Stonehenge Aligned to Solstice Axis Because of a Geological Feature

Stonehenge, by Wigulf (Creative Commons Share-Alike 3.0 Licence)

In recent years, the surroundings of Stonehenge have undergone a massive redevelopment, with one of the changes being the closure of the A344 road which had cut straight across 'The Avenue', a 1.5 mile long earthwork route from Stonehenge to the River Avon. The closure of the A344 allowed new archaeological excavations of this feature, and the findings appear to have completely changed our view of the famous monument and its well-known solstice alignment:

Just below the tarmac, they have found naturally occurring fissures that once lay between ridges against which prehistoric builders dug ditches to create the Avenue. The ridges were created by Ice Age meltwater that happen to point directly at the mid-winter sunset in one direction and the mid-summer sunrise in the other.

Professor Mike Parker Pearson, a leading expert on Stonehenge, said: "It's hugely significant because it tells us a lot about why Stonehenge was located where it is and why they [prehistoric people] were so interested in the solstices. It's not to do with worshipping the sun, some kind of calendar or astronomical observatory; it's about how this place was special to prehistoric people.

"This natural landform happens to be on the solstice axis, which brings heaven and earth into one. So the reason that Stonehenge is all about the solstices, we think, is because they actually saw this in the land."

Also interesting is the discovery of three holes where missing stones would have stood on the outer sarsen circle, suggesting that the monument was once a full, complete circle.

Link: Stonehenge was built on solstice axis, dig confirms

You might also like:

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Rick MG's picture
Member since:
2 May 2004
Last activity:
1 week 9 hours

The archaeologist quoted says Stonehenge is "not to do with worshipping the sun, some kind of calendar or astronomical observatory," but then states "the reason that Stonehenge is all about the solstices..."

Wait, what..? This guy doesn't know if he's Arthur or Martha. I can't make out if he's saying Stonehenge's solstice alignments are a big accident, or it was built to mirror a landscape feature that does have solstice alignments. If the latter, which is what I get from his quotes, then Stonehenge was built with astronomical alignments in mind. Weird article.

~ * ~

@levitatingcat

Greg's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
35 min 43 sec
Rick MG wrote:

The archaeologist quoted says Stonehenge is "not to do with worshipping the sun, some kind of calendar or astronomical observatory," but then states "the reason that Stonehenge is all about the solstices..."

Wait, what..? This guy doesn't know if he's Arthur or Martha. I can't make out if he's saying Stonehenge's solstice alignments are a big accident, or it was built to mirror a landscape feature that does have solstice alignments. If the latter, which is what I get from his quotes, then Stonehenge was built with astronomical alignments in mind. Weird article.

Was about to post this same thing to Twitter: the big newspapers are going with headlines such as "Nothing to do with solar worship"...but the reason the avenue was apparently built was that the ancient people *recognized* the alignment of the landscape feature *was on the solstice path*. In other words, the solstice was important in their culture.

Kind regards,
Greg
-------------------------------------------
You monkeys only think you're running things
@DailyGrail

Rick MG's picture
Member since:
2 May 2004
Last activity:
1 week 9 hours

Yep, that's churn-alism for you. Lost in all of the sensationalism is the amazing discovery that Stonehenge was a full circle at one point. Also, @Grailseeker pointed out to me that they miss the point entirely about ritual observation of sacred landscapes. 

This sums it all up. ;)

 

~ * ~

@levitatingcat

red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
20 hours 28 min

This would also show them 'primitives' were rather pragmatist in their approach to megalithing: If they built Stonehenge in that place, it's because they saw the site had the ideal conditions for it.

Which brings another interesting concept to the table: If they moved those big-ass blue stones 160 miles from a quarry in Wales --instead of using the materials available for them at Stonehenge-- it's because they had to.

...But why?

It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie
_______________
@red_pill_junkie

ciamarra's picture
Member since:
19 April 2007
Last activity:
29 weeks 2 days

even if the stones were carried by glacier to somewhere near stonehenge, it doesnt really dismissed the fact they intended to use them at stonehenge.

so really the questions you should be asking.

1. why did they intend to use the blue stones ?

2. why is the location special ?

3. why hasnt greg mentioned my greatest regarding the mystery of the GP ?
perhaps greg doesnt wish to talk to Maitreya Miranda , but that doesnt take away the truth regarding the relationship of the great pyramid and me. but if greg wishs to live in denial he can. :)
i know i sound vain, but sure i can throw in vanity in :)

ciao clemente

ciamarra's picture
Member since:
19 April 2007
Last activity:
29 weeks 2 days

hey greg,

contact Maitreya Miranda the avatar,
and ask her about the great pyramid and jesus.

dont forget to ask her about the connection
between me and the mystery of the great pyramid.

i really wish bauval, hancock and others
would stop spreading such misinformation
to something i know so well.

have some precognitive dreams, and
knowing time isnt linear,
makes me understand it therefore is possible
i introduced someone in the past
to frank sinatra. - love the thought - :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OTTgH-sNmw

ciao clemente

pov's picture
Member since:
16 July 2013
Last activity:
18 weeks 1 day
ciamarra wrote:

h
would stop spreading such misinformation
to something i know so well.

lol. I wonder if you get why that's funny and just how funny it is.

ciamarra's picture
Member since:
19 April 2007
Last activity:
29 weeks 2 days

you misquoted me, sorry dude your a loser.

pov's picture
Member since:
16 July 2013
Last activity:
18 weeks 1 day
ciamarra wrote:

you misquoted me, sorry dude your a loser.

I misquoted you? Are you nuts?? I copied and pasted from your post! Maybe you misquoted yourself?

ciamarra's picture
Member since:
19 April 2007
Last activity:
29 weeks 2 days
pov wrote:

I misquoted you? Are you nuts?? I copied and pasted from your post!

Yes you misquoted me and its there for ALL to SEE.

h is not a word,
nor did i respresent h as a word in my statement.

and your failure to see that or understand is your problem whether you be nuts or blind or just a loser,
or a combination of the 3.

i suggest you take it up with greg at this point and not address me in any further posts.

pov's picture
Member since:
16 July 2013
Last activity:
18 weeks 1 day
ciamarra wrote:

yes you misquoted me and its there for all to see.

did i enter a WORD h, h is not a word.

You need help. So I accidentally left the 'h' when I erased the parts of your post that I wasn't commenting on and *that's* what you're on about?

Fine, I'll re-do
----

ciamarra wrote:

i really wish bauval, hancock and others
would stop spreading such misinformation
to something i know so well.

lol. I wonder if you get why that's funny and just how funny it is.

ciamarra's picture
Member since:
19 April 2007
Last activity:
29 weeks 2 days
pov wrote:

need help.

well it was a fact you misquoted me because h was not a word.

i have a long programming and analyst background
so i dont like to assume, because it may lead to errors.

so i wasnt going to assume which h it was, or what you intended, example hancock starts with h, as well as hey.

so its a matter of what you intended, so i wasnt going to asume on your accident of leaving a single h.

therefore being a analyst the root there stands.

some may wish to assume certain things without including certain
possibilities.

example "Maitreya Miranda the avatar ",
greg may not wish believe she is a avatar, even i have my doubts.

but i called her that because she uses that avatar as her title.

the fact that i mention her title, can be possibly seen as misinformation if you assume it that way.

but the fact remains it plays no bearing of the truth of my knowledge regarding the great pyramid regardless if she is a avatar or not.

i know its online, and not the workplace,
so i understand people dont proof-read, as seen by your error of leaving sole letter h in.

pov's picture
Member since:
16 July 2013
Last activity:
18 weeks 1 day
ciamarra wrote:
pov wrote:

need help.

well it was a fact you misquoted me because h was not a word.
[etc, etc]

Let's be clear:

- If you didn't think that the "h" was most likely just a remnant, then your analytical processes are deficient.

- Added to that you didn't simply inquire about a misquote - you attacked. That shows defensiveness.

- Finally, you still have not addressed the question I put to you.

ciamarra's picture
Member since:
19 April 2007
Last activity:
29 weeks 2 days
pov wrote:

Let's be clear:

- If you didn't think that the "h" was most likely just a remnant,

your mindset seems to be flawed in understanding simple statements. i even wonder to the extent you understand english and simply choice to ignore statements directed at you.

i maded it clear i was not going to assume anything from your misquote because my analyst background. your statement could of meant other things, therefore to answer a question which may not be the question is a not the correct approach. my analytical approach was correct and good programmer analyst would agree.

clearly you didnt read my last few posts,
but lets be clear, if you would of understood you would not be
asking that statement.

but clearly you cant read, or your just ignoring my statements,
and seem not to understand.

example - i told you not to address me in any further posts.

i will now ask greg to step in becauses its apparent you disgarding certain statements.

pov's picture
Member since:
16 July 2013
Last activity:
18 weeks 1 day

###

ciamarra's picture
Member since:
19 April 2007
Last activity:
29 weeks 2 days
pov wrote:

###

you were in error and misquoted me.

please refrain in addressing me in any further posts.

i strongly suggest to greg or any mod to take note of my request.

red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
20 hours 28 min

Also noted the fact that you contributed in creating this storm in a glass of water, which could have been simply averted by initially explaining why you felt you were being misquoted.

Srsly guys, haven't you got anything better to do?

It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie
_______________
@red_pill_junkie

ciamarra's picture
Member since:
19 April 2007
Last activity:
29 weeks 2 days

was a misquote and there for all to see, including the mods.
that garbage was clearly visible.

a spell check routine could help here, by him,
or even the grail could of design webpage to include spell check that could avoided the dreaded misquote.

seemed clear he wished to make fun of someone from the start, perhaps its bauval or hancock or other book authors,
perhaps even greg.