Featured: Current Archaeology Book of the Year 2019!

Current Archaeology Book of the Year 2019!

Random Image


Darpvenne Grab 2

Stone Circles, a Modern Builder's Guide to the Megalithic Revival

Stone Circles, a Modern Builder's Guide to the Megalithic Revival

Who's Online

There are currently, 205 guests and 2 members online.

You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here

Sponsors

<< Our Photo Pages >> Craig Rhosyfelin - Rock Outcrop in Wales in Pembrokeshire

Submitted by Blingo_von_Trumpenstein on Monday, 09 September 2019  Page Views: 88332

StonehengeSite Name: Craig Rhosyfelin Alternative Name: Pont Saeson rock outcrop, Craig Rhos-y-felin
Country: Wales County: Pembrokeshire Type: Rock Outcrop
Nearest Town: Cardigan  Nearest Village: Crosswell
Map Ref: SN11653614
Latitude: 51.991686N  Longitude: 4.74468W
Condition:
5Perfect
4Almost Perfect
3Reasonable but with some damage
2Ruined but still recognisable as an ancient site
1Pretty much destroyed, possibly visible as crop marks
0No data.
-1Completely destroyed
4 Ambience:
5Superb
4Good
3Ordinary
2Not Good
1Awful
0No data.
4 Access:
5Can be driven to, probably with disabled access
4Short walk on a footpath
3Requiring a bit more of a walk
2A long walk
1In the middle of nowhere, a nightmare to find
0No data.
4 Accuracy:
5co-ordinates taken by GPS or official recorded co-ordinates
4co-ordinates scaled from a detailed map
3co-ordinates scaled from a bad map
2co-ordinates of the nearest village
1co-ordinates of the nearest town
0no data
5

Internal Links:
External Links:

I have visited· I would like to visit

Mountainharry Couplands would like to visit

Chrononaut1962 visited on 5th Jul 2016 - their rating: Cond: 4 Amb: 5 Access: 4

SimonBlackmore visited on 20th Jun 2014 - their rating: Amb: 3 Access: 4

Cyclinginstructor visited on 22nd Nov 2012 - their rating: Cond: 4 Amb: 5 Access: 3 I often stay in Brynberian nearby, drive up to the car park and walk along the preseli tops, i recomend this walk and area.

PAB have visited here

Average ratings for this site from all visit loggers: Condition: 4 Ambience: 4.33 Access: 3.67

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Aluta : A view of Craig Rhos-y-felin, one of the possible sources of some of Stonehenge's bluestones. (Vote or comment on this photo)
Pinpointed in new research as a possible source of one group of the Stonehenge bluestones. Their source has long been a subject of fascination and considerable controversy. Another type of bluestone, the so-called ‘spotted dolerite’, was convincingly traced to the Mynydd Preseli area in north Pembrokeshire in the early 1920s

However, the sources of the other bluestones - chiefly rhyolites (a type of rock) and the rare sandstones remained, until recently, unknown. Now geologists at Amgueddfa Cymru – National Museum Wales have further identified the sources of one of the rhyolite types, which also provides the opportunity for new thoughts on how the stones might have been transported to the Stonehenge area.

Their findings are published in the March 2011 edition of the Journal of Archaeological Science.

Dr Richard Bevins, Keeper of Geology at Amgueddfa Cymru, in partnership with Dr Rob Ixer, University of Leicester and Dr Nick Pearce of Aberystwyth University, have been working on the rhyolite component of the bluestones, which leads them to believe it is of Welsh origin.

Through standard petrographical techniques combined with sophisticated chemical analysis of samples from Stonehenge and north Pembrokeshire using laser ablation induction coupled mass spectrometry at Aberystwyth University, they have matched one particular rhyolite to an area north of the Mynydd Preseli range, in the vicinity of Pont Saeson.

The Bluestones are a distinctive set of stones that form the inner circle and inner horseshoe of Stonehenge. Much of the archaeology in recent years has been based upon the assumption that Neolithic Age man had a reason for transporting bluestones all the way from west Wales to Stonehenge and the technical capacity to do it.

Richard Bevins said:

"This recent discovery is very significant as it potentially provides us with new clues for understanding how and possibly why the Welsh bluestones were transported to the Stonehenge area.

"It has been argued that humans transported the spotted dolerites from the high ground of Mynydd Preseli down to the coast at Milford Haven and then rafted them up the Bristol Channel and up the River Avon to the Stonehenge area. However, the outcome of our research questions that route, as it is unlikely that they would have transported the Pont Saeson stones up slope and over Mynydd Preseli to Milford Haven. If humans were responsible then an alternative route might need to be considered. However, some believe that the stones were transported by the actions of glacier sheets during the last glaciation and so the Pont Season discovery will need appraising in the context of this hypothesis.

"Matching up the rock from Stonehenge with a rock outcrop in Pembrokeshire has been a bit like looking for a needle in a haystack but I’ve looked at many if not most outcrops in the Mynydd Preseli area. We are however, confident that we have found the source of one of the rhyolites from Stonehenge because we’ve been able to make the match on a range of features not just a single characteristic. Now we are looking for the sources of the other Stonehenge volcanic and sandstone rocks".

Mike Parker Pearson, Professor of Archaeology at Sheffield University, added: "This is a hugely significant discovery which will fascinate everyone interested in Stonehenge. It forces us to re-think the route taken by the bluestones to Stonehenge and opens up the possibility of finding many of the quarries from which they came. It’s a further step towards revealing why these mysterious stones were so special to the people of the Neolithic."

Source: National Museum of Wales


Links and further background to this exciting discovery are here.

Note: Brian John has just released a new video explaining his assertion that Craig Rhosyfelin as a quarry for the Stonehenge Bluestones is a Myth. More in the comments on our page
You may be viewing yesterday's version of this page. To see the most up to date information please register for a free account.


Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by PAB : Runemage commented that a map might be useful to help people understand what the 'new' discovery means, so I popped up there at lunchtime to try and get a picture to show the connections. This is one of our favourite spots for Sunday lunch, so no great hardship! The Carn Meini outcrop is to the left of this shot - which is basically looking along the northern flank of the Preseli Hills towa... (4 comments - Vote or comment on this photo)

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by ESgt : This site was visited during the Leyhunters S.Wales moot. Archaeologists are currently searching for dating evidence in the bluestone (Ryolite) neolithic quarry. Location - SN11673616, at Rhos-y-felin between Brynberian and Crosswel, near Crymych in Pembrokeshire. It is thought that stones were transported from here down the adjacent river bed. (2 comments - Vote or comment on this photo)

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Blingo_von_Trumpenstein : I kid you not - this is the gap in the quarry face where Stonehenge stone 42 came from. They can tell the precise area of the rock face so accurately with their new technology. Strange day as I had just bought "The Bluestone Enigma" by Brian John and this unpublished dig result completely rubbishes the glacial erratic theory. You heard it here first. (2 comments - Vote or comment on this photo)

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by TheDuke : Professor Mike Parker-Pearson pointing to the exact spot where one of the rhyolite bluestones was removed which is now in stonehenge. Even evidence of cutouts for wedges to be driven in to split the stone away from the face are visible. Awesome site. (3 comments - Vote or comment on this photo)

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by TheDuke : Craig Rhos-Y-Felin. Now the confirmed site of one of the rhyolite bluestones at Stonehenge. (2 comments - Vote or comment on this photo)

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Bladup : Craig Rhosyfelin - this place is amazing.

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Horatio : As you get closer to this striking Bluestone outcrop, one stone always stands out and it's this one. Ironing board flat, I forget what Mike PP calls this stone and what it was used for, obviously missed this bit during his dig report at the Bluestone Brewery (must've been at the bar) (1 comment)

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Blingo_von_Trumpenstein : This is the neolithic clay path from the quarry down which the stones must have come - only hours after being uncovered for the first time in 5000 years. It seems convincingly too narrow for log rollers and leads me to think sleds/skids may be the answer... (1 comment)

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Bladup : Craig Rhosyfelin - it certainly makes you think about how they got to Stonehenge.

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Estrela : Craig Rhosyfelin Outcrop of rhyolite bluestone

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Estrela : Craig Rhosyfelin bluestone outcrop - the site of the mining of Stonehenge rhyolite bluestone (1 comment)

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by morgannwg : The shrub-covered bluestone crag at Craig Rhosyfelin. Using the ridgeway tracks across Wales, moving the semi-dressed stones would be arduous but not impossible. Viewing from the bend in the narrow road down to the ford the crag is surprisingly startling - it stands out visually.

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Postman : Pretty as a picture, Craig (Bob) Rhosyfelin would like it here.

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Postman : Round the side.

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Postman : The small path takes you up past the outcrop to this wonderful view. Soundtrack provided by babbling brook birdsong and land rovers struggling with livestock up the hill road, you cant have everything, right?

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Postman : Sure looks like stones were taken from here

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by Postman : 06.15am 21st June 2021.

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by ChrisBA : Craig Rhos-y-felin August 2018 (c) Chris Walford

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by ChrisBA : Craig Rhos-y-felin August 2018 (c) Chris Walford

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by ChrisBA

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by ChrisBA

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by ChrisBA

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by ChrisBA

Craig Rhosyfelin
Craig Rhosyfelin submitted by ChrisBA

These are just the first 25 photos of Craig Rhosyfelin. If you log in with a free user account you will be able to see our entire collection.

Do not use the above information on other web sites or publications without permission of the contributor.
Click here to see more info for this site

Nearby sites

Click here to view sites on an interactive OS map

Key: Red: member's photo, Blue: 3rd party photo, Yellow: other image, Green: no photo - please go there and take one, Grey: site destroyed

Download sites to:
KML (Google Earth)
GPX (GPS waypoints)
CSV (Garmin/Navman)
CSV (Excel)

To unlock full downloads you need to sign up as a Contributory Member. Otherwise downloads are limited to 50 sites.


Turn off the page maps and other distractions

Nearby sites listing. In the following links * = Image available
 1.1km SSW 201° Brynberian Round Barrow(s) (SN112351)
 1.2km N 10° Penybenglog fort Hillfort (SN119373)
 1.5km NNW 344° Castell Llwyd Ancient Village or Settlement (SN113376)
 1.6km N 6° Castell Mawr (Pembrokeshire)* Hillfort (SN11873776)
 1.8km SSW 207° Bedd yr Afanc* Passage Grave (SN10793458)
 1.9km WNW 291° Penfeidr Coedan* Ancient Mine, Quarry or other Industry (SN099369)
 1.9km WNW 291° Penfeidr Coedan Stone* Standing Stone (Menhir) (SN099369)
 1.9km WNW 295° Pentre Ifan* Portal Tomb (SN09943702)
 2.4km W 272° Carnedd Meibion Owen Tor 3* Natural Stone / Erratic / Other Natural Feature (SN092363)
 2.5km WSW 257° St Brynach's Well Holy Well or Sacred Spring (SN09173568)
 2.6km N 0° St Dogfaels Well Holy Well or Sacred Spring (SN11773874)
 2.6km W 280° Tycanol Hillfort (SN091367)
 2.6km NE 46° Cerrig-Y-Derwyddon* Standing Stone (Menhir) (SN13593790)
 2.6km W 259° Penlan Stone Pair* Standing Stones (SN09033575)
 2.7km WSW 253° The Penlan Stone* Standing Stone (Menhir) (SN09053545)
 2.9km W 260° Troed y rhiw Stone Row / Alignment (SN0879235756)
 2.9km N 359° Castell Henllys* Promontory Fort / Cliff Castle (SN11723905)
 2.9km N 5° Penpedwast Ancient Village or Settlement (SN12013903)
 3.1km SSE 155° Carngoedog* Ancient Mine, Quarry or other Industry (SN1283133283)
 3.2km NE 43° Ffynnon Fair (Pembrokeshire) Holy Well or Sacred Spring (SN13953843)
 3.3km SE 135° Carn Alw* Ancient Village or Settlement (SN139337)
 3.5km ESE 107° Lach y Fleiddast Burial Chamber or Dolmen (SN1535)
 3.6km ESE 120° Modern Stone Circle at Ty'r-bwlch* Modern Stone Circle etc (SN1474234210)
 3.8km NNW 339° Cwm Gloyne Hillfort (SN104397)
 3.8km SW 215° Banc Llwydlos* Ancient Village or Settlement (SN093331)
View more nearby sites and additional images

<< Cale Cross (Newcastle)

Frihedslund Runddysse >>

Please add your thoughts on this site

Stone Circles CD-ROM now £10+p&p

Stone Circles CD-ROM now £10+p&p

Sponsors

Auto-Translation (Google)

Translate from English into:

"Craig Rhosyfelin" | Login/Create an Account | 86 News and Comments
  
Go back to top of page    Comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.
Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by Anonymous on Saturday, 01 April 2023
There is on stone, number 42..It is supposed to have come from Craig Rhos-y-Felin...yet stone 42 is in the soil at Stonehenge and there has been no physical confirmation chemically or shape that this stone came from this location ? I read one comments that the a stone still at the quarry was a profile match of stone 42 ? Any comments, please
[ Reply to This ]

Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by Anonymous on Saturday, 14 September 2019
Things have rather moved on other than the John hypotheses they have remained rock-fast.
Ixer and Bevins and their colleagues have published 30 plus papers on the bluestones of all types and have yet to see any convincing evidence for significant glacial involvement in the transport of the bluestones to Stonehenge.
Rehashing views can never trump collection and publication of new data.
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by mountainman on Monday, 16 September 2019
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    Have these esteemed and productive authors actually seen any convincing evidence for the human transport of the bluestones, or for the quarrying of bluestone monoliths from Pembrokeshire outcrops? In my opinion not one of those papers does anything to enhance the hypotheses promoted by the archaeologists.

    And have these geologists actually done any work on glacial features, either in Pembrokeshire or on Salisbury Plain?
    [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by cerrig on Tuesday, 17 September 2019
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      Brian, unless you know of glacial tendencies to dig holes in a circle and place stones in them then the next best option would probably be human transport, of at least some distance.

      Can you account for the separate arrangements of sedimentary and igneous rocks at Stonehenge?
      [ Reply to This ]
        Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by mountainman on Tuesday, 17 September 2019
        (User Info | Send a Message)
        Of course the stones were moved "some distance" and placed into assorted arrangements. The question is "how far?". And at some stage (maybe not initially) the "bluestones" were treated differently from the sarsens. Quite happy with that. However, it is a perfectly reasonable hypothesis that the stones were all collected from the neighbourhood, that there never were enough stones to finish the job, and that therefore Stonehenge was never completed as the "immaculate" monument so beloved of EH and the textbooks......
        [ Reply to This ]
        Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by cerrig on Tuesday, 17 September 2019
        (User Info | Send a Message)
        "How far" is only one of the questions. "Why different types" is just as pertinent. It can only be human choice that has sedimentary sarsen and igneous "bluestone" in the same monument yet in separate elements. It is obviously a deliberate aspect of the design and must be intentional despite easier local alternatives. The inclusion of Welsh stone was obviously very important, which makes the human transport theory more likely.
        [ Reply to This ]
          Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by mountainman on Thursday, 19 September 2019
          (User Info | Send a Message)
          Respectfully agree to differ with you on this, Cerrig. "The inclusion of Welsh stone"?? More likely, the inclusion of "different stone" -- they used all the assorted stones they could find, and then towards the end of the stone setting episodes they separated out the sarsens from everything else. They probably had not the faintest idea where any of the stones originally came from. There is certainly no indication at all that either rhyolite or spotted dolerite, for example, was viewed as special in any way by the megalith builders of west Wales.
          [ Reply to This ]
            Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by cerrig on Thursday, 19 September 2019
            (User Info | Send a Message)
            Brian, it's very curious that " all the assorted stones they could find" was igneous Welsh bluestone. Are you saying that nothing else was available?
            [ Reply to This ]
              Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by mountainman on Friday, 20 September 2019
              (User Info | Send a Message)
              Altar Stone is a sandstone, and there are other sandstones as well in the rock collection.
              [ Reply to This ]
              Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by cerrig on Saturday, 21 September 2019
              (User Info | Send a Message)
              Apart from the Sarsens how many are local to Wiltshire and how many are Welsh. Just saying they were the available stones doesn't account for local stone that could have been used instead.
              [ Reply to This ]
                Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by mountainman on Monday, 23 September 2019
                (User Info | Send a Message)
                There is plenty of local stone (limestones and other sedimentaries) in the debitage and packing stones / mauls / hammerstones collection. These stones are often conveniently forgotten.
                [ Reply to This ]
                  Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by Anonymous on Monday, 23 September 2019
                  That just goes to show that there was local stone available that wasn't used for the actual standing stones, but the Welsh stone was used in preference. The builders obviously knew the difference, given that some of the "bluestone" is also poor quality, so the type was more important.
                  [ Reply to This ]
                    Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by Anonymous on Tuesday, 24 September 2019
                    In the light of DNA and strontium analysis of bodily remains and bone respectively, given the links with migrants from Anatolia (with its megalithic sites at Gobekli Tepe and elsewhere), given the evidence of migration to Britain via the Med and finally Wales, the overland transport of bluestones from Pembrokeshire to Wiltshire no longer looks such an oddball hypothesis as it did initially. That's especially the case if much heavier bulkier sarsens were also moved in some 20 miles or so from the Marlborough Downs.

                    Time some might think to lay the glacial transport theory to rest. Stonehenge and its construction over centuries is/was a a seeming miracle of human endeavour, not geomorphology.

                    It's high time the focus was on the (real) reasons for constructing Stonehenge, free from the continuing and needless distraction of the glacial transport hangup...

                    There, I've said it (anonymously, having mislaid previous log in details). Someone had to....

                    ColinB
                    [ Reply to This ]
                      Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by mountainman on Saturday, 28 September 2019
                      (User Info | Send a Message)
                      Colin -- assumptions, assumptions and more assumptions. Evidence please? Do you have a problem with geomorphology?
                      [ Reply to This ]
                        Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by Anonymous on Saturday, 28 September 2019
                        Transport of those bluestones was a topic to which I devoted an entire posting back in August last year, Brian, on my own specialist Stonehenge site.

                        https://sussingstonehenge.wordpress.com/2018/08/02/todays-bbc-article-stonehenge-first-residents-from-west-wales/

                        So far, it's received just one commentator (applauding me there and elsewhere for an original take).

                        For as long as you, Megalithic Portal and other supposedly 'relevant' internet sites continue to treat me as a non-person, or at any rate blank wall (despite being a retired PhD scientist, despite creating the site back in 2012) I decline to add further comments, either here or on your own site.

                        It's basically down to those old-fashioned pre-internet desirables like even-handedness, open-mindedness, fair play etc etc.

                        Colin Berry, Herts, UK
                        [ Reply to This ]
                          Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by Anonymous on Sunday, 29 September 2019
                          PS: please excuse this PS with its slight change of mind. I will add this as THE final comment.

                          Google Street view allows one to "motor" up to Craig Rhos-y-felin, claimed extraction site for at least some of the bluestones. I'll show the approach route in my own site's next posting (a day or two at most).

                          What the Google photos show is that "quarrying" is too grand a term, given the way the stones are outcrops protruding precariously out of a wooded hillside rather than mountain, with trees and other vegetation growing in the vertical cracks, acting like slow separating chisels.

                          If the remaining stones are anything to go by, it was less a case of quarrying, more one of simply dislodging, even toppling over via a tug on slung round ropes etc. And the fact that the present-day site is approachable via gently-sloping country lanes surrounded by fields and crops suggests that transport away from the site, whether to the nearby coast and ships, or, as I prefer to think, via an entirely overland/cross-river migratory route, was entirely within the realms of the Neolithic-era possible, for those who, for one reason or another, had developed a strong attachment to the stones (sound of Neolithic "church bell" chimes when struck, for attracting attention in all three spatial dimensions?).

                          Colin Berry



                          [ Reply to This ]
    Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by mountainman on Thursday, 10 November 2022
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    This is a bit rich. "Rehashing views can never trump collection and publication of new data." Quite so -- the multiple papers published by Ixer, Bevins et al contain multiple repetitions of the same old stuff. As for "convincing evidence of glaciation", just look at the shapes and characteristics of the bluestone erratics at Stonehenge. Some have clearly been dressed -- but the rest are abraded, faceted and heavily weathered boulders which would not be out of place if you were to see them at a glacier front anywhere in the world. Then we have the little glaciated erratic recently turned up in Salisbury Museum just for added interest. And we have a new paper claiming the discovery of "stone wedges" at Rhosyfelin and which makes claims that are completely unsupported by the evidence. There is still no evidence whatsoever of quarrying at Rhosyfelin that stands up to scrutiny. https://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2022/11/bluestone-wedges-and-death-of-science.html
    [ Reply to This ]

New Video just released: The Myth of the Bluestone Quarries by Andy B on Monday, 09 September 2019
(User Info | Send a Message)
Brian John writes: I'm pleased to announce the release of a new video on the "bluestone quarries" -- filmed and edited by my grandson Finley. He has just started as a first-year student at the University of the West of England in Bristol. Maybe I am biased, but I think he has made a splendid job of it, and I'm really proud of him!

Description:

Certain geologists and archaeologists have claimed that the bluestones at Stonehenge were carried by Neolithic tribesmen from West Wales to Salisbury Plain. Further, they claim to have found two "bluestone quarries" in West Wales from which monoliths were extracted. Geomorphologist Dr Brian John examines the evidence on the ground, and concludes that the quarries are simply "figments of somebody's fertile imagination." He shows that the "engineering features" are entirely natural, and that the blocks of stone and other debris that ended up at Stonehenge were entrained and transported by glacier ice during the Ice Age. The quarrying hypothesis is falsified by the radiocarbon dating evidence too. The archaeologists are accused of promoting yet another Stonehenge myth........

Here is the YouTube link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBTEcByYUME

In the making of the video we were careful to keep clear of polemics and accusations of scientific malpractice, and to keep things simple and evidence-based. I hope that Prof MPP and his team will enjoy it and accept that I know what I am talking about.

As background, if you want to read the articles which perpetrate the myth that Rhosyfelin is a Neolithic bluestone quarry, you can find them linked from Brian's web page here:
https://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2019/09/video-just-released-myth-of-bluestone.html
[ Reply to This ]
    Video Talk: Dispelling the Stonehenge myth by Andy B on Monday, 09 September 2019
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    Brian writes: I have been taking another look at the lecture which I gave an the DO Lectures series in 2010. Nine years have passed, but hardly anything has happened to invalidate the things I said. So here it is again -- summarising the manufacture of the myth and its shortcomings. The only details that need correcting relate to the "bluestone sources" near Dinas and Newport -- which are now doubted by the geologists. But the actual number of probable bluestone sources has still not changed at all -- I still estimate that to be around 30 sources.

    Also, in 2010 we had heard nothing of Rhosyfelin and Carn Goedog as "quarrying" locations, and Carn Meini was at that time pretty well universally accepted by archaeologists as the site of THE bluestone quarry..........

    Another interesting point is that in 2010 Prof MPP was already developing his ideas about bluestones being "embodiments of the ancestors" -- so the roots of the current narrative were already taking hold and beginning to flourish.

    You can either watch the lecture (about 30 mins) on YouTube here, at relatively low resolution:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKj_Uzt7lpU

    https://www.thedolectures.com/talks/brian-john-dispelling-the-stonehenge-myth

    or on the Do Lectures web site, as a Vimeo video, at much higher quality:

    https://www.thedolectures.com/talks/brian-john-dispelling-the-stonehenge-myth
    [ Reply to This ]

Sourcing the Stonehenge Bluestones by Andy B on Thursday, 25 January 2018
(User Info | Send a Message)
The source of the Bluestones at Stonehenge has long been a subject of fascination and controversy. One type was traced to north Pembrokeshire in the early 1920s, but now geologists at Amgueddfa Cymru and University of Leicester have directly matched another type to a different part of north Pembrokeshire. Will this provide us with more ideas about how the stones might have been transported to Stonehenge?
The Stonehenge monument

Stonehenge, on Salisbury Plain, is one of the world's most iconic ancient monuments. It is designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, and it is as recognisable worldwide as sites such as Machu Picchu in Peru and the Xian Terracotta Warriors in China.

Stonehenge is a complex site. It is best known, of course, for the standing stones, which comprise the Outer Circle, the Inner Circle, the Inner Horseshoe and the Heel Stone and, within the structure, the so-called Altar Stone. Surrounding the stone circle are further structures, identified by mounds and ditches, and a series of 'holes' thought to have held standing stones of more henges. These holes, known as the Aubrey Holes, are important because they contain debris (or 'debitage' as some archaeologists call the material) whose lithology is not represented among the current standing stones. However, the current Stonehenge monument is only a part of a broader range of contemporary features, including the Avenue, the Cursus and the recently identified West Amesbury Henge (known as Bluestonehenge). Collectively, these comprise the Stonehenge Landscape.

The large stones that form the Outer Circle are known as 'Sarsens'. They are hard, resistant sandstones thought to have been collected from the local Salisbury Plain environment. The sources of the smaller stones that form the Inner Circle, the Inner Horseshoe and the Altar Stone, known as the 'Bluestones', are 'exotic' to the Salisbury Plain area. For many years their source baffled eminent Victorian investigators such as Maskelyne, Cunnington, Teal and Judd. This is the so-called Bluestone lithology.
The Bluestones

In 1923, however, H.H. Thomas from the Geological Survey published a paper in The Antiquaries Journal in which he claimed to have sourced the spotted dolerite component of the Bluestones to hilltop rock outcrops, or 'tors', exposed in the high Preseli, to the west of Crymych in west Wales. Specifically, he thought that the tors on Carn Meini and Carn Marchogion were the likely source outcrops. He went on to speculate about how humans had transported the stones to Salisbury Plain, favouring transport across land rather than a combined land and sea journey.

Not all the Bluestone stones standing today at Stonehenge, however, are spotted dolerites. Four of them are ash-flow tuffs, of either dacitic or rhyolitic composition. Debris recovered from the Aubrey Holes, as well as various archaeological excavations at Stonehenge and the Stonehenge Landscape, comprise spotted dolerite and more, and very different, dacitic and rhyolitic Bluestone material.

Recent discoveries

In 2009 Amgueddfa Cymru, in collaboration with Dr Rob Ixer, University of Leicester began new petrological investigations. Examination of debris from the Cursus Field, adjacent to the Cursus, showed the presence of samples identified as being ash-flow tuffs, with tube pumice, crystal fragments and lithic clasts in a fine-grained recrystallized matrix. These were broadly similar to the four dacitic and rhyolitic standing stones, yet showed key differences. Also present were samples that had previously been informally called 'rhyolite with fabric'. This lithology is defined by a very well-developed fabric, present on the millimetre scale. This distinctive rock texture has led Museum scientists to identify the source of the rock to Pont Saeson, in the low ground to the north of Mynydd Preseli.

More at
https:/

Read the rest of this post...
[ Reply to This ]

...further evidence for the provenance of the Stonehenge bluestones by Andy B on Thursday, 05 October 2017
(User Info | Send a Message)
U–Pb zircon age constraints for the Ordovician Fishguard Volcanic Group and further evidence for the provenance of the Stonehenge bluestones - Robert Ixer et al

New U–Pb zircon ages from rhyolite samples of the Fishguard Volcanic Group, SW Wales, confirm a Middle Ordovician (Darriwilian) age for the group. One of the samples is from Craig Rhos-y-felin, which has recently been identified on petrological and geochemical grounds as the source of much of the debitage (struck flakes) at Stonehenge. Analysis of a Stonehenge rhyolite fragment yields an age comparable with that of the Craig Rhos-y-felin sample. Another Stonehenge fragment, thought to come from orthostat (standing stone) 48 and on petrographical grounds to be derived from the Fishguard Volcanic Group (but not Craig Rhos-y-felin), yields an age also consistent with a Fishguard Volcanic Group source.

https://www.academia.edu/34770710/
[ Reply to This ]

News from the 2017 Preseli digging season: Pensarn, Parc y Gaer and Waun Mawn by Andy B on Wednesday, 04 October 2017
(User Info | Send a Message)
Brian John writes: Without breaking any confidences, here is a brief summary of what has been placed in the public domain, arising from the 2017 digging season involving Mike Parker Pearson and his colleagues. This was all under the auspices of the "Stones of Stonehenge" project. The dig lasted about 3 weeks, ending around 20th September.

The focus of attention was again Pensarn, not far from Brynberian and Crosswell, on the south side of the B4329 road. This is the key report which gives the regional context:
http://www.dyfedarchaeology.org.uk/projects/schedulepembroke2011.pdf

To return to the matter in hand. What we now know is as follows:

In 2016 the dig at location SN123358, on a low mound in the middle of the field, revealed a Bronze Age cist burial site, details of which are still to be published. I summarised what we know here:
https://brian-mountainman.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/pensarn-turns-out-to-be-bronze-age-cist.html

In 2017 there were two new excavations near Pensarn Farm, in another field, on the western side of the lane, at the following grid refs: SN123357 and SN 122357

Further work has been done at Waun Mawn, close to Tafarn y Bwlch (see nearby sites list above) Apparently work was not started there until almost the end of the digging season, but on Tuesday 19th Sept the diggers found what appears to be a stone socket with some organic material within it, and rumour has it that another socket has also been found. Samples sent for C14 dating might show when the stones were in position and when they were removed or fell over. Nobody should be surprised by any of this -- there are two very large recumbent stones and a smaller one visible on the surface at Waun Mawn, which might well have been upright at some stage. So there will be sockets and there will be organic materials within them. There is also a very fine standing stone. As pointed out in previous posts, the stones might be on the circumference of a very large circle. Grid ref SN084340 approx.

[More on Brian's blog at the link below]

This information has been sourced from what Mike PP has been saying on his guided tours and evening lectures over the past few days. If I (Brian) have misreported anything, apologies -- no doubt somebody will correct me

Anyway, there is cause for pleasure all round, I think, since our knowledge of prehistoric north Pembs has been significantly advanced. So congratulations to all the diggers for what they have come up with. It confirms what we already knew from the unsung work of Dyfed Archaeological Trust over the years -- that there is a very long history of early settlement here, stretching from the Mesolithic through Bronze Age and Iron Age to Roman times, with a range of settlement and ritual features under the turf and out on the moor. Some of the new sites will no doubt become scheduled ancient monuments, which is right and proper.

More at
https://brian-mountainman.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/news-from-2017-preseli-digging-season.html
[ Reply to This ]

"Bluestone quarry" archaeologists are accused of creating their own evidence by Andy B on Wednesday, 16 December 2015
(User Info | Send a Message)
Earth scientists who have worked at a "bluestone monolith quarry" site at Craig Rhosyfelin in Pembrokeshire have suggested that the archaeologists have got it all wrong, and that the so-called "engineering features" on the flank of the crag are entirely natural. Further, it is suggested that members of the digging team have unconsciously created the very features that they have cited in support of their quarrying hypothesis.

In a peer-reviewed paper published today in "Archaeology in Wales" journal (1) Dr Brian John, Dr Dyfed Elis-Gruffydd and John Downes have described a set of Ice Age deposits and landforms at the site of an archaeological dig that was started in 2011, and have determined that there are no traces of human intervention in any of the features that have made the archaeologists so excited (2). These include features described by the diggers as a quarry face, a quarry spoil bank, a storage platform, props and pillars, stone rails, a "proto-orthostat", a revetment, and an export pathway. Most of these are now dismissed as "archaeological artifices" unconsciously created by the archaeologists themselves during five years of highly selective sediment removal. In other words, the authors of the new article suggest that the archaeologists have created what they wanted to find, instead of describing what was there.

Dr Brian John commented: "We suggest, on the basis of careful examinations of this site, that certain of the “man made features” described have been created by the archaeologists themselves through a process of selective sediment and clast removal. An expectation or conviction that “engineering features” would be found has perhaps led to the unconscious fashioning of archaeological artifices."

This site has been described by lead archaeologist Prof Mike Parker Pearson as "the Pompeii of prehistoric stone quarries" and has caused great excitement in archaeological circles. The selection of this rocky crag near the village of Brynberian for excavation in 2011- 2015 was triggered by the discovery by geologists Richard Bevins and Rob Ixer that some of the stone fragments in the soil at Stonehenge were quite precisely matched to an unusual type of foliated rhyolite found in the crag. This led the archaeologists to conclude that there must have been a Neolithic quarry here, worked for the specific purpose of cutting out monoliths for the bluestone settings at Stonehenge.

Commenting on the new research paper, Dr Brian John added: "The new geological work at Rhosyfelin and Stonehenge is an interesting piece of "rock provenencing" -- but it tells us nothing at all about how monoliths or smaller rock fragments from West Wales found their way to Stonehenge. We are sure that the archaeologists have convinced themselves that the glacial transport of erratics was impossible. We are not sure where they got that idea from. On the contrary, there is substantial evidence in favour of glacial transport and zero evidence in support of the human transport theory. We accept that there might have been a camp site at Rhosyfelin, used intermittently by hunters over several millennia. But there is no quarry. We think the archaeologists have been so keen on telling a good story here that they have ignored or misinterpreted the evidence in front of them. That's very careless. They now need to undertake a complete reassessment of the material they have collected."

The three authors of the new paper suggest that this fundamental error in interpretation might have been avoided if there had been greater cooperation in the Rhosyfelin dig between archaeologists and specialists from related disciplines.

Ref (1)
Brian John, Dyfed Elis-Gruffydd and John Downes. 2015. OBSERVATIONS ON THE SUPPOSED “NEOLITHIC BLUESTONE QUARRY” AT CRAIG RHOSYFELIN, PEMBROKESHIRE". Archaeology in Wales 54, pp 139-148. (Publication 14th December 2015)

(2) Mike Parker Pearson, Richard Bevins, Rob Ixer, Joshua Pollar

Read the rest of this post...
[ Reply to This ]
    Craig Rhos-y-felin: a Welsh bluestone megalith quarry for Stonehenge by Andy B on Wednesday, 02 May 2018
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    Craig Rhos-y-felin: a Welsh bluestone megalith quarry for Stonehenge
    Mike Parker Pearson, Richard Bevins, Rob Ixer, Joshua Pollard, Colin Richards, Kate Welham,
    Ben Chan, Kevan Edinborough, Derek Hamilton, Richard Macphail, Duncan Schlee, Jean-Luc
    Schwenninger, Ellen Simmons and Martin Smith
    Antiquity / Volume 89 / Issue 348 / December 2015, pp 1331 - 1352
    DOI: 10.15184/aqy.2015.177, Published online: 07 December 2015

    The long-distance transport of the bluestones
    from south Wales to Stonehenge is one
    of the most remarkable achievements of
    Neolithic societies in north-west Europe.
    Where precisely these stones were quarried,
    when they were extracted and how they
    were transported has long been a subject of
    speculation, experiment and controversy. The
    discovery of a megalithic bluestone quarry at
    Craig Rhos-y-felin in 2011 marked a turning
    point in this research. Subsequent excavations
    have provided details of the quarrying process
    along with direct dating evidence for the
    extraction of bluestone monoliths at this
    location, demonstrating both Neolithic and
    Early Bronze Age activity.

    http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/121403/1/121403.pdf
    [ Reply to This ]

Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry by Andy B on Wednesday, 09 December 2015
(User Info | Send a Message)
The Guardian have caught up on this with the totally dodgy headline: " Stonehenge may have been first erected in Wales, evidence suggests " - with thanks to Mary B for the link:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/dec/07/stonehenge-first-erected-in-wales-secondhand-monument
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry by mountainman on Saturday, 12 December 2015
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    Yes, the Guardian was the first paper to respond to the flood of press releases and images sent out by the UCL press office and lots of other press offices as well. The report has been read well over 50,000 times -- which shows that the appetite for wacky Stonehenge stories is as insatiable as ever!! The Antiquity paper does nothing whatsoever to enhance the quarrying theory. So much speculation and so little evidence -- makes me rather sad......
    [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Wales Online Article by AngieLake on Monday, 14 December 2015
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      Noticed this today:
      http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/stonehenges-bluestones-were-moved-wales-10591475

      Some good photos and controversial comments:

      "...In a peer-reviewed paper published in the Archaeology in Wales journal, Dr Brian John, Dr Dyfed Elis-Gruffydd and John Downes say there are “no traces of human intervention in any of the features that have made the archaeologists so excited”.

      The group does not accept the idea of a Neolithic quarry in the Preseli Hills and says the supposed signs of ‘quarrying’ by humans at Craig Rhos-y-Felin were entirely natural.

      They also believe that the archaeologists behind the report may have inadvertently created certain features during five years of “highly selective sediment removal”..."

      Dr Brian John is Meg P's 'mountainman', isn't he?
      [ Reply to This ]

New geo research undermines Bluestone Quarry theory by Andy B on Wednesday, 11 November 2015
(User Info | Send a Message)
Research published this week in the peer-reviewed journal "Quaternary Newsletter" has thown doubt on claims that there is a Neolithic "bluestone quarry" at Rhosyfelin in Pembrokeshire.

Since 2011 archaeologist Prof Mike Parker Pearson and his colleagues have conducted annual summer digs at the site, not far from the village of Brynberian. They have promoted the idea that some of the rhyolite bluestones at Stonehenge were quarried here and then carried all the way to Stonehenge by Neolithic tribesmen about 5,000 years ago. In 2012 Parker Pearson referred to the site as "the Pompeii of prehistoric stone quarries."

His theory arose from some precise "provenancing" by geologists Richard Bevins and Rob Ixer, who discovered that some of the fragments of rock in the soil layers in and around Stonehenge could be matched closely to a flinty blue foliated rhyolite rock exposed in a crag at Rhosyfelin. The archaeologists also discovered an eight-tonne elongated slab of rhyolite close to the Rhosyfelin rock face, which they assumed had been quarried and then somehow left behind. Many tonnes of sediments have subsequently been removed by the archaeologists in their hunt for quarrying traces.

Now geologist John Downes and geomorphologists Dyfed Elis-Gruffydd and Brian John have examined the site very carefully, and have come to the conclusion that there are no traces of a Neolithic quarry here. Instead, they interpret the rocky debris found during the archaeological dig as entirely natural accumulations resulting from intermittent rockfalls over a long period of time.

In their new article they also describe a number of different landforms and sediments which can be related to the events of the Ice Age - and in particular to the last glaciation of this area which occurred around 20,000 years ago. They accept that there might have been a prehistoric camp site in the sheltered valley at the foot of the Rhosyfelin rocky crag, and that this may be confirmed by radiocarbon dating, but they suggest that the site was used by hunters rather than by quarrymen.

Back to the glacial transport theory:

Speaking about the new study, researcher Dr Brian John said: "We have no argument with the geological work that links this site with Stonehenge. But we cannot accept the idea of a Neolithic quarry here without firm evidence - and in our considered opinion there is none. The archaeologists admit that there are no artefacts, bones or tools at the site. In a future paper we will examine the so-called 'quarrying' or 'engineering' features at this site, and will show that they are all natural."

"We are also increasingly convinced that the rhyolite debris at Stonehenge is derived from glacial erratics which were eroded from the Rhosyfelin rocky crag almost half a million years ago by the overriding Irish Sea Glacier (Britain's biggest ever glacier) and then transported eastwards by ice towards Salisbury Plain. Glaciologically that was perfectly possible, if not probable. We are confident that radiocarbon and other dating in the future will confirm the falsehood of the Neolithic quarry theory and the essential reliability of the glacial transport theory."

Reference: Brian John, Dyfed Elis-Gruffydd and John Downes (2015). "Quaternary Events at Craig Rhosyfelin, Pembrokeshire." Quaternary Newsletter, October 2015 (No 137), pp 16-32.

Reproduced on Scribd (with low definition images) here:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/289210389/Quaternary-Events-at-Craig-Rhosyfelin-Pembrokeshire

The new paper is now posted onto Researchgate, from which it can also be downloaded:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283643851_QUATERNARY_EVENTS_AT_CRAIG_RHOSYFELIN_PEMBROKESHIRE
[ Reply to This ]

Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by cerrig on Thursday, 17 September 2015
(User Info | Send a Message)
I found my way to the talk last night to hear the latest from MPP and his team. It seems Craig Rhosyfellin is being shut down today and the emphasis is being shifted to Carn Goedeg, where slabs ready to go have been stacked up, and the debris in their original socket holes has been dated to 3400bc, so well before they were sited at Stonehenge.
There was a fair bit of analysis of the two sites and the way the quarry floors had been prepared for the stone removal.
The most surprising thing about the talk was how the search now involved finding a lost Mesolithic tomb, as a possible first use for the bluestones before they were moved to Stonehenge ? Where did that come from ?
Still no source for the Altar stone though.
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by mountainman on Tuesday, 10 November 2015
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    " slabs ready to go have been stacked up......" ???

    "....the quarry floors had been prepared for the stone removal..." ???

    Really, Cerrig! A little more critical thinking, please. You should not believe everything that is said in public lectures. Go and take a look, and decide for yourself. Stacks of slabs and quarry floors are figments of somebody's fertile imagination.
    [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by cerrig on Thursday, 12 November 2015
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      My comments above are an account of the talk given by MPP, not a critical appraisal of the evidence. If you had been the one giving the talk I would have given a similarly accurate account of your words.
      I am not in a position to make a judgement on it's credibility, or the validity of your counter claim, if qualified geologists can't agree on this then how am I supposed to decide.
      I am curious as to why there are Bluestones in Stonehenge, not so much as to how they got there, although that is a very interesting and unresolved issue. While neither MPP or yourself have given a credible reason for the choice of Bluestone itself, at least he is trying to make some sense of it, whereas you only seem to be concerned with the transport theory, and while you may be right about glaciation, even if you are, and you haven't proved that yet, the stone would still have had to be moved from wherever it had been dumped the remainder of the way to Stonehenge, which is about as far as your theory goes.
      I am interested in "why Bluestone", and why not any number of other types of stone that may have been around, and glaciers don't answer that one, so there had to have been a human element at some stage, it's just a matter of where. I want to know why, and that's why I will continue to follow the debate, looking at all arguments.
      When you have definitively proven your theory I will quietly forget about the long distance transport theory, and just wonder about the short distance transport theory instead, and the reason why!
      Personally, I think you are wrong , but I am open to being persuaded otherwise.
      [ Reply to This ]
        Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by Anonymous on Saturday, 14 November 2015
        Well my suggestion ,with no supporting evidence whatsoever ,is that the bluestones may have been originally erected in a circle in or near the Preselis. As such they were taken as plunder by a conquering tribe from afar who considered them as auspicious booty to enhance their own cathedral.It could then be a matter of finding evidence for the appropriate number of location holes in the ground,perhaps near to the new "quarry"!While this is admittedly complete conjecture the idea does have some appeal as it offers a reason why these stones were removed at such expense of effort when other stones would have been available much more readily.The conquering tribe were not just removing stones. They were actually removing an established structure and centre of power and "worship",one whose fame may have been widely known and envied.
        [ Reply to This ]
        Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by mountainman on Tuesday, 24 November 2015
        (User Info | Send a Message)
        Talk report? Fair enough...... sorry if I attributed certain views to you rather than to Prof MPP!

        Remember that we are not talking about "bluestone" or one rock type here. The name is a curse that we all have to live with. There are many different rock types that go under this umbrella term -- and they have come from many different sources.
        [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by Andy B on Thursday, 12 November 2015
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      Dear Brian, we were good enough to post your press release in full, please stop insulting our contributors!
      [ Reply to This ]
        Re: Craig Rhosyfelin by mountainman on Tuesday, 24 November 2015
        (User Info | Send a Message)
        Sorry Andy, if anybody felt insulted! Not my intention, I assure you.....
        [ Reply to This ]

Brian John is doubtful... by Andy B on Friday, 11 September 2015
(User Info | Send a Message)
Brian John, one of the main proponents of the glacial transportation theory is doubtful: Rhosyfelin and "spot provenancing"

Re: the Stone 42 hole - on the evidence currently before us, M'Lud, I suggest that the case is not proven. I do not see anything in the Stonehenge samples to convince me of an identical match. Neither do we know how big a variation there is in the Stonehenge material. Could the samples all have come from one or two stones that have been broken up, or could they have come from a much wider range of material in the Stonehenge landscape and transported by ice from the Rhosyfelin - Pont Saeson neighbourhood?

http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/rhosyfelin-and-spot-provenancing.html

See also
http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/rhosyfelin-some-geological-questions.html
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Brian John is doubtful... by 0752chris on Monday, 14 September 2015
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    Stone 42 is a spotted dolerite, I thought, and therefore not from this rhosyfelin site
    [ Reply to This ]

Prof Mike Parker Pearson talk, Wednesday 16th September by Andy B on Friday, 11 September 2015
(User Info | Send a Message)
CASTELL Henllys Iron Age Village will host a fascinating talk revealing the links between Stonehenge and Preseli Bluestones on Wednesday, 16 September.

Renowned archaeologist Prof Mike Parker Pearson will present findings from this year’s dig at Craig Rhosyfelin, which is believed to be a quarry for smaller stones located at Stonehenge.

Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority culture and heritage manager Phil Bennett said: “Stonehenge continues to reveal its secrets, and intriguing links between it and this spectacular part of the national park continue to be discovered.

“The hunt for the origins of the bluestones continues apace and Mike Parker Pearson and his team will be conducting a dig for around a month beginning at the start of September.

“This will be the fifth season of excavations at Craig Rhosyfelin and the team will also be studying other sites in the Preseli Hills.”

Source:
http://www.countyecho.co.uk/article.cfm?id=2259

Castell Henllys Iron Age Village
http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=5906
[ Reply to This ]

Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by mountainman on Friday, 19 September 2014
(User Info | Send a Message)
The 2014 digging season is now over, and there's a lot of new information -- none of it suggesting any quarrying activity here, in spite of what the archaeologists might tell you. I have put several new posts onto my blog -- comments are welcome....

http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.co.uk/

Just put "Rhosyfelin" into the search box, and the entries will come up.
[ Reply to This ]

Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by Estrela on Thursday, 19 September 2013
(User Info | Send a Message)
Went to a very interesting talk in Moylegrove last night by Mike Parker Pearson on the Craig Rhosyfelin quarry, its Stonehenge links, the new excavations on Castell Mawr etc.. Plenty of known stuff and a sprinkling of new information. The Welsh audience particularly liked his suggestion that the Welsh links to Stonehenge may be evidence for the first Welsh invasion of England!
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by Anonymous on Sunday, 13 September 2015
    invasion ? this was before the romans btw ;)
    [ Reply to This ]

Craig Rhos-y-Felin is the dominant source of The Stonehenge Rhyolitic ‘Debitage’ by Andy B on Wednesday, 10 July 2013
(User Info | Send a Message)
Craig Rhos-y-Felin, Pont Saeson is the Dominant source of The Stonehenge Rhyolitic ‘Debitage’ by Rob Ixer and Richard Bevins in Archaeology in Wales 50

In situ rocks from accurately located outcrops from thePont Saeson area north of the Preseli Hills have been collected, described and compared with Stonehenge lithics, notably the struck ‘debitage’ in order to try to provenance those lithics to within a few square metres rather than the more usual tens to hundreds of square metres. This, in turn, it is hoped will provide more focussed loci for detailed archaeological investigations.

Within the Stonehenge ‘debitage’ (loose materialprobably associated with extant or earlier orthostats) the second most abundant bluestone rock type (afterthe spotted dolerites) comprises a hard, blue-grey, fine-grained siliceous rock with a rhyolitic composition. Therock type has been recognised for over a century

Conclusion
(In brief) "The overwhelming majority of the Stonehenge rhyolitic ‘debitage’, namely that belonging to Groups A-C, can be sourced from the Pont Saeson area and perhaps entirely from Craig Rhos-y-felin, but from more than one site on the crags"

Available here
http://academia.edu/3990426/._CRAIG_RHOS-Y-FELIN_PONT_SAESON_IS_THE_DOMINANT


[ Reply to This ]

A Long History of Rhosyfelin, A Geomorphological Perspective by Brian John by mountainman on Wednesday, 26 June 2013
(User Info | Send a Message)
Hi folks, you may be interested in this. Here is my current take on what has happened at this infamous "quarry" site:

If you type in "Rhosyfelin" into Google, you will find a good many entries, including many from myblog called “Stonehenge and the Ice Age”. For better or worse, the site at Craig Rhosyfelin, notfar from Brynberian, has become a key archaeological site -- which is rather interesting, given thatthere is not much archaeology there.

Its new-found fame, of course, lies in the fact that some of the "debitage" at Stonehenge has been traced back to this particular rather insignificant rocky spur in the valley of the Brynberian River, atributary of the Afon Nyfer. The link has been featured in a number of papers by Rob Ixer and Richard Bevins- all discussed at length in my blog. More to the point, for the past two years there have been extensive archaeological digs on the site, with Mike Parker Pearson, Josh Pollard and Colin Richards all involved, along with a host of other amateur and professional archaeologists who are all apparently sold on the idea that this is the first proper "bluestone quarry" ever to be systematically investigated. That is the hypothesis, as enunciated in some detail by Prof MPP in his recent Stonehenge book. To me, it looks like a ruling hypothesis, because it has simply been accepted as correct, and has not been tested. There have been no published survey reports or peer-reviewed papers thus far - and this is interesting, given that this project started in 2011, almost two years ago. Why this tardiness? This may be down to the strict veto exercised by the National Geographic Society, which seems to be financing the dig, and which (according to MPP in his Brynberian talk last September) does not allow anything to be published without its consent. Presumably it wants a "world exclusive" in the pages of the National Geographic Magazine. I’m inclined not to believe that - after all, MPP has revealed many of the details of the dig in his book, and that presumably was published with a nod from the publishers of the magazine. Also, if anything spectacular really had been found, nobody would have been able to restrain MPP or any of the others involved from going public. There would have been banner headlines and excited press conferences. No - it is much more likely that nothing very interesting has been unearthed thus far; and that is why the diggers are returning for another session in September 2013. The team members are determined tofind the Holy Grail - incontrovertible evidence of quarrying and the removal of stones from this site all the way to Stonehenge. If at first you don't succeed.........

The 2011 excavation at Rhosyfelin, showing the “abandoned orthostat” of foliated rhyolite which has come from the adjacent rocky spur. Note the apparent stratification in the exposed sediments. If any organic material from any of these sediment beds should yield a radiocarbon date greater than 5,000 years BP, that would invalidate the quarry hypothesis.

We don't know what dating techniques have been used on samples from the site. There are organic materials in some of the exposed layers in the stratigraphy, and so radiocarbon dating has probably been used. But other dating techniques - including cosmogenic or OSL dating - may also have been appropriate with a view to working out the sequence of sedimentation. Why have no dates been published? Well, some bloggers suspect a deep conspiracy on this front [who are these Brian/ - MegP Ed] - and I have to agree with them that this lack of publication probably means that the sequence of events which is emerging is not particularly favourable to the "bluestone quarry" hypothesis. After all, if any date greater than 5,000 yrs BP is given to material stratigraphically above the base of the big "recumbent orthostat" which has appeared in all the photos, that would knock the whole hypothesis for six. I might even speculate that dates conside

Read the rest of this post...
[ Reply to This ]

The latest results from dig at a possible source of the Stonehenge Bluestones by Andy B on Wednesday, 19 September 2012
(User Info | Send a Message)
Professor Mike Parker Pearson (affectionately known as MPP) from University College London is leading a collaborative project involving universities from across the UK in looking at the connection between Preseli and Stonehenge. Their work has brought them back to the area in search of the quarries and sites that may be the start of the longest journey for megaliths anywhere in prehistoric Europe.

Following initial investigations in 2011 the team have returned to excavate a quarry site at Brynberian, North Pembrokeshire,

On Tuesday 18th of September at 7pm, Professor Mike Parker Pearson and team presented a talk at Brynberian Old School, on the results of the project so far.

Cerrig attended, and writes: Good talk here tonight, very interesting. They have found, according to the Geologist on the team, what amounts to as close a match as he's ever seen. This match, of a Rhyolite at Stonehenge, came from a local Neolithic quarry. There are no doubts about it being a genuine quarry, as tools and lots of other evidence have been found there.

It would seem from this that at least one stone found it's way to Stonehenge by human means. This has obvious implication for the glacier theory.

There was much more to the talk, but that was the main theme.

Brian John, the arch sceptic of the human transportation theory, who puts the case for the bluestones having been harvested as glacial erratics from around Salisbury Plain was also at the talk and has written up the 'for' and 'against' sites of the human transportation argument:

Brian John summarises the key features which MPP is using in support of his quarry hypothesis:

1. An elongated stone perpendicular to the lower end of the big recumbent stone which has a damaged upper surface. MPP argued that this damage is the result of other big stones being dragged over it before the current big one was left where it is.

2. The hammer stones and mauls found here and there in the dig. I haven't examined them myself, and I 'm not sure where they have come from, but a photo was shown purporting to be of one of them insitu, embedded in the midst of a litter of angular stones.

3. There is an Iron Age date (around 500 BC?) from charcoal (?) somewhere on the site, which I suppose shows that at that time there were people around here, making fires. Date obtained in 2011?

4. The elongated "railway lines" or "sliding stones" along which big stones were supposedly slid sideways down the slope from the cliff face.

5. A huge stone pit or socket, reputed to have held a big standing stone held in place with packing stones.

Read more on Brian's blog
and in our forum.
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: The latest results from dig at a possible source of the Stonehenge Bluestones by Andy B on Thursday, 20 September 2012
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    From the Forum, Sem writes:
    As Cerrig said the "Old School" was jam-packed, with standing room only when I arrived - I counted over a hundred people! It started with Prof Colin Richards giving a resume of both the 2011 and 2012 digs at Garn Turne (for more on this see http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=4345)

    Excavating the two boulders in the forecourt of what was presumed to be the fallen capstone of the dolmen, has revealed that these were also capstones. Whether these three dolmens were in use simultaneously or at different periods is at present uncertain and the team are awaiting RC-dating results to help clarify the matter.

    MPP then spoke on the excavation at Craig Rhosyfelin (Pont Saeson). Undertaken by Dr Richard Bevins, this had previously involved matching rhyolite chippings found at (and here I am unsure) either The Cursus or Stonehenge itself with the rock outcrop. During the dig the team found what they describe as clear evidence for ancient quarrying at the site. MPP is also working on an idea that the Bluestones originally formed a circle in this region that was moved to Stonehenge lock, stock and barrel.

    He thinks that the nearby hill-fort of Castell Mawr, which has previously been suggested to be a reused henge, may provide an answer. Initial excavations have revealed flint and quartz chippings here but more investigation will be required to show a Neolithic origin for the site. If MPP is correct, this would go a long way towards validating Geoffrey of Monmouth's "fantasy".

    After the talk, both speakers and Dr Bevins answered questions from the audience. As Cerrig said, none of these were particularly probing, but I am certain the results the team have obtained will provide the basis for many more questions.

    All in all, a marvellous eveing and well worth the 2hr drive home - any errors are due to my memory and the lighting in the hall, which made it impossible to take complete notes.[Dedication indeed! - MegP Ed]
    [ Reply to This ]

Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by Vanya on Thursday, 19 January 2012
(User Info | Send a Message)
Any connection between sarsen and saeson do you think?
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by sem on Friday, 21 September 2012
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    Hi Vanya
    In Welsh "Saeson" normally means English(man) and Pont means bridge, so Pont Saeson probably means "Bridge of the English".
    FU Saes is a common shout in pubs during an international rugby match!
    Best wishes
    Sem


    [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by Anonymous on Friday, 21 September 2012
      Saeson has come to mean the English, but it really means their true origins. the Saxons, same as the Scots reference to then. Sashenach,
      [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by garnalw on Sunday, 08 November 2015
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      I've always known of it as Pont Saith Garreg. Bridge of the seven stones in English but both names are used locally.
      [ Reply to This ]

Moved from Pembs sitepage by Runemage on Tuesday, 17 January 2012
(User Info | Send a Message)
by Vanya on Tuesday, 17 January 2012
(User Info | Send a Message) (IP: 41.215.42.210)
I would love any Update on the bluestones from preselis 5,000 years ago

Geologists from the University of Leicester and the National Museum of Wales believe they came from Craig Rhos-y-Felin, near Pont Saeson in north Pembrokeshire.

Full Story:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2076050/Stonehenge-Has-mystery-stones-origin-solved.html
[ Reply to This ]
    Craig rhos y felin by Vanya on Thursday, 19 January 2012
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    When the world was young & I was maybe 21 or so.. collecting sheep along that road I saw two rams facing up to each other and crashing their heads together on the peak of that rock.. it was so dramatic I never forgot it..
    Might be worth looking at the line going west through it too.. the road goes up past the crossroads of the graves (farm called ?cwm Beddwr? where Davies the butcher lived..on up past Llwynhirion school where the milk board used to collect the churns , straight up the hill over the top where the"boys" used to have bonfires; down the other side past an ancient site where Cilgwyn church is & up towards Bedd Arthur, the standing stone on Carningli shoulder. I think it may pass through a couple of fields which had dozens of cup & ring stones around 51.59.14.86N 4.50 04 87.. this is a farmers field & negotiations would have to be made to see it now I think!

    Further over it must cross the stone line which points directly to the Irish hill of kings.. that's on one of the roads over the top to Dinas Cross.. etc..etc! Happy days..
    [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Craig rhos y felin by Vanya on Thursday, 19 January 2012
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      Well I have just been looking at the map of sites & of my childhood & it's obviously not as simple as that.. though very interesting old tracks & Castell Henllys seems important.. Some great days ahead, I think.... I think I will try & be around there in June & re assess..
      [ Reply to This ]

Reported in the National Geographic: Stonehenge Stones Were Moved 160 Miles by Andy B on Monday, 09 January 2012
(User Info | Send a Message)
Some of the volcanic bluestones in the inner ring of Stonehenge officially match an outcrop in Wales that's 160 miles (257 kilometers) from the world-famous site, geologists announced this week.

The discovery leaves two big ideas standing about how the massive pieces of the monument arrived at Salisbury Plain: entirely by human hand, or partly by glacier.

As it looks today, 5,000-year-old Stonehenge has an outer ring of 20- to 30-ton sandstone blocks and an inner ring and horseshoe of 3- to 5-ton volcanic bluestone blocks. (See Stonehenge pictures.)

The monument's larger outer blocks, called the Sarsen stones, were likely quarried some 20 to 30 miles (32 to 48 kilometers) away in what's now England, where sandstone is a common material.

The origin of the bluestones, however, has weighed heavy on the hearts of archaeologists. Rocks resembling the material under a microscope haven't been found anywhere relatively near Stonehenge—at least until now.

Pinpointing the stones' origins is crucial to understanding how so many heavy hunks of rock made their way to the open plain where Stonehenge now stands.

Read more :
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/12/111222-stonehenge-bluestones-wales-match-glacier-ixer-ancient-science/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/news/scientists-discover-source-of-rock-used-in-stonehenges-first-circle-6278894.html

with thanks to neolithique02 for the link
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Reported in the National Geographic: Stonehenge Stones Were Moved 160 Miles by tiompan on Monday, 09 January 2012
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    What the Bevins & Ixter paper is about is that the vast majority of the debitage at Stonehenge can be sourced from Craig Rhosyfelin . There are no standing stones with the same signature , although the stump SH 32 e may be . The rhyolitic debitage may have come from orthostats that were dressed or destroyed , we don't know , but there are none standing today .
    George
    [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Reported in the National Geographic: Stonehenge Stones Were Moved 160 Miles by mountainman on Saturday, 01 September 2012
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      Tiompan -- that's not what they say in the paper. They say that the majority of the debitage IN THOSE PARTS OF THE SITE RECENTLY INVESTIGATED BY DARVILL AND WAINWRIGHT appears to be linked to Rhosyfelin. That's a very different thing! Who knows what the debitage might be made of elsewhere?
      [ Reply to This ]
        Re: Reported in the National Geographic: Stonehenge Stones Were Moved 160 Miles by tiompan on Saturday, 01 September 2012
        (User Info | Send a Message)
        What they say in paper is "Almost all (>99.9%) of the Stonehenge rhyolitic ‘debitage’ can be petrographically matched to rhyolitic rocks found within a few hundred square metres at Pont Saeson and especially to those found at Craig Rhos-y-felin. " Ixer & Bevins 2011 .

        The Darvill and Wainwright 2008 excavations were not the only source of the samples , the other areas include the Aubrey holes , heel stone ,Avenue and trenches 44&45 .
        George
        [ Reply to This ]
          Re: Reported in the National Geographic: Stonehenge Stones Were Moved 160 Miles by mountainman on Wednesday, 18 September 2013
          (User Info | Send a Message)
          You are right -- they have assembled as many fragments as possible from all the digs from which samples were collected. That still does not justify a statement that 99% (or whatever) of the rhyolitic debitage at Stonehenge can be tied back to Rhosyfelin and Pont Saeson. For what it's worth the authors have accepted that they shoulkd not have used that percentage figure. Most of the ground surface layer at Stonehenge has not even been excavated, let alone undergone a systematic search for bits of rhyolite......
          [ Reply to This ]

Re: Pont Saeson bluestones - News on ITV by AngieLake on Wednesday, 21 December 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
Did anyone watch the ITV News tonight (20th Dec 2011)?
A pal alerted me by text that an item "about Stonehenge" would be on, and this was eventually featured right at the end of the programme, and concerned the discovery of the source of the stones.
[There's hardly any 'news' that hasn't appeared here first, is there?!]

I may have missed the words 'bluestones' and an explanation of which ones they were talking about [though don't think I did], but by the time the young woman reporter had finished her piece, I was convinced that she thought it was the sarsens that had been transported from Pont Saeson!
If I'm right, many people would have been misled.

[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Pont Saeson bluestones - News on ITV by Anonymous on Wednesday, 21 December 2011
    Agree, Angie -- that was a crap piece of reporting -- and it did indeed seem that they thought ALL of the stones at Stonehenge had come from Rhosyfelin. Then they showed a pic of Carn Meini and pretended that it was Rhosyfelin. Utterly incompetent........
    [ Reply to This ]

Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by Anonymous on Tuesday, 20 December 2011
When considering possible methods for transporting heavy stones from this site, do not rule out the adjacent river. It looks far too small to be navigable, but it could easily have been made deeper temporarily by constructing dams/weirs, plus waiting for heavy rain. The idea that megaliths were transported by sea, lashed under coracle-type boats that rose on the tide appears to have been suggested by several archaeologists, notably Frank Mitchell. See for example page 20 of http://www.continuitas.org/texts/alinei_benozzo_atlantic.pdf. People accustomed to this technique at sea would have found the idea of creating an artificial tide inland perfectly natural. For the way that people messed about with river depths in Roman times see particularly Raymond Selkirk's book On the Trail of the Legions.
[ Reply to This ]

Scientists discover source of rock used in Stonehenge's first circle by Andy B on Monday, 19 December 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
Scientists have succeeded in locating the exact source of some of the rock believed to have been used 5000 years ago to create Stonehenge's first stone circle.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/news/scientists-discover-source-of-rock-used-in-stonehenges-first-circle-6278894.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/8964899/Scientists-locate-exact-source-of-Stonehenge-stone.html

[I don't think there's anything new here, just the 'nationals' catching up with what we reported months ago. Good to see the glaciar transportation theory getting some exposure, it's never mentioned in BBC programmes about Stonehenge]
[ Reply to This ]

Re: Stonehenge Unhinged video by mountainman on Tuesday, 04 October 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
Tend to agree with those comments -- there are many wonderful sites that must contain fascinating clues to what happened in the Neolithic. But the warring archaeological tribes and their leaders know that research council grant applications with the words "bluestone quarry" in them will have a much greater chance of success than applications that have something else in them -- and the media interest in Stonehenge is unabated. Put the two together -- research funding and media contracts -- and you have a powerful financial incentive to come up with more and more wacky fantasies relating to that enigmatic old monument. Add a whiff of TV stardom and notoriety, and the urge to dig more "Stonehenge holes", either at Stonehenge or anywhere else that seems vaguely appropriate, becomes irresistible......
[ Reply to This ]

Re: Stonehenge Unhinged video by coldrum on Tuesday, 04 October 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
I'm afraid to say this but I turn off now everytime I hear news and theories about Stonehenge. Don't get me wrong It's an interesting monument but it seems to me that archaeologists and those with alternative theories concentrate on it way too much.
The British Isles is covered in prehistoric monuments of all ages. Many are neglected and have not been studied in any detail if at all. Even Avebury is the poor relation to Stonehenge.
I know money is an issue but with so many interesting and unexplored monuments, it would be nice for a change to have a dig at Stanton Drew , Arbour Low, Gors Fawr , Long Meg, Tyrebagger, Twelve Apostles, St Lythans etc.
I'm sure there are people up and down the country who would love to know about local monuments in their areas.
And what new discoveries are waiting to be unearthed. What lies under Stanton Drew for instance. We've had some tantalising glimpses of something special at Stanton Drew but what about a proper dig.
Stonehenge gets all the attention yet surely to understand British Prehistory other monuments should have just as much attention.
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Stonehenge Unhinged video by TheCaptain on Tuesday, 04 October 2011
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    Couldn't agree more Coldrum. All these "bonkers" theories we keep getting, which people inexplicably extrapolate to everything else with no reason whatsoever. Like you, I hear a "new Stonehenge theory" and switch off instantly.

    Unfortunately, this attitude has also made me dislike Stonehenge itself, which is unfair!!!
    [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Stonehenge Unhinged video by Runemage on Tuesday, 04 October 2011
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      Absolutely agreed! Another thing that grates is the amount of articles saying new evidence has come to light and how astounded archaeologists are that ancient man had such capabilities. As though they envision ancient man as barely cognisant and only recognise each individual similarity with us every time there is a mountain of evidence to do so.
      [ Reply to This ]

Stonehenge Unhinged video by Andy B on Friday, 30 September 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
Finally, Brian's well made video questioning many of our assumptions about Stonehenge

Now that some archaeologists are beginning to accept that Stonehenge's "empty quarter" was never built on, that the ancient monument was never finished, and that the same stones were used over and again in various settings by people who could apparently not make up their minds what they wanted, here is a reminder of my little YouTube video. It was deemed very subversive a couple of years ago, but now it seems mild and almost run-of-the-mill. I wonder how long it will be before this becomes the accepted wisdom?

[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Stonehenge Unhinged video by Andy B on Friday, 30 September 2011
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    See also the comments from Anthony Johnson and others on Brian's blog
    http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2011/09/stonehenge-unhinged.html
    [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Stonehenge Unhinged video by coldrum on Tuesday, 04 October 2011
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      "Every generation gets the Stonehenge it deserves - and desires." - Jacquetta
      Hawkes
      [ Reply to This ]
        Re: Stonehenge Unhinged video by mountainman on Tuesday, 04 October 2011
        (User Info | Send a Message)
        Since I made this little video, I/ve been interested to see that the latest Field / Pearson report coming out of the Stonehenge Landscape project makes very similar points -- namely that the sarsens were probably collected up locally, that the monument was probably never finished, and that there is a possibility that the bluestones are erratics, dumped by ice somewhere not too far away.

        If this goes on, I'll soon be welcomed into the warm and cosy archaeological brotherhood..!! Hmmm -- not sure I want that.
        [ Reply to This ]

More on the Rhosyfelin outcrops by Andy B on Friday, 30 September 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
Outcrops and sampling

Excuse the rather crude lines drawn on this map, but you get the message! The grain of the country here, around Craig Rhosyfelin, is roughly SW-NE. I think that somewhere on the blog an unnamed geologist said that much of the rhyolite debitage at Stonehenge could be fixed to within an accuracy of 2m -- to the NE tip of that rocky ridge of Craig Rhosyfelin. That assumes that the very special rhyolite texture identified isn't found anywhere else. I did ask whether the density of sampling points in the neighbourhood allows a statement like that to be made with any degree of certainty.

http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2011/09/outcrops-and-sampling.html

More on the Rhosyfelin outcrops

With reference to the recent dig at Craig Rhosyfelin, conducted by MPP and his team, where did that big slab of rhyolite actually come from? All will be revealed in due course by the geologists, but in looking back at my photos I am struck by the fact that there are teetering pinnacles and precarious slabs all over the place on this rocky spur. Just look at these pics:

http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2011/09/more-on-rhosyfelin-outcrops.html
[ Reply to This ]

The Craig Rhosyfelin dig by Andy B on Friday, 30 September 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
Brian 'Mountainman' John's blog is well worth a read:
The Craig Rhosyfelin dig
http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2011/09/craig-rhosyfelen-dig.html

Craig Rhosyfelin -- Hammer Stones galore
http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2011/09/craig-rhosyfelin-hammer-stones-galore.html

Pont Saeson rhyolite at Stonehenge?
http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2011/09/pont-saeson-rhyolite-at-stonehenge.html
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: The Craig Rhosyfelin dig by Anonymous on Tuesday, 20 December 2011
    the stones were wrapped in brush and timber, almost like a wicker basket so they could be
    rolled and floated, which show us how it was achieved. too much work to load them on a
    raft.they weren't that dumb.
    The next step is to look for evidence of more details as to how the stones
    were rolled and floated down the River Avon to their final destination by early Britons.

    [ Reply to This ]

'An evening of fairy tales' by Andy B on Friday, 30 September 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
Brian 'Mountainman' John gives his impression of the recent evening of talks by Prof Mike Parker Pearson, Colin Richards and Josh Pollard:

Patience, dear reader. This may take a little time. I am still trying to adjust to the real world again, after an evening of fairy tales in the presence of three (no, there may have been 20) learned archaeologists. The occasion was in Newport Memorial Hall, last evening, and the talk was free to allcomers, hosted by the Dyfed Archaeological Trust and paid for by the taxpayer. ("Is that relevant?" I hear you cry?........ Well yes, actually it is......)

More at
http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2011/09/evening-of-fairy-tales.html

A quarryman's tale

Josh Pollard was in no doubt whatsoever that the site of the dig was indeed a Neolithic quarrying site. (I think he even suggested that quarrying might have been going on here since the Mesolithic.....) He suggested that the big stone -- assumed to be a "proto-orthostat" or a big stone intended to be placed upright in the ground -- was levered from the quarrying face above and fell onto the ground, where it was then prepared to be taken away on a sledge. He suggested that its resting angle on the ground was "unnatural" and that it had been levered round to a position where it could be taken away more easily. I'm not sure whether he thought this big stone had been shaped or modified in any way, but he certainly suggested that the excavation pit was full of man-made debris -- sharp-edged fragments and also rounded hammerstones brought from elsewhere -- he suggested that some of them were so round in shape that they probably came from the beach at Newport.

More at
http://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2011/09/quarrymans-tale.html
[ Reply to This ]

Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by mountainman on Saturday, 24 September 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
Probably best to call this site -- and this general area -- Craig Rhosyfelin, since Pont Saeson is some distance away. The geologists are examining the stretch of the valley on either side of the rocky crag where the dig was located -- over a distance of c 500m. brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by PAB on Saturday, 24 September 2011
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    From my own visits and walks along the valley, I'd just like to say that there really was no feeling of a quarry-type location, more the sort of glacial melt-water valley I have see elsewhere in Pembrokeshire and in Iceland.

    Perhaps it would be more neutral (and perhaps more appropriate at the current level of evidence) to use the Portal's category of 'Natural Stone/ Erratic / Other natural feature' to define the location? Whatever the outcome of the other research, this is certainly a very special 'natural feature'!

    As for the name of the location on the Portal, Craig Rhosyfelin is definitely where the outcrop is, so I would go along with mountainman's suggestion in terms of site description and name.
    [ Reply to This ]

Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by mountainman on Saturday, 24 September 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
In case anybody is interested, I have put a number of posts onto my "Stonehenge Thoughts" blog relating to the recent dig by Mike Parker Pearson and others at Craig Rhosyfelin. They think it's a bluestone quarry, and I don't....

There was also a lecture by MPP, Josh Pollard and Colin Richards about the new work in the Preseli area -- I've also put up some posts about that.

[ Reply to This ]

Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by Anonymous on Tuesday, 01 March 2011
Has any expert considered the weather of the period of Bluestone transportation? Could Oxen have been used to drag/roll stones over the prepared ice, and was the weather cold enough for the stones to have been dragged across a frozen tidal estuary?
[ Reply to This ]

Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by Runemage on Sunday, 27 February 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)
This is the other bluestone source of spotted dolerite at Carn Meini, to compare locations.
http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=4287

Fabulous Streetview shot Andy!


[ Reply to This ]

Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by Andy B on Sunday, 27 February 2011
(User Info | Send a Message)

View Larger Map
[ Reply to This ]
    Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by AngieLake on Sunday, 27 February 2011
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    Thanks for this Andy.
    Google Street View really comes into its own here, doesn't it? Wonderful invention. I didn't like the look of that hairpin bend, though!
    Spent quite a while last night looking for 'Pont Saeson' on Streetmap, without any luck, so thanks to this new site page we now know where it is.
    Great stuff.
    [ Reply to This ]
      Re: Pont Saeson bluestone quarry Street View by PAB on Sunday, 27 February 2011
      (User Info | Send a Message)
      Angie - we often use this route when visiting Pentre Ifan and I remember first coming across the outcrop 20years or so ago when exploring the lanes, and it certainly has a very special feel. Now that I realise just why I was drawn to it, I must look out some old photos!

      I hope anyone visiting as a result of all the discussions realises just how narrow these lanes are....and I do feel rather sorry for the people who live next to the ford, as their peace could be shattered this summer?
      [ Reply to This ]

Your Name: Anonymous [ Register Now ]
Subject:


Add your comment or contribution to this page. Spam or offensive posts are deleted immediately, don't even bother

<<< What is five plus one as a number? (Please type the answer to this question in the little box on the left)
You can also embed videos and other things. For Youtube please copy and paste the 'embed code'.
For Google Street View please include Street View in the text.
Create a web link like this: <a href="https://www.megalithic.co.uk">This is a link</a>  

Allowed HTML is:
<p> <b> <i> <a> <img> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <tt> <li> <ol> <ul> <object> <param> <embed> <iframe>

We would like to know more about this location. Please feel free to add a brief description and any relevant information in your own language.
Wir möchten mehr über diese Stätte erfahren. Bitte zögern Sie nicht, eine kurze Beschreibung und relevante Informationen in Deutsch hinzuzufügen.
Nous aimerions en savoir encore un peu sur les lieux. S'il vous plaît n'hesitez pas à ajouter une courte description et tous les renseignements pertinents dans votre propre langue.
Quisieramos informarnos un poco más de las lugares. No dude en añadir una breve descripción y otros datos relevantes en su propio idioma.