Stonehenge is one of the most widely renowned images on the planet. The outline instantly recognised by millions as representing ‘Pre-historic Britain’, is constantly circulated throughout the UK and the rest of the world by personal postcards and the mass media.
The silhouette of Stonehenge is frequently deployed as a symbol of great longitude and permanence — its outline being used as an icon by history societies, insurance companies, manufacturers, breweries, councils, and housing associations. Many will therefore find it surprising that the Stonehenge witnessed at the ‘Millennium’, can be considered less than 50 years old.
Restoration plans were resisted by the owners of Stonehenge throughout the Victorian period, but with the age consigned to memory, renovation was soon implemented through a stone being placed upright in concrete in 1901.
The restoration did not stop there. A further six stones were straightened and set in concrete in 1919 and 1920, which also necessitated moving four others. In 1958 three more were straightened in concrete with two others reset, three more in 1959, and four in 1964.
The excavation of the Altar stone and the re-erection of the Great Triathlon are perhaps the most noticeable features of the restoration, but this masks the extensive work in securing the monument in a permanent state.
In the 21st century it will therefore be easier to report on what is original as opposed to that altered, as only a handful of the ‘prehistoric’ stones stand much as they were 100 years ago.
Twentieth century ‘restoration’ did not return Stonehenge to how it appeared during prehistory, or indeed as it was when the Romans first saw it. The silhouette is not that seen by Victorians celebrating the turn of the century, or those celebrating the solstice, nor is it the Stonehenge seen and investigated by the antiquarian forefathers of modern archaeology. It is therefore not the Stonehenge of William Cunnington or Sir Richard Colt Hoare, or of the first Inspector of Ancient Monuments — General Pitt Rivers.
It is not the Stonehenge of Thomas Hardy, or of the climax in which he set Tess of the D’Urbervilles. It is not the Stonehenge painted by Turner or Constable, and thus not the Stonehenge sold on cards, posters, and calendars in their many thousands each year. If anything, it is the Stonehenge of the 20th century heritage industry, and seemingly few are aware of this fact.
Asking those leaving Stonehenge one recent afternoon to describe what they had seen, not one person was aware of the renovation. Some of these people had listened to the Stonehenge audio tour, others had followed guides bought in the Stonehenge shop, and some had discussions with Stonehenge staff.
None, however, had come away with knowledge of what they had actually seen, as questions about renovation are not prompted by anything made obvious on site.
A few older published guides to the site actually included select images of the restoration of Stonehenge. These images served as explanation of the changes, and celebration of both scientific retrieval and restorative preservation. Such pictures seem to have been dropped from more modern guides, however, and only passing reference remains.
As a consequence, the restoration is not an obvious part of the Stonehenge story. The vast majority of visitors and those subjected to the image of Stonehenge therefore believe they are witnessing exactly what remains unadulterated after 5,000 years.
It can of course be argued that Stonehenge has not changed in essence, but if so the symbolism of Stonehenge has equally remained unaffected.
Stonehenge is not only a powerful symbol of what made Britain ‘Great’ and deployed as such for political and historical purposes, but the public should surely be made aware of the reconstruction history during a period when it is proposed to spend huge sums of public money creating a Stonehenge theme park.
The long awaited new visitor facilities undoubtedly hinder the inclusion of a more extensive history, but if the ‘prehistoric theme park’ planned to accompany this relocation of facilities goes ahead, it will surely compound rather than remove the deception of the visitor experience.
Apart from the restoration being a fascinating part of Stonehenge history that enables visitors to make a knowledgeable judgment on the future of Stonehenge, if exposed to the realities of the restoration, the public can judge for itself if preservation is preferable to renovation. It could, for example, be argued that without restorative treatment there would be nothing to see now at Stonehenge, other than perhaps an abandoned pile
of stones. This, however, is perhaps how Stonehenge would best be translated and most readily understood.
An easy way to imagine how Stonehenge appeared while under construction, is to parallel what we see now with a set of child’s building bricks left on the floor after some game. Some blocks remain in some semblance of order known only to the designer, and the surrounding area is littered with other blocks that are yet to be considered or used, and others that were tried and discarded. If we
now imagine that a visitor introduces a further set of building blocks, of a different size, shape, colour, and perhaps a new idea or concept to go with it, we may recognise the impact that new blocks or new people might have on the original arrangement.
It is not difficult to visualise new ideas and new generations of people influencing Stonehenge over its first 1,200 years existence, especially if we remind ourselves of the changes many Saxon churches have undergone in a similar time scale.
Stonehenge was not altered by mediaeval extensions, the Reformation, or the Victorian Gothic Revival, but it did witness natural disasters, territorial and other disputes perhaps, and almost certainly plagues and killer diseases.
We should, for example, recall that the Stonehenge stones were shaped by hammering, and this would have almost certainly have seen Stonehenge people inhaling dust that would inevitably result in death from silicosis.
The lives of many 19th and 20th century stone-cutters employed in the sarsen industry were similarly terminated by lung disease, and those in the vicinity of the sarsen stones being worked at Stonehenge may well have been affected by related disorders.
If this is an example of why the stones were left in incomplete arrangements and subsequently rearranged, it is hardly surprising that later generations had something different in mind to the originators, and we can now only imagine what Stonehenge was all about.
That the missing story of the prehistoric changes keeps us from understanding Stonehenge, illustrates what a mistake it is to omit the story of renovation from the site.
Despite the seeming permanence of the landscape, archaeologist Jacquetta Hawkes claimed that each generation gets the Stonehenge they deserve.
This may have been true of past generations — but future generations will only get the Stonehenge they deserve if kept informed of exactly what they are witnessing.
Further reading: Christopher Chippendale’s revised edition of Stonehenge Complete, 1994, & Barbara Bender’s Stonehenge: Making Space, (Berg, 1998).
• Story originally published by •
Western Daily Press / Bristol UK - January 9 2001
Stonehenge And Avebury Modern Rebuilds Sensation[Original headline: How they rebuilt Stonehenge]
For decades the official Stonehenge guidebooks have been full of fascinating facts and figures and theories surrounding the world’s greatest prehistoric monument.
What the glossy brochures do not mention, however, is the systematic rebuilding of the 4,000 year old stone circle throughout the 20th Century.
A million visitors a year are awe-struck as they look back in time into another age and marvel at the primitive technology and muscle-power which must have been employed transporting the huge monoliths and raising them on Salisbury Plain.
They gasp as they are told about this strangely spiritual site .... mankind’s first computer, its standing stones and precise lintels, lining up magically and mysteriously with the heavens above and the solstice suns.
But now, as if to head off a potential great archaeological controversy — and following interest displayed by
historical researcher Brian Edwards and the Western Daily Press — the brochures will be re-written, to include the “forgotten years.”
The years when teams of navvies sat aboard the greatest cranes in the British Empire to hoist stones upright; drag leaning trilithons into position, replace fallen lintels which once sat atop the huge sarsens.
As Mr Edwards — the erstwhile enfant terrible of British archaeology following his revelations that nearby Avebury was a total 20s and 30s rebuild by marmalade millionaire Alexander Keiller — says:
“What we have been looking at is a 20th Century landscape, which is reminiscent of what Stonehenge MIGHT have been like thousands of years ago.
“It has been created by the heritage industry and is NOT the creation of prehistoric peoples.
“What we saw at the Millennium is less than 50 years old.”
In archaeological terms the re-writing of the guidebooks is dynamite.
English Heritage run Stonehenge on behalf of the nation, and an English Heritage insider revealed: “Dark forces were at work in the 70s , when a decision was taken to drop the information about the restorations. Now that is about to change.”
Mr Edwards said: “Let’s face it, Stonehenge was historically cleansed. And the true history was hidden away.
“There should be no shame about the series of restorations. That’s what happened ...and is a fascinating part of the Stonehenge story which should be told.
“I think it is absolutely brilliant that the guidebook is going to be re-drawn. It is a remarkable achievement, and I believe the Western Daily Press is central to the rethink.”
The first restoration of Stonehenge was launched 100 years ago this year. And, in 1901, as the builders went to work, The Times letters column was full of bucolic missives of complaint.
But the first stage of “restoration” thundered ahead regardless and the style guru of the day, John Ruskin, released the maxim which was to outlive him ....“Restoration is a lie,” he stormed.
Nevertheless the Stonehenge makeover was to gather momentum and more work was carried out in 1919, 1920,1958, 1959 and 1964.
Christopher Chippindale, curator at the Cambridge University Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, and author of Stonehenge Complete, admits:
“Nearly all the stones have been moved in some way and are standing in concrete.”
The guide book Stonehenge and Neighbouring Monuments, and the audio tour of the Henge omit any comprehensive mention of the rebuilding in the 20th Century.
Only on page 18 is there a slight reference .... “A number of the leaning and fallen stones have been straightened and re-erected.”
But even that official guide book does contain clues to the large scale restoration, which was not deemed worth a full entry.
Why does John Constable’s 1835 painting of the Henge on pages 18 and 19 look so vastly different from the latter-day pristine photograph across pages 28 and 29?
Reason: A lot of restoration work had taken place in between the two images being recorded.
And, during long hot summers it would be possible — if one could get near to the stones — to see the turf peeling back to reveal the concrete boots into which the majority of the stones are now set. A dead give-away, but difficult to spot now as proximity to the henge is limited.
During one of the phases of work a Bostonian professor had the temerity to ask a senior member of the restoration team how they knew exactly where to place the fallen stones. He was sent swiftly on his way with a flea in his ear.
But the siting of the restored stones remains a haunting question.
Our pictures clearly show the rebuilding in progress. Some were discovered by Mr Chippindale and were used in a revised edition of his book. Many of those have since been lost.
Others were found by Mr Edwards who unearthed guide books from the time when Stonehenge was not ashamed of its past and featured photographs and stories of the restorations.
But the historic dark ages are over for Stonehenge, said English Heritage’s Senior Archaeologist Dave Batchelor, who said the guidebook was to be revised — and he was the person tasked to do it.
“I first became involved with Stonehenge in 1993. The decision not to cover the work in any detail was taken before my time,” he said.
“The work is a very important part of the history of Stonehenge and when people are told about it they are fascinated. The information was dropped in the 1970s, but we are moving to remedy that.”
“The news is sensational,” said Mr Edwards a doctorate student at the University of the West of England.
“Once I realised how much work had been carried out, I was amazed to discover that practically no-one outside of the henge knew of its reconstruction in the last 100 years. I have always thought that if people are bothering to make a trip to Stonehenge, from home or abroad, then the least they should expect is a true story.”
When we visited the site recently hundreds of visitors from all over the world were pouring into Stonehenge.
Some 700,000 visit the world heritage site every year. Millions more see it from the adjoining roads.
On the Stonehenge bus returning to Salisbury, laden with international tourists, none of the several questioned had any idea that what they had seen had undergone a complete facelift. They thought it had been standing like that for 4,000 years.
There was another clue to be found in the recently released text book, Seeing History: Public History in Britain Now, which asks:
“And what of the not-so-ancient place Stonehenge? It has not escaped the attentions of the heritage industry: A stone was straightened and set in concrete in 1901, six further stones in 1919 and 1920, three more in 1959 and four in 1964.
“There was also the excavation of the Altar stone and re-erection of the Trilithon in 1958.”
Now English Heritage has a “masterplan” to build a tunnel and put the landscape back to ‘how it was’.
The author, Mr Edwards, continues: “ Such has been the impact on the landscape that the monuments at Avebury and Stonehenge which future generations will inherit are neither the creation of prehistoric peoples nor of the communities who have occupied these lands during history.
“The future will instead inherit something constructed by the heritage industry.
“The instigators of the English heritage landscape were essentially amateurs, working by trial and error.
“Yet their landscape is endorsed and promoted as our collective cultural heritage by the custodians of our past who omit the extent of modern interference and reconstruction from their guides and museum displays.”
Elspeth Henderson, spokesperson for English Heritage and Stonehenge, agreed much work had been carried out on the monument which the public was not aware of. But she said English Heritage had been involved in telling the full story in an academic book, Stonehenge: A Monument In Its Landscape. It was also covered in a more popular publication, Stonehenge — Mysteries of the Stones and Landscape.
“We are fully aware of what is being claimed and you will find it dealt with in the larger books on Stonehenge,” she said. “ You are right that quite a lot of people don’t know what went on in the 20th Century.
“I don’t think we have deliberately sought not to talk about the reconstruction. It depends what you focus on, and we think most people are interested in why it was built and the different elements of its development.”
‘No more restoration’
Christopher Chippindale is one of the greatest living authorities on Stonehenge. His Stonehenge Complete won the British Archaeological book award, but it is mostly in its revised edition you will find discussion and pictures of the “lost” history of Stonehenge in the 20th Century.
Mr Chippindale, curator in the Cambridge University Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology and editor of the archaeological journal Antiquity, identifies three campaigns of restoration.
“I never cease to find it extraordinary that a monument which is 4,000 years old and of unknown purpose can cause people to be so angry and even move people to violence every year at solstice time. But I am thrilled, bemused and amused that Stonehenge is so alive today across the world.”
The first restoration was in 1901. The next phase began in 1919 and went on into the 20s and was much the most comprehensive. The work was led by Colonel William Hawley, a respected member of the Stonehenge society, experienced excavator of Old Sarum and friendly with the Office of Works, funding the operation. The next major work was in 1958 at a cost of £8,500.
The problem of raising trilithon stones was solved by bringing in the largest mobile cranes in Britain, those on standby in Bristol in case a Bristol Brabazon bellyflopped on landing. The work was overseen by the respected professorial team of Atkinson and Piggott.
By now Stonehenge had been returned to its form in the earliest paintings. Something reminiscent of the henge as it was in 1580. But three more stones were to be straightened in 1959, and even in 1963 another recently fallen stone was hauled skywards again.
By now only seven of the circle’s uprights of the sarsen building were in their original sockets.
Mr Chippindale says: “I think the 1901 restoration was sensible because the stone would have fallen over. But the work under Colonel Hawley in the 20s is a sad story. It was much too vigorous.”
“In retrospect what he did was very regrettable. But we have to be grateful he didn’t do something worse. Just down the road at Avebury, Alexander Keiller was busy doing his restoration.
“It was the fashion, unfortunately. The work in the 50s was reasonable. The stones had fallen and were put back up. That was the simple rationale. It is clearly understood now there won’t be any more restoration.”
Stonehenge Complete (revised and updated) by Christopher Chippindale, is published by Thames and Hudson, cost £12.95.
