Ringworks

close
PeterH P
PeterH Aug 6, 2005 11:18:27

I have come across the term "ringworks" recently and am not sure of its meaning and use. The writers seem to be describing circular earthworks at the centres of a pastoral and/or agricultural landscapes. Sort of central overseeing positions.

I first wondered if the term could be inter-changeable with henge (and better of course as nothing actually "hangs" at henges other than at Stonehenge) Then I wondered if the features that we call henges could have been used in this way ie - pastoral centres for shepherds and their flocks, perhaps reinforced with thorns as in Africa for overnight protection from wolves. Leaving aside Littlestone's notion of Avebury being a giant pig pen - it does seem possible that smaller henges (and we have 11 in Essex alone) could be practical rather than ritual or astronomical. Thoughts?

L Littlestone
Littlestone Aug 6, 2005 12:06:12
Replying to PeterH

"Leaving aside Littlestone's notion of Avebury being a giant pig pen..." That notion has yet to be disproved and among other things may have given rise to our world-renowned Wiltshire ham and sausage traditions ;-)

On a serious note, I do agree with you that 'smaller henges could be practical rather than ritual or astronomical' (or if not one or the other then perhaps a combination of both).

B baza
baza Aug 6, 2005 12:23:38
Replying to PeterH

Ringworks aren't prehistoric; they are, in the main, defensive enclosures built within about 100 years of the Norman Conquest.

Read all about 'em here:

http://www.eng-h.gov.uk/mpp/mcd/ring.htm

Speculation about the purpose of henges often pops up amongst us and long may it continue. I've no pet theories of my own.

Baz

P Pilgrim
Pilgrim Aug 6, 2005 12:27:24
Replying to PeterH

Mike Pitts' take on Henges (from Hengeworld 0099278758):

<i>"Technically, they are earthwork enclosures in which a ditch was dug to make a bank, which was thrown up on the outside edge of the ditch. To the military-minded, this excludes any practical, defensive function for the ditches and banks.</i>

later....

<i>"These may have been sacred places, but they were not built to a common blueprint like medieval churches."</i>

and

<i>"......So much for the official definition. I prefer to think of them simply as circular enclosed spaces."</i>

As far as I'm concerned, they - Henges - serve as a locus - a "centre or focus of great activity or intense concentration" - and the inner ditch perhaps an attempt to connect the happenings inside the circle with the (exposed?) "ancestral" ground. As has been said, the bank - if it were high enough - would act as a "view blocker" - which would aid concentration.

Henges with posts (The Sanctuary, Woodhenge, Stanton Drew) could be - in my opinion - echoes of the forest, their density designed to re-affirm the intimate connection with the "edgeworld" of the first clearings.

Peace

Pilgrim

X

W wideford
wideford Aug 6, 2005 12:50:27
Replying to PeterH

Venikelday http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/5087 is now seen "as a broch within a ring-work" [but Petrie saw it as resembling the Ring of Bookan http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/390 (which in the present state is comparing one unknown with another - locals remember it being a chambered mound!)] so obviously a ringwork is not solely Norman (the ringwork and bailey of England-shire) but a many-splendoured thing. And regarding Petrie's Bookan comparison archaeologist's are very hot to see this as an henge. So it might be best to see ringwork/ring-work as more of a description than a type of site.

T tuesday
tuesday Aug 7, 2005 14:49:32
Replying to PeterH

Couldn't they have been filled with pigs and be sacred? The seperation of the sacred and the secular is a fairly recent thing - even in these islands. The nave of old St Paul's cathedral was used as a market place with records of people weeing in dark corners and cows running amok.

The parable of Jesus and the tax collectors in the temple probably put paid to a lot of that generally speaking here but previously maybe there might have been a range of uses with the purely ritual at one end and the purely social at the other but most sites existing somewhere between

And pigs are holy somewhere still I am sure..

F Forrester
Forrester Aug 10, 2005 13:25:16
Replying to PeterH

In his book "Seahenge: Life and death in Bronze age Britain" Francis Pryor (an archaeologist) identifies all manner of shapes and sizes of henges and enclosures, and relates them into a systemic ritual landscape tradition based on excarnation and funerary rites within small clans and familiy groups. These were for human use, and had a religious/magical significance. The surrounding land would certainly have had animal pens and paddocks, and fields enclosed by dykes, ditches and hedges, but I don't think the features you're talking about would have been defensive measures against wild animals. The main predator of animals would have ben organized rustling raids by neighbouring clans (especially their hormonally challenged young men).

F Forrester
Forrester Aug 10, 2005 13:27:13
Replying to PeterH

In his book "Seahenge: Life and death in Bronze age Britain" Francis Pryor (an archaeologist) identifies all manner of shapes and sizes of henges and enclosures, and relates them into a systemic ritual landscape tradition based on excarnation and funerary rites within small clans and familiy groups. These were for human use, and had a religious/magical significance. The surrounding land would certainly have had animal pens and paddocks, and fields enclosed by dykes, ditches and hedges, but I don't think the features you're talking about would have been defensive measures against wild animals. The main predator of animals would have ben organized rustling raids by neighbouring clans (especially their hormonally challenged young men).

F Forrester
Forrester Aug 10, 2005 13:27:16
Replying to PeterH

In his book "Seahenge: Life and death in Bronze age Britain" Francis Pryor (an archaeologist) identifies all manner of shapes and sizes of henges and enclosures, and relates them into a systemic ritual landscape tradition based on excarnation and funerary rites within small clans and familiy groups. These were for human use, and had a religious/magical significance. The surrounding land would certainly have had animal pens and paddocks, and fields enclosed by dykes, ditches and hedges, but I don't think the features you're talking about would have been defensive measures against wild animals. The main predator of animals would have ben organized rustling raids by neighbouring clans (especially their hormonally challenged young men).

F Forrester
Forrester Aug 10, 2005 13:27:27
Replying to PeterH

In his book "Seahenge: Life and death in Bronze age Britain" Francis Pryor (an archaeologist) identifies all manner of shapes and sizes of henges and enclosures, and relates them into a systemic ritual landscape tradition based on excarnation and funerary rites within small clans and familiy groups. These were for human use, and had a religious/magical significance. The surrounding land would certainly have had animal pens and paddocks, and fields enclosed by dykes, ditches and hedges, but I don't think the features you're talking about would have been defensive measures against wild animals. The main predator of animals would have ben organized rustling raids by neighbouring clans (especially their hormonally challenged young men).