Stonehenge Origins: Facts and Fiction | Ancient Architects

Hello everybody and welcome to Ancient Architects. Stonehenge is arguably Britain's greatest megalithic monument and although there is great debate about why the monument was built, nobody can say with any degree of certainty what its purpose was. Like with the pyramids of Egypt, there are no primary sources, texts or inscriptions that shed any light on Britain's enigmatic standing stones, so we are left to look to scientists and archaeologists for answers. With Stonehenge there are at least three phases of construction, each of which may have been the work of a different culture, so it is logical to assume that Stonehenge has meant different things to different people over the ages. But the finished form, with the large sarsen trilithons topped by the socketed lintels, is how many of us think of the structure, and although the purpose of it has always been a hot topic, there are a number of problems with the way the structure is presented and need to be taken into account before we can truly understand it. In my opinion, English heritage and archaeologists give Stonehenge an overly colourful, fanciful and exciting history without any historical or scientific basis to generate unnecessary added interest and to tell a story that may never have even taken place. The archaeological papers and data are available for everybody to review, and although we can't argue with facts, we can argue with interpretation, even if the interpretation originates with a so-called expert. For example, we are told that people transported the smaller bluestones of Stonehenge for 150 miles from Wales to Wiltshire because of their sacred properties, and that the large sarsens were transported for approximately 20 miles from the Marlborough Downs. The almost superhuman accomplishments certainly adds an element of wonder and intrigue to ancient British history, but the fact is it is highly unlikely and it is a myth that we should expel or at least counterbalance with a more logical hypothesis. Taking the smaller bluestones, which sit inside the main sarsen ring, archaeologists tell us that they were quarried from a specific location in the Priseli Hills in West Wales. We are told, for reasons unknown, that the Neolithic people thought these 80 stones were sacred and worth carrying all the way to Stonehenge, and experts have shown the routes over land and Of course, nobody knows this actually happened, and geologists have shown that the 80 stones didn't even come from one location, but from at least 20. The ancient quarrying in the Priseli Hills is also dated between 3400 and 3200 BC, at least 700 years before their presumed arrival on Salisbury Plain. Archaeologists conveniently explain this anomaly by saying that the bluestones originally made up an older stone circle in Wales that was dismantled and brought to Wiltshire. Mike Parker Pearson, the authority on Stonehenge said, they were actually moving their heritage and these stones represent the ancestors. They were actually bringing their ancestors with them. There is no basis for this hypothesis and there certainly isn't any archaeology or geology to back up such a claim. There isn't even a logical reason why people would want to move from Wales to Wiltshire in the Neolithic. The famous altar stone has also been proved to come from the Brecon Beacons, which is an isolated locality compared to the other Stonehenge stones. The largest arson stones are a form of silicified sandstone and are found in various locations on the Salisbury Plain. The ones that make up Stonehenge are said to come from the Marlborough Downs, but it is actually impossible to prove and it is just as likely that the stones came from the immediate vicinity. But it is my belief that they actually came from an earlier Neolithic structure, which I'll discuss in a later video. All we know is that the stones that make up Stonehenge didn't come from just three locations, they actually came from at least 23. But the big question is how did the bluestones get to Stonehenge? In my research into the ancient past I've realised that the simplest interpretation is usually the correct one and it is my opinion that all of the bluestones that make up Stonehenge are in fact glacial erratics. This is by far the most likely scenario and a hypothesis that geologist Brian John has spent a great deal of time and energy researching. I would highly recommend his book The Bluestone Enigma, shown here. Like Brian, I too believe that the great Irish Sea glacier transported the rocks into the area around 450,000 years ago. From glacial deposits, geologists know that a huge mass of ice and rock moved from the Irish Sea through Pembrokeshire and then up the Bristol Channel towards the edge of Salisbury Plain, where glacial sediments and structures are certainly apparent. I'm not going to go into too much scientific detail here but there is certainly far more evidence for this theory than there is for human transportation, of which there is none. The latter is a fanciful idea that, in my opinion, has been created to generate interest, mystique and wonder into Britain's Neolithic past. In fact, it is unknown whether or not Stonehenge was ever even complete. Every artistic impression of Stonehenge in the past few hundred years shows it in a ruinous state and certainly never in a complete form, which modern scholars allude to in their idealistic diagrams. Many stones are missing in even the oldest paintings and although parchmarks have been found in the grass where the missing stone should be, there is no proof that they ever housed a stone. Again, it's a nice belief that the ancestors completed Stonehenge, but it's an assumption and not a fact. It is possible they simply ran out of stones and found the job of moving them from further afield, such as the Marlborough Downs, an impossible task. In total, there are 67 stones missing from the idealised reconstruction of Stonehenge. Of course, the missing stones could have been there and they could have been removed by anyone, such as the Romans, the Vikings or the Normans. The parchmarks in the ground do seem to be quite compelling evidence. All I am saying is that we can never know for sure. The final thing I want to address in this video is the restoration work of the 20th century. There are some videos on YouTube that state that Stonehenge is a hoax, a 20th century construction project and fake history. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that such claims are ludicrous, as there are descriptions and sketches going back hundreds of years, so please don't be taken in by such claims. The restoration work was believed to be critical to preserve the site for future generations. And yes, Stonehenge today looks very different to the early sketches, with leaning stones moved to an upright position, some trilithons concreted in place where the chalk socket was badly worn, and stone lintels reattached when they had become displaced. Stonehenge today is a product of the 20th century heritage industry, as perfectly presented as any ruin can be. No, the restoration work isn't often referred to in official literature, but I do believe the work was done for the right reasons. To stop further damage, to preserve the site and of course for tourism. The restoration work does worry me with regards to the popular astronomical alignment theories, as nearly all the stones have possibly been moved in some way. We have to have faith that their current placement setting is precisely as the Neolithic people arranged them, or else every astronomical marker theory has no credibility. The numerous restoration projects have certainly transformed Stonehenge to an idealistic version of itself, but the idealistic view may not have been the Neolithic way. Maybe some stones were meant to lean, even if just by a shallow angle. Maybe the builders purposefully left some stones on the ground. We simply don't know the minds of the builders of Stonehenge. I don't think this is some kind of conspiracy. I believe the restoration was done for what experts thought were the right reasons at the time, but I also doubt we would undertake this kind of work today. I am highlighting the restoration as it is one of the reasons I have never been too excited about the astronomical alignment theories, as we just don't know if they have any true historical meaning. Stonehenge is Britain's most famous monument and it is truly an amazing structure built by ancient Neolithic people, but in this video I have highlighted the problems with the way it is presented in the modern age. There is no proof that the blue stones were transported for vast distances across the land and they are most likely glacial erratics deposited close by. We don't know if the structure was ever complete and due to 20th century restoration work, we can never know for sure if the stones really had true astronomical significance. What we do know is that Stonehenge is a Neolithic structure and architecturally it is hugely impressive and that should be enough to excite us without the need to promote unnecessary interpretations based on fanciful ideas and faith which can never truly be proven. Thank you very much for watching. This has been Matt at Ancient Architects. Please subscribe to the channel, please like the video, and please leave a comment below. Thank you very much.