It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New dig at Stonehenge to solve mysteries?

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 10:23 AM
A new archaeological dig was scheduled to begin today at Stonehenge.
It will be the first for 40 years.
The dig is funded by the BBC and the researchers leading the dig seem to have pre-determined that Stonehenge was actually an old age healing centre.

When the film is eventually released it will be interesting to see how the evidence supports their theory and if they can offer any scientific evidence to show how and why healing was thought to occur at Stonehenge.

What "powers" were thought to provide the healing?

posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 10:00 AM

Originally posted by FreebornWhat "powers" were thought to provide the healing?

Well... that depends on which of the cultures we're talking about. This was an oral-tradition culture, so much of what we know about them comes from fairly late (Roman era, 100-500 AD). We can certainly identify medical gear and herbs, but we can't say much about what else might go along with it (we can't hear prayers or see whether it favored people with certain types of illnesses, etc.)

posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 10:26 AM
reply to post by Byrd

If the healing was just through a process of adminestering herbs etc then why build Stonehenge there in the first place with all the effort involved and why did people travel from miles around to visist it?

I just think that there must have been more to it than that.
They must have at least thought that there were other "forces" aiding the healing process.

Unfortunately, as you say, most traditons / myths were passed on orally by the indigeneous culture of the day and I suspect that the new dig will offer very little concrete envidence and will only help add to the conjecture and confusion.
The are numerous theories as to the purpose / age / powers of Stonehenge.

I sincerely hope that I am wrong.

posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 12:23 PM
reply to post by Freeborn

Perhaps they are just using that theory as an excuse to validate a new dig there, it stands to sense that they have no reason to suppose this, the possible evidence for this would be invisible to the naked eye, so it can only be theory. I think that the theory which seems to make the most sense, is the well worn astronomical observatory one. It seems to fit the best, although if it is there to mark the Sun/Moon phases, then it is also there to mark the transits of Venus, which makes more sense than a healing centre. Venus is still marked by many Mound sites, like Newgrange etc. Nothing changes, it seems.

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:38 AM
I believe StoneHenge is a healing site!
The arrangement and type of stones allows this site to focus the Earth's energies into the central area.
Look at it as though it were a huge collector/reflector.
Yea I know none of this new age energy stuff can be proven, but that doesn't mean it's not real, The energy is there it can be felt.
Why would ancient men with no technology other than stone and copper tools (no wheels back then) cut and move such huge slabs of stone unless there was a VERY significant energy source there.
I don't discount the astro/calendar theory at all. I believe it was a place of many uses. At that period in time people were too busy growing food and surviving to just throw down their plows and go quarry huge stones for simple reasons such as observing the sun and moon.
This was and still is a place of great power, and people are still coming to StoneHenge after all these years not only for the mysterious "standing stones" but because of a much more ancient drive, a more basic drive, one that modern people might not even feel......yet.
As for the "energy" that comes to a focal point due to the stones we as modern people don't feel this energy as easily as the ancients, due to the constant bombardment of microwaves, cathode rays, electromagnetic fields and radio waves. We as a race have been numbed to this energy thus cutting our ties to the Earth. If you don't believe me about the energy, go camping for two weeks, as far from civilization as you can get. After two weeks the human body begins to re-tune its "sensors" to the Earths natural energy field. Then tell me how you feel and what you can sense.

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:56 AM
reply to post by Qwenn

To the naked eye perhaps, but new tools in archeology can help find remnants of plants in the soil around the site and determine if they were medicinal. Also, with new tech they may be able to find more stuff left by the builders. Maybe even a "Financed by Eddie" mark or something. (I really hope someone gets that joke)

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 10:41 AM
At the beggining of the 20th century, a scientist know as Thomas Townsend Brown (some say father of electro gravitics, but I still think thats Tesla) conducted experiments into extracting energy (electricity) from rocks using EM fields. He did this up until he died, but who knows whats been discovered. If stone henge is a sight to 'control' or manipulate EM fields, maybe it was used as a healing centre. I agree that there must be a more 'esoteric' use for stonehenge. The positioning of the stones themselves, and the relation they have with each other has always made me think of EM array, but this is all only ideas and conjecture, no solid proof other than rumours and here there ever anything more?

thanks. EMM

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:47 AM

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by Byrd

If the healing was just through a process of adminestering herbs etc then why build Stonehenge there in the first place with all the effort involved and why did people travel from miles around to visist it?

Well, it definitely has a calendrical motif to it, so it was important for many things. It's not just a "one use" site. It's also multicultural; used by a number of cultures since it was built, so the evidence there is often more tangled than people assume. Each culture may have used it in a very different manner than the preceding culture did. If memory serves, there's no evidence of millennia-long continual use (as with, say, the site of Troy), but rather a period of use... and then a gap...and so on and so forth.

As to "why go there" -- could be a number of reasons, including that this was a sort of "academy"; a central location where healers were trained. We know that there were "colleges" of bards in the older Celtic traditions, so it would not be unusual if there was a "college" of healers.

Nothing is recorded of their practices, but hopefully this dig will give an insight into when the site was used as a healing site and what some of the practices (herbs, etc) were.

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:59 AM

Originally posted by Qwenn

Perhaps they are just using that theory as an excuse to validate a new dig there, it stands to sense that they have no reason to suppose this, the possible evidence for this would be invisible to the naked eye,

I believe their evidence comes in 2 strands:

1 A number of bodies have been recovered from around the site which had evidence of chronic illness/injuries - search on "Amesbury Archer"

2 Right into the 19th century people went to Stonehenge for it's healing powers, including taking a chip of the bluestone. They are speculating that this tradition goes back millenia - of course it could also only go back to the 16th century, or whenever. They say that whatever arrangement the henge has had the "healing" bluestones are always key.

Quite a good summary in the Guardian yesterday:

[edit on 2/4/08 by FatherLukeDuke]

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:05 PM
Construction on the earthworks at Stonehenge began about 3000BC, current dating, and the stoneworks were completed about 2000BC.

Tha Celtic people's were the dominant race in Britain about 750BC, long after the construction of Stonehenge.

The original architects and builders of Stonehenge were the "Ancient Britons" of which very, very little is known.
There is less known of these people and their culture than almost any other ancient culture.

It is suspected that they may have been pretty similair to The Picts who are sometimes mistaken for a Celtic people.

[edit on 2/4/08 by Freeborn]

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 06:55 AM
Here's the latest BBC update on how the dig is going.
Seems gto back up what FatherLukeDuke, (what a cracking name!), was saying about the bluestones.

I will post more updates as they are released.

[edit on 10/4/08 by Freeborn]

posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 07:57 AM
Here are some links to some recent articles published on Stonehenge:

It seems that the experts co-ordinating the latest dig agree that Stonehenge was a very important "healing" site in Neolithic times and that it was constructed in an organised manner over a lengthy period of time.

I personally supect that we may never know the true purpose and nature of Stonehenge.

posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 11:23 AM
reply to post by Freeborn

It probably had multiple purposes over the years once the local people had ID it as being a "special place".Iit continued to be so for many generations, while the wood structures rotted away just the stone remained

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:00 AM
There are many threads on Stonehenge so rather than start yet another one I thought I'd post this in a thread I started a few years ago, (I'm not a great author of threads and they don't tend to spark that much interest).

Apparently there is a yet another theory being put forward for the building of Stonehenge.

Building Stonehenge was a way to unify the people of Stone Age Britain, researchers have concluded.

Teams working on the Stonehenge Riverside Project believe the circle was built after a long period of conflict between east and west Britain.

Researchers also believe the stones, from southern England and west Wales, symbolize different communities.

Prof Mike Parker Pearson said building Stonehenge required everyone "to pull together" in "an act of unification".

Now I'm not sure that was the only or sole purpose but it certainly may have been a consequence of it's building.

This article is a very good read and interestingly enough suggests that we Brits considered ourselves quite seperate from continental Europeans and wanted no interaction with them even way back then.

If anyone wants to use the article for a basis of their own thread please feel free, it may ensure that it get's the attention it deserves.

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:11 AM
reply to post by Freeborn

Now that is certainly an interesting take on "the henge". It also backs up some Roman accounts of early Britain, particularly their fears that invasion may not actually be possible if the tribes stopped fighting each other long enough to unite against Rome. In actual fact, only some tribes did unite to fight the Romans......the rest either still fighting amongst themselves or waiting to see how their rivals fared!

I realise this was several thousand years after the construction of Stonehenge but it kind of demonstrates that we have never changed!

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:35 AM
reply to post by Flavian

I think Stonehenge is a truly amazing and awe inspiring place.

When I try to comprehend how and why it was constructed all those many thousands of years ago it really stimulates me on so many levels.

And we know so little about the people that built it and their civilization etc - which is quite remarkable considering what we know of other cultures etc around the globe and as they lived here for such a long time before the advent of The Celts.

There is surprisingly little to read about pre-Celtic Britain and it's people.
However, here is an interesting article that suggests that the people of these islands are much closer related than previously thought.

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:41 AM
reply to post by Freeborn

Yes it is

In comment on the news article. Instead of the people coming from Spain wouldn't it have been easier for the Celts to have come from a common group in central Europe and then moving into Spain and England (and the rest of western Europe)??

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 11:01 AM
reply to post by Hanslune

I'm sure I recall reading that The Celts migrated into Spain as they spread westwards.....I'll try to dig out some links etc.

I think it was generally assumed that The Celtic influx into the British Isles came from what is now the French and Belgium coast, perhaps not.

Strangely enough we often joke in my family about the frequent 'Spanish throwbacks' we have.
It was thought this was due to one of my grandparents coming from Valentia on the west coast of Ireland.
Valentia provided refuge for some sailors from Valencia in Spain who were shipwrecked on the island who were part of the fleeing Spanish Armada and they integrated into the local community and some even married into local families, allegedly mine included.
But perhaps there's a less romantic explanation and the whole story is hogwash?

new topics

top topics


log in