Chance

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).

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

[SW 6733 3665] Hangman’s Barrow [L.B.] (1) Two standing stones on the hill called Hayman’s Barrow. (2) Hangman’s Barrow is a 3.0m high cairn. Published 1:2500 survey correct. It is not possible to identify two individual standing stones in an area such as this which is littered with granite boulders. Pevsner’s information possibly incorrect or a mis-identification of the place name. (3) Hangman’s Barrow is recorded by Thomas as being 95ft in diameter, the removal of many of the stones having revealed an inner wall of large stones which appeared to surround the cairn centre within 10ft of its outer edge. (4-5)

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

SJ 78842384 A bowl barrow, 20.0m in average diameter and 0.9m high. There are traces on the south and east of a ditch, 2.0m wide and 0.1m deep. The mound is under grass and has five trees upon it. There is the crater of an old, central mutilation. The barrow occupies the summit of a small but distinctive hill. On OS 6” 1925, the name “The Roundabout” is applied either to the hill or to the open wood upon it. No local evidence was gained as to whether this name is applicable to the barrow. (1) (SJ 78852385) Tumulus (NR). (2) No change. Published 1:2500 survey correct. (3) SJ 788238. Round barrow on the Roundabout. Scheduled. (4) SJ 7885 2384: Bowl barrow on the Roundabout, Scheduled RSM No. 22424. (5)

Details of stone on Pastscape

[SU 3200 8117] Hangman’s Stone [G.T.] (1) Hangman’s Stone, Lambourn. A naturally shaped, grey upright sarsen stone, set in a bank on the east side of a lane and standing four feet above it. No sign of mound or any other sarsens, in the vicinity. (2) Hangman’s Stone, see G.P. AO/63/95/1. (3) Additional bibliography. (4)

Details of Long Barrow on Pastscape

(ST 85367788) Tumulus (OE) (Site of). (1) A large oblong barrow called Green Barrow, was levelled C.1852 by the owner of the field. (2) A very slight but obvious long oval rise was visible in 1924(3) but when visited by Crawford in 1932 nothing was seen. Grinsell comments that a shapeless rise, 2 feet high was visible in 1949, and that it may have been a long or oval barrow. (The surrounding fields have the place-name element Green Barrow on the Tithe Map). (2-6) There is a very slight rise at this site but it cannot be identified as a barrow. (7) There is no trace of this feature on the ground; the area is used as a farm rubbish dump. (8)

Details of site on Pastscape

A slight univallate hillfort located on the south western outskirts of the village of Padbury. The hillfort stands on a slight plateau bounded on the north western side by a meander of the Padbury Brook. The hillfort’s perimeter can be traced across the pasture to the south, where it forms an oval circuit measuring some 200 metres from north to south and 250 metres from east to west. The boundary earthworks are thought to have been designed to enhance the natural topography and to have included an inner bank surrounded by an external ditch, except on the north western side where a single outward scarp faces the brook. The ditch has largely been infilled, although one section, measuring some 8 metres to 12 metres in width and 0.8 metres deep, remains visible around the northern part of the boundary. The bank can still be traced on the eastern side of the perimeter, where it measures about 10 metres in width and 0.4 metres high. The bank is known to have stood up to 1 metre in height around the south western side, although it was pushed into the ditch in the 1940s when the interior was briefly cultivated. The boundary on this side is now marked by a pronounced scarp which descends some 1.8 metres towards the line of the infilled ditch. The south eastern quarter of the ramparts, together with a small area of the interior, was completely destroyed by a 19th century clay quarry and brickworks (now abandoned). There is no visible evidence of habitation within the interior of the hillfort, which is generally level apart from a slight slope towards the brook. The name ‘Norbury’ was first recorded on a map of the All Soul’s College Estates dated 1591, and is believed to derive from the old English terms ‘noro’, meaning north, and ‘burgh’, meaning a stronghold or fortified place. Evidently, the site remained notable for its defences long after its abandonment. Scheduled.

Details of site on Pastscape

SP 181123 Windrush Camp (NR). (1) Windrush Camp is an Iron Age fort almost certainly to be identified with the round camp at Winderedge, south of Sherborne (Windrush occurs as Wyndridge in a document of 1590), which Aubrey describes as being 160 paces diameter, enclosing 6 acres with “the works double”, ploughed up on the south and east sides. By Playne’s time only a single bank and ditch remained, and by 1914 the ditch had disappeared. (2-8) Univallate, enclosing just over 3 acres. The 25 ft wide bank rises 5 1/2 feet above the interior and 7 1/2 ft above the generally levelled external ditch, which can be traced for only a short distance around the east angle of the bank. The entrance, a 25 ft gap in the bank, is on the west. (9) Windrush Camp consists of a single stony rampart with an average outer height of 1.5m, and inner height of 0.9m. There is no trace of an outer bank or ditch. The entrance on the west side is mutilated, and consists of a 9.0m break with indications that the bank on the south side turned outwards. The level interior is raised 0.6m above the exterior, and the earthwork itself is situated in a generally level area in a position of no great strength. Re-surveyed at 1:2500 on MSD. (10) SP 181 123. Windrush. Listed in gazetteer as a univallate hillfort covering 1.2ha. (11) Windrush Camp (SP 181123) univallate hillfort, unexcavated, encloses just over 3 acres. [Further detail and plan included]. (12) A rapid examination of air photography (14) suggests the presence of an outer ditch visible as a cropmark and a slight earthwork extending from the north side around to the east side of the hillfort. (13-14) Windrush Camp hillfort is a Scheduled Monument. (15) The Iron Age hillfort referred to above (1-15) is visible as an earthwork on aerial photographs. The hillfort has been mapped as part of the South Cotswolds NMP. The hillfort may have had two more defensive banks surrounding the inner rampart. On the east side of the hillforts main rampart is a ditch and bank, with the ditch on the southwest side, which is located from ST 1819 1237 to ST 1861 1228. This is first outer bank. Further north, a second curving outer bank and ditch was located on the NE side, with the ditch on the southwest side, extending from ST1813 1244 to ST 1819 1240. A small section of bank is located further southeast on the south side of the road, centred at ST 1823 1235, which appears to be the continuation of the second outer bank located to the north. The bank and ditch located to the NE have subsequently been plough levelled and were visible as cropmarks on aerial photographs taken in 1983. The banks and ditch on the east side still appear as slight earthworks. (16-18)

Details of Long Barrow on Pastscape

(SP 1434 2063) Long Barrow (NR) (1) A long barrow measuring 100 ft by 55 ft by 7 ft oriented SSE/NNW, planted with trees and enclosed by a wire fence (2). Crawford described it as perfect and unopened, with no sign of attempted mutilation (3), though Fosbroke in 1807 reported Roman coins excavated from a barrow in this parish, and this is the only barrow known in it. (2-3) SP 1434 2064. A long barrow 33m long, 16m wide and uniformly 1.8m high, with no trace of side ditches. Conspicuously sited on a small prominence in ploughed farmland, it remains tree planted and generally well preserved. A slight depression midway along its S side represents a modern mutilation and a modern pile of stones surmounts its E end. Local enquiry could add no further information as to whether or not this was the barrow in which the Roman coins were found.
Revised at 1:2500. (4) Scheduled as ‘Cold Aston long barrow 200yds (180m) E of Camp Farm’. (5) The Neolithic long barrow described above (1-5) is obscured by trees on the available aerial photographs, however, a bank that appears to continue its alignment to the south-east is visible as a cropmark on aerial photographs, suggesting that the long barrow may have been significantly longer. The cropmark bank measures a maximum of 106m long and up to 44m wide and is probably caused by a spread of the bank material. (6)

Details of site on Pastscape

An earthwork site once interpreted as being a Roman Legionary fortress; though now thought to be a probable Iron Age hillfort. Late Bronze Age and Iron Age pottery and a Roman pottery sherds have been found here. The site was later incorporated into Brough/ Burgh Medieval Deer Park and may have indeed given the park its name.

(SK 498058) Bury Camp (NR) (1)
A rectangular camp of single vallum & fosse, known as “Ratby Burrow” or “Bury” Camp: occupies an area of over nine acres.
Rampart 3ft high on north side with escarpment of 38ft into a ditch with 9ft counterscarp. “At the NE & SW angles the vallum rises to a greater height and at the former is a fragment of a slightly raised circular platform”. Four of the gaps “are in each side, are no doubt entrances: so apparently are two other openings near the eastern angles, that at the northern looked down upon by the aforesaid platform, and that on the south defended by a rise in the vallum to 8 ft perpendicular measurement. At point ‘C’ on plan (2) is a modern opening”. Gould suggests that the earthwork is pre-Roman. (2-4)

Possible site of the early legionary camp in the neighbourhood of Leicester. “It may be suggested that the earthworks at Ratby, of which a plan made by Throsby in 1791 is reproduced on p 4, may be the actual site. The position is a commanding one on the hills three miles west of Leicester. The shape of the camp certainly suggests a Roman rather than an earlier or later origin, while a small sherd of Roman mortarium was picked up in a rabbit scrape in 1938. Excavation is obviously necessary to prove this suggestion”. (5)

Details of site on Pastscape

An iron age slight univallate hillfort situated on a hilltop on the watershed between Ford Brook to the west and River Culvery to the east. The interior of the hillfort survives as a sub-triangular enclosure.

(SX 79789572) Higher Bury (NR) (1)
Higher Bury Camp, a simple defensive enclosure, is a square camp the sides 300 feet long and ramparts 3 feet high. The ramparts are extant on the north and west sides, but an escarpment on the east is lost towards the south. (2)
Higher Bury Camp is sub-triangular, and is typical of a small Iron Age defensive earthwork. It has a single rampart, best preserved on the west where it is up to 2.0 metres high, with traces of an outer ditch. The northern side is now only a scarp which continues along the south east side though here it has been re-cut to form a boundary bank. A gap in the south west corner appears to be a simple entrance. Surveyed at 1:2500. (3) SX 797957 Higher Bury Camp Scheduled No 854. (4)

Details of site on Pastscape

Exposed rock strata originally interpreted as a stone circle.

ST 79456280- A possible stone circle, in “No Man’s Land”, cut by the road between Conkwell and Upper Haugh Farm, was discovered by G. Underwood. The area is disturbed by quarrying and a number of stones are visible.
Some of the stones have stalagmitic deposits and must therefore have been brought there (though they might equally represent a shattered deposit, in situ). Flint flakes and one sherd were found.
Grinsell described the circle as doubtful, see illustration card. This is not a stone circle. The stones, which extend further than shown by Underwood, are parts of normal strata, probably visible because of quarrying in the area.

Details of site on Pastscape

Flint working site with evidence of working from the Palaeolithic to Bronze Age.
(Area ST 716702) Flint Chipping Floor. (It is assumed that this is one of the Mesolithic sites referred to in Arch. NL, 5 no 5, Sept 1954, 74). (1) This area is under pasture; no further information. Some of the Falconer collection is in Monkton Coombe School, Bath, vaguely provenanced. (2)
ST 717702 An area strewn with scrapers, flakes and cores, which includes a site at ST 716699. This is part of a field extending into wood and Further Slate at ST 718698 (flint working site ST 76 NW 13). All these areas are considered to be parts of one site. See plan with ST 76 NW 35. (The sites collated by Tratman have collections derived from surface finds; the periods represented by typology range from Late Upper Palaeolithic/Mesolithic through Neolithic to Bronze Age). (3)

Pastscape

Neolithic flint implements found during gravel working [Area centred ST 6742 6912] Neolithic Flint Implements – “A gravel pit is being worked at the present time at the lower end of Holm Mead Lane, S.W. of Bitton. Part of the pit lies below the flood level of the Avon ... Neolithic flint implements are found in the subsoil over the gravel.” (1)
The gravel pit, which is now disused and partially infilled, was centred at ST 67466918. (2)
The finds were in the U.B.S.S. Museum, Bristol, but were destroyed by bombing in the 1939-45 war. (3)

Details of site on Pastscape

Earthworks of a supposed ancient ‘camp’ on Tog Hill. The site appears to comprise a low boundary bank, probably Medieval, and several tracks. (AREA ST 7300 7210) “Camp”. (1)
“Tog Hill Camp” A mound has been thrown up almost parallel to the brow of the hill with a deep ditch on the escarpment side, and a shallow ditch on the other side. (2-3) There is another slight ditch more to the west. (4)
A mysterious earthwork. Whatever it is, it is not a camp, and the ditch is too small. (5)
These earthworks fall in a rough semi-circle around the end of a shallow re-entrant. They cannot be directly approached, the fields are under corn, but are readily visible and would appear to be Md field ways and lynchets. They are certainly, as Crawford says, not part of a camp. Of minor significance. (6)
Area ST 730721: The ‘ancient earthwork’ on Tog hill described by Playne and noted by Witts (sources 2-3) appears to comprise a low boundary bank, probably medieval, and several tracks. (7)

Monument No. 205027

Details of site on Pastscape

A surface scatter of flints on Tog Hill was investigated in 1959 and 1961. Over a thousand worked flints were recovered and are now in Bristol City Museum. The bulk of the material is of Mesolithic date, with later periods represented by arowheads, a plano-convex knife and two flakes struck from polished axeheads.
ST 738735. A flint chipping site on Tog Hill, investigated by Marochan, Reid, Sykes and Whittle in 1959 and 1961, has yielded
over a thousand worked flints, all now in the possession of Bristol City Museum. The greater part of the material is Mesolithic, with an indeterminable precentage of more recent work, including ten Neolithic-Bronze Age arrow-heads, a plano-convex knife and two fragments struck from polished axeheads. Occupation appeared to have been most intense late in the Mesolithic period, in the Maglemosian tradition, and the absence of hearths, and rarity of burnt flints, indicated summer-time occupation of the site only. (1)

Details of site on Pastscape

Flint working site dating from palaeolithic to bronze age

(Area ST 749715) Flint chipping floor at Henley Hill, Cold Ashton, two fields east of 5th milestone on Bath – Gloucester Road, cores, flakes and about 200 scrapers – very small, badly worked flints. At 2o 21’ 37” E 51o 26’ 34” N. (Presumably one of the Mesolithic sites on the Bath Downs referred to in Arch NL 5, Sept 1954, 74). (1)
This area is under pasture. Some Falconer material is in Bath Museum and some at Monkton Coombe School Bath. Mostly vaguely
provenanced. (2)
ST 750715 Henley Hill. One of a number of sites in a large area from which surface flints have been collated and the implements, dated by topology, range from Late Upper Palaeolithic/Mesolithic through Neolithic to Bronze Age. (See plan of site with ST 76 NW 35). (3)

Details of earthwork on Pastscape

A possible Iron Age linear earthwork on Freezing Hill, known as Royal Camp or Old Dyke in the past.
(Extends from ST 7200 7148 to ST 7233 7102) Camp (NR) (1)
Some earthworks on the southern side of Freezing or Furzen Hill consist of a bank with a ditch on either side. It has been suggested that they formed part of a civil boundary connected with the earthworks on Tog Hill. (ST 77 SW 90). (2)
An earthwork, possibly a linear dyke of Iron Age date, extends for about 1800 ft along the SW side of Freezing Hill. It is called “Old Dyke” in Saxon charters, and “Royal Camp” on Isaac Taylor’s map of 1777. The bank, 24ft wide and 2ft high, stands on the edge of the escarpment, and the ditch, also 24ft wide, lies 9ft below. At either end the dyke terminates at hollow-ways leading down the slope. It is interrupted only at the parish boundary where bank and ditch are cut by a deep hollow-way and over-ridden by an associated boundary bank. Neither the internal ditch mentioned by Playne and Witts nor the NE extensions of the dyke shown on Witts’ map, can be traced. (3)
Published 1:2500 survey correct. (4) Freezing Hill Earthwork, scheduled. (5)

Details of Barrows on Pastscape

ST 7323 7044 and ST 7328 7045. Two round barrows excavated in 1909 by H H Winwood, G Grey and T S Bush. The first contained much burnt material, animal bones and potsherds, but apparently no human bones. There were numerous flints including eight scrapers and two borers. The second barrow had an unaccompanied primary cremation. A number of flints, including one borer, were found in the material of the mound. (1)
ST 7323 7045, ST 7325 7044. Two barrows, the westerly has been truncated and is 0.9m high, the easterly, 1.7m high, is partially overlaid by a dump of extraneous material, possibly from the other barrow. Surveyed at 1:2500. (2)

The Sun-disc Barrows – Monument No. 203725

Details of Barrows on Pastscape

Two round barrows – human cremation plus “fused copper” and gold-plated bronze “sun-disc” 200 yards North-West of the Lansdown Camp.
[ST 7116 6896] TUMULI [O.E. – two shown] Bronze Disc found [T.I.]
About 200 yards north-west of the Roman Camp [ST 76 N.W. 19] on Lansdown are two round barrows 28-30 ft. in diameter.
The excavation of one revealed a circular cist near the middle, containing cremated bones, sherds from at least two urns, and some fused copper, A fragmentary gold plated bronze sun-disc was found in the other.
These are two ditchless bowl barrows, 0.6m high. Surveyed at 1/2500. 1/2500 survey of 3.3.66 filed with ST 76 NW 16.

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

Possible barrow sites to the North of the Roman camp at Lansdown, now part of a golf course.
[Area ST 7140 6910] Some irregular mounds to the north of the possible Roman Camp at Lansdown.
[ST 76 NW 19]may be the remaians of a small group of barrows, partially ploughed down. (1)
The area referrd to now forms part of a golf course. The irregular mounds are no longer visible. (2)

Details of Hillfort on Pastscape

The earthwork on Little Down, North Stoke, is a single ramparted hillfort, triangular in shape with a curved base on the east consisting of a bank and ditch terminating at the north and south on the escarpment which falls away almost precipitously. The entrace is in the middle of the eastern side. (2-4)
There is a second, outside bank, south of the entrance. (5-6) Scheduled as an ancient momument. (7)
This is a promontory fort utilising strong natural defences on all but the east side where the wide, flat approach necessitates a strong defence. Here an irregular spread bank with outer ditch and in part a counterscarp bank, crosses the spur. The irregularity of the bank may have partially resulted from stone robbing. The ditch shows three stages of development, separated by the entrance way and a large bank dividing the southern half. South of the entrance the ditch is 2.4m deep, with a berm between it and the counterscarp bank, South of this the ditch is 1.7m deep, with a short section of counterscarp bank and berm, and becomes perceptibly shallower towards the natural escapement. North of the entrance the ditch averages 0.8m deep with no trace of counterscarp bank. The foregoing strongly suggests that the defence was never completed. The berm between bank and ditch could never have resulted from attempts at destruction and as an original feature it is without parallel in completed Wessex hill-forts. Surveyed at 1/2500. (8)
The gap in the centre of the eastern side is almost certainly modern, but there appears to be a sort of out-turned entrance at the north end of that side. An unpublished excavation by Mr Gardner of Kingswood School and the late F A Shore has proved that on the east side there was an outer bank and ditch, as described by Witts (3 above), though nothing of it is now visible. (9) Fort (NR) (10)
The interior of Littledown Camp is cultivated, the rampart is degraded and surmounted by a stone wall. Artifical defences are only present on the east side, the ditch here being up to 3m deep and the top of the bank about 4m from the ditch bottom. There are traces of a counterscarp south of the simple entrance at centre of the east side, and VCH (4) shows other earthworks, now destroyed by ploughing, north of this. Two building foundations, at the rear of the north and south ends of the east defences, were under plough when visited in 1973. No dating evidence was found but they are probably post-medieval agricultural buildings. (11) Additional references, plan, illus. (12)

Details of Barrow on Pastscape

Round barrow or feature associated with enclosure, plus pillow mound, near the entrance to Little Down Camp.
[ST 7105 6887 & ST 7110 6883] Two round barrows, seen 17.3.25. [Authy. suggests that one is the barrow, No. 114, shown on
G.B. Wilts’ map in ‘Archaeological Handbook of Gloucester’, 1888, p.167.]
At ST 71066887, near the entrance to Little Down Camp, is a vaguely circular mound 0.8m high. It may be a barrow but could also be an incomplete bank flanking the camp entrance (see ST 76 NW 16.) At ST 71136880 is a large ditchless rectangular mound 1.0m high. This is almost certainly a pillow-mound. Surveyed at 1/2500.
1/2500 survey of 2.3.66 filed with ST 76 NW 16. (ST 71146880) Pillow Mound(NR)