Rhydderch, we read that, "Both three and eleven were equally symbolic,
the multiplicant thirty-three particularly so. It has frequently been used to imply supra-human attributes, regal
authority and deification."
This is very interesting, if only because the Western world has, for nearly two millennia, chosen to base its own
hero myth, and hence its belief system, on the story of Jesus. Here, our solar hero, "officially" born very
appropriately at the winter solstice, dies and is resurrected at 33 years of age. Immediately, we recognise that this
story has commonality with the earlier European oral traditions, and immediately we can begin to do some original
research - a megalithic or preliterate Project Hindsight, if you like. So, what is a biblical account of a major hero
within a major world religion doing drawing attention to the same number 33 that Irish and British heroes were
resonating to over 2,000 years previously? The plot thickens!
Our first clues are an obvious solar hero myth; a repeated number, 33; and a resurrection after 33 years. There
are some other suggested clues, the main one being that the major activity taking place in Western Europe when
the oldest stories associated with this myth are thought to have originated was coincident with the beginning of
cultural astronomy through the accurate placement of huge stone monoliths and the erection of calendar buildings.
Time and again, these are shown to relate to extreme Sun and Moon risings and settings against the local horizon.
Marking the Resurrection
The practical solar year is 365 days long. I say practical because folks who haven't ever thought the matter through
will often tell you there are 365 and a quarter days in the year. This is abstracted cerebral slush - one can never
experience a quarter day, and years come in packets containing 365 days, except that every fourth year an extra
day slips in to make it 366 days. In four years there are thus 1,461 days. It is fairly easy to observe the Sun's
behaviour and thereby measure this number. Anyone who attempts this task will immediately be pitched into the
correct mental space to solve our solar hero problem.
An equinoctial sunrise marker, of which many still exist on moorland and fell, will, each year, deliver the vernal
equinox sunrise from a slightly different position on the horizon. The quarter "day" effect means that each year the
Sun is displaced about a quarter of a (Babylonian) degree from the marker stone, which is as easy to measure
as the gap between the two asterisks at the end of this sentence (* *). During three years of observation, the
Sun appears to be slipping ever more away from the alignment until, at the fourth year, two remarkable and very
observable things happen simultaneously: the Sun rises more closely to the marker stone when the day count - the
tally - for the year is found to be 366, not 365, days.
Observation does not stop there. A good human eye can detect much more minuscule angular changes than a
quarter of a degree [3] from watching sunrises. And although we may wonder why our present history books
waffle and flounder along with apocryphal stories about heliacal risings of Sirius offering the Egyptians a 360-day
year, the truth about solar-year measurements done at the equinox is that one always gets 365 days, unless
sustained observations are done over many years, whence, after four years, you have the 365.25 days that our
present calendar is based upon.[4]
For longer time periods, something else happens. Every once in a whole number of years, one gets the chance to
obtain the year to even more precise accuracy by observing certain key years when, once again, the Sun rises
precisely behind the foresight, be this a stone marker or a distant mountain peak - in other words, a perfect
repeat solar cycle.
In our modern mathematical world, we can calculate in advance when these important years are going to occur. But
this is only because we can look up the exact length of the solar tropical year within astronomical constant books,
and because we have access to $5 calculators that multiply two numbers together. Historically, in those Babylonian
clay tablets, we can find precision arithmetical tables dating back into the megalithic era we are dealing with.
However, we daren't assume, on present evidence, that ancient Europeans were capable of multiplying two numbers.
What we may assume, courtesy of their enduring architecture, is that they at least knew the length of the solar
year to two decimal places. They could do this by marking 1461 equal lengths on a rope - the tally count of days
in four years - and then folding it in half twice to get 365.25. The 1461 is a given - gleaned from simple
observation and tally counting over four years.
As astrologers, we are supposed to be very interested in cycles, aren't we? When that cycle involves our Sun, one
might expect us to be even more interested. So here's a long-term Sun cycle we all appear to have forgotten -
after 33 years one can observe an exact repeat of the original equinoctial rising behind the marker stone. Those of
you who own computers can quickly check out this "super" solar return chart for your 33rd birthday. You'll find that
the houses - the horizon alignments - are all aligned much as they were for your natal chart. To a megalithic
soul, this same phenomenon would have translated as an exact repeat rising (or setting) behind a marker.
Here we appear to have the solution to our original riddle. Our adopted cultural solar hero, Jesus, at age 33, rose
from the dead, witnessed at "the rising of the sun" [5] by Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus.[6]
They noticed that the large stone standing in the entrance of the tomb, which held the body of our erstwhile dead
hero, had been rolled away. This is enough evidence to link the astronomical phenomenon to the scriptural account,
although these latter texts also inform us that this particular resurrection took place at Easter - a festival tagged
onto the much older one of the equinox, which then locates the marker, and hence the sunrise in question, as
being exactly due East of the observer.
A Plagiarised Resurrection
Whatever else these over-translated, censored, and strange gospels tell us about the life of Jesus, the resurrection
story does concern itself with a solar hero rising again at the same place with the sunrise, at Easter, after 33
years. There is a very large stone blocking the tomb - the entrance to the underworld - which rolls away to reveal
the resurrected form and his entrance back into the visible world. Thus, this simple research would apparently seem
to have solved our task about why the number 33 assumed such importance in folklore and the oral traditions,
many of which probably date back to the late Stone Age. What we have also done, of course, is to stir up a
potential hornet's nest, because it is now suggested that the Jesus story, whatever else it may be for Christians
around the world, rides on the back of an historical and astronomical account of what have come to be called
pagan practices in megalithic Europe. Ironically, those very same practices were stamped out ruthlessly by the later
Christian Church.
The Need to Explore Alternative Cultural Sources
Unless we include this European megalithic dimension within our cultural paradigm, we cannot really understand the
inner meaning of these scriptures, and, therefore, we must ask a vitally important question: what else are we failing
to understand for the same lack of interest in such material? Similarly, as astrologers, unless we understand
something of the culture of this original source of astronomical data, we are unlikely to ever understand certain
cycles within our own specialism, which have now become abstracted within ephem- erides and computer programs.
The direct experience of observing Sun and Moon rises and sets produces strange effects on modern western folk,
effects the author has both experienced and observed over the past twelve years in himself and his clients.
So, what was your solar super-return at 33 years all about? Set it up and you will discover that the Ascendant
and, therefore, the houses are also returned to the same place. That's a strong return, isn't it - ignore it at your
peril! I took my Faculty of Astrological Studies examinations on my 33rd solar return, an event that altered the
course of my life. You have just read one of the outcomes from these changes.
Important Solar Returns behind a Horizon Alignment
Number of Years Number of Days Time Difference from Whole Number
4 1,460.968796 45 minutes
21 7,670.086179 124 minutes
33 12,052.99257 10.7 minutes (18 seconds of a degree)
62 22,645.01634 23.53 minutes
The tropical solar year is 365.242199 days in length. (Source: Sir H. Spencer Jones, General Astronomy, London:
Edward Arnold, 1922 (3rd edition 1951.) Multiply this by whole numbers (of years) and look for products where
the fractional part of the result tends toward zero or one. There are several contenders, shown above.
The daily angular sunrise change along the horizon in Southern Britain at the equinox is about 0.7degrees. This is
considerably more than one solar disc diameter (about 0.6 degrees).
NUGMIS 135: STONEHEDGE: UN CERCLE DE PIERRES BIEN MYSTERIEUX?
Stonehenge, dont le nom signifie « les pierres suspendues », est un monument mégalithique circulaire érigé entre
3100 et 1500 av. J.-C., au Néolithique et à l’Âge du bronze. Il est situé à 13 km au nord de Salisbury (comté
du Wiltshire, Angleterre) [1].
L’ensemble du site de Stonehenge, et le cromlech d’Avebury, situé à une trentaine de kilomètres au nord, sont
inscrits sur la liste du patrimoine mondial de l’UNESCO.
Les trois phases de la construction
Stonehenge I
Le premier monument n’était constitué que d’une enceinte circulaire délimitée par une levée de terre et un fossé
adjacent extérieur (7 et 8), mesurant environ 110 m de diamètre, avec une entrée principale orientée vers le
nord-est, et une entrée plus petite vers le sud (14). L’ensemble fut mis en place sur une surface légèrement en
pente, qui ne présentait aucun caractère exceptionnel par rapport au paysage environnant.
Stonehenge II
Dans une deuxième étape, on trouve un monument édifié entre 1700 av. J.-C. et 1550 av. J.-C., consistant en
un double cercle concentrique de soixante-seize pierres dressées.
Stonehenge III
Enfin, dans une troisième étape vient s’ajouter un cercle de 30 m de diamètre, constitué de trente monolithes de
grès, dressés dans la première moitié du XVe siècle av. J.-C.. Ces pierres mesurent jusqu’à 5 m de haut et
pèsent jusqu’à 50 tonnes.
Techniques de construction
Les pierres dressées mesurent jusqu’à 5 m de haut, 2 m de large et pèsent jusqu’à 50 tonnes. Des linteaux,
fixés au moyen de tenons et de mortaises, sont posés sur ces pierres dressées.
À l’intérieur du cercle se trouvent cinq groupes de trois pierres disposées en fer à cheval.
Les techniques mises en œuvre ainsi que les contacts commerciaux avec la Grèce font penser à des influences
mycéniennes pour la construction, bien que depuis les années 1980 les archéologues penchent plutôt pour un
développement local et autonome.
Les pierres bleues de dolérite, mais aussi de rhyolite de la deuxième phase, pesant chacune 4 tonnes, proviennent
des Preseli Hills, Pembrokeshire, Pays de Galles, à 220 km au nord du site, alors que les grandes pierres, de
grès local couramment appelé sarsen, ont été extraites d’une carrière située à 28 km de Stonehenge, dans les
Marlborough Downs. Bien que nous n’ayons aucune certitude sur les techniques réellement mises en œuvre, des
expériences récentes, comme celle de Bougon, ont montré que l’utilisation de moyens rudimentaires tels que leviers
(surtout pour vaincre la force d’inertie au départ), cordages, rouleaux de bois sous la pierre, chemin d’argile pour
rendre le sol plus glissant, permettaient à un groupe bien organisé de déplacer de très lourdes charges.
Wally Wallington, charpentier retraité, a mis au point plusieurs techniques simples et nécessitant peu de force,
permettant de déplacer, tourner, soulever et dresser des blocs de pierre de plusieurs tonnes.
Theories about Stonehenge
Stonehenge has been subjected to many theories about its origin, ranging from the academic worlds of archaeology
to explanations from mythology and the paranormal.
Early interpretations
Many early historians were influenced by supernatural folktales in their explanations. Some legends held that Merlin
had a giant build the structure for him or that he had magically transported it from Mount Killaraus in Ireland, while
others held the Devil responsible. Henry of Huntingdon was the first to write of the monument around 1130 soon
followed by Geoffrey of Monmouth who was the first to record fanciful associations with King Arthur which led the
monument to be incorporated into the wider cycle of European medieval romance.
In 1655 , the architect John Webb, writing in the name of his former superior Inigo Jones, argued that Stonehenge
was a Roman temple, dedicated to Caelus, (a Latin name for the Greek sky-god Ouranos), and built following the
Tuscan order[citation needed]. Later commentators maintained that the Danes erected it. Indeed, up until the late
nineteenth century, the site was commonly attributed to the Saxons or other relatively recent societies.
The first academic effort to survey and understand the monument was made around 1640 by John Aubrey. He
declared Stonehenge the work of Druids. This view was greatly popularised by William Stukeley. Aubrey also
contributed the first measured drawings of the site, which permitted greater analysis of its form and significance.
From this work, he was able to demonstrate an astronomical or calendrical role in the stones’ placement.
By the turn of the nineteenth century, John Lubbock was able to attribute the site to the Bronze Age based on the
bronze objects found in the nearby barrows.
The early attempts to figure out the people who had undertaken this colossal project have since been debunked.
While there have been precious few in the way of real theories to explain who built the site, or why, there can be
an assessment of what we know to be fact and what has been proven false.
Stonehenge
First there is the matter of radio carbon dating the construction of the site itself. As has been already stated in the
construction outlines above, the monument building of the site began around the year 3100 BC and ended around
the year 1600 BC. This allows the elimination of a few of the theories that have been presented. The original
theory that the Druids may be the most popular one; however, the Celtic society that spawned the Druid priesthood
came into being only after the year 300 BC. Additionally, the Druids are unlikely to have used the site for sacrifices
since they performed the majority of their rituals in the woods or mountains, areas better suited for “earth rituals”
than an open field. The fact that the Romans first came to the British Isles when Julius Caesar led an expedition in
55 BC negates the theories of Inigo Jones and others that Stonehenge was built as a Roman temple.
The question that dominates the debate as to what Stonehenge was used for can be easily divided into whether it
was a religious or a scientific observatory. As outlined in the theories section below, Gerald Hawkins noted 165 key
sites that he stated correlated very strongly with the rising and setting points of the sun and moon. He believed
that because of this, the site could be used to anticipate astronomical phenomena. This has sparked the idea that
the site was created in order to help commemorate the solstices, as the alignment with the sun and moon would
seem to indicate.
Further supporting this line of evidence is the fact that the site’s alignment is focused along the lunar lines in a
way that increases the accuracy of precession, which is the amount that the Earth’s slight tilt on its axis, or
“wobble” will eventually change the timing of lunar events. In short, this site could have been set up to more
accurately predict events taking place in the heavens above. While there is still no conclusive evidence that this site
was indeed intended for use as an observatory, the fact also that much of the support for the religious use for this
has come from a purely political standpoint. The modern Celts, who were for a long time believed to be the
creators of the site, have moved quickly to claim the site as their own. They now hold festivals and ceremonies at
different times during the year. The problem with this has been outlined above, with the carbon dating refuting their
hand in the site’s creation. There are a number of assumptions that have supported this theory, however. It is
known that on the longest day of the year, the summer solstice, the sun shines directly through the centre of the
structure, which given many of the cultural attitudes of sun worship that were rampant at the time, seems to
indicate a religious purpose. In addition, much of what survives from the distant past, buildings, etc., have all been
religious in nature.)
Secular calendar theory
Most theories have guessed at a cultic purpose behind the astronomical design of the monument, on the grounds
that such a mammoth undertaking must have had an ideological rather than practical basis. They derive from
anthropology rather than from cultural and technological history. But Lockyer (Stonehenge Astronomically Considered,
1906) and others have pointed out the practical value of astronomical observation at a time when there was no
other way to establish precise calendar dates, whether these were needed for agricultural, social or
seasonal-religious reasons.
The double-level circle and the central stone of the monument define an observational vantage-point from which the
precession of constellations could be accurately established. It would have been known from earlier and less massive
constructions that these events corresponded precisely with the cycle of seasons, but wooden edifices, earth-mounds
and even standing-stone circles would not retain accuracy over any long period. Without at least one authoritative
standard, events and seasons had no chronological index, since the exact length of the year (including part-days)
was not known, nor would the mathematics have been available to extrapolate from it. There was a good reason
for a massive and permanently immobile construction at a flat inland location where all sides of the sky could be
equally measured.
The modern view of astronomy as a pure-science, which would seem to be of little practical use to primitive
Britons, can make us forget that astronomy was a key factor in the transition from the hunter-gatherer culture to an
agricultural one. The motivation for the sort of co-operative effort needed by such a large constructive undertaking
can be appreciated in relation to the unique value of accurate dating for the whole region of southern Britain, but
our ignorance of the social context of the time makes it difficult to speculate on how it might have been organised.
Since there was a considerable dividend for the whole population, Stonehenge must have been the culmination of
lesser regional investments in this kind of technology over a long period. What sort of society might have existed
which could draw labour and commitment from a wide geographical area, and over presumably a long period of
years while the monument was being erected? All we can say is that the astro-technology involved must have been
sufficiently trusted and valued to make this possible.
The bluestones
Roger Mercer has observed that the bluestones are incongruously finely worked and has suggested that they were
transferred to Salisbury Plain from an as yet unlocated earlier monument in Pembrokeshire. J. F. S. Stone felt that
a Bluestone monument had earlier stood near the nearby Stonehenge cursus and been moved to their current site
from there. If Mercer’s theory is correct then the bluestones may have been transplanted to cement an alliance or
display superiority over a conquered enemy although this can only be speculation. Oval shaped settings of bluestones
similar to those at Stonehenge 3iv are also known at the sites of Bedd Arthur in the Preseli Hills and at Skomer
Island off the southwest coast of Pembrokeshire. Some archaeologists have suggested that the igneous bluestones
and sedimentary sarsens had some symbolism, of a union between two cultures from different landscapes and
therefore from different backgrounds.
Recent analysis of contemporary burials found nearby known as the Boscombe Bowmen, has indicated that at least
some of the individuals associated with Stonehenge 3 came either from Wales or from some other European area of
ancient rocks. Petrological analysis of the stones themselves has verified that they could only have come from the
Preseli Hills and it is tempting to connect the two.
The main source of the bluestones is now identified with the dolerite outcrops around Carn Menyn although work led
by Olwen Williams-Thorpe of the Open University has shown that other bluestones came from outcrops up to 10 km
away. Dolerite is composed of an intrusive volcanic rock of plagioclase feldspar that is harder than granite.
Aubrey Burl and a number of geologists and geomorphologists contend that the bluestones were not transported by
human agency at all and were instead brought by glaciers at least part of the way from Wales during the
Pleistocene. There is good geological and glaciological evidence that glacier ice did move across Preseli and did
reach the Somerset coast. However, it is uncertain that it reached Salisbury Plain, and no further specimens of the
unusual dolerite stone have so far been found in the vicinity. One current view is that glacier ice transported the
stones as far as Somerset, and that they were collected from there by the builders of Stonehenge.
Stonehenge as part of a ritual landscape
Sunset at Stonehenge
Many archaeologists believe Stonehenge was an attempt to render in permanent stone the more common timber
structures that dotted Salisbury Plain at the time, such as those that stood at Durrington Walls. Modern
anthropological evidence has been used by Mike Parker Pearson and the Malagasy archaeologist Ramilisonina to
suggest that timber was associated with the living and stone with the ancestral dead amongst prehistoric peoples.
They have argued that Stonehenge was the terminus of a long, ritualised funerary procession for treating the dead,
which began in the east, during sunrise at Woodhenge and Durrington Walls, moved down the Avon and then along
the Avenue reaching Stonehenge in the west at sunset. The journey from wood to stone via water was, they
consider, a symbolic journey from life to death. There is no satisfactory evidence to suggest that Stonehenge’s
astronomical alignments were anything more than symbolic and current interpretations favour a ritual role for the
monument that takes into account its numerous burials and its presence within a wider landscape of sacred sites.
Many also believe that the site may have had astrological/spiritual significance attached to it.
Support for this view also comes from the historian of religions, Mircea Eliade, who compares the site to other
megalithic constructions around the world devoted to the cult of the dead (ancestors). “Like other similar English
monuments (For example, Eliade identifies, Woodhenge, Avebury, Arminghall, and Arbor Low) the Stonehenge
cromlech was situated in the middle of a field of funeral barrows. This famous ceremonial centre constituted, at least
in its primitive form, a sanctuary built to insure relations with the ancestors. In terms of structure, Stonehenge can
be compared with certain megalithic complexes developed, in other cultures, from a sacred area: temples or cities.
We have the same valourisation of the sacred space as “centre of the world,” the privileged place that affords
communication with heaven and the underworld, that is, with the gods, the chtonian goddesses, and the spirits of
the dead.”.[1] In addition to the English sites, Eliade identifies, among others, the megalithic architecture of Malta,
which represents a “spectacular expression” of the cult of the dead and worship of a Great Goddess.
Construction techniques and design
Closeup of Stonehenge
Much speculation has surrounded the engineering feats required to build Stonehenge. Assuming the bluestones were
brought from Wales by hand, and not transported by glaciers as Aubrey Burl has claimed, various methods of
moving them relying only on timber and rope have been suggested. In a 2001 exercise in experimental archaeology,
an attempt was made to transport a large stone along a land and sea route from Wales to Stonehenge. Volunteers
pulled it for some miles (with great difficulty) on a wooden sledge over land, using modern roads and low-friction
netting to assist sliding, but once transferred to a replica prehistoric boat, the stone sank in Milford Haven, before it
even reached the rough seas of the Bristol Channel.
As far as the stones, it has been suggested that timber A-frames were erected to raise the stones, and that teams
of people then hauled them upright using ropes. The topmost stones may have been raised up incrementally on
timber platforms and slid into place or pushed up ramps. The carpentry-type joints used on the stones imply a
people well skilled in woodworking and they could easily have had the knowledge to erect the monument using such
methods. In 2003 retired construction worker Wally Wallington demonstrated ingenious techniques based on
fundamental principles of levers, fulcrums and counterweights to show that a single man can rotate, walk, lift and tip
a ten-ton cast-concrete monolith into an upright position. He is progressing with his plan to construct a simulated
Stonehenge comprising of eight uprights and two lintels.
Alexander Thom was of the opinion that the site was laid out with the necessary precision using his megalithic yard.
The engraved weapons on the sarsens are unique in megalithic art in the British Isles, where more abstract designs
were invariably favoured. Similarly, the horseshoe arrangements of stones are unusual in a culture that otherwise
arranged stones in circles. The axe motif is, however, common to the peoples of Brittany at the time, and it has
been suggested at least two stages of Stonehenge were built under continental influence. This would go some way
towards explaining the monument’s atypical design, but overall, Stonehenge is still inexplicably unusual in the context
of any prehistoric European culture.
Estimates of the manpower needed to build Stonehenge put the total effort involved at millions of hours of work.
Stonehenge 1 probably needed around 11,000 man-hours (or 460 man-days) of work, Stonehenge 2 around
360,000 (15,000 man-days or 41 years) and the various parts of Stonehenge 3 may have involved up to 1.75
million hours (73 000 days or 200 years) of work. The working of the stones is estimated to have required
around 20 million hours (830 000 days or 2300 years) of work using the primitive tools available at the time.
Certainly, the will to produce such a site must have been strong, and it is considered that advanced social
organization would have been necessary to build and maintain it. However, Wally Wallington’s work suggests that
Stonehenge’s construction may have required fewer man-hours than previously estimated.
Alternative views
Stonehenge’s fame comes not only from its archaeological significance or potential early astronomical role but also in
its less tangible effect on visitors, what Christopher Chippindale describes as “the physical sensation of the place”,
something that transcends the rational, scientific view of the monument. This manifests itself in the spiritual role of
the site for many different groups and a belief that no single scientific explanation can do justice to it as a symbol
of the great achievement of the ancient Britons and as a symbol of something that continues to confound
mainstream archaeology.
Some people claim to have seen UFOs in the area, perhaps connected with the military installations around
Warminster, that has led to ideas over it being an extraterrestrial landing site. Alfred Watkins found three ley lines
running through the site and others have employed numerology, dowsing or geomancy to reach diverse conclusions
regarding the site’s power and purpose. New Age and neo-pagan beliefs might see Stonehenge as a sacred place
of worship which can conflict with its more mainstream role as an archaeological site, tourist attraction, or marketing
tool. Post-processualist archaeologists might consider that treating Stonehenge as a computer or observatory is to
apply modern concepts from our own technology-driven era back into the past. Even the role of indigenous peoples
in archaeology, rarely applied in Western Europe, has created a new function for the site as a symbol of Welsh
nationalism.
The significance of the ‘ownership’ of Stonehenge in terms of the differing meanings and interpretations held by the
many orthodox and unorthodox stakeholders in the site has been increasingly apparent in recent decades.
Researchers Jenny Blain and Robert J. Wallis (Sacred Sites, Contested Rites/Rights project,
http://www.sacredsites.org.uk) have pointed to the huge variety of views which show the continued and growing
importance of Stonehenge today, as symbol and ‘Icon of Britishness’; and indicate also the increased awareness of
pasts by many people with no training in archaeology or heritage. For many, Stonehenge and other ancient
monuments form part of the ‘living landscape’ which holds its own stories and which is there to be engaged with
as people mark the seasons of the year. Today’s mythology around Stonehenge includes the recent history of the
Battle of the Beanfield and the previous Free festivals. Stonehenge has not one meaning but many. Today, curators
English Heritage facilitate ‘managed open access’ at solstices and equinoxes, with some disputes over the days on
which these fall. Blain and Wallis argue that issues over access relate not only to physical presence at the stones
but to interpretations of past and validity of ‘new-indigenous’ and pagan usages in the present and such
‘alternative’ views have been central in alerting public awareness to the issues of roads, tunnels and landscape.
No comments:
Post a Comment