New Light on Stonehenge
The first dig in 44 years inside the stone circle changed our view of why—and even when—the monument was built
- By Dan Jones
- Photographs by Michael Freeman
- Smithsonian magazine, October 2008, Subscribe
Carved sarsens-enormous blocks of hard sandstone-were used to build the towering trilithons that dominate the landscape of Salisbury Plain in southern England. But archaeologists Timothy Darvill and Geoffrey Wainwright believe the smaller so-called bluestones hold the key to unraveling Stonehenge's mystery Michael Freeman
Editor’s Note: This article was adapted from its original form and updated to include new information for Smithsonian’s Mysteries of the Ancient World bookazine published in Fall 2009.
The druids arrived around 4 p.m. Under a warm afternoon sun, the group of eight walked slowly to the beat of a single drum, from the visitors entrance toward the looming, majestic stone monument. With the pounding of the drum growing louder, the retinue approached the outer circle of massive stone trilithons—each made up of two huge pillars capped by a stone lintel—and passed through them to the inner circle. Here they were greeted by Timothy Darvill, now 51, professor of archaeology at Bournemouth University, and Geoffrey Wainwright, now 72, president of the Society of Antiquaries of London.
For two weeks, the pair had been leading the first excavation in 44 years of the inner circle of Stonehenge—the best-known and most mysterious megalithic monument in the world. Now it was time to refill the pit they had dug. The Druids had come to offer their blessings, as they had done 14 days earlier before the first shovel went into the ground. “At the beginning we warned the spirits of the land that this would be happening and not to feel invaded,” said one of their number who gave his name only as Frank. “Now we’re offering a big thank-you to the ancestors who we asked to give up knowledge to our generation.”
The Druids tossed seven grains of wheat into the pit, one for each continent, and offered a prayer to provide food for the world’s hungry. The gesture seemed fitting, given the nature of the excavation; while other experts have speculated that Stonehenge was a prehistoric observatory or a royal burial ground, Darvill and Wainwright are intent on proving it was primarily a sacred place of healing, where the sick came to be cured and the injured and infirm restored.
Darvill and Wainwright’s theory rests, almost literally, on bluestones—unexceptional igneous rocks, such as dolerite and rhyolite—so called because they take on a bluish hue when wet or cut. Over the centuries, legends have endowed these stones with mystical properties. The British poet Layamon, inspired by the folkloric accounts of 12th-century cleric Geoffrey of Monmouth, wrote in A.D. 1215:
The stones are great;
And magic power they have;
Men that are sick;
Fare to that stone;
And they wash that stone;
And with that water bathe away their sickness.
We now know that Stonehenge was in the making for at least 400 years. The first phase, built around 3000 B.C., was a simple circular earthwork enclosure similar to many “henges” (sacred enclosures typically comprising a circular bank and a ditch) found throughout the British Isles. Around 2800 B.C., timber posts were erected within the enclosure. Again, such posts are not unusual—Woodhenge, for example, which once consisted of tall posts arranged in a series of six concentric oval rings, lies only a few miles to the east.
Archaeologists have long believed that Stonehenge began to take on its modern form two centuries later, when large stones were brought to the site in the third and final stage of its construction. The first to be put in place were the 80 or so bluestones, which were arranged in a double circle with an entrance facing northeast. “Their arrival is when Stonehenge was transformed from a quite ordinary and typical monument into something unusual,” says Andrew Fitzpatrick of Wessex Archaeology, a nonprofit organization based in Salisbury.
The importance of the bluestones is underscored by the immense effort involved in moving them a long distance—some were as long as ten feet and weighed four tons. Geological studies in the 1920s determined that they came from the Preseli Mountains in southwest Wales, 140 miles from Stonehenge. Some geologists have argued that glaciers moved the stones, but most experts now believe that humans undertook the momentous task.
The most likely route would have required traversing some 250 miles—with the stones floated on rafts, then pulled overland by teams of men and oxen or rolled on logs—along the south coast of Wales, crossing the Avon River near Bristol and then heading southeast to the Salisbury Plain. Alternatively, the stones may have come by boat around Land’s End and along the south coast of England before heading upriver and finally overland to Stonehenge. Whatever the route and method, the immensity of the undertaking—requiring thousands of man-hours and sophisticated logistics—has convinced Darvill and Wainwright that the bluestones must have been considered extraordinary. After all, Stonehenge’s sarsens—enormous blocks of hard sandstone used to build the towering trilithons—were quarried and collected from the Marlborough Downs a mere 20 miles to the north.
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.
Related topics: Archaeology Neolithic England Stonehenge
Additional Sources
Stonehenge and Neighbouring Monuments by R. Atkinson, English Heritage, 1990
| Tweet | Digg |







Comments (30)
+ View All Comments
is there any record of maintenance/construction work done on the stones at Stonhenge? I seem to remember some 50/60 years ago when "Council workers realigned some of the stones"
Ernie
Posted by melbournebird on November 8,2011 | 09:08 PM
Dear Mr. Jones,
I am doing a paper on Stonehenge for a college project and I was wondering if you wouldn't mind answering some questions for me.
Thank you,
Brandon Beck
Posted by Brandon Beck on October 18,2011 | 11:38 AM
The thought that the "bluestones" had healing properties is a good one. The lack of remains in the area around stonhenge could be taken as evidence that they worked! The lame and sick were restored and simply walked away. The grotto at Lourdes still attracts visitors for the same reason. Same for the sacred well at Glastonbury. Hauling rocks to construct religious monuments to heal the soul is one of mankind's oldest traditions. Some of these efforts were/are just more complex than others.
Posted by Tom Holliday on December 22,2010 | 03:06 PM
I am an Art student, I like to see more of your history in Archaoelogy.
Posted by Samia Karam Daou on September 3,2010 | 01:46 PM
Seeing Stonehenge on Fox News this AM. It stikes me to be some way of telling "Time". The way it is placed, and following the shadows from the North Star.
Just a thought.
Posted by Debbie on July 23,2010 | 10:20 AM
If you actually look at the layout of stonehenge, it really looks like the world, the crust, the core, etc. Especially with the stones for north and south - almost like a representation of the north and south poles.
Posted by Douglas Atherton on January 28,2010 | 06:05 PM
It is a nice piece of information with great and deep thoughts.
Posted by Eliza on February 10,2009 | 12:16 AM
I am afraid I find this theory rather hard to swallow. Healing MAY have played SOME part of the rites at this ancient temple (people always have asked their gods for healing) but I cannot see ANY real evidence pointing in this direction, other than the medieval legend of Merlin the Wizard. The fact there are people buried in the area with injuries tells us nothing. Injuries of this kind are common in ALL ancient cemetaries across Britain--it was a hard life back then,easy to damage and hard to heal properly.If Stonehenge was a healing shrine it didn't do much good, as the henge itself contains the cremated remains of over 200 people, and the fields around are full of burial mounds! In the BBC timewatch special about this theory, they kept referring to the Amesbury Archer as having fallen from a horse. there's no evidence they were riding horses in Britain at that time,for one thing. Also, they mentioned bluestone in his grave--that's the first i've heard of it (and it's not in the exhibition containing his skeleton/grave goods.) There was also an error regarding his younger companion, stating that he too was born in the Alps--he wasn't,he was British born.These errors show some sloppy research. The funniest bit,though, was when they displayed the skull of a deformed woman and reverently stated, 'people like this often became healers!' Uhh, maybe sometimes, but sometimes the 'different ones' also became scapegoats and even sacrifices (ie in the dwarf woman and the malnourished woman interred in the ditches of Avebury and marden henges.) to suggest she was a healer because of her head was just barmy!
Posted by trilithon on January 27,2009 | 02:40 PM
Darvill and Wainright's hypothesis is built on the shakey foundation of human transport of the bluestones for S.W. Wales. There is a considerable body of geologic evidence to suggest that they were glacial erratics transported to S.W. England. The case is stated in an article published in January 2009:
http://www.earthmagazine.org/earth/article/1a1-7d8-c-1f
Darvill and Wainright are practicing sloppy science by not at least considering possibility. The sacred spring and stones notion has no factual basis in Pembrokeshire.
Posted by Lionel Jackson on January 5,2009 | 01:15 PM
Great article. I was particularly interested in the challenge of transporting these huge boulders from Wales. Does anyone have a reference to more detailed information about how they moved these monsters? Logs, yes. Rafts, yes. Anymore?
Posted by Douglas Sprague on November 29,2008 | 10:44 AM
Re: "Pitts also wants to see more evidence that people suffering from injuries and illness visited Stonehenge." Perhaps Mike Pitts should consider that this was a very successful healing center! That would mean that there aren't going to be any evidentiary remains because everyone got healed and went back to their homes. There would only be "evidence" if the people didn't get healed. Face it, Stonehenge is a very special place on this earth and has been for millenium, so lack of "evidence" isn't going to change that.
Posted by drhooper on November 18,2008 | 12:08 PM
WAS AN EXCITING TO READ ABOUT STONEHENGE,HOWEVER, IT DIDN'T EXPLAIN THE MYSTERY ANY MORE THAN PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED DIGS AT THE SITE...WHAT DO PRESENT DAY DURIDS THINK PURPOSE WAS? POSSIBLEY A SECRET ORAL TRADION EXISTS?
Posted by JUNE E. WATKINS on November 16,2008 | 02:53 AM
"We need some scientific studies into the healing properties of colours." I can think of nothing more profoundly in need of study than the healing properties of colours. I am astounded by the depth of your scholarship in determining the ancients used blue to promote healing. Gaia took as her husband Uranus, who was also her son (source: http://www.pantheon.org/articles/g/gaia.html) - this is the Gaia of which we speak?
Posted by wjoconnor on November 16,2008 | 12:21 PM
We need some scientific studies into the healing properties of colours. Blue, for example, depending on its shade, profoundly affects mood and I use it to enhance deep feelings of warmth, safety, and peace. No one can doubt that mood affects health so the ancients probably used blue to promote healing. I believe Gaia is alive and there are many places all over Gaia that are power centres of one kind or another. Some feel welcoming and quite a few do not. Some promote healing while others promote fear. Can the powers of a healing place be augmented by the presence of bluestones?
Posted by Masonblue on November 11,2008 | 12:27 PM
+ View All Comments