Thursday, 4 December 2025

Skyscape Academy Launches Groundbreaking Programme in Archaeoastronomy

 

Midsummer Sunset Alignment

Skyscape Academy today announced the launch of its inaugural 15-month training programme in archaeoastronomy and skyscape archaeology. Set to commence in January 2026, the initiative invites enthusiasts and scholars alike to explore how prehistoric peoples, from the builders of Stonehenge to Polynesian navigators, aligned their monuments with the rhythms of the sun, moon, and stars.

The full programme, priced at an accessible £1,250 (a 38% discount from the standard £2,000), offers a comprehensive journey through foundational concepts, hands-on fieldwork, historical theory, and advanced lunar and stellar analyses. No prior knowledge of astronomy or archaeology is required for most modules, making it ideal for beginners inspired by Wiltshire's iconic landscapes. Highlights include:

  • Introduction to Archaeoastronomy (31 January – 1 February 2026): A beginner-friendly overview of global sites, spotlighting Stonehenge's solstice alignments.
  • Foundations in Skyscape Archaeology (11–12 April 2026): Core methods for interpreting celestial influences on ancient structures.
  • Fieldwork and Data Analysis (13–14 June 2026): Practical skills for surveying sites like the Wiltshire henges.
  • History and Theory (12–13 September 2026): Tracing the evolution of archaeoastronomical thought.
  • Advanced Topics (7–8 November 2026): Deep dives into lunar standstills and statistical validation, with exclusive access to cutting-edge research.

For more details or to enrol, visit skyscape.academy. Early bird discounts are available until the end of 2025.

Wednesday, 3 December 2025

Ciborowski and Nash (2026): An Arithmetic Framework for Geochemical Provenance – A Review and Its Bearing on Stonehenge Studies

T. Jake R. Ciborowski, David J. Nash, 

Defining similarity: An arithmetic method for archaeological source provenance targeting using geochemical data,

Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, Volume 69, 2026, 105513, ISSN 2352-409X,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2025.105513.
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X25005462)

 

The provenance of Stonehenge’s sarsen megaliths continues to stimulate scholarly debate, particularly as increasingly precise geochemical datasets expose the methodological challenges of lithic sourcing. In a significant contribution published online on 2 December 2025 in Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports (69:105513), T. Jake R. Ciborowski and David J. Nash introduce a new arithmetic framework for quantifying geochemical similarity between archaeological artefacts and potential source outcrops. Arising from the contested interpretations of the Phillips’ Core dataset (Nash et al., 2020; Hancock et al., 2024; Nash & Ciborowski, 2025), their open-access study reaffirms the West Woods provenance for Stonehenge’s principal sarsens and proposes a generalisable method for lithic provenancing across diverse geological contexts.


Methodological Innovation: From Ratios to Ranked Similarity

Ciborowski and Nash’s central innovation is to formalise a transparent, petrologically grounded arithmetic approach that overcomes limitations in both visual inspection and conventional multivariate statistics. These traditional methods can obscure key geological processes—especially the variable silicification that characterises silcrete formation—and may introduce subjectivity when applied to complex datasets.

Building on the immobile trace-element/Zr ratio approach used in Nash et al. (2020), the authors propose a simple but powerful measure of pairwise geochemical similarity. Equation 1 calculates the percentage difference (ΔEi/Zr %) between any trace element/Zr ratio in an artefact and a prospective source:



By taking the geometric mean of Δ values across many elements—21 immobile trace elements in the case of the silcrete dataset—the method yields a single, scale-independent similarity score that can be used to rank potential source outcrops objectively.

This formulation avoids the known pitfalls of relying on raw element concentrations, which may vary widely due to silicification, hydrodynamic sorting in the host sediments, or weathering. The authors explicitly contrast their approach with that of Hancock et al. (2024), who used concentration data and unusually wide tolerances (–50% to +100%), a strategy the present authors argue is incompatible with silcrete petrogenesis.

Applied to the Stonehenge dataset—comprising ICP-MS analyses from the Phillips’ Core and samples from 20 southern British sarsen outcrops—the method ranks West Woods (Outcrop 6) unequivocally as the most similar source, with a geometric mean Δ value near 29%. Outcrops proposed by Hancock et al. (2024), including Clatford Bottom (Outcrop 3) and Piggledene (Outcrop 4), rank only 7th and 8th respectively.

Strikingly, comparisons among the three subsamples of the Phillips’ Core itself yield similarity scores of 12–20%. In several cases, West Woods samples are more similar to individual core subsamples than those subsamples are to each other—a result that strongly reinforces the West Woods connection and highlights the natural variability within a single silcrete block.

The authors demonstrate the method’s generality through multiple “worked examples” involving igneous lithologies—obsidian, basalt, andesite, and dolerite—and show that the arithmetic framework performs well across both high-precision ICP-MS datasets and lower-precision, non-destructive pXRF data.


Implications for Stonehenge Provenance

Within Stonehenge research, this study consolidates the case for West Woods as the principal source of the sarsen megaliths, including the trilithon uprights. Rather than relying on binary “match/no-match” interpretations, the arithmetic framework quantifies similarity as a continuous measure. This is particularly valuable for silcrete, where substantial intra-outcrop and intra-stone variability is expected.

While the present paper does not analyse other sarsen stones directly, the authors note that this method is especially well suited for evaluating sarsen outliers identified in earlier surveys—such as Stone 26 or lintel Stone 160—where geochemical affinities differ from the main cluster. They also demonstrate how similarity scores can be mapped spatially (“source vectoring”) to identify promising areas for further field sampling (Fig. 13).

Taken together, these results support an interpretation of deliberate, targeted extraction rather than glacial agency, consistent with broader archaeological evidence for complex quarrying and transport networks in the Late Neolithic.


A Note on Bluestone Dolerites: Scope and Clarification

A particularly informative worked example in the paper applies the arithmetic method to Preseli dolerites, using the dataset published by Pearce et al. (2022), which includes pXRF measurements from Stone 62, a core extracted from it, and seven potential source outcrops. This case study demonstrates both the utility and the nuance of the ΔEi/Zr % approach for igneous rocks. As expected, Stone 62 is most similar to its own core, validating the method’s internal consistency. When compared against regional outcrops, Carn Goedog emerges as the closest match (geometric mean Δ ≈ 20–25%), followed by Carn Ddafad-las and Garn Ddu Fach (both ≈ 25–30%) . Intriguingly, the Garn Ddu Fach sample appears slightly more similar to Stone 62 than the Stone 62 core itself, highlighting natural intra-monolith variation and illustrating how the arithmetic framework can refine interpretations previously based solely on cluster analyses. Although restricted to one monolith, this example shows how the method complements ongoing Preseli quarry research, offering a transparent and effective way to interrogate fine-grained geochemical differences within a dolerite suite.


Broader Scholarly Significance

Beyond Stonehenge, the authors argue persuasively that their arithmetic approach fills a methodological gap between subjective visual comparisons and statistically opaque clustering or discriminant analyses. By emphasising petrological reasoning—immobile elements for silcretes, incompatible elements for igneous suite discrimination, compatible elements for intra-suite differentiation—the method offers a clear and reproducible framework for geochemical provenance work.

Limitations are candidly acknowledged:

  • No universal exclusion threshold yet exists for ΔEi/Zr values.
  • Element choice must be petrologically justified for each lithology.
  • Arithmetic similarity measures should complement, not replace, petrographic and archaeological evidence.

Despite these caveats, the paper represents a measured and substantial methodological advance, providing a transparent and adaptable tool for archaeologists working with diverse lithic materials.


Conclusion

Ciborowski and Nash (2026) offers a rigorous, process-aware approach to geochemical provenancing and provides the clearest quantitative support yet for a West Woods origin of Stonehenge’s principal sarsens. The authors’ arithmetic framework—simple in formulation but powerful in application—bridges geochemical precision and archaeological interpretation. Its demonstrated utility across silcrete, basalt, and obsidian artefacts positions it as a promising standard for future provenance studies, both within and beyond Stonehenge research.

 

Saturday, 29 November 2025

Maud Cunnington Photographs

I was pleased to find on Ancestry.com a couple of photographs of Maud Cunnington, which can be used as alternatives to the widely known, slightly unflattering, one.


Maud Cunnington née Pegge

Maud Cunnington

Maud Cunnington née Pegge

Maud Cunnington née Pegge ca.1919


Maud Cunnington

Click photos to embiggen


Interglacial Seas in Somerset: The Burtle Beds and the Demise of Glacial Transport for Stonehenge's Bluestones

Introduction

The transport of Stonehenge’s bluestones—igneous rocks sourced from the Mynydd Preseli region of west Wales—remain one of the most debated questions in British prehistory. Two major explanations have dominated: transport by Pleistocene glaciation or deliberate human movement during the Neolithic. The glacial hypothesis, once influential, suggested that Irish Sea ice carried the stones into southern England during the Devensian glaciation. However, accumulating geomorphological evidence increasingly contradicts this scenario.

A key contribution comes from Kidson et al. (1978), whose investigation of the Burtle Beds in the Somerset Levels provides robust evidence for intact interglacial marine deposits. This finding strongly challenges the idea that Devensian ice reached the lowlands of Somerset and, by extension, the feasibility of glacial delivery of the bluestones.

A map of the united states

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

(Figure 1: Distribution of Burtle Bed sites across the Somerset Levels, - Kidson et al., 1978. Note the confinement to river valleys below 23 m OD, with no upland glacial signatures.)

The Burtle Beds: An Interglacial Marine Record

The Somerset Levels, a low-lying basin between the Mendip and Quantock Hills, preserve a complex sequence of Quaternary sediments. Among them are the Burtle Beds—Pleistocene sands, gravels, silts, and clays forming raised patches (“batches”) in the landscape. Their origin was historically contested, with interpretations ranging from interglacial marine transgression to glacial outwash.

Kidson et al.’s trench investigation at the Greylake No. 2 sandpit provided decisive clarification. By examining the full sedimentary sequence, including faunal assemblages, granulometry, and geomorphological context, they concluded that the beds represent in situ estuarine and nearshore marine environments.

A diagram of a bed

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

(Figure 2: Schematic cross-section of Burtle Beds at Greylake No. 2, showing marine transgression sequence. After Fig. 2 in Kidson et al., 1978.

Key Findings

  • Faunal Assemblages: Abundant molluscs (Hydrobia ulvae, Littorina spp.), foraminifera (Ammonia spp., Elphidium spp.), and ostracods (Cyprideis torosa, Leptocythere spp.) indicate in situ estuarine and near-shore marine deposition. These are life assemblages, not reworked glacial debris, with population structures (e.g., juvenile-to-adult ratios) confirming local habitats from brackish mudflats to fully saline channels. Water temperatures mirrored the modern Bristol Channel, ruling out cold-stage periglacial sorting.
  • Stratigraphy and Environment: The sequence records a progressive marine transgression: basal clays (samples 8–15) represent intertidal mudflats at ~15–30‰ salinity, grading into sands (samples 16–24) deposited near low-water mark in a channel-shoal setting. No agglutinating marsh species or glacial tills appear; instead, phytal (algae-attached) forms suggest open-coast influx.
  • Age and Elevation: Radiometric and palaeomagnetic assays were inconclusive, but geomorphology and ostracod affinities favour an Ipswichian (Marine Isotope Stage 5e, c. 130,000–115,000 years BP) attribution over Hoxnian (MIS 11). Critically, 25 sites (Table 1) yield elevations from 4.6 m to 22.8 m OD (Ordnance Datum Newlyn), with the authors estimating peak mean sea level at 9–12 m above present, and Mean High Water Spring Tides (MHWST) at 15–18 m OD. Post-depositional erosion accounts for the upper limit; these are not storm ridges but intact transgressive beds.

This marine signature directly rebuts Kellaway's outwash model, as the fauna demand temperate, current-swept accumulation incompatible with meltwater deposition.

 

Site

Elevation (m OD)

Notes

Ponfield Nr Langport

15.2–22.8

Highest; sand at depth

Sedgemoor Hill

18.2

Isolated batch

Greylake No. 2

7.0–7.6

Excavation site

Middlezoy

10.7–12.2

Valley fill

(Table 1 excerpt: Selected Burtle Bed sites and elevations, adapted from Kidson et al., 1978. Full table spans 25 localities, emphasising lowland confinement.)

Implications for Devensian Glaciation

If Devensian ice had advanced into the Somerset Levels, the Burtle Beds would show evidence of disturbance, erosion, or burial beneath glacial deposits. Yet the stratigraphy above them contains only periglacial head deposits and solifluction layers, indicating cold-climate processes without direct ice contact. This supports broader reconstructions placing the southern limit of Irish Sea ice offshore in the Bristol Channel, not onshore in Somerset.

These findings parallel research in Devon and surrounding regions, where low-elevation erratics once attributed to Devensian glaciation have since been reassessed as either pre-Devensian or non-glacial in origin. Together, these data strongly suggest that Devensian ice did not traverse the Somerset lowlands.

Conclusion

The Burtle Beds provide a clear and coherent record of interglacial marine deposition in the Somerset Levels. Their intact state decisively argues against a Last Glacial Maximum incursion in the region, undermining key assumptions of the glacial transport hypothesis for Stonehenge’s bluestones. 

References

BULLEID, A., & JACKSON, J. W. (1937). The Burtle Sand-Beds of Somerset. Proceedings of the Somerset Archaeological and Natural History Society, 83, 171–196. https://sanhs.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/16-A-Bulleid.pdf 

KIDSON, C., GILBERTSON, D.D., HAYNES, J.R., HEYWORTH, A., HUGHES, C.E. and WHATLEY, R.C. (1978), Interglacial marine deposits of the Somerset Levels, South West England. Boreas, 7: 215-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1502-3885.1978.tb00280.x

 


Thursday, 27 November 2025

The Archaeology of the Stonehenge Visitor Centre

 In *The Archaeology of the Stonehenge Visitor Centre*, Matt Leivers and Andy Valdez-Tullett present a comprehensive synthesis of nearly two decades of investigations that illuminated the rich prehistoric and historic tapestry of the Stonehenge landscape, from sparse Mesolithic flint scatters and Late Neolithic pits containing Grooved Ware pottery, antler tools, and environmental remains, through Middle and Late Bronze Age field systems and settlements, to a Romano-British stone-built structure and a cluster of early Anglo-Saxon sunken-featured buildings dated to the late 6th–early 7th centuries AD. 

Drawing on geophysical surveys, excavations, geoarchaeological analyses of colluvial deposits and palaeochannels, artefact studies including over 19,000 flint pieces and prehistoric pottery, and environmental evidence revealing evolving subsistence strategies from wild resource exploitation to diversified crops, this monograph not only details the piecemeal discoveries made during the development of the visitor facilities but also enhances our understanding of long-term human-environment interactions within the World Heritage Site and its environs, addressing key research themes on landscape use, daily life, and the enduring significance of this iconic plain.

Available for free download at https://wessexarchaeologylibrary.org/plugins/books/96/format/91/.

Monday, 24 November 2025

The Perils of Pits: Further Research at Durrington Walls Henge (2021–2025)

Gaffney, V., Baldwin, E., Allaby, R., Bates, M., Bates, R., Finlay, A., Gaffney, C., Hansford, T., Kinnaird, T., Neubauer, W., Löcker, K., Sparrow, T., Trinks, I., Wallner, M. and Ch’ng, E. 2025 The Perils of Pits: further research at Durrington Walls henge (2021-2025), Internet Archaeology 69. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.69.19

Figure 1: Plan of the pit structure associated with Durrington Walls Henge. Features 1A–9A form an 'arc' south of Durrington Walls in Amesbury parish, while 10D–16D (formerly v) form a northern 'arc' in Durrington parish. Four additional features, noted from other sources including aerial photographs, excavation or topographic modelling, are annotated with roman numerals i–iv. Lidar derived digital surface model (shaded) with OS 10K overlay © Environment Agency copyright and database right 2024. All rights reserved. Lidar (composite sources) DTM 1m resolution, Scale 1:4000 with gaps filled by DTM 2m resolution, Scale 1:8000 – Ordnance Survey (100025252)/EDINA supplied Service. http://digimap.edina.ac.uk

Gaffney et al. (2025) present results from five years of targeted investigations into enigmatic large pits encircling Durrington Walls henge, a Late Neolithic monument within the Stonehenge World Heritage Site. Building on initial geophysical detections from 2010–2020, the study confirms 16 pits in southern (1A–9A) and northern (10D–16D) arcs, probing their status as deliberate prehistoric features or mere geological quirks. Led by Vincent Gaffney, the team deploys an array of geophysical and analytical tools to settle the matter, framing the pits as key to a broader ritual landscape. Amid scepticism branding them sinkholes, this work underscores the 'perils' of hasty dismissal in Chalk country archaeology.

Fieldwork integrated non-invasive geophysics with invasive sampling across selected pits. Fluxgate gradiometry and ground-penetrating radar mapped circular anomalies 14–20 m in diameter, while electrical resistance tomography profiles revealed low-resistivity voids up to 5 m deep (Figures 4–18; Tables 3–7). Borehole coring at sites including 1A, 13D, and 16D supplied sediment sequences for inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectroscopy, yielding chemostratigraphic correlations via ratios like CaO/K₂O and P₂O₅/K₂O (Figure 20; Table 9). Optically stimulated luminescence dating fixed infilling to c. 3000–2500 BCE (Table 10), and sedimentary ancient DNA profiling detected Bos signals universally alongside Ovis in southern pits, implying animal deposition (Figure 22). These uniform dimensions—16–18 m diameters within Head deposits—signal consistent anthropogenic intervention (Table 5).

The pits emerge as engineered components of a Neolithic enclosure, their arcs potentially aligning with solstitial paths to Stonehenge - see Gaffney (2020). Phased infills, from chalk bases to clay caps, align with OSL clusters at 2800–2600 BCE, evoking structured rituals tied to the henge's feasting legacy (Table 10). SedaDNA hints at selective offerings, recasting Durrington Walls as a monumental hub for territorial or ceremonial demarcation, akin to causewayed enclosures. This interpretation elevates the pits beyond anomalies, illuminating Late Neolithic landscape agency.

Vincent Gaffney and colleagues strike back forcefully at detractors like Ruggles and Chadburn (2024) and Leivers (2021), who peg the features as natural solution hollows lacking artefactual proof. The team counters with multi-proxy rigour: uniform magnetic dipoles, ERT voids, and non-random chemo-zones defy sinkhole variability, while Neolithic dating precludes coincidence (Figures 24–26). 'Even if natural basins played a part,' they retort, 'modification into arcs betrays intent'—a direct riposte to claims of geological determinism. Hybrid models are entertained but sidelined by the pits' symmetry and shared fills, exposing flaws in single-method critiques that ignored 2021 data.

Affirming the pits as cultural artefacts, the study bolsters narratives of Neolithic connectivity and ritual scale (Bradley 1998, 2012), with Larkhill's outlier chalked up to modern meddling (Figure 7). It champions open data via the Archaeology Data Service, urging caution in Chalk interpretations to safeguard heritage. Gaffney et al. thus not only vindicate their 'pits as pits' stance but equip future probes with a blueprint for disentangling nature from Neolithic design. 

Ref: Gaffney, V. et al. 2020 A Massive, Late Neolithic Pit Structure associated with Durrington Walls Henge, Internet Archaeology 55. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.55.4

Sunday, 23 November 2025

A Blue Stone Discovered in Wiltshire

I was slightly involved in this discovery and Paul has done an excellent job of presenting it: