STONEHENGE AS A CLASSICAL TEMPLE

 

STONEHENGE AS A CLASSICAL TEMPLE

When I tell people about Stonehenge, I find myself increasingly stressing two things. Firstly,  the stone monument of c.2500 BC was carefully and thoroughly planned, and built to a pre-determined design. For such a complex structure, there are few if any discernable mistakes, which indicates a planned project, designed presumably to fulfil its function  effectively. Second, although we do not know how it was used and are unable at present to prove that core function, there is little doubt that that function will be a religious one. Because, apart from anything else, this planned design bears an uncanny resemblance to later European religious buildings, most notably to the Classical Greek and Roman Temple.

Let me be clear about this. There is an almost 1800 year gap between the two structural forms, and I'm not suggesting that Stonehenge was used in the same way as the later temples, except in the broadest sense that both are religious buildings, designed to impress the visitor with their magnificence  and  power, and to increase the focus of the mind as he or she moves towards the centre of the building. The elements that make up the two building types are, however, directly comparable, suggesting that at least the concept of what constitutes a space for religious participation is already present in the minds of Neolithic Europeans. The ritual uses of the elements is likely to have changed in two millennia, as religion itself became more structured and the nature of worship evolved with the growth of stratified urban civilisations and stratified pantheons.

 

A RECONSTRUCTION OF STONEHENGE POST 2500BC

(Original source not given)

Now, most classical Greek Temples (let's stick with them, as the Romans tended to deviate more from the basic pattern), are composed of several concentric layers leading from the profane outside world to the sacred presence of the God deep inside. A perimeter wall encloses the temple precinct, in the centre of which stands the temple. The area behind the temple often contained storerooms and facilities for the priests, whilst the forecourt was used for low-level religious observances, private altars, and religious or other dealings between the priesthood and the public. At Stonehenge, there is a similar area between the outer boundary bank and ditch and the stone monument.  There is little evidence to show how this was used, but it is interesting that postholes (undated but normally considered to be older than the sarsen structure) form distinctly different patterns - indicating different activities - to the back and front of the stones.

 

The temple itself always presented its most impressive facade to the forecourt and normally comprised a tall building containing a usually rectangular hall (sometimes with side chambers) surrounded on all four sides by a colonnade of decorated stone pillars supporting the roof. The area between the inner hall (known as the cella) and the colonnade was used for religious processions and for more private consultations between priests and their public. This area - which became the ambulatory in later churches - is represented at Stonehenge by the outer circle of Sarsens with their lintels and the space between them and the inner "horseshoe" of trilithons. It is further accented by the inner circle of Bluestones which would have created a very believable ambulatory before the collapse of the structure.

At the centre of the temple is the sarsen Horseshoe, emphasised by the rearranged horseshoe of bluestones. which defines the most sacred area of the monument, equivalent to the Cella of classical temples. In Greek and Roman Temples, the focus of veneration is represented at the inner end of the cella by an altar and the statue of the god. In Christian churches the statue is replaced by a usually small cross or crucifix on the altar, and the awe that the statue is meant to create is enhanced by the morning light through the huge east window. At Stonehenge, we have no representations of gods (indeed, I would argue that we are in a pre-deity stage of religion) but we have the focus created by the altar stone and the positioning of the tallest trilithon, behind which the sun sets spectacularly at the end of each year.

All the elements of later temples are therefore present and presaged by the arrangements of stones at Stonehenge. The elements are present in earlier stone circles, such as the Rollright Stones, Castlerigg, Stanton Drew, and of course Avebury, but the concentric arrangement is new at Stonehenge, one of the last of the great stone circles to be built in Britain. It might be tempting to suggest that it is Stonehenge that sets the example which later European temples follow. Or is that a step too far?