Thursday, March 11, 2021

The secret of Stonehenge



"Stonehenge: The Lost Circle Revealed" is an exclusive BBC documentary, first aired on 12 February this year. It follows the research team of archeologist Mike Parker Pearson as it tries to uncover the mysteries of Stonehenge, the famous Stone Age and Bronze Age monument on Salisbury Plain in southern England. 

Parker Pearson´s investigations reveal that an old theory about Stonehenge is correct: the earliest monument at the site was a wide circle of standing bluestones, taken from a quarry in Preseli Mountains in Wales, almost 140 miles west of Salisbury. Indeed, "Stonehenge 1" was actually a "second hand monument", since the original stone circle stood at Waun Mawn, only a stone´s throw (pun intended) from the Welsh quarry. After 400 years, the original builders migrated to Salisbury Plains and quite literally took the stone monument with them, erecting it again at the new location! At both locations, the bluestone circle was aligned with the midsummer solstice sunrise. 

Parker Pearson speculates that Stonehenge might have been a monument built to honor the ancestors. Indeed, remains of 63 individuals have been found buried at the site. The bluestones are "forever", so is the sun to which the monument is aligned, and so are the ancestors. He further speculates that the ancient Woodhenge at Durrington Walls (long since gone) symbolizes life, while Stonehenge was associated with death. 

One thing that fascinated me when watching the documentary were the fairly advanced techniques used to date ancient sites, including measuring the amount of sun light "trapped" in quartz crystals (thermoluminescence dating)! The good ol´ carbon-14 method was also used by Parker Pearson´s team, of course. By analyzing the type of strontium deposited in human bones, archeologists can pinpoint where the humans originally lived. This is the method used to determine that the original inhabitants around Stonehenge were really migrants from Wales. 

The documentary points out that there is a curious medieval legend about the wizard Merlin and a group of warriors stealing a magic stone circle in "Ireland" and bringing it to Salisbury Plains. Personally, I find it hard to believe that this means anything at all - folklore is notoriously unreliable, and king Arthur is bogus anyway. The truth about Stonehenge´s lost circle is sufficiently fascinating in its own right...

Recommended viewing if available in your jurisdiction. 


8 comments:

  1. I think we just got the answer, lol.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbyzgeee2mg

    ReplyDelete
  2. At least, the Stonehenge documentary was more interesting than the latest episode of Meghan-gate...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Is the Alt Right still defending the royal prerogatives of Queenie and the House of Windsor against the dangerous-dangerous-dangerous interloper Meghan Markle, or have they moved on to browner pastures and pursuits?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jag läste en gång en bok som fanns på det som jag då tror kallades HB - Huvudbiblioteket i Stockholm. Den drev tesen att både Artur och Merlin hade existerat, men att de levde någon gång under perioden när Stonehenge byggdes. Alltså årtusenden före den keltiska kultur där man brukar placera dem.

    Det skulle tydligen ha levt kvar i någon sorts folktro. Jag minns vare sig författarens eller boken namn, och när jag letar på Stadsbibliotekets katalog hittar jag inget som jag verkar känna igen.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Intressant. Den "etablerade" teorin verkar vara att Merlin är fritt baserad på en person med det oefterhärmerliga keltiska namnet Myrddin Wyllt, som påstås ha varit en verklig person på 500-talet. Fast egentligen kan man väl inte vara säker på det heller...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Off topoic. https://www.flashback.org/t3311100. !!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ja, verkligen. De enda som nämner hans namn är en YouTube-kanal som heter Riks, och som jag antar är SD-anknuten, fast jag antar att de inte vill riskera anmälan och åtal, så det är nog han...

    Då kommer väl Flashback bli glada, de har väl en del gäss oplockade med Lambertz sedan Quick-fallet?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Flashback som sådant har ju ingen linje i specifika frågor, en hel del på deras forum stödde ju den sida som Lambertx var på i Quick-debatten Men de var förstås en minoritet, liksom i andra media.

    ReplyDelete