Stonehenge excavations 2008

The following paper is the first published account of an excavation that took place at Stonehenge during April 2008. As this was the first excavation to take place within the stone circle for some forty years, the excavation has attracted an uncommon degree of interest, hence its publication in the Antiquaries Journal as an interim account of work in progress, in the form of an edited transcript of a paper first given at the Ordinary Meeting of the Society of Antiquaries of London on 9 October 2008. The paper explains that the 2008 excavation set out to date the construction of the Double Bluestone Circle at Stonehenge and to chart the subsequent history of the bluestones and their use at the monument. Evidence is presented for a provisional working date of around 2300 BC for the construction of the Double Bluestone Circle, while it is argued that the history of the site is far more complex than has been allowed for in existing interpretations, with a multiplicity of overlapping and intercutting (though not continuous) events, including substantial late Roman, medieval and early modern activity. The excavated material, and the evidence from the surviving stones, supports the suggestion that bluestones were brought to the site because of their perceived special qualities, perhaps for their supposed healing properties, and that some knowledge of those qualities remained current in later times with the result that in excess of two-thirds of the original bluestone volume has now disappeared

Megaliths, monuments and materiality

Stones, and especially the arrangement of large stones in relation to one another, have long been the focus of attention in megalith studies, a concern reflected in the name itself. It is, however, a blinkered view. Many so-called megalithic monuments embody other carefully selected materials in their construction, including turf, soil, rubble, and timber. In considering long barrows, Paul Ashbee noted that it was a false distinction to separate earthen long barrows from stone-chambered long barrows as the builders of long barrows inevitably used materials available within their local environments. Alternatively, writing mainly about the Irish material, Arthur ApSimon suggested a development from timber to stone implying an onological progression in the preferred use of materials. Whether environmental or evolutionary, it is certain that many monuments interchangeably combine stone and wood in their construction in a way that forces us to consider what these and other materials meant to the megalith builders. Was it simply about what was available? Or what was fashionable? Or were there deeper sets of meanings relating to how different materials were perceived and understood within the cosmological systems that lie behind the design, construction,and use of long barrows, passage graves, dolmens and other related monuments? Focusing upon wood and stone, it is argued here that both were components of a cyclical world view of life and death that was embedded in the fabric and structure of monuments

WIGGOLD: The archaeology of a 'lofty open country'. Project Design: Phase 1 (2007)

WIGGOLD: The archaeology of a lofty open country is a research project jointly conceived and run by Bournemouth University School of Conservation Sciences,Cotswold Archaeology,and Abbey Home Farm (Cirencester) to promote a greater understanding of the ancient past and facilitate access to it for education and enjoyment

Excavations at a Neolithic Enclosure on The Peak, near Birdlip, Gloucestershire

Surveys and excavations in 1980–81 confirmed Peak Camp as a Neolithic enclosure on a flat promontory of the Cotswold escarpment overlooking the Severn Valley just 1km south of Crickley Hill. Although heavily eroded by quarrying the site can be reconstructed as having two concentric arcs of boundary earthworks forming an oval plan which was probably open to the north where a steep natural slope defined the edge of the site. A section through the outer boundary showed four main phases of ditch construction, at least one causewayed. An extensive series of radiocarbon dates shows construction began in the late 37th century cal BC and probably continued through successive remodellings into the 33rd century cal BC or beyond. An internal ditch or elongated pit situated in the area between the inner and outer boundary earthworks had a similar history. Where sampled, the ditch and internal feature was rich in material culture, including a substantial assemblage of plain bowl pottery; flint implements and working waste; animal remains dominated by cattle but including also the remains of a cat; human foot bones; slight traces of cereal production; a fragment of a Group VI axe; part of a sandstone disc; and a highly unusual shale arc pendant of continental type. It is suggested that the ditch fills represent selectively redeposited midden material from within the site that started to accumulate in the late fifth or early fourth millennium cal BC. The construction and use of Peak Camp is contemporary with activity on Crickley Hill, and the two sites probably formed components of a single complex. Its use was also contemporary with the deposition of burials at local long barrows in the Cotswold-Severn tradition which are linked by common ceramic traditions and the selective deposition of human body parts