|
Myth and fantasy are the stuff of legend, and Stonehenge is quintessentially legendary, making any analysis of it arguable, and sensible debate unlikely. Fashions change, ideas evolve and argument about its
purpose rages, whilst archaeology nibbles away at our preconceptions, only to replace them with others. The whole history of Stonehenge is consequently carpeted with controversy, which is aptly summarised by Jacqie McKinley, a
specialist in human remains, by her wry comment that archaeologist's are in the business of destroying one myth and creating another.3
Therefore any fresh opinion on Stonehenge is as likely to be considered a self-fulfilling myth, as an objective statement of fact. Yet the passage of time sometimes turns myth into reality, and reality into myth. The
unequivocal evidence of the `ring structures´ at Stonehenge clearly shows a long activity at the site, with separate rings being erected over a period in excess of 1400 years. The current view of archaeology is that this sequence
of constructional activity was random, and had no cohesive plan. All of it deriving from a dubious rationalization that if one sequence of rings is proven to be later than another, then nothing must have existed before it was
erected. If however the latter sequence was erected in exactly the same place as an earlier structure, little if any evidence of the former would remain. Similarly, if successive phases of the monument were complementary, then the
dating sequence becomes an abstraction that serves only to deviate from the heart of the matter. This work aims to demonstrate that far from being a hotchpotch of arbitrarily erected stone and wooden post circles, Stonehenge was a
purposeful and complete geometric structure based on an overall simple, but esoteric plan, that was in itself, far from being unique. |
