Beyond Stonehenge: Carn Menyn Quarry and the origin and date of bluestone extraction in the Preseli Hills of south-west Wales.
Darvill, Timothy ; Wainwright, Geoff
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Introduction
For nearly a century it has been known that the 80 or so pillars of
dolerite, rhyolite and tuff, collectively known as
'bluestones', that were incorporated into the structure of
Stonehenge, Wiltshire, originated over 220km away to the north-west in
the Preseli Hills of southwest Wales (Thomas 1923). However, despite the
publication of numerous excavations and surveys within and around
Stonehenge (RCHME 1979; Richards 1990; Cleal et al. 1995; Darvill &
Wainwright 2009; Parker Pearson 2012), it is only relatively recently
that systematic archaeological fieldwork has been undertaken in west
Wales to investigate the bluestone sources and their original context
(Darvill & Wainwright 2002; Darvill et al. 2012b with earlier
references; Nash et al. 2012; Parker Pearson 2012: 261-91; Cummings
& Richards 2014).
Careful geological detective work has established that outcrops at
Craig Rhosyfelin, Pembrokeshire, match the main types of rhyolite found
as waste debris at Stonehenge (Ixer & Bevins 201 la & b), and
archaeological investigations around the outcrops are now ongoing
(Parker Pearson 2012: 261-91). Attention has also been given to the
dolerites at Stonehenge that have long been sourced to a series of
exposed outcrops, locally known as earns, at the eastern end of the
Preseli Ridge (Thomas 1923; Thorpe et al. 1991). A recent re-analysis of
published geochemical data suggests at least three main kinds of
dolerite are represented at Stonehenge, with Carn Goedog on the northern
side of the ridge providing the closest match for just over half of the
samples examined. Other outcrops, possibly including Cerrig Marchogion
to the south-west and Carn Gyfrwy/Carn Menyn to the south-east,
collectively contributed the remainder (Bevins et al. 2014; see below
for further discussion).
In July 2012 the authors excavated a trench on the southern flanks
of Carn Menyn, Mynachlog Ddu, to investigate evidence of stone quarrying
and a dolerite-working area. The investigation revealed a well-preserved
stratigraphic sequence spanning the period from before 5000 BC through
to 1000 BC that provides secure evidence for pre-Neolithic stone
quarrying in the region and absolute dates for the extraction of
dolerite pillars from a source outcrop high in the Preseli Hills.
Following a brief overview of the background surveys, this report
describes the stratigraphic sequence revealed at the Carn Menyn Quarry
and assesses its wider implications.
Landscape surveys
Between 2002 and 2011 the Strumble-Preseli Ancient Communities and
Environment Study (SPACES) undertook extensive walk-over surveys
combined with geophysical surveys, aerial photography and limited
excavation within a study area of 450[km.sup.2] extending from Mynydd
Dinas in the west to Crymych in the east (Figure 1). The overarching aim
was to provide an archaeological context for the source of the
Stonehenge bluestones. More than 500 sites and monuments of
archaeological interest were recorded, many of them for the first time.
Two key findings rapidly became clear. First was that throughout the
study area prehistoric communities had a close relationship with local
stone, variously selecting and manipulating blocks for the construction
of monuments including portal dolmens, chambered tombs, circles,
standing stones, and sometimes just lifting slabs out of the ground as
'propped rocks'. Second, within the eastern part of the study
area our fieldwork supports a suggestion by Richard Bradley (2000:
92-96) that the arrangement of various bluestone lithologies used in the
later stages of Stonehenge broadly replicates in microcosm the actual
arrangement of stone types across the landscape of the Preseli Hills and
surrounding areas. Thus, the dolerites of the Bluestone Horseshoe in the
centre of Stonehenge derived from the central Preseli Ridge, while the
various rhyolites and tuffs present in the Outer Bluestone Circle
originated at outcrops within a wider catchment (Darvill 2006: 136-39).
Geological investigations in the early 1990s by a team from the
Open University used petrological and chemical analysis to show that two
or three types of dolerite were represented amongst the pillar-stones
and debris sampled from Stonehenge, and that these derived from a number
of source outcrops in the landscape of the eastern Preselis including
Carn Menyn, Carn Goedog and Carn Breseb (Thorpe et al. 1991). A recently
published re-analysis of the original data, supplemented by a sample
from Stone 34 recovered during our 2008 excavations at Stonehenge
(Darvill & Wainwright 2009: 17) and additional samples from outcrops
in the eastern Preselis, provides further resolution (Bevins et al.
2014). Based on concentrations of four selected elements (MgO, Ni, Cr
and [Fe.sup.2] [O.sub.3]) this work confirmed and characterised three
distinct types of dolerite amongst the Stonehenge samples (designated
Groups 1-3). Bivariate analysis of the same elements in samples from the
eastern Preselis (Bevins et al. 2014: figs. 13-16 with sample source
areas listed on the keys but selectively quoted in tab. 3 and in the
text) suggests that, with appropriate margins of uncertainty to
accommodate sample variability, Group 1 correlates with samples from Cam
Goedog on the northern side of the ridge (see Bevins et al. 2014: fig.
1); Group 2 with samples from Carn Bica, Cam Arthur, Carn Sian, Craig
Talfynyndd and Cerrig Machogion/Mynydd-bach to the south-west; and Group
3 with samples from the adjacent outcrops of Carn Gyfrwy, Carn Menyn,
Carn Breseb and Carn Gwr to the south-east. A Principle Components
Analysis shows much the same picture, although the clusters are far from
discrete. What becomes very clear is that the chemical composition of
dolerites in the Preselis varies considerably from place to place.
Uneven sampling during the original fieldwork means that some outcrops
are very poorly represented. This is especially problematic in the case
of Carn Menyn, which, although widely considered to be a major source,
is represented by just one sample (CM1) that cannot possibly reflect the
variability expected across the outcrop. Clearly, further informed
sampling is needed, and Bevin et al.'s recent publication can be
taken as an alternative rather than a revised interpretation of the Open
University's datasets (Bevins et al. 2014: 181, 192). Moreover, as
only around 55 per cent of the 21 Stonehenge samples in the study
(including unattributed debris as well as identified extant
pillar-stones) can be attributed to a source at Carn Goedog (Bevins et
al. 2014: 189), any claim that this was the main source for the
Stonehenge bluestones must be treated with extreme caution.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
Notwithstanding the implications of these recent debates, Carn
Menyn remains a probable source for some of the dolerite pillar-stones
used at Stonehenge. Archaeologically, our surveys show that Carn Menyn
was the focus of a great deal of activity in the later Neolithic and
early Bronze Age. Burial cairns have been recorded at either end,
standing stones on the outcrops, a walled enclosure around the highest
point, and natural springheads elaborated through the creation of pools
and the occasional application of rock art on the southern side. The
surveys found that on the southern flanks of Carn Menyn there was a
scatter of broken or abandoned dolerite pillar-stones of the same size
and proportion as the stones present in the two visible structures at
Stonehenge today (see Figure 2), as well as occasional hammer stones.
Shallow hollows suggestive of quarry pits were also recognised and, on
the basis of surface evidence, seemed to be for the extraction of a
fine, light-grey coloured meta-mudstone (Darvill et al. 2008). Surface
evidence including a broken pillar-stone, intercutting quarry pits and
indications of dolerite extraction on a terrace on the southern slopes
of Carn Menyn at an altitude of 310m asl was especially noteworthy (NGR:
SN 143324). Samples of spotted dolerite taken from this area were
submitted for analysis and described by Ixer and Bevins (2011a: 13) as
petrologically indistinguishable from Stone 35a and very close to Stones
SH34 and SH61 at Stonehenge. Accordingly, in July 2012 a single trench
covering an area of 30[m.sup.2] was excavated across the terrace in
order to further examine the features visible on the surface (Figure 3).
The re-analysis of geochemical data discussed above, published after the
fieldwork described here was completed, goes some way to support the
initial petrological work. No geochemical data is available for SH35a,
but Stones SH34 and SH61, which were compared favourably with the Carn
Menyn rock samples, both fall within dolerite Group 3 (Bevins et al.
2014: tab. 3). They are thus not from Carn Goedog but most likely from
outcrops at the eastern end of the Preseli Ridge which, as already
discussed, includes outcrops in the area of Carn Menyn/Carn Gyfrwy (cf.
Bevins et al. 2014: figs. 1, 9, 13-16). Further geochemical analyses
using samples from our excavations will be undertaken during
post-excavation analysis to redress the balance of samples included in
the wider study.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
The Cam Menyn Quarry sequence
The 2012 excavation revealed a complicated and well-preserved
stratigraphic sequence representing three main periods of activity
(Figure 4) dated by a series of 12 radiocarbon determinations (Table 1).
These were variously associated with the working of spotted dolerite,
outcropping as an igneous intrusion at the northern end of the trench,
and meta-mudstone formed through the metamorphosis of mudstones of the
Aber Mawr Formation along the edge of the dolerite dyke in the southern
part of the trench.
The earliest period of activity takes the form of a quarry pit for
the exploitation of meta-mudstone (Figure 5). It is one of a series of
at least a dozen such pits that follow the edge of the dolerite dyke
around the southern shoulder of the hill. Fire-setting appears to have
been part of the extraction process (Figure 6). Four radiocarbon dates
were determined on the abundant charcoal from oak stick-wood in the
primary fills, CIO and C9. These fall into two groups. Two dates,
7060-6700 cal BC (UBA-22341: 7987 [+ or -] 50 BP) and 6640-6460 cal BC
(UBA-21360: 7711 [+ or -] 47 BP) from CIO, clearly belong to the first
half of the sixth millennium BC, although they are nor statistically
consistent when compared using a standard [chi square] test (T' =
16.2; T'(5%) = 3.8; v = 1). Two later dates, 5300-4980 cal BC
(UBA-23207: 6170 [+ or -] 54 BP) from CIO and 5480-5310 cal BC
(UBA-21359: 6396 [+ or -] 42) from C9, are clearly later fifth
millennium BC, although again they are not statistically consistent
(T' = 10.8; T'(5%) = 3.8; v = 1). Together these dates suggest
at least two successive episodes of working separated by a full
millennium.
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
This modest quarry, no more than 5m wide, up to 6m long and 1.2m
deep (Figure 3, meta-mudstone quarry 2), relates to the extraction of
fine-textured, hard, light-coloured meta-mudstone. It is possible that
some of the other pits recorded through fieldwork in the area are of
similar date, but some could be earlier and there is also evidence for
later working (see below). Hammer stones and numerous flakes were
recovered during the excavation and are currently undergoing detailed
study. Research is also under way to identify raw material and worked
pieces in contemporary assemblages beyond Preseli, some of which may be
reported in the literature as 'adinole' or misidentified in
hand-specimens as 'rhyolite'. The early date for quarrying on
the upper slopes of Carn Menyn accords with palaeo-environmental
evidence from the Gors Fawr Bog close by to the south that shows signs
of an early elm decline and pre-Neolithic disturbance of the landscape
caused by fire management (Darvill et al. 2005: 20-22).
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
The second period of activity at the Carn Menyn Quarry related to
the working of dolerite in the later third millennium BC. Quarrying per
se is not necessary for extracting spotted dolerite, as natural columnar
blocks spall from the exposed earns to create a spread of clitter and
scree. At the northern end of the 2012 trench was a shallow socket (F2)
for a standing stone. The stone lies fallen to the south; the packing
stones that secured it were still largely in place (Figure 7). Oak
stick-wood charcoal from the fill of the socket provided three
radiocarbon dates of 2900-2640 cal BC (UBA-22345: 4188 [+ or -] 34 BP),
2350-2060 cal BC (UBA-23208: 3795 [+ or -] 34 BP) and 2270-2020 cal BC
(UBA-22342: 3724 [+ or -] 32 BP). The earliest date is not statistically
consistent with the two later dates (T' = 113.3; T'(5%) = 6.0;
v = 2) and must be considered residual. The two later dates are
statistically consistent (T' = 2.3; T'(5%) = 3.8; v = 1) and
give a combined date of 2280-2040 cal BC. Broken spotted dolerite
pillar-stones lie to the north and south, with the example to the south
showing clear traces of flaking to roughly shape the original block; it
was presumably abandoned because it broke during this process (Figure
8). An area of preserved old ground surface towards the southern end of
the trench (see Figure 4 for position) contained a scatter of spotted
dolerite flakes and hammer stones with evidence of burning directly
associated with it. Oak charcoal from this area provided three
radiocarbon dates: 2200-1960 cal BC (UBA-22344: 3685 [+ or -] 32 BP),
2200-1930 cal BC (UBA-21357: 3672 [+ or -] 45 BP) and 2030-1770 cal BC
(UBA-22343: 3567 [+ or -] 32 BP). Together these form an overlapping
range, but they are not statistically consistent (T' = 7.6;
T'(5%) = 6.0; v = 2). However, the two earlier dates are entirely
consistent (T' = 0.1; T'(5%) = 3.8; v = 1) and give a combined
date of 2190-1970 cal BC. These are the first secure dates for
prehistoric dolerite working in the Preseli Hills and clearly indicate
that Carn Menyn was being actively exploited in the late third
millennium BC.
[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]
The third and final period of activity represented in the Carn
Menyn Quarry sequence again relates to the extraction of meta-mudstone.
The earlier quarry was more or less silted-up by the end of the second
millennium BC, but a new pit appears to have been dug to the south,
partly overlapping its ancient predecessor. Blocks of stone and waste
from the new quarry were deposited on top of the earlier fills and
covered parts of the contemporary ground surface as a fairly uniform
layer C6. This deposit is important as it sealed the evidence of
dolerite working on the old ground surface C7. Indeed, blocks of
meta-mudstone from this late quarry seem to have built up into what
appears to be a small mound or cairn just outside the trench to the
north-east. Charcoal from within the upcast layer C6 was dated to
1380-1110 cal BC (UBA-21358: 2979 [+ or -] 30 BP), while charcoal from
the primary fill of this phase of the quarry (C10a) yielded a slightly
later date of 1190-920 cal BC (UBA-21361: 2871 [+ or -] 34 BP). It is
notable that a large cairn was built after 1420-1250 cal BC (UBA-18773:
3073 [+ or -] 31 BP) at the western end of Carn Menyn; two fresh flakes
of meta-mudstone had been inserted upright as a special deposit in the
ground surface under the mound before its construction (Darvill et al.
2012b: 31). A foundation deposit below the multi-phase round barrow at
Croesmihangel at the eastern end of the outcrops has been dated to
1930-1740 cal BC (UBA-18774: 3509 [+ or -] 32 BP) (Darvill et al. 2012b:
34-38).
[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]
Discussion
The Carn Menyn Quarry sequence has a number of important
implications for understanding the special significance of the site
itself, the early history of stone quarrying in Britain, and the
interpretation of Stonehenge in its wider cultural setting. It has
underlined, once again, the likelihood that Carn Menyn was one of the
sources of the Stonehenge bluestones, with evidence for third-millennium
quarrying of dolerite blocks and abandoned bluestones in situ on the
hillslope. The main stratigraphically determined periods of activity
described above appear to be more or less discrete episodes spatially
connected by the power of place. Figure 9 shows a provisional Bayesian
model of the radiocarbon dates based on the stratigraphic sequence. Five
chronological phases are identified for the purposes of estimating the
start and end date of key events in the overall sequence. The dates
shown in italics are posterior density estimates derived from
mathematical modelling and are quoted at 95% probability (Bronk Ramsey
2009).
The extraction of meta-mudstone is probably represented as two
stages in the sixth and fifth millennia BC, with Phase 1 modelled as
starting at 7720-6660 cal BC and ending between 6640 and 5710 cal BC,
and Phase 2 starting at 6290-5310 cal BC and ending at 5300-3480 cal BC.
These early dates make the Carn Menyn Quarry the earliest-recorded
securely dated stone extraction site in Britain. It may not be alone,
however. A close parallel for the exploitation process found at Carn
Menyn can be seen on the far side of Cardigan Bay at Mynydd Rhiw on the
Lleyn Peninsula of north Wales. Tufaceous sediment (altered shale)
adjacent to a dolerite intrusion was removed for the manufacture of
axes, knives, points and scrapers (Houlder 1961; Burrow 2011). The date
at which quarrying at Mynydd Rhiw started is not known, but pieces of
stone from this source have been identified in a scatter dated to the
period 7500-4000 BC on Bardsey Island, some 13km to the southwest
(Edmonds et al. 2004); radiocarbon dates from quarry pits at Mynydd Rhiw
show exploitation during the middle and late fourth millennium BC,
perhaps with some re-use of the site in the late second millennium BC,
when half a dozen round barrows were built on the hill (Burrow 2011: 25
5). Further north, a recently discovered chert quarry at Burnetland Hill
in the Scottish Borders has been dated to 4045-3975 cal BC (Bjarke
Ballin & Ward 2013).
On a wider front, the discovery of formal quarrying in the British
late Mesolithic adds significantly to the growing list of monuments and
structures from this period. Particular note may be made of the
monumental alignment of 12 possible post-sockets set within larger pits
at Warren Field, Crathes, Aberdeenshire, first constructed c. 7800 BC
and re-cut c. 4000 BC. These have been variously interpreted as a
ceremonial or calendrical structure of some kind (Murray et al. 2009;
Gaffney et al. 2013). A large pit or shaft 3m across and 2m deep was
found at Little Dartmouth Farm, Devon, with a primary fill dated to
5640-5510 cal BC (SUERC-24615: 6645 [+ or -] 35 BP), a re-cut dated to
4950-4740 cal BC (SUERC-24617: 5970 [+ or -] 35 BP), and a small
assemblage of worked flint and chert (Tingle 2013). Best-known of all
are the three certain postholes, a posthole later re-cut as a pit, and a
possible tree-throw hollow found around 200m north-west of Stonehenge
during the construction and expansion of the visitor car park in 1966
and 1988 (Cleal et al. 1995: 43-47). Not all of these features were
contemporary; episodic activity rather than continuous use is most
likely. Of the dated features, Pit A is the earliest at 8840-7740 cal BC
(HAR-455: 9130 [+ or -] 180 BP) with Pit 9580 cut soon after or
contemporary with it. This complicated feature was initially 1 m across
and 1.3m deep, and perhaps served as a posthole before being re-profiled
as a broad shallow pit 1.9m across and 0.7m deep. This secondary feature
is dated by three radiocarbon determinations from bottom to top of
8260-7750 cal BC (GU-5109: 8880 [+ or -] 80 BP), 7740-7370 cal BC
(OxA-4219: 8520 [+ or -] 80 BP) and 7600-7180 cal BC (OxA-4220: 8400 [+
or -] 100 BP). A piece of 'rhyolite' was reportedly found in
the upper fill associated with the last of these dates, although its
petrography has not yet been studied (Cleal et al. 1995: 47). The latest
feature is Pit B at 7460-6650 cal BC (HAR-456: 8090 [+ or -] 140 BP).
[FIGURE 9 OMITTED]
The extension of the cultural sequence at Carn Menyn back into the
sixth and fifth millennia BC brings the pattern of activity there into
close accord with what is known of the Stonehenge area, and begins to
flesh out the bare bones of parallel but connected developments in the
two areas. Stonehenge was not constructed in a virgin landscape. Pine
charcoal residual within a later feature in the centre of Stonehenge has
been dated to 7310-7070 cal BC (OxA-18655: 8183 [+ or -] 36 BP) (Darvill
& Wainwright 2009: 12). It suggests activity in the area later
occupied by the stone circles that are broadly contemporary with the
aforementioned posts set up 200m to the north-west. Just 3km east of
Stonehenge, excavations at Blick Mead below Vespasian's Camp,
Amesbury, have brought to light what appears to be debris from a
riverside settlement around a spring. Provisionally dated to the period
6250 BC through to 4000 BC, its occupation is contemporary with the
quarries at Carn Menyn; one worked piece of slate/mudstone has been
reported from Blick Mead, although it has not yet been accurately
provenanced to source (Jacques et al. 2012).
The second main period of activity at the Carn Menyn Quarry also
divides into two phases: the erection of a standing stone and
dolerite-working. Modelling suggests that the standing stone was set up
before the dolerite-working took place, but in the absence of
constraining dates the modelled start date for the standing stone
(Figure 9, Phase 3) is wide at 4090-2640 cal BC. The end-date for Phase
3, 2210-2000 cal BC, is artificially constrained by the dates for the
dolerite-working, which could in fact be contemporary. The modelled
start date for the dolerite-working (Figure 9, Phase 4) is 2160-1960 cal
BC, ending at 2030-1610 cal BC. Although geochemical data are not yet
available, petrological studies support the proposition that rock
outcropping at Carn Menyn matches some of the spotted dolerites found at
Stonehenge, where they had been set up as pillar-stones in the late
third millennium BC. The shape and size of the stones also match. Local
uses of Carn Menyn dolerite pillars might also be considered, but it is
notable that no local monuments incorporated shaped pillar-stones of the
kind that were found abandoned during field survey at Carn Menyn and
which were used as structural components at Stonehenge. These findings
finally lay to rest the theory that the bluestones arrived on Salisbury
Plain through glacial action (Kellaway 1971), an idea that has been
remarkably persistent and periodically revived (e.g. John 2008) despite
being comprehensively discredited by geologists, geomorphologists and
glaciologists more than a decade ago (Green 1997: 264; Scourse 1997;
Clark et al. 2004; Bowen 2005: 147-48). We cannot say whether dolerite
pillars were present in earlier stages of Stonehenge, but they still
stand as part of the decayed remains of the Bluestone Horseshoe and the
Outer Bluestone Circle. It is also important to recognise that several
other lithologies are represented within the assemblage of bluestones
from Stonehenge and that these derive from other source outcrops that
have yet to be identified (but see Ixer & Bevins 2011b for ongoing
research).
Continued activity within and around Stonehenge through the second
millennium BC is well represented (Darvill 2006: 157-79), and ends with
the digging of two rings of pits around the central setting (the Y and Z
holes) and the construction of numerous round barrows on the ridges and
hilltops overlooking the site. The same thing seems to happen at Carn
Menyn with the re-working of the earlier quarry pits for the extraction
of meta-mudstone (Figure 9, Phase 5), modelled with a start date of
1800-1090 cal BC and an end date of 1210-420 cal BC. At much the same
time the Cam Menyn Cairn and the Croesmihangel Round Barrow were
constructed at the western and eastern ends of the outcrops respectively
(Darvill et al. 2012b).
Recognition of the early date of quarrying on Carn Menyn and the
confirmation of bluestone working there contemporary with the movement
of pillar-stones to Stonehenge means that the challenge now is to
explain what was so special about the Preseli bluestones, and why and
for what purpose they were transported to Salisbury Plain for exclusive
use at Stonehenge. As discussed elsewhere, we believe the bluestones
were powerful items within a structure whose framework was formed by the
great sarsen trilithons and the Sarsen Circle (Darvill & Wainwright
2011). Together, the sarsen elements replicate in stone the kind of
structure that in many cases elsewhere had been built in timber
(Wainwright & Longworth 1971: 207-16; Wainwright 1989: 115-34). Once
in place the framework remained static, but the bluestones were
periodically moved and reorganised as the Double Bluestone Circle (Q and
R holes) which later became the Outer Bluestone Circle, and the Inner
Bluestone Circle which later became the Bluestone Oval and finally, with
the removal of stones from the north-eastern sector, the Bluestone
Horseshoe seen today.
Many explanations as to why the bluestones were considered
sufficiently important and meaningful to move from Wales to Wiltshire
can be proposed, and there may be more than one reason. The demonstrable
antiquity of stone extraction on Carn Menyn, long before the building of
Stonehenge began, tells us something about the ancestral significance
and power of the landscape from which the bluestones were taken. Perhaps
Mynydd Preseli was the home of the gods: the Mount Olympus of Neolithic
Britain. But we also believe that the association between bluestones and
healing springs in the Preseli Hills was important (cf. Jones 1992), and
something that resonates with long-standing oral traditions that were
first written down in the thirteenth century AD (Piggott 1941). Springs
were a significant and persistent feature of the Stonehenge landscape,
as the recent work at Blick Mead shows (Jacques et al. 2012). Soon after
the bluestones were installed at Stonehenge (Stage 2) the central
structure was linked by an Avenue to Stonehenge Bottom and the River
Avon (Stage 3), thereby fixing and formalising the relationship to water
(Darvill et al. 2012a: 1035). The idea that powerful stones were moved
from their source outcrops on a special, ancestral or sacred place to
'franchise' distant shrines and temples finds parallels in
West African societies and elsewhere (Insoll 2006). We propose that,
after the earthwork enclosure at Stonehenge ceased to be a major
cremation cemetery sometime about 2500 BC, bluestones from Carn Menyn
and other nearby outcrops in west Wales were brought to Stonehenge and
set up within a temple whose structure had already been built from
sarsen stones. From that time onwards, pilgrims and travellers were
drawn to Stonehenge because of the special properties that had empowered
Stonehenge to provide pastoral and medical care of both body and soul:
tending the wounded, treating the sick, calming troubled minds,
promoting fecundity, assisting and celebrating births and protecting
people against malevolent forces in a dangerous and uncertain world. The
bluestones hold the key to the meaning of Stonehenge, and Preseli was
the special place from whence they came at a high cost to society in
labour and time, as befitted such important talismans.
Acknowledgements
We thank Fran Murphy, Hubert Wilson, Judith Wainwright and Vanessa
Constant for their assistance with the excavation at Carn Menyn in 2012;
Rob Ixer and Richard Bevins for advice on geological sources; Ralph Fyfe
for advice on the environmental samples; Debra Costen and Anne Buffoni
for processing the soil samples and identifications of the charcoal; and
Stephen Hoper for assistance with the radiocarbon dating. All the
radiocarbon dates reported here were determined at the Chrono Centre,
Queens University Belfast, using accelerator mass spectrometry. Funding
and support for work in Pembrokeshire was received from PLANED, the
Cambrian Archaeological Association, Pembroke Coast National Park,
RCAHMW, Bluestone, and Bournemouth University. Finally, we would like to
thank Rob Westaway and two anonymous referees for their helpful comments
on earlier drafts of this paper.
References
BEVINS, R.E., R.A. IXER & N.J.G. PEARCE. 2014. Carn Goedog is
the likely major source of Stonehenge doleritic bluestones: evidence
based on compatible element geochemistry and Principal Component
Analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 42: 179-93.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2013.11.009
BJARKE BALLIN, T. & T. WARD. 2013. Burnetland Hill chert
quarry: a Mesolithic extraction site in the Scottish Borders. The Quarry
9: 3-23.
BOWEN, D.Q. 2003. South Wales, in C.A. Lewis & A.E. Richards
(ed.) The glaciations of Wales and adjacent areas: 145-64. Logaston:
Logaston Press.
BRADLEY, R. 2000. An archaeology of natural places. London:
Routledge.
BRONK RAMSEY, C. 2009. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates.
Radiocarbon 51: 337-60.
--2013. OxCal radiocarbon calibration program v 4.2. Oxford:
Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, Oxford
University.
BURROW, S. 2011. The Mynydd Rhiw quarry site: recent work and its
implications, in V. Davis & M. Edmonds (ed.) Stone axe studies III:
247-60. Oxford: Oxbow.
CLARK, C.D., P.L. GIBBARD & J. ROSE. 2004. Pleistocene glacial
limits in England, Scotland and Wales, in J. Ehlers & P.L. Gibbard
(ed.) Quaternary glaciations extent and chronology. Part I: Europe:
47-82. London: Elsevier.
CLEAL, R., K.E. WALKER & R. MONTAGUE. 1995. Stonehenge in its
Landscape. Twentieth-century excavations (English Heritage
Archaeological Reports 10). London: English Heritage.
CUMMINGS, V. & C. RICHARDS. 2014. Exploring Neolithic
construction at Gam Turne. Current Archaeology 286: 32-35.
DARVILL, T. 2006. Stonehenge: the biography of a landscape. Stroud:
Tempus.
DARVILL, T. & G. WAINWRIGHT. 2002. SPACES--exploring the
Neolithic landscapes in the Strumble-Preseli area of southwest Wales.
Antiquity 76: 623-24.
--2009. Stonehenge: excavations in 2008. The Antiquaries Journal
89: 1-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S000358150900002X
--2011. The stones of Stonehenge. Current Archaeology 252: 28-35.
DARVILL, T, D.M. EVANS, R. FYFE & G. WAINWRIGHT. 2005.
Strumble-Preseli Ancient Communities and Environment Study (SPACES):
fourth report 2005. Archaeology in Wales 45: 17-23.
DARVILL, T, G. WAINWRIGHT, K. ARMSTRONG & R. Ixer. 2008.
Strumble-Preseli Ancient Communities and Environment Study (SPACES):
sixth report 2007-08. Archaeology in Wales 48: 47-56.
DARVILL, T, P. MARSHALL, M. PARKER PEARSON & G. WAINWRIGHT.
2012a. Stonehenge remodelled. Antiquity 86: 1021-40.
DARVILL, X, G. WAINWRIGHT, F. LUTH & N. MULLER-SCHEESSEL.
2012b. Strumble-Preseli Ancient Communities and Environment Study
(SPACES): seventh report 2009-11. Archaeology in Wales 51: 27-44.
EDMONDS, M., R. JOHNSON, E. LA TROBE-BATEMAN, J. GRIFFITH & G.
WARREN. 2004. Bardsey Island. Archaeology in Wales 44: 146-47.
GAFFNEY, V., S. FITCH, E. RAMSEY, R. YORSTON, E. CH'NG, E.
BALDWIN, R. BATES, C. GAFFNEY, C. RUGGLES, T. SPARROW, A. MCMILLAN, D.
COWLEY, S. FRASER, C. MURRAY, H. MURRAY, E. HOPLA & A. HOWARD. 2013.
Time and a place: a luni-solar 'time-reckoner from 8th millennium
BC Scotland. Internet Archaeology 34. http://dx.doi.Org/10.1114l/ia.34.1
GREEN, C.P. 1997. The provenance of rocks used in the construction
of Stonehenge. Proceedings of the British Academy 92: 257-70.
HOULDER, C.H. 1961. The excavation of a Neolithic stone implement
factory on Mynydd Rhiw in Caernarvonshire. Proceedings of the
Prehistoric Society 27: 108-43.
INSOLL, T. 2006. Shrine franchising and the Neolithic in the
British Isles: some observations based upon the Tallensi, northern
Ghana. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 16(2): 223-38.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0959774306000138
IXER, R. & R. BEVINS. 2011a. The detailed petrology of six
orthostats from the Bluestone Circle, Stonehenge. Wiltshire
Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 104: 1-14.
--2011b. Craig Rhos-y-Felin, Pont Saeson is the dominant source of
the Stonehenge rhyolitic 'debitage'. Archaeology in Wales 50:
21-32.
JACQUES, D., T. PHILLIPS & T. LYONS. 2012. Vespasian's
Camp: cradle of Stonehenge? Current Archaeology 271: 28-33.
JOHN, B. 2008. The bluestone enigma. Stonehenge, Preseli and the
Ice Age. Newport: Greencroft.
JONES, F. 1992. The holy wells of Wales. Cardiff: University of
Wales Press.
KELLAWAY, G.A. 1971. Glaciation and the stones of Stonehenge.
Nature 233: 30-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/233030a0
MURRAY, H.K., J.C. MURRAY & S.M.A. FRASER. 2009. A tale of the
unknown unknowns: a Mesolithic pit alignment and a Neolithic timber hall
at Warren Field, Crathes, Aberdeenshire. Oxford: Oxbow.
NASH, G. A. STANFORD, I. THERRIAULT & T. WELLICOME. 2012.
Transcending ritual boundaries from dolmen to menhir: the excavation of
the Trefael Stone, south-west Wales. Archaeology in Wales 51: 51-62.
PARKER PEARSON, M. 2012. Stonehenge: exploring the greatest Stone
Age mystery. London: Simon & Schuster.
PIGGOTT, S. 1941. The sources of Geoffrey of Monmouth. II. The
Stonehenge story. Antiquity 15: 305-19.
RCHME Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England.
1979. Stonehenge and its environs. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press.
REIMER, P.J., E. BARD, A. BAYLISS, J.W. BECK, P.G. BLACKWELL, C.
BRONK RAMSEY, P.M. GROOTES, T.P. GUILDERSON, H. HAELIDASON, I. HAJDAS,
C. HATTE, T.J. HEATON, D.L. HOFFMANN, A.G. HOGG, K.A. HUGHEN, K.F.
KAISER, B. KROMER, S.W. MANNING, M. NIU, R.W. REIMER, D.A. RICHARDS,
E.M. SCOTT, J.R. SOUTHON, R.A. STAFF, C.S.M. TURNEY & J. VAN DER
PLICHT. 2013. IntCal13 and Marinel3 radiocarbon age calibration curves
0-50,000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon 55: 1869-87.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2458/azu_js_rc.55.16947
RICHARDS, J. 1990. The Stonehenge environs project (HBMCE
Archaeological Reports 16). London: English Heritage
SCOURSE, J.D. 1997. Transport of the Stonehenge bluestones: testing
the glacial hypothesis. Proceedings of the British Academy 92:271-314.
THOMAS, H.H. 1923. The source of the stones of Stonehenge. The
Antiquaries Journal 3: 239-60.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003581500005096
THORPE, R.S., O. WILLIAMS-THORPE, D.G. JENKINS & J. WATSON.
1991. The geological sources and transport of the bluestones of
Stonehenge, Wiltshire, UK. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 57:
103-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0079497X00004527
TINGLE, M. 2013. A new Mesolithic pit site and Beaker features at
Little Dartmouth Farm, Devon. Past 74: 5-6.
WAINWRIGHT, G. 1989. The henge monuments. London: Thames &
Hudson.
WAINWRIGHT, G. & I.H. LONGWORTH. 1971. Durrington Walls:
excavations 1966-1968 (Reports of the Research Committee of the Society
of Antiquaries of London 29). London: Society of Antiquaries.
Received: 23 October 2013; Accepted: 10 December 2013; Revised: 12
February 2014
Timothy Darvill (1) & Geoff Wainwright (2)
(1) Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, Faculty of Science
and Technology, Bournemouth University, Fern Barrow, Poole BH12 5BB, UK
(Email: tdarvill@bournemouth.ac.uk)
(2) March Pres, Pontfaen, Fishguard SA65 9TT, UK (Email:
geoff@bluestone.eu.com)
Table 1. Radiocarbon dates from the Carn Menyn Quarry.
Calibrated age BC
Laboratory number Age BP (95.4% confidence) (1)
UBA-22341 7987 [+ or -] 50 7060-6700
UBA-21360 7711 [+ or -] 47 6640-6460
UBA-23207 6170 [+ or -] 54 5300-4980
UBA-21359 6396 [+ or -] 42 5480-5310
UBA-22345 4188 [+ or -] 34 2900-2640
UBA-23208 3795 [+ or -] 34 2350-2060
UBA-22342 3724 [+ or -] 32 2270-2020
UBA-22344 3685 [+ or -] 32 2200-1960
UBA-21357 3672 [+ or -] 45 2200-1930
UBA-22343 3567 [+ or -] 32 2030-1770
UBA-21358 2979 [+ or -] 30 1380-1110
UBA-21361 2871 [+ or -] 34 1190-920
Laboratory number Phase and context
UBA-22341 Early meta-mudstone working. F1. C10
UBA-21360 Early meta-mudstone working. F1. C10
UBA-23207 Early meta-mudstone working. F1. C10
UBA-21359 Early meta-mudstone working. F1. C9
UBA-22345 Standing stone socket. F2. C11
UBA-23208 Standing stone socket. F2. C11
UBA-22342 Standing stone socket. F2. C11
UBA-22344 Dolerite working. C7
UBA-21357 Dolerite working. C7
UBA-22343 Dolerite working. C7
UBA-21358 Late meta-mudstone working. C6
UBA-21361 Late meta-mudstone working. C10a
(1) Dates calibrated and rounded to 10 years using OxCal v4.2
(Bronk Ramsey 2013) with the IntCall3 calibration curve
(Reimer et al. 2013).
