Current archaeological theories surrounding these ditches maintain that they were used either as defensive fortifications and/or landscape features to keep out animals – not as a moat. This idea strikes me as somewhat flawed as a ditch (although in some parts over 5 metres deep) is significantly less effective than a palisade (a long line of sharpened wooden stakes planted into the ground), which would have been considerably easier, quicker to construct and more effective.
Lt-Col William Hawley was one of the amateur archaeologists, employed by the Ministry of Works to undertake excavations at our famous monuments Stonehenge and Avebury in the 1920s. Unfortunately, he was not the most ‘careful’ of archaeologists. This was a view shared by colleagues such as Atkinson. In his book, ‘Stonehenge’ 3rd edition, London 1979 - he suggests that Hawley’s methods were somewhat ‘inadequate’.
Despite this accusation of carelessness, he was still able to find some strange features, which can clearly be seen as evidence of a moat. For example, below a layer of chalk rubble infill (chalk which would have fallen naturally into the moat when it was disused) under a layer of flint, he discovered ‘foot-trampled mud’ – this, in an area of chalk land which has no natural mud/clay.
Now this in itself sounds quite interesting, if not conclusive as evidence of the existence of a moat, until you look for other landscape features with similar foundations which, when analysed, start to build up a much more conclusive picture. Such landscape features can be found in ‘dew ponds’.
A dew pond is an artificial pond usually sited on the top of a hill, intended for watering livestock. Dew ponds are used in areas where a natural supply of surface water may not be readily available. The name dew pond (sometimes cloud pond or mist pond) is first found in the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society in 1865. Despite the name, their primary source of water is believed to be rainfall rather than dew or mist.
The mystery of dew ponds has drawn the interest of many historians and scientists, but until recent times there has been little agreement on their early origins. It was widely believed that the technique for building dew ponds has been understood from the earliest times, as Kipling tells us in Puck of Pook’s Hill. The two Chanctonbury Hill dew ponds were dated, from flint tools excavated nearby and similarity to other dated earthworks, to the Neolithic period.
They are usually shallow, saucer-shaped and lined with puddled clay, chalk or marl on an insulating straw layer over a bottom layer of chalk or lime. To deter earthworms from their natural tendency of burrowing upwards, which in a short while would make the clay lining porous, a layer of soot would be incorporated or lime mixed with the clay. The clay is usually covered with straw to prevent cracking by the sun and a final layer of chalk rubble or broken stone to protect the lining from the hoofs of sheep or cattle.
Proof of Hypothesis No. 10
Hawley found evidence of a ‘water sealant’ in the bottom of the ditch at Stonehenge, described as a ‘layer of foot-trampled mud’. This ‘water sealant’ consisted of a mixture of clay/mud, chalk and struck flint. This arrangement is only usually found at the bottom of Mesolithic/Neolithic period ‘dew ponds’ – clear evidence of groundwater at Stonehenge, meaning that the ditch was a moat, not a defensive fortification.
So was it a dew pond liner that Hawley found at the bottom of the ditches at Stonehenge?
Dew Pond
I believe so. Nonetheless, Hawley can be forgiven for not recognising that these are clear features of a liner being used to stop lying water being absorbed through the porous chalk into the bedrock, because he was not looking for a moat. The surrounding area was perceived to have been dry for over half a million years and consequently Hawley could not have imagined that water would have existed.
Hawley also found evidence of what he called a strange ‘dark soil layer’ which existed within the primary fill, in many parts of the ditch. I would strongly suggest that this ‘dark soil layer’ consisted of decayed remains and sediment – further evidence of the existence of water. As time went by, organic matter would have floated to the bottom of the moats, especially if they had not been cleaned regularly. This would have left a lining of dark soil at the bottom of the moat when it fell into disuse and became dry.
In 1923 Hawley reported that this ‘ubiquitous dark layer’ was found throughout his excavations, sometimes up to 8” thick, suggesting its existence for a considerable length of time, and it rested directly at the bottom of the ditch.
So, it’s been established that Stonehenge had, at some stage, a layer of waterproofing, the ‘layer of foot-trampled mud’, added to the ditch. It’s also been established that this ditch was, at some point, filled with water for quite some considerable amount of time, as evidenced by the deep sediment, ‘dark layer’, discovered.
Proof of Hypothesis No. 11
Hawley called it the ‘dark layer’. It was the remains of decayed organic matter and sediment – clearly showing that the Stonehenge ditch once was filled with groundwater.
But that’s not all!
If you look at remains of the Stonehenge moat today, it appears very shallow and uneven but when excavated it looks very different. It is, in fact, a series of ‘individual pits’, which, in places, are connected by shallow walls.
This opens up a series of fascinating unanswered questions:
• Was the ditch half finished, for the pits differ in size and shape, or perhaps they we ‘dodgy builders’ who did not know what they were doing?
• If the ditch is indeed defensive as some archaeologists suggest for this and other henge sites, why not used the excavated chalk as a wall?
• Why leave internal walls with no purpose?
Stonehenge Ditch/Pits
If the ditch had been intended as a defensive feature, they would have used the chalk as a defensive bank, probably with a palisade on top. The chalk excavated from the pits, however, was distributed evenly over both sides of the ditch – showing that defence was not their aim. A palisade was used at Stonehenge but not for defensive purposes as we will see later in this Section.
So the ability to build defensive structures was available to our ancestors but on this occasion they decided not to use it as clearly it was built for another purpose and that purpose was as a groundwater filled moat. We can see now the only reason for cutting the ditch to different levels, which would be to search for the groundwater level under the soil. As chalk is a porous substance and water travels freely through it, the groundwater table over an area like Stonehenge can vary by a metre or so depending on the makeup of the chalk, as water runs through the fault lines in the chalk strata, leading to uneven groundwater levels over an area.
This variation of groundwater tables would also explain why the builders left shallow walls and why none of the walls go up to the surface – so the water could flow between the individual pits.
Proof of Hypothesis No. 12
Irregular ditches were deliberately cut at different depths and with low level internal walls to allow groundwater to flow over the ridges.
Bearing this in mind we can now answer one of the most frequently asked questions about Stonehenge – why was it built on Salisbury Plain?
There are TWO answers to this question.
First, CHALK!
Our ancestors needed a place with a chalk sub-soil as it has two very special properties – it’s porous and does not dissolve.
The problem with chalk is that it’s difficult to excavate, in fact almost impossible. So if Mesolithic Man wanted an easy time and needed a large defensive ditch, he wouldn’t have chosen soil, unless he’s completely mad or had nothing better to do for the next ten years or so!
So clearly, our ancestors were attracted to chalk and its unique characteristics. Not only is it porous, but it is SLOW porous, which means that a pit or hole below the local groundwater table would gradually fill with or empty of water at a more consistent rate. In addition, because it’s part of the limestone family it would not crumble and dissolv
e.
If these moats are used in conjunction with natural groundwater reeds (Phragmites australis is one of the main wetland plant species used for phytoremediation water treatment) the result is pure clean fresh water good enough to drink even in comparison to modern tap water. This type of water purification would not be seen in Britain for another 8,000 years.
The second reason is WATER!
We have seen from the previous Geological Section that the groundwater tables were far higher than we experience today, due to the ice caps compressing the landscape. For a site like Stonehenge this would mean that the monument would have been surrounded by groundwater on three sides.
This contributes to the groundwater being able to permeate into any pits or ditches dug below the groundwater table, and the water would be FILTERED! So the ditches that surrounded Stonehenge were deliberately cut by our ancestors below the groundwater table in order to allow them to fill with filtered, clean drinkable water.
It is commonly agreed amongst both geologists and archaeologist that ‘dew ponds’ could be used in areas without natural springs for drinking water so why didn’t our ancestors simply build a “dew pond”– why go through the enormous and challenging task of building a 100 foot ring ditch full of freshwater pits?
The mystery of this ring ditch (which when filled with water becomes a moat) deepens when you look at the other ditches in our case study site Stonehenge, which shows that the entire site incorporates moats interlinking to each other.
Proof of Hypothesis No.13
The construction of a moat with a chalk sub-soil shows that the site was deliberately chosen to allow groundwater to freely flow into the moat at high tide – providing not only a groundwater filled feature but pure water, clean enough to drink.
The Heel Stone and two Station Stones.
The two Station Stone features found on the Stonehenge site are situated on the North West and South East side of the main monument within the ditched circle - both have individual moats surrounding them. This can be seen clearly in the Station Stone situated on the North West (also known as WA3595 and the North Mount), as discovered by ‘Atkinson’ in 1956. He observed that ‘a small gully running East-West appears to lie beneath the rubble and earth bank’.
This is a clear indication that the gully was a connecting strip, linking the main moat to the smaller moat surrounding the North West Station Stone. It wouldn’t be an unrealistic suggestion to then say that the southern Station Stone was also connected to the main moat. If we are to believe traditional archaeologist’s commonly held view that the moat surrounding the main monument at Stonehenge was constructed purely as a landscape feature, why would our ancestors connect the two smaller ditches to the main one?
The heel stone also has a ditch indicating its significance. This ditch is almost bisecting the avenue ditch, which we will show also was full of water. These ditches are invisible today as they were filled in long ago when the water left the site - but if they were important and ceremonial like the stones, why did they not keep the ditches from filling up with soil?
Proof of Hypothesis No. 14
These smaller moats that feed from the main moat at Stonehenge would only have been constructed if the main moat contained groundwater.
Chapter 7 – The Prehistoric Health Spa
Timothy Darvill, Professor of Archaeology at Bournemouth University, has recently revealed research that he believes shows that Stonehenge was an ancient healing place. This was further backed by subsequent episodes of Time Team. In his new book, ‘Stonehenge: The Biography of a Landscape’ the Professor cites that human remains excavated from burial mounds near Stonehenge, reveal that many of the buried had been ill prior to their death.
Darvill also suggests that these remains are not those of local people but of people who had come travelled from far and wide. For example, the Amesbury Archer, the name given to one of the remains identified, originated from what is now known as Switzerland. The Professor believes that Stonehenge would have been predominantly used during the winter solstice, when our ancestors believed it was occupied by Apollo, the Greek and Roman God of healing.
However, I would suggest that it was not the gods alone at Stonehenge that encouraged people from across the known world to travel such vast distances, it was another feature of Stonehenge that still survives today - Bluestones.
Bluestones are unexceptional, igneous rocks, such as Dolerite and Rhyolite. They are so called because they take on a bluish hue when WET. Over the centuries, legends have endowed these stones with mystical properties. The British poet Layamon, inspired by the folklore accounts of 12th Century cleric Geoffrey of Monmouth, wrote in 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
As this ancient poem very obviously shows, the sick would BATHE away their illnesses. I find it surprising that neither Professor Darvill nor Time Team made this same discovery. Recently, findings by Professor Mike Parker Pearson of Sheffield University have revealed a smaller version of Stonehenge, confirming the link between Bluestones and WATER. The BBC reported that:
‘About a mile away from Stonehenge, at the end of the ‘Avenue’ that connects it to the River Avon, archaeologists have discovered a smaller prehistoric site, named - appropriately, after the colour of the 27 Welsh stones it was made of – ‘Bluehenge’. The newly discovered stone circle is thought to have been put up 5,000 years ago - which is around the same time work on Stonehenge began - and appears to be a miniature version of it.’
As the ‘Bluehenge’ site was constructed by the River Avon some 5,000 years after Stonehenge, it stands to reason that the original Stonehenge site, built for exactly the same purposes as ‘Bluehenge’, would also have been surrounded by water as well.
Proof of Hypothesis No.15
The discovery of ‘Bluehenge’ by the River Avon proves that the Bluestones were located by water in order to be effective and provide their healing properties. Consequently, it is entirely feasible that Stonehenge, with its famous bluestone circle, must also have been constructed by to a water source.
So how did our ancestors use the Bluestones for these healing treatments?
Another interesting aspect of the moat at Stonehenge discovered by Hawley was the number of craters found at the bottom of the moat. These craters were large enough to have accommodated quite large Bluestones. In fact, Hawley in one particular part of the moat found a two metre wide hole which he described as a post hole – this, however, could easily have been a stone hole as its size and shape was similar to the remaining standing Bluestones we see today in front of the Sarsen Stone circle.
It should be remembered that Bluestones aren’t the same size as the Sarsen Stones, they’re much smaller – in fact an average visitor to the Stonehenge Monument may quite easily scan over them without really noticing their presence. Archaeologists currently believe that there small size is because they are what remains after the damage by souvenir hunters over the years. But I propose that they may well have been small when brought to Stonehenge originally, for they have little to no building quality, but as a healing agent to be placed at the edge and in the moat, to initiate their healing qualities. As an indication of how these stones were originally used, archaeologists have identified a colossal amount of Bluestone chippings covering the entire site at Stonehenge, 3600 in fact.
I would suggest that just as we enjoy adding a variety of salts to our baths today, so did Mesolithic Man – he would have added a small amount of Bluestone chippings into the moat as he bathed. By chipping the Bluestones, revealing the inner core their healing qualities would have been enhanced.
The traditional view of why these quantities of Bluestones chippings are abundant, is because they were ‘worked’ upon and ‘re-shaped’ to fit the chalk holes, into which they would be
placed. This seems completely illogical - why would anyone in their right mind undertake the gruelling task of working on this exceptionally hard stone to fit into the holes, when it would have been so much easier to have dug the chalk soil first to accommodate the shape of the stones. Another traditional view is that the many chippings found were remnants from ‘dressing’ by re-shaping of these Bluestones.
The Stonehenge Enigma (Prehistoric Britain Book 1) Page 8
