Reply to comment

Perhaps if the Amesbury Archer or Boscombe Bowman had been placed in the foundation of pillar 22 (Atkinson's final) and the Sarsen placed on top of him, the radiocarbon date of his death would be of significance. But then only if it could be proved without doubt that he died from being crushed, and had not been placed already dead as a structured deposit. As long as the tag on the sample reads "from base of socket" you don't have a reliable date for when the stone was originally placed, and not even for when it was removed, especially when Prof. Darvill explains how the area had been extensively reworked, possibly even excavated before but unrecorded. Or are we to believe the good Professor and his predecessors carefully replaced the soil in the order in which it had been removed? The important question is not from where the Archer or Bowman came, but when Stonehenge was built. That was the challenge the Professors gave themselves, and it was not answered. But it could be: http://www.louistalboys.com/stonehenge/article6.htm