22:31 GMT +328 March 2017
Live
    Stonehenge

    From Ancient Sexual Organ to Aliens: The Radical Theories Behind Stonehenge

    © Photo: Pixabay
    Europe
    Get short URL
    241880132

    New revelations have emerged that Stonehenge used to be in Wales and was uprooted to Wiltshire, but what other theories have surrounded the ancient site?

    A popular tourist attraction, Stonehenge is never short of commentary, from groups and people claiming to know the mysteries behind the prehistoric monument.

    The latest claim has come from University College London, where archaeologist Mike Parker Pearson has claimed that the 5,000 year old monument actually originated 140 miles away in west Wales, before being transported to its current location in Wiltshire.

    This is the not the first claim to be made about the historic site, several others have been made over the years.

    The Lourdes of the UK

    Archaeologists Geoffrey Wainwright and Timothy Darvill claimed in 2008 that there was evidence to suggest that Stonehenge had healing properties.

    The scientists claimed that the ancient chipping of the rocks was the equivalent of Lourdes, a French commune that allegedly possesses healing powers.

    Both Wainwright and Darvill also stated that skeletons had been recovered from the area around Stonehenge which showed that many people who visited the site in ancient times were extremely unwell.

    Sex Symbol

    Anthony Perks, a researcher at the University of British Colombia claimed in 2003 that in fact the ancient site was a sex symbol, which had been constructed to look like the female sexual organs.

    "Stonehenge could represent the opening by which Earth Mother gave birth to the plants and animals," Perks said in an interview.

    Burial Site

    Earlier this year, archaeologists found that Stonehenge could have been a graveyard for a community of elite families.

    The British team analyzed the ancient remains of 63 bodies buried around Stonehenge, discovering that the first monument was originally a graveyard for a community of elite families, whose remains were brought to Stonehenge and buried over a period of more than 200 years. However, the team also discovered that the earliest burials predate the monument in its current form.

    Team Building Exercise

    The University College London also come up with a strange theory in 2012. They thought that Stonehenge had in fact been used for team building.

    Scientists believed that construction coincided with a time of increased unity among the Neolithic people of Britain.

    This was perhaps inspired by the natural flow of the landscape, which seems to connect the summer solstice sunrise and winter solstice sunset. It is believed that these ancient people may have got together to build the monument. 

    Ancient Aliens

    In 1968 in the book, 'Chariots of the Gods' by Erich von Daniken, it was claimed that the technologies as well as religions of ancient civilizations had been given to them by extraterrestrial beings, which had also influenced the building of Stonehenge.

    Because the stones weigh around 50 tons, it is thought that help may have been required to lift them.

    This, claims von Daniken, could only have come from outer space.

    Related:

    Prehistoric Enigmas Craving for Keys: Earth's Most Mysterious Monuments
    Masterpieces of Human Creative Genius: Enjoy UNESCO World Heritage Sites
    Archeologists Unearth 'Britain's Oldest Migrant Camp'
    Tags:
    theory, myths, archeology, life, study, history, science, Stonehenge, University College London (UCL), Europe, United Kingdom, England
    Community standardsDiscussion
    Comment via FacebookComment via Sputnik
    • Сomment
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, Thanks for the reference. I'll look into it. With my background in civil engineering I have long felt that the ancient engineers knew how to use some sort of "prosaic" means to move and erect the stones. There are four primary questions that I have still. One is how they achieved such precision in setting the stones in alignment with certain astronomical phenomenon. Not perfect, but with much greater accuracy than can be currently achieved. Two, as I said before why did they go to so much trouble to align them with those astronomical phenomenon. It makes no sense that such sites were just calendars, because that would entail a lot of effort to no good purpose as they could have determined dates with just as much accuracy with a lot less trouble. Three, why did they insist on using that particular type of stone from that particular quarry. Four, Why did they build such sites to last for such long periods of time. Except in cases where there is outright corruption and/or incompetence involved, obviously not the case here, engineers do not like to unnecessarily complicate their jobs, because the more complicated something gets the more certain it is that something will go wrong. They had to have practical reasons for what they did at Stonehenge, even though those reasons may have been at least in part spiritual in nature.
    • avatar
      michaelin reply toRandall Lee Hilburn(Show commentHide comment)
      Randall, let me know when you get to checking the doco and website. I have several texts on this topic and can locate one of the significant texts from the '70's (I believe) which looked at the astronomical use of Stonehenge. That being said I will quote (verbatim) a classic scholar of Stonehenge and other monuments (Aubrey Burl), who said; other than what we see of Stonehenge, we know nothing - about the people, lifestyles, motivations etc. All that is left is some clever analysis. That was a while ago and historians and others have done a little work since then about how things might have happened. But that's all. :)
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, Your comment reminded me of a quote I once came across. The Romans were recording what the Druids had told them about Stonehenge. "It was already here when we got here, and while we have adapted it to our purposes, we have no idea when, why or by whom it was originally built." Or words to that effect. That says a lot. It could have been used for any number of things over time that weren't necessarily a part of its original purpose, whatever that was.
    • avatar
      michaelin reply toRandall Lee Hilburn(Show commentHide comment)
      Randall, and that can be applied to so much of our history. Thanks! :)
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, Over the last several months it has really begun to sink in with me just how little of mankind's history we actually know for certain. Take 9/11 for example. The official account is obviously a total fabrication. But how many times have similarly blatant fictions been passed off as historical facts going all the way back into ancient times? It is obvious that mankind has been robbed of much of their true history. But by whom and for what purpose is the great mystery.
    • avatar
      michaelin reply toRandall Lee Hilburn(Show commentHide comment)
      Randall, a gem: legend = rumour + time
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, True. In researching mans true history one must constantly face the stumbling block of having to determine whether a "history" is real or a fabrication that has become history threw constant repetition. The example of 9/11 once again. Of course that was deliberate, but the same thing could happen threw repeating rumors often enough as you said. (Sometimes I think such a search for mans true history is very frequently futile because all you come up with are contradictions that you have no way of resolving.)
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, It has taken me awhile but I have finally gotten around to checking out the site you suggested. There is some very useful information there. Thanks once again.

      Unless the sites can be unequivocally attributed to Native Americans the subject of megalithic sites in the US is a forbidden subject on the part of academia. The Viking influence is only barely tolerated and is rendered much less than what it actually was. Everything really began with Columbus is still the accepted academic dogma. That not all Native Americans came into the Western Hemisphere by the Bering land bridge has been proven long ago by hard evidence and is also not accepted by academia. Every seafaring culture from the Egyptians on down reached the Americas, and this includes the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans from out of Asia. This puts Non-Native American sites into the realm of alternative archeology by mostly non-archeologists. Even knowledge of some Native American sites are suppressed if they conflict with academic dogma. There are a plethora of megalithic sites in this country from various known and some unknown cultures. But knowledge of their existence is as I said suppressed. If you are interested in the subject the best overview that I am aware of is Barry Fell's "America B.C.". Although there are some excellent studies done of individual sites that I could also recommend. Some professional archeologists have been involved in the destruction of certain sites that contradicted the established dogma. It would not be to much of an exaggeration to say that archeology and anthropology textbooks regarding the Western Hemisphere aren't worth the paper that they're printed on.

      I don't consider myself an expert on the subject but I am fairly knowledgeable. I look at both legitimate science and the traditions of my Native American ancestors. As well as the knowledge of some of my older relatives who knew of some of those forbidden sites. Some of the sites are so old that they were here when the Cherokee arrived here ages ago according to their traditions. They never claimed to know anything about their origins.
    • avatar
      michaelin reply toRandall Lee Hilburn(Show commentHide comment)
      Randall, that also applies to any man's or woman's history. :)
    • avatar
      michaelin reply toRandall Lee Hilburn(Show commentHide comment)
      Randall, now there's something I haven't heard about in a while...prejudice in academia.
      Fell certainly ruffled some feathers with his three works on this topic. I'll chase up ABC as I'm curious about the ogham he located. I would like to see some images.

      Thanks! :)
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, A good compliment to the work of Fell's would be that of Thor Heyerdahl which reinforces the same idea from a different direction. I take for granted you are familiar with him.
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, Absolutely! Even from ancient times it has been understood that honesty is actually a quiet rare human attribute. Both with individuals and with groups.
    • avatar
      michaelin reply toRandall Lee Hilburn(Show commentHide comment)
      Randall, oh yes, for many years! :)
    • avatar
      michaelin reply toRandall Lee Hilburn(Show commentHide comment)
      Randall, yes, we have enough fun telling the illusions apart within us and then, there's the external world! One either needs to laugh or cry. Maybe that's why we have so many clowns! :)
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, Excellent! It looks like you could say we are fellow travelers in a manner of speaking.
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, I think the reason that I have been such a hardcore Monty Python fan for years is that I saw a need to be able to laugh at the situation. Even if it was sometimes black humor. The alternative would be insanity and perhaps suicide. That is why I think so many people are afraid to go down the rabbit hole. They don't have the requisite sense of humor needed to face what they're going to find there.
    • avatar
      michaelin reply toRandall Lee Hilburn(Show commentHide comment)
      Randall and there you raise an extremely interesting topic, that of humour as a survival trait. I like it! :)
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, It has helped me to survive some extremely difficult situations, but without compromising my principals, Humor is a to often neglected component of ethics it seems to me.
    • avatar
      michaelin reply toRandall Lee Hilburn(Show commentHide comment)
    • avatar
      Randall Lee Hilburnin reply tomichael(Show commentHide comment)
      michael, That certainly gave me something to think about considering my own thoughts on the matter. Many thanks.
    Show new comments (0)