Even if we discount the possibility that Diodorus was referring to one of any number of circular Iron Age wooden structures in Britain or Ireland—and we have no idea how many might still remain to be discovered—the prehistorian Aubrey Burl has highlighted an important reason why this temple could not have been Stonehenge. According to Diodorus, the moon as viewed from the island in question appears closer to the earth.11 Burl points out that, if this was an attempt to describe a particular astronomical phenomenon, it cannot be a description of southern Britain. Rather, Diodorus may be describing a lunar phenomenon that can only be seen much further north, at 58 degrees north, at least 500 miles from Salisbury Plain. Burl thinks that the temple in question is the Neolithic stone circle at Calanais on the Isle of Lewis in the Outer Hebrides.
If we discount Diodorus’s story as having nothing to do with Stonehenge, as I think we should, Stonehenge’s first appearance in written records was in CE 1129. In his Historia Anglorum, Henry of Huntingdon, archdeacon of Huntingdon in the diocese of Lincoln, described Stonehenge as one of four wonders of Britain. Of it, he wrote, “no one has been able to discover by what mechanism such vast masses of stone were elevated, nor for what purpose they were designed.”12
For nearly nine hundred years, people have puzzled over the same questions. Stonehenge still keeps many of its secrets, but we now know a little more about when, how, and why it was built. Although further excavation at Stonehenge itself is unlikely in the near future, new survey and excavation projects in the area—some already under way—will continue to add to our knowledge in years to come. It seems perverse that Stonehenge has become a focus of conflict and disagreement when the purpose of its construction was to symbolize social unity and cultural cohesion.
PLATES
__________
Our 2008 excavation of Aubrey Hole 7 recovered the cremated bones of about sixty people buried within Stonehenge more than four thousand years ago.
The 26.6 square kilometers of the Stonehenge World Heritage Site, including Durrington Walls, Stonehenge, and other Neolithic sites. Clusters of Early Bronze Age barrows encircle Stonehenge.
Stonehenge without the tourists.
Sunset through sarsen stones 1 and 30. These form the northeast entrance to Stonehenge, leading to and from the Avenue.
Reconstruction of Stonehenge Stage 1.
Reconstruction of Stonehenge Stage 3.
Colin Richards (center top) excavating one of the Neolithic houses at Durrington Walls.
Trenches around the east entrance of Durrington Walls revealed Neolithic houses (foreground) and the avenue running to the river (visible in the far trench).
The Durrington Walls Avenue had a surface of broken flint (darker area in center), flanked by chalk banks.
Reconstruction of the Southern Circle at Durrington Walls. It is likely to date to the same time as Stonehenge’s sarsen circle and trilithons (Stage 2).
The Southern Circle as rebuilt at North Newnton, Wiltshire, in 2006 by Time Team.
Reconstruction of the Durrington Walls avenue and surrounding houses.
Reconstruction of the Western Enclosure at the center of the Durrington Walls village.
Reconstruction of the Neolithic village of Durrington Walls before the building of the henge bank and ditch.
Reconstruction of the Durrington Walls henge bank and ditch.
The discovery of an antler pick at the bottom of the Greater Cursus ditch. This helped us to place the Greater Cursus in the same date range as the Lesser Cursus.
The Cuckoo Stone, near Woodhenge, was erected east of the Greater Cursus.
The Food Vessel burial under excavation at Bulford. This multiple burial, close to the standing stone, contained many grave goods.
At Woodhenge, Josh Pollard discovered that a stone “cove” once stood in the southern part of the site after the timber posts had decayed.
Excavations at Durrington Walls (center and right) and south of Woodhenge (bottom left).
The remains of a Late Neolithic timber tower overlooking the River Avon, south of Woodhenge. It was subsequently disturbed by the building of an Early Bronze Age barrow.
The completion of the excavation of Aubrey Hole 7.
Reconstruction of Bluestonehenge at West Amesbury, on the west bank of the River Avon.
Reconstruction of the Stonehenge Avenue reaching the West Amesbury henge after removal of the bluestones and construction of a henge bank and ditch.
The busy moments of an excavation. This is Bluestonehenge in 2009.
The periglacial stripes and chalk ridges revealed in our excavation across the avenue close to Stonehenge in 2008.
Colin Richards (left) and Andrew Chamberlain at the closed chamber tomb, or cromlech, of Carreg Samson in west Wales.
At Craig Rhosyfelin, we found the first clear evidence of bluestone quarrying. The monolith (lower right) left behind in the quarry was detached by prehistoric stoneworkers from the outcrop (behind where Ben Chan and I are standing); they then moved the monolith from the rock face along stone rails, on which it still rests.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
__________
My codirectors of the Stonehenge Riverside Project were Josh Pollard, Chris Tilley, Julian Thomas, Colin Richards, and Kate Welham. We were joined for specific projects in later years by Mike Allen, Wayne Bennett, Charly French, Chris Gaffney, Paul Garwood, Jacqui McKinley, Mike Pitts, Julian Richards, (California) Dave Robinson, Clive Ruggles, Rob Scaife, and Armin Schmidt. The long excavation seasons were made possible by the team of supervisors—Becca Pullen, Hugo Anderson-Whymark, (Manchester) Dave Aspden, Ben Chan, Ian Heath, Neil Morris, Bob Nunn, Jim Rylatt, Ellen Simmons, and Anne Teather—who were joined by many hard-working site assistants each year. Amongst these, I need to mention Lizzie Carleton, Chris Caswell, Ralph Collard, C. J. Hyde, (Farmer) Dave Shaw, Susan Stratton, and James Thomson, who started as novice undergraduate diggers and ended up training others.
The geophysical surveys and data processing depended on Mark Dover, who managed the digital resource throughout the first stage of the project; from among the many Bournemouth students who undertook the surveys, Lawrence Shaw and Charlene Steele continue to work on aspects of the project. All of the above, especially Hugo, also contributed to the success of some indescribable campsite parties, for which Alistair Pike provided glow-sticks; I imagine there are photographs on Facebook, but I have never dared look.
The student diggers came primarily from the universities of Sheffield, Manchester, Bournemouth, UCLAN, Birmingham, Cardiff, Kalmar, Leicester, Exeter, Plymouth, and UCL: They cannot be named individually of course, because we probably trained over five hundred undergraduates over the life of the project. As is usual with archaeology students on excavations, the majority enjoyed themselves enormously, a handful appeared to hate the whole experience, and a lucky few came back for more year after year. Some of the students took part in visitor guiding and public outreach, an integral part of a project such as this, managed by Megan and David Price, and then by Pat Shelley. Adam Stanford of Aerial-Cam took many essential—and stunning—photographs throughout the project. Helen Wickstead coordinated the artists in residence, who are thanked for bringing a new dimension to the project.
The main staffing problem in the later years of the project was having to turn people away—we could never accommodate everyone who wanted to volunteer. For those who did, I again cannot mention all by name, but Jane Downes, Duncan Brown, Denise Allen, Win Scutt, David Durkin, and all the other volunteers know that their work was much appreciated. Three important volunteers throughout the project’s life have been Eileen Parker, Lesley Chapman, and Jane Ford, all mature students of archaeology in Sheffield, who continue to dedicate their time, patience, and skills to the post-excavation process.
All the landowners and tenant farmers were unfailingly helpful and patient, allowing us access to the sites, sometimes over several seasons: We owe a debt of thanks to Sir Edward Antrobus, Richard Bawden, Ian Baxt
er, Stuart Crook, Mr. E. Hann, Billy King, Hugh Morrison, Stan and Henry Rawlins, the Rowlands, and Rob Turner in Wiltshire, and Huw Davies, the late Iorwerth Williams, and the late Hyacinthe Hawkesworth, Lady Marcher of Cemaes, in Pembrokeshire. Chris Gingell and Martin Papworth ran the National Trust side of the necessary permissions, and Amanda Chadburn and Rachel Foster of English Heritage had the unsung task of managing all the paperwork and meetings generated by our research proposals every year; English Heritage also funded two seasons of visitor outreach, coordinated by Kath Graham and Lerato Dunn. Dave Field and Martyn Barber at English Heritage have been endlessly helpful and willing to share their research ideas. MoD archaeologists Richard Osgood and Martin Brown are thanked for making arrangements for work on Royal School of Artillery land.
Thanks go to Wessex Archaeology for providing equipment, and support for the flotation program. Reg Jury provided mechanical excavators, some huge trout, and an enormously generous contribution to the diggers’ beer fund. The Woodbridge Inn in North Newnton housed us every year, the Masseys provided an essential ex-Army tent, and Rushall Village Hall and Corsham Scouts helped out with domestic equipment. Archaeological projects rely on such local goodwill, and we are tremendously grateful to all concerned.
We also rely on our funding bodies who, we hope, are pleased with the results of this project that they supported for so many years. The major project funder was the Arts and Humanities Research Council, with further grants and awards for different aspects of the overall project provided by the National Geographic Society, the British Academy, the Royal Archaeological Institute, the Society of Antiquaries, Google, the Robert Kiln Trust, Andante Travel, and the Royal Society of Northern Antiquaries of Copenhagen. Naomi Nathan, Jo Mirfield, and Chris Grimbley in Sheffield were driven to distraction at times by the problems of administering these multiple grants, and Karen and I thank them for their patience in helping sort out our bundles of muddy, dog-eared receipts every year, and in putting together our hired vans and fieldwork equipment.
My director’s site diary will end up in the project archive at some point in the future; as well as recording the technical details of what was happening on site each day, it often mentions visitors to the excavations. We were encouraged and heartened by the interest that other archaeologists took in our work, and it was a pleasure to have so many come to visit the sites. I think we managed to prove that a multi-director team was not just feasible but genuinely productive, especially since we are still working together.
For their archaeological advice or other contributions, I particularly wish to thank Louise Austin, Jenny and Bill Britnell, Dave Buckley, Tim Darvill, Peter Drewett, Julie Gardiner, Alex Gibson, Mark Gillings, Phil Harding, Mats Larsson, Ben Laurie, Neil Linford, Andy Payne, Alison Sheridan, Paul Tubb, and Geoff Wainwright. In addition, a large team of specialists—too numerous to list here—continues to work on the post-excavation aspects of the project.
My wife Karen has been in the background, managing the project, from its inception, and has dealt with everything from van-driving and fancy-dress outfits to sewage disposal and impetigo, as well as taking on time-consuming post-excavation tasks back in Sheffield. As she spent each summer cooking for hundreds of people, she rarely had time to see the excavations in action, so her editing work on this and all past and future project publications is her chance to finally see what we found out (or so I keep telling her, as I hand her yet another draft . . .).
The new illustrations prepared for this book are by Peter Dunn (several of them being sponsored by Pat Shelley’s Salisbury & Stonehenge Guided Tours), and Irene de Luis.
Bill Hamilton of A. M. Heath & Co., Monica O’Connell, and Mike Jones of Simon & Schuster brought the book to publication.
NOTES
__________
INTRODUCTION
1. Wim van Es, cited in Bakker 1999: 9.
CHAPTER 1
1. Cleal et al. 1995: 154–5, 451–61.
2. Wainwright with Longworth 1971.
3. Cleal et al. 1995: 291–329.
4. Burl 2002; Gillings et al. 2008; Pollard and Gillings 2004.
5. Whittle 1997a.
6. Parker Pearson and Ramilisonina 1998a.
7. Durrani 2009.
8. Flinders Petrie 1880: 31.
9. Evans 1885.
10. Burl 1987.
11. Bender 1998; Whittle 1997b.
12. Barrett and Fewster 1998; Whitley 2002.
13. Parker Pearson and Ramilisonina 1998b.
14. Spindler 1995; Walton and Wild 1990.
15. Barker 2009.
16. Larson et al. 2007; Edwards et al. 2010.
17. Whittle and Cummings 2007.
18. Sykes 2006; Oppenheimer 2006.
19. Haak et al. 2005; Zvelebil and Pettitt 2008.
20. Sykes 2006: 330; Oppenheimer 2006: 243.
21. Sahlins 1972.a
22. Sheridan 2003; 2004.
23. Sheridan 2010.
24. Hammond 2009.
25. Coles and Coles 1986.
26. Cleal et al. 1995: 188–90, 441, 522.
27. Richards 1990: 40–61.
CHAPTER 2
1. Burl 2006: 42–9.
2. Field et al. 2010.
3. Cleal et al. 1995: plan 1.
4. Burl 2006: 42.
5. Stukeley 1740.
6. Stukeley 1724: 67, cited in Burl 2006: 45.
7. Burl 2006: 47.
8. Chippindale 1994: 161.
9. Flinders Petrie 1880.
10. Darwin 1881: 154–6.
11. Gowland 1902.
12. Chippindale 1994: 176.
13. Hawley 1921; 1922; 1923; 1924; 1925; 1926; 1928.
14. Atkinson 1956.
15. Hawley 1928.
16. Cleal et al. 1995: table 2.
17. Atkinson 1946.
18. Atkinson 1956; 1979.
19. Atkinson 1979: 196.
20. Atkinson 1956.
21. Pitts 1982.
22. Cleal et al. 1995: 270–1.
23. Pitts 2008.
24. Cleal et al. 1995.
25. Chippindale 1994: 139–40.
26. Hawkins with White 1965.
27. Hoyle 1977.
28. North 1996.
29. Thom 1967.
30. Thom et al. 1974.
31. Ruggles 1997; Pollard and Ruggles 2001.
CHAPTER 3
1. Richards 2005.
2. Childe 1931.
3. Wainwright with Longworth 1971.
4. Cleal and MacSween 1999.
5. Thomas 1999.
6. Wainwright with Longworth 1971.
7. Richards and Thomas 1984.
8. Tilley 1994.
9. Gillings et al. 2008.
10. Cunnington 1931.
11. Leary and Field 2010.
12. Schulting and Wysocki 2005.
13. Mercer 1999.
14. Passmore 1942.
15. Teather 2007.
CHAPTER 4
1. Reynolds 1977.
2. Wainwright with Longworth 1971: 41–4.
3. Ibid.: 23–38.
4. Ibid.: 38–41.
5. Cunnington 1929.
6. Pollard 1995a.
CHAPTER 5
1. Gibson 1998a.
2. Richards 1990: 40–61.
3. Atkinson 1956: 14–16.
4. Richards 2005.
5. Richards 1991.
6. Parker Pearson 2005: 63.
7. Gibson 2008.
8. Farrer 1918.
9. Stone et al. 1954.
10. Wainwright with Longworth 1971: 14–18.
11. Ibid.: 19–21.
12. Ibid.: 21.
13. Ibid.: figs 6–8.
14. Ibid.: 38–41.
15. Richards 2005; 2010.
16. Hawley 1923: 14–15.
17. Parker Pearson et al. 2009.
CHAPTER 6
1. Parker Pearson 2007; Thomas 2007.
2. Booth and Stone 1952.
3. Thom an
d Thom 1974. This small mound is located at OS grid reference 14334 43967.
4. Buck et al. 1996.
5. Stone et al. 1954.
6. Parker Pearson et al. 2009: table 3.
7. Wainwright with Longworth 1971: 22.
8. Cleal et al. 2004.
9. Mukherjee 2004; Mukherjee et al. 2008.
10. Jay and Richards 2007; Mahoney 2007; Montgomery et al. 2007.
11. Parker Pearson et al. 2009: table 3.
12. Albarella and Serjeantson 2002.
13. Viner et al. 2010.
Stonehenge—A New Understanding: Solving the Mysteries of the Greatest Stone Age Monument Page 37