Mystery solved: Scientists trace source of Stonehenge pillars

[PeteC]

https://www.bangkokpost.com/world/19598 ... ge-pillars

WASHINGTON: Stonehenge, a Neolithic wonder in southern England, has vexed historians and archaeologists for centuries with its many mysteries: How was it built? What purpose did it serve? Where did its towering sandstone pillars come from?

That last question may finally have an answer after a study published Wednesday found that most of the giant stones -- known as sarsens -- seem to share a common origin 25 kilometres away in West Woods, an area that teemed with prehistoric activity.

The finding boosts the theory that the megaliths were brought to Stonehenge about the same time: around 2,500 BCE, the monument's second phase of construction, which in turn could be a sign its builders were from a highly organized society.

It also contradicts a previous suggestion that one large sarsen, the Heel Stone, came from the immediate vicinity of the site and was erected before the others.

The new paper appeared in the journal Science Advances.

Lead author David Nash, a professor of physical geography at the University of Brighton, told AFP he and his team had to devise a novel technique to analyze the sarsens, that stand up to nine metres high and weigh as much as 30 metric tons.

They first used portable x-rays to analyze the chemical composition of the rocks, which are 99 percent silica but contain traces of several other elements.

"That showed us that most of the stones have a common chemistry, which led us to identify that we're looking for one main source here," said Nash.

Next, they examined two core samples from one of the stones that were obtained during restoration work in 1958 but which then went missing until resurfacing in 2018 and 2019, respectively.

They performed a more sophisticated analysis on these samples using a mass spectrometry device, which detects a bigger range of elements at a higher precision.

The resulting signature was then compared to 20 possible source sites for these sedimentary rocks, with West Woods, Wiltshire found to be the closest match.

Only the 17th century English natural philosopher John Aubrey had previously postulated a link between "Overton Wood," probably a former name for West Woods, and Stonehenge.

- 'Enormous endeavor' -

Previous work has found that Stonehenge's smaller "bluestones" came from Wales, about 200 kilometres to the west, and the new study says that they and the sarsens were placed at the same time.

"So it must have been an enormous endeavor going on at that time," said Nash. "Stonehenge is like a convergence of materials being brought in from different places."

Just how the early Britons were able to transport the boulders weighing up to 30 tons a distance of 25 kilometres remains unknown -- though the prevailing idea is they were dragged on sleds. The site's significance also remains mysterious.

"I think you're looking at a very organized society there," added Nash.

As for why they picked West Woods, he said, it could have been a case of pragmatism as it was one of the closest sites.

But the area was also a hive of Early Neolithic activity.

It is home to a huge ancient burial site known as a barrow, a large circular earthwork, prehistoric cultivated fields that are now woodland, and a polissoir -- a rock used to sharpen ancient stone axes.

Nash said that the technique the research team had devised could help answer further archaeological questions, such as the route used to transport the boulders -- which can be inferred if sarsen chippings are discovered at waypoints.

He and his team also hope to use the techniques on other ancient sarsen sites scattered around Britain.

[HHTel]

Scientists discovered the exact location of the quarries where dozens of Stonehenge's massive stones came from, a study released Tuesday said.

In addition to pinpointing the location of the quarries – in western Wales, about 180 miles away from Stonehenge – archaeologists said they know how and when the stones were quarried.

"What's really exciting about these discoveries is that they take us a step closer to unlocking Stonehenge's greatest mystery – why its stones came from so far away," said study lead author Mike Parker Pearson of University College London. "Every other Neolithic monument in Europe was built of megaliths brought from no more than 10 miles away."

The answer? The stones were quarried so far away from Stonehenge because they were relatively "easy" to remove, Pearson theorized, since they were natural vertical pillars. Using wood mallets, quarry workers only had to bash wedges into the ready-made joints between the pillars to break them apart, according to the study.

The 2-ton stones were lowered onto wooden sledges and dragged or carried to their new location in present-day England.

The quarried stones are the interior rocks of Stonehenge, separate from the larger outer ring.

Unlike stone quarries in ancient Egypt, where obelisks were carved out of solid rock, the Welsh quarries were easier to exploit, the study says.

And that was only last year. Full story:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 910010002/

So who's right?

[Dannie Boy]

And just for good measure, another report on the history of the stones at Stonehenge
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-w ... e-53580339

[caller]

Always preferred to visit Avebury a few miles north myself. Older than stonehenge, more history and a better visiting experience. And the now identified source of the sarsen stones - nearer to Avebury. They are all over the Wessex and North Wessex Downs.

[Big Boy]

Funny/strange story.........

We lived just a few miles from both. When he was a baby, my son used to be terrified at Avebury. If we drove past, he would scream. Even if asleep, he would wake up screaming. The stones had a very strange effect on him. It got to the stage where I would have to re-route to avoid the stones.

[HHTel]

He wasn't called Damien as a child and you changed his name as he grew up?

[dtaai-maai]

... and a better visiting experience.

Yes, I remember being quite disappointed when I went to Stonehenge, underwhelmed.

Having said that, the discoveries they've made in recent years about the whole Stonehenge/Avebury area, including Durrington Walls, Woodhenge, etc. are quite stunning.

[pharvey]

... and a better visiting experience.

Yes, I remember being quite disappointed when I went to Stonehenge, underwhelmed.

Having said that, the discoveries they've made in recent years about the whole Stonehenge/Avebury area, including Durrington Walls, Woodhenge, etc. are quite stunning.

There wasn't a great deal there (aside from the stones) years ago - just a car-park across the (busy) road and a very small/basic information center.

Not visited Stonehenge for a long, long while. Used to drive past it on a weekly basis on the A303 for work. The route has long since closed and they've spent a great deal of money on a visitor center/museum, which I must admit I'd like to see.

The LHG and I have visited many stone circles across the UK (mostly Wales & SW England) - whilst Stonehenge is very impressive, we've found many more interesting (and less popular) sites...... a couple with great country pubs nearby

[GroveHillWanderer]

Scientists discovered the exact location of the quarries where dozens of Stonehenge's massive stones came from, a study released Tuesday said.

In addition to pinpointing the location of the quarries – in western Wales, about 180 miles away from Stonehenge – archaeologists said they know how and when the stones were quarried.

"What's really exciting about these discoveries is that they take us a step closer to unlocking Stonehenge's greatest mystery – why its stones came from so far away," said study lead author Mike Parker Pearson of University College London. "Every other Neolithic monument in Europe was built of megaliths brought from no more than 10 miles away."

The answer? The stones were quarried so far away from Stonehenge because they were relatively "easy" to remove, Pearson theorized, since they were natural vertical pillars. Using wood mallets, quarry workers only had to bash wedges into the ready-made joints between the pillars to break them apart, according to the study.

The 2-ton stones were lowered onto wooden sledges and dragged or carried to their new location in present-day England.

The quarried stones are the interior rocks of Stonehenge, separate from the larger outer ring.

Unlike stone quarries in ancient Egypt, where obelisks were carved out of solid rock, the Welsh quarries were easier to exploit, the study says.

And that was only last year. Full story:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 910010002/

So who's right?

That earlier report was about the smaller 2-ton "bluestones" that sit atop the larger 20-ton sarsen stones. This new report is about the sarsen stones themselves.

Here's a quote from a different article about the discovery made last year:

Geologists have long known that 42 of Stonehenge's smaller stones, known as 'bluestones', came from the Preseli hills in Pembrokeshire, west Wales. Now a new study published in Antiquity pinpoints the exact locations of two of these quarries and reveals when and how the stones were quarried.

[GroveHillWanderer]

Here's another part of the quote from Mike Parker Pearson from that different article, making it clear he was taking about the bluestones:

"Every other Neolithic monument in Europe was built of megaliths brought from no more than 10 miles away.

We're now looking to find out just what was so special about the Preseli hills 5,000 years ago, and whether there were any important stone circles here, built before the bluestones were moved to Stonehenge."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/ ... 080737.htm