Unfenced Heel Stone

I was lucky enough to manage to sneak a few pictures of the Heel Stone in the minutes between the one fence being taken down and a temporary fence being put up.  I haven't ever seen a photo of it without a fence. When the improvements are finished and the A344 is properly grassed over the temporary fence will come down and the bridge will be removed and everyone will be able to enjoy this view.

Click any to embiggen

Stonehenge Sans Frontières

The old A344 is being filled in with soil ready to be seeded to grass and the fences removed (a replacement fence will be up tomorrow).

All pictures enlarge when clicked

Autumnal Stonehenge in the Mist

Click any to embiggen

Stonehenge Unhinged - A Review

Stonehenge Unhinged The Wheel of the Sun by Michael and Dan Johnston

The Author's Description:

Over the years, many authors have claimed to have “solved” Stonehenge only to have their pet theories fall apart. This book provides a new perspective which really does offer some incredible insights into the minds and intentions of the Stonehenge builders based solely on treating Stonehenge as an intricate puzzle, subject to analysis and partial solution.

The book, entitled Stonehenge Unhinged The Wheel of the Sun, is written for a general audience and consists of a brief overview of Stonehenge, the developments in human thought that led to its construction, a discussion of its components and the history of speculation as to its meaning. This is followed by chapters revealing just how Stonehenge was probably used, at least in a practical, non-ritualistic way, to mark the seasons, track the motions of the moon and even predict lunar eclipses. Throughout, it refrains from interjecting modern thinking into the analysis and tries to let the archeology and the reasonable motivations of its builders drive the interpretation. The result is a striking, straightforward and believable explanation of how numbers were at the base of their insight and were used successfully, if not serendipitously, to achieve an understanding of their cosmos that still echoes today. In fact, we present compelling evidence that amongst the inheritors of the Stonehenge knowledge were such luminaries as Pythagoras and that celebrations such as Halloween and May Day are a direct outgrowth from Stonehenge. 65 illustrations.

To be honest I was a little worried when I was asked to review this book as I'm firmly on the practical and scientific side of Stonehenge explanations and I hear daily far too many way out theories that need no extra publicity.
So I was really pleased to find this book is a very practical one. The overview of Stonehenge is great and covers everything a general reader needs. It is written in a very easy style to read and the illustrations are numerous and helpful.
Of course they have a theory about Stonehenge to share. I really admire the way they build up the theory from the data clearly signposting their deductions and separating out speculation from them. As a connoisseur of traditional measurements I really enjoyed their numerical excursion trying to pick up neolithic echos in the proper way to measure the world.

I can really recommend that you read the book. It is worth for the general Stonehenge description alone, but their theories of how it may have been used as a calender and predictor are worth considering and should be studied by any student of the stones.

 (It is worth pointing out that there is no connection to the "Heaven's Hinge" theory of Stonehenge)

A Mystery Mark In The Mound

I have written before about the mound in the middle of Stonehenge - between Stones 53 and 10 - which David Field has some thoughts about.

See http://www.sarsen.org/2012/01/three-original-standing-stones-of.html and

http://www.sarsen.org/2013/07/digging-into-david-fields-central-mound.html

In the excitement of finding other parchmarks this summer I also spotted something strange on the mound.

My updated version of Cleals map http://www.sarsen.org/2013/09/cleal-et-al-twentieth-century.html shows where the known excavations in the mound area are and I have outlined the squares in the bottom picture, the two smaller Atkinson ones and the corner of the more recent Darvill and Wainwright's one.

In the area between them there appeared a circular parchmark with a lush centre.

(A large hole left into chalk can produce this as the chalk edges collapse to give a dry rubble edge and the centre depression is filled with blown soil).

It is off the bluestone circle and I don't think it is an artifact produced by the watering, could it be a hint of a large stonehole?

click to embiggen

It is also visible in this picture taken this year if you look closely:

Cleal et al Twentieth Century Excavation Plan Updated

Cleal et al Twentieth Century Excavation Plan updated with an indicative outline of Darvill and Wainwright's 2008 excavation in red. (Plan scanned from book so excuse the fold - this is for my own information only)

click for larger

A note on Gowland’s pits re-revealed by parch marks July 2013

Gowland’s excavation report of 1901 details the contents of the pits he dug to use for his supporting props as he straightened Stone 56.

The details are in the appendix and for excavations B & C read:

Excavation B. 3 feet 6 inches long, 3 feet 6 inches wide, and 3 feet deep.
The chalk rock was reached at the same depth as in A (1 foot 3 inches below the turf). There was a much smaller quantity of stone chippings. All the stones were represented, sarsen being somewhat in excess of the “bluestones;” of the latter, diabase and “fissile rock” were most abundant.There were, too, several pieces of iron pyrites, three small fragments of ancient pottery, and one of micaceous sandstone, just above the chalk.

Excavation C. 3 feet long, 2 feet 4 inches wide, and 3 feet deep.
Here the ground below the turf was all earthy chalk rubble. The chalk rock was not reached. There were but very few chippings of the stones, and they were accidentally thrown away.
A hammerstone of compact sarsen weighing 15 ounces was also found.

The position of B & C is marked on this plan from Cleal et al.

Cleal et al’s position of Hole C doesn't quite match Gowland’s original plan - this is a comparison of a sketch of the parch marks, Gowland’s (from his 1901 report)  and Cleal’s.

The positions of  Excavation B is quite clear in the foreground of this photograph taken on 19/7/13 by Tim Daw. B was into what was undisturbed ground.

This demonstrates that the parch marks are showing excavations. 

Excavation C was into rubble down to its full depth of three feet, the chalk rock wasn't found. From its position, description and how it fits in with the other parch marks it seems that Gowland unknowingly excavated into the stone hole for Stone 20.

This photo taken by Simon Banton on the same date may be showing the outline of Excavation C within the line of other marks.

(Click any plan or picture to enlarge)