photos from Digital History Wiki page, by Creative Commons license
This small replica was part of a project aimed at better understanding how people interact with presentations of historical subjects, one of a group of projects done under the tutelage of William J. Turkel of the University of Western Ontario. Note the computer monitors also showing Stonehenge.
This made us think it would be great to set up computer monitors in a circle with a nice Stonehenge model in the middle, and have them all showing Stonehenge, constantly rotating. But back to the study, the conclusion arrived at here was that people are impatient and easily distracted, and, extrapolating, it’s difficult to teach us anything. Duh!
This is a nice little model, though, and we award it 6 druids. We want to add a couple of links to photos of small models we can’t get permissions for. Here is an early model, from the late 1800’s or early 1900’s (scroll down on that page, and note the other model in the background). And here is a very clean well-done model from the Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum, photo taken in 1964.
Clearly people have gone to great lengths to make these models accurate to their idea of what Stonehenge is or was. What is this hold it has on us? We’re four months into Clonehenge now, and we still don’t have an answer for that!
CLONEHENGE 
Thanks you for your comment. You’re right, and within the outer circle there is a smaller circle of blue stones. But I liked the shapes of the stones on this one–much closer to the real shapes than usual. With the inner trilithons taller than the outside stones as in the real one and the extra stones they did include, it has a nice look. If they’d included the blue stones and the Aubrey holes, we’d be looking at a 7 druid score.
I do not think that this is very accurate because within the horseshoe of trilithons, their is a smaller horseshoe of bluestones. It is still very cool though!