rs ee aca nena sree Segre a \ UN UNIAN ISH MUSEUM (NATURAL HISTORY) = 1 MARI991 PURCHASED GENERAL LIBRARY anaes BRITISH MUSEUM | (NATURAL HISTORY) - { MARI991 PURCHASED | | GENERAL LIBRARY | THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE VOLUME 84 199] This volume of the Magazine is dedicated, with respect and affection, to the Society’s President, Professor Stuart Piggott, to celebrate his eightieth birthday on 28 May 1990 Published by Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society 41 Long Street Devizes SN10 INS Telephone: (0380) 727369 Registered Charity No 309534 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE VOLUME 84 (1991) ISSN 0262 6608 © Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society and authors 1991 Editor: Kate Fielden Hon. Natural History Editor: Marion Browne Hon. Reviews Editor: Michael Marshman Editorial Assistant: Lorna Haycock Change of Title The journals issued to volume 69 as parts of The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine (Part A Natural History; Part B Archaeology and Local History) were from volumes 70 to 75 published under separate titles as The Wiltshire Natural History Magazine and The Wiltshire Archaeological Magazine. With volume 76 the magazine reverted to its combined form and ttle. We acknowledge with thanks publication grants from the Marc Fitch Fund for the papers ‘Accommodation and Travel in Pre-Turnpike Wiltshire’ by John Chandler and ‘The Institutional Response to Insanity in Nineteenth Century Wiltshire’ by Peter McCree in this volume. We also gratefully acknowledge a special grant from the Council for British Archaeology towards the cost of publishing John Edwards’ paper ‘New Light on Christ of the Trades and Other Medieval Wall-paintings at St Mary’s, Purton’; and publication grants from English Heritage for Philip Rahtz’s paper ‘Bower Chalke 1959’ and for the paper ‘Trowbridge Castle Excavations 1988’ by S.M. Davies and A.H. Graham in volume 83 (1990). All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the Society and authors. Produced for the Society by Alan Sutton Publishing Limited, Stroud, Glos. Set in Plantin by Alan Sutton Publishing Limited Printed in Great Britain THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY COUNCIL AND OFFICERS (1990-1991) PRESIDENT Professor S. Piggott, CBE, FBA, FSA VICE-PRESIDENTS Professor S. Piggott, CBE, FBA, FSA Mrs C.M. Guido, FSA Professor W.H. Dowdeswell, MA, FIB TRUSTEES B.H.C. Sykes, MA R.G. Hurn E.R.A. Sewell, MC H.F. Seymour, BA Chairman E.R.A. Sewell, MC Deputy Chairman Professor W.H. Dowdeswell, MA, FIB Miss S. Rooke C.R. Chippindale, BA, MIFA Mrs P. Slocombe, BA Mrs G. Swanton, BA, Dip. Ad. Ed. F.W. Hanford, MRCS, LRCP P.R. Saunders, BA, FSA, FMA C.R. Elrington, MA, FSA *Mrs G. Swanton, BA, Dip. Ad. Ed. M. Fuller, B.Sc. (Eng.) H.F. Seymour, BA D. Shelton, BA, B.Sc., Dip. Ed., FRGS J.H. Smith, B.Sc., AIFST Miss G. Fairhurst Mrs J. Friend R.C. Hatchwell, FSA K.H. Rogers, BA, FSA J.M.G. Kirkaldy, Ph.D. (Econ.), M.Sc. R.L. Pybus, MA, FLA, FCIS, MBIM K.H. Rogers, BA, FSA P.R. Saunders, BA, FSA, FMA Mrs B. Rogers Secretary Curator Assistant Curator Assistant Curator (Natural Sciences) Assistant Curator (Biological Recorder) Sandell Librarian Editor Elected Members (1985) D. Lovibond (1985) (1986) J.L. Rowland (1986) (1986) H.F.W. Cory, JP (1987) (1987) A.J. Lawson, MSc., FSA, MIFA (1987) (1988) H.A.W. Burl, MA, D. Litt., Ph.D (1988) (1988) J.F. Phillips (1988) (1989) M. Heath, MA (1989) Ex-officio Members Chairman, Archaeology Committee Chairman, Natural History Committee Chairman, Buildings & Monuments Committee Chairman, Industrial Archaeology Committee Chairman, Programme Committee Hon. Treasurer Hon. Publicity Officer Hon. Keeper of Prints and Drawings Chairman, Library Committee also Elected Member Nominated Members Mrs M.V. Haines, Mrs V. Landell and Mrs P. Rugg Members, Wiltshire County Council Member, Kennet District Council Director, WCC Library & Museum Service Wiltshire County Archivist Salisbury & South Wiltshire Museum Co-opted Member Wiltshire Buildings Record OFFICERS G.G. Brown, DMA P.H. Robinson, Ph.D, FSA, AMA Miss A. Terry, RA, AMA A.S. Tucker, B.Sc. Miss S. Scott-White, MA Mrs P. Colman, Dip. ELH, FRSA Miss K.J. Fielden, D.Phil. Contents The Heel Stone, Stonehenge: A Study in Misfortunes by AUBREY BURL Round Barrows Wilsford cum Lake G51—G54. Excavations by Ernest Greenfield in 1958 by I.F. SMITH Cleveland Farm, Ashton Keynes: Second Interim Report, Investigations May—August 1989 by DUNCAN COE, VINCE JENKINS AND JULIAN RICHARDS The Excavations at Wellhead, Westbury, 1959-1966 by BARBARA ROGERS and DORIS RODDHAM A Re-examination of the Tile Designs from the Medieval Kiln at Nash Hill, Lacock by NICK GRIFFITHS and PAUL ROBINSON An Archaeological Study of Field and Parish Boundaries in North Newnton by JUDITH ROSEAMAN Accommodation and Travel in Pre-Turnpike Wiltshire by JOHN CHANDLER The Institutional Response to Insanity in Nineteenth Century Wiltshire by PETER McCREE The Background and Beginnings of the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society by STUART PIGGOTT Notes Earlier Evidence for Stonehenge Carvings? by NORMAN ROGERS Archaeological Excavation on the Route of the Cockey Down to Petersfinger Main Pipeline, near Salisbury by MARTIN TROTT A Durotrigian Coin from Stonehenge by PAUL ROBINSON A Bronze Vulcan from North Bradley by MARTIN HENIG Two Contemporary Forgeries of Coins of William I Found in Wiltshire by C.E. BLUNT and I. STEWART New Light on the Bear Inn, Devizes by EDWARD BRADBY The Wiltshire Sheriffs of Charles I: To Whom the Loyalty? by PAMELA COLMAN The Third Marquess of Lansdowne and his Family at Bowood, 1810-1840 by DOREEN SLATTER Further Records of Wiltshire Quaternary Mammalia by J.B. DELAIR Notes on the Flooding of the River Bourne (Wiltshire), January/February 1990 by J.B. DELAIR 11 40 51 61 71 83 96 108 116 116 116 119 120 1228 1254} 127 130 1355 137 Excavation and Fieldwork in Wiltshire, 1989 141 Wiltshire Archaeological Register for 1989 146 Reviews 152 Bert Dawkins. When Warm Milk was Fresh Milk (MICHAEL MARSHMAN) 152 Leslie V. Grinsell. An Archaeological Autobiography (KEN ANNABLE) 152 A.F. Harding with G.E. Lee. Henge Monuments and Related Sites of Great Britain and Geoffrey Wainwright. The Henge Monuments (AUBREY BURL) 153 Danny Howell. Remember the Wylye Valley (JOHN CHANDLER) 154 T.B. James and A.M. Robinson with Elizabeth Eames. Clarendon Palace (PETER SAUNDERS) 155 Caroline Malone. English Heritage Book of Avebury (CHRISTOPHER GINGELL) 157 John Peddie. Alfred the Good Soldier; His Life and Campaigns (MICHAEL COWAN) 159 Stuart Piggott. Ancient Britons and the Antiquarian Imagination (ALAN J. CLARK) 160 Marjorie Reeves and Jean Morrison (eds.). The Diaries of Jeffery Whitaker Schoolmaster of Bratton, 1739-1741 (ALISON TERRY) 161 G. Speake. A Saxon Bed Burial on Swallowcliffe Down. Excavations by F. de M. Vatcher (BRUCE EAGLES) 163 Bruce Watkin. A History of Wiltshire (KEN ROGERS) 164 Angus Winchester. Discovering Parish Boundaries (HELEN ROGERS) 165 Geoffrey N. Wright. Roads and Trackways of Wessex (KENNETH WATTS) 165 Obituaries 166 Sir Christopher Howard Andrewes Marion Browne Edward John Mawby Buxton Noel Lloyd Chadwick Index VAL THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY The Society was founded in 1853. Its activities include the promotion of the study of archaeology (including industrial archaeology), history, natural history and architecture within the county; the issue of a Magazine, and other publications, and the maintenance of a Museum, Library, and Art Gallery. There is a programme of lectures and excursions to places of archaeological, historical and scientific interest. The Society also maintains the Wiltshire Biological Records Centre at the Museum. The Society’s Museum contains important collections relating to the history of man in Wiltshire from earliest times to the present day as well as the geology and natural history of the county. It is particularly well known for its prehistoric collections. The Library houses a comprehensive collection of books, articles, pictures, prints, drawings and photographs relating to Wiltshire. The Society welcomes the gift of local objects, printed material, paintings and photographs to add to the collections. The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine is the annual journal of the Society and is issued free to its members. For information about the availability of back numbers and other publications of the Society, enquiry should be made to the Secretary. Contributions for the Magazine should be on subjects related to the archaeology, history or natural history of Wiltshire. There is no fixed length. Papers, notes and reviews should be typed on one side of a page only, with good margins and double spacing. The style for footnotes, references and so on should be that found in this issue. The author-date system is preferred for references and footnotes should be avoided unless essential. Contributions of article length should be accompanied by a summary of about 100 words. Two copies, one of which is a top copy, should be sent to the editor at the Museum, 41 Long Street, Devizes, Wiltshire, SN10 1NS. A further copy should also be retained by the author. The editor and subject editors will be pleased to advise and discuss with intending contributors at any stage during the preparation of their work. They will also supply notes, if requested, which may be helpful in explaining house style and in giving advice on the compilation of references and bibliographies, and the preparation of illustrations. Proofs: authors will receive galley proofs only. Offprints: ten offprints of each article will be given free or shared between joint authors of articles (not notes or reviews). Further offprints may be ordered from the printer at galley proof stage, when prices will be indicated. Publication by The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society does not imply that the Society endorses the views expressed; the factual content and the opinions presented herein remain the responsibility of the authors. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 84 (1991), pp. 1-10 The Heel Stone, Stonehenge: A Study in Misfortunes by AUBREY BURL The outlying Heel Stone at Stonehenge has been subject to several misconceptions. It has had several names of which ‘Heel’ is the correct one. Confusingly, however, the name is now attributed to the wrong stone. The outlier is popularly claimed to have been erected to stand in line with the midsummer sunrise. This is wrong. If prehistoric people did mean to use the stone as an astronomical marker it was the moon that was their target. Study of the writings of Aubrey, Stukeley, Wood and Smith reveals how these errors developed. It was the change in the British calendar in 1752 that caused some of the misunderstandings. ‘The Friar’s Heel, the Heel-stone, Sun-stone, or Index-stone. By means of this huge unwrought rock the temple is set to the rising sun at the summer solstice.’ Barclay (1895, 11) ‘Its original purport is totally unknown, though conjecture has not been idle in ascribing various uses to it.’ INTRODUCTION It is doubtful whether any prehistoric standing stone has experienced as many changes of name and inter- pretations, most of them wrong, as Stone 96, the famous pillar standing to the north-east outside Stonehenge (see plan on p. 6). As an example, there are two major errors in the statement by Barclay quoted above. The name is wrong and so is the solar astronomy. One might also wonder why it was that, despite the work of earlier investigators such as Aubrey and Stukeley, it was not until 1770 that the stone was claimed to be an astronomical marker. Such mistakes and problems can be explained. The outlier is an eroded pillar of sarsen about 77.3 m from the centre of the sarsen circle. It leans towards the south-west nearly 27° from the vertical (Hoyle 1977, 23) and its tip is now 4.7 m above ground (Petrie and Hawkins 1989, 53). Upright it would have been 5.2 m high with a base 1.2 m below the surface (Atkinson 1979, 29). Crudely cylindrical, with a tapering top, 2.4 m thick and with an overall girth of approximately 7.6 m the stone weighs well over 35 tons and it would have taken the strength of more than a hundred and fifty men to haul it upright (Burl 1987, i) Excavation has shown it to belong to the first phase of Stonehenge (Atkinson 1979, 70) when the site was a simple henge with two entrances, the wider at the north-east, and a less well-known narrow causeway at the south. It is probable that there was a massive Hoare (1812, 143) circular timber structure inside the earthwork (Atkin- son 1979, 170-1; Burl 1987, 51-6). The megalithic outlier was the only stone in the monument. THE NAME Turning from fancy to fact, the word Hele, from which the stone takes its name, is possibly derived from the Anglo-Saxon verb helan = ‘to conceal’, and is so applied to the stone because it conceals the sun at rising on the day of the Summer Solstice. Nor must the Greek word ‘Helios’ = ‘The Sun’ be overlooked. F. Stevens (1929, 29) The outlying sarsen has been known variously through the years as the Friar’s Heel, Crwm Leche or the Bowing Stone, the Marker Stone, the Pointer Stone, the Index Stone, the Sun Stone and the Hele Stone. It is only in the past three decades that its name has been generally accepted as the Heel Stone or, more eccentri- cally, as the Heelstone. To understand how such an improbable mélange came about it is necessary to look back from the present day to the seventeenth century. The most whimsical of the variant titles has been the ‘Hele Stone’, so called from a belief that ‘Heel’ was a corruption of the Old English helan, ‘to hide’, because the stone was believed, quite wrongly, to conceal the rising of the sun at the summer solstice. A variation on 2 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE this solar theme was that ‘Hele’ derived from the Greek yAvoc or helios, ‘the sun’. The same faulty reasoning led to the renaming of the pillar as the Sunstone (Newall 1953, 4). Cunnington (1935, 22), rather dubious about ‘Hele’, whether Old English or Greek, offered a Celtic option, freas heol, an abbreviation of what he thought to have been the stone’s full title, cloch na freas heol, or ‘stone of the rising sun’. This was etymological optimism. The more accurate translation of ‘fresh sun’ is astronomically meaningless. ‘Hele’, happily, never became popular and had a lifespan of barely fifty years. It can be found in F. Stevens (1929, 28) and Gowland (1903, 45), the latter adopting it from its apparent inventor, Lady Antro- bus, wife of the owner of Stonehenge. On page 24 of her book, A Sentimental and Practical Guide to Amesbury and Stonehenge (1901), she wrote ‘This stone is also named the “‘Pointer”, because from the middle of the Altar Stone the sun is seen at the summer solstice (21st of June) to rise immediately above it. The Hele Stone is the true name, “Hele” meaning “‘to hide”’, from Heol or Haul of Geol or Jul, all names for the sun, which this stone seems to hide.’ The reference appears to be the earliest appearance of ‘Hele’ and one can be grateful that it was a solecism that did not endure. It made one late but notable appearance. ‘The axis . . . of Stonehenge is aligned approximately on the point of midsummer sunrise though not. . . on the Hele Stone’ (Atkinson, 1955). Professor Atkinson then promptly dropped the word when he published his book Stonehenge in the very next year. In the late nineteenth century interest in the theo- retical solar alignment at Stonehenge increased. Harri- son (1901) listed articles by authors such as Bacon (‘the grandest annual sun-register in Europe’) and Maurice (‘a stupendous solar temple’) who discussed the accuracy of the outlier’s orientation. People often called it the ‘Pointer Stone’ because of its supposed directional properties. Fidler (1881) considered that the chances were 1:1400 against the solar alignment being coincidental. In 1880 the Heel Stone was included in the definitive numbering scheme for Stonehenge. Following his meticulous survey of 1877 Petrie (1880, 9) rejected previous systems by Wood (1747, 54), John Smith (1771, Plate IT) and Hoare (1812, 145) in favour of his own more logical and flexible method, each stone being given a number from 1 to 160a. The outlier, Petrie’s ‘Friar’s Heel’, became number 96. The ‘Friar’s Heel’ remained the most popular name for the stone from the seventeenth to the nineteenth century despite a solitary attempt to follow Stukeley (1740, 33) in calling it ‘the Crwm leche or bowing stone’ (Anon, 1776, 7). Sir Richard Colt Hoare (1812, 143) wrote of ‘the Friar’s heel’, so did Wansey (1796, 109) and so did Dr John Smith (1771, 51). It was Smith who introduced the idea that the stone had been a marker for the midsummer sunrise. His invention of the greatest archaeoastronomical fallacy of prehistoric Europe is considered later. Paradoxically, although he wrote with complete assurance that ‘the apex of the stone number | points directly to the place’ of the solstitial sunrise (Smith, J., 1771, 64) he had earlier disclaimed any understanding of what the outlier’s function was. “The use of it I can’t certainly tell: but I am inclined to think, that, as part of the religious worship, in old patriarchal times, consisted in a solemn adoration, or three silent bowings: the first bowing might be performed at this stone, just without the ditch’ (ibid., 37). The contradiction between the two statements arose from Smith’s unscholarly reluctance to admit that Stukeley had anticipated him in the matter of Stonehenge’s astronomy. The quotation above was copied word for word from Stukeley’s Stonehenge (1740, 33-4) and much of Smith’s description of Stonehenge was taken directly from the book. But Stukeley’s references to the midsummer solstice (1740, 35, 56), although not to the Heel Stone, were never acknowledged by Smith. Depressingly, to this ingratitude and astronomical misapprehension must be added that Smith was also mistaken about the identification of the Heel Stone. It was he alone who was responsible for transferring the title of the Friar’s Heel from the correct, fallen stone at the far side of Stonehenge to the previously anonymous outlier at the north-east. “As the spectator advances, from the valley, up the grand avenue to the temple, the first stone, that offers to his view, is called the Friar’s heel, and stands two hundred and ten feet from the body of the structure’ (Smith, J., LAL SIN This was wrong. Smith had read the earlier descrip- tions of Stonehenge by John Wood and William Stukeley but neither of them had specified where the Friar’s Heel was. Indeed, Stukeley never mentioned it. Smith had to guess its whereabouts. In so doing, and unluckily choosing the outlying Heel Stone, he misled nearly every future student of Stonehenge. A few years before Smith, John Wood, an asthmatic architect from Bath, had made the first accurate plan of Stonehenge. In his book Wood repeated a legend recorded by Geoffrey of Monmouth (1136, 196-8) in the early twelfth century but embellished by a later THE HEEL STONE, STONEHENGE mediaeval recension that brought the Devil into the story. According to this, Merlin the magician employed the Devil to transport huge sarsens from Ireland to Salisbury Plain for the construction of Stonehenge. When he had completed the stone circle the Devil was so pleased with the result that he boasted that no one would ever know how the enormous ring had been built. A Friar, who had lain all the Night concealed near the Building, hearing the Devil’s Declaration replied to it by saying, That 1s more than thee canst tell; which put Satan into such a Passion, that he snatched up a Pillar and hurled it at the Friar with an Intention to bruise him to Dirt; but he running for his Life, the Stone, in its fall, only reached his Heel, and struck him in it, the Mark of which appears in that Pillar even unto this day. Wood (1747, 75) What is significant in Wood’s tale is that he never thought of the Heel Stone and the Friar’s Heel as one and the same although he referred to the outlier, his Stone R, many times in his book, Choir Gaure (1747, 33, 44, 48, 52, 58, 81-2). Even when discussing the etymology of the word Heil (1747, 17-18) and claiming it as ‘the British name of the SUN’ he never attached it to the outlier. There were two obvious reasons for such an omission. In Wood’s time the stone had not yet been linked with the sun, and no such term as the ‘Heel Stone’ existed. Similarly, Stukeley, whose Stonehenge was published seven years before Wood’s work, never mentioned a Heel Stone or even a Friar’s Heel. Instead, he described the outlier as ‘a crwm leche still standing in its original position and place in the avenue .... The use of it I can’t certainly tell.’ (Stukeley 1740, 33). Which of the Stonehenge sarsens the Friar’s Heel was is still a matter of conjecture although it is certain, from John Aubrey’s account, that it could not have been the Heel Stone. Sixty years before Stukeley Aubrey had distin- guished quite clearly between the Heel Stone, which was standing at the north-east, and the Friar’s Heel which was prostrate at the west of the circle. The outlier, he wrote, was ‘a good way off north-eastward from the circularish bank, of which there hath not been any notice taken’ (Aubrey 1665-93, 76). He ‘believed the stone to be a survivor of an avenue that had led up to Stonehenge. That it was erect in his day there is no doubt. He showed it as standing (ibid., 80, Plate VII) and he described it. “The great one 3 answereth to fig. 7th in the Walke or Avenue. The other two [the Slaughter Stone, Stone 95, and its now-missing companion] are but about six foot high’ (bid., 97; also 81, Plate VIII). [N.B. For the interest of readers wishing to examine Aubrey’s plan of Stonehenge it should be pointed out that in the Dorset Publishing House edition (1980), page 80, the edges of the plan have been cropped. It can be seen in its entirety in Long (1876, 32), where the fallen and missing stones are all shown.] To Aubrey the Friar’s Heel was a different stone from the upstanding north-eastern outlier. One of the great Stones that lies downe, on the west side, hath a cavity something resembling the print of a mans foot; concerning which, the Shepherds and countrey people have a Tradition (w°? many of them doe stedfastly believe) that when Merlin conveyed these Stones from Ireland by Art Magick, the Devill hitt him in the heele with that stone, and so left the print there. Aubrey (1665-93, 95) If it should be wondered why later investigators so readily accepted Smith’s blunder over the two stones it should be remembered that the three parts of Aubrey’s Monumenta Britannica were not published until 1980 and 1982 and access to it, even knowledge of it, in the eighteenth century can not be assumed. It was only in the nineteenth century that lengthy extracts about Stonehenge were published (Long 1876, 32-40). Indeed, by the nineteenth century the acceptance of the outlier as the Heel Stone was so firmly established that E.T. Stevens (1882, 88) actually questioned whether Aubrey had not erred. ‘Aubrey . . . appears to have mistaken the “slaughtering stone” for the “Friar’s Heel” stone’, and quoting Aubrey’s ‘One of the great stones that /ies downe on the west side. . .’, Stevens queried whether the direction should not have been ‘north-east? where the Slaughter Stone lay. He was unaware that the pillar had been erect in Aubrey’s time and therefore ineligible as the Friar’s Heel. Thus fable becomes fact. Surprisingly, given the increasing seventeenth century interest in Stonehenge, the outlier was never mentioned before Aubrey’s brief notes (Long 1876, 7-31) although it is shown standing in a Tudor sketch of 1575, signed ‘R.F.’ (Bakker 1979, 109). There is no reference to it in Camden (1620), nor in Inigo Jones (1655), who persuaded himself, but few others, that Roman architects had designed the great temple of the ancient god Coelus. Despite visiting Stonehenge and digging inside the circle Jones (1655, 55, 57) completely :znored the outlier. Which stone the real Friar’s Heel was is question- able. As a ‘great’ stone it must have been a sarsen rather than one of the much smaller bluestones, and if it was in the south-west quadrant there are only two eligible prostrate stones, Petrie’s nos. 12 and 14 (see Plan on p. 6). When Wood made his plan in 1740 Stones 8 and 9 were also down but both were badly broken. It is probable, moreover, that in Aubrey’s tuume Stone 9 was sull standing. Of the intact fallen sarsens Atkinson (1979, 204) favoured no. 14 ‘on which just such a natural ‘‘foot- print’ can still be seen. A trial fitting suggests that the Friar’s right foot was considerably larger than my own!’ There are problems. Stone 141s not at the west but at the south-west though this is not a major objection. More pertinent is the fact that eighty years after Aubrey the stone was still half-standing. “The Stone number ten leans against the Stone number twenty four’ (Wood 1747, 55), his numbers corresponding to Petrie’s numbers 14 and 38. Stone 12 to its east was prostrate. Twenty years after Wood John Smith confirmed this. ‘Number 8 [14] leans on the same number [38] of the inner circle’ (1771, 53). A century later Flinders Petrie recorded that Stone 14 had fallen farther forward, half-displacing the lower stone on which it rested (Petrie 1880, 10, note). Its present near- prostrate position is therefore misleading. It is possible, even so, to accept that this was the sarsen to which Aubrey had referred. In the early eighteenth century Stukeley’s sketch (1740, 24, Tab. XIII) showed it leaning badly, almost touching the broken trilithon 55. Aubrey’s own schematic plan (1665-93, 80) distinguishes between upright and pros- trate stones and apparently depicts Stone 14 as fallen. Against this is the fact that he also showed Stone 12 supine, and that this pillar of the outer sarsen circle was certainly flat on the ground when Wood made his plan in 1740. The ravaged upper surface of the sarsen has several cavities that the credulous might take for the imprint of a heel. We may never know the truth. The true Friar’s Heel Stone may for ever remain tantalisingly elusive. As an aside, the friar — or Merlin, or both — were particularly unlucky in being hit by the Devil’s stone. Whether in Britain or Brittany the Devil was con- stantly throwing stones at people and places he disliked and just as consistently missing them whether his target was the church at Rudston, or the town of Aldborough. His aim there was so bad that he missed the entire settlement three times leaving his missiles embedded in the fields west of the town where they became known as the Devil’s Arrows. THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE THE ASTRONOMY An eclipse of the moon or sun always occurred when the winter moon — that is, the full moon nearest the winter solstice — rose over the heel stone. Hawkins (1966, 139) On Salisbury Plain the sun reaches its extreme north- easterly rising near 50° from True North on 21 June. For four days it appears to rise in the same place on the skyline, its ‘solstice’ or ‘standstill’, and then on 25 June it begins its six-month long journey southwards towards midwinter sunrise at the south-east before once again returning to its midsummer solstice rising. The first person to believe that Stonehenge had an astronomical alignment built into it was William Stukeley. ‘The Avenue . . . answers, as we have said before, to the principal line of the whole work, the north-east, where abouts the sun rises, when the days are longest’ (Stukeley 1740, 35). It is noticeable that Stukeley was referring not to the Heel Stone but to the southwest—northeast axis and avenue of Stonehenge thereby anticipating Lockyer (1909, 62-8) by almost two hundred years. ‘The intent of the founders of Stonehenge was to set the entrance full north east, being the point where the sun rises, or nearly, at the summer solstice’ (Stukeley 1740, 56). It is a pity that Stukeley’s ‘nearly’ was not considered more carefully by subsequent proponents of a solar alignment. Stukeley, however, did not regard the outlying Heel Stone as an astronomical marker. That was left to John Wood. Referring to the outlier he said that in the same way as at the Stanton Drew stone circles in Somerset, ‘the great Pillar before the front of STONEHENGE is situated North Eastward from that Edifice; and in each Work [referring again to Stanton Drew] a Phase of the new Moon is pointed out’ (1747, 81-2). This was the first astronomical reference to the outlier and it was a lunar one. According to Wood (1747, 95) the Heel Stone was . . in line to that Quarter of the Heavens where the new Moon first appears on that Day of her Age when the Druids began their Times and Festivals’. Wood’s interpretation, unfortunately, was based on an error in orientation of almost 10° (Smith 1771, vi). It was soon superseded by the seemingly more thorough astronomical survey of Dr John Smith undertaken in 1770 when that deadly inoculator of the smallpox was driven from his practice by antagonistic villagers. As a diversion he made many visits to Stonehenge and ‘conceived it to be an Astronomical Temple’. His procedure was not reassuring. ‘Without « THE HEEL STONE, STONEHENGE an Instrument, or any assistance whatever, but White’s Ephemeris, I began my Survey. I suspected the Stone, called the Friar’s Heel, to be the Index that would disclose the uses of this Structure; nor was I deceived’ (Smith 1771, v). It was a statement as confident as Hawkins’ two hundred years later: ‘There can be no doubt that Stonehenge was an observatory; the impartial mathe- matics of probability and the celestial sphere are on my side’ (Hawkins 1966, vii). Smith (1771, 63) was convinced that the Heel Stone stood on a solar alignment. The stone number | [the Heel], in the middle of the grand avenue to the Temple, is the Key or Gnomon, by which I propose to unlock this Ambre, or Repository of Druidical Secrets . . .. At the summer solstice, when the days are longest, he [the sun] enters the sign Cancer, and seems to rise in the same point of the horizon, three days together. The Arch-Druid standing against his stall, and looking down the right line of the temple, over the stones II. and I. [Stone II was the Slaughter Stone, by then fallen] his eye is bounded by Durrington field (a charming horizon about two miles distant), he there sees the sun rise from behind the hill; the apex of the stone number I. points directly to the place. This was the first solar interpretation and it has been accepted ever since by the majority of writers about Stonehenge such as Wansey (1796, 61): ‘On the top of that stone the Sun is supposed to make its first appearance on the longest day of the year’, and others like Duke (1846, 133); Herbert (1849, 98); and E.T. Stevens (1882, 86). Even in the late twentieth century the mistake has persisted. ‘Such factors as the sun rising above the Heelstone ... may well point to particular cult usages’ (Ashbee 1978, 152). It emphasises the strength of popular tradition. The solar interpretation has endured, obstinately, uncri- tically, even though it has been known for years that the orientation of the Heel Stone towards the mid- summer sunrise is inexact. In this investigation the so-called Friar’s Heel was used only as a convenient point for reference and verification in measurement, and no theory was formed as to its purpose. It is placed at some distance . . . to the south of the axis so that. . . the Sun must have completely risen before it was vertically over the summit of the stone. Lockyer(1909, 68) Midsummer sunrise ... has never yet taken place over the Heel Stone, and will not do so until more than 1000 years have passed away. Stone (1924, 130) If the top of the Heel Stone marked the direction in which the sun rose above the horizon at the summer solstice, the sun ought to rise to the right of the top of the Heel Stone on the morning of June 21 in our time. But it does not: it rises about a foot and a half to the left. Niel (1975, 63) The Heel Stone is the subject of one of the most popular and persistent misconceptions concern- ing Stonehenge, namely that it marks the point of sunrise on Midsummer Day for an observer stationed at the centre of Stonehenge, or on the Altar Stone. Actually, it does nothing of the sort. Atkinson (1979, 30) This vigorous statement by the author was ignored by his publishers. For the second edition of Professor Atkinson’s Stonehenge, they rather surprisingly used a photograph by Dr Georg Gerster for the book’s front cover. It showed the sun poised dramatically but misleadingly over the Heel Stone (Chippindale 1983, 137). There is no mystery, only confusion, about the astronomical role of the Heel Stone. When, around 3200 BC, the first earthwork was laid out at Stonehenge the causeway across the ditch at the north-east was only 10.7 m wide. From the centre of the monument the southwest—northeast axis of the henge through the midpoint of this entrance had a bearing of 46° 33’ (Burl 1987, 77). The Heel Stone was put up in line with the righthand side of the entrance. This custom of directing an alignment not to the unmarked centre of an entrance but to one of its well-defined sides was a common prehistoric practice. It can be found, meer alia, in the stone circles of Long Meg and Her Daughters and at Swinside in Cumbria (Burl 1988, 197) and at the Rollright Stones in Oxfordshire (Thom, Thom and Burl 1990, I, 78-9). In the years when the ditch and bank of Stonehenge were being constructed, midsummer sunrise on Salis- bury Plain occurred close to 50° from True North (see plan on p.6). The Heel Stone, however, had been erected at 51° 18’, over a degree, and nearly 2 m, from the correct position if it had been meant as a solar foresight. By the same reckoning it was barely 40 cm from a lunar alignment. An illuminating insight by the late ‘Peter’ Newham (1972, 15-17) demonstrated that it was a lunar ori- entation that the builders had intended. Evidence from six iines of small postholes across the entrance THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Midsummer Sunrise KS err i ‘® HEEL STONE ’ tN 4 Minor Northern \ Moonrise A re on. PAS A <3: TW ee Q WSs 3 * ® 4, Aire 2, bs ee 6% ' * ee - i C & ly vs: @ O- , e 3, mes og ; i s a ® 0 pha ‘ vay o@ q@ a go My: . @. @ AS 7 * f. gd oi; Petrie's @ ef . ? Dh Stone 14 Ne é Petrie's ® Stone 12 s Cm DITCH . . BANK Zi same ee e eee 25 « ate oS - kia — ae ere x id SR wv PrP TES THE HEEL STONE and STONEHENGE Key: a = the line from the centre of Stonehenge to the major northern moonrise; b = the first axis, 3200 BC; c = the second axis, c.2200 BC; d = to midsummer sunrise; e = to the minor northern moonrise; f = the area of the backfilled bank and ditch. causeway discovered in 1922 (Hawley 1924, 35; 1925, 31) suggests that the posts had probably been tempo- rary sighting devices for observing the moon’s northern, midwinter path along the skyline with the Heel Stone marking a midway point between the minor and major northern lunar risings (Wood J.E., 1978, 100-1). On Salisbury Plain the moon, in its annual northern risings, oscillated over an arc some 20° wide from north-east to north-north-east and back again over a period of 18.61 years. From a minor rising near 61° it would each year have moved ever closer to its major rising at 41° before returning once more to its minor position. The Heel Stone, erected at 51° 18’, stood quite neatly midway between these positions and would have warned observers that once the full moon reappeared to the stone’s left, western, side it would reach its major rising four years later (Newham 1972, 13; Wood, J.E., 1978, 163), something that J.E. Wood’s namesake (Wood, J., 1740, 95) had half- realised over two centuries earlier. Four heavy posts regularly spaced apart to the left of the Heel Stone THE HEEL STONE, STONEHENGE would have registered even more precise sightings of the moon’s progress (Burl 1987, 68-70; Petrie and Hawkins 1989, 53). Prehistoric iconoclasm is not unknown. Centuries later when the first bluestone circles were constructed inside the henge, the north-eastern entrance was deliberately widened by levelling a 7.6 m long stretch of the bank east of the causeway, tumbling the rubble into the ditch (area f on plan, opp.). There were two important results. With the new entrance over 18 m wide the axis of Stonehenge veered more than 4 m eastwards, to the right, from 46° 33’ to 49° 54’, an orientation now near to that of midsummer sunrise. It was an_astro- nomical modification which transformed Stonehenge from a lunar into a solar monument. The second effect was as spectacular. It caused the Heel Stone to stand very close to the new axis (Burl 1987, 140). The argument for a lunar alignment, involving the Heel Stone, in the first phase of Stonehenge is not invalidated by the discovery in 1979 of a wide hollow to the west of the Heel Stone. A large stone had been withdrawn from it at an unknown date (Pitts 1982, 83-7). This stone, now known as Stone 97, may possibly have been erected in the bluestone phase of Stonehenge II when the axis was converted to a solar alignment. It and the Heel Stone standing side by side could have formed an astronomical ‘window’ between which the rising midsummer sun would have been framed (Castleden 1987, 102, 129). This explanation, however, would not account for the withdrawal of the stone if this had been effected in prehistoric times. The 1979 excavation produced no evidence that the stones had ever stood together. A second possibility is that the hole was a pit in which the Heel Stone itself had formerly stood before being manoeuvred to a more satisfactory position (Burl 1987, 78). There is, however, a third, equally plausible expla- nation for the stone. The azimuth or compass bearing of Stone 97 from the centre of Stonehenge was 46°, nicely placed on the axis of the first henge and just halfway between the Heel Stone and the most northerly rising of the full moon at midwinter. Such a marker would have acted as a second lunar foresight, replacing the four heavy but impermanent posts, A-D, (Atkinson 1979, 66) that had been used to record the moon’s movements (Wood, J.E., 1978, 161-2). The position of the stone would have warned observers that the major moonrise would occur two years after the moon appeared to its left. Had there been a third stone actually standing in line with the extreme major moonrise it would have been removed and its hole destroyed when the ditch for the avenue was dug out in Stonehenge’s second phase (Burl 1987, 70). 7 With the transformation of the axis in the second Stonehenge from a lunar to a solar alignment the presence of Stone 97 would have been irrelevant, even distracting. Withdrawing it left the Heel Stone as the sole outlier, a foresight to the sun with no hint of a former lunar orientation. Any continuing belief today that the stone was meant to indicate the summer solstice can only be maintained by a refusal to acknow- ledge that the present axis of Stonehenge, on which the Heel Stone nearly stands, is not the original one (Atkinson 1979, 69, 73). Today the Heel Stone is better understood but in the process it has suffered. Deprived of its popular name, stripped of its solar function, and perhaps not even in its first position (Burl 1987, 78), the weather-rotted, leaning pillar has only reluctantly revealed its purpose. It should not be called the Hele Stone, the Heel Stone, or the Friar’s Heel. It is wrong to term it the Sun Stone, or Pointer or Marker or Index Stone. Petrie’s ‘Stone 96’ is numerically helpful but uncha- rismatic. As the outlier is unlikely to be renamed the Merlin- Moon Monolith it should be allowed to return to its lunar anonymity. And somewhere across the circle the Friar’s Heel lurks undiscoverably. THE SOLSTICE Why, this is very midsummer madness. Twelfth Night III, iv, 62 It must also be asked, when three good plans of Stonehenge already existed, by Aubrey in 1666 (1665-93, 80), by Stukeley in 1723 (1740, 18), and by Wood in 1740 (1747, 33), why it was not unul 1770 (Smith 1771, 63) that it was claimed that the Heel Stone stood in line with the midsummer sunrise. The sun’s regular yearly cycle from midsummer to midwinter and back is such an obvious one and so well-known even to prehistoric people (Burl 1983) that it seems puzzling that perceptive fieldworkers such as Aubrey and Stukeley should not have noticed how close the Heel Stone stood to the orientation of the midsummer sunrise. The answer lay partly with the British calendar and partly with mechanical unre- liability. In 1666 John Aubrey made the first good plan of Stonehenge. He noted the presence of the north-east outlier, and he distinguished between it and the Friar’s Heel which lay at the west of the circle. Yet he made no mention of any correlation between the outlier and the summer solstice. Aubrey knew that Midsummer Day was 24 June, 8 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE the birthday and Feast Day of St John Baptist. ‘It was a Custome for some people that were more curious than ordinary to sitt all night in the Church porch of their Parish on midsomer-eve, that is, St John Baptist’s eve; and they should see the apparitions of those that should die in the parish that year come and knock at the dore’ (Aubrey 1688, 207). But in 1666 24 June was not one of the days of the midsummer solstice. In the seventeenth century Britain was still using the Julian calendar of 46 BC which, by miscalculation, had been ‘losing’ a day every 163 years since its inception. Roman Catholic countries in Europe had corrected this in 1582 by adopting the new calendar of Pope Gregory, adding ten days to their pre-Gregorian dates. But in those vehemently anti-papist days Protestant states ignored the innovation and it was not until 1752 that Britain and her colonies reluctantly accepted the necessity for change. Russia, even more orthodox and isolationist, remained non-Gregorian until 1918. The lonely western island of Foula in the Shetlands still does. There, Christmas Day is still celebrated on 6 January, twelve days later than the rest of the Christian world. Because Britain in 1666 continued to follow the Julian calendar, ten days behind the true date, Aubrey’s ‘24 June’ in reality was 3 July. By then the sun was rising over 4°, nearly 6 m, to the east of the Heel Stone and well away from the solstice. Aubrey, presumably unaware of the discrepancy, inevitably saw no relationship between the stone, 24 June, and the longest day. This was not true of Stukeley who had discussed Stonehenge with several astronomers, and had a fair understanding of possible alignments there. A manu- script of his in Cardiff Public Library (Piggott 1985, 87, 178), is dated 1723. It contains an undated note. ‘The Entrance of Stoneh. is 4° from the true N.E. point, they set it to the N-E. loc that is the suns utmost elongation in Somer Solstice’ (Stukeley 1723, 112). This is the earliest astronomical reference to Stonehenge, and may have been made after Stukeley had discussed some of the problems of Stonehenge with his colleagues. On page 105 of the manuscript, in another’s hand, there is an interpolated small sheet containing calcula- tions of where the sun would rise ‘on the Longest Day’ in the latitude of Stonehenge. The note is signed ‘Wyng’, almost certainly Tycho Wing (1696-1750), a noted astrologer and the Coroner of Rutland from 1727 to 1742. In his diary Stukeley, who had moved from London to Grantham in 1726, recorded that he had ‘spent many agreeable hours at Stamford and Pickworth with Mr. Tycho Wing and Mr. Edward Weaver, the great Lincolnshire astronomer’ (DNB, 1975, 2300). Stukeley, therefore, was in possession of accurate solar data and could have been expected to notice how close the Heel Stone stood to the midsummer sunrise alignment. In his case, however, it was not the Julian calendar but a faulty compass that misled him. He was well aware that in 1723 the longest day of the year was not 21 June but 11 June, the feast day of St Barnabas, eleven days earlier than ‘Midsummer Day’. His notes made during fieldwork at the Devil’s Arrows, the line of three great standing stones to the west of Boroughbridge in Yorkshire, prove this. ‘Boroughbrig fair is now on S. Barnabas, the summer solstice. . .’ (Lukis 1885, 376). *... the great panegyre of the Druids, the midsummer meeting ... the remem- brance hereof is transmitted in the present great fair held at Burroughbridge on St Barnabas’s day’ (ibid., 308-9). On St Barnabas Put the scythe to the grass. Barnaby bright The longest day and the shortest night. Vince (1979, 32) Stukeley had made a survey of Stonehenge: ‘I exam- ined their [the Druids’] works for several years together with sufficient accuracy with a theodolite’ (Stukeley 1740, 64), and he concluded that there had been an error in the layout of the circle. *.. . the works at Stonehenge generally vary to the right hand, from cardinal points, and that to the quantity of 6 or 7 degrees. The principal diameter or groundline of Stonehenge, leading from the entrance, up the middle of the temple, to the high altar (from which line the whole work is form’d) varies about that quantity southward of the north-east point’ (Stukeley 1740, 56), namely, up to 7° south of 45°, an azimuth of 522 Even before his talks with Wing, Stukeley had taken other astronomical advice. ‘I remember I open’d this affair, near 20 Years ago [c.1720], to Dr. Halley, who was of the same sentiment’ (Stukeley 1740, 57). Halley, the astronomer-royal who predicted the reappearance of the comet named after him, had compiled charts of magnetic deviation. Stukeley’s knowledge of these may explain his own reference to the Druids and their compasses. The reason for the irregularity of the bearings at Stonehenge, Stukeley suggested, was because ‘the Druids us’d a magnetical compass . . . and the needle vary’d so much, at that time, from the true meridian THE HEEL STONE, STONEHENGE line’ (ibid., 57). Today it is known that Stonehenge was erected in the pre-iron Neolithic and Bronze Ages, and the existence of prehistoric magnetic compasses can be discounted. Instead, the explanation for Stukeley’s misalignment in Stonehenge can be attr- ibuted, ironically, not to the Druids’ compass but to his own which seems to have been in error by about 1° 30’ +3° westwards ‘because the compass pivot was worn or rusty or both’ (Atkinson 1985, S62). As it was, before his solstitial conjecture any ast- ronomical investigations of stone circles had been based either on the number of stones in a ring, 19 suggesting a lunar cycle, 29 or 30 a lunar month (Toland 1726, 122; Wood 1747, 80), or on the shape of a ring, a crescent symbolising the moon, a circle the sun (Toland 1726, 124). Even Stukeley himself, having visited the great Somerset rings of Stanton Drew in 1723, wrote that the circles there, ‘consisting of 30 stones, and the other of 12, seem to mean the Solar month and Lunar year’ (Stukeley 1776, 174). The change in his astronomical thinking, for the first time considering the possibility of discovering sight- lines in megalithic monuments, may have come to him following his conversations with Tycho Wing. But the inaccuracy of his theodolite caused him to believe that the Heel Stone stood off the line of the midsummer solstice. Astronomically, Stukeley was an innovator. He must be acknowledged as the pioneer of British archaeoastronomical studies, only failing to detect the proximity of the Heel Stone to the summer solstice because of his defective surveying equipment. No one before him had thought of looking for celestial align- ments, and it was almost certainly his work that influenced both John Wood and John Smith. In 1752, after Wood but before Smith, came the reformation of the calendar. The change took place on 2 September, the next day becoming 14 September. Confusion was widespread. There were arguments over when bills were due, tears over uncelebrated birthdays, fears that almost half a month’s wages had been forfeited, that everyone had lost a week and a half of their lives. The national cry was ‘Give us back our eleven days’. But calendrically the change led John Smith to his moment of fame. Wood had been wrong about the Heel Stone and the moon because his plan was in error by some 10°. Smith was wrong about the Heel Stone because he thought it had been a solar marker. Neither, however, was as “wrong as William Shakespeare. In 1594 or 1595, twelve or thirteen years after the Catholic countries of Europe had amended their calendar, he wrote the comedy, A Midsummer-Night’s Dream (Rowse 1973, 9 123; Levi 1988, 135). In it he quite cheerfully placed his Midsummer Night in the month of May! (Act IV, scene i, line 139). Because of Titania’s reference to ‘the middle summer’s spring’ (Act II, 1, 82) it has been suggested (Brooks 1979, Ixx) that instead of the calendrical midsummer Shakespeare set his lovers’ play at Whitsuntide or 15 May because this was the ume of weddings and of the lewd May revels that were so condemned by the puritanical Stubbes (1583): ‘Of fortie, threescore, or a hundred maidens going to the wood overnight, there have scarsely the third part returned home again undefiled’. Whatever the truth, it is poetically appropriate in a discussion of the purpose of the Heel Stone and the manner in which it has been misidentified and misin- terpreted as a midsummer marker that the play should be radiant not with sunshine but with moonlight. And it should have been the Heel Stone rather than Bottom who so desperately called out, ‘A calendar, a calendar! Look in the almanack; find out moonshine, find out moonshine’. (Ibid., II, 1, 55-7). Monuments themselves are subject to Forgetful- ness, even while they remain . . . they usually stand rather as dead objects of popular wonder, and occasions of Fables, than as certain records of Antiquity. Charleton (1663, 5) REFERENCES ANON, 1766 A Description of Stonehenge, Abiry etc., Salisbury ANTROBUS, LADY, 1901 A Sentimental and Practical Guide to Amesbury and Stonehenge, Salisbury ASHBEE, P., 1978 The Ancient British. A Social-Archaeological Narrative, Norwich ATKINSON, R.J.C., 1955 ‘Stonehenge’, Encyclopaedia Bri- tannica (14th edition), London — 1979 Stonehenge, Harmondsworth — 1985 ‘William Stukeley and the Stonehenge sunrise’, Archaeoastronomy 8, S61—S62 AUBREY, J., 1665—93 Monumenta Britannica I, Milborne Port, Dorset (1980) — 1688 ‘The Remaines of Gentilisme and Judaisme’, in Three Prose Works. Fohn Aubrey, ed. by J. Buchanan-Brown, Fontwell, 1972 BAKKER, J.A., 1979 ‘Lucas de Heere’s Stonehenge’, Anzquity 53, 107-11 BARCLAY, E., 1895 Stonehenge and its Earthworks, London BROOKS, H.F., 1979 A Midsummer Night’s Dream, London BURL, H.A.W., 1983 Prehistoric Astronomy and Ritual, Princes Risborough — 1987 The Stonehenge People, London — 1988 ‘Without sharp North. . . Alexander Thom and the great stone circles of Cumbria’, in Records in Stone. Papers in Memory of Alexander Thom, ed. by C.L.N. Ruggles, Cambridge, 176-205 10 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE CAMDEN, W., 1620 Britannia, London CASTLEDEN, R., 1987 The Stonehenge People, London CHARLETON, W., 1663 Chorea Gigantum; or, the Most Famous Annquity of Great Britan, Vulgarly called Stone-heng, London CHIPPINDALE, C., 1983 Stonehenge Complete, London CUNNINGTON, R.H., 1935 Stonehenge and its Date, London DNB, 1975 Compact Edition of the Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford DUKE, REVD E., 1846 The Druidical Temples of the County of Wilts, London FIDLER, T.C., 1881 ‘The Astronomical Theories as to Stonehenge’, Journ. Brit. Archaeol. Assoc. 37, 167-8 GEOFFREY OF MONMOUTH, 1136 The History of the Kings of Bnitain, (trans. by L. Thorpe), Harmondsworth, 1980 GOWLAND, W., 1903 ‘Recent Excavations at Stonehenge’, WAM 33, 1-62 HARRISON, W.J., 1901 ‘A Bibliography of the Great Stone Monuments of Wiltshire — Stonehenge and Avebury’, WAM 32, 1-169 HAWKINS, G., 1966 Stonehenge Decoded, London HAWLEY, W., 1924 ‘Fourth Report on the Excavations at Stonehenge’, Antiquaries Fournal 4, 30-39 — 1925 ‘Report on the Excavations at Stonehenge during the Season of 1923’, Antiquaries Journal 5, 21-50 HERBERT, A., 1849 Cyclops Christianus, London HOARE, SIR R.C., 1812 The Ancient History of Wiltshire I, London HOYLE, F., 1977 On Stonehenge, London JONES, I., 1655 The Most Noble Antiquity of Great Britain vulgarly called Stone-Heng on Salisbury Plain, London LEVI, P., 1988 The Life and Times of William Shakespeare, London LOCKYER, SIR N., 1909 Stonehenge and Other British Stone Monuments Astronomically Considered, London LONG, W., 1876 Stonehenge and its Barrows, Devizes; (see also WAM 16, 1876, 1-239) LUKIS, REVD W.C., 1885 The Family Memoirs of the Rev. William Stukeley, M.D., the Antiquarian. . . , IIT, Surtees Society 82, 1887 NEWALL, R.S., 1953 Stonehenge, Wiltshire, London NEWHAM, C.A., 1972 The Astronomical Significance of Stonehenge, Leeds NIEL, F., 1975 The Mysteries of Stonehenge, New York PETRIE, W.M.F., 1880 Stonehenge: Plans, Descriptions and Theories, London PETRIE, W.M.F. and HAWKINS, G., 1989 Stonehenge, Plans, Descriptions, and Theories and Stonehenge Astronomy — an Update, London PIGGOTT, S., 1985 William Stukeley. An Eighteenth-Century Antiquary (2nd edition), London PITTS, M.W., 1982 ‘On the Road to Stonehenge . Prehist. Soc. 48, 75-132 ROWSE, A.L., 1973 Shakespeare the Man, London SMITH, J., 1771 Choir Gaur: the Grand Orrery of the Ancient Druids, Commonly Called Stonehenge, London STEVENS, E.T., 1882 Fottings on some of the Objects of Interest in the Stonehenge Excursion, Salisbury STEVENS, F., 1929 Stonehenge Today and Yesterday, London STONE, E.H., 1924 The Stones of Stonehenge, London STUBBES, P., 1583 The Anatomie of Abuses, London STUKELEY, W., 1723 ‘The history of the temples and religion of the antient Celts, Par II’, unpubl. MS, Cardiff Public Library, MS 4 253 — 1740 Stonehenge a Temple Restor’d to the British Druids, London — 1776 Itinerarium Curiosum IT, London THOM, A., A.S., and BURL, A., 1990 Stone Rows and Standing Stones, 2 vols., BAR (S560), Oxford TOLAND, J., 1726 A Critical History of the Celtic Religion and Learning, containing an Account of the Druids, London (1814 edition) VINCE, J., 1979 Discovering Saints in Britain, Princes Ris- borough WANSEY, H., 1796 ‘Stonehenge’, in Conjectures on that Myster- ious Monument of Ancient Art, Stonehenge, on Salisbury Plain, ed. by J. Easton, Salisbury, 1815, 59-63 WOOD, J., 1747 Choir Gaure, Vulgarly Called Stonehenge, Oxford WOOD, J.E., 1978 Sun, Moon and Standing Stones, Oxford . 7 eProc. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 84 (1991), pp. 11-39 Round Barrows Wilsford cum Lake G51—G54: Excavations by Ernest Greenfield in 1958 by I.F. SMITH with contributions from ALISON CAMERON and JANET D. HENDERSON, HUMPHREY CASE, R. HARCOURT, and E.E. RICHARDS The four barrows, all investigated by William Cunnington in 1805, had been diminished by ploughing. G53 covered a single unaccompanied cremation. The other three yielded evidence for the practice of multiple sequential interment: imhumations only in G54, inhumations and unaccompamed cremations in GS1 and G52. Grave furniture includes Early, Middle and Late style beakers; the latest interment was accompanied by a flat bronze dagger and stone battle-axe. INTRODUCTION The four round barrows described in this report — Wilsford cum Lake G51—G54 — formed a compact group on Wilsford Down, 1.8 km SSW of Stonehenge and some 60 m E of the Late Beaker/Early Bronze Age earthwork known as the North Kite (Figure 1). They stood just below the 91 m contour on an E-facing spur overlooking a broad coombe. On this spur, as on others above the Avon valley (Gifford 1957, 12), the Chalk is covered by a reddish- brown loam containing flints. The acid soil, which once supported heather and gorse (Atkinson 1985, 245, n. 20; Hoare 1812, 202), has caused the develop- ment of numerous solution hollows in the Chalk, itself disrupted by periglacial cryoturbation (Evans 1968). These particular characteristics of the environment bear directly upon the interpretation of some aspects of the archaeological evidence discussed below. The barrows, said by Hoare (1812, 211) to be ‘scarcely elevated above the soil’, are depicted as small mounds on ‘A Map of Stonehenge and its Environs’ (ibid., facing p. 170) and on the plan of barrows on Lake Down (ibid., facing p. 207), where they are numbered 21-24. There are discrepancies between the relative positions of the barrows as plotted on map and plan and also (we now know) between the identities of the ‘Lake 21-24’ described in the text (zbid., 211) and the positions of the numbered barrows on the plan. (The text, ibid., 210, 217, also describes a second ‘Lake 21’, not shown on the plan, location uncertain, that contained Piggott’s (1938, 105) Wessex grave- group 67.) The four barrows had been investigated by William Cunnington in 1805, possibly between 18-20 Septem- ber when he may have been ‘at Lake’ (Cunnington 1975, Appendix III). Circular brass tokens bearing the inscription ‘Opened by Wm Cunnington 1805’ were deposited in G52 and G53 (cf. frontispiece in Annable and Simpson 1964). The original reports on ‘Small Tumuli East of the Large Oblong Enclosure or Temporary Camp’ are preserved in the library of the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society (Cunnington MSS, Book 4, pp. 11-12, under the general date of 1807). The reports do not differ materially from the edited versions published by Hoare, but are quoted here at the beginning of the account of each barrow. There follow concordances with Hoare, with Goddard’s (1913) List, and with the gazetteer in the Victoria County History of Wiltshire (Grinsell 1957, 198). Both Goddard and Grinsell give the parish name as ‘Wilsford (S)’. In the earlier part of the present century the barrows and the North Kite were scheduled as Ancient Mon- ument Wiltshire 61. The original description, perhaps written in 1925, specified ‘Four small barrows and an earthwork in fine condition. All on unploughed downland.’ By August 1954 an Inspector reported that most of the earthwork had been flattened, that barrow G52 was also flat, and the other three much reduced by ploughing. In 1958 the then Ministry of Works (now English Heritage) arranged for a ‘rescue’ excavation to be undertaken by Mr Ernest Greenfield. Between 15 September and 21 November Mr Greenfield excavated the four barrows, cut six exploratory trenches across 12 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE —— E ; 28 Go The ighe irate |G | = Nb King’ / arrows ah mt » Y . ? 2 fee a . aes / | ® ‘e Ss be = ——- } ; E V yy ne | - Dh iy Roe 5 / fi : Wilsfort ~* J Le * Be ( Belly. fo \ i eum) J / ~f ) ae) =e \\ ) ee Figure 1. Location map, Wilsford cum Lake barrows G51—G54 parts of the North Kite and also investigated the condition of the Long Mortuary Enclosure on Nor- manton Down. Interim reports on the excavations appeared in the Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society (Longworth 1959, 275) and in this journal (Annable 1959, 228-229). The information obtained from the North Kite and the Long Mortuary Enclosure has been included in reports of subsequent excavations undertaken by Richards (1990) and by Vatcher (1961). Excavation methods and records During the excavations the director was assisted by the late Mrs Judy Minter, who probably was responsible for recording and packaging the small finds. All digging was done by hand; the labour force was supplied by R. Butcher and Son of Warminster. For each barrow the first procedure was to lay out trenches running N-S and E-W defining opposite quadrants. The trenches were 4 ft (1.2 m) wide and of ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE GS51-G54 a length estimated to extend beyond the perimeter of the barrow. They were arranged to leave baulks one foot (0.3 m) wide between quadrants. The initial trenches were completely excavated and the quadrants opened out to expose the anticipated central graves. At G52, G53 and G54 large areas were left unexamined; complete excavation was carried out only at G51. The sides of the quadrant trenches and of the temporary baulks provided the N-S and E-W sections recorded for each site. Where expedient, a drawn section sometimes switched to the reverse side of a baulk. Except for G51, where sections were drawn of nearly all the quarry pits, no supplementary drawings were made. Plans, sections, graves and any contents still in situ were drawn at a uniform scale of 2 ft to one inch (approximately 0.61 m to 0.025 m). The measure- ments have been converted to the metric scale in the following pages. The main written record is a notebook (plus type- written copies) in which finds from the four barrows are listed serially, starting with G51; contexts are specified by layer number and description. Horizontal positions are given only by quadrant unless the item lay under a temporary baulk or in a grave. An interim report submitted to the Ministry of Works at the end of the excavation provides more information than the published summaries. A field notebook contains scrappy observations, confined to the initial stages of excavation. Particulars of natural features excavated on the site of GS2 are given in a separate sheet. There are field drawings of barrow plans (but not of sections) and semi-finished versions of plans and sections. The section drawings include layer descriptions, not always complete. Some discrepancies exist between plans and sections. The photographic record contributes useful additional information; it comprises 66 prints and negatives and eight colour transparencies of each of G51, G52 and G54, many of them duplicate exposures. Some deficiencies in procedures and records should be noted. In no instance was a buried surface/ancient soil recognized beneath a barrow; consequently mounds are shown resting directly on the subsoil in Figures 2, 9-11 below. No soil or other environmental sampling was undertaken. In contrast with the apparently efficient retrieval of pottery from pre- barrow contexts, hardly any other occupation debris was collected. Animal bone that had been incor- porated in the acid topsoil on these sites may have been destroyed but it is evident that most struck flints were discarded. There are no radiocarbon dates; the excava- tor had requested that a securely stratified antler pick from G51 be used for this purpose but without result. Some specimens — charcoal from the cremations, the 13 substance wrapped round the bronze dagger from G54 — appear to have been mislaid in the Ancient Mon- uments Laboratory at an early stage and have not been identified. Owing to a failure in communications, the examination of the human remains in the Laboratory was conducted without information about contexts; all bones were treated as if they came from a single site and a summary (‘level 3’) report, with generalized descriptions, was produced. The present writer has added contexts to the original version (see Appendix 1), but has been unable to obtain access to the data sheets and archive inventory essential to a clearer understanding of what was recovered in 1958. Some comments in the report seem difficult to reconcile with the excavator’s accounts. The artifacts, paper and photographic archive from the barrow excavations have been deposited in the museum of the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society. The human remains were delivered to the museum as this report went to press. Wilsford cum Lake G51 (Figures 2-5) Cunnington (1807): ‘No. 21. A small circular tumulus that had been partially opened before. In this barrow was found some unburnt bones that had been moved with the remains of two neatly ornamented drinking cups — but digging further to the South East we discovered the skeleton of a child, over which we found the singular drinking cup fig. 8, pl. xxviii.’ Hoare (1812, 211): Lake 22. Pl. XXVIII, fig. 8 (beaker) Goddard (1913, 349): Hoare 24? Grinsell (1957, 198): SU 11494047. ‘Diameter 16 paces, height one foot. RCH 24? The entire area of the barrow was excavated in 1958 (Figure 2), including the contents of the ring of quarry-pits and the fill of a secondary linear trench that crossed the W side (discussed separately below). Ploughing had almost destroyed the mound. Because of discrepancies between the original plan and section drawings only profiles are given in Figure 2. For clarity the surviving elements are described here in the sequence proposed for the three distinguishable phases of burial and monument construction. The feature denoted ‘Remnant of phase 1 mound’ on Figure 2 is labelled ‘Edge of barrow’ on the original plan. Photographs (WDN 17, 31) show a thin spread of chalk of the shape indicated. The deposit is not marked on the section drawings; its stratigraphical position is therefore uncertain. As the quarry-pits attest at least two episodes of digging (see below), it seems a reasonable assumption that an early mound should have consisted partly of chalk. The section drawings show between plough soi! and subsoil a layer up to 15 cm thick labelled ‘black sooty soil and calcined flints’, also referred to as ‘black core’ 14 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Wilsford cum Lake G51 | TRENCH Remnant of phase1 mound extent of phase 3 we mound Zz LINEAR SS Estimated \ = D Q- 2 46" “SAO 42 eae a fifty iT: of “pe on! gia m e ane pees ier, Chew aap spank Lite alata] wg ae : ; S H peed hte oa J sere as ee alahaelgiaa —— mae GRAVE CREMATION TRENCH PIT Figure 2. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G51: plan and profiles ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE GS51-G54 in the finds list. The extent of this material was not plotted on the original site plan; a diameter of about 8.0 m is indicated by the positions of its edge at the four cardinal points on the section drawings. The ‘sooty soil and calcined flints’ were clearly residues from the phase 3 cremation, later additions to the remains of the phase 2 core, itself composed of dark occupation earth. Although some of the pottery attr- ibuted to the core in the finds list may well have lain in or on the buried surface, the quantity recovered is taken to indicate that much had been introduced in mound material. The core produced 100 sherds of Neolithic pottery, a further 35 came from the over- lying plough soil, and all but 15 of the 135 were concentrated in the NW and NE quadrants. Earlier Wilsford cum Lake G51 Pit Sections B C a I DED _ e 15 Neolithic and Peterborough wares were associated in the core; both of these, as well as Grooved Ware and one ?beaker, were mixed together in core material redistributed in phase 3. Such mixtures often occur in occupation debris built into round barrows (Ashbee 1981, 9, 18-25; 1986, 72-73). In the present instance other normal components of occupation debris — struck flints and animal bone — are virtually absent from the record, almost certainly because of the pattern of selective retrieval mentioned in the Intro- duction. Details of the pre-barrow finds and their contexts are given in Appendix 2. The only other recorded mound component, a narrow fringe of ‘fine brown soil’ at the E edge of the core, may have been a relic of the phase 3 mound. Pit H 1 Plough soil 2 Humus 3 Flinty loam a.core 6 Primary silt b: chalk and loam 5 Fine-grained silts 4 Redeposited mound material So° Chalk lumps o* Flint @ ~ Animal burrow Figure 3. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G51: sections of quarry-pits FE, F, H, A, and of linear trench 16 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE There are signs that the quarries (Figures 2 and 3) had started as a series of smaller pits (e.g. the deeper circular pit base in F and the constriction in the base of H). In their final form they had expanded into an irregular ring of shorter and longer, partly conjoining, elements, separated by causeways of variable width. Cross-sections were drawn of all pits except B; four are illustrated in Figure 3. All pits had flat bases, but varied in width, depth and profile. The basal fill reveals an episode of recutting, attributed to phase 2. The primary silt, described as ‘clean, loose chalk rubble’ (layer 6), had been truncated, either by complete removal of the outer part, as in pits A, E and H, or by stripping off the upper part, as in F. The subsequent accumulation of fine-grained silts (layer 5) is taken to mark the interval between phases 2 and 3. Normal silting was arrested when large quantities of dark occupation earth (layer 4a) and chalk rubble with an admixture of loam (layer 4b) were tipped into the pits, filling them to their tops. These redeposited materials survived from edge to edge of pit A; else- where, as in E, F and H, decalcification and the development of solution holes had changed the outer portions into a brown loam (layer 3). The chalky layer 4b, usually the first to be deposited, is taken to represent the otherwise unattested chalk envelope of the phase 2 mound. A few Neolithic sherds are recorded from layer 4b; layer 4a and the associated solution holes contained many more. In all, 165 sherds were recovered from pits E-H and the directly over- lying plough soil. Only six came from the western pits. In a few instances sherds from core and pits could be assigned to the same vessel, e.g. P15 and P22 in Figure 14. Parts of P15 came from pit E and from the core in the NE quadrant; sherds of P22 were distributed in pits E and G and in the core in the NW and SW quadrants. As mentioned above, the conformation and contents of layer 3 show it to have been essentially a product of the chemical weathering of the redeposited mound material, but the source of the flint nodules distributed through it is uncertain. A flint-free humus (layer 2) overlay the tops of the pits beneath the plough soil (layer 1) from which a few sherds of Romano-British pottery were recovered. The sequence proposed below represents an attempt to integrate the evidence for successive interments beneath the barrow with the structural phases implied by the remains of the mound and the pattern of filling in the quarry-pits. Much remains uncertain, even the number of individuals interred in the inhumation grave. The unburnt human bones recovered in 1958 seem to correspond with those described by Cunn- ington, but the pottery may suggest that at least one other person had been buried there. Phase 1. The oblong grave, orientated NNW-SSE, was 1.75 m long by 1.0 m wide at the base and 0.75 m deep (Figure 4). Cunnington’s excavation had damaged the upper edges; the completely disturbed fill is described as ‘light brown soil and chalk’ incor- porating tip-lines of ‘fine brown soil’. Human bones found ‘at a high level’ in the SE corner represent a minimum of two individuals (Appendix 1, WD 1A, WD 1B). WD 1A, aged 18-20 years, is represented by about half the skeleton, possibly Cunnington’s ‘bones that had been moved’, and is here assumed to have been the first interment. Two fragments of pottery from the backfill (Figure 5, P1—P2) may be the ‘remains of two neatly ornamented drinking cups’ found ‘with’ the bones. As P2 is part of a Developed Southern beaker and P1 may have Food Vessel affinities it seems unlikely that both would have accompanied the same interment. The quarry-pits were dug and the spoil used to make a chalk mound (phase 1 in Figure 2). An antler tine, possibly from a broken pick, had been discarded on the floor of pit H; four antler picks and three antler rakes are recorded from the chalk rubble in pit A. One sherd of Earlier Neolithic pottery came from the rubble in pit D. Phase 2. The mound and grave were opened and the second interment inserted. WD 1B, represented by a more complete skeleton,;had been under 16 years of age and would seem to be the ‘child’ uncovered by Cunnington ‘to the South East’, lying beneath the ‘drinking cup’ (Figure 5; P3). The mound was reconstructed with a core of dark occupation earth containing a large quantity of Neoli- thic pottery. The quarry-pits were recut to provide material for a chalk envelope. Two antler picks were found low in the secondary silt (layer 5) in pit C; it is not clear whether they had been dislodged from the primary rubble fill (layer 6) or were fresh tools employed in the recutting. Silting continued until most pits were one-third to one-half full. Phase 3. The amount of material dumped in the quarry-pits (layers 4a and 4b) suggests demolition of the mound, except for the base of its core. The pits were filled to their tops and effectively obliterated. A shallow depression with a sooty fill on the E side of the grave (Figure 4) seems to have been the site of a pyre. Through it had been dug a cylindrical pit, 0.9 m in diameter and 0.9 m deep. A compact mass of cremated bone had been placed on or just above the base, close to its E side. The bones are those of an adult (Appendix 1, WD 4). ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE GS51-G54 Wilsford cum Lake G51 N Edge of : disturbance a ~ INTERMENTS | and 2 POTTERY Disturbed 17 Edge of chalk capping ae CREMATION 1 Charred a timbers oo Oo Chalk cap, Pe 0 O49 200° eee FE Ole aca ot . Dol KO Clean chalk rubble Sooty chalk Cremation (projected) Figure 4. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G51: plan and section of grave and cremation-pit The pit was filled with discrete deposits of ‘burnt fine red-brown silt’ and ‘fine sooty soil’ at the base, mostly clean chalk rubble around the sides, and a central mass of ‘mixed grey soil and chalk’. The swept-up remnants of the pyre contained a few cremated bones (WD 6), charcoal (now lost), 12 pieces of heat-fractured sarsen, and occupation debris: 70 struck flints, seven sherds of Neolithic pottery, and one sherd from a ?beaker. Several of the sherds belong to vessels also represented in the core of the phase 2 ~ mound. Six more bone fragments (WD 12) and two Neolithic sherds lay on the lip of the pit. Charred umbers, up to 0.45 m long, had been placed around and partly over the edges, and a thick layer of chalk rubble, presumably the remains of the upcast, was laid over the whole. The layer of rubble extended to the E edge of Cunnington’s disturbance; a similar feature, 0.6 m wide, projected for a distance of 1.4 m beyond the W edge of the disturbance. It appears that the capping over the pit had contnued as a narrowing band across the centre of the exposed grave. The barrow was probably reconstituted with scraped-up loam, the diameter again about 8.0 m (Figure 2). The lower fill of the linear trench where it passed close to the W side was normal chalky silt, showing that this later feature had skirted and not cut through the mound (section F—G, Figure 3). 18 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE THE POTTERY FROM THE GRAVE (Figure 5) Sherds from the disturbed fill (1958) Pl. Rim sherd with pendant lug, from a cord- ornamented vessel, internal diameter 100 mm. The incomplete lug, 32 mm wide at the top, contracts to 10 mm at the break, where it is almost circular in cross-section and had hung just clear of the wall. The wall to the right of the lug carries four horizontal twisted cord impres- sions. Surfaces red; dark core; fabric contains sparse fine flint, some sand. Listed by Clarke (1970, no. 1170F), as ‘indeterminate’. The broad internal rim bevel suggests affinity with Food Vessels; the rounded profile of the wall and the decoration may be compared with cord-ornamented globular forms such as those from Amesbury, Wiltshire, and Kirkby-la- Thorpe, Lincolnshire (Clarke 1970, figs. 37, 40). The anomalous pendant lug seems best matched by the pair of triangular lugs attached to the rim of the Neolithic bowl from a barrow in the Wiltshire parish of Mere (Annable and Simpson 1964, no. 5). P2. Sherd from the neck of a beaker of Clarke’s (1970) Developed Southern group, decorated with evenly spaced zones of upright oval impres- sions defined by incised lines. Surfaces red; thin dark core; fabric contains sparse fine flint, a little sand. Classified by Clarke (1970, 1169F) as ‘Northern/Middle Rhine’, P2 is more plausibly attributable to the group of Developed Southern beakers that he (Joc. cit., 213) singled out as retaining archaic styles, ‘including the last ale \ abo sy RES ty \o ea phi | Cot US —_—_____— KET, p= yb Ph : FX Sed Wahi ae w pRGN) PI A eee cs) KEK teu) EST be fall KI) 5 \{ ) ( Na sin Ct (CC ies oa el Figure 5. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G51: pottery from the grave. Scale 1:3 appearance of style a with multiple equal zones’, exemplified by the S2(W) beaker from Winter- bourne Stoke G54 (his fig. 900), only 2.6 km W of this barrow. Beaker found ‘over the skeleton of a child’ (1805) P3. Rusticated beaker of Clarke’s (1970) Late or Final Southern British group. Decorated overall with columns of paired fingernail impressions. Surfaces pale red with darker patches; no visible inclusions in fabric. Height 136 mm. Diameters: rim 105 mm; waist 97 mm; belly 100 mm; base 82 mm. Wall thickness 6 mm to 7 mm. Hoare (1812), pl. XXVIII, fig. 8. Annable and Simpson (1964), no. 107. Clarke (1970), no. 1168, FP; fig. 794 Gnaccurately drawn). THE LINEAR TRENCH (Figures 2 and 3) This feature had been cut on a N-S alignment from a point just outside quarry-pit D, past the W edge of the barrow mound, through and beyond quarry-pit A. It was about 0.5 m wide at the flat base and 0.6 m deep, with nearly vertical sides (Figure 3, section F-G). In his interim report the excavator stated that the N end ‘was later proved to be the south side of an enclosure entrance. The ditch continued to the south beyond the limits of the barrow and was traced for 200 ft’. The evidence was probably obtained by geophysical survey; a ‘megger’ had been in use during the excavations but the record seems not to have survived. The only finds came from the base at the S end; they are five small plain sherds in fresh condition and include a slightly tapering upright rim (not illus- trated). The fabric, pale red throughout, contains abundant particles of calcined flint, none measuring more than 1 mm across. The surviving characteristics are appropriate to a Globular Urn of the Early Bronze Age. The trench is acomponent of the Bronze Age system of land demarcation in the area SW of Stonehenge (RCHM(E) 1979, 26; fig. 14). Its N—S alignment is parallel to that of another narrow trench, some 56 m to the W, that runs alongside the E ditch of the North Kite and was also sectioned by Greenfield (ibid., 28; Richards 1990). ROMANO-BRITISH POTTERY Nineteen abraded sherds of Romano-British pottery were recovered from plough soil, mainly over the quarry-pits. ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE GS51-G54 Wilsford cum Lake G52 (Figures 6-8) Cunnington (1807): ‘No. 24. In this tumulus we discovered an interment of burnt bones immediately under the turf with fragments of a drinking cup; two feet below this we discovered another interment of burnt bones immediately over the head of a skeleton. This appeared to have been the skeleton of a young person not more than 15 years of age. Beneath this we found within a deep cist another skeleton lying with the head to the North West by the side of which lay several large pieces of stag’s horn.’ Hoare (1812, 211): Lake 24. Goddard (1913, 349): Hoare 23? Grinsell (1957, 198): SU 11474045. ‘Diameter 9 paces; height none. Distinguishable only by circle of whitish ground. RCH D2 The mound of G52, the westernmost of the four barrows (Figure 1), may have been destroyed when the adjacent E bank of the North Kite was bulldozed (Richards 1990) or when a water-pipe trench was cut to a depth of about 0.23 m through the subsoil and along the length of the grave (Figure 7). The field notes state that ‘large flints’ were scattered over the site; flint nodules also occurred in the backfill of Cunnington’s disturbance within the grave. Features partly revealed in the E and S arms of the quadrant trenches suggested the existence of a ditch. Supplementary cuttings and extensions were made in order to investigate further. The archive contains a detailed account of all the hollows shown around the grave in Figure 6 and it seems clear that they were of natural origin. Some 200 sherds of Neolithic pottery were found in the upper part of the fill of red-brown loam with flints in Features 2-5 and 9. These sherds, together with others recovered from the fill of the grave and from the plough soil, are described in Appendix 2. This account of the contents of the grave and the accompanying illustration (Figure 7) incorporate information obtained from the photographic record (black and white photographs WDN 4-12 and colour transparencies) to supplement and, in part, amend the original description and drawings. Details such as measurements of pits may therefore not be entirely accurate. It is evident from Cunnington’s report and from the human bones recovered from his disturbance (see below) that only part of the long history of this burial place can now be reconstructed. The 1805 disturbance had reached the bottom of Pit 3 on its N side; Cunnington’s disc was found close to the skull of Interment 3. Parts of Interments 1, 2 and 4 remained on the S side of the grave. The backfill of the disturbance, described as ‘brown-grey, many flints’, contained: 14 sherds of the beaker found with Inter- ment 2; part of an antler pick and other pieces of antler; 8 fragments of cremated bone; 6 pieces of 19 charcoal; 4 parcels of unburnt human bones; 2 animal bones; and sherds of Neolithic pottery (Appendix 2). Pit 1, the earliest and deepest of the series, had been mostly cut away by Pits 2 and 3 and its contents dispersed. It was 1.15 m deep and, to judge from remains of the S and E sides of the base, had been about 0.85 m in diameter and cylindrical in shape. A sample of charcoal and one fragment of cremated bone from a human skull (Appendix 1, WD 230) were recovered from the ‘fine grey chalky’ fill exposed in the base of Pit 3. Other stratified cremated bones and charcoal comprise: one rib fragment (WD 243, not certainly human) and one piece of charcoal from the fill of Pit 2; 9 fragments of human bone (WD 253) together with 5 pieces of charcoal ‘under’ Interment 4. The cremated bone (WD 273, 276, 295) and charcoal from the 1805 disturbance are less certainly from the same source; they might derive from the ‘interments of burnt bones’ found by Cunnington. Pit 2 was an oblong inhumation grave orientated NNW-SSE; its fill is described as ‘dirty chalk rubble’. Allowing for irregularities of the upper edges, prob- ably connected with disturbances, it had been about 2.4m long and 1.8 m wide at the top; the base, 0.76 m deep, measured 2.0 m by 1.4 m. The base extended as a flat shelf cut in the chalk all around the lower part of Pit 1. The articulated bones of the feet and lower legs of Interment 2 rested on the S end of the shelf, the knees at the edge of Pit 1. The body had been placed on its left side; the angle of the legs to the axis of the pit suggests that the head had probably been to NE, facing SE. The rest of the skeleton, that of an adult, probably male (Appendix 1, WD 239), had been disturbed by Pit 3. Its breastbone had come to rest behind the lower legs, close to two large fragments of a Wessex/Middle Rhine beaker (Figure 8, P4) which almost touched the right heel. The two pieces of beaker lay one within the other, the inner surfaces upwards, and the base missing. At the time of breaking, presumably when Pit 3 was dug, these parts of the vessel had been handled and possibly removed from the original position. Clarke’s analysis (1970, 455) shows that the favoured positions for W/MR beakers were in front of the face or in front of the feet. One stratified sherd of the beaker was in the fill of Pit 4. As mentioned above, 14 sherds came from Cunnington’s disturbance; one more was found in the top of Feature 7, some 4.0 m NE of the grave, together with a bone, thought to be human (apparently now lost). Pit 3 had been dug almost exactly through the centre of Pit 2, but ona slightly different orientation. It was 1.07 m deep and roughly square in plan, measuring 20 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Wilsford cum Lake \ a ; ~ n G52 ea ve Excavated natural hollows 8 ae GRAVE \ 4 IAC 4 F E Excavated natural hollows 2. 5 Roe © errr, Che 3 DU B (e NL) Gl TLL a Se Ee] [ale DE a a) Natural hollow (0) 2 4 6 8 10 12 FT GRAVE a ) 1 2 3 4M Figure 6. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G52: plan and profile ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE G51-G54 Wilsford cum Lake G52 Water pipe trench ‘| PAP BTOX limit jof disturbance ROS Deepest disturbance SINT. 4 Yo o88, ftattai &—PIT 2: INT 2 TOUN| ye ee Se PIT INT. CREMATION +P4 DIAGRAM OF PIT INTERSECTIONS il (e) 21 Figure 7. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G52: plan and section of grave; details of pits and interments 1-4; diagram of pit intersections about 0.9 m across the base. Interment 3, the skeleton of an infant aged 16-20 months (Appendix 1, WD 228), had been placed somewhat N and W of centre, partly on the fill of Pit 1. There are no clear photo- ‘graphs of the skeleton and details on the original plan are indistinct, but it appears that the head was to the NW and the body extended, with a rusticated beaker (Figure 8, P5) at the feet. The fill of this pit is described as ‘light brown soil and chalk rubble’. Pit 4, also said to have been infilled with ‘light brown soil and chalk rubble’, had been dug entirely within earlier pit fills. The skull of Interment 4 rested almost directly above the knees of Interment 2; the rest of the skeleton lay on the sagging base of Pit 4, slightly below the base of Pit 2. Interment 4 was 17—25 years of 22 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE age, probably female (Appendix 1, WD 255). The body had been placed on its right side with head to SE, facing NE, the hands in front of the chin. Cunn- ington’s hole had cut through the skeleton at the waist, leaving the pelvic and leg bones in disarray nearby. Steps cut in the N and S sides of the chalk rubble fill of Pit 2, about 0.23 m above its base, probably indicate at least one more pit, otherwise undetectable in the undifferentiated fill of Pit 4. Disarticulated human bones were found stratified under and around Interment 4 and in significant quantity in Cunnington’s backfill. WD 252: 7 pieces of bone, one tooth, from ‘contents under’ Interment 4. Cremated bone and charcoal came from the same context (see above), presumably the mixed fills of Pits 1-3. WD 269: 8 pieces of adult bone from ‘contents of filling around’ Interment 4. A sherd from the W/MR beaker found with Interment 2 occurred elsewhere in the fill of Pit 4. In the absence of specific evidence it is uncertain whether these bones are to be construed as parts of Interment 2, displaced, like the beaker sherd, when Pit 3 was dug, or as representative of one or more otherwise undocumented inhumations. The following were recovered from Cunnington’s backfill ‘below the level of Interment 4: WD 271A: bones, probably female, aged 20-23 years; WD 272 and WD 275A: two parcels of adult bones; WD 271B and WD 275B: bones of one or two (?) infants; the skeletal remains seem to be comple- mentary. The upper half of the backfill contained WD 294: 4 adult human bones. Leaving aside WD 252, WD 269 and WD 294, it may be reckoned that at least three additional inter- ments are represented: one sub-adult female, one unsexed adult, and one infant. Although no juvenile bones were recovered, the two older individuals could perhaps be correlated with the two skeletons described by Cunnington — that of ‘a young person not more than 15 years of age’ and another ‘lying with the head to the North West by the side of which lay several large pieces of stag’s horn’. Neither of those two can be correlated with Interment 2 or Interment 4. The upper part of the former had been disturbed when Pit 3 was dug; some of the adult bones from the backfill may well be his, twice disturbed. Cunnington had not exposed the skull of Interment 4 — and failed to note that he had severed the skeleton at the waist. The infant also escaped attention. It seems, then, that the series of interments began with a cremation and, on Cunnington’s testimony, ended with two more. The known sequence of inter- vening inhumations comprises: Interment 2, adult male with W/MR beaker; Interment 3, infant with rusticated beaker; Interment 4, sub-adult female, unaccompanied. In uncertain relationship, and presu- mably interred in the upper part of the grave, were: a second infant, a second sub-adult female and an unsexed adult. The minimum number of individuals represented is therefore nine. THE GRAVE FURNITURE (Figure 8) With Interment 2, original position uncertain P4. Beaker of Clarke’s (1970) Wessex/Middle Rhine group: motif group I, motifs 1, 2, 4; shape II; style b. Represented by about one-third of rim and body. Comb-impressed decoration comprises four principal zones alternately filled with lattice pattern and with oblique hatching, each defined above and below by five horizontal lines; additional zones, beneath rim and above base, are of grouped lines. Impressions of comb teeth medium, square; comb length in horizon- tals probably 45 mm; two combs, one with 5 teeth, one with 8, used for lattice patterns; a third short comb, slightly curved, with teeth of variable widths, used for hatching. Surfaces ‘sealing-wax red’; core dark grey; well smoothed; fabric compact, with sparse fine flint. Height 232 mm. Diameters: rim 217 mm; waist 177 mm; belly 196 mm; base 106 mm. Wall thickness 5 mm to 7 mm. Annable and Simpson (1964), no. 124. Clarke (1970), no. 1171, W/MR;; fig. 159. At feet of infant, Interment 3 P5. Rusticated beaker of Clarke’s (1970) Developed Southern ($2) group; shape VI. Irregular hori- zontal rows of upright and oblique oval jabs on neck and body; plain band at waist. Red-brown surfaces; black core; fabric soft and coarse, containing large flints and grog. Height 178 mm. Diameters: rim 131 mm; waist 111 mm; belly 124 mm; base 80 mm. Wall thickness 4 mm to 8 mm. Annable and Simpson (1964), no. 123. Clarke (1970), 106; no. 1172, FP; fig. 971. Not illustrated Unstratified fragments of antler pick, denoting Art- isan’s burial (Case 1977, 81). ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE GS51-G54 23 CCOULEE ( ce ececi COOL OCC eco cbuces LE 6 CoOiOU Cools CELEL“™’ LZ Lr ed C Cucud C0000 O¢ OUECOD ECHO LDL png COL UNLOVE O CLODE Figure 8. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G52: beakers found with interment 2 (P4) and interment 3 (PS). Scale 1:3 Wilsford cum Lake G53 (Figure 9) Cunnington (1807): ‘No. 22. A simple interment of burnt bones in a small cist like a cone.’ Hoare (1812, 211): Lake 23. Goddard (1913, 349): Hoare 22. Grinsell (1957, 198): SU 11474042. ‘Diameter 10 paces; height Y) foot. Cairn of flints, on arable. RCH 23?’ The original section drawings show that the mound of this ditchless barrow was composite (Figure 9). The core, about 4.0 m in diameter and surviving toa height of 0.15 m, was a cairn of large flint nodules mixed with red-brown loam. Its edge was overlapped by an envelope of grey-brown loam with flints, about 10 min diameter. Cunnington’s disturbance was not recorded on the original drawings. Its approximate extent is indicated on Figure 9 from photographs showing the baulks still standing (WDN 1-2). Photographs also attest the presence of cryotur- bation structures and solution hollows in the subsoil beneath the mound (WDN 2, 49). The funnel-shaped feature that contained the cremation was an emptied solution pipe, 0.45 m in diameter at the top, tapering to a point at a depth of 0.45 m. After placing his disc on - the bottom, Cunnington had returned the cremated bone (or some of it) and sealed the top of the hole with flint nodules. The surviving portion of the bone represents an adult (Appendix 1, WD 347). The only artifacts recovered were 9 flint flakes from the plough soil (Appendix 2). Wilsford cum Lake G54 (Figures 10-12) Cunnington (1807): ‘No. 23. Had had a prior opening, but among the earth and scattered bones we found some pieces of a fine drinking cup, some chipped flints, and one very fine flint arrowhead.’ Hoare (1812, 211): Lake 21. Pl. XXX, fig. 5 (arrowhead). Goddard (1913, 350): Hoare 21. Grinsell (1957, 198): SU 11554043. ‘Diameter 15 paces; height one foot. On arable.’ (Hoare’s Lake 21 correlated with Wilsford (S) 50c.) The core of the mound (Figure 10) consisted of red-brown loam containing a high proportion of flint nodules. As planned, it was ovoid, measuring 7.0 m E-W by 5.5 m N-S and was not centred on the grave. An envelope of dark brown loam with occasional flint nodules overlapped the edges of the core. It was not recognized as part of the barrow during the excavation and none of the quadrant trenches extended to its perimeter. On Figure 10 the estimated diameter is shown as 14.0 m. Photographs (W DN 37-41) show cryoturbation and extensive development of solution hollows filled with red-brown loam in the subsoil beneath the mound. In the area around the grave some of these features formed shallow curving gullies that could be linked 24 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Wilsford cum Lake A N G53 i ee ee “a = ae 7 = ae) Ls —~ Ya ~S We = I SS ree Outer mound: NX wh grey-brown loam NS / ‘ Z — ‘ / \ He —— N i N TIS SEE / coo INSERT \ | a HA \ yo t oor \ | ee See ee ee cama nsace tal = HEH FEBS \ = SSE eB Ba \ = ory | a = | CREM Di é \ \ S. Disturbed - = ae \ rer y F cot Gen \ \ A Preestttt = \ rH pee \ = N \ / N / A \ / | x | vA \ = ZL \ fr PA ma \ a y | eCunnington disc XN Le = oo 3 | Replaced flint Mes ee ~~ a! Ror a . aae ints Ste heer - NSS7> \sz/ «Replaced cremation \e! ° d ; 3 Fil B 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 eee MA (eee eee ae re 0 qo | ] I I 1M. (6) 1 2 3 A | Disturbed | B Terie Geer sieeve JE SRB T | ee I Outer mound: grey-brown loam Flint cairn CREMATION Outer mound: grey-brown loam Cc D Figure 9. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G53: plan, sections and details of cremation ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE GS1-G54 5 25 Wilsford cum Lake ae —— bis A Pe N G54 2 = Zs ~< a ~ a ~ a X As \ a Outer mound: Estimated extent Yi dark brown loam of outer mound SS. / We I if / / / / / / red-brown loam a flints ———— Teclealpelzinales iain aerials a Disturbed Outer mound: Soluti “ a : olution i J dark brown loam pipe Wy mound Outer mound: | red-brown loam & flints dark brown loam Figure 10. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G54: plan and sections 26 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE with individual hollows to make a ring, interpreted by the excavator as a ditch. Similar features within and without this area were exposed but left untouched; the ‘ditch’ shown on the original plan and sections was probably the product of selective excavation. The outline has, however, been retained in Figure 10 because of the slight possibility that, perhaps as a result of differential weathering, the circular shape may have reflected the existence of a structure associ- ated with interment during the long period when the site was in use. A few Neolithic sherds were recovered from the upper ‘ditch’ fill; these and other pre-barrow artifacts are described in Appendix 2. Wilsford cum Lake G54 The original section drawings indicate a hollow at the centre of the mound but do not identify disturb- ance beneath plough soil level. Photographs of the baulks (WDN 33, 39) reveal discontinuity in mound material beneath the hollow; the approximate extent of this presumed disturbance around the grave is indi- cated in Figures 10 and 11. A fairly compact deposit of artifacts was recovered within this area on the E side of the grave, at or a few centimetres beneath the base of the plough soil (Figure 11). The deposit comprised fragments of a Cord-zoned Maritime beaker, an All-Over-Cord beaker, a Wessex/ Middle Rhine beaker and four barbed-and-tanged flint ia ei arse -P8 Disturbed Remnant of == IRV Solution grave fill pipe Last interment +dagger+battle-axe Last interment +dagger +battle-axe pb— Remnant of grave fill — —Beaker sherds 4 4Barbed-and-tanged arrowheads P7y+pg | —P7 a =P6 Solution — — Beaker sherds pipe 4 4 Barbed-and-tanged arrowheads P6+P7+P8 _ ey Disturbed area in inner mound / Zi 7. Vi VA Figure 11. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G54: plan and section of grave showing positions of dispersed beaker sherds and flint | arrowheads, and skull of last interment with bronze dagger and stone battle-axe ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE GS51-GS4 arrowheads (Figure 12, P6—-P8, F3—-F6). Another break in mound material suggests a smaller disturb- ance W of the grave. A sherd from the AOC beaker (P7) was found thereabouts at the base of the plough soil. The grave, orientated NW-SE, was oblong with rounded corners and measured 2.3 m by 1.5 m by 0.45 m deep. Cunnington’s disturbance, back-filled with red-brown ‘turfy’ loam containing large flint nodules, extended to the bottom at the centre (Figure 11). It contained single sherds from the AOC beaker (P7) and the W/MR beaker (P8), a barbed-and tanged arrow- head (F2), 14 fragments of red deer antler, and part of an adult inhumation (Appendix 1, WD 350-351). The bones are all attributed to the owner of the skull found in situ (see below). Remnants of an earlier fill, described as ‘grey chalky soil and flints’, occupied the basal angles along the sides and ends of the grave. Three small sherds from the AOC and W/MR beakers were recovered from its N part. The skull and accompaniments of the last interment, covered by this fill, rested on the floor of the grave, about 0.6 m from the N end (Figure 11). The skull, identified as probably that of a male aged 17-25 years, lay on its left side, facing NE. The blade of a flat three-rivet bronze dagger (Figure 12, B1) lay point upwards in front of the face. A substance described as ‘wood or leather’ (now lost) was found ‘around the dagger’. A stone battle-axe (Figure 12, $1) lay above the forehead, on its side, with the blade end pointing outwards. THE GRAVE FURNITURE (Figure 12) Items displaced from grave P6. Beaker of MHarrison’s (1977) Cord-Zoned Maritime type/Clarke’s (1970) ‘European’ Bell beaker group; motif group I, motif 2; shape II, style a. Decorated with 12 evenly spaced single zones of comb-impressed diagonals bordered by fine twisted cord impressions. Diagonals run in alternate directions in successive zones, except the fifth and sixth above the base. Zone width, generally about 10 mm, narrows towards base. Comb teeth narrow and rectangular. External surface brick red; hard fabric contains abundant grog (up to 2 mm), sparse flint, sparse sand, occasional pellets of red iron ore. Dimensions of restored vessel: height 212 mm; diameters: rim 150 mm; waist 131 mm; belly 155 mm; base 72 mm. Wall thickness 5 mm. Note that earlier illustrations are inaccurate. Annable and Simpson (1964), no. 144. Clarke 27 (1970), no. 1173F, E; fig. 60. Lanting and van der Waals (1972), fig. 1. Piggott (1973), fig. 13:A. P7. Sherds from body of beaker of Clarke’s (1970) All-Over-Cord group, style O(z). Evenly spaced horizontal twisted cord impressions. External surface pale red; soft greasy fabric contains abundant grog (up to 3 mm), sparse fine flint, sparse sand, pellets of red iron ore. Wall thickness 4 mm to 5 mm. Annable and Simpson (1964), no. 142. Clarke (1970), 1174F, AOC. P8. Sherds from neck, body and base of a beaker of Clarke’s (1970) Wessex/Middle Rhine group; mouf group I, motifs 1, 4, 9; shape II, style c. Conjectural restoration suggests a broad zone in upper neck followed by a narrow one above belly, both incorporating diagonal hatching in chequer pattern; zones on body incorporate lattice pattern; zone above base, horizontal lines only. Proportions modelled on those of W/MR beaker from Winterslow Hut, Wiltshire (Clarke 1970, fig. 134). External surface red-brown, burnished; fabric contains grog, sparse flint (up to 7 mm), and sparse sand. Wall thickness 3 mm to 6 mm. Annable and Simpson (1964), no. 146. Clarke (1970), 1175F, W/MR. F1-F6. Six barbed-and-tanged flint arrowheads of Green’s (1980) Sutton types b and c, equally represented. Colours range from dark to trans- lucent grey-buff to translucent ‘honey’. F1 is the arrowhead collected by William Cunnington and illustrated by Hoare (1812, pl. XXX, fig. 5). Annable and Simpson (1964), nos. 136-141. Green (1980), 345-6, no. 225. Not illustrated. Fourteen fragments of red deer antler from the backfill of Cunnington’s excavation, possibly denoting an Artisan’s burial (Case 1977, 81). Items associated with last interment Bl. Bronze dagger of Gerloffs (1975) Type Butterwick. Flat triangular blade has weakly bevelled edges; rounded heel has 3 rivet-holes and slightly domed rivets in position; clear omega outline preserves traces of hilt. Some corrosion at tip and along edges. Present length 117 mm; width 48 mm; thickness 2.5 mm. Central rivet: length 14 mm; diameters of head and body 7 mm and 5 mm. Other rivets, more corroded, apparently of similar dimensions. 28 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Figure 12. Wilsford cum Lake barrow G54: displaced beakers and flint arrowheads: bronze dagger and stone battle-axe with last interment. Scales: P6-P8 1:3; FI-F6 1:1; Bl, S1 1:2 ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE G51-G54 Annable and Simpson (1964), no. 145. Gerloff (1975), 43, no. 25. Analysis of the metal, kindly arranged by Humphrey Case, was carried out by Dr E.E. Richards at the Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, Oxford, with the following results: Sample Cu Sn _ As Bi Fe Ag Rivet 87.6 10.3 2.1 0.005 n.d. 0.0066 Blade 90.2 8.2 1.5 <0.004 0.014 0.0088 n.d. (not detected above limits of detection): Pb, Sb, Ni, Zn, Au Sl. Stone battle-axe of Roe’s (1966) Calais Wold group, Stage II, butt form A, made of Group XIII rock (spotted dolerite) from the Preselau Hills in SW Wales. Highly polished and sym- metrical, with slightly concave faces and cres- centic butt. Length 156 mm; width 56 mm; thickness at blade and at butt 36 mm, at shaft-hole 32mm; diameter of shaft-hole at faces 30 mm, at mid-depth 25 mm. Weight 0.567 kg. Annable and Simpson (1964), no. 143. Roe (1966), 238, no. 232. Roe (1979), fig. 1. Clough and Cummins (1988), 159: Wiltshire 302/1103. COMMENTS The limitations of the information set out in the preceding pages inhibit detailed discussion of the barrows and their contents. What follows is an extended summary, with brief observations on the pre-barrow pottery, the grave furniture, and burial practices and barrow structure. The pre-barrow pottery The Neolithic pottery, mentioned in passing in the accounts of G51, G52 and G54 and described in - Appendix 2, indicates at least sporadic activity on the site over a long period before the change to use as a cemetery. The range of pottery styles extends from Earlier Neolithic to the Ebbsfleet, Mortlake and Fengate varieties of Peterborough Ware and the Durrington Walls and Woodlands sub-styles of 29 Grooved Ware. It should be noted that this occupation debris does not include beaker pottery, with the possible exception of five sherds from G51 that may represent one undecorated beaker. The grave furniture The grave furniture from G54 (Figure 12) comprises a range of offerings that suggest this may have been the first and last of the four sites to be used for burial. To recapitulate: sherds of Cord-Zoned Maritime, All- Over-Cord and Wessex/Middle Rhine beakers, together with four barbed-and-tanged flint arrow- heads, were found grouped in a disturbed area outside the grave; sherds from the AOC and W/MR beakers were also recovered from disturbed and undisturbed grave fill (Figure 11). It is assumed that all the beakers had been in the grave and were already in fragments when thrown out, together with the arrowheads, by Cunnington’s diggers in 1805. The only surviving human remains appear to belong to the last interment, a male accompanied by a flat riveted bronze dagger and a stone battle-axe. The Cord-Zoned Maritime beaker (P6) represents a Continental variety which Harrison (1977, 7; fig. 3) considered to be an early hybrid form between the All-Over-Cord and Maritime Bell beakers. The rarity of this form in the British Isles suggests that it did not long survive transference. Clarke (1970, 431) listed P6 among seven ‘European’ beakers with ‘cord defined horizontal zones’; Lanting and van der Waals (1972, 36; fig. 1) included it among ‘the only four recon- structable real maritime beakers from the British Isles’. These they placed at the head of their scheme for the development of beakers in Wessex, together with AOC beakers judged to display early characteris- ucs. Piggott assigned both AOC and E beakers to an Early Phase, partly exemplified by P6 (1973, 337; fig. 13:A). In Case’s (1977) system AOC beakers were the sole representatives of an Early style which persisted through his Middle and perhaps into his Late phase. E and W/MR beakers (among others) were attributed to his Middle style. The Lanting and van der Waals and the Piggott schemes seem to offer the more appropriate frameworks for the G54 beakers. As a presumably short-lived form in Wessex, the CZM beaker (P6) should take precedence over the W/MR beaker (P8), which would find its place in Lanting and van der Waals’s Step 3. The AOC beaker (P7) may be linked to the CZM beaker by similarity of fabric (see detailed descriptions above), but cculd represent a separate burial. The set of six barbed-and-tanged arrowheads are of 30 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE the Sutton b and c types found with all styles of beaker and, as an ‘everyday’ form, typically in archers’ graves (Green 1980, 138). If not simply discards from the digging of the grave, the fragments of antler may denote an Artisan’s burial accompanied by pick or hoe (Case 1977, 81). The last interment in G54, with bronze dagger and stone battle-axe, probably marks the abandonment of this small barrow cemetery and, generally, of the custom of placing ceramic beakers in graves. The typologically significant associations of Type Butterwick daggers (Gerloff 1975, 48) are with Late style beakers of Clarke’s Final Southern group (at Eynsham, Oxfordshire, Clarke 1970, fig. 746; Case 1977, fig. 6: 21-26; Lanting and van der Waals 1972, fig. 1, Step 7: and at Methilhill, Forth, Henshall 1964; Clarke 1970, fig. 1016); flat bronze axes (as at Butterwick 39, North Yorkshire, Greenwell 1877, figs. 37, 38; Kinnes and Longworth 1985; and Borwick, North Lancashire, Needham 1987); and Stage III battle-axes of Calais Wold type (at Carder Low and Parcelly Hay, Derbyshire, Roe 1966, 224; Piggott 1963, fig. 17). Humphrey Case has kindly contributed the follow- ing comments on the metallurgical composition of the G54 dagger blade and rivet in advance of publication of his detailed study of beaker culture metalwork (Case forthcoming): The riveted daggers from Wilsford cum Lake G54 (Gerloff 1975, no. 25) and Amesbury G85 (Moore and Rowlands 1972, 38; Gerloff 1975, no. 66) show tin-bronzes with arsenic and little else. Coppers for alloys of this kind appear specifically neither Irish nor Scottish and may partly at least be of continental origin. Occurring in Wessex Culture and other associations in England during the first quarter of the 2nd millennium BC, contexts include the axe and dagger from Ayles- ford, Kent (Gerloff 1975, pl. 44F, 2, 3; Britton 1961, nos. 13, 14), the knife from Weymouth G8, Dorset (Gerloff 1975, no. 116; Britton 1961, no. 37), both dagger and knife from ‘Bush Barrow’, Wilsford cum Lake GS (Gerloff 1975, pl. 45B, 2, 1) and possibly the knife in Food Vessel asso- ciation from Towthorpe 139, North Yorkshire (Gerloff 1975, pl. 45A, 1; Britton 1961, no. 11) and the socketed axe with late Unétice parallels from Wangford, Suffolk (Briscoe 1954). The stone battle-axe of Group XIII rock (prese- lite) from Wilsford cum Lake G54 and the recurrent association of battle-axes of Group XII rock (Shropshire-Montgomeryshire) with multi- rivet daggers of early type could suggest that northern Welsh or English ores (? including Alderley Edge, Cheshire) were being exploited by Beaker Phase 3. Stage II battle-axes have not been found in graves that contain pottery. Stage I examples have Late style beaker associations: in Wiltshire at ‘Woodhenge’, Durrington G67 (Roe 1966, Table IV; Clarke 1970, fig. 864; Case 1977, fig. 6: 18-19) and at East Kennet Glc where the grave furniture included a three-rivet bronze dagger (Roe loc. cit.; Clarke 1970, fig. 948; Lanting and van der Waals 1972, fig. 1, Step 6; Kinnes 1980). Outside Wessex both Stage I and Stage III battle-axes are known from Food Vessel contexts (Roe loc. cit.). Non-ceramic associations with Stage II include a rivet-tanged copper dagger at Standlow, Derbyshire (Roe Joc. cit.; Kinnes 1976); a three-rivet dagger, tanged knife or razor, and V-bored button from Rudston 68, Humberside (Roe loc. cit.; Green- well 1877, 262, fig. 126; Kinnes and Longworth 1985); and Stage I battle-axes in a late beaker context at Ness of Gruting, Shetland (Roe 1966, 222). The present example is one of the three known Stage II battle-axes made of Group XIII rock. The others are casual finds from Wales, one of them close to the rock source in the Preselau Hills. Except for slight differen- ces in size, the three are very much alike (Roe 1979, 23, 41, fig. 3), perhaps the work of a single craftsman. The handsome W/MR beaker from Pit 2 in G52 (Figure 8, P4) belongs, like P8 from G54, within the range of Middle style beakers; in the Lanting and van der Waals scheme perhaps to Step 2. The Late style rusticated beaker PS from Pit 3 probably belongs to Clarke’s Developed Southern group and to Lanting and van der Waal’s Step 6. An Artisan’s burial may be implied by the antler pick from the disturbance and Cunnington’s account of a skeleton ‘by the side of which lay several large pieces of stag’s horn’. Together with PS from G52, the pottery from G51 (Figure 5) denotes continuing deposition of burials during the currency of the Late beaker style when G54 may not have been in use. The neck fragment P2 is probably from a Developed Southern (S2) beaker like the one from Winterbourne Stoke G54 (Clarke 1970, fig. 900). The anomalous sherd P1, with possible Food Vessel affinities, would be in place in such a context; an S2(W) beaker (ibid., fig. 840) and an apparently contemporary Food Vessel came from a grave in Fargo Plantation, Amesbury (Stone 1938). P3, the rusticated beaker recovered by Cunnington, displays the slack profile that characterizes some of Clarke’s Late or ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE GS51-G54 Final Southern beakers and Lanting and van der Waals’s Step 7. Burial practices and barrow structures The existence of large unexcavated areas in GS2-G54 must be borne in mind; concentration on the central graves has left uncertainty as to whether or not they held all the interments deposited under these barrows. The intersecting pits of the first four interments at GS2 (Figure 7), together with Cunnington’s account of the four that he encountered in the mound and upper part of the grave, allow a partial reconstruction of the sequence in this barrow. It began with an adult cremation in the deepest pit and ended with a crema- tion in the top of the mound with which were fragments of a lost vessel described as a ‘drinking cup’. In the interval between these interments at least six inhumations had been deposited: adult male with Middle style beaker, followed and partly disturbed by infant with Late style beaker, followed by unacccom- panied sub-adult female; in uncertain relationship, in disturbed upper part of grave, were a second infant, a second sub-adult female, an unsexed male, and a third cremation. The minimum number of nine individuals is well above the average of 3.7 per grave established by Petersen’s analysis (1972, 28) of multiple burials on the Yorkshire Wolds. Fragmentary pottery and disturbed human bones imply comparable practices in the graves at G51 and G54, where successive inhumations seem to have been inserted without modification of the original grave- pits. There is also a close resemblance between the cremation pits prepared for the first interment at G52 and the last at G51. Both were cylindrical in shape, disproportionately large for the purpose, and had been partly infilled with pyre-sweepings. At G51 the pyre and the pit dug through it had been placed as close as possible to the inhumation grave and surplus upcast from the pit seems to have been spread across both. At G53 the cremated bones had been buried in a smaller receptacle, easily made by removing the soft fill from a solution hole. The mounds of all three ditchless barrows were probably much the same, with small cores beneath somewhat larger envelopes of scraped-up loam (Figures 9, 10). A residue of flint nodules on the site of the destroyed mound of G52 and in the fill of - Cunnington’s disturbance suggests the former pres- ence of a cairn, as at G53, or a core of flints and loam like that at G54. Durable devices must have marked the positions of the graves during the periods of successive re-openings. The small inner mounds could 31 have served this purpose; the ovoid shape of that at G54 may reflect distortion resulting from repeated dismantling. Synchronization of burial sequence with structural alterations to the mound has been proposed for G51 on the basis of events recorded by the quarry-pits and their contents. Two episodes of chalk extraction were assumed to relate to the deposition of inhumations in the grave. The demolition of the phase 2 mound, to provide space for a pyre and last interment, resulted in the complete infilling of the quarry-pits. The phase 3 mound seems to have been composed of scraped-up loam and the monument was then in effect a ditchless barrow like G52-G54. The haphazard disposition of the pits surrounding G51 is similar in kind to the first phase quarry-pits around two Late style beaker graves at Shrewton, 4-5 km to the NW (Green and Rollo-Smith 1984); there, however, the pits were eventually superseded by annular ditches. Another Late beaker grave at Raven- stone, Buckinghamshire (Allen 1981), was first sur- rounded by a symmetrical arrangement of ditch seg- ments comparable with those of the carefully laid out causewayed-ditch barrows discussed by Ashbee (1978, 34-37); but here the segments were refilled to the tops with mound material when a second interment was inserted above the first, and this, like G51, became in the end a ditchless barrow. It is difficult to ignore the synchronism between the closing down of the barrow cemetery and the construc- tion of the North Kite earthwork, part of a system of boundaries that attests a major reorganization of the landscape (RCHM(E) 1979, 26; fig. 14; map 1). The latest pottery on the surface sealed by the W bank of the North Kite belonged to a Late style beaker, possibly of Clarke’s Developed Southern group (Rich- ards 1990). The datable barrows within the cemetery seem to have been constructed in the order G54, G52, G51. The Late style beaker and ?Food Vessel pottery from G51 suggests that its period of use just preceded the episode of land division. Altered circumstances may then have prevented the building of new barrows and this might account for the re-opening of the long-disused grave in G54 for the reception of the ‘rich’ burial with bronze dagger and exotic stone battle-axe. Acknowledgements: thanks are offered to Humphrey Case and Fiona Roe for helpful discussions and information; to Rosamund Cleal and Julian Richards for information about the North Kite in advance of publication; and to Diane Robinson, who prepared the finished illustrations. By THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Appendix 1: The Human Bones from Barrows G51—G54, Wilsford cum Lake by ALISON CAMERON and JANET D. HENDERSON Note. The following text is a revised version of an original report by Alison Cameron (February 1985, Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report Number 4488). The cremated and inhumed human bones from these barrows were examined for details of minimum number of individuals, age, sex, stature, metrics, morphology and pathology. In addition the cremated samples were assessed for evidence of cremation practice (e.g. degree of burning). A catalogue of the methods used and the results will be found below. In general, standard observation techniques (e.g. for sex and age) were used throughout (see for example Brothwell (1981) or Stewart (1979)). Two adults were represented by the cremations deposited in pits in GS] and G53. One further individual was represented by the cremated bones dispersed from Pit | in G52. The cremations were very broken up, with most of the bone fragments being 20 to 40 mm long. These were mainly white in colour, an indication that they were all well burnt. It was noted that the vertebrae of the adult from G51 were less well cremated than other parts of the skeleton. The inhumed bone was found to include an apparent minimum number of 11 individuals. Bone preservation was generally quite good, the bones being reasonably complete and the surfaces not very eroded. The results for sex, age, stature and pathology (presence only) are summarized below. No attempt was made to sex infants or juveniles owing to the inaccuracies of the methods currently available. Results showed that there were three infants, one Barrow Ref. no. Sex G51 WD 1A = WD 1B ib. G52 WD 239 ?male WD 228 = WD 255 ?female WD 271A ?female WD 271B = WD 272 = WD 275A = WD 275B = G54 WD 350-1 ?male Note: the small collections of bone WD 252, WD 269 and WD 294, all from G52, are omitted: all could derive from individuals listed above. juvenile, four sub-adults (up to 25 years) and three individuals aged as ‘adult’ only. It was noted that two of the individuals from G52, WD 239 and WD 271A, had squatting facets adjacent to the inferior articular surface of the tibia. The oral pathology noted on WD 1B, WD 255 and WD 350-1 (see catalogue for details) is generally taken to indicate some form of gingivitis (gum disease) during life. WD 255 also exhibited a supernumerary incisor and some evidence for enamel hypoplasia (see catalogue). The latter condition usually results from an interruption of growth during tooth formation. Bone pathology was seen on WD 239 and WD 255 (see catalogue for details). CATALOGUE OF HUMAN BONES FROM BARROWS GS1-G54, WILSFORD CUM LAKE Note. In this catalogue details are only given where it was possible to collect data. Thus, for example, where it was not possible to make an attribution of sex no mention is made of that observation. Barrow GS1 WD 1. Inhumations. Disturbed bones from the grave represent a minimum of two individuals. 1A. Bone preservation quite good, about half of the skeleton was represented. Age: 18-20 years, based on epiphyseal fusion (Brothwell 1981). 1B. Bone preservation good, most of the skeleton was represented. Age: under 16 years, based on Age sub-adult juvenile adult infant sub-adult sub-adult infant adult adult infant sub-adult Stature Pathology present present present present ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE G51-G54 epiphyseal fusion (Brothwell 1981). Dental pathology: slight periodontal disease. WD 4. Cremation in pit. Bone preservation quite good, with many identifiable fragments. Age: adult, based on the size of the bones. Weight: 453 g. WD 6 and WD 12 were small samples of cremated bone recovered from pyre-sweepings in and around the pit; some of the bone could be identified as human. Barrow G52 WD 230. Cremated bone from Pit 1. One human skull fragment. WD 243 and WD 253, cremated bones dislodged from Pit 1, comprise respectively one rib fragment which could not be positively identified as human and a small amount of human bone. WD 273, WD 276 and WD 295, cremated bones recovered from Cunnington’s backfill, possibly but not certainly derived from Pit 1, comprise respectively: two skull fragments which could not be positively identified as human; five bone fragments which were probably of human origin; one long bone fragment which was probably human. WD 239. Inhumation: Interment 2 in Pit 2. Bone preservation very good, most of the skeleton was represented. Sex: probably male, based on the size of the bones. Age: adult, based on epiphyseal fusion (Brothwell 1981). Stature: 1.79 m +/— 0.034, c.5'10” (Trotter 1970). Skeletal pathology: the anterior of the mid-shaft of the right femur had an area of new bone growth. It was suggested that this probably repre- sented an ossified haematoma which might have been the result of a single trauma or a repeated stress. There was slight development of marginal osteophytes on the medial distal condyle of the right femur. On the proximal medial border of the right distal first foot phalanx there was a small bony exostosis. WD 228. Inhumation: Interment 3 in Pit 3. Bone preservation extremely good, most of the skeleton was represented. Age: 16-20 months, based on the erupt- ion of the deciduous teeth (Brothwell 1981). WD 255. Inhumation: Interment 4 in Pit 4. Bone preservation quite good, all of the skeleton was represented. Sex: probably female, based on the skull morphology and bone dimensions. Age: 17-25 years, based on molar attrition (Brothwell 1981). Stature: 1.71 m +/— 0.043, c.5’8”, based on the right radius (Trotter 1970). Dental pathology: on the lingual side 33 of the maxillary left second incisor was a super- numerary incisor. There was slight deposition of calculus and enamel hypoplasia on the teeth of the mandible. Skeletal pathology: there were slight mar- ginal osteophytes on the intervertebral facets of two thoracic vertebrae. Disturbed unburnt bones found beneath and around Interment 4: WD 252. A very small collection of human bone. WD 269. A small collection of adult human bone. Unburnt bones from Cunnington’s backfill: WD 271. There were a minimum of two indi- viduals: 271A. Bone preservation quite good, all of the skeleton was represented. Sex: probably female, based on pelvic morphology. Age: 20-23 years, based on epiphyseal fusion (Brothwell 1981). Stature: 1.70 m +/— 0.037, c.5'7", based on the left tibia (Trotter 1970). 271B. Bone preservation very poor, only the long bones and ribs were present. Age: infant, based on the size of the bones. WD 272. Bone preservation quite good, most of the skeleton was represented. Age: adult, based on epi- physeal fusion (Brothwell 1981). WD 275. There were a minimum of two indi- viduals: 275A. Bone preservation moderate, only the verte- brae, pelvis, skull and femora were represented. Age: adult, based on epiphyseal fusion (Brothwell 1981). 275B. Bone preservation poor, only the skull and appendicular skeleton were represented. Age: infant, based on the size of the skull vault. WD 294. A small collection of adult human bones. Barrow G53 WD 347. Cremation. Bone preservation quite good. Age: adult, based on the thickness of the skull. Weight: 159g. Barrow G54 WD 350-351. Inhumation. Last interment. Bone preservation quite good, most of the skeleton was represented. Sex: probably male, based on skull morphology and long bone metrics. Age: 17-25 years, based on molar attrition (Brothwell 1981). Dental pathology: the mandible had slight periodontal disease and there was a slight deposition of calculus on the teeth. 34 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Appendix 2. Pre-barrow Occupation Material (Figures 13-14) Table 1 sets out the distribution and contexts of the sherds of Neolithic pottery and the struck flints from the four barrows. The few animal bones are listed at the end of this appendix. Discussion of the pottery is preceded by comments on the contexts from which it was recovered. POTTERY G51. Most, if not all, of the pottery was brought to the site in the materials used to construct the core of the phase 2 mound. A high proportion was subsequen- tly redistributed — in the cremation pit, the upper fills of the quarry-pits and the plough soil. G52. The 204 Earlier Neolithic and 4 Peterborough sherds recovered from natural features represent occupation debris preserved more or less im situ by incorporation in the loam that filled the upper parts of the hollows. Most of the sherds (171) came from the adjoining Features 2 and 3 (Figure 6); a further 19 sherds derived from these features were found in the overlying plough soil. Smaller quantities came from Feature 4 (17 sherds), Feature 5 (15 sherds) and Feature 9 (2 sherds). The 11 Earlier Neolithic and 41 Grooved Ware sherds in the grave were probably introduced with the fill of Pit 1 and/or 2. G54. The only sherds found im situ are the 4 recorded from the upper fill of the excavated solution hollows (‘ditch’) beneath the mound (see plan, Figure 10). All others came from scraped-up mound material and plough soil. Earlier Neolithic (Figure 13: P9-P13) Most of the 322 sherds listed in Table 1 are small and featureless, placed in this category on criteria of fabric and finish. Rims are broken off short and provide few indications of vessel forms. The absence of recogniz- able necks or shoulders suggests simplicity. Lugs are represented by a detached fragment and by a sherd from another vessel that retains part of an original hole for the insertion of a tenon (P12). Twenty-two rim sherds represent 18 vessels. Forms are simple, 7; slightly rolled or everted, 4; slightly enlarged, 3; and internally thickened, 4. Three rims from the last group, belonging to three separate vessels, are decorated with diagonal or transverse incisions (P9, P10) and by fluting (P11). A body sherd from a small bowl or cup (P13) displays traces of two horizontal lines of punctulations. This sherd probably belonged to a vessel like P156 from Windmill Hill, : ae \ \ > \ : 1 i : P10 i as P13 Tet P14 O 5 10 ja [csfe| se alsa Figure 13. Earlier Neolithic pottery: P10, P14 from G51; P11-P13 from G52: P9 from G54. Scale 1:3 Avebury, where rims with transverse or diagonal incisions are also well represented (Smith 1965, figs. 23-25). Examples of both decorative techniques are reported from occupation debris in Amesbury G39, a round barrow 0.8 km E of Stonehenge (Ashbee 1981, 18: W1, W7). Inclusions in the fabrics of the 317 sherds are: flint and sand, 271; sand, 14; crushed quartz and flint, 10; flint, 8; crushed quartz, 6; organic substance, 3; sand and red iron ore, 2; none visible, 3 (all from cups). Peterborough Ware (Figure 14: P15—P30) The 144 sherds listed in Table 1 represent 43/46 vessels identified by form and decoration. Those from G51 comprise: rim, shoulder or base fragments from 18 vessels; 12 body sherds with whipped cord decoration from 8/9 vessels; 13 body sherds with complex (‘bird-bone’) impressions from 4/5 vessels; 10 body sherds with rustication or fingernail/fingertip impressions from 6/7 vessels. The sherds from G52 and G54 represent respectively 3 and 4 vessels. The Ebbsfleet, Mortlake and Fengate sub-styles are present; some feature sherds display atypical char- acteristics or are too fragmentary for attribution to a specific sub-style. ROUND BARROWS WILSFORD CUM LAKE G51-G54 35 Table 1. Distribution of Neolithic pottery and flintwork Sherds of pottery Struck flints Context Earlier Peter- Grooved Beaker? Indeter- Neolithic borough Ware minate* G51 Plough soil 17 54 ] 41 2 Mound (black core) 31 25 = _ 44 1 Cremation-pit 5 3 ] ] - 70 Upper fills of pits A, E-H 15 54 5 3 13 4 Disturbed fill, pit D 13 - ~ - = - Primary silt, pit D 1 - - = = = Solution hole, SW quadrant - - = = - l G52 Plough soil, SW quadrant 19 = — - 23 = Upper fills of natural features F2-F5, F9 204 4 = - 182 8 Grave 11 - 41 — = - G53 Plough soil - - - - - 9 G54 Plough soil 2 3 - - 5 2 Mound - 1 - - ] - Upper fills of solution hollows 4 = = = 4 be Unstratified - - - - - 1 Totals 322 144 49 5 313 98 * Crumbs and small sherds lacking distinctive characteristics Ebbsfleet. The restorable bowl (P15; Annable and Simpson 1964, no. 11) is decorated internally and on the rim with whipped cord impressions in a herring- bone pattern; zones of similar impressions, separated by end-to-end lengths of whipped cord, cover the outer surface of the neck, the shoulder and most of the body; a band of complex impressions represents a change of motif towards the base. Less elaborate whipped cord ornament links rim and shoulder sherds from a further 5 bowls. Despite minor differences in form, two of the rims (P16, P17) seem to be from the same vessel; a third (P18) displays horizontal fingernail impressions on the neck. The shoulder fragments (P25, P26 and one not illustrated) are from 3 different bowls. Visible inclusions in the fabrics are flint in P15, flint and sand in the others. Mortlake. The crescentic twisted cord impressions on a shoulder sherd (P27) are appropriate to this sub-style, as is a concave neck and part of a typical heavy rim with diagonal twisted cord (not illustrated). Fengate. Identifiable fragments comprise collars and narrow flat bases. The only complete rim profile (P28) takes the form of a deep, slightly convex collar with pronounced overhang. The outer surface is decorated with diagonal incisions and a few horizontal ?fingernail impressions; a fingernail was also used on the inner edge of the rim. The upper part of a collar (P21) is ornamented entirely with end-to-end fingernail: three lines along the inner bevel and a complex arrangement of horizontal and curving lines on the exterior. On a smaller fragment from a similar rim (not illustrated) fingernail impressions make a herring-bone pattern on THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE » % % % %ES ray uy Mien ON er unter ity “FRC E LEFF EE EEL CELE EBEEE COEEL a e ndfageli fy mitt hg a Bs Sey 6% YEELREYS YE au Ucn FA At UA Naa x ee eho Io N : Qs y ga - tee = hx ALOT : tele, suopimy Apues SA Bumpy, Noo Be eae a a= Pel] Apues Sper sues T, : ., SP[ely IUSSUIOG ( rie isi. S ABMYIVI TL Ges capa prow See ee os Arepunog Suryity ( - Sptrepeo Azepunog ysueg %) 5 ARAM Gs Z AInqaay 0} v2 74 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE land had been sold to Edward Poore of Rushall and the three arable fields had been enclosed. By 1838 they comprised a single field of 192 acres. The tithing of Hilcott consisted almost entirely of tenantry in the mid sixteenth century. The arable land was in four principal fields: South Clay and North Clay fields, Nether Field and Sandy Field. There were 12 acres of copyhold arable and 26 acres of freehold arable in West Highway field, west of the road to Cuttenham Farm. There were common meadows in Nether Field, Sandy Furlong and Oatlands, also a sheep pasture in Cow Leaze. The fields of Hilcott were still held in common in 1679 but were enclosed by private agreement in the early eighteenth century. Gores is the oldest of the more recent settlements. Its development started about 1773, and by 1971 there were 61 houses and cottages, making it the most populous settlement in the parish. METHOD Dr Hooper (1971) suggests that before a hedgerow dating study is undertaken the number of shrubs in at least 12 hedges of known date, and preferably a wide range, in the vicinity of the study area should be recorded to act as a control and avoid gross errors. Unfortunately, due to constraints of time and other resources, this has not been possible for this study. However, the method and discoveries of workers in this field, most notably Hooper and Hewlett, have been noted and their methods followed as closely as possible where practicable. The main tools used for the field work were a 1:25000 Ordnance Survey map of the area, a Collins Guide to Trees and a number of recording sheets. The parish was divided into five areas, A to E, for ease of systematic boundary walking, rather than because of any significance the areas may have had historically. Every field boundary was then studied, each one being marked on the Ordnance Survey map and given a unique reference number which was repeated on the recording sheet. Each landowner was contacted and the extent of his land noted to help tie in with historical records. The type of boundary, for example, hedge, barbed wire or bank, and its length, together with the height of the bank (if applicable) and the land use in the adjoining fields were ail noted on the recording sheets. Any special topographical information and features within the fields, for example evidence of ridge-and-furrow in pasture land, were also recorded. For boundaries other than hedges this was the only information recorded but for hedges a sample species count was carried out. The ends of a hedge may be atypical, so starting ten paces in, the number of species in three 30 metre sections was recorded. The types of species were also recorded, as some species are indi- cators of old woodland or hedgerows. There is some controversy over the species which should be included. In general it is agreed that all woody species which could form a hedge on their own should be recorded. This means that species such as spindle (Euonymus europaeus), dog rose (Rosa canina), haw- thorn (Crataegus monogyna), hazel (Corylus avellana) and elder (Sambucus nigra) were included in the count, but not brambles Rubus fruticosus or ‘climbers’ such as honeysuckle (Lonicera periclymenum), traveller’s joy (Clematis vitalba), ivy (Hedera helix) or the bryonies (Bryonia dioica and Tamus communis). Tree species were recorded if they were an integral part of the hedge, either relict coppice, pollards or saplings. Standard trees, for example beech (Fagus sylvatica), oak (Quercus robur) and ash (Fraxinus excelsior) were also included. Species counts were not taken for garden hedges as it was felt that their different planting and management would make the one species per hundred years thesis unlikely to apply. Hedges sur- rounding woodland were recorded although the prox- imity of a large number of species for colonization may affect the results. RESULTS Figure 2 shows the shrub species recorded during the survey listed in order, following Dandy (1958). A total number of 66 hedges were studied, covering a length of about 28 kilometres. They ranged from nine species hedges to single species ones, and span the period from Saxon times to the present day. Thirty kilometres of non-hedged field and parish boundaries were also recorded. Counting the number of species in a hedge can only lead to an approximate date; therefore it was decided to group the hedges studied into four categories based on the number of species, which would according to Hooper’s theory correspond to main periods of agri- cultural history. Category 1 consists of hedges with nine or more species. It is reasonable to expect these to date to Saxon times. Hedges with six, seven or eight species were put into category 2. These, according to Hooper’s theory, originated in early Medieval times between about 1150 and 1350. This was a ume when there was some addition to Saxon hedges and dead hedges were invaded by living species and became permanent. In Tudor and Stuart periods from about the mid 15th century to the mid 17th century, ex-open townships were planted with hedges and FIELD AND PARISH BOUNDARIES IN NORTH NEWNTON Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Acer campestre Field Maple Euonymus europaeus Spindle Rosa canina Dog Rose Prunus spinosa Blackthorn Crataegus monogyna Hawthorn Sorbus aria Whitebeam Sorbus torminalis Wild Service Tree Malus sylvestris Crab Apple Betula pendula Silver Birch Corylus avellana Hazel Fagus sylvatica Beech Quercus robur Pedunculate Oak Populus canescens Populus serotina Grey Poplar Italian Poplar Salix fragilis Crack Willow Salix caprea Pussy Willow Fraxinus excelsior Ash Ligustrum vulgare Wild Privet Sambucus nigra Elder Viburnum opulus Guelder Rose Figure 2. Shrub species recorded in survey of North Newnton hedgerows enclosed. These hedges would be expected to have three, four or five species, and were put in category 3. Category 4 contains hedges with one or two species which probably date to the parliamentary enclosures of the eighteenth century, right up to the present day. The three maps shown in Figures 3, 6, and 8 show the distribution of hedges in each category. As can be seen from Figure 3 there is just one hedge in category 1, which follows the parish boundary for about 350 metres south of the Avebury to Amesbury road. This is part of what is believed to be the course of a great pre-Saxon highway linking Norfolk along the Berkshire Downs, with Salisbury Plain (Grundy, 1918). It is referred to as ‘Herepathes’ in the Saxon charters (Grundy, 1919-1920) which indicates it was more than just a local path. A road ran from Wilsford to Swanborough Tump in Manningford Abbots foll- owing the course of the Herepath but in 1773 the part from the cross-roads south to Wilsford was no longer used. Now it is just a footpath marked by a bank surmounted by a substantial and botanically rich hedge. Figure 4 lists the shrub species present in the hedge and shows the percentage of sampled 30 metre sections in which they occurred. Each section contains on average nine species, and also a number of decaying elm stumps. 75 Five hedges fall into category 2. One follows the trackway which forms the western part of the southern parish boundary and is also mentioned in the Saxon charters, ‘Then along the Way to Teolta’s Ford’ (Grundy 1919-1920). The northern side has a substan- ual hedge with an average of seven species per 30 metres along its length. It consists of two banks with a ditch through the middle. The ford has been replaced by a bridge. One of the other hedges in category 2 lies in area E, and two of them lie in area F and are described later in relation to Cow Leaze pasture. The other category 2 hedge follows the north-south track- way which separates area D from E. North Clay field was known as Long Hedge field in the seventeenth century and probably got its name from this hedge, although this only suggests it was well established by this ume and does not give a date for its origin. It is one of the only two hedges in the parish to contain spindle (Euonymus europaeus). The other is the seven-species hedge along the western part of the southern parish boundary. Spindle (Euonymus europaeus) is indicative of hedges of pre-Tudor age as it is a late colonizer (Legg, 1983). Maple (Acer campestre) tends to colonize hedges which already contain three or more species and so indicates a hedge of Tudor or Stuart age, whereas elder (Sambucus migra) is one of the first colonizers and is present in nearly all the hedges in the parish. Figure 5 shows the shrub species present in the category 2 hedges, and the percentage of 30 metre sections in which they occur. The greatest number of hedges fall into category 3. There are 34 hedges with three to five species and these can be seen in Figure 6. Area E consists of older hedges in the north and younger hedges and fences in the south. The two areas are separated by a long hedge of possibly Tudor or Stuart age which follows the bound- ary between the former tenantry land of Hilcott and the former demesne fields. This fits in with the suggestion that some land exchange and reorgani- zation took place when the new farmhouse was built at Cuttenham Farm in the 1530s. Area F contains category 2 and category 3 hedges. This is the area where Cow Leaze pasture is known to have been enclosed and divided in 1583-4. The four species hedge running approximately east-west across Cow Leaze follows the dividing line between the demesne land in the south and the tenantry land in the north, shown on the sketch map accompanying the 1583-4 enclosure award (Wiltshire County Record Office). If it is assumed the hedge was planted in the 1580s it now matches the expected number of species according to Hooper’s theory of one species per hundred years. The older hedges to the north and south define the THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 76 Boy ape el JOATY Puefpoo/ saspoy 7 Arosa1eD aspoH [ Arosai1ey ABMYICI TL peod Arepunog ysiieg AWM saspey 7 pue [ Alosale7 :UOIUMON YMON ‘“¢ 21NBTy \-ELOO UI \ SX wey weyusiny AInqoay 0] FIELD AND PARISH BOUNDARIES IN NORTH NEWNTON 77 0 50 100 Acer pseudoplatanus Acer campestre Rosa cantina Prunus spinosa Crataegus monogyna Malus sylvestris Corylus avellana Quercus robur Fraxinus excelsior Sambucus nigra Figures in brackets denote the number of hedges and 30 m samples. Figure 4. North Newnton: shrub species present in Category 1 hedge: percentage occurrence in 30 metre sections 0 50 100 Acer pseudoplatanus Acer campestre Euonymus europaeus Rosa canina Prunus spinosa Crataegus monogyna Sorbus torminalis Malus sylvestris Corylus avellana Quercus robur Salix caprea Fraxinus excelsior Sambucus nigra Figures in brackets denote the number of hedges and 30 m samples. Figure 5. North Newnton: shrub species present in Category 2 hedges: percentage occurrence in 30 metre sections THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 78 saspay ¢ A1OSa1eD :UOIUMIN YON °9 aN3IJ NOLNAAN HLYON saspay ¢ Arosa1V9 ABMYICI peod Arepunog ysueg Ad We ay g LLOOTIH AInqoay 01 FIELD AND PARISH BOUNDARIES IN NORTH NEWNTON 0 Acer pseudoplatanus Acer campestre Rosa canina Prunus spinosa Crataegus monogyna Sorbus aria Betula pendula Corylus avellana Fagus sylvatica Quercus robur Populus canescens Populus serotina Salix fragilis Salix caprea Fraxinus excelsior Ligustrum vulgare Sambucus nigra Viburnum opulus 79 50 100 Figures in brackets denote the number of hedges and 30 m samples. Figure 7. North Newnton: shrub species present in Category 3 hedges: percentage occurrence in 30 metre sections Medieval boundaries of Cow Leaze when it was common pasture. The age of the trackways which cross the parish and link it with its neighbours is not known, but they are typical of the Lower Pewsey Vale and are probably at least Medieval in date. Apart from the seven-species hedge already mentioned, the hedges which border the tracks contain for the most part an average of only four species per 30 metres and may be later than the trackways. Both sides of Cats Brain Way are almost devoid of hedges. This is the area of the open fields of both Hilcott tithing and North Newnton. There is just one hedge with an average of four species which formed part of the southern boundary of North Clay field. Figure 3 shows where a one metre high bank runs roughly north-south either side of Cats Brain Way. This follows the division between Home Field and the tithing of Hilcott in the north, and Home Field and Bush Field in the south. The area is now ploughed as one big field but the bank remains after two hundred years and may be the remains of the head- lands formed at the end of each set of ridge-and-furrow where the plough team was turned round. Areas A and B have the river forming the parish boundary along much of their length, bounded by narrow strips of woodland in places (Figure 3). Along certain sections it is difficult to distinguish between linear woodland and hedges. The outline of one of the former open fields of Hilcott, Nether Field (Figure 1), still shows up clearly in Figure 6 bounded by hedges with four or five species. The area was not enclosed until the early eighteenth century and the higher number of species than would be expected may be due to the proximity of woodland. Nether Field is now sub-divided by barbed-wire fences. The extreme south-east corner of the parish is bounded by hedges with an average of three species per 30 metre section. This puts them in the late Stuart period according to Dr Hooper’s theory. The hedges are shown on the 1803 Survey but there is no record of when they were planted. Figure 7 lists all the shrub species found in category 3 hedges, and shows the THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 80 aN 1000) AN x qHOCTaa 20udJ saspoH fp Alosale) ABMyAIEI IT, pecu AJepunog ystieg AA saduay pue saspay p AIOZIIvD :UOIUMAN YON “8 21N3IF wie. weyusiny AINQdAY 01 FIELD AND PARISH BOUNDARIES IN NORTH NEWNTON 0 Acer campestre Rosa canina Prunus spinosa Crataegus monogyna Corylus avellana Fraxinus excelsior Sambucus nigra 81 50 100 Figures in brackets denote the number of hedges and 30 m samples. Figure 9. North Newnton: shrub species in Category 4 hedges: percentage occurrence in 30 metre sections percentage of sampled 30 metre sections in which they occur. There are 26 hedges with just one or two species and these can be seen in Figure 8. They are most in evidence around the village of Gores and south and west of the Woodbridge Inn which are areas of mainly nineteenth and twentieth century development. In area C the parish boundary is only marked by a young hedge and in one place just by a bank. The indented line of the boundary at this point is indicative of the expansion of open fields in early Medieval times until they met and interlocked with the strip fields of the adjoining parish. In the area of the large fields east of Cuttenham Farm it is known that in 1838 there was just one big field so any hedges must be later than that date. Fences predominate in the areas of most recent hedges and also along the parish boundary where it follows the stream and is often wooded, for example the extreme western edge of the parish. Figure 9 lists the shrub species found in category 4 hedges. These hedges show an almost total absence of standard trees and are generally thin, often with gaps. One area of interest is North Newnton Wood, formerly the Doles, just north of the village. On the Ordnance Survey map of 1923 it is still shown as a block of woodland but now has lost most of its western side to pasture. The pasture contains many large oak trees, betraying its woodland origin. The area of wood is surrounded by a deep ditch which in the north forms the parish boundary. Within the wood, which is coppiced hazel with oak standards, drainage ditches remain which probably formed the division between the individual tenants’ plots after enclosure some time in the early sixteenth century. The western boundary of what is now a field is formed by a line of oak trees. DISCUSSION Recent studies have shown the anomalies which occur when rigidly applying Hooper’s regression equation for predicting the age of a hedge. Pollard’s work on woodland relic hedges in Huntingdon and Peter- borough (1973) has already been mentioned. R.A.D. Cameron and D.J. Pannett (1980) working in the West Midlands found that hedges in that part of the country were also generally richer in species for their age than would be expected. This was partly due to the number of woodland relic hedges, but also to the local tradi- tions of hedge making. Hewlett rightly comments (1974), that the validity and usefulness of this type of study depends on whether it makes sense when presented as a map and when compared with documentary evidence. In gen- eral the North Newnton study does make sense and taken chronologically its findings can be summarised as follows: 1. The hedges with the greatest number of shrub species are for the most part along the parish boundary which is known to have existed in Saxon umes. 2. Just over half the hedges in the parish have three to five species making their expected date of origin in the Tudor-Stuart period. This was a tme of some enclosure throughout the country, probably increased in North Newnton when the demesne farmhouse was rebuilt in the south-west corner of the parish in the 1530s. 3. The hedge dividing Cow Leaze, which can be dated to the 1580s, contains four species on average which is the expected number according to Hooper’s theory. 4. The area enclosed in the mid nineteenth century 82 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE by the award of 1840 contains young species-poor hedges. Dr Hooper’s theory appears to work as a rough guide in this area. Greater accuracy can only be achieved by a long and more detailed study of this part of Wiltshire, particularly by concentrating on hedges with a known date of origin. A closer study of the botanical composi- tion of each hedge and the development of a master species profile for the whole area, along the lines suggested by Hussey (1987), would also aid subse- quent historical landscape studies in Wiltshire. Acknowledgements: The author would like to thank Dr R. Wilcox for his assistance, and also Dr J. Chandler and the staff of the Wiltshire Record Office, Trowbridge. REFERENCES CAMERON, R.A.D., and PANNETT, D.J., 1980 ‘Hedgerow shrubs and Landscape History in the West Midlands’, Arboricultural Fournal 4, 147-152 CROWLEY, D.A., 1975 ‘North Newnton’ in Victona History of Wiltshire 10, 126-36 DANDY, J.E, 1958 List of Brinsh Vascular Plants, British Museum (Natural History) GRUNDY, G.B., 1918 ‘The Ancient Highways and Tracks of Wiltshire, Berkshire and Hampshire and the Saxon Battlefields of Wiltshire’, Arch. Journal 75, 69-194 — 1919-20 ‘The Saxon Land Charters of Wiltshire’, Arch. Fournal 76, 143-301 HEWLETT, G., 1974 ‘Reconstructing an Historical Landscape from Field and Documentary Evidence’, Agric. Hist. Rev. 21, 94-110 HOOPER, M.D., 1971 Hedges and Local History, National Council of Social Service for the Standing Conference for Local History HOSKINS, W.G., 1967 Fieldwork in Local History, London: Faber HUSSEY, T., 1987 ‘Hedgerow History’, The Local Historian 17, 327-42 LEGG, R., 1983 Romans in Britain, Oxford: Heinemann POLLARD, E., 1973 ‘Woodland Relic Hedges in Huntington and Peterborough’, Fournal of Ecology 61, 343-352 POLLARD, E., HOOPER, M.D., and MOORE, N.W., 1974 Hedges, London: Collins RACKHAM, O., 1985 The History of the Countryside, London: Dent TAYLOR, C., 1975 Fields in the English Landscape, London: Dent Wiltshire County Council Library and Museum Service, Sites and Monuments Record for Wiltshire Wiltshire County Record Office, 1583-4 Award of Cow Leaze in Lieu of Common (WROS90/1043) Wiltshire County Record Office, 1803 Map of North Newnton (WRO1553/108) Wiltshire County Record Office, 1838 Tithe Award of North Newnton (T/A NORTH NEWNTON) Wiltshire County Record Office, 1840 Enclosure Award of North Newnton (EA 156) Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 84 (1991), pp. 83-95 Accommodation and Travel in Pre-Turnpike Wiltshire by JOHN CHANDLER A list of accommodation and stabling in Wiltshire towns and villages in 1686 1s compared with evidence of population, licensed premises at earlier and later dates, and the main road network. The data are plotted and analysed in order to assess the distribution and progress of the licensed trade, the main road network of Wiltshire before the turnpike era, and the relationship between roads and licensed premises. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this short paper is twofold: to publish the Wiltshire portion of a document which purports to record the number of beds for travellers and stabling for horses in each town and village in 1686; and, by comparing this document with data derived from other sources, to make some suggestions about the progress of the licensed trade and road travel in Wiltshire during the seventeenth and eighteenth cen- turies. SOURCES The document is a manuscript book entitled ‘Abstract of a particular account of all the Inns, Alehouses etc in England with their stable-room and bedding in the year 1686’ and is found among the War Office Miscellanea in the Public Record Office, Kew (PRO WO 30/48). It is the earliest of three such surveys (the others, which are less useful, are PRO WO 30/49 of 1756, and an undated list, PRO WO 30/50) compiled for the purpose of billeting troops. It has been used by, amongst others, historians of inns and alehouses (Clark 1983; Everitt 1985), market towns (Chartres 1985) and pre-industrial road travel (Hey 1980); and in a Wiltshire context it has been briefly described by N.J. Williams (1960, xiv—xv). The book is a fair copy written in an easily legible hand by a clerk who was working from a less legible original, and who clearly had little knowledge of Wiltshire topography. It poses four problems of interpretation. First, some homonymous places cannot be distinguished (Draycot, Hinton, Marston __ and Stoke, for example). Second, the spelling of many names has been distorted through the clerk’s misread- | ing of his original, with unidentifiable or grotesque results (such as Hatchbird for Heytesbury, Anklewire for Avoncliff Weir). Third, some towns and villages have been placed in the wrong county — Sherston and surrounding villages have been included in Glou- cestershire, Gillingham (Dorset), Norton St Philip (Somerset) and several other places have found their way into Wiltshire (for this reason the county totals given by Williams are inaccurate). Fourth, a part of east Wiltshire, including Pewsey and Ludgershall, seems to have been omitted altogether; places in this area are not to be found listed under Wiltshire, and a search through the whole document failed to find them attributed to any other county. Despite these imperfections, and uncertainty about who compiled it and how (presumably it was the work of the newly-formed Board of Excise, who certainly produced the later lists), it seems clear that the document was intended to embrace all premises whose proprietors should have been licensed under legisla- tion of 1552 touching inns and alehouses (5&6 Edw VI, c.25). Hey (1980, 209) seems to suggest that accommodation in private houses was also included, but so far as Wiltshire is concerned this is unlikely, not only because the later lists are specific on this point, but also because four Wiltshire places (Axford in Ramsbury, Coombe Bissett, Milbourne in Malmes- bury and Winsley in Bradford on Avon) are given a nil return in the 1686 list, implying that an alehouse existed but provided neither accommodation nor sta- bling. If the totals included private houses it would be hard to understand the purpose of such entries. Two near-contemporary historical sources serve to place the 1686 list in perspective. The geographer John Ogilby surveyed the principal roads of England and Wales between 1669 and 1674, and published a volume of one hundred scroll maps in 1675 (Ogilby 1971). From this may be derived with reasonable confidence information about the routes of main roads through Wiltshire in the late seventeenth century. The so-called ‘Compton Census’ of 1676 lists for most Wiltshire parishes and some chapelries the numbers of Anglican communicants, Roman Catholics and protes- tant dissenters, which taken together should represent 84 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE the total adult population. Most peculiars and some other parishes (notably those where the living was vacant at the time of compilation) have no return, and many of the totals give the appearance of being estimates or ‘round numbers’. Nevertheless Anne Whiteman’s recent magisterial edition of this census (Whiteman 1986) has demonstrated its general consis- tency, and her conclusions, with a few exceptions, have been used in the accompanying tables. For comparative information about licensed premises at earlier and later periods we may turn to a published list of 1620 (Williams 1960, 11-51, derived from PRO E 180/145), and to eighteenth-century Quarter Sessions records (WRO_ A1/325/1,3,4; A1/326/1). The 1620 list is of Lenten recognizances, entered by all innkeepers, alehousekeepers and others who normally sold meat, that they would observe Lenten fasting. Its editor is over-optimistic in ass- erting that these recognizances, ‘provide us with the names of practically every innkeeper, alehousekeeper, taverner, and tippling-house keeper in the county in 1620’ (Williams 1960, xii—xiv), since no Marlborough or Wilton licensees are included. But he correctly observes that the list is far more complete than any that could be derived from Quarter Sessions records; and with the usual caveat about incomplete data it offers the chance to compare the licensed trade in 1620 with that of later periods. The earliest register of alehousekeepers’ recognizan- ces returned by magistrates to Wiltshire Quarter Sessions is dated 1756 (WRO A1/326/1). This useful list gives the licensees’ names and, for parts of the county, the parishes or settlements in which their premises were situated, but not the sign or name of the premises. It is arranged by groups of hundreds, corresponding to licensing divisions, and it omits Devizes, Marlborough and Salisbury boroughs, which fell outside county licensing jurisdiction. It was compiled from enrolled recognizances submitted by licensing magistrates, which survive very incompletely from 1737-69 (WRO A1/325/1-18). These were for- merly stored alongside the Quarter Sessions great rolls (Fowle 1955, xxxill), but now form a separate class. Three of the earliest bundles (WRO A1/325/1,3,4, of 1737, 1739 and 1741 respectively) between them include the whole county except certain towns, and have been used in the accompanying table; totals for Malmesbury, Wilton and Wootton Bassett are sup- plied from the 1756 register. No data for Devizes and Marlborough at this period appear to have survived, and the totals in a book of Salisbury recognizances, c.1735—40 (WRO A3/175/3) fluctuate wildly from year to year, and so have been disregarded. One other body of evidence can be explored in order to check and supplement Ogilby’s road maps. The first large-scale map of Wiltshire, by John Andrews and Andrew Dury, was published in 1773 (Crittall 1952), shortly after the great period of turnpiking of Wilt- shire roads which occurred 1750-c.1762 (Cossons 1959, 258-62). It does not, therefore, reflect the pre-turnpike road system. However, many county maps published after Ogilby were influenced by his work to include main roads (Beresiner 1983, 26), and one Wiltshire map, Philip Lea’s revision of Saxton, may have been first published with roads in 1667, eight years before Ogilby, although surviving copies are dated 1689 (Chubb 1911, 227-8). Figure 8 (below) conflates the evidence of roads from eight county maps published between 1689 and 1755. Like all the other sources used in this paper they cannot be taken entirely at face value, because some were printed at too small a scale for precision, and all represent rework- ings to a greater or lesser extent of earlier maps. LICENSED PREMISES Most of the premises listed in Table 1 might properly be described as inns or alehouses. The return for the Marlborough Collection of the Board of Excise (most of north Wiltshire, with parts of Berkshire and Glou- cestershire) included in the 1756 billeting document (PRO WO 30/49, f.96) distinguishes between ‘public houses’ (alehouses) and ‘inns or houses of enter- tainment’, with 61% of premises falling into the former category and 39% into the latter. The 1620 and later recognizances use a variety of terms to describe licensees (alehousekeeper, innholder, innkeeper, tav- erner, tppler, victualler, or simply spinster or widow) without consistency. It is not possible, therefore, to make any meaningful distinction between types of establishment from the sources available, other than to point out that inclusion in the 1620 list implies that food was normally served, and the 1686 list implies that in most cases accommodation was offered. Even humble alehouses included in these lists, therefore, were not mere drinking dens, but provided some of the facilities expected of an inn. The 1686 list shows surprisingly little pattern in the ratio of beds to stabling; in the ensuing calculations, therefore, they have been added together to achieve a single total of accommodation. Comparison between Figures 1] and 2 suggests that the incidence of licensed premises in 1686 reflects in general the density of population, with the greatest concentration on the more populous west and north Wiltshire claylands, and the least on the chalklands of ACCOMMODATION AND TRAVEL IN PRE-TURNPIKE WILTSHIRE Table 1: Accommodation, Population and Licensed Premises, 1620—c.1740 This table should be read in conjunction with the notes and explanations which follow it. Aldbourne Alderbury Alderbury Whaddon Alderton Amesbury Ansty Ashton, Steeple Ashton, Steeple Hinton, Great Semington Ashton Keynes Avebury Avebury Beckhampton Kennett, West Barford St Martin Baydon Bedwyn, Great Bedwyn, Great Marten Wilton Bedwyn, Little Beechingstoke Berwick St James Biddestone Bishopstone (south) Box Box Chapel Plaister Hatt Kingsdown Middle Hill Bradford on Avon Atworth Bradford Holt Leigh and Woolley Limpley Stoke Winsley Wraxall, South Bradley, Maiden Bradley, North Bradley, North Cutteridge Southwick Bremhill Avon Bremhill Foxham Highway Brinkworth Britford Britford Harnham, East Brokenborough Bromham - Bromham Chittoe Clinghill Broughton Gifford Bulford Burbage Burcombe, South A nan DAetpnvn B C 279 67 127 170 423 D NR 1 Burcombe, North Ditchampton Calne Blackland Bowood Calne Cuffs Corner Derry Hill Quemerford Red Hill Sandy Lane Stock Stockley Studley Cannings, All Allington Cannings, All Etchilhampton Cannings, Bishops Cannings, Bishops Horton Nursteed Shepherds Shore Southbroom Chalke, Broad Charlton (near Pewsey) Charlton Park Cherhill Cheverell, Great Chicklade Chilmark Chilton Foliat Chippenham Chippenham Tytherton Kellaways Chirton Chisledon Chitterne (both) Chitterne Chitterne All Saints Chitterne Down Chitterne St Mary Cholderton Christian Malford Chute Clyffe Pypard Broad Town Clyffe Pypard Codford (both) Codford St Mary Codford St Peter Colerne Collingbourne Ducis Collingbourne Kingston Combe, Castle Combe Bissett Corsham Chapel Knap Corsham Linleys Pickwick Corsley Chapmanslade Corsley 510 (3050) (1) 1 1 1S [15] [2] 85 30 [28] [2] 86 Corsley Heath Whitbourne Coulston, East Cricklade Calcott Chelworth Cricklade Cricklade St Mary Cricklade St Sampson The Forty Crudwell Chedglow Crudwell Eastcourt Damerham Dauntsey Deverell, Longbridge Crockerton Deverell, Longbridge Devizes Ditteridge Donhead St Mary Ludwell Downton Easton Grey Easton Royal Eaton, Castle Edington Edington Tinhead Enford Erlestoke Everleigh Farleigh, Monkton Fisherton Anger Fonthill (both) Fonthill Fonthill Bishop Fonthill Gifford Stopp Fovant Froxfield Fugglestone St Peter Bemerton Hare Warren Quidhampton Garsdon Grittleton Hankerton Hannington Hardenhuish Harnham, West Heddington Heytesbury Highworth Blunsdon, Broad Highworth Hilmarton Hilperton Hindon Hinton, Broad Hinton, Broad Uffcott Hinton, Little Horningsham Hullavington Hungerford (Wilts and Berks) Charnham Street (Wilts) Idmiston Porton A B [1] [2] [3] [3] 3 6 68 85 [56] [72] [12] [13] GO) 2) 6) *@) 4 0 1 3 3 4 [3] [4] 97 525 8. 22 {8} [22] 18 20 2 0 10 12 [5] [10] [5] [2] 3 8 6 4 82-123 6 6 [2] [0] [4] [6] 4 6 4 5 4 0 [4] [0] 5 10 l 2 1 2 ae”. 31-190 [31] [190] 2 2 4788 6 9 (50) (104) 2 1 [2] (1] 225 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE D [5] (6) [6] E (1) 12 (1) (2] [8] (1) Imber Inglesham Keevil Bulkington Keevil Kemble Kingswood Kington St Michael Kington Langley Kington St Michael Kington, West Knook Knoyle, East Knoyle, West Lacock Lacock Reybridge Langford, Steeple Bathampton Langford, Steeple Langley Burrell Langley Burrell Peckingell Latton Latton Seven Bridges Laverstock and Ford Ford Laverstock Milford Lavington, Market Lavington, Market Lavington Lodge Lavington, West Lavington, West Littleton Pannell Lea and Cleverton Lea Liddington Luckington Ludgershall Lydiard Millicent Lyneham Clack Lyneham Malmesbury Burton Hill Corston Malmesbury Milbourne Manningford Bruce Marden Marlborough Martin Melksham Beanacre Blackmore Canonhold Melksham Seend Whitley and Shaw Mere Mere Zeals Mildenhall Minety Netheravon Nettleton Newnton, Long Newnton, North Hilcott Cc 157 156 101 500 370 160 141 493 134 2500 D 2] {10] pe E ACCOMMODATION AND TRAVEL IN PRE-TURNPIKE WILTSHIRE Newton, South Newton, South Stoford Ugford Nunton and Bodenham Bodenham Oaksey Odstock Ogbourne St George Overton Pewsey Pewsham Poole Keynes Potterne Marston Potterne Worton Poulshot Poulton Preshute Newbury Street Preshute St Margarets Purton Braydon Purton Ramsbury Axford Ramsbury Rowde Rushall Salisbury Sedgehill Sherston Pinkney Sherston, Great Willesley Shrewton Somerford, Great Somerford, Great Startley Somerford, Little Stapleford Stourton Stratford sub Castle Stratton St Margaret Sutton Benger Sutton Mandeville Sutton Veny Newnham Sutton Veny Swindon Teffont Evias Tidworth, North Tilshead Tisbury Chicksgrove Hatch Tisbury Trowbridge Staverton Studley, Lower _ Studley, Upper Trowbridge Upavon Upton Lovell Upton Scudamore Urchfont [5] zZ [2] NN [10] [0] 203 937 D [5] RK NN We NK Nd —_ - Lydeway Urchfont Wanborough Warminster Westbury Bratton Brook Chantry Chapmanslade Dilton Penleigh Short Street Westbury Westbury Leigh Westport St Mary Westwood Avoncliff Westwood Whiteparish Wilsford Bottlesford Wilton Wingfield Winterbourne Bassett Winterbourne Earls Hurdcott Winterbourne Stoke Winterslow Wishford, Great Woodborough Woodford Woodford, Upper Wootton Bassett Woodshaw Wootton Bassett Wraxall, North Ford Wraxall, North Wylye Deptford Wylye Yatton Keynell Giddea Hall Yatton Keynell UNIDENTIFIED Barwick Bushett Bushton [south Wiltshire] Draycourt Frary Harmon Close Hayford Hinton Hutton Kirby Green Mark Stratford Marston Marston Moyle [north Wilt- shire] Maston Stoke Sutton Vstock TOTALS _ eh NNN ONNFNH WMWnNnN— 2724 nN _ NWOCONCCAOS WrNN Nh 5029 317 147 100 160 720 165 102 13] 101 200 245 171 613 124 180 112 87 D E [1] (1] 2 5 25 31 18 25 (2] (1] (3] [2] (2] (1] [1] (1] (iJ [11] [2] [6] 4 2 [2] 2 2 1 (1] 6 1 1 1 (1] 1 1 1 1 ] (1] 4 18 [3] [4] [15] 3 [1] [2] 3 5 [3] [5] 3 (3] 1 2 423 776 88 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE NOTES TO TABLE 1 column A: number of guest beds recorded in 1686 (PRO WO 30/48) column B: stabling for horses recorded in 1686 (PRO WO 30/48) column C: adult population in 1676 (Whiteman 1986) column D: innkeepers, etc., recorded in 1620 (Williams 1960) column E: innkeepers, etc., recorded in c.1740 (WRO A1/325/1,3,4; Al/326/1. (Precise dates are as follows: 1737: Alderbury, Amesbury, Bradford, Branch and Dole, Cawden and Cadworth, Chalke, Damerham South, Downton, Dunworth, Elstub and Everleigh, Frustfield, Heytesbury, Kinwardstone, Melksham, Mere, Swanborough, Underditch, Warminster, Westbury, Whorwellsdown hundreds; 1739: Calne and Chippenham, Damerham North, Kingsbridge, Malmesbury, Potterne and Cannings hundreds; 1741: Highworth, Cricklade and Staple, Ramsbury, Selkley hundreds; 1756: Malmesbury, Wilton and Wootton Bassett boroughs. ) Places are omitted if no accommodation or licensees are recorded, even though a population figure may exist; column C is not therefore the complete Compton Census for Wiltshire. In the following cases the total given in column C differs from that in Whiteman 1986: Corsley (Whiteman gives 3050, which is obviously exaggerated); Devizes (Whiteman’s figure appears to be for only one parish; WAM 2 (1855), 330n, gives a total of 485 families in Devizes in 1655. I have multuplied this by 2.5 to give an approximate adult population figure); Malmesbury (Whiteman cites variant manuscript totals of 2500 and 2050, and assumes them to be mistakes for 250; this seems far too low); Warminster (I have multiplied Whiteman’s figure of 600 families by 2.5). Square brackets [] signify a sub-total, curved brackets () enclose suspect data, which have in general been excluded from calculations. Places for which the spelling in PRO WO 30/48 is unusual, or where my identification may be open to question, are as follows (spelling in document follows name, and is in curved brackets): Avoncliff in Westwood (Anklewire); Ansty (Austee); Bathampton in Steeple Langford (Buthopton); Beckhampton in Avebury (Bickton); Bedwyn, Great (Bedding); Braydon in Purton (Breadon); Chapel Knap in Corsham (Chapell Knopton); Chapmanslade in Corsley or Westbury (Chipmaflud); Chedglow in Crudwell (Church Lawty); Chirton (Chur Eaton); Chitterne Down in Chitterne (Cutterndowne); Christan Malford (Xpian Malford); Clinghill in Bromham (Clynhole); Coombe Bissett (Come); Deptford in Wylye (Dedford); Derry Hill in Calne (Durney Hill); Deverell, Longbridge (Deverell); Erlestoke (Eastoake); Etchilhampton in All Cannings (Ashleton); Ford in North Wraxall (Ford); Ford in Laverstock (Jeyford — the spelling Iford occurs on Morden 1695 and other early maps); The Forty in Cricklade (ye Forts); Foxham in Bremhill (Voxum); Heytesbury (Hatchbird); Kingsdown in Box (Kingsdown); Langford, Steeple (Lanford); Langley Burrell (Lougley); Linleys in Corsham (Lynly); Marten in Great Bedwyn (Morton); Melksham (Milstone — the totals seem too high for Milston near Amesbury; Melksham was often spelt ‘Milsham’ and variants); Newton, South (Newton); Peckingell in Langley Burrell (Pecknell); Quidhampton in Fugglestone St Peter (Quidington); Red Hill in Calne (Readhill); Semington in Steeple Ashton (Symingham); Seven Bridges in Latton (Brigis); Staverton in Trowbridge (Stofferton); Stoford in South Newton (Slaniford — could also be identified with Slaughterford, or Stowford in Wingfield); Tinhead in Edington (Tinnett); Tytherton Kellaways in Chippenham (Tetherington); Whaddon in Alderbury (Whadon). east Wiltshire. The same distribution may be seen in Figures 3 (1620) and 4 (c.1740), which tends to confirm the general reliability of these three sets of incomplete data. Although Figure 1 is of necessity calibrated differently, it is possible, by examining Figures 3, 1 and 4 to see the spread of licensed premises from a predominantly urban attribute in 1620 to a far more widespread feature of town and village life by c.1740. The crucial word here is ‘licensed’, because this apparent expansion is probably the result as much of increased vigour on the part of magistrates to bring premises within licensing control, as 1t is of an actual increase in the number of premises. Data from some other parts of the country do indeed show an increase in alehousekeeping, especially up to 1640 and after 1710 (Clark 1983, 50-4), but not on the scale which might be inferred for Wiltshire by compa- rison of Figures 3 and 4. Although the purpose of this paper is to examine the correlation between licensed premises and roads, it should not escape attenuon that the distribution patterns revealed in Figures 1, 3 and 4 bear a striking resemblance to the agricultural zones of ‘chalk and cheese’ countries described by Kerridge (1959), which appear to underlie deep-seated cultural differences (Underdown 1987; Smith 1988). It may be, therefore, that the incidence of licensed premises should be seen as one more manifestation of the cultural divide between pastoral and arable, open and closed villages, which is revealed also by nonconformist allegiance (Chandler 1985, xxviii; Smith 1988, 165—6), and even by preference for either football or stoolball (Under- down 1987, 73-7). ROADS Ogilby’s road book, published in 1675 (Ogilby 1971), appeared at an interesting period in the history of the English road system. The first turnpike act was passed in 1663, but not until 1706 was the first statutory turnpike trust created (Webb 1913, 115—16). No fewer than 62 trusts were granted powers between 1706 and 1840 to maintain Wiltshire roads (Cossons 1959). Hey (1980, 21) has suggested that Ogilby and the turnpike trusts were responsible for a change in terminology, the word ‘road’ gradually replacing the older ‘way’; he notes that ‘road’ occurs only once in the Authorized Version of the Bible (1611), and in only one of Shakespeare’s plays. But this change of name may also reflect a change of attitude towards overland travel, most travellers (except drovers) henceforth choosing the designated, maintained ‘road’, whereas previously they would have contented themselves with a choice of roughly parallel and equivalent ‘ways’, the precise route determined by load, weather conditions and other factors. This would explain the tendency on the ACCOMMODATION AND TRAVEL IN PRE-TURNPIKE WILTSHIRE 89 Figure 1. Accommodation (guest beds and stabling combined) in Wiltshire towns and villages, 1686 (source PRO WO 30/48) ) ADULT popu. 100 Bal LATION 200 Figure 2. Approximate distribution of adult population in Wiltshire, 1676. Areas left blank were not included in the source (source Whiteman 1986) 90 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Figure 3. Licensed premises in Wiltshire, 1620 (source Williams 1960) Figure 4. Licensed premises in Wiltshire, c.1740. For precise dates see notes to Table 1 (sources WRO A1/325/1,3,4; Al/326/1) ACCOMMODATION AND TRAVEL IN PRE-TURNPIKE WILTSHIRE 9] 5 q MA 6 3 eo..." Miles / eo CS BON ES Lo oe @ es @ e CRICKLADE LUCKINGTON 2 @ CKINGTON a @e ® a CHIPPENHAM = COMBE wget ag @ AVEBURY J MARKET LAVINGTON MAIDEN BRADLEY FISHERTON SALISBURY Figure 5. Ratio of accommodation (guest beds and stabling combined) to adult population in Wiltshire towns and villages, 1676/1686; main roads in 1675 (sources PRO WO 30/48; Whiteman 1986; Ogilby 1971) Figure 6. Accommodation and roads in the area between Chippenham and Melksham, 1676/1686 (sources PRO 30/48; Ogilby 1971; Crittall 1952; maps used in Figure 8) —=—— MAIN ROADS BEDS +. =— OTHER ROADS AND STABLING COLERNE | CHAPEL N L PLAISTER KINGSDOW: BROUGHTON GIFFORD CHIPPENHAM "RED HILL REYBRIDGE CUFFS CORNER BLACKMORE ; BROMHAM MELKSHAM CLINGHILL @ 92 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE ; (DEVIZES WARMINSTER y A ASALISBURY Wis 2 : iba MARLBOROUGH CHIPPENHAM Y © ye e@ AMESBURY Wi 300! A WILTON ° O 200 ° FISHERTON ANGER e@ CORSHAM “ BRADFORD ON AVON ° CRICKLADE | MARKET LAVINGTON 9° is} e © TROWBRIDGE MALMESBURY ° HINDON : 100 / 9 SWINDON o LACOCK DOWNTON e URCHFONT On ae ALDBOURNE ° MELKSHAM ° ° POTTERNE 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 ADULT POPULATION 1676 Figure 7. Scatter diagram of Wiltshire towns and villages showing accommodation 1686 plotted against adult population , (L 1676. Places on Ogilby main roads are represented by a solid iy Seer i aus circle, others by an open circle. A = linear regression line of : \ chick Lape accommodation on population for places on Ogilby main roads; B = linear regression line of accommodation on : population for places not on Ogilby main roads (sources as LYDIARD Figure 5) : HIGHWORTH Figure 8. Roads in Wiltshire depicted on county maps, 1689- 1756 (sources Lea 1689; Morden 1695; Palmer 1715; Moll 1724; Badeslade 1742; Kitchin 1751; Seale 1752; Bowen 1755 — for bibliographical details of these maps see Chubb 1911) ACCOMMODATION AND TRAVEL IN PRE-TURNPIKE WILTSHIRE 93 part of pre-Ogilby county mapmakers to omit all roads, but to include even minor rivers (obstacles to travel) and their bridging points. A reading of Celia Fiennes (Morris 1949), who was travelling from 1682, confirms this impression. When she uses ‘road’ it is nearly always to describe a thoroughfare with a good surface, whereas ‘way’ is much more general, and is often used with a derogatory adjective. Warminster she describes as, ‘a good road town’ (Morris 1949, 17). In this context comparison between Figure 5, showing Ogilby’s roads through Wiltshire, and Figure 8, showing roads marked on other maps, 1689-1755, may be helpful. Figure 8 depicts only three entirely different routes not considered by Ogilby (Fosse Way, Marlborough—Cricklade, Salisbury—Bradford on Avon), but many of the established destinations are achieved by alternative roads. Thus a second route from High- worth to Malmesbury (via Lydiard Millicent) is marked, a different course of the Highworth road north of Marlborough is shown, several routes appear north-east of Salisbury, and there is a second approach to Warminster from the east. The proliferation is most marked between Marlborough and Bath, especially in the area between Chippenham and Melksham. Figure 6 shows some roads in this area which are known from early maps, or may be deduced from topographical considerations. Before leaving Ogilby it is worth noticing that many of his main roads have subsequently been demoted, or sections have disappeared altogether. Among the former we may note: the Oxford—Bristol road which ran across north Wiltshire through Highworth, Purton, Malmesbury and Sherston; the Salisbury— Oxford road which took the high ground of east Wiltshire above the Collingbournes to Hungerford; the London—Bridgwater road, which ran through Amesbury, Shrewton, Chitterne, Warminster and Maiden Bradley; and the Salisbury-Weymouth road through Homington and Cranborne. Two of the most important roads out of Salisbury survive along part of their lengths merely as footpaths — the ‘racecourse’ road to Shaftesbury, and the Old Marlborough Road through Everleigh. And virtually all trace has been lost of a road which crossed the Avon at Downton on its -way between London and Weymouth. ROADS AND ACCOMMODATION _ That links should exist between population, innkeep- _ing capacity and the road system is to be expected, and the strength of these links may be explored both | geographically and mathematically. (It should be | noted, however, that because the data are defective for | | many places the analysis cannot be complete.) Figures 1 and 2 enable comparison between population and innkeeping capacity, and have been discussed above. Figure 5S expresses the ratio of capacity (guest beds and stabling) to the adult population, showing by a large symbol those places with a disproporuonately high ratio. Figure 7 conveys similar information by means of a scatter diagram. In economic terms it may be fair to assume that a town which possessed one guest bed/stable per five adult residents depended twice as much on the passing trade as a town possessing one for every ten. We may therefore identify Wiltshire places which were becoming or had become ‘thoroughfare’ towns and villages, as they were generally known in the eighteenth century, deriving part of their pros- perity from their position on roads. Table 2 lists those places (for which data exist) with a ratio of capacity to population greater than 1:7. Fisherton Anger, which heads the list, was a suburb of Salisbury (although a separate parish), and may be compared with other innkeeping suburbs identified by Everitt (1985, 162—4), such as Speenhamland (Newbury), Moulsham (Chelmsford) and Bishop’s Fee (Leicester). It should be noted that several ‘high-scoring’ places — Hindon, Table 2: Highest Ratios of Accommodation (Guest Beds + Stabling) to Adult Population, 1676/1686 Fisherton Anger eset he4 Devizes 1: 2.0 Chippenham disse 23 Hindon lee2 33 Wylye M223 Salisbury is 2:4 Poulton Nts 425 Amesbury Ls 52.8 Wilton ie 382 Market Lavington SS Warminster Iie 824 Cricklade 1: 4.2 Shrewton 1: 4.3 Luckington Sy Swindon Ieee 525 Corsham 5 5.6 Avebury 126 Castle Combe 8558 Sherston Te ESES Yatton Keynell Nee 529 Odstock lize, 16:2 Maiden Bradley e623 Marlborough lh; 6:3 Trowbridge 5626 94 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Market Lavington, Poulton, Wilton and Wylye — lie away from Ogilby’s main roads. Marlborough’s posi- tion in the table seems surprisingly low (below Swindon!), but this is perhaps explained by a slow recovery after the fires of 1653 and 1679 (Stedman 1960, 227). Figure 7 distinguishes between those places which lay on an Ogilby main road and those which did not. As might be expected, the ratio of accommodation to population is much higher for places on an Ogilby road; indeed, if linear regression lines of accommo- dation on population are plotted (lines A and B, Figure 7) it can be seen that a hypothetical place inhabited by 500 adults might be expected to have accommodation for 95 guests/horses if on an Ogilby road, but only 34 if not; against an adult population of 1,000 the equiv- alent figures would be 223 if on an Ogilby road, 66 if not. The disparity between these two sets of data is great enough to permit confidence that all three sources involved — the Compton Census, the 1686 accommo- dation list, and Ogilby’s road book — are fairly trustworthy. But it is possible to test the strength of the relationship further by calculating the correlation coefficients (R) between accommodation and population of various data sets, and these are listed in Table 3. Correlation coefficients have a value between 0 (unrelated) and 1 (perfectly related), so that the closer R is to 1, the closer the correlation. Table 3 shows that the correlation coefficient of all places for which the data permit comparison is about 0.75, whereas for just those places on Ogilby roads it is slightly higher (about 0.78). The residue of places, however — those not on Ogilby roads — shows far less consistency, with an R value of about 0.48. In other words, whilst ‘thoroughfare’ towns and villages, using Ogilby as the yardstick, are a fairly homogeneous and predictable group in terms of accommodation compared with population, other places are not. The more detailed map of the Lacock area (Figure 6) shows that a number of licensed premises lay off the Ogilby main road (the Bath road via Chapel Plaister, Pickwick, Chippenham and Calne) but on other early routes, including those shown on Figure 8. Perhaps, therefore, a closer correspondence might be found, not by using Ogilby alone as the criterion, but by distinguishing between those places along any road shown by Ogilby or on Figure 8 (other early roads), and those which still fell ‘off the beaten track’. The R value for those places on a road remains almost the same (about 0.78), but the residue becomes a far more heterogeneous group (R = about 0.19). The reason for this is not far to seek. It is caused by the presence of two places among this residue, Hindon and Wylye, which, as we saw in Table 2, have among the highest ratios of accommodation to population of any Wilt- shire places. If we postulate the existence of a road or group of parallel roads (not marked on Ogilby or the sources used for Figure 8) roughly equivalent to the later Amesbury turnpike and modern A303, which would have connected Amesbury and Mere through the parishes of Wylye, Chicklade, the Fonthills and Hindon, then the coefficient correlations show a marked improvement. The R value for thoroughfare towns and villages remains at about 0.78, but the value for the residue rises dramatically to about 0.66. Such a route seems, on the mathematical evidence outlined above, to be the only serious Wiltshire omission by Ogilby and his followers. CONCLUSION Quite apart from the inherent interest of the 1686 list of accommodation to historians of individual places, we may suggest the following more general conclu- sions derived from it and contemporary sources. First, there is a fairly high correlation between population and licensed premises in Wiltshire at the end of the seventeenth century, and both seem io be related to the agricultural and supposed cultural division between ‘chalk’ and ‘cheese’ (Figures 1 and 2). Second, the licensing of premises increased between Table 3: Correlation Coefficients (R) between Accommodation (Guest Beds + Stabling) and Adult Population, 1676/1686 All comparable places (data set 106) All comparable places on Ogilby roads (data set 32) All comparable places not on Ogilby roads (data set 74) All comparable places on Ogilby and Figure 8 roads (data set 62) All comparable places on neither Ogilby nor Figure 8 roads (data set 44) All comparable places on Ogilby, Figure 8 and Amesbury—Mere road (data set 66) All comparable places on neither Ogilby, Figure 8, nor Amesbury-Mere road (data set 40) R = 0.7472 R = 0.7803 R = 0.4753 R = 0.7797 R = 0.1861 R = 0.7773 R = 0.6571 ACCOMMODATION AND TRAVEL IN PRE-TURNPIKE WILTSHIRE 95 1620 and c.1740 (Figures 3 and 4). Third, accommo- dation for travellers was, as might be expected, concentrated along the main roads of Wiltshire, and that for many places by 1686 the ‘passing trade’ had become a significant part of the local economy (Figures 5 and 7). Fourth, the main road network which had evolved by the end of the seventeenth century and which was mapped by Ogilby was supplemented by other routes (including those depicted on county maps of the pre-turnpike era, as well as the Amesbury—Mere road) and that these too were served by thoroughfare towns and villages (Figures 6 and 8). Acknowledgements. For permission to publish documents in Table 1 the author is grateful to the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, and Wiltshire County Council. He is indebted to Mr K.H. Rogers for reading and discussing a draft of this paper. He wishes to acknowledge also the help given him by the staffs of Dr Williams’s Library, the Public Record Office (Kew), Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Society, Wiltshire County Council Library & Museum Service, and the Wiltshire Record Office. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY BERESINER, Y., 1983 British County Maps, Antique Collectors Club CHANDLER, J.H. (ed.), 1985 Wiltshire Dissenters Meeting House Certificates and Registrations 1689-1852, Wiltshire Record Society (vol. 40) CHARTRES, J.A., 1985 ‘The marketing of agricultural produce’ in The Agrarian History of England and Wales (ed. J. Thirsk), vol. 5 (2), Cambridge UP, 406-502 CHUBB, T., 1911] ‘A descriptive catalogue of the printed maps of Wiltshire . . .., WAM 37, 211-326 CLARK, P., 1983 The English Alehouse: a Social History 1200-1830, Longman COSSONS, A., 1959 ‘Roads’ in Victoria History of Wiltshire, vol. 4, 254-71 CRITTALL, E. (ed.), 1952 Andrews’ and Dury’s Map of Wiltshire 1773: a Reduced Facsimile, WANHS Record Branch (vol. 8) EVERITT. A., 1985 ‘The English urban inn 1560-1760’ in Landscape and Community in England, Hambledon Press, 155-208 [originally published 1973] FOWLE, J.P.M. (ed.), 1955 Wiltshire Quarter Sessions and Assizes, 1736, WANHS Records Branch (vol. 11) HEY, D., 1980 Packmen, Carriers and Packhorse Reads, Leicester UP KERRIDGE, E., 1959 ‘Agriculture c.1500— c.1793’ in Victoria History of Wiltshire, vol. 4, 43-64 MORRIS, C. (ed.), 1949 The Fourneys of Celia Fiennes, Cresset Press OGILBY, J., 1971 Ogilby’s Road Maps of England and Wales from Ogilby’s ‘Britannia’, 1675, Osprey SMITH, G.C., 1988 ‘Chalk and cheese: patterns of landholding and religious nonconformity in Wiltshire, 1739-1850”, WAM 82, 164-7 STEDMAN, A.R., 1960 Marlborough and the Upper Kennet Country, privately printed UNDERDOWN, D., 1987 Revel, Riot and Rebellion: Popular Politics and Culture in England, 1603-1660, Oxford UP WEBB, S.andB., 1913 English Local Government: the Story of the King’s Highway, Longman WHITEMAN, A. (ed.), 1986 The Compton Census of 1676: a Critical Edition, British Academy (Records of Social and Economic History, new series 10) WILLIAMS, N.J. (ed.), 1960 Tradesmen in Early Stuart Wiltshire: a Miscellany, WANHS Records Branch (vol. 15) Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 84 (1991), pp. 96-107 The Institutional Response to Insanity in Nineteenth Century Wiltshire by PETER McCREE This paper examines Wiltshire’s contribution to the segregative response to madness that developed in the early part of the nineteenth century, a response that had its legislative foundation in the County Asylums Act of 1808. The paper chronicles the background to the opening of the ‘Asylum for the Insane Poor of the County of Wilts’ at Devizes in 1851 and the subsequent dramatic rise in the numbers of those officially certified as insane within the County. The early optimism surrounding the curative role of the Asylum gradually declined and ‘success’ came to be redefined in terms of comfort, cleanliness and freedom from the more obvious forms of physical maltreatment. Extracts from the Reports of the Commissioners in Lunacy, Reports of the Medical Superintendent and other documents are used to depict aspects of Asylum life during the latter half of the nineteenth century — popular fears and prejudices, overcrowding, staffing levels, treatment regimes, patient health, recreational and work facilities, punishments, entertainments, escape attempts — as well as a number of ‘extraordinary events’ in the history of the Asylum. Insanity and the inhabitants of Wiltshire have a unique and longstanding association enshrined in local folk- lore tradition. Natives of the county are still known as ‘Moonrakers’,! a name which derives from the apocry- phal tale of a small group of Wiltshiremen engaged in that most popular rural pastime — smuggling. The quality and reputation of Wiltshire wool and the high profits to be made attracted Dutch and Flemish merchants who established themselves at Swindon from the mid sixteenth to late eighteenth centuries. A sophisticated local smuggling network was soon set up to keep the merchants supplied with ‘Hollands’ gin which was subject to heavy duty when imported legally. The network rapidly expanded to cover other goods such as brandy and tobacco. Barrels of spirits would be landed on the south coast and would travel in stages by night. On the perilous inland journey, the barrels would typically be hidden by day in church crypts or beneath the weeds of village ponds. On this particular occasion, so the story goes, returning by the light of the moon to retrieve their precious cargo from the depths of the local pond, a group of Wiltshire smugglers were surprised by Excisemen who demanded to know what they were doing with their long-handled hay rakes at such an unlikely hour. With commendable alacrity of thought, the men feigned insanity and said they were trying to 1. K. Wiltshire, Wiltshire Folklore, Compton Russell, 1975. 2. L. Leete-Hodge, The Story of Devizes, Local Heritage Books, catch the reflection of the full moon which they claimed was a fine cheese. Laughing heartily at the delusional behaviour of these ‘madmen’, the officers rode away. But the Moonrakers had the last laugh. A number of Wiltshire villages jealously claim the dubious honour of having been the location for this incident, but the most favoured candidate’ is the village of Bishops Cannings, near Devizes. It is interesting, though entirely coincidental, that a plot of land in this locality later became the site of the Wiltshire County Lunatic Asylum, built on high ground one mile from the centre of Devizes. The market town of Devizes lies almost exactly at the geographical centre of the County of Wiltshire and the ‘Asylum for the Insane Poor of the County of Wilts’ was opened on 19 September 1851. The original hospital buildings were designed by a local architect, T.H. Wyatt, who was responsible for a number of buildings in the town including the Assize Courts; his design was selected from the 26 sets submitted.? The building 1s in the Italianate architectural style, justified by Wyatt in the following manner: The Architect has felt that in a building appro- priated to the purpose of a Lunatic Asylum for paupers, it would be as inconsistent as unfair to ratepayers, to adopt a character of architecture involving the necessity of ornament or excessive 1983. 3. WRO A1/570/1. THE INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE TO INSANITY IN NINETEENTH CENTURY WILTSHIRE 97 expenditure. The Italian style has therefore been selected, as the simplest, the lightest, and most cheerful — that which probably gives the greatest effect at the least cost, and which was best adapted to the building materials available in this locality.* The Asylum was constructed of Bath stone, a commo- dity in which Devizes developed a flourishing trade with the opening of the Kennet and Avon Canal in the early nineteenth century. Despite the fact that there were many successful family firms in Devizes engaged in the building trade, the contract for the construction of the Asylum was awarded to Messrs Piper of London, whose tender of £19,594 for 250 beds was apparently the lowest.° Contracts for heating and sanitary fitments were also awarded to firms outside the area. The Committee of Visiting Justices considered methods of lighting and resolved to make its own gas at a cost of 2s. 5d. per thousand cubic feet as opposed to the 6s. 8d. required by the Devizes Gas Company.°® It was decided to appoint a resident Medical Super- intendent at an early stage in order that ‘his experience would be available as the building progressed, to suggest modifications and improvements in the plan’.’ The post was advertised and Dr John Thurnam was chosen from a shortlist of four, a choice that appears to have been well justified: Dr Thurnam was a man of quite outstanding character and ability far ahead of his generation in wisdom and humanity, and he established a tradition of kindliness and sympathetic treatment which all his successors have endeavoured to follow.’ The establishment costs of some £47,000 including land, buildings and furnishings had to be funded by an increase in the rates and at the Quarter Sessions held at Michaelmas 1849, the Justices ordered: That a rate of 14 of a penny in the pound be raised for the exclusive use of the Pauper Lunatic Asylum to be collected on or before the 19th day of December next.” Naturally, this procedure found little favour with 4. First Annual Report (1852), WRO J4/110/1. 5. Contract dated 15 October 1849, Wilts Pauper Lunatic Asylum Contract Book: WRO A1/571, 574. WRO A1/152/40 (9 April 1850); WRO A1/570/1. WRO J4/113/1. Ibid. Quarter Sessions Minutes, Michaelmas 13 Vict. (1849), WRO A1/152/40. won D ratepayers and long before the Asylum was erected, some 375 ratepayers were moved to sign a petition to the local Justices condemning the proposal as a wholly unnecessary additional burden on the rates.!° The County Asylums Act of 1808!! ‘for the better Care and Maintenance of Lunatics, being Paupers or Criminals in England’ had laid down detailed speci- fications for the construction and maintenance of County Asylums. A Committee of Visiting Justices was to be appointed at the Quarter Sessions to be responsible for the erection of the Asylum and for periodic inspection. They were authorised to purchase land, to appoint a Clerk and a Surveyor and to raise a county rate for the purpose of building the Asylum. The Asylum was to be built in . an airy and healthy Situation, with a good supply of Water, and which may afford a Probabi- lity of the Vicinity of constant Medical Assis- tance. |? The Act made no attempt to specify or regulate treatment but it provided statutory penalties against the Keepers if patients escaped.!* This was the beginning of the era of ‘lunacy reform’, the segregation and incarceration of the mentally ill, seen by many historians as the triumph of the humani- tarian reformers. Others have not been prepared to accept this view. Scull'* has traced the changing responses to insanity in England, seeking to explain the dramatic changes that took place between the latter half of the eighteenth and the first half of the nine- teenth centuries. Prior to this period, the mad were not treated as a separate category and formed part of an amorphous mass comprising the poor, the physically handicap- ped, vagrants and minor criminals. Scull shows how, by the middle of the nineteenth century, the mad were isolated, re-categorised as the mentally ill, and singled out for special treatment: They found themselves incarcerated in a special- ized bureaucratically organized, state-supported asylum system which isolated them both physi- cally and symbolically from the larger society. And within this segregated environment their condition had been diagnosed as a uniquely 10. Petition to the Quarter Sessions against the proposal to erect a County Lunatic Asylum (undated c. 1838), WRO A1/571, 574. ll. 48 Geo. IIc. 96. 12. Jbid., Section xvi. 13. Jbid., Section xxiii. 14. A.T. Scull, Museums of Madness: The Social Organization of Insanity in Nineteenth Century England, Allen Lane, 1979. 98 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE and essentially medical problem. Accordingly, they had been delivered into the hands of a new group of professionals, the so-called ‘‘mad- doctors”. !5 Scull goes on to argue that the real explanation for the rise of a segregative response to madness and other forms of deviance was to be found in the effects of the development of a mature capitalist market economy and the massive reorganisation of English society along market principles. He discusses the introduction of the workhcuse system, designed to remove the able-bodied poor from the community in order to teach them ‘proper’ work habits, but increasingly becoming a dumping ground for all categories of deviant, including the insane. He suggests that the threat to the order and discipline of the workhouse environment posed by the insane led to separate institutional provision for this troublesome group. The growing conviction that there was a need for specialised institutions for the insane led first to the establishment of private madhouses run for profit, a system which has been chronicled by William Parry- Jones in The Trade in Lunacy.'° In 1835 there were six establishments in Wiltshire run for private profit at Laverstock, Fisherton Anger, Box, Devizes, Fid- dington and Fonthill Gifford. Each was licensed by the Quarter Sessions and inspected by a Committee of Visitors as required by Act of Parliament.'’ The proprietors of these houses had to seek an annual renewal of their licences, but this seems to have been little more than a formality, for with the establishment of central supervision in 1845,'* not one of these houses met with the approval of the Commissioners in Lunacy. The early part of the nineteenth century saw changes in the conception of insanity itself and the development of a group of professional managers of the mad: Insanity was transformed from a vague, culturally defined phenomenon afflicting an unknown, but probably small, proportion of the population into a condition which could only be authoritatively diagnosed, certified and dealt with by a group of legally recognised experts. .. . Whereas in the eighteenth century only the most violent and destructive amongst those now labelled insane would have been segregated and confined apart 15. Ibid., p. 14. 16. W.LI. Parry-Jones, The Trade in Lunacy: A Study of Private Madhouses in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972. 17. ‘9iGeo...IV c.. 41. from the rest of the community, with the achieve- ment of lunacy reform the asylum was endorsed as the sole officially approved response to the problems posed by mental illness. And, in the process, the boundaries of who was to be classified as mad, and thus liable to incarceration, were themselves transformed. !? The insane had thus been sharply differentiated from other categories of deviant and the asylum had been officially sanctioned as the appropriate place for them to be housed. A national network of asylums was now to be created at public expense where the mentally ill were to be treated by members of the medical profes- sion claiming expertise in such matters. Reformers such as Ashley saw this as a triumph of science and humanity and had high hopes of the medical profes- sion’s ability to restore many of their new patients to sanity and productivity. The Justices charged with the responsibility for building the asylums did not appear to share this vision of a therapeutic Utopia. They were acutely conscious of the costs of building and maintenance and many were reluctant to levy local taxes. The result was that some 35 years after the passing of the County Asylums Act, the majority of English counties had failed to erect their own asylums. But by 1845, they no longer had any choice. Largely due to the efforts of Ashley, the Lunatic Asylums and Pauper Lunatics Act? became law in that year, making the erection of county asylums to house pauper lunatics compulsory. Wiltshire had been no exception to the general rule and the 1808 Act had been largely ignored. A proposal to open a County Asylum for pauper lunatics was rejected in 1838 on the following grounds: . . It is neither necessary nor expedient that this County should be subjected to the expense of a County Pauper Lunatic Asylum, so long as there are so many Institutions for the reception of Insane persons conducted by individual proprie- tors of Integrity and respectability within the County and so long as such Institutions continue to be as at present subject to the Inspection and Control of the Magistrates of the County.”! Following the 1845 Act, a committee was appointed in 1846 at the Easter Quarter Sessions and it reported its findings at the Michaelmas Sessions in 1847, more 18. 8&9 Vict. c. 100. 19. Scull, op. cit., pp. 49-50. 20. 8 & 9 Vict. c. 126. 21. Quarter Sessions Minutes, Easter 1 Vict. (1838), WRO Al1/152/ 39. THE INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE TO INSANITY IN NINETEENTH CENTURY WILTSHIRE 99 than twelve months later. The reason for the delay, explained the committee, was to enable it to study developments in adjoining counties so that ‘instead of making experiments ourselves we might benefit by the experience of others’.?* Moreover, according to the committee, . . . the condition of the Pauper Lunatics of this County did not seem so urgently to press for immediate alteration as to force on us the evils of executing hastily a costly and durable work.7? But they could delay no longer. If work was not begun before 8 August 1848, the Secretary of State was empowered to force the county to build ‘such an asylum for the Purpose aforesaid as Her Majesty’s said Principal Secretary of State shall think fit’? and, more important, the Justices would forfeit control over the structure and expenditure. Fearful that the Secretary of State would exercise his authority under the Act and mindful that preparations in adjoining counties were well advanced, the Quarter Sessions adopted the report of the committee which recommended the construction of a building to accom- modate 250 inmates at a cost of between £25,000 and £30,000.7° The first stone was laid on 30 July 1849 and the Asylum opened on 19 September 1851 with the admission of 18 female patients, who were transferred from one of the private asylums. During the following five weeks, female patients continued to be admitted and by the end of October there were 41 patients. The male wards were completed somewhat later than the female ones and it was not until 28 October that male patients could be admitted: Since this date, patients of both sexes have been received, in numbers varying from seven to twenty-two at one time, as speedily as the neces- sary arrangements could be made. The total number of patients admitted up to the 31st of December is 167: viz. 73 males and 94 females. Of the whole number admitted ten only have been new cases, received under the authority of fresh orders and medical certificates.*° But even though the capacity of the Asylum had been increased during construction from 250 to 290 beds, this was already inadequate, for at the beginning of 1851 there were some 399 ‘Insane Persons, Lunatics 22. Quarter Sessions Minutes, Michaelmas 11] Vict. (1847), WRO A1/152/39. 23. Ibid. 24. 8&9 Vict. c. 126. 25. Quarter Sessions Minutes, Michaelmas 11 Vict., op. cit. and Idiots in the County of Wilts’, chargeable to the unions.””? Over the following years, the Asylum expanded in an attempt to meet increased demand and provided 350 beds in 1860, 587 in 1880 and 916 by 1900.78 This is a feature that is repeated again and again all over the country — a continuous rise in the numbers of those officially identified as insane, a rise that consis- tently exceeded both population growth as a whole and planned provision in asylums. It is made more curious by the fact that the rationale for asylums put forward by the reformers in the first place centred around the conviction that ‘proper’ asylum treatment would lead to the cure and rehabilitation of a significant propor- uon of the insane. In its report to the Quarter Sessions at Marlborough in 1847, the Committee on Pauper Lunatic Asylums expressed the hope that . .1f only those on whom the Duty devolves will promptly dispatch all recent cases to a well regulated asylum, the cures will greatly reduce the number to be provided for.?° In his Annual Report for the year 1861, John Thur- nam, Medical Superintendent of the Wilts County Asylum, addressed the problem of the national increase in the numbers of pauper insane: This great increase in the number of insane persons chargeable to the rate-payers, is a subject of national importance, and, as such, has engaged the attention of the Commissioners in Lunacy, in the last, viz., Fifteenth Report. They show that it cannot be attributed to any increase in pauperism in the country, there being a considerable decrease in the number of those in receipt of relief; and they are unable to discover any mater- ial changes in the social condition of the labouring population, rendering them more prone to mental disease. They show that the amount of known insanity in the classes above pauperism, has rather diminished than increased for some years past. They hence conclude that the apparent increase of insanity in this country, as indicated by the growing demand for asylum accommo- dation, is mainly due to recent legislation, which ensures the more complete enumeration and public treatment of pauper lunatics.*° 26. First Annual Report (1852), WRO J4/110/1. 27. Ibid. 28. WRO J4/113/1. 29. Quarter Sessions Minutes, Michaelmas 11 Vict., op. cit. 30. Eleventh Annual Report (1862), WRO J4/110/2. 100 According to the Commissioners in Lunacy, the increase was attributable to three principal causes: 1. To the detection and registration of cases formerly left unnoticed or unreported. 2. To the removal to asylums of an increased proportion of patients from the influence of conditions unfavourable to life. 3. To the effect of sanitary regulations in asyl- ums, of improved diet, and of various means of sustaining the health and promoting the longevity of the entire body of inmates.*! Moreover, Thurnam warned: Of the general accuracy of these views there can scarcely be a doubt; nor yet as to the conclusion of the Commissioners . . . such causes being still in operation, we can only calculate on a further progressive increase.*? His calculations proved to be correct. Scull quotes the incidence of insanity in the general population as 2.26 per 10,000 in 1807; 12.66 per 10,000 in 1844 and 29.26 per 10,000 in 1890.7? He goes on to demolish official explanations for this increase — that it was due to an improved system for reporting cases of insanity together with an accumulation of chronic cases. He points out two fundamental fallacies — that there is a finite universe of the insane and that the criteria for identifying insanity are objective and uniform over ume. Scull offers his own explanation — that the very existence of asylums promoted a decrease in family and community tolerance and this led to an increase in the apparent prevalence of insanity, with the result that asylums became no more than dumps for the awkward and inconvenient of every description. As demand continued to rise, new wings and extensions were grafted on to existing buildings by cost-conscious local Justices, and reference is con- stantly made in the Annual Reports for Wiltshire to the increasing number of patients to be accommodated and the constant need for further building. Indeed, Wiltshire was in the unenviable position of having a greater proportion of insane paupers than any other county in England and Wales, a situation that prompted Dr Thurnam to append a Special Report on the subject to his Annual Report for the year 1871.** This ‘Supplementary Report on Insanity in Wil- 31. [bid. 32. Ibid. 33. Scull, op. cit. 34. ‘Supplementary Report on Insanity in Wiltshire’, in Twentieth Annual Report (1872), WRO J4/110/2. 35. Ibid. THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE tshire’ showed that the ratio of ‘pauper lunatics and idiots’ to the population of England and Wales was | to 494, whereas in Wiltshire it was as high as 1 to 327.*° Thurnam attributed this largely to the rapid decrease in the population of Wiltshire caused by the migration of a significant proportion of agricultural labourers in search of higher wages: ... during the ten years 1851-61, there was a very considerable exodus of the labouring population. As it would, as a rule, be the more healthy and energetic men who would leave their homes, there would result an increase in the relative proportion of the bodily and mentally weak; and the effect could hardly be other than that of filling the Union houses, and indirectly augmenting the proportion, perhaps even the numbers, of the insane.*° The report goes on to suggest that there may even be a particular predisposition to insanity on the part of the farm labourer: We may, indeed, almost conclude, with an able and original investigator, that, on a large scale “Insanity is an upshot of mental inactivity”; and that our “uneducated cloddish populations” are its chief breeders.*” The report quotes John Aubrey’s Natural History of Wiltshire in support of this thesis: In North Wiltshire . . .(a dirty clayey country) the Indigenae ... speake drawling; they are phiegmatique, skins pale and livid, slow and dull, heavy of spirit: hereabout is but little ullage or hard labour, they only milk the cowes and make cheese; they feed chiefly on milke meates, which cooles their braines too much, and hurts their inventions. These circumstances make them melancholy, contemplative, and malicious; . . . by the same reason they are generally more apt to be fanatiques: their persons are generally plump and feggy: galliopot eies, and some blacks. 2." The report concludes by attributing part of the increase in asylum admissions to recent legislation which resulted in 36. Ibid. 37. Ibid. See also B.W. Richardson, ‘On Physical Disease from Mental Strain’, Journal of Mental Science (October 1869), 15:350-362. 38. J. Aubrey, The Natural History of Wiltshire, 1847, p. 11 (quoted in WRO J4/110/2 (1872)). | } | THE INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE TO INSANITY IN NINETEENTH CENTURY WILTSHIRE 101 . . . the admission of patients, many of whom are sent labouring under slight and transient forms of mental disorder, such as in former days would never have been removed from their homes. Some are brought who ought to be cared for elsewhere, in Workhouses, or even in Prisons. Not a few superannuated and paralytic old people, when they become troublesome in the wards of the Workhouse, are at once removed to the Asylum. In other instances men are brought who should be regarded as offenders against the laws, and punished accordingly. It is an abuse of an Asylum to send to ita man who, maddened by drink, assaults his wife or child, or commits some other vagary or act of violence. It may not be easy in every case to discriminate the excitement of intoxication, acting on a violent temper and coarse nature from mania; but a day or two would generally suffice to decide the question. The journey to the Asylum and the warm bath on arrival often suffice to dispel the excitement; and, it is obvious, that in place of a residence in our comfortable wards, there are cases in which a month’s discipline at the treadmill would in every respect be the more appropriate treatment.*? Year by year, asylums grew in size and became increasingly chaotic and overcrowded. Authoritarian, bureaucratic regimes were instituted as the only prac- tical means of regulating such vast numbers of inmates and the notion of individual ‘moral treatment’ seemed largely forgotten. The early optimism surrounding the curative role of the asylum gradually declined and ‘success’ came to be redefined in terms of comfort, cleanliness and freedom from the more obvious forms of physical maltreatment. At first, the asylum doctors blamed their poor performance on their inability to secure enough cases ata sufficiently early stage and they repeatedly stressed the importance of early intervention: . . itis most desirable no time should be lost in sending any person to the County Asylum who may be attacked with symptoms of lunacy, because the prospect of permanent recovery is much facilitated, when cases brought in are recent.*? Medical Superintendents regularly complained that they were being swamped with hopeless cases, as in this report for the year 1873: 39. WRO J4/110/2 (1872). 40. First Annual Report (1852), WRO J4/110/1. 41. Twenty-Second Annual Report (1873), WRO J4/110/3. The very unpromising character as to the pros- pect of recovery in a large proportion of those admitted must again be referred to. The numbers labouring under paralysis and other obvious brain disease is still very great, and shows a considera- ble increase.*! In the report for the following year, the newly appointed Medical Superintendent, Dr Burman, was somewhat more specific than his predecessor. Having stated that the patient population numbered 480, comprising 205 males and 275 females, he went on to quantify curable cases: I regret to have to state that the admissions continue to be of a very unfavourable nature, as to prognosis and prospect of recovery, in a large proportion of the cases; many of them being old and in feeble bodily health. The total number of cases in the Asylum at present deemed curable amounts only to 36 cases, viz., 17 males and 19 females.*” By 1882, the proportion of curable cases was even smaller: When it is stated that of the 616 patients remaining, only 25 are likely to recover, it will be seen what little hope exists of any marked reduc- tion occurring in the population of the Asylum.” In his Third Annual Report, the Medical Superin- tendent gives a very illuminating account of the early treatments employed at the Wilts County Asylum and it is well worth quoting at length: In the Wilts County Asylum, the Superintendent needs scarcely observe, personal restraint is never resorted to, and there is literally no strait waist- coat or any similar instrument of coercion in the institution. It is in the constant surveillance of active and good tempered attendants, who do all in their power to check the first appearance of excitement and impropriety, and to direct those under their care to some useful occupation, that we find the most essential condition of a right moral treatment. In cases of great violence, where efforts to check or soothe the excitement of the patient are unsuccessful, temporary seclusion in a sleeping room is prescribed; or, for those requir- ing it, in a room, the walls and floor of which are padded, in order to prevent bodily injury. In 42. Twenty-Thiré Annual Report (1874), WRO J4/110/3. 43. Thirty-Second Annual Report (1883), WRO J4/110/4. 102 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE some cases, exercise, In a quiet airing court, 1s sufficient to cut short the paroxysm. When the patient persists in undressing himself, or in remaining out of bed at night, his garments and shoes are secured on his person, by an ingeniously contrived button-lock. If he destroy his clothes or bedding, these are provided of strong materials — canvass, bed tick, or sail cloth — which may baffle the violence of the most destructive. By these and similar contrivances, the patient may generally be controlled; whilst he is spared the additional irritation which the use of means of personal restraint usually excites. ... In every class of cases, medical treatment is often required to soothe an excited brain, or subdue disorder in some important part of the system; and it is from a judicious combination of moral and therapeutic measures, that the most satisfactory results are obtained.** From the very beginning, great importance was attached to the employment of patients and a large proportion of the men were engaged in agricultural pursuits. Efforts were also made to employ the men in other areas and workshops for tailors, shoemakers and carpenters were introduced. As for the women: Under the active and judicious superintendence of the Matron, an increasing majority of the female patients are occupied in the domestic labours of the kitchen, laundry, and wards, and in needlework. The great part of the bed and house linen, and much of the clothing has been, and is in process of being made by the patients, with the assistance of a single seamstress.* ‘Suitable’ reading matter was provided for patients in the wards and instruction was given to many illiterate patients in reading, writing and arithmetic. A wide variety of recreational facilities was provided. The cricket field was completed in 1856 and matches against outside teams were first played in 1882. In 1861, a large number of patients attended an exhi- bition in Devizes, and 100 patients took part in a procession through the town to celebrate the marriage of the Prince of Wales in 1863. For those patients unable to take part in the procession, a party was held in the grounds of the Asylum and they were enter- tained by a band composed of patients and attendants. In his report for 1875, the Medical Superintendent 44. Third Annual Report (1854), WRO J4/110/1. 45. First Annual Report, op. cit. 46. Twenty-Fifth Annual Report (1876), WRO J4/110/3. 47. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 16/17th October 1882, in mentions that weekly entertainments were held including dancing, music, magic lantern shows and hired performances of magic and ventriloquism. He concludes: Treatment of the insane, by amusements, recre- ations, and diversions, has now become thoroughly established in Asylums, is highly beneficial and satisfactory and, no doubt, of great remedial value.*° But there were other, less enjoyable forms of treatment including cold shower baths for both men and women and ‘wet-pack treatment’, which was also used as a form of punishment and attracted the attention of the Commissioners in Lunacy in 1882: Wet packing has also been introduced quite recently, and 11 patients have been subject to this restraint for 96 hours. No patient is continuously packed for more than 1! hours, at the end of which time he is unpacked and examined by the doctor. The result of this treatment has been satisfactory as we were told.*” As time went on, other forms of restraint began to be used and seclusion was increasingly resorted to: The recorded instances of the use of seclusion and restraint since the last visit are thus summarised: — 18 male patients on 40 occasions and for 2672 hours, and 31 females on 136 occasions and for 635 hours were secluded; and 8 male patients on 49 occasions and for 938! hours, and 4 females on 5 occasions and for 297/4 hours were mechanically restrained. *8 The Commissioners in Lunacy, charged with the responsibility for periodic inspection, were prepared to overlook the therapeutic failures of the asylum, concentrating instead on the details of custodial care. At first, they were more than willing to shower praise upon asylum administrators, as for example in their report of a visit to Wiltshire in 1852: Upon the whole, we have to record our satisfac- ton with this Establishment, which is manifestly under skilful and judicious management.*? And again in 1871: Of the condition generally in which we have found it today, and of the care, kindness, and Thirty-Second Annual Report, op. cit. 48. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 28th July 1885, in Thirty-Fifth Annual Report, WRO J4/110/4. 49. First Annual Report, op. cit. THE INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE TO INSANITY IN NINETEENTH CENTURY WILTSHIRE 103 efficiency that characterise its management and supervision, we leave with a very favourable impression.~? Only when the cost saving practices of local Justices began to really bite, did the reports of the Lunacy Commissioners become critical of the nature of custo- dial care provided. Local Justices were reluctant at the best of times to allocate sums of money to paupers and they became more and more determined to keep asylum costs to the barest minimum, particularly once it had become obvious that earlier expectations of cures were not going to be realised. The diet provided by the Wilts County Asylum was described as deficient by the Commissioners in 1876: The dinner we saw served was of soup, with bread and beer. It was not popular, and we had other complaints of the diet, especially of the rice pudding on one day in the week. The amount of animal food allowed here is less than that usually given in asylums, and the beer was very inferior in quality. In fact at the price paid (4d. a gallon) it must be almost impossible to obtain better, either palatable or wholesome for the patients.*! Bedding and clothing were highlighted as unsatis- factory in the report for the following year.*’ Staffing levels were criticised by the Commissioners in 1866: We have again to recommend that an increase be made in the staff of attendants and nurses. Assistance is especially wanted in the reception and refractory wards in both divisions.>? Again in 1872: The staff of attendants is still upon a lower scale than in most County Asylums, and is in our opinion inadequate as regards the refractory wards for the safe care at all times of this class.>+ And yet again, in 1873: The staff of attendants is, however, numerically insufficient: it consists of 13 men and 15 women, besides the men and women who are the night watch.°*° 50. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 2nd August 1871, in Twenty-First Annual Report, WRO J4/110/3. S1. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 22nd November 1876, in Twenty-Sixth Annual Report, WRO J4/110/3. 52. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 21st April 1877, in Twenty-Seventh Annual Report, WRO J4/110/3. 53. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 12th February 1866, in Sixteenth Annual Report, WRO J4/110/2. 54. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 24th October 1872, in Twenty-Second Annual Report, op. cit. Wages at the Wilts County Asylum were also lower than in most other asylums: There seems to be no scale of wages for the Female Attendants. Their salaries have, however, been slightly increased since our last visit, the women now commencing at £10 a year, with a gradual increase. The ordinary Male Attendants commence at wages of £20, rising to £25, the charge attendants get £25, rising to £32. These wages are sull lower than in most Asylums, and are, 1n our opinion, insufficient to secure or retain the services of suitable persons, more especially as no uniform is given — the changes in the staff have been very frequent.~° In 1878, the Asylum had 557 patients — 259 male and 298 female and the Commissioners reported, without criticism, the following staffing levels: The present staff of attendants includes, on the male side, a head attendant, 19 day and 3 night attendants; and on the female side, a head atten- dant, 20 day and 3 night nurses. A large propor- uon of the attendants have, we are glad to find, been longer than 12 months in the service of the Asylum.*’ In 1884, following the recommendation of the Com- missioners in Lunacy, male attendants were provided with uniforms. Maximum pay for male attendants was increased to £40 per annum and that for nurses to £26. The Medical Superintendent claimed in his report that this would give the staff equality with other asylums and would ‘no doubt tend to promote length of service’.>8 The Commissioners drew attention to the Laundry on a number of occasions, describing it as ‘in a most objectionable condition’ in their report for 1876.°? The general health of the patients was a frequent cause for concern. There were widespread instances of diar- rhoea which on more than one occasion were attr- ibuted to ‘atmospheric influences’. More serious were the deaths from erysipelas in 1876 and 1877: 55. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 8th October 1873, in Twenty-Third Annual Report, op. cit. 56. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 13th May 1874, in Twenty-F ourth Annual Report, WRO J4/110/3. 57. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 19th December 1878, in Twenty-Eighth Annual Report, WRO J4/110/3. 58. Thirty-Fourth Annual Report, WRO J4/110/4. 59. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 22nd November 1876, in Twenty-Sixth Annual Report, op. cit. 104 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE The sanitary condition of the Asylum is stll unsatisfactory. Erysipelas, which proved fatal in 7 cases last year, made its re-appearance in Feb- ruary, since which period there have been 5 cases in the male division, and 6 on the female side. Of these 2 of each sex have, as already stated, died. Typhoid and various forms of tuberculosis were not uncommon, although the Asylum managed to avoid the various national epidemics of cholera that afflicted other asylums. Two serious outbreaks of smallpox in Devizes in 1870 and 1872 also left the Asylum unscathed. Perhaps the most remarkable statement on the general health of the Asylum inmates was contained in the report of the Medical Superintendent for the year 1882. In a splendid display of optimism he reported: Apart from some diarrhoea, arising from errors of diet and atmospheric change, and a recurrence of sporadic cases, followed by an epidemic of typhoid, the health of the establishment has been fairly good.°! Overcrowding, which allowed fixed costs to be spread over a greater number of patients, no doubt contri- buted to a reduction or levelling out of maintenance costs per patient. In Wiltshire, the maintenance cost per head had been reduced from 9s. 4d. in 1879 to 7s. 7d. a week in 1883.°° By 1889, it had been further lowered to 7s. Od., despite the remarks of the Commis- sioners in 1885 that it was already too low and ‘there should be no attempt to reduce it’.°? Overcrowding was recognised by the Commis- sioners in Lunacy as a major problem and in their report for 1884 they recommended a whole range of improvements including fire escapes, a detached Hos- pital, a larger Chapel, a ‘good’ Recreation Hall, and an ‘adequate’ Laundry. These were described as . absolutely needful improvements to bring this Asylum to the usual standard in other County Asylums — (and here it may be well to note that the cost of maintenance is, and, has been, very low, so that even if all these improvements were carried out the expense would not be very great).°* 60. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 21st April 1877, in Twenty-Seventh Annual Report, WRO J4/110/3. 61. Thirty-Second Annual Report, op. cit. 62. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 18th October 1883, in Thirw-Third Annual Report, WRO J4/110/4. 63. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 28th July 1885, in Thirty-Fifth Annual Report, WRO J4/110/4. 64. Report of the Commissioners in Lunacy, 13th August 1884, in Most of these improvements were eventually insti- tuted despite considerable prevarication by the local authorities and the Wilts County Asylum continued to expand until the number of inmates reached an all-time high of 1500 in 1945.°° It remained more or less typical of the national network of county asylums, ‘so large as to make even the pretence of treatment a mockery’®® — littlke more than a warehouse for the refuse of humanity. Escape attempts feature regularly in the Annual Reports for the Asylum, although very few were successful. A contributory factor to speedy recapture, no doubt, was the Asylum warning system which consisted of a locomotive-type steam whistle, attached to the boiler of the Asylum steam engine: The sound being heard for a considerable dis- tance, warning 1s given in the neighbourhood and to the police, and in several cases the attempt to escape has in consequence been baffled.°’ Rarely were the attendants found to have been negli- gent and the first recorded case of ‘culpable neglect’ occurred in 1865. The attendant was found to have omitted to lock the door between the ward and the airing court at dusk, but ‘on a promise of greater care for the future, the fine to which he had made himself liable was not exacted.’°* In the following year, however, two attendants were not quite so fortunate: Two patients escaped from the gang employed in clearing and levelling the new land, on two successive days. Both reached Melksham or its neighbourhood, and were thence brought back to the Asylum, in each case after an absence of two days. On examination, the House Committee decided that there was sufficient evidence of want of vigilance to justify the infliction of a fine of half a week’s wages on each of the outdoor- attendants.°” As late as 1900, William Lovelock, an attendant at the Asylum, was fined eight shillings for ‘neglect in allowing a patient, G. Whatley, to escape from a party of eight’.”° In his report for 1874, the Medical Superintendent Thirty-F ourth Annual Report, op. cit. 65. Roundway Hospital Devizes 1851-1951, Centenary Report, op. cul. 66. A.T. Scull, op. cit., p. 219. 67. Fifth Annual Report (1856), WRO J4/110/1. 68. Fifteenth Annual Report (1866), WRO J4/110/1. 69. Sixteenth Annual Report (1867), WRO J4/110/2. 70. Male Staff Record Book, Wilts County Asylum, WRO J4/140/1. THE INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE TO INSANITY IN NINETEENTH CENTURY WILTSHIRE 105 drew attention to two ‘extraordinary events’. The first concerned a female patient, a single woman who had formerly been a ‘criminal lunatic’ and had been resident in the Asylum since April 1867. On 2 October 1874 she gave birth to a male child and subsequently accused one of the Asylum staff, a stoker, of being the father. The stoker, a married man with a family ‘indignantly repudiated the charge’. A full enquiry was held and after taking into account the previously impeccable record of the accused, the ‘bad moral character’ of the patient and the absence of ‘the slightest particle of corroboratory evidence in favour of the statement of the patient’, the case was dis- missed. In a footnote to the report, however, the Superintendent noted: The accused has, since the date of this report, resigned his situation in this Asylum, to avoid discharge for drunkenness and dereliction of duty subsequent to the date of the accusation.’! The other ‘extraordinary event’ of 1874, which attrac- ted national press coverage at the time, was . .. the burial, in the usual manner and with the usual religious ceremonies, of what was afterwards found to have been an empty coffin.’ The patient whose body should have been in the coffin at the time was described as a ‘micro-cephalic idiot of exceedingly small stature and light weight’ and thus the bearers did not attribute any significance to the lightness of the coffin. The burial took place at 1 p.m. and it was not until five or six hours afterwards that the body was discovered, still unburied: The coffin was dug up early next morning, and the patient’s body placed in it and afterwards properly buried, the burial service being gone through again as before.” In the 36th Annual Report for the year 1886, two other extraordinary cases are reported. The first concerned a patient who died from ingesting poisonous fungi, an occurrence described by the Medical Superintendent as unique, there being no other recorded instance of this happening in an Asylum. The patient, one of a group of 130 who had spent the afternoon and had tea under the trees on the cricket ground was ‘seized with pain in the stomach and violent retching’ the next morning. She ‘presented all the symptoms of irritant 71. Twenty-Fourth Annual Report (1874), WRO J4/110/3. 72. Ibid. 73. Ibid. 74. Thirty-Sixth Annual Report (1886), WRO J4/110/4. poisoning’ but although the cause became known and the ‘usual treatment was adopted’ she ‘succumbed after forty-eight hours suffering’.’* The second case in 1886 concerned a_ habitual malingerer: The Asylum has received a second visit from a man named H.W., who can probably boast of being the greatest malingerer in the “insane world”. On his former visit, he was classed as insane and was evidently so favourably impressed by the kindness he received, as to lead him to note the institution as worthy of a second visit. This ume he was less fortunate, and expressed himself as disappointed, and in consequence threatened never to favour Wiltshire with his presence again. This man has been, and generally more than once, in the majority of English Asylums, and also in those over the border. He has too, been in similar institutions in America, and resided for various terms in the prisons of that and this country. His notoriety sometime since led to a resumé of his career being recorded in a leading article in a London daily paper.’° Popular fears and prejudices regarding the Asylum are weli illustrated by a letter received by the Medical Superintendent in 1860. It was from the relieving officer of the town to which a particular patient belonged, asking for information as to the patient’s condition in order to set at rest certain rumours circulating in the town: About a month ago it was reported that he had been stifled. Another report fresh from Devizes is that you have bled him to death. A few lines to satisfy his friends will oblige. . .”° The Superintendent points out that the patient in question was subsequently discharged recovered and remarks: It seems at first sight scarcely possible that such reports could gain a moment’s credence at the present day; especially in the immediate neigh- bourhood of a large public asylum, under local and government inspection, and open to the visits of persons in all ranks of life.’ It seemed that not everyone would concur with the 75. Ibid. 76. Tenth Annuai Report (1861), WRO J4/110/1. 77. ibid. 106 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE assertion of Dr Paget, the Harveian Orator for 1866, who was quoted in the 16th Annual Report: To my eyes, a ‘Pauper Lunatic Asylum’, such as may now be seen in our English Counties, with its pleasant grounds, its airy and cleanly wards, its many comforts and wise and kindly superin- tendence provided for those whose lot it is to bear the double burden of poverty and mental derangement, I say this sight is to me the most blessed manifestation of true civilisation which the world can present.’® In May 1889, control passed from the Visiting Com- mittee of Justices to the newly created County Council. POSTSCRIPT During the First World War, the Asylum received a considerable number of patients evacuated from other institutions. In February 1915, 90 patients were transferred from Bristol and 200 patients were received from Portsmouth in 1918. The evacuated patients were all returned in 1919. Thirty two of the male staff joined the army in 1914 and by 1918 as many as 69 members of staff had enlisted in the forces. This temporary reduction in male nursing staff prompted the experiment of having female nurses on the male wards, an arrangement which lasted for almost ten years. The health of patients caused a great deal of concern towards the end of the First World War. Poor diet, resulting from food shortages, and overcrowding led to the prevalence of dysentery and tuberculosis and the death rate rose sharply. With the end of the war, the situation rapidly improved.” The numbers of inmates were again swelled during the Second World War with an influx of patients evacuated from Hampshire, Surrey and Exeter. Despite serious overcrowding (1500 inmates at 31 December 1945), adequate food supplies were main- tained and consequently the health of patients was this time not impaired.*° With the passing of the Health Service Act,*! in 1948 the Regional Hospital Board took over responsi- bility for the County Lunatic Asylum at Devizes, later to be called Roundway Hospital, and it was placed under the control of its own management committee. 78. Sixteenth Annual Report, op. cit. 79. WRO J4/113/1. 80. Ibid. 81. 9 & 10 Geo. Vic. 81. 82. Inter-Authority Comparisons and Consultancy: Mental Illness His- The national trend of declining numbers of inmates in mental hospitals established from 1954 onwards was reflected in the numbers at Roundway, although it lagged somewhat behind the national average, having 998 beds in 1971, the greater proportion of which were occupied by patients over 65.°* The catchment area of the hospital was reduced in the 1950s with the incorporation into the Health Service of the Old Manor Hospital at Salisbury, serving the southern part of the County of Wiltshire. Following the re-organisation of the Health Service, Roundway Hospital came under the auspices of Bath District Health Authority in 1976 and it was not until this period that real efforts were made seriously to reduce the number of in-patients.*? Today the number of beds has been reduced by more than 80 per cent from the peak figure of 1500 in 1945 to a total of 265 beds in 1991. By 1995/1996, Roundway Hospital will be closed. A new community hospital is to be established on the Roundway site and although some of the architectural integrity of the original building will be preserved, much of the land will be sold for development. The new community hospital will incorporate a 60-75 bedded acute psychiatric unit and thus the continuity of psychiatric care on the Asylum site will be maintained.** For 140 years the Asylum for the Insane Poor of the County of Wilts has dominated the market town of Devizes, so much so that the town has become a synonym for the Asylum. For many residents of rural Wiltshire, phrases such as ‘sent to Devizes’ have entered the vocabulary and sull carry the stigma associated with the mentally ill. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY PUBLIC GENERAL STATUTES 1808 48 Geo. III c. 96 1811 51 Geo. HI c. 79 1815 55 Geo. III c. 46 1819 59 Geo. III c. 46 1828 9 Geo. IV c. 40 1828 9 Geo. IV c. 41 1832 2 & 3 Will. IV c. 107 1842 5 & 6 Vict. c. 87 1845 8 & 9 Vict. c. 100 1845 8 & 9 Vict. c. 126 County Asylums Act Amendment to Above Amendment to Above Amendment to Above County Asylums Act Madhouse Act Lunatics Act Lunatic Asylums Act Lunatics Act Lunatic Asylums & Pauper Lunatics Act 1853 16 & 17 Vict. c. 70 Lunacy Regulation Act torical Profiles, Health Services Management Centre, 1983. 83. Ibid. 84. Mr Tom Dobson, Site Manager, Roundway Hospital. Pers. Comm., June 1990. THE INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE TO INSANITY IN NINETEENTH CENTURY WILTSHIRE 107 1853 1862 1889 1890 1946 16 & 17 Vict. c. 96 Lunatics Care & Treatment Amendment Act 25 & 26 Vict. c. 111 Lunatics Law Amend- ment Act 52 & 53 Vict. c. 41 Lunatics Law Amend- ment Act 54 & 55 Vict. c. 65 Lunacy Act 9 & 10 Geo. VI c. 81 National Health Service Act OFFICIAL PAPERS Wiltshire Record Office J4/110/1 J4/110/2 J4/110/3 J4/110/4 J4/110/5 J4/111/4 J4/112/1 J4/113/1 J4/140/1 J4/140/3 J4/150/3 J4/151/2 J4/157/1 J4/170/1 J4/190/1 J4/191/1 Al1/152/35 A1/152/39 A1/152/40 Reports of the Committee of Visitors and Annual Reports of the Medical Superintendent of the Asylum for the Insane Poor of the County of Wilts. 1852-1861 Reports ... and Annual Reports .. . 1862- 1871 Reports ... and Annual Reports ... 1872- 1881 Reports ... and Annual Reports ... 1882- 1891 Reports ... and Annual Reports .. . 1892- 1901 Visitors Book, Wilts County Lunatic Asylum Roundway Hospital Stanstical Returns, 1950— 1960 Roundway Hospital Devizes 1851-1951, Cente- nary Report Male Staff Record Book, Wilts County Asylum Female Staff Record Book, Wilts County Asylum General Ledger No. 3, 1897-1901, Wilts County Lunatic Asylum Patients Ledger No. 8, 1882-1887, Wilts County Asylum Orders for Repairs, Additions and Improvements Exceeding £100 in Value, Wilts County Asylum Register of Admissions, County Asylum Casebook No. 1. (Male), Wilts County Asylum Casebook No. 1. (Female), Wilts County Asylum Quarter Sessions Minutes, Wiltshire, 1837- 1841 Quarter Sessions Minutes, Wiltshire, 1845- 1847 Quarter Sessions Minutes, Wiltshire, 1847- 1851 1873-1879, Wilts A1/570/1 Minutes of the Committee of Visitors of the Lunatic Asylum for the County of Wilts. 1846- 1851 Al/570/2 Minutes of the Committee of Visitors of the Lunatic Asylum for the County of Wilts. 1852— 1862 Al/571, 574 Contract Book, Wilts Pauper Lunatic Asylum Al/S71, 574 Architectural Plans for the proposed County Lunatic Asylum at Devizes by T.H. Wyatt Esq. and approved by the Secretary of State A1/571, 574 Contract and Agreement with Thomas and Wil- liam Piper of London for building a new Pauper Lunatic Asylum for the County of Wilts at Bishops Cannings near Devizes. Dated 15 Octo- ber 1849 A1/S71, 574 Petition to the Quarter Sessions against the pro- posal to erect a County Lunatic Asylum, undated c. 1838 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICIAL PAPERS 1983 Inter-Authority Comparisons and Consultancy: Mental Illness Historical Profiles, Health Ser- vices Management Centre BOOKS AND ARTICLES AUBREY, J., The Natural History of Wiltshire, Wiltshire Topo- graphical Soc., 1847 BYNUM, W.F., PORTER, R., SHEPHERD, M. (eds.), The Anatomy of Madness: Essays in the History of Psychiatry, Tavistock Publications, 1985 FOUCAULT, M., Madness and Civilisation: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason, Tavistock Publications, 1967 JONES, K., A History of the Mental Health Services, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972 LEETE-HODGE, L., The Story of Devizes, Local Heritage Books, 1983 MACDONALD, M., Mystical Bedlam: Madness, Anxiety and Healing in Seventeenth-century England, Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 1981 PARRY-JONES, W.LI., The Trade in Lunacy: A Study of Private Madhouses in England in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972 PUGH, R.B. & CRITTALL, E. (eds.), The Victoria History of the County of Wiltshire, Oxford University Press for the Institute of Historical Research, 1957 SCULL, A.T., Museums of Madness: The Social Organization of Insanity in Nineteenth Century England, Allen Lane, 1979 SCULL, A.T. (ed.), Madhouses, Mad-doctors and Madmen, Athlone Press, 1981 SZASZ, T., The Manufacture of Madness, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1971 WILTSHIRE, K., Wiltshire Folklore, Compton Russell, 1975 Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 84 (1991), pp. 108-115 The Background and Beginnings of the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society by STUART PIGGOTT In this paper, the text of a lecture given to the Society at Devizes Museum on 28 October 1989, the origin and early activities of the Society are seen as a part of the socal and intellectual history of the nineteenth century. The founding of local archaeological societies at this time was a widespread and fashionable development which met the intellectual need of an educated public to acquire and share knowledge in new subjects. The Society’s founders, early social composition, allocation of interests and activities are discussed, and brief accounts are given of five of its original officers and their contributions to the fields of archaeology, local and natural history, ethnology, geology, ornithology and botany. The early foundation of a Library and Museum with its now famous prehistoric collection, together with the achievements of its members, are evidence of the maintenance of the Soctety’s high reputation for excellence in learning. Ata meeting held 138 years ago, on 12 October 1853 in the Town Hall here in Devizes, a company of two to three hundred persons of consequence in the county brought into being the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, which today has invited me to talk about the circumstances of this event, of its founding fathers and its early days. The foundation of such a society was not a unique event. Only ten years or so ago I wrote about such things (1976, 171-95; cf. also Levine 1986) and will now only outline what I think is significant. To begin with dates: in 1843 a group split from the venerable Society of Antiquaries of London to form a British Archaeological Association (there was then an internal row and an Archaeological Institute hived off within the year: both institutions survive today). And then local archaeological societies immediately started up: Northamptonshire and Lincolnshire in 1844, Norfolk 1846, Sussex, Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire 1847, and Somerset 1849, to list only some. This was not coincidence. A new social and intellectual need was being met, and behind this seem to date the events of 1839. In Cambridge in that year two earnest and pious undergraduates, John Mason Neale and Benjamin Webb, formed a society to promote the study of medieval church architecture, its restoration and its revival, calling it, from the Renaissance antiquary William Camden, the Cambridge Camden Society (White 1979). Now I need hardly remind you what was happening in the Church of England at this time in Oxford, culminating in Keble’s Assize Sermon in 1833, Newman’s Tract 90 in 1841 and his seccession to the Roman faith in 1845. In Oxford, too, a Society for the Study of Gothic Architecture was founded in 1839, but it was the Cambridge Camdenians whose fasci- nating and extraordinary success story introduced an often passionate interest in church architecture throughout the land. As I said in 1976, ‘in turning the attention of the parson, the squire and the churchwar- dens to the structure and fabric of their church, the movement injected a suff dose of medieval archaeo- logy and architectural history into the clerical and lay population of parish after parish’. What were the Camdenians up to and why were they so remarkably successful in what they liked to call ‘Ecclesiology’ and church restoration? They did in fact create in a decade or so what almost everyone up to today accepts as a traditional medieval church, but as an historian of nineteenth century church building, the Reverend Basil Clark (1938, 106), put it: The Anglican parish church as we know it today . . 1S certainly not like the parish church of the Middle Ages . . . it is the expression of the ideals of a small, pietistic society founded by undergrad- uates at Cambridge at the beginning of the reign of Queen Victoria. So powerful is the influence of faith, even if it be mistaken, and so irresistible is the force of obstinacy. The Camdenians were a dynamic product of the Romantic Movement. From the 1770s, if not before, many people were seeking emotional alternatives to the Renaissance ideal of a revived classical past by turning to other periods of history for inspiration and reassurance, and to the invention of tradition (Hobsbawm and Ranger 1983). The antiquaries from Stukeley onwards invented Noble Savages and Sub- THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY 109 lime Druids in prehistory; the poets found ‘a world of fine fabling’ in medieval romances and in ballads — Macpherson’s Ossianic inventions (1762-63), Percy’s Reliques of Ancient Poetry (1765), Scott’s Border Min- strelsy (1802). Scott, first as poet and later as the author of Waverley, was above all influential, here and on the Continent, in inventing a medieval past emotionally satisfying to the new mood: Ivanhoe (1819); the Scottish comedy of a corpulent George IV appearing in Edinburgh in 1822 in a new-fangled kilt (and pink ughts); the rain-drenched fiasco of the Eglinton Tournament of 1839; Disraeliis Young England movement. Wales was busily inventing its past from Iolo Morganwg and the Druidic Eisteddfod in 1819 to Lady Llanover’s ‘traditional’ Welshwoman’s dress in the 1860s. The Oxford Tractarians invented a tradi- tional High Church; the Cambridge Camdenians invented a traditional parish church for its use. As Hugh Trevor-Roper has pointed out (1969), all this was to have a serious and important effect on the nineteenth century approach to history. In the Romantic mood, there was a shift from the generaliz- ing philosophical stand of a Gibbon or a Hume, to the ‘local and particular, in ballads and traditions, in abbeys and castles, in the antiquities of a region known deeply and personally’. In such a climate of thought in England, reinforced from 1839 by the intense interest directed by the Camdenians to parish churches, the formation of local societies to express and further these local historical aims was an inevitable social outcome. Academic history as we know it today did not yet exist. As Professor John Kenyon recently put it (1983, 96): The failure of the universities to establish a professional discipline left the profession rootless and leaderless.... With the exception of Stubbs, all the English historians of the High Victorian era were amateurs, usually resident in or around London, and existing on private incomes or the proceeds of higher journalism. The way was open for the amateur local historian, or as he was now more often calling himself, the archaeo- -logist. _ The early county societies of the 1840s and 50s which I mentioned earlier on, all called themselves ‘archaeological’, but ‘archaeology’ was not quite as thought of today. It was a new concept, replacing the old word ‘antiquarian’ deliberately, when in 1843 that | splinter group of moderns broke away from the Society of Antiquaries, founded in 1717 and by the | early nineteenth century widely criticised as an institu- | tion of old dodderers. The new body called itself the Archaeological Association ‘for the encouragement and prosecution of researches into the arts and mon- uments of the early and middle ages’: archaeology, it proclaimed, now ‘assumes the position of an estab- lished science’ (Evans 1956, 232). The Wiltshire society had for its first objective (Rule I of 1853), ‘To collect and publish information on the Antiquities of Wiltshire, including Ancient Mon- uments, Manorial History, Ecclesiastical History and Endowments, Records, and all other matters usually connected with the name of Archaeology’, as well as Natural History (to which I shall come later). Exca- vation and prehistory, now usually thought of as essential elements of archaeology, hardly existed in 1853. Barrow digging of course, in the Colt Hoare tradition, continued vigorously, but rather as a gentlemanly field sport coupled with the pleasures of a picnic luncheon; prehistoric antiquities were only called such after Daniel Wilson had deliberately coined the word in 1851 (Piggott and Robertson 1977, 72; Chippindale 1988, 303), and their nature was still not understood. This then was the background of the 1853 meeting. It was a time of national self-confidence and local pride. Improved roads and improved carriage-springs were helping to enlarge the social unit from the parish to the county. Victorian England was essentially a horse-drawn society where in 1870 it was reckoned ‘there were 120,000 privately owned large carriages and 250,000 light two-wheelers’ (Cannadine 1983, 111). With the coming of the railways even wider horizons were opening, and the metropolis was coming into contact with the provinces as never before. It was the England of the sixteenth year of Queen Victoria’s reign, and the Great Exhibition had been held two years before; it was the world of Mrs Gaskell’s Cranford (1851) and of Anthony Trollope’s Barchester (The Warden would be published in 1855), and a more raffish side of English country life was presented in Robert Surtees’s Mr Sponge’s Sporting Tour of the very year, 1853. But it was a complex time and not all felt happy. It was also 1853 that Matthew Arnold wrote sadly of a lost time Before this strange disease of modern life With its sick hurry, its divided aims, Its heads o’ertaxed, its palsied hearts was rife. It is symbolic of the Victorian Age that Mr Sponge and the Scholar Gipsy should first meet their public in the same year. Now we turn to the meeting itself, its personalities and its founding fathers (see Pugh 1953 for a full account). Behind it, and present at an irrepressible 82 years of age, was John Britton, a self-educated and 110 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE indefatigably self-promoted Wiltshireman who had set up as an antiquarian journalist, cashing in (quite literally) on the Romantic Movement’s invented tradi- tonal past with, first, his picture books The Beauties of England. The first was on Wiltshire in 1801, and in 1839 he founded a Wiltshire Topographical Society which published three volumes by himself and the Reverend J.E. Jackson before foundering in 1847. In 1852 Britton negotiated with William Cunnington of Devizes for the sale of his Wiltshire books and papers (and of the famous ‘Celtic Cabinet’ made originally for George Watson Taylor of Earl Stoke Park about 1824) (Chippindale 1985, 121). These were bought by subs- cription for £150, and so led to the foundation of the Society in the following year. John Britton was indeed a link with the past; born early in George III’s reign in 1771, only six years after William Stukeley’s death, he had patronized the first William Cunnington and ingratiated himself with Colt Hoare, spanning the old world of eighteenth century antiquarianism and the new world of 1850s archaeology. The gathering of 1853 was of between 200 and 300 persons, of whom 50 attended a subsequent dinner (WAM 1 (1854), 1-xv, 1-67. For those involved, see DNB and obits. in WAM). Social respectability was assured by the patronage and presence of the third Marquess of Lansdowne, a Whig statesman still in the Cabinet, and Lord Lieutenant of the county. George Poulett Scrope of Castle Combe was elected as first President, a country gentleman and MP for Stroud, who as a young man had made distinguished contri- butions to the then rapidly developing fields of geology and geomorphology. Born Poulett Thomson, he took his wife’s name on his marriage in 1821; his father-in- law seems to have been a colourful character with contemporary renown as a deerstalker, salmon fisherman and amateur painter. Young Scrope immediately set off for six months’ field work in the Auvergne at the age of 21, becoming Joint Secretary of the Geological Society four years later. He published books on the volcanic landscape and subsequent denudation of the Auvergne which won him the acceptance and praise of the great geologists Mur- chison and Lyell. Aged 56 when he accepted the Presidency, and modestly making no reference to his distinction in his opening address, he was now devot- ing himself to local history, having produced a History of Castle Combe. With him were elected 14 Vice- Presidents, all respectable figureheads. The new Society also elected two General Secreta- ries, 14 local or district secretaries, and a committee of 12. Of these 28 officers I find five only worthy of comment, for they were the men who shaped the nature of the new society and ensured its success from the beginning. But before this it is worth while considering an aspect of the social composition of the Society members. With its entrance fee of a guinea and an annual subscription of 10s. 6d., it was clearly a middle class institution in common with all learned societies then and now; its appeal was to those with education and some leisure. But in striking contrast to today the original 200-strong membership was just over 30 per cent (nearly a third) Church of England clergymen; of the 28 officers just mentioned, 8 were clerics. The place of the country parson in the dissemination and encouragement of history and the natural sciences in Victorian rural England has per- haps not been fully appreciated. The role of the Church in the advancement of learning was perceived by Coleridge as early as 1817 (Chap. 10), when he wrote The church presents to every man of learning and genius a profession in which he may cherish a rational hope of being able to unite the widest schemes of literary utility with the strictest per- formance of professional duties. Among the numerous blessings of Christianity, the introduc- uon of an established church makes an especial claim on the gratitude of scholars and philoso- phers. As a result, the countryside could be provided with men having a background of academic learning in every parish, settled in reasonable financial circum- stances. Even though there could be wide disparities (and abuse by the lazy or incompetent), the 10,000 Victorian benefices averaged £285 a year (though many were twice or three times this figure); for the pluralists the going rate for a curate was around £75 (Young 1936, 63; Kenyon 1983, 151, 161). A country gentleman could be reckoned well-to-do at £600—700 a year, and when in 1866 the great historian William Stubbs was appointed to the Regius Chair of History plus an Oriel fellowship at Oxford, it was at £650. In the context of the Society, it might be remembered that those 10,000 livings served 9,000 parish churches wholly or partly of medieval date. Of the five original officers of the Society I have selected, three were parsons: J.E. Jackson and W.C. Lukis representing the historical side, and A.C. Smith that of natural history. William Cunnington was a Devizes merchant; John Thurnam, one of the first one can call an archaeologist rather than an antiquary, a doctor of medicine: there were altogether 7 of his profession in the original membership. I propose discussing the historians and archaeologists first, pio- THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY neers in fields familiar to me, but later I shall say something of natural history. One general point may be made: the average age of the five was just under 40. It was by no means a gathering of old grey-beards. As to the allocation of interests in the early days of the Society I have taken the first ten volumes of the Magazine (1853-65) and made a rough count of the classifiable titles of communications. Of a total of 177, some 131 represent history, genealogy, medieval arc- hitecture, folklore, and prehistoric and pagan Saxon archaeology; natural history, ornithology, botany and geology make up the remaining 46 articles. The publication from the first of the Magazine was ‘to serve as a valuable assistant to those who may hereafter undertake the more serious task of finishing the History of the County’, the reference being to the History of Modern Wiltshire begun by Sir Richard Colt Hoare and left incomplete in 1844. In the event the Victoria County History took on this task, stll in progress. The Revd J.E. Jackson, one of the two General Secretaries of the Society, was an Oxford man who in 1853 was vicar of Leigh Delamere. His brother was known as a local antiquary in Doncaster. One tends always to think of him as Canon Jackson, but his honorary Canonry of Bristol dates from two years later. He was associated with John Britton and the short-lived Topographical Society, with which he published a History of Grittleton in 1843, when he was still in his 30s, and made substantial contributions to Wiltshire local history. He is probably best remem- bered today for his rehabilitation, with Britton, of John Aubrey as a serious antiquarian scholar in the world of Restoration learning, after Aubrey’s reputa- tion, until then based on a partial knowledge of his Brief Lives and his published Miscellanies, had been that of no more than a feckless and credulous gossip. Britton’s Memoir of Aubrey of 1845 and the first publication of his Natural History of Wiltshire in 1847 was followed by Jackson’s fine edition of Aubrey’s Wiltshire Collections of 1862, with its facsimiles of the original Avebury drawings from the Monumenta Bn- _tannica MS, and these established Aubrey as a scholar | | 1 | whose significance has been increasingly confirmed today. Canon Jackson published papers in the Maga- gine on parochial history, including a history of _ Kington St Michael in 1858, and continued to give | vigorous support to the Society and its historical | interests until his death in 1891. __ The other General Secretary was the Revd W.C. | Lukis, vicar of Great Bedwyn. He was a Guernsey | man, son of F.C. Lukis, a notable pioneer in Channel | Islands archaeology and natural history. Graduating \] | | 111 from Cambridge, he was ordained at Salisbury in 1841 and became a curate in Bradford-on-Avon, where his antiquarian interests were soon shown by a mono- graph on the church plate. He subsequently held livings at East Grafton, Great Bedwyn and finally at Collingbourne Ducis, which he left in 1861 for a Yorkshire parish. At Collingbourne he excavated some barrows left intact by Colt Hoare in 1855, to standards which it must be admitted were little superior to those of his predecessor. From the 1860s he made his main contributions to archaeology in his excellent field surveys, latterly with Sir Henry Dryden, of megalithic tombs, stone circles and alignments in Britain and Brittany. British archaeological excavation techniques had, by the mid nineteenth century, made no advance over those of the seventeenth. The digging of barrows to obtain their grave-goods was pursued zealously and destructively, a process known as ‘opening’ — ‘I have never known the barrows open so well’, William Cunnington wrote in 1806 — and in Wessex the melancholy (if at times unconsciously funny) records go on after Hoare to W.A. Miles’s Deverel Barrow (1826) and the Revd Charles Woolls’s anonymous The Barrow Diggers (1839) in Dorset, and nearer home the exploits of Dean Merewether of Hereford near Avebury, where he ‘opened’ some 30 barrows between 18 July and 14 August 1849 in the intervals of tunnelling into Silbury Hill. The Revd A.C. Smith and William Cunnington will engage us later as ornithologists and geologists and we can now turn to an outstanding figure in nineteenth century prehistoric archaeology, Dr John Thurnam. A Yorkshire doctor of medicine, he had made a name for himself when still in his 30s as Medical Superintendent of the famous York Retreat (he was a Quaker) and by his publications on the statistics of insanity, and when following Ashley’s 1845 Lunacy Act the Wiltshire Authorities were in 1849 setting up a Mental Asylum at Devizes, they chose Dr Thurnam as its first Superintendent. By this time he was already interest- ing himself in the anatomical characteristics of ancient human skulls as an index of their archaeological significance, for which he had obtained a research grant from the Royal Society. Independently, a Derbyshire barrow-digging squire, Thomas Bateman of Middleton Hall, having dug some 380 barrows and so acquired many ancient crania, turned to a friend of his to publish them. This was a Staffordshire GP, Dr Joseph Barnard Davis, an enterprising man who as a medical student had taken service as ship’s surgeon on an Arctic whaler and was now interesting himself in ancient skulls. Davis agreed, and put out a prospectus for a Crania Celtica in 1852. Thurnam immediately got 112 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE in touch with him, and the two doctors collaborated in what proved to be a major enterprise, now Crania Britannica, published in parts between 1856 and 1865, and dedicated to Queen Victoria. Davis was an ama- teur artist, and it must have been on one of his visits to Thurnam when working on the Crania Britannica that he painted the view of Devizes Wharf recently acquired by our Museum (Davis and Thurnam 1865, preface). A word must be said about the preoccupation with skull forms which played such a part in nineteenth century archaeology up to and including Pitt Rivers. Its roots lay in the late eighteenth century interest in ethnography and the races of men, when the great anatomist Blumenbach first distinguished the white, black, brown and yellow ethnic groups or ‘races’. In this of course was latent the discreditable exploitation of the theme by politicians, deluded or unscrupulous or both, culminating in the Aryan myth and the Nazi atrocities, but in its early and innocent form it seemed a useful tool for prehistory. It had the added attraction of appearing to be scientific, when Victorian science was steadily rising in esteem. Unfortunately it also had a wider popularity owing to its association with the pseudo-scientific fashion of phrenology, which claimed that psychological characteristics were dis- played by the exterior conformation of the skull, alive or dead, and was a widely and wildly accepted craze in the early nineteenth century. But above all it provided for archaeologists a refuge from the frightening anon- ymity of the prehistoric past as it was now being revealed; silent, without languages or named peoples. And so an ethnic model which was also an ethnic fallacy was eagerly adopted. Bateman had retained the skulls from his barrow- digging, but Colt Hoare had piously left his interments intact before re-filling..Once in Wiltshire, Thurnam saw his chance of augmenting the comparative series by re-excavating Hoare’s barrows and recovering the skulls, as well as pursuing additional examples by new excavations, as at the West Kennet chambered long barrow. In 1868-73 he published his two classic papers on Ancient British Barrows, enshrining his famous dictum ‘Long barrows, long skulls; round barrows, round skulls’ and making a pioneer classification of the pottery and other grave-goods (1868, 161-244; 1873, 285-544). Modern genetics have eroded the simpli- cities of dolichocephalic and brachycephalic skulls, but the archaeological taxonomy was the foundation of that of Abercromby and all of us up to the 1930s. One last point may be made. To the final Crania Britannica volume of 1865 Thurnam contributed a book-length Chapter V of some 100,000 words which was virtually a British prehistory but significantly titled ‘Historical Ethnology of Britain’. In it he deployed his now unrivalled knowledge of the barrow grave-goods and their skulls, but could only visualize this in the context of the written record of the Greek and Roman writers on Britain (of which he shows a_ formidable acquaintanceship) and an ethnic grouping in terms of named Celtic tribes, and so failed to perceive any long antecedent prehistoric past. Even though in 1859 the direct recognition of the contemporaneity of human artefacts and an extinct fauna had been made in the gravels of the Somme, and simultaneously the impli- cation of Darwin’s Origin of Species had been made apparent, a very short chronology still contained the neolithic and bronze age. In 1877 Canon Greenwell, excavator of nearly 300 barrows, could write ‘of round barrows one thing is certain, that they ... are antecedent to the conquest of Britain by the Romans’ and ‘belong to a period which centres more or less on 500 BC’ (1877, 131). Greenwell was Pitt Rivers’s mentor in barrow-digging in the 1880s. At the time of his death from a sudden stroke in 1873 Thurnam was writing a paper on Stonehenge and its barrows, and at the request of the Society a Somerset antiquary, William Long, took over his notes and produced an admirable and massive paper, a 244-page contri- bution to the Magazine, in 1876. Earlier, in 1862, Long had published in Volume 4 a useful synthesis of the knowledge available on Avebury. From the first, the Society made itself responsible for a Library and Museum, acquiring the nucleus of our present Long Street premises by 1874, with successive enlargements in 1902 and from 1944 to today. The repeal in 1850 of the heavy tax on glass had many scientific repercussions (Allen 1976, 145 et seq.). One can think of the Crystal Palace of the next year as a vast museum show-case, and in museums themselves an important social transition took place from the drawers and cabinets of collections shown to few, and on request, to the glass-windowed cupboard or display case on view to the public. From an early date our Museum had, like the County Museum at Dorchester, cases crested with Gothick battlements, with more splendid crimson and gilded counterparts in the Blackmore Museum at Salisbury dated to 1864. When Thurnam wrote so perceptively of the grave-goods from Colt Hoare’s and Cunnington’s excavations, they were stored at Stourhead, where he worked on them from 1865 to 1871, but in 1878 were transferred on loan to the Society’s Museum (and those battlemented cases where I first saw them 60 years ago), and in 1883 bought for the sum of £250. They represent today the international glory of the Museum, still under review | THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY by scholars and very recently the storm-centre of some unhappy happenings. At the time their acquisition was unenthusiastically received in some quarters. The Devizes and Wiltshire Gazette of 1878 wrote To rescue a ‘collection’ of what as it lies in the cellar at Stourhead appears to nonarchaeological eyes more like the refuse of a marine store than anything else, argues a degree of antiquarian eccentricity which few people will be able to appreciate. Perhaps more today, but I sometimes wonder . . . Glass of course played an important part in the high technology of the Victorian period, photography (Sim- cock 1989, 15). This year in Wiltshire we have been celebrating the 150th anniversary of W.H. Fox Tal- bot’s invention at Lacock Abbey in 1839, but it must be remembered that independently in the same year an analogous process was invented in Paris by Louis Daguerre, and it was the daguerrotype rather than Talbot’s calotype that became commercially successful in the 1850s, followed by the use of collodion glass negatives with albumen paper prints. Ruskin was already taking daguerrotypes of Venetian architecture in the 1840s, and Canon Jackson, as he said in his speech at the 1853 meeting, had that year taken a daguerrotype of a portrait of John Aubrey in the basement of the Old Ashmolean in Oxford — no mean achievement With his camera made of rosewood, Made of sliding, folding rosewood as Lewis Carroll, that embarrassingly keen photo- grapher of little girls, wrote in 1869. Photography was of course to play an important part in the illustration of archaeology and natural history; tipped-in photo- graphic prints of buildings begin to appear in the Magazine from the late 1860s. When we turn from the Archaeological to the Natural History side of the new Society, we enter rather a different world, one which was scientific, prestigious and becoming mature and_ profes- sionalised. The importance of botany and _ natural history in general was marked by the foundation of the Linnean Society as early as 1788; geology with its mercantile repercussions had grown in status from the _ foundation of the Geological Society in 1807 and the | initiation of the Geological Survey in 1835. When the distinguished geologist Sir Roderick Murchison became its Director in 1855, the news of his appointment was greeted in the House of Commons, | the contemporary report says, ‘with general cheers’, | and Gladstone as Prime Minister attended his funeral — 113 unlikely circumstances for a natural scientist today (Allen 1976, 60). It was largely under pressure from the geologists that the British Association for the Advancement of Science was formed as early as 1828. Geology was represented in the 1853 Society by William Cunnington of Devizes, the grandson of Colt Hoare’s director of excavations, and of course the President had a distinguished geological past; but of the 46 communications on natural history in the first ten volumes of the Magazine, only five deal with geology. Cunnington published a workmanlike catalo- gue of the Stourhead Collection for the Society in 1896. Natural history in general was felt to be a peculiarly suitable field of study for the clergy. I quoted Coler- idge on the parson as scholar, and others were soon thinking of parson-naturalists. When in 1831 the young Charles Darwin, aged 22 and vaguely destined for the Church, wanted to join the famous voyage of the Beagle as a naturalist, his uncle Josiah Wedgwood wrote in his support ‘the pursuit of natural history, though certainly not professional, is very suitable for a clergyman’ (Eisley 1959, 175). A little later J.C. Loudon, the great botanist, was enthusiastic on the matter: It would be altogether superfluous to insist on the suitableness of the study of Natural History for a clergyman residing in the country. . . a taste for Natural History in a clergyman has great advantages, both as respects himself and others. it is superior, in a social point of view, even to a taste for gardening. . . The naturalist is abroad in the fields, investigating the habits and searching out the habitats of birds, insects and plants, not only invigorating his health, but affording ample opportunity for frequent intercourse with his parishioners. (Quoted in Allen 1976, 22) The youngest of my five founding fathers, one of the local secretaries at the age of 31, was the Reverend A.C. Smith, Rector of Yatesbury, a very active member of the new society and all that Loudon could have wished for as a parson-naturalist. He is remem- bered by archaeologists as the author of the Guide to British and Roman Antiquities of the North Wiltshire Downs of 1885, but he also published The Birds of Wiltshire two years later, and it was as a passionate ornithologist that he made his early reputation. A young man of means (Eton and Christ Church), with his father a retired cleric living at Old Park here in Devizes, he became incumbent of Yatesbury (a living of which he himself was conveniently patron) in 1852. His knowledge of birds was extensive: since the age of 114 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 17 he had travelled, at first with his father, observing and collecting birds in Europe and the Near East — ‘In Egypt and Syria, in Spain and Portugal and Norway, the gun and the skinning-knife were his inseparable companions’ his obituarist recorded (WAM 30 (1899), 198). Returning for a moment to glass display cases, their Victorian embodiment to most of us is in the cases of stuffed birds and small mammals looming menacingly in museum, country house or provincial hotel: before their advent and the concurrent development of taxi- dermy, bird skins in cabinets, like butterflies, were the only means of displaying a collection. Observing birds rather than shooting them was coming in by the 1860s, when the glasses used on the race-course or in the opera-house began to be used in the field: prismatic binoculars were invented in France in 1859. The Wiltshire natural history of the period is that of Richard Jefferies, a farmer’s son born at Coate near Swindon in 1848 who wrote in the 1880s of his boyhood in the 50s and 60s. Smith started straight away delivering lectures to the Society ‘On the Ornithology of Wiltshire’ from the first year of its existence; there are 15 in all printed in the Magazine, up to 1869. After the first introductory lecture, itself in five instalments from March 1854 to August 1855, the young rector put his audience through a remorseless taxonomy from Raptors to Waders. One only hopes that some of the new glass slides and magic lanterns with improved lighting were sometimes used, though the Society of Antiquaries did not have a lantern lecture until Haverfield insisted in 1892 (Evans 1956, 364). Smith’s introductory lecture is interesting for the history of the subject. He quotes the early writers such as Ray, Willughby, Pennant and Gilbert White and seems mainly to rely on William Yarrell’s British Birds (1837-43). But he also refers toa Wiltshireman, Col. George Montagu of Easton Grey (1751-1815) (remembered best today from Montagu’s Harrier), who as a young man fought in the American War, when his amorous adventures with his fellow- officers’ wives led to his being court-martialled and drummed out of his regiment. In subsequent respecta- bility he became a Lieut-Col. in the Wiltshire Militia and, as David Allen (1976, 94) puts it, ‘transformed the scientific study of birds in Britain’ with the military efficiency of a Pitt Rivers. The Rector of Yatesbury pointed out that the classification of the works of Nature leads us to an admiration of God’s works in a providentially ordained universe ordered for man’s. delectation; of pheasants and partridges he observes ‘as all members of this order are extremely good for food, a_ beneficent Providence has caused them to be very productive’. He was of course an excellent shot. He ends his fifth introductory lecture with a reference to the Great Chain of Being and a long poetical quotation — unattributed but in fact from ‘Summer’ in James Thompson’s Seasons of 1727 — by far the latest reference to this out-dated idea I have come across. We may leave early Wiltshire ornithology with Smith and one interesting detail. In the questionnaire on Wilt- shire Antiquities and Natural History sent out by the Society in 1854 there is a specific query on heronries, and this must refer to Alfred Newton’s pioneer listing, anticipating the famous Oxford census of the 1920s. Of the 46 natural history papers in the first ten years of the Magazine, ornithology (by Smith and others) is represented by 17 and botany by 19. Long an impor- tant natural science, dating back to the seventeenth century and the collection of herbs by the apothe- caries, botany offered a splendid field to the amateur, not least by its close connexion with gardening. In Wiltshire, Thomas Bruges Flower, aptly named but not a founding member of the Society, proposed the establishment of an herbarium in 1858 and had published a Flora of Wiltshire in the previous year; he was a Fellow of the Linnean Society and later worked with the Revd T.A. Preston, who founded the Marlbo- rough College Natural History Society in 1864 and whose Flowering Plants of Wiltshire appeared in 1888. Women had a long and distinguished record as amateur botanists, and our Museum has very recently acquired the herbarium of Ellen Eldridge, formed near Salisbury in the 1860s (WANHS Ann. Rep. (1988), 29). They were becoming stereotypes in fiction: there was the daughter of the old Dean of Barchester, Miss Trefoil, ‘a lady very learned in stones, ferns, plants and vermin ... a wonderful woman in her way’ appearing in 1857 (Trollope 1857, ch.10). There were in fact four ladies in the original membership of the Society, two wives and two spin- sters, and there must have been many more sympathe- tic to its aims. They remain tantalizingly elusive — I would dearly like to know who was ‘[the] lady precious as an Archaeologist, and deserving all our considera- tion’, recorded by Dean Merewether as being of his barrow-digging party at Avebury in 1849 (1849, 93). I have tried to sketch the origins and early days of our Society as a part of the social and intellectual history of the mid nineteenth century. It is not easy to accept the past on its own terms and not to make judgements from the viewpoint of our own. We must avoid a sentimental nostalgia for the newly invented Victorian age of today’s politicians, and seek to accept THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY 115 a world in many ways alien to our own. The Society, like the others of its time, was the outcome of a genuine desire of an educated public to acquire, and share knowledge of new subjects — history, archaeo- logy, natural history — as a component of its intellec- tual equipment. For the serious pursuit of knowledge and the cultivation of a well-stocked and critical mind was an avowed and respected aim in a society con- sciously anxious for self-improvement in a climate of thought which included technological exploitation and material advancement but was by no means dominated by them. The nineteenth century reading public may have been numerically smaller, proportionate to gen- eral literacy, than today, but it was also infinitely more critical and demanding in quality, and had no time for the superficial and facile. It took its learning with the seriousness intellectual disciplines demand, and aware that worth-while knowledge can only be acquired by hard work, did not look for short cuts. The amplitude and frequent density of Victorian prose may daunt us today, but at the time it was no deterrent to its readers. Sir Peter Medawar has recorded how Herbert Spen- cer’s System of Synthetic Philosophy (an early evolu- tionary text) confronts us ‘in twelve volumes thicker and squarer than Gibbon’s, each bound in a cloth which has acquired with age a reptilian odour and texture’, but Spencer’s numerous books sold by tens of thousands in his life-time. Darwin’s Origin of Species is neither short nor with its close argument easy to read, but railway-station bookstalls were running out of copies and awaiting new printings immediately upon its publication in 1859 (Medawar 1967, 39; Irvine 1955, 125). It was for such an educated public, amateurs prepared to equip themselves with intellec- tual knowledge to professional standards, that our Society in 1853 came into being, and it was in such a climate of learning that it established and maintained its high reputation. Today, when all serious scho- larship, individual or corporate, is under attack, let us hope that as a bastion of civilized learning it may hold out a little longer in a new hostile world. REFERENCES ALLEN, D.E., 1976 The Naturalist in Britain: A Social History, Allen Lane CANNADINE, D., 1983 ‘The Context, Performance and Mean- ing of Ritual’ in The Invention of Tradition, ed. by E. Hobsbawm and T. Ranger, CUP, 101-164 CHIPPINDALE C., 1985 ‘John Britton’s “Celtic Cabinet” in Devizes Museum and its Context’, Antiquaries Journal 65, Pt.1, 121-38 — 1988 ‘The Invention of Words for the Idea of ‘“Prehis- tory”, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 54, 303-14 CLARK, B.F., 1938 Church Builders of the Nineteenth Century, SPCK COLERIDGE, S.T., 1817 Biographia Literaria, London DAVIS, J.B. and THURNAM, J., 1865 Crania Britannia 1, London (privately printed) EISLEY, L., 1959 Darwin’s Century, Gollancz EVANS, J., 1956 History of the Society of Antiquaries, OUP GREENWELL, W., 1877 British Barrows, Clarendon Press HOBSBAWM, E., and RANGER, T., (eds.), 1983 The Invention of Tradition, CUP IRVINE, W., 1955 Apes, Angels and Victorians, Weidenfeld & Nicolson KENYON, J., 1983 The History Men, Weidenfeld LEVINE, P., 1986 The Amateur and the Professional .. . 1838-1886, CUP MEDAWAR, P.B., 1967 The Art of the Soluble: Creativity and Originality in Science, Penguin MEREWETHER, J., 1849 ‘Diary of the Examination of Barrows .. 5 Proc. Arch. Inst. Salisbury, 73-112 PIGGOTT, S., 1976 ‘The Origins of the English County Societies’ in Ruins in a Landscape, Edin. Univ. Press, 171-95 PIGGOTT, S., and ROBERTSON M., 1977 Three Centuries of Scottish Archaeology, Edin. Univ. Press PUGH, C.W., 1953 The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society 1853-1953: A Centenary History, Devizes SIMCOCK, A.V., 1989 ‘The Beginnings of Photography in Oxford’, The Ashmolean 16, 15 THURNAM, J., 1868 ‘On Ancient British Barrows, Especially those of Wiltshire and the Adjoining Counties. Part 1: Long Barrows’, Archaeologia 42, 161-244 — 1873 ‘On Ancient British Barrows ... Part 2: Round Barrows’, Archaeologia 43, 285-544 TREVOR-ROPER, H.R., 1969 The Romantic Movement and the Study of History, London: Athlone Press TROLLOPE, A., 1857 Barchester Towers, Longmans WHITE, J.F., 1979 The Cambridge Movement: the Ecclesiologists and the Gothic Revival, CUP (first published 1962) YOUNG, G.M., 1936 Victorian England, OUP Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 84 (1991), pp. 116-40 Notes Earlier Evidence for Stonehenge Carvings? by NORMAN ROGERS The well-known local historian, William Cunnington (1813-1906), was a member of the Wiltshire Archaeo- logical and Natural History Society. When he received his magazine, he separated it into sections and bound each section into a much larger book with blank pages, around the edges of which he attached relevant cuttings, correspondence etc. These books are now in the Society’s library. The collection contains many absorbing by-ways that all too easily distract the most dedicated researcher from his main task. For example, ina letter written by G.E. Dartnell, dated 31 August 1893, which is mainly devoted to a _ discussion of the dialect words that William Cunnington had contributed to Wiltshire Words (by Dartnell and E.H. Goddard, 1893/4), there is this intriguing note on Stonehenge: A lady has recently come out with a wonderful theory of her own about Stonehenge, Gray Wethers etc. She claims to be able to take rubbings from invisible picture carvings on the stones, which reveal their true history. She is sane enough on other points, but the ‘discovery’ certainly savours of a lack of mental balance somewhere. If real, it would be one of the biggest archaeological discoveries ever made. She claims that it applies to all manner of stones and coun- tries equally well. She is going to bring out a book well illustrated if she can find a publisher. It ought to sell as a curiosity.! Readers will not need to be reminded that in 1953 Professor Atkinson noticed by chance a carving of a Mycenean dagger and four axe-heads on a stone. Other similar discoveries have been made more recently. 1. This letter is appended to ‘Contributions to a Wiltshire Glossary’ by G.E. Dartnell and the Revd E.H. Goddard in the interleaved Cunnington Wiltshire Archaeological Magazine Vol. 26 (1891), pp. 293-314, in the Society’s library. Archaeological Excavation on the Route of the Cockey Down to Petersfinger Main Pipeline, Near Salisbury by MARTIN TROTT INTRODUCTION In April 1989 Wessex Water Engineering Services commenced construction of a pipeline from the reser- voir on Cockey Down (SU17003140), 2.5 km northeast of Salisbury, to Petersfinger (SU16962862) (Figure 1). This was to replace an existing main on the same route. The pipeline crosses an area of predominantly chalk downland which has occasional patches of clay-with- flints, such as that on Cockey Down itself. The area is known to contain an extensive ‘Celtic’ field system (Wilts. SMR SU13SE644 and SU12NE608) and elements of this system still exist as low earthworks. Aerial photographs have shown that the summit of Cockey Down (c. 147 m OD) is occupied by a ditched enclosure with interior features (Wilts. SMR SU13SE301). The very uneven surface of the fields around the reservoir may represent traces of earthworks within this enclosure. Finds made during the construction of the reservoir and the original pipeline in the 1970s included a number of inhu- mations (Wilts. SMR SU13SE302/305), at the loca- uions shown in Figure 1, and late Roman pottery. Because of the high probability of archaeological NOTES 117 W308 COCKEY DOWN PIPELINE “ Clarendon 7 Palace “ttt pyppypp ptt! ttl!’ Ra; Lu ay Cropmark Known inhumation Fenceline Areas of Excavation Fig.1 Site location 118 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE remains being found during the pipe-laying opera- tions, The Trust for Wessex Archaeology was engaged by Wessex Water Engineering Services to carry out excavations in advance of construction and to record any features found during the pipe-laying operations. The first stage in the construction of the pipeline was the removal of topsoil by mechanical excavator along a 15 m wide easement. Observations made at this time indicated that there were few features south of the crest of Cockey Down (point D, Figure 1). Subse- quent monitoring of the pipe-laying operations also failed to find archaeological remains outside this area. EXCAVATION RESULTS The enclosure ditch crossed the easement from the northwest to the southeast. It was 4 m wide and 1.75 m deep. The sides were quite steep towards the base of the ditch but the upper edges splayed out to 45°. The datable pottery found within this feature formed a coherent sequence starting in the Early or Middle Iron Age and going through to the second half of the first century AD. No finds were recovered from the lowest deposits in the enclosure ditch but the pottery from layers immediately above these included haematite coated bowls of 600—400 BC, and an unusual jar form in the same fabric. Sherds from at least four vessels of ‘proto saucepan-pot’ type, dated to between 400 and 300 BC, were recovered from deposits below the uppermost layers in the ditch. The finds from these top layers were significantly later in date, such as the sherds of Durotrigian and Corfe Mullen wares from the first centuries BC/AD. Two beehive-shaped pits and a number of less well-defined features were recorded within the enclos- ure. Most of these were undated but are assumed to have been contemporary with the enclosure itself. Features which were potentially contemporary with the infilling of the enclosure ditch included two narrow gullies immediately to the south and a pit, 60 m to the south of the enclosure, which contained a crouched inhumation. One gulley was semi-circular in plan with a U-shaped profile, 0.2 m wide, 0.18 m deep, and was cut by a larger, more irregular gulley 0.6 m wide and 0.35 m deep. The larger gulley contained a small number of sherds in a shell-gritted fabric, possibly of Early Iron Age date. The semi-circular gulley prob- ably marks the wall-line of a roundhouse 9 m in diameter. The larger gulley is more likely to have been part of the boundary of a subrectangular enclosure. The crouched inhumation was of an adult placed on the base of a small oval pit. The skeleton was lying with the skull to the north-east, the right arm across the chest and the left arm underneath the legs which were drawn up to the chest area. The body had been placed in the pit lying on the left side facing towards the south. More human bones, including large frag- ments from a second skull, were found in the soil overlying the skeleton. The pottery from the pit was of the same range of ‘proto saucepan- pot’ types as found in the enclosure ditch. Features of early Roman date were found within the enclosure. They included a group of irregular intercut- ting pits, two post-holes and an infant burial. A second infant burial, found close to this feature group, may have been contemporary. Late Roman features included two ditches and a corn drier. The northernmost ditch was 25 m to the south of the enclosure ditch. It was 4 m wide and 0.65 m deep and ran approximately east-west. Amongst the pottery from the filling of the ditch were sherds of third/fourth century AD New Forest ware. The second ditch was 70 m to the south of the enclosure ditch. It was not as wide as the one to the north, only 2—2.5 m across, and was 0.6 m deep. The finds included sherds from dropped flange vessels and colour-coated wares of the third to fourth centuries AD. A corn drier was discovered between these two ditches. It consisted of two pits linked by a trench. One pit was rectangular, 2.5 m by 2.3 m and 0.90 m deep, the other was irregular in plan, about 1.5 m by 1.2 m, and 1.35 m deep with a flat base. These two pits were 0.5 m apart and connected by a vertical-sided trench, | m wide and 1.56 m deep, which was stepped near the base and lined with courses of horizontal tiles resting on this step. From the gradual change in the positioning of these blocks, from horizontal to slightly pitched, it was apparent that the lining formed a vault. The vault was secured in place by a yellowish mortar containing large chalk lumps. Some of this remained in situ along the sides of the trench, more was found filling the trench as a compact chalky matrix contain- ing tile, flint and limestone rubble from the collapsed vault, together with half of a large greensand mill- stone. The finds from the soil overlying the scorched chalk floor of the trench included a number of iron nails and a substantial proportion of a Wiltshire greyware flagon, certainly of Late Roman date although the detailed chronology of this local ware is not well understood. CONCLUSIONS The results of this small-scale excavation suggest that extensive settlement remains survive on the summit of Cockey Down, both within the main enclosure and NOTES extending for some 70 m to the south. The range of pottery found during the excavation covers most of the period from 600-400 BC to 300-400 AD. It is notable that no pottery characteristic of the third century BC ‘saucepan pot phase’ of the Iron Age was recovered. Whether this demonstrates the complete aban- donment of the site during this period, or merely the shift of the centre of activity to another part of the hill is not known. 119 Acknowledgements. The project was managed on behalf of the Trust for Wessex Archaeology by Dave Farwell and the field work supervised by Martin Trott with assistance from Duncan Coe, Steve Tatler, Kirsty Ritchie and Sarah Wyles. The illustrations were drawn by Julian Cross. The comments on the ceramic finds were made by Dr. Elaine Morris. The Trust for Wessex Archaeology would like to thank Wessex Water Engineering Services for funding the work and for their assistance and cooperation during the excavation; also Brooklands Aerospace Plc. for providing an Optica aeroplane to enable aerial photographs of the site to be taken. A Durotrigian Coin from Stonehenge by PAUL ROBINSON The sale, anonymously, of ‘A collection of Coins and Medals formed nearly a century ago’ at Sotheby, Wilkinson and Hodge, 18-20 June 1923, included as part of lot 336 a coin described as an ‘Early British Stater (Evans 1864 Pl. F 2) found at Stonehenge’. The type corresponds to Mack 317-318, a silver or base silver stater of the Durotriges, whose coins are found principally in Dorset and South Wiltshire. The coin is not mentioned in archaeological literature or in any of the gazetteers of findspots of Celtic coins from Britain and it merits brief publication here. The same lot in the auction sale also included a group of coins from the hoard found at Weston, Norfolk in 1852, suggesting that the Stonehenge coin may have been acquired around 1850 and perhaps was found not much earlier than this. Although the findspot lies towards the periphery of the area in which Durotrigian coins are principally found, there is another Durotrigian coin now in Salisbury Museum, said to have been found in Amesbury. More recent finds of Durotrigian coins at sites lying to the north of Stonehenge (for example, at Pewsey, Upavon and East Coulston) combined with earlier records of finds at sites such as Yarnbury Castle, confirm that there is no geographical problem with regard to the findspot. It is extremely unfortunate that the findspot is not confirmed. Stonehenge has been a tourist attraction ‘since the Middle Ages and it is possible that a false findspot was dishonestly applied to the coin to help sell ‘it to a gullible tourist or antiquary. Other possibilities are that the coin may actually have been found near |Stonehenge — a loose term which could cover sites such as Yarnbury Castle or Vespasian’s Camp — or that it ‘could be a more recent loss by a nineteenth century visitor to Stonehenge, who had originally found the coin elsewhere. There is, of course, no satisfactory way of determining this. A struck bronze Durotrigian coin was found at Maumbury Rings in Dorset (Allen 1961, 243; St George Gray 1913, 97f) in association with early Roman activity on the site. A Gaulish coin of the Atrebates is recorded as having been found at Avebury (Robinson 1982, 88) but whether within or signifi- cantly close to the henge as opposed to elsewhere in the parish is uncertain. More significant, however, is the plated stater, probably of the north Gaulish tribe of the Ambiani, recently excavated at Condicote Henge in Gloucestershire (Saville 1983, 37). The last indicates that the findspot of the Stonehenge coin should not lightly be disregarded. Coins were a common votive offering at late Iron Age and Romano-Celtic temple sites but it would certainly be going beyond the present evidence to argue that any of those above were late offerings at prehistoric religious sites. Finally, it may be remarked that two of the above coins were struck in Gaul. (Gaulish coins also occur among the votive coin offerings at Romano-Celtic religious sites in Britain, such as that at Hayling Island.) It may be relevant that a gold stater of the Armorican tribe, the Aulerci Cenomani, is also recorded as having been found at Lake, Wilsford, not far from Stonehenge (Robinson 1982, 88). REFERENCES ALLEN, D.F., 1961 ‘The Origins of Coinage in Britain: A Reappraisal’ in Problems of the Iron Age in Southern Britain, 120 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE ed. by S.S. Frere, University of London Institute of Archaeology Occasional Paper No. 11, 97-308 EVANS, SIR J., 1864 The Coins of the Ancient Britons, London ROBINSON, P., 1982 ‘Recent Acquisitions by Devizes Museum of Ancient British, Saxon and Norman Coins’, WAM 76 (1981), 83-91 ST GEORGE GRAY, H., 1913 ‘Interim Report on the Excavations at Maumbury Rings, Dorchester, 1912’, Proc. Dorset Nat. Hist. and Antiq. Field Club 34, 81-106. SAVILLE, A., 1983 ‘Excavations at Condicote Henge Mon- ument, Gloucestershire, 1977’, Trans. Bristol and Gloucs. Arch. Soc. 101, 21-47 A Bronze Vulcan from North Bradley by MARTIN HENIG The figurine was found in 1988 by Mr P.B. Tucker at Woodmarsh in North Bradley, south of Trow- bridge, at approximately ST 852557. It was offered for sale at Christie’s, London on 6 June 1989 and was purchased by the Society for Devizes Museum, with the assistance of generous grants from the Victoria and Albert Museum Purchase Grant Fund, the National Heritage Memorial Fund, Messrs A.E. Farr Lid. and H.J. Knee Ltd., and members and supporters of the Society. The findspot is not a previously recorded one. Mr Tucker subsequently found there a group of 15 coins of mid third to late fourth century date as well as an assemblage of sherds and tesserae and lead fragments, confirming the presence of a building on the site. It may also be noted that not far off lies another important Roman building, at Oxlease Wood in Dilton Marsh, which probably extends as far as Cutteridge Farm on the North Bradley—Dilton Marsh boundary. The figurine appears to be a heavily leaded bronze; it was cast by the lost-wax process on a core, but the result was not perfect and there is splitting on the back and on the left side. Slivers of alloy, under the armpit of the left arm and on the back, were evidently plugs used in finishing the piece. Slight damage to the left foot, the front of which is bent out of true, and the corrugations below both feet show that at one time the figure was affixed to a stand, now wrenched away. In its present condition it measures 106 mm in height and 42 mm across the shoulders (30 mm across the base of the tunic). It is in the form of a bearded male standing with his right arm bent at the elbow, the forearm raised, and the left lowered. The hands no longer hold the attributes which would have 1. Christie’s, London, Sale Catalogue, 6 June 1989, 16: lot 364. immediately identified the subject, although the conical cap or pileus which he wears, basically the headgear of an artisan, shows that the figure is Vulcan, who would assuredly have held a hammer and tongs. The short belted tunic supported on his shoulder, the right shoulder in this case, is fully conformable with such an identification. His left shoulder and breast are bare. Vulcan might have been expected to wear boots, a sensible precaution in a forge, but is here bare footed. By virtue of its distinctive physiognomy and careful detailing the bronze is clearly superior to the general run of figurines. The face displays the bulbous, almond-shaped eyes with well-defined lids which are so characteristic of Celtic portrayals of the human visage. The nose is wedge-shaped, and the mouth is small and turned downwards, giving Vulcan a some- what lugubrious expression. The face is framed by a raised ridge, embellished with short s-shaped grooves, representing curly hair above the brows and the beard around the cheeks and chin. The hair is similarly rendered at the sides, here surrounding cup-shaped ears with long lobes. The upper part of the tunic is rendered as a swathe of thick material, both front and back. Three folds or pleats run along its length and it is held in place by a conical, boss-like brooch on the right shoulder. The lower tunic below the belt is shown as a skirt with vertical pleats, decorated with horizontal hatching. Identification and Comparanda The bronze was first published, with two good colour plates in a Christie’s Sale Catalogue,! where it is described as ‘a Romano-British figure of Mars Teu- tates wearing a conical cap’ and subsequent to its acquisition for the Museum’s collections it appeared in NOTES 121 Bronze Vulcan from North Bradley. Actual size (Photographs by Derek Parker) the August 1989 newsletter of the Society, again as Mars. It is certainly not Mars, who would have been portrayed with a helmet, not a pileus. However, in both listings the similarity between the North Bradley figurine and those found in the early eighteenth century from Southbroom, Devizes was noted. There is certainly a generic resemblance, although those which survive in the British Museum are not so well modelled nor as detailed. One figure in particular provides something of a parallel, although he has 2. G.C. Boon, Jahrbuch des Rémisch-Germanischen Zentral- museums Mainz 20 (1973), 265-9. The native-style bronze is pl. 59 no. 13 (= M. Henig, Religion in Roman Britain, London, 1984, 66, pl. 23, third figure along); for drilled eyes and his tunic hangs over his left shoulder. It has not previously been published as Vulcan, but it too would seem to portray the smith-god; another bronze from the cache of fully classical style undoubtedly did show Vulcan.” Amongst other bronzes which depict him, especial note should be taken of one from Catterick for its richly modelled clothing and striking physiognomy.* This is a Romano-British figurine of even higher quality than the one from North Bradley, but it is the ‘classical’ Vulcan see Boon, pl. 58 no. 5. 3. M. Henig and P.R. Wilson, Ant. 7. 62 (1982), 370-2; pl. liv. 122 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE clearly the work of a different smith. There is plenty of evidence for the production of bronze figurines in Roman Britain but, in contrast to France and Ger- many, there has been no real attempt to publish a corpus, and so provide an opportunity to define workshops or even regional traditions, although this might be hard to do, for smiths were itinerant and their wares were portable. Tempting as it is to attribute the new bronze to the craftsman responsible for the Southbroom bronzes, we should probably resist doing so, while recognising that the rendering of Vulcan’s garments is very similar. Affinities can be seen elsewhere, for example in the bronze figure of Mars (with his stylised helmet) from Dragonby, South Humberside, at the other end of the Fosse Way; note his beard and eyes and above all his belt.* Finally there is the question of date. The North Bradley bronze has been ascribed to the late second or third century AD, presumably because the South- broom cache is dated by a coin of Alexander Severus. 4. J.P. Alcock, Lincolnshire History and Archaeology 24 (1989), 59, fig. 4. It must be stressed that coins only give some indication of the latest possible date and I am convinced that the range of Southbroom figurines, both ‘classical’ and ‘Celtic’ in style, suggests that they come from a temple favissa, and comprise a deposit of offerings discarded from display ata shrine but still too holy to destroy. As such they might be of any date and I am inclined to place the bronzes in the British Museum in an early Roman horizon, to which their strange iconographies and drilled eyes (for glass insets?) would otherwise consign them. They belong to a ‘Romanising phase’ of art. No such constraints bind the North Bradley bronze, but to the extent that there is some stylistic similarity between them, I would also see the new bronze as relatively early, no later than the second century. Acknowledgements. I would like to thank Dr Paul Robinson, for inviting me to write this note, and Grahame Soffe for his practical assistance. Two Contemporary Forgeries of Coins of William I found in Wiltshire by C.E. BLUNT and I. STEWART In 1986 Mr Michael Clark, a member of the Kennet Historical Research Group, found a coin of William I’s last type at Calstone. In November 1986 he submitted it to Devizes Museum.and the late Mr C.E. Blunt was invited to publish a record of it in this Magazine. Mr Clark has most generously presented the coin to the Museum. Mr Blunt had just drafted a note on the piece, in which he convincingly demonstrated that it was a contemporary forgery, when another coin that had lately been found at Upavon was shown at and acquired by the Museum in May 1987. The Upavon coin which is of the third type of William I’s coinage, is also evidently a forgery, and Mr Blunt was preparing to publish a note to that effect. Having produced a first draft, however, he felt that there was an awkward overlap with the note on the Calstone coin in respect of the general comments on counterfeiting in the Norman period that he had included in each, and he was therefore contemplating a thorough revision and amalgamation of the two notes. Sadly, he fell ill a few months later and was unable to complete the task before he died in November 1987. Shortly before his death he handed me the papers of his unfinished work, and asked me if I would publish any of it that I felt was worthwhile and readily capable of being completed. In the case of these two Norman forgeries, his work was sufficiently far advanced for this to be done without difficulty, although with some revision and rearrangement. The following text has been divided into three sections for this purpose. The first two, containing descriptions and discussion of the coins, are almost exactly as they were written by Mr Blunt, with only minor adjustments. The third is my attempt at writing the sort of general note on Norman forgeries | that I believe Mr Blunt had in mind. It incorporates | virtually all of the remarks contained in his preli- | | } NOTES minary drafts, but with some further material and comment. I cannot be sure that it exactly reflects his thinking, but having discussed the topic with him, I do _not think we had any difference of view. Miss Marion Archibald of the British Museum kindly provided photographs for Figures 2, 4 and 5, and helpful comments in correspondence. I am also grateful to Mr and Mrs Simon Blunt for assistance in producing this note from Mr Christopher Blunt’s papers. eS? 1. CONTEMPORARY FORGERY OF A ‘CANOPY’ TYPE PENNY The following is a description of a curious coin of William I that was found at Upavon in 1987 (Figure 1): ‘Canopy’ type BMC III, North 843 Obyv. + PILLEMII REX. Bust facing, crowned and diademed within a porch (or canopy?) of two columns supporting a triangular pediment. Rev. + AGIRIC AT RARED (the initial letter of the ‘mint-name’ could be D). Double quad- rilateral figure with incurved sides, fleury at the angles, placed lozenge-wise, with annulet in centre. Die-axis O°. Wt. 17 gr. Curious features about this coin are (i) the use of AUT in place of ON, which is normal in this series: this and an associated coin discussed below are the only two pieces on which this appears to be found; (11) the use of A in place of the more normal form IE — this is, however, occasionally found elsewhere; (111) the round form of C in the moneyer’s name, as opposed to the square more normally found; and (iv), perhaps most curious of all, the spelling of the name of the mint. A comparable coin was published by L.A. Law- rence in his paper on forgeries.' He records the reading as AGELRIC AT DARE, much as on the new coin but in part a little uncertain. Differences are that he reads the first letter of the mint name D, and the new coin adds a D at the end. The two coins, though clearly related, are from different dies. Law- rence described his coin as being a cast. It came to the British Museum with his collection of forgeries and is illustrated here (Figure 2). The weight is 14.3 gr and 1. British Numismatic Journal (BNF), U1 (1906), p. 285 and plate II, no. 39. 2. ‘Numismatic History of the Reigns of William I and II’, BNF VI 123 the metal looks base. Lawrence made no attempt to idenufy the mint, or to suggest from what original his piece might have been cast. Another comparable coin is recorded by P.W.P. Carlyon-Britton under Hereford, in this case with no suggestion that it might be a forgery.” Unfortunately, there is neither an illustration of the coin nor a note of the collection in which it was found. There is no cast of it in the very extensive collection of casts that Brooke accumulated when he was preparing his catalogue of the Norman series. Carlyon-Britton gives the reverse reading: + AGGELRIC ON H&RE. Thus, he spells the moneyer’s name in the normal way, records the preposition as ON not AXT, and makes the mint name read as for Hereford. It hardly seems likely to be Lawrence’s forgery, but Brooke not having been able to see the original was clearly unhappy about it. In a footnote he cites Carlyon-Britton’s publication, notes ‘False?’ and adds a reference to no. 39 in Lawrence’s article.? What emerges is that we have certainly two examples of this curious coin, that both are from different dies, and that there is a possibility that a third exists. The style of the two known coins is unexpectedly good for contemporary forgeries. The weight of the Upavon coin 1s low, but not unacceptably so, and the metal looks good. The weight of Lawrence’s coin, on the other hand, 1s unacceptably light and the metal has every sign of being base. We can, I think, therefore accept Brooke’s reservations about the Lawrence piece. 2. CONTEMPORARY FORGERY OF A ‘PAXS’ TYPE PENNY Found in 1986 at Calstone in the parish of Calne Without, Wiltshire, the coin illustrated in Figure 3 is described as follows: Obv. Bust of the king facing, holding a sceptre in his right hand. Around [+]PLLELM REX (omitting ‘T’). Rev. PAXS in the four quarters of a cross (the S reversed). Around +IILIPINE [OJNGPI wll. Wt. 13 gr (pierced). The metal looks base. Die axis 270°. This is a penny of William I’s last type, BMC VIII, termed the ‘Paxs’ type. There are several unusual (1909), p. 173. 3. G.C. Brooke, Catalogue of English Cos in the Briush Museum, The Norman Kings (BMC), I (1916), p. cexil. 124 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Figures 1-5. Forgeries (1-4) and coin(5) of William I. Actual size features about it. The normal reading of the king’s name on coins of this type is PILLELM and among the 660 specimens of the type in the British Museum Catalogue not one, as far as I can see, omits the letter ‘T. The reverse reading is even more curious. The moneyer’s name is probably intended for Aelfwine whose name, properly spelt, is found on an Ipswich coin of the preceding type, BMC 458. The mint name is certainly intended for Ipswich, Gipeswic in Domes- day, though the sideways placing of the (reversed) S is unusual. The weight, 13 gr, is well below the probable standard of 22.5 gr. The usual weight of these pennies is between 20 and 22 gr.* Finally, the metal appears to be base and the coin has been pierced. All this points to it being a forgery. Is it a contemporary or a modern forgery? Fortunately that question can be answered convincingly. In the British Museum Catalogue is a coin from the same peculiar reverse die (no. 722) and this came from the great Beauworth hoard of 1833 (Figure 4). The British Museum coin is also of light weight, 15.6 gr, and of base metal. Brooke records the specific gravity as being 5.95 and describes it as ‘doubtless a contemporary forgery’. The additional curious feature about the British Museum coin is that it is struck from 4. G.C. Brooke, English Coins, 3rd edn, 1950, p. 82; BMC I, p. cli. 5. BMCI, p. cli and I, p. 136. Miss Archibald advises that the marks across the face on this coin (see Fig. 4) are ‘two parallel the same obverse die as another coin in the same collection, no. 811, which is of the London mint, of regular workmanship and weight, by a moneyer signing Godwine (Figure 5). Brooke suggests that the British Museum forgery was ‘perhaps made by the London moneyer Godwine’.° So there are now two specimens of this forgery, but from different obverse dies, one linked to London, the other so far unlinked, though if a coin omitting the ‘I’ in the king’s name were to be found, it is to be hoped that it would provide further evidence. 3. COUNTERFEITING IN THE REIGN OF WILLIAM I In discussing forgery Brooke noted that there were many light and base coins in the Norman series evidently struck from normal dies in regular mints.° But he also drew attention to several cases in which reverse dies had been altered in order to obscure the names of both moneyer and mint as originally shown on the die, in some instances identifying the use of the reverse die in its unaltered state. The types involved were BMC I, I, HI, VU, and VIII of William I and the moneyers include Aelfsi, Aelwine, Godwine and cracks aligned on the reverse cross’ and not the result of defacement of the die. 6. BMC, pp. exlix—chi. NOTES Wulfwine,’ all of London. Aelfsi struck coins of light weight from altered dies of each of the first three types, whereupon his career seems to have come to an end. One of Godwine’s forgeries from an altered reverse die of type II (BMC 128, 16.4 gr) is from an obverse die used by Cinric of Thetford (BMC 145, 12.9 gr), a moneyer who also used another obverse die (BMC 146, 13.2 gr) that is found coupled with a reverse die with the enigmatic ‘mint-name’ MAINT (BMC 130, 13.7 gr). A group of three die-duplicates, also of Godwine and of type II from another altered reverse die, were in the 1882 York, Bishophill find, which suggests that they had not at the time been identified as forgeries, despite their low weights (13.0, 13.1 and IGE en)se There are two particular aspects of interest raised by the new forgeries from Wiltshire, the use of irregular but unaltered dies and the link between London and East Anglian moneyers in these dishonest activities. Both the Upavon and the Calstone forgeries were struck from unaltered but irregular reverse dies, apparently made with official irons, and that from 7. For this moneyer see I. Stewart, ‘A New Norman Forger’, BN7 XXVIII (1955), pp. 190-1. 8. SCBI Yorkshire, nos. 1158-60. These three coins are from the same obverse die as a coin from the 1845 York, Jubbergate find (SCBI no. 1157), from a normal reverse die of Godwine, and of more or less normal weight (18.5 gr). Brooke suggested that the reverse die of the Bishophill coins was recut to indicate a 125 Calstone may be from an illicitly made obverse die also. Although Brooke recorded the reverse die of the Calstone piece and thought that the low weight of the MAINT coin suggested forgery, he qualified this by remarking that ‘there is no trace of false work, or even of any altering of the die’,’ as if dishonest moneyers would not be expected to have had the use of unofficial dies made from regular punches. But it does now seem that on occasions this could happen. So far as the London-East Anglian connection is concerned, there is not only the link between Godwine of London and Cinric of Thetford but also the Ipswich mint-signature on the Calstone coin (and BMC 722).!° Any attempt to idenufy the source of the Upavon piece and the similar one of Lawrence’s is, on current evidence, likely to be fruitless, even if the mint-signature owes something to a Hereford reading. The maker of these reverse dies presumably intended the readings to be meaningless, and unless the Carlyon-Britton specimen can be traced, or obverse die-links found, the forger seems to have been successful in covering his tracks. moneyer Aelfwine at ‘Cufi’ (BMC I, p. cl). 9. BMCI, p. clxxvi. 10. Another possible link (not necessarily a dishonest one) between London and Thetford may be in the person of Blacsunu, a London moneyer of type IV and possibly at Thetford in type II (SCBI Yorkshire, no. 1174). New Light on the Bear Inn, Devizes by EDWARD BRADBY A set of documents in the Wiltshire Record Office,! to which the County Archivist, Ken Rogers, kindly drew the writer’s attention, goes some way to filling a notable gap in the history of the Bear Inn, Devizes. Sull a prominent feature of the market square, and earlier famous as a coaching inn and as the boyhood home of Sir Thomas Lawrence, the Bear was included ina list of licensees of the six principal inns of the town who gave bail at the Quarter Sessions in 1599.” The sign was then said to be ‘newly erected’, and the 1. WRO temporary reference 1494/76. ‘Extracts from the Records of the Wiltshire Quarter Sessions’, R.W. Merriman, WAM 20 (1882), p. 329. 3. E. Bradby, The Book of Devizes, (Buckingham, 1985), pp. 42-3, licensee was named as ‘John Sawter’, which is cer- tainly a mistake or variant for John Sawser, who figures in the Borough Minute Books as a glazier and one of the leading burgesses in the first decade of the seventeenth century, and who died in 1611.? Edward Kite, who collected all the known material about the Bear and published it as a pamphlet in 1924,* states that ‘the earliest landlord on record is John Sawter, in 1599’, adding that ‘early in the 18th century John Watts was both owner and occupier’, that he later 52. Will: WRO, Cons. Sarum, 1611. 4. E. Kite, The Bear Hotel, Devizes, (George Simpson, Devizes, 1924), WANHS library, Wiltshire Tracts 114. 126 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE sold it to John Child, and that he died in 1722. Kite then traces the succession of owners and licensees up to 1874, when the ownership passed to the newly formed Bear Hotel Company. But he evidently had no record of owners or landlords between John Sawter/ Sawser around 1600 and John Watts in the early eighteenth century. It is on this gap that the docu- ments referred to above shed some light. The first is a copy of the will of Anthony Harte, yeoman, of Devizes, dated 26 May 1607. Among other bequests, he leaves to his wife for life and then to another Anthony Harte, son of Walter Harte of Seend, weaver, the tenement etc. in Devizes ‘comonlie called or knowen by the name of the Beare, now in the tenure and occupacion of John Sawser’. This Anthony Hart (or Hort) of Devizes must have been a well-to-do citizen, for when he died — some time before 1627 — he left a legacy yielding £1 a year for the poor of the Devizes alms-house.° Next we find an indenture of 26 March 1626, by which Anthony Horte, weaver, of Blackmore Forest, Melksham, conveyed the inn — named this time as ‘the Blacke Beare’ — to Samuel Martyn, gentleman, of Devizes, for £140, acting on behalf of himself and his under-age son Walter Horte. This document describes the inn as then in the tenure and occupation of John Watts, and as ‘heretofore given to the said Anthony Horte by Anthony Horte deceased’. Samuel Martyn was the third son of a West Ashton clothier, Anthony Martyn, and was born there in 1594. He was living in Devizes by 1619, and it seems likely that he was trained in the law in the office of John Kent, the town clerk. He bought property in Devizes Old Park in 1623. In 1627 he was appointed to the prestigious office of Registrar and Solicitor to the Charterhouse in London, an educational and charitable foundation richly endowed by Thomas Sutton in 1611. From then until his death in 1643 he lived mainly in London, but retained close links with his family in Wiltshire. By his will, he left £10 to the Corporation of Devizes for the use of the poor of both parishes.° The third document, dated 17 March 1627,’ is another indenture, by which Samuel Martyn sells the 5. V.C.H. Wiltshire vol. 10 (1975), p. 309. 6. Information furnished by K.H. Rogers; cp. V.C.H. Wiltshire vol. 10 (1975), p. 312. 7. The date is 1627 according to our reckoning. The document, property to John Watts of Devizes, baker, for £180. The description, in the usual flowery legal language, is perhaps worth quoting: the inn is situated in the parish of St John the Baptist, ‘between the Castle there on the West part thereof and the Comon street on the East part thereof’, and was ‘nowe or late in the tenure and occupation of the sayd John Watts, and sometymes heretofore ... of one John Sawser alias seazer’. Besides the inn itself it includes ‘all that Wayne Way and Cartwaye lying at the north end of the said Messuage and tenement . . . and all shops, sellars, sollars, houses, edifices, buildings, stables, outhouses, backside, curtilages, gardens, orchards, Wayes, pas- sages, easments and fitte commodityes hereditaments and appurtenances whatsoever’. Further light is shed by the will of William Watts,® who in 1691 left the Bear Inn to his wife Margaret for life and then to his son John. The latter may be presumed to be the John Watts whom Kite mentions as the owner in the early eighteenth century. Between John Watts 1627 and William Watts 1691 there is an undocumented gap; but it is a fair presumption that the inn remained in the ownership of the Watts family throughout that period, and so from 1627 to the date of its sale by John Watts to John Child, about 1720. Kite’s account distinguishes between the owners of the inn and its landlords or licensees; and from 1725 onwards he lists a succession of landlords (John Foreman, George Whatley, etc.) who were distinct from the owners (by this time wealthy gentry such as John Child and Edward Nicholas). It would be interesting if the line of licensees could be extended back to cover the period before 1725: in 1599 John Sawser/Sawter was evidently both owner and licensee: how long was it before the licensee became merely the tenant of a wealthy property-owner? Unfortunately there seem to be no extant records of the granting of licences to innkeepers in the seventeenth century in Devizes, which held its own Quarter Sessions, and is therefore not covered by the well preserved records of the County Quarter Sessions. Unless, therefore, some lucky accident throws up further evidence, it looks as if this gap will remain unfilled. using the ‘Old Style’, gives it as 1626, adding the regnal year as the second of Charles (1). 8. WRO, Cons. Sarum, 1691. NOTES 127 The Wiltshire Sheriffs of Charles I: To Whom the Loyalty? by PAMELA COLMAN From the tenth century, the Kings of England had annually appointed county high sheriffs. Although the sheriffs powers were subsequently reduced by the appointment of JPs, Assize Judges, Lords Lieutenant and Special Commissioners, he was still very much the King’s man and, with the exception of the Lord Lieutenant, was the most prominent couniy figure, with financial and military responsibilities. The foll- owing analysis aims to discover whether this close relationship with the King affected the individual’s loyalty and allegiance in the Civil War period. Between his accession in 1625 and the outbreak of the Civil War in 1642, Charles I appointed seventeen high sheriffs. Two, Sir Robert Beynard of Lackham (1629)! and John Topp of Stockton (1630) had died before the latter date, and no evidence has been found to place four others — Sir George Ayliffe of Foxley (1635), Francis Goddard of Standen Hussey (1636), John Grubbe of Potterne (1638) and the rich clothier Robert Chivers of Quemerford (1641) in either Royal- ist or Parliamentarian camp. Royalists were John Duckett of Hartham (1628), John Duke of Lake (1639), Sir John St John of Lydiard Tregoze (1632) and Sir George Vaughan of Falstone (1642),” four out of a total of seventeen. Two Royalist stalwarts of James I’s reign were Sir William Button of Alton Priors and Tockenham (1611) and Sir Francis Seymour of Marl- borough (1625), great grandson of Protector Somerset, who was ‘pricked’ only a few days before James I’s death? and served almost all his shrieval year in Charles I’s reign. By contrast Walter Long of Whaddon (1627) was active in the House of Commons for the anti-court party, and Sir Edward Hungerford of Corsham (1631), and Sir Edward Baynton of Bromham (1637) were Parliamentary commanders in Wiltshire during the war. Though evidence is scarce, Sir Giles Estcourt and Giles Eyre were almost certainly in favour of the country party. Sir Henry Ludlow of Maiden Bradley 1. The year in brackets indicates the year of the shrievalty. 2. PRO Chancery Lane, The Round Room, Sheriffs List and Indices. 3. The Sovereign used (and still uses) a bodkin to prick the parchment where the sheriffs’ names appear. See Halsbury’s Laws of England, Vol. 42, p. 542 (1983 edn.). There are two traditions about the ceremony of ‘pricking the sheriff’. The first is that mediaeval monarchs had difficulty in writing, the second (1633), the father of the Parliamentarian general, Edmund, disliked everything to do with the Court as he was accused by the King of high treason,‘ and Sir Nevil Poole of Oaksey (1636) was a Parliamentary colonel, at one time commanding the Marlborough garrison.” Thus the seven who were active for Parlia- ment well outnumbered those for the King, though once civil war began in the summer of 1642 Charles ‘pricked’ Sir John Penruddock (1643) and the follow- ing year Sir James Long, the latter becoming a very loyal soldier.° That only eleven of the sheriffs appointed before the war were active in it does not necessarily mean that the remainder were unsympathetic to one cause or the other. There would certainly be reasons why a former sheriff did not take up arms or was inactive in Parliament or the counsels of the King. That moderate Royalist ‘the King’s best servant’,’ the Earl of Claren- don, in his history of the Great Rebellion, said of the gentry in 1643: There was throughout the kingdom a wonderful and superstitious reverence towards the name of Parliament and a prejudice to the power of the court; yet a full submission, and love of the established government of the church, and state, especially to that part of the church as concerned the liturgy, or Book of Common Prayer, which was a most general object of veneration with the people. And the jealousy, and apprehension that the other party intended to alter it, was a principal advancement of the king’s service. Though the major and most considerable part of the gentry, and men of estates were heartily for the king, many of them being of the house of commons, and so having seen and observed by what spirit the distemper was begot, and carried on; yet there were others of name, fortune and reputation with the people, very solicitous for the parliament, and that Queen Elizabeth was sewing when the list was placed before her and used her bodkin. In both cases a ‘prick’ would be easier and quicker than a signature. 4. Hyde, E., Earl of Clarendon, The History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England (Oxford, 1826), Vol. 3, p. 618. 5. Waylen, J., History of Marlborough (London, 1864), p. 157. WANHS, MSS, Sheriffs of Wiltshire from 1085, p. 30. 7. Trevelyan, G.M., History of England (London, 1929), p. 415. a 128 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE more active than the other. There was a third sort (for a party they cannot be called) greater than either of the other, both of fortune and number, who, though they were satisfied in their conscien- ces of the justice of the king’s cause, had yet so great a dread of the power of the parliament, that they sat still as neuters, assisting neither.® Among the factors deciding where a man’s loyalty lay were the actions of the King, the deliberations of Parliament, and the influence of the local peerage and gentry. The first action of the King which turned the sheriffs against him was the raising of money without Parliamentary consent. The gentry disliked the impo- sition of long obsolete taxes, such as the forest laws of which Clarendon wrote: The old laws . . . were revived by which not only great fines were imposed, but great annual rents intended .. . which burden lighted most upon persons of quality and honour. . . like to remem- ber it with more sharpness.” The forced loans or benevolences of 1626 raised under the Privy Seal were also unpopular. John Hampden refused to pay, some eight years before he refused to pay ship money.!° There were also fines for omitting to seek a knighthood at the King’s coronation on those individuals whose income from land was a mere £20 per annum, including John Duckett of Hartham, though eventually he backed the Royalist cause. It was, however, the imposition in 1635 of ship money on the inland counties which tested a Wiltshire sheriff's loyalty to the full and, according to one authority, gave those who had to collect it, deliver it to the Admiralty and be personally responsible for any shortfall, the unhappiest year of their lives.!! The King said he wanted the money to strengthen the Navy; if it had been demanded only of the maritime counties, it would probably have been considered within the prerogative, but to levy it for the first time on the inland counties was disputable, and it was new that sheriffs were now to be major tax gatherers. Francis Goddard, member of a well-known and widespread county family, received the ship money writ in 1635. The unwanted task of collection was made more unpleasant as the county justices refused help, an indication of general feeling among the 8. Clarendon, op. cit., Vol. 3, p. 419. 9. Clarendon, op. cit., Vol. 1, p. 120. 10. Chambers Biographical Dictionary, ed. by J.O. Thorne and T.C. Collocott, W.R. Chambers Ltd., p. 624. 11. Gladwin, I., The Sheriff, the Man and His Office, (Letchworth, 1984), p. 315. gentry. On his own initiative Goddard called the bailiffs of the several Wiltshire hundreds together, and allocated a percentage of the total of £7000 for collection by the village constables. The bailiff of the Hundred of Kingsbridge, whose account book sur- vives, assessed and collected £384 in some 600 separate payments, the majority in small amounts: ls. to 20s. only. By 1636 Goddard had collected all but £500 and eventually, with difficulty, secured the whole sum.!* He had about £5000 in his own house which he thought ‘too weak . . . to trust such a great charge’; he was told to send it to the Admiralty ‘by trusty persons’ but ‘the sooner he finished that business the sooner he would be eased of his office but until that be des- patched there was no hope of being freed’. Sir George Ayliffe of Foxley and Grittenham was the next sheriff, but his difficulties are not recorded. His successor, Sir Nevil Poole, MP for Malmesbury in the Long Parliament, had trouble. By May 1637, he had only collected £3400 of the £7000, and in November was still £1200 short of the total. Some £700 was never collected!* and Sir Nevil Poole was said ‘to have died poor’ as a result of his efforts. The fourth ship money writ went to High Sheriff Sir Edward Baynton. Though the county allocation had been reduced to £2200, Baynton could only collect £940, despite high handed methods of enforcement. The influential Sir Francis Seymour, Sheriff in 1625, did not pay and had his horse confiscated, and Edward Hungerford’s goods were distrained.!> The King, disappointed by the failure of ship money to provide the required money, was forced to recall Parliament. The second factor in deciding a sheriff's loyalty was events in Parliament. Several men who had been sheriffs were members of Parliament, such as Sir Edward Hungerford, Sir Edward Baynton and Sir Francis Seymour. Those who sat in the Long Parlia- ment must have been strongly influenced by the King’s high handed attempt to arrest the five members in January 1642. Those who had been in earlier Parliaments would remember Eliot and Coke ‘in committee and debate’ and were now serving with ‘Pym, perhaps the strongest Parliamentary leader in history, and Hampden, the best beloved in that choice assembly’. !° No Royalist in Parliament could compare with these. 12. V.C.H. Wiltshire, Vol. V, p.133. 13. Calendar of State Papers (Domestic) 1635, p. 560. 14. V.C.H. Wiltshire, Vol. V, p. 133. 15. Ibid., loc. cit. 16. Trevelyan, op. cit., p. 402. NOTES Wiltshire peers do not appear to have had any strong influence on the views of gentry and sheriffs in the struggle over the prerogative. The peerage in general tended to favour the Royalist cause. A* major and surprising exception was the county Lord Lieutenant, brother of William, third Earl of Pembroke ‘the most universally beloved and esteemed of any man of that age’:!’ this was Philip, the fourth Earl. The family was enormously wealthy and exercised great electoral influence. Philip, born in 1584, was one of King James’ early favourites; ‘the comeliness of his person . . . drew the King’s eyes to him with affection’.!* The King paid his debts, ennobled him and bestowed the Garter in 1608. As Privy Councillor, Lord Lieutenant and friend of James I and Charles I, he was clearly the most influential man in Wiltshire, yet ultimately he deserted his king, though fighting vigorously to retain his wardenship of the Stannaries when that office was attacked by the country party. He and his brother owed much to the monarchy for their advancement, and during the years 1639-1643 he tried unsuccess- fully to achieve an accommodation between King and Parliament. In 1641, he joined the Parliamentarians, induced, as Clarendon wrote, by ‘fear’;!? and he became ‘totally without credit’, having insufficient ‘ballast to endure a storm’.”° William Seymour, Earl of Hertford, brother to Sir Francis Seymour, was a very different man.”! The Seymours were the second most powerful family in the county, and earlier in the century had provided a Lord Lieutenant. Hertford was on good terms with his brother-in-law, the Parliamentary general, the Earl of Essex. Despite being overlooked by the Court, and his association with the Presbyterian Essex, he stayed with the King, but his example did little to influence the sheriffs of the period. The third peer in the county, Thomas, second Lord Arundell of Wardour, being a staunch Roman Catho- lic, would have no doubt about where his loyalty lay. On the outbreak of war, he equipped a troop of horse for the King, and later died of wounds received at either Lansdowne or Reading. His religion precluded him from influence over the gentry or sheriffs, and the Penal Laws prevented him from becoming Lord Lieutenant, a JP or burgess. The Wiltshire members of Parliament ‘showed 17. Clarendon, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 100. 18. Ibid. Vol. HI, p. 555. 19. Ibid., Vol. V, p. 73. 20. Ibid., Vol. I, p. 105. 21. D.N.B., Vol. XVII, p. 1271, ‘SEYMOUR, William, Earl of Hertford’. 1129, themselves overwhelmingly opposed to the King’.’? The county and boroughs returned 34 members, 29 with county estates, and 5 ‘foreigners’. Of the 29 Wiltshiremen, 21 were for Parliament. Sir Francis Seymour was one of the few active Royalist members. In the days of Buckingham’s ascendancy, he had been opposed to the Court party, and as late as 1639, was refusing ship money, but in the Long Parliament finally decided to support the King, and Parliament declared him a delinquent. Sir George Vaughan of Falstone, the last sheriff ‘pricked’ before the war, was the only notable soldier on the Royalist side. His house, taken over by the victorious Parliamentarians, became the headquarters of the committee which decided how much a delinquent should pay for support of the Royal cause. Another of Charles I’s sheriffs who turned against him was Walter Long of Whaddon. Fined by the Star Chamber in 1627 for being High Sheriff while member for Bath, he became a firm supporter of the Parlia- mentary leader, Sir John Eliot, in 1628 when the King was forced to concede the Petition of Right. In 1637 he was in trouble with the Privy Council for refusing to pay his share of the county muster expenses.** He had many grievances, imprisonment in the Tower among them. For Sir Edward Hungerford, Sheriff in 1631, and Deputy Lieutenant, however, it was his long parliamentary experience from 1620 which caused him to take the Parliamentary side, and play an active part in military operations in the west. Sir Edward Baynton too, despite past Royal patronage, supported Parliament. The official indices of sheriffs at the Public Record Office give no firm indication of sheriffs’ appointments from 1642 to 1645. According to Canon Jackson, the 1643 sheriff was Sir John Penruddock of Compton Chamberlain,** father of the ill-fated Colonel John Penruddock, executed for his part in the abortive Royalist rising of 1655.’° Sir John Penruddock’s adherence to the Royalist cause cost him £500. In 1643 the King ‘pricked’ Sir James Long of Draycot, a Colonel of Horse in the Royalist army, who worked urelessly for his sovereign until captured outside Devizes in 1645. It is indicative of anti-Royalist feeling among the Wiltshire gentry that the Falstone House Compounding Committee, which inflicted his fine of 22. V.C.H. Wiltshire, Vol. 5, p. 138. 23. Calendar of State Papers (Domestic), 1636-7, pp. 613, 469. 24. Revd J.E. Jackson, ‘List of Wiltshire Sheriffs’, WAM 3 (1857), p. 220. 25. V.C.H. Wiltshire, Vol. V, p. 148. 130 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE £357, included such well known names as Thistlewaite, Bennett, Long and Goddard. In 1645 the Lords and Commons at Westminster arrogated to themselves the appointment of sheriffs.*° Many whose families had supplied sheriffs in the past were prepared to accept office from Parliamentarian hands; of 17 appointments between 1645 and 1660, at least 8 went to members of families registered by the visiting Herald in 1623. At the Restoration, Royalists accepted the recovery by their class of power in the land and remained loyal to their sovereign, and more significantly, their class. No Wiltshire sheriff or squire 26. From 1653 to the Restoration, sheriffs were appointed by the Exchequer. sided with James II in 1688, the Pretender in 1715 or Bonnie Prince Charlie in 1745. One must conclude that during the early Stuart period ancient lineage, royal favours and the peculiarly royal nature of the sheriffs appointment had little to do with an individual’s decision which side he would support — King or Parliament. His major motivation was events in Parliament. As Clarendon implied, there were men of name, fortune and reputation with the people, very solicitous for the Parliament and more active than the others, who carried the day against the King. The Third Marquess of Lansdowne and his Family at Bowood, 1810—40* by DOREEN SLATTER When Lord Henry Petty married Lady Louisa Fox- Strangways, youngest daughter of the second Earl of Ilchester at her home, Melbury, Dorset, on 30 March 1808, he was M.P. for Camelford and had already had an active career in the House of Commons. Although only twenty seven years old, he had been Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1806 and must have hoped to continue in the Commons and for another opportunity to join the Government. The long Ministry of the younger Pitt had kept both his father and his elder half brother in opposition. When the second Marquess succeeded to the title in 1805, he had abandoned an interest in politics and built for himself a Gothic castle in Southampton from which he could indulge his interest in sailing. He did not live at Bowood and allowed it to lie empty and neglected although in his father’s time John Britton had found it such a hive of activity that he compared it to a small town.' The estate at High Wycombe, which had been owned by the family since the beginning of the eighteenth century, had been sold by the first Marquess. When he * This note, by using published letters and memoirs, attempts to sketch life at Bowood during the earliest period of its rebirth. It is based principally on the letters of Maria Edgeworth. It is hoped to compile further studies from other sources. 1. John Britton, The Beauties of Wiltshire, London, 1801, vol. 11, p. 220. died he had left many debts; sales of his collections and other assets followed. Consequently, when Lord Henry Petty married, he needed a home; he may probably have taken a short lease of a property in or near London. Less than two years later, however, his circumstances were entirely altered by the premature death of his half brother on 15 November 1809. The second Marquess having left no children, Lord Henry’s succession to the utle not only put an end to his political career in the House of Commons but brought him up against immediate practical prob- lems.? The third Marquess had to adjust his own domestic affairs, see the probate of his father’s and brother’s wills finalised, restore and re-equip Bowood House and complete his father’s work on the creation of the park and gardens.’ The task of reinstatement and improvement proceeded steadily for the rest of his life. A report made by James Broad, the estate steward, in 1810* said of the house ‘it is very little injured, except by removing fixtures and by the wet’ penetrating through the roof and broken windows. 2. Such matters as waste in the park, the ownership of the Lansdowne marbles and the future of the 2nd Marchioness and her daughters. 3. See the Earl of Kerry’s article on ‘King’s Bowood Park’, WAM 42 (1922), pp. 18-38. 4. Quoted by John Cornforth in ‘Bowood, Wiltshire, Revisited — I’, Country Life, 8 June 1972. NOTES Outside there were pigs in the wood and the flower garden had reverted to its natural state. Local resources were probably adequate to deal with minor dilapidations but later on several well known arc- hitects, such as Sir Robert Smirke, Charles Cockerell and Sir Charles Barry, were employed at different times upon important alterations and improvements. Contemporary artists were commissioned for internal decorations. The third Marquess also continued to work to re-establish the picture’ and sculpture collec- tions and to re-form the libraries at Bowood and Lansdowne House, which had been famous in his father’s lifetime. He may be called the second founder of Bowood. Lord and Lady Lansdowne had three children. The eldest, William Thomas Petty Fitzmaurice, was born at Lansdowne House on 30 March 1811. He was known as the Earl of Wycombe, the title used by the second Lord Lansdowne as a young man, until 1818. The death in that year without an heir of the last Earl of Kerry® representing the senior branch of the Fitzmaurice family meant that the title passed to the Lansdownes and William Thomas was known there- after as the Earl of Kerry. The second child, Louisa, later married the Hon. James Kenneth Howard, fourth son of the sixteenth Earl of Suffolk and M.P. for Malmesbury. The third child, Henry Thomas, was known as the Earl of Shelburne after his brother’s early death. Henry succeeded his father as fourth Marquess in 1863. In 1840 he married Georgina, daughter of the eleventh Earl of Pembroke and after her death Emily,’ daughter of Count Charles de Flahault and Margaret Mercer Elphinstone, heiress of Admiral Viscount Keith. Relatives and connections of the family visited Bowood, sometimes, it may be supposed, with their children. Cousins lived at Moreton, near Dorchester, Dorset, the home of James Frampton and his wife, Lady Harriot, who was Lady Lansdowne’s sister. The Lansdowne children had an older cousin in William Henry Fox Talbot, later the pioneer of photography, who was the son of Lady Elizabeth, Lady Lansdowne’s eldest sister, and Wil- 5. See Catalogue of Paintings at Bowood House by James Miller, 1982. Artists included Clarkson Stanfield, Sir Charles Eastlake and John Wood. 6. John, Earl of Shelburne, grandfather of the 3rd Marquess, was the younger son of Thomas, Ist Earl of Kerry and Anne, daughter of Sir William Petty. Francis Thomas, 3rd Earl of Kerry, was the son of their elder son, William. The family name of the Lansdownes then became Petty Fitzmaurice. 7. Their son, the Sth Marquess was born in 1845. 8. T. Pinney (ed.), Letters of Thomas Babington Macaulay, C.U.P., 1974, vol. 1, p. 265, 10 Feb. 1830. 131 liam Davenport Talbot of nearby Lacock Abbey. He was born in 1800 but owing to his father’s death and his mother’s remarriage, Fox Talbot did not live at Lacock untul 1827. It may be supposed that Lord and Lady Lansdowne would have been unable to entertain at Bowood for a ume whilst the neglect in the house and grounds was made good and the house was refurnished and re- staffed. Increasingly, however, well known figures from the worlds of literature, scholarship and the arts were invited to join the family and their friends there. The house gained a reputation, not only for the quality of the conversation heard in it, but for its pleasant hospitality and comfort. Macaulay wrote to his father in 1830 ‘the house is splendid and elegant, yet more remarkable for comfort than for either elegance or splendour. I never saw a great place so thoroughly desirable for a residence’.* Speaking of a visit in 1838, Miss Berry similarly declared that Bowood enjoyed ‘every comfortable elegance of table and of chairs and sofas without such gilding, and satin as prevents one sitting comfortably on them’.? Current fashions in furniture and curtain materials must have been set against the eighteenth century fireplaces and decorated door panels. A description suggesting a modish scheme of decoration was given by Maria Edgeworth in 1820 when she mentioned being shown into a room ‘with yellow furniture and black stars’.!° An occa- sional mention of specific items can be found, such as the bone china Wedgwood bowls with hawthorn buds and leaves ordered by Lady Lansdowne in the year 1815-16.!! Very different Wedgwood products, six- teen large black basalt ‘Etruscan’ style vases, with decoration on the front only, were made to be placed on top of the Library bookcases about 1813.!? It is likely that, while the house was being restored, Lord and Lady Lansdowne spent some time travelling in their early years together. Their ability to do so would have been restricted by the war with France but it is recorded that they visited the Edgeworth family at Edgeworthstown in county Longford in 1813, cementing their friendship with Maria Edgeworth. 9. Lady Theresa Lewis (ed.), Extracts from the Journals and Correspondence of Miss Berry, 1783-1852, London, 1865, vol. 3, p. 460, 27 Oct. 1838. Miss Berry (of Petersham) would have known of the hospitality provided at Lord Lansdowne’s villa on Richmond Hill. 10. C. Colvin (ed.), Mana Edgeworth. Letters from England, 1813-44, Clarendon Press, 1971, p. 225. ll. Geoffrey Willis, Wedgewood, Country Life Books, 1980, p. 99. 12. Copied by the Wedgwoods from vases brought to England by Sir William Hamilton. They became fashionable about this time. 132 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE (Their children had been left in the care of Lady Harriot Frampton.)!* A few years later they travelled in Italy visiting Florence among other places.'* This tour may have inspired the Italianate gardens on the upper terrace which were designed by Smirke in 1817-18. Lying outside the library, which was used as a family room, these gardens would have been impor- tant for enhancing the pleasure of the family and their visitors. John Buckler’s drawing!’ shows the exterior of the house and the completed upper terrace in 1823. The fountains were added to the gardens there in 1839 and the lower terrace, designed by George Kennedy, was not finished until 1853, after the death of Lady Lansdowne. Her personal contribution to the gardens on the other side of the house can happily still be seen. In 1825 she planted a sprig from the great Spanish chestnut at Tortworth Court, Gloucestershire, which has become the impressive gnarled tree standing not far from the north east corner of the house. The children meanwhile would have been attended by nursemaids and governesses. The name of one governess, Miss de Lally, has been preserved in Miss Edgeworth’s letters.!° Her correspondence contains a number of references to Lady Lansdowne and her children, giving the impression of a happy and lively family. On 8 September 1818, she described them to Mrs. Ruxton, her aunt, — ‘Lord Kerry 8 or 9 years old a fine intelligent boy — Lady Louisa about 6 — a very lively natural engaging little creature — Lord Henry about 3. Lady Lansdowne obviously is as intent upon their education as a mother can be but this does not spoil her for society’.'’? Describing an excursion with the family, on another occasion, Miss Edgeworth records that the three little Fitzmaurices went with them ‘natural lively happy children walking skipping running along with us, calling to Mamma at every yard’.!® This impression is confirmed by miniatures of three bright eyed children by Anthony Stewart at Bowood. One is identified as Lord Kerry but the two others may well be his brother and sister. Bowood seems to have been a house in which the parents also could relax with their guests and enjoy simple enter- tainments, such as charades, after the grandeur of Lansdowne House and the bustle of life in London. 13. H.G. Mundy (ed.), The Journal of Mary Frampton from the year 1779 until the year 1846, 3rd. ed., London, 1886, p. 161. 14. Edgeworth Letters, p. 120, 15 Oct. 1818. Sarah Grace Carr, wife of Dr Stephen Lushington, had met the Lansdownes in Italy and gone sketching with Lady Lansdowne. 15. Reproduced by Cornforth, ‘Bowood Revisited — II’, Country Life, 22 June 1972. 16. Edgeworth Letters, p. 93, Sept. 1818. Though sometimes exhibiting the hauteur of a grand seigneur at Lansdowne House, at Bowood Lord Lansdowne told humorous stories to his friends — now and then against himself, ‘he having a great deal of sub-drollery which few suspect and which he never lets out but to quite his particulars’.!? Like her sisters, Lady Lansdowne was a well educated and accomplished woman who must have exercised considerable influence on her children’s early studies. Her interest in education appealed to Maria Edgeworth, part author with her father, Rich- ard Lovell Edgeworth, of Practical Education (1798). Other writers stressed Lady Lansdowne’s capabilities not only as a hostess but also her willingness to apply her knowledge for the benefit of the estate tenants. She seems to have been specially interested in genealogy and medieval history and about 1823 designed the scheme for the armorial windows in Cockerell’s restored chapel at Bowood. The coats of arms comme- morate the families occurring in the Lansdowne family history — Petty, Fitzmaurice, Waller, Brooke, Fitzpa- trick and Fox-Strangways. She shared a love of music with her husband and in 1813 was said to be learning the harp to please him.”? They not only enjoyed the songs and singing of the Irish poet, Thomas Moore, and other guests at Bowood but also gave musical entertainments for large numbers of people at Lans- downe House. No doubt she read the historical novels of Sir Walter Scott as they were published and enjoyed Jane Austen’s novels of contemporary life. The Bowood household could hardly fail to have been familiar with Miss Edgeworth’s novels and stories. Etienne Dumont was pleased to tell the authoress that Mme. de Staél had left Bowood late in 1813 with a copy of her Castle Rackrent (1800).*! More serious and difficult works did not come amiss to Lady Lansdowne who was one of those allowed to read the manuscript of Richard Edgeworth’s autobiography at Bowood in September 1818.7? A tribute by The Gentleman’s Magazine in Lady Lansdowne’s obituary in 1851 declared that ‘of Lord Lansdowne’s refined and intell- ectual household, the Marchioness was the animating spirit’.?? Education and the wider diffusion of knowledge 17. Ibid., p. 84, 8 Sept. 1818. 18. Jbid., p. 85, 8 Sept. 1818. 19. Jbid., p. 439, 6 Dec. 1830. 20. Frampton Fournal, p. 161. 21. Marilyn Butler, Mania Edgeworth, Clarendon Press, 1972, pp. 222-3. 22. Ibid., p. 404. 23. The Gentleman’s Magazine, July 1851, vol. 36 (N.S.), p. 81. NOTES were major interests of the third Marquess, perhaps owing to his own and his father’s connection with Jeremy Bentham. This can be seen in his association with the Royal Institution, the Statistical Society and the foundation of London University. His friendship with the barrister and historian, Henry Hallam, may have stemmed from their common interest in these organisations.** Hallam became an early visitor at Bowood, perhaps going there from his brother-in- law’s house at Clevedon near Bristol. Miss Edgeworth mentioned him acting in charades with the family at Christmas 1820. His son, Arthur Henry, the friend of Tennyson, was almost the same age as Lord Kerry and it seems likely that as the children grew older, their education was discussed between the fathers. Hallam was on sufficiently close terms with Lord Lansdowne to ask him to stand godfather to his son Henry Fitzmaurice in 1824. Lord Kerry’s education was of great importance as a training for the social and political activity expected of the eldest son of a Whig aristocrat. The services of the governess were probably followed by teaching at a private school. Miss Edgeworth was at Bowood when Lord Kerry came home from school on 20 Dec. 1820, ‘much improved’ she thought.*° A few weeks later, he followed his father and great grandfather to Westmin- ster School where he was admitted on 5 June 1822. He left the school at Whitsun in 1827,7° a year after his brother Henry had arrived, in order to continue his education under the tutorship of the Revd John Guthrie, the vicar of Calne. He went up to Trinity, Cambridge, his father’s College, where he was admitted a nobleman on 21 October 1828 and matric- ulated that Michaelmas Term. At Trinity he would have mixed with brilliant contemporaries, fellow undergraduates including Arthur Hallam, Richard Monckton Milnes, later Lord Houghton and the brothers Alfred and Charles Tennyson, the senior tutor being Dr William Whewell, Professor of Min- eralogy in the University. Cambridge must have encouraged literary talent in Lord Kerry for in 1830 he was the first winner of a College Prize for an essay on some literary, moral or antiquarian subject. His com- position on the ‘Effect of the Translation of the Bible on English Literature’ was printed in Cambridge in 1830 and in a slightly revised form in Calne some time 24. M. Berman, Social Change and Scientific Organization. The Royal Institution, 1799-1844, Heinemann Educational Books, 1978, pp. 110-112. 25. Edgeworth Letters, p. 226. 26. G.F. Russell Barker & A. H. Stenning (eds.), The Record of Old 133 later. The next winner of the prize, which is still awarded, was Arthur Hallam with an essay on the philosophical ideas of Cicero.*”? Lord Kerry took his MA in 1834; Arthur Hallam died suddenly in Vienna in 1833. In the meantime, Lord Kerry was being schooled to follow his father and uncle into the House of Commons. The second Marquess, as Lord Wycombe, had been M.P. for the borough of Chipping Wycombe but had had no chance of taking part in government. The career of the third Marquess in the Commons had been cut short. He continued, however, to control the representation of Calne and in 1830 offered one of the seats to T.B. Macaulay, then a barrister and contri- butor to The Edinburgh Review. It was made clear to Macaulay that in a short time he would be expected to make way for Lord Kerry but he remained deeply grateful for the opportunity he had been given of furthering his career. Lord Lansdowne invited him to stay at Bowood while canvassing in Calne and he then found himself sharing the house with Lord Kerry. His letters to his family contain interesting remarks about the house and the personality of its young occupier. On 10 February 1830, he wrote to his father ‘Lord Kerry seems to me to be going on well. . . . I do not know when I have taken so much to so young a man. ... Lord Kerry is really quite a favourite of mine, — kind, lively, intelligent, modest, with gentle manners which indicate a long intimacy with the best society, and yet without the least affectation’.?* A miniature by Sir George Hayter at Bowood of a young man with dark chestnut brown hair gives an idea of him at this ume. On election day 1832, Lord Kerry supported Macaulay in the procession of Guild Ste- wards and Burgesses through Calne and afterwards at the public dinner in his honour at the Lansdowne Arms.’? Lord Kerry was the first member for Calne to be elected under the provisions of the 1832 Reform Act whereby its M.P.s were reduced from two to one. Sadly his association with Macaulay was fated not to last. Macaulay was in India when Lord Kerry died aged only 25 and did not hear of his death unul 1837 when he wrote to Lord Lansdowne to express his sorrow.°° He would have been interested in a historical project his young friend had been undertaking in the last years of his life. The year 1833 marked the Westminsters, 1928, vol. 1, pp. 334-5. 27. Information kindly supplied by the Archivist, Trinity College. 28. Macaulay Letters, vol. 1, p. 265. 29. . Ibid., vol. 2, p. 131. 30. Ibid., 1976, vol. 3, pp. 208-9. 134 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE bi-centenary of the birth at Romsey, Hants, of Sir William Petty, the political economist and famous ancestor of the family. In 1834 the third Marquess had been able to purchase two volumes of correspondence between Petty and his friend Sir Robert Southwell and this acquisition may well have inspired Lord Kerry to begin a ‘Life’ of Petty. He was concerned to record all Petty’s published works and to locate material not in his family’s possession. In 1836 he sought the assis- tance of Sir Thomas Phillipps, the collector of manu- scripts, in finding new material and was pursuing his research until just before his untimely death.*! According to Thomas Moore, he had planned to publish certain papers and to preface them with an account of Petty.*? Moore’s suggestion that he might complete the work came to nothing. It is tempting to speculate that had Lord Kerry lived longer, he would have made other ventures into historical writing and shown the same interest in local history as his parents. At the same time Lord Kerry was serving a useful public service apprenuceship in Parliament where on 10 March 1834 he seconded the motion for the Second Reading of the Western Rail Road Bill at the request of the Great Western Railway Company.** On 18 March 1834 he married Lady Augusta Lavinia Priscilla Ponsonby, second daughter of the fourth Earl of Bessborough, a political colleague of Lord Lansdowne and Lord Privy Seal 1835-39. They had a daughter, Mary, who in 1860 married Sir Percy Egerton Herbert of Stycche Hall, Shropshire and became the mother of the fourth Earl of Powys. Lady Kerry made a most favourable impression on Sydney Smith though he was not quite as enthusiastic in his opinion of her hus- band.*4 Lord Kerry appears to have been taking up his father’s interests and making a favourable impression in society with his charming young wife when he fell ill. Moore wrote that ‘poor Kerry having been most lucky in his marriage, was giving every promise of a manhood of usefulness and honour’.*? There is no information about his final illness but its termination was unexpected by his parents. His father had been preparing to go to Bristol to preside over a meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. He was obliged to write on 19 August to 31. ‘Calendar of the papers of Sir William Petty at Bowood House’, compiled by the writer for the Historical Manuscripts Commis- sion, 1980, pp. 307, 310-12. 32. Lord John Russell (ed.), Memoirs, Journal and Correspondence of Thomas Moore, London, vol. vii, 1856, p. 167. 33. Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, vol. 21, 1834, 1352-53. 34. Nowell C. Smith, (ed.), Lewters of Sydney Smith, Clarendon Press, 1953, vol. i, pp. 502, 631. excuse himself, referring to the ‘alarming illness’ of his eldest son.*° Lord Kerry died on 21 August and was buried in the family vault in the parish church of High Wycombe. A sad reference to this calamity occurs in a letter a month later from Sydney Smith to Lady Holland: ‘I wrote a letter to poor Lord Lansdowne begging he would not answer me which he has done. He was not prepared for misfortune, always hoping and never fearing’.*” It may perhaps be supposed that Lord Kerry’s parents would have attempted to find support at this time in work in their respective spheres of influence. As it happened, it was an important period for Lord Lansdowne who had been appointed Lord President of the Council in April 1835. He took office shortly after the formation of the Judicial Committee of the Council to replace the Court of Delegates as a court of appeal. He became ex officio a member of the newly formed Ecclesiastical Commission in 1836. In 1839 the Committee of the Council on Education was set up for which he procured Sir James Kay Shuttleworth as the first Secretary. Lady Lansdowne may have devoted more of her ume to work for the Bowood tenants. John Britton remembered ‘I have seen her carriage at the comfort-looking cottages at Derry Hill and two other places, adjoining Bowood, and learnt from their inhabitants that her ladyship was happily employed in comforting the sick, instructing the young and feeding the hungry’.*® In her obituary notice in The Gentleman’s Magazine in 1851, the writer claimed that her influence could be seen ‘in many a roomy and convenient peasant’s home; in her three very efficient schools at Buckhill, at Calne, and at Foxham; in the lodges of elegant and varied designs which cover the avenues to the Park, or in the picturesque group of gabled buildings which cluster about the Italianate gate at Derry Hill; above all in the churches. . . there and at Foxham (the one by her influence founded, the other restored)’.*” Christ Church, Derry Hill, by Thomas Henry Wyatt and his partner, David Brander, opened for worship in 1840. If the building of the church was a milestone of one kind, suggesting that the fame of Bowood had brought prosperity and a growing 35. Moore Memoirs, vol. vil, p. 166. 36. J. Morrell and A. Thackray (eds.), Gentlemen of Science, Camden 4th. Series, Royal Historical Society, London, 1984, p. 2306. 37. Smith Letters, vol. 1, p. 645. 38. John Britton, Bowood and its Literary Associations, C. Muskett, Norwich, 1854, p. 17. 39. The Gentleman’s Magazine, vol. 36 (N.S.), p. 81. NOTES population to Derry Hill, another was the construction of the Great Western Railway line to Bristol in 1841 by which the famous hostess, Lady Holland, visited Bowood in December that year, escorted by Brunel himself.*° In the period between 1810 and 1840, Bowood can be seen developing first as a home for the family and their friends and later as a centre of brilliant society and benevolent patronage. Some of the earlier guests were older people, who had known the first 40. Eleanor Ransome (ed.), The Terrific Kemble, Hamish Hamilton, 1978, pp. 163-4. ee) Lord Lansdowne. As time passed, younger guests were invited, especially from the worlds of literature and art. The house itself became more elaborate and the society it held more diverse. By 1841, a high point of brilliance had been reached though the atmosphere possibly lacked the spontaneity of the earlier period. The party of that December, which included Fanny Kemble and Charles Greville, marked a turning point into the Victorian age. Further Records of Wiltshire Quaternary Mammalia by J.B. DELAIR INTRODUCTION Mammalian remains have been certainly recorded from Wiltshire’s Quaternary deposits (gravels, sands, brickearths, alluvia, etc.) for almost 200 years, occur- ring at some localities in surprising abundance. Accordingly, they have from time to time been the subject of special attention in a variety of publications, of which those of Cunnington (1858), Stevens (1864 and 1870), Reynolds (1929-1939), Delair (1978), and Delair and Shackley (1978) have generally furnished the widest perspectives to date. Despite these earlier studies, a comprehensive modern survey of the county’s Quaternary mammalia is still lacking and is, in fact, considerably overdue. As a contribution towards diminishing that deficiency the present note constitutes the first printed record of a number of old (hitherto unnoticed examples in long established collections) and new discoveries from Wiltshire sites previously unproductive of the animals concerned — Bos, Equus, Mammuthus and Rhinoceros. Thirteen sites are involved. Abbreviations: the following abbreviations are used: CBMAG (City of Bristol Museum & Art Gallery) and SSWM (Salisbury and South Wilts Museum). THE DISCOVERIES These are recorded by sites listed alphabetically on p. 136. Pleistocene finds are given separately from, and in advance of, those of Holocene age, although these ages are inferred rather than uncontested as none of the remains have been dated by Carbon-14 methods or any other controlled technique. Nevertheless, all the finds assigned a Pleistocene antiquity will predate 11,000 years B.P.,* and all those referred to Holocene times will post-date 11,000 years B.P. BRIEF DISCUSSION It will noted that most of the Pleistocene remains recorded here belong to the ‘hairy mammoth’, and that only single specimens represent Rhinoceros, Equus, and the ‘Great Auroch’ (Bos primigenius). This ratio, despite being presently expressed via widely scattered material, seemingly still reflects the relatively high percentage of mammoths previously logged from the Fisherton brickearths — as yet Wiltshire’s most pro- ductive site for Pleistocene mammalia (Delair and Shackley 1978). The genera identified represent a late Pleistocene fauna. Although dubiously referred here to a bovid, the fragmentary bone from Bodenham may eventually prove to belong to a different mammalian group. In this connection, it is noteworthy that none of the present material apparently represents any of the larger cervids which were the regular companions of the Auroch, Rhinoceros, and mammoth during Pleis- tocene times. * The date now commonly regarded as marking the end of Pleistocene umes. 136 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE PLEISTOCENE Amesbury (unlocalised site near) Ashton Keynes (exact site not recorded) Mammuthus primigenius Mammuthus primigenius Mammuthus primigenius Mammuthus primigenius Mammuthus primigenius A molar (5992 SSWM). Found in 1930 An incomplete molar (Ce 9872 CBMAG) A similar molar (Cb 5534 CBMAG) A small tusk (Ce 9875 CBMAG) Fragment of a larger tusk (Cb 5533 CBMAG) NB: These remains, which apparently represent two or more individuals, were found in 1972, or earlier, by M.J.E. Nott, Esq. Berwick St James (near the ‘Old Dairy’) Bodenham (A338 road-widening works, at SU 166225 ?Bos sp. Coombe Bissett (bed of River Ebble) Christian Malford (exact site not recorded) Equus caballus Rhinoceros sp. Mammuthus primigenius Portion of a small molar (6893 SSWM). Found in 1987 by T.M. Williams. A fragment of an indeterminate bone (6057 SSWM). Found by J.B. Delair, in March 1986. A tooth (6274 SSWM). Found by Mr Offer in the Autumn of 1987. Part of the symphysis of a lower jaw (Ce 9873 CBMAG). Formerly a part of the J. Chaning Pearce collection. NB: Owing to the former history of this specimen it will be in order to regard it as an early (first half of the nineteenth century) find of this large mammal now extinct in Wiltshire. [dmiston (temporary excavation at SU 196374, by the bank of the River Bourne) Marlborough (unlocalised site near) Mammuthus primigenius Salisbury (old gravel-pit — now infilled — adjacent to the A36 at SU 154293 Stoford (bed of the River Wylye at 083E. 357N., opposite the Swan Inn) Bos primigenius Mammuthus primigenius Mammuthus primigenius Portion of a molar (6864 SSWM). Found by J.B. Delair, in February 1989. A large molar, broken into two pieces (Ce 9874 CBMAG). Found in 1824. A complete molar, found in 1949. Originally in SSWM as an unregistered specimen, but transferred in August 1951 to the British Museum (Natural History), where it can no longer be identified. A limb bone (6855 SSWM). Found in Feb- ruary 1979. HOLOCENE Downton (near 67 The Borough) — Bos longifrons Swallowcliffe (by Vine Cottage) Bos sp. Swallowcliffe (field surface north of) Indeterminate mammal The fragmentary specimens from the environs of Swallowcliffe are very probably relatively modern (1.e., Romano-British or later), but the horncore of Bos longifrons from Downton is more heavily mineralised and may date from early Holocene times. If so, its assignation to the period of the Flandrian transgres- sion may not be unreasonable. A right horncore and portion of an associated frontal bone (2475 SSWM). Found in November 1983. A tooth (6275 SSWM). Found during the summer of 1987 by Cmdr. S. Jenkins. Fragment of a limb bone (6863 SSWM). Found during October 1988 by Cmdr. S. Jenkins. Acknowledgements. Grateful thanks are due to the following indi- viduals who have placed material at my disposal or who have provided information or assistance during the course of producing this paper: Dr Peter Crowther and Mr Roger Clark of the City of Bristol Museum & Art Gallery; Mr Andrew Currant of the Department of Palaeon- tology at the British Museum (Natural History); Mr Peter Saunders and Miss Clare Conybeare of the Salisbury and South Wilts Museum; Miss Sarah Nash of Devizes Museum; and Mr Arthur Weston of Thornbank House, Idmiston. Special thanks are due to Mr Currant NOTES for attempting to trace the Salisbury mammoth molar in the collec- tons of the British Museum (Natural History), and which should now be regarded as lost or misplaced, and to Mr Peter Saunders for drawing to my notice its former existence in the Salisbury collections on the evidence of accessions records. Miss Sarah Nash very kindly searched the analogous records of Devizes Museum on my behalf, an exercise which unfortunately proved unproductive of additional material. REFERENCES CUNNINGTON, W., 1858 ‘On the Mammalian Drift of Wiltshire and its fossil contents’, WAM 4, 129-142 137 DELAIR, J.B., 1978 ‘The Fossil Mammalia of the River Valleys converging on Salisbury’, Wilts. Nat. Hist. Mag. 73, 17-18 DELAIR, J.B.,and M. SHACKLEY, 1978 ‘The Fisherton Brickpits (Salisbury), their stratigraphy and faunal contents’, Wilts. Nat. Hist. Mag. 73, 3-16 REYNOLDS, S.H., 1929-1939 ‘A Monograph of British Pleis- tocene Mammalia’, Mon. Pal. Soc.; parts and supplements issued at different times between the years cited STEVENS, E.T., 1864 Descriptive Catalogue of the Salisbury and South Wilts Museum, Salisbury — 1870 Flint Chips: A Guide to Prehistoric Archaeology, London: Bell & Daldy Notes on the Flooding of the River Bourne (Wiltshire), January/February 1990 by J.B. DELAIR Although almost 3! miles of its middle reaches flow through Hampshire, the River Bourne, beginning just southeast of Marr Green, Burbage, and ending by joining the Salisbury Avon approximately 2 mile southwest of Milford, is to all intents and purposes a Wiltshire river, and was among those which experi- enced serious flooding during January and February 1990. The following notes record the writer’s observa- tions on the extent of this flooding made on a weekly basis during the two months concerned. Before detailing these observations, however, it will be advantageous briefly to outline the usual pre-flood character of the river in order to convey adequately the differences between the river’s normal (non-flooded) condition and that attained during actual flooding. The Bourne is the smallest of the rivers converging on the Avon at Salisbury, and nowhere reaches any great depth or width. Indeed, except in its lowermost reaches, it is possible at many places along its winding course (see Maps 1-3 in Figure 1) to pass from one bank to the other in a single leap. Where it flows through villages (e.g., Collingbourne Ducis, the Tid- worths, Cholderton, Idmiston, etc.) and under the new A303 trunk road, it is usually contained in brick or stone lined channels. Elsewhere it flows unhindered across the open countryside. All the spanning bridges are small and constructed either of flat concrete slabs (both with and without handrails) or brick or stone single-arched bridges with or without parapets or handrails. With the exception of the bridge carrying the old A303 road, all the bridges are narrow and in some instances, especially in open fields, little more than footbridges. Under normal (non-flood) conditions the Bourne flows between villages as a rather sluggish stream across a long series of essentially flat, roughly ovate shaped, alluvial meadows set between the compara- tively steep low chalk hills characteristic of the Bourne valley for practically its entire length. The fall between these meadows is slight, so that the river’s rate of flow is normally gentle and its erosional powers accordingly modest. The meadows below Porton and as far as Winterbourne Earls, however, are decidedly marshy and untypical of those above Porton. In ‘dry’ years large stretches of the river above Idmiston seem to run dry although water is always seen in the river-bed below Porton and at various places higher up the valley above Shipton Bellinger. There are no islands in the river, although it bifurcates briefly immediately above Ford, has a well developed meander just below Porton (both on Map 3), and the Ordnance Survey map (sheet 184 of the 1:50 000 series) shows a blind-ended branch parallel to the main stream just east of Boscombe (Map 2). This feature, which quite often lacks water, and the mean- der, which is almost always water-filled, are both relics of a time when the exact course of the river differed from that of today. Their inherent interest will become more apparent when the recent flooding is described. The prolonged heavy rains of late January and much of February 1990 caused a general raising of river levels across the whole of southern England. Those in Wiltshire’s rivers reached levels not seen in living memory. The Salisbury Avon in particular, and the lower reaches of its two principal tributaries, the Wylye and the Nadder, overflowed large tracts of THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 138 (papoogun) AayeA auinog ayy STCAISZUT SZZSW OL Fe SmmozpUOD LemTTeY ae asptag se S®TTW 4 1 J T T Mi gery awotty” papooyun, (yinos) -— O02 AagyeA aumnog ce dVW papooguy) (yenua)) AafeA auinog cdVW + “Co 2g aes uoldiys 3 a CEG i. *T oin3ty papooyuy (qUON) AgyfeA, suing LdVW u0qi0g® tT i ee a Nae UOISIWPT.- - “a Fee Ou : Ee : + 6 e Agee u038u/77 Y ee + + ov + + + + ae + ow + - + ¢& + ak att + + + oF Ay woe Tt a y A : * trong it i Bi _Y4NOs @ : i at fa inte Se aS et y INGE Sen + + 4 ot +6 | \ asap yas0y + + ale ae + ee + +46 “9/2NG ca a +55 ‘Ost foo iE , wOysbuiy as moghul7707 ae Disa ot ( ® uoqybny ot SS +95 139 NOTES “BUTPOOY 0661 :AA[BA MuINOg oY] °7Z oN3Iy BUTPOOY 0661 BTBAIEZUT sTjeU O| }E SIozU0D (YON) yore ros Boorse sm AgyeA ouinog set V dvW [a 2 3 z f Ca pad, sexy au0t he aTvoS BuIpooy 0661 (enua)) AgeA aunog d dVW BUTPOOY 0661 (yinos) pee B j — AaleA aunog y904ssanD7° Sy N Se - “ @ juneneunifo > din | os 3S et PO Ga eS Gtr Ce ee ee a aa = ick - - + + +OM04 + oc a 06 at ali ag a? age + v8 SPIDZ QUMOGI22UI 001: i : erotic bens agen cay Fee + + a Soa auinoguaquiay + « ste te ct toooLE 140 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE adjoining low ground to an unprecedented degree all the way down to and beyond the Hampshire border south of Downton, and graphic accounts of the resultant disruptive effects appeared in several local newspapers and were featured in both radio and television news bulletins. The severe Avon flooding created a backing-up of the waters in the Bourne’s lower reaches which, combined with the naturally acquired rain throughout its catchment area (Maps | to 3), created the develop- ment of abnormally high water levels along virtually the Bourne’s entire course. The general extent of these is shown in Maps A to C in Figure 2. Except for the comparatively deep water stretch of the Bourne between Winterbourne Gunner and its confluence with the Avon and those stretches where it sometimes runs dry during non-flood conditions, the river is nowhere deeper than about 18 inches and is frequently very much less. Above Winterbourne Gunner the deepest water occurs only where it is confined within the stone or brick lined village chan- nels. During the 1990 floods, however, the river above Collingbourne Kingston rose nearly two feet higher than normal, and by almost as much again along the remainder of its course. The deepest water again accumulated in the confining channels, but where the flood spate overflowed meadowland it spread laterally to produce irregularly shaped sheets of surface water in places up to 400 feet across but of no great depth (see Maps A to C). At some places the flood waters submerged the lowest bridges, especially those sited in fields, but at others rose to within 3 or 4 inches of the undersides of the apexes of the bridge arches. At the height of the flooding the Bourne thus increased its depth at least 200% and its width locally by almost 400%. Predictably the velocity of the water-flow also increased. Although no flow measurements were secured, the increase is estimated to have been approximately four times greater than usual. Among the more noteworthy effects generated by the rains was the activation on the west bank of the river of two small (normally inactive) feeder streams, one just south of Collingbourne Ducis at 24.20E.53.50N. and another at 23.40E.50.98N. towards North Tidworth (Map A). Both streams were still actively supplying water to the Bourne in mid- March. Other transient feeder streams may have similarly developed elsewhere in the river valley but were not seen. Probably the most interesting aspect of this flooding has been the revelation of many hitherto unrecorded former channels of the Bourne traversing various stretches of meadow-land adjacent to its present course. A handful of these have long been traceable for short distances as clearly marked, grass-covered, shal- low river beds in the meadows concerned. The major- ity disclosed by the seawards flow of these flood waters, however, are normally undiscernible, and it was a considerable surprise to observe flood waters frequently divide as their rising level in the main- stream diverted excess water into and along unsuspec- ted former channels only for these to subdivide or coalesce again further downstream. This was especi- ally noticeable between Porton and Winterbourne Gunner (see Map C). By this process several old (previously unmapped) meanders came to light, as at 22.20E.42.10N. just southwest of Cholderton, at 21.20E.39.85N. east of Allington, at 19.45E. 37.50N. a short distance west of Idmiston (all Map B), and at 16.70E.33.40N. between Winterbourne Earls and Ford (Map C). A noteworthy partial meander was similarly exposed at 15.90E.31.35N. between Ford and Laverstock (Map C). Some of the sheet flooding in several of the meadows appeared to occupy natural depressions (again scarcely visible under normal conditions) which not improb- ably represent the sites of former small lakes or bogs long since silted-up and converted to meadowland. The present general flatness of nearly all the meadows in the Bourne valley suggests that such an interpreta- tion is consonant with what can be inferred to have been earlier phases of the valley’s natural evolution. For a few short weeks in 1990, therefore, flood waters provided glimpses of the Bourne’s former course, or courses, when it was perhaps a larger river hundreds, if not thousands, of years ago. Heavy flooding of any river is usually undesirable and often destructive. In the present instance it has been unex- pectedly instructive. Acknowledgement. My sincere thanks are due to Graham Knapp for untiring assistance in the field with flood water measuring wherever practicable, under circumstances that were invariably wet and uncom- fortable. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 84 (1991), pp. 141-145 Excavation and Fieldwork in Wiltshire 1989 Ashton Keynes: Cleveland Farm (SU 069947); Pre- historic, Romano-British An interim report on the 1989 excavations is published on pp. 40-50 of this volume. Avebury: Avebury Chapel (SU 10226993); Prehis- toric, Medieval, Post-Medieval The United Reformed Chapel lies within the projected arc of the northern side of the Southern Circle inside the Late Neolithic monument. Renovation of the Chapel in 1989 involved trenching outside and the digging of a soakaway pit to the rear of the building: work carried out by John Hawkes, Michael Heaton and Martin Trott for the Trust for Wessex Archaeo- logy (TWA). Natural chalk was encountered along the north, west, and parts of the south walls of the building, and in the soakaway pit immediately to the south-east. Elsewhere, the trenches were confined to topsoil or construction levels, including the areas investigated in the interior of the chapel following the removal of the suspended timber floor. With the exception of a single flint-flake, only post-medieval or modern finds were encountered, many of the diagnostic pieces being compatible with an early eighteenth century date contemporary with the construction of the Chapel. Two sub-soil features pre-dating the building were recorded, but these could not be effectively examined within the confines of the trench and remain undated; they may have been part of a complex of medieval and later features (cess pits, marl pits, ditches and post- holes) noted in Keiller’s excavations immediately to the south-west of the southern boundary wall of the Chapel and adjacent properties (Smith 1965, 191). REFERENCE SMITH, 1.F., 1965 Windmill Hill and Avebury: Excavations by Alexander Keiller, 1925-39, Oxford Avebury: West Kennett Farm (SU 11176829), Prehis- toric, Medieval Archaeological evaluation was undertaken by the TWA on behalf of Marlborough Homes Ltd., on a proposed development site at West Kennett Farm, Avebury, in February and March 1989. The strategy for archaeological evaluation, the programme of work, and ultimately its progress were undertaken in consul- tation with Wiltshire County Council and English Heritage. The aims of the evaluation were to establish the presence or absence of archaeological deposits and, where they occurred, to establish their date, extent and quality of survival. It was especially important to establish whether the circuit of the recently discovered palisaded enclosure to the south of the farm, identified by Alasdair Whittle in 1987, continued to the north of the River Kennet (Whittle, 1988). A series of machine- and two hand-excavated tren- ches were dug to strip farmyard debris and disturbed deposits from nine areas to the top of the subsoil. The predominant feature consisted of a proportion of a palisaded enclosure, a component of the Late Neolithic-Early Bronze Age monument identified to the south. In each of five exposures this enclosure feature was initially apparent as a concentration of sarsen within a soil matrix comparable to and often difficult to distinguish from the subsoil. Sarsen occur- red frequently throughout the evaluation area either as dumped or disturbed material at ground surface or as a component of the overburden and subsoil, and, hence, the palisade feature was not immediately obvious. Two shallow sections were cut across this enclosure feature. In both cases further sarsens occurred below those exposed at the base of the overburden and the sarsens were shown partly to infill a c. 4 m wide trench with a nearly vertical inner and shallow, sloping outer edge. There was some suggestion of post-pipes in these sections. The sections were excavated only to a depth at which the feature was clearly recognisable. Material recovered from the upper fills consisted of two pieces of flint, seven fragments of animal bone and a fragment of fired clay. There were no surviving occupation levels associ- ated with the enclosure ditch, either externally or internally, above the floodplain of the River Kennet. Any contemporary surfaces have presumably been removed by later land usage and agriculture, not least that associated with the present farm. Both in plan and section it was clear that this enclosure ditch comprised part of the double- palisaded enclosure identified to the south of the River Kennet in 1987 (Whittle, 1988). The enclosure arc at West Kennett Farm bore closest comparison to the 142 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE outer arc south of the river; a second arc was not identified in the evaluation area. In recognition of the importance of this monument, the portion identified as a result of the evaluation work was scheduled as an Ancient Monument (Wilts No. 10380/1) on 15 May 1989, While the palisaded enclosure comprised the outstanding discovery of the evaluation, other archaeological features were identified. These consisted primarily of shallow linear ditches, generally aligned north-south or east-west. Pottery of medieval date, none of which could be assigned a date earlier than the thirteenth century, was recovered from five of these ditches and it can be supposed that the majority of them are of a broadly comparable date, although at least two phases of activity are represented. The ditches can be presumed to delineate plots or property boundaries associated with the medieval settlement of West Kennet. A series of post-hole alignments ran parallel or at right-angles to the linear boundaries and can be presumed to be contemporary. The more substantia! of these post-holes are likely to have been associated with timber structures, although, owing to the limited area of the evaluation no full building or structure plan could be defined. The less substantial post-holes probably represent fence-lines or pens associated with the structures. A hand-excavated trench was positioned on the floodplain of the River Kennet. Here was identified a buried land surface sealed below alluvial deposits. The extent of this land surface within the assessment area was recorded by augering and, on the basis of plant remains, it is of Saxon or medieval date. Otherwise all the archaeological features were sealed by an overburden consisting of soil layers containing fragments of modern rubble, or mixed building rubble and chalk deposits or compacted yard surfaces associ- ated with the present farmyard. The identification of the palisaded enclosure to the north of the River Kennet has provided an important advance in determining the extent and nature of this intriguing monument. A preliminary report on the monument has been published (Whittle and Smith, 1990), and further research is planned by Alasdair Whittle as part of a research programme in the Avebury area by the University of Wales, Cardiff, in Summer 1990. It is hoped in the near future to present the results of the evaluation work at West Kennett Farm in conjunction with the find- ings of Alasdair Whittle, whose help and comments during the Trust’s investigations are gratefully acknowledged. REFERENCES WHITTLE, A.W.R., 1988 ‘West Kennet: palisaded enclosure (SU 111682); Late Neolithic and Romano-British’, WAM 82, 180 WHITTLE, A.W.R. and SMITH, R.J.C., 1990 ‘West Kennet’, Current Archaeology, 118, 363-365 Avebury (Winterbourne Monkton): Millbarrow (SU 095722); Neolithic Excavations were carried out from September to October 1989 by Dr Alasdair Whittle of the University of Wales, Cardiff, at the ruined chambered tomb of Millbarrow, Winterbourne Monkton. The barrow, some 60 m long, lies on the Lower Chalk a little north of Windmill Hill and has been described by Chris Barker (WAM 79, 1985). The excavation, part of a continuing programme of research into the Neolithic sequence of the Avebury area, was designed to use the remains of the barrow as a monitor of Neolithic activity and environmental impact in the little investi- gated area north of Windmill Hill. A cutting was made across the ditches flanking each side of the barrow. In the event, two ditches were found on each side, presumably dating from two phases of construction. The inner pair were some 18-19 m apart, and were massive, up to 3.5 m deep as dug and up to 6 m wide in their upper parts as eroded. They had silted up fast. Striking turf lines had stabilised above primary silting, to be followed by large amounts of further chalk silt. Normal slow humic silting was not in evidence. The outer pair, which may be presumed to be secondary, were set a little outside the inner pair, and were a little smaller, up to 2.5 m as dug and up to 4 m wide at the top as eroded. These had silted up normally, with primary rubble and silts succeeded by slow humic silts. Finds were scarce. Antler and bone from primary contexts will be submitted for radiocarbon dating. There was a fine partly polished plano-convex flint knife from the upper silts of one outer ditch. The ditches were rich in mollusca and sampling columns were collected for analysis. Part of the levelled area of the eastern end of the tomb was excavated. This revealed a surprising number of features, which appear to define a former chamber area, a facade and a kerb, but which also include post holes. Most features were interpreted as stone holes or stone destruction holes. The presumed chamber area was axial to the ditches, and about 6 by 4 m; its plan was simple, but had possible subdivisions of space. The features contained fragments of human bone from collective deposits, and pottery included Peterborough sherds. Among other features were stone holes and destruction holes from a simple facade . EXCAVATION AND FIELDWORK IN WILTSHIRE, 1989 and flanking kerb, in the manner suggested by both Aubrey and Stukeley. The kerb appears to belong with the outer ditches, since the stone holes are set very close to the inner edge of the inner ditch. Possible pre-tomb features include post holes and two pits with fragmentary human bone. The excavation showed, therefore, that there had been limited activity before the construction of a substantial tomb. The first phase of the monument decayed or was allowed to decay rather quickly. After an interval, the monument was redefined by new ditches, and probably by elaboration of the mound. Despite this activity, scarce finds in both sets of ditches suggest that the monument was not close to a settlement focus. Avebury: World Heritage Site; various periods The Thamesdown Archaeological Unit (TAU) carried out site visits to all sites listed in the Sites and Monuments Record, on behalf of the County Archaeo- logical Officer and English Heritage. Further details were recorded in the field and the overall results will be used to provide information for the future manage- ment of this important landscape. Box: Box House (ST 822684); Roman Excavations were undertaken by the Wiltshire Rescue Archaeology Project (WRAP) unit, prior to develop- ment near the site of Box Roman Villa. Five trenches were opened, two of which produced evidence of Roman ploughsoil and a probable Roman wall. Calne: northeast of Church (ST 999709); ?Saxon Excavation by the WRAP unit, prior to demolition and rebuilding of a wall adjacent to a footpath, revealed redeposited ground containing an assortment of human bones. Saxon burials have previously been found close to this area. Cherhill: south of Church (SU 038703); 2Roman Excavations by the WRAP unit, in advance of car park construction and graveyard extension work, revealed nothing of archaeological significance despite the pre- vious discovery of a Roman tessellated pavement west of the church. Chippenham: various projects; including Neolithic, Roman Investigations by the TAU and WRAP unit have taken place on a number of development sites, including Sainsburys and the new roundabout. On the Sainsbu- rys site a small pit was discovered, containing signs of Neolithic occupation. A scattering of Roman pottery 143 found during earlier fieldwalking prompted exca- vation in the area of the roundabout which revealed a Romano-British enclosure ditch. Chippenham Without: Sainsburys development site (ST 898727); Saxon Excavation by the WRAP unit identified remains of a Saxon grubenhaus. Downton: Downton By-Pass (SU 168222); Roman An archaeological evaluation of 28 ha of land, involv- ing machine trenching and fieldwalking, was under- taken by the TWA and financed by the Trustees of Viscount Folkestone, Longford Castle Estate; the work was managed by R. Newman and directed by M. Rawlings. The land is the subject of a planning application for a by-pass and residential development. An area of rectilinear cropmarks visible on aerial photographs was investigated together with part of a complex of circular and penannular features to the north. Initial results suggest a settlement area with two distinct phases of activity, one in the earlier first century A.D. and the other in the second and third centuries. Despite some truncation, most features appear to be well preserved and amongst those investi- gated was a clay lined oven. About 50 m to the south of this site, two ring ditches were noted; these are likely to be of Bronze Age date. Durrington: Bulford (SU 162439); Post-Medieval The TAU undertook a limited evaluation excavation in advance of development. It seems that the site had been heavily disturbed when the area was levelled earlier this century and only one feature was identified cut into the natural chalk: a post-medieval well, already known from maps and filled in within the last 30 years. No other archaeological deposits had sur- vived. Highworth: Golf Course (SU 195920); Romano- British A series of explorations and watching briefs by the TAU revealed evidence of a Romano-British farmstead, together with finds of pottery, bone and coins of the period. Members of the Highworth Historical Society also took part in the investigations. Malmesbury: Malmesbury Abbey (ST 93308728); Medieval Limited excavations were undertaken, by John Hawkes and Michael Heaton for the TWA, to assess the archaeological implications of the proposed demo- lition and rebuilding of a section of retaining wall, 144 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE abutting Abbey House, within the medieval monastic precincts. Dismantling of a 3 m length of retaining wall revealed an apparently original continuation of the north wall of the thirteenth century Abbey House to the east of the present structure, with evidence for arches springing at a level corresponding with the existing undercroft. Basement floor level was not reached. The implied continuation of the range con- forms to the reconstruction of the Abbey layout proposed by Brakspear (1913). The excavated evi- dence suggests that the principal phase of demolition occurred during the middle or later eighteenth century. REFERENCE BRAKSPEAR, H., 1913 ‘Malmesbury Abbey’ Archaeologia 64, 399-436 Marlborough: behind 108—9 High Street (SU 1868); Medieval and Post-Medieval The TAU has recently completed the second of two phases of investigations in advance of and alongside development. Several late medieval and post-medieval pits were located and a quantity of stem stamped clay pipe recovered. Most of the latter was the work of Roger Andrus (Andrews) who is the last known maker in the town to have stamped his pipes. A large coarse ware vessel containing a residue which is possibly lime mortar was recovered from one of the pits; the substance is being analysed at Salisbury. Purton: North View Hospital (SU 085873); Roman The TAU carried out excavations adjacent to the area where Roman burials and a cremation had been recovered the previous year. No further human remains were found but the north east corner of the cemetery wall and several associated structures were located which have helped to reconstruct the layout of the cemetery. Salisbury (near): Cockey Down to Petersfinger Pipeline (SU 17003140 — SU 16962862); Prehistoric, Roman A report on the excavations is published on pp. 116-119 of this volume. Salisbury: New Canal (SU 14462987); Medieval, Post-Medieval Excavations, by Duncan Coe and John Hawkes for the TWA, have commenced on the site of the Marks and Spencer’s extension, off New Canal. The area comprises some 0.1 ha. of backland in the medieval city, within which an area of c. 25 x 10 m. is being investigated. Early indications are that there is extensive post- medieval activity across the site, but no significant amount of medieval stratigraphy. The results of the present excavations will be combined with reports on other sites excavated in Salisbury since 1984, currently in preparation. South Marston: Honda Romano-British, Medieval The TAU has located a series of Roman features, including field drains and a possible field boundary, as well as a large amount of pottery in the area of what appears to be an occupation site of the period. Remains of at least three human skeletons were also discovered: probably of early medieval date, they were disturbed by the cutting of two large eighteenth century land drains. Works (SU 184877); Swindon: Dayhouse Lane (SU 181824); ?Prehistoric Documentary research and a geophysical survey were undertaken by the TAU to assist the County Archaeo- logical Officer in preparing a report on the archaeologi- cal implications of the proposed Coate Water Business Park. Several possible features were identified, prob- ably of the prehistoric period, in association with what appeared to be a stone circle. Swindon: Croft Campus (Nationwide Anglia) (SU 154823); Prehistoric, Post-Medieval Evidence of prehistoric activity from the end of the Mesolithic and the early Neolithic was recovered during a watching brief and limited trenching by the TAU. The information obtained significantly adds to the overall picture of prehistory in Swindon, which is poor in comparison with the rest of the county. Evidence of the layout of the Victorian rubbish dump was also obtained during work on the site. Tisbury: Castle Ditches (ST 96282815); Prehistoric Following a land slip on the southern slope of Castle Ditches hillfort, the TWA undertook salvage and clearance work on behalf of, and financed by, HBMC; the work was managed by R. Newman and directed by C. Farwell. The slip occurred at a point where the three ditches and two ramparts of the fort’s southern approach appeared to be much eroded. A partial section of the innermost ditch and a possible remnant of a greatly truncated outer bank were recorded. Preventative measures are to be taken in 1990 to avoid further slippages and excessive scouring on the hill- fort’s southern slope. EXCAVATION AND FIELDWORK IN WILTSHIRE, 1989 West Swindon: Blacklands (SU 111846); Roman The site, between Wick Drive and Grange Park, was part of the West Swindon Roman kiln industry. The TAU undertook a geophysical survey to determine the location of kilns. Doubts about the value of such work on clay were borne out but limited investigations by members of the Unit have established the location of a possible kiln, while further observations by the Com- munity Archaeologist are helping to piece together a part of the picture which would otherwise have been lost. West Swindon: Office Campus on Shaw Ridge (SU 118847); Romano-British Investigations by the TAU, assisted by members of Thamesdown Archaeological Society, produced further evidence of the Roman kiln industry and a related trackway. Large quantities of Romano-British pottery were also recovered and a study of this material, together with what is now known of the site, has provided a better picture of the extent of the kiln industry. West Swindon: Wick Farm (SU 110849); Medieval Further researches by the TAU have shown that Wick was not just a dairy farm and that ploughing took place on the poorly drained clay. A series of eight platforms for the corralling of cattle were shown to date from about the time that the farm was leased to a series of farmers of the same family, who expanded the dairy side of the farm in the 1370s. A full report will be part of a landscape history of West Swindon which is being compiled by the Thamesdown Archaeological Advi- sory Body. Wilton: Wilton House (SU 09923096); Medieval, Post-Medieval John Hawkes, for the TWA, has maintained a 145 watching brief on underpinning work being carried out as part of a programme of repairs within the south range of Wilton House. These observations have suggested that the south range of the Palladian House of c. 1636 is partly built on earlier foundations belonging to the Benedictine Abbey and the post-Dissolution Tudor house known to have occupied part of the site. The limited areas of study have prevented close dating or any detailed reconstruction of the layout of the early buildings, but it is hoped that dendrochronology and further obser- vations will help elucidate the early post-medieval sequence. Wootton Bassett: Tockenham ?Medieval A measured survey carried out by the WRAP unit on the site of a proposed golf course revealed evidence of a possible deserted medieval village. (SU 059799); Wroughton: Westleaze (SU 137831); Medieval, Roman Evidence for the medieval construction of fish ponds, as well as of earlier Roman activity, was obtained by the TAU prior to ground disturbance by pipe trenches. Wiltshire: England’s Archaeological Heritage Survey; all periods The TAU was commissioned by English Heritage to undertake the collection of field data and to check known records for a pilot survey of all Sites and Monuments Record entries between Northings 4 and 5 and Northings 8 and 9 across the county. In all c. 18,000 sites were checked, representing some 20 per cent of Wiltshire sites. Certain limitations concerning the survey approach were identified and a decision on the future scale of the programme is awaited. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 84 (1991), pp. 146-151 Wiltshire Archaeological Register for 1989 The Register for 1989 is arranged in chronological order and by parishes. In order to save space ’89 does not precede the serially numbered entries in the text, but this prefix should be used to identify individual items in future cross references. The Register has again been compiled on a selective basis. Records of small groups of unassociated flintwork and of pottery, when of uncertain date or of common Romano-British or medieval types, have been omitted as well as a number of uninformative stray finds. Also not included are certain groups of finds from sites which are due to be published in detail in the near future, and finds from sites which might be particularly vulnerable to the depredations of ‘treasure hunters’. While it is no longer practical to include all stray finds, it is hoped that contributors will continue to supply full records so that future Registers may be compiled from as comprehensive a range of material as possible. Accessions to museums are noted by the short name of the museum (Devizes, Salisbury or Thamesdown) followed by the accession number. For objects remaining in private possession, the sources of information noted are museum records or individual informants, not necessarily the owners. Particulars of attribution and provenance are as supplied by the museums, societies and individuals named. Where there is a reason to doubt the accuracy of the find record, this caveat is given in the text. The illustrations have kindly been provided by N. Griffiths. Abbreviations C century as in C2, second century DMDB Devizes Museum Day Book PP In private possession TMAR Thamesdown Museums Archaeological Records WAM Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural His- tory Magazine WAR Wiltshire Archaeological Register MESOLITHIC 1 Aldbourne, Woodsend. SU 227759. Two cores and utilised flake. PP. DMDB 1552. 2 Baydon, NW of Coate Barn. SU 29067712. Tranchet axe. PP. DMDB 1485. 3 Chippenham Without, Sainsbury’s on Bath Road. ST 896722 approx. Small flint assemblage. Devizes 1989.263. 4 MHullavington, Bradfield. Around ST 899830. Small flint assemblage perhaps of this date. Devizes 1989.314. 5 Luckington, around Racecourse. Around ST 850835. Small flint assemblage. Devizes 1989.315. 6 Pewsham, W of Rooks Nest Farm. ST 923720. Small flint assemblage. Devizes 1989.160. NEOLITHIC 7 Aldbourne, Woodsend. SU 228759. Small flint assemblage. PP. DMDB 1491 and 1517. 8 Bulford, barrow G2. SU 16874280. Four worked flints found in a rabbit scrape. Salisbury 70.1989. 9 Everleigh, ‘near Military Hospital’. Polished flint axe found c. 1940. PP. DMDB 1533. See also No. 15 below. 10 Luckington, S of Cream Gorse. ST 859831. Small flint assemblage. Devizes 1989.264. 11 Purton, Ringsbury Camp. SU 075868. Small assemblage comprising core fragment, ‘thumb’ scraper, triangular arrowhead and waste. Purton Museum. TMAR. 12 Shalbourne, Oxenwood, c. SU 295595. Flint axe rough-out. Devizes 1989.183. 13. Sutton Veny, Glebe Farm. No n.g.r. Large transverse arrowhead. PP. DMDB 1541. BRONZE AGE 14 Everleigh, near Military Hospital. Bronze spear- head found c. 1940; no further details. PP. DMDB 1533. See above No. 9. 15 Langley Burrell Without, S of Birds Marsh. ST 916753. Top of a narrow bronze _ palstave. Devizes 1989.265. 16 Liddington, Liddington Hill. SU 21447926. Group of Middle-Late Bronze Age sherds and sarsen muller. PP. DMDB 1490. 17. Lydiard Tregoze, Hook cemetery. SU 08258478 approx. Late Bronze Age antler cheekpiece. Thamesdown B1990.2. 18 Ogbourne St George, Whitefield Pond. Around WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL REGISTER FOR 1989 Figure 1. SU 21207574. Group of Late Bronze/Early Iron Age sherds. PP. DMDB 1551. Winterbourne Bassett, Hackpen Hill. SU 131748. Small flanged axe. Devizes 1989.132. The findspot corrects WAM 76, p. 175 No. 27. IRON AGE 20 21 22 23 Bishopstone N., Manor Farm. SU 241833 approx. Socketed and looped iron axe-head. Thamesdown B1990.1. Hullavington, Bradfield. ST 894832. Durotri- gian base silver stater, type Mack 317-8; wt. 2.1g. PP. DMDB 1546. Ramsbury, Whittonditch. SU 29157295. Bronze terminal of handle or mount in the form of a grotesque animal head. Devizes 1989.138. Winterbourne, Stock Bottom Farm. SU 18953312. Small copper alloy ring with punched decoration (Figure 1). Salisbury 55.1989. ROMAN 24 25 26 27 28 Aldbourne, South Street adjoining Old Rectory. SU 26537550. Late Roman buckle with dolphins’ heads; two bronze coins — types not described. PP. DMDB 1535. Aldbourne, Woodsend. SU 226758. Bronze mili- tary pendant. Devizes 1989.91. Aldbourne, rear of Rectory. SU 26587546. Four C4 bronze coins. PP. DMDB 1496. 1-4. Aldbourne, Pentico. SU 25567354. Group of sherds including Savernake and Samian wares; broken penannular brooch with folded over ter- minals. PP. DMDB 1550. Amesbury, Countess Road. SU _ 154426: Mandorla-shaped mount with two studs on the reverse. PP. SU 153426: copper alloy finger ring with blue glass setting bearing a moulded design of a figure with a staff. PP. SU 154422: stem of cn “fens boas ane 14 Ores ye Bis ie eas ace pean SS hay Ss 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4] 147 No. 23. Iron Age copper alloy ring from Winterbourne; actual size copper alloy spoon. PP. SU 154423: copper alloy harness fitting. C2. Salisbury 79.1989. See also No. 44 below. Bishopstone N., Hinton Down. SU 250800. 6 C4 coins. PP. DMDB 1516. Oblong plate brooch in the form of a Celtic shield. Devizes 1989.93. Blunsdon St Andrew, footpath near Groundwell Farm. SU 150891. C4 coin. PP. TMAR. Brixton Deverill, Manor Farm. ST 86303885. Late Roman pewter cup. PP. DMDB 1493. Codford, Codford St Mary by-pass. SU 971395. Dolphin brooch; tapering bow brooch; C3 anto- ninianus. PP. DMDB 1531. Hullavington, Bradfield Farm. ST 837896. Pot- tery assemblage. PP. DMDB 1506. Langley Burrell Without, Churchyard. ST 927758. Dolphin brooch. Devizes 1989.223. Luckington, Alderton, ‘Bowling Green’. ST 843832. Part of bronze ‘fleur-de-lys’ key handle. PP. DMDB 1520. Purton, Reid’s Piece. SU 086873. Fragment of Langton Down brooch; coin of Crispus. PP. TMAR. Fragments of box flue and pilae tiles noted. Salisbury. SU 1332. Coin of Constantine I, type RIC 529. PP. Swindon, Elgin Drive. SU 16108638. Sestertius of Antoninus Pius. PP. TMAR. Swindon, Old Town, Lawns Nursery.. SU 15898358. Hoard of 22 antoniniani of the period 259-273, found 1954-5. Thamesdown. B1990.3. Swindon, Covingham. c. SU 190853. Rounded lead weight, wt. 2 lb 92 oz. PP. TMAR. Winterbourne, Winterbourne Gunner, Bowles Meadow. No n.g.r. Coin of Magnentius, type RIC 7. PP. SAXON/EARLY MEDIEVAL, AD 400-1100 42 Aldbourne, E of village. SU 26647556. Saucer 148 Figure 2. 43 44 Figure 3. 45 46 47 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE actual size brooch of tinned copper alloy without decoration (Figure 2, Left). PP. DMDB 1538. Amesbury, Countess Road. SU 153422. Copper alloy disc brooch, originally tinned, with concen- tric incised circles and dot and ring decoration (Figure 2, Right). PP. See also 28 above. Bishops Cannings, Bourton. SU 04356432. Gilt bronze saucer brooch (Figure 3). PP. DMDB 1500. No. 44. Saxon/early medieval gilt bronze saucer brooch from Bishops Cannings; actual size Corsham, Gastard. No n.g.r. Strap-end with designs of a cross and a simple flower on each face. Devizes 1989.298. Cut halfpenny of Cnut of the helmet type; struck at Totnes by the moneyer Aelfwine. PP. DMDB 1543. Durrington, unlocated. Copper alloy disc brooch with decoration of engraved concentric circles. PP. Great Cheverell, SE of church. ST 986543. Gilded copper alloy strap-end with interlace decoration (Figure 4). PP. DMDB 1519. Figure 4. 48 49 50 51 52 53 No. 42 (left) and No. 43 (right). Saxon/early medieval copper alloy brooches from Aldbourne and Amesbury; No. 47. Saxon/early medieval gilt copper alloy strap end from Great Cheverell; actual size Milston, SW of Brigmerston Farm. SU 15654525. Gilded copper alloy brooch in form ofa bird. Salisbury 112.1989. Ogbourne St Andrew, SW of village. c. SU 186720. Copper alloy dress hook. Devizes 1989.13.1. SU 187720: small-long brooch. PP. DMDB 1479.1. SU 188718: copper alloy dress hook with decoration of incised circles. PP. DMDB 1479.2. See also WAR 88.75. Ramsbury, NW of Membury hill-fort. SU 30057560. Fragment of gilded copper alloy saucer brooch with ‘star’ design. Devizes 1989.136. Ramsbury, Whittonditch. SU 29157270. Coin of Constantine II of the ‘Gloria Exercitus’ type, pierced twice, probably in Saxon times. Devizes 1989.92. SU 29107258: pierced C4 worn Roman bronze coin. Devizes 1989.137. Seend, Great Thornham Farm. ST 929597. C11 triangular copper alloy mount, possibly for a book or casket, with decoration in Urnes style. Devizes 1989.291. Possibly post-Conquest. Shalbourne, SE of Shalbourne Mill. Around SU 317636. Small assemblage of finds of the Pagan Saxon and Middle Saxon periods including a WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL REGISTER FOR 1989 54 small-long brooch, a fragment from the foot of a gilt-bronze square headed brooch of Kentish type, two sceattas, a Merovingian tremissis, pins, buckle, strap-ends. PP. DMDB 1494. Wilsford S., Normanton Down. SU 11254130. Split socketed iron spearhead of Swanton type 2. Salisbury 65.1989. LATER MEDIEVAL 55 56 57 Figure 5. 58 59 60 Aldbourne, rear of Rectory. SU 26587546. Animal headed bronze strap-end. PP. DMDB 1496.5. Aldbourne, Woodsend. SU 22347572. Open- work bronze pendant. PP. DMDB 1497. Aldbourne, on lynchets. SU 26627602. Silver gilt ‘fede’ ring: design of clasped hands with a crown above (Figure 5). PP. DMDB 1518. No. 57. Late medieval silver gilt ring from Aldbourne; actual size Alderbury, Ivychurch Priory. SU 18252769. Assemblage of material (pottery, tile, stone, bone) found in 1986 in laying of new drive. Salisbury 7.1989. Amesbury. SU 155413. C14 or 15 gilt copper- alloy buckle plate with design of a dragon (Figure 6); animal headed strap-end. PP. Silver penny of Edward I of the London mint. Salisbury 54.1989. Amesbury. SU 154422. Vesica shaped seal matrix inscribed +SPES MEA IN DEO EST; C15 copper alloy strap-end with incised decoration with the letters IhC. Salisbury 51.1989 and 80.1989. Figure 6. 61 62 Figure 7. 149 No. 59. Late medieval gilt copper alloy buckle plate from Amesbury; actual size Amesbury. SU 16284128. Harness pendant. Sal- isbury 1.1989. Broad Town, East Farmhouse. SU 08957805. C15 Gilt bronze and enamel stud with design of ?vine and inscription (Figure 7). Thamesdown B1990.4. No. 62. Late medieval gilt bronze and enamel stud from Broad Town; actual size 150 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Corsham, Gastard, Boyd’s Farm. Around ST 881677. Bronze banal seal with design of hare seated on dog and blowing trumpet, with inscrip- tion SOHOU ROBIN (Antiq. 7. 64 (1984) p. 381 no. 18); bronze heraldic pendant in the form of a standing lion. PP. DMDB 1542 and Devizes 1989.253. Publication of the latter forthcoming. Easterton, Eastcott, Eastcroft Farm. SU 024557. Pewter shield-shaped mount with a merchant’s mark; small ring brooch of gilt bronze and blue enamel, with a silver pin. Devizes 1989.73. Easterton, as above. SU 023565. Square gilt bronze brooch with white glass paste jewels (Figure 8). Devizes 1989.302. Easterton, as above. SU 022567. Fragment of gilt bronze spur. PP. DMDB 1563. Edington, Tinhead. ST 930532. Iron stirrup. Devizes 1989.240. Hullavington, Surrendal Farm. ST 876822. C14 iron rowel spur. Devizes 1989.274. Market Lavington, The Grove. SU 01405410. C15 Gilt bronze book mount with decoration of interlaced squares. Devizes 1989.171. Market Lavington, Fiddington Clays. SU 02205425. Bronze banal seal with the design of a hare or rabbit and the inscription PRIVE SU (Figure 9). Devizes 1989.72. Milston, Brigmerston Farm. SU 15804521. Lead ampulla with design of crowned W and scallop shell. Salisbury 2.1989. Ogbourne St Andrew. c. SU 186720. Henry II ‘Tealby’ type penny, mint and moneyer uncertain; circular buckle. Devizes 1989.13. Salisbury, River Avon. No n.g.r. Two talbot badges found in 1986 and four lead seals found in 1975. Salisbury 11 and 12.1989; and 46—49.1989. Wanborough, N of the Roman road. SU 255795. Socketed iron spearhead with long, very fine tapering blade (cf. London Museum Catalogue pl. XVI nos. 1-4). PP. DMDB 1515. Winterbourne. SU 19103309. English jetton, temp. Edward II. Salisbury 56.1989. Wootton Bassett, Library Row. SU 066826. C14-15 Copper alloy strap-end buckle. PP. TMAR. UNDATED 77 Amesbury. SU 155413. Circular copper alloy disc with 3 perforations. Design shows a bird, with Figure 8 No. 65. Late medieval gilt bronze brooch with Figure 9. 78 Figure 10. paste jewels from Easterton; size 2:1 No. 70. Late medieval bronze banal seal from Market Lavington; actual size No. 77 ?Medieval copper alloy disc from Amesbury; actual size traces of blue enamel surviving (Figure 10). ?Early or later medieval. Salisbury 60.1989. East Knoyle. Unlocated. Circular copper alloy disc with dot and ring decoration and part of a decorated ring loop, attached to the reverse (Figure 11). ?Early or later medieval. PP. | WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL REGISTER FOR 1989 151 Figure 11. No. 78. ?Medieval copper alloy ring from East Knoyle; actual size Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 84 (1991), pp. 152-165 Reviews Bert Dawkins. When Warm Milk was Fresh Milk. Published privately by the author at Warminster, 1989; 110 pages; monochrome photographs. £5.00, paperback. ISBN 0 9509291 9 0 There are many books of reminiscences now being published and it is refreshing to find one which is both well written and contains useful information. Bert’s family all seem to have been farmers in the Warminster area and both he and his father were milk producers and retailers, first living at Green Farm, Crockerton, and later at the Mill House, Bishopstow. The book covers the period from 1911 to 1950 although naturally most of the memories come from the period between the wars. Bert began a milk round at the age of 12, bicycling in the evening after school; later he went to work full time for his father. Both farming and social conditions of the period are well illustrated. The local knackers would give 10 shillings for a dead animal and whereas a good man could milk 8 cows an hour the average was 6. It is interesting to read that the Summer Solstice at Stonehenge was as much a public spectacle in the early 1930s as it is today. Coaches would leave Warminster at midnight and at Stonehenge their occupants were greeted by the braziers of hot food vendors who soid their wares whilst awaiting the sunrise. Many men had taken to the road during the Depression and the habits of these tramps, and their womenfolk, are discussed. The book ends in 1950 as the Dawkins family change from hand milking to machine milking. It provides an entertaining view of life seen through the eyes of a farmer’s son. Comparisons are invidious but there is much here that reminds one of the writings of Fred Archer of Worcestershire. M.J. MARSHMAN Leslie V. Grinsell. An Archaeological Autobiogra- phy. Alan Sutton, 1989; 134 pages. £14.95, hardback. ISBN 0 86299 658 9. The author of this autobiography informs us that he did not become a professional archaeologist until reaching his forty-fifth birthday. One is led to wonder if the very nature of our profession is such that it ensures many of us will enter it often by strangely diverse routes, that the journey towards proficiency will sometimes be long. Leslie Grinsell’s first job as a bank clerk hardly suggests an auspicious beginning. But it took him to live in Brighton, and more important, to walking the Sussex downs. Tramping these great hills of Belloc’s South Country, he found relief from banking in solitude and the pursuit of escapist subjects. Not being drawn to excavation, he started by collecting flints, and from there took off on his earliest excursions into field archaeology by classifying and recording the barrow mounds of British prehistory. How fortunate for archaeology that our author, through his banking profession, developed a passion for tabulation which (dare one suggest it?), transmut- ing into a sort of archaeological accountancy, even- tually resulted in the publication of his indispensable barrow surveys. By 1941, the barrow populations of almost all the counties of southern England had been classified and recorded. This reviewer claims famili- arity with only one of his volumes, a gazetteer of Wiltshire Prehistoric, Roman and Saxon sites (VCH Wilts, I.1 (1957)). It served for thirty-one years as almost daily reference, during which ume I found within it but a single error, remembered simply by being unique! The penalty of research is surely to be superseded, proved wrong. If the rest of his Surveys are equally accurate, Mr Grinsell will have bequeathed to archaeo- logy a corpus of irrefutable data, and to himself, immortality. The dissertations of the literati of arch- aeology are presented, and some like grass withereth away. But Grinsell’s Gazetteers go marching on. For long a supporter of the amateur’s role in archaeology, it must give him pleasure that as an amateur himself he has achieved some of his most significant work. In 1941, after war service with the RAF, which took him to Egypt, and a deeper interest in Egyptology, he finally forsook banking to become freelance, working on the Wiltshire Gazetteer for the VCH. But in 1952, knowing nothing, as he claims, of a curator’s duties, he was appointed Keeper of Archaeo- logy and Ethnography at Bristol Museum. Here you might say, he entered upon the second phase of his career. Bristol’s collections opened up new lines of enquiry, particularly in numismatics and REVIEWS Egyptian Archaeology. The latter started him travel- ling, spending Christmas and New Year holidays in Egypt, then ranging further afield across the Mediter- ranean region in relentless pursuit of its archaeology. He had already begun lecturing on Egyptology and British prehistory; now he was to become widely known across southern England as an extra-mural tutor, and guide lecturer at Youth Hostel weekends and week long study tours. To these, and to his numerous and wide-ranging publications, how many students and enthusiasts must owe their first and lasting interest in archaeology? Are not his Ancient Burial Mounds of England (1936), The Archaeology of Wessex (1958), and so much more, still compulsory reading for the graduate just off the campus, crammed as they are with primary data? But is it too late to plead for a supplement to this plain statement of a life? Students, scholars and amateurs crowd across its pages; some have since achieved high distinction within the profession, yet they are presented to us merely as names. Could our author have found time, and a few more pages to give us the benefit of his observations and recollections on these, his large and erstwhile audience? Their contri- bution was surely worth recording; one, moreover, which can only have added warmth and colour to his own distinguished career. Part also perhaps, of the archaeological thought and practice of our own day? I chanced to write to the author soon after his volume had come on to the bookshelves. ‘After the Life’, I queried in a postscript, ‘what next? Time to take up again at the beginning?’ I should have known better. Came the reply by return of post: ‘What next? See The Bronze Age Round Barrows of Kent, now well on the way.’ The long journey continues. Floreat Grinsell. KEN ANNABLE A.F. Harding with G.E. Lee. Henge Monuments and Related Sites of Great Britain. Air Photographic Evidence and Catalogue. B.A.R. British Series 175, 1987; iv + 443 pages, illustrations. £40.00. ISBN 0 86054 470 2. Geoffrey Wainwright. The Henge Monuments. Thames & Hudson, 1989; 176 pages, illustrations. £19.95. ISBN 0 500 39025 8. The Oxford English Dictionary, even the comprehen- sive Compact Edition, contains no definition of ‘henge’. Presumably this is because the compilers failed to discover any archaeological consensus about 153 what a henge was. Even the authors of the two fine books under review share the uncertainty. For this one must blame the Saxons, the Cunningtons and T.D. Kendrick. The Saxons began the confusion by calling the sarsen circle on Salisbury Plain stan-hencen or ‘stone gallows’ because the trilithons at Stonehenge resem- bled mediaeval gibbets. The suffix, ‘henge’, happily remained unique to Stonehenge, however, until 1926 when the Cunn- ingtons thought it amusing to name the nearby timber settings, Woodhenge. Maud Cunnington explained that “The name seemed to be “‘in the air” and no one person can be held responsible for it. It proved to be so convenient and descriptive that it was soon generally adopted’. Previously the site had been known as the Dough Cover. Would that it had remained so! Then came T.D. Kendrick. In a book co-authored with Christopher Hawkes, Archaeology in England and Wales, 1914-31, 1932, he wrote a chapter entitled ‘The Henge Monuments’. This was the first occasion in which the word had been used generally. It was also used badly. Amongst ‘henges’ Kendrick included sites as diverse as Stonehenge, Woodhenge, stone circles, henges, great earthwork enclosures, enclosed crema- tion cemeteries and embanked round cairns. Henges have remained in confusion ever since. No wonder Kendrick had to write (p. 83), ‘I must admit, further- more, we are not agreed that all these monuments are of about the same age and are ceremonial sites, that is to say “temples” or “meeting places”’. Full marks to Christopher Hawkes. Now, almost sixty years later, we have two books, completely different in content, one for reference, one for reading, which together clarify some of the mis- understandings. Harding’s is a compendium of 324 site descriptions. Wainwright’s is an account of his three great excavations in Wessex. Neither offers more than a sidelong glance at the intriguing unditched henges of Ireland. Harding’s Henge Monuments and Related Sites is the reference work. It is a scholarly categorisation of henges using Atkinson’s classic definition of a henge as a roughly circular earthen bank with internal ditch, broken by one or more entrances, and with diameters from about 40 to 220 m. If applied rigorously this would have resulted in the ludicrous omission of ‘henges’ such as Mayburgh and Stonehenge. To avoid this Harding has followed Atkinson but with some slight blurring to include these peripheral mon- uments. The strength of the book is its corpus which occupies 80 per cent of its pages. The catalogue is 154 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE preceded by consideration of date, origins, clustering, astronomy and function. These are all sensibly debated including the possibility, not strongly insisted, that the Middle Neolithic causewayed enclos- ures were the precursors of henges. Readers of WAM will be well aware of the juxtaposition of the two types of earthwork at complexes such as Robin Hood’s Ball and Stonehenge. Harding is understandably sceptical about the ‘ast- ronomy’ of henges with their wide entrances, prefer- ring to see them as monuments within a landscape in which adjacent manmade structures and _ natural features such as hills were interrelated. It is alarming, however, to discover (p. 297) that the NE entrance at Stonehenge, so long believed to face the midsummer sunrise, has been moved a full 260° towards sunset at the NW. Henge Monuments . . . is a clearly written review of these enigmatic henges many of which have been discovered by aerial photography as the many illustra- tions in the book demonstrate. The catalogue itself is praiseworthy, containing bibliographical details and plans of over 300 sites in England, Wales and Scot- land. Every student of the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age in Britain should have a copy. The second book is for armchair reading. Despite the misfortunes of its Index in which, amongst several other blunders, that under-rated archaeologist Harold St George Gray becomes Sir George, Geoffrey Wain- wright’s The Henge Monuments, will be of especial local interest to readers of WAM. Well-written, it is a very readable summation of the author’s prodigious exca- vations at Durrington Walls (1966-8), Marden (1969) and Mount Pleasant (1970-1), all previously published in academic detail but now presented in an attractively illustrated, more popular format. The photographs of JCBs, monstrous spoil-heaps and vast tracts of uncovered chalk at these sites must awe even the most experienced excavator. The projects were triumphs of archaeological investigation and interpretation. Yet the book is more than an account of these undertakings. It contains discussions of the evidence for roofed structures, work-practices, the significance of Grooved Ware, social background, and the impli- cations of the remarkable deposits at Durrington Walls. The author sees the building of enormous structures such as Marden as ‘a deliberate strategy by those holding power to maintain ... social order and to increase the control over it’. This is so sensible a stance, supported by so much architectural and arte- factual evidence, that one can hardly disagree. The title of the book, however, is misleading. Durrington Walls, Marden and Mount Pleasant are not henges. They are great earthwork enclosures. Such enclosures are enormous. Whereas a large henge might have an interior of 1% acres (0.6 ha) the average of these sprawling monsters is 15 times greater. The smallest, at Mount Pleasant, surrounded 11 acres (4.6 ha), and the misshapen horseshoe at Marden abutting the R. Avon, engulfed 35 (14 ha). They were erected where there had been a undefen- ded settlement, and it may have been the changing, uneasy times of the Late Neolithic that led to the savagely deep ditches of these new earthworks. In Wessex such colossal earthworks, as Wainwright sug- gests, seem to have acted as territorial centres. And, reaffirming their distinction from the ritual centres known as henges, just as today’s cities have churches inside them so these great earthwork enclosures had henges in or near them. At Durrington Walls there is a henge, Woodhenge, immediately outside the south entrance. There are others within two miles at Coney- bury Hill and Stonehenge. Cumulatively the evidence is insistent that the enclosures were settlement sites, put up against navigable rivers but with daunting banks and ditches for protection. They might contain henges or have henges alongside them. They were not henges them- selves. Only six genuine henges are indexed, and then only briefly, in Geoffrey Wainwright’s splendid book. Had it been given another title it would have raised different expectations in this reviewer. For quite separate reasons both books can be commended. After T.D. Kendrick their lucidity is welcome. AUBREY BURL Danny Howell. Remember the Wylye Valley. Danny Howell, 57 The Dene, Warminster BA12 9ER, 1989; 152 pages. £10.95, paperback. ISBN 0 9509291 8 2. “T often wonder about the things my father used to talk out. If only he had wrote them down. He didn’t half know some things. You’ve got no way of knowing things if someone doesn’t tell you these things. It’s gone.” So muses Alec Moulding, one of twenty senior citizens whose memories of childhood, youth and work in the Wylye valley make up this admirable book. Danny Howell has already proved his talents as publisher, editor and local historian, and here he shows how rewarding a quarry reminiscences can be when collected (with a tape recorder) by an accomplished oral historian. Remember the Wylye REVIEWS Valley consists of edited extracts (a few thousand words each) of much longer interviews — or, as the compiler prefers to call them, conversations — which he has recorded during the last few years. They are accompanied by nearly 250 photographs, both old snapshots or postcards supplied by the interviewees, and modern photographs especially taken to illustrate buildings and places mentioned in the text. A brief introduction describes the compiler’s interest in this field, and his methods. As might be expected, a collection of this kind provides a certain amount of factual information about historical events, but its real strength — as with much oral history — lies in providing a permanent record of vanished ways of life. Topics frequently recur, such as the workaday tasks of the farm labourer; school discipline; the effect of the wartime army camps on the local population; tradesmen and shopkeepers; and the social distinctions between squire, farmer and worker. Each subject is explored from several standpoints, and each contributor has different memories to offer. Sometimes connections are made — the baker’s shop at Bapton is referred to in several contributions, one interviewee (Frank Moxham) had been an employee of another (Alec Moulding), and two (Norah Bull and Paul Cole) used to catch the same train to school (though strictly segregated — boys in one carriage, girls in another). As contemporaries in a fairly compact geographical area — then far more of acommunity than now — many must have known each other, and all would have had mutual acquaintances. Their portrait of Wiltshire rural society sixty years ago is consistent and convincing. For the social historian this book has a special value, but anyone familiar with the Wylye valley will also be fascinated by it. The contributors (though mostly from quite similar working-class backgrounds) are a mixed bunch, and so are their memories. None is without interest, but some are better than others. For this reviewer the highlights are the pieces by Norah Bull and Cliff Woodham. Miss Bull’s description of being pitchforked into village society in Wylye as an eight-year-old from Leeds is a mine of acute and detailed observation. Mr Woodham’s disgruntled account of his two or three years working for a rather slipshod farmer at Upton Lovell is full of sad humour. In fact humour, and camaradarie in the face of adversity, are to be found throughout this book. “You had to be pretty well to see the doctor, because you had ‘a three mile walk to him and a three mile walk back.” “We didn’t have all the temptations they’ve got today. When I was young our only excitement was chasing the girls around the village.” Good stories (lovingly 155 honed during decades of retelling) abound, such as the perils of drinking mead in the mornings (page 59), or how to outwit an obstreperous donkey (page 46), or the salutary lesson to be learnt from sending a simpleton to buy a football (page 65). Oral history, in the hands of Danny Howell, makes compulsive as well as illuminating reading, and there is room on the bookshelves for many more works of this calibre. JOHN CHANDLER T.B. James and A.M. Robinson with Elizabeth Eames. Clarendon Palace. Society of Antiquaries of London Research Committee Report XLV, 1988; xxiv +279 pages; 66 plates; 98 figures; 4 tables. £84. ISBN 0 85431 248 X. Distributed by Thames and Hudson. Clarendon Palace, as the authors James and Robinson state, ‘is the result of a project to reassemble the records of campaigns of excavations which have been undertaken over more than half a century, with passing reference to nineteenth-century interest in the site’. The work comprises five parts: the historical context, the archaeological evidence, the tile kiln and floor tiles, specialist reports on the finds and synthesis. Society of Antiquaries Research Reports have a repu- tation for being magisterial volumes of record about subjects of more than local relevance: this is no excepuon. Clarendon Palace is now a picturesque ruin, much overgrown since the excavations of Tancred Borenius and John Charlton in the 1930s, which were brought to an end by war and whose publication remained incomplete. To the uninitiated who stumble across the site it comes as a surprise to learn that it was once a royal hunting lodge and palace from the Conquest to the end of the Middle Ages; that the Constitutions of 1164 take their name from this place; and that in the reign of Henry III its richly carved stonework, painted window glass and decorated tiled pavements placed it in the mainstream of European art. Until the publica- tion of this monograph enquirers had to be referred to Borenius and Charlton (1936), Colvin (1963) and Eames (1965). One longed for an all embracing, up to date, definitive account. We now have it but, at £84, it is clear that local people and the interested layman will be deterred from purchasing this work. The long perceived desire for a popular account at a reasonable price has, however, produced a happy spin off from the Clarendon project, as Salisbury Museum has published Clarendon: a Medieval Royal Palace by Tom James. 156 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE The first two parts (the historical context and archaeological evidence) bring together a wealth of information about palace life in the Middle Ages. The former is the more readable. We are told, for example (p. 27), that Henry III’s ‘predilection for Clarendon can be established . . . through the cartloads of wine he sent there’. Full, mouthwatering details are then given. For the Christmas feasting in 1240 (p. 31) ‘the king requested officials . . . to supply . . . 5 bulls, 80 porkers, 58 boars, 40 roe deer, 1500 lamb, 200 kid, 1000 hares and 500 rabbits’. The poultry and birds requested were ‘7000 hens, 1,100 partridges, 312 pheasants, 100 peacocks, 20 swans . . . together with 20 herons or bitterns and, if possible, in excess of 50 cranes’. Descriptions of artistic and architectural features abound. Where the interpretation of excavated features is not clear (and the varying quality of survival of notebooks and passage of time since the 1930s sometimes makes clarity difficult) the authors present the evidence and leave choices. A drain (p. 89) may thus have been either a ‘blood and guts’ drain for the salsary as Mrs Eames suggests, or ‘perhaps a drain to carry away accumulations of water in the main courtyard’. It is particularly helpful to have all the structure names, classification numbers and dates of excavations tabu- lated and cross referenced to a composite plan (Fig. 5). Allan Williams is to be congratulated upon his reconstruction drawings of the Palace c. 1275 (Figs. 14 and 15) though A.C. Garnett’s dust jacket illustration, based on Williams, is the more attractive because it is more naturalistic and peopled. Library copies are liable to lose their dust jackets but the illustration 1s reproduced in James (1988). The previously unpub- lished plan (Fig. 11) and the plan (Fig. 12) of the surface features of the Palace as surveyed by the Ordnance Survey in 1973 and amended by the R.C.H.M. in 1980 will be particularly useful to those of us who conduct people around this overgrown site. It is disappointing, as the authors freely admit, that no new excavation was undertaken to elucidate points of detail, neither were the original sources at the Public Record Office re-examined. Opportunities to re- interpret the evidence have thus been ignored and the volume has an air of being caught in a time warp; the authors appear to have fulfilled the debt of publication to Borenius and Charlton but at the same ume to have failed significantly to add to medieval scholarship. The relationship of Clarendon Palace to its medieval hin- terland is also little touched upon. The proximity of a royal castle at Old Sarum, the cathedrals at Old and New Sarum, the city of Salisbury, the priory at Ivychurch, the deserted village of Gomeldon and the important pottery site at Laverstock, all explored in the past to varying degrees, might usefully have been woven more into the story. In Part 3 Elizabeth Eames gives us a masterly presentation of her well-known work on the tile kiln (the earliest known datable medieval tile kiln in England), floor tiles and pavements as well as the added bonus of an appendix (pp. 160-165) on ‘The identification and dating of certain of the buildings in Clarendon Palace based on surviving documentation of the reign of Henry III and the excavated remains’. Her long association with the site gives the volume added stature generally and it is fitting that her name is included with those of James and Robinson on the spine and title page. The specialist reports in Part 4 provide a useful catalogue of the extant finds from Clarendon, which are divided between Salisbury Museum and_ the British Museum. Although both museums have dis- plays of Clarendon material it is nevertheless very pleasing to see at last all the finds published thus making them more accessible to scholarship. How- ever, there are some notable errors. The post-medieval miniature wheel-lock pistol described on page 207 is extravagantly given a half page plate (LVIIIc) which unfortunately shows the firing mechanism incorrectly assembled. For the correct assembly see Blackmore (1989, 12) or the original object displayed in Salisbury Museum. The object described as a seal matrix (p. 249 and Fig. 95) is actually part of a mould for casting pewter roundels. At an editorial level minor errors have crept in. In the acknowledgements (p. 1x) Clare Conybeare’s name is incorrectly spelt, as is Great Bedwyn on page 159. On page 51 it is stated that Mrs Eames describes the process of division of the finds between Salisbury Museum and the British Museum on page 135. In fact this takes place on page 130; it is the process of lifting the kiln and its subsequent reconstruction which is described on page 135. A minor irritation is the fact that the plasterwork illustrations (Figs. 96 and 97) are printed back to back making use of the single detailed key rather difficult. The key printed on page 239 (with Fig. 88) has both figure numbers omitted from its text. Logically it must refer to Figure 88 but does it also refer to Figure 90? There are no fewer than 66 plates allowing 140 images, four in colour. Many of the photographs of the 1930s excavations are taken from John Charlton’s glass slide collection (now in the care of R.C.H.M.). These are generally of a high quality and are an invaluable visual record. The photographs of objects, however, vary greatly in quality. Those of tiles, by the British REVIEWS Museum, and sculpture, by the Courtauld Institute, are excellent. Those by Peter Jacobs are poor both technically and compositionally and several are frankly unworthy of this otherwise excellent production. The full page Plate LXII of the Gothic head of a youth, the most famous object from the site, is very flat and unappealing and in any event seems superfluous given that the head is well depicted in the frontispiece. Plate LXVIb makes fragments of metal thread look like strangled worms or coprolites, so poor is the lighting. In 1977, Jubilee Year, Andrew Christie-Miller, the palace’s owner, and I organised a symposium at Salisbury Museum and at Clarendon to celebrate the national importance of this royal site and to highlight the wealth of the surviving archive. James and Robin- son are now to be warmly congratulated for taking up the challenging task of bringing to publication in one place the results not only of the Borenius and Charlton excavations but also those of Elizabeth Eames and John Musty. It is clear that there was much patient detective work in piecing together the disparate and dispersed sources of evidence accumulated over a long period of time (archives, finds, notebooks, plans, correspondence, newspaper reports and the site) and at last there is a record, though not perhaps interpreta- tion, worthy of such an important site. It shows too that sense can be made of past excavations and the record, which does need to be published. Perhaps that other nationally important Wiltshire site, Stonehenge, might be next to receive such treatment? PETER SAUNDERS REFERENCES BLACKMORE, H.L., 1989 ‘Elizabethan Toy Guns’ in The Sixth Park Lane Arms Fair (catalogue produced by Apollo Magazine Ltd to accompany exhibition held 27 and 28 February, 1989) 10-14 BORENIUS, T. and CHARLTON, J., 1936 ‘Clarendon Palace: an Interim Report’, Antiquaries Journal 16, 55-84 COLVIN, H.M., et al., 1963 The History of the King’s Works, II The Middle Ages, London EAMES, E., 1965 ‘The Royal Apartments at Clarendon Palace in the Reign of Henry III’, Journal of the British Archaeo- logical Association 28 (3rd series), 57-85 JAMES, T.B., 1988 Clarendon: a Medieval Royal Palace, Salisbury Caroline Malone. English Heritage Book of Avebury. B.T. Batsford Ltd./English Heritage, London, 1989; 144 pages; 109 black and white illustra- tions; 11 colour plates. £9.95, paperback (also availa- ble in hardback). ISBN 0 7134 5960 3. 157 This book is representative of a new direction in the publication of guides by the body which has succeeded to the role of guardian of monuments in the care of the state: English Heritage. Although its authorship is clearly stated on the cover, unlike the traditional site guide, and individual in approach, this volume on Avebury — where the principal preserved monuments, even if National Trust property, are maintained by English Heritage under Deed of Guardianship — bears the utle English Heritage Book of Avebury. Part of the blurb describes the volume as heralding a ‘major new series, jointly conceived by English Heritage and Batsford, under the general editorship of (the) Academic Editor at English Heritage’. Readers of this volume may wonder, with this reviewer, how ‘general’ was that editorship. In spite of the official-sounding utle was the editorship really entrusted to the commer- cial joint publishers? It has been easier to review Caroline Malone’s book in ignorance of the answer to those questions. Dr Malone starts with three introductory chapters: the first on the setting, chronology and discovery of Avebury; the second on the prehistoric environment, drawing especially on the work of John Evans and the late Bob Smith; the third describing the principal classes of Neolithic monuments and the reconstruction of society of the period. The following chapters deal with Windmill Hill, the long barrows, the Sanctuary and avenues, Silbury Hill, and the construction of the Avebury henge. A final chapter describes the later history and excavation of the henge. There is an appendix containing visitor information, an extensive reading list, a glossary and index. There are no footnotes or references in the main text. Amongst the many illustrations (which in the review copy reproduced well) those ‘borrowed’ from other publications are credited as ‘after Piggott 1963’ etc. regardless of whether they have been re-drawn or not. Bob Smith’s maps are redrawn, for example, with Waden Hill misspelt. The maps are very variable in style and quality; inconsistencies are noted below. Illustrations nos. 35—37 are ordered oddly, and the caption to colour plate no. 11 intrigues, with a cave (sic) in the Northern Inner Circle. The colour plates and monochrome figures contain a number of reconstruction drawings by Judith Dobie. The style may appeal to readers, especially younger ones; many of these drawings, with additional ones, are employed in English Heritage’s The Avebury Monuments — a study pack for teachers. Some disap- point: the scale of Silbury Hill under phase III of its construction (colour plate 7) is spoilt by an impossible viewpoint and the flint knappers (illus. 43) will 158 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE succeed in nothing but injuring themselves and the dog. Many are eccentric: the assortment of tepees, ‘benders’ and totem poles in colour plates 1 and 10, and illustration 25, owe more to the Plains and West Coast Indians and perhaps to the New Age gypsies and their fellow-travellers than to the British Neolithic period as we recognize it. Others are downright misleading: colour plate 4 claims horse-riding for the Neolithic period. This last aberration is repeated in an otherwise excellent teacher’s study pack from English Heritage. However, we should not shoot the illus- trator! Dr Malone aims to explain the evidence, methods of study and theories in a non-technical manner and the book is written in a clear, attractive style. At times, though, the avoidance of technical but precise terms can be perverse; it is misleading to describe thin- sectioning, the Implement Petrology Survey, and stone axe production in the following terms: ‘extensive trade networks . . . have been identified through the chemical analysis of stone axes. These were mined in many parts of northern and western Britain. . .’ (page 35). The reader who can cope, for example, with excursions into the theories of social anthropology (pages 44-45) can surely be expected to comprehend the practice of petrology and an accurate description of axe production. I come now to the saddest part of this book. The apparent absence of effective editing has allowed both inconsistencies and inaccuracy of dating and definition seriously to mar the text. An example of inconsistency finds the author falling prey to the trap of the orthography of the place-name Kennet(t). The advice the reviewer follows is: Kennett for the modern village and adjacent hamlet only, Kennet for all other uses (river, archaeological mon- uments, literary and historical usage). Would that we could banish altogether the recent and gentrifying affectation of a second ‘t’. Here, however, we find a perversely random distribution of the letter. Time and again on the same or consecutive pages the spellings are contradictory: page 16, West Kennet long barrow; illustration 4, page 17, West Kennett long barrow. In chapter 1 alone the reviewer found River Kennet three times, River Kennett twice; East Kennet village once, East Kennett once, and so on. How exasperating that on page 135 of the appendix only the river, on which all sources agree a single ‘t’, has an additional letter. More regrettable are some of the misleading state- ments made in the text. A few examples will suffice. At best, page 19 confuses the reader by misrepresenting the relationship between Fengate and Peterborough Wares, and the chronology of Middle to Late Neoli- thic ceramics; Peterborough Ware incorporates several sub-styles: Ebbsfleet, Mortlake, and, the latest, Fengate Ware. The sequence runs from its evolution from Windmill Hill origins, to its final development with the Fengate Style in the later Neolithic. (Incidentally, the text at this point refers to illustration 36; no. 56 must be intended. However, illustrations 40 and 41, also relevant, are taken from Smith (1965). One vessel in no. 40, and no. 41.5 captioned as ‘Windmill Hill pottery from Windmill Hill’, are Ebbsfleet Ware (Smith 1965, fig. 32, nos P251, P256 respectively). The text appears to ignore I.F. Smith’s analysis, and her illustrations are re-used but incorrectly identified!) Again, on page 19 we read of the ‘Middle Bronze Age, locally known as the Wessex Culture’. The table on page 15 places the “Wessex culture’ correctly in the Early Bronze Age, but on page 119 we find the ‘Wessex culture of the middle to late Bronze Age’. Can we be generous, and assume that ‘culture’ does not always mean ‘Culture’? If so, what in this context does the author mean? The Early Bronze Age remains the period in which a Wessex Culture has been recognised since the 1930s. Returning to page 19 we move on to the ‘Urnfield practice found on the Continent, of burial in large cemeteries in specially-made ceramic vessels. This is sometimes known as the Devrill (sic) Rimbury Culture after a large cemetery in Wessex’ instead of two type-sites, one a bowl barrow. On page 21 Dr Malone postulates the site of a ‘fortified Saxon manor or palace’ within the circle, and establishment of the village in the interior of the circle from, implicity, the twelfth century. The first remark is strange; Domesday records no manor, Avebury being a hamlet of the demesne of Kennet. On the second, surely the signifi- cant point is the very absence of evidence for anything other than destruction and refuse-dumping within the henge before the post-medieval, perhaps post- Reformation period. The church stands between the apparent N-S axis of earlier Saxon settlement and the west entrance to the henge. On page 42 the definition of henges includes ‘a high bank around the ditch, usually inside, but sometimes outside (like Avebury)’. Atkinson (1951, 82) defined the classes: ‘The most common feature of the henge monuments is the presence of a surrounding earthwork, in the form of a ditch within (his italics) a bank’. The statement on page 37 that ‘no samples of soil have been studied. . . from under the bank or from the base of the ditch of Avebury itself ignores the work of Evans (Evans, Pitts and Williams 1985). Different reviewers will choose to highlight other instances where the text confuses or misleads; Burl REVIEWS (1979) remains a more reliable guide to the mon- uments, and the standard for reporting and inter- preting them was set a quarter of a century ago (Smith 1965). Any editor should be expected to help the writer to eliminate repeated inconsistencies of spell- ing. What purpose does an ‘Academic Editor’ serve if fundamental errors of dating and definition, in areas which are not recondite, appear in print? In this case the failure is unfair both to the author of the present volume and to those labouring to produce further volumes in this series. More serious, the public is misinformed by a volume which is entitled the English Heritage Book of Avebury. CHRISTOPHER GINGELL REFERENCES ATKINSON, R.J.C., 1951 ‘The Henge Monuments of Great Britain’ in R.J.C. Atkinson, C.M. Piggott, and N.K. Sandars Excavations at Dorchester, Oxon, Oxford BURL, A., 1979 Prehistoric Avebury, New Haven and London EVANS, J., PITTS, M.W., and WILLIAMS, D., 1985 ‘An Excavation at Avebury, Wiltshire, 1982’ Proc. Prehist. Soc., 51, 305-310 SMITH, L.F., 1965 Windmill Hill and Avebury. Excavations by Alexander Keiller 1925-1939, Oxford John Peddie. Alfred the Good Soldier; His Life and Campaigns. Millstream Books, 1989; 192 pages. £12.95, hardback. ISBN 0 948975 19 9. From a period for which there are few written records the story of Alfred (AD 849-899, King of the West Saxons from 866) is better known than most. This may be because it was more noteworthy but, in a variation of the adage that history is written by the winners, it is partly due to the survival of two major sources written during his reign and at his instigation, Asser’s Life of King Alfred, started after 885, and the Anglo-Saxon Chromcle, compiled c. 893. From these essentially political (and thus suspect) sources and the labours of those who have been before, John Peddie provides a good up to date and well documented introduction to the life of his subject. The reader missing the real significance of the title and the author’s disclaimer that he seeks only to concentrate on Alfred’s military problems might think that he has gone a little over the top about this soldiering business. But concentration on the military dimension, by a soldier, enables the ‘familiar sources to be tested in an unusual light. A Burma veteran can empathise with the fugitive of the Somerset levels. A valuable chapter on the ‘military balance’ analyses 159 and reviews the organisation, tactics, weapons, mater- ial and relative capabilities of the Saxons and their Viking (or Danish) invaders. A minor quibble is that the author lists bows and arrows as a standard Danish sea going armament but repeats uncritically the asser- uon that neither side used them on land. There is no archaeological or textual evidence that they did but then there is not much evidence about anything and to speculate on this point would extend the tactical discussion. The remainder of the work is a generally chronological treatment of the reign. Alfred inherited a weak position and was repeatedly defeated before being driven back into the heartland of his kingdom. He emerged from the fastness of Athelney, as the legend and the sources will have it, to victory and triumph. The story is vividly told while the sceptical experience of a practical soldier brings in the realities of topography and logistics. Peddie takes the conventional view that Alfred combined in his person the qualities of a great Christan, scholar, lawgiver, inventor, administrator and soldier. There is a revisionist view. The Dictionary of National Biography observes that by legend Alfred has become a model Englishman and that ‘as usual popular belief has got hold of a half truth ... the historical position 1s strangely misconceived and... [he] . . . has drawn to himself the credit that belongs to many men both earlier and later’. However the DNB ignores military matters, as do most other historians, and Peddie redresses this by concentrating on the undoubted real military problems that Alfred faced for more than thirty years. He judges that the King lacked the ‘final quality of ruthless aggression so essential to a commander in the field’ but nonetheless by military victory set the scene for the creation of our modern nation state. By concentrating on military detail and viewing events mainly from the Saxon viewpoint, however, he tends to beg the political dimension. There is a view that Alfred’s role has been exaggerated by the propa- gandist nature of the sources. To the Danes the invasions of England were minor matters compared with more substantial advances in the rest of Europe. Maybe Alfred was truly a great captain, plucking eventual victory at Ethandun after many defeats. But perhaps this is a parochial view and the Danes simply ran out of steam and accepted a sensible political solution. It should be said that Dorothy Whitelock, foremost scholar of this period, will have none of this. Peddie quotes her extensively and the record should include an ephemeral piece, the text of a lecture she gave at Edington in 1977 The Importance of the Battle of Edington AD 878 (printed; no publication data). This 160 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE argues the case for its significance more fully than in the standard works. Significant or not, there was a Battle of Ethandun. Local readers of this journal will want to know whether the author identifies the site as Edington, probably at Bratton Castle, near Westbury. He only goes so far as to devote most of a chapter to explaining how it might well have been. Local interest apart, its precise location is less important than its context which is ambiguously dealt with in the Anglo- Saxon Chronicle and only sketchily addressed by the author. In 876 the Danish general Guthrum made a ‘lightning strike’ through Saxon territory to link up with a seaborne force at Wareham in Dorset; thence, after negotiation, to Exeter in 877, then Gloucester, finally driving Alfred out of Chippenham to Athelney in the Somerset levels early in 878. The latter had then to contend with another seaborne invasion from the Bristol Channel before emerging, assembling an army, winning at Ethandun, recaptur- ing Chippenham by Easter and negotiating an agreement. But it was a settlement, not a victorious imposition. Much hinges on the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle entry for 878 that the Danes‘. . . occupied the land of the West Saxons and settled there . . .’. The author discusses this in the context of events during the first four months of that year which makes it sound ludicrous. Our modern attachment to sequence and accuracy was unknown to the compilers and it must be unsafe to see the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as a chronological straitjacket and to match events too precisely with their given year. It would be more pertinent here to consider how these phrases apply to the whole period. It could make sense to see Ethandun as the culmination of three years or more of insurgency in a colonised territory during which Alfred slowly but surely overcame the ‘counter revoluuonary warfare’ tactics of the Danes and won by exhausting them. This would devalue the claims of Ethandun but promote the author’s contention, otherwise per- haps a little fanciful, that Alfred invented guerilla warfare. The index is of limited value; for example there are no references to particular weapons and fifty six undifferentiated entries for ‘Danes’ is not very helpful. The book is very well produced and illustrated with some good maps. Altogether a welcome addition to the Anglo-Saxon canon. MICHAEL COWAN Stuart Piggott. Ancient Britons and the Antiquarian Imagination: Ideas from the Renaissance to the Regency. Thames & Hudson, 1989; 175 pages, illus- trations. £14.95. ISBN 0 500 01470 1. The best tribute to a scholar is to stand on his shoulders: Stuart Piggott’s are broad, and the view from them clear and engaging. Behind the urbane ease of this book lies more than fifty years of work in British antiquarian studies: it constitutes both a further contribution to and a useful introductory summary of that substantial facet of Professor Piggott’s extra- archaeological activity. His learning is conveyed lightly, in fresh and vigorous English, while the economy with which it is done is a lesson to all who struggle to condense arduously acquired knowledge into accurate narrative. This ‘story of an intellectual adventure’ provides a wide-ranging survey of Britain’s part in European antiquarian thought and practice prior to the emerg- ence of ‘the beginnings of scientific excavation and a true prehistoric archaeology’ in the nineteenth century. One tmely re-emphasis is on the virtually universal acceptance, up to that century, of what are to the modern mind extremely short time-scales for speculation about the deep human past. Since history began with the Book of Genesis, and was recorded in convincing outline until the Flood, there could be no pre-history. The central problems were confined to at most some 2,500 years ensuing: the period of post- Diluvial dispersion, including the westward trek of Japhet’s descendants. Scholarship then focused on intentional record: documentary, incised, or obviously monumental; and such sources could be accorded minutely detailed attention. But how to stabilize a tall thought-edifice built on a narrow base? Piggott notes, for instance, in Athanasius Kircher’s illustrated account of Noah’s Ark (1675), ‘an exact devotion to the words of Genesis coupled with a sort of crazy common sense’ (p. 54). A gradual revolution was to be wrought by perception of the empirical evidential value of the unintended, the accidental survival. John Aubrey was prescient, 1n his preamble to ‘Templa Druidum’ (Monumenta Bri- tannica MS, 30), as he prepared to tackle his descrip- tions of Avebury and Stonehenge, in adumbrating a ‘method by comparing these [Stonehenge, Avebury and other British Monuments] . . . one with another . [so as] to make the Stones give evidence for themselves’. That passage is not here noted by Piggott, but he pays tribute to the ‘acute intelligence’ of Aubrey, whom, writing of North Wiltshire in about 1659, he sees as employing ‘the essentials of all that REVIEWS was to constitute the first stage in the development of British archaeology: fieldwork on earthworks, barrows and stone circles, the use of the classical texts, the final ethnographic comparison’ (p. 62). The human beings dispersing westward into ‘plan- tations’ — a term discussed interestingly by Piggott (pp. 60-1) — were, as in all other directions, post- Edenic, fallen. Thus the American Indian, lately discovered, could be interpreted as evidence of degen- eration, to be set alongside Julius Caesar’s record of the woad-painted Briton: Aubrey’s ‘ethnographic comparison’ was that the Briton was ‘2 or 3 degrees . . . less savage than the Americans’. However, even the former, that ‘brutish, skin-clad, club-bearing hunter’ — hero of one’s childhood in the guise of Stone-Age Kit the Ancient Brit (p. 11: Piggott’s is a catholic range of reference) — was a compelling demon- stration of what it meant to be several steps down from Adam and Eve, not several up from the ape as our scarcely more exact modern stereotype would have it. One source of Piggott’s freshness is self-revision: both respect and affection are in order toward a writer who can footnote his own earlier acceptance of a 2000 BC beginning for the Neolithic with ‘Cf. the absurdly short chronology of S. Piggott, Neolithic Cultures of the British Isles, Cambridge 1954’ (p. 162)! Similarly, Piggott has privately greeted a carefully argued ques- tioning of certain key judgements in his indispensable and widely influential study, William Stukeley (1950; 1985) (a questioning (Ucko et al. in press) too recent to have impinged on the work under review) with magnanimous agreement and a cheerful ‘I am fed up with being the only one concerning [Stukeley]’. The Royal Society, as emblem and rallying-point of new ‘climates of opinion’ — a phrase, Piggott records, ‘invented by Joseph Glanvill, one of the first Fellows and a zealous apologist of the Society’ (p. 24) — receives a dozen judicious mentions. The picture of the Society’s domination by mathematics during New- ton’s long Presidency is probably not unjust, but might be relieved a little by fresh study of the wide subject-reach of unarchived papers abstracted, some- times at length, in the Society’s contemporary Journal Book. Stukeley himself (the President’s proto- biographer) made a number of apparently neglected such contributions during the Newton period, in addition to his expectable medico-surgical items. In 1719, for example, the year of his first visits to Avebury and Stonehenge, Stukeley reported inter alia on the latter monument (only) (19 November), and on the ‘silk-tail’ bird (24 December). Earlier, before his Wiltshire trip, there had arrived at the Society (12 February) a ‘Sceleton in a Stone’ containing ‘several 161 Shells of Different kinds’, procured by Stukeley from Nottinghamshire. At such eighteenth-century junctures we may, alerted by Piggott — whose own choice of quotations is always a pleasure — perhaps feel that ‘Ever and anon a trumpet sounds/From the hid battlements’, if not of Eternity then certainly of Darwin, Lyell, and vast evolutionary time, for the skeleton was not that of a human giant as at first surmised, but of ‘some Amphibious Creature . . . or some Fish of the Cetaceous kind’. But Stukeley judged, as he had to, these fossil bones and shells and their likes ‘to have been reliques and Remaining Figures of the Universal Deluge’. Many aspects of this rewarding and well illustrated book have not been so-much as touched on in this review. Piggott’s desiderata should be noted, and responded to, by suitably-equipped historians: we lack, for instance, biographies of Edward Lhuyd, a major figure, and of his fellow-F.R.S. Robert Plot. Piggott’s several index-references to both men show on whose shoulders such historians are likely to find themselves poised. ALAN J. CLARK REFERENCE UCKO, P.J., HUNTER, M., CLARK, A.J., and DAVID A., in press Avebury Reconsidered: From the 1660s to the 1990s The Diaries of Jeffery Whitaker Schoolmaster of Bratton, 1739-1741, edited by Marjorie Reeves and Jean Morrison, for the Wiltshire Record Society, Volume 44, 1989, lxiv + 117 pages. ISBN 0 901333 21 2. Obtainable from the Hon. Treasurer, Mr M.]J. Lansdown, 53 Clarendon Road, Trowbridge, Wil- tshire. Price to non-members £15, postage extra. Of the diaries of Jeffery Whitaker, middling farmer and dissenting schoolmaster of Bratton, three survive, covering the period March to October 1739 and April 1740 to July 1741, part of an apparent longer run. The entries are regular and wide-ranging, but brief, the writer rarely wasting words on any topic, whether national or local events, parish or farm matters, or his own feelings. Despite the brevity of the time-span covered, and the concise style, the publication of the diaries represents the appearance of an important new source for the study of Wiltshire local history of the eighteenth century. Through the diaries comes a glimpse into many aspects of eighteenth century village life — landhold- ing, farming practice, parish duties, relations with 162 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE neighbours — as well as into the world and concerns of Jeffery Whitaker himself: family matters, the school, his religious life and his marital hopes. Several local events over the period give the diaries a sense of development, and make reading interesting. There is the affair of Jeffery’s neighbour John Aldridge Ballard and his servant maid: ‘Nan Thrush accuses her master with getting her with child’, and the smallpox epi- demic which occupies Jeffery’s thoughts from May 1740 until June of the following year. There is his sister’s marriage which ‘caus’d a great disturbance between mother and her’, and Jeffery’s own courtship of Molly Adlam. Though at times Jeffery Whitaker appears a cold character (he considers May Day revellers ‘a parcel of fools’, shows little sympathy with his sister over her marriage, and records deaths and burials in a cursory, matter-of-fact way), at others he is attractively human, making a memorandum not to drink so much another time, disappointed in his modest _love-affair, complaining of his ill health and the boil on his bottom. He is serious-minded, describing himself as ‘being used to reading & Study ... thoughtful & grave in Countenance’, and interested in the world around him, recording odd items of international news and unusual natural phenomena, and going to see the curiosities of the Royal Society when in London. If Jeffery himself seems a somewhat unexciting man, we get glimpses of some more colourful perso- nalities. The Ballard brothers are Jeffery’s neighbours; they frequently irritate him and it is almost with glee that he records their deaths of smallpox. Ben Bourne, Jeffery’s assistant, has a taste for going to fairs; his late nights and frequent failure to turn up on time infuriate Jeffery. Jeffery’s servant Tom puts on his best clothes, walks out against orders, gets drunk, and gets beaten; the maid Amy has been doing something unmentiona- ble in a cupboard. Of Jeffery Whitaker’s farming activities we hear much. He generally records the tasks done by his workmen or himself, and he is naturally concerned with the weather: ‘Weather very wet. Barley like to be spoil’d.’ There are references to work in the water meadows, to the corn and hay harvests, to sowing turnips, to caring for fruit trees and making cider and perry. While not enough information is given to convey a very complete picture of the running of an eighteenth century farm, the editors in the Introduc- tion give a good general picture of the agricultural practice of the time in Wiltshire villages like Bratton, and an account of the land held by Jeffery Whitaker which helps familiarise the reader with the field names he mentions. A sketchy picture emerges of the school. It contains day boys and up to about 18 boarders, whose parents Jeffery visits to collect fees. Most of the teaching is done by Jeffery’s assistant, Ben. Jeffery notes angrily when Ben’s absence forces him to attend to the pupils. Ink and books are made for the school, tailors arrive to mend the boys’ clothes, a boy is whipped for stealing money, the boys break windows and pick apples. Little is heard of the actual lessons, though the boys learn to bow and one boy is taught land measurement, and Ben sometimes spends a day writing out mathe- matical rules. There are many references concerning landholding, church practice and local administration. Too brief in themselves to give the reader a clear picture, they are usefully put into context in the Introduction which draws on a number of other sources, including the Whitaker family papers, to give a comprehensive background to the diaries, discussing the Whitaker family (about which both editors have written elsew- here), Jeffery himself, and the school, as well as the agricultural and social scenes and Nonconformity in Bratton. The final section on local administration is particularly useful, since the patterns of civil and church administration and the structures of law were fairly complicated in Bratton at this period. There were two Vestries, at Bratton itself and at Westbury, whose meetings Jeffery attended, yearly manorial courts held by three landowners and Visitation courts when the churchwardens made presentments. Jeffery attended the Petty Sessions, and served on the Hun- dred Jury at the Quarter Sessions at Warminster; he also assessed and collected Land and Window Tax. In addition to the Introduction, the volume contains detailed notes on the families most often mentioned by Jeffery, on other inhabitants of Bratton, and on Jeffery’s servants and pupils. There is a Glossary (most dialect words and peculiarly eighteenth century terms are also individually footnoted), a Whitaker family tree, and a map of Bratton in about 1740 which is adequate but does not convey a very clear sense either of the shape of the village or the land held by Jeffery Whitaker. There are comprehensive indexes of persons and places, and of subjects, but containing some mistakes. The diaries are, unavoidably, heavily footnoted. While this makes reading without distraction difficult, the footnotes themselves are almost always helpful. The instances where the editors have failed to find an explanation for one of Jeffery’s brief, passing comments are rare, thus making unfootnoted entries like ‘three Rioters to be hang’d’, ‘A monster born at Crockerton some time past’, and ‘... naish, an Hermaphrodite here’, all the more tantalizing. REVIEWS Jeffery Whitaker cannot be considered a great diarist. Great diarists are not only the unconscious eyes into their world for their readers, but put enough of themselves into their diaries to give their readers real understanding of their characters and affection for them. Both as eyes and as a sympathetic personality Jeffery falls short: he simply says too little. However, the published diaries, excellently introduced and explained as they are, can be said to give at least as good a view of eighteenth century Wiltshire as does Kilvert’s diary of Wiltshire in the nineteenth century. While the facts about mid eighteenth century rural life are well known, first-hand accounts of the period are few, making this volume useful and entertaining to anyone interested in eighteenth century social history or in the past of Bratton and the surrounding area, and a valuable source for local historians. ALISON TERRY G. Speake, A Saxon Bed Burial on Swallowcliffe Down. Excavations by F. de M. Vatcher (with contributions by J. Bayley, E. Crowfoot, M. Guido, and J. Henderson). English Heritage, Archaeological Report no. 10. Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England, London, 1989; vii + 135 pages; 97 figures; no price stated, paperback. ISBN 1 85074 211 1. This important volume describes the unexpected discovery of a rich Anglo-Saxon grave during the excavation in 1966 of a plough-damaged Bronze Age round barrow. The barrow had also been partially robbed and the Saxon deposits disturbed. Many of the Saxon objects which were recovered by Mrs Vatcher are of an exceptional nature and of international significance. The report is therefore much to be welcomed, although the long delay in its appearance is due in part to Mrs Vatcher’s tragic death in 1978. A particularly regrettable aspect of the failure to make headway with the publication is the fact that the finds remained unconserved in Avebury Museum until 1975. The Saxon burial lay in a chalk-cut chamber, 2.74m long, 1.52m wide and 1.22m deep. A reconstruction of the layout of the grave depends essentially upon six plans, which were made at successive levels during the excavation of the burial deposit; these record the -observed positions of a great, and to the excavator often bewildering, variety of objects, some of them in dense clusters. It is by no means the least of the achievements of the author of this report that, as a 163 result of his painstaking study of the remains them- selves and his use of the available literature, he has been able both to offer convincing identifications and interpretations of this material and to place it in its national and international context, with the most interesting results. The remarkable nature of the contents of the grave is immediately clear from a list of the main asse- mblages of objects, each group being treated sepa- rately in the report. These assemblages comprise a casket of maple wood which contained a bronze sprinkler, a silver spoon, five silver brooches, a strap mount, knives, beads and a comb; an iron pan and an iron-bound bucket of yew wood; a bronze-bound bucket, also of yew; a highly-decorated satchel; two glass cups; and the numerous metal fittings of a bed on which had been placed the body of a young lady. There is, unfortunately, no separate catalogue of the artifacts, as is the normal practice in the publication of an excavation report. Instead, a description of an object is immediately followed by a discussion of its significance, with the consequence that the illustra- uons of the Swallowcliffe finds are interspersed with those from a wide variety of other sites from which parallels have been drawn. This is not satisfactory, as it makes it more difficult for the reader to see the Swallowcliffe material as a whole. This problem apart, the volume provides a wealth of new information. The casket and some of its contents may be considered first. The casket’s bronze fittings include a lock-plate, corner brackets, and a hinged clasp and a pair of hinges whose curvature indicates that the lid was probably of semi-circular section. A smaller casket of a similar form, and also of maple, is known from Finglesham in Kent. The Frankish ancestry of the type is illustrated by an example from St Severin, Cologne. Amongst its contents the most important item is the silvered bronze sprinkler, which has an enamelled plate at the base of the handle; the object had suffered ancient damage. Only one parallel is known, from a mid ninth-century Viking grave at Vinjum in Norway but with decoration of Celtic origin, with parallels in the Book of Durrow at the end of the seventh century. The identification of both objects as sprinklers is an original contribution, for they had formerly been considered incense burners. The Swallowcliffe sprinkler had been placed on top of the silver spoon, which recalls the juxtaposition of rock crystal balls and perforated spoons in other graves — at Winterbourne Gunner there was a bronze spoon but no crystal. Speake notes a custom on Mayday in Scotland whereby water in which a crystal sphere had been washed was sprinkled on cattle, 164 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE presumably as some form of protection. Practical experiments with a replica of the Swallowcliffe piece showed that it is quite suited to use with liquids, either as a sprinkler or infuser. The silver brooches in the casket, all of the same rare type, have analo- gues in seventh-century female graves in Kent and at Uncleby in Yorkshire. The sporran-like satchel is of the most elaborate construction. It was made, apparently, of wood which was covered with leather. The kidney shape of the lid is reminiscent of the form of the purse at Sutton Hoo. The approximately circular bronze mount with ring-and-dot decoration at the centre of the lid was mounted on a wooden disc. The known function of this mount allows a similar interpretation to be given for discs of a comparable size, some of them of bone or antler, from other sites, including Winkelbury Hill (Berwick St John). Below the ld, the front of the satchel was decorated with a circular openwork mount, whose nineteen variously-sized compartments are filled with silver and_ gold repoussé foils. The foils are clearly derived from other objects and they have been cut to make the best possible fit for this mount. They exhibit both Celtic and Anglo-Saxon styles of ornament and the mingling of the two cultures evident here provides a further insight into what is increasingly seen as a widespread, although still little understood, phenomenon in later seventh-century England. The bed itself, made of ash, has been reconstructed from a miscellany of iron cleats, eyelets, nails, a headboard stay and side rails. Dr Speake then pro- ceeds to show that similar iron fittings are known from anumber of other burials, generally demonstrably rich ones, in England and this leads him to identify two areas, in East Anglia and in Wessex (together with a single example in Derbyshire), where the rite of bed-burial was practised in the seventh century. The Wessex evidence is provided by Pitt Rivers’s records of the cemetery at Winkelbury and, less certainly, by Colt Hoare’s digging at Woodyates (Roundway Down is a further possibility). Some topographical context for the Swallowcliffe burial is provided by a tenth-century land charter. One of the boundary points described in the grant is Posses Hlaewe (Poss’s barrow) whose position in the sequence of markers leaves little doubt that it relates to this burial mound. The Old English personal name Poss, as uniquely recorded in this charter, is masculine and quite probably refers to an owner of the land at some date later in the Saxon period. The charter also mentions the herpath, that is the highway (much later the coach road) which passes along the south side of Swallowcliffe parish south of the barrow. There are many examples of the siting of seventh-century burials, often under barrows, beside main routes, and it was clearly a deliberate practice. Another local example is the rich grave on Salisbury Racecourse, by the Roman road from Old Sarum to Dorchester. BRUCE EAGLES Bruce Watkin. A History of Wiltshire. Darwen County History Series, Phillimore, Chichester, 1989; 128 pages; colour and black and white photographs, and line drawings. £9.95. ISBN 0 85033 692 9 The words A History of Wiltshire belong to two current books — this one, and the Victoria County History of Wiltshire (V.C.H.); one, a slim volume produced within a couple of years, the other in fourteen volumes and still far from complete, and the product of 40 years work by a team of researchers. It is an interesting contrast, and one so striking that it would be easy to compare them to the detriment of the lesser; to say, in other words, that a book like Bruce Watkin’s must be shallow and derivative. This would, in the present case, be doing his book a great injustice. It is derivative, in the sense that all of it is summarized from work already in print, both the general volumes of the V.C.H. and other work on particular aspects of Wiltshire history or on individual places. But how could a book of its scope hope to include new facts, or even new interpretations? All that can be aimed at is a summary of the present state of knowledge as far as it can be presented in one volume of limited size. The work of the summarizer is difficult, well witnessed by the fact that the last single-volume history (as opposed to guide-book) of Wiltshire appeared in 1930. That was R. Welldon Finn’s volume in the Borzoi County Histories. Mr Watkin had a far stiffer task than Finn, since so much more of substance is available now than sixty years ago. The author’s task is to select the facts and topics that his readers will expect in such a book, and to present them in an accurate, lucid, and readable way. It is a measure of the success of Mr Watkin’s work that all those adjectives could be applied to it. The plates, both coloured and black and white, are of good quality, and present some unusual subjects, such as the interior of the Old Meeting House at Horningsham (though, alas, those fictitious Scottish Presbyterians appear in the caption). Most of the drawings appear in the margins of the text and are in REVIEWS general unworthy of the book. Nevertheless, it is a book that all our members should have on their shelves. KEN ROGERS Angus Winchester. Discovering Parish Boundaries. Shire Publications, Discovering Series No. 282, 1990; 88 pages; black and white photographs and maps. £2.50, paperback. ISBN 0 7478 0060 X The title of this book is an underestimate of its scope, for Angus Winchester discusses boundaries of civil divisions from the county downwards, and also those of ecclesiastical divisions. He has much to say on the status, function, and history of townships, ancient parishes, and hundreds, as well as giving a lucid account of what the local historian can deduce from their boundary patterns. The ways in which bounda- ries were marked by ditches, mounds, roads and stones are examined as well. It is an excellent addition to this excellent series. HELEN ROGERS Geoffrey N. Wright. Roads and Trackways of Wessex. Moorland Publishing Co Ltd., 1988; 191 pages. £11.95 hardback. ISBN 0 86190 248 3. The organization of a book describing a system of roads presents particular problems. If a geographical structure is adopted a coherent account is not easily achieved because of the inevitable overlapping, and a chronological treatment encounters the problem that a road created in one period normally continues to be used in subsequent periods and is therefore often undateable. Acknowledging the difficulties inherent in such an approach, Mr Wright has chosen a chronologi- cal framework for his book, from prehistoric track- ways by way of Roman roads, medieval ways, the travellers, diarists and mapmakers, to the drovers’ roads and smugglers’ ways, ending with the turnpike roads of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. As the author states in his introduction, Wessex is only definable at its coasts, and Wiltshire readers should note that he takes the A4 as his northern boundary, thus generally excluding the north of Wiltshire. The amount of fieldwork demanded by a book of this nature is immense, and Mr Wright has spent his leisure time over twenty-five years while resident in Wiltshire on fieldwork and research. The extent of his 165 researches is evident from the two and a half pages of bibliography and the obviously first hand authority of his text. The medieval and turnpike periods are given wide coverage. Other periods are given less space, which is acceptable in a book of limited scale in which the author only claims to deal with some aspects of his subject. The book is well produced with clear type on good paper. It is profusely illustrated with 102 photographs, 16 line maps prepared by the author’s wife, and 21 reproductions of old maps. The illustrations and maps are adjacent to the relevant text. The black and white photographs, taken by the author, are admirably reproduced, as are the clear diagrammatic maps. The old maps, however, are often reduced to a small scale, and a standard of reproduction which renders them on occasion (for example on page 124) unreadable. The map on page 129 has even been reversed. This is a major criticism since these maps take up about ten pages of the 191-page publication. I find this book reliable, readable, and easy to use. The chapters are sub-divided by subject headings, and my spot checks of the six double-column pages of index suggest that it is accurate. A mistake occurs at the top of page 55 where the date 1895 is given for a south Wiltshire boundary stone which is actually inscribed ‘1891’, and on page 57 Milton Abbey in Dorset is listed with a ‘W’ for Wiltshire. On the same page the cathedrals and monastic houses marked on the map are inconsistent with those listed in the caption, but these are minor errors — possibly printer’s mistakes — which can easily be corrected if the book goes into further editions which I believe it deserves. In the interests of accuracy, Mr Wright uses National Grid map references which will be welcomed by the serious reader. He also exhorts his readers to undertake their own research and stresses the pleas- ures and satisfaction that fieldwork can bring. A new history of the roads and tracks of Wessex 1s to be welcomed. This is one of the few books which covers the subject in general, most of its predecessors having concentrated on specific periods. Geoffrey Wright’s book provides a stimulating read and a valuable source of reference to all who are interested in the old roads and green lanes of the area covered: the whole of Dorset, mid and south Wiltshire, east Somerset, west Hampshire, and part of Berkshire. Having ordered it unseen, I am now very pleased to have the book on my shelves. KENNETH WATTS Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 84 (1991), pp. 166-170 Obituaries Sir Christopher Howard Andrewes, FRS died in December 1988, and will be remembered throughout the world for his pioneering work on viruses, in particular those which cause influenza, and for being a founder of the Common Cold Research Unit near Salisbury. Born on the seventh of June 1896, Christopher was the son of pathologist Sir Frederick Andrewes. Foll- owing in his father’s footsteps, he studied medicine at St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London, gaining his degree in 1921 and his M.D. in the following year. An outstanding student, he spent a further two years as a house physician at St Bartholomew’s before becoming an assistant resident physician at the Hospital of the Rockefeller Institution in New York. In 1927, Christopher returned to England and joined the Medical Research Council at Hampstead. He was married in the same year to Kathleen Lamb. By this time, it was obvious that his main interest was the study of viruses, a comparatively new area of science, and one which was to occupy much of his working life for the next 40 years. Among the viruses he studied were Virus III (a rabbit virus), vaccinia and influenza; he also investigated the role of viruses in transmissible tumours of birds and animals. Following the Second World War, the Ministry of Health received, as a gift from Harvard Medical School, the hospital and laboratories at Salisbury, formerly used by the U.S. Armed Forces in Europe. This site became the Common Cold Research Labora- tories, and Christopher Andrewes was appointed Director of the investigations. Then in 1947, the World Health Organisation and the Medical Research Council collaborated in setting up a World Influenza Centre at Mill Hill in Middlesex. Under the direc- torship of Christopher Andrewes, this centre coordi- nated international studies on the spread of influenza epidemics. Apart from his career as a virologist, Christopher will be remembered by Wiltshire naturalists as an insect collector, and a regular contributor of insect records to the WANHS and the Wiltshire Biological Records Centre. He gave much of his collection to Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum, and made a donation of Hymenoptera (bees, wasps, hoverflies and ants) to Devizes Museum in early 1988. Most of his collecting took place from 1941 untl 1967, during which time he obtained around one thousand different species of flies, ants, wasps, bees, sawflies, caddis flies and moths. Wiltshire sites feature strongly in his collections, including Salisbury, Tisbury, Warmin- ster, Wilton, Coombe Bissett, Broad Chalke and Downton. There are also insects collected from parts of Surrey, and several sites in Dorset and Wales, the last two perhaps reflecting his choice of holiday venues. Though the collections do not comprise a complete record of the insect faunas of the areas he studied, they have provided us with a good overview of the more common species. Christopher Andrewes held many positions of auth- ority in medical organisations, among them Deputy Director of the National Institute for Medical Research and President of the Pathological Section of the Royal Society of Medicine and the Society of General Microbiology. He was elected Fellow of the Royal Society in 1939. Following his retirement in 1961, Christopher continued his interest in virology by writing a book on the taxonomy of viruses. With the death of Marion Browne on 16 July 1990, Wiltshire has lost a dedicated nature conservationist and one of its most energetic naturalists. Marion Browne was born at Warsash, Hampshire on 21 April 1921 the daughter of Patrick and Sylvia Hall. Although there was a strong natural history influence in the family — Patrick Hall was a botanist with a particular interest in orchids and Kate Hall, a great aunt, was Curator of the Borough of Stepney Museums and author of Nature Rambles in London (Hodder and Stoughton, 1908) and Common British Animals (Bartholomew Press, 1913) — Marion’s early interest was in handicrafts through which she could express her artistic abilities. Marion attended Rookesbury Park Preparatory School, Wickham, Hampshire and then boarded at Prior’s Field, Godalming, Surrey before going to the Paris Academy of Dressmaking, London. The War interrupted her studies in London and she immedi- ately volunteered for service in the Women’s Land Army. For the whole of the War she was based in Hampshire where she drove tractors and lorries and worked in a mill. She returned to the Paris Academy after the War and completed work for a Diploma OBITUARIES before joining Motley Theatrical Costumiers, London as a costume maker; she was particularly proud of having made the shirt that Laurence Olivier wore in a stage version of Hamlet. Later she became Needlework Editor of Good Housekeeping and wrote two books on needlecraft. In September 1953 Marion married Ronald B. Browne. ‘Ronnie’ was Managing Director and later Chairman of T.B. Browne Ltd, an advertising agency based first in the City and then in Piccadilly; the couple lived in Campden Street, London. The Brownes’ long association with Wiltshire began in 1966 when Ronnie retired and they moved to West Kington. Within a few years Marion was involved in the work of the Wiltshire Trust for Nature Conser- vation. She served on the Council of the Trust from 1973 to 1988. From 1973 until the appointment of a full-time development officer in 1979, Marion organ- ised the ‘sales stall’ which involved buying goods from wholesalers and arranging for their sale at Trust and other natural history events. This was an important fund-raising task and the sales stalls were a precursor of the highly successful Wiltshire Trust shop. From the mid-1970s Marion’s work in conservation and natural history took on its own distinctive qualities with a focus on mammals. In conservation she pio- neered methods of caring for injured and orphaned animals, many of which were subsequently returned to the wild. This was highly skilled work, requiring patience and dedication and a willingness to work well into the night. She specialised in work with badgers, foxes and, most difficult of all, bats, but other animals successfully rehabilitated included weasels, hedgehogs and squirrels. In the 1980s Marion became particu- larly concerned about the plight of bats, travelling extensively over the county giving advice to those who wanted to ensure that their house conversions were ‘pat-friendly’ and persuading those who were rather more apprehensive to take a positive view about allowing small mammals to occupy their roof spaces. In the course of this work she founded the ‘Wiltshire Bat Group’ and, in 1987, wrote Bat Aid, a booklet dealing with first aid and general care of bats. Marion was a regular contributor to the Trust’s ‘Country Commentary’ column in the Wiltshire Gazette and Herald and she participated occasionally in natural history broadcasts on regional and national radio and television; her ‘ramps in cattle-grids for hedgehogs’ featured in an early programme in the BBC ‘Wild- track’ series. Marion’s experiences of working with animals, her observations in the field and her conservation work were recorded in meticulous detail in a series of 167 diaries. Her work with animals frequently formed the focus of field observation, as for example when she spent long nights walking the countryside with orphaned badgers which, once they had demonstrated their ability to find food for themselves, were returned to the wild. In addition, she carried out a number of systematic field studies. Of these, the natural history of the hunted fox is probably the most comprehensive. Her earliest published works on natural history, written under the pseudonym ‘Renarde’ (WAM Part A, 1973 and 1974 and Wiltshire Natural History Maga- zine, 1975 and 1976) were based on observations on the hunted fox. She became a recognised authority on this subject and presented a paper at a conference organ- ised by the Mammal Society in 1978. From 1975 Marion was County Recorder for Mam- mals, Reptiles and Amphibians. In the early years a book on mammals was envisaged and a group of specialist contributors was approached. However, it soon became clear that there was insufficient data for such an undertaking and, starting in 1976, Marion instigated a series of systematic species surveys. A mammal record sheet was designed and circulated throughout the county to naturalists known to have an interest in mammals, to natural history and conser- vation societies, anglers, farmers, water bailiffs and members of Womens’ Institutes. The survey was supported by short articles in the local press and in the newsletters of local societies and lectures to Womens’ Institutes, local societies, Young Farmers Clubs and any group with an interest in wildlife or the country- side. The outcome was that Marion built up an extensive network of correspondents who collectively submitted thousands of records which she collated and brought together for publication. In their ‘raw’ form these records were published annually from 1977 to 1988 as a series of ‘Mammal Reports’ in the Wiltshire Natural History Magazine and WANHS Annual Report. By the early 1980s she had gathered enough data for a series of in-depth studies on the status and distribution of mammals, all published in WAM (water vole 1983, voles and mice 1984, dormouse 1985, shrews 1986, hedgehog 1987, mole 1988 and brown rat 1989). An earlier study on the harvest mouse (Wiltshire Natural History Magazine, 1975) of which she was joint author, may be considered as part of this series as it was based on a systematic county survey, in this case as part of a national enquiry coordinated by the Mammal Society. At county level, these studies are unrivalled for quality and comprehensiveness. Following the early success of the mammals survey, a ‘reptiles and amphibians of Wiltshire’ project was launched in 1978 with the aim of collecting informa- 168 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE uon on the distribution and status of herptiles in the county as a basis for a definitive publication. Between 1978 and 1980 over two thousand circulars were sent out through a variety of organisations and some three hundred people responded with information. The records, as a series of provisional distribution maps prepared by Marion, were included in an interim report published by WANHS in 1980. The project was set up before the installation of the computerised databases at the Biological Records Centre in Devizes Museum and the sheer volume and diversity of information received through the survey was a hind- rance to its effective analysis. Marion absorbed the day-to-day record keeping and contributed a detailed update on records, 1980-82, toa second interim report (WANHS Annual Report, 1982). Although the detail of the survey remains to be published, summary data has been passed on to national surveys, notably ‘change in status of the commoner amphibians and reptiles’ conducted by the Nature Conservancy Council in 1982. It was the technical demands of working with biological information which led Marion to offer her editorial skills to the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society and from 1980 she was Natural History Editor for WAM. Marion’s many services to the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society were coordinated through the Natural History Section Committee; she was its longest serving member having been elected in 1974. In pursuing these interests Marion travelled widely in Wiltshire and beyond giving lectures and talks to schools, natural history societies, Women’s Institutes and the like. All of her lectures were illustrated with her own slides; she was an accomplished wildlife photographer. It is impossible to estimate the amount of ume and energy which she invested in these various activities over the years. Suffice to say that Marion Browne became widely known and much loved. Her own published papers stand as a formal record of her achievements but, more important, she has left lasting and affectionate memories with the many people she inspired and the wildlife and countryside of Wiltshire is the richer for her involvement. Edward John Mawby Buxton died on 11 December 1989, at his home at East Tytherton near Chippen- ham. He was born in Cheshire in 1912, and educated at Malvern College and New College, Oxford. While at Oxford he went on archaeological digs in Palestine and Ireland, and spent a summer at Stockholm Bird Observatory, ringing birds and carrying out research. He also visited Norway a number of times, giving lectures on English Literature at Oslo University, and acquiring a knowledge of the Norwegian language. At the outbreak of war he was back at Oxford reading for his D.Phil. He volunteered for the Navy but, while he was waiting to be called up, an appeal went out from the War Office to Oxford and Cambridge Colleges for men with special language qualifications, especially Norwegian. After a little over two months at an infantry O.C.T.U. he was sent to Norway in the First Independent Company (later the 1st Commandos) as part of the ill-fated British Expeditionary Force. He was taken prisoner in May 1940 and in July was sent to Oflag VII c/h where he spent the remainder of the war. He returned to England in 1945, being elected a Fellow of New College in 1949. In 1939 he had married Marjorie Lockley, and for a number of years after the war they lived in Glou- cestershire. In 1955 they moved to Cole Park near Malmesbury, where they created a beautiful garden; and on Marjorie’s death in 1977 John moved to The Grove in East Tytherton. John Buxton was a man of great sensitivity and impeccable scholarship. He showed early his wide interest in most branches of natural history, especially ornithology. His years in the German prison camp had provided the time for acute observations of birds, notably the redstart, and his book on that bird was published in the New Naturalist series in 1950. The same year he joined with his brother-in-law, Ronald Lockley, in a survey of the natural history of the island of Skomer, off the west coast of Pembrokeshire. The only other book on natural history that he wrote was The Birds of Wiltshire (1981); but during this period he was extremely active in many fields of ornithology. He published many papers in scientific journals, and served on the Bird Observatories Committee and on the Bird Ringing Committee of the British Trust for Ornithology. He also made several plant-hunting expeditions to Persia and elsewhere. He joined this Society in 1955, and was a constant provider of recordings and sightings for WAM and other period- icals. It is as a naturalist and ornithologist that he will be chiefly remembered in Wiltshire, but the main work of his life was at Oxford, where he succeeded Lord David Cecil as Lecturer in English Literature at New College. His literary interests were in two periods, Sir Philip Sydney and the Elizabethan Age and the seventeenth century, and the period of the Romantic Poets, especially Byron, Shelley and Keats. His published works fully reflect these interests. His years in a prison camp told heavily on his spirit, OBITUARIES but a reading of some of his early poems brings back the man who went to war, leaving behind a young bride. Men are all born entangled in the past: It holds them ever fast, For dead men’s thoughts and actions make a net To mesh the living, and the living cast Another for the children they beget. John Buxton’s main publications are: The Pilgri- mage (1936); Fudas (1938); Westward (1942); “Such Liberty” (1944); Atropos and Other Poems (1946); The Redstart (1950); The Island of Skomer (with R.M. Lockley, 1950); Sir Philip Sidney and the English Renaissance (1954); Elizabethan Taste (1963); A Tradi- tion of Poetry (1967); Byron and Shelley (1968); The Grecian Taste (1978); New College, Oxford: 1379-1979 (edited with Penry Williams, 1979) and The Birds of Wiltshire (1981). Noel Lloyd Chadwick, who died on 17 March 1988, is mourned by a wide circle of friends and professional acquaintances. As a noted Wiltshire botanist, he was associated, from its inception, with the Flora Mapping Project, one of the most important exercises in the natural history research of Wiltshire. Born in London on 19 December 1917, Noel moved with his parents several times during his early childhood, residing successively in Warwick, South Wales, Wolverhampton, and finally Nottingham. As early as 1924 and 1925 he exhibited an interest in natural history, since in those years he was collecting fossils from around Penarth, and a mere two years later from Stanton-in-the-Wolds and Lulworth. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that upon entering Denstone College at Uttoxeter in 1928, when aged eleven, Noel was soon looking after the College’s museum, and that, until completing his schooling there in 1935, he often collected geological specimens from neighbour- ing localities, including Wenlock Edge in Shropshire. Little is known of his botanical activities during this period of his career, but in view of what was to develop later we can be sure that plants and flowers already interested him. Between 1936 and 1938, after leaving Denstone, Noel worked as a laboratory assistant in the chemicals research unit of British Celanese at Derby, an episode which formed a prelude to a year’s study (1938-1939) of Chemistry at Nottingham University. There, among other things, he gained First Class Colours for shooting. With the outbreak of World War II, Noel Chadwick 169 joined the army and, no doubt owing to his proficiency as a marksman, served with the Royal Artillery. His unit sailed for India on 2 June 1941, and he as a 2nd. Lieutenant, a commission he had obtained at Shriven- ham the year before. Arriving at Bombay in Septem- ber 1941, Noel was attached to the 2nd. Indian Light Ack-Ack Regiment as a gunnery instructor. Pro- motion came in 1943 when he was made a full Captain. Following the cessation of hostilities, Noel left India and arrived in Britain in May 1945. Minerals and fossils he had found time to collect while in India accompanied him back to England. A final brief spell of active duty in Germany preceded his demobilisation on 12 March 1946. Noel’s studies were resumed at Nottingham Univer- sity later in 1946, with emphasis on Botany — by then his over-riding passion — with Zoology, Geology, and Chemistry as subsidiary subjects. Collecting minerals and fossils was also resumed energetically, and, no doubt, largely led to the offer of a temporary post as Museum Assistant in Natural Sciences at the Castle Museum, Norwich, in 1949. A year later he married Brenda Gray, who shared his many interests. Shortly afterwards Noel obtained a similar (but permanent) post at Woolwich Borough Museum, London, where he remained until he moved to Southampton Univer- sity in 1951 to study Mycology and Ecology for an MSc. in Botany. These studies duly led to involvement with a research project for the Nature Conservancy. In 1954 Noel was engaged as Lecturer in Biology at Salisbury College of Further Education, where he developed the Higher National Certificate in Applied Biology suitable for local industries and authorities, such as the Porton Down Establishment. In 1970 he was appointed Head of the Science Department at Salisbury College of Technology, a post he held until his retirement in 1981. Throughout his years at Salisbury, Noel furthered his botanical studies and continued to coilect geolo- gical specimens from an impressive array of British sites, seldom failing to stop and explore, however briefly, any accessible grassy bank or quarry unfa- miliar to him during his frequent travels. The speci- mens he thus obtained were brought back to Salisbury, identified, carefully documented and boxed in drawered cabinets — a clear legacy of the methods he absorbed during his earlier years at Norwich and Woolwich. He imparted his enthusiasm for these activities to many others with whom he came into contact. His energies in these fields, especially in botany, were seemingly boundless, and he was ever ready to communicate to others the vast store of biological and 170 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE geological information he had accumulated throughout his own detailed studies. A jealous guard- ing of painstakingly acquired knowledge, once all too common among many older naturalists, was never a part of Noel Chadwick’s character. To Noel Chadwick, retirement did not mean ‘stop’ or ‘slow down’. His newly acquired ‘leisure’ time was used to complete previously unfinished research or to embark upon new ventures, including the Wiltshire Flora Mapping Project. A great deal of this work was conducted from his home at Redlynch near Downton, around which he planted a garden full of rare and beautiful plants and trees. Despite a heavy involve- ment in botanical mapping, Noel sull continued avidly to collect minerals and fossils, even when holidaying abroad; some truly magnificent invertebrates found on the Isle of Kos in 1982 testifying eloquently to this. His activities were not, however, restricted to wholly scientific subjects, and embraced such diverse topics as photography, walking, swimming, and collecting old postcards. Noel was also a keen scuba diver, and on such occasions would often use the opportunity to study littoral marine life, especially invertebrates, or to follow submerged exposures of geological for- mations normally only accessible in their landward extensions. ‘Leisure’ was thus happily combined with ‘learning’: the art of ‘time well spent’ was assiduously cultivated. There can be little doubt that Noel Chad- wick was one of that fast-vanishing breed, the true all-round naturalist possessed of matching integrity. Shortly before his death, Noel had arranged for his collections of minerals and fossils to be placed in the geological collection of the Bournemouth Natural Science Society, and for certain rare aerial photo- graphs, taken by his father, of First World War battle-fields in Flanders, to be presented to the Royal Air Force. These wishes have been followed and general accounts are published of the geological mater- ial now at Bournemouth (Copp et al. 1989). Several early postcards of Torquay harbour, depicting long vanished street features, have also been presented to the Torquay Natural History Society, and others of various Wiltshire scenes lodged in the Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum. It is a matter of great regret that Noel Chadwick, a remarkable man, with multitudinous interests, published almost nothing during his lifetime. REFERENCE V.E. COPP, J.B. DELAIR, and A. OSBORN, 1989 ‘Noel Chadwick — A Biographical Sketch: General Summary of the Fossil Collection: The Noel Chadwick Rock and Mineral Collec- tion’, Proc. Bournemouth Nat.Sci.Soc. 62, pt.6 (1988— 1989), pp. 38-45. Index NOTE: Wiltshire places are indexed under civil parishes. The table on pages 85-8 has not been indexed, and many incidental references to personal and place names have been omitted. accommodation and travel, paper on, 83-95 Aelfsi, moneyer, 124-5 Aldborough, North Yorks, 4 Aldbourne, 147, 149; Woodsend, 146, 147, 149 Alderbury: Ivychurch Priory, 149, 156 Alfred, King, 72, 159-60 Allington, 140; Boscombe, 137 Amesbury, 18, 94, 136, 147, 148, 149, 150; Abbey, 61, 63; Coneybury Hill, 154; Fargo Plantation, 30; Stonehenge, 1-10, 11, 112, 116, 119, 152, 153, 154, 157, 160, 161; Woodlands, 37 Andrewes, Sir Christopher H., obituary, 166 Andrews, John, 84; Roger, 144 Annable, Ken, 51; review by, 152-3 antler and antler artefacts, 16, 19, 22, 27, 30, 38, 58, 142, 146 Antrobus, Florence, Lady, 2 Arundell of Wardour, Thomas, 2nd Lord, 129 Ashbee, Paul, 5 Ashley, Lord (7th Earl of Shaftesbury), 98, 111 Ashton Keynes, 136; Cleveland Farm, 40-50, 141 astronomy, prehistoric, 4-9 Athelhelm, 72 Atkinson, Richard J.C., 2, 4, 5, 116, 153 Aubrey, John, 1, 3-4, 7-8, 100, 111, 113, 143, 160-1 Avebury, 111, 112, 114, 119, 142, 143, 157-9, 160, 161; Sanctuary, 157; Silbury Hill, 111, 157; United Reformed Chapel, 141; West Kennet Long Barrow, 53, 112; West Kennett, 141-2; Windmill Hill, 53, 142, 157, 158 Avon (Salisbury), River, 137, 140, 150, 154 axes, chalk: Neolithic, 53 Ayliffe, Sir George, 127, 128 Barclay, E., 1 barrows, 152-3; long, 46, 112, 142-3; round, excavations, 11-39, 112 Barry, Sir Charles, 131 Bateman, Thomas, 111, 112 Baydon, 146 Baynton, Sir Edward, 127, 128, 129 bed burials, 163—4 Beechingstoke: Marden Henge, 154 Berry, John, 59; Mary, 131 Berwick St James, 136 Berwick St John: Winkelbury Hill, 164 Beynard, Sir Robert, 127 Bishops Cannings, 96; Bourton, 148 Bishopstone (North), 147 Bishopstone (South): Falstone House, 129 Bishopstrow, 152 Bitton, Avon, 63 Blundson St Andrew, 147 Blunt, Christopher E., note by, 122-5 bone, worked: Romano-British, 57-8, 59; Saxon, 60 Borenius, Tancred, 155, 156, 157 Boroughbridge, North Yorks, 8 Bos sp., 38, 135, 136 boundaries, 165; paper on, 71-82 Bourne, River, note on 137-40 Bowood, note on, 130-5 Box, 98; Box House, 143 Bradby, Edward, note by, 125-6 Brander, David, 134 Bratton, 161-3; Castle, 160 Bremhill: East Tytherton, 168; Foxham, 134 Bristol City Museum, 152 British Association for the Advancement of Science, 113, 134 Britton, John, 109-10, 111, 130, 134 Brixton Deverill, 147 Broad, James, 130 Broad Town, 149 Brooke, G.C., 123, 124, 125 Browne, Marion, obituary, 166-8 Brunel, Isambard K., 135 Bulford, 143; barrow G2, 146 Burbage: Marr Green, 137 Burl, Aubrey, paper on the Heel Stone, 1-10; review by, 153-4 Burman, J. W., 101 Button, Sir William, 127 Buxton, E. John M., obituary, 168-9 Calne, 133, 134; Church, 143; Lansdowne Arms, 133 Calne Without: Bowood, note on, 130-5; Calstone, 122-5; Derry Hill, 134-5; Stanley Abbey, 61, 63, 65, 67-8, 70 Cambridge, 108; Trinity College, 133 Camdenians, 108-9 Cameron, Alison, contribution by, 32-3 Carlyon-Britton, P.W.P., 123, 125 Case, Humphrey, 29, 30 Castle Combe, 110 Catterick, North Yorks, 121 Chadwick, Noel L., obituary, 169-70 Chandler, John, paper on accommodation, 83-95; review by, 154-5 Charles I, King, 127-30 Charlton, John, 155, 156, 157 charters, Saxon, 72, 75 Cherhill, 143; Yatesbury, 113, 114 Child, John, 126 Chippenham, 143 Chippenham Without, 143, 146 Chivers, Robert, 127 Cholderton, 137, 140 Christian Malford, 136 Cinric of Thetford, moneyer, 125 Clarendon, Earl of (Edward Hyde), 127-8, 129, 130 Clarendon Park: Clarendon Palace, 65, 155-7; Cockey Down, 116-19, 144; Petersfinger, 116, 144 Clark, Alan J., review by, 160-1; Basil, 108; Michael, 122 Cleal, Rosamund, 53—4 Cleveland Farm, excavation report, 40-50 Cockerell, Charles R., 131, 132 Cockey Down Pipeline, note on, 116-19 Codford, 147 Coe, Duncan, 144; report on Cleveland Farm, 40-50 coins: Iron Age, 119-20, 147; Roman, 47, 51, 58-60, 120, 147; Saxon, 148-9; Medieval, 122-5, 150 Coleridge, Samuel T., 110 Collingbourne Ducis, 111, 137, 140 Collingbourne Kingston, 140 Colman, Pamela, note by, 127-30 Cologne, Germany, 163 Compton Census, 83—4, 94 Condicote Henge, Glos, 119 Coombe Bissett, 83, 136 Corsham: Gastard, 148, 150 Covingham, 147 Cowan, Michael, review by, 159-60 172 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE cremations: Neolithic, 19; Neolithic or Early Bronze Age, 23, 24, 31, 32-3; Bronze Age, 15, 16-17 Cunnington, B.H., 153; Maud E., 153; R.H., 2; William (TD), 11, 13, 16, 19, 22, 23, 27, 110, 111; William (IID, 110, 111, 113, 116 Daguerre, Louis, 113 Dartnell, G.E., 116 Darwin, Charles, 112, 113, 115, 161 Davis, Joseph Barnard, 111-12 Dawkins, Bert, work reviewed, 152 Delair, Justin B., notes by, 135—40 Devil’s Arrows, North Yorks, 8 Devizes, 84, 96, 98, 102, 106, 129; Bear Inn, note on, 125-6; Old Park, 113, 126; Southbroom, 121—2; Town Hall, 108; Wharf, 112 Dilton: Oxlease Wood, 120 Dobie, Judith, 157 Dorchester: County Museum, 112; Maumbury Rings, 119 Downton, 136; by-pass, 143 Duckett, John, 127, 128 Duke, Edward, 5; John, 127 Durrington, 148; barrow G67, 30; Durrington Walls, 37, 53, 154; Woodhenge, 53, 153 Dury, Andrew, 84 Eagles, Bruce, review by, 163-4 Eames, Elizabeth, 155, 156, 157 East Kennet, barrow Glc, 30 East Knoyle, 150-1 Easterton: Eastcott, 150 Edgeworth, Maria, 131-3; Richard L., 132 Edington, see Ethandun; Tinhead, 59, 150 Eldridge, Ellen, 114 enclosure, palisaded, 141-2 Equus caballus, 136 Essex, Earl of (Robert Devereux), 129 Estcourt, Sir Giles, 127 Ethandun, battle of, 159, 160 Everleigh, 146 Eyre, Giles, 127 Farwell, C., 144 Fiennes, Celia, 93 Finglesham, Kent, 163 fish ponds, medieval, 145 flintwork: Mesolithic, 146; Neolithic, 38, 53, 146; Neolithic or Early Bronze Age, 27, 28, 29-30 Flower, Thomas Bruges, 114 Fonthill Gifford, 98 Foreman, John, 126 Fowler, Peter J., 51, 60 Fox-Strangways, Louisa (Lady Lansdowne), 130-5 Frampton, Lady Harriot, 131, 132; James, 131 gaming counters, Romano-British, 58 Garnett, A.C., 156 Gingell, Christopher, review by, 157-9 glass: artefacts, Romano-British, 58; artefacts, Saxon, 60, 163; in Victorian science, 112-13, 114 Glastonbury Abbey, 65 Goddard, Edward H., 11; Francis, 127, 128 Godwine, moneyer, 124, 125 Great Cheverell, 148 Great Western Railway, 134, 135 Greenfield, Ernest, barrow excavation by, 11-39 Greenwell, W., 112 Griffiths, Nick, paper on Nash Hill tiles, 61-70 Grinsell, Leslie V., 11, 13, 19, 23, 51; work reviewed, 152-3 Grittleton, 111; Leigh Delamere, 111 Grubbe, John, 127 Guido, Margaret, 60 Guthrie, John, 133 Guthrum, 160 Hallam, Arthur Henry, 133; Henry, 133 Halley, Edmond, 8 Hampden, John, 128 Harcourt, R., 38 Harding, A.F., work reviewed, 153-4 Harte, Anthony (two of that name), 126; Walter, 126 Hawkes, Christopher F., 153; John, 141, 143, 144, 145 Hawkins, Gerald, 4, 5 Hayter, Sir George, 133 Heaton, Michael, 141, 143 hedges, paper on, 71-82 Heel Stone, Stonehenge, paper on, 1-10 Henderson, Janet D., contribution by, 32-3 henge monuments, 153-4; see also individual monuments Henig, Martin, note by, 120-2 Henry III, King, 155, 156 Herbert, A., 5; family see Pembroke, Earls of Hereford, 123, 125 heronries, 114 Hewlett, G.P., 71, 72, 74, 81 Hey, David, 83 High Wycombe, Bucks., 130, 133, 134 Highworth: golf course, 143 hillforts, 144; see also individual monuments Hindon, 93, 94 Hingley, Richard, 40 Hoare, Sir Richard Colt, 1, 2, 11, 110, 111, 112 Holland, Elizabeth, Lady, 134, 135 Hooper, Max D., 71, 72, 74, 79, 81 Horningsham, 164 Hort see Harte Hoskins, William G., 71 Howard, Hon James Kenneth, 131; Louisa, 131, 132 Howell, Danny, work reviewed, 154-5 Huish, 70 Hullavington: Bradfield, 146, 147; Surrendal, 150 Hungerford, Sir Edward, 127, 128, 129 Hussey, Trevor, 71, 82 Idmiston, 136, 140; Gomeldon, 156; Porton, 137, 140 inhumations: Neolithic, 16; Neolithic or Early Bronze Age, 25-7, 29, 31, 32-3; Bronze Age, 16, 19, 21-2; Iron Age, 118; Romano-British, 47, 116-18, 144; Saxon, 143, 163-4; Victorian lunatic, 105 inns, paper on, 83-95 Insanity, paper on, 96-107 Ipswich, Suffolk, 124, 125 Iversheim, Germany, 54 Jackson, D.A., 54; John E., 110, 111, 113, 129 James, Tom B., work reviewed, 155-7 James I, King, 127, 129 Jefferies, Richard, 114 Jenkins, Vince, report on Cleveland Farm, 40-50 Kendrick, T.D., 153, 154 Kennedy, George, 132 Kennet(t), orthography of name, 158 Kennet, River, 141, 142 Kent, John, 126 Kerry, Lady (Augusta Ponsonby), 134; William Thomas, Earl of, 131, 133, 134; see also Lansdowne, Marquesses of INDEX kilns: Roman Lime, 52, 54-5; Roman pottery, 50, 51, 145; medieval tile, 61-70 Kington St Michael, 111 Kirkby-la-Thorpe, Lincs, 18 Kite, Edward, 125-6 Lacock, 94, 131; Nash Hill, paper on, 61-70 Langley Burrell Without, 146, 147 Lansdowne, Ist Marquess, 130, 135; 2nd Marquess, 130, 133; 3rd Marquess (Henry Petty), 110, 130-5; 4th Mar- quess (Henry), 131, 132, 133 Laverstock, 98, 140, 156; Ford, 137, 140 Lawrence, L.A., 123, 125; Sir Thomas, 125 Lea, Philip, 84 Lee, G.E., work reviewed, 153-4 Lhuyd, Edward, 161 Liddington: Liddington Hill, 146 Linnean Society, 113, 114 Lobb, Sue, 40 Lockyer, Sir Norman, 4, 5 London, 8; Charterhouse, 126; moneyers, 124, 125; West- minster School, 133 Long, Sir James, 127, 129; Walter, 127, 129; William, 3, 112 Long Meg and her Daughters, Cumbria, 5 Longbridge Deverill: Crockerton, 152, 162 Loudon, J.C., 113 Lovelock, William, 104 Luckington, 146; Alderton, 147 Ludlow, Sir Henry, 127 Lukis, F.C., 111; W.C., 110, 111 Lydiard Tregoze: Hook, 146 Macaulay, Thomas B., Ist Baron, 131, 133 Malmesbury, 84; Abbey, 63, 143-4 Malmesbury Without: Cole Park, 168; Milbourne, 83 Malone, Caroline, work reviewed, 157-9 mammalia, Quaternary, note on, 135-7 Mammuthus primigenius, 135-6 Manningford: Swanborough Tump, 75 Market Lavington, 94, 150; Fiddington, 98, 150 Marlborough, 84, 94, 127, 136; High Street, 144 Marlborough College Natural History Society, 114 Mars Teutates, 120-2 Marshman, Michael J., review by 152 Martyn, Anthony, 126; Samuel, 126 McCree, Peter, paper on insanity, 96-107 Mere, 18, 94 Merewether, John, 111, 114 metalwork: Early Bronze Age, 27, 28-9, 30; Bronze Age, 146-7; Late Bronze Age, 46; Iron Age, 147; Romano- British, 57, 120-2, 147; Late Roman, 47; Saxon, 148-9, 163; medieval, 149-50 Milston: Brigmerston, 148, 150 Minter, Judy, 12 Montagu, George, 114 moonrakers, 96 Moore, Thomas, 132, 134 Morrison, Jean, work reviewed, 161-3 Moulding, Alec, 154, 155 Mount Pleasant, Dorset, 154 Murchison, Sir Roderick, 113 Musty, John W.G., 51, 157 Nash Hill tiles, paper on, 61-70 Neale, John Mason, 108 Ness of Gruting, Shetland, 30 Nettleton: West Kington, 167 Ws Newham, C.A. (‘Peter’), 5-6 Newman, Richard, 143, 144 Newton, Alfred, 114; Isaac, 161 Nicholas, Edward, 126 Neil, F., 5 North Bradley: Cutteridge Farm, 120; Woodmarsh, 120-2 North Newnton, paper on, 71-82; Cuttenham Farm, 72-4, 75, 81; Gores, 74, 81; Hilcott, 72-4, 75, 79; Woodbridge Inn, 72, 81 North Tidworth, 137, 140 Odstock: Bodenham, 136 Ogbourne St Andrew, 148, 150 Ogbourne St George, 146-7 Ogilby, John, 83, 84, 88, 93, 94, 95 ornithology, 113-14 Otford, Kent, 72 Oxford, 108; Churchill Hospital, 50 Peddie, John, work reviewed, 159-60 Pembroke, Ist Earl (Sir William Herbert), 72; 3rd Earl (William Herbert), 129; 4th Earl (Philip Herbert), 129 Penruddock, John, 129; Sir John, 127, 129 Petrie, W.M. Flinders, 2, 4 Petty, Sir William, 134; family see Lansdowne, Earls of Pewsham, 146 Phillipps, Sir Thomas, 134 Piggott, Stuart, paper on WANHS, 108-15; work reviewed, 160-1 pipes, clay tobacco, 144 Pitt Rivers, A.H.L.F., 112 Plot, Robert, 161 Pollard, E., 71 Poole, Sir Nevil, 127, 128 Poore, Edward, 74 Potterne, 54 pottery: Neolithic, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 26, 29, 34-8; Peter- borough Wares, 15, 29, 34-7, 52-3, 142, 158; Grooved Ware, 15, 29, 36-8, 53, 154; Beaker, 15, 18, 19, 21, 22, 26-9, 30-1, 38; Bronze Age, 18, 52, 53-4, 146-7; Iron Age, 45, 46, 52, 54, 118, 147; Romano-British, 16, 18, 46, 47, 51, 55-8, 116, 118-19, 143, 144, 145, 147; Saxon, 47, 51, 60; medieval, 60, 142, 149; post medieval, 60, 144 Preselau Hills, Dyfed, 29, 30 Preston, T.A., 114 Purton, 147; North View Hospital, 144; Ringsbury Camp, 146 Ramsbury: Axford, 83; Membury, 148; Whittonditch, 147, 148 Ravenstone, Bucks., 31 Rawlings, M., 143 Reeves, Marjorie, work reviewed, 161-3 Rhinoceros sp., 136 Richards, E.E., 29; Julian, report on Cleveland Farm, 40-50 ring ditches, Bronze Age, 143 Robinson, A.M., work reviewed, 155-7; Paul, 53; note by, 119-20; paper on Nash Hill ules, 61-70 Roddham, Doris, report on Wellhead excavation 51-60 Rogers, Barbara, report on Wellhead excavation, 51-60; Helen, review by, 165; Kenneth, review by, 164-5; Norman, note by, 116 Rollright Stones, Oxon, 5 Roseaman, Judith, paper on North Newnton, 71—82 Ross, Harry, 53 Roundway: Roundway Down, 164; Roundway Hospital see Wiltshire County Lunatic Asylum Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England, 40, 42, 46, 47 Royal Society, 160, 162 174 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Rudston, Humberside, 4, 30 Ruskin, John, 113 Salisbury, 84, 136, 147, 156; Blackmore Museum, 112; Common Cold Research Unit, 166; Fisherton Anger, 93, 98; Milford, 137; New Canal, 144; Old Manor Hospital, 106; Old Sarum, 156; River Avon, 150 Saunders, Peter R., review by, 155-7 Sawser, John, 125-6 Scott, Sir Walter, 109 Scrope, George Poulett, 110 Scull, A.T., 97-8, 100 Seend, 126, 148 settlements: Neolithic, 154; Iron Age, 40-6, 49-50, 116-19; Romano-British, 40, 46-50, 51-60, 116-19, 120, 143, 144; Saxon, 143; medieval, 142, 145 Seymour, Sir Francis, 127, 128, 129; William (Earl of Hertford), 129 Shakespeare, William, 9, 88 Shalbourne, 148; Oxenwood, 146 shale artefacts: Iron Age, 54; Romano-British, 58 Shaw, W.D., 51, 54 sheriffs, Wiltshire, note on, 127—30 Shrewton, 31; Robin Hood’s Ball, 154 Shuttleworth, Sir James Kay, 134 skull forms, 111-12 Slatter, Doreen, note by, 130-5 Slocombe, Pamela, 70 Smirke, Sir Robert, 131, 132 Smith, A.C., 110, 111, 113-14; Bob W., 157; Isobel F., report on Wilsford barrows, 11-39; John, 2, 4-5, 9; Sydney, 134 smuggling, 96 solstice, midsummer, 7—9 South Marston: Honda works, 144 South Newton: Stoford, 136 Southwell, Sir Robert, 134 Speake, G., work reviewed, 163-4 spindle whorls: Iron Age, 54; Romano-British, 58; Saxon, 60 St John, Sir John, 127 Standlow, Derbs, 30 Stanley Abbey see Calne Without Stanton Drew, Avon, 4, 9 Stevens, E.T., 3, 5; Frank, 1, 2 Stewart, Anthony, 132; I., note by 122-5 Stockton: Bapton, 155 Stone, E.H., 5 stone artefacts: Neolithic or Early Bronze Age, 27, 28-9, 30; Romano-British, 47, 58, 59; see also axes, chalk; flintwork stone cirles, 144; see also henge monuments Stonehenge see Amesbury Stourton: Stourhead, 112, 113 Stubbes, Philip, 9 Stubbs, William, 109, 110 Stukeley, William, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8-9, 108, 110, 143, 161, Sutton Hoo, Suffolk, 164 Sutton Veny, 146 Swallowcliffe, 136; bed burial, 163-4 Swindon, 94, 96, 147; Coate, 114; Croft Campus, 144; Dayhouse Lane, 144; Old Town, 147; West Swindon, 145; Whitehill Farm, 50 Swinside, Cumbria, 5 Talbot, William Davenport, 131; William H.F., 113, 131 Terry, Alison, review by, 161-3 Thamesdown Archaeological Unit, 143-5 Thetford, Norfolk, 125 Thurnam, John, 97, 99-100, 110, 111-12 Timby, Jane, 55, 56 Tisbury: Castle Ditches, 144 Tockenham, 145 tokens, 17th century, 59 Topp, John, 127 Trollope, Anthony, 109, 114 Trott, Martin, 141; note by, 116-19 Trust for Wessex Archaeology, 40, 118, 141, 143, 144, 145 turnpike trusts, 88 Uncleby, Humberside, 164 Upavon, 122-5 Upton Lovell, 155 Vatcher, Faith de M., 163—4 Vaughan, Sir George, 127 129 Vinjum, Norway, 163 Vulcan figurine, 120-2 Wainwright, Geoffrey J., work reviewed, 153-4 Wanborough, 150 Wansey, Henry, 2, 5 Warminster, 93, 152, 162 Watkin, Bruce, work reviewed, 164-5 Watts, John (two of that name), 125, 126; Kenneth, review by, 165; Margaret, 126; William, 126 Weaver, Edward, 8 Webb, Benjamin, 108 Wedgwood, Josiah, 113 Weekley, Northants, 54 West Ashton, 126 Westbury, 162; Wellhead, report on excavations, 51-60 Whatley, G., 104; George, 126 Whitaker, Jeffery, diary reviewed, 161-3 Whitelock, Dorothy, 159 Whiteman, Anne, 84 Whittle, Alasdair, 141, 142 Wilcot: Rainscombe, 72 William I, King, 122-5 Williams, Allan, 156; N.J., 83, 84 Wilsford, 75 Wilsford cum Lake, barrow excavation report, 11-39; barrow G51, 13-18, 29-38; barrow G52, 19-22, 29-38; barrow G53, 23, 24, 31, 33; barrow G54, 23, 25-38; Lake, 119; Normanton Down, 12, 149; North Kite, 11-12, 19, 31 Wilton, 84, 94; Abbey, 72, 145 Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, paper on, 108-15 Wiltshire County Lunatic Asylum, paper on, 96-107 Wiltshire Rescue Archaeology Project, 143, 145 Winchester, Angus, work reviewed, 165 Wing, Tycho, 8, 9 Winsley, 83 Winterbourne, 150; Stock Bottom Farm, 147; Winterbourne Earls, 137, 140; Winterbourne Gunner, 140, 147, 163 Winterbourne Bassett: Hackpen Hill, 147 Winterbourne Monkton: Millbarrow, 142 Winterbourne Stoke: barrow G54, 18, 30 Wood, John, 2-3, 4, 6, 7, 9; John Edwin, 6 wooden artefacts: Saxon, 163, 164 Woodham, Cliff, 155 Woodyates, Dorset, 164 Wootton Bassett, 84, 150 workhouses, 98, 101 Wright, Geoffrey N., work reviewed, 165 Wroughton: Westleaze, 145 Wyatt, T.H., 96, 134 Wylye, 94, 155; River, 137; valley, 154-5 7 pea oa Spapyporeet= Pap asia ew goarenowepncanee epee Bea peerage lea eke : : Bane ARB sere = s soe a : Los tS Bases : : Farner eam pret nee Eee! ay ea pokes pees Se sara Raat trae &