Stonehenge still surprises: How research reshapes an ancient story
![]() |
| Photo: AnirMitra / Pixabay |
It's a fantastic achievement to have a first-author paper in Nature at any stage of an academic career so huge kudos to then PhD researcher Anthony Clarke from Curtin's School of Earth and Planetary Sciences who led this particular study. Analysis of the age and chemical composition of minerals within fragments of the Altar Stone showed they were clearly different from Welsh bedrock. The team matched it with rocks from the Orcadian basin of northeast Scotland, some 750 kilometres away.
![]() |
| Dr Anthony Clarke at Stonehenge (Photo: Curtin University) |
These findings have huge implications for understanding ancient communities, their connections, and their transportation methods. The researchers concluded that a marine transport route along the coast of Britain was most likely.
Of course we might never know how it really got there. However, fast forward a few months to January 2026, and Curtin University led a new Stonehenge study, this one published in the journal Communications Earth & Environment, part of the Nature portfolio. It was led once again by Anthony Clarke, now Dr Clarke - congratulations Anthony! This research delivered strong scientific evidence that people, not glaciers, transported Stonehenge's famous bluestones to the ancient site.
As their press release explains, Curtin scientists used advanced techniques to examine microscopic grains preserved in rivers close to the monument around Salisbury Plain. The mineral grains act as geological time capsules, revealing how sediments travelled across Britain over millions of years.
The research team analysed more than 500 zircon crystals, apparently one of the most durable minerals on Earth. The results showed no evidence that glaciers ever reached the Stonehenge site.
"If glaciers had carried rocks all the way from Scotland or Wales to Stonehenge, they would have left a clear mineral signature on Salisbury Plain," Dr Clarke said.
Study co-author Professor Chris Kirkland, also from the Timescales of Mineral Systems Group at Curtin, said the findings highlight the power of modern geochemical tools to resolve long-standing historical questions.
“Stonehenge continues to surprise us,” Professor Kirkland said.
“By analysing minerals smaller than a grain of sand, we have been able to test theories that have persisted for more than a century.
“There are so many questions that can be asked about this iconic monument — for example, why was Stonehenge built in the first place?
“It was probably used for a wide variety of different purposes, like a calendar, an ancient temple, a feasting site.
“So asking and then answering these sorts of questions requires different sorts of data sets and and this study adds an important piece to that bigger picture.”
Both studies are open access - hurrah!- Detrital zircon–apatite fingerprinting challenges glacial transport of Stonehenge’s megaliths
- A Scottish provenance for the Altar Stone of Stonehenge
Stonehenge has fascinated us for so long now it's almost easy to become complacent about it. Thanks to research, we're still getting new insights and new questions.

.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment