Chance

Details of stones on Pastscape

Two round barrows situated to the west of Barton Copse. They are visible on air photographs as broad, light coloured, circular bands about 30 metres in diameter.

(A) SU 16926964 (B) SU 16956962. Round barrows west of Barton Copse. (1)
These sites could not be traced on the ground. The area lies on the crest of a S facing chalk spur under plough. Both sites appear on the AP (a) as broad light coloured circular bands about 30.0m in diameter. The field seems to have been under stubble at the time and other elliptical bands near the boundary hedge suggest that all the marks are the result of agricultural activity. (2)

Details of site on Pastscape

Sites of eleven Bronze Age round barrows seen as cropmarks and mapped from aerial photographs.

(SU 15416901) Tumulus (NR) (1) Preshute 3: SU 15416901. A bowl barrow 35 paces by 5ft high, on arable land and spread. (2) In 1955 two barrow circles were seen as crop marks of similar size. One (A: SU 15256901) within the west border of the field had two concentric ditches several feet apart. The other (B: SU 15296901) first appeared as a single ditch but in 1962 showed up as two concentric ditches. In addition to these marks Dr I Smith and W E V Young in 1962 saw another smaller ring about 50 yds south east of Preshute 3 (D: SU 15446893). Dr Smith reported marks of a further barrow
which later showed as a very small circle (C: SU 15246903) on the extreme edge of the field. (3-5)
The published barrow, Preshute 3, has now been destroyed but shows on the Wilts CC air photo as a light circular band, 30.0 m overall, indicating the ditch and enclosing a darker area. None of the other reported cropmarks can be identified on the ground but the ring ditch at approximately SU 15446893 visible on the St Joseph air photo is probably ‘D’. No site can be seen on OS AP’s.
OS 1:2500 published survey revised. (6)

These barrows were mapped at 1:10,000 from APs as part of the Fyfield Down and Overton Down Mapping Project. Their positions were fixed more accurately and a further six barrows were recorded. It is clear from AP evidence that five of the barrows comprise double ring ditches, and that within four of these, the inner ring ditch is off centre.
SU 15416900 (Preshute 3 above): a double ring ditch with an overall diameter of 45m. The inner ring is off centre.
SU 15276900 (’A’ above): a double ring ditch with an overall diameter of 40m. The inner ring is off centre.
SU 15326900 (’B’ above): two concentric ring ditches with an overall diameter of 35m.
SU 15226901 (’C’ above): a double ring ditch with an overall diameter of 30m. The inner ring is off centre.
SU 15476893 (’D’ above): a single ring ditch 35m in diameter.
SU 15486898: a double ring ditch with an overall diameter of 28m. The inner ring is off centre.
SU 15266908: a single ring ditch 20m in diameter.
SU 15306910: a single ring ditch 18m in diameter.
SU 15596892: a single ring ditch 18m in diameter.
SU 15586882: a single ring ditch 15m in diameter.
SU 15546891: a partial single ring ditch 18m in diameter. (7)

Details of site on Pastscape

Possible cup markings identified on a sarsen in Delling Penning. The stone “is situated within an old field and a few feet from the edge of a baulk running downhill from north west to south east, between the south western corner of Totterdown Wood and Delling Cottage”.

SU 135715: Twenty well-preserved cup-markings on the south east slope of a recumbent sarsen stone in Delling Penning. The stone is situated within an old field and a few feet from the edge of a baulk running downhill from north west to south east, between the south western corner of Totterdown Wood and Delling Cottage. (1) The sarsen is at SU 13437152 and is as described by Lacaille. The markings are not easily distinguished, and are of uncertain origin, though they cannot easily be dismissed as natural. Photograph not practicable. (2) Scheduled, National Number 33951. (3)

Details of site on Pastscape

A mound on Granham Hill has been suggested to be a possible long barrow. It is 76 metres long, 13 metres wide, and up to 2.3 metres high at the eastern end and 3.1 metres high at the western end. It has suffered damage from the presence of a parish boundary ditch, a hollow way, and ploughing. No side ditches can be observed on the ground. Ordnance Survey field investigation in 1974 suggests that while its orientation, general appearance and proportion mark it out as a likely long barrow, the fact that the western end is taller casts doubt on this classification. However, a westerly-orientated long barrow would hardly be unheard of.

(SU 17976797) A possible long barrow marked by O Meyrick on Granham Hill. (1)
A mound 76.0m long, 13.0m wide rising from a height of 2.3m at the E to 3.1m at the W; it is composed of earth and flints, covered by very old trees, and is situated just below the crest of a N
facing slope. The feature is cut along the spine by an old parish boundary ditch, to the S of which all trace of the mound appears to be completely ploughed out. At its W end there is a 0.6m deep scarp extending N which suggests that this side of the mound has been constructed by scarping; a side ditch is not evident. Material has been removed from the E end of the mound, possibly for repair to the hollow-way which skirts its eastern extremity. In spite of its orientation, general appearance and proportion, the fact that the west end is higher than the east does cast some doubt on its classification as a long barrow. Surveyed at 1:2500. (2)

Details of Flag Barrow on Pastscape

Bowl barrow surviving as a mutilated earthwork. The mound has been `squared up’ to form a platform for a flagstaff which is set in the top.

SU 18067026 Tumulus (NR). (1) Bowl barrow, diam 25 paces; height 5 1/2’. (2) A mutilated bowl barrow 20.0 metres in diameter and 1.2 metres high. The mound has been “squared-up” to form a rough platform for a flagstaff set in the top. Published 25” survey revised. (3)

Details of site on Pastscape

Barrow group comprising two bowl barrows and a possible bell or bowl barrow with a possible tree ring. Two of the barrows have been incorporated into golf tees. All survive as earthworks but were noted to be in poor condition in 1975.

(Centred SU 18047019) Tumuli (NR). (1)
(SU 18107020.) Possible bell-barrow, query whether surrounding ditch is original or a recent tree-ring. Mound diam. 100’; height 4’; berm width 30’?; (no dimensions for ditch).
(SU 18067019) scheduled bowl barrow. Turned into a golf tee and cannot be measured.
(SU 17977017). Mutilated bowl barrow, diam 14 paces; height 3’. (2)
SU 18107020. The barrow is very badly mutilated and can no longer be positively classified either as a bell or bowl. The mound which is approximately 38.0 metres by 34.0 metres and about 1.5 metres high has been ‘adapted’ to accommodate two golf-tees. Its ditch is no longer evident.
SU 18067019. As described.
SU 17957015. The mutilated barrow is up to 13.5 metres in diameter and 0.5 metres high.
In a poor condition. Published 25” survey 1:2500 revised. (3)

Details of site on Pastscape

A probably Late Prehistoric or Roman trackway defined by a hollow way and external banks for much of its length seen as earthworks in a 2006 lidar survey. (1) (SU 1118 6896). Parts of the trackway are also visible in two aerial photograph (2) (3)

This route deviates away from West Kennet and the Roman road to the north bypassing the Avebury Henge after which it appears to link to another trackway that runs into the field system on Monkton Down (NMR 221722). It is likely that this track represents an important access route from the Kennet valley up into the field systems on the downs.

Geographically the track runs up a dry coombe to the north of West Kennet it then follows a flat terrace that skirts the bottom of Avebury Down. The track seems to incorporate the barrow Avebury 21 into its bank (NMR 220877) and would have passed close to Faulkner’s circle (NMR 220780).

Details of site on Pastscape

(SU 15206965) Devil’s Den (NAT) Burial Chamber (NR) (1)
Preshute 3a; Long barrow, destroyed except for ruined remains of chamber, re-set 1921. Orientated SE-NW, with larger end to SE. Assessed by Passmore to have been 230ft x 130ft; there may have been a forecourt originally. (2) In 1921 the remains of the barrow were much spread and lowered by ploughing but still visible. The chamber was about 70ft inwards from the larger end. (3)
‘Devil’s Den’ (name confirmed and in local usage) is situated at 450ft OD, in arable, at the bottom of a broad shallow coombe. The NE upright stone, supported at its outerbase by concrete, is 3.0m long, that on the SW is 2.6m long and leaning; both enclose an overall ground width of 3.6m. Height to top of capstone approx 2.5m. Two large fallen sarsens within the chamber possibly represent end stones, and a further 16 (? field clearance) sarsen fragments lie within the interior. The chamber, which remains in good condition rests upon a grass covered mound, diameter 7.6m, height 0.8m. All other ground spread of the barrow is now ploughed out. Divorced survey at 1:2500. (4) The mound was mapped at 1:10,000 from APs by the Fyfield Down and Overton Mapping Project. No further information was recorded. (5)

Details of site on Pastscape

SU 14397128 “Long Tom”. A finely-dressed sarsen monolith, 8 ft 3 in high with squared sides about one foot across, on the parish boundary. (1)
SU 14407127. The stone, in common with other boundary and standing stones in the neighbourhood, bears the marks of the steel wedges used to split it from a larger block, suggesting that it is of
recent date. (2) Scheduled, National Number 33951. (3)

Details of site on Pastscape

(SU 1515 7140) Burial Chamber (NR) SU 1513 7140 Manton Down Long Barrow. Length 65’; width 35’; height 3 1/2’. No 11 on Wessex map. (2) The remains of the burial chamber were at the E end and could not have been more than 6’ square internally (3) (4). Traces of an orthostatic revetment are still visible (4) and one outlying stone at SE corner of the could be remains of the peristalith. (3). Hoare (5) refers to the mound being “set round with stone” and Mrs Cunnington (6) noted three or four stones being partly buried c 1913. Has been levelled by a bulldozer. A rescue excavation was carried out by R J C Atkinson in 1955. Publication forthcoming.
There are no surface indications of this long barrow in the arable field. 5 large sarsen slabs and numerous smaller sarsens lie in a patch of scrub centred SU 1513 7141 immediately adjacent to the
barrow site; it is probable that some formed the burial chamber (see illustration card) Sited on 1:2500 Description of the site and history of antiquarian and archaeological investigation, including a summary of Atkinson’s excavation. Barker also states that the remains “are shown on all OS maps at SU 15137140,while they actually stand some 350m to the west at SU 14787135”. (10)
The site of the long barrow is located within the area mapped at 1:10,000 from APs by the Fyfield Down and Overton Down Mapping Project. In the light of Barker’s comments, an attempt was made to determine the barrow’s true location. Information received from Prof PJ Fowler suggested that Barker’s assertion was based, in part, on a site visit during which he apparently found a pile of stones in a hedge at his preferred location. Two slight mounds were recorded from APs in the vicinity of Barker’s revised location, but are probably abraded field system lynchets. At the location originally given on OS maps (SU 15137140) most APs from 1946-1982 show a clump of rough vegetation covering an area of disturbed ground and obscuring surface detail, although CUCAP photographs taken in 1954 show an area of bulldozer damage at this spot. It seems likely that the stones noted by Barker had been moved by bulldozer from their original location, and that the grid reference indicated on OS maps is correct. (11-13)

Details of site on Pastscape

An Iron Age “developed” multivallate hillfort with substantial earthwork remains. The hillfort measures 400m wide east to west by 290m wide north to south. It is one of a number of hillforts located on or close to the line of the Iron Age and later Ridgeway (see NMR LINEAR60). The hillfort is located at the western end of the ridge of Barbury Hill at a height of 265m. The hillfort comprises two concentric rings of banks and ditches enclosing an oval area of circa 4.5ha and has entrances, which both measure circa 10m wide, at the eastern and western ends aligned with the ridge. A track, possibly an offshoot of the Ridgeway, extends between the entrances and was adopted as the parish boundary between Wroughton and Ogbourne St Andrew. The eastern entrance is defended by a right angled outwork which comprised a ditch and bank that extends out from the main hillfort and which may be the remains of an earlier Bronze Age enclosure as the hillfort banks appear to overlay it. The northern part of the outwork has become in-filled due to 20th century cultivation. Excavations have uncovered Iron Age rubbish pits. Iron Age /Roman, Anglo-Saxon finds have made and Anglo-Saxon inhumations have been found. The hillfort was used for defence / training by the United States Army during the Second World War and they caused significant damage to the western entrance when they widened it. The interior of the hillfort also suffered damage from bombing and the construction of slit trenches (see NMR SU 17 NW 152 and NMR SU 17 NW 153, respectively). Immediately northwest of the hillfort lies a flat topped Bronze Age bowl barrow (see NMR SU 17 NW 154) and just to the west is a Bronze Age disc barrow (see NMR SU 17 NW 7). A post medieval dewpond has been constructed on the south-e

Details of site on Pastscape

A stone circle near Clatford was first recorded by John Aubrey in the 17th cent. In 1723 Stukeley noted that in the lane, or rather Roman Road between Marlborough and Devizes, over against Clatford and on the edge of the meadow just by the side of the Kennet, close to Clatford Bottom “lie twelve stones flat upon the ground in the middle of the road which seems to widen on purpose for it and takes a little turn, too, upon that account. Eight of them seem to lie in a circle (see plan (2)) and the other four may possibly have been the entrance or beginning of an Avenue; they are all very large, being about the size and shape of the stones of the outer circle of Stonehenge.
I measured one, 16 1/2ft long, 2yds broad .... There are two barrows within site of it .... a little further westward you turn on the right into the fields which leads (leaving a barrow on the left hand) into the Clatford Bottom”.
The stones have long since disappeared, Colt Hoare only being able to cite Aubrey as evidence, and AC Smith could not identify the site in the 1880’s (1).
Free (3) considers the site to be on a piece of unenclosed ground SE of Clatford cross roads on which there is still a Pound, (SU 16106840). The area is known as Broken Crosses.
Grinsell (4) sites the circle to SU 16106855, quoting Piggott. Meyrick, however, mentions ‘The Broadstones’ as being the local name for the circle and “Broadstone W Meadow” shown by Smith as the Tithe Map name for the narrow strip between the Bath road and the Kennet, bounded on the west by Clatford Bottom and on the east by Plough Cottage. (Area SU 16126900) “Bradstone mede” can be dated back to 1466. (5). (1-5) A topographical view of the stone circle, bisected by a road and contained within wide verges, appears on a drawing of 1722 (b). The site lies above Broadstone Mead (c) on the N side of the river where the road forms a junction with a secondary track. (6) The map with the Inclosure Award of 1792 (d) suggests that the “Lord Bruce’s Arms” now “Elm cottage” at SU15916898, was built where the road had locally widened or deviated. There is now no evidence of this, though it is feasible, and the plot lies immediately north of “Broadstone Watermeadow” (e). Stukeley’s ground observations of barrows etc, can also be deduced from this area. The siting indicated by Grinsell and Free seems largely based on the field name “Broken Crosses”. Neither the Tithe nor the Inclosure map shows any local widening of the road in the vicinity. (7)

Details of site on Pastscape

A Bronze Age bowl barrow, listed by Grinsell as Preshute 1a, excavated in 1906 by B and M Cunnington. Approximately central beneath the mound was a crouched inhumation, said to be an adult female, lying on the former ground surface, accompanied by numerous objects including a bronze knife-dagger with amber pommel, a small dagger blade, 150 shale beads, some amber beads, a gold-bound amber disc, a gold-bound shale bead, a small gold “halberd pendant” with bronze blade, some bronze awls, and a small pottery “grape cup”. An incense cup was found a short distance away. Elsewhere in the mound was an upright Collared Urn, though no accompanying cremation was found. All the finds are in Devizes Museum. The skeleton was reinterred after excavation and the barrow reconstructed.

Details of site on Pastscape

Neolithic chambered long barrow first investigated by Stukeley in 1723. Listed by Grinsell as Preshute 10c. By the time of Ordnance Survey field investigation in 1975, only a large amorphous ground swelling existed. An elongated patch of chalk was observed during recent RCHME aerial survey.

SU 12907290) Long Barrow (NR)(site of)(NAT). (1)
The “Old Chapel” long barrow, length 100’; width 27’. Aligned NW-SE, large end first(2).Daniel quotes Stukeley(b)who examined it in 1723. The barrow, at the NW side of a large enclosure (SU 17 SW 94), had stone works at each end and was surrounded by stones. The burial chamber appears to have been at the NW, being a semi-ellipse of five stones, a stonehenge cell in miniature although in ruins, the stones being generally about 10’ long. Daniel states that it seems likely that the barrow was once chambered. When O G S Crawford(4) visited it in 1921 he was able to recognise only a low mound, almost completely ploughed out.
Hoare(a) records that only one stone and slight traces of the barrow remained. (2-4)
A large amorphous ground swelling in arable land, indicates the site. No sarsens noted in the vicinity. Published 25” siting correct.(5) This area was mapped at 1:10,000 from APs by the Fyfield Down and Overton Down Mapping Project. The barrow was not recorded by the AP survey. (6)
Re-examination of the air photographs for the Avebury World Heritage Site Project identified an elongated patch of chalk at this location, which is presumed to represent the badly eroded long barrow mound. (7)

Details of Enclosure 2 on Pastscape

A sub-rectangular enclosure visible as a cropmark on air photographs, located immediately adjacent to barrows of the Beckhampton cemetery (SU 06 NE 76). Measuring circa 42 metres by 32 metres, its southeastern corner is cut by the A361. The enclosed area appears to contain traces of a mound.

[NB this site was formerly recorded as part of SU 06 NE 179. That record should be consulted for some additional sources and information]

An RCHME 1:2500 scale air photo interpretation survey was carried out in April 1992. An enclosure was noted, possibly related to the barrow group (SU 06 NE 76). The feature at SU 09246917 consisted of a ditch surrounding a sub-rectangular area, measuring 42m x 32m containing traces of a mound, cut by the A361 on the S side. (1) The enclosure described by the previous authority has also been mapped at 1:10,000 scale. (2) Soffe lists the site as a possible barrow, though interpretation as an enclosure is more plausible on present evidence. It is unclear whether it is contemporary with or later than the barrow cemetery. (3, 4).

Details of Enclosure 1 on Pastscape

A sub-rectangular ditched enclosure visible as a cropmark on air photographs. Circa 20 metres long and 10 metres wide, aligned north-south, only parts of the north, east and west sides are visible, the northwest corner also being clipped by the A361. It lies close to the Beckhampton barrow cemetery (SU 06 NE 76), but it is unclear if it is contemporary. Another sub-rectangular cropmark, SU 06 NE 273, also lies close by.

An RCHME, 1:2500 scale air photo interpretation survey (Event UID 965816) was carried out in April 1992. Two features were noted, possibly related to the barrow group described in SU 06 NE 76, but they were sub-rectangular rather than basically curvilinear as was the shape of the barrows. The first feature at SU 09246917 consisted of a ditch surrounding a sub-rectangular area, measuring 42m x 32m containing traces of a mound, cut by the A361 on the S side. The second feature lay just to the south SU 09286916 and again suggested a parts of a ditch surrounding a sub-rectangular area of ground, measuring 20m x 10m. This second site was much confused by recent agricultural marks. The archive created by this project (Collection UID 965795) is held by the RCHME. (1) The prehistoric or Roman enclosures, described by the previous authority, have also been mapped at 1:10,000 scale. The second sub-square enclosure described appears to be co-located with a small Bronze Age round barrow (see SU 06 NE 272 for a full description). (3-5) NB this record now deals solely with the southernmost enclosure, that at SU 09286917. The other enclosure has been recorded separately as SU 06 NE 273. Soffe (1993) lists the site as a possible barrow, though he notes alternative interpretations may be equally plausible. Despite the proximity of the barrow cemetery, without excavation it is impossible to assign date or function with any certainty. (2, 6)

Details of enclosure on Pastscape

Double-ditched curvilinear enclosure with an internal pit visible as a cropmark within the henge at Avebury.

A 1:1000 scale level 3 photogrammetric survey of the features visible as parch marks within the henge at Avebury was carried out by the RCHME Air Photography Unit between the 17th and 28th June 1996. The survey was carried to record a newly discovered double-ditched enclosure situated within the north-western quadrant of the henge. The enclosure is cut by the garden wall of one of the houses on the northern side of road. Faint traces of the enclosure can be discerned within the garden. The enclosure is curvilinear with four convex sides and very curved corners. Within the enclosure there appears to be a central pit. No previous record of the site is known, and it was not recorded during the early surveys of the site, indicating that it had been eroded or flattened very early on. A morphological parallel has been suggested between this and the Neolithic oval barrow at Radley nr Abingdon (Bradley 1992 and Wilson 1982). Photogrammetric plans were prepared with the aid of the AERIAL 4.20 rectification software published by Bradford University. The resultant plan was combined with the RCHME earthwork survey at 1:1000 scale. Also included were the parchmarks noted on the ground in 1990 by the RCHME Field survey. The plan, report and digital files are held by the RCHME (Collection UID 1057206). (1) A discussion of the cropmark, accompanied by photographs and transcription, has been published (4).

Details of Barrow Cemetery on Pastscape

A Bronze Age barrow cemetery comprising 6 or 7 barrows located south of Beckhampton Penning. The group comprises four disc barrows (Grinsell’s All Canning’s Cross 23 and Avebury 65-7), 2 saucer barrows (Avebury 67a and b), and a cropmark ring ditch discovered subsequent to Grinsell’s gazetteer. The four saucer barrows were excavated by Thurnham, probably in the 1850s. Few details were published by him, but one contained a pottery vessel (“Aldbourne Cup”) with a cremation; a second contained a further Aldbourne Cup and cremation, this time with a bronze awl. The other two were “unproductive”. However, it is impossible to say which of the barrows contained the cremation deposits. Thurnham may also have excavated the two saucer barrows, again withut result. All 6 of the barrows Thurnham refers to had apparently been dug into previously by persons unknown. The individual barrows are recorded separately. This record comprises general information about the group, plus specific information on the saucer barrow Avebury 66. Ordnance Survey field investigation in 1973 recorded this barrow as being 35 metres in diameter, surrounded by a ditch 0.2 metres deep. There was no trace of any central “tump” or outer bank surviving.

Details of site on Pastscape

A possible prehistoric rectangular enclosure, surrounding a ring-ditch, probably the remains of a Bronze Age round barrow, are visible as cropmarks on air photographs.
Crop marks of a quadrangular enclosure surrounding a ring-ditch (SU 09336783) visible on air photographs. (1) Nothing visible on the ground or on OS AP. (2) The possible prehistoric enclosure and probably Bronze Age ring ditch described by the previous authorities has been mapped from air photographs. The enclosure is only partially visible, measures 100m by 120m, and is centred at SU 0930 6780. The west side of the enclosure is possibly attached to a series of faintly visible boundaries. The ring-ditch is probably the remains of a round barrow and measures 35m across. It is unclear how the enclosure and ring ditch are related, if at all.(3-4)

Details of earthwork on Pastscape

Linear earthwork of presumed later prehistoric date, comprising an earthwork bank and ditch, running roughly east-west from Knoll Down towards White Horse Plantation. Three sections are the subject of two schedulings.

A generally well preserved, grass covered, linear boundary bank and ditch (erroneously described by Crawford (a) as the Old Bath Road – this feature is published and described on OS 25” about 100.0m to the N – extending almost continuously for 2320m in a NW-SE direction, from SU 05106958 to SU 07366918 along the S side of a dry valley in which are vestiges of Field Systems (see SU 06 NE 98, 123) A gap in the linear of some 200.0m occurs between SU 06976945 and SU 07136932 where its
continuity is represented by crop marks and a parish boundary. The earthwork has an average width of 12.0m with a flat-topped bank up to 7.0m wide and 1.2m high, but considerably reduced on the S facing scarp where it passes through arable and a ditch up to 1.0m deep on the higher side. At its N end the bank and ditch has been utilised and overlaid by a probable Md or later sheep penning (see SU 06 NE 50), and at its eastern extremity, the S side of the bank partially overlies the outer bank of a saucer barrow (see SU 06 NE 48). It seems most probable that the linear represents a LBA/EIA ranch type boundary. Published 1:2500 survey revised. (1) The possible prehistoric linear earthwork has also been mapped from air photographs. (2)

Details of Barrows on Pastscape

Two Bronze Age barrows on Knoll Down. A saucer barrow, Grinsell’s Avebury 4, and a bowl barrow, Grinsell’s Avebury 5. Both are still extant as earthwork mound with associated ditches, and in the case of the saucer barrow, an outer bank.

(A: SU 07246922 and B: SU 07266921) Tumuli (NR). (1)
Two barrows on Knoll Down listed by Grinsell (2) as (A) Avebury 4: saucer barrow, mound 58ft by 2ft ditch 10ft by 6ins, outer-bank 10ft by 6ins, overlapped by a ditch. (B) Avebury 5: ditched bowl barrow, 13 paces by 3ft. Crawford (3) however describes both of these as bell barrows. (2,3)
Avebury 4: A saucer barrow; overall diameter 30.0m. Mound 15.0m diameter 0.9m high; ditch 3.5m wide by 0.3m deep; outer bank 4.0m wide by 0.2m high.
The NE quadrant of the outer bank is partially overlaid by a linear earthwork (SU 06 NE 135).
Avebury 5: A ditched bowl barrow; overall diameter 15.0m; mound 11.0m diameter, height 1.3m. The ditch well defined as a vegetation mark, is overlaid on the W by the outer bank of the adjacent saucer barrow. The tumuli are somewhat obscured by rank grass. Published 1:2500 survey revised. (4)

Details of site on Pastscape

A subtle earthwork long mound seen in a 2006 lidar survey. (SU 0696 6835) (1)
A roughly rectangular subtle earthwork mound 39m long and 24.5m wide was seen near to the Roman road on the south slope of West Down (SU 0696 6835). The mound is on an east-west alignment and lies parallel to a large oval barrow/ enclosed twin barrow (NMR 215549) and adjacent to a line of three round barrows (NMR 215546). There is slight hint of a side ditch on the north side of the mound. The mound has been disturbed by pits that have been used for dumping hay and has two linear scarps running across it. It is possible that this could represent a flattened prehistoric feature such as long barrow or earthen long mound or it could be an area of dumped material or a natural peri-glacial deposit

Details of Barrows on Pastscape

Two Bronze Age bowl barrows on West Down, Grinsell’s Avebury 1 & 2. Both are extant as earthwork mounds, and both feature surrounding ditches.

(A : SU 06496902 and B: SU 06516904) Tumuli (NR). (1) Two bowl barrows on West Down.
(A) Avebury 1: ditched, 15 paces by 2 ft. (B) Avebury 2: 24 paces by 5 ft. A sarsen at the NE. (2)
Avebury 1: Ditched bowl barrow overall diameter 20.5m; mound 14.5 diameter, 1.0m high; ditch 3.0m wide, 0.5m deep. Avebury 2: Ditched bowl barrow 29.0m overall, diameter of mound 21.0m, height 1.8m with 0.9m oval depression in top. Both barrows are grass covered and well preserved. The sarsen (published as ‘Boulder’ on OS 25”, 1924) has been removed. Published 1:2500 survey revised. (3)
The Bronze Age round barrows, described by the previous authorities, have been mapped from air photographs. (4)

Details of Barrows on Pastscape

Avebury 20a, 50, 51, 52 & 53 plus assorted ring ditches on Waden Hill. One extant bowl barrow (50) plus the cropmark remains of eight other barrows, one of them apparently a disc barrow (20a). Two of the monuments comprise paired concentric ring ditches. No record of any excavations.

(A: SU 10366925) Tumulus (NR) (site of) (1)
A bowl barrow and group of ring ditches on Waden Hill.
(A) Avebury 50 30 paces x 1 ft. Described by Crawford as a long barrow (3).
(B) (SU 10376928) Ring-ditch AP.
(C) SU 1034 6927 Avebury 52 Bowl barrow 15 paces in dia. Ring-ditch AP.
(D) SU 1034 6929 Avebury 51 Bowl barrow 15 paces in dia. Ring-ditch AP.
(E) (SU 1034 6933) Ring-ditch AP.
(F) (SU 1032 6937) Ring-ditch AP.
(G) SU 1037 6932 Avebury 20a Disc barrow. Poss 100 ft overall dia. Ring-ditch A P.
(H) (SU 1040 6932) Ring-ditch AP.
(J) SU 1049 6944 Avebury 53 Bowl barrow 30 paces in dia. Ring-ditch AP. (2-4)

A. SU 1037 6925 Bowl barrow 22.0m dia, 0.5m high.
B. SU 1037 6928; Concentric ring ditches, 20m and 31m dia.
C. SU 1035 6928; Concentric ring ditches, 10m and 18m dia.
D. SU 1035 6929; Ring ditch 16m diameter.
E. SU 1034 6931; Ring ditch 15m diameter.
F. SU 1033 6933; Ring ditch 20m diameter.
G. SU 1037 6933; Ring ditch 34m diameter.
H. SU 1041 6934; Ring ditch 20m diameter.
J. SU 1047 6943; Ring ditch 30m diameter.
B – J are visible as AP soilmarks only but their position and dimensions suggest the sites of barrows. Surveyed at 1:2500 from OS AP’s. (5)
Cropmark remains of nine probable Bronze Age round barrows recorded and described by authorities 1-5. In addition to these, there are two further barrows located at the southern end of the group: At SU 1038 6919 is a small earthwork mound, possibly a barrow, and at SU 1038 6917 is an incomplete ring ditch with a diameter of approximately 20m. (6-7)
The barrow group shows up very well on Google Earth 12/31/2002. (8)
Scheduled. For the designated record please see The National Heritage List for England. (9-10)

Details of site on Pastscape

SU 1092 6930 Two distinctive mounds of an unknown origin located close to Faulkner’s circle seen on a 2006 lidar survey.

SU 10936931 East of the Kennett Avenue, Avebury 57; bowl barrow 27ft in diameter and almost ploughed out in 1965. The diffuse ploughed out mound of a probable Bronze Age round barrow at SU 1093 6931 was mapped from RAF aerial photographs taken in 1946. The mound of this barrow was seen in a 2006 lidar survey.

SU 10996920 A mound 26 m across and approximately 0.4 m high, possibly a round barrow, is situated on a ridge of ground which extends up to 100 m to the NNW. There is nothing to suggest that this ridge, 1.0 m high and 30 m wide, is artificial.

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

A Bronze Age barrow cemetery comprising 13 monuments, only one still extant as an earthwork. The remainder have been recorded from air photographs. The extant mound, Grinsell’s Avebury 19b, is extant as an oval turf-covered mound measuring circa 26 metres by 21 metres across and up to 1.3 metres high. The oval shape appears to be partly caused by deposition of spoil from an extensive central mutilation, presumably an unrecorded antiquarian excavation. In 1992, it was noted that the mound had been dug into once more, and was in need of repair. The spoil from this episode contained a flat, rivetted copper alloy dagger, plus Bronze Age potsherds, struck flint, and cremated bone. See associated monument records for other barrows, ring ditches and cropmarks in this group.

Details of Long Barrow on Pastscape

The side ditches of a Neolithic long barrow were seen as a soil mark in a 2009 aerial photograph (1) (SU 1077 6951) The site is situated at the end of a prominent ridge 450m to the south east of the henge at Avebury and is aligned west to east. The dark curvilinear ditch could be the remains of a Cranborne Chase style long barrow, which are distinguished by side ditches that generally continue around one end of the mound. This one features a gap or causeway across the ditch at its enclosed end, something that is also known at other such sites, such as the Thickthorn Down long barrow.

Details of Stone Circle on Pastscape

(SU 09856713) Stone Circle (NR) (remains of). (1)
Excavations at a scatter of stones, nearly a mile south of Silbury Hill, by Smith and Long in 1877, revealed the remains of a roughly oval setting of stones (see plan) enclosing an area 261ft by 216ft. Identified by Smith with Stukeley’s very large oblong work like a long barrow, made only of stones pitched in the ground, no tumulus (2) which Stukeley says is on ‘the heath south of Silbury Hill’. According to Grinsell (3) in 1950 the ground had long been arable and the stones were lying in heaps with probably hardly any in situ. SU 09886716 Soilmarks of a bank with both inner and outer ditches, forming the NE half of a rough circle, possibly some 60.0m overall diameter. It is not possible to determine precisely if this feature is associated with either the setting of stones, or the later field system (SU 06 NE 68) but stones and soilmark together form a rough oval centred a SU 09876715. (4) In arable ground, no trace of either the soilmark or the stones. Soilmark surveyed from OS APs (4)(5) Description of the site and a brief account of its history (6). The status of the site and its date are uncertain. Not mentioned by Burl (7), Barnatt suggests that the site is better interpreted as an enclosure, comprising of many small contiguous stones in a sub-oval ring of c.80m x 66m. (6-8) The only enclosure visible on air photographs, in the vicinity of the location given by the previous authorities, forms part of an extensive field system that covers the area (described in full SU 06 NE 68). This enclosure is defined by banks and is rectilinear but with very curved corners. No trace of the stones or any accompanying circular or oval enclosure was visible on the available air photographs. (9)

Details of Stones on Pastscape

(’A’ SU 08896930; ‘B’ SU 08926933) Long Stones (NR). (1) The Beckhampton Long Stones, two standing stones, also known as “Longstone Cove”,“Adam and Eve”, and the “Devil’s Coits”. In Aubrey’s time there were three stones and Stukeley, who records the breaking up of the third stone, considered that they once formed “a cave or cell” on the northern side of the Beckhampton Avenue (see SU 06 NE 62), the smaller extant stone
(B) being part of the Avenue. (2) The larger stone, that at the SW (A) fell in 1911 and during its re-erection in the following year by B H and M E Cunnington a crouched skeleton with Bi beaker was discovered at its foot. Skeleton and beaker are now in Devizes Museum. (3)
The two sarsens remain standing in ploughland. The largest stone at SU 08896930 is 3.3m by 1.3m at base with a height of about 3.8m; the smaller 30.0m to the NE, is 2.2m by 2.3m at base and up to 3.5m high. Published 1:2500 survey correct; symbols redepicted. (4) See Avebury (SU 16 NW 22) and Beckhampton Avenue (SU 06 NE 62) for relevant bibliography, including discussions on the lack of evidence for the latter’s existence. Ucko et al (5) report on geophysical survey within the area around the longstones, and raise the possibility that they may represent the remains of a distinct monument themselves, separate from Avebury. Burl (6), reviewing Ucko et al, appears to accept the suggestions of Stukeley and Twining that there was a “genuine Beckhampton Avenue” which included the Longstones in its course. (5-6)

Details of the Long Barrow on Pastscape

(SU 08706915) Long Barrow (NR) (1) North of Beckhampton – Avebury 17: a mutilated long barrow with traces of side-ditches, orientated NE/SW, 225 ft long by 120 ft wide by 14 ft high. Excavated by Merewether (1820-1850), primary deposit not found part of secondary Bronze Age urn (Deverel Rimbury showing Cornish influence) containing burnt bones and a bit of bronze (dagger?). Urn now in Devizes Museum. (2-3) SU 08706914 The long barrow, up to 6.0m high, is 84.0m long, NE-SW, and 35.0m wide, with clearly defined side ditches which Average 0.6m in depth, and are each 24.0m wide. The mound has been severely mutilated and its terminals ploughed, although it is now under pasture.Resurveyed at 1:2500. (4) Listed in Kinnes’ gazetteer of long barrows but excluded from his gazetteer of excavated barrows, presumably due to the poor quality of the excavation record. (5) Finds in Devizes Museum from Mereweather’s investigation described as consisting of the upper part of a biconical urn with finger Impressions on rim and body. Cremation and bronze dagger (?). (6) The Neolithic long barrow, described by the previous authorities, is visible on early air photographs but has been covered with trees since then. (7-8) The barrow was first recorded by William Stukeley in the early-to-mid 18th century. He noted that it had been “much damaged by the digging chalk out of it and perhaps stones”. Merewether, in a note published after his death, referred to the discovery (by him?) of “fragments of a large unburnt urn, having the peculiarity of a handle;...[it] contained but bones and a piece of bronze, probably a spearhead. This barrow has been on several occasions reduced for purposes of husbandry, and has generally produced such relics. It appears to have been used at different periods as a place of sepulture, and might yet repay further investigation.” Later in the 19th century, Smith referred to two sarsens being visible on the top of the mound. The bronze object as depicted by Merewether is difficult to identify. It has been referred to on occasions as a dagger, but this is far from certain. Gerloff does not include it in her gazetteer of British Bronze Age daggers, although she does include other finds known only from Merewether’s drawings. Her gazetteer does not include any definite associations of daggers with biconical urns. (2, 5, 6, 9-12)

Details of the Long Barrow on Pastscape

(SU 09036927) Long Barrow (NR) (site of) (1)
South east of the Long Stones, South Street – Avebury 68, a ploughed down long barrow (see plan (3)) sited to SU 09026928 (2). Revealed by excavation to be unchambered and probably unfinished (2). The excavation in 1966-7, by Evans on behalf of the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society found no burials in the mound, which had been preserved to a height of two feet, but fragments of antler were discovered both in the mound and in the primary fill of the ditches.
Finds from the soil beneath the mound consisted of Windmill Hill sherds, two sickle flints and many flakes. From the buried soil in the ditches came sherds of Peterborough and Beaker ware, barbed and tanged and flint laurel-leaf arrowheads and animal bone (4 & 5). Radio-carbon analysis of finds date the barrow to the first half of the 3rd millennium BC (6). The long barrow is now represented by an unsurveyable amorphous ground swelling, centred at SU 09006072, in ploughland. Re-sited at 1:2500. (7) The final report of the 1964-7 excavations appeared in 1979 (8). The earthen and chalk mound had been constructed as a series of infilled bays defined by wooden fences offset at right angles from a central long axis. A crescent shaped zone of massive chalk rubble defined the front of the mound. A number of sarsens of varying size were incorporated into the mound. The mound material came from flanking ditches. Finds included a quantity of animal bone, 2 human skull fragments, plus pottery and flint assemblages. The potsherds included plain bowl fragments, plus Peterborough wares in secondary ditch fill, and Beaker and later material associated with cultivation in Beaker and subsequent periods. Radiocarbon dates range from 2810 plus/minus 130 bc to 2580 plus/minus 110 bc. An important feature of pre-barrow activity was the presence of two sets of grooves scored into the the subsoil and crossing each other at right angles. These have been interpreted as marks caused by cross-ploughing. (8) Additional references: long barrow. (9-10) Additional references: ploughmarks. (11-13) The Neolithic long barrow, described by the previous authorities, was visible, on oblique air photographs, as a cropmark of a ploughed oval mound, oriented roughly east west, and measuring 45m by 20m. Dark marks at the east end of the barrow and linear features visible over the barrow are probably the result of the excavations detailed in the previous references. The possible remains of side ditches to the barrow are visible as dark marks flanking the mound but these were too amorphous to be certain. The long barrow aligns on the southern of the two Beckhampton stones (SU 06 NE 56). The barrow is visible as a low mound on vertical air photographs. (14-15)

Details of the Avenue on Pastscape

Beckhampton Avenue, an avenue of stones which, according to Stukeley, extended from the west entrance of Avebury across the Winterbourne, and on in a south-westerly direction south of the Long Stones (see SU 06 NE 56), one of which could have probably formed part of the Avenue, to a spot in the valley west of Beckhampton (SU 100690 to SU 082688, see plans (2) (3)) and called by him Beckhampton Avenue. Stukeley considered its length equal to that of the West Kennet Avenue, with the transverse and longitudinal intervals of the stones similar. By the time Stukeley made his plans there remained only thirty-odd stones (all but three recumbent) some in pairs, out of possibly two hundred, and by the end of the 18th century nothing remained except the Long Stones. “On the whole, then, the grounds for accepting the former exsistence of the Beckhampton Avenue seem to be strong, though the question of its full extent and precise relationship to the Long Stones must remain open.” (1) Stukeley’s theory was supported by the finding in 1968, during the inspection of cable trenches of (i) the possible robbing pit of a stone in the High Street, Avebury SU 099699 and (ii) a buried stone beside the A4 road SU 087690, both on line with the Avenue. (1-5)
No evidence of the Beckhampton Avenue remains except for the Long Stones. No further information regarding the “finds” made in 1968. (6) A large buried sarsen at SU 08776897 and a possible stone robbing hold at SU 08766898, 12.0m to the W, were encountered in October 1965 in a GPO trench. Identified by Mrs Vatcher as almost certainly part of the Beckhampton stone row recorded by Stukeley. (7)(7a) Accounts of the discovery of the recumbent sarsen (8). Extracts from this particular record (notably those prepared by R1 and F2 above) were singled out for criticism by Ucko et al (9) as an example of the ‘continuing fascination in attempting to fit the occasional find of sarsens, pits, and other features into Aubrey’s or Stukeley’s presumed patterns’. The debate as to whether the Beckhampton Avenue existed at all is touched on in many of the items listed in the bibliography for Avebury (SU 16 NW 22) and is discussed most recently by Ucko et al, who also published the results of the geophysical survey carried out in January 1989 in the area of the Longstones (SU 06 NE 56), the findings of which ‘neither disprove nor support Stukeley’s firm assertion of the presence of an avenue.’ Burl (10) argues for impartial independent support for Stukeley’s ‘firm assertion’ in the work of Rev Thomas Twining. Twining’s plan is reproduced by Ucko et al (p. 38). Twining depicted a wedge-shaped pattern of avenues which he regarded apparently as representing the island of Britain as conceived by the Romans. (8-10)

Details of the Stone Circle on Pastscape

(SU 10976931) Stone Circle (NR)(remains of) (1)
A standing stone is all that remains of a former circle of stones known as ‘Falkner’s Circle’. (2)
It is situated about 280 yds east of the West Kennett Avenue, and was described by Falkner in 1840 as consisting of one stone standing, and two recumbent, with the holes of nine others visible (see plan). The ground within the 120 ft diameter circle was completely flat.(3) No change. Published 1:2500 survey correct. (4) Falkner’s Circle described simply by Burl as “12 stones set in a 36.6m ring. One stone has survived the intensive farming of the 19th and 20th centuries” (5). Barnatt notes that any stoneholes are now untraceable due to ploughing. (6) Malone (7) refers to the monument as the ‘Faulkener ring’, and states that it was associated with a neaby barrow (presumably SU 16 NW 44 or 67) and further suggests that the circle ‘may date from the early Bronze Age, or the Beaker period’. No excavation has occurred, so dating and association with nearby monuments as well as the original form of the monument, remain uncertain. (5-7)

Details of site on Pastscape

Ne occupation site was discovered by Piggott and Keiller in 1934, along the West Kennet Avenue (see plan) between stones 27 and 32, 10706925, which antedated the Avenue across it (see SU 16 NW 22.2). A number of hearths or fire-pits and two rubbish pits were excavated and the whole area yielded Peterborough and Rinyo-Clacton sherds, petit tranchet derivatives, knives, scrapers with polished edges, two fragments of Niedermendig Lava, arrowhead of Portland chert, and two fragments of axes of Graig Lwyd stone. Finds now in Devizes Museum. (1-3) No surface evidence. (4) Discussion of finds from the site. See Avebury (SU 16 NW 22) and West Kennet Avenue (SU 16 NW 101) for additional bibliography] (5)

Details of the Avenue on Pastscape

(SU 10326975 to SU 11846802) Stone Avenue (NR) (remains of)
In the main part of the West Kennett stone avenue there are 27 upright stones with heights ranging from 1.6 metres to 3.3 metres. Sites of stones are marked by 37 concrete pillars. (The modern spelling, signposts etc., is “Kennett”, replacing the earlier “Kennet”. Resurveyed at 1/2500.
The West Kennet stone avenue links the henge enclosure and stone circle complex at Avebury (SU 16 NW 22) with the Stone circle site known as the Sanctuary (SU 16 NW 102) on Overton Hill, running in an approximately south-easterly direction from the former to the latter. The course followed is by no means a direct one, with notable changes in direction as the Avenue approaches both Avebury and the Sanctuary. Excavations by Keiller in the 1930s focussed particularly on the northern end of the avenue as it approached Avebury, and resulted in the re-erection of some fallen stones and the marking out on the ground of the positions of stones no longer extant in this area. A Neolithic occupation site was also discovered alongside the stones (SU 16 NW 39). (4) Human remains and pottery, including part of a Beaker, have been found beneath some stones or in some stone holes. (4-5) Ucko et al (6) report on geophysical survey along sections of the avenue which suggests a more irregular course than previously thought. They also examine antiquarian accounts in detail.
The probably mistaken suggestion that a cove once stood within the avenue is discussed by Ucko et al (6) and (Burl) (7). (6-7) [See SU 16 NW 22 and 102 for more detailed bibliography. See SU 06
NE 62 for details of the Beckhampton stone avenue, which allegedly ran from Avebury’s western entrance.]
An RCHME 1:2500 scale, level 3 air photographic interpretation survey (Event UID 936869) was carried out on this monument in January 1992. The monument is extant and no changes were made to the record. The archive created by this project (Collection UID 936807) is held by RCHME. (8)
West Kennett Avenue is formed by two roughly parallel rows of standing sarsen stones dating to around 3000 BC. The Avenue winds its way across the landscape east of Waden Hill and the River Kennett for a distance of about 2.3 km. In the best preserved 800 metre section there are 27 upright stones. Some of these have been restored to their original positions and in other locations there are concrete markers showing where stones are originally likely to have been positioned. The two rows stand on average 15 metres apart with the stones in each row about 20 metres apart. In 1913, a burial was found in the socket pit beneath one of the stones and further pits and features have been found within the line of the avenue or in close proximity. Keiller uncovered an occupation site containing hearths, rubbish pits, pottery sherds and other remains. At the southern end of the Avenue is a linear earthwork bank, which is believed to be associated with medieval management of the Kennet Valley. However it’s location could indicate an earlier origin. The bank runs for about 320 metres and is 7 metres wide and up to a metre high. In the area between the Avenue and River Kennet there have been numerous finds including stone axes, pottery, Romano-British jewellery and coins.(9)

Details of the Long Barrow on Pastscape

West Kennet Long Barrow is a Neolithic chambered burial mound situated just below the crest of a north east facing slope overlooking Silbury Hill. Recent radiocarbon studies have dated it to the 37th century cal BC and it was in use for at least a thousand years. The mound is trapezoidal in plan and measures about 104 metres in length, 25 metres at the widest point and 3.2 metres at the highest point. The forecourt is situated at the eastern end of the mound. Beyond this is the entrance into the mound, which leads to a 12 metre central passage with five small sub-circular chambers opening off it; a pair to each side and an end chamber. The chambers vary in size from 2 to 4 metres across with a maximum height of 2.5 metres. The long barrow was excavated in 1859 by J. Thurnam and in 1955-6 by S. Piggott, which included re-erection of many of the stones. The chambers of the long barrow were constructed of large sarsen boulders with drystone walling and contained the remains of at least 46 individuals including both inhumations and cremations. Many of the burials were incomplete – some bones were missing, while others had been grouped together in particular parts of the barrow. For example long bones and a quantity of vertebrae had been placed by the rear wall of the north west chamber. Pottery from the excavations included Windmill Hill type, Peterborough, Grooved Ware and Beaker sherds. The mound consisted of a core of sarsen boulders capped with chalk rubble cleared from flanking quarry ditches. These ditches, about 100 metres long and 5 metres wide, are now infilled but remain visible as earthworks. Final ‘blocking’ of the burial mound took the form of chalk rubble and other debris (including pottery, animal bone, flint implements and other objects) which was used to infill the passage and chambers. The forecourt at the eastern end was blocked with sarsen boulders and a ‘false entrance’ of twin sarsen uprights constructed.

Details of the Sanctuary on Pastscape

(SU 11846802) The Sanctuary (NAT) Stone Circle (NR) (site of) (1)
The concrete blocks which denote the positions of the stones have been surveyed at 1/2500 but the concrete markers indicating the positions of the wooden post holes have been omitted (limitation of scale). (3)
The Sanctuary was the site of a pair of concentric stone circles. When visited in the later 17th century by Aubrey and early 18th century by Stukeley it seems that many of the stones were still extant although most had fallen. However the bulk of the stones appear to have been removed and/or destroyed in the years around 1724. The records of Aubrey and Stukely were used to relocate the site in 1930, and following its discovery it was completely excavated. The two stone circles proved to have been preceded by six concentric timber rings. Numerous artefacts came from post holes, but the phasing of the various circles remains unclear. The bulk of the pottery found was of later Neolithic date, including Grooved Ware, although both earlier (Windmill Hill) and later (Beaker) sherds were present. The site appears to be connected via
the West Kennet Avenue (SU 16 NW 101) with the henge-enclosure and stone circles at Avebury (SU 16 NW 22). Following excavation, the locations of the various post-holes and stone settings were marked out on the ground. (4-5)
Suggested reconstructions of the structures at the Sanctuary have been published by Piggott (6) and Musson (7). (6-7) [See SU 16 NW 22 for additional bibliography].
An RCHME 1:2500 scale, level 3 air photographic survey (Event UID 936869) was carried out on this monument in January 1992. The site is extant and no change was made to the record. The archive created by this project (Collection UID 936807) is held by RCHME. (8)
The archive and finds from the Cunningtons’ excavations have been reconsidered by Pollard, who suggests a rather simpler phasing and constructional sequence for the site than previously suggested. The main construction phase is suggested to have occurred around 2500 BC and was associated primarily with Grooved Ware. Pre-construction activity is represented by earlier ceramic and lithic finds. A crouched inhumation with Beaker, found in a grave adjacent to one of the stones, was suggested by Cunnington to be broadly contemporary with construction. Pollard suggests that it is in fact among the last archaeologically visible events at the site, c.2000 BC (with the exception of the appearance of Romano-British potsherds in upper fills of features) (9).
The Sanctuary is known from partial excavation in the 1930s and 1960s to have had two concentric circles of stones and four concentric circles of timber rings. The outer circle measured about 40 metres in diameter and included 42 sarsen stones. Four main phases have been postulated: Phase 1: a 5 metre diameter circle of seven timber posts around a central post; Phase 2: a 6 metre diameter circle of 8 posts surrounded by a 11 metre diameter circle of 12 posts; Phase 3: an additional circle of 21 metre diameter of 33 posts. A smaller stone circle was constructed and an entrance built on the south eastern side; Phase 4: construction of the outer stone circle and the avenue from avebury was built. This indicates that the Sanctuary was important prior to the construction of the avebury henge and that it continued to be significant after. (10) Brief details of the site. (11)
Excavations in 1999 aimed to reconcile discrepancies between the original 1930’s excavation report and the diary of W E V Young, the excavation foreman at the time. A number of important new finds were uncovered, including a large group of lithics, and new insights into the nature of the Sanctuary’s construction are made. These include evidence that some of the posts were repeatedly renewed. (12)
The author puts his case for an earlier single-phase roofed structure. (13)

Details of associated earthwork on Pastscape

Earthworks of an uncertain date seen along the edge of a low terrace overlooking the Kennett valley seen on a 2006 lidar survey. (1) (SU 1070 6824) This terrace would be unremarkable appart from the fact that its curve follows the projected course of the palisade enclosure 2, the larger of the main palisade enclosures of the West Kennett Palisade Enclosure complex. The terrace overlooks the mound ‘Silbaby’ and the Waden spring. The earthworks create an edge to the terrace which appears to have faint traces of ridge and furrow within the enclosure that the earthworks create. It is cut through at its west end by two drainage ditches. around its base at its east end is another drainage ditch that could be a part of the water meadow to the east (NMR 1500135).

Details of site on Pastscape

The earthwork mound of uncertain date known as ‘Silbaby’ seen in a 2006 lidar survey. (1) (SU 1069 6831)

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

Ditchless round barrow at Mount Wood, listed by Grinsell as Compton Bassett 1. The mound is conical, 15 metres across and 3.1 metres high, and has been suggested by OGS Crawford to perhaps be Roman rather than Bronze Age.

(SU 03727119) TUMULUS (LB). (1) Compton Bassett 1 – a mound of uncertain date 84 ft x 8 ft. Crawford suggests a possible Roman date. (2-3) This is a ditchless conical mound 15 m. across and 3.1 m. high. It is certainly a barrow and its shape supports Crawford’s suggestion of a possible Roman date. Grinsell in describing it as 84 ft in diameter probably transposed his figures. Published survey (1/2500) revised. (4)

Details of Cursus on Pastscape

A supposed Neolithic cursus is visible as cropmarks on air photographs taken in the 1930s. It has been partially built over during the construction of Yatesbury military camp in the 1930s or 1940s.

A crop mark of what is probably a ploughed-out Cursus (SU 06976987 to SU 07187010) is visible on air photographs in Yatesbury Field, north of Knoll Down. At the south east end are three ring-ditches (see SU 06 NE, 51). (1,2) No significant archaeological features visible on ground; area under plough. (3) The supposed Neolithic cursus has been mapped from 1930’s air photographs, almost certainly those cited in source 2. It is visible as discontinuous parallel ditches, orientated SW-NE, for 120m between SU 0699 6991 and SU 0717 7007. The ditches are very uneven and their course is confused by two, probably post Medieval, quarries (also visible as cropmarks) which encroach upon their course. The site of the cursus was built over between the 1930’s and 1940’s. The ring ditches referred to by authority 1 are situated just to the east of the south end of the `cursus’ . (4)

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

A subtle mound of uncertain origin spread by ploughing in the Yatesbury Field seen in a 2006 lidar survey (1) (SU 0655 7084) This low wide mound could potentially be the remains of a Bronze Age round barrow. It has a good location on the end of a spur.

Details of Yatesbury 4 on Pastscape

A Bronze Age bowl barrow, listed by Grinsell as Cherhill 10, “excavated” in 1849 by Merewether, who found a primary cremation deposit. Earlier digging in 1833 had uncovered two extended inhumations, presumably Saxon, accompanied by a knife, some beads, and a metal workbox with a chain. Prior to boundary changes, the barrow was listed as Yatesbury 4. It remains extant as an earthwork, though it is being ploughed.

During early August 1849, Dean Merewether had been “excavating” various sites locally, including Silbury Hill. Local tradition had spoken of the mounds on Yatesbury Field as having special significance to Silbury’s shape and the Dean and his party decided to visit on the evening of August 4th.....

“Having obtained permission of the proprietor...we proceeded at as early an hour as our party could reach the spot...and with anticipations the most encouraging, as they [this barrow and SU 07 SE 10] were distinguished by traditions which ranked them highly in the estimation of the inhabitants. They had been at least 20 ft high; their bases were still of an extent to admit of such a proportinate height. henry Shergold, the man who had been employed to lower them, being fortunately within reach, was sent for, and gave us the following account as to the first of the two which we examined, beingthat towards Avebury. He said “He had cut it down a matter of 9ft, throwing the earth on the sides, sixteen years ago. there was a little box of metal 3 inches long; it had a lid at one end, and a chain fixed in the middle, and it had been fastened to the end where it opened; it was round. Abut a yard deep, there were three beads (terra cotta, one was produced), as big as his finger round; a knife fit to stick a pig, and two skeletons lying at full length”. At a depth of 8ft in this barrow, we came to a large quantity of very black substance, like charcoal, or rather burnt straw; numerous bits of bone of the various kinds, fragments of pottery, &c, and a large cist containing a considerable quantity of burnt human bones.”

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

A Bronze Age bowl barrow, listed by Grinsell as Cherhill 9, “excavated” in 1849 by Merewether. It contained a cremation in a tree-trunk coffin, accompanied by a bronze dagger. Prior to boundary changes, the barrow had been listed as Yatesbury 3. It remains an extant earthwork, though it is being ploughed.

(’A’: SU 07037099; ‘B’: SU 07067095) Tumuli (NR) (1)
Two bowl barrows opened by J Merewether in 1849 (2)
(’A’) Cherhill 9: 45 paces in diameter by 4 1/2ft high (3).
Primary (?) cremation in tree-trunk coffin containing bronze dagger with two rivets (2).
(’B’) Cherhill 10: 45 paces in diameter by 5ft high (3).
Primary (?) cremation. Two intrusive extended skeletons, one with knife, three earthenware beads, and a metal box with chain were discovered by a labourer (2) in 1833 (4) while lowering the barrow (Saxon ?) (3). (2-4)
“A”: A bowl barrow up to 48.0m in diameter and 1.8m high. Under plough.
“B”: A bowl barrow up to 38.0m in diameter and 1.7m high. Under plough.
Resurveyed at 1:2500. (5) The Bronze Age bowl barrows described by the previous authorities were visible as earthworks and mapped from aerial photographs (7). By 1971 the barrows were under plough (8). NB these two barrows have now been recorded separately. This record deals only with barrow “A” (above). For details of barrow “B”, see SU 07 SE 105. An Early Bronze Age bowl barrow opened by J Merewether (his barrow 18) on the evening of August 4th 1849, and continued in his absence the following day. The barrow was subsequently numbered Yatesbury 3 (by Goddard,among others) and more recently as Cherhill 9. Merewether was also excavating Silbury Hill on August 4th. The bronze blade, though lost, was classified (on the basis of Merewether’s drawing) as a flat riveted knife-dagger of Early Bronze Age date by Gerloff. (1-9)

During early August 1849, Dean Merewether had been “excavating” various sites locally, including Silbury Hill. Local tradition had spoken of the mounds on Yatesbury Field as having special significance to Silbury’s shape and the Dean and his party decided to visit on the evening of August 4th.....

“The closeness of the soil...and the depth to which we had to descend, occupied more thanusually our time, and the evening was far spent before we had reached such a depth...as to satisfy our curiosity; but the next day, on which we did not proceed to Yatesbury...the men, under the superintendence of Mr Money Kyrle, came to a layer of the black substance, burnt straw apparently, and below that to a most curious deposit, a cist, at the depth of 8 ft., formed at the level of the adjoining land, containing an unusual quantity of burnt human bones. These had been deposited in the hollow of a tree, and a piece of the cleft wood, the side of the tree, had been placed over it. From the peculiar clayey and damp quality of the earth, it was so greatly decayed, that ot might be difficult to determine its former substance, although it appeared by the remains of fibres, and lines of the grain of the wood, to have been oak; the wood was 4 ft long by [2.5] broad and 18 inches thick, being reduced in places by compression. About the middle of this, on the apex of the mass of bones, and beneath the wooden cover, lay a bronze blade of a hunting spear [the knife dagger]; the two rivets which had fixed it to its staff remained in their respective holes, but the metal, from the extreme moisture of the situation, had become oxidised throughout, and when dried extremely brittle and friable; it was [4.125] inches in length, and [1.5] inch in breadth at the broadest part.”

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

(SU 06827135) Tumulus (NR). (1) Cherhill 8: a bowl barrow, 30 paces in diameter by 6 1/2ft high (2). Excavated by J Merewether (3) in 1849, who found animal bones and fragments of iron. (2-3) Visible but inaccessible, field report and survey accepted. (4) Merewether’s excavation was also described by Goddard and Smith. Prior to boundary alterations, the barrow was listed as Yatesbury 2. (5, 6) The Bronze Age bowl barrow described by the previous authorities was seen as an earthwork and mapped from aerial hotographs. The barrow measures about 10m in diameter (7). Lidar survey shows a spread of material coming away from the barrow to the north, this may indicate that the barrow has been spread at some point or that the barrow may have been incorporated inot the field boundaries located to the southeast and that this material is a remnant of that earthwork. (8)

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

(SU 05817202) Tumulus (NR). (1) Cherhill 11: a bowl barrow, 18 paces in diameter by 1ft high.Formerly arable but under grass in 1949. (2) A bowl barrow up to 18.0m in diameter and 0.4m high. Under plough. Resurveyed at 1:2500. (3) English Heritage schedule entry describes the barrow mound as 25m in diameter and 0.5m high, and surrounded by a ditch (4). Smith and Goddard both described the monument as a low bowl-shaped barrow with no ditch. Prior to alteration of parish boundaries, the barrow was referred to as Yatesbury 5. (5, 6) The Bronze Age bowl barrow described by the previous authorities was seen as an earthwork and mapped form aerial photographs taken in 1946 (7). A ditch surrounding the barrow was not visible on the aerial photograph. By 1971 the barrow is likely to have been damaged as the field was under plough (8).

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

Bronze Age bowl barrow listed by Grinsell as Cherhill 7. It was “excavated” in 1849 by Merewether, but nothing was found. Excavation in 1993 confirmed the interpretation of a barrow. A water tank occupies the top of the barrow, which otherwise survives as an earthwork. The barrow, which stands within Yatesbury village, was formerly known as Yatesbury 1.

(SU 06507165) Tumulus (NR). (1) Cherhill 7: a bowl barrow; top now occupied by a water tank (2). Excavated by J Merewether (3) in 1849 but unproductive. (2-3)A bowl barrow up to 24.0m in diameter and 1.2m high. Mutilated. The water tank is raised above the mound on brick supports. Published survey 1:2500 revised. (4) Merewether’s excavation is summarised by Smith and Goddard. Prior to boundary alterations, the barrow had been listed as Yatesbury 1. (5, 6) The bowl barrow described by the previous authorities was not visible on aerial photographs due to tree cover (7). Excavations in 1973 has confirmed the interpretation of a barrow (8).

Details of stone on Pastscape

(SS 60214688) “Mr Badcock seems to have been of the opinion that these ancient stones at Combe Martin, that were called the Hanging Stones, were some Druidical remains of a temple: and the Hangman Stone is the Stonehenge or Balanced-stone, which was remarkable in all these edifices. It is said that there is but one pillar left, which served as a boundary between Combe Martin and the next parish (1). A menher which now crowns Hangman Hill, in long 4 degs. 0’6”, lat. 51 degs. 12’14”. The stone is 5’3” high, its breadth points N59 degs. E. The N W side is 33”, N E 18”, S E 32 1/2”,, & the S W side is 16” tapering to the top. “This is probably ‘the one pillar left’ according to Badcock’ (2). Given as long 4 degs. 0’6” lat 51 degs. 12’14” (3) Mentioned. (4) (SS 60214688) Description in Authy 2 correct. Although the long. & lats. are approximately correct Hangman Hill lies further to the North. The stone is of the local red grit stone and stands alone. (5) SS60204688. Well preserved. 0.8 metres wide, 0.4m. thick and 1.5m. high. Probably of pre-historic origin. There are no traces of any other stones in the vicinity. Positioned on 1/2500. (6) SS 603469. Standing stone on Knap Down, listed as Bronze Age by Grinsell who also stated that it may be the ‘Hangman Stone’ described by Westcote on the boundary between Combe Martin and Trentishoe. (7) (SS 60204688). Standing Stone (NR). (8) This standing stone is as described and measured by authority 6, and there seems no reason to refute claims to its prehistoric origin. Nevertheless historical elements attributed to it by authorities 1, 2 and 7 appear to be entirely fallacious. Palmer (3) noted that Chanter and Worth had misidentified Knap Down as Hangman Hill, on the Tithe map (a) at SS 585481 (now called `Little Hangman’) and then described as 62 acres of pasture. Grinsell (7) is probably correct in ascribing the stone to Knap Down, though the OS 2” drawing (c) depicts enclosed ground and in 1842 (b) it would have been in one of several fields called `Vellacotts’, making up a holding of 84 acres. Grinsells suggestion that it may be Westcotes `Hangman Stone’ is unsupportable geographically. Westcote (7a) says a series of stones marked the parish boundary of Combe Martin and Martinhoe (now Trentishoe) of which one was locally known as the `hang-man-stone’ and associated with a sheep stealing legend. Chanter and Worth (2) are perhaps quoting the Badcock reference in Polwheles muddled account (1). The `one pillar left’ of a complex setting almost certainly applies to the stone on Mattocks Down, (SS 601438), dealt with at length by Westcote, when it was a more complete setting. There is thus no reason to suspect that was ever anything other than a single, un-named prehistoric standing stone (9).