Mike Pitts makes a very valid point about the position of the cremation remains at Stonehenge; "If you read anything that suggests there is some kind of astronomical significance in the location of things found under the bank, you need to bear this in mind – what we’re seeing could easily be just where archaeologists have dug."
As the author of
a paper that claims that there might be some such significance I feel it is worth expanding on my reasoning.
This is the map of the known cremation burials at Stonehenge. I have added a blue line which is in line with the Great Trilithon and is aligned to the Winter Solstice Sunrise (The Winter Solstice Sunset is the acknowledged solstitial alignment and is towards the south west.)
My paper was about the Great Trilithon being twisted from its "expected" position and that this twist then aligns it with the Winter Solstice Sunrise. With regards to the cremation burials it says: "There is also a cluster of cremation burials on this alignment. Because of the uneven past excavations and recordings of them we cannot be sure that cremation remains were not missed in the excavated parts of Stonehenge, and of course we know nothing of what lies buried in the unexcavated part. So while the cluster may be significant there must be some caution applied. "
I plotted
the known cremation burials which aren't in Aubrey Holes to highlight this cluster. (I ignored the one in the Sarsen circle - identified as 2125 - as there is some doubt as to whether it is of animal or human remains.)
As Mike is I'm cautious in claiming any significance in the cluster in itself. But it is part of a pattern.
Firstly is the cluster real? The excavations were not of modern standards and in the area excavated more than one cremation was probably missed. Obviously we know nothing of what is under the unexcavated turf but in the excavated area the null hypothesis would be that there is an even sampling of the cremations present, meaning if Hawley missed, say, one out of four cremations then the cluster is real and actually had more cremations in it. It is not certain but that is the most probable scenario.
Does the cluster prove an astronomical alignment? No, not on its own. But the case is built up from multiple circumstantial clues. None in themselves prove it but combined together they provide a strong case. Evidence can either be supportive, or not or neutral. Weighting the supportiveness and significance is not a precise science, so read
the paper and judge for yourself.
