Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T16:02:05.023Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Bronze Age Round Barrows of Wessex1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2014

L. V. Grinsell
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The area covered by this survey, which epitomizes the writer's work on Wessex barrows since 1929, is limited on the west by a line drawn from Weston-super-Mare to Bridport, on the east by a line drawn from Dorking to Arundel, on the north roughly by the northern limit of the chalk downs south of the Thames, and on the south by the sea. It encloses the great majority of bell, disc, and saucer barrows, all of which appear to be expressions of Piggott's Wessex Bronze Age culture. It should be noted however that elements of this culture are found outside the area dealt with, notably at various places to the north-east. Nearly all of these are so close to the Icknield Way as to make it certain that this was the means of communication linking the one with the other. Another, though less important, extension of the Wessex Bronze Age culture is represented by a few sites, some of them doubtful, within a short distance of the course of the Upper Thames, and it is probable that the river was the means of communication used.

Here it is well to point out the respects in which the boundaries of Bronze Age Wessex, as determined by my own distribution-maps of barrows, differ from those adopted in the O.S. Map of Neolithic Wessex, and by Mr Stuart Piggott in his recent paper, ‘The Early Bronze Age in Wessex.’

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 7 , 1941 , pp. 73 - 113
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 1941

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 73 note 2 Proc. Prehist. Soc., 1938, 52–106Google Scholar.

page 74 note 1 ‘Not a plough had ever disturbed that stubborn soil. In the heath's barrenness to the farmer lay its fertility to the historian.’ Return of the Native, chap. 3.

page 75 note 1 W.A.M., XLVI, 350–5.

page 75 note 2 Proc. Prehist. Soc., III, 1937, 77–9Google Scholar.

page 75 note 3 Described in the first three volumes of Oxoniensia.

page 76 note 1 e.g., Down, Woolley (Berks. 20 SW), N.D.F.C., VII, 30–47Google Scholar.

Rackham, (Sussex 50 NE) S.A.C., LXXIII, 182–4Google Scholar; but this appears to be La Tène III.

page 76 note 2 e.g., Poor Lot (Dorset 39 SE).

Bincombe Hill (Dorset 47 SE).

page 76 note 3 e.g., Lambourn, No. 8 (Berks. 19 SE).

Sheep Down (Dorset 46 NE).

Beaulieu Heath (Hants. 73 SW).

Sutton Veny G.7 (Wilts. 58 NW).

page 76 note 4 e.g., Povington (Dorset 49 SE).

Roundwood (Hants. 25 SW); this may however have been a twin bell-barrow.

page 76 note 5 Mr Stuart Piggott has, however, recently (1938) excavated a round barrow on Crichel Down (Dorset 15 SW), which he considers to have been probably erected in the Neolithic period. It contained a primary crouched burial with a leaf-shaped flint arrowhead, buried at the foot of a wooden post. Report shortly to appear in the Archaeologia. Note also the example near Whiteleaf in the Chilterns opened by W. Lindsay Scott, a full report of which has yet to appear. Preliminary note in Proc. Prehist. Soc., 1935. p. 132Google Scholar.

page 78 note 1 In a barrow near Badbury (Dorset, 25 SW), the ditch between mound and bank is absent, but in this case the bank is probably a modern tree-ring.

page 78 note 2 B.U.S.S., 11, 65–74, 132–146. I should add that when I saw T.5 and T.7 I did not notice an outer bank in either example, but as this feature is shown in the text and plans in the excavators' reports I assume that they are surrounded by a very low bank which escaped my notice.

page 78 note 3 e.g., Wiston (51 NW, No. 21), Findon (51 SW, No. 9), Lewes (54 SW, No. 29), and Willingdon (79 NE, Nos. 27, 32) in my paper on Sussex Barrows (Sussex A.C., LXXV, 221 and listGoogle Scholar). The outer banks of some of these are however vague and differ from those of Wessex.

page 79 note 1 A probable third instance of this combination of barrows is Bishops Cannings G.29–31 (Wilts. 34 NE), but I have not seen it and it is now much mutilated. Wessex from the Air, 1928, 203–4Google Scholar.

page 82 note 1 Itinerarium Curiosum, 1723, p. 40Google Scholar.

page 82 note 2 These circles have been discussed in Oxoniensia, 1936–8, and B.A.J., XLIII, p. 9.

page 82 note 3 There is evidence suggesting that at least one bell-barrow overlaps, and is apparently later than a disc-barrow, i.e., Mortimer Common (Berks. 44 NE), B.A.J., XLIII, 1939, 15–17; but this case does not necessarily invalidate the author's view that the earliest bell-barrows were earlier than the earliest disc-barrows. It does however support the view that the two types flourished at the same period.

page 86 note 1 Winterbourne Stoke G.14 (Wilts. 54 SW) is drawn with four tumps on Hoare's map but it is clear from the text that there were only three tumps. MrCrawford, O. G. S. has cited another example (Wessex from the Air, p. 25)Google Scholar in which however I saw only one tump (Amesbury G.86, Wilts. 60 NE).

page 86 note 2 MrsCunnington, , in her Archaeology of Wiltshire, 2nd edn., 1934, 85Google Scholar, gives three more possible exceptions. Of these, that on Gallows Hill, Alvediston (Wilts. 69 SE) is almost certainly a tree-ring surrounding a bowl-barrow; Milston G.30 (Wilts. 55 NW) appears to be a small earthen circle or platform-barrow with bank and outer ditch, there being no central mound: I have not seen Mrs Cunnington's third example, Milston G.50 (Wilts. 55 NW).

page 86 note 3 Wessex from the Air, 13.

page 86 note 4 C.T.D., 1, Nos. 1, 2. Another probable Late Bronze Age disc-barrow was explored by Mr Crawford at Roundwood.

page 88 note 1 R. R. Clarke and the writer hope to deal with these after the war in a paper on Norfolk Barrows, the material for which is already collected.

page 88 note 2 Proc. Prehist. Soc., 1936, pl. 11.

page 88 note 3 Abury, 1743, p. 12Google Scholar.

page 88 note 4 Oxoniensia, 1, 1936Google Scholar; III, 1938.

page 90 note 1 Ant. J., XIII, 1933, 425–6Google Scholar.

page 90 note 2 Proc. Cambridge A.S., 1936, 143Google Scholar.

page 90 note 3 Rivers, Pitt, Excavations, IV, pl. 293Google Scholar.

page 90 note 4 Bull. Board of Celtic Studies, 1. pt. IV, 1923Google Scholar.

page 90 note 5 Letcombe Bassett CCXC (Berks. 19 SE), contained a cist 14 inches diameter, Archaeologia, LII, 61–2Google Scholar.

page 90 note 6 Scrubbity XII (Dorset 9 SE), contained an empty grave 12 feet long. Rivers, Pitt, Excavations, II, 4, 16, 33Google Scholar.

page 91 note 1 Shaft Graves and Beehive Tombs of Mycenae, 1929.

page 91 note 2 Trans. N.D.F.C., VIII, 1939, 109–16Google Scholar.

page 91 note 3 Scandinavian Archaeology, 1937, 150Google Scholar.

page 91 note 4 Archaeology of Cornwall, 95.

page 91 note 5 e.g., C.T.D., 1, Nos. 13, 32; II, Nos. 31, 38; III, No. 79.

page 91 note 6 A stone cist containing a crouched skeleton and Beaker (type A), but without a barrow, was found at Corston (Somerset 13 NE). B.U.S.S., IV, 128–37. For another just found there, see Ant. J., 1941, p. 151Google Scholar.

page 91 note 7 As at Wallmead (Somerset 20 NW). Brit. Mus. Ad. Ms., 33663 (Skinner).

page 91 note 8 As at Lulworth (Dorset 55 NW), C.T.D., III, nos. 8, 9; Limerstone Down (Hants., I.W. 94 SE), I.W.N.H.S., II, 702; Blackdown T.6 (Somerset 18 NW), and T.13 (18 SW), B.U.S.S., II, 68–70, 133 and 141–2; Pool Farm (Somerset 27 NE), Proc. Som. Arch. Soc., LXXVI, 85–90Google Scholar; Berwick St. John G.6b (Wilts. 74 NE).

page 91 note 9 Brit. Mus. Ad. Ms., 33663 (Skinner).

page 91 note 10 British Barrows, 1877, 447 ff.Google Scholar; Crawford, Long Barrows of Cotswolds, 1925, 91Google Scholar.

page 91 note 11 As at Pewit Farm (Berks. 20 NW), N.D.F.C., VIII, 109–16.

page 91 note 12 As in Winterbourne Stoke G.4 (Wilts. 54 SW).

page 91 note 13 e.g., Scrubbity Barrow IX (Dorset 9 SE), Rivers, Pitt, Excavations, II, 3, 14, 32Google Scholar; Winterbourne Stoke G.9 (Wilts. 54 SW).

page 92 note 1 The primary cist of T.6, Blackdown (Somerset 18 NW), was 6 feet south of the centre. B.U.S.S., II, 68–70, 133. Other examples are given by Thurnam, in Archaeologia, XLIII, 309Google Scholar. In some instances the apparent eccentricity of the primary interment may well be due to the gradual shifting of the material of the barrow away from the direction of the dominant winds. Van Giffen has noted this in Holland, (Proc. Prehist. Soc., 1938, 263)Google Scholar.

page 92 note 2 As at Pool Farm (Somerset 27 NE), Proc. Som. Arch. Soc., LXXVI, 85–90Google Scholar.

page 92 note 3 Proc. Devon Assoc., XXXIV, 6Google Scholar; LXIX, 81–2.

page 92 note 4 C.T.D., 1, No. 24.

page 92 note 5 Sussex Arch. Collns., XXII, 59Google Scholar; uncertain whether Bronze Age or Anglo-Saxon.

page 92 note 6 e.g., Scrubbity Barrows IX, X, XI (Dorset 9 SE); IX contained a cremation in wooden box but no ashes, X contained an urn with no bones, and XI contained ashes but no bones and no urn. Rivers, Pitt, Excavations, II, 3–4, 14–15, 32–33Google Scholar. Burlands Hill Field (Glos. 77 NW), twin barrow, had one mound erected over the funeral pyre and funeral feast, the other over the cremation (Bath Dist. Somerset Arch. Soc., 1909, 28–32Google Scholar). Enford G.5–6 (Wilts. 47 NE), another twin barrow, is another instance of this.

page 92 note 7 e.g., Blackdown (Somerset 18 NW, T.6), B.U.S.S., 11, 68–70; Sigwell III (Somerset 75 SW), J.R.A.I., VIII, 189–91; see also Thurnam, , in Archaeologia, XLIII, 324–5Google Scholar.

page 92 note 8 e.g., Large masses of charcoal were found in Enford G.5–6 (Wilts. 47 NE); Mere G.15 (Wilts. 63 NE), and Bulford G.49 (Wilts. 54 NW); in the last one of the excavators was nearly buried by a falling mass of char-coal.

page 92 note 9 SirBrowne, T., Urne-Buriall, 1658, 44Google Scholar.

page 92 note 10 Archaeologia, LII, 60Google Scholar.

page 92 note 11 Proc Hants. F.C., IX, 192Google Scholar.

page 93 note 1 W.A.M., XXXVI, 619.

page 93 note 2 ‘Th’ appointed band remain'd, and pil'd the wood.

A hundred feet each way they built the pyre.

And on the summit, sorrowing, laid the dead.'—Iliad, XXIII, 192–5.

page 93 note 3 W.A.M., XLV, 432–58.

page 93 note 4 As at Bridport Road (Dorset 40 SW), C.T.D., 1, No. 26; Ogbourne St. Andrew G.5 (Wilts. 28 NE).

page 93 note 5 For a list of about 20 Dorset examples see my unpublished paper on Dorset Barrows, in the Dorset County Museum; a Berkshire example may be cited west of Churn Knob (Berks. 21 NE), Arch. J., v, 280Google Scholar; a Hants, example is Roundwood 2 (25 SW); for a few Wiltshire ones see Hoare, , Anc. Wilts., I, 39, 45, 48, 66, 124Google Scholar.

page 93 note 6 e.g., Aldbourne G.8 (Wilts. 23 NE); Ogbourne St. Andrew G.5 (Wilts. 28 NE); Avebury G. 23, 24 (Wilts. 28 SW).

page 93 note 7 As at Aldbourne G.12 (Wilts. 23 NE), Archaeologia, LII, 55Google Scholar.

page 93 note 8 As at Aldbourne G.3 (Wilts. 23 NE), Archaeologia, LII, 48–9Google Scholar.

page 93 note 9 As at Harptree T.19 (Somerset 27 NS), B.U.S.S., 11, 214; Hinton G.1 (Wilts. 16 SE), Arch., LII, 57–8Google Scholar); Aldbourne G.1 (Wilts. 23 NE), Arch., LII, 46–8Google Scholar; Preshute G.1a (Wilts. 28 SE), W.A.M., xxxv, 7; Amesbury G.85 (Wilts. 61 NW), W.A.M., XLV, 435. This method is also common in Holland, Van Giffen, Bauart, passim; in his sections plaggen = turf sods).

page 93 note 10 The presence of the original turf-line beneath round barrows has not been noted very frequently, but it was recorded by Father Home at Pool Farm (Somerset 27 NE), Proc. Som. Arch. Soc., LXXVI, 85–90Google Scholar; by H. Taylor near Harptree T.19 (Somerset 27 NE), B.U.S.S., 11, 214; by H. St. G. Gray at Martinstown I (Dorset, F.C., XXVI, 6–40Google Scholar); by Piggott at Latch Farm (Hants. 86 NE), Proc. Prehist. Soc. 1938, 171Google Scholar, and Crichel Down nos. VIII and XIII (Dorset 15 SW), unpublished; also by Newall at Amesbury G.85 (Wilts. 61 NW).

page 93 note 11 Rivers, Pitt, Excavations, 11, 3Google Scholar.

page 93 note 12 Bath Branch, Somerset Arch. Soc., 1909, 28–32Google Scholar.

page 93 note 13 Opened by the late MrSumner, H., B.N.S.S., XIV, 77–8Google Scholar.

page 93 note 14 Niton III (Isle of Wight 98 SW), I.W.N.H.S., 1932, 205.

page 94 note 1 Proc. Prehist. Soc., 1938, 107–121Google Scholar.

page 94 note 2 Archaeologia, LXXXVII, 129–80Google Scholar.

page 94 note 3 e.g., Bincombe Hewish (Dorset 47 SE), C.T.D., 1, no. 1, and a large number of others.

page 94 note 4 e.g., Bloxworth Down (Dorset 33 SE), C.T.D., 1, no. 15, and numerous other sites.

page 94 note 5 e.g., Churn no. 1 (Berks 21 SE), Arch. J., v, 280Google Scholar and N.D.F.C., VII, 160; Inkpen II, III, IV (Berks. 41 SE), O. G. S. Crawford's unpublished MSS; Dorset examples were noted by Warne in C.T.D., 1, no. 22; 11, nos. 3 and 16, and 111, nos. 1, 63, 78, 92. Another was noted by Mr H. St. George Gray at Martinstown (Dorset 47 NW), Proc. Dorset F.C., XXVI, 6–40Google Scholar, his no. 1. Hoare noted one in Wiltshire (Anc. Wilts, 1, 65Google Scholar).

page 94 note 6 Proc. Hants. F.C., IX, 189–95, Roundwood barrowsGoogle Scholar.

page 94 note 7 W.A.M., XLV, 432–58, Amesbury Barrow 85.

page 94 note 8 e.g., The Tynings North barrow (Somerset 18 SW), B.U.S.S., IV, 67–127.

page 94 note 9 Proc. Devon Assoc., LXIX, 1937, 93–101Google Scholar.

page 95 note 1 Arch. Camb., LXXXI, 1926, 48–85Google Scholar.

page 95 note 2 Liverpool Annals of Arch., xx, 187 ffGoogle Scholar.

page 95 note 3 Arch. f. Hessische, 1902.

page 95 note 4 Die Bauart der Einzelgraber, 1930; Proc. Prehist. Soc., 1938, 258–71Google Scholar.

page 95 note 5 Proc. Camb. Antiq. Soc., XXXIX, esp. 36–7Google Scholar.

page 95 note 6 Numerous examples are described in my Ancient Burial Mounds of England, 1936, pp. 53, 80, 84, 99, 117, 128, 216–9, 224Google Scholar.

page 95 note 7 L‘Anthropologie, XLIII, 1933, 228Google Scholar (Le Rouzic's paper).

page 95 note 8 Brøndsted, , Danmarks Oldtid, II, 1939, 34–5Google Scholar.

page 95 note 9 Antiquity, 1, 1927, 429Google Scholar; x, 1936, 512.

page 95 note 10 W.A.M., XLII, 215–7.

page 95 note 11 Sussex A.C., IX, 109–18Google Scholar.

page 95 note 12 Van Giffen, , Bauart d. Einzelgraber, 11, taf. 84Google Scholar.

page 95 note 13 Iphigeneia in Taurica, line 702.

page 96 note 1 Odyssey, XII, 16–20 (Trans. Mackail, J. W.)Google Scholar.

page 96 note 2 The purpose may in part have been to prevent the primary being disturbed by later interments.

page 96 note 3 e.g., Handley 27 (Dorset 9 SE), Rivers, Pitt, Excavations, IV, 136–42Google Scholar.

page 96 note 4 On the date of the different types of ditch, see Crawford, in Antiquity, 1, 1926Google Scholar. It must however be remembered that the character of the ditch must have depended largely on the nature of the subsoil and the skill used to construct the barrow.

page 96 note 5 Anc. Wilts., 1, 54Google Scholar.

page 96 note 6 See Addy, , Proc. Derbyshire Arch. Soc., XL, XLI, 1918–1919Google Scholar.

page 97 note 1 Dorset F.C., XXXVIII, 74–80Google Scholar.

page 97 note 2 e.g., Radley (Berks. 10 NE); Pimperne (Dorset 14 SE); east of Clandon barrow (Dorset, 47 NW); NE of Wagon and Horses Inn (Wilts., 28 SW); near Barrow Clump, Figheldean (Wilts. 54 NE); south of Woodhenge (Wilts. 54 SE), air-photographs at O.S. Office, Southampton.

page 97 note 3 Hants. F.C., XIV, pl. VII.

page 97 note 4 W.A.M., XXXVIII, 260.

page 97 note 5 Fox, , in Arch. Camb., 1926, 60 ffGoogle Scholar.

page 97 note 6 Iliad, XXIII; Odyssey, XXIV.

page 97 note 7 Arch. J., LXXVIII, 49Google Scholar.

page 97 note 8 C.T.D., 1, No. 33.

page 97 note 9 Dorset F.C., XXXVIII, 74–80Google Scholar.

page 97 note 10 B.U.S.S., 11, 137; IV, 67–127.

page 97 note 11 W.A.M., x, 88.

page 98 note 1 Archaeologia, XLIII, 317–8Google Scholar.

page 98 note 2 British Barrows, 1877, 22Google Scholar.

page 98 note 3 See e.g., Metzger, , Les Sépultures … des Ages de la Pierre et du Bronze, 1933, 112–3Google Scholar.

page 98 note 4 Archaeologia, XLIII, 321–2Google Scholar; this view is not supported by Greenwell and Mortimer whose results are tabulated in Forty Years' Researches, XXXVII, XXXVIII, and show a slight preference for the placing of the head at W. and E.

page 98 note 5 e.g., Warne, , C.T.D., 1, 41Google Scholar; Greenwell, , British Barrows, 20, 152Google Scholar; Mortimer, , Forty Years, xxxiiiGoogle Scholar; Thurnam, , in Archaeologia, XLIII, 311Google Scholar.

page 98 note 6 Tertres Funéraires …, I, 1926, 218Google Scholar.

page 98 note 7 None of Greenwell's large cists with cremations contained any urns (British Barrows, Nos. I, XV, XVIII, XLIX, LXXXII, XCVI, and CXXXVII).

page 98 note 8 Forty Years' Researches, Barrows 88 (p. 58)Google Scholar, 209 (p. 90), 82 (p. 232, and c. 90 (p. 323).

page 99 note 1 Tertres Funéraires, 1, 218–9Google Scholar.

page 99 note 2 Sépultures … des Ages de la Pierre et du Bronze, 120.

page 99 note 3 Sussex A.C., LXXIII, 182–4Google Scholar.

page 99 note 4 As at Childrey, CCXCII; Handley V; Scrubbity XIII; Berwick St. John G. 11.

page 99 note 5 Hamlet, Act v, sc. 1.

page 99 note 6 e.g., Hinton, G.1; Aldbourne G.1.

page 99 note 7 Examples quoted in section on the Funeral Pyre, p. 92.

page 99 note 8 e.g. Pool Farm (Somerset 27 NE); Latch Farm (Hants. 86 NE) which had a bronze awl or pin near the bones; Blewbury (Berks. 21 SE), Arch. J., v, 282Google Scholar.

page 100 note 1 cf. Wilts. 61 SE, Winterslow 3 (Stone's numbering):—‘linen … was seen hanging from the mouth of the urn.’ W.A.M., XLVIII, 174–82Google Scholar; Archaeologia, XLIII, 326Google Scholar.

page 100 note 2 Stourhead Catalogue, 1896, No. 253.

page 100 note 3 See also page 92.

page 101 note 1 Cambridge Region, 1938, p. 4Google Scholar.

page 101 note 2 Archaeologia, LXXXV, 234 (beads of faience and amber)Google Scholar; Proc. Camb. Ant. Soc., XXXVI, 1936Google Scholar; XXXIX, 1939; Ant. J., xv, 61–2Google Scholar.

page 101 note 3 Proc. Prehist. Soc., 1938, 92–3Google Scholar.

page 101 note 4 Proc. Prehist. Soc., 1936, 1–51Google Scholar.

page 101 note 5 See Proc. Somerset Arch. Soc., LXXXV, 151–66Google Scholar; Archaeologia, LXXXV, 213–4Google Scholar.

page 101 note 6 For references, see pp. 82, 97.

page 101 note 7 Iter. Curios, 1723, 40Google Scholar; Abury, 1743, 12.

page 101 note 8 Oxoniensia III, 1938, p. 35, pl. VIIGoogle Scholar.

page 101 note 9 Unpublished; information from Mr Stuart Piggott.

page 102 note 1 Archaeologia, XLIII, 304Google Scholar; 44th Report of R.I.C., 1862, 27.

page 102 note 2 Proc. Prehist. Soc., 1938, 82–3Google Scholar; W.A.M., XLIV, 116.

page 102 note * Below natural turf level.

page 103 note * It need scarcely be stated that, owing to difficulties of definition this list can hardly be described as complete. The cists listed mostly had four wall-slabs and a capstone, as far as can be judged from the excavation reports.

page 103 note † Based on that by DrClay, R. C. C. in W.A.M., XLIV, 101–5Google Scholar, with additions; Clay included all the Wilts, examples, other than Wilsford (G.50), Amesbury (G.85) and Winterslow, as well as Stoborough, Dorset.

page 107 note * It is certain that many other Wessex barrows have no surrounding ditches, but the presence or absence of this feature was rarely noted by the early barrow-diggers.