The Ice Rafted Limeslade Boulder Route

It appears from preliminary results the Famous Limeslade Erratic found on the shoreline of the Mumbles was probably rafted from the shore of Pembrokeshire on an ice flow which was part of a general drift from the Irish Sea to the Bristol Channel. 

See how, "High relative sea level during MIS4 and 3 coincident with adjacent calving ice sheet margins provides an explanation for the rafted giant erratics found around the shores of southern Britain and Ireland": Scourse, J.D. (2024), The timing and magnitude of the British–Irish Ice Sheet between Marine Isotope Stages 5d and 2: implications for glacio-isostatic adjustment, high relative sea levels and ‘giant erratic’ emplacement. J. Quaternary Sci., 39: 505-514. https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.3611

And: "Another possibility is that the boulders are ice-rafted,since erratic boulders are commonly found on shorelines along the coast of Devon and elsewhere in the Bristol Channel, including as far east as Flat Holm"  Gibbard, Philip & Hughes, Philip & Rolfe, Christopher. (2017). New insights into the Quaternary evolution of the Bristol Channel, UK. Journal of Quaternary Science. 32. 10.1002/jqs.2951.

Excitement over, it was just a tale full of sound and fury but signifying nothing.

Monolith Experiments at Stonehenge - links

 

The Stonehenge Monolith Project 2019

https://historicconcepts.co.uk/2019/09/05/stonehenge-monolith-project-2019/

Monolith Moving Experiment at Stonehenge

https://historicconcepts.co.uk/current-projects/monolith-moving-experiment-at-stonehenge/

Like a rolling stone: experimental archaeology at Stonehenge

https://the-past.com/feature/experimental-archaeology-at-stonehenge/

Meta-review of How to Build Stonehenge

Having featured the fabulous guest review of Mike Pitts book by Rob Ixer - https://www.sarsen.org/2023/08/how-to-build-stonehenge-by-mike-pitts.html -

here is a meta-review of it as well.

 Mike Pitts' book "How to Build Stonehenge" offers a comprehensive and engaging exploration of the construction process behind one of the world's most famous prehistoric monuments. Drawing on decades of research and recent scientific discoveries, Pitts provides readers with a detailed account of how Stonehenge was likely built.

The book focuses on answering the "how" rather than the "why" of Stonehenge's construction, addressing questions about the sourcing of stones, their transportation, and the techniques used to erect them[1][2]. Pitts combines archaeological evidence, anthropological records, and his own expertise to present a compelling narrative of the monument's creation[3].

Key aspects of the book include:

1. Stone sourcing: Pitts discusses the origins of the bluestones from the Preseli Hills in Wales and the larger sarsen stones from Marlborough Downs[2].

2. Transportation methods: The author draws parallels with recent megalith-moving practices in Indonesia and other parts of the world to suggest how the ancient builders might have transported the massive stones[2].

3. Construction techniques: Pitts explores the possible methods used to carve and raise the stones, offering insights into the engineering challenges faced by Neolithic builders[1].

4. Timeline and phases: The book acknowledges that Stonehenge was not built in a single event but evolved over nearly 1,000 years, with various phases of construction and modification[3].

5. Preservation efforts: Pitts also discusses the more recent history of Stonehenge, including preservation attempts and the impact of visitors on the monument[2].

Reviewers praise the book for its readability and Pitts' ability to weave together various sources of information[3]. The narrative is described as conversational and engaging, making complex archaeological debates accessible to a general audience[3]. The inclusion of numerous photographs and descriptions of stone-moving practices from other cultures adds depth to the discussion and helps readers visualize the possible methods used at Stonehenge[3].

Some minor criticisms include the book's focus on the main construction phase, which may overshadow the monument's long-term evolution[3]. Additionally, one reviewer noted that the quality of the black and white photographs could have been improved with better paper[4].

Overall, "How to Build Stonehenge" is considered a valuable resource for those interested in understanding the latest research and evidence surrounding the construction of this iconic monument[3]. Pitts' approach offers a fresh perspective on Stonehenge, emphasizing the human aspects of its creation and the impressive feat of engineering it represents[1][2][5].

Citations:

[1] https://thamesandhudson.com/how-to-build-stonehenge-9780500024195

[2] https://www.csmonitor.com/Books/Book-Reviews/2022/0518/We-can-t-know-the-why-of-Stonehenge.-This-book-reveals-the-likely-how

[3] https://the-past.com/review/books/how-to-build-stonehenge/

[4] https://www.sarsen.org/2023/08/how-to-build-stonehenge-by-mike-pitts.html

[5] https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Build-Stonehenge-Mike-Pitts/dp/0500024197

We choose to, not because it is easy, but because it is hard.

Echoing the sentiments of the builders of Stonehenge

Geomorphological and Archaeoastronomical Analysis of a Neolithic Landscape, Cranborne Chase, Southern Britain

Burley, Paul. (2024). Geomorphological and Archaeoastronomical Analysis of a Neolithic Landscape, Cranborne Chase, Southern Britain

Abstract 

Cranborne Chase in southwest England is a well-known area of Neolithic archaeology where a nexus of population growth, cultural evolution and resource extraction during the 4th millennium led to development of one of the highest densities of earthen monuments, including numerous long barrows, the largest and longest cursus in Britain, and many other structures. Natural physiographic characteristics of the study area in tandem with anthropomorphic modification of local vegetation patterns on the downs since the Mesolithic provided a distinctive setting where the Early- to Middle-Neolithic cultural landscape developed. However, reasons for siting monuments at certain locations within the complex chalkland landscape, the purpose of specific and unique architectural forms and features of the earthen structures, and spatial relationships between the pattern of monuments and elements of the surrounding environment as a whole remain largely enigmatic. Are there special features of the natural landscape that the Neolithic population valued for earthen monument development, and why was such a high density of earthen monuments developed there? This thesis describes geological and paleo-environmental characteristics and cultural features of the study area c. 4th millennium, evaluates similarities and differences associated with Neolithic and Bronze Age earthen and chambered burial sites located across Britain, and presents methods and results of an astrometric analysis of topographic position, monument orientation, and viewscape from earthen monuments at Cranborne Chase. Results of this study demonstrate that spatial and temporal relationships between the earthen structures and elements of the surrounding landscape, seascape, and skyscape are key to recognizing and understanding the symbolism and signification expressed by the monumental architecture. The cultural landscape – including the pattern of both natural features and earthen monuments at Cranborne Chase, the South Hampshire Lowlands, and surrounding region – expresses spatial and temporal unification by alignment between Earth and sky, and the living and the dead. In that way, the cultural landscape is related to a Neolithic cosmology emphasizing features of the landscape and skyscape.

View/Download File Burley_umn_0130E_25070.pdf (6.63 MB)

Persistent link to this item https://hdl.handle.net/11299/262882

The Stonehenge Solstitial Alignments

At Stonehenge the difference between the Solstice Sunrise and Sunset alignments is 81 degrees, the exact angle between a line drawn between the 42nd and 15th minute mark on a clock face, compared to the 0 to 30 line. It is built into the stones with the outer sarsen ring, and the Altar Stone and middle Trilithon.

The Collapse of the Glacial Transport theory

Newall's Boulder - found at Stonehenge

John's key argument that the boulder that was sourced from Craig Rhosyfelin in Wales and found at Stonehenge was glacially transported is this: 

In seeking to understand how the Newall Boulder might have been transported from its original place of origin, a number of key features need to be explained: 

• 1. a crude bullet shape, with a pointed nose and a blunt back end 
• 2. at least five major facets and several smaller ones 
• 3. abraded surfaces and edges 
• 4. fracture scars on the flanks and especially at the lee or blunt end 
• 5. apparent streamlining prominent on one facet 
• 6. faint crossing scratches on one facet and weathered parallel scratches on another 
• 7. minor crescentic gouges and microfeatures (chip marks or chatter marks) attributed to pressure exerted at particular points. 

On the basis of its shape the Newall Boulder is classified on the Powers six-category scale as sub-angular (Powers, 1953). In general, clasts in periglacial slope deposits and rockfall fragments tend to be sharp-edged or angular, simply because they have not travelled far. This boulder is clearly not simply a broken piece of rockfall debris 

https://doi.org/10.5194/egqsj-73-117-2024 

E&G Quaternary Sci. J., 73, 117–134, 2024 124 B. S. John: Stonehenge bluestone erratic

The evidence, including many photos, shows that the boulder is identical to those still at Craig Rhosyfelin. They are abraded, rounded, scarred, have apparent streamlining etc.

The simple conclusion is that Newall's boulder shows no signs of glacial transport from Wales to Wessex. John fails to provide any evidence that it differs from its siblings still at Craig Rhosyfelin, he failed to compare them, and unless he can then his whole hypothesis collapses.

John's photo of a boulder at Craig Rhosyfelin

The same photo with the Newall Boulder from Stonehenge added as a photographic layer 

Two more photos of similar boulders at Craig Rhosyfelin

Newall's boulder compared to the tip of in situ pillar at Craig Rhosyfelin