samw90
|
Cross Gills Mound
Oct 03, 2006, 10:19
|
|
Cross Gills Mound is definitely not an artificial mound, it is part of what was known as Saddle hill the rest of which was quarried until 1975.
|
CalumMcLennan
|
Re: Cross Gills Mound
May 01, 2021, 17:26
|
|
Hi, I'm not entirely sure how this site works, but I'm a local looking into history of the area, and I'm wondering how claims that saddle hill at Cross Gills is artificial even came about, it doesn't really make sense, also I wrote about the history of the cross on the hill here: https://www.facebook.com/hurstgreenandstonyhursthistory
|
GLADMAN
|
Re: Cross Gills Mound
May 01, 2021, 20:09
|
|
CalumMcLennan wrote: Hi, I'm not entirely sure how this site works, but I'm a local looking into history of the area, and I'm wondering how claims that saddle hill at Cross Gills is artificial even came about, it doesn't really make sense, also I wrote about the history of the cross on the hill here: https://www.facebook.com/hurstgreenandstonyhursthistory
Well, TMA is a community-driven site and - since based upon members' perceptions... predominately formed by walking the landscape, not by academia - is considered a continual 'work in progress. Where the prehistoric precedence of a site is not beyond reasonable doubt the Eds will generally apply a 'Disputed' categorisation until evidence is forthcoming one way or another. Some, obviously, will slip through the net.
On this occasion, I would assume it was the topography, combined with the erection of a cross - a common way of christianising/desecrating an ancient monument back in the day - that led to the assumption by the member concerned.
I have no doubt the Eds will be happy to take your local evidence into account in this instance.
|
ryaner
|
Re: Cross Gills Mound
May 03, 2021, 14:22
|
|
In fairness, and judging only from the two shots here, it does seem as if the top of the hill has been artificially enhanced, but hey, looks can be deceiving.
|
CalumMcLennan
|
Re: Cross Gills Mound
May 03, 2021, 16:15
|
|
On the opposite side of the hill it is steeper and the underlying soil and superficial deposits are visible. The natural deposits are glaciofluvial in origin, with rounded pebbles from glacial meltwater (~2Ma), and appear to reach very close to the peak, making me think that it is natural. There was more to this hill in the past as it originally had two peaks (hence saddle hill because of the saddle-like dip between the peaks (although a writer of the Stonyhurst Magazine argues that it derives from Shale-hill I find this unlikely since the name was used by Stonyhurst Boys rather than actual locals, and so was likely just an observation of the hill's shape rather than a derivation of an supposed old local name for it)), but the western peak was quarried away from the 1940s onwards as the natural deposits made it excellent for gravel quarrying. However, just a little bit south of the hill is Winckley Lowe I, which has brought up some bronze age remains, and two other tumuli of disputed age are nearby too, so there could be something to the claims of something artificial possibly being placed as an addition to the peak of the hill, so I'll look into finding more about this in future. I'm not much of an archaeologist myself, but I know the land owners and some metal detectorists if that's useful.
|
CalumMcLennan
|
Re: Cross Gills Mound
May 10, 2021, 16:59
|
|
Considering the glacial deposits beneath and a nearby ancient field name, perhaps its unusual look is because the hill is a drumlin?
|
