Hi Paul,
I don't know much about the neolithic either. But, I have an opinion regarding the excavation, which appears to be a rather old-fashioned method of disrupting the past. I am curious as to why / how it came to be funded by the BBC, and a little sceptical since these digs appear to be a rather rushed affair, especially when done in the spotlight of a camera and most likely under a tight filming schedule.
I am not at all convinced by the hypotheses of Darvill and Wainwright which appears to be based on the basis of some skeletal remains. Someone, somewhere needs to remind them that they are a taphonomic remnant. I am not aware of the techniques, method and approach that will be used to "date" the placement of these stones, but again I am a little sceptical based on the record of rock art dating for which there is very little not subject to flawed methodology from the outset ....
The idea of seeking magical water may invoke resonance in some, but evidence of surgery is hardly in accord with the claim that they were seeking "supernatural" help, and instead suggests a civilisation a little more advanced than is perhaps generally accepted.
Far more revealing is the argument provided here
http://www.geocities.com/dolph322000/stonehenge.htmlRichard
