jimit

Note
“This is one of the most confusing digs I have seen. Wessex Archaeology is still evaluating the meaning of the various excavations and finds, therefore any comments I make are entirely provisional! More of the site to the east will be excavated within the next year or two. With thanks to the WA guides.”
(See plan for current details)

The site is on the cusp of the TMA remit being late IA early Romano/British. Neolithic artifacts have been found but so far no trace of any houses etc.
A large ditch and bank were constructed in a (assumed) square or rectangular shape and several parallel drainage (?) ditches led to the lowest part of the site. Another, smaller, ditch was constructed with an “entrance” to the W. Outside this 5 or 6 postholes have been found. They don’t seem to suggest a building, might they have been “totemic” in function?

The most obvious features of the site are the numerous “quarry pits”. There seems, at present, no obvious explanation for them. What were the inhabitants digging for? Clay, flints, gravel or sand are possibilities as they appear to follow “seams” and were backfilled as soon as they were exhausted as there is no sign of weathering. Geofiz seems to be of little use as the underlying geology brings up too many anomalies.

Some cremation deposits have been found within the perimeter of the site which suggests native customs as the Romans usually had separate cemeteries outside.

The area seems to have abandoned for a considerable time (100years?) but re-occupied in later Roman times.

The former MOD buildings to the E (hence the site name) are being removed and excavations will re-commence when the site is cleared, these may discover the main settlement.

The whole site is to be developed as a housing estate, Avon Fields.

Access
Guided tour only. Consult Wessex Archaeology for details.

With the risk of criticism from some quarters, I think that this site should be included as its early history certainly falls within the TMA remit.

The late IA town’s defensive earthworks covered almost as much area as the later (and more famous) Roman town. They are best seen on the N side by the car park where the ditch and bank are well preserved.

silchester.rdg.ac.uk/guide/preroman

The Atrebates who lived here were a sophisticated lot who traded extensively with the Roman Empire and their “Kings” minted coins to claim their authority.

Passing over the later period, which of course is of more interest to Romanophiles, we come to the problem of why it was abandoned.
It had great trade and road links, a fertile hinterland which was well watered and a presumably stable and integrated population. Why didn’t it become another Winchester?
The later pages of the University of Reading’s website addresses these problems.

silchester.rdg.ac.uk/guide/end

Access
For such a famous site the access and information is rather poor.Go slowly down the narrow roads as the signs suddenly spring up and the car park on the N is very easy to miss. There are pamphlets available there.

I looked carefully at the weather forecast and decided that it might be a reasonable sunset at the (near) solstice.
There was a marquee in the car park with an exhibition about astromony with telescopes looking at the sunspots. Sheltering from the bitter Arctic wind, I got into a long and very interesting conversation with an archeaoastronomer (Simon Banton) about various alignments in the area.
(He reckons that when the new visitor centre is built with its twin “pavilons” the sun will appear to rise between them at some date in the year! A new legend in the making?)
Paid my entrance fee and joined about 15 other people by the Heel Stone. The sunset didn’t disappoint. Dramatic clouds with the sun appearing and disappearing every few minutes, a wonderful half hour. I hope my “duplicate” photos don’t offend but the ambiance changed so quickly.

While chatting to the people there I found out that there were to be talks given by three experts within the circle after the general public had left. They might have a couple of spare spaces! Blagged my way in after a warming hot chocolate and mince pie!

Listened to a short talk by a chap from the Armagh Observatory(?) about Comets and the Zodaical Light and then went into the circle. I missed out on the other two lectures as I was fascinated by the way the stones took on a strange and mysterious presence in the pitch dark. The pictures I’ve added to the “Artistic/Interpretive section might give a flavour of the feeling.
By this time the extreme cold was beginning to get to me and I made a strategic retreat to a warm car.
A memorable experience.
Jim.

Boxgrove is almost certainly the oldest site to be added to TMA.
About 480,000 years ago, groups of homonids were here slaughtering and butchering some of the large game which came to a small lake fed by springs at the foot of a cliff. The fresh water lured prey and hunter alike.

The climate of southern Britain at this time was similar to the present but the topography was vastly different. A very wide land bridge existed between the proto-North Sea and the proto-western English Channel. Most of the present flora and fauna was present but many large herbivores/carnivores crossed the bridge and included rhino, bears, huge extinct lions, hyenas and wolves. The countryside was more open than thought a few years ago and appeared more like a cool savannah due to the heavy grazing.

Boxgrove Man, of whom a tibia and two teeth have been found, was a sturdy, athletic and tall (6ft) individual. He was not a modern human but of a species called Homo heidelbergensis, who were descendants of Homo ergaster who had left Africa about a million years previously.

Prey animals seem to have been killed with wooden spears and butchered on the spot and eaten raw, no evidence for fires has been found. Large bones were split for their marrow.
The cutting tools seem to have been made quickly on the spot and then discarded. Too heavy to carry by nomadic hunter gatherers?
Various groups must have returned again and again as about 450 hand axes/knives have been found.
Boxgrove Man might have come to a sticky end as his tibia was found to have been chewed at each end by (possibly) a wolf. Whether he was predated or scavenged after death, who can tell?

It all came to an end with the onset of the Anglian Glaciation when severe tundra conditions prevailed. Meltwater outwash created new valleys and also covered and preserved this site.

As with most excavated sites there is almost nothing to see above ground.

Thanks are due to WARG, the local Winchester society for archaeology and history, for finding me a slot in the very limited numbers allowed to be present.

Very especial thanks go to Mark Roberts who, as the project director for the UCL excavations here and elsewhere, was an astounding guide to the geology/history of this remote period. He also provided the genuine finds from the site (apart from the tibia) for us to handle and marvel at.

The pictures have a few more detailed notes

The English Heritage/UCL website is here for more info on the excavations...... matt.pope.users.btopenworld.com/boxgrove/boxhome.htm

Access

No public admittance. Old quarry is being infilled and regraded. Private land.

Although not spectacular in itself it is a small triumph for conservation. A few years ago, Roy Canham, the then County Archaeologist for Wilts ,was concerned that a track used by the army was damaging the end of the barrow. After consultation with the MOD the protecting posts were moved further E and the track diverted.
(The other mounds are modern army constructions)

This is a convenient place to park for Old Ditch Longbarrow and White Barrow but read the warning on the first site.

Access
Park opposite the prominent water tower on the Tilshead to Chitterne road. The barrow is right next door.

A fine barrow (protected by the NT) with well preserved ditches. The slightly swollen E end is thought to be due to a later round barrow constructed on top. MAGIC suggests that there was also a forecourt at this end.
The IA ditch and banks which approach from the NW are better preserved here within the fenced off area.

Access
By footpath from Tilshead or the A360 or from Old Ditch Longbarrow but read the warning on that site.

An extraordinarily large and fine barrow which seems to have survived the ravages of time (and the MOD) rather well. A great whaleback prominent on the horizon and framed by lines of trees. The crest is straight and unblemished and the large flanking ditches are equally well preserved.
Roy Canham (The ex County Archaeologist of Wilts) suggested the name as the later IA boundary bank and ditches are named as such on early maps. He also mentioned that a limited Victorian excavation at the NE end found a charcoal layer which could suggest a previous wooden mortuary enclosure perhaps similar to Fussell’s Lodge.

The SW/NE tending IA bank and ditch does a dogleg around the NE end and the continuation NE is easily visible in the avenue of trees (less well defined SW). It is then ploughed out but is visible as cropmarks as it approaches White Barrow where it is better preserved.

The somewhat park-like setting is due to the fact that this was part of the estate of Tilshead Lodge, a minor stately home, demolished in the 1950s.

Access
Park opposite the prominent redbrick water tower on the Tilshead to Chitterne road.

Warning
Although this barrow is outside the restricted MOD area, there is still a lot of military activity in the area so it is wise to keep to the paths, be alert and don’t pick up any large shiny objects you might find lying around!

Tremendously impressive ditches and banks on this large site, unfortunately, as others have mentioned, you do need decent weather up here.
We were greeted by a ferocious gale which made exploring the site very difficult and one wonders how the original inhabitants dealt with inclement weather.
Any future research and/or excavation here should be very interesting indeed, if, as noted, much of the site has never been ploughed.

Access Small layby to the SE. Short level walk to entrance, gate, modest slope to interior.

A stiff but shortish climb to the top but any pauses are worthwhile for the views to the south. The southern “entrance” is a bit of a puzzle. The notice board says that the main entrance is in the NE quadrant where the banks and ditches are much larger and deeper as the spur levels off here. At the southern “entrance” the banks and ditches peter out on either side which seems curious as, although the hillside is steep, it seems odd that this part is less defended.
The hill is capped with a layer of clay-with-flints and I just wonder if there has been a slippage down the hill, destroying the banks and ditches.

The tumulus and the pillow mounds are easily visible and the possible dew pond certainly had water in it when I visited.

A great place to visit (in good weather) with buzzards wheeling overhead, sheep peacefully grazing and stupendous 360 degree views.

Tests are being done to find out whether it predates the Cursus the east end of which is just behind the trees. After the excavation the barrow will be invisible as it has been completely flattened and a road built over it!

The general consensus is that it is a settlement site of late Bronze/early Iron Age date.
Interesting finds include a small carved chalk pig (?),the articulated skeleton of a sheep(goat?) with a scatter of flint above and below it, was it crushed alive as a sort of sacrifice? An infant burial has been found but at the time of writing (07.09.08) was waiting for the coroner to give permission for its removal.

Atkinson found this enigmatic feature in the 1950s.
It seems to lead NNE from the first elbow in the Avenue. Any more information will be welcome. It will be invisible after the excavation.

Aerial photography and geophiz found a line of postholes and it was suspected there was a large enclosure here with a timber lined avenue leading to Stonehenge Bottom. Field walking found pottery and tools and the present excavations (Stonehenge Riverside Aug 08) are designed to discover if there was a settlement here about 3000BCE.
Jim.

What a surprise and delight and what a curious site.
As noted in the fieldnotes elsewhere, this fort/settlement/refuge was never finished. This is plainly obvious when walking around it. In some places the ditch and bank are nicely finished and contoured, then there is a break, a sort of causeway, and the next bit is quite different: a shallower ditch, a less “finished” profile and dumps of earth on top which have had no attempt to make them into a profiled bank.
It looks just like a building site when everybody has just knocked off for tea! There is the strong feeling that if you were to wait a bit they’ll be back.

Archaeologists have suggested that each section might have been constructed by a different family. What a source of competition/arguments/backbiting that arrangement could have been!

Anyway it was abandoned when almost finished. Why? Did Big Brother (Sister?) across the valley, Beacon Hill, tell them to stop/join forces/out perform them/enslave them?

Internal and other external features are difficult to see as waist high grass and nettles obscure them.
A winter visit might be in order.

The site is not visited much and there are no worn paths anywhere. Skylarks and buzzards while I was there and it is much quieter than Beacon Hill with very little noise from the A34. Although not as high it probably has better views and is much easier to get to the top.

A site for the imagination.

Access
Take signposts off A34 to Old Burghclere, go through village and at T junction to the left (N) park on verge on right. (2/3 cars?) Take bridleway (S), level if muddy path along valley floor, with diversions. Gentle slope right to the top. At iron gate take sharp dog-leg to the left, follow field boundary to 5-bar gate. (Private land?)

This site is familiar to anyone traveling between Southampton and Oxford on the A34,
A great rounded hill on the W of the gap in the N Hants Downs.
The “fort” is not that obvious from below but after a very stiff climb (with many pauses for breath) the banks and ditches are revealed. They are all very well preserved and of impressive dimensions and some views reminded me of Maiden Castle although smaller. It’s a rather peculiar shape being like an hour glass with the top chopped off, a result of following the contours I suspect.
In the NW corner (not SW as MAGIC has it) is the tomb of the 5th Earl of Carnarvon, the sponsor and co-discoverer with Howard Carter of Tutankhamen.
Extensive views except to the NW with Ladle Hill to the E and plenty of chalk flora and fauna.
The only downside is that the roar of traffic from the A34 below is difficult to avoid. Otherwise a very worthwhile site to visit.

Access
Small car park at base signposted from A34.
Very steep climb to top with many steps.

A few sad notes about the roundhouse erected in July 06.... Vandals have pushed out two sections of the painted wattle and daub walls and have pulled out chunks of the thatch.

It would be interesting to know where they got the inspiration/source for the carvings and painting from. Decorated bowls perhaps?
Jim.

Although this poor Long Barrow has been almost completely ploughed out, it is well worth visiting because of its spectacular setting. Situated on one of the highest parts in Hampshire (234M.), the views encompass nearly the whole of the county and the N. of the I.O.W.
Deep combes to the E. and Butser Hill,Old Winchester Hill to the W, Southampton Fawley and the Solent to the SW and the N. Hampshire Downs and Beacon Hill to the N.

It is shocking that this ancient relic has no protection. So far as I could see, ploughing may well be going on (The site was under grass silage), and within a lifetime could destroy all traces of the barrow.
Why not impose a small exclusion zone as has been done elsewhere?
(MAGIC says it survives well. Hmmm!)

In all my pictures the barrow is the vague hump in the extreme foreground!

Access
Rough but adequate track to the W. of the disused MOD site leads to radio masts and parking by the barn. Short walk on level but rutted foot path (South Downs Way) and the barrow is just, barely, visible in the second field on the left.

When the Saxon/Norman church was demolished in 1876, it was found that the old tower had been built on a circle of 12 Sarsen stones. They were described as “A Druidical Temple” at the time and the builders blamed the difficulty of working around them as one of the reasons for the cost/time overrun of the new church. This was designed by the famous Victorian architect Sir Alfred Waterhouse (Nat Hist Mus, Manchester Town Hall etc.) and he put the new tower on the site of the old and used the old circle again for the foundations. Nothing to see above ground sadly but another nice example of one religion imposing itself on another.

(Two prone Sarsens by footbridge over the River Itchen and fine ancient clipped Yew to the north)

What does one say about a site like this? Another of Hampshire’s “lost” Long Barrows. Unvisited, unloved and almost inaccessible later in the growing season because of the waist high stinging nettles. Partly trashed in the past by a small quarry at the NW end and a track over the centre and rabbit/badger burrows at the SE end. Photographic recording of sites like this is important, boring though the images may be, as ancient barrows like this can so easily be lost.

As a case in point, my old (1976) 1: 25,000 OS Map (SU42/52) shows clearly a fenced Long Barrow a couple of hundred meters to the SE.
Later maps and a site visit show no traces. What has happened to it in the past 30 years?

Access Private woodland but footpaths close by.

This really was the best time to visit these sites, a perfect 20 degree sunny spring day. The bluebells in their first flush of flower and the beeches just coming into leaf. Later in the season, with the tree canopy developed and the understory in full growth, the sites are more obscured and dark.
To add a few comments to Nat’s... The pub has been demolished and if you take the anti-clockwise path from the car park the Banjo Enclosure is first (almost impossible to photo but see FlashEarth link.) then the E barrow (with trees removed), follow the path to the conifers and turn right parallel to the (very noisy!) M3 to the N barrow.
Jim.

A group of 4 (?) Long Barrows close to Danebury, which they pre-date.

flashearth.com/?lat=51.137338&lon=-1.537666&z=15.1&r=0&src=2

Using the above, the northerly couple can be seen clearly. There is said to be another at SU323387 (Tumulus on OS) to the E in the corner of the right hand field above the farm sheds. The LB/Bowl Barrow can be seen by the Y junction to the E of Danebury as a black clump of trees by the road.

It’s interesting that the N group are orientated ESE and the others ENE.

Decided to “do” the Medway sites on the spur of the moment and didn’t have a chance to consult this site so my impressions were uncoloured.
After Kit’s Coty and The circular stones of Addington and The Chestnuts (Don’t forget to book on 01732 840220) we happened upon Coldrum.
Wow! What a site. I don’t know if it was the weather, still and brilliant winter sun, the general neatness of the site, the position or the fantastic stones.
After negotiating the steepish path to the bottom with my 87yr old mother, I was more concerned with getting her over the stile and up the steps than looking around. My first impressions then were of the “cloutie” tree, then the recumbent stones, then the upright chamber with the lovely views of the North Downs and the valley beyond.
I was struck with the difference in colour when the stones were either sunlit or in shadow, a warm honey or a steely blue.
The fencing around the site was not the horrible railings that close off Kit’s Coty but seemed to say “Respect this place” so didn’t feel too guilty about hopping over to take pics.
When I got to the chamber I was astounded to find myself on top of a cliff with the obvious remains of the rest of the tomb lying below. Squeezing in, I wondered what it might be like on a March morning with the rising sunlight flooding it as Wayland has mentioned below. Explored the rest of the site including the informative ‘re-construction’ plaque. I have never come across a square LB before, is it unique?
The whole site was graffiti free although the fire pit noted by others is still a grass free area.

A magical site. I’d have loved to have spent much more time here, another day for sure.

P.S. Difficult not to post duplicate pics of the site but the stones change in character with the light and season.

P.P.S. Check out the marvellous pub in the village (See facilities) where the locals told me the name is pronounced ‘Trosley’ with a long ‘o’.

Access Small carpark then gentle track down, short steeper track up on grass.
For those with mobility problems, instead of taking the last steep track down, the top of the site can be accessed by walking around the edge of the open field.

Not a great deal to see but prettily sited above the source of the River Itchen.
One of those rather ignored, but still quite rare, long barrows in Hampshire. This, as many, could be under threat by the plough but the farmer seems to be giving it a fairly wide berth.

Access Parking MAY be possible at the cottage to the SE. Up track to stile and footpath leads close to barrow.

The church of St Michael was built on top of a large mound, probably in the 13C. The mound is obviously artificial as the site is on the flood plain of the River Itchen and close to its source. It looks like a classic round barrow to me although for obvious reasons the church and graveyard have obliterated any subtle details which could date it.
As is usual, photos can’t give an impression of the height but the top of the mound is nearly level with the eaves of the local cottages.
The “Wayfarers Walk” (Hants County Recreation) says that “...the medieval building has endured much restoration work due to continual structural failure”.
Revenge of the older Gods?
Hampshire Treasures suggest that the mound is “Celtic”, what ever that might mean.

A bit of an oddity as for many years they were considered to be long barrows, and still are by Hampshire Treasures.
The confusion arose because the most prominent group consists of two bowl barrows and a twin bowl barrow surrounded by a common ditch, all on a NE/SW alignment about 150M long.
There is another twin bowl barrow and a rare saucer barrow near by and a further two bowl barrows to the W.
Conjoint barrows surrounded by a single ditch are comparatively rare.

Could one speculate that these marked the burial of several family/tribe/clan members who died at the same time?

(The “Earthwork” shown to the N is an IA univallate Hill Fort)

Access
Gentle gradients on good tracks from car park but drops steeply near barrows.
Area fenced off but access possible at bottom of field through a “Hampshire Gate”.
Area popular with walkers as the whole of Hampshire and the IOW can be seen from the track, especially at the Monument.

EXTRACT FROM ENGLISH HERITAGE’S RECORD OF SCHEDULED MONUMENTS
MONUMENT: Dumpdon Camp
The monument includes Dumpdon Camp, a prehistoric hillfort located on a
detached hill, 260m high, at the southern end of a steep-sided ridge of Upper
Greensand between the River Otter and the Luppitt Brook. The flat topped and
triangular shaped hillfort of 2.6ha was defended by two substantial ramparts
and ditches on the northern side, controlling the only easy line of approach,
and by single ramparts on the east and west sides. A single inturned entrance
on the north east side provided the only known point of entry.
The layout of the defences largely reflects the configuration of the hilltop
which is flattest and widest towards its northern end, narrowing down to a
steep sided point at its southern end. The northern approach required the
strongest artificial protection and here the defences were bivallate with a
berm 30m wide separating two ramparts and their accompanying ditches. The
inner rampart is on average 1.3m in height on the interior with an average
width of 4.5m. It has a depth on the outer slope of 8.3m and is fronted by a
ditch which is mostly filled and waterlogged but which has an average width of
4.7m. The outer rampart is on average 1.2m in height and 3.1m in width. It is
fronted by a well defined ditch which has an average width of 3.5m and in
places is up to 1.35m deep. The remaining two sides of the monument were
defended along part of their length by a single rampart and a single ditch of
much smaller dimensions than those on the northern side and with a small
counterscarp bank on the outer side of the ditch. Controlled excavations have
demonstrated that the base of the eastern rampart was constructed of sizeable
chert blocks forming a wall 2.15m wide and 0.4m high; it was noted in the same
excavation report that the unexcavated western rampart becomes less distinct
and breaks up into a series of small dumps. It has been suggested by the
excavator, Professor Todd, that the defences were never completed and that
only the rampart base was constructed along part of the western and eastern
sides before work ceased. The fading out of the defensive ditch at about the
same place as the rampart base on both sides of the monument would support
this view. The hillfort was however provided with a single 20m long inturned
entrance close to the north east angle; this comprised a 7m wide causeway
flanked by low banks between the ditch ends. The thickened end of the southern
rampart may have been intended as a fighting platform covering the approach in
front of the gate. A gap in the northern defences is considered to be modern.
The interior of the hillfort is featureless and limited excavations in the
interior have revealed no signs of occupation. The suggestion is that Dumpdon
hillfort was neither finished nor fully occupied.

Managed to find this stone at last having looked in the wrong place before. My thanks to Prof. Caroline Tisdall of the Conholt Park Estate for pointing me in the right direction.

What a very odd stone. The markings are shallower than I expected but quite obvious. The most prominent features are the 5 or more grooves which describe a very regular arc. Tracing it out, my fingers fitted perfectly. From the top of the arc the grooves split off at an angle and are straight but less well defined. There are other ill-defined marks but I didn’t want to remove the moss which was obscuring them. The “frame” at top of the stone is also a curious feature but has a “natural” feel to it.

What is one to make of this stone?

The geologists who looked at it in the 1920s rather sniffily dismissed the marks as natural but I’m not so sure. I’ve seen a fair number of sarsens but this is the first time that I’ve come across anything that looked like this.

When I was there (21.11.04) the light was not the best for seeing the marks as there was thick fog. It needs a good photographer with lights to bring out the details.

This is the most northerly of the series of Iron Age forts in this area, Danebury, Norsebury, Woolbury, that line the River Test.
The original slight univallate fort was later strengthened and given another entrance.
The banks and the ditch are in a fine state of preservation although fairly heavily wooded, the centre is grazed and private.
The site was used well into the Roman period and in the Battle of Andover in 1016 (King Canute v Edmond Ironside) it was used as Canute’s camp.

Access Parking available close to S. entrance, level, short walk to kissing gate. Parts of level inner walk have many tree roots and the ditch bottom can be rutted and wet.

It’s a pity that the local villagers trashed this barrow in 1750 when they completely removed the middle in a fruitless(?) search for grave goods. It sits on a fine spur overlooking the Vale of Pewsey and is surrounded by a multitude of linear banks and ditches and early field systems. From the link below it is not clear when the 10ft high Sarsens at the entrance were removed, they would have been a grand sight.

Access Close to road and field gate, rough pasture.

I have provisionally posted this as a carved stone although the last time it was really looked at, in the 1920s, the general concensus was that the marks were natural. However I have not seen marks in Sarsen that look quite like these. People with more experience of rock art than I may have other opinions.
If the marks are truly man-made they are rare in this part of the country.
The picture quality is explained in the caption.

Access
Park on verge at T junction, cross road to field gate and the stone is in the hollow to your right about 50M away. Tussocky grass.

(The hollow in which it lies is one of the quarry pits used by the Romans to construct the Chute Causeway, a diversion on the Winchester-Cirencester road to avoid the steep valley to the North)

A rare and curious example of a preserved excavation of a Mesolithic dwelling.
The site was discovered in the late 1940s by Sir E. Beddington Behrens who noticed the existence of flint flakes, tools and weapons dating to the Mesolithic Era. It was excavated and preserved by Dr. Louis and Mary Leakey of Olduvai Gorge fame in Dec. 1950. Hearths and post-holes found suggest that it was a temporary hunting camp.

A small museum, which covers the site has more information and a selection of artifacts.

Access
The site is on private land and the key to the Museum is held at Manor Farm. Local schools occasionally visit in pre-booked parties but for individual trips it is better to contact the landowner on 01306 730760.
The site is either accessible from Manor Farm, across fields, or from a field gate near the bottom of the hill.

Having at last re-visited this site (see notes below) I am very confused. Its position in the park is very beautiful and tranquil, only the occasional car passing. The circle itself is mainly composed of the generic Sarsens but a curious extension to the N is made from conglomerate including the tallest stone at the termination.
There is a small double concentric prone circle somewhat N of centre of the main circle. Some of the stones are upright, some leaning and some prone. In the valley, apart from some used as road markers, there are several erect stones seemingly randomly placed.
How much of it is authentic? My own thoughts are that the circle itself “feels” right but the odd N extension looks as though an antiquarian has though to make a faux passage grave and while he was at it put a ruined cist in the circle for good measure!
The etymology for “Stonor” is, not surprisingly, “stone hill”.
This pretty circle needs more people to visit it, someone with more experience than me would be a start!

When Hampshire Treasures describe this as “overgrown” they’re not joking! The site of the barrow is easily seen from the road as it is crowned by Yew trees.Closer to, it seems to be surrounded by a very overgrown hedge but after struggling through this it becomes apparent that it is Ivy clad scrub growing on the outside and partly down the very well defined ditches. The barrow itself is the shortest “Long” barrow I’ve seen and has a very dumpy appearance, however its actual outline is difficult to determine as the Yews are falling over, re-layering and/or rotting and there are huge mounds of fresh chalk everywhere caused by active badger setts. The ditches are heavily weed infested and a winter visit left me picking burrs out of my clothes for some time.
What does one do about a site like this? Clear it of the untidy scrub and dead trees and restore it to some of the majesty it had when first constructed or leave it to gently decay and remain the undoubted wild-life sanctuary it surely has become?

Disabled: Parking on small verge just off the road. Walk up-hill on very deeply rutted track (Much used by off-roaders while I was there), locked farm gate, ploughed field, many brambles and much scrub and uneven ground.

A really impressive barrow indeed. While not as long as Knap Barrow next door, it is much higher and quite overwhelms close to. Very well preserved with a remarkably smooth outline like a large whale breaking the surface. Interesting that its orientation is almost at right-angles to its companion. Mostly clear of scrub growth although it is encroaching from the north.
Disabled: As Knap although both would be accessible by a 4x4. Open farm gate.

A unassuming little stone just over a metre high marking the tip of a point where the Wilts boundary takes dog-tooth shaped bite out of Hants. Grim’s Ditch1 mile to the NE points directly to this stone but to the NW seems to want nothing to do with it. Marked with an Ordnance Survey carving and accompanied by a small Victorian concrete boundary (?) post. The stone itself seems to be of the generic “Sarsen” type so was probably moved some distance.

Disabled: Approach by car along a flat, slightly rutted track (care in very wet weather) and park next to stone on grassy triangle without blocking the tracks. Access to Grans Barrow and Knap Barrow is best attempted from here for the more mobile.

This has several similarities to the West Kennet Long Barrow. For a start, a slow climb up the hill with the barrow invisible until the last moment, then its length is comparable, being only a few metres shorter and its orientation as (very!) roughly E/W. No stones unfortunately, only a little Victorian concrete post at the E end. The condition is good with none of the mutilation seen at the WKLB evident. Only one worry is that the track to the S. beloved of off-roaders, is not fenced off and is perilously close. A small amount of scrub clearance at the W end would be an improvement. Wide views to the N and prominent tumuli on the skyline to the S. Grans Barrow is very close by. A fine and well preserved site but very exposed in winter gales as I found out!

Disabled: Longish walk up hill in rutted and grassy track if approaching from the Sarsen stone. Note.. Take the left track of the two going south.

“.......As for this site (PRN 2064), we have recorded it as a folly on the SMR. A primary source is the Country Life article, May 7, 1981. Apparently the chapel was built over the original site of the circle; the circle was first reconstructed in C17. Re-erected in 1981 “as near as possible in its original formation.” There are additional sources within the SMR which you are welcome to consult during opening hours by appointment.”

County Sites and Monuments Record Officer
Central Library, Westgate
Oxford OX1 1DJ
01865 810825

Does this site now class as a modern folly, a very curious C17 re-working of a Neolithic site or a semi-faithful reconstruction of a destroyed monument?

I can only leave it to the Eds to decide whether this should remain on TMA. My own feeling is that it should remain if only to show the curious cheek by jowl jostling of different beliefs.
One wonders whether they would allow a Druid ceremony to be held there...........?

Barrow-like mound surmounted by a yew tree at ST052214. {1}

The mound is circular, although slightly truncated at its N side. E-W diameter is 9m, N-S diameter 7m and c1.25m high. The centre of the mound is about 17m due S of the E wall of the chancel. It is crowned by a massive yew stool with a number of trunks and is clearly very old. {2}

NGR should be ST052213. {3}

Very doubtful. {4}

References:
1 Mention – Proceedings of the Somerset Archaeology and Natural History Society Aston, M 1976 “Somerset Archaeology 1974-5” vol 120, 71
2 Personal communication – Burrow, I SCPD 07.03.84
3 Detailed records – Ordnance Survey Archaeology Division 1976 ST02SE(M) SCPD
4 Mention – Quinell, NV quoted in Grinsell, LV “Somerset Barrows: revisions 1971-87” Proceedings of the Somerset Archaeology and Natural History Society 131 (1987), 22.

Record created by:
Ian Burrow in March 1984

© Copyright Somerset County Council 2003

The authenticity of the mound as a barrow is in question.
With thanks to the Somerset Museums Service for their help.

Class 1 henge monument of single causeway type consisting of a circular rock-cut ditch with an external rampart of earth and stones, enclosing a flat central area without any form of upright. The causeway is to the N. The ditch varied in width from 12ft to 21ft and 4-9ft deep. The NE and SW segments yielded evidence of Beaker occupation. This was separated from the ditch bottom by a barren yellow clay silt layer. In two places a platform of closely packed stones was interposed between the clay and beaker deposit, which consisted of dirty rubble, charcoal, hearths etc. Finds from this deposit included 4,000 flint flakes and implements, pottery of A-C beaker type (including rusticated ware) representing at least 100+ beakers, a few sherds of Neolithic “B” ware and large quantities of animal bones, mainly domestic. No evidence was found of stone or post holes, walling or any other structural remains. Two hypotheses can be suggested – the monument may be attributed to the grooved ware or “B” beaker group, or the A.C. beaker folk for whom the ditch held no significance. {1}

The beaker burial and occupation deposits had radio-carbon date centring on 1900-1700bc. {6}

The henge is set on a gentle E-facing slope to the W of Long Wood, in improved pasture. Condition is generally good except for three hawthorn trees growing in the ditch. {7}

The majority of the archives and finds were destroyed in the Second World War. {8}

The monument is in a generally satisfactory condition with no evidence of damage by grazing cattle. {9}

References:
1 Excavation report – PUBSS Jones, S.J 1935 “...Excavations at Gorsey Bigbury...” vol. 4(3), 174-8
2 Excavation report – PUBSS Jones, S.J et al 1938 “The Excavation of Gorsey Bigbury” vol. 5(1), 3-56
3 Excavation report – PUBSS ApSimon A.M 1951 “Gorsey Bigbury: The Second Report” vol. 6(2), 186-200
4 Detailed records – Ordnance Survey Archaeology Division 1966 ST45NE15 SCPD
5 Excavation report – PUBSS Tratman, E.K 1966 “Gorsey Bigbury...Third Report” vol. 11, 25-30
6 Description – PUBSS ApSimon A.M 1976 “Gorsey Bigbury...dating...” vol. 14(2), 155-183
7 Personal communication – Burrow, I SCPD (13.09.82)
8 Archive – UBSSM
9 Detailed records – Field Monument Warden’s report (22.4.1998) in HER files

Record created by:
Ian Burrow in September 1982

© Copyright Somerset County Council 2003

(Edited) With thanks to the Somerset Museums Service for their help.

“The stone circle is of comparatively recent construction, but of stones found in the vicinity which correspond in type to a cornerstone underpinning the medieval chapel here. By implication these stones were part of a much older pre-Christian circle which was located where the Chapel now is. As you know it was frequently the habit in medieval time to “claim” a pagan circle for Christianity by including a stone in the foundations for the new christian chapel.“.....“Stones have been re-located here in the last 30 years or so, I believe”

With many thanks to John Weaver, Administrator of the Stonor Estate for these observations.

The Estate re-opens in the Spring so any investigations as to stone type and source must wait till then.

stonor.com/

Curious that this site is not better known as it is at a very public location. Stonor Park is visited by thousands but on the web site no mention is made of this Neolithic(?) monument. The circle is right next door to the Catholic Chapel and does one sense a touch of embarrassment?
I visited this site a huge number of years ago(I used to knock around with one of the younger sons of the family) so the memory is a bit dim but I remember an earthwork and several standing stones. There is a small image available on the Google search but it’s not much help.
I tried trawling through Oxfordshire CC’s Web but couldn’t find much, perhaps someone knows the right site to go to for more information.
Some pics would surely bring this circle back to the prominence it deserves.

As Grrr notes this is all occupied by a very smart stud farm but a footpath skirts the N side and views of the ramparts can be seen from here. Following the side road signposted to the church, much better views can be had of the S side.

Disabled: Parking might be possible at the stud farm (Please ask) and part of the N part is circled by a flat path with wide views to the N. To the S, parking is possible where the road branches to the church (is this area private?) but the road is steep.

What a busy little bit of Hampshire this is! The Counties of Dorset and Wiltshire meet, the Dorset Cursus approaches from the SW,the Ditch(Dyke?) forms the boundary in association with Grim’s Ditch, a Long Barrow, tumuli and enclosures and a finely prominent aggar of the Roman Road.
A short walk SE shows that the earthwork is still very well defined and preserved, on the NE(Hants) side a deep ditch, on the SW(Dorset) side a smallish bank, Which was the defended side? Grim’s Ditch marks the boundary of a vast Bronze Age ranch so it would be nice to know which earthwork came first.

Disabled: Difficult from where I parked in the lay-by on the A354. However, my old map didn’t show the new parking area shown on Streetmap. Where I walked was flat but bumpy.

Couldn’t see this at first as the approach to the top of this bare and almost flat topped ridge hides it from view. Once there however it’s quite rewarding, a sinuous ditch with banks in places, sometimes climbing gently up the hill or following the contours where the ditch becomes a flat path with the natural steepness of the hill on one side and a smaller bank accentuating the drop on the other. From looking at this very short section it’s impossible to say whether it was built to keep raiders out, stock in or a huge statement of property ownership. Was it pallisaded? It seems unlikely as maintenance and patrol of this vast ranch boundary would tax even a modern stock farmer.

(“Soldiers Ring” ESE, marked by a prominent clump of trees, is Roman)

Disabled: Parking available up a cobbled road, right next to a gate. Gentle slope on grazed turf to top from where some of the ditch can be seen. Extensive views.

An Iron Age Fort, roughly oval in plan but associated with several Bronze Age earthworks.

An example of a Bronze Age boundary ditch still marking the border between two counties, Hants and Wilts. More obvious to the SW where Bokerley Dyke and the Grim’s Ditch serve the same purpose. What is more startling about this area is the disparity between the concentration of ancient sites either side of the dividing line. To the W. a huge number of tumuli and earthworks, to the E. none at all! The landscape is of similar form and there is no large physical barrier such as a river to provide a logical boundary. A line drawn between two tribes of dissimilar wealth?

This is but a very short section of the remains of a massive earthwork which encloses much of this part of Hampshire. The County boundary still follows the course of this dyke (although not here) which gives western Hampshire a huge penninsular of land which juts into Wiltshire and Dorset. Part of the W boundary is defined by the Bokerley Dyke and a short stretch by a Roman road. Much of the Dyke consists of twin banks with a ditch between. The area enclosed is about 16 sq.miles in extent and deliniates a large ranch belonging to the Middle/Late Bronze Age.

Pevsner/Lloyd (Hampshire & the Isle of Wight) mention that in the 1960s, an excavation near the N defences found the plan of a circular wooden house 25ft in diameter. Pottery dated it to Iron Age B cultures. The site was occupied in the Mesolithic and Roman periods.

Two large ramparts and outer ditches with a counterscarp on the northern half. The fort covers about 16 acres and is Iron Age in date.

This is really quite a delightful site. Very close to the centre of the bustling market town of Petersfield, an area of sandy heath with a large lake. No better place to play the game of “Spot the barrow” as some stand proud, dominated by noble trees, others lurk shyly in light woodland and some seem to stand guard over the boundary of the little cricket pitch. One or two are difficult to distinguish as there are a few natural tiny hills in the area. To the SW,the dominant Butser Hill. A charming place to exercise the dogs/children, to do a bit of fishing and to search for a distant past.

Disabled: Excellent. Dedicated parking and flat access to the Millennium Walk which encircles the lake. Short cropped grass walks traverse the site with very gentle gradients.