I think there is a certain amount of doubt about the function/s of Waulud's Bank. Certainly as you say Dyer regarded it as a ritual centre, comparing it in size and design with other 'superhenges' such as Durrington Walls, Avebury, Mount Pleasant and especially Marden (with the river forming the western boundary). Also, the discovery of Grooved Ware at WB added to the idea of a 'ritual' usage for the site. But there have AFAIK been no finds like stones, wooden posts, burials etc unlike other sites. I also wonder about the ditch being on the outside - more suitable for a defensive site than a ceremonial one (whereby onlookers could stand on the outside bank and look in)? Seems the comparison is more by analogy.
Aubrey Burl seems to regard these 'superhenges' as being of domestic/residential use rather than ceremonial. This might be borne out by the finds at WB, lots of flints (a factory?) the pottery, the little hut just outside the ditch on the North side...I guess that unless the entire site was excavated we will not know for certain.
I would love it if WB did have a ceremonial/ritual usage, seems to fit in with the location of the source of the Lea and river/water veneration anyway. Whatever, I love the place and am often wandering around trying to compare the archaeological dig site plans with the reality! There are 19th century accounts of locals speaking of a second bank and ditch, now lost?
If you ever see a bloke with short dark hair, looking confusedly at a piece of paper, please say hello!
 Reply | with quote | Posted by Sifaka
16th April 2005ce
09:37 |
|
Head To Head 
waulud's bank (Treeman)