Sarsen sources: West Woods and the debate

Topic page

Nash et al. 2020: 50 of the 52 surviving sarsens share one chemistry, and West Woods is "the most probable source area for the majority". Stones 26 and 160 differ. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abc0133.

References

• Nash, D.J., Ciborowski, T.J.R., Ullyott, J.S., Parker Pearson, M., Darvill, T., Greaney, S., Maniatis, G., Whitaker, K.A. 2020. Origins of the sarsen megaliths at Stonehenge. Science Advances 6(31): eabc0133. DOI (open access)
• Daw, T. 2024-06. sarsen.org blog post "stonehenge revisited geochemical". link (open access)
• Daw, T. 2025-07. sarsen.org blog post "the latest on stonehenge sarsen sources". link (open access)
• Daw, T. 2026-06. sarsen.org blog post "reading rubble". link (open access)
• Michelaki, K., Barham, D., Gorton, M.P., Mahaney, W.C., Aufreiter, S., Hancock, R.G.V. 2026. Geochemical data treatment and interpretive uncertainty: a reanalysis of Stonehenge stone fragments ('Debitage'). Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 18(7). DOI
• Daw, T. 2020-08. sarsen.org blog post "the stonehenge sarsens did they come". link (open access)
• Daw, T. 2024-01. sarsen.org blog post "local and exotic sources of sarsen". link (open access)
• Daw, T. 2024-01. sarsen.org blog post "possible stonehenge debitage sources". link (open access)
• Daw, T. 2025-05. sarsen.org blog post "why west woods sarsens couldnt come". link (open access)

Search quotes on this subject

Experimental, built for research bots; results are short quotes with sources. From Tim Daw's Stonehenge research notes; see sarsen.org. Search · All topics · llms.txt