This is my post:
“But the site where they quarried the Bluestones is 160 miles from the site they built Stonehenge.
Why did they go that far? Have they any theories?”
It is not about what Stonehenge IS or who built it.
It was likely the nearest place to quarry stones of that size and type. Or they could have chosen it because they could move them by raft most of the way. There’s also a theory that they may have been broken off and carried by an ancient glacier to someplace nearby. But as Cornwell points out we can only guess as there’s no records.
It is a burial site, that used to be denied, but there are hundreds, probably thousands, of neolithic burials all over the vicinity. Ordinarily, around here, the pioneers used the areas which were difficult to plow for the new buryin' grounds, and kept the flat country for agriculture and/or pasturing. Hilly areas were for orchards and/or pasturing. The folks who built Stonehenge took one look at the Salisbury plain and thought the opposite. That's probably why there's no rhyme or reason to the structures.