David Field, Neil Linford, Martyn Barber, Hugo Anderson-Whymark, Mark Bowden, Peter Topping, Paul Linford, Marcus Abbott, Paul Bryan, Deborah Cunliffe, Caroline Hardie, Louise Martin, Andy Payne, Trevor Pearson, Fiona Small, Nicky Smith, Sharon Soutar and Helen Winton (2014). Analytical Surveys of Stonehenge and its Immediate Environs, 2009–2013:
Part 1 – the Landscape and Earthworks.
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 80, pp 1-32
The Project brought to bear an integrated array of non-invasive survey techniques, including earthwork analysis, geophysics, laser scanning, and aerial survey, together with documentary and archive research. All monuments in the World Heritage Site with a visible surface component were investigated........
There is a detailed and fascinating discussion of the embankment, ditch and Avenue, and the relations between them -- very fastidious and well described, and mercifully free of speculation. Then the authors go on to describe the barrows in the Stonehenge landscape, and the Y and Z holes.
Overall, the most interesting things to come out of this paper are:
1. The so-called periglacial stripes are not accorded any great significance, either in landscape terms or in the interpretation of the Avenue or the Stonehenge area as a whole.
2. The authors appear to have no problem with the idea that many or most of the sarsens at Stonehenge have come from the neighbourhood.
3. If the North Barrow is indeed older than the Stonehenge embankment, it shows that bluestone fragments were present in this landscape before work started on the Stonehenge earthworks. That of course would support the thesis that other long barrows could contain bluestones as well -- and that the Boles Barrow bluestone was indeed embedded in the Neolithic long barrow there, well before Stonehenge was thought about.......