|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Wolstonbury » Wolstonbury: henge or hillfort |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
GLADMAN 950 posts |
Edited Apr 12, 2011, 12:35
Apr 11, 2011, 20:59
|
||
|
Nearly six years ago TMA asked 'Wolstonbury: henge or hillfort?' Following a visit on Saturday... and seeing a quite insubstantial bank and no trace of an outer ditch (that I could see, anyway) I'm inclined to say Wolstonbury appeared to me a non-defensive enclosure - serving some sort of ceremonial function, perhaps? Either that or the builders thought the hill too impregnable to warrant much effort, sticking a cross dyke across the easiest approach perhaps as an afterthought. Must admit I've been intruigued by the possible dual 'defence/ceremonial' aspect of hillforts in general for several years now. A number I've seen (e.g Cow Castle, Chesters) would appear to have been sited by - shall we say - people not overly endowed with military genuis. Anyone any thoughts?
|
|||
danielspaniel 90 posts |
Apr 12, 2011, 14:59
|
||
|
Ooh, I'm going to have to 'unlurk' for this one! Hi Gladman, thanks for bumping my favourite site into the latest posts/ forum! Was it really 6 years ago?!? Unfortunately I am no closer to an answer, but as you rightly point out there doesn't seem to be much practical defensive use in Wolstonburys ditches (which are internal) and banks (which are fairly low). A thing which I find striking is the hills domination of the landscape when viewd from the North. It has a real 'sacred hill' type presence from this aspect, which is unusual amongst the more rolling 'whale backed' hills of the South Downs. I can't help thinking this would have given the hill a significance to ancient people which would have gone beyond defense. Maybe the word hillfort is a bit of a misnomer generally - many of these hilltop monuments would have had multiple uses over time (the confusing, overlaid phases of Wolstonburys earthworks seems to confirm this - see: http://apollo5.bournemouth.ac.uk/wolstonbury/wol_intro.html) My pragmatic side thinks 'animal enclosure', while the dreamer in me likes to think 'ceremonial enclosure'. Either way, I don't reckon it was a "fort"!
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Apr 12, 2011, 21:14
|
||
According to one of the plans Wolstonbury has a pond within the enclosure .Tom Condit and Derek Simpson noted the association of ponds with the Irish "royal " enclosures i.e. Dun Ailinne , Navan ,Rathcroghan and Tara , all multi period monuments with the descriptions hillfort and hengiform being applicable at some phase .
|
|||
|
Resonox 604 posts |
Apr 13, 2011, 05:14
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: According to one of the plans Wolstonbury has a pond within the enclosure . Just out of curiousity...is it a natural pond or a dew pond?
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Apr 13, 2011, 09:20
|
||
|
Resonox wrote: tiompan wrote: According to one of the plans Wolstonbury has a pond within the enclosure . Just out of curiousity...is it a natural pond or a dew pond? Dunno , the plan is not too detailed and there is a suspicion that if it was natural it may have not been noted .
|
|||
moss 2897 posts |
Edited Apr 13, 2011, 11:05
Apr 13, 2011, 10:02
|
||
|
GLADMAN wrote: Must admit I've been intruigued by the possible dual 'defence/ceremonial' aspect of hillforts in general for several years now. A number I've seen (e.g Cow Castle, Chesters) would appear to have been sited by - shall we say - people not overly endowed with military genuis. Anyone any thoughts? Defence/ceremonial, and also a place for annually gathering livestock maybe. If I was to categorise; large hillforts like Maiden Castle and Danebury are 'proper' hillforts, and there is a lot that falls in between such as smaller defensive settlements. The coastline of West Wales is littered with promontory forts, but really they are small places of a few huts defended by a ditch/bank and probably there to protect from raids of their neighbours. Three Cotswold escarpment hillforts, Horton Camp, Sodbury Camp and Solsbury Hill are all slightly different. The first two have substantial banks (Sodbury was later fortified by the romans) and sit on the edge of the escarpment, whilst Solsbury is situated on a hill. Yet just up the road on the Lansdown you have a 'hillfort' which used to have three barrows inside, so was that an animal enclosure? edit; few years back someone started a hillfort site which never took off, but they run into hundreds all over the country its almost impossible..
|
|||
|
Resonox 604 posts |
Apr 13, 2011, 16:54
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: Resonox wrote: tiompan wrote: According to one of the plans Wolstonbury has a pond within the enclosure . Just out of curiousity...is it a natural pond or a dew pond? Dunno , the plan is not too detailed and there is a suspicion that if it was natural it may have not been noted . So is that an indication that the enclosure would've been built around the pond rather than the pond created later. Could raised ditch circles be an early dew pond/rainwater trap design?? Isn't it the case that lot of what are categorized as hillforts aren't defensive...or weren't originally defensive....but used as a basis for a defence by later residents...so what does that mean their original purpose was? Surely "defensive" doesn't have to mean against warring factions...why not just defence against the elements or loss of livestock???
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Apr 13, 2011, 17:08
|
||
|
Resonox wrote: tiompan wrote: Resonox wrote: tiompan wrote: According to one of the plans Wolstonbury has a pond within the enclosure . Just out of curiousity...is it a natural pond or a dew pond? Dunno , the plan is not too detailed and there is a suspicion that if it was natural it may have not been noted . So is that an indication that the enclosure would've been built around the pond rather than the pond created later. Could raised ditch circles be an early dew pond/rainwater trap design?? Isn't it the case that lot of what are categorized as hillforts aren't defensive...or weren't originally defensive....but used as a basis for a defence by later residents...so what does that mean their original purpose was? Surely "defensive" doesn't have to mean against warring factions...why not just defence against the elements or loss of livestock??? Yep it's apparent that the "defence " in many cases is display . In the Irish enclosures the pond was a later creation . Henges and water whatever their altitude seem to associated . Does anyone know the original purpose of any prehistoric monument ?
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Apr 13, 2011, 20:07
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: Resonox wrote: tiompan wrote: Resonox wrote: tiompan wrote: According to one of the plans Wolstonbury has a pond within the enclosure . Just out of curiousity...is it a natural pond or a dew pond? Dunno , the plan is not too detailed and there is a suspicion that if it was natural it may have not been noted . So is that an indication that the enclosure would've been built around the pond rather than the pond created later. Could raised ditch circles be an early dew pond/rainwater trap design?? Isn't it the case that lot of what are categorized as hillforts aren't defensive...or weren't originally defensive....but used as a basis for a defence by later residents...so what does that mean their original purpose was? Surely "defensive" doesn't have to mean against warring factions...why not just defence against the elements or loss of livestock??? Yep it's apparent that the "defence " in many cases is display . In the Irish enclosures the pond was a later creation . Henges and water whatever their altitude seem to associated . Does anyone know the original purpose of any prehistoric monument ? I've always believed that Neolithic man believed in the Afterlife George and that water played a huge part of that belief, hence many monuments were built near to it. Water cleansed the body and by definition purified it and the soul prior to beginning its journey into the next world. It represented the border between this world and the next!
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Apr 13, 2011, 20:53
|
||
|
Sanctuary wrote: tiompan wrote: Resonox wrote: tiompan wrote: Resonox wrote: tiompan wrote: According to one of the plans Wolstonbury has a pond within the enclosure . Just out of curiousity...is it a natural pond or a dew pond? Dunno , the plan is not too detailed and there is a suspicion that if it was natural it may have not been noted . So is that an indication that the enclosure would've been built around the pond rather than the pond created later. Could raised ditch circles be an early dew pond/rainwater trap design?? Isn't it the case that lot of what are categorized as hillforts aren't defensive...or weren't originally defensive....but used as a basis for a defence by later residents...so what does that mean their original purpose was? Surely "defensive" doesn't have to mean against warring factions...why not just defence against the elements or loss of livestock??? Yep it's apparent that the "defence " in many cases is display . In the Irish enclosures the pond was a later creation . Henges and water whatever their altitude seem to associated . Does anyone know the original purpose of any prehistoric monument ? I've always believed that Neolithic man believed in the Afterlife George and that water played a huge part of that belief, hence many monuments were built near to it. Water cleansed the body and by definition purified it and the soul prior to beginning its journey into the next world. It represented the border between this world and the next! Sorry should have been a bit clearer about the water /henge connection . It is just that even when not close to water courses henge ditches show signs of having being silted and even today are seen to hold water .
|
| Pages: 2 – [ 1 2 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
