Latest Fieldnotes

This is a bell barrow on a rise above the excellently named Slap Bottom, the best photo I could get was from a a distance as the barrow is covered in gorse and bracken.

This is a bowl barrow on Cranes / Church moor. M.A.G.I.C says its 13 metres in diameter and 1.3 metres high. I couldn’t get close to it, as the area has ground nesting birds with young at the moment. Apparently the there is a ditch and bank surrounding it, I will try to get closer to the barrow in the winter.

This is a large bowl barrow on the highest point in the Purbecks. It is fairly knocked about, there is a large chunk taken out of the west side of it. Also there are 2 large blocks of Purbeck stone on top of it, they aren’t ancient and have a north/south line and a diagonal scribed across them.These were the base of a windmill, they must weigh several tons each and must have taken some effort to get up the hill.
About a hundred yards north is a small, low barrow with a dry stone wall across it. Opposite the large barrow, across a valley is a celtic field system.
I have now found out that the barrow has been modified in shape when it was used as a windmill base.

There are three barrows in this woodland setting. The easterly one is a large bowl barrow in a low lying area, it is 75 feet in diameter and 9 feet high. The berm is only well preserved on the west side and there is a large excavation scar on its summit.
The next barrow west is a small bowl barrow on the highest point of Canon hill. Presumably for its protection it is fenced off. It looks in reasonable condition it is 10 feet across and 2 1/2 high.
The third barrow I couldn’t find, from the map it appears to be in dense under growth.

Field Notes
Mount Scylla Settlement Earthwork, Ford – June 8th 2008

Ordnance Survey Explorer Map 157 – Scale 1:25000
Chippenham & Bradford-on-Avon inc. Trowbridge & Melksham.
ISBN 978-0-319-23943-8

Saw this site listed on TMA and checked it out.
Not the easiest too easy to view. No public footpath and parking problematic.
The nearest lay-by is at ST 83032 74297 on the B road between Ford and Colerne.
It’s not marked on the OS map, but lies over the road from the footpath style.
You either walk down the road until you get to the gate at ST 83165 74455, on the right hand side,
or you make your way through the field along the hedgerow.
WARNING – the road is very narrow, steep and has a blind bend at this gateway. In fact the road runs very straight until it gets to the edge of the earthwork. Maybe it was driven through it on purpose, to make the earthwork less defensive. The hillfort in the next valley, Bury Wood Camp may have been sacked by the Second (Augusta) legion of the Roman army, on their advance to Gloucester.

I cycled down the road until I out to the gate and left the bike by the hedge.
Walking into the field, I was struck by the natural beauty of the area. The site sites halfway up the side of a hill overlooking the Bybrook valley.

The earthwork consists of two straight sections joining at a slight angle. The northern section runs North West to south east for 115m and consists of a rampart but no ditch. This section forms a field boundary and is surmounted by the remains of a much later dry stone wall creating a field boundary.

Getting level with the rampart at it’s lowest point, I was surprised to find a stile built for crossing over the wall and into the field containing the rampart. The stone wall had been built over the left hand side of the rampart. I guess it must have been still stable after 2 thousand years, to do this.

The section to the south runs from NNE to SSW for 140m ending at a point at which the slope to the south becomes very steep. It comprises a bank up to 0.3m high from the west and 2.8m high from the east. The bank is 8.4m wide and is flanked to the east by a ditch 7m wide and up to 0.5m deep.

The right hand side of the rampart is much easier to see and follow, as it stands 2.8m high at the southern end and has been a sprinkling of young Oak trees.
There seemed to be some kind of hollow or dried up pond in its middle, where the two sections met. A number of large stones sat around its edge and it gave the impression of a ruined stone circle. The stone boundary wall also curved around this point, so it may have been built as a pond. The hollow had hazel growing around its edges.

Together with the steep slope to the south and north, the earthwork defines an area of about 3ha, although the full extent of the monument to the west is not known.

The area as a whole has lots of Mesolithic and Neolithic flint tool finds, an Iron-Age hillfort, Romano-British buildings, and the undated burial mounds in Colerne Park, excavated in 1953.

This single menhir stands against a hedge at the back of Eynsham’s catholic church, once the site of a flourishing Benedictine abbey.

The stone was found by Oxford Archaeology (OA) who were excavating the site (in 1989-92) of the abbey enclosure which had been built over a much earlier Bronze Age one.

The very rich ancient archaeological landscape around Eynsham (including the Devil’s Quoits stone circle just 3 miles away; the now trashed Tarr’s Grave close to the A40 and large circular crop marks in fields around the village) means the ditch in which OA found the stone may have been part of a thriving early settlement.

The stone was re-erected in its current position thanks to the then priest John Tolkein (nephew of JRR) who offered it a safe haven in church land next to the graveyard.

It is of oolitic limestone, the same kind of stone used to build the Rollrights and many other monuments in Oxfordshire. And looks to be weathered in the same way.

There’s more information in ‘Aelfric’s Abbey: excavations at Eynsham Abbey, Oxfordshire’, 1989-92, by Alan Hardy, Anne Dodd and Graham D Keevil.

This stone is marked ‘of disputed antiquity’ because it’s not in its original position and just because it was found in a Bronze Age ditch doesn’t actually mean it was a standing stone of that period, even though its discovery, size and weathering all point to an ancient provenance.

There’s something just satisfying about the yellow of freshly cut fields – as redolent of the May/June cusp as hedges full of hawthorn blossom or the crisp heat, not yet turned heavy and dead on the senses.

A great time of the year for Bohonagh. The nettles and long grass around it only seem to enhance its wildness and great age, its dominance of what would be an overwhelming growth for a smaller site.

It’s an interesting test. Swap places in your mind with Drombeg. Would it be improved here, in these surroundings? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Bohonagh would certainly lose something by being tidied up.

The 30 odd heifers crying aggressively outside the fence give a reminder of the origin of the townland’s name.

A medium sized bowl barrow on the West Knighton and Warmwell boundaries. It is 18 metres in diameter and 2 metres high. It was damaged by the military during the second world war, but is not in bad condition. It is set in mixed woodland surrounded by huge holes in the ground from gravel quarrying.
Huck appears to be a corruption of hook – referring to it’s position at the corner of three parish boundaries.

The GPS reading above is for the obvious standing stone, though the first sight over the gate is the horned boulder. Sketched by Webster almost eighty years ago and described as a “demi-dolmen”, he proposed that it and the recumbent pillar immediately to the east were the remains of some type of monument.(1) Jack Roberts wrote that it could be “loosely classed as a cromlech”.(2).

My suspicion is that it may have been an upright block that has sagged and split. The main cut smoothly separates the centre, forming a sort of dry megalithic sandwich, while the upper portion is bisected into two further pieces, both resting on the lower.

The horn effect is quite striking. Bronze trumpets sounding a bull call while flames and figures dance. Maybe not, but who knows?

The “anomalous stone group” described by the Inventory is about 50m north and comprises a standing stone and a prostrate slab.(3) The compilers seem to have missed the stone described by Roberts, that now forms part of the hedge and which prompts the tantalising possibility of a three, or even four, stone arrangement. Webster’s sketch shows the field before the wall was erected; then containing the two standing stones, the grounded slab and a fine stretch of empty grass as far as the house at Quaker’s crossroads. From a position in the centre of the triangle, and looking southish – parallel to a line between the two uprights, your gaze travels straight across to the large boulder. Contact.

(1) Webster, ‘Rude Stone Monuments in West Cork’, JCHAS 35, 1930; 35.
(2) Roberts, ‘Exploring West Cork’, 1988, Ch(1) 39; 44
(3) Archaeological Inventory of County Cork, Voume 1, West Cork, 1992, 926; 113.

Something worth pointing out about Lettergorman, with regard to the quartz boulder. It has previously been noted, a belief held by the former owner, that the stone was probably moved in from the field, from a position either along the axis or in line with Carrigfadda.

However the stone has been in the same position since Windele’s survey in the mid 1800’s and when viewed from centre-circle crudely indicates the four stone grouping on the slope of Maulatanvally. An arrangement three-quarters composed of quartz.

This is a medium sized bowl barrow above the tiny hamlet of Whitcombe. It is 28 metres in diameter and 3 metres high. There is evidence of past excavation on the summit and it is covered in beech trees and scrub. A low bank and fence cross the barrow which marks the parish boundaries of Whitcombe and West Stafford.
To the south, on the skyline can be seen Came wood and at least 4 round barrows.
In the adjacent field I found 4 pieces of worked flint in about 10 minutes, showing this place has been in use for thousands of years.
On a flat site near the hamlet below this monument, a very rich burial was found. Called the Whitcombe Warrior it is of a late Iron Age male buried with a sword in its scabbard, an iron spearhead and various other pieces of iron equipment. The burial was removed intact and is on public display in Dorset County Museum.

Fieldnotes – Conkwell Stone Circle – Sunday 20-01-08

O.S. Map: Bristol & Bath inc. Keynsham & Marshfield.
Sheet Number: 155 – 1:25000 – ISBN: 9780319239773

The easiest route to this site is as follows;
Leave the A4 at the Bathford roundabout and travel down the A363 towards Bradford-on-Avon. After a mile, you will come to a cross roads with a sign for Warleigh. Take the B road and travel past the Manor school, and up Warleigh Hill. When you reach the top of the hill you will cross the county line into Wiltshire. Just past this, the road comes to a tee junction. Park your car off the road, and the site is to the right.

At first sight this site looked a tip. When me and Scubi63 visited back in January, it contained the remains of an abandoned camp with two tents and much rubbish. I had a copy of Guy Underwood’s 1946 report of his excavations, which includes all the documentation I could find on the site.
The sketch made by Guy was a bit poor so I re-drew it and have posted it up here, together with a detail from the overall site plan. We didn’t have a lot of time and being January; the light would have gone by 5 o’clock in the afternoon. We uncovered enough of the stones to be certain it was the correct place, although some, like the centre stone, No.1 did seem to be missing. A detailed probing of the undergrowth would be needed to update the record.

The following comes from Guy Underwood’s notes from 1946.

No Man’s Land.
This site was illustrated in W.A.M., December. 1945, p. 231, when attention was called to the possibility that certain stones might be the remains of a Stone Circle. It is at the S.W. corner of the main site, and it was this site that called my attention to the main site, and may be associated with it.
Surface quarrying has disturbed the site. Most of the stones north of the road, are of local surface ragstone. Most of those on the south, and No. 1 and 10 to the north, are of finer material and come from lower levels. Some bear stalagmitic deposits indicating the action of water for long periods. These stones, several of which weigh over a ton must therefore have been brought to the site, which occupies the highest point for some distance round. They are printed black on the plan.

Wiltshire Archaeological Magazine Vol. 51, p447 Guy Underwood

It was our final day in Sardinia and we wanted to return to Coddhu Vecchju to enjoy the morning light on the stones.

Tombi di giganti are aligned south-south-east, towards the morning light, which I suppose is symbolic of life and rebirth. This is certainly the case in ancient Egypt. The tombs’ grave corridors point north-north-west, towards evening and sunset, perhaps symbolic of death. So to get the best modeling light on the stones (for painting and photography) you need to be there late morning, so the sun is high enough to cast shadows and reveal the carving and sculpting.

At Coddhu Vecchju the carving is not deep at all (not like those more southerly stele we’d seen) so we needed all those shadows. And I wanted to see the pink granite sparkle in the sun.

We parked almost on the A481, inbetween hedge and field theres room for a dozen cars, the walk through two fields and some woods was more than pleasant, only one fence to step over. The circle is quite large about 25metres
some stones are quite big, but lying flat, the remainder are small. At both the southern and northern ends of the ring are piles of large stones, probably where farmers have dumped nuisance rock, although some could be from the circle if not all...ha! what do i know.
The circle though small is in a beautiful place seemingly in the centre of a bowl created by the most shaplely of mother hills and sleeping goddesses, I felt the whole valley was trying to speak to me but was too limited to understand.

Many thanks to Jane for taking over to see the henge earlier today. As previously stated, this lies in the middle of landfill, on private land. However, we weren’t challenged at all and spent some time looking around the henge and watching the birds all around.

I was extremely surprised at the extent of the site – for some reason I’d only expected an arc of stones at the edge of a gravel pit!

Although only partially restored, it’s possible to relate to the previous splendour of this place, even amongst all the rubbish. The rabbits have made a real mess of the restored part of the ditch, and there are copious deposits of bones (no feathers) all across the site. I expect the bones have been dropped by the many crows and kites around. However, it looks as if some progress is being made as a large number of pits have been dug, including an outlier close to the circle, presumably ready to receive the stones strewn in the centre of the site. The pits are not evenly spaced, suggesting that they have been based upon previous digs noting the original positions of the stones. I look forward to eventually seeing the porject completed!

Access is not really possible unless you are happy to climb through a cut bit of fence and past a “No public access” sign. If you do you’ll be rewarded with this compact line of barrows at the edge of a steep but short drop. From west to east there is one largeish bowl barrow, two smaller bowls with shared ditch, another pair with a shared ditch, and a saucer barrow. Alas, my battery ran out here and I didn’t get photos of the latter pair and the saucer barrow. There are also two marked as in the woodland further to the west, but it is hard to make out what might be man-made mounds when peering in from the bridleway. You can see across to Woolbury and Danebury and indeed all the views around here are breathtaking. The aspect that was important to the barrow-builders was very much towards the Test valley. The redoubtable Jimit informed me later in the pub that he thought there was easier access from the track that leads off the Clarendon Way towards the southwest, into Parnholt Wood.

High on a hill at the back of the town of Silanus in the grounds of the chapel of San Lorenzo are five more of these short bullet shaped standing stones. One stands in front of the chapel and four clustered behind. So randomly placed are they we felt they were originally more.

None of the stones had breasts or froglet eyes, like at Tamuli, and one had been broken off half way down. But one has a huge slit carved long its top – deliberately made – and looking very phallic. We both felt that this slit carving was original. After all if you were a 16th century xtian, looking to destroy the nasty pagan stones, you’d hardly go about doing so by making it even more cock-like would you?

We wondered why the betili were here, so high above the town. Then as we returned to the car I found out why – I could hear the sound of running water. There was a spring.

There are six standing stones, conical and pointing out of the ground like bullets and all absolutely round in section. Quite phallic. And the best bit is that three of them had small breasts carved on them.

And the more I looked the sillier these (no doubt once serious) fertility totems became. At one moment they were froglets from the Clangers, the next they we giant mudskippers poking their fishy heads up. I loved them; I’d seen nothing like them before and they left me wondering about a whole bunch of questions which I’ve long given up thinking about other monuments for lack of answers. In the case of these betili, questions like: were they painted or perhaps anointed with liquid – milk, blood or something else, like the Shiva lingam are in India today. Were they dressed or decorated at ceremonial times? How were they used? And so on…

Intriguing!

It lacks flanking slabs and only has a little rubble each side and vestiges of tomb material behind it. It’s that whopping stele, standing there all alone in the field which struck me.

Like Imbertighe and Figu I could see that thickness of width in proportion to its height again, (in Bainzu’s case 3.24ms high).

I’d noticed at nearby Figu that the stele (or what was left of it) seemed chunkier than the stele at tombi further north. At Imbertighe this regional stylistic difference was confirmed to me. The stele here was chunkier too – bigger, thicker, deeper and with far deeper carving. The depth of the carving was about 9”. Up north, you’re lucky to get an inch.

Imbertighe still had its curved arms. Like Figu, these were constructed from big blocks rather than a line of slabs. Not much of the tomb remains – through the deep meadow grass we detected a few stones, but nothing grand.

The thick stele is cracked and broken vertically so that only one side of it remains up with the top arch curling over like Hokkusai’s tsunami wave or a giant F.

Most of the tomb section is gone, though there is a lot of rubble under hoof and one or two stones lurking higgledy piggledy in the grass. Some of the tomb material seems to have been assimilated into the wall beside the lane.

Like at Imbertighe the forecourt area seems to have been constructed like wall from big blocks of stone rather than a line of standing slabs

We pressed on to Mura Cuada tombi di giganti in the midday heat, which is right by a railway line. If you do follow Julian’s instructions to reach it, as Sals says, DO NOT walk on the railway line! Trains run on this line. We walked just to one side of the track out of the way of any passing rolling stock. Julian is spot on with his ‘355 paces’ though.

What a surprising place it is; less of a tomba di giganti and more of a Menorcan naveta with arms! This tomba has no stele; instead it has just an entrance hole in the front wall, which forms a very curved forecourt.

Moth squeezed inside, but I was not wearing clothing suitable to join him in there. He said he could easily stand up and it was exactly like a naveta.

There’s a small peep hole about the size of a football directly above the well at ground level through which light passes. Apparently, when the moon shines over it at one point in its 18.6 year cycle it completely fills the hole. (Sound familiar, Callanishistas?) I managed to suppress my horrible small girl urge to spit through it and listen for the splash at the bottom.

To get down to the well you pass through a trapezoid-shaped hole and decend down into the ground on a stone staircase. The steps and the corbelling is so fresh and crisp that you feel it could have been built yesterday, though Julian in TME says that this is original stonework. If he’s right, then this is truly astonishing. Likewise the beehivey conical corbelling leading up from the well to the peephole at ground level – incredible stonework. It really does look modern.

I descended down the crisp, steep staircase (suppressing further girlish urges, this time to kick out my feet and sing “New York, New York”) about 3 metres below ground level to the water. Down there it was refreshingly cool; perhaps 10degC lower in temperature, but then it was 35degC outside.

Though I’m not big into wells, this one’s a must-see.

A saucer barrow, a disc barrow, and a bowl barrow, all arranged in a compact triangle. And then someone dug a forestry track through the middle of them at some point between the 1930s and the 1970s. Nice one. The arrangement is very unusual and definitely worth a visit I thought. Well, I didn’t make it. They are well inside private woodland and although I decided to strike out for them for some guerilla photography along the track which actually bisects the barrows, I got spooked. I’m not one for that sort of thing (I’m a statistician you know!) and I usually feel at home in dense woodland but somehow it felt really hostile in there. When I hit a fence not marked on the maps, I legged it back the way I came as fast as I could.

A small bowl barrow and a larger saucer barrow at the side of a field. Easy access from the bridleway down the edge of the field for a quick look. Hooray for the landowner here who has left the scheduled monuments alone. Having said that they have suffered in the past, but you can still make out the dimensions of it all. The arrangement is unusual in that the bowl barrow was raised second and overlapped the edge of the saucer barrow.