The Stonehenge Enigma (Prehistoric Britain Book 1)

by Langdon, Robert John

  Pit 9580 (as it’s known in archaeological circles) was found at the time to be 1.9m in diameter and 1.3m deep and it was calculated that the original hole would have been 1m in diameter and 1.3 m deep - the exact same dimensions as the 3 other post holes found in the car park in 1966.

  This post hole was later re-cut and widened to the 1.9m. But the most interesting find in the entire site is this additional post hole discovered 1989 by Wessex Archaeology. A piece of Rhyolite (62g) was discovered in the hole at 20cm below the surface. Now, on the face of it, this doesn’t sound like an earth shattering discovery, but when you realise that Rhyolite is the technical term for BLUESTONE, it takes on a whole new meaning.

  The soil above and below the Rhyolite/Bluestone was carbon dated and it proved that Rhyolite/Bluestones were at Stonehenge between 7560 BCE and 7335 BCE.

  As previously shown, given that Bluestones were only found in South Wales at the time, they would have to have been transported by water and as also established earlier in this chapter, this means that once the Bluestones arrived at their destination, the posts were used to unload them. This then, gives us the original construction date of Stonehenge NO LATER THAN 7560 BCE to 7335 BCE.

  Proof of Hypothesis No. 20

  The piece of Rhyolite/Bluestone discovered in the 1989 excavated post hole, has been dated between 7560 BCE to 7335 BCE, proving not only that the original post hole is older than archaeologists believe, and more importantly, offers the first real date of when the Bluestones arrived at Stonehenge and construction began.

  Chapter 9 - The Lost North West Entrance

  This chapter will provide evidence of a lost entrance at Stonehenge and will show that although used as a spa, the original site was also utilised as a mortuary and was orientated towards the moon and its phases.

  North West Passage

  Based on my hypothesis, there should be some evidence of a ‘lost’ processional walkway on the North West side of the monument, towards the original ancient shoreline and mooring station, which would have acted as a natural entry route to the site. Archaeologists have discovered a series of holes (known as Q & R holes) in a semi-circular shape at the centre of Stonehenge, which predate the current Sarsen Stones. The most interesting aspect of this semi-circle is its alignment in a North Western direction.

  In astronomical terms this is very important as it faces the general direction of the midsummer moonset - highlighting the relationship of the moon to the site, as opposed to the sun as many ‘experts’ would have us believe. This connection is reinforced as the sites construction is based on the tidal waters which, in turn, are dependent on the moons position reflected by the location of the Bluestone marker that would have been present sitting in the Aubrey holes. These markers could forecast the daily and seasonal tides which, as a result, would fill the moat with water. Consequently, the importance of the moon is linked with the theory that the original purpose of Stonehenge was as a monument to the dead. This mythology can even be seen today as death and ghosts are associated with the same symbolic objects such as the moon, night-time and gravestones.

  One of the greatest archaeological mysteries of the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods is associated human remains.

  We know that the population would have been quite small during these periods in history, but the lack of grave plots, has forced archaeologists to investigate non-burial alternatives. One of the favoured alternative methods to burial is known as ‘excarnation’. This process, was commonly practiced by Native American Indian tribes, it involves the body being left open to the elements to decompose – a process of returning the body to mother earth. The larger bones would then be collected together and buried together with other members of the tribe or family in tombs. We know that such groups of bones have been found in the Long Barrows surrounding Stonehenge, but to date, no dedicated excarnation sites have been found, until now.

  Looking at these Q & R post holes, these form a pre-Sarsen semi-circle at Stonehenge. If you look closely, they consist of two parallel sets. Moreover, they emulate not a ‘horseshoe’ as archaeologist’s normal refer to such objects, but a ‘crescent moon’ for obvious reasons, in preparation for the journey to the land of the dead. Another point of interest is the distance between each stone in each individual set, which is approximately 2 metres. The 2 metre (6 foot) spacing of these stone holes should seem familiar as it’s the same length as an average coffin or grave pit. As this was a monument to the dead, it would seem appropriate that it would be designed in such a way as to allow bodies to be positioned at its centre, aligned with the setting moon.

  It’s likely that the platforms upon which the dead were laid were either wooden or stone.

  Proof of Hypothesis No. 21

  The existence of the R & Q post holes, forming the semi-circle, pointing in a North West direction and both the geophysical and missing post hole evidence, proves that the original monument was orientated towards North West and the mid-summer moon setting. Consequently, the path from the centre of the Bluestone crescent moon leading to the landing site and our hypothesis’ Mesolithic shoreline.

  Moreover, a ‘resistance survey’ taken in May 1994 clearly shows a path leading from the centre of the monument to the car park post holes, past the expected location of Aubrey Hole 40. The lack of evidence for this post hole clearly indicates that there once existed a pathway that passed to the North West on the original plan of the site.

  With the nondescript name of WA 9421 or the Palisade Ditch, yet another mysterious even lesser publicised feature has been found which does not fit the current expert theories. This Palisade ditch lies in the North West part of the site, between the Stonehenge monument and the visitor’s car park and runs across the site running in a South West to North East direction. It spreads from Stonehenge Bottom to Stonehenge Down. From the depth of the post holes it has been calculated, by archaeologists, to be quite high and would created the ideal barrier or entrance to the monument, as the interior would have been hidden to outsiders on the land until entering through the Palisade.

  As my hypothesis has shown that three sides of the monument were cut off by water, the palisade would have effectively created a barrier between two bodies of water cutting off the entire monument, apt for a sacred site dedicated to the dead.

  Resistance survey showing an ancient pathway to the NW

  Moreover, to keep wild animals from eating the corpses laid out on the slabs, the palisade extends down the water’s edge to the North West and was later extended to the Avenue when the waters fell during the Neolithic Period. This clearly indicates that the use of the site as an excarnation facility must have stayed relevant for over 5,000 years, as they increased the palisades length to match the water’s falling levels.

  The palisade cuts off not only the peninsula from the mainland but encloses a second peninsular containing some of the most important Long Barrows at Stonehenge - adding credibility to the belief that the site was created for the sick and the dead who were then buried on the same isolated island peninsular if the treatment was unsuccessful.

  Proof of Hypothesis No. 22

  The presence of a palisade to the North West of the monument which joins two predicted shorelines, proves that water was present at the construction stage of Stonehenge and moreover, that it was used an excarnation site.

  Aubrey Holes

  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 were 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).
/>
  Moreover, he discovered that lunar eclipses could be predicted through a system of moving markers around the circle of Aubrey Holes (a series of 56 holes situated around the Stonehenge moat, which archaeologists believed originally held the Bluestones).

  Anyone who has ever tried to make a model of how the Sun and Moon move around the Zodiac will end up, most likely, 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%.

  Every year, for about 34 days, the full and new moons occur near the Sun’s path (the ecliptic) and eclipses result. These two occasions, 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 the lunar nodes, as mentioned above.

  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.

  This complex computation could be calculated through the ‘Aubrey Holes’ features at Stonehenge. By simply moving one marker, once a day and another marker every 13 days, not only could the spring high tides (by when the marker reaches a particular stone) be predicted, but the Solar and Luna eclipses could also be calculated with great accuracy – a stunning achievement for so the called primitive Stone Age Man and probably beyond most readers of this book, even with our cherished education system.

  Chapter 10 – The Avenue to a New Neolithic Mooring Place

  When the waters started to subside, the builders of Stonehenge had an engineering problem: how to access the falling waters in order to fill the Stonehenge moat, in this chapter we find out how this was achieved. Firstly, by lining the Stonehenge moat with a liner, this was found by Hawley during his excavations in the 1920s and then by building a new earthwork called ‘the Avenue’ to the monument.

  Processional Walkway

  The Avenue was created some time after the original moated henge, according to my calculations, once the original Mesolithic groundwater and shoreline lowered towards the new Neolithic groundwater level. When the waters lowered, the builders faced two problems; firstly, the original mooring could no longer accept boats or cargo, so a new entrance was required. Secondly, the moat would no longer fill as it did in Mesolithic times, as the water table had dropped by about 10 metres.

  As we have seen from the excavations by Hawley in the 1920s, the builders had added a liner similar to those found in Mesolithic period constructions of ‘dew ponds’, found in this area. The reason for the liner would have been to retain the water that accumulated from the natural rain and seasonal high tides that would have replenished the moat. It is quite plausible that this insufficient, or infrequently sufficient, water level was a common occurrence in the past, so to carry on the bluestone treatments an alternative method to fill the moat needed to be found.

  Neolithic walkway to a new shoreline

  The Avenue is quite curious and excavations have revealed its development in the past, as indicated by the post holes dotted down its entire length. This clearly shows that it ‘adapted’ over a long period to match the retreating shoreline in the Neolithic period, which lasted over two and a half thousand years. Moreover, the physical construction of the Avenue earthwork shows the incorporation of water features. The Southern ditch is much shallower than the Northern ditch of the Avenue. This is because the water lies on the Southern side of the Avenue and does not need extra depth to fill the Southern ditch evenly, while the Northern ditch is further away from the water (and on a gradient). For it to fill evenly to the same depth of water as the Southern ditch, the Northern ditch would therefore need to be deeper.

  The wooden poles within the Avenue seem to be rather sporadic and impractical at first glance. But if you then add the prehistoric waters to the Avenue, you can see that the poles actually line up in pairs. These pairs of posts seem to appear every ten metres as you proceed down the Avenue, indicating that the Avenue was created in sections. This is a consequence of the periodic need to replace the poles as the shoreline retreated. The first main brace of these shoreline poles are seen quite close to the famous North-Eastern entrance by the Heel Stone, extending to the last evidence of the poles at the ‘elbow’ at the end.

  Stonehenge in the Neolithic Period showing the new mooring posts

  Proof of Hypothesis No. 23

  The variation in the size of the ditches either side of the Avenue, to allow an even depth of water on both sides, shows that water was present at Stonehenge in Neolithic Times.

  The current ‘expert’ theories suggest that the path of the Avenue is a processional walkway down to the River Avon. But careful study of this walkway shows that it makes absolutely no sense in the route it follows - it’s not direct, nor logical in its course. What the Avenue shows as we see today, is the continuation of its association with the River Avon, after the original Avenue that finished at Stonehenge Bottom has fell into disuse. This explains the strange haphazard route it now shows. Archaeologists, not finding the true reason for its course, attempt to justify the route as a ‘ceremonial’ pathway, which ignores the facts. These ‘facts’ are compounded as later ancestors constructed Barrows that mimicked their ancestors constructions and placed burials within them, totally confusing the timeline.

  The later attempts to keep connection to the original builders of Stonehenge can be seen in the Avenue as it moves off to the North East for about 500 metres (the original construction), then suddenly swings off East for another 1,000 metres, then turns again and heads South, like a stretched lower case ‘n’. Archaeologists suggest that this is a ‘natural route’ deliberately passing burial mounds that lay to the East of Stonehenge.

  But haven’t they put the cart before the horse on this one?

  The facts are; the walkway came first, followed by the introduction of the burial mounds – which is borne out by carbon dating showing that the Avenue was first introduced in Neolithic times, and the burial mounds much later in the Iron Age. Also archaeologists have identified that the Avenue was built in sections; the first section up to the ‘elbow’, according to Julian Richards in his book ‘The Stonehenge Environs Project’, was built during what archaeologists call ‘Period II’, including:

  • Modification of the original enclosure

  • Entrance

  • Construction of the first straight stage of the Avenue

  • Erection of the Station Stones

  • Resetting of the two entrance stones

  • Dismantling of the double bluestone circle

  If the Avenue was a processional route, why stop it in the middle of nowhere, only to eventually be joined to the Avon some thousands of years later?

  Our hypothesis (unlike the present expert views) answers this question fully. Clearly, the Avenue was built to meet the new shoreline that emerged during the Neolithic period, where (as at the old North West entrance) they received and moored the boats, cargo, and even the stones. Consequently, this then acted as a new entrance to the Stonehenge monument.

  Proof of Hypothesis No. 24

  According to ‘The Environs Stonehenge Project’, the Avenue terminated at the ‘elbow’ of the processional causeway in an abrupt ending, without reason. Our hypothesis explains that the reason for the termination was the predicted shoreline of Stonehenge during the Neolithic Period.

  Further evidence of this shoreline can be seen in the post holes found in the Avenue. These post holes do not make sense, as they would have blocked the walkway, unless they are mooring posts for various phases in the Avenue’s construction and water level. A small survey carried out from 1988 to 1990 investigated the last 100m of the Avenue up to the elbow. It found 14 large post holes that could have been used as moorings for boats. These moorings are paired off at 45 degrees to the Avenue, which would match the exa
ct shoreline predicted over several periods.

  We can also date the extension past the ‘elbow’, as it no longer has the elaborate moats on either side of the processional walkway. The Avenue beyond the ‘elbow’ travels over a series of hillocks that could not hold water at any level, and therefore made such moats useless and unnecessary. This, again, shows that our ancestors were practical and pragmatic people who included aspects such as ditches for useful purposes, not for religious or aesthetic reasons as current archaeologists believe.