Beanley Plantation Settlement forum 1 room
Image by mascot
Beanley Plantation Settlement

Calling Mascot

close
more_vert

Generally speaking Mac, the Beckensall archive is more on the ball than K2P. Obviously just for the rock art, not the other stuff, though you bhave to be a bit wary of K2P sometimes, as they've used some slightly iffy sources at times, and their classifications/nomenclatures cover records from quite a few decades, so sometimes the same sites or group of sites can be enetered more than once under different names, and sometimes different site types. Their mapping is pretty good though, though not usually as accurate as the BA, it has those lovely old maps just a click away.

Good example is those Beanley portables, there are 3 carved stones in the Postern Tower of Alnwick Castle, but one of them is from a wall in Inghoe:
http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/post/69867/warrior_stone.html

There's also Beanley on Rockartuk's British Rock Art Collection:
http://rockartuk.fotopic.net/search.php?txt=Beanley&action=Go&t=p

The front page of which shows some nice examples of rarely seen Northumbrian RA, curently held captive in the British Museum :)

Ah, thanks for that. I'm new to this game so these are all good pointers for me.

I've been very impressed with both K2P and the Beckensall archive.

I love K2P for both the access to the old maps and the local histories but wish it would publish a KML file for google earth as the internal mapping on the site makes it a real hassle to locate nearby sites/info when research a new one.

The Beckensall archive is a real jewel, the level of detail etc is just brilliant.

I try to use both, combined with google earth scanning and google books searches for old sources when I'm looking at new places (ie not on TMA) to visit.

BTW, the enclosure north of Beanley plantation looks like it was only spotted recently as it's only on the latest map at K2P. At 45m or so across it's almost as big as the plantation site but looks like a single shallow ditch from the air so not defensive in any way.

I've put photos of the rock feature on the geologyrocks site and the feedback there is that it's probably natural, strange as it looks. Explaination is that a "lens" of weaker material (silt perhaps) could be laid down when the sand stone was formed and this could then errode away more quickly to leave the feature. I'm going to have a closer look when I'm next there though.

Mac

Yup, got to agree about the SMR/HER/KttP, can be rather confusing. This rather wonderful looking site tries to pull the Beckensall Archive and SMR/HER records together:

http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/era/

Looks like there might be a third beanley portable stone - the mystery deepens :-) Link below show's Tate's 1865 drawing of this one.

http://rockartuk.fotopic.net/p30665285.html

Looks like it might be one from you?? as the full title is Tate, 1860s
beanley-c..1860s.tate.06.hob.47247.jpg - spot the hob?

Tate's description of this is that it was a loose stone found while draining a field west of beanley. He doesn't say it went to Alnwick Castle (which he does with another).

Only concern here is that the form looks identical to stone B but the shape of the stone and the position on the form looks totally different - so it could be an artists view of B rather than another portable?

Thats' me done on this one, off to browse google earth for another target :-)