Saturday, May 20th was the day we left London to meet our ship in Southampton. Our travel agent, Paula, found an excursion on Viator that sounded great - Southampton Excursion: Pre-Cruise Tour from London to Southampton via Stonehenge. This would be the only excursion we wish we hadn't taken! I had so blocked it from my memory that I forgot to include it when I wrote that we only took one bus tour. This was our first bus tour, with one more in Ireland.
Here's how our day went:
7:00 a.m. - We were picked up at our hotel in a van. The van then picked up four more people from another hotel, then drove to another hotel where we met up with a bus. We loaded up in the bus and waited a while.
7:45 a.m. - Left central London for the London Heathrow area.
9:00 a.m. - Made two more pick ups at Heathrow hotels.
9:30 a.m. - Left London.
Two and half hours from the time we walked out of our hotel until we were on our way! We then drove about 75 minutes until we arrived at Stonehenge. We had 90 minutes to explore Stonehenge which sounded great. It would have been great except to actually get to the stones you either need to take about a 30 minute walk or ride a shuttle. Unfortunately, the wait to get on the shuttle was 30 minutes. This gave us about 30 minutes to explore before walking back to the bus.
We weren't done with our hurry up and wait mode - once we were back on the bus, it took another 75 minutes to get to Southampton where we would join the line to board our cruise ship. From the time we were picked up at 7:00 a.m. until we were at the cruise terminal at 2:00 p.m. was about 7 hours, with only 30 minutes to see Stonehenge. Definitely not worth it!
For comparison's sake - our hotel to Stonehenge is 88 miles, estimated 1 hour 50 minutes. Stonehenge to Southampton is 33 miles and should have taken less than 45 minutes. Total driving time is estimated at 2 hours and 45 minutes. Had we gone directly from our hotel to Southampton it would have been about 80 miles and under 2 hours! Live and learn.
You may be thinking, "what about Stonehenge?" Well... there are many theories, mostly written by those who believe in evolution. Let me simplify what
The Institute for Creation Research has to say in this article (which you can read
here.)
1. Evolutionists believe the age of the stones range from 6000 to 2500 B.C. These dates are chosen to fit their narrative, which is a common practice.
2. There is a written record of Britain's past,
The Chronicle of the Early Britons, that tells how King Ambrosius’ royal advisor Merlin, accompanied by Ambrosius’ brother and troop commander Uther Pendragon, helped build Stonehenge.
3. According to
The Chronicle, giants who had originally inhabited Ireland brought the stones from Spain (though another ancient account cites remote Africa) and set them up on a hilltop in Killara.
The Chronicle also describes how Britain’s founder Brutus, of Trojan descent, and his entourage disposed of giants when he founded the place now named after him: Britain.
4.
The Chronicle’s references to giants actually substantiate the Welsh document for those familiar with Biblical references to giants living after the Flood, like Goliath, and with the Bible’s clear references to “dragons.” (The word "dragons" is found 16 times in the Old Testament.)
5. The Romans famously occupied Britain from 43 to 410 A.D. During that time, they renamed most of England’s stone works, ancient castles, and religious sites, including Old Sarum, located within seven miles of Stonehenge. The Romans Latinized Old Sarum to Sorviodunum. But they did not rename Stonehenge or build a Roman shrine there, as they did at other key locations. Why do we have Roman names for so many monuments but not England’s most famous one? Well, according to dates taken from historical sources, Stonehenge was built almost a century after the Romans departed.
6. So, secular scientists have
guessed that Stonehenge may have been constructed between 3000 and 2000 B.C., but this merely follows a pre-set evolutionary timescale. They assert that Stonehenge is a “prehistoric” monument, meaning that it was constructed prior to any written history. But if
The Chronicle—which
is a written history—describes Stonehenge, then their “prehistoric” conjecture is as false as their evolutionary age assignments. A date of around 504 A.D. for the construction of Stonehenge is much more recent than 2500 B.C., but it is backed by written history. By setting aside secularists’ bias against the Bible and other documents that confirm the Bible, we find that ancient writings, modern archaeology, and Genesis history mesh quite well.
FYI - the name Stonehenge is made up of two very simple words - stone and henge. A henge is a prehistoric circular or oval earthen enclosure. The key feature of every henge is a ring-shaped bank on the outside and a ring-shaped ditch on the inside that mark out a central, circular area.
Would I recommend a visit to Stonehenge? No, not really. If I had it to do all over again, I would have chosen to sleep a little later and enjoy part of a morning in London. I would have then selected a direct transfer from London to Southampton. But now I can say we've been to Stonehenge...
