Stonehenge 181
Image by Snap
Stonehenge

Analysis of zircon crystals

mountainman M
mountainman May 17, 2011 06:50:13
Replying to tiompan

Some interesting posts on this. Pont Saeson is in the area of Fishguard Volcanics, running in a broad swathe of country from the eastern end of Preseli along the North Pembs coast and towards Strumble Head. Have a look at my Stonehenge Thoughts blog and do a search for "Pont Saeson". I've considered the new evidence at length.

No reason to get all excited about the discovery that one or more of the Stonehenge bluestones came from Pont Saeson or somewhere near it. After all, there are more than 30 different stone types represented at Stonehenge -- and every new piece of geology seems to suggest additional stone sources. As Judd suggested a very long time ago, this simply looks like a collection of glacial erratics. Pont Saeson, Carn Goedog, Carn Alw, Carn Llwyn, Carn Clust-y-ci and other sites on the northern slopes of Preseli are exactly the sort of places where you would expect glacial entrainment to occur, with ice coming in from the NW and flowing towards the SE. I think more locations will be found in that general area as the geology work by Rob Ixer and others proceeds.

In my view the key factor in the decision to build Stonehenge where it is was simply the availability of stones -- of many types and sizes. That in itself may have given the area "significance" or "power" and triggered off the building project. The stones will not ALL have been AT Stonehenge -- they may have been scattered over quite a wide area. To assemble them and use them was undoubtedly an impressive feat. Why destroy a good story by bringing in all this fanciful stuff about mighty land and sea journeys by intrepid stone collectors? It was fanciful in 1922, and it is infinitely more fanciful today, now that we know much more about geology, glaciology and geomorphology.

T tiompan
tiompan May 17, 2011 07:24:25
Replying to mountainman

mountainman wrote:
In my view the key factor in the decision to build Stonehenge where it is was simply the availability of stones -- of many types and sizes. That in itself may have given the area "significance" or "power" and triggered off the building project. The stones will not ALL have been AT Stonehenge -- they may have been scattered over quite a wide area. To assemble them and use them was undoubtedly an impressive feat. Why destroy a good story by bringing in all this fanciful stuff about mighty land and sea journeys by intrepid stone collectors? It was fanciful in 1922, and it is infinitely more fanciful today, now that we know much more about geology, glaciology and geomorphology.
In my view the key factor , as is the case in many monuments megalithic or otherwise , was that the site itself or more importantly what had taken place at that site earlier was the decisive factor . Long before any stones where erected there was a bank and ditch and possibly a wooden structure . It was only half a millenia later the stones were put to use . As the monument has only been partially excavated we may yet discover an even earlier phase . This phasing is not uncommon at major sites , many Long Barrows despite being built in the early Neolithic have evidence of even earlier use .What appears to be a stone circle often proves to have had a history of use that encompasses many other types of monument and may have started life as a knapping site in the Mesolithic .
There are no shortages of areas where stones are readily available but no monuments to be found .

N nigelswift
nigelswift May 17, 2011 07:32:08
Replying to mountainman

mountainman wrote:
The stones will not ALL have been AT Stonehenge -- they may have been scattered over quite a wide area. To assemble them and use them was undoubtedly an impressive feat. Why destroy a good story by bringing in all this fanciful stuff about mighty land and sea journeys by intrepid stone collectors?
But you seem to be saying they transported stones "scattered over quite a wide area" in England rather than from an even wider area in Wales.

What is so "fanciful" about Wales and how far from Stonehenge is the line beyond which human transport of 4 ton stones becomes fanciful? :)

T tiompan
tiompan May 17, 2011 08:18:46
Replying to mountainman

mountainman wrote:
No reason to get all excited about the discovery that one or more of the Stonehenge bluestones came from Pont Saeson or somewhere near it. After all, there are more than 30 different stone types represented at Stonehenge -- and every new piece of geology seems to suggest additional stone sources. As Judd suggested a very long time ago, this simply looks like a collection of glacial erratics. Pont Saeson, Carn Goedog, Carn Alw, Carn Llwyn, Carn Clust-y-ci and other sites on the northern slopes of Preseli are exactly the sort of places where you would expect glacial entrainment to occur, with ice coming in from the NW and flowing towards the SE. I think more locations will be found in that general area as the geology work by Rob Ixer and others proceeds.
Dunno who is excited but the Pont Saeson site is interesting in that it is not the source of the axes and the slightly higher Carns (approx 300m ) typically are .

© 2026 Head Heritage.

Unless otherwise stated, the copyright in each work is the property of the respective contributor. For usage or questions, contact [email protected].