New Stonehenge Dig

[Tegernacus]

The first archaeological dig at Stonehenge for 44 years is now underway.

Apparently, the Druids (whoever they are) are "ok with it". Lol

English Heritage Stonehenge Dig site

[bodlon]

aliguana said:

Apparently, the Druids (whoever they are) are "ok with it".

[/url][/quote]

...

[insert Bodlon's manic snickering here.]

[Tegernacus]

What is interesting about this, aside from grain analysis and radiocarbon dating, is that it is a battle between two theories.

On the one hand you have Geoff Wainwright, former head of archaeology at English Heritage, the person doing the dig, who is convinced that Stonehenge was a centre of healing. His reasoning is that there was a spring near the bluestone source that people used to go to for cures, and a number of diseased skeletons found near Stonehenge.

On the other side, you have Mike Parker-Pearson, the person excavating Woodhenge and Durrington, who is convinced that Woodhenge was a monument for the living, and Stonehenge was a monument for the dead. (which Geoff Wainwright thinks is "A very elegant theory, lacking only the quality of a shred of supporting evidence.")

Now, personally, I think both theories could be correct. Stonehenge could be the place of the dead, of the ancestors. It is natural, then, that you would go there if you wanted to ask the ancestors for a bit of help with your arthritis or whatever.

Where Wainwright's theory falls short for me, is that he sees the bluestones as an end in themselves, as if the only point of the monument being there is to house the bluestones. Not true, obviously, as the henge and totems were sacred long before the bluestones were dragged there. It's the site that is sacred, not the rocks on it. Although, they must have thought there was something about the bluestones to go to all that effort to take them there.

The other difference, to me, is of scale. Wainwright is digging a 3.5x1 metre trench to support this theory. Parker-Pearson has dug up half of Wiltshire in support of his. Pearson is very much in the Francis Pryor school of thought, that everything in the landscape is connected.

Although this new dig has a burst of publicity, and will draw in the tourists, it's going to be a while before we get any scientific results from it.

[Craig]

I do wonder at learned men who first posit a theory and then gather the evidence to support it. The results of such an exercise will always be tainted by the desire to be right.

Surely the way to go about it is to gather the evidence and then see what it actually tells you?

[Deleted]

I also lean to wards the Parker-Pearson/Pryor idea that it's part of a larger picture within the landscape such as the 'Woodhenge for the living, Stone for the dead' idea with the river & Avenue linking them.

And, agreeing with Tegernacus (I'm a bit of a yes man ;D ) that the location, then the henge were sacred before the stones,
(But then thats a bit obvious when viewing its time-line, sorry I'm typing as I'm thinking.) should we even take any notice of the stones, their constructors, were they not the neo-druids of their time?

Now the fluffy bit, I will say that on all of my visits, its the site/location that gives me the biggest 'Buzz' rather than the stones.

[Tegernacus]

I think the stones were put there to enclose the space, rather than being some cosmic energy generator/calendar/whatever else. We will probably never know, it was a loooooong time ago. But I think Mike is in the right area, coming as it does from mass excavations all over the landscape. Of course, Mr Wainright could have a point about the bluestones, being healing symbols, BUT.. I think the bluestones were put in an already sacred place, as opposed to the place being there just to house the bluestones. Infact, that is accepted theory, even by English Heritage. (Notice, he is ex-English Heritage)

[Blackbird]

Bearing in mind that the site was used over thousands of years originally - (and you could argue that it's current use is just as relevant), I would be surprised if there were only one answer to the question.

For example, the early construction of the site could simply have been as a point of assembly, easily visible from miles around, thus easy to find. By the time of the bluestones, the original significance and use could have been forgotten or transmuted.

Over successive generations, as the site became old, it makes sense that it would literally be seen as a place of the ancestors. Look at how we now see places such as cathedrals - we wonder at the skill of the builders and marvel at the tombs of kings. It gives us a sense of history and place and they have become important even for non Catholics.

I've already posted up a link to another related article on the front page, if anyone wants a gander

[bodlon]

admin said:

Bearing in mind that the site was used over thousands of years originally - (and you could argue that it's current use is just as relevant), I would be surprised if there were only one answer to the question.

I think that's an excellent point. People tend to re-use big things, and assign them new meaning. There are several points in the Four Branches of the Mabinogi in which the writer tries to point out origins for phrases, or speculates about place names, and such.

Just because one long-lost Neolithic tribe did the original work for a specific purpose doesn't mean that later groups of people throughout history didn't use them for something completely different.

[Midori]

I subscribe more to Mike Parker Pearson's views as well.

I feel that the whole area of Stonehenge, Woodhenge and Durrington would have been a large, but integrated area, especially with the large number of gravesites around and overlooking Stonehenge, less around Woodhenge and Durrington.

Cheers, Midori

[Tegernacus]

ahhh... there are the druids... anyone recognise anyone?

video

[littleraven]

aliguana said:

ahhh... there are the druids... anyone recognise anyone?

video

Can someone tell me the difference between the guy playing the guitar and a Xian church haller singing 'cum-by-yah'?

Sorry, but I do find neo-Druidic ritual to be faintly ridiculous.

[Tegernacus]

it's the inherent... hippyness... of it all. Bang the drum and blow your carnyx by all means, but when someone with pulls out an acoustic and starts singing "we are the trees, we are the stars, dolphins are our friends..." then I feel like head-hunting should make a comeback. When they said "all we can give you is... " I was expecting some barefoot nymph to dance over and give them a flower and a peace-sign.

I think the Smithsonian just gave some students cash to turn up and perform. If they think those people represent me or my religion, they are sadly mistaken.

[Midori]

I recognised someone from The Dolmen Grove, the guy in the antler headdress. They are a group which originate on thr Dorset/Somerset borders, and celebrate around Maumbury Rings.

I don't know a lot about them, but they are definitely Neo, and have some association with a Trad Witchcraft group called the Coraneid.

That's all the onfo i ban give you, I'm afraid


cheers. Midori

[littleraven]

midori said:

I recognised someone from The Dolmen Grove, the guy in the antler headdress. They are a group which originate on thr Dorset/Somerset borders, and celebrate around Maumbury Rings.

I don't know a lot about them, but they are definitely Neo, and have some association with a Trad Witchcraft group called the Coraneid.

That's all the onfo i ban give you, I'm afraid


cheers. Midori

Ah, I thought the guy in the headdress seemed familiar somehow. I went to the 2006 Mercian Gathering, Coraneid and The Dolmen were involved with that.

[Lee]

"and have some association with a Trad Witchcraft group called the Coraneid"

interesting name for a group... pests and vermin best disposed of with beetles

[Tegernacus]

to be fair to them, at least they turned up.

[Blackbird]

Shh, they might be listening! ;D

[arth_frown]

Did anyone spot the face on the stone next to the man in the orange high vis jacket?

[Tegernacus]

I didn't until you mentioned it. Seems I'm not the only one, Eternal Idol blogged about it too, and he knows Stonehenge inside out.

incidently, his latest post is a book length look at old Geoffrey's tale of Merlin building Stonehenge, in light of modern archaeological evidence, and is worth a read