Conundrum 11 – Periglacial Stripes…………………………. Book Extract (The Great Stonehenge Hoax)

When was the wheel invented?

The Problem

Deep chalk cuts lines found under the surface of the Avenue, which lead from the Stonehenge monument site to ‘Stonehenge Bottom’ a valley in the NE of the landscape, had always created speculation, especially today as the ‘experts’ came up with a ludicrous argument that had caught the mainstream archaeologists imagination when they suggested that these were Periglacial Stripes from the last ice age, and this was the reason for our ancestors built Stonehenge at this place.  These lines are just a foot or so below the topsoil on a known roadway that dates back older than the B-road that passed the stones that have now been removed.

The Solution

This is probably the most provocative subject in history – who invented the wheel and when?  What should be remembered when considering this as a key ‘landmark’ invention in the progress of humanity is that the wheel is useless without a road. The current belief is that the wheel was invented in Mesopotamia in about the 4th millennium BCE. This, however, is archaeological gobbledygook as the concept of moving items around on top of a round surface, like a tree trunk, goes back to the Neanderthals, I would imagine, if not before.

Archaeologists and historians would argue that the concept of the ‘axle’ connected to two free-running discs constitutes an actual wheel technology. However, in 2012, a Museum in Turkey found a ‘toy car’ made of stone with wheels in the northern Kurdish town of Qoser (Kızıltepe), pushing back the accepted date of wheel technology to the 6th millennium (5500BCE). The interesting aspect of this discovery was that it was a toy and not the real thing. This may be because the wood would not last this long, and even the toy car’s timber axle had to be replaced by a modern stick by the museum because it had rotted. But it should be kept in mind that this may represent an accurate record of a wagon or cart with wheels, but without a flat surface, it would be useless. (The Stonehenge Hoax – Periglacial Stripes)

We have seen these kinds of ‘revolutionary inventions’ many times in history and the two most famous ‘useless’ inventions that spring to my mind are the ‘Steam Engine’, and the ‘Windmill’ – both inventions were available to the Romans in 2000 years ago, the original steam engine was a toy that spun around when a candle was placed under the brass ball with pipe outlets. Diagrams of this unique invention are shown in Hero of Alexandria’s epic work on pneumatics, which offers many other unused (or currently undiscovered) hydraulic devices.  The windmill, again another mechanism well known to the Romans, was also made as a toy for children, for those who need to construct a full life-size version, at a considerable cost, which can only be used when the wind blows – in comparison to a treadmill that can work 24/7 when you have slaves?

As an example of this limited efficiency of the wheel, the American Indians also had knowledge and access to ‘real wheels’ before they were placed on their reservations, but they continued their nomadic lifestyle with horses that pulled sleighs as the distribution of weight on unmade roads made it less likely for the sleigh to get stuck and bogged down – unlike the wagon trains that could only be used seasonally as the roads were unsuitable for winter weather.  Moreover, wagons suited the lifestyle of the white pioneers as not everyone could or wanted to get to their destination quickly, unlike the indigenous populations that survived on the movement of herds.

Where and when did our ancestors invent the wheel or cart, and for what purpose?

To answer this question, we need to find some kind of ‘road’ or a natural clearing that could be used as a road. If we could find such an area, we might be able to spot the telltale signs of these wheeled carts and, if we are fortunate, the cart itself.  (The Stonehenge Hoax – Periglacial Stripes)

When Doggerland had finally sunk into the North Sea, The Megalithic Builders built Stonehenge, and around 4300BCE, they changed the site to incorporate a new mooring place from the original car park in the North West (which pointed towards the Preseli Mountains where they obtained their sacred healing Bluestones), to a new mooring place in the North-East towards the Solstice midsummer sunrise and their old homeland Atlantis/Doggerland.

The New Shoreline was about a kilometre from the Stonehenge site, so they built what we call ‘The Avenue’, a long straight road about 30 metres wide, too wide for a walkway (which we have seen in places like Avebury is much narrower) but large enough to get two carts going either way with ease. Sadly, for archaeologists, a long ‘road-like’ prehistoric trackway will not persuade them that it was constructed as a road for carts, even if it is concave in shape and has water drainage gullies on both sides – like a Roman road. (The Stonehenge Hoax – Periglacial Stripes)

William Hawley in 1922, Atkinson in the 1950s and Mike Parker-Pearson in 2009 found what they believed to be periglacial stripes – they thought that these stripes were the product of rocks being dragged along the floor by ice glaciers or the constant freezing and thawing of the soil known as tundra. 

Why am I mentioning such an essential natural feature seen throughout the world? 

Well, the great surprise is that they are not natural. These features are found only on the Avenue, not outside the 30m width of the Avenue. Moreover, none are found in the excavated old car park some 50m away, or even inside the Stonehenge enclosure.  If they were natural, they should be found either side of the Avenue or past the ‘Heel Stone’ – but mysteriously, they are not. Archaeologists would have you believe that this strange ‘narrow passage’ event happened naturally during the last ice age, which supposedly explains why they built Stonehenge where it is. (The Stonehenge Hoax – Periglacial Stripes)

However, the most apparent error by these archaeologists in their assumptions is that we know that the Avenue was built AFTER the Phase I of the site construction (including the ditches) as the ends of the Avenue ditches do not line up and stop short of the Stonehenge Ditches, which would not be the case if periglacial stripes were there first?

Perhaps this strange event brought the stones to Stonehenge?

Well, could we not argue that it is possible the Bluestones of Phase I mentioned earlier were delivered via this route on a glacier? This is a nice theory, but sadly, the glacier would be travelling the wrong way. We now know that the Bluestones came from Wales and the Preseli mountains, which are northwest of the site (Solstice midsummer sunset), not the northeast, and the last ice sheet stopped at the Bristol Channel 200km away and travelled in a southeast direction.

So, it is only in previous ice ages that an ice sheet could have reached Stonehenge, which was about 400,000 years ago, and could have come from the northeast. However, would this leave stripes only 30 metres wide? The other problem with these ‘natural features’ is the depth at which they were found, and supposedly half a million years old, yet just under the surface. (The Stonehenge Hoax – Periglacial Stripes)

If it’s not a glacier, what could have made these tracks?

Similar ruts have been found elsewhere in the world, and particularly in Europe. However, the most famous tracks can still be seen today in Malta, which played a crucial role in another of Humanity’s trade routes.  Misrah Ghar il-Kbir (informally known as Clapham Junction) is a prehistoric site in Malta near the Dingli Cliffs. It is best known for its “cart ruts” – a complex network of tracks gouged in the rock. However, the age and purpose of the tracks are still a mystery in Maltese history. (The Stonehenge Hoax – Periglacial Stripes)

In general, most archaeologists presume that the site was established around 2000 BCE, when new settlers arrived from Sicily to begin the Bronze Age in Malta.  It is reported that the “Clapham Junction” nickname was given by an Englishman, who later wrote that it reminded him of the busy railway station Clapham Junction in London. The tracks (known and signposted in Malta as Cart Ruts) can be found at several sites in Malta and Gozo.  Busewdien in St Paul’s Bay, Naxxar, San Gwann, and Bidnija are good examples of cart tracks on the island of Malta. Gozo’s best cart ruts are on the Ta’ Cenc plateau, Sannat. The Misraћ Gћar il-Kbir site near the Dingli Cliffs in the south of the island is probably the most impressive – they form a real “traffic jam” here. Also called cart ruts, they are up to 60 cm deep and have an average spacing of 110 to 140 cm. Some cross while others form junctions. This creates the illusion of a great railway station switching yard.

Is this what William Hawley found originally in 1922? 

He believed so and immediately called them ‘cart tracks’ because he lived in a time when horse-drawn carriages were common, and their tracks were easily identified.  The cart ruts in Malta are not the only reports of earlier wheel use for transportation. In Portugal, in a mountain called Vale d’egua, cart tracks have been found cut into the rock (which by its very nature is undatable) but are located at an altitude of 800m, and they appear ‘out of nowhere’, but it is possible to follow them quite a distance. We can solve this mystery quite simply, as these carts would be used to move goods to and from boats, and at the time of these ruts, the groundwater level would, like we have found throughout Britain, be much higher than today – hence the height and apparent disappearance of the cart tracks.

Why build a road?

The second phase of Stonehenge (the Sarsen Stones) was much heavier than the Bluestones (twelve tonnes versus four tonnes), so the Bluestones could effortlessly be dragged or even carried by the Megalithic Builders as they were tall and heavy, weighing in at about 150kg, so as little as ten fit men would easily lift a stone weighing four tonnes on a ‘stretcher’ type stone carrier. In contrast, the larger Sarsens would need sledges or wheeled transportation. As we have seen previously, such technology has existed since the 6th Millennium BCE, in the form of ‘toy cars’ in Black Sea ports on the trading routes of Doggerland. Therefore, Stonehenge Avenue was Britain’s first ‘road’, and a wheeled cart was first used to move the immense Sarsen Stones from the boats moored at Stonehenge Bottom at the end of 4300BCE. (The Stonehenge Hoax – Periglacial Stripes)

Yes. The strongest 2026 update is no longer the T9 model. The strongest update is that the Stonehenge Bottom borehole dataset has now been completed, and it independently confirms the hydrological interpretation.

Here’s the direction I’d take:

2026 Update: The Stonehenge Bottom Borehole Data Have Now Settled the Question

When this article was updated in 2025, the argument against the so-called “periglacial stripes” relied primarily on the T9 hydrological model. The conclusion was simple: the Avenue corridor was underwater when archaeologists claim these stripes were visible and used to align the monument.

Since then, the investigation has moved beyond modelling.

The complete Stonehenge Bottom borehole dataset has now been analysed.

The results provide direct physical evidence from beneath the landscape itself.

The Fundamental Problem

The periglacial-stripe hypothesis requires archaeologists to believe four things:

1. The stripes were visible on the ground surface.
2. The landscape was dry enough for them to be observed.
3. The Avenue was laid out using these surface features.
4. The features survived from the last Ice Age until the Neolithic.

The borehole evidence now challenges every one of these assumptions.

What the Boreholes Reveal

The Stonehenge Bottom boreholes show a concentration of water-related deposits at consistent elevations across multiple independent boreholes.

This is precisely what would be expected if the valley functioned as a long-term watercourse or flooded basin.

It is not what would be expected in a dry landscape dominated by preserved surface frost features.

The remarkable aspect of the dataset is that the deposits cluster by elevation rather than depth.

When analysed against the Ordnance Datum height, the water-related horizons consistently occur at the same levels across the valley, indicating that they were controlled by a common water surface rather than by random geological processes.

The landscape was responding to hydrology.

Not periglacial stripes.

Why This Matters

Periglacial stripes are fragile surface features.

They are not engineered structures.

They cannot remain visible and intact within an active hydrological system subjected to:

• Groundwater fluctuations
• Seasonal flooding
• Sediment deposition
• Erosion
• Channel migration

Yet the borehole evidence demonstrates that Stonehenge Bottom was precisely such a hydrological environment.

The valley was not a dry chalk corridor waiting for Neolithic surveyors.

It was part of a dynamic water system.

The Fatal Contradiction

The archaeological explanation now faces a simple problem.

If the boreholes are correct, the landscape was water-dominated.

If the landscape were water-dominated, the stripes could not have functioned as visible alignment markers.

If the stripes could not serve as alignment markers, the entire explanation of the Avenue’s alignment would collapse.

The theory depends upon a dry landscape.

The boreholes demonstrate a wet one.

Both cannot be true.

The Simpler Explanation

The Avenue follows the same route because it follows the hydrology.

The so-called stripes are not the reason the Avenue exists.

They are simply geological features that happened to occupy the same corridor later used by water and subsequently by people.

Archaeologists have reversed cause and effect.

The Avenue was not built because of the stripes.

Both the Avenue and the stripes follow the same route because it was controlled by the underlying landscape and its water system.

Conclusion

The 2025 T9 model suggested that the periglacial-stripe theory was environmentally impossible.

The 2026 Stonehenge Bottom borehole analysis now provides direct subsurface evidence supporting that conclusion.

What began as a mathematical challenge has become a geological one.

The landscape beneath Stonehenge does not support the traditional explanation.

The more evidence we recover from the ground itself, the harder it becomes to argue that the Avenue was aligned using visible Ice Age stripes.

The evidence increasingly points in a different direction:

Stonehenge was designed around water.

Not frost.

🔵 2025 Update: The T9 River-Height Proof Completely Invalidates the Periglacial Stripe Theory

Since this article was first published, we have completed the T9 River-Height Mathematical Model, which reconstructs the groundwater and river levels around Stonehenge across the early Holocene.
The findings are so clear-cut that they require a public correction to the archaeological narrative.

The T9 model shows that at the time the Avenue was supposedly aligned using “periglacial stripes,” the entire Avenue route was underwater.

Not partially wet.
Not marshy.
Submerged. Long-term.

This single fact collapses the entire periglacial-alignment hypothesis.

🔵 Why This Matters: Periglacial Features Cannot Survive Underwater

Archaeologists have claimed that “periglacial stripes” or “meltwater channels” formed during the last glaciation and just happened to align with solstice sunrise — and that Neolithic builders chose Stonehenge’s location because these markings were visible on the ground.

The T9 hydrological reconstruction proves this is impossible:

If the Avenue corridor were underwater, those delicate surface features would have been erased by:

• Hydraulic scouring
• Sediment redistribution
• Bank collapse
• Sheet wash and over-topping
• Reworking of the chalk by sustained flow

Periglacial stripes are shallow, fragile polygonal cracks.
They cannot survive decades — let alone centuries — of fluvial action.

You do not get crisp “visible surface stripes” in an active river channel.

You get reworked chalk, mud deposition, and smoothing — the exact opposite of what MPP’s team claimed to see.

🔵 Archaeologists’ Core Assumption Was Environmentally Impossible

The periglacial hypothesis depends on two assumptions:

1. The stripes were visible on dry ground.
2. The ground was dry when Neolithic people built the Avenue.

The T9 model completely destroys assumption #2.
If the ground was underwater, then:

• The stripes could not have been visible.
• The stripes could not have survived.
• The Avenue could not have been laid out on foot.
• The “alignment-by-glacial-chance” story collapses.

A submerged landscape cannot guide architectural decisions based on surface marks.

🔵 Correct Interpretation: The Avenue Was a Watercourse, Not a Footpath

The T9 river height data reinforces everything established in The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis:

• Stonehenge Phase 1 was built on a peninsula surrounded by water.
• The Avenue followed a natural waterway, not a land track.
• The solstice line makes hydrological sense, not glacial sense.
• The site is maritime, not terrestrial, in origin.

Once the Avenue is restored to its true environmental context — a post-glacial river channel, not dry land — the archaeology suddenly stops contradicting itself.

🔵 Conclusion: The “Periglacial Stripe” Theory Is Not Just Weak — It Is Geologically Impossible

The new T9 mathematical proof forces a decisive correction:

❌ The Avenue was not laid out on glacial stripes.

❌ The ground was not dry when the stripes were supposedly “used.”

❌ The stripes could not have survived prolonged inundation.

✅ The Avenue corridor was underwater.

✅ The landscape was shaped by hydrology, not ice.

✅ The entire periglacial-alignment hypothesis must be abandoned.

Unearth the Astonishing Secrets of Stonehenge (The Stonehenge Hoax)

Introduction

Video

Synopsys

Stonehenge, a timeless enigma etched in stone and earth, has stood as a formidable puzzle challenging the intellects of archaeologists and historians alike. Despite the myriad attempts, including books, TV programs, and academic conferences, the secrets of these ancient stones and their encircling ditches have proven elusive. Against this backdrop, we scrutinise the existing thirteen hypotheses, each presenting its narrative but collectively lacking a coherent thread.

In adopting the deductive reasoning akin to Sherlock Holmes, we endeavour to weave these disparate threads into a unified tapestry that not only unravels the mystery of Stonehenge but also shakes the foundations of established academic narratives. This intellectual journey may induce some discomfort as we challenge conventional perceptions and invite a reevaluation of our understanding of the past. Apologies are extended in advance for any cognitive dissonance, but the pursuit of truth and reason mandates an unfiltered presentation of the facts.

So, fasten your seatbelts for an expedition into the archaeological unknown.

As we navigate this intellectual rollercoaster, be prepared for a revelation that might reshape our understanding of Stonehenge and question the foundations of our historical narratives. The dawn of a new archaeological era awaits promising insights that could leave even the most curious minds astonished. As we delve into this intellectual rabbit hole, be ready for a revelation that could astonish Alice. (The Stonehenge Hoax)

Robert John Langdon (2023) – (The Stonehenge Hoax)

The Journey

Langdon’s journey was marked by meticulous mapping and years of research, culminating in a hypothesis that would reshape our understanding of prehistoric Britain. He proposed that much of the British Isles had once been submerged in the aftermath of the last ice age, with these ancient sites strategically positioned along the ancient shorelines. His groundbreaking maps offered a fresh perspective, suggesting that Avebury had functioned as a bustling trading hub for our ancient ancestors. This audacious theory challenged the prevailing notion that prehistoric societies were isolated and disconnected, instead highlighting their sophistication in trade and commerce.

In the realm of historical discovery, the audacious thinkers, the mavericks who dare to question established narratives, propel our understanding forward. Robert John Langdon is undeniably one of these thinkers. With a deep passion for history and an unyielding commitment to his research, he has unearthed a hidden chapter in the story of Avebury that transcends the boundaries of time and offers fresh insights into our shared human history.

As Langdon’s trilogy, ‘The Stonehenge Enigma,’ continues to explore these groundbreaking theories, it beckons us to embark on a journey of discovery, to challenge our assumptions, and to embrace the possibility that the past is far more complex and interconnected than we ever imagined. With its ancient stones and enigmatic avenues, Avebury continues to whisper its secrets to those who dare to listen, inviting us to see history through a new lens—one illuminated by the audacious vision of Robert John Langdon.

(The Stonehenge Hoax – Periglacial Stripes)

The Book

Biography

Robert John Langdon, a polymathic luminary, emerges as a writer, historian, and eminent specialist in LiDAR Landscape Archaeology.

His intellectual voyage has been interwoven with stints as an astute scrutineer in government and grand corporate bastions, a tapestry spanning British Telecommunications, Cable and Wireless, British Gas, and the esteemed University of London.

A decade hence, Robert’s transition into retirement unfurled a chapter of insatiable curiosity. This phase saw him immerse himself in Politics, Archaeology, Philosophy, and the enigmatic realm of Quantum Mechanics. His academic odyssey traversed the venerable corridors of knowledge hubs such as the Museum of London, University College London, Birkbeck College, The City Literature Institute, and Chichester University.

In the symphony of his life, Robert is a custodian of three progeny and a pair of cherished grandchildren. His sanctuary lies ensconced in the embrace of West Wales, where he inhabits an isolated cottage, its windows framing a vista of the boundless sea – a retreat from the scrutinising gaze of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, an amiable clandestinity in the lap of nature.

Exploring Prehistoric Britain: A Journey Through Time

My blog delves into the fascinating mysteries of prehistoric Britain, challenging conventional narratives and offering fresh perspectives grounded in cutting-edge research, particularly LiDAR technology. I invite you to explore some key areas of my research. For example, the Wansdyke, often cited as a defensive structure, is re-examined in light of new evidence. I’ve presented my findings in my blog post Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’, and a Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover video further visualises my conclusions.

My work also often challenges established archaeological dogma. I argue that many sites, such as Hambledon Hill, commonly identified as Iron Age hillforts, are not what they seem. My posts Lidar Investigation Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’ and Unmasking the “Iron Age Hillfort” Myth explore these ideas in detail and offer an alternative view. Similarly, sites like Cissbury Ring and White Sheet Camp receive re-evaluations based on LiDAR analysis in my posts “Lidar Investigation Cissbury Ring through time” and “Lidar Investigation White Sheet Camp,“ revealing fascinating insights into their true purpose. I have also examined South Cadbury Castle, often linked to the mythical Camelot56.

My research also extends to ancient water management, including the role of canals and other linear earthworks. I have discussed the true origins of Car Dyke in multiple posts, including Car Dyke – ABC News Podcast and Lidar Investigation Car Dyke – North Section, which suggest a Mesolithic origin 2357. I also explore the misidentification of Roman aqueducts, as seen in my posts on the Great Chesters (Roman) Aqueduct. My research has also been greatly informed by my post-glacial flooding hypothesis, which has helped explain landscape transformations over time. I have discussed this hypothesis in several posts, including AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis and Exploring Britain’s Flooded Past: A Personal Journey

Finally, my blog also investigates prehistoric burial practices, as seen in Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain and explores the mystery of Pillow Mounds, often mistaken for medieval rabbit warrens, but with a potential link to Bronze Age cremation in my posts: Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation? and The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?. My research also includes astronomical insights into ancient sites, for example, in Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival. I also review new information about the construction of Stonehenge in The Stonehenge Enigma.

Further Reading

For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and excerpts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books that explore Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, which offer compelling evidence of ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.

In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

• The Ancient Mariners
• Stonehenge Built 8300 BCE
• Old Sarum
• Prehistoric Rivers
• Dykes, Ditches, and Earthworks
• Echoes of Atlantis
• Homo Superior
• 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History
• Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue
• Offa’s Dyke
• The Stonehenge Enigma
• The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis
• The Stonehenge Hoax
• Dawn of the Lost Civilisation
• Darwin’s Children
• Great Chester’s Roman Aqueduct
• Wansdyke

For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.

Other Blogs

Conundrum 12 – The Slaughter Stone……………………… Book Extract (The Great Stonehenge Hoax)

“The Killing of great numbers of human beings”

The Problem

The slaughter stone has always been associated with mythology and speculation.  Some say it was where Druids sacrificed bodies to their gods (hence the name); others suggested that it is merely a fallen Sarsen stone that once stood upright as the entrance to the monument.  But recent scanning has shown that it was once sculpted to look ’lumpy and ‘rolling’,’ but why?

The Solution

In the centre of the Sarsen circle lies an extraordinary stone – the Altar stone; the reason it’s unique is two-fold. Firstly, it’s made of mica, unlike the other Sarsen standing stones. ‘Hawkins notes that while all the other stones were either bluestone or Sarsen, the so-called altar-stone is ‘of fine-grained pale green sandstone, containing so many flakes of mica that its surface, wherever, wherever it is freshly exposed, shows the typical mica glitter’.  The second reason is that it was positioned to be ‘flat’ with the landscape; the only other stone designed in that fashion is the Slaughter Stone.

Most archaeologists believe that the Slaughter Stone was once a standing stone at the monument’s entrance; this is a flawed theory resulting from a hypothetical drawing by Inigo Jones in 1655. This drawing shows Stonehenge as a perfect circle (Roman Solar Temple), with a hexagon-shaped trilithon and three entrances into the site, with six upright standing stones serving as access points, one of which was the slaughter stone. This idea was incorporated into John Aubrey’s drawing in 1666, which was more accurate but again tended to place all the fallen stones upright.

This false assumption was further compounded by William Cunning in 1880, when (it was reported) that he suggested his grandfather “saw” the upright slaughter stone in the 17th Century. This mistake was later corrected, yet the myths among archaeologists persist (Stones of Slaughter, E. Herbert Stone, 1924, p. 120). (The Stonehenge Hoax – The Slaughter Stone)

The reality is that the Slaughter Stone was always (like the Altar Stone) a deliberate recumbent, as the excavations of this stone by Hawley and Newall in the 1920s clearly show, as the chalk subsoil was also deliberately flattened before it was placed in its current position. Hawley presumed that the Slaughter Stone was once ‘buried’; this idea is understandable as the stone does lie below the ground level, but what Hawley never understood is that the reason the stone was in this position was for the same reason the ditch was built around Stonehenge, as it was made to be full of water.

This can be observed by the size of the stone hole called ‘E’ (WA1165), which lies two metres North West of the Slaughter stone but still within the ‘hollow’ that contains the stone. Most stone holes at Stonehenge are relatively shallow – less than a metre in-depth, but stone hole ‘E’ is twice as deep, over 2m. So if the Slaughter stone were placed in it (as the experts have suggested), it would be only 3m high at the surface, compared to 4.57m for the Heel Stone a few yards away.

The only other place in Stonehenge with these more massive pits is within the Ditch section surrounding the site, which is the same depth, allowing access to the groundwater levels. In the past, when the Slaughter stone was placed in this ditch, as in the moat, water would have surrounded the stone, making it appear like an island.

Therefore, what we see today at Stonehenge is a 6,000-year-old relief map of the land the megalithic builders originated from – Doggerland, which now lies below the North Sea.

Not only did they place a 6ft piece of Sarsen stone, flat in a watery ditch, but they also carved out the island’s contours, showing high and low ground, like a contour relief map.  Archaeologists have always believed these features were ‘weather-worn’ by age (although the other recumbent stones have not been weathered in the same fashion), but recent laser technology has confirmed our belief that this stone was carved, as the tool marks are still visible at the microscopic level.

Moreover, and more importantly, the stone has been placed in a bizarre position, almost in the way of The Avenue. This shows that this stone and the Avenue have a connection; this type of relationship is seen in association with Egyptian Pyramids, where ‘sight lines’ are cut into the sides of the burial chambers toward important star constellations to show their associations with the Gods.

At Stonehenge, the Slaughter Stone and the Avenue are important as they link death with rebirth for this Megalithic Civilisation, for if we look from the Altar stone and follow a line past the Slaughter stone, they make a sight-line, which quite remarkably points directly to their homeland, Doggerland. This was only a small island at the time of the Avenues’ construction in 4100 BCE, but it was constantly shrinking as sea levels (as now) continued to rise.  Geologists currently estimate the sinking of Doggerland to have occurred 2,000 years earlier, at 6200 BCE, after finding a Tsunami that would have hit the island at that time.

Moreover, as we have seen in the Indian ocean and Japan – when tsunami’s hit, they do NOT sink the region, sadly, this is just another example of ‘bad science’ within archaeology.  We can confirm that Doggerland did not disappear at this stage of history with a bit of simple maths.  We know that the island is between 15m and 36m (average 25m) (Wikipedia) under the sea as a sandbank (and hence covered in modern-day wind farms).  And we know (from satellites) that the sea rises 3.6mm per annum – consequently, by 4100 BCE it was still 6m above sea level, but probably so small it was uninhabitable.

2026 Update

When I first published The Stonehenge Enigma almost twenty years ago, one of the most controversial suggestions was that the accepted story of Stonehenge’s stones was incomplete. At the time, archaeologists largely confined their search for sources to Wales and southern Britain, while suggestions of much longer-distance transport were routinely dismissed.

Today, the debate looks very different.

Researchers have now concluded that Stonehenge’s six-tonne Altar Stone most likely originated in north-east Scotland, approximately 700 kilometres from Salisbury Plain. More significantly, the latest peer-reviewed study has examined how such a journey may have been achieved.

According to Dr Anthony Clarke of Curtin University:

“Our modelling shows glaciers may have transported rocks part of the way during the last Ice Age — potentially as far as Dogger Bank in the North Sea — but not into southern England, meaning the stone would still have needed to be moved hundreds of kilometres by people.”

That statement is remarkable.

For decades, the standard objection to long-distance transport was that prehistoric people simply could not move such massive stones across Britain. The new research reaches the opposite conclusion. Not only was human transport required, but the journey appears to have involved multiple stages, combining overland movement with river and coastal transport.

The paper concludes there were no viable glacial pathways connecting the source region directly to Stonehenge. Human organisation, planning and transport networks were therefore essential.

What makes this particularly interesting is the appearance of Dogger Bank within the discussion.

Dogger Bank occupies the heart of the drowned North Sea landscape known as Doggerland. For years, Doggerland has often been portrayed as little more than a submerged hunting ground. Yet the new study identifies the region as a potential staging point within the wider movement of material from Scotland towards southern Britain.

In other words, the researchers are now discussing precisely the kind of interconnected landscape that I have been putting forward for nearly twenty years.

The significance of the paper is therefore not simply that the Altar Stone came from Scotland.

The significance is that a peer-reviewed transport model now places Dogger Bank directly into the discussion and confirms that prehistoric communities were capable of moving multi-tonne stones across hundreds of kilometres using a combination of routes and technologies.

Twenty years ago, such ideas were considered pseudoscience or conspiracy theory.

Today, they appear in the scientific literature.

The lesson is simple.

Never underestimate prehistoric people.

The real mystery is not how they moved the stone.

The real mystery is why it took archaeology so long to accept that they could.

Fast forward to today, and the story has taken a remarkable turn. Advances in geochemical analysis and improved scientific methods have provided new insights into the origin of Stonehenge’s stones, particularly the Altar Stone. Researchers have determined that this unique stone, composed of fine-grained pale green sandstone with a high mica content, does not match the geology of Wales or Cornwall, as once thought. Instead, studies now strongly suggest that it originated in Scotland, a revelation that challenges long-held assumptions and lends credibility to my earlier hypothesis.

The Altar Stone has always been an outlier in terms of its composition. Unlike the bluestones of Preseli or the massive Sarsens from the Marlborough Downs, its distinctive mica-rich material immediately set it apart. Early examinations by archaeologists such as Richard Atkinson noted these differences but lacked the tools to trace their exact origins. It wasn’t until recent years that advanced geochemical fingerprinting techniques were applied, allowing scientists to identify its likely provenance with greater accuracy.

One pivotal breakthrough came in 2016 when researchers conducted isotopic analysis on fragments of the Altar Stone. These tests revealed a chemical composition that closely matched sandstone formations found in southern Scotland. This discovery was groundbreaking, as it opened the door to a broader understanding of how far people in the Neolithic were willing to travel—or trade—to obtain materials for their monumental constructions.

In 2020, further studies refined this analysis, narrowing the possible source to the southern uplands of Scotland. However, the exact quarry site remains unknown. This uncertainty stems from a lack of comprehensive geological mapping of underwater sandstone formations along Scotland’s eastern coast. Some experts have speculated that the stone may have been transported via waterways, possibly from a submerged quarry site now lying beneath the North Sea.

This raises intriguing questions about the logistical capabilities of Neolithic societies. How did they transport such a massive stone across hundreds of miles? Did they rely on an extensive network of waterways and seafaring routes, or were the stones traded overland in a series of exchanges between communities? These questions remain unanswered, but they highlight the sophistication of the builders’ organisational and engineering skills.

The story of the Altar Stone also underscores the slow pace of archaeological research. Despite the clear potential for groundbreaking discoveries, investigations into the stone’s origins have been limited by funding constraints and the challenges of underwater archaeology. The sandstone formations off the east coast of Scotland, which could provide definitive answers, have yet to be explored in detail. Without such investigations, the hypothesis that the Altar Stone came from this region remains partially validated but not fully proven.

Interestingly, the Altar Stone’s unique material properties may have held symbolic significance for the builders of Stonehenge. The shimmering mica within the sandstone gives it a luminous quality when freshly exposed, which may have been interpreted as spiritually or ritually important. Its placement at the centre of the Sarsen circle, lying flat rather than upright like the surrounding stones, further suggests it played a central role in the monument’s purpose.

The debate over the Altar Stone’s origin is part of a broader reevaluation of Stonehenge’s construction and function. The monument was interpreted primarily as a solar temple or astronomical observatory for centuries. However, newer theories emphasise its role as a site of cultural and ritual significance, with connections to far-flung regions of the Neolithic world. The diversity of the stones’ origins supports the idea that Stonehenge was not just a local project but a monument with broader regional and possibly even international connections.

This evolving understanding of the Altar Stone exemplifies the dynamic nature of archaeology. What was once dismissed as pseudoscience is now recognised as a plausible, even likely, explanation. It also highlights the importance of revisiting old assumptions with new tools and technologies. Had geochemical fingerprinting not been applied, the Altar Stone’s Scottish origin might still be unknown.

The following steps in this journey will likely involve underwater archaeology, a field that has only recently begun to gain traction. As technology improves and funding becomes available, it is hoped that investigations into the submerged sandstone formations along Scotland’s coast will uncover the exact source of the Altar Stone. Such a discovery would not only validate this hypothesis but also shed light on the broader network of trade and communication that existed in Neolithic Britain.

Until then, the story of the Altar Stone remains a testament to the resilience of ideas and science’s slow but steady progress. It serves as a reminder that archaeology, while painstakingly slow, has the power to rewrite our understanding of history. My initial hypothesis, once dismissed, has found a place in the growing body of evidence that challenges traditional narratives about Stonehenge and its builders.

Unearth the Astonishing Secrets of Stonehenge (The Stonehenge Hoax)

Introduction

Video

Synopsys

Stonehenge, a timeless enigma etched in stone and earth, has stood as a formidable puzzle challenging the intellects of archaeologists and historians alike. Despite the myriad attempts, including books, TV programs, and academic conferences, the secrets of these ancient stones and their encircling ditches have proven elusive. Against this backdrop, we scrutinise the existing thirteen hypotheses, each presenting its narrative but collectively lacking a coherent thread.

In adopting the deductive reasoning akin to Sherlock Holmes, we endeavour to weave these disparate threads into a unified tapestry that not only unravels the mystery of Stonehenge but also shakes the foundations of established academic narratives. This intellectual journey may induce some discomfort as we challenge conventional perceptions and invite a reevaluation of our understanding of the past. Apologies are extended in advance for any cognitive dissonance, but the pursuit of truth and reason mandates an unfiltered presentation of the facts.

So, fasten your seatbelts for an expedition into the archaeological unknown.

As we navigate this intellectual rollercoaster, be prepared for a revelation that might reshape our understanding of Stonehenge and question the foundations of our historical narratives. The dawn of a new archaeological era awaits promising insights that could leave even the most curious minds astonished. As we delve into this intellectual rabbit hole, be ready for a revelation that could astonish Alice.

Robert John Langdon (2023) – (The Stonehenge Hoax)

Author’s Biography

Robert John Langdon, a polymathic luminary, emerges as a writer, historian, and eminent specialist in LiDAR Landscape Archaeology.

His intellectual voyage has been interwoven with stints as an astute scrutineer in government and grand corporate bastions, a tapestry spanning British Telecommunications, Cable and Wireless, British Gas, and the esteemed University of London.

A decade hence, Robert’s transition into retirement unfurled a chapter of insatiable curiosity. This phase saw him immerse himself in Politics, Archaeology, Philosophy, and the enigmatic realm of Quantum Mechanics. His academic odyssey traversed the venerable corridors of knowledge hubs such as the Museum of London, University College London, Birkbeck College, The City Literature Institute, and Chichester University.

In the symphony of his life, Robert is a custodian of three progeny and a pair of cherished grandchildren. His sanctuary lies ensconced in the embrace of West Wales, where he inhabits an isolated cottage, its windows framing a vista of the boundless sea – a retreat from the scrutinising gaze of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, an amiable clandestinity in the lap of nature.

Exploring Prehistoric Britain: A Journey Through Time

My blog delves into the fascinating mysteries of prehistoric Britain, challenging conventional narratives and offering fresh perspectives grounded in cutting-edge research, particularly LiDAR technology. I invite you to explore some key areas of my research. For example, the Wansdyke, often cited as a defensive structure, is re-examined in light of new evidence. I’ve presented my findings in my blog post Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’, and a Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover video further visualises my conclusions.

My work also often challenges established archaeological dogma. I argue that many sites, such as Hambledon Hill, commonly identified as Iron Age hillforts, are not what they seem. My posts Lidar Investigation Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’ and Unmasking the “Iron Age Hillfort” Myth explore these ideas in detail and offer an alternative view. Similarly, sites like Cissbury Ring and White Sheet Camp receive re-evaluations based on LiDAR analysis in my posts “Lidar Investigation Cissbury Ring through time” and “Lidar Investigation White Sheet Camp,“ revealing fascinating insights into their true purpose. I have also examined South Cadbury Castle, often linked to the mythical Camelot56.

My research also extends to ancient water management, including the role of canals and other linear earthworks. I have discussed the true origins of Car Dyke in multiple posts, including Car Dyke – ABC News Podcast and Lidar Investigation Car Dyke – North Section, which suggest a Mesolithic origin 2357. I also explore the misidentification of Roman aqueducts, as seen in my posts on the Great Chesters (Roman) Aqueduct. My research has also been greatly informed by my post-glacial flooding hypothesis, which has helped explain landscape transformations over time. I have discussed this hypothesis in several posts, including AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis and Exploring Britain’s Flooded Past: A Personal Journey

Finally, my blog also investigates prehistoric burial practices, as seen in Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain and explores the mystery of Pillow Mounds, often mistaken for medieval rabbit warrens, but with a potential link to Bronze Age cremation in my posts: Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation? and The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?. My research also includes astronomical insights into ancient sites, for example, in Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival. I also review new information about the construction of Stonehenge in The Stonehenge Enigma.

Further Reading

For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and excerpts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books that explore Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, which offer compelling evidence of ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.

In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

• The Ancient Mariners
• Stonehenge Built 8300 BCE
• Old Sarum
• Prehistoric Rivers
• Dykes, Ditches, and Earthworks
• Echoes of Atlantis
• Homo Superior
• 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History
• Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue
• Offa’s Dyke
• The Stonehenge Enigma
• The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis
• The Stonehenge Hoax
• Dawn of the Lost Civilisation
• Darwin’s Children
• Great Chester’s Roman Aqueduct
• Wansdyke

For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.

Other Blogs