Stonehenge

The long-running debate about the origin of the Stonehenge “bluestones” and how they got to Salisbury Plain some four millennia ago has taken another turn: a precise quarry source for much of the Stonehenge rock has been pinned down to a few square metres in southwestern Wales. This supports the notion that the bluestones were taken by human agency all the way from Pembrokeshire to Wiltshire, rather than helped along their way in the Ice Age by glacier transport.

“The glacial theory is frozen out by this new evidence,” Dr Rob Ixer of Leicester University told The Times. If the stones had been transported east of the Bristol Channel by glacial action, a much wider range of sources would be expected. The pinpoint sourcing that has now been done argues strongly for human quarrying and transport of the bluestones, whatever the motivation and precise route employed.

Stonehenge’s “bluestones” are not the enormous sarsen trilithons which form the bulk of the visible monument, but relatively short, slender, single shafts which were used in an earlier version of the stone circle and then repositioned within the final layout.

Three major rock types and two minor ones can be identified within the “bluestone” range using both the entire stones and waste chips known as debitage which result from trimming the slabs on site at Stonehenge. The three major groups, originally thought to be from different geographical sources, can now be shown to be from the same locale.

The area of the new find lies at Pont Saeson on the northern flank of the Preseli Mountains, long known as the general source of the bluestones, some 6.5 kilometres (four miles) from Newport in north Pembrokeshire. The discovery follows the use of zircons included in the rocks to identify an area near Pont Saeson as one likely source of Stonehenge material by Dr Ixer and his colleague Dr Richard Bevins of the National Museum of Wales.

“Almost all — 99.9 per cent — of the Stonehenge rhyolitic ‘debitage’ can be petrographically matched to rhyolitic rocks found within a few hundred square metres at Pont Saeson and especially to those found at Craig Rhosyfelin.

“However, it is possible in a few cases, where the petrography of these Welsh in situ rocks is so distinctive, to suggest an even finer provenance to within square metres, namely to individual outcrops,” Ixer and Bevins report in Archaeology in Wales.

They have pinned down the source of rhyolite rock fragments, found at Stonehenge more than 60 years ago and stored in a shoebox for decades, to a specific outcrop at Craig Rhosyfelin, part of the Pont Saeson outcropping. “These very distinctive rhyolitic rocks can be traced for no more than 150 metres from the northeasternmost end of Craig Rhosyfelin,” they say.

The outcrop itself is some 70 metres long and has many tall, narrow slabs up to two metres (6.5 feet) high as the dominant feature, splitting off from the parent rock and reminiscent of the Stonehenge bluestones. One of the Stonehenge shafts, known as SH32e, can be matched very closely to this outcrop, and must have been quarried there, not transported by a glacier.

“I have always wanted to tell this story under the tabloid heading ‘Old shoebox held key to Stonehenge mystery,” Ixer said. “The work stems from an old box in the Salisbury Museum holding stones collected in 1947.

“The overwhelming majority of the Stonehenge rhyolitic ‘debitage’ can be sourced from the Pont Saeson area and perhaps entirely from Craig Rhosyfelin, but from more than one site on the crags,” Ixer and Bevins conclude. The dispute over natural versus human transportation for these elements of an early and important phase of Stonehenge now seems to be settled —as Ixer says, the glacial theory is out cold.

Rugby - The Seven

The openside flanker is rugby’s deity in the 21st century. England, alas, have been struggling to find mortals to wear the shirt since Peter Winterbottom and Neil Back. Tempo is all and the man with the biggest opportunity to dictate the speed of a game is the seven; a guarantee to provide rapid ball in attack and hamper opposition ball in defence is vital.

This is the kingdom of the openside. In the battle of the breakdown others have roles to play but none as pre-eminent as the seven. That is why New Zealand, the smartest of rugby countries, revere their openside flankers above all other players. Dan Carter is a hero but Richie McCaw is a rugby god.

By slowing opposition ball, the defending team can reset their alignment. Once the field is covered from touchline to touchline, opportunities to strike with ball in hand are minimal. Conversely, fast ball lets an attack control a game’s momentum by causing defensive malfunction as the retreating rearguard’s usual shape disintegrates.

In attack the seven must be quick to the breakdown to take a pass and continue the move or, more often, ensure he is first there to prevent opposition getting bodies between the tackled man and the support runners. A two-second delay and the defenders are in command.

Body is draped between the tackled man and his back-up. Turnovers offer attacking opportunities and the ability of Heinrich Brussouw and David Pocock to achieve them makes them among the most valuable players on the planet. If they cannot rip a turnover from the attacker’s grasp, slowing the clock will suffice. It is the salvation of the defence.

The seven’s role has metamorphosed over the years. Now he is not the man who should be making all the tackles (he’ll make plenty, though) but the support defender, second on the scene, sealing off the attacking option and making the seconds tick by before attack is resumed against reorganised defence.

In attack and defence sevens dominate games. In the recent World Cup the opensides were the crux of the competition. In their semi-final New Zealand frequently forced Pocock into the first tackle and thereby prevented the Australian flanker from utilising his strength and technique at the breakdown to slow and turn All Black ball.

In their quarter-final, South Africa failed to prevent him dominating collisions — and thus Australia won a match that was South Africa’s for the taking. France relied on a back row in which Thierry Dusautoir was as omnipotent in the final as he had been four years earlier in the quarter-final between the same teams. France won that day and almost caused a sensation in this year’s final. Such was one flanker’s influence.

While eclipsed at Eden Park, McCaw has been one of rugby’s most influential players for the best part of a decade. The centrality of the openside goes on and on. Did Wales beat Ireland partly because their inspiring young seven, Sam Warburton, got the better of Ireland’s ball- carrying tank, Sean O’Brien, a six playing seven?

And then we have England. The Test team cannot compete with the elite on the openside. Back’s heyday seems distant. His old clubmate Lewis Moody was a natural six converted to seven who never got beyond being somebody who played six and a half. In the debacle of a Kiwi campaign he led a clueless England back row that was penalised to near-oblivion, unable to win quick ball and slow opposition possession without being blown off the park. The selection was Martin Johnson’s gravest error. It was heightened by the stubborn omission of Tom Wood, England’s player of the Six Nations — the tournament they won. He could have made a difference at openside.

Stuart Lancaster’s most vital job is to find a seven to perform against the best. The selection is as tough as it is critical with two contenders, Wood and Chris Robshaw, touted as prospective captains.

But while each has outstanding attributes, is either the out-and-out seven as Back was, as Pocock is? The answer is definitely not in the case of the Harlequins captain and possibly not in Wood’s case. Their great strength is an ability to perform to a high standard across the three backrow positions but neither has that openside instinct without which the Wallabies, All Blacks and South Africa simply would not consider them for a Test start as a seven. I still like the idea of playing them both in the way France used Julian Bonnaire and Imanol Harinordoquy as a flexible six/eight. But that leaves England searching for a seven; that is unless Lancaster decides to declare an interest in the Saracens second-choice openside, Andy Saull, a Saxon but seemingly forgotten man.

Understudy to Saracens folk hero Jacques Burger, Saull has been thwarted by Namibian power and the conservatism of the Premiership game. Most teams accept the breakdown is a stodgy affair and, dominated by defence coaches, are more interested in keeping their defensive shape for the next phase than trying to compete aggressively to win the ball at the point of contact.

In the more attack-minded southern hemisphere world of Super Rugby, Saull’s speed and superb technique over the ball would be treasured. The former regime of Johnson failed to imagine his game in a fluent environment. Lancaster has to forget the Premiership model and think beyond to what is needed at the next stage.

England’s interim coach should study the Saracens performance against Harlequins at Twickenham. Saull was a metre ahead of Robshaw at contact and made a series of superlative turnovers, especially in the first half. Robshaw looked an outstanding six playing against a specialist seven, albeit a specialist who has fallen from his club’s first team.

That should not dictate how Lancaster thinks. Burger does his job within Saracens’ set pattern but with Burger injured Saull has a chance to impress.

He did that on Tuesday; a seven with turnover technique, speed, deft hands and Back’s precious ability to escape censure at the breakdown. He might just be worth a Lancaster gamble.