Eternal Idol

No one could be more interested than me in the recent developments at Stonehenge. Well, it’s perfectly possible, I suppose, that someone else ‘out there’ might be even more fascinated with the ruins than I am, but I base my blunt statement on the simple fact that I’ve been running Eternal Idol for over 5 years. On that time, over 300 original posts have appeared here, along with something like 3,300 comments and contributions, along with countless links, photos, diagrams, graphics, news reports, accounts of meetings and so on.

Over the weekend, I noted that some comments went up here to the effect that Eternal Idol is the world’s foremost site as far as Stonehenge is concerned, and this may be true. Certainly, I know of no other like it, and if I did, I would of course be more than happy to link to this other site and announce its existence to the Four Winds. From the very start, Eternal Idol, along with its study of Stonehenge, Silbury Hill and our ancestors has been a labour of love, with others choosing to contribute freely and for the benefit of all. All of which set me to thinking…

Last week, there was a flurry of press reports from numerous sources concerning “Hillside Henge”, all of which have been posted here as links. There was great excitement all round, but precious little detail, and what detail there is proved to be somewhat confusing, rather than illuminating. For example, on the BBC link, we learned of a new henge “made of wood and aligned with Stonehenge itself…”

How? By virtue of the fact that you can draw a straight line connecting the two? As for this structure being made of wood, how do we know this? Thankfully, Mike Pitts wrote a sober and informative piece for the BBC, going into what I presume is very interesting detail for the layman, but the mere existence of Mike Pitts’ piece begs the question of why the BBC didn’t include what he had to say in a more informative original announcement?

More amazing still, we learn from the Independent’s Archaeology Correspondent that this new structure was “almost certainly some kind of Neolithic temple” and that it “appears to have been a circle of massive timber obelisks, constructed more than 4,200 years ago.” Where do I begin?

I’m far from convinced that Stonehenge itself was a temple as we understand the word today, and I’ve written about this before. How we know that “Hillside Henge” was “almost certainly some kind of Neolithic temple” is beyond me, while I’m equally baffled as far as the dates are concerned, because as far as I’m aware, we have no way of knowing how precisely how old this structure is.

As for the existence of timber “obelisks”, I’m at a loss. To be sure, it’s an exciting new addition to the lexicon of the Stonehenge landscape, but as I understand it, an obelisk is “a tall, narrow, four-sided, tapering monument which ends in a pyramid-like shape at the top.” How can anyone reasonably conjecture the existence of multiple structures like this, which as far as I’m aware are unprecedented in Neolithic features?

There’s a mention of Hillside Henge, Stonehenge and Coneybury being ‘roughly aligned’, but apart from the simple observation that Hillside Henge lies to the northwest of Stonehenge, there is otherwise not the faintest sign of interest in this compass direction. I personally think this is extremely odd, on account of the many features that lie to the northwest of Stonehenge, while it is the direction in which the sun sets on Midsummer’s Day and it also marks the approximate home of the bluestones, regardless of how they ultimately found their way to Stonehenge.

Even more bizarre is the fact that yet another large wooden henge or temple with a curious feature at its centre lies ‘somewhere to the northwest of Stonehenge’, but this latest ‘most exciting discovery in 50 years or so’ has not even been reported! Its existence is well-known in certain archaeological circles and has been for some time, but for a multitude of truly fascinating reasons, no press release has been issued and it’ll probably be quietly forgotten until such time as it suits someone to release news of this latest discovery.

So, it might well be that if you’re reading this, then you have a genuine interest in the landscape of Stonehenge and are following the advice given by Mike Pitts on page 299 of Hengeworld – “Perhaps now, having read this far, you feel like having a go at working it (the mystery of Stonehenge) out for yourself. I recommend you do. There is something quite special about deep contemplation of our ancestors….” However, if you’re a member of the public and you’re having a serious stab at studying Stonehenge, then you might as well forget it because there’s something huge ‘out there’ that you don’t know about and won’t know about, either, so you can’t include it in your calculations. Ah well, you read the new new Henge here first, while you’ve also read about yet another huge and unrecorded prehistoric feature here first, but I’ll write more about this last one in a separate post as soon as I get a chance.

Otherwise, as far as the current “New Henge” or “Hillside Henge” is concerned, I’m mystified by how little detail has gone into the official reports, while it strikes me that the aforementioned contribution by Mike Pitts on the BBC is a welcome addition as far as those with a genuine interest in the monument are concerned. The other reports strike me as simply a means of cashing in on the universal interest in Stonehenge, which further perpetuates my belief that the monument is far more of a ‘cash cow’ than a real site deserving of respect, study and veneration.

You’ll find other links to “Hillside Henge” on this site, sent in by enthusiasts, but they pretty much repeat the information in the original press releases. There’s some confusion about the precise location of Hillside Henge, which may have been intended from the start, but for those many people with a genuine interest in the place, I have to wonder why it’s left to Alex Down to visit the site and take measurements and photographs, to Juris Ozols in Minnesota to produce further contributions and graphics, and for me to write it all up and publish it. While I’m on the subject of contributors, I’m extremely grateful to my friend Lee Smeaton – a metal detectorist of all people, but as good a friend of our heritage as you could wish to meet – for taking the time and trouble to send in the enhanced photos (below), that may throw some further light on Hillside Henge.

Hillside Henge aside for now, why is it that Eternal Idol is regarded by some as the foremost site on Stonehenge, when by rights, there should be other contenders fiercely contesting this title?

I’ve spoken before with admiration about the Stonehenge Riverside Project and this admiration remains. They been excavating in the Stonehenge landscape for years, allowing visitors to watch the excavations and providing open days where anyone is free to question the archaeologists and wander around the sites. The SRP has come up with a host of fascinating discoveries in recent times, but while their website isn’t bad, it’s hardly up to date and brimful with information. Mike Parker Pearson has given talks on Stonehenge and he’s taken part in documentaries, all of which were informative and intriguing, but the blunt fact remains that while the people in charge of the SRP are a mine of experienced information, there’s not a lot of this on the internet, which is to my mind a very great shame.

Before I move on, I should point out (again) another major shortcoming in British archaeology. I’ve spoken to many senior archaeologists over the years who specialise in the study of Stonehenge (and Silbury Hill) and I’ve been fascinated to learn what they have to say in private conversations. However, these men have to be exceedingly careful with their public pronouncements because there’s a great deal of professional envy and resentment ‘out there’, from others who go over their printed words with a fine toothcomb, ready to pounce on any syllable deemed to be unprofessional, speculative or populist. Now, you might think that I’ve done exactly the same thing with what I’ve said about Hillside Henge, but while I was admittedly startled by Prof Gaffney’s announcement that “This (Hillside Henge) is probably the first major ceremonial monument that has been found in the past 50 years or so”, because the recent discovery of Bluestonehenge seems to have slipped his memory, I’m more disappointed by officialdom’s fleeting and inaccurate coverage of this new discovery.

The next contender for the person or organisation who should have the best Stonehenge site on the internet is Wessex Archaeology, not least because they use a stylised trilithon as their company logo in an obvious attempt to cash in on Stonehenge’s global reputation; where do I begin?

Apart from using a stylised Stonehenge trilithon, Wessex Archaeology undertook the Stonehenge A303 Test Pit Project in 2002 and I should know, because I worked on it. Archaeologists employed by Wessex Archaeology discovered the world-famous Amesbury Archer or King of Stonehenge and again, I should know because I was one of the first to see the remains and artefacts close up, while I was also involved in the many broadcasts made about this discovery, as I was one half of the laughably-termed Media and Communications Department.

Archaeologists employed by Wessex Archaeology excavated the Boscombe Bowmen or ‘Builders of Stonehenge’, another discovery I was intimately involved with throughout, while archaeologists employed by Wessex Archaeology have been present at numerous other Stonehenge-related discoveries over the years. Yet another was the laser-scanning of Stonehenge, carried out in 2003 by Wessex Archaeology and Archaeoptics, but I think it’s fair to say that the Stonehenge expertise gathered at Wessex Archaeology is not proportionately represented on their website. One might find this mildy surprising, when one also considers the size of their IT Department, the existence of a Media & Communications Department, their self-proclaimed status as an Educational Charity and the fact that the Chief Executive of Wessex Archaeology, Ms Sue Davies, was recently elected Vice Chairperson of the United Kingdom National Commission for UNESCO.

Stonehenge is of course a UNESCO World Heritage site, situated not only in the United Kingdom, but also a mere stone’s throw away from the majestic offices of Wessex Archaeology. Chief Executives and Heads of Department at Wessex Archaeology are paid far better than I am, they have a lot more free time on their hands than I do, they have better access to Stonehenge, related projects and related experts than I do and they have vastly superior computer technology, yet their website is hardly a cornucopia of information as far as Stonehenge is concerned. And as the icing on the cake, as it were, the staff at Wessex have been banned from accessing Eternal Idol from their workplace, while anyone found attempting to do so faces some pretty unforgiving questioning.

I’ll have far more to say about Wessex Archaeology and Stonehenge as the year progresses, but I will simply leave you to ponder why this institution isn’t aiming to be the first stop for Stonehenge information on the internet. Mystifying though this situation is, it seems positively straightforward in comparison with the current status of English Heritage, as far as Stonehenge is concerned.

If Wessex Archaeology are well-connected and comfortably off in terms of Stonehenge connections, then English Heritage, as the current custodians of the ruins, are faced with what is self-evidently an embarrassment of riches. And yet, when we glance at their website, which most reasonable people might expect to be the last word in instantly accessible and comprehensible information on Stonehenge, we find very little indeed.

When I type “Stonehenge English Heritage” into Google, I get this result for the homepage, and while there are some tabs, which I’ll come to shortly, the rest of the page is dominated by ticket prices and exhortations to spend money in the visitors’ shop, buying membership and so on. The spirit of Mammon is alive and well here, but what happens when we turn to Explore Stonehenge and the Interactive Map?

Now, it may well be that I’ve missed something amidst this veritable treasure-trove of up-to-date information on Stonehenge, as maintained up its custodians, but I’d be grateful to anyone who can point out updates on:

Hillside Henge, “probably the first major ceremonial monument that has been found in the past 50 years or so.”

Bluestonehenge, “one of the most important prehistoric finds in decades.”

Professors Wainwright and Darvill’s 2008 excavation at Stonehenge, the first since 1964 and the subject of a BBC Timewatch special, in conjunction with the Smithsonian Museum. Good Lord – there IS a page on this!

The filming of an episode of Dr Who, one of the most famous, popular and successful sci-fi series of all time, at Stonehenge.

The discovery that Stonehenge was a royal cemetery.

The news that the 56 Aubrey Holes may once have held bluestones.

The removal of the Ancestors from Aubrey Hole 7.

The subsequent Druid picket of Stonehenge.

The Amesbury Archer or The King of Stonehenge.

The Boscombe Bowmen or The Builders of Stonehenge.

I could go on and on and on, but you’d be better of simply scrolling through Eternal Idol to find everything that’s not featured there. Druid links with Stonehenge, Aborigines performing dances at Stonehenge, Pytheas of Massilia, Stonehedge, Stonehump….you name it, it can’t be found.

What of the appearance of The Ancestor at Stonehenge? Perhaps I’m looking in the wrong place, so let’s have a look at the Summer Solstice 2010 tab. Well, that’s odd – no mention of The Ancestor, no pictures, no reference to the extensive media coverage, no mention of this unique cultural event, no mention of the first time a giant’s appeared at Stonehenge since Geoffrey of Monmouth described the monument being built by such creatures…nothing.

This complete absence of competition for Eternal Idol can’t be put down to a lack of funding – Stonehenge receives something like 1,000,000 visitors a year at around six pounds a head, so when you add sales from the shop, parking and God only knows what else into the pot, there should be more than enough to pay for someone to post a few updates every few days. But apparently not.

As you’ll see on the Explore Stonehenge page, there is a list of handsome credits, which I’ll reproduce here “This interactive map was funded by the New Opportunity Fund and created by Oxford ArchDigital in April 2004. The project was led by Isabelle Bedu, the Stonehenge World Heritage Site Coordinator, in collaboration with the English Heritage web team and the Wiltshire County Council project Window On Wiltshire. A huge thank you to Helen Shalders, Kate Turnbull, Fiona Ryan, Graham Sear, Margaret Cook, Vuk Trifkovic, Tom Goskar, Damian Grady, Helena Cave-Penney, Amanda Chadburn and all the others involved in the project.”

Well, Tom Goskar was a former colleague of mine at Wessex Archaeology and I understand that he’s now occupying the dizzy heights of management, but while I’ve long lost touch with him, it looks from the above as if 2004 was the last time he made any serious attempt to put original information about Stonehenge into the public domain, although I’m always prepared to learn otherwise.

As for Amanda Chadburn, she holds some senior position within English Heritage, but you’re welcome to look this lady up for yourselves. I heard her name mentioned recently in Alex Down’s report on the recent Stonehenge and Avebury Seminar at Devizes, in which he wrote:

“Amanda Chadburn welcomed us, and introduced the seminar, and explained that the two different sites are actually just one WHS – that was news to me – with the large gap of Salisbury Plain and Pewsey Vale in between. She explained that it’s proposed that an Archaeological Research Group be set up for the whole WHS, and asked for ideas to help frame its terms of reference. I’ve sent mine, and I bet that the readership here has a whole lot more.”

Well, I’ve had what I flatter myself is a brilliant idea, Amanda – why don’t you, and all those others who currently occupy well-paid and stratospheric positions in the world of Stonehenge archaeology, start pulling your fingers out and start making more than a token effort to show an interest in Stonehenge? If you want suggestions to help frame terms of reference for an Archaeological research Group for the Stonehenge World Heritage site, might it not be big help if all concerned updated their websites more than just the once every few years? The IFA’s rules and regulations aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on, but somewhere among all the dross is a real gem, which is worth reproducing here:

“The fuller understanding of our past provided by archaeology is part of society’s common heritage and it should be available to everyone. Because of this, and because the historic environment is an irreplaceable resource, archaeologists both corporately and individually have a responsibility to help preserve the historic environment, to use it economically in their work, to conduct their studies in such a way that reliable information may be acquired, and to disseminate the results of their studies.”

Around four and a half thousand years ago, our ancestors embarked on an unimaginable labour, dragging vast quantities of stone many miles across rough terrain to a site their ancestors before them had chosen to venerate many millennia before. Using nothing more than mauls and their bare hands, they fashioned these rough stones and erected them into a monument that is regarded as a true Wonder of the World, a now-crumbling set of ruins that draws visitors from around the planet to stare in open-mouthed admiration, awe and bafflement.

However, their descendants – those tasked by society to investigate, record, safeguard and disseminate the information pertaining to this Wonder of the World – simply find it beyond their abilities to create an official and accessible repository of knowledge on the internet worthy of the name, let alone update it in a meaningful fashion; as for a visitors centre – forget it. All this despite enjoying facilities, benefits and a standard of living incomprehensible to those long dead men and women whose remains are now scattered throughout the landscape, in museums and university laboratories.

So, I ask again “How much longer must this utter travesty continue?”

Categories: Amesbury Archer, Hillside Henge, Silbury Hill, Stonehedge, Stonehenge, Stonehenge Sentinel, Stonehump, Tanith, The Ancestor, The Druids, The Reburial Issue, Wessex Archaeology
6 Comments »

Once again, everyone who reads Eternal Idol for new and original information on Stonehenge should be indebted to Alex Down, but I’ll go into this in greater detail after I’ve reproduced an email and some illustrations Alex sent me earlier today (Saturday). I had intended to post them up earlier, but alas! The Road to Hell is paved with good intentions…be that as it may, here’s an update on Hillside Henge or New Henge from Alex:

I visited SH this afternoon, and took a look around. Dennis had asked in the (preceding) thread if I had any imagery, and this is what I’ve edited from GE:

I hope this should be self-explanatory, but the yellow line represents points that are all 900m from Stonehenge, roughly on the Coneybury alignment, the mirror-image henge. The blue ellipse represents what I think is the most likely area for the centre of the new henge: it seems to me likely that the later Cursus barrows were aligned on the site of the earlier ancient monument. Barrow 51 is easily visible here, and that’s what the BBC identified, but it’s more than 1000m from SH. The Cursus is visible about 100 m to the north of the centre of the blue ellipse. The Fargo plantation is just in-picture on the left.

One or two people have mentioned an “empty field.” Well this is what the site (marked by rucksack and bored bystander) looks like, looking north:

It is a pretty empty field there, confirming what the archaeologists say. The cursus is just visible in front of the line of cows in the distance.

And here’s the Barrow 50, marked by a couple of NT volunteers, and a “pagan” who was looking for his ancestors. The NT chap said that he wasn’t permitted to say where the site was, but it was in this area, and the BBC website gave an indication. Indeed it does, and a very good job of misdirection it does too. (The NT chap hadn’t got a clue ….) As a matter of interest, the Barrrow 50 has a diameter of 30m, which means that it would completely overlay the 25m henge. Not quite what was intended, I think. You can see the third of the obvious barrows in the area against the Fargo plantation – it’s unnamed/unnumbered.

And that’s about it. No great photographic opportunities there, but I did confirm that Coneybury and Stonehenge are intervisible from the site I identified.

I think there are two interesting points relevant to the site. I think it’s quite likely that the Cursus barrows aligned themselves on the (to them) Old Henge; and the proximity of the cursus is interesting at around 100m, when Stonehenge is about 800m from the cursus … while Woodhenge, actually aligned on the cursus, is 1300+m away to the east. Seems to me that makes the new henge rather significant.

One other thing. I used the 2003 imagery in GE, because the soil is parched. I don’t know if it’s my imagination, but I think I can see roughly circular shapes in the ground, where I’ve indicted on the image I’ve sent you. Guesstimating the limits of these, it comes to nearer 30m diameter rather than 25, but I wondered if MOJO Productions could use their magic to enhance the contrast between grass and parch marks? Worth a try, do you think?

I’ll leave it to you!

Cheers
Alex

Right, in the course of some further correspondence between Alex, Juris Ozols of MOJO Productions and myself, Alex added the following, and I’m pretty sure I’m not misquoting him here:

“I’ve had a look, and I thought I might have seen a possibility. The outer ring of the new henge is enclosed roughly by the blue circle, while the inner marks of the burial are marked by the rounded rectangle. They seem to correlate better than the outer ring with the geophysics image (there’s quite good matching of the darker areas)”

“The bright spot at the top is the leftmost cattle trough in the GE imagery (below), while the barrow on the right is westernmost cursus barrow, outside the fenced area. For comparison purposes that barrow is about 22m in diameter, compared with a reported 25m for the new henge. The size is about right. My best guess …”

Juris then replied with this and I sincerely hope I’m doing these two gentlemen jsutice: “I did my best to register GE, the Alex blue circle, and RCHM, attached. As best I can make it, the blue circle seems to lie exactly on top of RCHM barrow 114, which of course muddies the water considerably. Barrow 49 is right there too.”

It’s 3.30 am now, so it’s a bit late even by my standards, but when I find the time on Sunday, I’ll add a postscript to this piece rather than a comment. In the meantime….

Words by Alex Down and Juris Ozols. Pictures by kind permission of ALex Down and Juris Ozols of MOJO Productions.

Categories: Hillside Henge, Stonehenge
14 Comments »

Once again, I’m extremely grateful to Alex Down (pictured above at Stonehenge) for the following fascinating contribution concerning some current excavations at Marden Henge. I had meant to post this up earlier in the week, but events conspired to overtake my efforts, while I felt I had to acknowledge the many links sent in earlier today by people who had learned about the new “Hill Henge” discovery near Stonehenge. Once more, without further ado, I shall leave Alex to present his account, but I’m sure we’re all extremely grateful for these many contributions and we all continue to wish Alex the very, very best.

Marden reveals some secrets

Marden is the Cinderella henge. Few people outside the archaeological community have heard of it, and it doesn’t have any of the glamour or massive structure of its counterparts in Wessex, Avebury and Stonehenge. Yet it deserves to be much better known … it’s one of the biggest henges in Britain at nearly 16 hectares (Durrington Walls, usually advanced as the biggest is, by my calculations, nearer 20 hectares) and it has some really intriguing features that are currently being investigated in a 6-week excavation led by Jim Leary, of English Heritage (EH). That’s the same Jim Leary who led the investigation at Silbury Hill when it was being repaired.

Apart from the features, described below, Mike Parker Pearson has recently put forward a new theory regarding the route for the sarsens from the Avebury area to Stonehenge. He believes that the stones were taken from the sarsen fields of Overton Down, down Clatford Bottom to the River Kennet where there appears to be a causeway that would assist the crossing of the river. From there they would take the easy sloping valley up to Knap Hill on the edge of the Marlborough Downs, and cross the Vale of Pewsey by way of Marden, on a direct route to Stonehenge.

It’s an attractive theory, because it neatly links three highly significant sites. In addition, Marden is very close to the source of the river Avon, which forms a boundary to the henge on its southwest side, in a similar way to Durrington Walls and its short avenue to the Avon. The rivers Kennet and Avon seem to have been important elements in the landscapes of the Wessex henges. Elsewhere, Jim Leary has proposed that the Avon, like the Thames, was a sacred river.

Marden will be disappointing to those who want their henges to have circular banks and ditches, and dramatic stone settings. Instead, it has a discontinuous bank, in four disjointed segments that encompass about three quarters of the area. The remaining quarter uses the river bluff of the infant Avon to complete the encirclement. Except that it’s not a circle: it’s a very irregular ellipse, with the long axis roughly aligned with the north. So, not the sort of henge that we’re used to, and its construction on greensand rather than chalk means that it’s degraded more easily, and now it needs the eye of faith to see many of the features.

Nor does it have any megaliths – there may have been stones there in the past though the geophysics survey doesn’t show any obvious stone holes. But the surrounding area is full of sarsen stones of all sizes, at road junctions, in hedges and outside houses, so the stone was available to the original builders.

This is necessarily an interim report on the English Heritage excavation, for it’s only three weeks into a six-week dig, but the site is potentially so interesting that I thought it was worth alerting EI readers. So what is the excavation revealing at Marden? There are three trenches:

Trench A covers what has been the most controversial part of the Marden complex. It’s the so-called Hatfield Barrow, a huge mound that has now almost completely disappeared. EH describes the mound thus: A huge mound, perhaps 15m high, similar to Silbury Hill, which is 30m high. A huge ditch surrounded the mound, which in 1798 according to local naturalist, James Norris, formed a “sort of moat which does not become dry even in the midst of summer.” The geophysics survey shows the diameter of the mound itself to be about 50m, while the surrounding 4m deep ditch is a further 25 m wide, so the whole hill and ditch is at least 100m across.

What should be an impressive sight has now completely disappeared except, perhaps, to the trained eye. The hill was originally excavated by those two stalwarts of early archaeology, Cunnington and Colt Hoare, in 1807. As was done at Silbury, they excavated a shaft from the top, and at the bottom they found “two small parcels of burned human bones.” They called off their labourers, providentially, for as soon as they’d moved away, the hill collapsed, and by 1817 it had been completely levelled. Perhaps this is not surprising as the greensand soil is very loose and unstable.

Assuming triangular sections, my calculations show a maximum height of 12m if the hill was created solely from ditch material, a significant difference from the EH figure. It’s probably a coincidence, but the angle of slope created by a height of 12m gives 31 degrees, almost exactly the angle of slope of Silbury Hill. Given the nature of the greensand, I’d be surprised if the mound could have been any higher, as the angle of repose (maximum “steepness”) of dry sand is 32 degrees, 35 for wet sand. A height of 15m would have required an angle of 38 degrees.

The trench has little to show the casual visitor. It aims to reach the original bedrock (and perhaps evidence of the Cunnington/Colt Hoare shaft), and recover dating material.

Trench B is placed over a ditch terminal in the southeast quadrant of the site. In this respect it echoes Geoffrey Wainwright’s excavation in 1969 when he found a lot of Neolithic remains in a ditch terminal in the north of the site. Trench B has a few finds (including Roman) in the upper layers but these were probably washed in. The excavators are encountering a sort of slurry of sand and mud at a depth of less than 2m, and it looks very heavy going before they reach the bottom and possible depositions.

Trench C is fascinating. It investigates what is known as the “southern circular feature”, a feature probably unique in Neolithic Britain. It’s a sort of henge-within-a-henge: EH describes it as a large circular depression 30m wide and half a metre deep, containing a small off-centre platform. The depression is surrounded by a bank almost 90m in diameter and nearly 1m high. The geophysical survey over this feature shows it has two parallel gullies running under the bank, and extending off to the east like antennae. They may represent an earlier phase of the feature. Cunnington and Colt Hoare also excavated here, and found “a few bits of old pottery and a little charred wood, but no marks of any interment.”

The trench covers part of the northwest quadrant of the bank. And the fascinating discovery is a chalk platform that is believed to represent a dwelling, because to one side is a midden. In the photo, the area between the two pieces of textile is fully-excavated chalk surface, while the midden is the darker soil under the left hand end of the plank. The chalk surface extends towards the camera, but has yet to be fully exposed. The midden has already yielded fresh flint flakes, pottery, and bone pins. Charcoal has also been discovered, which give rise to hopes that the corresponding hearth will also come to light.

Obviously, popular interest will focus on Trench C, and its dwelling on the bank. There were three significant questions that occurred to me, and I discussed them with Jim Leary.

First, the discovery of a dwelling on one relatively small part of the bank seems beyond happenstance, and implies to me that there may be more to be found elsewhere on the bank. Jim thought that this was likely, but geophysics seems problematic in this soil, and it’s very unlikely to show anomalies like this – the current floor didn’t show in the survey. The perimeter of the bank is about 280m, while my guesstimate of the size of the dwelling plus midden is about 6-8m (scaled from the scaffolding plank of 3.9m – I wish I’d taken better measurements on-site.) The chances of encountering a single dwelling by chance seem to be about 1 in 40, or 2.5%. Archaeology doesn’t often get that lucky!

Second, the chalk floor is obviously of interest, as it seems to have been specially imported. And that raises the question of whether the chalk itself is sacred. My feeling is that the chalk landscapes of Avebury and Stonehenge are in some way sacred through the medium of the brilliant white chalk, and that special quality was imported into Marden. Jim was rather more cautious, saying that the chalk could have been present locally through solifluction [movement of soil in periglacial areas when upper layers thaw in summer and slide over the permafrost below.]

Third, the discovery of a structure in such a strange place gives it some special quality – is it possible that it’s a dwelling that’s more sacred than domestic? There appears to be precedent for this at Durrington Walls, where recent digs have shown separate houses that seem to have been more associated with a priestly caste than the other buildings that were decidedly more domestic. Jim cautiously supports this idea, through comparison with Durrington Walls, but there is much more excavation to be done and evidence to be collected before any conclusions can be drawn. However, it seems to me that, if the hypothesis is correct that there are more dwellings around the perimeter of the bank, then we could imagine a priestly caste of “guardians” around the focus of the ring, the enigmatic mound in the centre. But while I’m allowed to imagine this, it’s denied to an archaeologist, at least in public!

I plan to revisit the site near the end of the excavation, to see what else has come to light. But we already have enough new information to make Marden an even more intriguing and significant site in Wessex.

Categories: Marden Henge
19 Comments »

The internet’s positively alive with reports of the latest major discovery at Stonehenge, and it’s certainly very interesting indeed. You can read about it and watch an animation on the BBC news site, you can read a piece in the Independent, or you can read about it in this article from the Daily Mail.

There’s an excellent piece with graphics and photos on the Heritage Key site, and I’m sure there will be many more to come. Of course, I couldn’t be happier for Professor Gaffney and the others involved in this discovery, but I must confess that I’m mildly baffled by one or two of the recorded pronouncements.

For example, the BBC quotes Professor Gaffney as saying “”This is probably the first major ceremonial monument that has been found in the past 50 years or so. This is really quite interesting and exceptional, it starts to give us a different perspective of the landscape.” This rather begs the question of how we would describe the discovery of Bluestonehenge by Professor Mike Parker Pearson and the SRP, but as archaeologists are absolute sticklers for terminological exactitude, then I’m guessing that this new “Hillside Henge” is classified as ‘major, strictly on account of its size, but I must admit that I don’t really know.

The other aspect of this new discovery that I find mildly baffling is that, among the detailed & insightful coverage it’s received from science editors from the BBC and from some of our most prominent newspapers, there is not a solitary mention or suggestion of the fact that I predicted the discovery of such a structure here on Eternal Idol as far back as November 5th 2009 and long before that as well, during the course of my extensive writings about TANITH, or the alignment to the northwest of Stonehenge.

I should point out (again) that my prediction of important structures to the north-west of Stonehenge came about simply as as result of studying Stonehenge and the surrounding landscape, not through smoking copious amounts of marijuana or by discussing the matter with Elvis Presley while sitting on the Cursus barrows. Mike Pitts has just had a very good and informative piece published on the BBC news site, in which he mentions the possibility that the apparent ‘pits’ at Hillside Henge once held bluestones. I wrote a piece about a lost bluestone monument as far back as 2006, when the Stonehenge Riverside Project excavated a section near the western end of the Cursus in search of a bluestone monument whose existence was first postulated by Wiltshire archaeologist J F S Stone in 1947, because he had excavated an area near the Cursus and discovered a scatter of bluestone fragments with a marked concentration near the Cursus itself.

Newer visitors to Eternal Idol may be unaware of these posts from 2006, which is when I re-opened or re-launched the site after a difference of opinion with some hick firm of lawyers purporting to represent Wessex Archaeology, the archaeological ‘consultancy’ where I worked at the start of the decade. Round Two is shaping up nicely, I have to say, so we’ll just have to see what happens during the remainder of 2010.

Finally for now, on the subject of “Hillside Henge”, Juris Ozols, Alex Down and myself wrote extensively about “Stonehenge – The Undiscovered Country” in August of last year, but we’d naturally been investigating the evidence produced by LiDAR and other non-invasive methods for a long time before that. During the course of our studies, we’d seen this new discovery clearly marked on a LiDAR frame, where it was immediately apparent that some large structure lay to the north-west of Stonehenge, aligned with all the many other features I’d been writing about for years. Be that as it all may, none of the media outlets have seen fit to mention any of this in their detailed coverage…..oh, it’s sooooooo unfair! Ah well, you read it first here on Eternal Idol and I’ll continue to do my best to provide such material as & when time allows.

Categories: Hillside Henge, Stonehenge, Tanith
32 Comments »

I’m extremely honoured to have been invited to speak at St James Church in Piccadilly in November, so if you’re at all interested, you can read the details here. I’ve been asked to give a speech or presentation on the subject of the ‘missing years‘ of Jesus, while I’ll naturally be concentrating on the notion that he spent most, if not all the years between the ages of 12 and 30 in the West of England and South Wales.

Of course, this idea was encapsulated in the beautiful words by William Blake, in the song we’ve now come to call Jerusalem. It’s particularly satisfying for me to have learned that the great William Blake was baptised at St James’s Church in 1757, so I hope that his shade will look on and listen in approval to what I have to say in November. Be that as it may, St James’s Church is next door to where the BAFTA‘s are hosted, and just across the road from the Royal Academy of Arts, where Blake studied as a student.

Purely by coincidence, I was sent a fascinating link earlier today by my friend Satchi Simmons, who brought to my attention a piece in today’s Daily Telegraph. Numerous clerics in recent times have banned Jerusalem, as I’ve written elsewhere, but now it seems that the Church of England has ‘issued guidance’ that it shouldn’t be banned because its words shouldn’t be taken literally.

At this point, it’s tempting to launch into a five thousand word fulmination, but I’ve been through all these points before on several occasions. However, to the best of my knowledge, there are only two ‘hymns’ that people in this country sing spontaneously outside a church – one of these is Cwm Rhondda, which is sung at Welsh rugby matches, while the other is Jerusalem. I would have thought that in an age of ever-shrinking church congregations, the popularity of any hymn would be regarded as a blessing by any cleric, but it seems that some churchmen really have it in for Blake’s Jerusalem.

As you’ll see, the Rev Peter Moger, national worship development officer for the Church of England, “warned against a too literal response to the words, written by William Blake and inspired by the apocryphal story that a young Jesus visited Glastonbury.” I’m assuming that the Rev Moger was misquoted, as he surely meant a too literal interpretation of the words, which prompts the question…why? What is a too literal response or interpretation? Or a too literal response or interpretation as opposed to…what?

I was also amused by the following by the Rev Moger: ‘The words ”And did those feet in ancient time/Walk upon England’s mountains green” could be used to prompt discussions about what Jesus would have found and what our response would have been if he had visited this country.’ To whom, exactly, is this gentleman referring when he writes of ‘our response?’

In my experience of giving radio and television interviews last year after the publication of my book, many of the men and women who questioned me did not have the faintest idea about Iron Age Britain, so I would be absolutely astonished if any churchman could so much as name the Iron Age tribes who inhabited the areas in which Jesus is said to have lived and travelled, let alone any of their characteristics or religious beliefs. Without this, any discussion about what ‘our response’ might have been to a tough young Warrior Mystic from an Eastern land is not going to last very long, which is perhaps what is intended.

The next post will be a further study of the aurochs skeleton I wrote about a few months back.

Categories: AD 12 - 30
2 Comments »

My apologies, for the thousandth time, for my seeming absence from these pages recently, but aside from anything else, I’ve been busy with follow-up work on the Stonehenge Giant, and news of that will probably surface soon.

Otherwise, I couldn’t be happier to announce that I’ve now entered into a formal arrangement with my friend Phil Gardiner and you can read an announcement on his site here, if you wish. I’ve known Phil for over a year now and I have the very highest regard for him as a writer, a film maker and fellow ‘investigator of ancient mysteries’. We certainly don’t agree on everything by any means, but in this respect, he’s like most of the contributors to Eternal Idol in that he has an open mind, he’s amenable to reason, he listens carefully to the views of others, he’s prepared to accept the validity of evidence that contradicts his own beliefs, and so on.

Phil is extremely conversant with all manner of ancient mysteries and his expertise far surpasses any that I may possess in numerous areas. However, during the course of our long talks, it’s become clear that I have some decades of first hand experience with all manner of apparent supernatural manifestations and I’ve written about these here, occasionally, in posts concerning the Everleigh Ghoul, Silbury Hill and so forth.

Be all that as it may, I couldn’t be happier to be a consultant for Phil and Reality Entertainment, so I’m looking forward to what the future holds. Various clashes of dates meant that I couldn’t take part in The Stone movie as I’d originally hoped, but I wish Phil and everyone else concerned the very best with it. Phil has also launched an online version (if that’s the right expression) of his Gardiner’s World series of interviews, so this is something else that Eternal Idol readers may be interested in viewing.

Now, there may well be many of you who are far less interested in reading about developments in my personal and professional life than in accounts of Stonehenge, Silbury Hill and so on, and this is perfectly understandable. However, one reason why I’m pursuing these various avenues, as and when they present themselves, is to enable me to have more time to devote to Eternal Idol, paradoxical as it might seem. I’ve tried hard over the years only to post here with the best writing I can manage, so once I’ve got various matters in order outside Eternal Idol, I’ll be able to earmark specific time for this site without being distracted.

My immediate aim to is to publish a new post dealing with the baby aurochs that I wrote about a little while ago. I also want to write an open suggestion to Amanda Chadburn of English Heritage as a result of the details reported back by Alex Down recently, while I’ve also remembered some material concerning the supernatural and Stonehenge that didn’t make it into the final version of my book. This last idea or reminder came to me last night after a lengthy conversation with a film maker by the name of Steve Mitchell, who is planning a study of hauntings that sounded very interesting to me. I had a call a few weeks ago from a production company in Soho who were planning a pilot programme dealing with a theory on how the bluestones were moved, but someone else ended up passing informed comment on the proceedings instead of me. I’d been mildly surprised to learn that the programme makers were unaware of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s account, but it seems that a number of companies embark upon projects dealing with subject matter that they’ve barely researched, something which never ceases to surprise me.

Otherwise, I’ve written a brief study of Stonehenge for a Russian publication and I’ll give the details on this later. I’ve also written a piece for Angie Lake and I’d like to write more about this when I find time. I’ve had two recent invitations to speak on the subject of The Missing Years of Jesus which I’ll post up as soon as I can, as well as an increasing amount of correspondence on the subject, which I deal with as best I can.

Yesterday brought a truly stunning development on the subject of the ‘missing years’ of Jesus. I shall have to see if it comes to fruition, but I sincerely hope it does and I’m sure it’ll be of enormous interest to many people around the world, regardless of whether or not they have a specific interest in the whereabouts of Jesus between the ages of 12 and 30. Of course, I’d like nothing more than to write about this at greater length here and now, but as ever, I have to find an accomodation between saying absolutely nothing and tempting Fate.

I’m still trying to complete Robert Graves’ book The White Goddess, as there are a great many fascinating Stonehenge-related matters there to write about, including the Spoils of Annwn and Caer Sidi. There’s all this and more, including a post on why I asked for impressions of the Preseli Moutnains but I’ll only write about it as and when I find time to do it properly.

Finally for now, I’m very grateful to Alex for providing us all with his story of The Ancestor, but the story of the Stonehenge Giant is far from over. As I suspected from the very start, he has created a vast amount of good in the world, so I’ll enlarge upon this when I come to write my own account of my involvement with him and with his creators.

Categories: AD 12 - 30, Hauntings and the supernatural, Stonehenge, The Ancestor
4 Comments »

As I’ve written numerous times recently, my time’s no longer my own, so while there are plenty of posts waiting in the archives here on Eternal Idol, I’m extremely grateful to Alex Down for another wonderful article, this time recounting his part in the appearance of The Ancestor at the Summer Solstice at Stonehenge, 2010. So, without further preamble, here is Alex’s latest contribution:

One instinctively knows when something is right. I still remember that old TV ad for – incongruously – sherry. But it had never seemed more appropriate than when I caught my first sight of the Ancestor.

Thanks to Dennis’s posts, everyone knows the story now. The sculptors, Andy and Michelle, have created a truly iconic figure, 6m high, of a kneeling man, arms stretched back, greeting the first rays of the rising sun in awe and reverence. For me, that pose perfectly captures the intense relationship between early man and his gods. And to display it at Stonehenge during the solstice celebrations was a stroke of genius on the part of all concerned.

I was able to visit Michelle and Andy’s workshop several times while the Ancestor was being constructed, so I’ve seen it evolve, and it’s given me a chance to ponder its elemental appeal. The workshop is a huge agricultural shed in splendid isolation, only a mile or so from Stonehenge itself. The Ancestor is built in modules, so that it can be more easily moved and worked on. My first sight was of Michelle welding leaves of steel into the upper half of the body, with sparks flying from its massive muscles. This sight alone was enough for me to visualize the dramatic effect of the finished sculpture. The effect is heightened by the colouring and the texture of the meshed leaves of steel – it seems instinctively right for someone from our distant past.

The sculpture is the result of true collaboration. The inspiration, vision and artistry is Michelle’s, while the practical realization is Andy’s. Such a massive construction – six meters high and seven tonnes – requires a keen appreciation of engineering principles, for all sorts of reasons. Andy has created internal frames that allows arms, legs, torso and head to be worked on separately and be bolted together to integrate the parts into the finished structure. It’s easy to overlook the magnitude of the task – normally the design of the internal framing would have required extensive CAD work on powerful computers. Andy’s natural insight into what was needed delivered a perfect construction first time, that passed its Health and Safety checks without a quibble. This sinewy skeleton alone seemed to me to be a work of art in its own right.

And the result is stunning. Michelle’s concept seems to reach deep inside us to some part that identifies with our distant forebears. We followers of Eternal Idol already feel that link more keenly than most, simply because we want nothing more than to understand the motives, dreams and hopes of the builders of Stonehenge. But I’d guess that the concept works for almost everyone, because it touches something primal that’s common to us all.

We’ll all have our own ideas about what that might be. But, for what it’s worth, my belief is that Michelle’s vision meshes perfectly with a Jungian archetype. Jargon, I know, but a useful idea, for the archetypes are, according to Wikipedia, “universal psychic dispositions that form the substrate from which the basic themes of human life emerge.” While the archetypes are unconscious, they give rise to innumerable conscious images, symbols and patterns of behaviour in which we model the world. It seems to me that the Ancestor crystallizes the yearning to bridge the natural and supernatural worlds, part of the human condition since the earliest peoples first learned to express themselves. And that must indeed have been what the Stonehenge builders intended when they constructed their incredible monument – a place where the natural and supernatural worlds come together.

Psychology aside, the importance of the Ancestor must have been instantly sensed by all who saw it. Importantly, Frank Somers, respected contributor to Eternal Idol, was able to effect a meeting with English Heritage who, to their credit, immediately saw the solstice potential, and arranged for the Ancestor to be part of the celebrations. Unfortunately I wasn’t able to be there during the solstice party, but I understand that the Ancestor exerted a magnetic draw on all who attended. And then it was promptly whipped away again before the normal public opening hours.

You can still see it if you travel west on the A303. The Ancestor is greeting visitors to Wessex and the Salisbury Plain area in the Solstice Park area outside Amesbury, where it sits in the grounds of the Holiday Inn.

It says a huge amount about Andy and Michelle that their vision extends beyond their own creations. They want to train a number of instructors with their own skills who, in turn, will pass them on to more and more disadvantaged youngsters who’ll gain enormous pride from creating something for themselves and learn valuable new skills at the same time. Andy is particularly keen on helping disabled young servicemen to acquire skills that will support them in their new lives.

And what better inheritance from our Ancestor could there possibly be?

Categories: Stonehenge, The Ancestor
6 Comments »

Earlier today, I received a wonderful, generous and uplifting email from Michelle and Andy, creators of The Ancestor or the Stonehenge Giant. It’s self-explanatory, so without further ado, I’m reproducing it in full below:

Dear Dennis,

It was great to see you and your family again at the Solstice celebrations and we hope you’ve all recovered. It’s been a madhouse here in Wiltshire, because we had to move The Ancestor from Stonehenge at eight in the morning to his new temporary home, but we’ll write and tell you about that another time, with some pictures as well.

Andy and I have been completely overwhelmed at the reception The Ancestor received. We spoke to hundreds and hundreds of people on the night itself and while we enjoyed speaking with them all, we were amazed at how many people said that they thought The Ancestor looked as if he’d always been there, keeping watch over Stonehenge to welcome the sunrise. We wanted him to fit in with the sacred landscape, of course, but we were stunned and very touched at how many people took him to their hearts.

We only ever wanted him to enhance the experience for others at the Stonehenge Solstice and we couldn’t be happier at all the many kind things that have been said about our “baby”, The Stonehenge Giant. If he captured the imagination of everyone there on the night, then that was good enough for us, but we’ve been taken aback by the sheer amount of coverage he’s received, as you’ve mentioned in your post.

We wanted to take this opportunity to thank some people via your site, but we’ll be working on our own site in the meantime where we’ll continue to provide fuller details and tell the story of The Ancestor. Andy and I particularly want to thank Alex Down, who took so many pictures of The Ancestor “under construction” and who offered us so much encouragement while we were labouring away to get the giant built. We really appreciate everything that Alex said and did, so we both wish him a very speedy recovery and we’re sure this will be echoed by everyone who was at the Solstice.

We also want to publicly thank Peter Carson of English Heritage and it was very satisfying to discover that he shared our vision of community involvement at Stonehenge. There are so many things we could say, but all that matters for now is that the appearance of The Ancestor at the Stonehenge Solstice was an unqualified success.

We also want to publicly thank Frank Somers of the Stonehenge Druids. Without the generous invitation from Frank and the other Stonehenge Druids, the thousands of people who enjoyed Solstice 2010 so much would have been denied a unique spectacle, so we want to publicly thank Frank and his fellows once more for instantly realising what we were trying to achieve and for going out of their way to help us and the Amesbury community.

We also want to thank you, Dennis, but we all know why and we know how enthusiastic you’ve always been about anything to do with Stonehenge and getting people to enjoy and appreciate the monument. We only hope that you and your family enjoyed the night one half as much as Andy and I did!

Most of all, we want to thank everyone who’s written in to your site, every single person who was present at Stonehenge Summer Solstice 2010, all the media outlets who covered the appearance of The Ancestor, all the people who’ve made YouTube videos, all the people who took photos and posted them up and all the millions of people around the world who love Stonehenge and who take such an interest in what goes on there. We’re sure that all the Stonehenge ancestors appreciate it as well, and we’ll keep you posted with developments in the story as they appear.

Best wishes to everyone from

Michelle and Andy

Photo at top of post by mind permission of Michelle & Andy – photo of The Ancestor by kind permission of Frank Somers.

Categories: Stonehenge, The Ancestor
No Comments »

I’m still trying to gather my thoughts, as well as all the pictures, from last night’s visit to the Solstice Celebrations at Stonehenge, but I’ve just found this link to a BBC interview with Michelle and Andy, my friends who built The Ancestor, the colossal metal statue that captivated so many people over the weekend.

As you’ll see, the interview with Michelle and Andy was conducted a few weeks ago, but The Ancestor was intended to enhance the 2010 Solstice Celebrations, not to draw more people there by being advertised beforehand; more to follow when I’ve woken up properly and got myself organised.

This mention of The Ancestor just in from This Is Hampshire news.

And now there’s this detailed account and a truly fantastic photograph of The Ancestor in the Daily Mail.

And now another fantastic photograph of The Ancestor on this BBC news slideshow.

Update: A mention of The Ancestor on the Heritage Key site.

Update: Some film of The Ancestor at Stonehenge on this ITN News clip.

Update: A wonderful clip of The Ancestor on YouTube with visuals by David Whiting and music by Heretics.

Update: A mention, but strangely, no picture of The Ancestor on the official English Heritage site.

Update: Another YouTube clip showing The Ancestor at night at Stonehenge.

Update: A brilliant photo of The Ancestor welcoming the dawn at Stonehenge Summer Solstice 2010.

Update: A mention in the Andover Advertiser (identical to This Is Hampshire release)

Update: A brief film clip of The Ancestor in The Telegraph, but strangely enough, no mention in the text or in the commentary.

Update: A superb photograph of The Ancestor in The Guardian.

Update: Wonderful picture and review of The Ancestor on Heritage Key site.

Update: A syndicated mention of The Ancestor in the Romsey Advertiser.

Update: A syndicated mention of The Ancestor in The Basingstoke Gazette.

Update: An atmospheric photo of The Ancestor in The Huffington Post.

Update: More photos of The Ancestor on this YouTube clip.

Update: Superb photo of The Ancestor in The Vancouver Sun.

Update: more fantastic photos of The Ancestor on The Megalithic Portal, kindly contributed by Angie Lake.

Update: A great page on The Ancestor from Amesbury Visual Artists.

Update: A great write-up and photo of The Ancestor in the Salisbury Journal.

Update: A very enthusiastic review of The Ancestor by the Wiltshire Scouts, many of whom helped out with his presentation to the world at the Summer Solstice at Stonehenge.

Update: Some truly stunning photos of The Ancestor at Stonehenge taken by Angie Lake.

Update: This lovely write-up of The Ancestor by Travelrat.

No mention of The Ancestor, strangely enough, but a very good report from Meridian News on the Summer Solstice 2010.

Photograph of The Ancestor ‘under construction’ at the top of this post by kind permission of Michelle & Andy.

Categories: Stonehenge, The Ancestor
6 Comments »

The long wait is over – Meet “The Ancestor”.

When recounting the history of Stonehenge, Merlin said to King Aurelius: “Laugh not so lightly, King, for not lightly are these words spoken. For in these stones is a mystery, and a healing virtue against many ailments. Giants of old did carry them from the furthest ends of Africa….”

And now, millennia later, one of those Giants has returned to the scene of their fantastic, timeless creation on the Plain. It’s a long, long story – one that will unfold over the course of the coming weeks – but you’ll be reading a great deal about two wonderful, talented and dedicated friends of mine – Michelle Topps and Andy Rawlings – who brought this stunning Giant to life.

In the meantime, courtesy of Michelle and Andy, The Stonehenge Druids, English Heritage and myself, I hope you all enjoy a Wonder of the World.

“Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that all was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes, and make it possible”. T. E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia) The Seven Pillars of Wisdom.

Photograph of The Ancestor at the top of the post by kind permission of Michelle Topps. Photograph of The Ancestor at Stonehenge by kind permission of Alex Down.

Categories: Stonehenge, The Ancestor
5 Comments »