eeeree tiem nen a! TS =, Sere c Ber ae aes Preeti ee aes eet ae Seti ae. eet ; ch me THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE VOLUME 85 1992 Published by Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society 41 Long Street Devizes SN10 INS Telephone (0380) 727369 Registered Charity Commission No. 309534 V.A.T. No. 140 2791 91 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE VOLUME 85 (1992) ISSN 0262 6608 © Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society and authors 1992 Editor: Kate Fielden Hon. Natural History Editor: Patrick Dillon Hon. Local History Editor: James Thomas 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 for this volume from the following bodies: the Marc Fitch Fund, for the papers ‘The Castles of Marlborough and Ludgershall in the Middle Ages’ by Janet H. Stevenson and ‘The Wiltshire Militia Band 1769-c.1831’ by M.J. Lomas; the Council for British Archaeology, for D.F. Mackreths’s paper ‘Roman Brooches from Gastard, Corsham, Wiltshire’; Wiltshire County Council, for C.K. Currie’s paper ‘Excavations and Surveys at the Roman Kiln Site, Brinkworth, 1986; and English Heritage, for C.A. Butterworth’s paper ‘Excavations at Norton Bavant Borrow Pit, Wiltshire, 1987’. We also gratefully acknowledge a special grant from the Council for British Archaeology towards the cost of publishing Aubrey Burl’s paper “The Heel Stone, Stonehenge: A Study in Misfortunes’; and publication grants from English Heritage for I.F. Smith’s paper ‘Round Barrows Wilsford cum Lake G51—G54. Excavations by Ernest Greenfield in 1958’ and for the paper ‘Cleveland Farm, Ashton Keynes: Second Interim Report, Investigations May-August 1989 by Duncan Coe, Vince Jenkins and Julian Richards in volume 84 (1991). 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 FOUNDATION TRUSTEES Professor S. Piggott, CBE, FBA, FSA B.H.C. Sykes, MA Mrs C.M. Guido, FSA R.G. Hurn Professor W.H. Dowdeswell, MA, FIB H.F. Seymour, BA R.G. Hurn Dr. T.K. Maurice, OBE J.F. Phillips, B.Sc. Chairman J.A. de Normann, OBE, MA (1990) Deputy Chairman Professor W.H. Dowdeswell, MA, FIB (1989) Elected Members C.R. Chippindale, MIFA (1986) H.F.W. Cory, JP (1987) Mrs P. Slocombe, BA (1986) A.J. Lawson, MSc., FSA, MIFA (1987) Mrs G. Swanton, BA, Dip. Ad. Ed. (1987) J.F. Phillips, BSc. (1988) F.W. Hanford, MRCS, LRCP (1988) M. Smith, BA, FICE (1990) P.R. Saunders, BA, FSA, FMA (1988) D. Williams, MA (1990) C.R. Elrington, MA, FSA (1989) F.K. Annable, BA, FSA, FMA (1991) Dr. C. Shell, MA, MMet (1990) E. Elliott, FBPS, B.Sc. (1991) Ex-officio Members *Mrs G. Swanton, BA, Dip. Ad. Ed. Chairman, Archaeology Committee M. Fuller, B.Sc. (Eng.) Chairman, Natural History Committee H.F. Seymour, BA Chairman, Buildings & Monuments Committee D. Shelton, BA, B.Sc., Dip. Ed., FRGS Chairman, Industrial Archaeology Committee J.H. Smith, B.Sc., AIFST Chairman, Programme Committee Miss G. Fairhurst, ACIS Hon. Treasurer Mrs J. Friend Hon. Publicity Officer R.C. Hatchwell, FSA Hon. Keeper of Prints and Drawings Mrs. G. Learner, BA Chairman, Library Committee *also Elected Member Nominated Members A. Edwards, Mrs V. Landell-Mills and Mrs P. Rugg Members, Wiltshire County Council R.L. Pybus, MA, FLA, FCIS, MILAM, MBIM Director, WCC Library & Museum Service K.H. Rogers, BA, FSA Wiltshire County Archivist P.R. Saunders, BA, FSA, FMA Curator, Salisbury & South Wiltshire Museum Co-opted Member Mrs P. Slocombe Wiltshire Buildings Record OFFICERS Secretary G.G. Brown, DMA Curator P.H. Robinson, Ph.D, FSA, AMA Assistant Curator Mrs H. Goodman, BA, AMA Assistant Curator (Natural Sciences) A.S. Tucker, B.Sc. Assistant Curator (Biological Recorder) Miss S. Scott-White, MA Sandell Librarian Mrs P. Colman, Dip. ELH, FRSA Assistant Librarian Mrs L. Haycock, BA, Dip. ELH, Cert. Ed. Editor Miss K.J. Fielden, D.Phil. Contents Excavations at Norton Bavant Borrow Pit, Wiltshire, 1987 by C.A. BUTTERWORTH with contributions by R.M.J. CLEAL, F. HEALY, J. McKINLEY, L.N. MEPHAM, C. MORTIMER, E.L. MORRIS, W. MURRAY, K.E. WALKER, S. WATKINS and L. WOOTTEN ] Excavations and Surveys at the Roman Kiln Site, Brinkworth, 1986 by C.K. CURRIE with a contribution by M.A. LOFT 27 Roman Brooches from Gastard, Corsham, Wiltshire by D.F. MACKRETH 5] Some Late Saxon Mounts from Wiltshire by PAUL ROBINSON 6: The Castles of Marlborough and Ludgershall in the Middle Ages by JANET H. STEVENSON 7( The Subscription List of an Eighteenth Century Book Printed in Devizes by LORNA HAYCOCK and JAMES THOMAS 8 The Wiltshire Militia Band, 1769-c.1831 by M.J. LOMAS 9: The Life and Work of John Britton (1771-1857) by RICHARD HATCHWELL 10) The Woodlands, Calne, and The Charlesworth Case by RAYMOND J. SKINNER 11 The First Record of Portlandian Plesiosaurs from Swindon, Wiltshire by J.B. DELAIR and R.F. VAUGHAN 12] Some Investigations on Habitats of Lichens on Sarsen Stones at Fyfield Down, Wiltshire by PATRICK DILLON, SIOBHAN SKEGGS and CHRISTINE GOODEY 12§ Notes 14( More About the Heel Stone by AUBREY BURL 14( Amesbury Barrows 61 and 72: A Radiocarbon Postscript by PAUL ASHBEE 14( The Human Remains from Avebury Barrow G55, with Special Reference to the Further Evidence of a Childhood Deficiency Disease in the Bronze Age by DON BROTHWELL 141 Littlecote Park Excavations: 1978-91 by BRYN WALTERS 144 A Further Piece of Wiltshire Imitation Samian by JANE TIMBY 147 A Chipped Solidus from Wiltshire by ANDREW BURNETT 148 A Late Seventh Century Anglo-Saxon Gold Pendant from Pewsey by SUSAN YOUNGS 149 The Dedication of the Chapel at Tory and the ‘Safe Refuge’, Bradford-on-Avon by PAMELA SLOCOMBE 151 A Medieval Pendant from Monkion Deverill by NICK GRIFFITHS 151 Comments on ‘New Light on Christ of the Trades and Other Medieval Wall-paintings at St Mary’s, Purton’ by JOHN EDWARDS 153 Isaac de Caus, Dominick Pyle and the Gardens at Wilton House by HOWARD COLVIN 154 A Jenny Haniver from Melksham? by ISABEL IDE 155 Excavation and Fieldwork in Wiltshire 1990 156 Review Article Two Early Plans of Avebury by AUBREY BURL (P.J. Ucko et al., Avebury Reconsidered: From the 1660s to the 1990s) 163 Reviews 173 P. Ashbee, M. Bell and E. Proudfoot, Wilsford Shaft: Excavations 1960-62 (MARK CORNEY) 173 John Chandler, Wessex Images (K.H. ROGERS) 173 Christopher Chippindale et al., Who Owns Stonehenge? (ROY CANHAM) 174 Anthony Clark, Seeing Beneath the Soil. Prospecting Methods in Archaeology (MARK CORNEY) 175 Nick Griffiths and Anne Jenner with Christine Wilson, Drawing Archaeological Finds (DIANE ROBINSON) 175 Katharine M. Jordan, The Folklore of Ancient Wiltshire (NORMAN ROGERS) 176 Julian Richards et al., The Stonehenge Environs Project (D.J. BONNEY) Wi. Julian Richards, English Heritage Book of Stonehenge (C. PLACE) 178 Peter and Eleanor Saunders (eds.), Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Catalogue Part 1, Brian Spencer, Part 2 (PAUL ROBINSON) 179 Obituaries 181 Martin Heath Arnold Walter Lawrence John Langford Rowland Bowmont Weddell Major-General Sir John Willoughby, KBE, CB Index 186 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. 85 (1992), pp. 1-26 Excavations at Norton Bavant Borrow Pit, Wiltshire, 1987 by C.A. BUTTERWORTH with contributions by R.M.J. CLEAL, F. HEALY, J. MCKINLEY, L.N. MEPHAM, C. MORTIMER, E.L. MORRIS, W. MURRAY, K.E. WALKER, S. WATKINS and L. WOOTTEN Investigation of cropmarks threatened by quarrying produced evidence of an Early Bronze Age barrow ditch and central primary inhumation, an adult male accompanied by grave goods comprising a small, plain pottery vessel, a dagger and knife dagger, both of bronze, a whetstone, bone needle and bone belt hook. A disturbed secondary inhumation was found in the barrow ditch. Other features, including an isolated Late Bronze Age pit and Romano-British ditches, gullies and pits, were also excavated. INTRODUCTION During the construction of the A36 Warminster by-pass it was found necessary to excavate additional material for the road foundation. Suitable chalk was known to exist in an area immediately south of the proposed road line between Norton Bavant and Sut- ton Veny (centred on ST 905428) and a decision was made to extract chalk from a borrow pit there (Figs. la and Ic). Quarrying would lead to the destruction of a number of archaeological features known as cropmarks from aerial photographs (Fig. 1b), and it was decided that archaeological investigation of the site should be carried out to determine their nature and date. Four weeks of excavations at the borrow pit were undertaken by the Trust for Wessex Archaeo- logy in July and August 1987, financed by the main contractor for the by-pass, Alfred McAlpine Con- struction Ltd. THE SITE The borrow pit was situated on the brow and southern slope of a low hill some 140 m west of the River Wylye at its nearest point (Fig. la); the hill rose to c.109 m OD. Clay loam topsoil overlay a deposit of Clay-with- Flints lying across the top of the hill. The Clay-with- Flints had a maximum depth of 0.70 m at the top of the hill but thinned and ceased lower down the slope (Clay-with-Flints: 380 on Fig. 2), leaving the underly- ing Lower Chalk exposed. No cropmarks were seen to extend across the top of the hill, but excavation there did show them to continue across the area of the Clay-with-Flints. The upper surface of the chalk was variable, being noticeably softer and more friable in some areas, probably as a result of weathering, but perhaps also as a result of uneven overburden strip- ping. The chalk became more solid and blocky at depths of between 0.50 m and 1 m. Known archaeological sites in the vicinity of the borrow pit include two extant bowl barrows approxi- mately 300 m to the north and a third some 500 m to the west. Cropmarks just outside the area of the borrow pit to the south-west may be indicative of a long barrow; other linear cropmarks occur immedi- ately to the west of the site. Two Roman villas are recorded near the River Wylye at Pit Meads, between 350 m and 500 m north west of the present site. Details of the villas, which were less than 300 m apart, are scant, however, and cannot be securely assigned to individual buildings (Wiltshire Sites and Monuments Record Nos. ST94SW 301 and 302). STRATEGY AND METHOD Since the archaeological excavation was to be carried out while quarrying was in progress it was necessary to select and isolate those areas which might provide the most useful archaeological information while in- terfering least with the extraction of the chalk. The site was examined while topsoil stripping was in progress and three areas toward the western side of the borrow pit, Trenches A, B and C, altogether approximately 1800 m*, were selected for examin- ation (Fig. lc). Topsoil was removed by box-scraper, after which the trenches were further cleaned where necessary and planned. Sections were dug by hand through selected features, but very few were 2 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE \ / ) if KEY: | ye 5 { i the . / s zy ( /\ © Long barrow N [ ie 37 ° ( / ) NN ® Round barrow ga \ é ( ) 7) ( ‘ /) O Ring ditch ae es [l si —~% oS | F | @ = ( : / V Linear feature | x | ra) ( \Baitlesbury LY fe NC ° . Contours in metres O.D. | x Sale of’ y= / la WARMINSTER Cl b, a "59 ) we YY, aie < if C / r) u = . SS ———— ( Ve PAS ® a Scratchbury ~ ? Ap we Cate ee °° (wie BA ar aed Da oe / ( a no / J \ SX ( | ae / See = @ 3 UE t I eee —_ to —— ( 3 ( r J Al oe @ ‘ =a = e | > ; : pa q & ° \Norton Bivalt, yO \ \ i “/) EE oa S \ N—_,50 O a ( \ y | ere eae oN oa ZA ye \ = a ae oe i ee ae y Sea > ec =, x) x MA for CALs A é (os ot sf ) ¢ ») fe) ( y) ESN oo S o) on a ( 2 \ . \ y Co °o 6 a \ e 1% ° SS / fee gy 1b NX Ic Roman villa Extent of borrow pit Excavation trenches A-C Barrow Pit F2 0 500 wee” Cropmark WA/JC Fig.1la-c: Norton Bavant Borrow Pit: location plans EXCAVATIONS AT NORTON BAVANT BORROW PIT completely excavated. It was not possible to locate and investigate all the cropmarks within the area of the borrow pit. The southernmost trench, B, was in the first area to be quarried (Fig. lc). It had been hoped that one cropmark feature might be located in this trench but this was not achieved and the area was soon aban- doned. Trenches A and C, north of Trench B (Fig. lc), both contained features in addition to the antici- pated cropmarks and work was concentrated in these two areas. A single pit, F2 (Fig. 1c), was excavated outside the excavation trenches. Some features were seen in the quarry faces as work progressed, but it was not possible to examine these closely. ARMY TRENCHES After the removal of the topsoil many chalk-filled intersecting or interconnecting features were clearly visible in Trench A and in the northern part of Trench C. The features showed plainly against the Clay-with-Flints but could be seen only with diffi- culty against the chalk lower down the slope, usually only in those places where they cut the darker fills of other features. On excavation the trenches proved to have vertical or very steep sides and flat bases and were up to 1.35 m wide and 1.20 m deep, although many were shallower. In almost all cases the trenches appeared to have been backfilled with chalk rubble very soon after being dug. Pieces of barbed wire, tin cans and other modern objects were found in them and it was clear that all had been dug in recent times. An army camp was established at Sutton Veny dur- ing the First World War (James 1987) and it is most likely that the trenches were dug as training exercises then. Once the nature of the trenches was estab- lished, sections through them were excavated only where they impinged on recognisable archaeological features. PHASE SUMMARY Four phases of archaeological activity were recog- nised: 1. Early Bronze Age: barrow ditch 473 and central primary inhumation 472 in grave pit F465; barrow ditch recut F475 2. Late Bronze Age: pit F2; secondary inhumation 401 in barrow ditch (section F304) 3. Romano-British, mid first century — early second century AD: ditches, gullies and pits 4. Modern: army trenches. Phase 1 Barrow ditch 473 The cropmark caused by the southern arc of the ditch showed clearly on aerial photographs, and the ditch itself, although crossed by later features, was plainly visible in the southern part of Trench C after the removal of topsoil. The curved, almost semi-circular course of the cropmark suggested that the ditch might extend ina full circle, although no sign of it was visible in the Clay-with-Flints in Trench A. On the assump- tion that the ditch might cross that trench, however, an estimate of the approximate diameter of a full circle was made and a section excavated across the projected line; this section confirmed the presence of the ditch in Trench A. Additional machining clarified its course in the north eastern corner of Trench C. Seven sections were excavated through the ditch: F64, F302, F304, F315, F316, F341 and F407 (see Fig. 2). The external diameter of the ditch was c.47 m. The ditch was symmetrical in profile, having a broad flat base and steeply sloping sides (Fig. 4, section A); maximum width at the top of the ditch was 3.45 m, maximum width across the base 2 m and maximum depth 0.95 m. In the southern sections primary fills were of weathered chalk, sometimes in a sparse clay matrix. The depth and extent of the surviving primary fills varied, covering the base of the ditch completely in some sections, but scarcely filling the angle between the base and sides in others. The northern section had a clay primary fill, reflecting the greater depth of clay in that area. The ditch appeared to have been recut or cleaned out, as a result of which secondary fills had been removed or truncated in most sections (see below, page 7); where they did survive these also contained a high proportion of chalk. There was no surviving evidence of an outer bank, nor was there any indication of material derived from such a bank in the ditch fills. No area of clay or chalk which might have been protected by a central mound was recognised within the interior of the ditch. Central primary inhumation 472 in grave pit F465 Indication that ditch 473 was probably annular, or at least penannular, led to consideration of its function and whether evidence for any related features might survive within it. To establish whether any such features were extant, however, was difficult, since almost half of the ditch’s internal area lay outside the excavation trenches and much of the remainder was either covered by Clay-with-Flints, in which archaeo- logical features were not easy to see, or crossed by army trenches. One small patch of slightly darker clay 4 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE TRENCH A Army trench A - F Sections illustrated Primary Burial 472 Fa54/ F304 a NZ Jo9 | P474 : > southernmost extent of 380 -—~ F309 | Go. aan ! i Secondary Burial 401~ TTT a F3650° 381 Fig.2: all excavated features, trenches A and C EXCAVATIONS AT NORTON BAVANT BORROW PIT at the northern edge of Trench C, and almost exactly at the centre of the ditch as far as that could be established, did suggest itself as a potential area of interest, however, despite being disturbed by at least one army trench. Excavation of the dark clay showed it to be com- posed of blocks of redeposited topsoil in the otherwise ‘clean’ upper fill of grave pit F465. Almost all of the remaining fill was redeposited clay with flints, indis- unguishable from the surrounding natural; the edge of the grave pit was only securely defined where it cut the underlying chalk. A few soft chalk fragments were mixed with the clay at the base of the grave. The grave pit was large, c.1.90 m x 3 m in area and 0.60 m deep, in plan sub-rectangular with rounded corners, the sides curving down to a flat base. The grave contained a flexed inhumation lying on its right side, head to the south-east (Fig. 3a). The feet and lower parts of the legs had been destroyed by PRIMARY BURIAL 472 | Dagger group y, Miniature i pottery vessel / Fig.3: primary and secondary inhumations :) the excavation of an army trench across the south- west corner of the grave pit, but otherwise the skeleton, that of an older adult male, was complete. Extending beneath the skeleton and for some distance around it was a very thin, brown, apparently organic deposit (not analysed), 471 on Fig. 3a. A small, plain pottery vessel had been placed in front of the burial. A bronze dagger and knife dagger, a whetstone, bone needle or perforated pin and bone belt hook were lying close together behind the head and shoulders, the whole group covered by an unidentified organic deposit (see below, page 13) possibly the remains of some sort of wrapping. The pottery vessel and both bone objects were recognised and excavated in the field; the dagger, knife dagger and whetstone were lifted in a soil block and excavated at the Wiltshire Conservation Laboratory. The human bone and grave goods are discussed below (grave goods: pages 9-14; human bone: pages 14-18). SECONDARY BURIAL 401 Army trench 6 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Barrow ditch recut F475 A possible recut of the barrow ditch, F475, was recorded in all of the excavated sections and was marked by abrupt changes within the ditch fills (Fig. 4, section A). Clays replaced the earlier chalk-rich deposits, indeed chalk was almost completely absent from the deep (up to 0.70 m), homogeneous clays filling the upper levels of the ditch, whereas flints, which were scarce in the base of the ditch, became increasingly abundant: large flints were often noted lying at or near the centre of the ditch. Lenses of charcoal and of animal bone were also noted in some of the sections (e.g. Fig. 4, section A). Phase 2 Pit F2 Pit F2 was near the site entrance, at the eastern corner of the borrow pit (Fig. lc). It was c.0.90 m in diameter and 0.30 m deep and contained much pottery (see below, page 18). No other features were seen in this area. Secondary burial 401 An incomplete adult skeleton, 401, probably a con- tracted inhumation, was found near the bottom of the recut ditch, F475, in ditch section F304 (Fig. 3b). The area had been very badly disturbed by army trenches and no grave cut was recognised. The body had been placed on its right side; the head, although missing, had been to the west. The skull, ribs, feet and hands were missing and the fragility of those parts of the pelvis and vertebrae which were present was such that it was not possible to lift them successfully. The surviving bone is discussed below (page 18). Phase 3 The limited time available and the widespread dis- turbance caused by army trenches did not allow features of this phase to be comprehensively exam- ined. The second cropmark ditch and those ditches which cut it are described in some detail. Dimensions of other excavated features are tabulated (Table 1, on p. 8) and all excavated features are shown on plan (Fig. 2). More than one feature number has been used for excavated sections through linear features where continuity was not securely determined. Analysis of the datable finds indicates no wide chronological variation and the phase is not sub-divided. Ditches F305/F 309, F474 and F408 A ditch, visible on aerial photographs, and apparently forming the southern and western sides of a sub- rectangular enclosure, was seen to intersect the southern arc of the barrow ditch (Figs. 1b and 2; Fig. 4, section B). The ditch, F305/F309, crossed the southern part of area C and started to turn eastwards before its course was lost in disturbed ground near the centre of the trench. Ditch F408, near the northern edge of Trench C, may have been a continuation of the ditch, but was on a different alignment. Three sections were excavated through F305/F309. A recut, diverging slightly from the original line of the ditch was recorded in the two northern sections, F474 (Fig. 4, section C), but was not seen in the third. In the southern section the ditch profile was stepped but separate cuts were not recognised (Fig. 4, section B). Ditch F305/F309 varied in profile and dimensions, the angle of the sides being markedly shallower in some sections; the ditch was at its largest in the southern section, 2.25 m wide and 1.17 m deep, but maximum width elsewhere was c.1.05 m, maximum depth 0.88 m. Recut F474 was also of variable profile, narrow, symmetrical and steep-sided in the northern section, 1.02 m wide and 0.62 m deep, broader and asymme- trical further south, 1.80 m wide and 0.61 m deep. Primary fills of F305/F309, and also of F474 although in considerably smaller quantities, were weathered chalk rubble and clay. Later fills were mainly of darker clays with flints and occasional chalk fragments. Ditch F408 had stepped sides and a rounded base (Fig. 4, section F); maximum width was 1.35 m, maximum depth 0.78 m. Fills were very similar in nature and sequence to those of ditches F305/F309 and F474. Other features Sections through two other ditches, F46 and F66 (Trench A), and at least seven gullies, F39, F54 (Trench A), F300/F404, F328/F339/F351, F337, F364 and F437 (Trench C) were excavated; gully F328/F339/F351 had been recut. Ditch F66 and gullies F300, F337 and F339 all cut barrow ditch 473; gully F300/F404 also cut ditch F309 and recut F474. Ditches F46 and F66 were both V-shaped in profile (Fig. 4, sections D and E). Gullies F39, F54, F364 and F437 were very shallow, although F328/F339/ F351 and F337 were more substanual. Other features excavated included a number of pits or possible post holes: F4, F13, F19 and F34 (Trench A), F365, F367, F369, F387, F399, F410, F412, F440, F445 and F452 (Trench C). Pit F454 cut barrow ditch 473 and gully F337. Pit F410 probably cut gully F337. No evidence of structures was recognised. Fills of all features were similar: usually clays or clay loams, often containing natural flints and, less frequently, weathered chalk and lenses of charcoal. EXCAVATIONS AT NORTON BAVANT BORROW PIT 107.95m O.D. 107.97m O.D. 108.20m O.D. Asal 108.58m O.D. K 108.14m O.D. Clay loam | i HTH nn Army Trench Fig.4: ditch sections 8 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Table 1: excavated features, Phase 3 Feature No Trench Feature Type F4 A Ppit F13 ‘7 pit F19 f pit F39 y gully F46 ‘ ditch F54 - gully F66 ‘ ditch F300 C gully F305 " ditch F309 i ditch F328 gully F337 " gully F339 g gully F351] v gully F364 i‘ gully F365 s pit F367 i pit F369 fi pit F387 i pit F399 tf post-hole F408 ‘ ditch F410 i! pit F412 pit F437 2 gully F440 : pit F445 t pit F452 id pit F454 4 Ppit F474 " ditch * Not fully cross-sectioned. Phase 4 The army trenches are discussed above (see page 3). SUMMARY The excavations at the borrow pit indicated four phases of activity on the site, although the latest of these, the army trenches, might arguably be con- sidered of too recent origin to be a phase of archaeo- logical activity in the true sense. The earliest archaeological phase, dating to the seventeenth century BC, the Early Bronze Age, is represented by the ditch and primary, central, adult male inhumation of a barrow. The original form of the barrow is not known, but the broad diameter (c.47 m) of the ditch may indicate that it was either a disc or a bell barrow. Width (in metres) Depth (in metres) 10.43 0.13 0.49 0.17 0.60 0.13 0.75 0.25 1.50 1.04 0.56 0.16 1.23 L315 0.78 0.20 2.24 1.17 1.05 0.88 0.60 0.45 0.30-1 0.40 1.10 0.42 0.83 0.37 0.45 0.05 0.60 0.12 0.80 0.22 0.45 0.07 0.77 0.35 0.26 0.25 135 0.78 1.20 0.56 0.46 fore) 1.06 0.30 0.05 1.05 0.43 1 0.45 0.63 0.43 1.20 0.70 1.80 0.61 Both types of barrow are generally associated with higher status interments, although against the former it has been suggested that disc barrows were more usually associated with cremations than with inhu- mations (Grinsell 1974). The high social standing of the occupant of the Norton Bavant grave is un- doubtedly reflected both by his accompanying grave goods and by the evidence of his considerable inca- pacitation before death; the severe osteoarthritis and degenerative bone disease from which he suffered would have made his survival into relatively old age unlikely without the respect and support of others. Likewise, the assemblage of grave goods, although it has no objects of precious metal, does include two items, the bone needle and bone belt hook, only rarely found accompanying Early Bronze Age burials. Their association, particularly that of the belt hook, EXCAVATIONS AT NORTON BAVANT BORROW PIT with the dagger, knife dagger and whetstone is noteworthy. The absence of evidence relating to any upstanding part of the barrow leaves the question of its original form unresolved, but the presumed destruction of a central mound or outer bank suggests that neither was particularly substantial: the Romano-British features cut across the barrow ditch in many places and may be taken to indicate the probable absence of visible earthworks at that time. Almost without exception the surviving or recorded round barrows in the surround- ing area (Fig. la) are bowl barrows, usually smaller in diameter but with higher mounds, better seen and therefore preserved. It may be supposed that plough- ing and levelling of less prominent earthworks was as likely to take place in earlier times as it has been in more recent ones. A small number of ring ditches in the surrounding area (Fig. la) quite probably rep- resent other ploughed out barrows, but excavation of these has been rare; trial trenches excavated at the site of two ring ditches between Sutton Veny and Tyther- ington produced no evidence of archaeological activity (Wiltshire Sites and Monuments Record No. ST94SW 675). The recutting or cleaning out of the barrow ditch has been taken to represent a later episode of activity within the first phase. No other contemporary features or evidence of related activity were seen. The very disturbed secondary burial found within the recut ditch appeared to have been deposited there after the ditch had started to silt up again, and has been assigned to the second archaeological phase, the Late Bronze Age. Little can be said regarding the other feature of that phase, an isolated pit dating from the tenth—ninth centuries BC. Settlement related ac- tivity (indicated by the large quantity of pottery and rubbing stone recovered from the pit) may have been taking place in the area of the still visible barrow but the nature and focus of that activity remain obscure. Most of the features excavated at the borrow pit belonged to the third, Romano-British phase, dating to the mid first—early second centuries AD. The larger linear features may represent field boundaries early within this phase, possibly associated with one or both of the villas at Pit Meads, but the area examined was not broad enough to confirm this. Gully F328/F339/ F351 approximately echoes the course of ditch F305/ F309 and recut F474 (and also, like the larger feature, cuts the barrow ditch) and may be all that survived of a realigned field boundary. It is certain that some of the other, smaller linear features belong to later within the phase, certainly gully F300 cut ditch F309 and its recut F474, but their function is not clear. e) Gully F337 follows a very meandering course before being lost in army trench disturbance. Some of the gullies and pits may have been associated with a building or buildings nearby; no foundations or struc- tural evidence were encountered within the exca- vation trenches, but many of the ‘domestic’ finds, the brooches, shale tray fragment, loom weight, spindle whorl and much of the pottery from this phase were recovered from features at the southern side of Trench C, and it is possible that other Roman buildings may have existed in the area beyond the borrow pit to the south. The nature of some of the finds, in particular the shale tray and the brooches, may indicate that the settlement, if such it was, was of some wealth. The Early Bronze Age Grave Goods by R.M.J. CLEAL, W. MURRAY, S. WATKINS and L. WOOTTEN The primary inhumation within the ring ditch, of an adult male (see below, page 18), was accompanied by a group of objects comprising a copper alloy dagger and small copper alloy knife dagger, a bone belt hook, a whetstone, a bone needle, and a miniature pottery vessel. The general location of these objects in the grave is described above (page 5). A catalogue of the grave goods is accompanied by compositional and X-ray fluorescence analyses of the copper alloy objects and followed by descriptions of the relationship to each other of the objects excavated from the soil block and of an associated organic deposit, and a discussion of affinities and of parallels for the whole group. Specialist reports on the organic deposits associated with the objects are in the archive held at Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum (SSWM). All the objects were examined at x20 magnification under a binocular microscope. CATALOGUE Dagger (Fig. 5, 1) Surviving length: 140 mm; maximum width: 60 mm; maximum thickness: 5 mm. Sf 28; context 471, feature 465, Phase 1. Conservation No. WILTM:C€870317. The dagger was located in an area of black soil of organic appearance behind the head and shoulders of the skeleton, and at a distance of 0.35 m from it; this was also the location of the knife dagger, the belt hook, the whetstone, and the needle. Because of the presence of organic material, possibly representing a bag or wrapping for the objects, the soil in which the 10 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE wu (from laboratory diagram by W. Murray) 0 50 100 = = mm = WA/SEJ&INV Fig.5: grave goods from primary inhumanation 472 Brown layer Black-brown deposit Reconstituted blade objects were found was lifted as a block and excavated rivets, five of which were in position when excavated; in the laboratory. the sixth was detached. In places the original surface A solid metal core survives along the central rib of is very well preserved with decoration and working the dagger, but towards the edges of the blades the features visible. However, much of the surface is metal is increasingly mineralised. The edges are fra- disrupted by pustules and pits of corrosion. Around gile and on excavation there were many detached some of the rivets is a material with a layered struc- fragments. The original edge of the dagger has not ture, pale cream with green copper corrosion staining. survived. The tip is missing. The dagger has six Visual examination under a binocular microscope EXCAVATIONS AT NORTON BAVANT BORROW PIT would suggest that this material is horn and the remains of the hilt. Staining and more severe corro- sion (particularly visible on the X-radiographs) at the top of the dagger, below the rivets, indicate the original extent and shape of the hilt. On excavation the dagger was completely covered by the dark black-brown deposit (i.e. the putative bag or wrapping). Part of this was removed in order to reveal the shape and surfaces of the dagger itself. Visual microscopic examination of the deposits on the dagger revealed an additional, separate and more cohesive brown layer underneath the black-brown deposit (see section in Fig. 5, based on a laboratory diagram by Will Murray) but only in the area of the blade. The brown layer does not extend beyond the rivets. Striations were detected in the under surfaces of pieces of this brown layer (i.e. the surface in contact with the dagger surface) from near the hilt end. The scale of these striations is comparable to those of the mineral-preserved horn hilt. The dagger blade is of triangular or concave- triangular shape (Gerloff 1975, 11) with a rounded heel and with an omega-shaped hilt mark. Five of the six rivets were im situ when found, as two sets of three, following the rounded heel of the blade. The blade is bi-convex in section, with three narrow ridges follow- ing the shape of the blade down each side. The central part of the blade, between the ridges, is covered with pointlle decoration. Knife dagger (Fig. 5, 2) Length: 80 mm; maximum width: 36 mm; maximum thickness 5 mm. Sf 29; context 471, feature 465, Phase 1. Conservation no. WILTM:C870318. The knife dagger was found lying above, although only just overlapping the dagger, and at an angle of about 30° to the latter. The condition of the knife dagger on excavation was varied. In its central area it has a relatively uncorroded core and metallic copper alloy is visible at the surface in places. Some original surface survives with decoration and working marks clearly visible. The edges, however, are massively corroded, fragile, and, when excavated, fragmentary. The tp is missing and the surviving end in many pieces. Only one rivet was in situ when excavated; the metal of the knife dagger at the hilt end was fractured and broken, freeing the rivets. Little of the hilt material survives apart from a line in the copper corrosion products visible on one side just below the rivets. When excavated both surfaces of the knife dagger were covered with the dark black-brown deposit, but 11 no brown layer was detected. Deposits with a more linear structure, directly in contact with the blade, were found in places. Most of these deposits were removed to reveal the knife dagger, but samples were retained for further examination. The blade is of triangular form, with a rounded heel, and either two or three rivets following the line of the heel. The rivets are in fragments, and it is difficult to establish the original number present; only two heads are clearly identifiable among the frag- ments, but this is not conclusive, and from the position of the single im situ rivet the number could have been either two or three. The blade is bi-convex in section, and exhibits two narrow zones of fine scoring on either side of the blade and presumably converging in the area masked by corrosion. These lines are not in themselves grooves, and are so faint as to be almost certainly not intentional. The blade edges are badly corroded, but a short length of a shallow groove is visible, within which the scoring mainly occurs. It is possible, therefore, that the light scoring is related to the finishing, after casting, of the shallow grooves running down each side of the blade. The area between these two shallow grooves is badly pitted, but does not appear to be decorated. In the same area of the blade are a number of very lightly incised or scratched lines, only visible with a micro- scope (observed at x20 magnification); most run down the blade, but a few run across its long axis. These marks appear too slight to be intentional, and are presumably marks of use. COMPOSITIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE DAGGER AND KNIFE DAGGER by C. MORTIMER and S. WATKINS Fragments from the dagger and from the knife dagger which were already detached but which appeared to retain some metal (i.e. were not completely min- eralised) were sent for quantitative X-ray fluorescence analysis to Catherine Mortimer at the Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art at Oxford (see below). Samples from the dagger were ‘A’ from near the tip, ‘B’ from the edge of the blade, and ‘C’ one of the rivets. Samples from the knife dagger were ‘D’ a rivet, and ‘E’ a blade fragment. Only samples C, D, and E proved to be usable for the analysis. All three are of unleaded tin bronze, and both rivets have high levels of tin (see Mortimer, below). Because of the difference between the com- position of the rivet and that of the blade in the knife dagger (i.e. samples D and E), and the fact that only 12 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE the rivet of the dagger proved suitable for analysis, it is not possible to comment on the likely composition of the dagger blade. The blade of the knife dagger is of a bronze rich in tin. The additon of tin eases casting, and produces an increasingly stronger imple- ment, until an optimum is reached at about 10-12% tn, above which increased brittleness results (Britton 1961, 41). Percentages of around 14-15% tin are not unknown in Wessex Culture bronzes (Britton 1961, Table 1; Gerloff 1975, Appendix 10) although slightly lower percentages are more usual. X-ray fluorescence analysis of samples from the dagger and knife-dagger by C. MORTIMER It was only possible to clean three of the samples received to a metallic surface. Percentage weight Cu Sn As Pb Ag Sample C (rivet 79.0 20.5 0.4 wt tr from dagger) Sample D (rivet from knife dagger) Sample E (blade 84.5 15.0 0.4 tr tre of knife dagger) Accuracy Minimum detectable levels 78.0 21.5 0.2 tr - 2-0 (5°2:0:5.220:2 — - Needle or perforated pin (Fig. 5, 3) Length: 90 mm; maximum width: 9 mm; maximum depth: 4 mm. Sf 32, context 471, feature 465, Phase 1. Conservation no. WILTM:C870320. This object, like the bone hook, was excavated in the field, before the soil block was lifted, although it came from the same area of organic material. It was found in three pieces, and all surfaces, including the breaks, showed patches of a black concretion. The tip and the head are missing, but part of the eye remains. Much of the surface is well preserved, with a high polish, and scratch marks and work marks are visible. The bone is in a fragile condition, with many longitudinal marks, especially on the side with the depression. The bone used for the object is possibly a metapo- dial, and probably from an ovicaprid (Dr C. Gamble, pers. comm. ). Bone hook (Fig. 5, 4) Dimensions of plate (face): 30 x 31 mm; depth (from face of hook to face of plate): 16 mm. Sf 30, context 471, feature 465, Phase 1. Conservation no. WILTM:C870319. The bone hook was not lifted as part of the soil block, as it had been identified and excavated in the field, before the complexity of the organic deposit was fully recognized. The object was made from a single piece of bone with a hook carved into one side, the outer surface polished smooth but the underneath rough. There are a number of incised lines on the outer surface. Haversian systems are visible on one side of the hook. The bone is degraded in places to the extent that areas are missing from the sides and at the up of the hook. Faint green copper staining extends over most of the object. When received in the laboratory there were traces of black-brown deposit on all surfaces. The face of the hook is decorated with what originally is likely to have been two sets of three parallel grooves: traces of three survive on one side, but only of two on the other. The grooves are narrow and V-sectioned, and run to the edge of the plate; their terminals, or convergence, would have occurred on the missing part of the hook. Whetstone (Fig. 5, 5) Length: 83 mm; width at widest point: 24 mm; thickness ranges from 4 mm at the narrow end to 10 mm at the wide end. SF 31, context 471, feature 465, Phase 1. Conser- vation no. WILTM:C870321. The whetstone was found beneath the two daggers and, like them, was covered in organic matter. It is made of a fine grained dark grey stone, pierced by a biconical hole at the narrow end. The stone is in good condition and the surfaces sound. It was decided not to thin-section the object, but it is clearly of some form of quartz-based rock (Dr D. Williams, pers. comm.). A dark black-brown deposit was poorly attached but present on all surfaces, with faint striations visible in the deposit in places. The stone was not subjected to any conservation processes, including cleaning, so as not to prejudice analysis of the surface of the stone. Pottery vessel (Fig. 5, 6) Dimensions: external diameter at rim: 75 mm; inter- nal diameter at rim: 50 mm; height varies between 35 mm and 23 mm. Sf 22, context 468, feature 465, Phase 1. A small, plain vessel was found 0.4 m to the north of the skeleton, opposite the head and chest. The contents of the vessel were retained, but have not been analysed. The vessel is virtually complete, only EXCAVATIONS AT NORTON BAVANT BORROW PIT lacking a short length of rim (approximately 10%); it is likely to have been deposited as a whole vessel, although it was broken when found. The fabric is slightly micaceous, and contains moderate to common grog and sparse sand and iron oxide particles (Fabric type G1; fabric descriptions in archive held at SSWM). The vessel is very poorly finished, with uneven surfaces and a variable profile. The surfaces are oxidised to a pale orange, with one pale grey patch on the exterior of the base angle, and a mid-grey patch on the interior base-angle, on the opposite side of the vessel; the core is unoxidised (black). Apart from the damage, which was caused on excavation, the vessel is in good condition, and shows no sign of wear. RELATIONSHIP OF THE FINDS TO EACH OTHER AND TO THE ORGANIC DEPOSIT by S. WATKINS, L. WOOTTEN, and W. MURRAY In the group of three objects excavated from the block of black-brown deposit in the Conservation Labora- tory the knife dagger was uppermost and just over- lapping one corner of the dagger. The whetstone was underneath the dagger. The hilts of both the dagger and the knife dagger were towards the head end of the grave. A black-brown deposit covered the objects and extended around them across an oval area measuring 350 mm by 200 mm; depth 5-10 mm. When exca- vated the deposit was damp and fairly cohesive, but on drying it became very friable. Microscopic examin- ation revealed the deposit to be entirely organic with no mineral soil visible. It was extremely degraded, with no apparent structure. Many pupae cases were present. The material was not impregnated with copper corrosion salts, as the hilt of the dagger was, and the reason for its preservation would appear to be a combination of anaerobic conditions and the pres- ence of copper (i.e. the artefacts) inhibiting complete biodegradation of the organic material. As there was no indication of a woody structure, or of any weave in the black-brown deposit, samples, together with samples of a brown deposit found on the dagger, were sent to Christopher Calnan at the Leather Conservation Centre, Northampton, for analysis and identification. Samples were taken from above and below (i.e. both sides of) the dagger and knife dagger, and from an area of the deposit away from the objects. This analysis did not resolve the question of the nature of the deposit, as no features diagnostic of leather were identifiable (Calnan, held in archive at SSWM). N) The black-brown deposit was found on all surfaces of the five objects from the deposit (i.e. also over the two bone artefacts excavated in the field). On the underside of the dagger the black-brown deposit bore the impression of the whetstone which was lying beneath it. The brown layer underneath the black- brown deposit on the dagger was not found on any of the other objects. These remains could be interpreted as follows: the brown organic layer on the dagger blade is the remains of a sheath or scabbard which has taken on the impression of the hilt and of surface marks on the blade. The black-brown deposit around, between, and extending beyond the dagger, knife dagger and whetstone, is the remains of a bag, folds of which between the objects account for the presence of the deposit on all surfaces. The presence of this same deposit on the belt hook and needle or perforated pin, together with the copper staining on the belt hook, and the fact that they came from the same area of the grave, would seem to indicate that these two objects were also originally in the bag. Similar finds of daggers and stone objects inside possible remains of bags have been found: Shrewton, barrow 5K — tanged dagger wrapped in moss apparently inside a woven fabric bag (Green and Rollo-Smith 1984, 275); Ames- bury, barrow G58 — knife dagger and leather sheath in sphagnum moss (Ashbee 1985); Amesbury barrow G85 — ‘flat riveted dagger found under skull of a contracted skeleton with between them a flint, organic material (? a bag) and sphagnum moss’ (Moore and Rowlands 1972, 44); Winterbourne Stoke, barrow G47 — textile fragments adhering to the dagger (Crowfoot 1988, 62). DISCUSSION by R.M.J. CLEAL The dagger (Fig. 5, 1) shows characteristics which occur in two of Gerloffs dagger groups, Armorico- British A and C, which have several features in common; the Norton Bavant dagger cannot be assig- ned unequivocally to either, although the latter group seems most likely. Daggers of Type A have a trian- gular outline, no midrib, a straight heel, six peg rivets, and blades of flat section, while those of Type C typically possess a concave-triangular to ogival outline, straight or slightly rounded heel, and six peg-shaped rivets; blades may be bi-convex or flat- sectioned, depending on the variant. Using the illus- trations provided by Gerloff it can be appreciated that the differences between the two are occasionally minimal (cf. Gerloff 1975 nos. 139 and 109-112). A 14 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE critical feature is the curvature or lack of curvature of the blade which can, in some cases where the blade edge is missing, be extrapolated from the grooved decoration which generally reflects the shape of the blade. The ribs, which on the Norton Bavant dagger occupy the position normally filled by grooves, are concave-triangular, and it would seem reasonable to assume that the blade edges probably shared this form. Three other factors suggest that an attribution to the Armorico-British Type C is a correct one: the heel is slightly rounded, the section bi-convex, and the dagger has pointille decoration, which, with two exceptions of Type B/C, Gerloff did not record on daggers earlier than Camerton Snowshill type, with which Armorico-British Type C daggers may be in part contemporary (Gerloff op. cit., 95). The chrono- logical position of Armorico-Briush Type C is there- fore uncertain, but is likely to be late Wessex I, early Wessex II, or both. As such, a date in, or close to, the seventeenth century BC would be expected (Butler 1981; Lawson 1984, Fig. 6.1). The knife dagger (Fig. 5, 2) can be assigned to Gerloffs Grooved Knife Dagger class, in which blades with single shallow grooves are recognised (Gerloff 1975, 170). The needle or perforated pin (Fig. 5, 3) is a rare type, but also has clear Early Bronze Age associations elsewhere. At least two other examples, with dimen- sions similar to the Norton Bavant example, are known from Wiltshire. One is from a grave group found in Amesbury Park (details unknown), and was associated with a bronze knife dagger and a bronze awl (Annable and Simpson 1964, nos. 322-324), and the other was found in an urn (now lost) with the primary cremation in barrow G2Ic, Collingbourne Ducis (op. cit., no. 358). Bone hooks of the form of the Norton Bavant example (Fig. 5, 4), generally termed belt hooks, sometimes scabbard hooks (Ashbee 1960, 103, 119), are a rare accompaniment to burials. Four, excluding the elaborate gold version from Bush Barrow, are illustrated in the Devizes Museum Catalogue (Anna- ble and Simpson 1964, nos. 306, 313, 331, and 332; Bush Barrow gold belt hook is no. 176). Two of these are unlocated from Wiltshire, and the other two are from barrows in Wilsford parish (Wilsford G16 and G18, part of the Normanton Down group, as is Bush Barrow). None was associated with metalwork. Ashbee also notes finds of belt hooks at Normanton and from Yorkshire (Ashbee 1960, 103), and one was also recovered from Arreton Down, Isle of Wight, probably associated with an Armorico-British Type C dagger (Alexander et al., 1960, 276, Fig. 5a; Gerloff 1975, Corpus no. 142). Also noted in the Arreton report is the recovery of a bone belt hook from Amesbury 147, noted by Colt Hoare as being found with a cremation and a bone pendant (ibid.). The occurrence of three of the bone belt hooks and the gold belt hook on Normanton Down might be taken as an indication that all are roughly contemporary, and may therefore, on the basis of the Bush Barrow find, be datable to Wessex I, although the Arreton association, like that from Norton Bavant, suggests a late Wessex I/Wessex II date. Perforated whetstones (Fig. 5, 5) are a typical association of the Camerton—Snowshill series of daggers, and therefore of Wessex II, but two instances of whetstones occurring with Armorico-British daggers, of Type B/C, are noted by Gerloff (Gerloff 1975, 112; she notes the daggers as nos. 135 and 136, and refers to them as Type C, although in the description of the daggers, and elsewhere in the volume, these are clearly defined as type B/C, a hybrid type). Proudfoot (1963, 411) noted eleven perforated whetstones from Wessex graves, most of which ac- companied a cremation with a copper alloy dagger; in most cases one whetstone only occurred in each group, although there were two cases of two. The pottery vessel (Fig. 5, 6) is plain and of an extremely crude type; even if it were not associated with Early Bronze Age artefacts it would, however, sull be identifable as Early Bronze Age on the grounds of fabric alone, as in central Wessex grog-tempered fabrics are characteristic of this period. Small, crude vessels, often undecorated, are occasionally a feature of Early Bronze Age burial groups. Such vessels, of very varied form, occur for instance with Collared Urns (Longworth 1984, e.g. with plate 128b, from Stanton Moor, Derbyshire; plate 153c, from Ford, Northumberland; and with plate 180e, from Frampton, Dorset), although this seems to be a more northerly phenomenon than a southern one. The Human Bone by J. MCKINLEY Two collections of bone were received for examin- ation. One was an almost complete skeleton, 472, the lower legs and feet of which had been lost as a result of modern disturbance. The second skeleton, 401, was represented by fragments only. METHODOLOGY The age of the individuals was assessed from the degree of bone/suture fusion and the degree of de- EXCAVATIONS AT NORTON BAVANT BORROW PIT generative changes to the bone. Tooth wear patterns (Brothwell 1972) were also used to give a broad indication of age. Age categories, rather than age in years, are utilised in view of the difficulties surround- ing the assessment of age for adult individuals over 25 years (approximate age of last epiphyseal fusion). Tooth wear patterns and the degree of degenerative changes to the bone may vary considerably, depen- dent on the individual. Sex was assessed on the basis of the sexually diamorphic traits of the skeleton (Bass 1987). Cephalic index (cranial capacity) was calculated where possible (Brothwell 1972). Stature was esti- mated using Trotter and Gleser’s regression equations (1952, 1958). Pathological lesions and morphological variations were noted and diagnoses suggested where appro- priate. RESULTS Full details are in the archive at SSWM. Skeleton 472 (Plates 1-2) Age: older adult Sex: male Estimated stature: 170.18 cm (5’ 7”) Cephalic index: 76.1 (cm cubed) mesocephalic Pathology: 1. Dental hyperplasia evident in mandibular incisors. Indicative of periods of arrested tooth formation in infancy as a result of illness or periods of prolonged hunger. 2. Very heavy calculus deposits on mandibular and maxillary teeth, occlusal surfaces covered in some molars. Indicates lack of dental hygiene. 3. Slight periodontal disease in mandible. Indicative of poor dental hygiene (gum infection affecting bone). 4. Dental caries, cervical lesions in several mandibular and maxillary teeth. Indicative of poor dental hygiene. 5. Ante-mortem loss of maxillary right lst and 2nd molars, probably as result of destructive dental le- sions. 6. Degenerative disc diseases as evidenced by degrees of pitting in the surfaces of vertebral bodies from all areas of the spine. Age related arthritic degeneration of intervertebral discs. 7. Degrees of osteophytosis on the margins of the vertebral bodies, particularly the cervical and lower thoracic. Age related degeneration — spondylosis. 8. Mild osteophytosis around right acetabular rim, distal articulation surface margins of both femurs, 15 proximal articulations of both radii and ulnas and degrees of osteophytosis on the joint margins and the bones of the hands. Age related joint degeneration. 9. Gross osteoarthritis through all areas of the spine as evidenced by degrees of pitting, eburnation and mar- ginal osteophytosis in dorsal articular facets: particu- larly gross in atlas and VIIth cervical; in the latter facets extend down the spinal process by 40 mm and 30 mm with gross eburnation, pitting and osteophy- tosis. Also excessive lesions in Ist thoracic superior facets to join cervical VIIth, lower thoracic VIIIth— Xth, lumbar Vth inferior and sacral Ist superior facets, where eburnation was deeply striated, illus- trating gross friction between the facets. Slight—mild degrees of lesions in thoracic vertebrae and ribs indicative of costo-vertebral arthritis. 10. Ankylosing of cervical [Vth and Vth vertebrae by smooth flow of new bone in body laminae and spine, disc space still evident. Ossification of the anterior and posterior ligaments. 11. Slight-mild degrees of ossification of posterior ligament in the thoracic region with bony ‘spurs’ on posterior margins of the neural foramen. 12. Ankylosing of the left, pelvic auricular surfaces. Gross destruction of the left hip joint. Lesions comprised gross remodelling and enlargement of acetabulum to give ‘cupped’ effect. Gross new bone development around acetabular rim. Gross ebur- nation in superior anterior portion of acetabulum and in centre of acetabulum over area of original notch, now covered with new bone growth. Gross pitting over eburnated areas and in superior anterior rim, in new bone growth around rim and inferior anterior portion adjacent to obturator foramen. Lesions in the femur comprised of large area of eburnation over anterior portion of head with pitting. Gross new bone development in and around the notch with slight eburnation of the new bone on anterior portions. Gross osteophytosis all around margins of head and extending down neck on inferior margin. Posterior portion of head and neck covered in exu- berant new bone growth following possible partial collapse of that part of the head. Exuberant new bone growth also in trochanteric fossa. Left patella has gross bony growths across whole of the anterior surface with 10 mm ‘spurs’ of bone extending from superior tendon attachment both superiorly and inferiorly. Osteoarthritis in left hip joint affecting entheses in auricular surfaces and patella. 13. Medium osteophytosis on margins of right scapula glenoid, small area of pitting in inferior ventral portion and along superior ventral margin. Humeral THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 16 azis yenjoe x “[ ‘smtmyi1e0aiso palejar BUINeI YUM poaleloosse SUOTSIT “UOTIasUT uopua} ay} ye Aplepnonsed ‘adejIns JOLII]Ue IT]] SsOIOB 34 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE To the west and immediate north of F5 the clay at this level showed signs of burning within it. Although charcoal fragments were rare, the clay was a greyish colour. These levels were given context numbers 6 and 4 respectively. The top soil and the area around context 4 con- tained quantities of a dark brown or grey ceramic which showed abundant signs of pock-marking where the acidic clays had leached limestone fragments out. Closer examination revealed that they were of medie- val date. Although the surfaces were considerably worn, some of the rim sherds were identifiable typolo- gically with pottery known as Selsey Common Ware after vessels reported by Dunning (1949, 30-44). Discussion of Trench 1 Trench | was believed to contain the remnant base of a Roman ule stack, constructed to make loading easy. It is considered that carts would have been drawn up alongside the stack on the east. A man standing on the stack would then have passed the tiles directly to a man standing in the cart. This would eliminate the need to lift the ules up to the height of the cart from the ground level. The author has seen this technique in operation at a brickworks where manual handling was sull in operation in the early 1970s. Such an operation would have eventually caused the bricks nearest the ground to become considerably crushed and broken as fresh bricks were stacked up to keep the height constant. During this type of modern manual loading it was accepted that the lowest bricks in the stack would be ‘wasted’ in forming the base. In the course of hand loading, a number of bricks were dropped and broken. At the end of each loading these were swept to one side to keep the brick stack clear for receiving incoming transport. This system would appear to be very close to that in operation at Brinkworth in the Roman period. Here a udy rubbish heap of broken tiles (F5) appears to exist adjacent to the conjectured ‘stack’. This would indi- cate that, right up to the abandonment of the site, the working areas were kept clear of debris. There was some evidence of burning in the clay to the west of F16 and F5. There was, however, no sign of any feature within the excavated area that could account for this phenomenon, although it is not impossible, in the circumstances, that a kiln lay nearby. Quantities of clinker and a piece of kiln floor, similar to that found associated with the structure in Trench 2 were found in this area. The medieval pottery found in context | and in the upper levels of contexts 3, 4 and 6 could well rep- resent rubbish brought out from habitation nearby in manuring the fields. There is considerable evidence for the existence of ridge and furrow in the immediate area, if not over the kiln area itself. Degenerate ridges seem to be present in the smaller field (no. 6124, OS 25" map SU 0085-01) and in most of the fields to the west. The field containing Trench 1 (no. 7328, OS 25” map SU 0085-01) appears to have been ploughed up within the last century (Grinsell 1957, 46) and this may account for the lack of earthworks there. Another possible explanation is that Longman’s Street Farm, about 100 m to the north, exists on the site of an earlier settlement and the pottery represents residual scatter from this site. No evidence, however, was found during documentary searches to confirm this. TRENCH 2 (Figure 5) This trench was located on identical soil types to those of Trench 1. Immediately to the north of the exca- vated area lay an overgrown boundary hedge. The top soil was clay loam only 15 cm deep overlaying brown clay. Ceramic fragments were present in abundance from the turf line downwards and after only 25 cm the top of a feature was uncovered. When cleaned off, this proved to be a rectangular structure (F9/10), the surviving elements being approximately 3 m in length and up to | m in width. There appeared to be an outer wall made up of broken ule and pottery (F9) within a clay matrix on the south side. This showed signs of having been subjected to considerable heat on the inside and some of the inner ‘wall’ was vitrified. Between F9 and a ‘floor’ like feature (F10) was a line of burnt clay between 5 and 8 cm in width along the full length of the structure. The interior of the structure had a ‘floor’ (F10) of heavy tile-like ceramic. These ‘tiles’ were up to 8 cm thick where exposed. They formed roughly two lines being about 70 cm at the widest point, diminishing to about 60 cm at the western end of the feature. On the north side, the remains of a similar ‘wall’ to F9 were seen at the eastern end. This extended westwards for about 60 cm. Beyond this there was no sign of an outer wall and it was assumed that it had been destroyed at some time in the past. This ‘wall’ would have only been about 25 cm below the modern turf at this point. At the eastern end of F10 was a ule slightly larger than the rest, being approximately 60 < 40 cm rather than the average of 40 x 30 cm elsewhere on the ‘floor’. This was turned long side on against the width of F10. Examination of F1l0 showed that the tiles were 35 ROMAN KILN SITE, BRINKWORTH (LTA) JOY-eyo1s pue (OT 4/61) ainjonNs IINq-a Zurmoys 7 yous] jo uejd :yoMYUTIg *¢ 21NBLy | Sas Ce y 8 st a <| 5c 2s WB; of © 36 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE —82:0m. Figure 6. Brinkworth: south-facing section through the stoke-hole (F17) considerably crushed and broken. They also showed signs of much subsidence into what was clearly a hollow area beneath them. This could be seen at one point through a gap between two ules at the west end, although there was no indication of perforations within the ‘floor’. To the east of F9 and F10 there was a pit (F17) whose excavated diameter was almost 1.6 m (Fig. 6). The feature continued under both the eastern and northern baulks of the trench. It appeared to be roughly circular, the bottom being about 35 cm below the level of F10. There was evidence of much burning and large quantities of broken ceramic within the pit fill. The clay in the upper layers was a blue-grey colour but this gradually darkened until it was almost black near the bottom of the feature. Ceramics found in this area comprised tile, flagons, jars and mortaria. There was some evidence of waster materials and vitrified clay but this was not substantial. To the south of the rectangular structure and its associated pit was a line of baked clay (F18), 1.3 m in length and between 8 and 14 cm in width, with broken ceramic contained within it. This was approximately parallel to F9 and about 60 cm to the south. Discussion of Trench 2 The structure comprising features F9 and F10 may represent either a kiln or a ceramic drying structure as illustrated by Young (1977, 21, Fig. 5). This and other similarities to the Brinkworth structure are discussed below. Feature F17, to the east of the structure, clearly represents some sort of stoke-pit. Its fill contained evidence of considerable burning and burnt materials were common. It is possible that much of the lower deposits resulted from debris being raked out of the flue after each firing. The matrix of these levels was considerably darker than the upper fill of the pit. The latter probably represented rubbish thrown into the stoke pit on the abandonment of the site. The structure was rectangular and appeared to be fairly narrow. The floor was of thick tes, possibly purpose-made to withstand heavy loads placed on them during firing. Superficially the structure bears similarities to a number of tle kilns discovered in Britain, these generally being rectangular in shape (Swan 1984, 87). There was clear evidence that the Brinkworth structure was hollow underneath and this would indicate that it operated on some sort of updraught principle. As the structure was reburied intact it was not possible to make further comment. There was little sign of a ‘flue’ proper although there would appear to have been some reinforcement of the outer wall (F9) on the lip of the stoke-hole, possibly indicating the ‘entrance’ to the structure. Further- more it is noticeable that the ‘floor’ extended into the ‘stoke-hole’ (F17) by some 60 cm. This may represent subsequent collapse or a possible flue. What is most unusual about the structure is the lack of any vents in the ‘floor’ to enable heat to rise through it. This evidence prevents the conclusion that the structure was definitely a kiln being drawn. Structures similar to that at Brinkworth are not unknown in the North Wiltshire area. Rectangular kilns were discovered at Purton in 1975 where the flue was found to be barely narrower than the kiln body itself (Anderson 1980, 51-58). These kilns were con- jectured as having two flues, one at either end of the main body and hence two stoke-holes (ibid., 52). No conclusive evidence, however, was found for this. A similar suggestion was made for Brinkworth, but despite careful excavation no signs of a second stoke- hole were found. It is perhaps worthy of mention that, despite the difference in date, (Purton is assigned to the late second century), the fabrics of the kiln products of Brinkworth and Purton bear many simi- larities. ROMAN KILN SITE, BRINK WORTH Rectangular tile kilns have recently been discovered at nearby Minety (McWhirr 1979, 180-82). These have been provisionally dated to the late first or early second century AD. There would appear to be a possibility that Minety may have taken over tile manufacture in the area after the Brinkworth industry ceased to operate on a large scale c. AD 75. Alternatively, the excavated structure may rep- resent a ceramic drier. Here the much gentler heat rising naturally through the floor may have provided the correct temperature for this process. These devices are amongst the most common ancillary struc- tures found on Romano-British kiln sites (Young 1977, 20). They were required to drive off any excess water still remaining in the unfired clay before firing could take place and were particularly desirable in the uncertain British climate where outdoor drying in the sun would have been unreliable (Swan 1984, 47). The most common types of drier known in Britain would have been T-shaped, as found at Churchill, Berkshire (Young 1977, 27; Fig. 7), and at Crambe, Yorks. (Swan 1984, 47), or rectangular, as also shown at Churchill Hospital. It is possible that the floor itself may have been a freestanding structure, leaving a gap between the floor and the wall for hot air to rise into the upper chamber. Such structures are not unknown and the absence of evidence for perforated floors at most of the North Wiltshire kiln sites so far excavated has suggested that the load may have been placed on a central platform supported on plinths (Anderson 1977, 43-48). Brinkworth has shown itself in many respects typical of the North Wiltshire industries and it may be that the above suggested operation may help to explain puzzling evidence found at these other sites regarding the nature and positioning of the floor. It is unfortunate that a fuller examination of the Trench 2 structure was not possible. Certainly the existence of another ‘wall’ (F18) about 60 cm south of the surviving structure would indicate that the site went through at least two phases of development. Feature 18 would seem to represent an earlier struc- ture of similar form. On the north side of the main structure (F9/10) the ground appears to have been disturbed. This disturb- ance removed the outer wall of F9. It is quite possible that this occurred whilst the nearby hedgebank, now largely subsided, was constructed. Subsequent ploughing could account for the failure of the excava- tor to locate any clear sign of cutting through the topsoil here. As is indicated in the Trench 1 discuss- ion, ploughing appears to have taken place in this field within the last hundred years. 37 In the Rhineland close links have been made with rectangular kilns and military establishments (Swan 1984, 85). These kilns are often early, Claudian to early Flavian (Swan 1984, 83), and are often associated with ule production. Where pottery is also made on such sites, this kiln-type has been shown to favour the heavier vessels such as mortaria, flagons and larger storage vessels (Swan 1984, 85). Such sites seem intended to produce oxidised pottery, a factor again emphasising the links with the Brinkworth site. Even if it is not possible to define F9/10 as either a kiln or a ceramic drier, tile, mortaria, flagons and large jars were clearly made on the site, seemingly before AD 75. It would be expected, therefore, that the kilns would probably double up for both tile and pottery produc- tion. There may also have been a military connection and the evidence points strongly in this direction. On initital inspection it appears that Brinkworth was isolated from most of the nearby Roman settle- ments. The nearest communities were Cirencester (10 miles) and Wanborough (10 miles). Brinkworth stands almost in the exact centre of a triangle of major roads with its apex meeting at Cirencester and its base being the Cunetio—Bath road about 12 miles to the south. In view of the lack of credible alternatives, it might be argued that the kiln site may have supplied the early settlement at Cirencester. There was an early fort here from c. AD 49 until the early or mid 70s (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 65), with an apparently strong military presence in the area until around AD 75. There is no doubt that pottery production had begun in North Wiltshire by this time as wares from the nearby Savernake industry were present in a well deposit at Cunetio dating from the period AD 50 to 60 (Hodder 1976, 67). The distance from Cirencester presents some prob- lems and it might be suggested that a kiln supplying this centre should be located closer to the town. The nearest known road is some eight miles away at its nearest point, making the transport of heavy objects like ules and mortaria a difficult prospect. There is evidence at Brinkworth to suggest that at least medium distance transport was practised by the use of carts. This is shown by the way the tiles appear to have been stacked (Trench 1). The magnetometer also picked up possible evidence that there may have been tracks leading from the site in a northerly direction. A study of the Roman pottery industries native to North Wiltshire has been made by Anderson (1977, 1-141). A number of kilns have been discovered recently in this area at Purton (Anderson 1980), Whitehill Farm and Toothill Farm (Anderson 1977, 38 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 14-16) supplementing existing kilns already known at Broomsgrove (Cunnington 1893, 294-301) and in Savernake Forest (Annable 1962, 142-155). None of these sites was very close to known centres of po- pulation where the wares were presumably marketed and so it is reasonable to conclude that the trade and distribution must have been dependent on local track- ways rather than main roads (Anderson 1977, 14). Wiltshire kiln sites must therefore be seen as predominantly rural (Anderson 1977, 19). Ray (1976, 107) has argued that Imperial policy was largely instrumental in the failure of North Wiltshire to produce urban centres of any real significance. It would appear that the native agricultural communities continued to dominate the economy even after the Brinkworth site was abandoned. It is therefore pos- sible to see this site as falling within the pattern of Romano-British rural industry in North Wiltshire during the occupation centuries. LONGMAN’S STREET FARM: SPOIL HEAP BEHIND BARN (SU 007854) In re-digging the ditch dividing fields 6124 and 7328, the farmer transported large quantities of spoil behind the barn at the above grid reference position. This spoil heap was of considerable dimensions (about 70 m by 25 m) and could not be examined thoroughly. A number of diagnostic pieces of pottery, however, were recovered from this area and are included in the pottery report as unstratified finds because it was hoped they would fill out the typology of the ceramics the site was producing. If this had not been done the assemblages from Trenches | and 2 on their own would probably not have covered anywhere near the full spectrum of wares being produced on the site. CONCLUSIONS The evidence seems to indicate that production began at Brinkworh before AD 70. The types produced seem to favour an industry geared to providing the military, possibly at Cirencester, before AD 75. The large majority of the pieces recovered seems to favour a production of Neronian — early Flavian date. This is reinforced by the occurrence of possibly similar fab- rics at Cirencester identified in pre-AD 75 contexts. Either production continued on a reduced scale or the site was reoccupied after a brief abandonment at some time after AD 80, the evidence for this being the presence of flagons not normally known before AD 80 or after AD 130. Although these artefacts are found in unstratified contexts, a carinated bowl also typical of the period was found in the stokehole in Trench 2. Thus it would seem that the site was finally aban- doned before AD 130, at the latest. This would seem to parallel the preliminary evidence from a site pro- ducing similar wares to Brinkworth at Oaksey Nur- series, Minety. Here the total production was found to range from the mid/late first through to the mid second century AD (Swan 1984; fiche frame no 5666). The possibility that Brinkworth may have been a military predecessor to the extensive civilian kiln at Minety (McWhirr 1979, 97) is interesting. At present, however, this site is unpublished and the author found difficulty in obtaining samples to make realistic comparisons. Nevertheless, links between these in- dustries seem highly likely, although to what degree will have to await publication of the Minety site. The Brinkworth kiln was contemporary with the Savernake industries and the occurrence of native forms may indicate the presence of native potters drafted in to serve initially military needs and, later, a small scale domestic market. The presence of fabrics that may be attributable to the Whitehill Farm kilns would seem to confirm use of the site in the late first century and possibly on into the second. The discovery of medieval pottery in the vicinity of Trench | may indicate robbing of the site for tiles in the twelfth-thirteenth centuries. Alternatively these ceramics may have been deposited during the manur- ing of ploughed fields. It would appear, however, that later ploughing has removed the evidence of possible post-Roman robber trenches. The overall conclusion points to a site initially involved in the production of ceramics for the army before AD 70. This may have been centred largely on tle manufacture with the pottery as a side line. It is not possible to say with any certainty if the recovered structure in Trench 2 was a kiln or an associated drying feature. As yet the site has only been sampled on a very small scale. It is hoped that further researches will be able to throw a clearer light on the industry at Brinkworth, either by a closer examination of the ceramics recovered to date or by excavation should future opportunities for it arise on the site. Specialist Reports by C.K. CURRIE and M.A. LOFT ROMAN TILE (not illustrated) No whole tiles were recovered although there were examples in the base of the stack in Trench 1. These ROMAN KILN SITE, BRINK WORTH were reburied in situ. The dimensions of the tles appear to have generally been 40 cm by 25 cm by 2.5 cm thick. Most examples found on the site were conventional tegulae, although occasional imbrex fragments were recognised. It was interesting, however, to note that the tiles left in situ at the bottom of the former stack had projecting lumps, often four in number, on their upper surfaces. These were identified as mammatae ules, a specialised hypocaust tile (Rook 1979, 305). It was suggested that they may have been placed at the bottom of the stack to allow air to circulate under the ules, thus allowing them to cool more rapidly (B. Walters, Director, The Roman Research Trust, pers. comm.). There is a possibility that bricks were manufac- tured on the site. A number of examples were found, for example, acting as a floor of the structure F9. Other pieces found on the site were usually vitrified and these were thought to be pieces of former kiln floors. The clay matrix of the tiles was similar to that of the fabrics of the pottery produced on site, generally having a silty texture with red ore and occasional white calcareous inclusions. There were also oc- casional quartz grains included. Distinguishing the ules from the pottery were large grog and gravel inclusions, up to 20 mm in diameter. The tiles were oxidised with occasional grey cores. The general colour was reddish yellow (5 YR 7/8). Where grey cores were present they were generally 5 Y 7/1. ILLUSTRATED ROMAN POTTERY Pottery from unstratified contexts (Figures 7 and 8: 13-27) 1. Mortarium with flanged rim. Reddish yellow oxidised fabric (5 YR 7/6) with grog/clay pellet inclusions. Occasional gravel inclusions present up to 4 mm. Archive code D1. Fabric C. Base present: 100%. This rim form has similarities to Fishbourne type 139 (Cunliffe 1971, 205, Fig. 97) where it was dated before AD 75. Also similar to forms found at Cirencester in Ist century AD levels (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, Fig 54, 166; Fig 60, 337). 2. Flanged rim mortarium. Oxidised silty fabric (5 YR 7/6). Grog/clay pellets, red ore and oc- casional gravel temper. Archive code C4. Fabric C. Rim present: 11.5%. This form parallels Fishbourne type 136 ah) (Cunliffe 1971, 205, Fig. 97) and is found in pre-AD 75 levels. At Cirencester the nearest parallels are as for Brinkworth no. 1 (above). Ist century AD date. Flanged rim mortarium with very badly abraded maker’s stamp. Oxidised exterior (5 YR 7/4) with grey core (10 YR 7/2). Grog/clay pellets, ore and quartz inclusions. Archive code C5. Fabric E. Rim present 9%. This type of rolled rim is typical of the Claudian-Neronian period (Collingwood and Richmond 1976, 253-54, Fig. 78ff.). Flanged rim mortarium. Oxidised silty fabric (10 YR 7/2) with ore and calcareous inciusions. Interior heavily pockmarked because the titu- ration has been completely leached out. Archive code C6. Fabric E. Rim present: 11.5%. Similar to forms found at Fishbourne, type 141.2 (Cunliffe 1971, 206-207, Fig. 98) and Cirencester (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, Fig. 55, 169). lst century date. Flanged rim mortarium. Oxidised exterior (5 YR 7/6) with grey core (10 YR 7/2). Red ore and cream coloured calcareous inclusions. Archive code C8. Similar to Cirencester fabric CM42. Rim present: 5%. Parallels Fishbourne type 137 (Cunliffe 1971, 205, Fig. 97). As with forms 1-4, it can be most closely associated with mortaria types intro- duced to Britain from the Continent. All are of Ist century AD date and are likely to be no later than early Flavian. Datable parallels seem to be found in contexts no later than AD 75-85. Small flagon with disc rim. Oxidised silty fabric (5 YR 7/6) with red ore inclusions. Archive code 14. Fabric A. Rim present: 79%. Parallels Fishbourne type 120 (Cunliffe 1971, 201, Fig. 95). Found in pre-AD 75 levels. Small flagon with disc rim. Oxidised exterior with grey core (7.5 YR 5/N). Silty fabric with red ore inclusions. Archive code IS. Fabric A. Rim present: 25%. This form deviates from the more common ring necked flagons found at Brinkworth. No exact parallels are to be found locally or in pre-AD 75 levels at Fishbourne. The flaring neck is characteristic of pre-AD 130 types (Collingwood and Richmond 1976, 257-58). The nearest local parallels are found at Wan- borough (Greene 1976, 54, Fig. 2, nos. 8-11) where they are dated AD 80-130 by parallels with Gillam (1957) types 4 and 5. Large ring neck flagon. Pinkish oxidised fabric 40 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE SS ee 6 WA 7¥ 8 VR 10 \2 11 ( & 12 V7 0 cxcecececes 10 cms Figure 7. Brinkworth: unstratified Roman pottery ROMAN KILN SITE, BRINK WORTH 10. 11. 12. 13. (7.5 YR 8/4). Silty fabric with red ore and cream coloured calcareous inclusions. Archive code D4. Fabric A. Rim present: 100%. (Also found T2-12.) Parallels Fishbourne type 109.1 (Cunliffe 1971, 94, 200) and Cirencester (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 183, Fig. 58, no. 303). Fishbourne dates are generally AD 75; at Ciren- cester the latest dates are given Neronian—early Flavian (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 179). Large Hofheim-type flagon with horizontal rim. Pink exterior surface (5 YR 7/4) with grey core (10 YR 7/1). Silty fabric with red ore inclusions up to 5 mm, and sparse grog temper. Archive code I6. Fabric C. Rim present: 35%. These flagons were generally manufactured in Britain for the army between AD 43-70 (Swan 1980, 13, Fig. 1, no. 1). Ring necked flagon. Oxidised exterior (7.5 YR 8/6) with grey core (5 Y 7/1). Silty fabric with red ore and occasional cream _ coloured calcareous inclusions. Archive code D2. Fabric A. Rim present: 100%. Possibly a variation of number 8. Ring necked flagon. Grey reduced fabric. Archive code D7. Fabric B. Rim present: 17.5%. Parallels Fishbourne type 109.4 (Cunliffe 1971, 200, Fig. 94). At Cirencester parallels are Fig. 58, no. 300 (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 183) and Fig. 60, no. 341 (ibid., 186). Both these have four rings as opposed to three for the Brinkworth example but this is considered a minor variation. Number 300 is considered as possibly Claudian (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 179) but was found in levels no later than early Flavian. Number 341 appears in the back filling of a ditch and was dated between AD 70 and 85. It seems possible that this latter sherd was redeposited on the evidence of no. 300. This indicates a probable pre-AD 75 date for the Brinkworth examples. Flagon with flared rim and reeded collar. Re- duced fabric (2.5 Y 7/2) with sparse ore inclu- sions. Archive code I8. Fabric B. Rim present: 20%. This piece is difficult to parallel. The nearest similarity was at Wanborough (Greene 1976, 54; Fig. 2, no. 12). As with Brinkworth no. 7, this piece falls within a late lst/early 2nd century date range. The type is dated by Greene (1976, 65) to around AD 120. Flagon base with foot ring. Oxidised exterior (5 14. Se 16. We 18. 19: 20. Jalle 22% 4] YR 7/8) with grey core (2.5 Y 7/2). Silty fabric with frequent reddish ore inclusions. Archive code K8. Fabric A. Base present: 100%. Also found in contexts T1-6, T2-7, T2-11. Bulging bodied flagon with foot ring base. Oxi- dised silty fabric (5 YR 7/8) with frequent red ore and sparse calcareous inclusions up to 4mm. Archive code K4. Fabric A. Base present: 100%. Parallels base found in the well at Cunetio by Annable (1966, Fig. 4, no. 64). This site has been dated mid Ist century AD (Anderson 1977, 127). Bulging bodied flagon with foot ring base. Oxi- dised exterior with grey core (10 YR 6/1). Silty fabric with sparse ore and calcareous inclusions. Archive code K7. Fabric A. Base present: 11%. Five ring flagon handle. Oxidised silty fabric (5 YR 7/8) with sparse red ore and creamy calcareous inclusions. Archive code P4. Fabric A. Five ring flagon handle. Oxidised silty fabric (5 YR 7/6) with red ore, white calcareous and grog/clay pellet inclusions. Archive code O7. Fabric C. Four ring flagon handle. Oxidised silty fabric (5 YR 7/8) with sparse red ore and cream coloured calcareous inclusions. Archive code O2. Fabric A. Four ring flagon handle. Reddish-yellow ex- terior (5 YR 7/8) with grey core (5 Y 7/1). Archive code N8. Fabric A. Three ring flagon handle. Reduced fabric (10 YR 7/1) with worn orange slip (5 YR 7/6). Archive code N4. Fabric B. As with nos. 16-19 this handle has char- acteristics of lst century AD date and can be paralleled with pieces of similar date at Fishbourne (Cunliffe 1971, 200-01, Figs. 94-95) and elsewhere. Possible wine flagon copying Dressel type 20 amphora form. Very thin wall to body. Oxidised fabric (5 YR 7/6). Heavily pockmarked with large grog-like inclusions up to 4 mm. Fabric type similar to CM 139. Rim present: 46%. Dressel 20 amphora are generally Ist century AD. This copy appears, because of its unusually thin wall, to have been an experimental vessel. Bead rimmed vessel in oxidised silty fabric. Exterior reddish-yellow surfaces (5 YR 7/8) with pink core (5 YR 7/4). Sparse ore inclusions up to 4 mm with grog/clay pellets up to 2 mm. Archive code H9. Fabric C. Rim present: 7%. 42 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Is! un 14 . | a 17 l- 18 | 19 | 20 21 q@ | Od a — a te ) i aN 27 y BES 18: MM So oa. | aaa hee a he Wl as 0 CEoececem 10cms Figure 8. Brinkworth: Roman pottery: nos. 13—27, unstratified; nos. 28-29, stratified (Trench 2) ROMAN KILN SITE, BRINKWORTH 23. 24. 25. Bead rimmed vessels in Wiltshire are char- acteristic of a mid Ist century AD date (Ander- son 1977, 55) and were found at a kiln site of this date at Oare, near Cunetio. At Fishbourne similar vessels, type 166, have been found in pre-AD 75 contexts (Cunliffe 1971, 213; Fig. 102). Jar with concave rim. Oxidised quartz tempered fabric (5 YR 6/8) with sparse red ore inclusion. Archive code H3. Rim present: 14%. Similar forms to this vessel were found at Fishbourne where they are said not to have outlasted the Ist century AD (Cunliffe 1971, 214, 215; Fig. 103, no. 181). Jar with flat rim with two concentric grooves, possibly a seating for a lid. Oxidised reddish- yellow exterior (5 YR 7/6) with grey core (2.5 YR 7/2). Silty fabric with red ore inclusions up to 2 mm. Archive code H4. Fabric A. Rim present: 17.5%. The nearest parallels locally are found at Cirencester. Although not an exact parallel, Fig. 65, no. 484 (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 197) shows similar characteristics. This is dated to the pre-Flavian period (ibid., 198). Another piece that has parallels is Fig. 52, no. 76 (ibid., 179). This was found in levels that contained material ranging from the mid to late (Flavian— Trajanic) lst century AD (1bid., 167). Plain jar with out-curved rim. Oxidised silty fabric (S YR 7/8) with red ore inclusions and some quartz. Archive code H8. Fabric D. Rim present: 16.4%. There are a number of local parallels for this type. Similar vessels have been identified at Cunetio as being from mid Ist century AD contexts (Annable 1966, 15, Fig. 2, no. 38; 16, Fig. 3, no. 50); and by Anderson (1977, 104, Fig. 17, no. 39), where the type is attributed to the lst century AD, but with the possibility of extension over a longer time range (1bid., 107). At Cirencester it has parallels in Fig. 51, no. 60 (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 166) and Fig. 53, no. 109 (ibid., 171). The former comes from Neronian/early Flavian levels, the latter from a context associated with Flavian samian and a mortarium dated AD 80-120 (ibid., 167). The likelihood therefore is that this form dates from the mid/late lst century with an outside possi- bility of it being slightly later (early 2nd century). Vessel base (possible cooking pot?). Oxidised exterior (2.5 YR 6/8) with grey core (10 YR 7/1). fe 43 Silty fabric with ore and calcareous inclusions, with small amounts of quartz present. Archive code KS. Fabric D. Base present: 15%. Kick base of possible beaker. Oxidised exterior (7.5 YR 8/6) with grey core (7.5 YR 7/N). Silty fabric with sparse ore and calcareous inclusions. Grey slip applied to exterior (2.5 Y 7/2). Archive code K1. Fabric A. Base present: 22%. Stratified Roman pottery (Figure 8: 28-29 and Figure 9: 30-52) 28. 29. 30. 31 32; 33) 34, Flanged mortarium rim. Oxidised exterior (7.5 YR 7/6) with grey core (10 YR 6/1). Red ore and cream coloured calcareous inclusions. Context T2-8. Archive code C7. Rim present: 9%. Paralleled by Fishbourne type 141 (Cunliffe 1971, 207, Fig. 98) and considered common in pre-AD 75 levels. It is here recorded that at Camulodunum the form is considered Claudian- Neronian (zbid., 206). A similar vessel at Ciren- cester (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 164, Fig. 50, no. 10) is considered to be pre-Flavian (zbid., 163). Mortarium with flanged rim. Grey reduced fab- ric (10 YR 5/1). Grog/clay pellets, ore and quartz inclusions. Context T2-14/T2-12). Archive code C3. Fabric E. Rim present: 12.5%. Paralleled at Fishbourne by type 141 (Cunliffe 1971, 207, Fig. 98). Nearest parallels at Ciren- cester are dated c. AD 60-96 (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 176, Fig. 55, no. 169; 186, Fig. 60, no. 337). Ring neck flagon in oxidised fabric (5 YR 7/6). Red ore, some quartz and calcareous inclusions. Context T2—11. Archive code El]. Rim present: 44%. 1st century AD form (see nos. 8, 11, 20). Ring necked flagon. Oxidised silty fabric (5 YR 7/6) with red ore and cream coloured calcareous inclusions. Similarities with Cirencester Museum type fabric 42. Context T2-11. Archive code D3. Fabric A. Rim present: 100%. Probably Ist century date. Similar vessels found at Fishbourne do not outlive the Trajanic period (Cunliffe 1971, 198, 200; Fig. 94). Ring neck flagon in oxidised silty fabric (5 YR 7/6). Sparse ore and calcareous inclusions. Con- text T2-11. Archive code Fl. Fabric A. Rim present: 35%. Ring neck wine fiagon. Grey reduced silty fabric (10 YR 7/2). Red ore inclusions. Context T2-12. Archive code GS. Fabric B. Rim present: 21%. Ring neck flagon. Oxidised fabric (5 YR 7/6) with sparse ore, calcareous and quartz inclu- THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE ie \B 31 a=, 32 = 33 tS 34, \ 35 a» eae . cade ah meal ae 38 Sete aia 4.0 iM) eon | I} 42 {{[}-e~e 4.3 -. -_—— Lh fia 45 Aa ei a Sie ere a> Teaiin ommcmenn a> \aMGNN RAE ereuece 49 ae | 50 bee | 51 \ | | 52 1 Sam a cieiat. * 9S 0 Cem 10cms Figure 9. Brinkworth: stratified Roman pottery ROMAN KILN SITE, BRINK WORTH 35) 36. 37 38. 39° 40. 41. 42. 43. sions. Context T2—14. Archive code D9. Fabric D. Rim present: 20%. Probably Ist century AD. Hofheim type flagon with horizontal rim. Oxi- dised silty fabric (S YR 7/6) with red ore inclu- sions. Context T2-12. Archive code I7. Fabric A. Rim present: 40%. See no. 9. Dated AD 43-70. Flagon with foot ring base. Oxidised exterior (5 YR 7/8) with grey core (2.5 YR 7/2). Context T2-8. Fabric A. Base present: 20%. Probably lst century. Flagon with bulging body and simple flat base. Oxidised silty fabric (5 YR 7/6). Light grey reduced patch on bottom of base, evidence of possible misfiring. Context T2-14. Archive code M3. Fabric A. Base present: 40%. Flagon base with foot ring. Reduced interior (2.5 YR 7/2) with oxidised exterior (S YR 7/8). Silty fabric with red ore and cream coloured calcareous inclusions. Context T2-12. Archive code K2. Fabric A. Base present: 20%. Two ring flagon handle. Oxidised silty fabric with pinkish tone (5 YR 7/4). Context T2-8. Archive code O9. Fabric A. Probably Ist century AD. Two ring flagon handle. Oxidised silty fabric (5 YR 7/6) with red ore and white calcareous inclusions. Context T2-2. Archive code O4. Fabric A. Probably Ist century AD. Three ring flagon handle. Context T2-11. Archive code N10. Fabric A. Three ringed flagon handle. Reduced silty fabric (2.5 Y 5/N) with worn reddish yellow slip (5 YR 7/8). Context T2-11. Archive code O1. Fabric B. Probably dated to lst century or early 2nd century AD. Bead rimmed vessel in reddish brown rough fabric (5 YR 5/3). Sparse calcareous inclusions up to 4mm. Context T2-11. Archive code H10. Rim present: 5%. Bead rim vessels were gradually superseded during the lst century AD, dying out by the early 2nd century (Anderson 1977, 105-106). This sherd is not considered to be a Brinkworth product but is an alien piece probably intro- duced by the potters to the site. It is paralleled at Cirencester (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 166, Fig. 51, no. 65). This was found in phase one of site DK and dated c. AD 55—70. Similar vessels were found in a well at Cunetio (Annable 1966, 15; Fig. 2, nos. 6, 7, 54) where a date of AD 50-60 has been suggested (Anderson 1977, 127). Plain jar with outcurved rim in grey reduced 45. 46. 47. 48. 45 fabric (5 Y 7/1). Some calcareous inclusions with grog/clay pellets up to 3 mm. Context T2-12. Archive code M2. Rim present: 17%. Parallels Fishbourne type 161 and 162 (Cun- liffe 1971, 211, Fig. 101) where it appeared in the Ist century contexts but continued well into the 2nd century. At Wanborough it was found in the Ermine Street Ditch (dated Ist century AD) but is here paralleled with Verulamium dating of about AD 105 (Anderson 1977, 104, Fig. 17, no. 41; 107). Similar forms at Cirences- ter (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 164, Fig. 50, nos. 20, 22, 24) are recognised as extending into the second century, but were found sealed be- neath levels dated between AD 80 and 100 (ibid., 163). Plain jar with everted rim. Oxidised reddish yellow silty fabric (S YR 7/8) with sparse red ore inclusions. Possible remains of dark grey slip on exterior surfaces. Context T2—11. Archive code H6. Fabric A. Rim present: 16%. Paralleled at Fishbourne (Cunliffe 1971, 193, Fig. 90, no. 73.3). Found in both pre- and post-AD 75 contexts but does not appear after Ist century AD (ibid., 190). Found at Cirences- ter (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 164, Fig. 50, no. 13) in pre AD 85 contexts and elsewhere (tbid., 170, Fig. 52, nos. 97/98) where it is attributed to the pre-Flavian or Flavian period. Plain jar with everted rim. Oxidised reddish yellow silty fabric (5 YR 7/6) with sparse ore inclusions. Context T2-11. Archive code H7. Fabric A. Rim present: 8%. This vessel may have been a copy of an imported vessel. Parallels at Cirencester have been dated c. AD 50-85 (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 186, Fig. 60, nos. 336, 367; 187, 189). Concave rim jar. Dark reddish brown exterior (5 YR 3/4) with dark grey core (5 YR 2.5N). Heavy quartz temper. Context T2-14. Archive code B6. Unprovenanced fabric. Rim present: 5%. Nearest parallel is shown in Anderson (1977, 109, Fig. 18, nos. 56, 58). These were produced in large quantities in the Severn Valley and also in the 2nd century at Purton. They were known to have been produced in Wiltshire at Oare from the mid Ist century AD, but ‘probably contin- ued throughout the period’ (Anderson 1977, 111). Concave rim jar. Light brown oxidised fabric with quartz and fine limestone temper. Context Tl-1. Archive code B2. Unprovenanced fabric. Rim present: 8.5%. 46 49, 50. Bye 52: THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Similar to 47. Produced from mid Ist through into the 2nd century AD in Wiltshire. Jar with everted rim? Reduced fabric (10 YR 7/2) with ore inclusions and quartz tempering. Context T1-4. Archive code J9. Rim present: 4%. There is not a sufficient amount of this vessel available to make a positive identification. It could be from a vessel similar to nos. 47 and 48. If it is an everted rim jar, then it could have been produced in Wiltshire at any tume from the mid Ist through into the 2nd century following parallels in Anderson (1977, 109, Fig. 18, nos. 49-53). Flat base of probable jar-like vessel. Oxidised exterior (7.5 YR 7/6) with grey core (5 Y 7/1). Sparse red and cream coloured calcareous inclu- sions. Context T2—8. Archive code M10. Fabric A. Base present: 10%. Paralleled by lst century forms at Fishbourne (Cunliffe 1971, 190, 193, Fig. 90, no. 73) and Cirencester (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 164, Fig. 50, no. 26). Cylindrical vessel with collared rim. Reduced silty fabric (10 YR 7/1) with ore and calcareous inclusions. Some pockmarking through leaching out of inclusions. Context T2—14. Archive code 110. Fabric B. Rim present: 23%. Nearest parallels at Cirencester (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 164, Fig. 50, nos. 7 and 18). The first came from a pre-Flavian context although the latter is dated no later than AD 85 (ibid., 162). Probable carinated bowl with horizonial rim. Grey reduced silty fabric (2.5 YR 6/N), with some pockmarking: Context T2-14. Archive code I9. Rim present: 3%. Hemispherical bowls of this type have been found at Fishbourne until Flavian times (Cun- liffe 1971, 194, 197, Fig. 92, nos. 89-91). Nearest parallels at Cirencester are considered to be either Flavian by typology or come from Flavian contexts (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 178, 180, Fig. 255; 187; 188, Fig. 61, 373). They are generally typical of the period AD 80-125 although they continued to be manufac- tured at Verulamium well into the 2nd century (Collingwood and Richmond 1976, 265). Unusual pieces and possible kiln furniture 53: In-curved rim, considerably warped. Possibly potter’s experiment, a mistake or apprentice’s practice piece. Reddish yellow throughout (5 54. YR 7/6). Sparse red inclusions. Unstratified context. Archive code J3. Rim present: 22%. The distortion of the remaining rim is such that it is not clear whether the drawing rep- resents the intended shape. Circular ring with small holes of about 5 mm in diameter. It is not considered that these would have been intended as part of a vessel. The most plausible theory is that they were some sort of spacer bars used to keep ceramic objects, poss- ibly ules, separated during firing. Unstratified context. MEDIEVAL POTTERY FROM TRENCH 1 (Figure 10: 55-63) Sp): 56. a7, 58. 59: 60. 6l. 62. Cooking pot with out curved rim. Abraded brownish exterior (7.5 YR 7/4) with black core (2.5 YR 2.5N). Flint, limestone and quartz inclusions. Heavily pock-marked. Very hard firing, possible waster? Context T1-1. Archive code Al. Cooking pot with everted rim. Buff exterior (7.5 YR 7/4) with grey core (7.5 YR 5/N). Heavily pock-marked through leaching in acidic soil. Lime- stone temper. Context T1—1. Archive code A2. Cooking pot with slightly flaring flat topped rim and bulging shoulder. Oxidised exterior (2.5 YR 5/6) with grey core (7.5 YR 5/N). Heavily pock-marked. Calcareous tempering. Context T1-6. Archive code A3. Cooking pot with everted rim. Pale brown ex- terior (10 YR 8/4) with grey core (2.5 YR 5/N). Heavily pock-marked, calcareous tempering. Context T1-6. Archive code A4. Cooking pot with everted rim. Faded oxidised exterior with grey core. Heavily pock-marked. Calcareous tempering. Context T1-3. Archive code AS. Cooking pot with ‘club’ type rim. Oxidised exterior (7.5 YR 7/4) with grey core (7.5 YR 4/N). Heavily pock-marked with calcareous tempering. Context T1—4. Archive code A6. Cooking pot with bead rim. Reddish-brown oxidised exterior (7.5 YR 4/4) with grey core (7.5 YR 4/N). Heavily pock-marked with calcareous tempering. Context T1—US. Archive code A7. Cooking pot with out-curved rim. Buff exterior (10 YR 8/4) with grey core (7.5 YR 5/N). Heavy pock-marking with calcareous temper. Red ore fragments frequent. Context T1l—4. Archive code A8. ROMAN KILN SITE, BRINKWORTH 47 Ae a oe a 0 meee 10 cms Figure 10. Brinkworth: Medieval pottery 63. Cooking pot with everted rim. Buff exterior (10 YR 8/4) with light grey core (10 YR 7/1). Heavy pock-marking with calcareous inclusions. Red ore fragments frequent. Context T1—-US. Archive code A10. FABRICS Fabrics were paralleled with Cirencester Museum type fabric series, indicated by the code CM, followed by the fabric number. The fabrics produced on the Brinkworth site ap- pear to fall into five distinguishable types. It was considered that all five fabric types are very similar and that there were sure to be vessels made on the site where it would be difficult to differentiate between these fabrics. Fabnc A: A silty matrix with frequent red ore and sparse cream coloured inclusions, probably of a calcareous nature. Oxidised but frequently with a grey core. Fabric B: Identical to Fabric A but reduced throughout. Fabric C: As Fabric A but used mainly for mortaria and ules. A coarser fabric, it contains grog/clay pellets up to 4 mm. Some pieces have very occasional gravel inclusions up to 4 mm. Fabric D: As Fabric A but containing sparse/ moderate amounts of sand/quartz. Fabric E: As Fabric C but with sparse/moderate amounts of sand/quartz. Vessels of this type recovered had no gravel inclusions within. The fabric seemed confined to mortaria. It is considered that all these fabrics were made from locally collected clays. A number of small clay pits were found in the area, some up to 0.5 km from each other. Slight variations in compositon of the clays as dug could account for the usually small amounts of sand/quartz occasionally found within the matrix (Fabrics D and E). Fabric A seemed to match Cirencester Museum fabric number 42 (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 158). 48 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE This was found mainly in the main filling of Ditch II, AM11 59 (ibid., loc. cit.) and is attributed a Neronian date, starting about AD 60-65 (1bid., 58). Occasional pieces at Brinkworth were found to be a pale pink colour, yet still very similar to Fabric A. These seemed to match fabric 11 at Cirencester, which was found predominantly in the same level as fabric 42 (ibid., 155). This fabric was dated Neronian-early Flavian. Many of the Fabric C mor- taria seemed to match CM fabric 11 but with grog/ gravel inclusions. The mortaria containing sand/quartz (Fabric E) were closest to Cirencester Museum fabric 73. This was also found associated with Ditch III and is considered to be local to Cirencester (1bid., 160). Fabric D was found to be very closely related to the fabric of Severn Valley type wares. CM fabric 10 is very similar. This is said to ‘fall within the definition of Severn Valley Wares’ (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 155). Other Severn Valley fabrics that were very similar to the ‘sandy’ Brinkworth types are CM 106 and CM 108. Another fabric with very close parallels to Fabric D is CM 98. This is the main fabric of the kiln site at Whitehill Farm, dated from the late Ist century through to the 2nd century AD by Anderson 97a): Fabric B was generally much rarer than Fabric A. These may have been mistakes as some examples were later covered in an orange slip. There were a small number of alien fabrics found at Brinkworth; they were considered to have been brought on to the site by the potters and other staff working there. Of the drawn examples these include: 21. A silty fabric containing many voids. Corre- sponds with CM 139 and Gloucester Archaeo- logical Unit type fabric TF 17. Believed to be charcoal tempered, hence the voids. 23. This fabric is very similar to CM 98, the main fabric produced at White Hill Farm kilns nearby. 43. Almost certainly CM 24 or CM 3, the only difference being that CM 24 is wheel thrown whereas CM 3 is hand made (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 153, 156, 201). These are un- usual in being jars with Iron Age form. They seem to continue to be made into the Roman period although the source has not yet been located (ibid., 201). 44. A light grey reduced fabric with heavy blue-grey grog tempering leaving a lumpy exterior. This is either Cirencester Museum fabric CM 6B or CM 13. Both types are variants of the Savernake industry. DISCUSSION OF THE ROMAN POTTERY The majority of the forms (mortaria, flagons, jars and possible beakers) seem to date from the first century AD although there are pieces that could have been made in the second century in the assemblage. There are two good examples of Hofheim flagons, both in kiln fabrics, which would seem to indicate a pre-AD 70 starting date for production on the site. The mortarium rims also seem to indicate an early date, pre-AD 75. Certainly the evidence derived from the fabric types seems to indicate an early Flavian date at the latest. This is further reinforced from the typology of the vessels found on the site and their dated parallels from other sites. Some caution might be suggested before assigning a pre-AD 75 date to the Brinkworth kilns. There are a number of types that, although they could pre-date AD 75, could also date from later periods, some extending well into the second century. The main objection to a pre-AD 75 date comes from certain flagon rim types that appear to have been made on the site. Nos. 7 and 12 are not early forms, although they pre-date AD 130. Their closest parallels are dated by Greene (1976, 54, 65) to the period AD 80-130. Both pieces are from unstratified contexts but would seem to indicate that some form of production continued after AD 80. The best stratified assemblage came from the stokehole in Trench 2. This appears to have been deposited after the structure in Trench 2 ceased to be used. With one exception (no. 52) all the pieces in the stokehole could have been made from the mid first century onwards. The carinated bowl (no. 52) is thought to be typical of the period AD 80-130 (Collingwood and Richmond 1976, 265). If AD 80-130 seems to be the latest date at which the site was abandoned, then the occurrence of Hof- heim flagons (nos. 9 and 35) shows that production must have started here before AD 70. MEDIEVAL POTTERY The acidic soil of Brinkworth has caused considerable leaching to occur on the recovered sherds of medieval pottery. This has removed what was clearly a lime- stone temper and has made it difficult to provenance any of the fabrics found. The general colouring of the vessels, however, seems to discount any material deriving from the nearby Minety kilns (Musty 1973, 79-88). Those fabrics which can be tentatively prov- enanced seem either to come from a yet unlocated site, possibly nearby, or to have affinities with the Wootton Bassett industries (Currie 1987). ROMAN KILN SITE, BRINK WORTH The forms are mainly twelfth/thirteenth century types, characterised by everted rim cooking pots known as ‘Selsey Common’ Ware after a site exca- vated by Dunning (1949, 30-44). These pots are characteristic of the mid twelfth/thirteenth centuries. Other forms, such as the club rimmed cooking pot (no. 62), are more likely to be of twelfth century date from parallels found at Huish (Musty 1972, 126-131). This puts the assemblage into the mid/late twelfth rather than the thirteenth century, although this piece may have been residual from an earlier period. NOTE ON ARCHIVE CODING The archive coding was adopted as a convenience to WRAP staff, but will prove useful because of the frequent renumbering of the pottery catalogue in the preparation of the report and subsequent editing for publication. Items considered for drawing were bagged individually on lots of ten. Each lot was lettered alphabetically: A, B, C etc. Therefore lot A includes numbers Al—A10; lot B numbers B1—10 and so on. The materials were deposited bagged-up under these codes. When seeking individual sherds in the catalogue, only the archive code should be sought on the bags as drawing numbers may have been altered since the archive was compiled. If this system is maintained at Devizes Museum, where the archive is deposited, cross referencing with the report should present few problems to future scholars. Acknowledgements. The author would like to acknowledge in particu- lar the immense help and co-operation of the landowners, Dick and Julian Sheppard and their families; he is especially grateful to Julian for making himself available with a digger to back-fill the trenches after the work was completed. The author would also like to thank the following for their assistance on site: Trudie Currie, Jackie Gregory, Andrew Miller, Gerrard Byrne, Gareth Smith, Mark Loft and Andrew Reynolds. Further thanks are due to Andrew Miller, for assisting with the magnetometer survey, and Bryn Walters, Director of The Roman Research Trust, for drawing attention to the mammatae tiles found in Trench 1. Post-excavation thanks are given to the above, and to Alfred Summers, Sarah Lee, Ann Viner, Mike Vince and Rupert Parker. Mike and Rupert were responsible for photographing the drawings and doing the pre-publication dark room work. Special thanks are expressed to Ron Wilcox for reading the draft report and offering encouragement; Roy Canham; the staff: of Cirencester Museum, who tolerated ransacking of their fabric series; and to Mark Loft, who undertook part of the research for the pottery _ report, and who did all the pottery drawings. REFERENCES Original Documentary Sources Wiltshire Record Office: Tithe map and award for Brinkworth Enclosure map and award for Brinkworth 49 Bedford Record Office: BRO R2/145: 18th century survey Abbot’s Worthy, Hamp- shire Manuscript Sources in Print Public Record Office: Patent Rolls Calendar of Patent Rolls, Henry III to Elizabeth I (73 vols), HMSO London, 1901-86 Elsewhere: Wiltshire Inquisitions Post Mortem: Temp. Charles I (1901), London Secondary Sources ANDERSON, A.S. 1977 “The Roman Pottery Industry in North Wiltshire’, MA Dissertation, University of Leicester — 1980 ‘The Romano-British Pottery Kilns at Purton’, WAM 72/3, (1977/78), 51-58 ANNABLE, F.K., 1962 ‘ A Romano-British Pottery in Saver- nake Forest, Kilns 1-2; WAM 58, 142-155 — 1966 ‘A Late First Century Well at Cunetio’, WAM 61, 9-24 BRITTON, J., 1825 The Beauties of Wiltshire, London COLLINGWOOD, R.G., and RICHMOND, I., 1976 The Archaeology of Roman Britain (1976 edition), London CUNLIFFE, B., 1971 Excavations at Fishbourne 1961-1969, Vol. IT: The Finds (1971), Leeds CUNNINGTON, B.H., 1893 ‘Notes on the Discovery of Romano- British Kilns and Pottery at Broomsgrove, Milton, Pew- sey’, WAM 27, 294-301 CURRIE, C.K., 1987 ‘Excavations in Wootton Bassett 1986’, Wilts County Council typescript DUNNING, G.C., 1949 ‘Report on the Medieval Pottery from Selsey Common, near Stroud’, Trans. Bristol and Glou- cestershire Arch. Soc. 6, 30-44 FINBERG, H., 1964 The Early Charters of Wessex, Studies in Early English History, 3, Leicester GILLAM, J.P., 1957 “Types of North British Coarse Ware’, Archaeologia Aeliana, 35, 180-251 GREENE, K.T., 1976 ‘A Group of Roman Pottery from Wan- borough, Wiltshire’, WAM 69 (1974), 51-66 GRINSELL, L.V., 1957 ‘Archaeological Gazetteer’ in R.B. Pugh and E. Crittall (eds.), A History of Wiltshire Vol. 1, part 1, London, 21-279 HODDER, 1., 1976 ‘The Distribution of Savernake Ware’, WAM 69 (1974), 67-84 McWHIRR, A.D., 1979 ‘Roman Tile Kilns in Roman Britain’, in A. McWhirr (ed.), Roman Brick and Tile, BAR Inter- national Series 68, 97-190 MUSTY, J., 1972 ‘The Pottery’ in N.P. Thompson, ‘Exca- vations on a Medieval site at Huish, 1967-68’, WAM 67, 1-131 — 1973 ‘A Preliminary Account of a Medieval Pottery Industry at Minety, North Wiltshire’, WAM 68, 79- 88 RAY, K. 1976 ‘Romano-British Settlements in Wiltshire’, in J. Haslam, Wiltshire Towns: the Archaeological Potennal, 107 ROOK, T., 1979 ‘The Effect of the Evolution of Flues upon the Development of Architecture’, in A. McWhirr (ed.), Roman Brick and Tile, BAR International Series 68, 303-308 50 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE SWAN, V.G., 1980 Pottery in Roman Briain (3rd ed.), Princes WACHER, J.S., and McWHIRR, A.D., 1982 Cirencester Exca- Risborough vations, I. Early Roman Occupation at Cirencester, Ciren- — 1984 The Pottery Kilns of Roman Britain, RCHM Supp. cester Ser. 5, HMSO, London YOUNG, C.J., 1977 The Roman Pottery Industry of the Oxford THORN, C. and F. (eds.), 1979 Domesday Book: Wiltshire, Region, BAR British Series 43, Oxford Chichester Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 51-62 Roman Brooches from Gastard, Corsham, Wiltshire by D.F. MACKRETH The collection of brooches which forms the subject of the following report was found principally by Mr Gary Yorke at a Roman site at Gastard, Corsham. The nature of the site has not been established, but the imitation samian (see Note by Jane Timby on p.147) and coins found confirm that it was in use from early in the Roman period until the fourth century. Although much smaller than the group recovered from Cold Kitchen Hill, Brixton Deverill, this assemblage 1s one of the largest from the county and as such merits detailed record. The collection includes Colchester Derivatives, and examples of Strip, Aucissa-Hod Hill and Plate brooch forms. The report has been compiled following examination of the drawings of the brooches and discussion with the illustrator, Nick Griffiths, on matters of detail. The brooches are of copper alloy, unless described otherwise. COLCHESTER DERIVATIVES (Figures 1-3: 1-24) Brooches 1-8 have or had their springs mounted in the Harlow manner: an axis bar through the coils passes through the lower hole in a plate behind the head of the bow, the chord being held in the upper hole. 1. Each wing has a groove at the end. The plate behind the head is run as a ridge down the centre of the upper bow which is narrow, other- wise plain and tapers to a pointed foot. 2. Similar to the last brooch, but without the lower bow and catch-plate. Both brooches are members of a group characterised by their thin bows, overall proportions, style of wing and ridge on the upper part of the bow. The group is distributed generally through central southern England. There is a concentration around Cirencester which may not just be a reflection of the greater amount of excavation which has taken place in the area. Unfortunately, the dating is both limited and untrustworthy: Brockworth, Gloucestershire, with a coin of Gratian (Rawes 1981, 65, fig. 8, 1). Although there are few stylistic grounds for assigning a particu- lar floruit, the absence of pierced catch-plates suggests that none should be significantly earlier than AD 75 and a date-range of late first century to c.150/175, when British bow brooches seem to have passed out of production, may be proposed. 3. A diminutive brooch, only 26 mm long; the design is the same as the previous two brooches, but very squat. The brooch does not belong to a well defined variety but its size may account for the overall proportions, and the same date-range as that proposed for Brooches 1 and 2 may be suggested. 4. The only ornamental features present are a crest on the head and a projecting foot. 5. The front of the crest on the head is pinched to a point. The better preserved wing has a groove at its end. The bow is plain. 6. The head only of a brooch like the previous one, but completely plain. There are no features which point towards any par- ticular variety of Colchester Derivatives. Plain brooches such as these are found running from East Anglia into Gloucestershire, but those in the eastern part of the distribution almost always have pierced catch-plates. Dating is again virtually non-existent and although pierced catch-plates tend to be earlier than solid ones, the distributions could indicate con- temporary groups of craftsmen producing them. There is, however, little sign of development in the eastern districts to suggest that plain brooches like these continued to be made into the second century, whereas in the western area there are such develop- ments and these suggest that the Harlow spring system continued to be produced in the first half of the second century; the foot on Brooch 4 would certainly suit a date later than AD 75. As these three brooches cannot be associated with any définite sec- ond century type, the style may have ceased to be made before the end of the overall floruit. This would suggest a date hardly later than 125. 7. Each wing has a pair of sunken ridges divided by a wide flute. The plate behind the head is carried over the top to form a ridge on the upper part of the bow. On each side of the head is a step which, in the side view, gives the impression of a plate rising from the wings. There is a small projecting foot. THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Figure 1. Roman brooches from Gastard: Colchester Derivatives. Actual size ROMAN BROOCHES FROM GASTARD The mouldings at the ends of the wings are most commonly found on Colchester Derivatives whose springs are held by a rearward-facing hook. The basic distribution of these is in Norfolk and in the adjacent areas, especially on the western edges of the Fens. On the Rearhook type, the decoration must be before AD 60-65 (Mackreth, forthcoming) and the impression is that the decoration on hinged-pin types is also first century. In the present case, the mouldings on each side of the head of the bow as well the projecting foot point to the latter part of the first century and the earlier part of the second century. 8. The better preserved wing has a groove at its end. The crest on the head has a pointed end. The bow is badly corroded and the lower part is missing. There is a moulding on each side at the top, with the remains of a line of interlocking triangular cells on the front and traces of projec- tions down each side. The state of the brooch makes it difficult to see to which variety it may belong. The wings and the mouldings added to the head of the bow point in one direction, but the cells for enamel and the possibility that there were projections down the sides of the bow point to a type which usually has a stud at the head of the bow, another facing forward on the foot and enamelling between the two. The latter type dates generally before c. AD 80, but it is more probable that the brooch dates after AD 75 and may be as late as 150/175. Brooches 9-11 have or had their springs mounted in the Polden Hill manner: an axis bar through the coils is held by pierced plates at the ends of the wings; the chord is held either by a crest on the head or by a hook behind that. 9. Each wing has two prominent ridges divided from each other and the bow by wide flutes. The crest on the head has a pointed front and lies between a pair of diagonal ridges meeting in points below the crest. On each side of the head of the bow is an extra moulding having a curved profile. The lower bow is missing. Here, the chief features are the mouldings on the sides of the head and the V formed by the mouldings on the head itself. The former are found in the lower Severn Valley and spread eastwards into central southern England. Dating is sparse: Caerleon, not earlier than Flavian (Wheeler and Wheeler 1928, 162, fig. 13, 4); Newstead, AD 80-c.200 (Curle 1911, 318, pl. LXXXV, 4); Verulamium, AD 85-105 (Frere 1972, 114, fig. 29, 9). At best, a range running from the later first century into the second for manu- 53 facture can be seen, but examples may have lasted beyond AD 150. Turning to the mouldings on the head of the bow, the distribution is more restricted, being more common in Gloucestershire, Wiltshire and Avon than elsewhere. Again the dating is limited: Alton, Hants., early Flavian (Millett 1986, 67, fig. 25, 2); Camerton, AD 65-85 (Wedlake 1958, 218, fig. 50, 7); Verulamium, before the late first century (Lowther 1937, 37, fig. 2, 1); Nettleton, AD 69-117 (Wedlake 1982, 125, fig. 52, 38); Camerton, AD 120-145 (Wedlake 1958, 218, fig. 50, 6). These tend to support the late first into the second century date already indicated, but with an earlier start. One point to be made about this second group is that pierced catch-plates are common, suggesting a mainly first century date. 10. The crest rises from the flat head of the bow and its profile is shaped to form a concave face between two nicks. Each wing has a groove at its end and a diagonal one between that and the bow. The bow is divided into two parts by a cross-groove above which is a panel defined by a groove on each side and containing two lines of triangular cells outlining reserved lozenges. There is a circular cell at the top. All the enamel appears to be missing. The lower bow has a central arris and a lobe on each side immediately below the cross-groove. The basic design here is well established and it also occurs with hinged pins. Whether there is a chrono- logical progression from sprung pin to hinged is not certain. Those brooches with sprung-pins have a pierced crest and those with hinged pins almost always have a cast-on loop, but there are a few with unpierced crests (e.g., Butcombe, Avon, excavations by P.J. Fowler, unpublished). These features may point to a development from one pin-fixing arrange- ment to the other and the comments here may be applied to Brooch 18 below. The distribution shows signs that the sprung-pin type is most at home in the same basic area as the previous brooches, but ex- amples are found over a much wider area. The hinged-pin type, excluding the examples from Nor’ Nour (Dudley 1967, 34, figs. 12-13, 17-21, 23-32), shows the same distribution, but with fewer outliers. The dating for the two types is: sprung: Chew, late first-early second century (Rahtz and Greenfield 1977, fig. 114, 8); Caerleon, before AD 125 (Wheeler and Wheeler 1928, 162, fig. 13, 9); Wroxeter, after AD 125? (Atkinson 1942, 205, fig. 36, H40); hinged: Caerleon, AD 130-160 (Wheeler and Wheeler 1928, 162, fig. 13, 13); Verulamium, second century (Stead and Rigby 1989, 17, fig. 11, 30); Camerton, third 54 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE century (Wedlake 1958, 221, fig. 55, 15A). The sprung type is apparently late first century into the second, possibly up to AD 150, while the hinged seems to begin later, thus supporting a typological change occurring c.125, but more dated examples are needed before this can be safely asserted. 11. The plates at the ends of the wings found on the ordinary Polden Hills type are here expanded to form short sections of solid wing. The fronts of the wings are badly corroded, but seem to have had close-set ridges. The bow rises above the wings, has a central arris and an extra moulding on each side at the top. The foot and most of the catch-plate are missing. This type of Polden Hill brooch occurs most often in the East Midlands where it would appear to be a short-lived phenomenon lying, typologically, between those Colchester Derivatives with a rearhook and hinged-pin or Polden Hill brooches. There is no good independent dating to tell one way or another what the case was. However, the present brooch should probably be related to brooches like No. 9 and this would indicate a broad date-range from the late first into the second century. Brooches 12-23, and probably 24, have or had hinged pins, their axis bars being housed in wings with circular sections. 12. Each wing has prominent mouldings at its end, the left-hand one having three. The head of the bow has a short extra moulding on each side, a pair of deeply sunken ones in the middle down to a lozenge-shaped boss beneath which is a very narrow flat central face. The foot is finished with a boss with a groove round it. The catch-plate has a round hole with the suggestion of a small triangle above and below. The proportions, the mouldings on the upper bow and the foot all recall a type made in the West Midlands, where it was popular, and there are many outliers in the rest of Roman Britain. The boss on the bow can also be paralleled in the same family (e.g., Brown 1986, 27, fig. 19, 127; Curle 1933, 336, fig. 36, 2 and 3). A chief feature of the West Midlands group is the plate rising from the wings to mask the sides of the head of the bow, a version of which is to be found on Brooch 7 where these plates have been replaced by short applied mouldings which, from the front, recall the originals remarkable well. All in all, it is the present brooch which is probably a copy of one of the West Midlands products and, as such, should have the same date-range. This has recently been reviewed (Mackreth, forthcoming) with the conclusion that the fully developed form runs from the last quarter of the first century to c. AD 150/175. 13. Each wing is continuously ridged. The upper bow has a flat central face relieved on each side by a hollow. The lower bow is missing. This brooch does not belong to an already defined group and, without the lower bow and catch-plate, all that can be said is that fully moulded wings and the section of the bow best suit a date somewhere in the second half of the first century. 14. The better preserved wing has a pair of ridges at its end. There is a small added moulding on each side of the head of the bow which has three ridges down the middle. The lower bow is missing. 15. Each wing is elaborately moulded with two relieved ridges divided from each other and the bow by flutes. The head of the bow has a sunken crest with a pointed end. There is an elongated added moulding on each side and the suggestion of an elongated triangular hollow or cell beneath the crest. The lower bow is missing. 16. The wings are very thin and the right-hand one suggests that each had two sunken ridges. The bow has a groove down each side and a pair of diagonally cross-cut ridges down the middle. The lower bow is missing. 17. Again the wings are very thin and each has a pair of mouldings at its end and a groove between them and the bow. The head of the bow has a pair of additional mouldings on each side, the inner one being beaded. Down the middle is a pair of splayed beaded ridges meeting in a point with a plain ridge between at the top. In dealing with these four brooches we return to the same arguments used in the comments on Brooch 9. The use of the hinged pin is, however, less common and the distribution is much more closely confined to Avon, Wiltshire and the adjacent parts of Glou- cestershire. Although there is some variation in the design of these four brooches, they can still be seen to belong to the same general type. The dating is: Camerton, AD 65-85 (Wedlake 1958, 219, fig. 50, 10), first or second century (1bid., 229, fig. 53, 40), before AD 180 (ibid., 219, fig. 50, 9), second century (ibid., 229, fig. 53, 39); Chew, late first— second century (Rahtz and Greenfield 1977, fig. 114, 3); Ower, Dorset, probably before AD 125, (Woodward 1987, 95, fig. 52, 210); Ilchester, before the late second century (Leach 1982, 243, fig. 115, 9), third century to after 400 (ibid., 243, fig. 115, 10). The general range indicated is largely from the end of the first century to c. AD 150/175 by which ROMAN BROOCHES FROM GASTARD 17 Figure 2. Roman brooches from Gastard: Colchester Derivatives. Actual size 5 56 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE time virtually all British bow brooches had ceased to be made. 18. The better preserved wing has a ridge at the end separated by a thin flute from a pair of ridges. The profile of the crest on the head of the bow is shaped in three convex curves. The upper bow has an added moulding on each side and a triangular cell above a lozenge-shaped one in the middle. There appears to be a cross-groove dividing the upper from the lower bow most of which is missing. This, as was noted in the comments on Brooch 10, can be seen as a cross-over between those with sprung pins and those with a hinged one. Here, the crest of the former type is married to the hinged pin. The comments on the dating of both types suggests that the hinged pin was introduced later and so there should have been some mixing of the two styles before the hinged pin became predominant. If this sequence is correct, this brooch should be early second-century. 19. Each wing is thin and the original scheme appears to have had a ridge at the end and another in the middle. On the head is a crest with a ridge on each side. On the bow is an elongated lenticular ridge in the centre of which is a small boss, rising from an annular groove, above and below which is a triangular cell. The lower bow, along with most of the catch-plate, 1s missing. The writer knows of no precise parallel for this example. Attention, however, can be drawn to the mouldings on the head and the added ones on each side. These have been discussed in the comments on Brooch 9. There, the appropriate dating would seem to be the later first century into the second, but the hinged pin could point to an exclusively second- century date and there are no other signs that the brooch can be associated with any of the first-century enamelled varieties. 20. The wings appear to be plain. The bow has a broad swell, with an arris, down the middle. Each border is elaborately moulded with a series of C-shaped motifs divided by convex curves. The catch-plate has a pin-groove. An almost exact parallel, with the distinctive orna- ment down the sides of the bow, comes from Wilsford Down, Wilts. (Devizes Museum accession no. 328). There are no satisfactory groups to which these brooches can be assigned and neither has any other decorative feature which can be used for dating. The pin-groove tends to be first-century, seldom occurring as a standard feature on any group which can be seen to run into the second century. 21. One wing has two grooves at its end, the other has one. On the head is a cast-on tab with a central depression. The upper bow has a flat central face and concave sides. Dividing the upper from the lower bow is a triangular area with a similarly shaped cell, now empty. On each side is a small boss. The lower bow has a central flat face and a very small moulded foot. Another uncommon design, the triangle occurs on two brooches from Nor’ Nour (Dudley 1967, 34, fig. 13, 35, 36) and one from Camerton dated AD 180-230 (Wedlake 1958, 230, fig. 53, 46). Of these three, only the last really resembles the present piece, the other two having a groove up the upper bow with slashing on each side. A brooch from Ironmonger’s Piece, Marshfield, Avon (Blockley 1985, also has a strong resemblance, the triangle being replaced by a disc, with a projection on each side, bearing a central cell with four others around it. The brooch is only generally dated: to the second half of the first century and the second century. Another brooch, from Whit- ton, Glamorganshire, lacks the side projections and has two enamelled triangles forming a lozenge, the rest of the piece showing that it came from the same group of manufacturers as the present example. It was dated AD 55-75 (Jarrett and Wrathmell 1981, 173, fig. 70, 20). Despite the apparently early date of the Whitton brooch, the best date-range is probably from the later first century to c. AD 50/175, the end of the range of British bow brooches. 22. The wings have been subsumed into a head- plate with a damaged top edge. Along its middle is a moulding, with punched dots along its lower edge, four annular stamps above and what passes for plain wings below. The bow has five flutes, with traces of rocker-arm ornament in them, separated by a step from the plain top. The lower bow is missing. Without the head-plate, the brooch can be assigned to a group the full form of which is shown by an example from Chichester (Mackreth 1989a, 185, fig. 26.1, 13). Dating is exiguous: Camerton, AD 90-200 (Wedlake 1958, 225, fig. 52, 23). The head-plate is uncommon (the very few examples recorded by the writer are distributed loosely in Wiltshire, Dorset and Avon), and is not necessarily applies to brooches with a close resemblance to the present piece (e.g., Hawkes 1947, 54-5, fig. 9, 12; Hattatt 1985, 96, fig. 40, 408). The only one with both a head-plate and a date, however, is related to the present group: Chew, second century (Rahtz and Greenfield 1977, fig. 114, 12). There should be little doubt that this is the correct chrono- ROMAN BROOCHES FROM GASTARD Si Figure 3. Roman brooches from Gastard: Colchester Derivatives (20-24) and Strip forms (25-27). Actual size 58 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE logical horizon of the present piece, but only up to c. AD 150/175 for manufacture. 23. The thin wings are plain. On the head are the stubs of a cast-on loop raised on a waisted pedestal. The bow has a slight taper to a broad foot. In the centre is an elongated lenticular boss divided by a flute with a diagonally cross-cut boss above and another with a saltire below. The bow ends in a prominent projecting foot divided by a groove. Belonging to a relatively well established family, the distribution of the type is mainly in Wiltshire and Avon with outliers in adjacent areas. The bosses above and below the divided lenticular boss are not always present. Dating is apparently good: Catsgore, early second century (Leech 1982, 109, fig. 78, 28) late second century? (ibid., fig. 78, 26); Nettleton, with first and second-century pottery (Wedlake 1982, 125-127, fig. 53, 48). In addition to these, there are several from late third and fourth-century contexts (Catsgore: Leech 1982, 105-109, figs. 76-78, 10-12, 27; Chew: Rahtz and Greenfield 1977, fig. 114, 13, 15), but these should have been residual in their contexts as there are no good grounds for thinking that any British bow brooch, even as a late survivor, lasted any longer than the early third century. A brooch from Waddon Hill, Stoke Abbott, Dorset (Webster 1981, 62, fig. 25, 17) dating to before AD 60/65 looks as though it is a simplified form, the bow being reduced to a flat face with two raised cross-cut ridges. It may be that this is an early example of the whole group and that those without the cross-cut bosses predate those with, the early second-century piece from Catsgore possibly belonging to the earlier end of the main range which would then be purely second-century. 24. Only the lower bow survives. It has a flat front, a groove down each side and tapers to a fully moulded foot, projecting below the catch-plate, having a moulding top and bottom divided by a waist. There should be little doubt that this belongs to a brooch which is ultimately derived from the Colches- ter form. Without the rest, however, it is not possible to assign it to any definite group. Stylistically, a second-century date would be suitable. STRIP BROOCHES (Figure 3: 25-27) These three brooches had the axis bars of their hinged pins housed in the rolled-under heads of their bows. 25. Almost certainly forged from folded or rolled sheet metal, the bow is triangular, ending in a pointed foot. Along each margin of the bow is a groove and down the middle of the upper part is a pair of grooves, with rocker-arm ornament, ending in a point. The back of the catch-plate has an incised-line border and a chevron made up of rocker-arm decoration in the panel so formed. Attention is drawn to the rolled-under head of the bow and the decorated triangular front. Discussion of a group of similar and related brooches from the Halstock villa (excavations, R.N. Lucas, to be pub- lished), all with the rolled-under head and all, as far as can be detected under different degrees of corrosion, made from rolled or folded sheet metal, deals with the origins and dating of the three chief brooch types apparently copied by manufacturers working within a single tradition. Briefly, those whose design is like the present specimen derive from the Nauheim form or its immediate derivatives; others were based on the Langton Down form (e.g., Brailsford 1962, 8, fig. 7, C30, C31, C42; Hattatt 1985, 69, fz. 29, 341B) and on versions of the Aucissa form predating the named variety (e.g., Brailsford 1962, 10, fig. 10, C87). The dating is revealed by the last: fully developed ‘eyes’ are found in the last quarter of the first century BC and gradually devolve in the first two to three decades of the first century AD until they disappear before the development of those brooches belonging to the named variety. One at least came from a pre-Conquest deposit at Halstock. As for the Nauheim-style pat- tern, one came from a deposit datable to before 30-20 BC at Foxholes Farm, Little Amwell, Herts. (Mack- reth 1989b, 132, fig. 76, 5). There should, therefore, be little difficulty in placing brooches such as No. 25 in what has long been a chronological gap between the Nauheim proper and the host of derivative forms which can, at best, be dated to after the Conquest only. The whole family belongs to Avon—Dorset— Wiltshire with outliers in the regions around. Ex- amples remained in use into the decade AD 50-60 as specimens from Waddon Hill, Stoke Abbott, Dorset, show (Webster 1981, 61, fig. 25, 5, 7, 14). The large size and the decorated catch-plate of the present piece almost certainly indicate a pre-Conquest date. 26. Iron. A plain strip with almost straight sides ending in a point. 27. Iron. Like the last. Iron Strip brooches are relatively common and were probably much more so than appears as it is only in recent times that much attention has been paid to the scraps of iron which the average excavation produces and this accounts for the dramatic increase in the number of iron brooches of all sorts now being ROMAN BROOCHES FROM GASTARD identified. Almost all brooches like Nos. 26 and 27 have the rolled-under head, less than one tenth having a rolled-over one. The distribution shows that it was not the prerogative of the makers of copper alloy brooches of the same basic form. The dating, ex- cluding those with apparent wings, is: Braughing, Herts., 10 BC-AD 20 (Mackreth 1981, 135, fig. 67, 11); Maiden Castle, before AD 43 (Wheeler 1943, 252, fig. 85, 35); Waddon Hill, Stoke Abbott, Dorset, AD 50-60 (Webster 1960, 97, fig. 7, 126); Puck- eridge, Herts., Claudian?-AD 70 (Partridge 1979, 40, fig. 6, 13). Those which come from later contexts were clearly residual as there is no neat stylistic progression to them from examples of earlier date. AUCISSA-HOD HILL BROOCHES (Figure 4: 28-30) The axis bars of the hinged pins of this group are or were housed in the rolled-over head of the bow. 28. There is no head-plate. The upper bow has a bead-row down the centre of the swelled front and there is a trace of a bordering ridge. The lower bow is corroded and the foot-knob is missing. The condition of the brooch was such that the presence of a rolled-over head cannot be determined, while the absence of a head-plate may suggest that this brooch is not properly an Aucissa. The profile, the design of the upper bow and the general form of the we 3 31 cy ; Figure 4. Roman brooches from Gastard: Aucissa—Hod Hill (28-30) and Plate forms (31-33). Actual size 59 lower bow, however, suggest strongly that it belongs to the family, if not to the named type itself. The distribution of Aucissas in Britain shows that the form was passing out of use between AD 50 and 60. 29. The upper bow has a central circle decorated with three annular ridges. Above and below are two cross-mouldings and to each side is a wing ending in a circular plate. The lower bow has a curved front and a slight taper to the usual two-part foot-knob. This is one of the few consistent designs of Hod Hills, most of the examples recorded by the writer coming from well behind the Fosse Way. There is no good sign that this pattern is chronologically different from other Hod Hills and one from the eponymous site shows that it was present before AD 50 (Richmond 1968, 113, fig. 56, 3: 117-119). The distribution of Hod Hills shows that the main type in all its manifest- ations was passing out of use between AD 60 and 70, very few remaining in use to be taken into the north of England in the early 70s. All should have passed out of use by AD 75. The only element which was to remain in manufacture (see Brooch 30) contained nothing to which this brooch could be related. 30. Only the lower bow with the very bottom of the upper survives. The remnant of the upper bow has a ridge down each side and a pair of opposed wavy ridges down the middle. The latter were made by using a punch to distort straight ridges. 60 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE The lower bow has a cross-cut ridge across the top of a section with a cross-moulding. The foot has a cross-ridge across the top of a boss with vertical grooves. The fragment fits well with the Hod Hill type, but is more elaborate than most belonging to the main run. The uncharacteristic foot and the mouldings on the lower bow almost certainly place this piece amongst those Hod Hills which continued to be made after the bulk of the repertoire had come to an end. These are frequently of large size and very often finely finished. The dating is difficult, but some remained in use to be deposited in second century contexts (Brulet 1970, 63, fig. 11, 4; 68, fig. 14, 3). The design, however, changes towards the end of the first century (Riha 1979, 160, Taf. 48, 1405) and gives rise to a sequence in which the foot is replaced by a zodmorphic head commonly found on a major group of second-century brooches, many showing no trace of having derived from a Hod Hill type (e.g., ibid., 196, Taf. 65, 1690). The probable date-range for the present piece is from the later part of the first century into the second. PLATE BROOCHES (Figure 4: 31-33) 31. The hinged pin was housed between two pierced lugs. The centre of the brooch is an oval boss with a concave-sided cone rising from a step in the middle. Above and below is an oval wing recessed for enamel, now decayed. On each side is a small excrescence. A distinct design of which only five examples are known to the writer. One is unprovenanced, but three are spread between Hampshire and the Isles of Scilly and the remaining one comes from Worcester. This is not enough of a sample to establish whether it is truly British and so closely confined. The concave-sided dome can be replaced by a face (Hattatt 1987, 292- 293, fig. 95, 1276A) or a normal dome like that on the Worcester brooch. No dating is known and it is only on the most general grounds that the type is assigned to the second century. 32. The hinged pin was mounted like that on the last brooch. The plate is essentially flat with only a slight break forward for the main part which consists of a plate tapering outwards towards the bottom. On the front are three narrow cells, the central one empty and the other two containing red enamel, with a flute on each side. Above is a plate with a projection on each side: there may have been a loop above. Below the main plate is a thin chamfered foot with a cross-ridge in the middle and a small boss at the end. No reasonable parallel 1s known to the writer; the date is probably second century. 33. The bilateral spring was mounted on a single pierced lug behind the plate which is shaped to represent a man on a horse trotting or cantering to the right. The rider is crudely reduced to a triangle for the body and a head with a rough profile, a set of nicks for the hair and a dot for the eye. There are two ill-shaped cells for en- amel representing the rider’s clothing and the rider’s foot is now reduced to a stump below the horse’s belly. The horse has a raised tail with two grooves, both legs are damaged but show movement. The head is largely missing. There are two cells containing red enamel on the horse’s body; those on the body of the rider contain green enamel. There are faint traces of soldering for white metal appliqué. An example of what appears, in Britain, to be the commonest class of zoomorphic brooches. They are found all over southern England and it may only be the bias in both the writer’s and Mr Hattatt’s collec- tion which favours East Anglia. The brooches, as their pin-fixing arrangement shows, are purely British in production. The dating is not easy as there is clearly one factor which distorts the evidence: the evident religious connotation. Ordinary dating is sparse: Bannaventa, with third—fourth-century pot- tery (Dix and Taylor 1988, 334, fig. 19, 2); Veru- lamium, AD 375-400 (Frere 1984, 29, fig. 9, 52). This is remarkably late for enamelled brooches and if the dating from religious sites is looked at, a similar late bias emerges: at Hockwold-cum-Wilton, four of the eight examples are dated late second—late fourth century (Mackreth 1986, 66-7, fig. 41, 17-20, 22-24; another was found on the surface of the site); Nett- leton, Wilts., late third century? (Wedlake 1982, 132, fig. 54, 73); and Lamyatt Beacon temple built towards the end of the third century (Leech 1986, 270, 316-319, fig. 34, 6-10). The late dating is remarkably consistent. Yet the fully restored brooch has applied white metal appliqué around the enamelled cells and a review of the dating of this technique (Mackreth, forthcoming) shows that it only flourished between c. AD 125-225. Apart from the Horse-and-Rider brooches, all purely British brooches had ceased to be made by AD 250 and it seems inconceivable that only one type should have begun production only at this point, especially when two with no enamel, but tinned or silvered all over, are known (Ware, Herts., exca- vations, C. Partridge, to be published; Shapwick, Dorset, Hattatt 1987, 235, fig. 74, 1178). These would fit the normal progression such as that shown ROMAN BROOCHES FROM GASTARD by the Dragonesque in which first century forms are plain and the later ones are enamelled and tricked out with white metal appliqué. Looking at other Horse- and-Rider brooches, at least two come from Cold Kitchen Hull, Brixton Deverill, Wiltshire, where there are strong presumptive grounds for thinking that there had been a temple. Another group comes from or near Ipswich and was recovered by metal detectors with the consequent lack of precision about the actual site. As there were at least three of them, however (Hattatt 1982, 161, fig. 68, 156, 158; 1987, 74, fig. 74, 1174), the chances are that they came from another religious site. If one from Nor’ Nour is added to the religious sites group (Dudley 1967, 48, fig. 18, 132), half of all these brooches recorded by the writer are accounted for and this raises the question of the antiquity of objects devoted to whichever deity is concerned. The dating therefore offered by brooches not from this type of site may reflect not so much their common use, but the character of the sites from which they come. REFERENCES ATKINSON, D., 1942 Report on Excavations at Wroxeter (The Roman City of Viroconium) in the County of Salop, 1923- 1927, Oxford BLOCKLEY, K., 1985 Marshfield, Ironmongers Piece, Exca- vations 1982-3, An Iron Age and Romano-British Settlement in the South Cotswolds, British Archaeological Reports, British Series, 141, Oxford BRAILSFORD, J.W., 1962 Hod Hill, volume one, Antiquities from Hod Hill in the Durden Collection, London BROWN, R.A., 1986 ‘The Iron Age and Romano-British Settlement at Woodcock Hall, Saham Toney, Norfolk’, Britannia 17, 1-58 BRULET, R., 1970 ‘La nécropole belgo-romaine de Biesme’, Annales de la Société Archéologique de Namur 55, 47-125 CURLE, J., 1911 A Roman Frontier Post and its People, The _ Fort of Newstead in the Parish of Melrose, Glasgow _— 1933 ‘An inventory of objects of Roman and provincial Roman origin found on sites in Scotland not definitely | associated with Roman constructions’, Proceedings of the | Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 66 (1932-1933), 277-397 | DIX, B. and TAYLOR, S., 1988 ‘Excavations at Bannaventa (Whilton Lodge, Northants), 1970-71’, Britannia 19, | 299-356 | DUDLEY, D., 1967 ‘Excavations on Nor’ Nour in the Isles of Scilly, 1962-6’, The Archaeological Fournal 124, 1-64 FRERE, S., 1972 Verulamium Excavations, Volume I, Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London, No. 28, Oxford — 1984 Verulamium Excavations, Volume III, Oxford Uni- | versity Committee for Archaeology, Monograph No. I, Oxford HATTATT, R., 1982 Ancient and Romano-British Brooches, | Milborne Port — 1985 Iron Age and Roman Brooches, a Second Selection of Brooches from the Author’s Collection, Oxford 61 — 1987 Brooches of Antiquity, a Third Selection of Brooches from the Author’s Collection, Oxford HAWKES, C.F.C., 1947 ‘Britons, Romans and Saxons Round Salisbury and in Cranborne Chase’, The Archaeological Fournal 104, 27-81 LEACH, P., 1982 Ilchester, Volume I, Excavations 1974-1975, Bristol LEECH, R., 1982 Excavations at Catsgore, 1970-1973, A Romano-British Village, Western Archaeological Trust, Excavations Monograph No. 2, Bristol — 1986 ‘The Excavation of a Romano-Celtic Temple and a Later Cemetery on Lamyatt Beacon, Somerset’, Britannia 17, 259-328 JARRETT, M.G. and WRATHMELL, S., 1981 Whitton, An Iron Age and Roman Farmstead in South Glamorgan, Cardiff LOWTHER, A.W.G., 1937 ‘Report on Excavations at Veru- lamium in 1934’, Antiquaries Journal 17, 28-55 MACKRETH, D.F., 1981 ‘The Brooches’ in C. Partridge, Skeleton Green, a Late Iron Age and Romano-British Site, Britannia Monograph Series 2, 130-151 — 1986 ‘Brooches’ in D. Gurney, Settlement, Religion and Industry on the Roman Fen-Edge, Norfolk, East Anglian Archaeology 31, Gressenhall, 61-67 — 1989a ‘The Roman Brooches from Chichester’ in A. Down, Chichester Excavations VI, Chichester, 182- 194 — 1989b ‘The Brooches’ in C. Partridge, Foxholes Farm, a Multi-Period Gravel Site, Hertfordshire Archaeological Trust Monograph, Hertford, 129-134 — forthcoming ‘The Brooches’ in R.P.J. Jackson and T.W. Potter, Excavations at Stonea, Cambs., 1980-1984 MILLETT, M., 1986 ‘An Early Roman Cemetery at Alton, Hampshire’, Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club Archaeological Society 42, 43-87 PARTRIDGE, C., 1979 ‘Excavations at Puckeridge and Braugh- ing, 1975-79’, Hertfordshire Archaeology 7, 28-132 RAHTZ, P.A. and GREENFIELD, E., 1977 Excavations at Chew Valley Lake, Department of the Environment Archaeo- logical Reports No. 8, London RAWES, B., 1981 ‘The Romano-British Site at Brockworth, Glos.’, Britannia 12, 45-77 RICHMOND, SIR 1.A., 1968 Hod Hill, Volume two, Excavations Carned out Between 1951 and 1958 for the Trustees of the British Museum, London RIHA, E., 1979 Die Rémischen Fibeln aus Augst und Kaiseraugst, Forschungen in Augst, Band 3, Augst STEAD, I.M. and RIGBY, V., 1989 Verulamium: The King Harry Lane Site, English Heritage Archaeological Report No. 12, London SUNTER, N.S., and WOODWARD, P.J., 1987 Romano-British Industries in Purbeck: ‘Excavations at Norden’ by Nigel Sunter, ‘Excavations at Ower and Rope Lake Hole’, by Peter J. Woodward, Dorset Natural History and Archaeo- logical Society, Monograph Series No. 6 WEBSTER, G., 1960 ‘The discovery of a Roman Fort at Waddon Hill, Stoke Abbott, 1959’, Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society 82, 88-108 — 1981 ‘Final Report on the Excavations of the Roman Fort at Waddon Hill, Stoke Abbott, 1963-69’, Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society 101, 51-90 WEDLAKE, W.J., 1958 Excavations at Camerton, Somerset, privately printed 62 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE — 1982 The Excavation of the Shrine of Apollo at Nettleton, WHEELER, R.E.M. and WHEELER, T.V., 1928 ‘The Roman Wiltshire, 1956-1971, Reports of the Research Committee Amphitheatre at Caerleon, Monmouthshire’, Archaeologia of the Society of Antiquaries of London, No. 40, Dorking 78, 111-218 WHEELER, R.E.M., 1943 Maiden Castle, Dorset, Reports of the WOODWARD, P.J., 1987 ‘The Excavation of a Late Iron Age Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of Settlement and Romano-British Industrial Site at Ower, London, No. 12, Oxford Dorset’, in Sunter and Woodward 1987, 45-124 Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 63-69 Some Late Saxon Mounts from Wiltshire by PAUL ROBINSON This class of decorative cast late Saxon copper alloy mount has been discussed most recently by Margeson (1986). Most of the examples described in print have been found in eastern England — Yorkshire, Lin- colnshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridgeshire, Hert- fordshire and Kent — which gives a deceptive indication of their distribution. They do, however, occur in western England. In Wessex they have been found for example in Berkshire, Hampshire, Dorset and Somerset as well as in Wiltshire. This paper briefly records the examples known at present from Wiltshire where they make an important contribution to the corpus of eleventh century ornamental metal- work from the county. Although generally described as ‘late Saxon’, the dating of the mounts is not good and some probably date after the Norman Conquest. As yet there is no good evidence to show how long they continued in use. The mounts have been described as strap-ends (Roes 1958; Fuglesang 1980, 40 re the mounts from Mildenhall and Sonderholm). Their form, however, shows that this is incorrect for they are essentially triangular or sub-triangular in shape, with a small flange at the base and holes for attachment at the base either through or above the flange. Almost all are distinctly convex. It has also been suggested that they are book-mounts (Wilson 1964, cat. nos. 26, 33 and 58; Roesdahl et al. 1981, cat. nos. L2, 6 and 8) and book-mounts or clasps (Hinton 1974, no. 19). Mar- geson (1986, 327) argued that they may have been fastened over iron bindings on a wooden chest. In general, however, the mounts do not have sufficient iron corrosion adhering to the reverse sides to suggest that they were permanently attached to iron strips or bands. This is confirmed by the recent publication of a mount from Winchester which has the original iron attachment still surviving on the back of the mount (Figure 1), indicating that it cannot have been perma- nently affixed on an iron strip or band (Biddle ez al. 1990, no. 4270). Moreover, Roes (1958) cites a mount at that time in a private collection in the Hague which had leather remains still attached to the back. A better interpretation is that they were stirrup- mounts: later versions of the Scandinavian stirrup- mounts such as those from the tenth century grave at Velds in central Jutland (Roesdahl er al. 1981, 177, KS). While these are much larger than the English mounts, it should be remembered that in the later Figure 1. Late Saxon mount from Winchester (a) with reconstruction showing function (b). Actual size 64 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE eleventh century, stirrups were smaller and lighter than the earlier Scandinavian and Anglo-Danish str- rups and had smaller threading loops at the top. As mounts they would have been permanently attached to the stirrup leather, the inturned flange at the base passing into the threading loop at the top of the stirrup in the manner shown above (Figure 1b). The intact iron attachment on the Winchester mount may therefore be seen as a strap-protection device to prevent wear on the stirrup leather. Stirrup mounts may be depicted on some of the mounted horses on the Bayeux tapestry, where a rectangular area in a different coloured fabric appears above the stirrups and at the end of the strap. To date twelve mounts have been recorded from Wiltshire (Figures 2-4: 1-12). While this is more than in any other western county, it is surely not signifi- cant. There is no reason not to believe that their use was widespread and that they were fairly common objects throughout England at this time. 1. Avebury, from the bed of the river Kennet near to Silbury Hill. Devizes Museum 25.1982. L.51 mm. A convex ‘triangular’ mount with gently curving sides and a pierced tri-lobe shaped terminal with an iron rivet still present. At the base are two further rivet holes with traces of the surviving iron rivets. A short narrow flange turns inwards at right angles to the mount. The decoration consists of a standing lion-like quadruped facing right with the left foreleg raised. The tail curls between the hind legs and over the animal’s back. The head is raised with the mouth open to eat an uncertain object, perhaps fruit, which hangs from the top of the mount. The right foreleg is shown with three or four toes: the rear feet appear as solid shapes. This is probably the most common design which appears on these mounts in England. The Avebury example is particularly attractive and competently executed. Others are often more crude, can suggest that the animal is squatting rather than standing and omit the fruit which it is about to eat (eg. Margeson, op. cit., nos. 1 and 6). The best parallels to the design are the lions which appear on the borders of the Bayeux Tapestry. The pair shown above the scene de- picting Bosham Church have tails curving be- tween their hind legs and over their backs and a front forepaw raised. Their similarity suggests strongly that the animal shown on the mounts is indeed a lion. The scene, however, could be an adaptation of the ‘Fox and Grapes’ motif from the story from Aesop’s Fables, but with the fox transformed into a lion. In the early eleventh century, Silbury Hill was adapted perhaps as a defensive site. For how long it remained in use as such is uncertain but it is possible that the Avebury mount relates to this period of occupation or merely to general traffic along the road (now the A4) between Marlborough and Calne which runs by Silbury Hill. Pewsey, northeast of Hill View. In private pos- session (Devizes Museum Day Book 868). L. 43 mm (broken). A convex ‘triangular’ mount with curved sides and a pierced tri-lobe shaped terminal, which is now broken. At the base are two large rivet holes and a short, uneven flange which turns inwards at right angles to the body of the mount. There are no traces of iron rivets or iron corrosion. Two holes in the field are not additional rivet holes but are either casting flaws or a means of emphasizing the design. The mount depicts a similar subject to no. 1, above: a ‘lion’ facing right with the left foreleg raised. The tail curves between the rear legs and over the animal’s back and terminates in a pronounced tuft. The head is raised with the mouth open to eat the ‘fruit? shown hanging from the top of the design. The toes on the front right and rear left paws are shown clearly; those on the other feet are shown indistinctly. No other finds of this date are recorded from the vicinity of the findspot and no medieval site or building is known. Bradford-on-Avon. Ashmolean Museum 1990.92. L. 47 mm (broken). A flat ‘triangular’ mount with curved sides which turn inwards at the base. At the top is a pierced tri-lobe shaped terminal, which is broken; at the base are two pierced holes for rivets which survive. A narrow flange projects inwards from the base at right angles. The design shows more crudely the ‘lion and grapes’ mouf of 1 and 2. The animal’s tail again curves between the rear legs and over its back, terminating in a pronounced tuft which touches the back of the head. The head is raised with mouth open to meet the five-sided ‘fruit’ hang- ing from the top of the design. The toes are indicated on each paw and the mane by two rows each of three inverted incised triangles with a LATE SAXON MOUNTS FROM WILTSHIRE 65 jd Hs Wari Ne, age Oa isn Po Figure 2. Late Saxon mounts from Avebury (1), Pewsey (2), Bradford-on-Avon (3) and Wiltshire (4). Actual size horizontal line beneath. The proportions are larger and heavier on the whole than those of the other mounts with the design. There is no further information about the findspot. Bradford-on-Avon was an important Saxon town but whether the mount was found in or merely near to it is not known. ‘Wiltshire’. British Museum 1978, 7-3, 1. L. 49 mm. A virtually flat ‘triangular’ mount with curving sides and a pierced tri-lobe shaped terminal. A short narrow rectangular flange projects inwards from the base and has a single rivet hole. The rivet is present with iron corro- sion on the inside angle. The design shows a neat and carefully ex- ecuted left facing ‘lion’ with right forepaw raised and with the head lifted to eat the ‘fruit’ which is incorporated within the tri-lobed terminal. The tail curves behind the animal’s back in a neat curl. The haunch is well rounded and the toes THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE and fetlock of the front left paw are depicted. The mane is indicated by three vertical incisions and a horizontal line. The plain base is deeper than those of nos. 1-3. There is no further information regarding the findspot. The mount was acquired from a dealer in Stroud. Figheldean, Knighton Farm. Salisbury Museum 75.1987. L. 38 mm (top broken). An irregular, five- sided convex mount with a broad tri-lobe shaped top which is pierced. The base is broad with two large dome-headed rivets. An irregularly shaped flange projects inwards from the base. Apart from the tri-lobed terminal there are two pairs of projections on the sides. The design is in Ringerike style and appears to depict a degenerate version of a ribbon shaped animal with a bird’s head, shown on the centre left. The outline shape as well as the design are reminiscent of the mount from Sonderholm, Denmark (Fuglesang 1980, pl. 79 d). The fol- lowing mount (no. 6) from Chilton Foliat, Wilt- shire, which has a more simple union-knot motif, may be a re-interpretation of the design. Knighton Farm appears in Domesday as ‘We- nistetone’. At that time as well as under Edward the Confessor it formed part of the extensive estates in Wiltshire, Leicestershire and War- wickshire of Harding, one of the most pros- perous late Saxon thegns. The name, ‘farmstead of the household servants’, is discussed in VCH Wilts 2, p. 81. The Cnihtas of the farm name may have been retainers of Harding himself, or of the Abbess of Amesbury, or of an unknown royal servant of the pre-Conquest period. Chilton Foliat, near Chilton House. Devizes Museum 1991.43. L. 50 mm. A convex five-sided mount with three opposing pairs of small projections from the sides. There is a central pierced hole at the top of the mount and two at the base. An irregular flange projects at an angle of about 135° from the base. The incised design depicts a simple union knot in Ringerike style. The symmetrical ten- drils above the union terminate with a pear- shaped offshoot and narrow tips. Below the union the bodies of the tendrils swell and show another offshoot before terminating in a simple point. There is a notched horizontal line at the base below the two pierced holes. The shape of the mount is identical to no. 5 above and essentially the same as the group of five-sided mounts from Wanborough and Corsham (nos. 7 and 8 below). There is a five-sided mount from Horsham St Faith with an asymmetrical design in Ringerike style (Mar- geson 1986, no. 5). The design is reminiscent of the more complex design of no. 5 and could be interpreted as a reworking of it. The mount was a casual find on an important domestic site at Chilton Foliat. Close by was also found a copper-alloy strap swivel of early twelfth century date, of the same type as the double strap swivel found at Cirencester, now in the British Museum (Zarneki et al. 1984, no. 248). Wanborough, near Callas Hill and close to the Roman road. In private possession. Devizes Museum Day Book 1622. L. 40 mm. An essentially flat five-sided mount with a large circular terminal at the top pierced with a narrow hole. The two lower sides are concave and the base narrow. A rectangular flange projects inwards from the base at about 135° and is pierced with two narrow holes. The openwork lattice design is quartered diagonally, with seven shallow bosses, dummy rivets, out- lined with an incised circle at the ends and junctions of the bars. This and the following mount from Corsham are openwork variants of the solid plate mounts of which examples have been recorded from Hellesdon (Margeson 1986, no. 3) and Winches- ter (Biddle et al. 1990, no. 4270). The Hellesdon mount has seven prominent bosses. The bosses on these (excluding the central one) correspond with the flat projections on the similarly five- sided mounts of Figheldean and Chilton Foliat above. No other finds of this date have been recorded from the site. Corsham, Boyd’s Farm. In private possession. Devizes Museum Day Book 1635. L. 46 mm. A convex five-sided mount of similar form to no. 7, above. There is a large circular terminal at the top of the mount with large central hole. As with 7, the two lower sides are concave and the base narrow, with two pierced holes. A rectangular flange projects in- wards from the base. The mount is quartered diagonally with an openwork lattice design. There are traces of at least three of the bosses as on no. 8, the central one outlined with an incised line. At the widest part of the mount the bosses LATE SAXON MOUNTS FROM WILTSHIRE WI oy 67 Figure 3. Late Saxon mounts from Figheldean (5), Chilton Foliat (6), Wanborough (7) and Corsham (8). Actual size do not project upwards but outwards, as with the five-sided mounts from Figheldean and Chilton Foliat, and on that from Hellesdon (Margeson 1986, no. 3). There is an important Roman site at Boyd’s Farm, but later finds, including a coin of Cnut, show that there was also long lasting domestic habitation there in the Middle Ages. Seend, Great Thornham Farm. Devizes Museum 1989.29]. L. 54 mm. A ‘triangular’ mount on which the design appears on a convex, tear-shaped field. There is a simple small projection with a rivet hole at the top. A narrow flange projects inwards near the base and is pierced with two further small rivet holes. The outline has two small projections at the widest parts. The design, which is worn, is in the debased Urnes style decoration of the later eleventh century. It depicts an interlaced animal seen from above with its head at the apex of the mount, the two ears being rectangular in form. The right leg projects outwards from just below the head and bends sharply upwards to termi- nate in a simple paw by the right ear. The back legs are interlaced with the body of the animal while the tail curls round to finish by the left ear to balance the front right foot. There are two essentially identical mounts in the British Museum from Kemsley Down, Kent and Peterborough, Cambridgeshire (Wilson 1964, cat. nos. 26 and 58), while a fourth was found in 1990 on the Isle of Wight (unpu- blished). There are also openwork versions of 68 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Figure 4. Late Saxon mounts from Seend (9), West Knoyle (10), Ogbourne St Andrew (11), and Box (12). Actual size the design from Crayford dump (probably from the former Thames Exchange site: Museum of London 90.263) and Lincoln (Wilson 1964, no. 33): No other finds of this date are known from this location and no medieval site or building is known. A very general similarity should be noted between these mounts and those with the ‘lion and grapes’ design. The animal’s head stretches to the top of the mount; the pronounced angle in the right leg at the right hand side is reminiscent of the raised left leg of the ‘lion’ and each has a 10. curled tail on the left side. If this is not a coincidence, it is possible that one was adapted from, or influenced by, the other. West Knoyle. In private possession. Devizes Museum Day Book 1634. L. 51 mm. A convex, narrow ‘key-hole’ shaped mount, pierced at the centre top and the bottom corners and with narrow iron riv- ets, one of which is now missing. A short, irregularly shaped flange projects inwards at right angles from the base. The surface is completely plain but has possible traces of tn- ning or silvering. LATE SAXON MOUNTS FROM WILTSHIRE 1: 12: Ogbourne St Andrew, Horse Meadow. In pri- vate possession. L. 41 mm (broken). A flat near-rectangular mount with the raised design of an animal’s head — possibly a lion or leopard — within a border which follows the edge. Only the top part of the head is shown suggesting that part of a lion’s or leopard’s pelt may be intended. The eyes are large. The ears are hollowed: one has subse- quently been used to take an iron rivet but this was probably not the original intention. There is a fringe of hair in rocked tracer technique between the ears. On each side of the face is a faint curved linear ornament formed from a series of punched triangles. There are two rivet holes at the upper corners and traces of iron corrosion around the hole in the right ear. At the bottom left corner is another rivet hole with iron corrosion still present. There is also a hole in the centre of the mount beneath the animal’s nose. At the bottom of the mount the metal begins to turn inwards to make the flange. The mount may be compared with mounts from York and Domburg (Roes 1958, nos. 1, 3 and 4) and Hethersett (Margeson 1986, no. 4) which have facing human faces upon them. Margeson also cites a mount from Harling, Norfolk with a cast grotesque human face (bid., 326). The use of rocked tracer technique and punched triangles suggests a later date for this mount, in the twelfth century. Box, south east of the Three Shires Stone on the Fosse Way. In private possession. Devizes Museum Day Book 1674. L. 53 mm. A sub-rectangular convex mount with gently incurving sides and a large tri-lobe shaped top, which is pierced by a single rivet hole. There are two crescentic projections from the centre of each side. At the bottom, where there are two further rivet holes, there is no 69 inturned flange but the outer edge is bevelled. There is no iron corrosion on the back. The mount is noticeably thinner than the other mounts in this paper. The design is an irregular incised linear pat- tern, perhaps based ultimately upon a union- knot. In the lower half the lines are double and symmetrical and curl around the rivet holes. In the upper register they are single and asymmet- rical. In both its outline and design, the mount belongs to the same general class as nos. 5 and 6 above. No medieval finds are recorded from the immediate area of the findspot but the mount would have been lost by someone travelling along the Fosse Way. Acknowledgements. | am grateful to the museums and private owners of the mounts who have permitted me to publish them here and for giving me information about their findspots; also to Douglas Wilson and D. R. Thompson who generously presented mounts they had found to Devizes Museum. Professor M. Biddle gave permission for the use of a new drawing of the Winchester mount. Nick Griffiths provided the illustrations and patiently discussed the function of the mounts with me. Mrs Susan Youngs, of the British Museum, kindly read a draft and made helpful suggestions for its improvement. REFERENCES BIDDLE, M. et al., 1900 Object and Economy in Medieval Winchester, Winchester Studies Vol. VII, part 2, Claren- don Press, Oxford FUGLESANG, S.H., 1980 Some Aspects of the Ringerike Style. A Phase of 11th Century Scandinavian Art, Odense Univer- sity Press HINTON, D.A., 1974 Catalogue of the Anglo-Saxon Ornamental Metalwork 700-1100 in the Department of Antiquities Ashmolean Museum, Clarendon Press, Oxford MARGESON, S., 1986 ‘A Group of Late Saxon Mounts from Norfolk’, Norfolk Archaeology 39, part 3, 323-327 ROES, A., 1958 ‘A Strap End in the Yorkshire Museum and its Continental Counterparts’, Antiquaries Journal 38, 94-6 ROESDAHL, E. et al., 1981 The Vikings in England, Penshurst Press Ltd, Tunbridge Wells WILSON, D.M., 1964 Anglo-Saxon Ornamental Metalwork 700- 1100, The British Museum, London ZARNEKI, G., HOLT, J., and HOLLAND, T., 1984 English Roman- esque Art 1066-1200, Arts Council, London Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 70-79 The Castles of Marlborough and Ludgershall in the Middle Ages by JANET H. STEVENSON The intention of this paper 1s, first, to compare the sites and architectural history of Marlborough and Ludgershall castles; secondly, to illustrate the uses to which they were put; thirdly, to describe their national importance and shared administrative history; and lastly, to demonstrate how, after c.1300, their histories and functions diverged. Both castles have failed to interest historians to any extent for several reasons: few records survive from which to reconstruct their history; their importance as fortresses was short-lived, ceasing after the death of Henry III in 1272; no trace of Marlborough’s buildings remains above ground and building on its site from the seventeenth century has prevented large-scale excavation. Both the borough of Marlborough and the castle were built on the north bank of the river Kennet within a large royal estate on the downs of north-east Wilt- shire.! That estate contained a settlement, ancient but of undatable origin, on the higher ground at the junction of two important routes which ran respectively east and west between London and Bath and north and south between Cirencester and Salis- bury. The borough was established west of the settlement on lower ground and long, narrow burgage plots were laid out north and south of the east-west route between London and Bath on the course of High Street. The castle, west of the borough, may have been established first, but both existed in 1086 and may have originated after 1066. The prehistoric earthwork, the ‘barrow of Maerla’ from which the estate around took its name and on which the castle motte was raised, stood where the Kennet meanders through a narrow valley between two chalk bluffs, Marlborough Common to the north and Granham Hill to the south. A defensive structure may have stood on it in 1070 when A&thelric II, Bishop of Selsey, was imprisoned at Marlborough, and the borough probably existed in 1068 when William I transferred a mint and a moneyer there from Great Bedwyn. That castle and borough originated soon after 1066, and possibly at about the same time, suggests that their functions were interrelated and their interests complementary. The settlement mentioned above, east of the planned borough, was presumably from early times a market and trading 1. This paragraph and the next are based on VCH Wiltshire, Vol. 12, 165-8, 201, 203, 208, and on articles on Marlborough and Preshute contributed ibid. by the present writer. centre for the surrounding area. The establishment nearby of a castle and mint both encouraged and protected the new borough’s commercial life and the main period of expansion coincided with the royal use of the castle as both fortress and residence. The castle site possessed the important natural advantages of being easily defensible and of possess- ing a water supply from springs rising at the junction of the gravel terrace beside the Kennet and the scarp of the Marlborough Downs. The defences raised on the site were reckoned ‘strong’ in the early twelfth century and residential accommodation existed in 1110 when Henry I spent Easter at Marlborough. Henry II, Richard I, John and, notably, Henry III all strengthened and improved the castle, but after 1272 no work other than that necessary for maintenance was carried out. Ludgershall castle was built twelve miles south of Marlborough on the south-eastern edge of Salisbury Plain. The estate on which it stood was held in 1086 by Edward of Salisbury,” but before 1103 the Crown had resumed it,* possibly attracted by the proximity of woodland which became Chute forest, and the castle had been built. Apart from its position on an ancient highway leading north-west from Winchester, the site had no special strategic importance, and it is likely that after 1216 the castle was a residence rather than a fortress. In the thirteenth century its develop- ment as a residence for dowagers and as a hunting-box surrounded by extensive parkland impeded the physi- cal expansion and commercial growth of the small 2. VCH Wiltshire, Vol. 2, 136. 3. Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, 1066-1154 (4 vols., Ox- ford, 1913-69), Vol. 2, no. 630. THE CASTLES OF MARLBOROUGH AND LUDGERSHALL To Cirencester CLYFFE PYPARD @ Marlborough Common MARLBOROUGH ee To Bath ?. Kenne, @ Granham 4] Sect a oC Hill a DEVIZES 8 LUDGERSHALL@® @ € NORTH Plain Y TlOworTH To Winchester Salisbury SALISBURY 0 b ME Figure 1. A sketch map of the area around Marlborough and Ludgershall in the thirteenth century. The courses of the roads are approximate only a 72 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE borough which was built south of it, east and west of the Winchester road. The accessibility of Ludgershall castle site and its transfer in 1936 from the War Office to the Office of Works,* allowed excavations during 1964-71, from which it has been possible to correlate archaeological evidence with that provided by docu- ments in the Public Record Office.» To compensate for lack of natural defences, the castle buildings were erected within two enclosures formed by earthworks comprising double banks and ditches in a figure eight. King John repaired and improved the castle between 1200 and 1211° but there is no evidence to suggest that it was strengthened to the degree that Marlbor- ough castle was in the same period. The assignment of Ludgershall castle in 1236 as dower to Henry III’s queen Eleanor determined its development as a country residence, and she may have lived there, in considerable style, even after she became a nun of nearby Amesbury priory in 1276.’ Archaeological evidence has shown that the buildings at Ludgershall castle in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries were mostly of wood and fairly rudimentary.* That the residential quarters may have been more important than the defences is sug- gested by the creation at Ludgershall of a royal park before 1203.? Buildings in the northern enclosure were replaced in the mid twelfth century by a massive stone keep. That was in turn replaced in the late twelfth century by a hall, undercroft and large stone mural towers, one of which survives as the chief feature of the remaining ruins. The buildings in the southern enclosure, which included a large timber structure and a cellar, were apparently either aban- doned or relegated to outbuildings. The main buildings were repaired and domestic arrangements improved for King John but it was Henry III who, in a prolonged and extensive building campaign from about 1234 to 1250 for which timber was supplied from Chute and Pewsham forests,!° transformed Lud- gershall castle from a fortress into a lavishly embell- ished royal residence intended chiefly for pleasure and relaxation. 4. Inf. from Defence Land Agent, Durrington, Wiltshire. See below. 6. Mem. R. 1199-1200 (P[ipe] R[oll] S[ociety] N.s. xxi), 95; 1207-8 (P.R.S. N.S. xxxi), 64-5; Pipe R. 1202 (P.R.S. N.S. xv), 124; 1204 (P.R.S. N.S. xviil), 187; 1207 (P.R.S. N.S. xxii), 209; 1211 (P.R.S. N.S. xxviii), 84; Rotfuli] Litt{erarum] Claus[arum in Turn Londinensi Asservati] (Rec. Com.), 1, 40, 52. 7. Calfendar of] Pat{ent] R{olls] 1266-1272, 736-7; P.R.O., S[pecial] C[ollections] 1/16, nos. 152, 178, 187, 189; SC 1/23, nos. 30-2; SC 1/47, no. 109. 8. Except where stated, the account of the buildings at Lud- gershall is based on WAM 61, 104-5; 63, 111-12; 64, 124-6; 65, wn The sequence of buildings at Marlborough castle cannot be determined from archaeological investiga- tion because its site was built over from the seven- teenth century.'! Documentary evidence, however, shows that not only was it refitted and improved to a similar standard in the same period as Ludgershall, but that equal consideration was given to strengthen- ing its defences and extending them with curtain walls and gatehouses. Hugh Blowe was the master mason employed at Marlborough in 1238 and 1239! and, although there is no direct evidence, may also have been employed at Ludgershall. An impetus to the improvement of both castles as residences was given by Henry III’s marriage to Eleanor of Provence in January 1236. At Marlborough a tower costing £126 was built in 1238!? and during 1241 and 1242 £400 was spent, mostly on repairing the faulty foundations of a tower, the reroofing with lead of the towers behind the hall and over the main gate, and the building of a new almonry and larder. A new chamber which cost £235 was built for the queen during 1244 and 1245. Another tower, begun in 1241, round and containing a kitchen, was completed in 1250. A new barbican was built, several chambers were enlarged and improved, and a portion of the castle walls was crenellated.'* After 1250, only small alterations and maintenance work were undertaken. Presumably because less attention had been paid to domestic comfort at Ludgershall by King John, the improvements made there in the same period were more extensive. The king’s chamber was decorated and a new window was inserted in 1234 and 1235.'° In 1241 a porch was built on to it, the queen’s chamber was wainscotted and given three windows, a porch and steps were built at the entrance to the king’s great chamber, and iron bars were fitted to its windows. The most important works undertaken at Ludgershall were the rebuilding and decoration of the great hall, begun in 1244 and completed in 1250, the construc- tion of accommodation for Henry III’s son Edward in 1251-2, and the building from 1244 of domestic accommodation which included a pantry, buttery, 205; 67, 176; Med. Archaeology 16, 183-4. 9. Pipe R. 1203 (P.R.S. N.S. xvi), 161. 10. e.g. Close Rolls] 1231-1234, 369; 1234-1237, 31; 1242-1247, 170, 303; Calfendar of] Libferate] R{olls] 1240-1245, 307; 1245-1251, 190, 304. 11. VCH Wiltshire, Vol. 12, 169-170. 12. Ibid., 168. 13. Cal. Lib. R. 1226-1240, 350. 14. H.M. Colvin (gen. ed.), The History of the King’s Works (6 vols., London, 1963-73), Vol. 2, 736-7. 15. Ibid., 730. THE CASTLES OF MARLBOROUGH AND LUDGERSHALL almonry, and two kitchens, one for the preparation of the royal food, the other for the use of the king’s household. The foundations of the hall and of an associated, possibly domestic, range have been ex- posed respectively south and east of the surviving mural tower. In 1246 a passage was constructed from the queen’s chamber to the hall and the hall itself was decorated. Smaller-scale improvements, such as the fireplace inserted in the king’s wardrobe in 1247, continued to be made until 1250.!° The resources of Marlborough and Ludgershall castles rendered unnecessary the creation of serjean- ties to maintain them. Both had extensive bartons or demesne farms attached to them, unlike Devizes, a royal castle from 1157, which had none.'’ The boroughs which grew up beside Marlborough and Ludgershall castles were farmed by the burgesses. The keeper of both had at his disposal in 1195 the £36 farm from Marlborough! and in 1233 the £16 13s. 4d. farm of Ludgershall.!? Extraordinary expenditure was met by direct recourse to the Exchequer. In 1199 mounted knights, serjeants and foot soldiers were garrisoned at Ludgershall and liveries were provided for knights and foot soldiers at Marlborough.”° Be- tween 1221 and 1224 payments were made to crossbowmen serving at Marlborough.?! By 1255 it was customary for the king to allow the castellan £26 13s. 4d. to maintain Marlborough castle in peacetime. Whether or not that sum was excessively generous it is impossible to judge. Devizes castle, for example, could be supported for only £16 13s. 4d.*? In 1263 the King allowed reasonable costs to maintain Marlbor- ough castle because of unrest, and, towards the end of Montfort’s rebellion, four mounted knights, four mounted serjeants-at-arms and fifty-four foot soldiers were kept in Marlborough castle for about ten weeks during 1264 and 1265 at a total cost of £63.74 In 1322, during Despenser’s uprising, Marlborough was again temporarily munitioned,”° and also in 1360 when a French invasion was threatened.”° There is no record of Ludgershall castle having resumed a defensive role in the later thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, 16. Cal. Lib. R. 1240-1245, 234; 1245-1251, 32, 84, 129; Cal. Close R. 1242-1247, 400; 1247-1251, 9. 17. VCH Wiltshire, Vol. 10, 238. 18. Pipe R. 1195 (P.R.S. N.S. vi), 150-1. 19. Cal. Lib. R. 1226-1240, 206. 20. Pipe R. 1199 (P.R.S. N.S. x), 174. 21. Rot. Litt. Claus. (Rec. Com.), i, 468, 524, 585. 22. Rot[{uli] Hund[{redorum] (Rec. Com.), 1i(1), 235; S. Painter, ‘Castle-guard’, American Historical Review XL(3) (1934-35), 450-9. 23. Cal. Pat. R. 1258-1266, 266. 24. Calfendar of] Ing{uisitions] Misc[ellaneous], Vol. I (Henry III 73 although the prompt repulsion of marauders who attempted to enter it in 1265 suggests that it was then maintained in, or could still quickly be put into, military readiness.7” Much of the internecine warfare of the anarchy which followed the accession of Henry I’s nephew Stephen in late December 1135 took place in the triangle formed by Gloucester, Bristol and Winches- ter. One of the most powerful magnates in eastern Wiltshire and Hampshire during the period was John the Marshal, who had succeeded his father Gilbert both in his office and estates c.1130.78 Possibly then among their possessions were the estates in Clyffe Pypard and North Tidworth held by the Marshal family in the early thirteenth century,” an assump- tion reinforced by the fact that John the Marshal’s first wife was the daughter of William Pipard, a minor landholder in the neighbourhood. The political insta- bility of the time provided John with an opportunity to consolidate his position in Wiltshire. How he acquired them is unknown, but in 1138 he held both Marlborough and Ludgershall castles and was strengthening their fortifications.*® Those of Marlbor- ough were described as ‘strong’ in 1140. To state that John supported either Stephen or the Empress Ma- tlda in 1138 and 1139 would be wrong: he pursued an independent policy in his own interest and countered threats to his position quickly and forcefully. He held Marlborough against Stephen’s forces in 1138, and in 1140 defeated the mercenary, Robert FitzHubert, who had earlier captured Devizes castle, and imprisoned him and his associates in a dungeon within Marlborough castle.*! The capture of Stephen at Lincoln early in 1141 persuaded John to support the Empress. While Stephen was conveyed to imprisonment at Bristol, Maulda proceeded to Win- chester where she was elected Queen. After a brief and disastrous foray to London, Matilda set up her headquarters at Oxford. In the meantime the Bishop of Winchester and papal legate, Stephen’s brother Henry of Blois, had been prevailed upon by Stephen’s queen Maud to desert the Empress’s cause and to and Edward I), 109-10. 25. Cal. Close R. 1318-1323, 437. 26. VCH Wiltshire, Vol. 5, 21 n. 27. Cal. Lib. R. 1260-1267, 242. 28. For the Marshal family see V. Gibbs et al., Complete Peerage (14 vols., 1910-59), Vol. 10, 358-68, App. G, 93-7. 29. VCH Wiltshire, Vol. 9, 27; Red Bfoo]k [of the] Exch[{equer] (Rolls Ser.), Pt. 11, 487. 30. Annales Monastict (Rolls Ser.), Vol. 2, 51. 31. Gesta Stephani: The Deeds of Stephen (1135-54), ed. and trans. K.R. Potter (London, 1955), 70-1. 74 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE support her husband’s. Matilda set out for Winches- ter, where she besieged Henry in his new palace of Wolvesey. Henry fired the city, and the Empress and her followers were trapped between it and his rein- forcements. In the ensuing rout, John the Marshal sought sanctuary in Wherwell abbey in which he was cornered by his pursuers. An attempt was made to fire the building but, although seriously injured, John escaped and, with the Empress, sought refuge in Ludgershall castle. Although it was nearer than Marl- borough castle, and on a direct route, the choice of Ludgershall may have been tactical. It is possible that, as in the early thirteenth century, Ludgershall castle was more a fortified hunting-box than a fortress and therefore might not have been thought of by Stephen’s supporters as an obvious refuge. That assumption is strengthened by the fact that no attempt was made to hold out there and the Empress was taken secretly to Devizes castle, said to have been disguised as a corpse on a bier.*? The paths of the Empress and John the Marshal afterwards diverged. He appears to have maintained a position of armed neutrality and from his base in Marlborough castle attempted to subjugate the area around both it and Ludgershall. He successfully ambushed his rival and fellow Wiltshire magnate Patrick of Salisbury near Ludgershall, persuaded him to desert Stephen’s cause for the Empress’s, and cemented his new alliance by repudiating his Pipard wife and marrying Patrick’s sister Sibyl. The oppor- tunities offered to John in the years 1138-1154 allowed him, by military skill and political judgment, to rise from royal serjeant to landed magnate unchall- enged in the area. Despite an attempt in 1149 by Stephen’s son Eustace to capture Marlborough, neither that castle nor Ludgershall was seriously threatened and both were restored by John to the Empress’s son when he became Henry II in December 1154. John’s possession of the castles was sanctioned in that year but, although allowed to retain Ludgershall until his death in 1165, he was compelled in 1158 to surrender Marlborough to Henry II, who 32. John of Worcester, Continuatio in Florenti Wigorn. Chronicon ex Chronicis, ed. B. Thorpe (English History Soc., 2 vols., 1848— 49), Vol. 2, 134. 33. Pipe R. 1155-1158 (Rec. Com.), 116; 1167 (P.R.S. xi), 130; 1177 (P.R.S. xxvi), 97-8; 1178 (P.R.S. xxvii), 28; Complete Peerage, Vol. 9, 478. 34. Pipe R. 1182 (P.R.S. xxxi), 84; 1188-1189 (Rec. Com.), 171. 35. Pipe R. 1167 (P.R.S. xi), 130; Chronica Rogerr de Houedene (Rolls Ser.), Vol. 3, 6. 36. Chronica Rogeri de Houedene, Vol. 3, 6. 37. VCH Wiltshire, Vol. 12, 166. 38. Pipe R. 1194 (P.R.S. N.S. v), 10; 1198 (P.R.S. N.S. ix), 71; may have wished to deny the marshal the opportunity to establish an hereditary claim to it. Its keeping was immediately entrusted to a royal servant, Alan de Neville, an administrator who held estates near Marl- borough and who, from 1165, was a judge of the court of Exchequer and justice of the forests throughout England. Neville remained keeper until his death c. 1178,*? and Walter de Dunstanville was keeper in 1182 and 1189.74 The marshal was replaced at Lud- gershall in 1165 by William FitzPeter and until 1189 that castle was administered separately from Marlbor- ough. In 1189 Richard I’s brother John received Marlbor- ough and Ludgershall castles on his marriage with Isabel of Gloucester.*° During John’s rebellion in 1193, Marlborough was besieged and taken for Rich- ard by the regent, Hubert Walter, Archbishop of Canterbury,’’ possibly with the assistance of John the Marshal, who died at Marlborough in 1194. Hugh de Neville, grandson of Alan de Neville, was appointed keeper of Marlborough and Ludgershall in 1194 and thereafter both were always administered by the same keeper until the later thirteenth century. Like his grandfather, Hugh de Neville was a royal servant and afterwards became one of King John’s chief ad- visers.°* During his keepership both castles were strengthened, and Marlborough was developed after 1207 as one of the provincial treasuries which John used to circumvent the Exchequer.*? It was a favoured royal residence from 1199, whenever John’s court was there, and during the political upheavals of 1215 was strong enough to offer safe refuge to John’s queen Isabel and son Henry.*° Hugh remained loyal until Louis of France invaded England in the summer of 1216 when he defected and surrendered Marlbor- ough castle to Louis, Robert de Dreux being intruaed as keeper.*! In 1217 William Marshal, grandson of John the Marshal, recaptured Marlborough for the King, and William’s father, also William Marshal, was entrusted with its keeping. Although not expressly mentioned, Ludgershall castle was presum- ably included in the charge. Complete Peerage, Vol. 9, 479-81. 39. J.E.A. Jolliffe, ‘The Chamber and Castle Treasures under King John’, Studies in Medieval History presented to E. M. Powicke, ed. R.W. Hunt er al. (1948), 117-42; Rot{uli] Litt{erarum] Patf{enttum in Turn Londinensi Asservati, 1201-1216] (Rec. Com.), M46-8, 153: 40. Rotuli de\Oblatis et Finibus in Turn Londinensi Asservati, temp. Regis Fohannis (Rec. Com.), 8, 108; Rotuli de Liberate ac de Musis et Praestitis, Regnante Johanne (Rec. Com.), 7-9, 75; Rot. Litt. Pat. (Rec. Com.), itin. John and 136. 41. Histoire des Ducs de Normandie et des Rois d’Angleterre, ed. F. Michel (Paris, 1840), 175-6. \ \ | THE CASTLES OF MARLBOROUGH AND LUDGERSHALL 75 Figure 2. The ruins of Ludgershall Castle, from an engraving by R. Godfrey published in 1772, and reproduced by permission of the British Library (Maps 34g. 1, vol. vii, f. 34) Prospect ef Maxiborough (rem the Seuth 29 fun 1725. CVNETIO A Marlborough Mount. B.the Koad to Binnet. ©. the Castle DIS Peters Chick GC the Kennet. VW the remanse of the Roman Calirum. 1 Lady Winekikeas. K.P elite . Figure 3. The site of Marlborough Castle in 1723, engraved from a view by William Stukeley reproduced in [tinerarium Curiosum (London, 1724). The mound is on the left and, right of it, Marlborough House and its grounds occupy the site of the castle buildings and bailey. (Photograph by Derek Parker) 76 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE The elder William Marshal was a younger son of John the Marshal by his second wife Sibyl of Salis- bury. Although he had taken part in the Young King’s rebellion of 1173-4, he was made a member of Henry II’s household in 1187 and thereafter remained loyal. His having prevented Richard from pursuing Henry II to Fresnay-sur-Sarthe did not discredit him when Richard became King in 1189. One token of royal favour was the arrangement in that year of William’s marriage to Isabel de Strigoil, Countess of Pembroke in her own right. As a younger son, William’s hereditary territorial expectations were originally limited but afterwards they increased con- siderably with the deaths of his childless brothers, Gilbert FitzJohn in 1166 and John the Marshal in 1194. Richard I was distrustful of the Marshal fami- ly’s entertaining an hereditary claim to Marlborough castle, as Henry III and his advisers subsequently proved to be, and for that reason entrusted it to Hugh de Neville. For the remainder of Richard’s reign, William Marshal was with him in Normandy. After Richard’s death, William persuaded Hubert Walter to support John as King, and was afterwards charged with a mission to England, where, at a meeting with the magnates at Northampton, he also gained their support. Although later critical of John, William Marshal continued to support him and on his death was named regent for the young Henry III. He and his son, the younger William Marshal, were instru- mental in thwarting the invasion of Louis of France and concluding the treaty of Lambeth with him in 1217. While the elder Marshal had remained loyal, his son had defected to Louis in the spring of 1216 and sworn fealty to him. He soon returned to his former allegiance, but the lapse was sufficient for his subse- quent trustworthiness to be in doubt. When his father died in 1219, no formal appointment of a successor at Marlborough was made, and it is possible, as has recently been suggested,” that the younger William assumed it as part of his paternal inheritance. The fortifications he made at Marlborough in 1220 without royal consent were the pretext used by the King to deprive him of it in 1221. For ten years after the departure of the younger William Marshal, the keeping of Marlborough and Ludgershall was entrusted to two minor royal 42. D.A. Carpenter, The Minority of Henry III (1990), 247. 43. Pat. R. 1216-1225, 428; 1225-1232, 250; Cal. Lib. R. 1226- 1240, 133, 136; The Book of Fees, Pt. 2, 711, 729-30, 749. 44. Pat. R. 1225-1232, 491; Dictionary of National Biography (D.N.B.). administrators, Robert de Meisi from 1224 and John of Easton from 1229, although John was not expressly mentioned as keeper of Ludgershall. Their names suggest that they came from Wiltshire.? In 1232 Henry HI appointed for life a royal favourite of Poitevin origin, the treasurer of his household, Peter de Rivaux. The post was but one of many granted to him in 1232. He was, for example, given custody for life of the king’s small seal and administrative and fiscal appointments including several sheriffdoms. From 1233 he was also treasurer of the Exchequer, a post exercised through a deputy.** That concentra- tion of fiscal power was intended as a prelude to financial reform, and the fact that Rivaux was en- trusted with Marlborough suggests that the castle may sull occasionally have been used as a_ provincial treasury as it had been in John’s reign. The power of Henry’s Poitevin favourites alarmed the magnates, whose opposition brought about a revolt in 1233 and led to Rivaux’s dismissal as castellan. He was replaced by Roger Wascelin, who may not have entered on his office, and then, in 1233 at Marlborough and in 1234 at Ludgershall, by Robert de Mucegros, who remained in charge of both until his death twenty years later. The successive appointments in 1254 of Reynold de Acle and Henry de la Mare and, in 1255, of Hugh Garget may also have been ineffective, and finally, still in 1255, Stephen Fromund was appoin- ted. From 1258 baronial opposition to Henry III was growing again and in 1261 one of his most trusted advisers, Robert Walerand, was appointed for a five- year term. Baronial pressure, and possibly the inter- vention of Simon de Montfort himself, led to Waler- and’s replacement in 1262 by Roger de Clifford, then in sympathy with Montfort’s ideals. When Clifford returned to his allegiance in 1263, Walerand was briefly reinstated at Marlborough. In 1264, the year of the battle of Lewes, Marlborough and its estate were committed first to Henry Esturmy and Robert de Lisle,*® both royal partisans with Wiltshire interests. Their control was possibly neither constant nor effective. The peace terms drawn up after the battle of Lewes stipulated that all castles held for the King should be surrendered and in June 1264 they were shared between Montfort’s supporters. Marlborough was retaken for the King by its former castellan Roger 45. Cal. Lib. R. 1226-1240, 205-6, 233; Close R. 1231-1234, 428; 1253-1254, 17, 217-18; Cal. Pat. R. 1247-1258, 413, 418, 448. 46. Cal. Lib. R. 1260-1267, 25; Cal. Pat. R. 1258-1266, 144, 266, 350; Close R. 1261-1264, 325-6; D.N.B.; Complete Peerage, Vol. 3, 290. THE CASTLES OF MARLBOROUGH AND LUDGERSHALL de Clifford with a group of fellow marcher lords. Early in 1265 Robert de Lisle still held Marlborough for the King, who recuperated there after the battle of Evesham and was again resident in 1267 when the Statute of Marlborough was enacted in the castle.*’ Roger de Cheyney was constable in 1271. John of Havering, mentioned in 1271, may have been a deputy, as Richard of Kingston was in 1275.** Nic- holas of Preshute in 1298 was possibly the last keeper to have charge of both Marlborough and Lud- gershall.*? It is likely that a joint keepership was by then the exception rather than the rule, because Ludgershall had been administered c. 1270 by John of Bicknor.°° The division occurred because the most important feature of the Ludgershall estate was its park, and from the fourteenth century the chief royal administrative officer there was the parker. Queen Eleanor continued to favour Marlborough castle as a residence after her husband Henry III’s death in 1272, and spent three weeks there in the summer of 1274.°! After her death in 1291 the accommodation in the castle, called ‘the king’s houses’, was, like that in Ludgershall castle, assigned to royal dependants including, in 1297, Edward I’s daughter Joan, who had clandestinely married Sir Ralph Monthemer.*” Edward I’s queen, Margaret of France, to whom the accommodation was assigned in 1299,>? was ousted briefly in 1308 by the intrusion of Hugh le Despenser as constable.°* Edward II’s queen Isabel held the castle from 1318 until it was again occupied by Despenser in May 1321.°° His political opponents plundered the castle that June and in September he surrendered it.°° With the Queen’s approval, Sir Oliver de Ingham was appointed keeper and munitioned it,’ but the munitions were removed before Despenser recovered it in September.*® The accommodation was occupied by Despenser’s 47. H.M. Colvin (gen. ed.), Hist. King’s Works, Vol. 2, 737; Red Bk. Exch. (Rolls Ser.), Pt. 1, p. cxxiii. 48. Close R. 1268-1272, 353; Rot. Hund. (Rec. Com.), ii(1), 262. 49. Cal. Close R. 1296-1302, 167. 50. Close R. 1268-1272, 222. 51. Hilda Johnstone, ‘The Wardrobe and Household of Henry, son of Edward I’, Bulletin of Fohn Rylands Library, vii (1923), 405-6. $2. Cal. Close R. 1313-1318, 257; Complete Peerage, Vol. 9, 140-2; Wilts. Notes and Queries 4, 531; D.N.B. 53. Cal. Pat. R. 1292-1301, 451-4. 54. Ibid., 1307-1313, 51, 91. 55. Ibid., 1317-1321, 115-16, 132, 202, 578. 56. Ibid., 1321-1324, 166, 168; Cal. Close R. 1318-1323, 544; Complete Peerage, Vol. 4, 264. 57. Cal. Pat. R. 1321-1324, 40; Cal. Close R. 1318-1323, 437; D.N.B. 58. Cal. Close R. 1318-1323, 437; Complete Peerage, Vol. 4, 265. 59. Cal. Close R. 1323-1327, 252; Cal. Pat. R. 1324-1327, 88; Complete Peerage, Vol. 9, 140-2. Vy, daughter and son-in-law who had charge of Edward II’s daughters.°? The castle was forfeited on Despen- ser’s execution in 1326 and restored to Queen Isabel in 1327.°° Her tenure was brief and in 1330 the castle was assigned to Edward III’s queen Philippa.°! Although the King and Queen visited it in 1358, its condition deteriorated in the later fourteenth century and in 1391 a commission judged that a complete rebuilding was necessary to restore it and it was allowed to decay.” When Queen Philippa died in 1369 Marlborough castle remained in the King’s hands, and for nearly eighty years afterwards was demised by the Crown to farmers. During that period the revenues were used chiefly to provide pensions for royal kinsfolk and servants. In 1380 Richard II granted £100 a year to his half-brother Thomas de Holand, Earl of Kent, who retained it only until his mother’s death in 1385. In that year the same pension was granted by the King to Michael de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk. In 1401 a pension of £66 13s. 4d. was granted to Sir John Ashley.®° The keepers appointed by the Crown in that period were middle-ranking royal servants who held for terms of years and may not always have been resident. The tenure of William Ramshill, constable from 1325, was briefly interrupted in 1329-30 by the intrusion of John Esturmy.®’ Robert Russell held office from 1341 or 1342 until 1347,°% and Thomas Hungerford in 1359. In the later fourteenth century three succes- sive keepers were appointed for ten-year terms at a farm of £120 a year: Sir Nicholas Tamworth in 1370;”° Roger Beauchamp in 1376;’! and Roger Power on Beauchamp’s death in 1380.’2 The next four keepers were appointed for life: Sir John de Roches in 1382;’? Sir William Hasthorpe in 1386;”* Sir William Scrope, later Earl of Wiltshire, in 1393;7° 60. Complete Peerage, Vol. 12(2), 754; M. McKisack, The Four- teenth Century (Oxford, 1959), 97, 102. 61. Cal. Pat. R. 1330-1334, 5S. 62. D.N.B. 63. Cal. Pat. R. 1388-1392, 272; Cal. Ing. Misc., v, p. 167. 64. Cal. Pat. R. 1377-1381, 450; 1385-1389, 18; Complete Peerage, Vol. 7, 150-6. 65. Cal. Pat. R. 1385-1389, 18; Complete Peerage, Vol. 12(1), 437-8. 66. Cal. Pat. R. 1339-1401, 473. 67. Ibid., 1327-1330, 435, 556; Cal. Close R. 1323-1327, 257; Cal[endar of] Fine R{olls] 1327-1337, 215. 68. P.R.O., SC 6/1091/5; Cat. Anct. D. i, C 551, C 659, C 724. 69. Cal. Pat. R. 1358-1361, 303. 70. Cal. Fine R. 1368-1377, 68. 71. Ibid., 369-70; Cal. Pat. R. 1374-1377, 417. 72. Cal. Fine R. 1377-1383, 200; Complete Peerage, Vol. 2, 44-5. 73. Cal. Pat. R. 1381-1385, 107; Cal. Close R. 1381-1385, 164. 74. Cal. Pat. R. 1385-1389, 197, 208, 260. 75. Ibid., 1391-1396, 309; Complete Peerage, Vol. 12(2), 731-2. 78 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE and Sir Walter Hungerford after Scrope’s attainder and execution in 1399.”° In 1403 Henry IV granted the £120 farm and the reversion of the estate to his son Humphrey, later Duke of Gloucester, who was in possession in 1415.”” From Gloucester’s death in 1447 the castle, except from 1461 to 1464, was held in dower almost continuously by the queens of England until the death of Catherine Parr in 1548.78 When Henry VI’s queen Margaret was deprived of it in 1461, the estate was demised at farm to Thomas Beauchamp for twenty years. That grant was presum- ably ineffective because in 1462 John Austin was appointed for sixteen years at £84 a year. On the formal resumption of the estate in 1464, Austin ceded it to Edward IV’s queen Elizabeth and she in turn yielded it to her daughter Elizabeth, queen of Henry VII, in 1487.” No record survives to illustrate the daily admin- istration of the castle, which in the later fourteenth century was undertaken by a deputy constable, a porter and a bailiff. By 1485 the office of constable or keeper, long redundant in reality, had lapsed and been replaced by the more appropriate one of stew- ard. The stewardships of Marlborough and Devizes were jointly exercised by a succession of Wiltshire landowners: Sir Roger Tocotes, appointed in 1485; Richard Beauchamp, Lord St Amand, in 1492; Anthony St Amand and Edward Dudley together in 1508; Sir Edward Baynton in 1526; and Sir William Herbert in 1544 or 1545.°° After Queen Eleanor’s death the accommodation in Ludgershall castle was granted in dower to Queen Philippa (1334-55),®! Queen Anne (1382-94)** and Queen Joan (1403-37),** and at other times was assigned for residence to royal dependants such as Almeric de St Amand (1294-1310),8+ Edward II’s sister Mary, like her grandmother a nun of Amesbury (1317-32),®° Edward III’s daughter Isabel (1356— 76. Cal. Pat. R. 1399-1401, 62. 77. Ibid., 1401-1405, 320; 1413-1416, 338; Complete Peerage, Vol. 5, 736: 78. VCH Wiltshire, Vol. 12, 169. 79. Cal. Fine R. 1461-1467, 11, 15, 115-16; VCH Wiltshire, Vol. 125/169: 80. Cal. Pat. R. 1485-1494, 22; 1494-1509, 386; Complete Peerage, Vol. 11, 303; Lfetters) and Pfapers, Foreign and Domestic], Henry VIII, iv(2), 1151; xxi(1), 359; VCH Wiltshire, Vol. 12, 166. 81. Cal. Fine R. 1327-1337, 414; Cal. Pat. R. 1354-1358, 190, 405. 82. Cal. Pat. R. 1381-1385, 203. 83. Ibid., 1401-1405, 235. 84. Cal. Close R. 1288-1296, 391; Complete Peerage, Vol. 11, 297-8. 85. Cal. Pat. R. 1313-1317, 625. 79),8° Edmund Tudor, Earl of Richmond (1453-6),°” and George Plantagenet, Duke of Clarence (1464— 78y.88 The negligence of Thomas Powick, the parker appointed at Ludgershall in 1364, led to his re- placement in 1365 by Roger Sotwell, a member of a family based in the neighbourhood of Chute, and perhaps he was still in post in 1382.°? John Morville, a servant of Richard II’s queen Anne, was keeper in 1391 and 1400, and, with William Esturmy, from 1403 to 1433.7? William Ludlow, a king’s serjeant and also a Wiltshire landowner and member of parliament for Ludgershall, was appointed for life in 1433. A grant of 1449 which would have transferred the ownership of Ludgershall to Ludlow was ineffective, and he had ceased to be keeper before his death in 1478.2! In 1462, and again in 1482, William Collingbourne was appointed for a term of twenty one years. Sir Edward Pickering was granted a seven-year term in 1502.°* Henry Bridges was appointed keeper in 1510, a charge renewed to his son in 1539 for a forty-year term.”? Both represented Ludgershall in parliament and lived in the borough,” possibly in the lodge beside the castle ruins which Leland saw c. 1540.” Although neither Marlborough nor Ludgershall was of military or administrative importance in the later Middle Ages, the town of Marlborough flourished while that of Ludgershall stagnated. The reason is that Marlborough’s position at the junction of one of the principal roads from London to the west of England and another important north-south road from Southampton by way of Salisbury attracted to it trade and travellers. Another is that from the twelfth century the burgesses, with royal approval and en- couragement, had developed independent civic insti- tutions which allowed the control and stimulation of trade. At Marlborough, the castle estate did not 86. Ibid., 1354-1358, 190, 405; Complete Peerage, Vol. 2, 69-70. 87. Cal. Pat. R. 1452-1461, 79; Complete Peerage, Vol. 10, 825-6. 88. Cal. Pat. R. 1461-1467, 331; Complete Peerage, Vol. 3, 260-1. 89. Cal. Pat. R. 1364-1367, 123; 1381-1385, 175; Wilts. Pedigrees (Harl. Soc. ev/cvi), 185. 90. Cal. Pat. R. 1391-1396, 422; Cal. Fine R. 1399-1405, 142-3; P.R.O., SC 6/1062/26~7. 91. Cal. Pat. R. 1429-1436, 266-7; 1446-1452, 247, VCH Wilt- shire, Vol. 11, 57; S.T. Bindoff (ed.), [The] Histfory of] Parlf{iament]: [The House of] Commons, 1439-1508, 561. 92. Cal. Fine R. 1461-1471, 53-4; 1471-1485, 225-6; 1485-1509, 325) 93. L.& P. Hen. VIII, xiv(2), 220-1. 94. S.T. Bindoff (ed.), Hist. Parl.: Commons, 1509-1558, Vol. 1, 226, 534-35. 95. L. Toulmin Smith (ed.), The Itinerary of John Leland in or about the Years 1535-1543 (5 vols., 1964 edn.), Vol. 5, 6. THE CASTLES OF MARLBOROUGH AND LUDGERSHALL surround the borough which was able to expand eastwards in the earlier thirteenth century. At Lud- gershall no parallel expansion took place because not only did the royal estate encircle the borough, but from about 1216 the royal manor was developed solely as a residential and sporting estate. The borough 79 continued to be administered as a manor, of which the castle bailiff was the chief officer, and no attempt to encourage its administrative independence or to nur- ture its market and fairs as trading centres was ever made. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 80-92 The Subscription List of an Eighteenth Century Book Printed in Devizes by LORNA HAYCOCK and JAMES THOMAS This paper analyses the subscription list of a book published in Devizes in 1773 and shows how this historical tool, used in conjunction with other contemporary material, can reveal social, economic and cultural patterns and something of the taste and ethos of late eighteenth century provincial life. With the publication, in 1617, of John Minsheu’s Ductor in Linguas, book production in England took on a new form — that of publication financed by prior subscription. Undergoing a recent revival through inclusion in retirement and birthday festschrifts and some studies of urban communities, subscription lists have once again generated interest. What many local historians have failed to realise, however, is just how many of these lists exist and how useful they can be to those studying the growth, development or decay of a community. For the period between 1617 and 1974, approximately 5,000 lists have been identified. They vary in length from the 31 dancing masters who subscribed to John Weaver, Anatomical and Mechani- cal Lectures upon Dancing (1721), to the 4,590 sub- scribers to J. Conybeare’s Sermons (1757) and the nearly 12,000 to Samuel Lewis’s A Topographical History of England (1831). A method of assessing demand and sharing financial responsibility, sub- scription lists can be used to shed fresh light upon both community and county developments. While subscription lists were a combined measure of both interest and popularity, they tended to vary in format, becoming slightly fuller in the nineteenth century. In some instances, the entries were brief to the point of being terse. Subscribers to John Drinkwater, A His- tory of the late Siege of Gibraltar (London, 1786), for example, included the Revd Dr Storer, ‘Prebend of Canterbury’. In other cases the detail provided was much more extensive and here the importance of such lists becomes apparent. Subscribers to An Universal Military Dictionary (1779) included Mr Kieselbach ‘Teacher of the Mathematics at the Rev. Mr. Smith’s Academy, Camberwell’ and Mr Lionberg ‘Professor of Mathematics at Kiel’. Multiple copies would be ordered by both booksellers and private individuals. 1. F.J.G. Robinson, and P.J. Wallis, Book Subscription Lists: A Revised Guide (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1975), p.vil. Subscribers to John Albin, A New, Correct and Much- Improved History of the Isle of Wight (Newport, 1795), for instance, included Mr B.C. Collins of Salisbury, who wanted twelve copies, and Mr T. Coombes who ordered fourteen. Those subscribing to Memoirs of the Life of the late Major-General Andrew Burn, R.M. (2 vols., London 1815) included Major-General Carey of Eltham who wanted four copies and Stephen Sharp of Romsey who ordered five. Occasionally, too, there were cryptic entries such as that found in Lt. L. Boutcher Halloran, Rescued Fragments of Cabin Memorandums (Plymouth, 1826) where ‘A Subscriber and his Lady, distinguished alike for their worth and estimable virtues, as well as high rank, but who from some unassigned reason decline having their names inserted’ wanted three copies.! The uses to which local historians can put such lists are various. While they show what people were buying, they can also be used both as an added biographical source and as a means of social analysis. Comparisons can be drawn between communities. While Guernsey and Jersey each produced one work containing a subscription list, in 1818 and 1847 respectively, some provincial communities published a number over time. Southampton managed three between 1801 and 1883, Stamford in Lincolnshire five between 1753 and 1879. The lists also show the extent to which subscribers wanted to keep abreast of the latest developments, and wished to be seen to be doing so. Books on travel and geography are particu- larly revealing on this count. Thus subscribers to A. Philip, The Voyage of Governor Philip to Botany Bay (London, 1789) included Hampshire magnate the Duke of Bolton, Southampton bookseller Mr Baker, who wanted three copies, his Portsmouth counterpart Mr Breadhower and merchant Andrew Lindegren SUBSCRIPTION LIST OF AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY BOOK from the same town. In many instances a social analysis in terms of clientele is possible. To Edge Hill — A Poem (1767), there were subscriptions for 553 copies, of which 124 went to titled individuals, 114 to the clergy, three to the libraries of local book societies and one to an Oxford College. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate a variety of ways in which one such list, with strong Wiltshire connections, can be analysed. In the eighteenth century, devotional works, texts of sermons, books of hymns and works offering guidance on spiritual enlightenment sold particularly well. Amongst the many treasures held by the Wilt- shire Archaeological and Natural History Society Library in Devizes are a number of works containing subscription lists. In the Wiltshire authors section of the Library are four small leather bound volumes, each measuring 4 by 7 inches, entitled The Way to the Temple of True Honour and Fame by The Paths of Heroic Virtue Exemplified in the most entertaining Lives of the Most eminent Persons of both Sexes, on the Plan laid down by Sir William Temple, in his Essay of Heroic Virtue. The work was compiled in 1773 by a young Oxford graduate and Fellow of New College, William Cooke, son of the Revd William Cooke of Enford.? The volumes contain stories about thirty two great classical figures, including Pericles, Leonidas, Theseus, Socrates, Philip of Macedon, Darius and Dido.’ The flyleaf of each volume is inscribed ‘Louisa Horne’, possibly the daughter of George Horne, Bishop of Norwich between 1790 and January 1792. Horne was a Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford, Chaplain to George III between 1771 and 1781 and Vice Chancellor of Oxford University in 1776. Enjoy- ing a reputation as a religious writer and preacher, he was a friend of Hannah More. The work was pu- blished by Thomas Burrough of Devizes, bookseller, gold and silver smith and joint publisher of The Salisbury Fournal and Devizes Mercury in 1752 with Benjamin Collins, the Salisbury proprietor. The books were acquired for the Library from a Leeds antiquarian bookseller at an indeterminate date. The Way to the Temple was dedicated to Earl Carteret’s daughter, the Marchioness of Tweeddale, whose husband John, the fourth Marquess, had died in 1762. This bereavement, with the deaths of her - eldest son, aged one, in 1752 and her second son, aged twelve, in 1770, had plunged the Marchioness into a state of profound grief. William Cooke, Chaplain to the family, compiled the work, evidently hoping 2. J. Foster, Alumni Oxonienses 1715-1886 (London 1891), vol. 1, p.290. 81 thereby to dispel ‘that veil of melancholy which shades the lustre of your Virtue and spreads the gloom of uneasiness on all your friends’. He believed that through reading stories of great fortitude and resig- nation, the Marchioness would ‘regain that cheerful tranquility and pious acquiescence’ by which she had hitherto been so eminently distinguished. In the preface, he claimed that ‘accidents which have befallen others contain lessons to enable us to support our own misfortunes with dignity and courage’. He continued: There is no complete felicity in this life, and they who suffer with the greatest fortitude and resig- nation are the happiest of all who partake of it. The work was also intended as an antidote to Roman- ces, Memoirs and Private Histories, ‘writings calcu- lated to enflame the Passions, and debauch the youth of both sexes’. As he explained: Real History, which imparts the knowledge of past events, affords the best instructions for the regulation and good conduct of human life. The title page also contained a verse of six lines on the same theme. Abhor’d the Tale, which vain Amusement brings, Tempts the frail mind, and tickles tll it stings, But bless’d those Lines, that in each of faithful Page Imparts the Fruits of far-experienc’d Age, Founded on Truth, the youthful Heart which mend And precious Use with various Pleasure blend. These stories, Cooke hoped, would extol the virtues of Wisdom, Goodness and Fortitude, ‘ingredients advantaged by Birth, improved by Education and assisted by Fortune’. Heroic Virtue he defined as ‘the Deserving well of Mankind’, making those who pos- sessed it seem ‘to common Eyes, something more than Mortals, and to have been born of some Mixture between Divine and Human Race, to have been honoured and obeyed in their Lives, and after their Deaths bewailed and adored’. Subscribers to The Way to the Temple were drawn from many parts of the country, as the following table indicates: Berkshire D Buckinghamshire 1 Dorset 2 3. The work was advertised in The Hampshire Chronicle 37, 3 May 1773. 82 Glamorgan 2 Gloucestershire 2 Hampshire 37 Ireland 1 London 12 Oxfordshire 6 Shropshire 1 Somerset 12 Surrey 1 Sussex l Wiltshire 173 No address 6 259 Table 1: Geographical Distribution of Subscribers HMiyh Ona Rock. of Hee Ie Wruchiure hay a Mien ts Atantrandt Ships n rey pes Lhe Nay, On iS Foun (ion FAMEE'S high eon ole Ji) ds; Sipendous Bile. not reart ey mor Hands. t Hew godlike Chufa in dake? wlges Corn , Ord} oMthies old whom Armsore ATi aM?N , Nhe, Ged rad crtamned @ MONSTOUSI ACC, he Valls an vencralle Order SPACE ae : C Dut hte aver Tho. te, rho 200, for Con vere fo rught, (Dul iv Mheecr Foils [heer Leaptes ‘ Jafety] Longht?. y Ropes". THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Nine subscribers purchased more than one set. In eight cases, they wanted two sets, while one customer, Lord Bruce, went so far as to order six sets! The geographical distribution of the one hundred and seventy three Wiltshire subscribers shows a pre- ponderance of sixty four from Devizes, the place of publication, with clusters in the clothing areas of West Wiltshire (twenty six), and Salisbury (nine). Seventeen lived in the Pewsey Vale and thirty in the Upper Bournemouth Avon Valley to the east of the county, adjacent to Hampshire. Apart from the God- dard, Long, Byrt and Vilett families in the Swindon, Cricklade and Chippenham areas, there is a marked absence of subscribers in the north of the county. The large number of Enford, Amesbury and Upavon subscribers — thirty one — was perhaps due to the 4 Fe Hh cenorse cosas002 wocnoe ste SS A Yccosroarceascoeccesesoas tht SX =. is THE 2 WAY to the TEMPLE? OF ‘ PATHS of HEROIC VIRTUE; i EXEMPLIFIED IN 3 The moft entertaining Lives : OF THE : Moft eminent Persons of bothSEexEs; é On the Plan Jaid down by Sir Witttam Temp te & True HONOR and FAME } in his Kffay of Heretc Virtue. Se In- FOUR VOLUMES. \ By W. Fellow of NEw CoLteGF, Oxford, and -Chaplain to the Moft Honorable the Marquis of & TWEEDDALE. < e x. oN Nee 20460000000 0000 0606 90006000700 16000000000000000000000008000 3 g Ve @ EWEN rs =a: Abliir'd tie Tale, which vain Amufement brings, Tempts the frail Mind, and tickles "till it flings ; But blefi'd thefe Lines, that tn cach faithful Page, Impart the Fruits of far-experienc'd Age, Founded on Truth, the yowhful Heart which mend, And precious Ufe wth various Pleafure blend. CO OTE, = AS y) ; i i i § Digit NG ths 7: SiS: Printed and Sold by T. BurrovuGn, Bookfeller ; Sold.alfo by L. Davis, over againft Gray’s-Inn-Gate, Holbourn, Lon pon. =e M,DCC,LXXII1. : : : § BHR He cceercoeccoccsensoeecoe x00 £0000 3000300209000002320¢009 00000 +e ? i CE Br verroveacccvavesems0000 He ASF SF He ceveoverc0cevccososcaee Ho NOG Figure 1. The Way to the Temple: reproduction of frontispiece and utle page SUBSCRIPTION LIST OF AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY BOOK author’s father being Vicar of Enford, though it may also correlate with the local influence of both the Diocese of Winchester and the University of Oxford. While the author was a former Winchester College scholar and a Fellow of New College, Oxford, the Bishop of Winchester had a holding at Enford. The Dean and Chapter of Winchester held property in the tithing of Long Street, Enford, and in pre-Dissolution times had been lord of the hundred of Elstub. Mag- dalen College, Oxford was the patron of Fittleton- cum-Hacklestone, and Winchester of Tidworth South. Ornamentation on the parapet walls with the arms of the see of Winchester betrays the episcopal connection of the church of Everleigh.* The tenure of the manors of Alton Barnes and Stert in the Pewsey Vale by New College, Oxford may well have had some influence on the eighteen subscribers in that area.” The fifteen subscribers in the Wylye and Nadder valleys in the south of the county were largely mem- bers of wealthy landed families, though Winchester College was patron of Downton.® It seems possible, too, that the secret brotherhood of freemasons exerted an influence on the subscription list’s composition. The Duke of Manchester, for example, who appears on the list, was Grand Master from 1777 to 1782. The earliest Wiltshire lodge at Salisbury, which some Hampshire masons attended occasionally, dates from 1732, and a lodge must have existed at Devizes because in 1778 they were struck out for contempt. There are frequent references in the Salisbury lodge minutes to ‘visitors from Devizes’ in the years 1771-3. Several subscribers to The Way to the Temple, such as Robert Cooper, William Chubb and Francis Shutt- leworth, were known to be members of the Salisbury lodge.’ As there were marriage connections between a good many of the Wiltshire subscribers, it seems likely that this link also disseminated knowledge of William Cooke’s publication. The Powells of Salisbury, for example, were connected with the Garths and Burroughs of Devizes, and the Poores of Rushall, who, in turn, had intermarried with the Eyleses and Montagues. Amongst the traders, the Gent family was linked with the Figginses and Salmons. Both George and Isaac Hillier of Devizes made cross county mar- 4. R. Colt Hoare, The History of Modern Wiltshire (London, 1826), vol. 2, ‘The Hundred of Elstub and Everley’, pp. 3-30. 5. T.F. Hobson (ed.), Manorial Documents at New College, Oxford (London, The Manorial Society, 1930), pp. 50-51, 56-58. 6. R.C. Hoare, op.cit., vol. 3, ‘The Hundred of Downton’, G. Matcham, 1834, p. 13. 7. F.H. Goldney, A History of Freemasonry in Wiltshire (London, 1880) pp. 1-10. 83 riages, their wives being daughters of Robert Boyes of New Alresford, Hampshire, who figured on the list. In the close-knit trading community of Devizes, pesonal recommendation would also be a factor. Many of the subscribers acted as witnesses or administrators of each other’s wills, referring to ‘my esteemed friend’,® while others were connected by their Nonconformist or Quaker affiliations. Six Wilt- shire subscribers were Quakers and nine were known Nonconformists. It is feasible that the number of Oxford graduates on the Wiltshire list, thirteen secu- lar and twelve clerical, is more than a coincidence and suggests some kind of cultural network. It was possible in eighty nine cases to ascertain birth dates of the Wiltshire subscribers and conse- quently their ages in 1773. The average age was 43.25, with the oldest 82 and the youngest 20, so the majority of the subscribers were probably middle- aged family men. Most were well known public figures in their locality and were often involved in civic and philanthropic activities. Ten were Mayors, six served as Wiltshire sheriffs, and several individ- uals were Recorders, Coroners and Magistrates. Ten served in the Wiltshire militia as officers.” Monumen- tal inscriptions in various Wiltshire churches bear testimony to the philanthropic work and charitable bequests of many of the wealthier subscribers in leaving property to support the poor and founding Sunday schools. Two of the subscribers made bequests to Oxford University. Sir James Tylney Long left funds to Oriel College to build a new library and decorate the chapel,'° while the Reverend Ni- cholas Preston, Rector of Alton Barnes left £3,000 to New College, Oxford, the patron of the living, to augment chaplains’ stipends,!! as well as endowing Salisbury Infirmary, with whose administration at least five other subscribers were connected.!* Two gentlemen, John Gale and John Powell, acted as Enclosure Commissioners and many were progressive farmers. Thirty six of The Temple subscribers were Trustees of the Devizes Improvement Commission. ! Among the less elevated names, civic duty was not neglected, many serving as Churchwardens, Over- seers of the Poor, Beadles, Almshouse Wardens, Bridewell House Keeper and Ale Taster, the last 8. Wiltshire Record Office, Cons.Sarum, fo.325, Will of Thomas Burrough. 9. Military Orders and Instructions for the Wiltshire Battahon of Militia (London, 1770). 10. W.A.S. [Library], Transcript of Shadwell, Registrum Orielense, joss 11. W.A.S., W[iltshire] C[uttings] 16.53. 12. The History of Salisbury Infirmary (Salisbury, 1922), pp. 41-2. 13. W.A.S., MS. Box 214. 84 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE named perhaps not such an onerous duty! Thirteen of the Devizes subscribers before 1773, and eleven after, were members of the Bear Club, which provided education and apprenticeships for poor town boys.'* The epitaph to Robert Cooper on a wall tablet in St Edmund’s Church, Salisbury might well serve as the memorial of many of the subscribers: The aimiable virtues of Benevolence and Charity were exemplified in their lives. Yet sometimes the favourable character traits of these public figures showed a more fallible streak. Francis Dugdale Astley may have built a new village church in Rushall, but he had also pulled down the former church and some of the village because they were too near his house.'!> Ambrose Awdry of Seend was later outlawed for trespass in 1787,!'° and Josiah Eyles Heathcote and two of his servants were found guilty of assaulting Wiltshire militiaman, Lieutenant Stephens, in the very year of The Way to the Temple’s publication,!’ despite Heathcote being ‘esteemed by his Equals — and rever’d by his Domestics’, as his memorial tablet in St John’s Church, Devizes pro- claimed. Several other Devizes subscribers had acted in a cavalier manner. The Reverend Mr Innes, while Curate of Devizes, had been instrumental in inciting mobs to break up the Wesleys’ meetings in 1747 and 1748.'8 George Flower had turned out his wife in 1757,'° while Willy Sutton had been tried for murder, though acquitted, in 1761.°° Edward Poore was busy buying up freeholds and eliminating copyholds in Rushall,’! and Thomas Beaven of Melksham secretly recruited clothing workers for a factory in Spain, at the Spanish ambassador’s instigation.” Information about the status and occupations of the Wiltshire subscribers is variable, landowners and clergy tending to leave more traces than humble tradesmen. Using a range of contemporary source material including wills, poll books, trade directories and newspapers, it has been possible to classify the Wiltshire contingent: Auctioneer Baker Banker Brazier Brewer Butcher FE NOK WDD 14. W.A.S., W[iltshire] T[racts] 27. 15. W.A.S., W.C. 18.52. 16. W.A.S., W.C. 14.156. 17> WAS W.C3 3313! 18. W.A.S., W.C. 3.82. Cabinet Maker 1 Chandler 1 Clergyman 22 Clockmaker 1 Clothier/Wool Merchant/Draper 14 Doctor 1 Excise Officer 1 Freeholder/Farmer/Yeoman 6 Glover/Breeches Maker 2 Grocer 7 Innkeeper 6 Ironmonger 2 Landowner/Gentleman 41 Lawyer 5 Maltster 1 Organist/Music Teacher 1 Plumber/Glazier 2 4 ] 2 1 2 1 3 l 5 l 8 6 7 — Printer Sadler Schoolmaster Snuffmaker and Tobacconist Soap Boiler Stonemason Surgeon Timber Trade Titled Upholsterer Woman Unknown Total: 173 Table 2: Wiltshire Subscribers by Occupation/Status Sixty can be generally classified as tradesmen. Of these, fourteen were clothiers and twenty one were involved in the victualling trades; the remaining twenty five were involved in a multiplicity of commer- cial occupations, such as banking, plumbing, soap boiling and printing. There is, of course, much overlapping in this classification; many clothiers and manufacturers such as George Flower and William Hussey also enjoyed the status of gentlemen. Some traders had secondary occupations. Innkeeper John Phillips was also a soap boiler, and tallow chandler John Brown ran a stage waggon service. These subsi- diary occupations have not, however, been included in the classification. The use of the prefix ‘Mr’ 19. W.A.S. Flower Mss. 20. WA.S.5.W:G,, 2.182: 21. W.R.O., 402/113. 22. W.A.S., W.C. 14.139. SUBSCRIPTION LIST OF AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY BOOK normally denoted commercial status as opposed to ‘Esq’ for a landed gentleman or head of a propertied family. The Wiltshire component of the list is, there- fore, a curious mix of wealthy landowners, farmers and small town tradesmen and professionals, all im- bued perhaps with a sense of public duty, fortitude in the face of adversity, such as bereavement and bankruptcy, and a desire to win the approbation of their contemporaries through their charity, zeal and integrity. The Hampshire subscribers, only a fifth of the number from Wiltshire, may be analysed in some slightly different ways. From a geographical point of view, they reveal an interesting distribution pattern: Alresford Bighton Brown Candover Cheriton Dogmersfield Down Hursbourne Freefolk Harmsworth Kilmeston Lane End New Alresford Overton Preston Candover Ringwood Romsey Upper Clatford Warblington Weyhill Wield Winchester Winton wm ON ON OO i Total 37 Table 3: Hampshire Subscribers by Community With but a few exceptions, all of these communities were to the west and north-west of an imaginary line linking the port of Lymington and the market town of Alton, on chalklands and in part of the Hampshire basin. In some ways, such a pattern might have been expected as, except for Kilmeston and Warblington 23. R. Sedgwick (ed.), The House of Commons 1715-1754 (2 vols., London, 1970), II, pp. 403-4; The Victoria History of the County of Hampshire, vol. 4, p. 259. 24.. F.A. Edwards, ‘Early Hampshire Printers’, Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club, I (1890-1893), p. 114; V.C.H. Hamp- shire, vol. 5, p. 461. 25. I. Sanderson, Dwellings in Alresford, no. 8 (1982), pp. 12-13; R. 85 subscribers, the communities were located in that part of Hampshire closest to Wiltshire. The most promi- nent community was Alresford (Old and New) with eleven subscribers, followed by Winchester with five. The Winchester contingent can be attributed to the influence of a clergyman, the College and a baronet, Sir Paulet St John, former county sheriff, M.P. and Mayor of the city during the year prior to publication of the work,”? as well as to the presence of John Burdon, printer, stationer and bookseller.** The sub- scribers from Alresford merit further attention. A group of eleven, they formed a coterie of professional and landed gentlemen, including surgeons Edward Bradley and William Whitear, gentleman farmer Wil- liam Harris, James Rodney, brother of the naval leader, and attorney Henry Sealy. Lynchpin in this group was schoolmaster and local historian Robert Boyes (1723-82), whose second wife, Sarah, was daughter of the work’s publisher, Thomas Burrough. Subsequently Boyes was to become the father-in-law of the two Hillier subscribers from Devizes. As with many other subscribers, Boyes filled a variety of local offices, including those of burgess, bailiff, constable and hayward, as well as finding time to compile the town’s first serious piece of local history scholar- ship.?° While the majority of Hampshire subscribers were clerics and landed gentlemen, a small group deserves particular comment. William Allee of Down Hurs- bourne, William Sharp of Romsey and Joseph Portal of Freefolk were all papermakers, suggesting that they perhaps supplied some of the paper for the book, or that they were paper-makers interested in owning and collecting books. The Allee family was still making paper at Down Hursbourne in the 1820s, while Sharp was to rent property in Romsey from Winchester College between 1787 and 1801.7° The most prominent of the three was Joseph Portal, whose family, from relatively humble beginnings in the early eighteenth century, was to ‘arrive’ financially and socially at both county and national level. At his death in 1793, Portal was described as ‘the first paper-maker in England, from whom the Bank of England were supplied with that invaluable requisite in trade’.’” Beyond the Wiltshire and Hampshire elements in the subscription list are three groups needing particu- Elliott, ‘Robert Boyes — Master of the Free School in New Alresford c. 1723-1782’, Alresford Displayed no. 10 (1985), pp. 9-15. 26. A.H. Shorter, ‘Paper Mills in Hampshire’, Proc. H.F.C., XVIII (1951-1953), p. 8; S. Himsworth, Winchester College Muniments (3 vols. 1976-1984), II, pp. 791, 796, 799. 27. The Gentleman’s Magazine, LXII (1794), Pt. Il, p. 1156. 86 @ @ Draycot Cerne Leigh Delamere @ Marlborough § .~ Melksham All Alton Priors @ Cannings / Hewish Rowde @ Devizes \ Seend ® ee e vence @ @Nursteed Poulshot —_@ Potterne @ Keevil Wedhampton @ Rushall Lavington Chatlion @ Upavon Cheverill @ ®@ Chisenbury @ nd a ; Bratton ® ie verleig Hackleston @ Netheravon ® Cee ry ey 43 1South @ 1 Tidworth @ Bulford @ Amesbury\, : Bradford - @ Brimslade on-Avon Wootton Rivers @ Milton Lilbourne @ bewsey Manningford Abbots De Hilperton Trowbridge @ Collingbourne ~ Milston Chitterne @ All Saints Orcheston St. George ®@ Stockton @ Hele Groveley ® Wilton Tisbury Pithouse ® @ \ ® Compton Ansty @ Chamberlayne ®@ Salisbury ~ ~~ _@ Downton -s @ Ringwood @ Winton Figure 2. t @ Savernake @ @ Chute Standen Freefolk eB @ Weyhill pee Hurstbourne @ Clatford Winchester @ THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE sa Te a Lane End @> ~~~? Dogmersfield @ @ Overton @ Preston Candover Candover @ @ Wield Harmsworth @ @ Bighton Alresford ®@ @ Cheriton @ Kilmeston HAMPSHIRE Warblington @ Map showing geographical distribution of subscribers from Wiltshire and Hampshire. (Drawing by Nick Griffiths) SUBSCRIPTION LIST OF AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY BOOK lar analysis: clergymen, women and those from Lon- don. All three groups embraced, and yet in some ways were quite separate from, the basic Wiltshire— Hampshire division. Clerical subscribers are tabu- lated below: Buckinghamshire 1 Dorset ] Gloucestershire 1 Hampshire 10 London 1 Oxford 5 Shropshire 1 Somerset 1 Sussex 1 Wiltshire 22 Total 45 * includes one Dissenting minister James Foot of Bradford-on-Avon Table 4: Clerical Subscribers Of the 45 subscribers in this category, half came from Wiltshire and were widely distributed throughout the county, though reflecting the spread of subscribers as a whole. Eight were from the Avon Valley, seven from the Pewsey Vale, three from the Nadder and Wylye valleys in the south west of the county and one from the north west. Sixteen of them are known to have been Oxford graduates and two were from Cam- bridge; the background of the other four is unknown. Several of the clerical subscribers were famous for their literary and educational activities. The author’s father, the Revd William Cooke, Vicar of Enford and Rector of Didmarton and Oldbury, was also master of Thame School from 1765 to 1774. He was a writer on numismatic and antiquarian subjects, including several works on Stonehenge and Avebury, and ‘An Enquiry into the Patriarchal and Druidical Reli- gion’.’® The Revd Thomas Jervis was chaplain and librarian to the Earl of Shelburne at Bowood.”? He translated Don Quixote into English, and gave Latn lessons to Thomas Lawrence, later the famous por- trait painter, who lived at The Bear Hotel in Devizes. 28. W.A.M. 4 (1858), p. 351. 29. D.N.B. vol. X, p. 802. 30. Salisbury & Winchester Fournal, 6 May 1771. 31. Marlborough Journal, 23 November 1771. 32. W.A.S., W.C. 8,186. 33. Monumental Inscription, St. John’s Church, Devizes; M. Ransome (ed.), Wiltshire Returns to the Bishop’s Visitation Quer- tes 1783, (W.R.S. vol. 27, Devizes, 1972), pp. 85-6, 204. 34. V.C.H. Wilts, vol. 11, p. 141. 87 Two clerical subscribers were schoolmasters, the Revd T. Markes in West Lavington?® and the Revd William Jervis in the Devizes area.?! Fifteen Wilt- shire clerics appeared as freeholders in the 1772 Shire Poll Book, which also reveals that three of them were non-resident. Others may have held land in nearby counties, like the Revd Thomas Grove, who had land in Dorset. Several incumbents were pluralists. The Revd Charles Curtoys, incumbent of Hewish, held the living of Wootton Rivers,*” while the Revd Mr Innes, Rector of Stockton, was also Prebendary of Netheravon and Curate of St John’s, Devizes.?? Dr Samuel Starky, curate of Everleigh, held a living in Cumberland.** The Revd Dr Stonehouse lectured at All Saints, Clifton, Bristol as well as being the incumbent, first of Little Cheverell and then of Great Cheverell, some five miles from Devizes.*> The Revd Mr Tomlins, Rector of Collingbourne Kingston, also held Upham in Hampshire.*° The list contains the names of some long-serving clergy in livings under Oxford University patronage, such as Edward Polhill, who was Rector of Milston for forty years,*” and Nicholas Preston, Rector of Alton Barnes for the same length of time.*® The Revd Mr Tomlins?? and the Revd William Mayo both held their livings for thirty two years.*° The next largest concentration consisted of ten Hampshire clerics, with a further five from Oxford, followed by an assortment of what may perhaps best be termed ‘clerical strays’. The Hampshire clerical subscribers, with the major exception of Mr Simpson from Warblington, near Portsmouth, were located either in Winchester, where there were three, or to the north of that city. From Winchester came the Revds John Newbolt, Harry Lee and Daniel Wil- liams. John Monk Newbolt was the incumbent of St Mary Kalendar in the city, while Lee and Williams were both at the prestigious College founded by William of Wykeham in the fourteenth century. Dr Harry Lee had been a Fellow of New College, Oxford, Wykeham’s other creation, between 1741 and 1763, while also incumbent of Rousham in Oxfordshire. In 1764 he became Warden of Winches- ter College, a position he was to hold until his death in 1789.4! Like Lee, the Revd Daniel Williams was a 35. D.N.B. vol. XVIII, pp. 1304-5. 36. V.C.H. Wilts, vol. 11, p. 114. 37. Foster, op. cit. (see Note 2), vol. III, p. 1126. 38. Ibid., p. 1145. 39. V.C.H. Wilts, vol. 11, p.114. 40. Foster, op. cit., vol. III, p. 937. 41. T.F. Kirby, Annals of Winchester College (1892), pp. 399, 416; idem, Winchester Scholars (1888), p. 238. 88 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Fellow of New College, 1769-81, and then of Win- chester until he died seven years later. He was not without influence, his wife being the niece of Sir William Blackstone (1723-80), lawyer, judge and Solicitor General to Queen Charlotte.** Three of the remaining five Hampshire clerical subscribers held livings close to one another at Brown Candover, Bighton and Wield. The Revd Mr. Burleigh, son of an Isle of Wight incumbent, was Rector of Brown Candover between 1736 and his death in 1788. John Harrison had served in Lincolnshire before moving to Bighton,** while the Revd Alban Thomas of Wield remains, for the present, something of a clerical ‘mystery man’. The latter’s namesake, the Revd Robert Thomas of Overton, could have been influ- enced by other subscribers. A near neighbour of Joseph Portal, he had also been Curate of Alresford, had purchased land from Robert Boyes and was to be one of his executors.** Two subscribers, Mr Roman of Upper Clatford and Dr Joseph Simpson at Weyhill, were geographically closest to the Wiltshire border. In Simpson’s case, this was particularly apposite. Rector of Weyhill in 1756, he also held the living of Garsdon, near Malmesbury in Wiltshire from 1763 untl his death in 1796.* Similarly John Monk Newbolt from Winchester held the nearby rural parish of Chilcombe from 1788.%° Of the five Oxford clerical subscribers, four were attached to the University, while one held a living elsewhere in the county. The Revd Joseph Bale had attended both Balliol and New College;*” the Revd Mr Huntingford was a Fellow of the latter. The Revd J. Burrough and the Revd Robert Merchant were both Fellows of Magdalen College; Merchant also had a Wiltshire connection as his father (died 1773) was Rector of Fittleton for forty years.** A word or two is also necessary about some of the ‘clerical strays’. Incumbent William Long of Maids-Moreton, just a mile from Buckingham, subscribed for a copy, as did William Rodbard (jun.), incumbent of ?Evershot in Dorset. A Somerset man by birth, Rodbard had attended Wadham College, Oxford, matriculating there in 1768. Gloucestershire’s one subscriber, already noted, was the pluralist, the Revd Dr 42. Idem, Winchester Scholars (1888), p. 258; W. Moens (ed.), Allegations for Marnages Licences issued by the Bishop of Winches- ter 1689-1836 (2 vols., Harleian Soc. 1893), II, p. 353. 43. A.J. Willis, Hampshire Ordinations 1660-1829 (2 vols) II, pp. 60-61. 44. R. Elliott, loc. cit. (Note 25), pp. 13-14. 45. A.J. Willis, op. cit., I, p. 45; Foster, op. cit., vol. IV, p. 1300; R.M. Heanley, The History of Weyhill and Its Fair (1922), pp. 91, 103-4. Stonehouse. Educated at St John’s, Oxford, a Doctor of Physic in 1745, he was an evangelical preacher, author of devotional tracts and a friend of Hannah More. Locally he was also a trustee of the Bancroft Charity for St John’s, Devizes.*” London’s sole cleri- cal subscriber was the Revd John Butler, who super- vised the Charlotte Chapel in ‘Pimblico’. Oxford educated, like so many of the subscribers, John Butler had a clerical career marked by seemingly endless promotion, and a penchant for pluralism. Incumbent of Great Yarmouth, he became in 1760 a Prebendary of Winchester. As well as being Rector of Everleigh, near Pewsey, he had also been Chaplain to George III, and, in 1769, was appointed Archdeacon of Surrey. Like many a Georgian churchman, he was also an author, writing pamphlets against Lord Bute in 1762 and against a standing army in the following year. Four years after he subscribed to The Way to the Temple, he became Bishop of Oxford, though ensur- ing that he held his Surrey Archdeaconry in commen- dam until 1782. In 1788 he was translated to Hereford, having held his position as Canon of Win- chester in commendam until then.”! Somerset, Shropshire and Sussex each attracted one clerical subscriber. From Somerset came one of the two titled clerical subscribers, the Very Revd Lord Francis Seymour, Dean of Wells. His subscription, along with that of the Revd Sir Edward Ernle, Bt., incumbent of Brimslade in Wiltshire, serves to em- phasise the strength of the connection between the clergy and the landed classes in late Georgian England. From Shropshire, the Revd David Owen of Ryton subscribed, though it is, as yet, unclear from which of the two communities of that name he came. Lastly, there was the Revd Dr Domvile, Vicar of St Anne’s, Dublin and quondam Dean of Armagh. Twelve women appeared on the subscription list, constituting some 4.6% of the total. Their distribu- tion pattern was one from Berkshire, one from Lon- don, eight from Wiltshire and two with no address. For the most part they were related, in some way or other, to male subscribers who figure on the list. In four cases, they were wives and in two cases sisters, including Miss Cooke. In two instances, it was a 46. Willis, op.cit., II, pp. 24, 28. 47. Foster, op. cit., vol. I, p. 53. 48. Foster, op. cit., vol. IIT, p. 944. 49. Ibid., p. 1217. 50. Visitation Queries, pp. 56, 86; M.G. Jones, Hannah More (1957), p. 12. 51. E.B. Fryde, D.E. Greenway, S. Porter and I. Roy, Handbook of Bnitish Chronology (3rd Edition, 1986), pp. 264, 252; le Neve, Fasu Ecclesiae Anglicanae 1300-1541, WI, pp. 89, 103. SUBSCRIPTION LIST OF AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY BOOK matter of another relationship. Lady Catherine Hay was the daughter of the Marchioness of Tweeddale, to whom the work was dedicated, while Mrs Frances Cooper was mother-in-law of Devizes subscriber, Charles Garth.** Three ladies, Mrs Margarata Spen- cer of Bowood Park, Mrs Mary Boucher of Newbury and Mrs Mary Middleton of Welbeck Street, London have unfortunately eluded positive identification to date. The London group of twelve subscribers reveals a curious admixture of provincial penetration by the capital, links with business and with scientific and royal circles. The intriguing Mrs Middleton may well have been related to fellow subscriber, John Middle- ton of Vine Street, Piccadilly, described at his death in January 1795 as ‘pencil-maker to His Majesty’.~? Three other London subscribers came from the commercial world. Joseph Dalby, a near neighbour of Mrs Middleton in Welbeck Street, invented the ‘sweet boon to children’, known as ‘Dalby’s Carmin- ative’, passing the manufacturing secrets to his daughter Frances. He had property interests in Great Shrewton, Wiltshire, which he bequeathed to his son, Charles Edward Dalby.** The thriving world of Lon- don publishing was ably represented in the sub- scription list by Francis Newbery (1743-1818) who had taken over his father’s business on the latter’s death in 1767. Eventually joining the ranks of the Sussex country gentry, with an estate at Heathfield Park, Newbery was related by marriage to fellow London subscriber, Thomas Raikes, subsequently to become a director of the Bank of England. Newbery had married his niece Mary, daughter of Robert Raikes, the promoter of the Sunday School movement from Gloucester.*? William Crouch (jun.) was in all probability the son of the namesake Marlborough subscriber. William Sawer, described as ‘of the Secre- tary of State’s Office for the Western Department’, may have had links with the Post Office.°° Unfor- tunately two subscribers, Dr Hill and Mr Lester, Master of St Luke’s London, have eluded positive identification. The final London subscriber, Marma- duke Cuthbert Tunstall (1743-90), represented the world of science and learning. Descended from the Tudor Bishop, Cuthbert Tunstall, he had been elected a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries at 21 and of the Royal Society two years before The Way to 52. W.R.O., 212B/5981. 53. The Gentleman’s Magazine, LXV (1795), pt. I, p. 171. 54. J.L. Chester, (ed.), The Marriage, Baptismal and Burial Regis- ters of the Collegiate Church or Abbey of St. Peter, Westminster (1876), p. 438 and n.4. 55. D.N.B., vol. XIV, p. 312; vol. XVI, p. 611; C.J. Robinson, A 89 the Temple was published. In Welbeck Street he began the formation of a museum, subsequently moving his collections to his house at Wycliffe in Yorkshire, where he died suddenly in October 1790.°” It should be noted that some of the subscribers to The Way of the Temple also contributed to other contemporary works now in the Wiltshire Archaeo- logical and Natural History Society Library. The Preface of a similar book, A Treatise on Peace of Soul and Content of Mind, by J. Scrope (Salisbury, 1765), contains the names of eleven of the later Way to the Temple subscribers, fourteen of whom also took The Book of Psalms as Translated by some of the Most Eminent English Poets by Benjamin Williams (Salis- bury, 1781). A devotional work, Sermons on Practical Subjects by Philip Henvill (Salisbury, 1799), attracted only three of The Temple subscribers, but this was probably due to many of them having died by the time it was published. A collection of Miscellanies in Verse and Prose (Salisbury, 1776), by John Lucas, a Trinity Hospital pensioner, was patronised by twenty six of The Temple subscribers, a reflection of its local inter- est and the current enthusiasm for poetry and mo- ralising prose pieces. The quotation from Pope on the utle page expresses the same sentiments as those in The Way to the Temple preface: Of old, those met rewards who did excel, And such were prais’d who but endeavour’d well: Though triumphs were to Gen’rals only due Crowns were reserv’d to grace the Soldiers too. The architectural and antiquarian interests of the litterati of the day were catered for by several contem- porary publications. Thomas Overton’s Orginal Designs of Temples and other Ornamental Buildings (London, 1766) attracted fifteen of the later Temple subscribers, most of them naturally being large land- owners who were able to envisage such ambitious landscape designs on their estates. Observations on the Cathedral Church of Salisbury by F. Price (London, 1753) attracted ten of The Temple subscribers, who lived in the south of the county, while a 1769 Salisbury publication, A Description of the Antiquities and Curiosities of Wilton House by James Kennedy, was subscribed to by five who lived in that area. A less localised work, Tunnicliffe’s Topographical Survey of Register of The Scholars Admitted into Merchant Taylors’ School 1562-1874 (2 vols. 1882-3), II, p. 118. 56. Anthony Todd to John Pownall, 18 Sept. 1771: Calendar of Home Office Papers 1770-2, p. 298. 57. D.N.B. vol. XIX, p. 1243; The Gentleman’s Magazine LX (1790), Pt. II, p. 959. 90 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE the Western Counties (1791), listed seventeen names from Wiltshire and four from Hampshire who patron- ised Cooke’s publication. A Topographical Map of Wiltshire, drawn by John Andrews and Andrew Dury in the same year 1773, was subscribed by ten of The Temple patrons, of whom three were titled, one was a cleric and the other six were wealthy landowners. Twenty two of The Temple subscribers had their seats marked on the Andrews and Dury map. Subscription to these last two publications was possibly influenced by social rather than local, devotional or cultural factors, and it must be borne in mind that eight of the ten works were published locally in Devizes or Salis- bury. Further research on other eighteenth century book lists would doubtless increase the list still further. What then may be said in conclusion? In terms of technique, subscription lists permit both in-depth analysis and multi-record linkage. As such, they hold both value and potential for local history research. The forces helping to explain why people subscribed to particular works certainly become more apparent. Such work clearly presents a number of rich possibili- ties. Particular individuals could be pursued in terms of their book buying. Alternatively, it would be equally valid and valuable to analyse a number of Wiltshire lists over a specified tme period. At the very least, analysis of such lists, of which the forego- ing is typical, serves to reflect some of the classical and antiquarian tastes of a literate section of the provincial population in the second half of the eighteenth century. Some books were probably placed on the shelves for purposes of show rather than as a reflection of interest. Nevertheless, subscription lists are valu- able. Perhaps the final words should go to Captain Cuttle who observed in Dombey and Son ‘When found, make a note of’. APPENDIX List of Subscribers to The Temple’ Mr James Alford, Tisbury Mr John Alford, Wells Mr William Allee, Down-Hursbourne, Hants Mr John Allen, Bradford-on-Avon Mr Edward Andrews, Collingbourne Mr John Anstie jun., Devizes Francis Dugdale Astley Esq., Everly Richard Astley Esq., ditto Mr Richard Atwood, Bradford 58. The list has been re-arranged in strict alphabetical order but original spelling has been retained. Ambrose Awdry Esq., Seend John Awdry Esq., Notton Mr Robert Baden, Long Street [Enford] Rev. Mr Joseph Chaloner Bale, late Fellow of New College, Oxford Mr John Barnes, Collingbourne Kingston Mr Joseph Baster, Rowde Mr Francis Bayly, Devizes William Beach Esq., Netheravon Mrs Beach, ditto Mr John Beaven, Devizes Mr Thomas Beaven, Melksham Mr Anthony Bell, Chisenbury Mr John Bell, ditto Thomas Bennet Esq., Pithouse Mr William Berrow, Trowbridge Mr Samuel Bevan, Devizes Mr Samuel Biggs, Chiltern-All Saints Mr James Bishop, Frome, Somerset Mr Samuel Bishop, Market Lavington Mr George Blake, Romsey, Hants Mrs Mary Boucher, Newbury, Berks Rev. Mr Bowles, Hele House Mr Robert Boyes, New Alresford, Hants Mr Edward Bradley, Alresford, Hants Mr John Bridgwood, Everly Mr Francis Brittan, Devizes Mr John Brown, ditto The Rt. Hon. Lord Bruce, 6 sets Mr John Burdon, Winchester Rev. Mr Burleigh, Rector of Candover etc., Hants Rev. Mr J. Burrough, Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford Mr James Burrough, Alton Priors Mr Sydenham Burrough, Sarum, 2 sets Mr William Butcher, Cheveril Rev. Mr Butler, Charlotte Chapel, Pimblico, London Lieutenant Byrt, Cricklade John Carr, Esq., Milton Hill, Wilts The Rt. Hon. the Earl of Castlehaven Mr George Chambers, Bowood Park Mr Richard Chandler, Devizes Green Mr William Chubb, Sarum Mr William Clare, Devizes Mr James Clutterbuck, Stroud William Coles Esq., Downton Mr Henry Cooke, Enford Mr William Cooke, Devizes Rev. Mr William Cooke, Enford Miss Cooke, ditto Mr Robert Cooper, Sarum, 2 sets Mrs Cooper, Crane Street, Sarum Mrs Frances Cooper, Polshot Mr Cooper, Freshford, Somerset Mr John Crew, Devizes Mr William Crouch sen., Marlborough Mr William Crouch jun., London Mr Richard Cruttwell, Bath Rev. Mr Charles Curtoys, Rector of Hewish SUBSCRIPTION LIST OF AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY BOOK Mr Joseph Dalby, Welbeck-Street, Cavendish Square, London Mr William Davis, Devizes Rev. Dr. Domvile, Vicar of St Anne’s, Dublin, late Dean of Armagh George Durnford Esq., Cheriton, Hants Rev. Sir Edward Ernle, Bart., D.D., Brimslade Mr Richard Everett, Devizes Mr John Eyles, ditto Mr Matthew Figgins, Devizes Rev. Mr Fletcher, Manningford Abbots George Flower Esq., Devizes Mr James Foot jun., Bradford-on-Avon Mr John Fowle, Charlton Mr William Frederick, Bath Mr John Gale, Allcannings Mr John Gamble, Nurstead Charles Garth Esq., Devizes Mr Henry Gent, Devizes Mr James Gibbs, Compton Mr Micah Gibbs, Frome Mr Thomas Glass, Pewsey Ambrose Goddard Esq., Swindon, 2 sets Rev. Mr Goddard, South Tidworth Richard Godwin Esq., Lane-End, Hants Mr John Grant, Hacklestone William Chafin Grove Esq., Chisenbury, 2 sets Rev. Mr Thomas Grove, Orcheston-St.-George Mr William Habgood, Newbury, Berks Thomas Hall Esq., L.D., Preston Candover, Hants Mr John Hannington, Winton Rowland Harley Esq., Old Alresford, Hants Mr John Harman, Keevil Mr E. Harold, Marlborough, 2 sets Mr John Harris, Bath William Harris Esq., New Alresford, Hants Rev. Mr Harrison, Rector of Bighton, Hants The Rt.Hon. Lady Catherine Hay Josiah Eyles Heathcote Esq., Devizes Giles Hemings Esq., Mr John Herring, Devizes Mr Augustine Heyter, Bulford Mr George Hillier, Devizes Mr Isaac Hillier, Bradford-on-Avon Mr Isaac Hillier, Devizes Mr Samuel Hilliker, Marlborough Mr James Hobbes, Devizes John Holder Esq., Chilterne Rev. Mr Hollingbury, Winchelsea Mr Robert Hooper, Pewsey Mr Richard Howard for Dr. Hill, London Mr Edward Hulbert, Devizes -Mr Samuel Hull, ditto Miss Nancy Hunt, Enford Rev. Mr Huntingford, Fellow of New College, Oxford William Hussey Esq., Sarum Rev. Mr Innes, Rector of Stockton Sir Hildebrand Jacob, Bt., Ewelme, Oxfordshire Rev. Mr Jaques, Rector of Leigh Dalamere oF Ensign James, Bradford Rev. Mr Thomas Jervis, Bowood Rev. Mr William Jervis, Devizes Mr James Jones, Grafton Street, London Mr James Jordon, Devizes Mr John Keene, Bath Mr Richard Keene, Devizes Mr Moses Kittier, Ringwood, Hants Mr Thomas Lacy, Devizes Robert Lambert Esq., Harmsworth, Hants Mr John Lane, Devizes Green Mr Robert Lawrence, Devizes Mr William Leach, ditto Mr Lester, Master of St Luke’s, London Rev. Dr. Lee, Warden of Winchester College Sir James Long, Bt., Draycott-Cerne Rev. Mr William Long, Rector of Maids Moreton, Bucks Dr. John Makittrick, Devizes Mr Richard Maltby, ditto His Grace George, Duke of Manchester Rev. Mr Thomas Marks, West Lavington Mr William Marsh, Devizes Mr James Mayo, ditto Rev. Mr William Mayo, Rector of Wooton Rivers Rev. Mr Robert Merchant, Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford Mr James Merifield, Sarum Mr John Middleton, Vine St., Piccadilly Mrs Middleton, Welbeck St., London John Moss Esq., Wells Mr George Mullins, Box Miss Elizabeth Neate, Devizes Mr John Neate, ditto Mr Stephen Neate, ditto Mr Francis Newbery jun., St. Paul’s Churchyard, London Rev. Mr Newbolt, Winchester Mr Isaac Newton, Devizes Mr Robert Noyes, ditto Mr John Oak, Devizes Mr Thomas Oak, ditto Rev. Mr David Owen, of Ryton of the Eleven Towns, Salop Mr George Paradise, Devizes Captain Peck, Marlborough Mr John Pearce, Devizes The Rt.Hon. The Earl of Pembroke Charles Penruddocke Esq., Compton, 2 sets Mr John Phillips, Devizes Mr William Pitman, Bradford Rev. Mr Polhill, Milson Edward Poore Esq., Rushall Edward Poore jun. Esq., Wedhampton John Poore Esq., Long Street John Methuen Poore Esq., Wedhampton Joseph Portal Esq., Freefolk, Hants Sir Alexander Powel, Sarum Mr John Powell, Devizes Mr James Power, ditto Rev. Mr Nicholas Preston, Rector of Alton Barnes 92 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Mr Thomas Raikes, London Mr James Read, Trowbridge Mr Richard Read, Devizes Mr William Read, ditto Rev. Mr Richards, Amesbury Mr Thomas Richards, Pimblico Thomas Ridge Esq., Kilmiston, Hants Rev. Mr William Rodbard jun., Evercreech [?Evershot], Dorset James Rodney Esq., Old Alresford, Hants Rev. Mr Roman, Rector of Up-Clatford, Hants Mr Nicholas Russel, New Alresford, Hants Lieutenant Rutty, Melksham Sir Henry Paulet St. John, Dogmer’s Field, Hants Sir Paulet St. John Bt., Winchester Mr William Salmon jun., Devizes Mr John Savage, Melksham Mr William Sawer, of the Secretary of State’s Office for the Western Dept. Mr Henry Sealy, New Alresford, Hants The Hon. & Rev. Lord Francis Seymour, Dean of Wells The Rt.Hon. the Earl of Shaftesbury Mr William Sharp, Romsey, Hants Mr William Shawford, New Alresford, Hants Mr Francis Shuttleworth, Sarum Rev. Dr. Simpson, Way-Hill, Hants Rev. Mr Simpson, Minister of Warblington, Hants Mr Benjamin Sloper, Devizes Mr George Sloper, ditto Mr John Sloper, ditto Mr John Smith, Marlborough Thomas Assheton Smith Esq., South Tidworth, 4 sets Mr William Henry Assheton Smith, ditto Mr William Soper, New Alresford, Hants Richard Southby Esq., Bulford Mrs Margarata Spencer, Bowood Park Rev. Mr James Hume Spry, Vicar of Potterne Mr Christopher Stantial, Melksham Rev. Dr Samuel Starky, Everly Lieutenant Stevens, Bradford-on-Avon Mr Gabriel Stull, Hilperton Rev. Dr. Stonehouse, Bristol George Stonehouse Esq., Standen Mr William Stroud, Devizes Mr James Stuart, Bradford-on-Avon Mr David Surcome, Devizes James Sutton Esq., ditto, 2 sets Mrs Sutton, ditto, 2 sets Mr James Sutton, Devizes Mr John Sutton, ditto Prince Sutton Esq., ditto Willy Sutton Esq., New Park, ditto Christopher Talbot Esq., Margam, Glamorgan Thomas Talbot Esq., ditto Mr Samuel Tayler, Devizes William Parker Terry Esq., Alresford, Hants Rev. Mr Alban Thomas, Minister of Wield, Hants Rev. Mr Robert Thomas, Vicar of Overton, Hants, 2 sets Rev. Mr William Thomas, Vicar of Tisbury Rev. Mr Tomlins, Collingbourne The Most Noble the Marquis of Tweeddale The Most Noble the Marchioness of Tweeddale Marmaduke Cuthbert Tunstal Esq., London Mr John Turton, Down Hursbourne, Hants Mr John Tylee, Devizes Captain Vilett, Swindon Mr Thomas Walford, Bath Mr Thomas Warner, Ansty Mr Robert Waylen jun., Devizes Rev. Dr. Weston, Rector of Rushall Rev. Mr P. Weston, Rector of Witney, Oxfordshire Richard Whatley Esq., Bradford-on-Avon Jeffery Whitaker, Bratton Mr William Whitear, New Alresford, Hants Mr James Whiting, Romsey, Hants Mr John Whitmarsh, Sarum -Willis Esq., one of His Majesty’s Justices for the County of Surrey Rev. Mr Williams, Fellow of Winchester College Mr Henry Willoughby, Melksham Mr Simon Witherell, Wells Mr Thomas Workman, Uphaven Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 93-100 The Wiltshire Militia Band, 1769-c.1831 by M.J. LOMAS Funded by the government and by wealthy officers, the Wiltshire militia band, like other auxiliary forces bands, enabled working men to develop skills and traditions in instrumental music-making which may have assisted and influenced the later development of amateur banding. The band’s history shows that plebeian culture did not collapse completely in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, nor was patrician support for ordinary people’s amusements entirely withdrawn. Rather, this period experienced important innovation in popular music — assisted by the patronage of the wealthy — which allowed some convergence in taste to occur. Introduction Many British militia units in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries possessed military bands. Little, however, is known in detail about these en- sembles. Nor has there been very much research into the impact of militia bands upon the later develop- ment of the brass band movement.! The present paper is intended to address both of these hiatuses. Firstly, it is focussed on the band of the Wiltshire militia — being based mainly upon the large body of militia records contained within the Savernake Collec- tion held at Wiltshire Record Office.? Secondly, the evidence relating to the Wiltshire militia band has been used to make some observations about the importance of militia bands to the history of amateur banding in Britain. In addition, the above material has been set in the wider context of some contem- porary cultural developments. In 1757, amid public concern about the ability of Britain’s national defences to withstand a possible French invasion, Parliament passed legislation which revived the militia after a long period of decay. The 1757 Militia Act (and subsequent amendments) pro- 1. A small amount of coverage is given to militia bands in one or two secondary sources. See, for instance, H.G. Farmer, The Rise and Development of Miluary Music (London [1912]), pp. 814 and E. Croft-Murray, ‘The Wind-Band in England, 1540-1840’, in T.C. Mitchell (ed.), The British Museum Year- book 4 Music and Civilisation (London, 1980), pp. 140-2. See also M.J. Lomas, ‘Militia and Volunteer Wind Bands in Southern England in the Late Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries’, Journal of the Society for Army Historical Research, vol. LXVII (1989), pp. 154-166; and Chapter 1 of M.J. Lomas, ‘Amateur Brass and Wind Bands in Southern England Between the Late Eighteenth Century and Circa 1900’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Open University, 1990), which provide some preliminary suggestions about the importance of the bands of the auxiliary forces in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. 2. At the time of writing, much of the Savernake collection — vided the basis for a force which was to become an important feature of British society in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Each county was expected to provide a specified number of militiamen; it was intended that many of these men would be raised by a ballot organised. by the Lord Lieutenants and their deputies. The force was officered by local landowners. Militia units underwent several days’ training a year and, in time of national emergency, such as war or insurrection, could be called out, or ‘embodied’, under roughly the same conditions as the regular army.* A regiment of the new militia was formed in Wiltshire in 1758 and was first called out in the following year. As a result of civil disturbances and wars against France, the Wiltshire militia was to remain embodied for much of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.* Initially, the only musical resource available to the regiment appears to have been a corps of fifes and drums. In 1766, the unit was presented with a bill for drum belts, slings and ‘5 Fife Lines & Tossels [sic]’.° In November 1769, however, the officers engaged a bandmaster who was to be Wiltshire Record Office 9, hereafter WRO 9 — including the Wiltshire militia papers, remains only sketchily catalogued, although I am informed that a more detailed listing of the collection is in preparation. The following references employ the system of referencing in use in Wiltshire Record Office’s current catalogue, coupled with the author’s own short descrip- uons of individual documents. 3. For a history of the militia, see J.R. Western, The English Militia in the Eighteenth Century The Story of a Political Issue 1660-1802 (London, 1965). 4. See N.C.E. Kenrick, The Story of the Wiltshire Regiment (Duke of Edinburgh’s) . . . (Aldershot, 1963), pp. 294-304, for a short history of the Wiltshire militia. 5. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters and accounts relating to Militia clothing / Bill of N. Pearce for clothing Wiltshire militia, April 1766. 94 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE responsible for the training of a full military band. The Wiltshire militia band appears to have rehearsed for the first time in January 1770. There are indi- cations that it remained active until about 1831, in which year the regiment finally ceased training. The finances of the band The band received financial support from two main sources. Firstly, the officers of the regiment made donations. When the regiment first engaged a bandmaster in November 1769, it was agreed that his wages of 24s. 6d. per week would be met by Colonel Lord Thomas Bruce, Lieutenant-Colonel William Northey and Major Sir James Long.° Bruce also paid for at least some of the band’s instruments. In July 1770, he paid £4 4s. for 3 flutes.’ His son, Charles, Marquis of Ailesbury, who was also Colonel of the regiment, appears to have paid for music for the band in the mid-1820s.° The second source of support for the band was the government. In theory, the government gave the barest support to military music. Initially, the Militia Acts stipulated that the state was merely to pay for the wages and equipment of two drummers per company and a drum major. In 1786, even this very limited provision was reduced. Henceforward, militia units in peacetime were only to receive pay and allowances for one drummer per company, except the grenadier and light companies, which retained two each. Regimental commanders were empowered to appoint — at their own expense — ‘supernumerary’ or ‘additional’ drum- mers to serve as bandsmen. In the eighteenth century, at least, no funds were provided for the pay, clothing or equipment of militia bandsmen.? The evidence, however, shows that militiamen paid by the state for ostensibly ‘military’ purposes were being used as bandsmen by the officers; thus, the government was the unwitting employer of a con- siderable number of military musicians. Like other militia regiments, the Wiltshire militia possessed a permanent staff of NCOs and drummers. Paid and maintained by the state even in peacetime, some of these were used as part-time bandsmen. In January 1770, a letter to Lord Bruce from the regimental 6. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / Bandmaster’s draft contract, 6 November 1769. 7. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / Receipt, 27 July 1770. 8. See WRO 9/ Wiltshire Militia Papers / Undated letters / List of music. This is discussed in detail later in this paper. 9. See Western, op. cit., p. 370. 10. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Milita Papers / Letters relating to the adjutant, William Peck, referred to ‘the Serjeants who Act in capacity of Musicians’ who would be ‘wanted likewise as Serjeants particularly the beginning of the Twenty Twenty [sic] eight days Exercise’.!° In the early nineteenth century, some of the perma- nent staff may even have been employed in the band full-time. For instance, the evening reports of Captain Bayly’s company have survived for 5, 6 and 24 October 1811, when the regiment was embodied. These give an indication of the activities of the men of the company. A sergeant, a drummer and a private were listed as ‘Musicians’ — bandsmen — on each of these dates.!! One explanation for this may be that the company’s several sergeants, drummers and privates acted as musicians in rotation and that none of Bayly’s men were full-time bandsmen. Musical skills, how- ever, were still insufficiently widespread in the early nineteenth century for this explanation to be plausi- ble; it is almost certain that Bayly’s company included three men who were continuously employed as bands- men, two of whom were on the regiment’s permanent staff. Militia commanding officers received an allowance for clothing their men. Part of this was commonly misappropriated to meet band expenses.!* Such mal- practice may have taken place in the Wiltshire militia, thereby relieving the officers of at least part of the burden of donations to the band, though there ap- pears to be no documentary evidence for this. It should be noted from the above that, in various ways, the landed gentlemen who officered the regi- ment were crucially important in establishing and financing the Wiltshire militia band. These men do not seem to have left any record of their motives; however, it is possible to offer a number of tentative explanations. It was no coincidence that the Wiltshire militia did not begin to form a military band until 1769. It was only in that year that the militia was placed on a permanent footing and it became prudent for miliua officers to commit large amounts of time and money to establishing bands. Also, militia officers could afford to support a band in this period because the landowning classes were enjoying considerable pros- regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / W. Peck to Lord Bruce, 13 January 1770, pp. [1-2]. 11. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Miliua Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Miliua riots at Devizes, 1810 / Evening report of Capt. Bayly’s company, 5 October 1811. See also WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Milita riots at Devizes, 1810 / Evening reports of Capt. Bayly’s company for 6 October 1811 and 24 October 1811. The sergeant may have been the bandmaster. 12. See Western, op. cit., p. 357. THE WILTSHIRE MILITIA BAND perity. From about the 1760s, grain prices, land values and rents began to rise. At about the same time, labour costs were being reduced, agricultural improvements were producing greater yields and landed proprietors were taking advantage of enclosure to expand and consolidate their holdings. No doubt the Bruces’ donations to the Wiltshire militia band in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries were facilitated by their activities as enclosing land- lords. ' It is unlikely that the Wiltshire militia band was established solely in order to provide a rhythmic accompaniment to parades; this function could have been performed adequately and far more cheaply by the corps of fifes and drums which was already in existence. There is circumstantial evidence that the band was partly intended as an addition to the amusements of the social circuit enjoyed by the upper classes. Wind band music was popular with the aristocracy during this period; it was discussed enthu- siastically in fashionable circles, and some prominent figures in society, such as the Marquis of Blandford and the Prince Regent, possessed their own private bands (or harmoniemusik).'* At least one of the Wil- tshire militia officers — Lord Thomas Bruce — appears to have shared this enthusiasm, evincing a keen interest in details of the militia band’s management. In late 1770, he was questioning his adjutant concern- ing the movements of the band and suggesting that White, one of the regimental fifers, should learn the clarinet.!° In the late eighteenth century, it was not unusual for military bands to be established in order to cater for wealthy officers’ eagerness to hear wind music.'© The Wiltshire militia band certainly played for social occasions attended by the officers of the regiment. One such event took place in August 1821, when The Devizes and Wiltshire Gazette reported that, after the militia’s annual training at Marlborough, the officers 13. For a short history of the Brudenell-Bruce family, see A.R. Stedman, Marlborough and the Upper Kennet Country (Marlbo- rough, 1960), pp. 258-264. 14. M.J. Lomas, thesis, pp. 235-241. 15. WRO 9/ Wiltshire Militia Papers / Undated letters / Series of questions and answers about the regiment, in the hands of Lord Bruce and William Peck respectively, probably late 1770. 16. See, for example, [F. Grose], Advice to the Officers of the British Army (London, 1946), pp. 27-28 for a satirical comment (first published in 1782) on the practice of army officers establishing military bands as private bands to provide entertainment for themselves and other members of fashionable society. 17. The Devizes and Wiltshire Gazette, Thursday 16 August 1821, p. (3]. See also The Western Flying-Post; or, Sherborne and Yeovil Mercury, and General Advertiser, Monday 3 November 1800, p. 95 were entertained by John Halcomb, esq. at his cottage in Savernake Forest, where they dined on the lawn before his house; the regimental band attended, and enlivened the company with many noble tunes.!” E.P. Thompson has argued that the landed classes maintained their hold over eighteenth-century society partly by self-conscious use of theatrical display, which was calculated to show power and authority and exact deference.'!* The Wiltshire militia band may have been intended as a prop in the ‘theatre’ described by Thompson. The appearance of the militia in a locality was one means by which the authorities could exhibit their strength and determination to the po- pulace. The officers of the Wiltshire militia may have established their band in order to enhance the effect of such displays; the presence of concerted music, an unusual sight and sound in the third quarter of the eighteenth century, with the militia amplified the opulence and might of the ruling order. Furthermore, the band’s playing helped to create an air of ceremony, which was very important in contemporary contacts between patricians and plebeians. Personnel The Wiltshire militia faced a major difficulty when forming their band. The pool of skilled instrumenta- lists available in Britain in the third quarter of the eighteenth century was inadequate to sustain the various military bands which were being established at the time. There were not many professional musicians available, especially outside the metropolis, and there were very few suitable amateur instru- mentalists. !? It was probably for this reason that, when the officers of the regiment were organising a band in 1769, they engaged only one professional musician, John Adam Buckner, who was brought from London to serve as bandmaster.*? He may have been of [4], which mentions the ‘very excellent’ band of the Wiltshire militia playing for a grand ball and supper held by the officers of the regiment at Cowley’s Royal Crown Hotel, Plymouth — an event attended by various prominent persons in local society. 18. See E. P. Thompson, ‘Patrician Society, Plebeian Culture’, Journal of Social History, vol. VII (1974), pp. 389-390. 19. C. Ehrlich, The Music Profession in Britain since the Eighteenth Century A Social History (Oxford, 1985), pp. 1-7. 20. WRO 9 / Wiltshire MIlitia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / Bandmaster’s draft contract, 6 November 1769; see also WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / Modification, dated 6 November 1769, of bandmaster’s contract. 96 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE German origin, as were many contemporary military bandmasters. ‘Buckner’ could be a corruption of the German name ‘Btichner’; indeed, Peck gives the bandmaster’s name as ‘Buchner’ in a letter of 1770.7! The shortage of suitable skilled instrumentalists also probably explains why Buckner taught the first Wilt- shire militia bandsmen from scratch — a laborious and exasperating business. Sergeant Morgan, one of the men initially selected for the band, begged to be excused, although he claimed he would ‘have been Exceeding Glad to have Larn’d the musick’.”? Buckner tried his men out on several instruments before deciding upon which part they had to play. After only a couple of weeks, however, he was on the verge of giving up with Milsome, one of the bassoon- ists; he only persevered because of the man’s eager- ness to learn.?? There is a little evidence that the men who were so painstakingly introduced to instrumental music- making by Buckner were of quite humble origin. William Peck gave the names of the members of the band in a letter of January 1770.7+ By comparing these with the returns of the various companies of the regiment, it is possible to form some idea of the ranks held by a few of the bandsmen. The two clarinettists Duffett and Card were probably the two ‘Serjeants who Act in capacity of Musicians’ who were mentioned later in Peck’s letter. A Sergeant Duffett was attached to Captain Poore’s company in 17707° and a Sergeant Card was a member of Captain Egerton’s company in the same year.’° Alternatively, it is possible that Card was a private; ‘Robt' Card’ was listed among the privates of Lieutenant-Colonel Northey’s company in 1770.*’ The troublesome bass- oonist, Milsome, might have been the ‘Jas. Millsom’ 21. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / W. Peck to Lord Bruce, 13 January 1770. 22. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / Sergeant Morgan to Lord Bruce, 10 January 1770, p. [1]. 23. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / W. Peck to Lord Bruce, 13 January 1770, p. [1]. 24. Ibid., loc. cit. 25. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Milita Papers / Monthly and weekly strength returns; lists of officers and other ranks, lists of parish ballots and subsutuuons / List of men in Capt. Poore’s company who were with the regiment on embodiment, 16 October 1770. 26. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Monthly and weekly strength returns; lists of officers and other ranks, lists of parish ballots and substitutions / Return of Capt. Egerton’s company, 15 October 1770. 27. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Monthly and weekly strength returns; lists of officers and other ranks, lists of parish ballots and substitutions / Return of Lieut.-Col. Northey’s company, 16 October 1770. who was a private in Northey’s company in 1769,”° or perhaps the ‘Drummer Milsom’ who was attached to Captain Duke’s company in 1770.7? Although few other details survive about Duffett, Card and Milsome, it is almost certain that they were of plebeian origin. Sergeants were usually recruited from amongst the more literate and prosperous work- ing people. Many had been in the regular army and had been employed to stiffen the ranks of the militia. (Sergeant Card seems to have been one of these.)*? In general, privates were poor men who had either been attracted by the pay or had been unable to avoid the ballot.*! Drummers were often sons of privates or sons of NCOs.” It is important to remember that, in the mid- eighteenth century, instruments, music and tuition were expensive luxury items. As a result, instru- mental music-making was mainly confined to the wealthier members of society and_ professional musicians. By providing access to musical facilities and tuition, the Wiltshire militia band, like other militia bands, had an initiating, enabling role; it was allowing working men to develop skills, traditions and tastes in band playing, upon which later bands prob- ably drew. The recruitment of the band might have changed by the early nineteenth century. By then, it was probably becoming unnecessary for the Wiltshire militia to teach new bandsmen from scratch. As a result of a contemporary expansion in instrumental music-making, there were a number of ensembles in the county which could supply skilled and experi- enced players to the regiment. There was a volunteer band at Marlborough in 1804.*? At least two wind bands appear to have been active in the Wootton 28. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Milita Papers / Monthly and weekly strength returns; lists of officers and other ranks, lists of parish ballots and substitutions / Return of Lieut.-Col. North[e]y’s company, October 1769. , 29. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Monthly and weekly strength returns; lists of officers and other ranks, lists of parish ballots and substitutions / Return of Capt. Duke’s company, October 1770. 30. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Monthly and weekly strength returns; lists of officers and other ranks, lists of parish ballots and substitutions/ Return of Capt. Egerton’s company, 15 October 1770. Card is listed amongst those who were ‘Old Soldiers when Imbodied [sic]’. See also Western, op. cit., p. 129. 31. See Western, op. cit., pp. 256-257 and pp. 271-272, which shows that most ordinary militiamen were unskilled and semi- skilled manual labourers. 32. The militia legislation of 1758 gave preference to privates’ children in the appointment of militia drummers: Western, op. cit., p. 142. See also Kenrick, op. cit., p. 299, which mentions that many of the later Wiltshire militia drummers were sons of members of the regiment’s permanent staff. 33. See M.J. Lomas, ‘Militia and Volunteer Wind Bands’, p. 156. THE WILTSHIRE MILITIA BAND Bassett area in 1808.*+ Some contemporary church bands used wind instruments. K.H. MacDermott found church bands at the following places in Wilt- shire: Devizes, Liddington, Manningford, Purton, Quemerford and Seend.*> Also, at least one of the later bandmasters of the Wiltshire militia was not a professional musician imported from London. Wil- liam Quelch senior appears to have been bandmaster in the mid-1820s.*° This was probably the same William Quelch who was listed in contemporary directories as a ‘music seller?’ and ‘Professor & Teacher’ of music, whose address was Marlborough ‘High st.’,** and who directed the Marlborough mu- sical festival of 1826.*? Instrumentation There is a great deal of evidence relating to the instruments used by the Wiltshire militia band in its early stages. It was specified in Buckner’s contract of November 1769 that the band was to consist of 3 clarinets, 2 French horns and 2 bassoons.*? A letter from William Peck to Lord Bruce, dated 13 January 1770, shows that, at a very early stage, this band was augmented by the addition of the regimental fifers. Peck reported that Buckner found ‘great fault with our fifes, their not being in Unison with the Clarinetts, & he is desirous that some new Ones may be purchased’.*! Later that month, the band took delivery of ‘3 German Fluths’ [flutes] which, presum- ably, supplanted the fifes.4? Like other contemporary military bandmasters, Buckner probably played with his band.*? It was recommended that a bandmaster’s coat should be made for him, with ‘a large pocket for 34. See M.J. Lomas, ‘Secular Civilian Amateur Wind Bands in Southern England in the Late Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries’, The Galpin Society Journal (forthcoming). 35. See K.H. MacDermott, The Old Church Gallery Minstrels: An Account of the Church Bands and Singers in England from about 1660 to 1860 (London, 1948), p. 70. 36. See WRO 9/ Wiltshire Militia Papers / Undated Letters / List of bandsmen, probably mid-1820s. I assume that this is of an ordinal nature; the list of bandsmen begins with Quelch’s name, which comes immediately after that of the drum major. 37. Pigot& Co.’s London& Provincial New Commercial Directory for 1822-3. . . (Manchester, 1822), p. 558. 38. Pigot & Co.’s National Commercial Directory . . 1830), p. 807. 39. See Marlborough Musical Festival. The Words of the Sacred Music, to be Performed in St. Peter's Church, Marlborough, on Tuesday, September 12th, 1826 (Marlborough [1826?]), p. 2. 40. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Milita riots at Devizes, 1810 / Bandmaster’s draft contract, 6 November 1769, p. [1]. 41. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / W. Peck to Lord Bruce, 13 January 1770, p. [1]. 42. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / Receipt . (London, 97 the Instrum" in the inside . . . Just under the Ribs of each side’.** Perhaps Buckner played a flute, which could have been carried in such pockets. Given the above information, and assuming that there were no other additions, the Wiltshire militia band consisted of the following in about early Feb- ruary 1770: 3 flutes (or perhaps 4, including Buckner), 3 clarinets, 2 French horns and 2 bassoons. Those’ who were responsible for the instru- mentation of the Wiltshire militia band in 1770 were quite forward-looking in several respects. Flutes were only beginning to come into use in British military bands at about this time* and the clarinet had just been introduced into the regular army a few years before.*° It was usual for contemporary military bands to approximate to the standard harmoniemusik combination of pairs of oboes, clarinets, horns and bassoons. The oboes were only gradually replaced by the addition of more clarinets in the course of the last quarter of the century.*” The instrumentation of the Wiltshire militia band — three clarinets and no oboes — foreshadowed this development. There are few indications of changes in the band’s instrumentation after 1770. By 1818, a [natural] trumpet had been in use in the band for some years. Indeed, the regimental adjutant mentioned that the instrument was so old that the trumpet player regarded it as unserviceable.*® In 1825, the band included a bass drummer, although, given the po- pularity of ‘Turkish music’ in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, it is almost certain that a bass drum had been introduced long before.*” The Wiltshire militia band, like other bands at- dated 26 July 1770. The ‘German flute’ was a transverse flute, so named to distinguish it from the recorder. 43. See H.G. Farmer, History of the Royal Arullery Band 1762-1953 (London, 1954), p. 40, which refers to bandmasters in the late eighteenth century leading their band from the oboe or the clarinet. 44. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / W. Peck to Lord Bruce, 13 January 1770, p. [2]. 45. See Croft-Murray, op. cit., p. 141. 46. Possibly the earliest regular army band to use the clarinet was the Foot Guards band in 1753: Farmer, History of the Royal Arullery Band, pp. 51-2. 47. Ibid., loc. cit.; Croft-Murray, op. cit., p. 141. 48. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters and accounts relating to Militia clothing / Capt. S.J. Lane to Lord Bruce, 27 July 1818, p. [2]. 49. WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters and accounts relating to Militia clothing / Clothing account relating to permanent staff, January 1826; this refers to the band being supplied with a ‘Bass Drummers Coat’ in 1825. For further information on ‘Turkish music’, see ‘The Turkish Influence in Military Music’, in H.G. Farmer, Handel’s Kettledrums and Other Papers On Military Music (2nd ed.), (London, 1960), pp. 41-6. 98 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE tached to the auxiliary forces in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, enabled working men to learn and gain experience in playing a variety of brass, woodwind and percussion instruments. During the Napoleonic wars, these musical opportunities for working men increased. It will be remembered that the band probably consisted of no more than 11 players in 1770. By October 1811, the band may have been 25 strong.*’ Even after the war, the band was providing significant musical opportunities. In the mid-1820s, it consisted of 13 players.*! Thus the Wiltshire militia band was probably making an important contribution to the development of amateur banding. Militia bandsmen formed a pool of experienced players, upon which civilian amateur bands could draw. It is also possible that the instru- ments provided by the band were sometimes appro- priated by civilian ensembles of one sort or another and that the militia was, in effect, unknowingly lending support to these groups.” The Wiltshire militia band was also facilitating the development of traditions of band playing amongst working men. Militia bandsmen probably passed on their musical knowledge to their descendants, thereby further increasing the number of skilled instrumental- ists available to civilian bands. In the mid-1820s, the Wiltshire militia band included William Quelch and his son, as well as John Nash and his son.~? The band, however, did little to establish the amateur tradition which was to characterise bands in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The evidence available suggests that some Wiltshire militia bandsmen were professional musicians in the sense that they probably earned most or all of their income from playing in the regimental band. In periods of embodiment, during which the entire regiment was in pay, most Wiltshire militia bandsmen were com- mitted exclusively to musical duties. It will be remembered that, in 1811, a sergeant and a drummer seem to have been solely employed as musicians. In 50. This assumes that all the ‘supernumerary’ or ‘additional’ drum- mers were bandsmen. See WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers / Letters relating to the regiment, including the Militia riots at Devizes, 1810 / Field returns for 7 October 1811 for: Capt. Monkland’s company, Capt. Kinneir’s company, Capt. Ly- ford’s company, Capt. Hawkins’s company, [Capt. Strick- land’s] grenadier company, Capt. Bayly’s company, Capt. Bouverie’s company, Capt. Tatum’s company, Capt. Eyre’s company; Evening report for 5 October 1811 for Capt. Faw- sett’s company. 51. WRO 9/ Wiltshire Militia Papers / Undated letters / List of bandsmen, probably mid-1820s. This number does not include the drum major, who was listed with the band. 52. See M.J. Lomas, thesis, pp. 229-233 for a discussion of the misappropriation of church and military band instruments by the same year, the majority of the band were probably ‘supernumerary’ or ‘additional’ drummers.** Super- numerary drummers were often appointed specifically as bandsmen. In the initial phase of the band’s existence, some of the musicians were probably semi- professionals, who were mainly employed to carry out normal military duties; this seems to have been true of the sergeants who were in the band in 1770. Repertoire A large proportion of the band’s repertoire was probably made up of short, light pieces: marches, dance music and popular (particularly patriotic) songs. Certainly, this seems to have been the case with other bands of the auxiliary forces in this period.*° There is evidence, however, that the repertoire of the Wiltshire militia band also included some more ambi- tious pieces. An undated list of music provided for the band by the Marquis of Ailesbury comprises the following pieces: N°1 Pezzo Baccanale Della Semiramide N°2 Finale Cenerentolla N°3 March N°4 March N°S5 Introduction Dell’ Opera Eliza e Claudio N°6 Romance Dell Ottello N°7 Duetto Semeramide immagio degli Dei N°8 Duetto Zelmira~® The association of the list with the Marquis of Ailesbury would suggest that it dates from the period between 1821 and 1827. Charles Bruce was created Marquis of Ailesbury by George IV in 1821,°” but he had ceased to be Colonel of the regiment by 1827.°* Six of the pieces on the list are clearly taken from the operatic repertoire which was so popular amongst the contemporary aristocracy. Five of these are probably from the operas of Rossini, which were fashionable secular civilian wind bands. 53. WRO 9/ Wiltshire Militia Papers / Undated letters / List of bandsmen, probably mid-1820s. 54. See WRO 9 / Wiltshire Militia Papers listed in footnote 50. The regiment had 15 additional (supernumerary) drummers. At most, the band consisted of 25 men. 55. M.J. Lomas, ‘Militia and Volunteer Wind Bands’, pp. 1634. 56. WRO 9/ Wiltshire Militia Papers / Undated letters / List of music. 57. Stedman, op. cit., p. 258. 58. [J. Waylen]: A History Military and Municipal of the Ancient Borough of the Devizes . . . (London and Devizes, 1859), p. 412. It is possible that Aulesbury’s connection with the regiment may have persisted after the Earl of Suffolk succeeded him as colonel in 1827. THE WILTSHIRE MILITIA BAND and new to British audiences of the time.°? It is likely that piece 2 was from La Cenerentola, which received its first London performance in 1820. Piece 6 was probably from Otello (London premiere 1822) and piece 8 from Zelmira, first performed in London in January 1824. Pieces 1 and 7 are likely to have been from Semiramide, which includes a duet, Bella imago degh dei. This work was first performed in London on 15 July 1824, suggesting that the list of music was drawn up at some date between then and 1827. It also indicates that some of the operatic music in the Wiltshire militia band’s repertoire had received its London premiére less than three years before and that the band was serving as a means by which the aristocratic officers of a provincial regiment could keep abreast of musical developments in the metropo- lis. Piece 5 seems to be taken from a much older opera. It may have been from Thomas Arne’s Eliza, premiered in 1754, or from Cherubini’s opera of the same name, which was first performed in 1794. The secondary sources for the history of amateur banding in Britain state that operatic music was first performed by working-class amateur bands in about the late 1830s and only gradually became a salient feature of the band repertoire over the next thirty years.°° The initial dissemination of a taste for opera- tic music amongst the working class is usually associ- ated with travelling professional musicians of the early Victorian period, such as Jullien’s band, the Distins and the menagerie bands.°! The evidence relating to the Wiltshire militia band indicates that these views require reassessment. It is questionable whether the Wiltshire militia was ever a truly amateur band, but it was probably largely plebeian in character. It possessed operatic music in the mid-1820s, about ten years before the date usually given for such bands’ initial adoption of the operatic repertoire. As militia bands played for a variety of public occasions,” it is possible that the band played some part in initiating and spreading a taste for operatic music amongst plebeian instrumentalists and 59. Althougl?it is probable that five of the operatic pieces in the list were by Rossini, whose music was fashionable in the 1820s, it is just conceivable that some of these five pieces were by other, less well-known, composers. For instance, at least one of the numbers from Semiramide may have been taken from Semira- mide Riconosciuta, by J.A. Hasse (1699-1783) or from an opera with the same title by N.A. Porpora (1686-1767). 60. See J. Scott, ‘The Evolution of the Brass Band and its Reper- toire in Northern England’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Shef- field University, 1970), p. 195; D. Russell, Popular Music in England, 1840-1914 a Social History (Manchester, 1987), pp. 186-7. 61. See Russell, op. cit., p. 186. Jullien’s band, an orchestra which made a number of tours of mid-nineteenth century England, 99 amongst the populace — a taste which was to influence the repertoire of later bands. Conclusions Secondary sources often depict the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries as a catastrophic period in the history of popular culture. It is claimed that, during these years, many of the traditonal amusements of the people, associated with a mainly pre-industrial and rural society, were swept away by industrialisation, urbanisation and Evangelicalism, leaving a ‘vacuum’ which was only gradually filled in the years after 1850.°? The late eighteenth century, however, witnessed the formation of numerous military bands attached to units of the auxiliary forces. These bands, as this paper suggests, were initiating musical skills, tradi- tions and tastes which were to provide a basis for the remarkable upsurge in amateur banding which took place amongst working men in Britain during the Victorian period. Far from being dark times in the history of popular culture, the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries witnessed the dawning of an age of unprecedented and massive working-class musical endeavour and achievement. Moreover, this was only one of a number of areas of growth and innovation. Hugh Cunningham, in his Leisure in the Industrial Revolution c.1780-c.1880, describes this period as experiencing a general ‘efflorescence of popular leisure’. One of the pillars of the ‘catastrophic’ view of popular culture in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries is the contention that a gulf had arisen at this time between the tastes of the aristoc- racy, the gentry and other élites on the one hand and those of the common people on the other. As a result, the more prosperous classes became less prepared to support popular entertainments, increasingly with- drawing into class-specific recreations such as the pleasures of the London season.® Yet in one respect at least, the apparently separate included a number of virtuoso woodwind and brass instru- mentalists and is often credited with disseminating a taste for operatic and other ‘art’ music amongst the less prosperous members of society. The Distin family were another virtuoso touring ensemble — iniually a brass quintet, later a quartet — of about the same period. Their performances usually included a great deal of operatic music. 62. M.J. Lomas, thesis, pp. 113-17. 63. See, for example, R.W. Malcolmson, Popular Recreations in English Society 1700-1850 (Cambridge, 1973), p. 89 et seq. 64. H. Cunningham, Leisure in the Industrial Revolution c. 1780-c. 1880 (London, 1980), p. 22. 65. See, for example, Malcolmson, op. cit., especially pp. 158-171. 100 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE world of the leisured still impinged upon plebian amusements. Although the Wiltshire militia’s officers probably supported the band partly as an enhance- ment of the county social circuit, they were, inci- dentally but importantly, providing patronage for an extension of musical opportunities for the poor. This patronage enabled a convergence of musical tastes to take place; plebeian audiences and bandsmen could come to share the enthusiasm of landed proprietors for wind bands and for the operatic repertoire. Types of music which had been mainly the prerogative of the inhabitants of the big houses were now also available to cottagers. Acknowledgements. Numerous archivists, librarians and others have assisted me in my research. I am particularly grateful to the staff of Wiltshire Record Office for their tolerant and friendly help and to Dr Trevor Herbert, of the Open University, who has made a number of comments on a draft of this article. Also, Iam very much indebted to my wife, who has provided me with invaluable and consistent support and encouragement. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 101-113 The Life and Work of John Britton (1771-1857) by RICHARD HATCHWELL Fohn Britton has had a bad press over the years, largely due to his undoubted capacity for self-advertisement and self-promotion. Be that as it may, he was in effect the spiritual founder of the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, and it behoves us to examine his life and record more closely, and perhaps to rehabilitate his reputation. The Society completely ignored the bicentenary of his birth in 1971, and this paper, based on the text of a talk given to the Society by the author on 24 March 1990, is an attempt to make some amends. The Society’s collection of prints and drawings is mainly the product of four men: Sir Richard Colt Hoare, Canons J.E. Jackson and E.H. Goddard, and John Britton. The open-handed patronage by Sir Richard Colt Hoare of Stourhead of contemporary artists such as Turner, Nicholson, and others, pro- duced the magnificent collection of watercolour drawings of Wiltshire churches by John Buckler, and the album of drawings of the monuments in Salisbury Cathedral by Thomas Trotter. Canon J.E. Jackson, first editor of WAM and unpaid librarian at Longleat for many years, was a great collector of books, documents and drawings, especially those illustrating the history of the Hungerford Family. He was for- tunate in being able to do this at a time when the extraction of such material from muniment rooms was not regarded as much to be deprecated. In addition he extra-illustrated some of his own topographical works, mostly with drawings by W.W. Wheatley, who was probably commissioned by Jackson for that purpose. Canon Jackson also compiled a series of large scrapbooks covering the county parish by parish which are now in the library of the Society of Antiquaries in London. Canon E.H. Goddard’s main contribution was the quiet assimilation into the collec- tion of Wiltshire material as it became available, mounting these drawings and engravings into albums, and subsequently cataloguing them. Lastly there is John Britton, whose contribution, although less ob- vious, is perhaps more important historically than any of the three already mentioned, and whose achieve- ment, from humble beginnings, was on a national scale. John Britton was born on 7 July 1771, the first son and fourth child of his parents, who subsequently had a further six children. Britton’s father was a baker, 1. Autobiography of Fohn Bniton (three parts in two volumes, 1849-1850), Vol. 1, p. 38. Only direct quotations from the maltster, shop-keeper and small farmer in Kington St Michael, to the northwest of Chippenham, and Brit- ton described his mother as an excellent woman who bore her husband’s infirmities with good humour, loved her children dearly, and who died at last with anxiety and grief, more on their account than on her own. After bearing ten children, that is not perhaps surprising. During Britton’s early years, the family seems to have been relatively prosperous. They employed a manservant for making bread and malt and general work and a female servant for the house, and in Britton’s own words ‘for some time the world smiled on the family and its prospects’.! To continue in Britton’s own words, taken from his autobiography which, though containing many long digressions, is sull the main source for his life: the family’s prosperity was due to the activity and good conduct of the mistress of the house, who not only attended to and managed the whole of the domestic arrangements, but to the shop also and its customers. An increasing family required more of her time and attention, when my father was obliged to occupy her place in personal attendance, but was entirely unfit to be her substitute in activity, good management, and obliging conduct. The consequences were natural and inevitable. Customers contracted debts and never paid them; the miller sent in bad flour which made bad bread; rivals secured the customers who were in debt; and ruin, complete and distressing ruin was the result. My mother died broken hearted; my father became idiotic, and my sister Mary, at the age of about sixteen, was left to hold possession of the house.? Here, perhaps, some antipathy can be detected be- Autobiography are mentioned in these notes. 2. Autobiography, Vol. 1, p. 38. 102 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE tween Britton and his father, but a further note on the latter may be appropriate. He had a younger brother in Bristol, who went out to Jamaica to seek his fortune, and who died there some time after, leaving a considerable inheritance in plantations, slaves and sugar. Britton’s father, however, made no attempt to obtain his undoubted inheritance from his bachelor brother.? Kington St Michael at the time of Britton’s birth was not much noticed by the world outside. It was a self-contained community with a slaughter-house, a carpenter, two blacksmiths, and six farmhouses. Though the street was a public road, it was rarely traversed by a post-chaise or a public carriage, and a strange cart or wagon almost never appeared. Such letters as were sent were entrusted to the mail-cart drawn by a single horse led by one man. Kington had no resident squire or clergyman, nor any person above the rank of farmer or village tradesman. The roads to the village, branching from the turnpike road about a mile away, were not easily traversed by carriages: being used only by waggons and carts, they were worn into two deep ruts by the wheels, and another equally deep by the horses. Before 1780 it is probable that no newspaper or periodical reached the village regularly, and after that date perhaps only an occasional Bath newspaper. Consideration of the condition of that particular part of north Wiltshire at that ume does help to emphasize how remarkable was the subse- quent career of John Britton. He retained the memory of his early years for the whole of his life, though he did not look back on them as an idyllic prelude to a life of ceaseless industry. As a boy he was devoted to all forms of sport and play; he spent many hours following Sir James Long’s harriers on foot and, with fishing, poaching, and other pursuits, was evidently growing up to be a typical country boy. Looking back later in life, Britton described his time at Kington as a period when he idled away nearly sixteen years, the greater part of which ought to have been devoted to study, and to the discipline and cultivation of the mind, in order to prepare it for bearing fruits and flowers in later life, and thus become useful and ornamental to its possessor and to society. He claimed his early years were wasted and frittered away in trifling miscellaneous occupations, and in learning words and things which were almost wholly useless. Britton’s education, by any standards of the past or present, must be described as disturbed and spasmo- dic. At the age of six he was sent to board with a 3. Britton, History and Antiquities of the Abbey and Cathedral Church of Bristol (1830), Preface, p. 5. Bapust Minister at Foscote near Grittleton, only two or three miles from Kington, where he lodged for two years. The minister, Moseley by name, had a small chapel where Britton attended regularly, and during the week he was supposed to be given more general instruction at the minister’s house. However, the only part of his sojourn at Foscote that Britton remem- bered in later life were the visits of his grandfather who lived at Maidford, at Norton near Malmesbury, who used to remove the lad for days and sometimes weeks at a time, in order to follow his bent for sporting pursuits. At the age of eight Britton was removed from Foscote by his parents, perhaps because of his outings with Grandfather, and placed with William Sparrow at Yatton Keynell, where he was the only boarder. Sparrow was evidently a more inspiring teacher than Moseley, for he encouraged Britton in writing and drawing, and in the rudiments of arithmetic. Yatton Keynell, however, was still close to Grandfather at Maidford and frequent sporting excursions still interrupted the boy’s education. Stay- ing at Yatton for a year, Britton was removed, taken home, and remained in idleness and play, as he himself put it, for a whole year. He was then sent to a day school at Draycot Cerne, involving a daily walk of about two miles in winter and summer. The master at Draycot, called Stratton, was described by Britton as a dull, plodding and illiterate man. Within a year Stratton removed to Bath where he opened a school and Britton stayed at home, doubtless resorting to his usual occupations. After an unspecified period, he was again sent to Mr Sparrow who had moved to Chippenham, this time as a day pupil. Here, for the first ume, he met town boys who initiated him into new games and sports, new ideas and excitements, and with some of whom he formed friendships that lasted all his life. Britton seems to have remained at Sparrow’s school until he was thirteen, when he was again removed, possibly because the family’s resources were no longer sufficient to maintain him there. By now, fortunately, he seemed to have developed a mind eager to absorb all that was put before it, and the smell of new paper, a new copy-book, and other novelties were always exhilarating. At the age of thirteen he returned home and for three years remained there, either in idle play or in helping his parents in their daily tasks, making bread, delivering it to customers in the neighbour- hood, and generally helping on the farm. One event during this period is perhaps significant. At a sale of THE LIFE AND WORK OF JOHN BRITTON 103 iat ef VRALa es John Britton. Reproduction 104 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE the contents of the manor house Britton bought a small bundle of nine books for one shilling, among which were Robinson Crusoe, The Pilgrim’s Progress, and a life of Peter the Great.* Britton had a maternal uncle, Samuel Hillier, who lived in London, and who used to visit Kington with his family once a year. Meeting this family from London evidently made Britton dissatisfied with his rustic life in Wiltshire, and in October 1787 he accompanied the Hilliers on their return home. Once there he was soon apprenticed, for six years, toa Mr Mendham, a wine merchant who ran the Jerusalem Tavern at Clerkenwell Green. There Britton’s duties consisted chiefly of cellar-work where, in his own words, ‘my physical powers were in continuous de- mand for business, whilst those of the mind were never called into exercise’. Though the usual terms of an apprenticeship were that the master should teach the young apprentice the arts or mysteries of whatever trade he was engaged in, Britton was taught none of these. Again in his own words I was ignorant where Portugal, Lisbon, Madeira, Xeres, the Rhine or Cognac were; and knew nothing of those places where the wine and brandy grapes are respectively grown. In like manner I was uninformed of the general nature of the trade, and the position and duties of the real merchant, or direct importer of wines and spirits . . . I was never taken to a bonded cellar.° His only solace was books which he borrowed or bought with his meagre allowance, but as these included William Dodd’s Thoughts in Prison, Charles Drelincourt on Death, James Hervey’s Meditations among the Tombs, and Edward Young’s Night Thoughts, all very suitable for one spending most of his time below ground, one cannot help feeling that now and again Britton must have wished himself back in Wiltshire. Towards the end of his apprenticeship Britton, perhaps not surprisingly, fell ill. He does not mention the nature of his illness, but a general decline or depression seems likely. He was sent to the public dispensary in St John’s Square which he attended for many months, being supplied with gallons of mix- tures and scores of pills and powders, mostly of a tonic or restorative nature, all of which were totally ineffective. As he himself put it ‘Instead of regaining health and strength I felt like a deserted being, bereft 4. Britton, The Beauties of Wiltshire, Vol. 3 (1825), p. xvii, note. 5. Autobiography, Vol. 1, p. 63. 6. Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 65. of hope’.’ At this stage of his life, Britton seems to have been something of a hypochondriac, as among the books he read were William Cheselden’s Anatomy of the Human Body, Quincy’s Dispensatory of the Royal College of Physicians, William Buchan’s Domestic Medicine, Samuel Tissot’s Essay on Diseases Incidental to Literary and Sedentary Persons, and William Luigi Cornaro on health and long life. This reading was perhaps of some help to him, as he died at the age of 86. Six months before the end of his apprenticeship, Mr Mendham released Britton from his term, and sent him off into the world with two guineas instead of the legal twenty. There is still a Jerusalem Tavern in Clerkenwell, but it is to be found at the base of a post-war building, and apart from the name it bears no relation to Britton’s work place. In his day there were two establishments called the Jerusalem Tavern in Cler- kenwell; one was in Red Lion Street leading south from Clerkenwell Green; the other was in St John’s Street, parallel to Red Lion Street, in what is now called St John’s Gate, and which is the headquarters of the Order of St John. The available evidence points to the tavern in Red Lion Street. The Red Lion Street house was kept by Mr Mendham, whose full-quart bottles were known locally as Jerusalem Bottles.* In its place now stands Booth’s Red Lion Distillery. The street today has little to recommend it; there are only two or three buildings that Britton might recognize, and save for a pleasant public garden at one end, the prospect is not inviting. The authorities in London have done more in the way of a memorial to John Britton than we in Wiltshire. In 1937 Red Lion Street was renamed Britton Street in recognition of his work for the study of London’s topography. It still bears that name today. It is not known where Britton lived during his apprenticeship, but it was presumably somewhere in the tavern itself. By the year 1800 he was at 14 Ramston Street off the Islington Road. This street no longer exists; neither does Britton’s next address which was 21 Wilderness Row, Goswell Street. At the age of twenty-one or twenty-two Britton was sent off into the world with a deprived upbringing by any definition of the word, fortified only by what he had gathered from the many books he had read, mostly by candlelight in the cellars of the Jerusalem Tavern; and by one or two friends that he had made in London, including a cook, a bar-woman, a porter and 7. Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 66. 8. B. Lillywhite, London Coffee Houses (1963), p. 706. THE LIFE AND WORK OF JOHN BRITTON a fellow-apprentice. One friend, called Essex, made a living by painting the figures on watch-faces at a shop not far from the Jerusalem, frequented by budding and established literary figures, for Essex was a collector of books and greatly interested in literature. Among those who met at Essex’s shop were Dr John Trusler, author of children’s books, educational books, books of popular instruction, and ready-made sermons for the more indolent members of the clergy; Dr Towers, who at one time had his own bookshop; and, most important of all, Edward Wedlake Brayley, who had been apprenticed to an enameller. Britton and Brayley were obviously kindred spirits, as before long they joined together in what was to be the first of many joint publications. This was a satirical ballad called The Guinea Pig, about the Powder Tax which was imposed on all those who used hair-powder. Britton later claimed that one Evans pirated this production and sold over 7,000 copies. Like many such pieces, it is now exceedingly rare; there is no copy in the British Library, the Bodleian, nor in the Society’s library. It was about this tme that Britton’s parents died. By now he had obviously become a very sociable young man who frequented, as often as he could afford to, theatres, music halls, debating societies, Odd Fellows, Sporting Clubs, the Free and Easys and other convivial places of entertainment where he often gave recitations and met many of the leading play- wrights, actors and entertainers. For the next seven years he supported himself with a variety of occu- pations, mostly menial. He was a cellar-man at the London Tavern for three months, following this with a similar job at Smithfield. Then for the next three years he became clerk to Mr Simpson, an attorney in Gray’s Inn, at fifteen shillings a week. In 1798 Simpson died and Britton had to seek another post, this time with another law firm, Messrs Parker and Wise of Hatton Garden where he was paid twenty shillings a week and remained for a year. The follow- ing year, perhaps in pursuit of what he thought was his natural bent, he was engaged by a Mr Chapman at three guineas a week to recite and sing at a theatre in Panton Street near the Haymarket. By now he was mixing in theatrical society, and evidently began to have dramatic ambitions which persisted for some - years. However, he never had much success in that line, either in writing or acting. He was something of a minor literary figure though, with a few literary or critical publications to his name, but still financially dependent upon Grub Street or a more permanent occupation. This was soon to change. In 1798 Britton became acquainted with a publisher called Wheble, 105 who had started his career in Salisbury many years before, and who owned The Sporting Magazine for which Britton had written a number of reviews. Wheble, an enterprising man, decided he would try to cash in on an increasingly popular form of publica- uon, the picturesque tour or Book of Beauties. This genre of literature, a development from earlier town guides, had really started in Holland at the end of the seventeenth century with the Delices de la Hollande (1678), followed by a series covering Italy, Switzer- land and France. The journalist Daniel Defoe was perhaps the first to bring that genre to England, with his A Tour Through the Whole Island of Great Britain, the first volume of which was published in 1724. Defoe was something of a pioneer, for although his work was reprinted many times during the eighteenth century, there were few serious attempts to imitate it untl the end of the century, when travel around the country became easier. There then ensued something of a glut of such utles, most of which shamelessly copied Defoe or each other. Wheble tried to persuade Britton to start work on a book to be called The Beauties of Wiltshire, a utle that Wheble had proposed some tme before when he was working in Salisbury. Conscious of his inade- quacy for such a task, Britton contacted an engraver called Walker, who was publishing a periodical en- utled The Copper-Plate Magazine, which consisted of engravings of towns, seats, ancient buildings and other views, and for which Britton wrote short accounts to accompany each print. He had, however, little to guide him for his work on Wiltshire. Most authentic works such as Camden’s Britannia and Thomas Cox’s Magna Britannia et Hibernia, Antiqua et Nova were either out of date or hopelessly inadequate for his purpose. Realising that the only satisfactory solution was personal inspection and research, Britton set out to visit a married sister in Shropshire, incor- porating his visit into a tour of central and southern England. He walked all the way, leaving London on 20 June and returning there on 30 September 1798, covering several hundred miles in Wiltshire, Glou- cestershire, Oxfordshire and other counties. At Ox- ford he studied the manuscripts of John Aubrey, that other Wiltshire antiquary who had been born only a short distance from Kington St Michael, at Easton Piercy. This may be a good point at which to consider the character of John Britton. In the preface to the third volume of 7he Beauties of Wiltshire he confessed that his mother’s family, the Hilliers, frequently gave way to ungovernable passions, continuing ‘I was constitu- tionally a Hillier and often a slave to passionate 106 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE excitement’.? It was this side of his character which seems to have been foremost in his earlier ‘dramatic’ period, and which remained with him always in his capacity for self-promotion. Most people at the age of 28 or 29, having had the sort of upbringing that he had experienced, could be forgiven if they exhibited some bitterness towards the world. Not so Britton; though prickly in some of his relationships, for the most part he had a remarkable ability to get on with people and make friends with them. His correspond- ence with all degrees of society was enormous, and the list of subscribers to his Testimonial in 1845 shows how varied were his friendships. The list of 317 names includes architects, scientists, Members of Parlia- ment, Fellows of the Society of Antiquaries, and most of the landed gentry of Wiltshire. This characteristic evidently stood him in good stead during his tour in 1798, because it was on this first itinerary through Wiltshire that he called at Bowood. The door was opened by the porter, who after listening to Britton’s somewhat incoherent account of his activities, handed him over to a footman who in turn passed him on to a valet, who eventually took him to the butler. The butler good humouredly showed him into the library where the Marquess of Lansdowne was seated. His reception by Lord Lansdowne was as kind as it was unexpected. His Lordship’s librarian was sent for and instructed to produce any books or manuscripts that Mr Britton might wish to consult. A bedroom was put at his disposal, and Britton stayed at Bowood for four days studying in the library, looking at the pictures and other objects of interests in the house, and wandering round the grounds. As Britton says in his autobiography, this one act of kindness confirmed him for ever in his literary career. He was equally well received by the Methuens at Corsham. At Stourhead, however, Britton’s relations seem to have been less easy. He first made the acquaintance of Sir Richard Colt Hoare in 1798, though most of the surviving letters between the two men belong to a later period, between 1818 and 1826. Britton seems to have regarded Colt Hoare as a fellow antiquary and was somewhat demanding in his corre- spondence. On his side, the baronet obviously felt that Britton was ever ready to take offence at imagined slights, as his replies to Britton are full of such remarks as ‘I am not aware of having shewn you 9. Britton, The Beauties of Wiltshire, Vol. 3, p. xxii, note. 10. Sir R.C. Hoare, undated letter to John Britton, c. 1882; in a private collection. 11. Sir R.C. Hoare, both quotations from a letter to John Britton dated April 1804; in a private collection. 12. John Britton to William Cunnington 10 December 1802; any slight, I have patronized all your publications’,!° or, “You have been very hasty in supposing that I wished to injure you, let me give you a word of useful advice, to be less hasty and more temperate in your expressions, for were I of a nature to take offence, your letter written in anger and intemperance, would certainly have lost my favor’ and again ‘I know you have lost friends by expecting too much on their part’.!' The baronet could certainly be patronizing, especially when faced with Britton’s Hillier char- acteristics, but his letters to Britton are also full of good advice on matters antiquarian, on the best artists and engravers to employ, and the best subjects to be used for illustrations. He certainly never regarded Britton as a rival in any way. That some of Britton’s contemporaries did is certain, however. In a letter to William Cunnington dated 10 December 1802 Britton remarked This idea of jealous opposition distresses me much. To think that just as I have acquired some information on the subject, and felt an ardour and enthusiasm to investigate and develop the curious antiquities of a neglected county, I should be watched with a jealous eye and op- posed and counteracted by those persons who ought to patronize and encourage me. . . and here he breaks off but concludes ‘however it may be of service, for it stimulates my ambition’.!* A few of Britton’s letters to Cunnington disclose a tem- porary coolness between the two, but this may have been due to a misunderstanding. Later in life, Britton was to write ‘though my path has been occasionally impeded by the briars of ill-nature and envy, it has been more generally smoothed with courtesy, and strewn with the fragrant flowers of kindness’. Like many of his contemporaries, Britton was a great correspondent, especially later in life when he relied increasingly upon friends for information. Some of them probably found him a distressingly frequent letter-writer, as many of their replies to him begin ‘I feel quite ashamed at the time that has elapsed since the receipt of your letter’.!? Having completed his tour in 1798 Britton seems to have spent much of the following year in reading the appropriate literature on the county. The two volumes of The Beauties were published in 1800, but WANHS Library, Cunnington Letters, vol. 2. 13. See, for example, John Carter to John Britton, 22 July 1833 and Archdeacon William Coxe to same, 26 Sept. 1812: WANHS Library, Volume of Wiltshire Letters to Britton. The Society’s Library contains over 80 letters from Britton to Canon Jackson alone. THE LIFE AND WORK OF JOHN BRITTON they covered only part of the county; the remainder had to wait until 1825 before it was included in a third volume. The first volume was dedicated to the Earl of Radnor, the second to Colt Hoare. The latter, in a letter written on 3 May 1801 observed: ‘I congratulate you on having laid the first foundation stone of a memorial to our county’ but then continued ‘I do not think the woodcuts appropriate or suited to the book, — the view of Stourhead wants strength — I do not much like your mode of putting so many words in italics as it spoils the effect of the printing — the remarks on Stonehenge are new and curious’.'* This last remark was perhaps ironic. In the preface to the first volume of The Beauties, Britton proposed the publication of a general history of the county in about four volumes, to be planned and written by a committee and financed by subscrip- tions. This may have been the germ that produced Colt Hoare’s History of Modern Wiltshire (1822-45), but it was over one hundred and fifty years before the proposal was seriously taken up and the first volume of The Victoria County History was published. Soon after the publication of The Beauties of Wilt- shire, Britton and his friend E.W. Brayley were approached by other London publishers with sug- gestions of producing a similar series of Beauties covering the whole country, including Wales. The publishers thought, rather optimistically, that this could be contained in six volumes. Accordingly the two friends set forth on a walking tour in Wales, the Midlands, and the West Country. Between 8 June and 20 September, they covered some 1,350 miles. At the outset the publishers, Messrs Vernon and Hood, had thought in terms of a compilation of material gathered from the numerous previous works of a like nature which had all borrowed heavily, sometimes exclus- ively, on their contemporaries or predecessors. Almost all of them owed most of their material to William Camden, Daniel Defoe, William Stukeley and a few others. Britton and Brayley were, however, determined to make The Beauties an original work, and by and large they succeeded. It was a pioneer work in many respects. The illustrations, unlike most other works, were to be subordinate to the text which was to be as accurate as the scholarship of the two friends could make it. For the first me, long lists of the paintings and other works of art to be found in the county seats visited were included, which are still of value to the art historian. The Beauties of England and 14. Sir R.C. Hoare to John Britton 3 May 1801: WANHS Library, Volume of Wiltshire Letters to John Britton. 107 Wales, as the work was called, which eventually filled twenty-five volumes, has been heavily criticized for its many omissions, errors and other faults. This is hardly justified. The wonder is that the work was ever undertaken, let alone completed, albeit by more than the two authors who began it. In modern terms it has to be compared with Pevsner’s series on the buildings of England, a more specialist undertaking, but one also liable to error and omissions. Considering the difficulties of travel in the early part of the nineteenth century, obstacles over obtaining satisfactory illustra- tions, and other factors, criticism becomes mere carping. The illustrations used in the first two volumes of The Beauties of Wiltshire were almost exclusively taken from drawings by Britton himself. Nowhere in his autobiography, however, did he explain where or when he learnt to draw, apart from his short period under Mr Sparrow, or who instructed him, but there is no doubt that at his best Britton was a very good draughtsman and watercolourist. For The Beauties of England and Wales he obviously realised that he could not illustrate all the volumes himself, but he was certainly responsible for the choice of artists and engravers, and for the subjects they were to illustrate. He was also responsible for collecting the books and documents to be consulted, and it was probably at this point that he began to acquire the books and drawings that were to fill his library in later years. He now became responsible for what was undoubtedly the largest commission of its kind to date ever offered to the artists of this country. Since the time of Wences- laus Hollar (1607-77), engraved illustrations of national monuments, churches, and country houses were imperfectly done, often because they were copies from artists of a previous generation. The reformation at the turn of the century was almost entirely due to John Britton, aided perhaps by improvements in the techniques of printing and engraving. Britton’s ac- uvity and enthusiasm soon gathered about him most of the leading topographical artists of the day includ- ing Samuel Prout, Frederick Mackenzie, Edward Blore, George Cattermole, W.H. Bartlett, R.W. Billings, Henry Shaw, Thomas Hearne, Joseph Gandy, J.S. Cotman, Edward Dayes, J.C. Buckler, Copley Fielding, Frederick Nash, J.M.W. Turner, William Alexander, and many more. All were pressed into service and their products skilfully executed by the best engravers, mostly pupils of Basire. For a time 108 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Britton seems to have run a sort of artistic school at Camberwell for some of these young artists, including Bartlett, Cattermole and Samuel Prout, the last- named having been introduced to Britton by Benja- min Haydon. Britton took the young Prout on a walking tour of Cornwall, and kept him at Cler- kenwell for two years. Prout and Mackenzie both made their artistic debuts in The Beauties of England and Wales, as did the engravers John and Henry Le Keux. An unexpected by-product of The Beauties was the stimulus it gave to the owners and guardians of many of the properties mentioned or illustrated into efforts of conservation. In this they were actively supported by Britton who devoted a considerable amount of time and energy to efforts to create an early kind of National Trust, an endeavour in which he was much ahead of his time. He wrote the text for six volumes of The Beauties, but his connection with the series ceased after volume thirteen. In the preface to volume four of his Architectural Antiquities he complained of the decline of The Beauties after he left in the following terms: It was intended to improve it progressively and to give it a more topographical and antiquarian character as it advanced, and as our sphere of knowledge extended. In this we were often thwarted by the obstinacy and cupidity of a publisher who at length carried his personal hostility towards me so far as to force me to give up my share of the work.!> It is not clear whether Edward Brayley was similarly affected. There is no doubt that his work on The Beauties prepared Britton for all his subsequent antiquarian work. When he started his writing career most of his readers would have been of the eighteenth century, and his works reflected that, illustrated as they were with engravings of the picturesque aspects of buildings. As the nineteenth century progressed, however, Britton realised that his readers were de- manding a more scientific approach to the subject, especially to the architectural side. He satisfied this demand with plans and careful drawings of archi- tectural details, elevations and sections. Indeed, he was perhaps the first writer to make any money out of topographical works. His predecessors either did not need to or were unable to judge the current demand for their product. Lord Clark, in his fine book on the Gothic Revival, stated that Britton had all the gifts of 15. Britton, Architectural Antiquities of Great Britain, Vol. 4 (1814), p. vu. a great newspaper proprietor — industry, persistence, and a fine instinct for changes of fashion and perfect shamelessness in exploiting it. He concluded, how- ever, that Britton deserved his success, and that his illustrations reflected an accuracy and detail never before attempted or achieved.!© Another critic once wrote that Britton’s particular genius lay in finding people at home when he rang their doorbells. He undoubtedly rang many doorbells and found many useful people at home. During the course of gathering materials for The Beauties, Britton accumulated copious notes covering architectural matters which the publishers of the series would not include. So, when his part in the series was ended, Britton turned his attention to producing a work that would use this material. With Josiah Taylor, a leading architectural bookseller, and Messrs Longman, between 1805 and 1814 he pro- duced The Architectural Antiquities of Great Britain, issued in parts and comprising four large quarto volumes. The most notable feature of this work was the large number of engraved illustrations, again by leading artists and engravers. The Wiltshire subjects included Malmesbury Abbey and Market Cross, and Longleat. Thus not only was the work illustrated by exceedingly competent drawings but also, in many cases for the first time, measured drawings were made of buildings that had never been so well studied. Although the amount of text to accompany each plate was limited, and in this Britton had reverted to the practice of many of his predecessors, at one stroke he had established himself, not only as a leading and pioneer populariser of architectural history, but also as a patron and encourager of numerous artsts. He later added a fifth volume to The Architectural Antiqu- ties entitled A Chronological History and Illustrations of Christian Architecture. Again this was a pioneer work containing the first attempt at a coherent history of English Gothic. It included a discussion of no less than sixty-six authors who had already written on the subject. Even when not the publisher of his illustrated books, Britton seems to have retained both the origi- nal drawings and the copyright in them, thereby helping to swell his growing collections. Like many of his predecessors and contemporaries, he was in the habit of dedicating not just his books, but also their illustrations, to particular patrons. This had the double effect of pleasing the patron, and often of producing money for the engraving of the plate. One 16. K. Clark, The Gothic Revival (1928), pp. 94-95. THE LIFE AND WORK OF JOHN BRITTON reviewer referred to Britton’s somewhat obsequious dedication both of plates and volumes as ‘undulations of grovelling humility’. Britton, never slow to return a jibe, retorted that the reviewer had a malignant and envious heart. Following completion of The Architectural Antiqui- tes in 1814, John Britton embarked on what was his most important and ambitious project, The Cathedral Antiquities of Great Britain. The last attempt at such a survey had been made by Browne Willis in 1742 and though the Society of Antiquaries and others had attempted something of the kind, none of them had been successful and all were inadequate. The first volume was, perhaps naturally, on Salisbury Cathed- ral, but here Britton found himself in competition with another. William Dodsworth, Head Verger of the Cathedral, had already engaged to produce a history of the building, with illustrations in much the same manner as planned by Britton, though by different artists. Although there seems to be no surviving correspondence between the two men, there was no great animosity over their rival publications. Britton’s came out in five parts, the first two in May and August 1814, and the remaining three in 1815. He had originally chosen Frederick Nash to illustrate his book, but as soon as Nash arrived in Salisbury he deserted to Dodsworth, and Britton had to turn to Frederick Mackenzie, Richard Cattermole and others. Dodsworth’s book appeared in 1814. He had considerable help from other local historians includ- ing Henry Hatcher, who nowadays is credited with having written most of the book himself. Britton had written to Archdeacon William Coxe as early as March 1813 asking for help with the book, but Coxe, in a long reply written by Hatcher but signed by Coxe wrote ‘with regard to the antiquities of our cathedral, the little I am able to give has been promised to Roger Dodsworth, who made his application before I re- ceiv’d yours.’!? William Dodsworth sent Britton an Imperial copy of his book on 5 May 1815, before the final two parts of Britton’s work were published. Although the preface to Britton’s work was only printed with the last part in November 1815, it made no mention of Dodsworth. Later, however, in the preface to his volume on Worcester Cathedral in 1835, Britton was somewhat bitter about Dodsworth’s book, claiming that his own engravings were superior, but conceding that Hatcher’s text was better than his 17. Archdeacon William Coxe to John Britton, 17 March 1813; WANHS Library, Volume of Wiltshire Letters to Britton. The reference to Roger Dodsworth was an unconscious slip by either 109 own, the former having had access to the Cathedral archives. !® During the following years fourteen volumes were published on the principal cathedrals of England: Salisbury, Norwich, Winchester, York, Lichfield, Oxford, Wells, Exeter, Peterborough, Gloucester, Bristol, Hereford, Canterbury, and Worcester which ended the series in 1835. A few cathedrals were omitted on purpose as Britton felt that they had been adequately dealt with by other writers, but there were seven that could have been included but for some reason were not. To illustrate these volumes, and again the illustrations were very important as they provided measured drawings of some of the buildings for the first ime, Britton again employed many of the same artists whom he had used for the Architectural Antiquities, bringing in others where necessary. Among the latter was an engraver called Richard Rhodes, whom Britton employed but once, for one plate (16) in the Lichfield volume (1820). Rhodes evidently disapproved of an alteration that Britton had made in Frederick Mackenzie’s drawing, for he surreptitiously inserted a confused inscription which ended ‘a fine drawing spoilt by John Britton’ at the bottom of one of the stained glass windows. Britton was a hard worker who expected others to work equally as hard. He was in the habit of visiting each cathedral with the artists so that he could specify the subjects he wanted illustrated, while at the same time he could examine the structure closely and inquire into its history. He seems to have stayed several weeks at each city. There were difficulties, however. At Gloucester he suffered a compound fracture of the right leg; and at Hereford and Exeter he was actively discouraged by their respective Deans from doing any work there at all. At Exeter he had to persuade Edward Brayley to finish the work for him. The Architectural Antiquities and The Cathedral Anti- quities are publications of great importance, for they offered the architect and the scholar for the first time accurate details of medieval architecture to copy or study. It should perhaps provide pause for thought that Britton, neither particularly clever nor learned, produced so much that was important for those who were — for the architects and the scholars. Indeed, nobody since then has attempted to bring out a comparable series on English cathedrals. Britton’s architectural works did more to promote public Coxe or Hatcher, as the verger’s name was William. 18. Britton, History and Antiquities of the Cathedral Church of Worcester (1835), p. 1x. 110 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE appreciation of medieval art than any other contem- porary publication. As Eastlake says in his history of the Gothic Revival, ‘before a national taste can be made effective it must be instructed, and before it is instructed it must be created. More than any other writer Britton was responsible for this creation’.!? Though modern taste for Gothic Revival architecture may have changed, appreciation of medieval art has never ceased since Britton wrote. But it was not just cathedrals that fascinated Brit- ton. It is not certain when he first visited William Beckford at Fonthill, but as a long account of Fonthill Splendens was provided in Volume one of The Beau- ues of Wiltshire, it must have been during his first tour of 1798. Although privately Beckford was heard to call Britton ‘that highly ridiculous, highly impertinent Britton, the Cathedral fellow’,’° the two men seem to have got on well together. Replying to a letter from Britton proposing a visit to Fonthill in 1813, Beckford suggested that he should put off his visit until the following summer ‘when I flatter myself your experi- enced eye will meet an object less unworthy of examination’.’! Later, in 1822, when Britton pro- posed writing a book on Fonthill, Beckford suggested outlines within which the work should be written and invited Britton down to the Abbey where he stayed for six weeks. Beckford was a notorious recluse, but besides offering Britton this hospitality, he also pre- sented him with two of his own books. By the time the book was published Beckford had moved to Bath. He complimented the author on his work, but continued ‘I was born at Fonthill and cannot help being a little surpriz’d that amidst such an infinity of knowledge, you should happen to be ignorant of that all important circumstance’.*? Britton seemed to be dogged by others writing on the same subject as himself. At Salisbury it was William Dodsworth; at Fonthill he had John Rutter, the Shaftesbury printer. Rutter’s is undoubtedly the better book and has the better illustrations. Britton seems to have felt this for he wrote to Colt Hoare concerning the rival publication. The baronet replied tartly that he would take both books, ‘and whichever is best will succeed best’.?? Some years after the publication of these two works on Fonthill John Nichols, the publisher of Britton’s volume, brought out a further work on the subject entitled Historical Notices of Fonthill Abbey in Wilt- 19. C.L. Eastlake, A History of the Gothic Revival, ed. J.M. Crook (1978), p. 88. 20. See J. Lees-Milne, William Beckford (1976), p. 15. 21. William Beckford to John Britton, 6 Sept. 1813: WANHS Library, Fonthill Volume of Correspondence, p. 130. shire, 1836.°* It was compiled by Nichols from both Britton and Rutter in the following fashion as he described it in the preface: ‘the chapters descriptive of the grounds and within the Barrier are borrowed from Mr Britton’s work, whilst the embellishments and most of the descriptions have been selected from Mr Rutter’s’. Nichols was an experienced topographical publisher and that is probably the best estimate of the comparative worth of the two books. The Cathedral Antiquities was the last of the great multi-volume works that Britton produced. From now on he wrote histories of individual buildings and other architectural works, several books on London, on collections of Fine Art, on Shakespeare, and contributed extensively to encyclopaedias, dictiona- ries, periodicals and other works. His published works occupy nearly nine columns in the British Library catalogue and a brief selection of the titles of some of them illustrates the range of his interests and activities: An Historical Account of Corsham House (1806); Catalogue Raisonée of the Pictures Belonging to the Marquis of Stafford (1808); The Fine Arts of the English School (1812); Remarks on the Life and Writings of Shakespeare (1814); The Norwich Cathedral Vade-Mecum (1817); The History and Description of Cassiobury Park in Hertfordshire (1837); Bourne’s Lon- don and Birmingham Railway (text, 1839); Graphic Illustrations of Toddington in Gloucestershire (1840); Essay on the Ancient Gate-houses of Norwich (1847) and The Authorship of the Letters of Funius Elucidated (1848). Britton also produced two editions of Anstey’s New Bath Guide and edited a book on the events of Paris in 1814. With William Hosking he produced a report on the restoration of St Mary Redcliffe, Bristol, and was also instrumental in the restoration of Holy Trinity at Stratford-on-Avon, and of the church at Waltham Cross. Two other publications of his perhaps deserve a little more notice. In his Descriptive Sketches of Tunbridge Wells (1832), he took a rather unusual line on the waters to be found there. Readers were warned at great length of the dangers resulting from the steel in the water, especially the ladies, who could expect ‘preternatural turgescence of the uterus’. He went on to say that once the steel was removed the waters would be found good for many diseases, especially for the ‘dyspeptic state of the literary student’. Perhaps 22. Copy of same to same, 31 December 1840: tbid., p. 131. 23. Sir Richard Colt Hoare to John Britton, n.d.; ibid., p. 145. 24. This is a scarce little book, a slim quarto, not in the British Library, the Bodleian, or WANHS Library. THE LIFE AND WORK OF JOHN BRITTON he had found them beneficial himself? Of all his non-architectural works, however, one of which he must have been proud was that entitled The Rights of Literature, or an Inquiry into the policy and justice of the claims of certain public libraries on all publishers and authors for eleven copies, on the best paper of every publication. For all his life Britton was an active campaigner against the Copyright Acts, by which publishers were obliged to furnish eleven copies of every publication to the Statute Libraries. His letters and prefaces were full of complaints against this unjust law, and though he lived to see the number reduced to five in 1836, where it still stands, the reform came too late to be of much benefit to him. He had in fact, as did others, found a novel way round the regulations. In 1828 he published a work called The Architectural Antiquities of Normandy, with illustra- tions by Augustus Pugin, and engraved by the brothers Le Keux. Volumes of prints were outside the scope of the Act, so the illustrations were sold at the full price of the book, purchasers being given copies of the text free of charge. He was not without resource. While Britton may appear to have been something of a hack, all his other activities show he was always much more than that. He was instrumental in the early formation of the Royal Geographical Society. For many years he was an active member of the Literary Fund which distributed money to needy authors, serving as its Registrar. He was involved in the foundation of the London Society of Architects and Antiquaries, the Royal Institution, the London Institution, and the R.I.B.A. He was Honorary Secretary to the Wiltshire Society, a charitable organi- sation founded in 1817. In 1839, at his instigation, the Wiltshire Topographical Society was formed, chiefly by many of the landed gentry of the county. It published only three works: Canon Jackson’s History of the Parish of Grittleton (1843), Britton’s Life of John Aubrey (1845), and his edition of Aubrey’s Natural History two years later. All this time, and by now he was 76, Britton was Honorary Secretary of the So- ciety. For much of the period he had been ill, however, and this, coupled with the small increase in the number of members of the Society, led to its _ demise. By 1845 Britton’s affairs were perhaps at a low ebb. He had had no new works to bring in any money, his first wife was ill and he himself had not been in the best of health. An architect friend, George Godwin, organised a testimonial on his behalf which was signed and subscribed to by 317 people, from varied walks of 1D life. It was presented to Britton at a public dinner at the Castle Hotel in Richmond on 7 July, the occasion of his 74th birthday. Over £1,000 was raised and, because the committee could not agree on how the gift should be permanently commemorated, Britton offered to produce his autobiography. This he pro- ceeded to do, with the help of his secretary T.E. Jones. Though the work appeared in two volumes in 1849 and 1850, it covered only the first part of his life, containing as it does long digressions on antiquarian and other subjects. This little episode nevertheless revealed quite clearly the esteem in which Britton was held by his contemporaries. He had one other way of raising money. All his life he had been a great collector of books, manuscripts, drawings, waterco- lours, and other items. His house in Burton Street in London (now demolished to make way for the British Medical Association building), had a large library, but Britton found it necessary from time to time to cull his ever-increasing collections, partly to make room for new purchases and occasionally to raise money for more mundane purposes. The first recorded auction of books and drawings from his library was in June 1832, when a portion of the library was sold, together with watercolours and paintings. A second sale took place in March 1835, with a similar selection. A third portion, just of books this time, was sold in May 1839. In April 1840, evidently feeling that he was nearing the end of his long and productive life he sold off the stock of his own works, the copper-plates of many of the illustrations, the copyrights of his books, and other volumes. A fine collection of his own works, many of them containing the original drawings was sold in 1842 ina raffle, with tickets at £1 each. During the whole of this period he issued small printed catalogues of books for sale, usually special copies of his own works. After all these dispersals, it may be thought that there was not much left on Britton’s death in 1857. On the contrary, the major portion of his library was sold in May 1857. The sale continued for four days and contained 1,112 lots. Among them were thirty-seven large folio volumes of architectural and antiquarian drawings by John Carter, many large lots of topographical drawings and views by the leading topographical artists of Britton’s time, a large number of presentation copies of other authors’ works, often on Large Paper or with drawings inser- ted, and seventy lots of manuscripts by Britton himself and a few others, many of them unpublished. There were also a number of books on Wiltshire, duplicates of his main collection of Wiltshire books. John Britton must have had one of the finest libraries on antiquarian subjects ever put together in this 112 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE country. As the first and leading populariser, he was in an unrivalled position to form such a library. His collection of drawings was especially important, but with few exceptions they were never listed individ- ually in his catalogues, most of the entries containing large numbers of unspecified drawings. The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society is fortunate in that it possesses the only portion of his library to have survived intact, though that statement must be qualified in that by no means all of his Wiltshire drawings are here. In 1851 Britton printed a catalogue of his main collection of books on Wiltshire, running to some sixteen pages and includ- ing his own works.?> It was divided into several sections: general books on the county, books on individual towns and places, books on Salisbury, Stonehenge and Druidical Antiquities; also included were the famous Celtic Cabinet, Acts of Parliament relating to the county, and maps and plans. This catalogue contained 162 separate items, but as some of these items contained several volumes, and some of them were albums containing large numbers of prints and drawings, it hardly provides a true picture of his Wiltshire collections. To this catalogue Britton pre- fixed an introduction, in which he wrote: According to the practice of many preceeding collectors, I must now prepare for the distribu- tion, by sale, of all these literary and graphic stores. Those expressly relating to Wiltshire, I would gladly see deposited in some county library and readily accessible and useful for future topographers. Were my means equal to my wishes, it would give me great pleasure to present them to a public library in the county; but I am denied this gratification by prudential considerations. Before the late Sir Richard Colt Hoare died, I offered to give the whole of my county collection, if he would do the same with his, to a public instituuon at Salisbury or in Devizes. Alas, my overture was declined, and I am informed that the unique collection of anti- quities, which was formed by my esteemed friend the late Mr Cunnington of Heytesbury, and purchased by the historian of the southern division of the county is useless to the public and in a neglected state. It is my wish to dispose of the entire collection, here described, in one lot, for the purpose of forming a Wiltshire Topo- graphical Library.*° 25. WANHS Library, Wiltshire Tracts 121.13. 26. Ibid., p. 3. 27. C.W. Pugh, The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Britton also wrote to his friend William Cunnington, grandson of the collaborator with Colt Hoare, to the same effect. Recognizing the importance of Britton’s offer, Cunnington wrote to a number of Wiltshire gentry whose replies were so encouraging that a meeting was called at Devizes where a decision was made to have the collection valued, and a call for subscriptions made. The whole collection was bought for £150 and formed the nucleus of the Society’s library. This purchase also precipitated the founda- uon of the Society itself. ‘With so encouraging a start the committee felt justified in taking definite steps to form a society for the purpose of establishing a museum and library for the promotion of its ob- jects’.?’ It is difficult not to regret that Colt Hoare did not take up Britton’s offer. Although certain items from the Stourhead library, notably the Buckler and other drawings, have since been acquired for the Society’s library, much else has not and is now irretrievably lost to Wiltshire. John Britton died on New Year’s Day 1857. His first wife died in 1848, and his second wife a few years after him. He had no children. He was buried at Norwood Cemetery, and his tombstone, by far the most remarkable in that burial ground, consists of a monolith in size and shape very like one of those that form Stonehenge. The original design for the tomb- stone by William Hosking, his one-time collaborator, was based on a design by Britton for a monument to Thomas Chatterton.?® According to a contemporary news-cutting ‘Prudential reasons’, presumably finan- cial, induced Mrs Britton to abandon this design. At Hosking’s suggestion George Godwin of the Testi- monial produced a new design using a monolith. This stone is approximately 3ft 6in by 2ft 4in at the base, and rises to a height of about 11 feet. It is not wrought, but is as it came from the quarry, with no mark of a tool upon it apart from that of the spalling- hammer, which was used to throw off some rougher irregularities. In his will, of which Dawson Turner the antiquary was a witness, Britton left everything to his second wife. When John Britton died the tributes to him were many and various. His obituary in The Times was largely written by himself inasmuch as it consisted largely of extracts from the Autobiography. Many eulogies of Britton were published both during his lifetime and after his death. Thomas Clark’s, pu- blished in 1855, while Britton was still alive, took the form of a long poem of which the first six lines read: Society 1853-1953: a Centenary History (Devizes, 1953), p. 6. 28. Part-time poet and part-time forger, Chatterton poisoned him- self with arsenic 24 August 1770 at the age of 17. THE LIFE AND WORK OF JOHN BRITTON In Britain born, by Britons bred John Britton still holds up his head The busiest bee of all the hive And though he’s nearly eighty-five He daily plies his ready pen To benefit his fellow men.’? At a meeting of the Royal Institute of British Archi- tects, a few days after Britton’s funeral, Digby Wyatt observed: His labours were incessant, his memory extra- ordinary, his system admirable, his clearness of understanding and liveliness of fancy in no common wise vigorous, his affection warm, his habits exemplary. Had he been less honest he might have been far richer; had he been more 29. From a small broadsheet in the writer’s collection. 113 selfish he would never have benefitted his country as he unquestionably did. All in all, that is not a bad epitaph for the founder of this Society. The house in Kington St Michael where John Britton was born is no more. On its site there now stands the village hall, let into the outer wall of which is an old stone with a barely decipherable inscription recording the birth of John Britton in 1771, presum- ably a relic from the original Britton house. This Society ignored the bicentenary of the birth of its founder in 1971. A proper plaque upon the wall in Kington St Michael to record his birthplace would make fitting and long overdue amends for our neglect of the memory of this Wiltshireman extraordinary. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 114-120 The Woodlands, Calne, and the Charlesworth Case by RAYMOND J. SKINNER The story of May Charlesworth, largely pieced together from a collection of newscuttings in the Society’s Library, begins in 1908 when she posed as a rich young woman renting three large houses and various expensive motor cars in Calne, North Wales and the Scottish highlands. The mansion she rented in Calne had been the home of the Harris family, the celebrated bacon purveyors. When her many creditors became too pressing, Miss Charlesworth staged a mock fatal road accident and disappeared to Tobermory on the Isle of Mull, being eventually tracked down by the London newspapers. May and her mother were subsequently sentenced to three years in Derby Gaol. Woodlands Park, a small and pleasant estate of new houses on the corner of Station Road, Calne has been developed in the last few years on the site of the Victorian mansion from which it took its name. Only a few yards away, across Silver Street, is the now- deserted site of the famous Harris factory, which for almost two centuries was a leader in bacon-curing, ever since the first John Harris established his busi- ness in the town in 1791. The firm, once Calne’s largest employer, prospered during the nineteenth century through the efforts and innovatory talents of John, his sons and grandsons.! In the 1860s, the family built the mansion which became known as ‘The Woodlands’ at the junction of Silver Street and Station Road;’ it was summarily demolished on 22 April 1983. The house, for many years associated with the firm and family of C. & T. Harris (Calne) Ltd., was later also the home of its respected managing director, Sir John Bodinaar, whose care for and interest in the house and grounds, with its stately trees and pleasant gardens, was well known in the 1920s. Later, the building served as offices for the company, and also contained within its grounds the Woodlands Club, catering for the leisure activities of the many Harris employees and still flourishing today as a meeting place for ex-employees. On the death of Mrs Ann Harris who had lived in The Woodlands for some years,’ the house seems to have been left empty for a period, until in 1908 a Miss Violet Charlesworth rented the property for five years, at an annual rent of £180. It was at this time that the name of the house was changed to The Hall; as such it was to figure in a local, even national cause 1. Victona County History of Wiltshire, Vol. 4, Calne, pp. 220-223. 2. N. Pevsner, The Buildings of England: Wiltshire, revised by B. célébre involving the apparent disappearance of its tenant. Miss Charlesworth, on leasing the property, had immediately ordered extensive re-decoration and con- siderable alterations at The Hall, much to the satisfac- tion of several local tradesmen. Strangely, however, even though these were carried out on a lavish scale, Miss Charlesworth seems never to have resided there. Indeed, the only regular inhabitants were some dozen St Bernard dogs, with their kennelman and three gardeners. On her visits to Calne the lady seemingly preferred to stay at the Lansdowne Strand Hotel. Violet Gordon Charlesworth, as she styled herself, was in her twenties, attractive, always smartly and stylishly dressed, and usually arrived with her chauf- feur in an expensive motor-car which, however, she drove herself — both sufficiently rare occurrences in Edwardian England to create predictable attention in the quiet country town. Obviously she strongly impressed the local inhabitants and tradespeople as having both the social position and the requisite means with which to maintain her apparent status. On the occasion of a visit to the town in November 1908, she had, as usual, stayed at the Lansdowne, and it was not until some two months later that the town was startled to learn that Violet Charlesworth had met with a motoring accident in North Wales, having apparently been thrown from her car as a result of a collision with a wall at the side of the road. Myster- iously, however, no body was found at the scene, and it was asserted by her motoring companions, the chauffeur and her sister Lilian, that Violet had been hurled from the car and down the cliff-face into the sea below. Violet Charlesworth’s companions — the Cherry (Penguin, 1975), p. 157. 3. Census, 1881 — RG11/2035, p. 96. THE CHARLESWORTH CASE Figure 1. The Woodlands, Calne, from a newspaper cutting, c. 1910. (Photograph by Derek Parker) only witnesses of the accident — were found lying apparently dazed by the roadside, but of her there was no sign, either in the road, or on the beach below. It was now discovered that Miss Charlesworth, far from being restricted to her Calne house, also had a large house, Boderw House in St Asaph, about twenty miles from where the accident had occurred. Nor were these two establishments the only ones she maintained for, shortly after taking the Calne house, she had also rented Flowerburn House, between Fortrose and Cromarty in the highlands of Scotland. Three large houses, in the apparent possession of a young girl in her twenties, would not perhaps alone TS have aroused suspicion, but the London Daily Chroni- cle, which had initially covered the story of her disappearance, soon unearthed further details of ‘extraordinary Stock Exchange speculations by Miss Violet Charlesworth’. Their reporter, interviewing a member of the firm of Denton, Dale & Sons, stock and share dealers, received corroboration of his suspi- cions: Violet Charlesworth, an inveterate gambler had, like many, often won large sums but, on the whole, had lost heavily in her financial gambles, and had been driven to desperation because of inability to recoup her losses. Further developments in Calne, North Wales and 116 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Scotland soon revealed that many local tradesmen shared a common bond in having presented large bills, so far unpaid, and about which they now wished to contact the vanished heiress, for such she had asserted was her status. One of the most pressing of these tradesmen was a Mr Hill of Calne, who was left holding a bill for £200 for alterations and refurbish- ments at The Hall. Violet had, in recent months, when in financial difficulty with pressing creditors, given various stories as to the inheritance which would be hers when she reached the age of twenty-five. Of these perhaps the most colourful was that she was the goddaughter of the late General Gordon, and that she would inherit a very large sum of money under his will. As ever, appearance counted for very much, and Violet Gor- don Charlesworth was undeniably very attractive, always fashionably attired and, accompanied by her Imposing retinue it was perhaps not surprising that she managed to hoodwink many ordinary folk and gullible tradesmen with her supposed status. What is more surprising is that she also managed to convince professional men such as solicitors, doctors, and financial agents as to her bona fides. In January 1909, the past finally caught up with her. It had soon become obvious to the police, the press, and other interested parties that her motoring accident at Penmaenbach Point was a sham staged for the purpose of a ‘disappearance’, in order to gain some leeway from the creditors who were closing in. Watts, Violet Charlesworth’s chauffeur, and lover some claimed, changed his story of events several umes under cross-examination. During the few days following the accident the lady was variously reported in places as widely separated as Glasgow, Plymouth, Leicester, Liverpool, Norwich, Portsmouth and Car- lisle. It was also discovered that two large trunks, addressed to a ‘Miss Mackenzie, Birmingham’, had been awaiting collection at New Street Station, Bir- mingham, since the previous Christmas. An examin- ation of the contents, through the broken sides, showed that they contained very valuable goods, amongst which was a_ photograph of Violet Charlesworth in Highland costume, and stationery bearing her crest in gold, with the motto Mors potuis macula, and various other letters and postcards addressed to Miss V.G. Charlesworth at a London hotel. Violet Charlesworth had earlier tried to collect these trunks from the station but, on being asked for her address and signature, had declined to give details with the result that the boxes were not released to her. Meanwhile, a diary found on the rocks near Pen- maenmawr, contained a record of her journeys be- tween 10 and 27 December, during which time she had covered nearly 3,000 miles. The entries started with a journey from Stafford, her home and birthplace, to St Asaph and back; on the next day she visited Calne, and on the day after, Derby. This was followed by two trips to London and back to Stafford; after a trip to Kendal and back to Wales, she went to Scotland on 20 December, to Edinburgh and thence to Fortrose, Wick, Inverness and Glasgow, arriving in Perth on the 27th. In Perth, she pawned a diamond brooch to buy petrol for the journey back to Wales, achieved, as the newspapers reported, with an almost heroic disregard for the terrible weather of that winter. At Prestatyn, her car had to be pulled by horses out of a snowdrift, and she accomplished the remainder of her journey by train. Her unexplained wanderings seem to have had little purpose other than perhaps to evade her most immediate creditors and indulge in motoring, which she is said to have enjoyed above any other activity. By now, the newspapers were busily checking up on her more closely, and it was discovered that her birth had been registered in the name of May Charlesworth. Her father was a mechanic and she had been born in a small terraced house in Lovatt Street, Stafford. These revelations obviously did not accord with her assumed status, and further investigations also showed that the exaggerated notions that had gained credence regarding her ‘fortune’ existed only in her and her mother’s imagination. At this ume Mrs Charlesworth began to figure more largely in the story, having told a reporter that a large fortune had been left to her daughter by a young man killed in an accident and, later, that an old gentleman whom Violet had nursed, had left her estates in Scotland and England, to the value of £800,000. It was represented by her mother that as Violet was not of age — another lie — her life was a very precious one, and the large dogs which were often part of her entourage had been bought to protect her from possible molestation by the testator’s relatives. Her mother was vociferous in her complaints about the annoyance the family had suffered from fortune- hunters. These, however, did not seem to include the ‘peer of the realm’ who had ‘matrimonial intentions’ towards her daughter. According to her mother also, ‘Violet always talked a good deal of the noble use she would make of her money when she had absolute control of it’. One of her plans was apparently to found a home for discharged soldiers, ‘in whom she took a great interest’. In order to forestall the mounting evidence that Violet and her mother, if not indeed her whole family, THE CHARLESWORTH CASE were practised confidence tricksters, Lilian, her sis- ter, the chauffeur Watts, and Mr Gratton, a family friend, paid a visit to their solicitors Messrs. Amery Parkes, Macklin & Co. who, somewhat incongruous- ly, had their office in Fleet Street. An official state- ment was issued to the press as follows: A member of our firm has conducted an exhaus- tive examination, lasting four hours, of Miss Lilian Charlesworth, Mr. Gratton, and Watts, the chauffeur. We see no reason to doubt that the accident, as described to us by the chauffeur and Miss Lilian Charlesworth, did in fact happen, and the state- ments made are not inconsistent with the alle- gation that Miss Gordon Charlesworth met her death as a result of the accident. (Signed) Amery Parkes, Macklin & Co. Opinion of Messrs. Amery Parkes must be coloured by the response of the waiting crowd of photo- graphers, pressmen and interested bystanders, who, together with the attendant police, greeted this state- ment with both prolonged laughter and incredulity. On leaving, Lilian Charlesworth’s party managed to elude the assemblage and make a dash for their cab which, deluged by flashing cameras, turned sharply up Chancery Lane and made for Euston Station, accompanied by a long procession of other taxis occupied by newspaper reporters. “The whole’, as the Daily Chronicle said, formed ‘an interesting sort of automobile pageant’. On 13 January 1909, ten days after Violet Charlesworth’s supposed accident at Penmaenbach, her goods left at The Hall in Calne were sold. The following report appeared in the London papers on the following day: SALE.OF EFFECTS Music Hall Agents Fail to Buy Miss Charlesworth’s St. Bernard The goods placed by Miss Violet Charlesworth in The Hall at Calne were sold yesterday at the Corn Exchange under a distress warrant at the instance of the landlord. The place was packed, many evidently being attracted by curiosity. The first two lots were lawn-mowers, which were by an irony of fate knocked down to the local tradesman who sup- plied them and had not been paid. A walnut bedroom suite went for £19. 10s., two Louis Quinze cabinets realised £3. 2s. 6d. and £4. 15s. respectively; a second suite went for £28. 117 The St. Bernard dog, ‘Second to None’ went for eleven and a half guineas. Several persons were there to purchase the dog to appear on the music-hall stage, but apparently their limit was £10, and they had to retire. A collie realised 22s. 6d., and at this point the auctioneer stopped the sale, saying that on the advice of his solicitor he could not offer any more. This caused great disappointment to many people, as the last items included the kennels in position at The Hall. Many fanciers hailing from as far as Guildford, Newport, Newbury etc., had therefore a fruitless journey. The total sum realised was £133. 2s., and the auctioneer after the sale expressed the opinion that on the whole he thought the public had the best of the bargain. During the following four days the newspapers, in Miss Charlesworth’s continuing absence, concen- trated their attentions on her mother and father, interviewing both, and being regaled by the mother, especially, with a long account of Violet’s promised ‘fortune’, her glowing matrimonial prospects and her several engagements. At this ume was first mentioned the name of Dr Hughes Jones of Rhyl, to whom Violet was said to have been affianced. Both father and mother asserted their certainty that their daughter had indeed perished in the motoring accident. Her father also claimed that Violet had been ‘made the agent of cleverer and more unscrupulous people than herself’, and that ‘some gambler has got hold of her, or made her his dupe’. Violet’s brother Frederick seemed, however, to have a little less faith in his sister’s innocence or probity, and observed that, ‘her story was not an entirely satisfactory one’. Like his parents, though, he tended to believe in the now-discredited story of Violet’s accident and death. After some sixteen days of widespread coverage in the newspapers a ‘Special Correspondent’ of the Morning Leader finally tracked down Violet Charlesworth at Macpherson’s Palace Temperance Hotel in Oban, Argyllshire, where she had arrived some days before, from Tobermory on the island of Mull. She was registered under the name of Margaret Cameron McLeod, and had apparently been staying in Tobermory since two days after the motoring ‘accident’. Mrs Macpherson, the proprietress of the hotel stated, ‘Of course when she came here on Wednesday, I asked her no questions. A beautifully- dressed young lady, with a handsome cloak lined with white fur as she had, would not expect to be ques- tioned!’ Such was the gullibility on which Violet THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 118 % Atwrets: A ‘e oe ratate sity a aiike ewe es ‘ an arece Tate een vet pares erecta " asa! shea tata tet sta te! as at o ‘ PEPE, x rota! oe, tn Sei sPafate Cn "ates tat ynay! eta ate ie An ate cre ee etch Sn BE oe. SS tin Wate, Derek Parker) 1908. (Photograph by from a newspaper cutting, c Miss Charlesworth, 2 igure ir ight to Scotland but declared that her fl b) occurred iking in her decep- and the charm and str traded so successfully, ll u h ills whic She also s Ise afterwards was on a sudden impu inta presence which enabled her to ma 10US W. he myster ieve in t professed to bel icle best summarised by the arti mentioned above in the Morning Leader 2 for so long is uions WZarre 1e€s. Some days later events took an even more b turn when the newspapers announced that would bring her valuable legac ister , hers After leaving Oban, Violet Charlesworth Lilian and Mr Gratton went first to Glasgow and then ic hall stage at a salary of £300 weekly iolet Charlesworth has been engaged for She commences her new performance on Feb ruary Ist and will appear three times nightly, iss V. the mus M on ae og s alco} _ o 2 oe9 = a a = vo wae Co Y a Zhe So a On SS aux ao « Qe S.4 oo Sea OD ws Gav ‘Sg au av & o 5 no} ° ey as eos oo 3 2-39 lft e) a Aas ma Hw DN sae G at co) _ syess sans ho eae Wada but eventually, in Edinburgh, Violet confessed to her true identity. She still maintained that the ‘accident’ THE CHARLESWORTH CASE twice at ‘Collins Music Hall’, Islington, and at the ‘Canterbury’, Westminster Bridge-road. The sketch in which she appears is entitled ‘A Clever Woman’. Unfortunately for Violet Charlesworth the rowdy and derisive audiences were less than sympathetic to her avowed aims that she was doing her best to pay-off her creditors. A newspaper described the fiasco: At the back of the stage the curtains parted and there stepped out a slim girl in a Scottish cap and a long red motor-coat, trimmed with fur. She faltered towards the footlights and bowed low, while her “interpreter” explained that this was indeed the missing lady motorist ... On his amiable suggestion she slipped off the cloak and stood revealed in a kilt and jacket of the Gordon tartan. At each music-hall there was the same rather pitiable performance. The gentleman accom- panying her begged for the indulgence of the audience because, owing to Miss Charlesworth’s “shattered nerves’, the doctor had forbidden her to sing her two songs, ““Good-bye, Mavourneen”, and “Good-bye girlie’. Miss Charlesworth was white to the lips, and as she stared forward at the great audience in the dim light, and heard the laughter, the repeated shouts of scorn, the prolonged hooting, the sharp volleys of clapping of those who sympathised with her, the steady hissing of those who were determined to show their disapproval, she was obviously terrified. Her worst ordeal was the “Canterbury”. The audience would not even listen to the expla- nations and replied with very scornful and pointed rejoinders. Miss Charlesworth looked as if she were on the verge of fainting. She swayed slightly, and kept moistening her lips, and once or twice smiled in a piteous way. This time she was not asked to take off her red cloak, but the manager hurried her off the stage, to the sound of a final burst of laughter. In a solicitors’ examination later, 1t was stated that Miss Charlesworth’s liabilities to creditors were some £13,000, later increased to £20,000, while her assets were estimated at approximately £7,000. The closing act of the story took place at Derby Assizes in the following year when both Violet Charlesworth and her mother were arraigned before Mr Justice Darling on charges of false pretences in respect of money alleged to have been obtained from 119 Dr Jones of Rhyl and a Mrs Martha Smith of Derby. The inevitable verdict was passed on the couple on 23 February 1910, described in The Times as follows: The jury after half-an-hour’s deliberation re- turned a verdict of “Guilty” against both the prisoners. The Judge passing sentence, said the verdict was entirely warranted. For some time he had doubted whether the mother was really a party to this series of frauds. By the evidence of Mr. Barrett (medical practitioner of Derby), a witness for the prosecution, when Violet was only a child ten years ago her mother had told him she was heiress to a fortune, and it was now clear that she had inoculated her daughter Violet with the same idea, which Violet herself most ingeniously developed by fraud upon fraud. He could not make any difference between them. Violet was a clever woman who, well directed, might have had an honourable, and possibly distinguished career, but her ingenuity was im- properly applied. He was pained to have to pass a severe sen- tence, but having regard to the enormity of the harm they had done, he could not do otherwise. He sentenced both the prisoners to five years penal servitude. Mrs. Charlesworth swooned on hearing her sentence. In spite of the statement in The Times report above, it appears from Assize records that the Charlesworths were in fact sentenced only to three years each. Both seem to have served their sentences in Derby Gaol, and with remission would probably have been re- leased in 1912. No doubt they were just endeavouring to re-settle themselves into society when the onset of the Great War in August 1914 changed many people’s circumstances. A narrative such as this should ideally be completed with details as to the subsequent lives of May Charlesworth and her mother, but investigation has failed to reveal many further facts. With her previous facility for adopting convenient aliases, it would seem extremely likely that on her release from prison Miss Charlesworth sought both a new identity and a different area in which to live. It was first believed that she had been traced to the Chesterfield area, but this trail proved to be false. She may have changed her name, either before or as a result of marriage: she would still have been a relatively young and attractive woman. There certainly seems to be no trace of a May Charlesworth in any relevant records after 1912. In the case of her mother, Miriam, it is thought that she may have been the woman of that name who died, 120 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE aged 69, in Chorley, Lancashire, in 1920: the age would correspond with that given at the Derby Assizes almost 11 years earlier. SOURCES OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE CHARLES- WORTH CASE W.A.N.H.S. Library, Box 126, Newspaper cuttings from The Daily Chronicle, Morning Leader etc., 1908-10 The Times, 9, 16 and 24 February 1910 Public Record Office, Kew, H.O. 140/279, Calendar of Prisoners Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages, St Catherine’s House, Kingsway, London Principal Probate Registry, Somerset House, Strand, London Kelly’s Directories for Derbyshire, Staffordshire, Wiltshire, 1880-95, 1922 Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 121-127 The First Record of Portlandian Plesiosaurs from Swindon, Wiltshire by J.B. DELAIR and R.F. VAUGHAN Remains of plesiosaurs of Portlandian age (Upper Furassic), although long known from various sites in Buckinghamshire (Lydekker 1905, 26), Dorset (Delair 1958, 62, 67, 70, 83), North Yorkshire (erroneously: Fox-Strangways 1892, table), and Oxfordshire (Anon. 1838, 608), as well as from Tisbury in Wiltshire (Woodward and Sherborn 1890, 220), have not until now been reported from Swindon, where Portland Stone formerly yielded numerous fossils. This negative Swindon record 1s somewhat surprising in view of (1) the essentially marine character of the Portland formation generally and the overwhelming majority of invertebrate fossils found in it, (1) the extreme adaptations of plesiosaurs to an habitually aquatic existence (Figure 1), and (111) the occurrence of plesiosaur remains at virtually all other major Portlandian exposures. The present paper records the first definite evidence of these interesting extinct reptiles from the Portland beds at Swindon. THE PORTLANDIAN FORMATION AT SWINDON The Old Town of Swindon sits on an outlier of Portlandian strata (Sands and Stone) overlying and surrounded by upper Kimmeridgian clays and sands. Two smaller outliers occur near Coate Water and between Coate and Swindon proper. For many years last century and during the earlier part of the present, Portland stone was quarried commercially in Swindon at Great Quarry, now the Town Gardens, and later in a still larger quarry, Okus, situated west of it at a site now occupied by Commonweal School, a trading estate, and much of Princess Margaret Hospital. Other, smaller, quarries also existed, one known as Reservoir Quarry west of Okus and another, Lethbridge Road Quarry, to the south-east. There are no quarries active in Swindon today. The workings at these quarries were shallow, no- where exceeding 5 metres in depth. They exposed the following beds, given here in descending order. Swindon Sands and Stone: (Kerberus zone) buff and white crossbedded sands with irregular layers of calcareous sandstone. Maximum thickness 8 metres. Cockly Beds: (Okusensis zone) a marly and sandy limestone crowded with fossils. 1.5 metres thick. Glaucolitic Beds: (Glaucolithus zone) a sandy lime- stone. 1.07 metres thick. Upper Lydite Beds: (Glaucolithus zone) the lowest bed worked at Swindon. 0.3 metres thick. The last stone was removed from Okus Quarry during the late 1950s, although by then quarrying there was Figure 1. The reconstructed skeleton of a typical plesiosaur. Not to scale. Dependent upon the species represented, adults varied between 10 and 25 feet in length. 122 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Figure 2. Colymbosaurus. A left humerus (F.111 SwM.) from the Portlandian Formation of Okus Quarry, Swindon. Scale 4:5 PORTLANDIAN PLESIOSAURS FROM SWINDON 123 Figure 3. Colymbosaurus sp. Drawing of left humerus (F.111 SwM.); dorsal aspect (A) and distal aspect (B). Reconstructed outlines of missing portions shown pecked; broken surfaces, hatched. Abbreviations: AF anterior face; CH condylar head; DF distal facet; DM distal margin; NF nervous foramina; PF posterior face; R rugose areas; TT trochanterial tuberosity. 124 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE on a greatly reduced scale. Now, in 1991, all that can be seen of the workings is a small face deliberately preserved in one corner of the playing field of Commonweal School (SU 147 836), where 3 metres of Swindon Sands and Stones are exposed. Several fossi- liferous horizons occur 1n it. THE SWINDON EVIDENCE The present material consists of an incomplete humerus (F.111 SwM.), five apparently associated cervical and dorsal centra (F.115—F.119 SwM.), an isolated late caudal centrum (F.120 SwM.), and three unrelated dorsal centra (F.112—-F.114 SwM.). At least three and probably four different plesiosaurian species appear to be represented. These specimens were discovered during recent curation of previously unregistered palaeontological material at Swindon Museum. All appear to have been found many decades ago, and to have subsequently reposed unnoticed in the museum’s geological collec- tons until now. History of the Specimens When first encountered, the specimens were found packed up from a previous museum display which had been dismantled in the 1960s. Accompanying typed labels made for that display evidently replaced now lost originals prepared long before by a former honorary curator at the museum, local clothier Charles Gore (1866-1951) (Arkell 1952, lvi-Ivii). The typed labels regrettably conveyed little of the speci- mens’ history. Search of the museum records revealed a hand- written list of proposed exhibits drawn up by Gore when he was planning displays in the 1920s. The list included the present specimens and correctly recog- nised them as plesiosaurs from the ‘Portland Stone of Okus Quarry’. It may be assumed that Gore collected these bones (or acquired them from quarrymen) personally. Gore made a collection of fossils at least as early as 1912, for in that year he offered it as a gift to Swindon Town Council. Following their acceptance, Gore commen- ced his honorary curatorship. Thus the bones now under consideration had certainly been found by the 1920s, when the long-hand list was compiled, and not improbably before Gore offered his collection to the Town Council. Horizon of the Specimens It remains unclear whether all the specimens described hereunder were part of Gore’s collection. Three (F.112—F.114 SwM.) may not have been. Certainly it does not follow that all were found in the same quarry (although all those expressly associated with Gore seem to have come from Okus Quarry) or that all occurred at the same horizon. Nor is it clear which of the aforementioned beds exposed in Okus Quarry Gore was referring to as ‘Portland Stone’. The Cockly, Glaucolitic, and Upper Lydite horizons are all consolidated ‘stony’ beds, and the compacted Swindon Sands and Stone is essentially the same. Comparison of the limited matrix (scattered sand grains) still adhering to some of Gore’s specimens with the sole surviving exposure of the Swindon Sands and Stone in the grounds of Commonweal School, suggests that this was probably the horizon which yielded Gore’s specimens. On this matter, the availa- ble evidence is, of course, suggestive not conclusive. DESCRIPTION OF THE MATERIAL Humerus (Figures 2—3) This specimen (F.111 SwM.), which was discovered in Okus Quarry, belongs to a juvenile individual and accordingly lacks the condylar and _ trochanterial development typical of humeri in adult individuals. Due to slight overall abrasion, its general condition is slightly below average, some local features conse- quently appearing with less than ideal clarity. A portion of the posterior margin of its distal extremity and a part of the condylar head are missing. These, however, can be reconstructed with reasonable ac- curacy on the basis of better preserved analogous material known from elsewhere (Figure 3A). Notwithstanding these shortcomings, however, sufficient of the specimen exists to enable useful measurements to be made and generic identification to be attempted. The principal dimensions of the specimen are as follows: a) Maximum antero-posterior length (as preserved): 211 mm b) Maximum distal width (as preserved): 99 mm c) Maximum distal width (inclusive of missing portion): 115 mm (estimated). As is normal in plesiosaurian humeri, the condylar head is gently rugose and the immediately adjacent proximal surface of the shank more acutely so (Figure 3A). This sub-condylar rugosity extends for a maxi- mum of 47 mm down the shank, below which the bone’s surface becomes smoother until the expanded distal extremity of the humerus is reached. There, rugosity, mostly characterised as a series of shallow PORTLANDIAN PLESIOSAURS FROM SWINDON marginal grooves, is weakly developed. Small nutri- tive foramina occur at the proximal ends of several of these grooves. Three facets constitute the distal margin of the humerus. Most of the posterior facet, however, is missing (Figure 3B). In life these facets provided articulation with the carpal bones. As preserved, each exhibits a weakly rugose surface punctuated randomly by small nervous foramina (Figure 3B). Incipient trochanterial tuberosity occurs in the usual position on the upper part of the shank (Figure 3A). Although clearly a juvenile, the proportions of this specimen most nearly approach those of humeri ascribed to Colymbosaurus, as defined by Brown (1981, 333, fig. 44). The present specimen is therefore referred provi- sionally to that genus. Colymbosaurus has been recorded previously from the Portland Stone of Portland, Dorset (Owen 1869, 1-12), and the same horizon at Tisbury, Wiltshire (Woodward and Sherborn 1890, 280), so its presence at Swindon is not unexpected. Associated(?) Centra Two cervical and three dorsal centra (F.115—F.119 SwM.) of closely similar proportions, and in every case lacking the neural arch, are believed to be the associated remains of a single individual. They were discovered in Okus Quarry, but no evidence exists certainly to connect them with the humerus (F.111 SwM.) just described. All the specimens have sustained slight postmortem deformation, possess terminal faces which are either weakly or only modestly concave, and well marked bevelled haemal borders (Figure 4). The terminal face 125 of F.116 SwM. is exemplified by a small central pit, and F.119 SwM. exhibits analogous pits on both its terminal faces. Central pits, however, are absent from the terminal faces of F.115, F.117, and F.118 SwM. Nervous foramina pierce the main body of the centrum either side of the ventral keel in all these specimens except F.116 and F.119 SwM. Together with F.113 and F.114 SwM. (described below), all these specimens closely resemble the cor- responding centra in the well known Callovian ple- siosaurs Cryptocleidus and Muraenosaurus (Figures 4A-B) and those of several rather less well known Kimmeridgian forms. Accordingly it is presently inadvisable certainly to refer these particular centra to a named plesiosaurian genus or species. Late Caudal Centrum The body only of an undistorted small centrum (F.120 SwM.), also recorded as having been found in Okus Quarry, exhibits all the features typical of a late caudal vertebra. Judging from its size and proportions, it must in life have been situated very near the end of the tail. Its terminal faces, which lack bevelled haemal borders, are almost flat. The specimen is also devoid of nervous foramina, and is not thought to be associated with any of the previously described material: The principal dimensions and characters of all the above mentioned centra are summarised in the table below. Dorsal Centra Two undistorted but incomplete centra (F.113—F.114 SwM.), possibly associated with one another, and larger than, though otherwise broadly similar to, those just discussed. Neither is recorded specifically Max. antero- Max. vertical posterior length depth of termin- Specimen (measured vent-) al face (lip of rally) neural canal to ventral border) F.115 (dorsal) 43 mm 50 mm F.116 ( ” ) 50 mm 45 mm Ree” ) 40.5 mm 46 mm F.118 (cervical) 32 mm 40 mm F.119 (." ) 30mm 36.5 mm F.120 (caudal) 27 mm 27 mm Max. horizontal Development Floor of width of term- of ventral neural inal face keel canal 61.5 mm Modest Obscured 55 mm Pronounced Narrow throughout 53 mm Weak Centre nar- 50 mm Weak row: widens 47 mm Weak anteriorly & posteriorly 32 mm Weak Wide throughout 126 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE B Figure 4. Typical Upper Jurassic plesiosaurian dorsal centrum; posterior aspect (A) and left lateral aspect (B). Broken areas shown hatched. Abbreviations: HB haemal border; NF nervous foramen; HR haemal rugosity; TF terminal face. as from Okus Quarry. Presumably they belong to a separate individual from that represented by centra F.115-F.119 SwM., and, due to certain osteological differences, perhaps also represent a different species. Centrum F.113 SwM. exhibits almost flat terminal faces with weakly developed central pits, although its bevelled haemal borders are strongly developed. The ventral keel, however, is no more than suggested and no nervous foramina pierce the centrum laterally. The floor of the neural canal is not preserved. Maximum antero- posterior length (measured ventrally) Specimens Maximum vertical depth of terminal face (lip of neural canal face Specimen F.114 SwM. is of greater transverse width than F.113 SwM., and possesses gently concave terminal faces devoid of central pits. The haemal borders are again prominently bevelled, but also rugose antero-posteriorly. The floor of the neural canal is narrow throughout, and the ventral keel is well developed, being flanked on either side by nervous foramina. The principal dimensions of these specimens are as follows: Maximum horizontal width of terminal to ventral border) F.113 (dorsal) F.114(" ) 40 mm 45 mm Dorsal Centrum (Figure 5) Finally, an undistorted dorsal centrum (F.112 SwM.), lacking most of its neural arch, but otherwise intact, completes the Portlandian material considered here. Like specimens F.113 and F.114 SwM. it is not recorded from a specific Portlandian Swindon locality. This centrum is distinguished by weakly concave terminal faces of markedly regular subcircular outline (Figure 5A), having no central pits. It is devoid of haemal bevelling, although the haemal border itself is sharply profiled (Figures SB—C). In these features this specimen is reminiscent of a dorsal vertebra of the ul-known Callovian ‘Plesiosaurus’ brachyspondylus figured by Phillips in 1871 (p. 369, diagram clxix). The body of the centrum is gently constricted medially (Figure 5C) and is pierced laterally by two pairs of nervous foramina (Figure 5B). The floor of the neural canal is unfortunately obscured, but a ventral keel is present, though incipiently. 59 mm 60 mm 60 mm 63 mm The principal dimensions of the specimen, measured as above, are as follows: 60 mm 52 mm 59 mm CONCLUSIONS No doubts now remain that plesiosaurian remains occur in the Portland beds at Swindon, and that these represent one provisionally identifiable genus, Colym- bosaurus, and two, perhaps three, additional forms. So far as is presently known, Colymbosaurus is monotypic (has only one species), and the centra comprising its vertebral column — only two partially complete series are known (J.29596 S.M.C., and 40106 BMNH) -— are so like those of the Callovian Cryptocleidus as to be unsafe for diagnostic purposes. Thus, the suspected additional forms just indicated, all, except F.112 SwM., represented by generally very PORTLANDIAN PLESIOSAURS FROM SWINDON 127 UL RFV 1991 | Figure 5. Dorsal centrum (F.112 SwM.); anterior aspect (A), right lateral aspect (B) and dorsal aspect (C). Solidified matrix shown stippled. Scale 1:2. Abbreviations: HB haemal border; NC neural canal; NF nervous foramina; NS neural spine; TF terminal face. similar centra, cannot be certainly assigned to any particular established genus or species. F.112 SwM., on the other hand, is sufficiently different to be ascribed to a distinct form akin to the large Kimmeridgian plesiosaur M uraenosaurus trunca- tus, which, however, is regarded in the latest survey conducted of these extinct reptiles (Brown 1981, 324) as of dubious validity. Thus, the identity of this specimen cannot be certainly established either, its present significance being that it confirms the pres- ence of several different plesiosaurian reptiles at _ Swindon in Portlandian times. Acknowledgements. We gratefully acknowledge the contribution made by the Geologists’ Association (Curry Fund) towards part of the production of this paper. Abbreviations used in the text: BMNH, British Museum (Natural History); S.M.C., Sedgwick Museum, Cambridge; SwM., Swindon Museum. REFERENCES Anonymous, 1838, ‘Fossils’ Proc. Geol. Soc. London 2, p. 608 ARKELL, W.J., 1952 ‘Obituary Notice of C.H. Gore’, Quart. Fi. geol. Soc. Lond. 107, |vi-lvii BROWN, D.S., 1981 ‘The English Upper Jurassic Plesiosau- roidea (Reptilia) and a Review of the Phylogeny and Classification of the Plesiosauria’, Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), Geology series, vol. 35, no. 4, 253-347 DELAIR, J.B., 1958 ‘The Mesozoic Reptiles of Dorset: Part Two’, Proc. Dor. Nat. Hist. and Arch. Soc. 80, pp. 52-90 FOX-STRANGWAYS, C.E., 1892 ‘The Jurassic Rocks of Britain: II. Yorkshire’, Mem. Geol. Surv. U.K. LYDEKKER, R., 1905 ‘Palaeontology’ in Victoria County His- tory of Buckinghamshire vol. 1 (London), p. 26 OWEN, R., 1869 Monograph on the British Fossil Reptilia from the Kimmeridge Clay (1861-69), Pt. 3, pp. 1-12, Monogr. Palaeont. Soc. London PHILLIPS, J., 1871 Geology of Oxford and the Valley of the Thames (Oxford) WOODWARD, A.S., and SHERBORN, C.D., 1890 A Catalogue of British Fossil Vertebrata (London) Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 128-139 Some Investigations on Habitats of Lichens on Sarsen Stones at Fyfield Down, Wiltshire by PATRICK DILLON, SIOBHAN SKEGGS and CHRISTINE GOODEY The results of two investigations on aspects of the physicochemical environments of two habitat types for lichens on sarsen stones at Fyfield Down are reported. A ‘limits to tolerance’ approach is proposed for equating lichen status with physicochemical environment. Change in the physicochemical environment 1s reviewed in the context of the long-term history of the landscape. INTRODUCTION Sarsen stones are irregular blocks of hard siliceous sandstone derived from Tertiary deposits which for- merly covered the chalk. They were once widely distributed as a surface feature, particularly in some southern parts of Britain (Summerfield and Goudie 1990). For centuries sarsen stones were cleared to facilitate agriculture and for use in walling, building and as road-metal; today, they exist in substantial numbers at a few sites only. Fyfield Down is a particularly important site where it 1s estimated that as many as 25,000 survive (O’Dare 1983). Fyfield Down lies on the Marlborough Downs 3 km north of the A4 between West Kennett and Manton. Some 300 ha, including parts of Overton Down and Clatford Bottom, are designated as the Fyfield Down National Nature Reserve (NNR) and Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). Most of the sarsen stones occur in Clatford Bottom where it is believed they were transported from the surrounding slopes and interfluves by periglacial solifluction (Small, Clark and Lewin 1970). In a quadrat survey reported by Small, Clark and Lewin (1970) a maximum density of 1 sarsen/ 6m? and a minimum density of 1 sarsen/ 140m? were recorded. Of 407 sarsen stones examined as part of this survey, 77% had visible major axes within the range 30 cm—150 cm and 8 stones had major axes in excess of 210 cm. The sarsen stones at Fyfield Down are composed of angular and sub- angular grains, mainly within the range 0.5 mm—0.05 mm, of greyish and whitish quartz sand, together with a finely comminuted flint, firmly cemented by secondary silica to give an extremely durable rock (Clark, Lewin and Small 1967). Lichens may be grouped into four broad habitat categories according to the range of substrata they occupy: corticolous species grow on trees, lignicolous species grow on barkless wood, saxicolous species grow on rock and terricolous species grow on soil (Hawksworth and Rose 1976). At Fyfield Down the faces of the sarsen stones provide a substratum for saxicolous lichens whilst the fissures and pockets within the sarsen stones and their associated imma- ture soils provide a substratum for terricolous species. Lichens inhabiting these substrata may be of three different growth forms: crustose, where the lichen thallus is in intimate contact with the substratum and can barely be separated from it; foliose, where large areas of the underside of the thallus are attached to the substratum but protrudent lobes are not attached; and fruticose where the thallus is attached to the substra- tum at its base only. The relationship between lichens and the sarsen stone habitats may be considered in the context of the following theoretical framework. A species is under constant evolutionary pressure to be optimally adapted to its environment, that is, to the abiotic (physical) and biotic (biological) circumstances in which it lives. For plants in particular, abiotic factors, as determinants of the physicochemical environment, primarily determine where a species can and cannot live. This relationship is represented diagramma- ucally in Figure 1. For any species, curves of per- formance may be drawn for a given physicological process against a given physicochemical parameter. These curves, known as ‘tolerance curves’, show how the efficiency of operation of the species is a function of change in a physicochemical parameter. Note that there is a ‘preferred range’ which represents optimum physiological conditions for the species over which its numbers and/or productivity are greatest. Tolerance will change with spatial variation in the physico- chemical parameter or when disturbance, generated either within the ecosystem or as a result of human activity, affects the parameter. Variations or disturb- 129 LICHENS ON SARSEN STONES AT FYFIELD DOWN HOIH LNGSay sdIodds SONVYATIOLINI dO YNOZ FONVEATIOL dO LINIT Yaddn | | | | | (S861 (72 Ja UoslIaq]Iy puke Scg6y Wane, puke uRUING ‘Cg6] B00; puke xXoD Wo uUMPIPIY) “Aduatoyse [eotsoyorsAyd 01 aanejar lusIpess [elUsUTUOITAUA Ue SuUOTe UoNNqINsIp satoads Jo JAIND [RWION “| 21N3ty ALIAILONGOYd YO/ANV NOTLV1NdOd MO'l SSdYLs TWOIDOTOISAHd JO YNOZ (INGIGVYD TWINSWNOYIANG) STGVIYVA TVLNGWNOYITANT ONITIOYLNOO JO SNTVA ALIAILONGOYd YO/ANV NOILVINdOd LSALVAYDS JO VauV WAWILdO IWOIDOIOISAHd ALIAILONGOYd YO/aNV NOILV1NdOd MOT SSayLs WOIDOTOISKXHd | | WAWIXWW |'<———— gONVY dauyaaadd ———>! WOWINIW TWOILITYD ! | TWOILITYO dO GNOZ | | | | Se ONE VO TSOOIsie——— LNGSEV SdIogdds JONVYSTOLNI JO YNOZ JONVYATIOL Jo LIWIT YaMot MOT SH00Ud ‘TWOIDOTIOISAHd JO AONSIOIA AA NOTES 15d A Jenny Haniver from Melksham? by ISABEL IDE The custom of placating the spirits inhabiting trees, rivers and the earth itself dates from tume immemo- rial. Thus a building demanded a sacrifice to protect it from the genie of the place that might have been disturbed by the intrusion of the foundation. In earliest times this might have been a human sacrifice; later on, bones, pieces of iron, shoes or bottles filled with charms were often incorporated into the walls. We were still surprised, however, while restoring our eighteenth century barn at Rhotteridge, to find a small skeleton tucked neatly into an aperture in the wall. It was about a foot long, and the skull had the teeth of a rodent while the spine was apodal (see figure, below). It was only after I had brought it to Devizes Museum to be identified by the Natural History Curator that I discovered it to be in the form of a Jenny Haniver.! Apparently the inhabitants of Ant- werp (Anvers) were in the habit of playing practical jokes on their neighbours by manufacturing fabulous beasts combining two separate creatures. Our specimen consisted of a rat’s head attached to a small snake or slow worm’s body. The little skeleton has found its last resting place at Devizes Museum and I hope it brings them good fortune. 1. Derived from je née a Anvers. Acknowledgements. The author would like to thank Caroline Oates, of The Folklore Society, Andrew Tucker, of Devizes Museum, and Pamela Slocombe, of the Wiltshire Buildings Record, for their advice. Foundation deposit from Rhotteridge Barn, Melksham. Scale: 1:2 approx. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 156-162 Excavation and Fieldwork in Wiltshire 1990 Amesbury: Butterfield Down (SU 167412); Romano- British Excavation and observation by the TWA _ at Butterfield Down, Amesbury, have revealed part of an extensive undefended Romano-British settlement. The site covers at least 6 hectares (15 acres); geophy- sical survey techniques indicate that it may be much larger. It is laid out to a fairly organised plan with post-built fences dividing the site into sub-rectangular units. Most of the ceramic material is from the third and fourth centuries although there is some slightly earlier material which is more abraded. The large number of storage pits, ovens and driers suggests an economy dominated by grain production and storage. Almost a thousand coins have been recovered from the surface of the field, including a hoard of eight gold ones which have been dated to around AD 405, almost the latest hoard known from Roman Britain. Other metal objects include a small model of a bird, with possible religious associations. It is hoped that further work, proposed for next year, will reveal traces of substantial buildings and a more complete plan of the other settlement features. The project was undertaken by Mick Rawlings and Julian Richards throughout 1990. Amesbury: King Barrows and Luxenborough Plan- tation (SU 13454225 (centre) and SU 130414); Prehis- toric (Neolithic to Early Bronze Age) As a result of damage caused by the storms of late January and early February 1990, the TWA was commissioned by the National Trust to record the archaeological deposits revealed in tree-throw holes on barrows within the groups known as the Old and New King Barrows, and on barrows within Luxen- borough Plantation. This work was carried out during February and March 1990. Ten of the barrows exam- ined merited recording in detail: two in the Old King Barrows group (Amesbury G33 and G34), six in the New King Barrows group (Amesbury G27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32), and two in Luxenborough Plantation (Amesbury G18 and G19). These are the subject of a report, in preparation by the TWA, which will incor- porate the results of the examination of a tree-throw hole in barrow Amesbury G30 caused by the October 1987 storm and for which the National Trust also commissioned the TWA to carry out the recording. During both the 1987 and 1990 episodes of work a considerable amount of struck flint and Neolithic pottery was recovered, and samples were taken for both molluscan and pollen analysis. In all of the exposed sections it was clear that a substantial mound of soil, probably turf, was the primary feature. Although the exposures of the barrow mounds were not chosen on archaeological grounds but were the result of accident, they have provided much useful information about the construction of the barrows, and of the nature of the pre-barrow environment. The project was coordinated by Julian Richards, and supervised in the field by Alan Graham. Avebury and East Kennett: West Kennett (SU 11082); Neolithic Further research excavations by Dr Alasdair Whittle of the School of History and Archaeology, University of Wales College of Cardiff, consolidated knowledge of palisade enclosure 1, which has been under iavesti- gation since 1987, and discovered the adjacent pali- sade enclosure 2. Both appear now to date to the Late Neolithic. Following the surface evaluation in 1989 by the Trust for Wessex Archaeology in West Kennett Farm yard, a cutting in the paddock of Tan Hill House served to confirm the presence of palisade enclosure 1 north of the present Kennet. A ditch some 2 m deep contained a central row of post pipes set into basal chalk-cut sockets. Posts had originally been held by backfilled spoil and sarsen packing stones. The ques- tion remains whether there is another ditch circuit north of the present Kennet to match the pair south of the river. West of Gunsight Lane and south of the river, three cuttings confirmed the layout of both inner and outer ditches of palisade enclosure 1, following leads given by geophysical survey by UWCC and by air photographs taken by the Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England). The palisade construction was uniform, and ditch, closely spaced post pipes, basal sockets, ditch backfill and sarsen packing stones were recurrent. The outer ditch was also traced but not excavated on the southern edge of the Kennet flood plain. Palisade enclosure 1 still has to be traced in its north-west quadrant and the number of ditches north of the river is uncertain, but at present the enclosure appears to be oval or sub-circular, and at least 250 m across from south-west to north-east. A small area of interior was EXCAVATION AND FIELDWORK IN WILTSHIRE 1990 investigated within the outer ditch west of Gunsight Lane. Some finds and features were recorded, includ- ing a concentrated deposit of animal bone. Grooved Ware sherds came from both outer and inner ditches, and from the surface deposit of animal bone. There is one small possible Beaker sherd. Samples of bone are being radiocarbon dated. Following geophysical survey and air photographs by RCHM(E), palisade enclosure 2 was discovered to the south-west of enclosure 1, south of the Kennet. It consists so far of a single ditch, of perhaps near- circular layout, with a diameter of some 180 m; its full extent remains to be traced to the west. Three cuttings established its nature and date. Construction was similar to enclosure 1. In a ditch some 2 m deep there was a row of post pipes (slightly more substan- tial than in enclosure 1), marking the position of posts which had rotted or been burnt im situ. Posts had been held by backfilled spoil and by sarsen packing stones. In one cutting a slight hollow at the top of the ditch contained substantial quantities of animal bone, evi- dently dominated, as in the 1987 assemblage from enclosure 1, by pig. Geophysical survey and air photos show both inner and outer radial ditches apparently butted on to enclosure 2. It was possible to make one cutting across an outer radial ditch (leading away to the south-east and apparently ending at a sub-circular feature over 200 m away). The radial proved to be a fence or small palisade (post pipes about 1 m deep) set in an irregular bedding trench. There was much animal bone. Grooved Ware sherds were found with both the main ditch of enclosure 2 and the radial. Samples of bone are being radiocarbon dated. Further research is planned. Within enclosure 2, a double concentric feature some 40 m in diameter was found by geophysical survey and air photography. The outer circuit was excavated in one narrow cutting. It consists of closely spaced post holes, about 1 m deep, whose posts had rotted im situ. There were no diagnostic finds, but a Late Neolithic or Early Bronze Age date may be considered. Blunsdon-St-Andrew: Blunsdon House Hotel, Golf Course Development (SU 143908); Post-Medieval An evaluation, by Paul Jeffery for the Thamesdown Archaeological Unit (TAU), was conducted on a site located to the east of the A419 (Ermin Street), at the brow of Blunsdon Hill and on the north facing slope. A series of trenches was excavated, the topsoil being removed by machine and the sub-soil excavated by hand. Despite its promising location, it became apparent on investigation of the site, that a large 157 amount of earth moving and quarrying had taken place during the preceding century. No features earlier than field drains dated to the nineteenth century were located, although extant ridge and fur- row was observed to the south of the site. An unusual scarcity of artefacts, even within the disturbed top- soil, further suggested that either the site had not been occupied in the past or that there had been total destruction of any evidence by earth moving. Bradford-on-Avon: Bearfield Farm, Housing Devel- opment (ST 819615); Romano-British An evaluation of this small site, carried out by C.A. Dyer for the TAU, was hampered by the presence of early twentieth century slurry pits and associated pipe trenches, earth moving for which had led to heavy disturbance of the topsoil, with bedrock being ex- posed over parts of the site. A small amount of Romano-British pottery was recovered, but not from any stratified deposits or features. Bromham-Melksham: British Gas Pipeline, Beanacre to St Ediths Marsh (SU 901654-ST 977643); Roman, Medieval A watching brief undertaken by J. Gregory and A. Miller, for the TAU, located two areas of archaeologi- cal activity: the first at Forest Farm (ST 916655) and the second south-west of Lower Woodrow (ST 923654). At Forest Farm, previously known earthworks (SMR ST 96NW459) were exposed over a 130-metre stretch. Within this section four holloways and a possible flint wall were recorded. These features were associated with substantial amounts of ceramic sherds, dated primarily to the twelfth century, some being possibly much earlier. Paul Robinson, of Devizes Museum, identified a base fragment as coming from Naish Hill kiln, some two miles north- west of Forest Farm. A section of dry stone walling running approxi- mately 12 metres in length along the trench was exposed and recorded although use of the trenching machine led to serious disturbance of evidence of the feature’s relationship to the surrounding soils. A well of 0.9 m diameter was located; it contained a quantity of the pottery already mentioned. Further scatters of pottery were also recorded. At the second location, a concentration of stone and pottery sherds was disturbed by the pipe trench. A V-shaped cut, with surviving measurements 0.6 m wide and 0.4 m deep, was located in the trench section, 7.5 metres south-east of the stone spread. Further scatters of Romano-British pottery were re- 158 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE covered from this section of the pipeline. Another larger ditch may also have been present although a collapse of the trench section and subsequent activity by the contractors made full recording impossible. Calne: Wiltshire to Fairford (Gloucestershire) Pipeline (ST 992715 to SU 163967); Roman, Medie- val, Post-Medieval The TWA was commissioned by Norwest Holst Plc to undertake a watching brief along three sections of pipeline route defined by the Wiltshire County Archaeologist as of potential archaeological interest. The 33 km route crossed mainly lowland clay geology but isolated limestone outcrops on higher ground were encountered. A single ditch at SU 112875 was observed in plan crossing the route on a limestone outcrop to the east of Purton. Roman pottery was seen to be protruding from its upper fill. To the south the route passed close to a scheduled deserted settlhement at Lower Beversbrook Farm, Calne (SU 005732). Ridge and furrow, possibly of medieval date, was observed in the pipe trench. Another area of possible medieval ridge and furrow was noted to the south of Fairford (SU 152952). The remains of the foundations of a post- medieval barn were recorded to the east of Cricklade (SU 132928). The fieldwork was supervised by I. Barnes and managed by R. Newman. The archive and artefacts have been deposited at Devizes Museum. Castle Combe: Castle (around SU 839779); Medieval A survey of the castle was made by Chippenham College Practical Course students, principally in order to examine the condition of the monument which has recently been sold as part of an estate to be developed as a golf course. The castle has suffered considerable damage from roots having been torn out in the exceptional gales of the last two years. The oppor- tunity was taken to check the accuracy of the large- scale OS map compiled at the end of the last century: most of the features shown were confirmed, including the presence of building foundations in the various baileys. A surprising number of walls were found to be extant around the motte and inner bailey, suggest- ing that a large amount of money was spent on the castle’s construction during the civil war of the early twelfth century. The question arises whether it had been simply an adulterine castle. Cherhill: Oldbury Hillfort (around SU 049693); Pre- historic, Romano-British, Medieval, Post-Medieval A final season of fieldwalking around Oldbury Hillfort was undertaken by students on the Chippenham College Practical Course. All available fields have now been examined in two successive autumn seasons. The finds fall into two major groups: flint and pottery. The flintwork is mainly Mesolithic, including a signi- ficant collection gathered from a small sheltered hol- low to the north of the hillfort. The pottery was found in spreads of sherds of Romano-British, Medieval and Post-Medieval date. Analysis of earlier sherds, which appear to be of Bronze/Iron Age, is awaited. Devizes: New Park Street (SU 006615); Late Medieval In May and June 1990 the Field Archaeology Unit, Insutute of Archaeology, University of London, con- ducted an excavation in New Park Street, Devizes. The work was commissioned by Wiltshire County Council in advance of road improvements. Modern disturbance of the site was considerable and part of a garage forecourt had removed an area of the earlier street frontage. Despite this, the substan- tial chalk foundations of a presumably late Medieval town house were uncovered. These footings had been modified in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries by the addition of brick built walls and drainage gulleys. A number of late Medieval features, includ- ing a chalk lined well, were excavated. Behind the site of the Medieval house many post Medieval features were encountered, including a seventeenth century ice house. Chilmark: Eyewell Farm (ST 97103125); Romano- British Eyewell Farm is located on Upper Greensand at 350 m O.D., at the base of an east-facing slope, on the edge of a gravel terrace overlooking a small stream. During the excavation of foundation trenches for a new bungalow, several human burials were exposed. English Heritage provided a grant to carry out salvage recording and to remove the burials. This work was managed by S. Lobb and conducted in the field by D. Bonner, for the TWA, during December 1990. Three cist burials, one of which was a young infant, were located in a row, aligned east-west. The recovery of pairs of iron nails suggested that the two adults had been placed in wooden coffins. A further inhumation burial which was clearly earlier than the others had been disturbed by them. None of the burials con- tained grave goods. A shallow stone coffin which did not contain a burial was also exposed along the same alignment. Adjacent, to the south, and aligned in the same EXCAVATION AND FIELDWORK IN WILTSHIRE 1990 direction as the graves was a loosely constructed level of rubble, including some horizontal stone slabs, within a shallow rectangular depression. This feature cut a fourth cist burial, part of the contents of which were recovered from the rubble layer. Another feature of similar dimensions to the other graves was almost entirely removed by the depression, and this feature may represent a further cist burial. A little upslope, to the south-west of the burials, was a large pit-like feature that had been partly removed by machine. Its full extent was not visible in the cleared area because it was filled with, and covered by, loose stone rubble. The feature was wide at the top and became narrow towards the centre, where large mortared stone slabs lined the sides of a verucally-sided channel, the base of which was filled with a thin layer of charcoal and ash. This feature may represent an oven or corn-drier. In addition, several ditches and pits, all containing domestic material, were visible in the foundation trenches to the north of the graves. All the features at the site were sealed by a soil containing Romano- British material, which deepened considerably to- wards the south-east and had probably accumulated as a result of ploughing and movement of soil downslope. Slight earthworks visible in the fields around the site were surveyed and planned by the Royal Commission on _ Historial Monuments (England). It is proposed to carry out a geophysical survey in the area. Codford—Chitterne: Pipeline (SU 979427 and SU 986440) During December 1990, watching briefs were under- taken at two separate locations along the course of this 5.2 km long water pipeline. At SU 979427 the route passed within 100 m of a small cluster of scheduled Bronze Age round barrows and at SU 986440 it appeared to bisect a series of parallel crop marks. No archaeological features or deposits were noted at either location. The work was financed by Wessex Water and carried out by Phil Harding for the TWA. Codford to Heytesbury: A36 road improvement (ST 958404 to ST 933427); Bronze Age, Medieval and Post-Medieval The TWA was commissioned by Wiltshire County Council to carry out an archaeological evaluation of the 3.4 km proposed A36 road improvement between Codford and Heytesbury. The route ran along the River Wylye valley at the foot of the southern edge of Salisbury Plain, occasionally rising up the valley side to avoid sensitive areas. The evaluation constituted a 159 combination of hand dug test pits, machine trenches, fieldwalking, earthwork survey and geophysical pros- pection. In addition, a watching brief was maintained during the Council’s excavation of geotechnic pits. The topographic zone at the base of Salisbury Plain has considerable palaeo-environmental potential. Consequently three machine trenches were excavated to investigate suspected colluvial deposits. One of these trenches, at Knook Horse Hill West (ST 939418), produced a colluvial sequence, 1.00 m thick, rich in mollusc remains and which could be firmly dated on artefactual evidence to the Bronze Age. Mollusc analysis showed a variation of land use through the sequence. Another trench, at Well Bottom (ST 953407), produced a colluvial sequence at least 3.60 m thick. The route ran through the known site of a deserted shrunken settlement at Knook (ST 940419), visible as a series of earthwork platforms and holloways. The main earthworks had been surveyed by the Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England) but further earthworks were found to the north-east and subsequently surveyed. Pottery from test pits over and around the earthworks dated the settlement to between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries AD. A full report on this work has been prepared. A series of post-medieval ditches was found in a machine trench located in the park surrounding Hey- tesbury House (ST 934425). Their location and date implied that they were originally garden features. The fieldwork was supervised by I. Barnes and P. Harding and managed by R. Newman. Codford—Heytesbury: Pipeline (ST 95360 40050 to ST 92720 44710); Romano-British, Medieval, Post- Medieval A full watching-brief was carried out by the TWA during construction of a feeder main between Codford pumping station and the pumping station at West Hill Farm, Heytesbury, during September and October 1990. The route was 5.9 km long and ran for the most part along the northern edge of the Wylye valley. Ten features were observed in the trench sections and recorded; of these six produced no finds and were probably field boundaries and associated features. Finds were retrieved from a ditch only, located at ST 92785 44460, which contained a large quantity of animal bone and Romano-British pottery. The other three features observed were a pit, a ditch and a large hollow, all in the same field and probably associated with the Romano-British ditch. A small excavation, the subject of a separate short report in preparation, was carried out at the village of 160 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Knook prior to construction. Some features of medie- val and post-medieval date were noted. All work on this project was financed by Wessex Water Plc. Cricklade: (SU 098938); Medieval The excavation of a section across the outer face of part of the south-west portion of the Cricklade burgh- al defences was undertaken in advance of a proposed extension to the borough cemetery. Since this part of the defences is a Scheduled Ancient Monument (County Monument No. 323), English Heritage re- quested and financed an evaluation conducted by the TWA. The approximate line of the defences was visible as a low-spread bank along the east side of the cemetery. The area had been subjected to a number of previous investigations in the 1950s, ’60s and ’70s_ by Knocker,! Wainwright and Haslam.* The new trench, 36 m long by 2 m wide, was excavated in one of the few areas not previously investigated. The results were broadly consistent with the previous observations of Knocker et a/. A robbed section of the external face of a stone wall was recorded. There was no evidence to suggest that there was a ditch on the west side of the wall within the length of the exca- vation trench, or that there had ever been significant occupation outside the town in this vicinity. The work was directed in the field by Phil Harding and managed by Richard Newman. 1. C.A.R. Radford, ‘Excavations at Cricklade 1948-1963’, WAM 67, (1972), 61-111. 2. F.T. Wainwright, ‘The Cricklade Excavations of 1953-54’, WAM 56 (1955), 162-66. 3. J. Haslam, Anglo-Saxon Towns in Southern England (Chichester, 1984), 106-110. Erlestoke: Erlestoke Sands Golf Course (ST 958538); Prehistoric/Romano-British At the request of the landowner, Mr Hampton, a limited evaluation was carried out by P. Jeffery and C. Dyer for the TAU by means of trenches on proposed bunker sites. A number of trenches yielded disturbed Romano-British pottery from the topsoil, while Trench 16 revealed evidence of five pits containing early Iron Age pottery, overlaid by a single inhu- mation burial of Iron Age date. Subsequent work on the site, including fieldwalking, has revealed a con- centration of late Bronze Age material which is cur- rently being studied. Latton: Bypass (SU 074972-ST 095952); Prehistoric, Roman, Medieval, Post Medieval An archaeological evaluation along the proposed routes of the Latton and Cirencester bypasses was undertaken by the Cotswold Archaeological Trust, the TAU providing a field team for the project within Wiltshire. Finds of various periods were obtained by field walking. Exploratory trenching on the site of a Romano-British settlement to the west of Latton exposed a number of ditch features. Market Lavington: Grove Farm (SU 013543); Bronze Age, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Medieval Subsequent to the identification of Roman and Anglo- Saxon remains during construction work by Walter Lawrence Homes (Wessex) Ltd, English Heritage grant-funded an assessment followed by excavation. The work was carried out by the Trust for Wessex Archaeology, directed in the field by Phil Williams and managed by Dr Richard Newman. The exca- vation, which was located immediately north-west of the medieval church, led to the identification of an early Saxon settlement, a closely associated inhu- mation cemetery and major boundary feature which had survived as a substantial earthwork. In addition, Roman, Middle Saxon, Late Saxon and early medie- val structural and occupation remains were identified, together with more residual Bronze Age material. There is sufficient evidence to suggest a continuity of occupation within or in close proximity to the excavated areas from the late Roman period untl the establishment of the medieval planned town in 1248. A full post-excavation programme is planned for 1991 with publication in 1992. Ramsbury: Littlecote Estate (SU 302700); Late Neo- lithic, Roman, Post-Medieval The TWA was commissioned by Mr Peter de Savary to undertake an archaeological evaluation in advance of a planning application for a leisure development within Littlecote Park. The estate is situated on the north-facing side of the River Kennet valley and slopes steeply from south to north before levelling out on the valley floor. A Roman villa in the north-west corner of the estate, by the River Kennet, has been extensively excavated by the Roman Research Trust. The strategy for the fieldwork was devised by the Cotswold Archaeological Trust in conjunction with Wiltshire County Council and comprised hand trial pits, machine trenches, fieldwalking and augering. Fieldwalking resulted in the identification of a cluster of late Neolithic worked flint artefacts. This cluster (SU 303694), 250 m in diameter, was situated at the top of the valley side in the south-east corner of the estate. Hand and machine trenches over the cluster produced more worked flint but failed to EXCAVATION AND FIELDWORK IN WILTSHIRE 1990 locate any features. It was therefore concluded, given the area’s thin topsoil, that any associated features must have been destroyed by ploughing. A single ditch, datable to the Roman period, was excavated on the valley floor and probably represents a component of a fieldsystem. No other Romano- British activity was identified. Some areas of post-medieval activity were recog- nised which may be related to known events in the estate’s history. The fieldwork was supervised by I. Barnes and managed by R. Newman. Salisbury: Harvard Hospital (SU 139281); Prehistoric In September 1990 the TWA was commissioned by Wessex Regional Health Authority to undertake an archaeological evaluation of the grounds of the hospital. The existing hospital buildings, together with access roads and areas of modern landscaping, curtailed the area that could be profitably assessed. The ground works were accordingly located in the remaining open areas appar- ently free of recent disturbance. Three forms of work were undertaken. A geophy- sical survey using a magnetometer covered 0.4 hec- tares, split into two areas. This was supplemented by eight hand-dug test pits within the two areas. In addition, three machine-dug trenches, each 2 m wide and 25 m long, were positioned in areas not covered by the geophysical survey. Turf and topsoil were found to be on average only 0.30 m deep above bedrock chalk. Modern debris and disturbance were encountered in all three exercises. One feature of archaeological significance was found: a ditch 1 m wide and 0.65 m deep which contained substantial deposits of worked flint, probably primary working debris. The ditch showed a slight arc and is thought to be part of a ring ditch. The feature was in the south of the assessment area, only 30 m to the west of a ring-ditch found in an adjacent field by magne- tometer survey. Both features are less than 300 m away from the Scheduled Ancient Monument of Great Woodbury, a univallate hillfort of Iron Age date. The work was directed in the field by Dave Farwell and managed by Richard Newman. Sherston: Villa (SU 850863); Romano-British The Thamesdown Archaeological Society, under the directorship of Chris Chandler, completed its exca- vation of a Romano-British villa at Sherston early in the year. The main building was originally a simple two roomed house, one part living quarters one part byre, c. AD 350. 161 The first major alteration was the addition of a corridor against the west wall, and the conversion of the byre to living quarters by laying a floor of ‘opus signinum’. The third phase consisted of the corridor being made into three additional rooms, one of which was used for boneworking, up to 18 roughed out to complete bone pins being found. In the latest phase, c: AD 370, part of the west wall was demolished and an access, paved with sandstone roof tiles, was made into what had been the original byre. The villa went into natural decay from the 370s and a dry stone room was constructed among the rubble. Immediately outside this room were three bodies, a male adult of c. 25 years of age and another male of c. 35 years with a child lying across his left side and chest. There were no obvious signs of violent death. Although the period is within the ‘grand conspi- racy’ date range, the collapse of the monetary economy and endemic disease may explain the demise of this particular villa. Swindon: Hesketh Play Area (SU 155831) A watching brief, by J. Gregory and A. Miller for the TAU, conducted during earth moving by Thames- down Borough Council, revealed that the site was made up primarily of modern deposits and that the present development did not disturb any archaeologi- cally significant material. Westbury: Angel Mill (ST 873513); Medieval Evaluation work, carried out by P. Jeffery for the TAU, by means of three trenches in this location revealed that much of the site had been disturbed by the Mill buildings, operating until well into this century. The area immediately north of Church Street, however, revealed a series of former water courses, now re-routed, which contained waterlogged deposits dating from at least the thirteenth century. A number of wooden features in a former stream chan- nel were associated with medieval pottery and other artefacts. A later stone-edged mill leat and cess pit were also encountered, both remarkably well pre- served. The overall impression is that although much of the site has been heavily disturbed, there is good survival of archaeological deposits adjacent to Church Street and where deposits are deeply buried within former water courses. Wootton Bassett: Priory Cottage (SU 065825); Medi- eval, Post Medieval A small scale evaluation excavation carried out by C. 162 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Dyer, for the TAU, within the grounds of Priory Cottage was undertaken to determine the impact of a proposed private garage scheme. The site was raised above the level of adjacent land to the east and west by what turned out to be a depth of over a metre of imported dark soil. This soil contained post medieval material, including clay pipe. A number of post-hole features and a possible rough stone foundation were located in one area, together with several sherds of thirteenth century pottery. No other evidence of major structures was present. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 163-172 Two Early Plans of Avebury a review article by AUBREY BURL Peter J. Ucko, Michael Hunter, Alan J. Clark and Andrew David. Avebury Reconsidered. From the 1660s to the 1990s. Unwin Hyman, London, 1991; xiv + 293 pages with plans, diagrams and photo- graphs. £60.00. ISBN 0 04 445919 X. (Published on behalf of the Institute of Archaeology, University College, London.) Many things are well worthy our Knowledge, that cannot yet deserve our Belief, and even Fictions sometimes have accidentally given light to long obscured verities. Walter Charleton (Chorea Gigantum, 1663, 14) INTRODUCTION The rediscovery in 1988 of two early but little-known plans of Avebury resulted in the publication of this book. The plans, by the seventeenth century antiquarians John Aubrey and Walter Charleton, are in the library of the Royal Society. They contain features unknown today and this stimulated a team of four researchers: Professor Peter Ucko, of the Department of Archaeo- logy, Southampton University; Dr Michael Hunter, historian and author of the highly-acclaimed John Aubrey and the Realm of Learning (1975); Mr Alan Clark, Deputy Librarian of the Royal Society; and Mr Andrew David, a Senior Scientific Officer at the Ancient Monuments Laboratory of English Heritage, to institute an academic and geophysical investigation to establish what it was that Aubrey and Charleton had seen. The conclusions are controversial. For anyone interested in the history of Avebury and its fieldworkers this book is worth every penny of its appalling price. It provides invaluable comparanda of details from the two plans, augmenting these by examination of later records by Aubrey and by Wil- liam Stukeley. The text is readable and informative, the illustrations are plentiful and as well produced as their condition permits. The typescript and binding are good. The index is comprehensive. An accom- panying folder contains a series of transparencies drawn to a common scale for use as comparative overlays. For Avebury enthusiasts the publication is an indispensable reference source. The scholarship is impeccable even in minor mat- ters. As an example, Charleton, physician to Charles II, Fellow of the Royal Society and author of Chorea Gigantum (1663), a work arguing that Stonehenge was a Danish monument, is usually said to have been born in 1619 (DNB 1975, 354; Aubrey 1665-93, II, 1109). His date of birth was, in fact, 2 February 1620, the confusion being caused by the seventeenth century custom of ending the year not on 31 December but on the following 25 March so that 2 February 1619/20 then would be 2 February 1620 today. And it is 1620 that is cited on page 3 et seq. in Avebury Reconsidered. Such scrupulous accuracy makes the book commen- dable. It is too long, occasionally repetitive, but excellent in its examination of the historical origins of the plans, and in its account of the geophysical surveys. There is a final philosophical section on the treatment of ancient monuments. The nub of the book, however, is the problem of how informative the two plans are and it is this that forms the essence of this review. Any reservations that this reviewer has are concerned not with the factual data but with the interpretations inferred from the plans. It must be added that the book contains many smug references to the shortcomings of colleagues: Atkin- son (p. 250); Crawford (p. 242); Jope (p. 180) Isobel Smith (p. 181); and Whittle (p. 243). Some shots in the dark were also aimed, erratically, at this reviewer. But it was offensive to describe part of Caroline Malone’s Avebury (1989) as ‘a garbled and misleading account’ (p. 7), and it is inexplicable why anyone deemed it necessary to add (p. 240) ‘it is hard to avoid the suspicion that she adopts this negative approach largely as an excuse for not going into the matter in the detail it deserves’. As the minor but uncomplacent poet Everett wrote: Don’t view me with a critic’s eye, But pass my imperfections by. It is regrettable that whoever wrote this part of such a scholarly book should have preferred discourtesy to discretion. 164 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE BACKGROUND The origins of the plans by Aubrey and Charleton (Figures 1 and 2 of this review) have been recon- structed (Ucko et al. 1991, 10-29), and to this details can be added. One morning in 1663 Charles II was discussing Avebury with Lord Brounckner, his Navy Commis- sioner, and Walter Charleton, his physician-in- ordinary. All belonged to the newly-formed Royal Society, the King its first patron, Brounckner its first President, and Charleton one of its first Fellows. Brounckner and Charleton told the King that John Aubrey, a Fellow elected only a few months before, claimed that Avebury ‘did as much excell Stoneheng, as a Cathedral does a Parish church’ (Aubrey 1665— 933. 1,.21): Intrigued by this the King, who had spent a day in 1651 counting the stones at Stonehenge, ordered Aubrey to be brought to him. Aubrey remembered the occasion. His Ma"“* admired that none of our Chorogra- phers had taken notice of it [Avebury]: and commanded Dr. Charlton [sic] to bring me to him the next morning. I brought with me a draught of it donne by memorie only: but well enough resembling it with w‘? his Ma"® was pleased: gave me his hand to kisse, and comman- ded me to waite on him at Marleborough when he went to Bath with the Queen (w‘" was about a fortnight after) w°" I did, and the next day, when the Court were on their Journey, his Ma" left the Queen and diverted to Aubury, where I shewed him that stupendious Antiquity. (Aubrey 1665— 933.1, 21) In September following I survey’d that old Monument of Aubury with a plain-table [Figure 3 of this review] and afterwards tooke a Review of Stonehenge. ([bid., 22) It is the difference between that careful, on-site survey which quite accurately reproduces what can still be seen today, and the controversial details in the two earlier ‘plans’ that leaves one sceptical about their trustworthiness. It is uncertain when John Aubrey was introduced to the King. In his diary Pepys (1663, 272) recorded that Charles IJ returned to London from Royal Tunbridge Wells on Tuesday, 11 August 1663, intending to stay for a day or two before going back to fetch the Queen who had not enjoyed the cold spa waters that were hoped to cure her sterility (Lennard 1931, 47). Then, on 26 August, ‘the King and the Court going out this day toward the Bath’ (Pepys 1663, 288), the wagons and horses of the royal entourage left London in the miserable weather of that summer for the warmer springs of the Somerset spa. There is a hint that Aubrey was summoned to the King on 13 August. On Wednesday 12 August the Royal Society minutes read, ‘The President [Brouck- ner] and his Deputy being both absent this day, there was no meeting of the Society’ (Roy. Soc. Lib 2, fol. 193, 211) and it may have been then that Brouckner and Charleton had their conversation with the King, Aubrey attending Court next day. This date would fit well with Aubrey’s ‘about a fortnight after’ for meet- ing the King in Marlborough at the end of August, and then making his plane-table survey of Avebury the following month. Charleton and Aubrey had already displayed plans of Avebury to the Royal Society. On Wednesday 8 July, 1663, when it rained all day ‘and so did every minute of the day after’ (Pepys 1663, 220), the minutes of the Royal Society state only that Dr. Charleton presented the Company with the Plan of the stone-Antiquity at Avebury neer Marleburgh in Wiltshire [Figure 2]: suggesting it were worth while, to dig there under a certain Triangular Stone, where he conceived would be found a Monument of some Danish King. Colonel Long and Mr. Awbrey were desired to make further inquiry into the same (Roy. Soc. Lib 2, fol. 168, 197). There is no mention of Aubrey’s plan (Figure 1) but at the top of it, in the same hand as on Charleton’s, is written ‘By Mr Awbrey, July 8, 1663’. It shows that Charleton’s plan was in existence at the tme of his conversation with the King, perhaps drawn as early as 1658 (Ucko et al. 1991, 15). A later date, however, is more likely as the Avebury circles are not mentioned in his Chorea Gigantum of 1663. As well as its excellent scholarly historical research, in its ‘reconsiderations’ Avebury Reconsidered gives credence to several uncorroborated features in the plans. Because of these novelties it is essential to determine how reliable the drafts are. THE PLANS Both are grossly inaccurate. They are obviously sche- matic and not based on methodical field-surveys. Neither has a scale. Both show the earthwork and the rings as precise circles whereas, only shortly after, Aubrey was writing of the ‘old misshapen Monument TWO EARLY PLANS OF AVEBURY of Aubury’, its irregular rings ‘not unlike Ariadne’s Crowne’ [a broken ring of stars, the Corona Borealis] ‘and no neerer to a perfect circle than is that Constell- ation’ (Aubrey 1665-93, I, 33, 36). Both plans show pairs of portal stones outside the entrances but have no sign of the Kennet and Beckhampton avenues even though there was marginal space for the beginnings of both on each plan. The plans are incompatibly dissimilar. Aubrey’s, in pencil (Figure 1), shows four concentric rings of stones, drawn semi-isometrically as they might have appeared to someone standing near the centre of the site. The North Circle Cove, marked ‘A’, is drawn in a similar manner, and there 1s a second sketch of it in the top lefthand corner. There are pairs of standing stones outside the NNW, ENE and SSE entrances and a pair of stones inside the NNW entrance. Charleton’s plan (Figure 2), in ink, more carefully drafted and obviously not drawn on site but from notes or memory later, differs. There are pairs of stones outside all four entrances. Within the great Outer Circle only the southern of the two inner circles is shown with a huge standing stone at its centre. In the north-east quadrant of the earthwork there is a he ma N Ss 165 curious setting of three megaliths standing like the backsights and foresight of a rifle. Two are in line on an east-west axis with a gap between them. Behind that is the third stone also on an east-west axis. What may be a fourth stone lies inside the group, its base against the back stone, its triangular tip in the space between the two at the front. This disposition is completely different from the arrangement of the two surviving Cove sarsens and reveals how undependable Charleton’s plan is. The only comparable setting known to the writer is the cove inside the Stenness circle-henge in the Orkneys (Burl, 1988, 16) and one cannot believe that Charleton had seen that and absent-mindedly confused it with the Avebury Cove. Despite the differences in the plans they do have features in common which, if correct, must modify current ideas. Acceptance of the four stones shown at the entrances, the absence of the Beckhampton avenue, the fourth stone in the Cove, all require revision of the belief that there was a huge stone circle at Avebury within which there were two smaller circles, that originally there had been two avenues, Kennet and Beckhampton, the latter now almost Figure 1. John Aubrey’s Royal Society Plan of July 1663. Reproduced by kind permission of the Royal Society 166 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE x + SS i mig Fa 2 Fs s 4 z he Geet hi the He J fenscbdiaath : b F i 4 £ a * 3 re t peed § ' Sy hss nit ¢ f & F * - LS i =e & ¢ SAN = a A q (5 i 2 a , KA a 3 . oe att : Y See Seer men b gr 4 MANES a : 4 a \s f si The Lis 6 x - f J t “a8 Sy me f . f r ra of vy So = 3s é H j leag af fi j : : é ee Ea Figure 2. Walter Charleton’s Royal Society plan of July 1663 entirely removed, and that there had been two three- sided, unroofed coves, one inside the North Circle, the other near the western end of the Beckhampton Avenue, the ‘Devil’s Quoits’ which Aubrey, years later, forgetfully wrote was ‘neer Kynnet? (Aubrey 1665-93, II, 823; Burl 1988, 4, 14). CREDIBILITY Given the idiosyncrasies in these early plans the quality of Aubrey’s and Charleton’s fieldwork must be assessed in this review because it is rather glossed over in the book. It is very unlikely that either man comprehended what Avebury actually looked like. Although Aubrey had known it since 1649 his remini- scence that with Colonel James Long he was ‘wont to spend a week or two every Autumne at Aubury in Hawking. . . our Sport was very good’ added to his happy recollection of attractive ‘Nut-brown Shepher- desses’ (Aubrey 1665-93, I, 20) does not suggest any commitment to single-minded fieldwork though it was presumably because of those autumnal excursions that the Royal Society asked Aubrey and Long to make further study of Avebury. yer vis ¢ fas loom eh Po? “ey a by x my » » a 4 2 Be . Reproduced by kind permission of the Royal Society Between 1659 and 1663 Aubrey had been collecting historical material (Hunter, M., 1975, 149) but any megalithic research had been more that of a dilettante than a serious researcher. He had become engaged and disengaged, entangled in lawsuits, suffered three riding accidents, almost killed himself in Ely Cathed- ral, started on the collection of data for a history of North Wiltshire, visited Ireland, nearly being drow- ned on the return voyage, and, between these events, enjoyed himself as a man about town (Powell 1988, 79-110; Dick 1949, xliv—li). Time -and attitude for fieldwork before 1663 must have been limited. Charleton’s credentials were worse. Although be- tween 1650 and 1660 he published ten books his knowledge and archaeological understanding of pre- historic sites were so imperfect and his adherence to traditions about their origins so fixed that he accepted that the Stiperstones, a weathered litter of quartzite boulders on the crags of a Shropshire ridge, “consist- ing of great piles of stones ... [were] set up to perpetuate the renown of a fatal defeat given to the Britans by Harald’, his source for this geological nonsense being the twelfth century monkish chron- icler, Giraldus Cambrensis (Charleton 1663, 47). Such TWO EARLY PLANS OF AVEBURY reliance on literary balderdash was very different from Aubrey’s later realisation that ‘having often been led out of the way . . . by Bookes. . . I was for relying on my own eie-sight’ (Aubrey 1659-70, 316-17). Charleton’s book about Stonehenge proves his gullibility. Through correspondence with Ole Worm, the distinguished Danish antiquarian, he convinced himself that megalithic monuments in Denmark were similar to Stonehenge. These ‘Antique Monuments hath so near a resemblance of Stone-heng’ (Charleton 1663, 37) that the great sarsen ring must have been built as a coronation court by Danish invaders during the early years of Alfred the Great. It was book- learning without the inconvenience of fieldwork. It seems, moreover, that as late as 1662 Charleton still had not appreciated that the stones glimpsed between the cottages in Avebury were the handiwork of ancient people. Knowing his credulity about the Stiperstones as a manmade memorial it is quite likely that he did not doubt what was written in Britain about the great stones at Avebury’s entrances ‘so rude Dies Ae he : ET PCY Oho ~*~ an ‘gee fy Ay dete Fem * ‘ < N N \ - gm Sport, te M part Genie 1 perf oe port ~ “Go percded. n / 167 that they seeme rather naturall than artificial’ (Cam- den 1610, 255; Ucko et al., 9). In his Chorea Gigantum, written to deny Inigo Jones’ assertion in his book about Stonehenge that only skilled engineers such as the Romans could have erected those enormous sarsens (Jones 1655, 66), Charleton pointed to the ‘vast stones’ of the Rollright Stones circle (Charleton 1663, 31), the ‘great stones’ of the three rings of the Hurlers on Bodmin Moor (ibid. 46) and the ‘huge stones’ of Boscawen-Un in Cornwall (ibid. 50), learning of them from Camden (1610). Yet none had uprights a tenth the bulk of Avebury’s enormous blocks. Charleton would surely have used Avebury to buttress his argument had he realised its rings were the work of men. The dedication of his book to Charles II was dated 27 August, 1662, and the volume went to the printer on 1] September that year (Charleton 1663, 8, iv). At either stage he could have inserted a reference to the colossal size of the Avebury sarsens. That he did not do so suggests that he had not recognised the stone a y, Par” det witgen Figure 3. John Aubrey’s September 1663 plane table survey of Avebury. Reproduced by kind permission of the Bodleian Library (MS. Top. Gen. c.24, fols. 39v-40) 168 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE circles. He had seen great stones ‘left in Vallies’ on the Marlborough Downs near Rockley and ‘Aibury’ (Charleton 1663, 58), a wild profusion of sarsens delightfully described by Aubrey (1656-91, 44), ‘This tract of land looks as if it had been the scene where the giants had fought with huge stones against the Gods’, but these were glacial streams, not the circle-stones. Charleton’s silence is significant but explicable. It may be that shortly before the publication of his book he was extolling the splendours of Stonehenge to John Aubrey only for the latter to reply that Avebury was even grander. If this supposition is correct then Charleton would have had little time to revisit Avebury before July 1663, perhaps between 18 Feb- ruary and 20 May of that year (Ucko et al. 1991, 17), and this would account for the shortcomings of his plan. Both Aubrey’s and Charleton’s plans, neither of them drawn on site, were combinations of careless observation, faulty recollection and preconceived ideas about stone circles, over-influenced by the unusual features of Stonehenge. Their inaccuracies were compounded by the obscurity of Avebury itself. THE REMOTENESS OF AVEBURY It is difficult today to appreciate how out of the way Avebury was in the seventeenth century. Like Lock- eridge and East Kennett and any other hamlet a mile or so from the main road, it was a backwater. It was not on the well-used highway. The majority of wagons and travellers went directly west from Marlborough on the ‘Rode from Marlborough to Bristoll’ (Aubrey 1665-93, I, 49) towards Overton Hill, by-passing Avebury. This route alongside the River Kennet avoided the steep descent into Avebury from the upper downs. Aubrey’s good, plane-tabled plan of September, 1663 (Figure 3), distinguished the difference between the two approaches, the road by the river being the ‘high-way’, the other track merely the ‘way’, a rougher journey past Rockley with its sarsens and the littered valley of the Grey Wethers. Early writers attest to the isolation of the village. In the mid-sixteenth century John Leland wrote of ‘Selbir. Hill Botom, where by hath be Camps and Sepultures of Men of Warre, as at Aibiri a Myle of (Leland 1769, VII (2), 85). A century later Pepys, when he visited Avebury on Monday 15 June 1668, did not leave the earthwork eastwards along the more direct track on his way to Marlborough but went to the main road, passing the Sanctuary stone circles. ‘Took coach again, seeing one place with great high stones pitched round’ (Pepys 1668, 240-1) a passage indicating that he had travelled southwards from Avebury towards Overton Hill. John Aubrey himself wrote of how Charles II ‘left the Queen and diverted [my italics] to Aubury’, riding up the Kennet Avenue to his first sight of the enclosure and its sarsen rings. Avebury Reconsidered understates Avebury’s isola- tion (Ucko et al., 1991, 172-3) and its confusion of hedges, lanes and buildings. The earthwork and circles were so off the beaten track, so encumbered by ‘crosse streetes, Houses, Gardens, orchards and severall small Closes’ (Aubrey 1665-93, I, 39), that these difficulties explain the many errors in Aubrey’s and Charleton’s plans. They are quite unlike Aubrey’s second draft, made only a few weeks later but done on the spot with surveying equipment. THE GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS AND MEGALITHIC ANOMALIES Because of the questionable existence of features such as external portal stones, the Beckhampton Avenue, and of a fourth stone in the Avebury North Circle Cove geophysical surveys were made over large areas of Avebury. But the nature of the ground, unfavour- able soil conditions and the difficulties of detecting the slight remnants of stoneholes after centuries of ploughing rendered the results inconclusive. (a) Portal Stones Charleton’s plan shows a pair of stones standing outside each of Avebury’s four entrances. Aubrey’s of July has similar portals at north, east and south. Despite this ‘evidence’ no indication of any external stone was recorded in geo-physical investigations outside the east and south entrances (Ucko et al. 1991, 183-6). The most probable explanation for these imaginary portals is not suggested in the book. Today only the SSE entrance has ‘stones beyond it where the Kennet Avenue begins. Aubrey’s Septem- ber, 1663 plane-table survey (Figure 3), shows this avenue but no portals. Internally there were great stones standing inside the NNW and SSE entrances, with a large fallen sarsen at the ENE. This had already been confirmed earlier. ‘Aiburie . . . hath four gappes as gates, in two of the which stand huge Stones as jambes . . .” (Camden 1610, 255), referring to the colossal sarsens of the Swindon Stone and its partner, and the Devil’s Chair and its companion at the NNW and SSE entrances respectively. An equally massive, prostrate sarsen lay, as it does now, inside the ENE entrance. | | | TWO EARLY PLANS OF AVEBURY It must be asked why Charleton and Aubrey drew in non-existent portal stones. The likely solution is that both had read what Inigo Jones had written about Stonehenge. In his ‘reconstruction’ of that circle Jones stated that ‘on the outside of the Trench aforesaid, [stand] two huge stones gate-wise, parallel whereunto, on the inside two others of less propor- tion’ (Jones 1655, 55), basing this on the presence of four pillars at the north-east entrance. It seems that Aubrey and Charleton, over-trusting literary sources and misled by the atypical architec- ture of Stonehenge, decided comparable settings must have existed at Avebury, especially as towering pairs sull stood inside two entrances. With such internal ‘gateways’ it was tempting to imagine that they were the remains of megalithic portals that once had framed all four entrances to Avebury. It was tempting but unscholarly. Both Aubrey and Charleton knew there were no portals outside the entrances to Avebury. (b) The Avenues Why neither of the early plans showed the Kennet Avenue is a mystery. Both men must have seen it. Curiously, Avebury Reconsidered repeats the megali- thic myth (Ucko et al. 1991, 8) that a charter of AD 939 probably referred to this avenue. The supposition was disproved over fifty years ago (Brentnall 1938). The omission of the Beckhampton Avenue from the plans is simpler to explain. It was not unul 1722 that Stukeley recognised it. ‘Two stones lie by the parsonage-gate . . . Reuben Horsal remembers three stones standing in the pasture’ (Stukeley 1743, 34). Others had been broken up in 1702 and 1714. Origin- ally the avenue had extended from Avebury’s western entrance but by the seventeenth century it was virtually unrecognisable. From medieval times vil- lagers had been toppling its convenient stones for their cottages and-only in the countryside, at the Longstones a mile WSW, did a few remain erect. ‘The Houses are built of the Frustrum’s of those huge Stones’ (Aubrey 1665-93, I, 38). Geo-physical examination in January, 1989, of the avenue’s course failed to produce incontrovertible proof of stoneholes but this may have been due to the unresponsive nature of the ground (Ucko et al. 1991, 196-9). What is unappreciated in Avebury Recon- sidered is that there is impartial support for Stukeley’s belief in the avenue. The Revd Thomas Twining, vicar of Wilsford and Charlton eight miles south of Avebury, a contem- porary of, but probable stranger to, Stukeley (Long 1858, 60), made several visits to Avebury in the early 169 1700s to prove it was Roman. Like Stukeley he also had seen the stones (Twining 1723, 15): ‘Hence the large Stones to the West. The Remains of the Discus [part of the avenue] are still called the Devil’s Quoits . . as other Stones lying in the same field do show’ [my italics]. This statement owed nothing to Stukeley. Stukeley himself was hard-headed enough to con- firm his ideas by questioning villagers about missing stones, ‘Richard Fowler shew’d me the ground here, whence he took several stones and demolish’d them’; and ‘Mr. Alexander told me he remember’d several stones standing by the parting of the roads under Bekamton, demolish’d by Richard Fowler’ (Stukeley 1743, 36). As other stones have been found in recent years (Vatcher 1976, 38) the former existence of a long, sarsen-lined avenue leading to Avebury from the west is probable. It is argued (Ucko et al. 1991, 199) that Stukeley uncritically accepted natural sarsens as toppled avenue stones because of his theory that the avenue formed the tail of a sacred ‘serpent’ of which the Kennet Avenue and the Sanctuary were the neck and head. It is more feasible that the opposite is true, that it was only after his recognition and planning of the genuine Beckhampton Avenue that he became aware of how snakelike it and the Kennet Avenue were. In 1722 he was not yet a biassed convert to dracontia. He found no difficulty the next year in accepting the unsnaking Stonehenge avenue, ‘Stonehenge strait avenue from the gate to the valley is 1400 cubits’ (Stukeley 1723, 97). But by 1724 his head was full of serpents. (c) The North-East Quadrant The geophysical survey made two _ important discoveries. The first was that there was no sign of a small concentric ring inside the North Circle (Ucko er al. 1991, 222-6). But just north-east of the North Circle what seemed to be a genuine concentric circle, perhaps of postholes, was recorded, the rings having approximate diameters of 30 and 50 metres (Ucko et al. 1991, 227, Plates 69A, B). Such proportions are comparable to the hypothetical roofed structures in- side Durrington Walls and may be the first physical indications of a supposed settlement inside the Avebury earthwork (Burl 1979, 179). It is odd that this structure, without question potentially the most important result of the survey, with its implications of early occupation, should be hardly mentioned in the book. Instead of an under- standably triumphant announcement it is given no 170 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE more than a ‘tentative claim, qualified almost out of existence’ (Bradley 1991). Despite this unexpected diffidence it is to be hoped that further investigations will be made in the area. Three stoneholes of the North ‘Circle’ were also located to the west of the A361 Swindon road bisec- ting Avebury. “The implications of these three anomalies are immense’ (Ucko er al. 1991, 226) because the holes did not lie on the supposed circum- ference of the circle but fell ‘successively farther off the circuit’. The text did not debate the ‘immensities’, maybe because unfamiliarity with current work about ritual enclosures precluded the inference that rather than a circle the north setting may have been a megalithic ‘horseshoe’ open to the south, a shape which Aubrey’s September plan depicts and which would not be unlikely in Late Neolithic Britain (Burl 1976, 157-8). Juxtapositions of a circle and a horseshoe existed in those centuries at Er-Lannic, at Kerlescan and elsewhere in Brittany (Burl 1985, 25-6, 111, 141). Later, in the Early Bronze Age, the shapes were conjoined in Stonehenge IJIC not far from Avebury (Burl, 1987, 199-201). In passing, it was incorrect (Ucko et al. 1991, 227) to state that Burl ‘claimed anew’ that there had once been a third circle inside Avebury. This reviewer wrote that such a ring may have been started but ‘abandoned after a few sarsens [whose stoneholes have been proved] had been put up’ (Burl 1979, 163-4). (d) The North ‘Circle’ Cove This is the strangest part of Avebury Reconsidered and the most contentious. In spite of the present arrange- ment of the Cove and earlier excavations that failed to discover any evidence for a fourth stone this “does not disprove the existence of an original (altar- or cap-) stone lying on the ground as late as the 17th century’ (Ucko et al. 1991, 231). This is more akin to special pleading than to reasoned argument. The only ‘evi- dence’ for the stone comes from the unconsciously- biassed testimony of Charleton. His plan of the Cove (Figure 2) is manifestly absurd. The two stones remaining prove that. His ‘record’ of a great triangular stone under which it would be worthwhile digging to discover the burial of a Danish king should be treated less confidently than ‘Whatever its purpose, what does seem to be the case is tha «the weight of evidence is in favour of there having been a ‘Cove’ with at least four, if not five stones’ (Ucko et al. 1991, 231). The weight can be estimated. On Charles II’s visit to Avebury in August, 1663, ‘His Majestie commanded me to digge at the bottom of the stones marked with the fig. 1 [the Cove], to try if I could find any humane bones: but I did not doe it’ (Aubrey 1665-93, I, 34). Charleton’s ‘stone’ had gone by then. It is not shown on Aubrey’s September plan, and the fact that the King ordered Aubrey to dig at the bottom and not under a stone shows that the block was not there in August only a month after Charleton presented his plan to the Royal Society. Folklore suggests that the Cove had always been three-sided. Locals called it ‘the devil’s brand-irons, from their extravagant bulk, and chimney-like form’ (Stukeley 1743, 24). To the villagers the Cove looked like the sides and back of a chimney and the open front of a hearth. Nor did excavators find a fourth stonehole (Hunter, J., 1829; Browne 1867, 34). The Revd A.C. Smith was definite that there was none. In 1865 he had four large trenches dug. The fourth extended eastwards from the Cove’s wide backstone ‘on the supposition that the tall stone standing due south, might have been flanked by large stones east and west, but we came upon no trace of any stone having ever stood in that position’ (Smith, A.C., 1867, 211). There is no doubt of the group’s competence to recognise a stonehole. They had already discovered where the north-west stone had been. ‘Here there apparently stood the third stone of the Cove, exactly equidistant from the inside centre of the remaining two . . . [which] fell towards the western stone’. There was no trace of a fourth stonehole, only chalk rubble 30 cm deep over the undisturbed subsoil and a collection of sheep, horse, ox and dog bones. Several years later, in July and August, 1881, probing by five labourers employed by Smith failed to find any indication of a fourth hole (Smith, A.C., 1885, 139-42). Nor do either of Aubrey’s plans record Charleton’s slab. The July plan (Figure 1) shows a three-sided setting in Avebury’s north-east quadrant. It is drawn isometrically with a backstone and two sidestones, and marked ‘A’. There is no fourth stone. In the plan’s top lefthand corner the Cove is drawn again, this time possibly showing four stones, the backstone and two sidestones with a sub-triangular stone be- tween them. The sketch could plausibly be explained as a conventional plan of a three-sided stone setting with the backstone drawn as it would have appeared when upright. The September plane-tabled survey (Figure 3) is as unambiguous. There is a sketch of the three-sided Cove and there is a plan alongside it (Aubrey 1665-93, I, 45). ‘Burl (1979, 43), ignoring any difference between the “‘sketch” and the “‘plant’”’, uses this plan and its detail to draw attention to Aubrey’s “very TWO EARLY PLANS OF AVEBURY good” and accurate work’ (Ucko et al. 1991, 227). This is true — because there is no difference and no fourth stone. What could be taken for such a stone is actually a shadow drawn just as Aubrey customarily did (Aubrey 1665-93, I, 105, 106, 112; II, 823). Yet a note on Charleton’s plan shows that he was positive that a fourth slab had existed, ‘a Triangular Stone of vast magnitude lying flat on the ground’. The reason is that Charleton was mistakenly certain that Danes had built Stonehenge and other megaliths in Britain (Piggott 1989, 104). He made a direct com- parison between what he believed must have existed at Avebury and what he had read about a monument in Denmark near ‘a certain small Town, called Birck. . . an Altar made up of four stones of stupendious magnitude, so as three standing in Triangle, support the fourth upon their heads, which is the greatest of all, and plain and flat’ (Charleton 1663, 38). Aubrey (1665-93, II, 858-9) repeated this, copying a drawing from Ole Worm showing that the Danish ‘Cove’ was in fact a megalithic tomb with a huge capstone, a langdysser near Birkede hamlet by Viby, 37 km south-west of Copenhagen. It was described by Worm because, in 1588, it was the first Danish dolmen to be excavated.* Charleton, in his ignorance, mistook the roofed burial chamber for a rostrum or observation platform for aristocratic spectators at a coronation or a royal burial. He thought that Avebury’s Cove was anal- ogous to this and other Danish megaliths where vast stones were imposed ‘in the manner of Architraves, upon the tops of others’ where nobles could stand at the coronation of kings (Charleton 1663, 55), almost word for word what he wrote on his Avebury plan, ‘a Triangular stone, of vast magnitude, lying flat on y‘ ground, but, (probably) at first impos on y° heads of y° other three, in manner of an Architrave’. It was a self-inflicted delusion. His ‘fourth’ stone could not have formed the fourth side of the Cove. It would have been too precariously balanced on its triangular base. Nor did it have a stonehole. And for other reasons it could not have rested upon the three uprights. It would have been almost impossibly big and heavy, a minimum of 7 x 5.5 < 1 metres in bulk, and about 100 tons in weight: a monster. Yet inspec- tion in 1988 of the tops of the surviving Cove uprights revealed no sign of the scraping and erosion such an oppressive burden would inevitably have caused. Avebury Reconsidered mentions this only in a footnote (Ucko et al. 1991, 235, note 7). If Charleton did see a fourth sarsen it may have been a fallen circle-stone, lying near rather than inside the Cove, which his Danish preconception trans- 171 formed into the required ‘Altar Stone’. No one else saw it. At the least a Scottish verdict of ‘Not Proven’ is justified. CONCLUSIONS The plans of July 1663 are combinations of imperfect recollection, casual observation and predetermined ideas about stone circles. With unsuspecting irony Charleton had already expressed the dangers of relying on fallible memories. ‘Monuments themselves are subject to Forgetfulness, 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). Yet, misleading though they were, the plans did archaeology a service because, ironically, of their very blunders. Until that time any debate about stone circles, especially Stonehenge, had been an arid and verbose exercise based on literary sources with no reference to the monuments themselves, ‘a forgotten controversy conducted on forgotten lines of argument’ (Piggott 1971, 1). September, 1663, changed that for John Aubrey. Although Camden and others had preceded him, he was the first to undertake a systematic study of circles and other megalithic monuments, realising that fieldwork was the only practical method of under- standing their purpose and age. He must have been taken aback to realise how much his plan of Avebury ‘donne by memorie’ differed from reality, how much he had taken for granted, relying on classical writers rather than on his own observations. Shortly, he began his Monumenta Britannica, an invaluable assem- blage of field-notes, sketches and plans, gathered between 1665 and the 1690s. “These Antiquities are so exceeding old . . . that there is no way to retrive them but by comparative antiquitie, which I have writt upon the Spott, from the monuments themselves’ (Aubrey 1665-93, I, 25). It was the beginning of a great tradition of which he was the forerunner (Hunter, M., 1975, 160; Piggott 1989, 28-9). ‘My head was always working: never idle, and even travelling (which from 1649 till 1670 was never off my horse’s back) did glean some observations, of which I have a collection in folio of two quires of paper or more, a dust basket, some whereof are to be valued’ (Barber 1982, 11). Inigo Jones’ Stone-Heng, published in 1655, and Walter Charleton’s Chorea Gigantum, published in 1663, belong to the forgotten past. John Aubrey’s Monumenta Britannica, not published until 1980-2, brought the past into the present. 172 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE The plans of July 1663 are of historical interest only. If, three years later, the Great Fire of London had destroyed them the loss to archaeology would have been negligible. But it is to the credit of Avebury Reconsidered that the details of such a long-forgotten episode have been so well recorded. Lovers of Avebury and enthusiasts for stone circles owe much gratitude to the authors. *T am most grateful to Mr. James Dyer for this information. REFERENCES AUBREY, J., 1656-91 The Natural History of Wiltshire, Newton Abbot: David & Charles (1969) — 1659-70 Wiltshire. The Topographical Collections, Devizes: WANHS (1862) — 1665-93 Monumenta Britannica, I, I, ed. by J. Fowles, Milborne Port: Dorset Publishing Co (1980, 1982) BARBER, R., 1982 Bref Lives, Woodbridge: Boydell Press BRADLEY, R., 1991, ‘No Stones Left Unturned’, The Times Higher Education Supplement, 15 July, 22 BRENTNALL, H.C., 1938 ‘The Saxon bounds of Overton’, Marlborough College NHS, 116-36 BROWNE, H., 1867 An Illustration of Stonehenge and Abury. . . (8th edition), Salisbury: Privately printed BURL, A., 1976 The Stone Circles of the British Isles, London: Yale University Press — 1979 Prehistoric Avebury, London: Yale University Press — 1985 Megalithic Brittany: a Guide, London: Thames & Hudson — 1987 The Stonehenge People, London: J.M. Dent — 1988 ‘Coves: Structural Enigmas of the Neolithic’, WAM 82, 1-18 CAMDEN, W., 1610 Britain: or a Chorographicall Description of the Most Flourishing Kingdomes, England, Scotland and Ireland (trans. Philemon Holland), London: G. Bishop and J. Norton CHARLETON, W., 1663 Chorea Gigantum; or the Most Famous Antiquity of Great-Britain, vulgarly called Stone-Heng, Lon- don: H. Herriman DICK, O.L. (ed.), 1949 Aubrey’s Brief Lives, London: Secker & Warburg DNB, 1975 The Compact Edition of the Dictionary of National Biography, London: Oxford University Press HUNTER, J., 1829 ‘The present state of Abury, Wilts’, Gent’s Magazine 1-17. in: (Gomme, G.L., ed.), The Gentleman’s Magazine Library. Archaeology, IT, 1886, 87-93 HUNTER, M., 1975 Fohn Aubrey and the Realm of Learning, London: Duckworth JONES, 1., 1655 The Most Notable Antiquity of Great Britain, Vulgarly called Stone-Heng, London: D. Pakeman LELAND, J., 1769 The Itinerary of John Leland the Antiquary (3rd edition), ed. by T. Hearne, Oxford: J. Fletcher LENNARD, R.V., 1931 ‘The watering-places’, in: Englishmen at Rest and Play. 1558-1714, ed. by R.V. Lennard, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1-78 LONG, W., 1858 Abury Illustrated, Devizes: WANHS MALONE, C., 1989 Avebury, London: Batsford PEPYS, S., 1663 The Diary of Samuel Pepys, IV, ed. by R. Latham and W. Matthews (1971), London: Bell — 1668 Ibid., IX (1668-9), 1976 PIGGOTT, S., 1971 ‘Introduction’, Inigo Fones, Stone-Heng, Walter Charleton, Chorea Gigantum. John Webb, A Vindi- cation, Letchworth, Gregg Publishing, 1-2 — 1989 Ancient Britons and the Antiquarian Imagination, London: Thames & Hudson POWELL, A., 1988 Fohn Aubrey and his Friends (3rd edition), London: Hogarth Press Roy. soc. Minutes of the Royal Society, Book 2, 1663 SMITH, A.C., 1867 ‘Excavations at Avebury’, WAM 10, 209-16 — 1885 Guide to the British and Roman Antiquities of the North Wiltshire Downs. . ., Devizes: WANHS STUKELEY, W., 1723 ‘The history of the temples and religion of the antient Celts’, Cardiff Public Library, MS 4. 253 — 1743 Abury. A Temple of the British Druids, London: Innys, Manby, Dod & Brindley TWINING, Revd T., 1723 Avebury in Wiltshire. The Remains of a Roman Work, Erected by Vespasian and Julius Agricola, During their several Commands in Britanny, London: J.Downing UCKO, P.J., HUNTER, M., CLARK, A.J., and DAVID, A., 1991 Avebury Reconsidered. From the 1660s to the 1990s, Lon- don: Unwin Hyman VATCHER, F. de M., and L., 1976 The Avebury Monuments, London: H.M.S.O. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 173-180 Reviews P. Ashbee, M. Bell and E. Proudfoot. Wilsford Shaft: Excavations 1960-62. English Heritage Archaeological Report 11, 1989; xii + 159 pages, 28 tables, 99 illustrations and microfiche. £16.00. ISBN 1 85074 210 3. When is a pond barrow not a pond barrow? This was the question which confronted the excavators of the hollow on Normanton Down in 1960. The exca- vations were undertaken to salvage the remains of a plough damaged group of earthworks comprising two bowl barrows and a hollow interpreted as a pond barrow. It is the investigation of the latter which forms the subject of this monograph, the eleventh in the excellent English Heritage Archaeological Report series. As the excavation progressed it became clear that all was not as expected; the ‘pond barrow’ became a weathering cone formed around the mouth of a shaft sunk into the chalk bedrock to a depth of 100 feet. The clearance of the deposits within the shaft yielded a great deal of organic material (primarily wood), environmental remains, pottery, animal bone and other materials. Pottery and radio-carbon dates sug- gest that the shaft was excavated c. 1500 BC and was filled by the middle of the first millenium BC. The post-excavation side of the story is a rather sorry tale, with much of the organic material literally turning to dust. The episodes relating to the length of tume taken and the problems pertaining to the completion of the report are related frankly and honestly. There are many lessons to be learnt here. This reviewer particularly laments the loss of so much of the organic material of Bronze Age date — always a rarity in Wessex. One must, however, congratulate the excavators for making a detailed photographic and written record of this material at the time of discovery for without it the report on the wooden objects would be all too brief. The report is somewhat unusual in having two quite different conclusions regarding the function of the shaft. Ashbee favours a ‘ritual’ function whilst Bell, whose summary of the environmental data (pp. 128-33) makes compelling reading, sees the shaft as a well related to a Middle Bronze Age intensification of agriculture in the Stonehenge region. Both interpreta- uons have their strengths and weaknesses, and it is rightly left to the reader to decide which one he prefers. Appendices to the main body of the report include discussions of the weathering and infill rate of the shaft, the logistical problems of excavating a 100 feet deep hole which is less than 6 feet in diameter, and a list of other pond barrows (or shafts/wells?) in Wessex, to which may now be added the report on the excavation of a genuine pond barrow at Down Farm, Sixpenny Handley, in Landscape, Monuments and Society, the Prehistory of Cranborne Chase, by Barrett, Bradley and Green (C.U.P. 1991). Despite the many problems which have plagued the Wilsford Shaft excavation since its completion, the authors responsible for this volume are to be congra- tulated in making the results of this important site available. As with other volumes in the English Heritage Excavation Reports series the work is well designed, the illustrations and tables are clear and the text well edited. The price of the volume, at £16.00, is good value for such an entertaining read. MARK CORNEY John Chandler. Wessex Images. Alan Sutton, 1990; 192 pages; illustrated. £14.95, hardback. ISBN 0 86299 739 9. John Chandler’s Wessex is narrower than Hardy’s, being just the two ancient counties of Wiltshire and Dorset. His images are both visual and verbal. The visual are over a hundred illustrations from prints and older (sepia) and recent (colour) photographs. The latter, mainly taken by Tim Hawkins and David Tavener, are of stunning quality. The older photo- graphs offer a nice variety of village and town scenes, a largely deserted Devizes Market Place contrasting with a well-peopled village street at Enford, for instance. One of particular interest is a school group, captioned ‘Trying to keep still’, but not located; it shows a boy of seven or eight dressed in a frock, because, presumably, family economy demanded that he should wear his older sister’s clothes; for a compar- able instance see Gordon Winter’s Country Camera, p. 20. The verbal images come in a series of lengthy extracts, ranging in time from Bishop Asser in the ninth century to Edward Thomas during the First 174 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE World War, and linked together by a well-thought- out commentary. Many of the names that we should expect, and indeed demand, in a Wessex anthology are there — Leland, Aubrey, Celia Fiennes, Defoe, Kilvert, Jefferies, Hudson and Williams — but nobody is better qualified than John Chandler both to choose well from them and also to introduce us to new images — Sydney Smith on the establishment of the Nether- avon Sunday School, or ‘Deborah Primrose’ (Mrs Ottley) on life at Winterbourne Bassett 90 years ago, to name but two. No anthology is going to escape comment with regard to selection. This reviewer noticed a lack of extracts on west Wiltshire, and the virtual omission of Swindon, apart from one picture. William Morris’s Swindon Fifty Years Ago would have provided some vivid pieces. This is, however, only a personal thought. This handsome book will give a great deal of pleasure and instruction, and is highly recommended. K.H. ROGERS Christopher Chippindale, Paul Devereux, Peter Fowler, Rhys Jones and Tim Sebastian. Who Owns Stonehenge? B.T. Batsford, 1990; 176 pages, 78 illustrations including many photographs. £13.99. ISBN 0 7134 6455 0. This is not the book you think it is. The title means ‘who owns Stonehenge — legally, morally, intellec- tually, spiritually?’ Stirred by a discussion at the World Archaeological Congress held in Southampton in 1986, the five authors have emerged from the barricades erected in the war between mystic and rationalist and decided that — for the while at least — they can march together. The unifying cause is the rescue of Stonehenge from its present predicament, and the driving force for each — reaching across the philosophical barriers that normally separate them — 1s the observation that Stonehenge is more than just an ancient monument. ‘Stonehenge may be 4000 and more years old, but it is an epitome of Britain in the later twentieth century . . . to study Stonehenge is to be a student of current affairs. We suspect it has always been thus . . .” (pages 9-10). With economy and = precision, Chippindale delineates the Stonehenge phenomenon in the first chapter; physical characteristics, archaeological inter- pretation, history of ownership, relationship to Druids, astronomy, earth mystery research and the Stonehenge festival. He is clearly appalled by the site as it is to-day. The century began well ‘with the fencing of Stonehenge in 1901, and an attempt to return Stonehenge to rural peace. Since then Stonehenge has been overwhelmed.’ (page 31). The inevitable culture shocks start in chapter two. With a minimum of side-swipes at the academic archaeologist, Devereux defines his territory as ‘geo- mancy’ or sacred geography. He relates the mid- summer clashes to social conditions and goes further, saying it is ‘only to be expected that one of the nation’s key geomantic sites should come to general awareness at such a time’ (page 35). Leys, systems of ancient measurement, and the alleged energies output by megaliths are the stuff of earth mystery research, cult figures being Alfred Watkins and John Michell. Rhys Jones is a Welshman who has studied and investigated the origins of settlement in Australia. This qualifies him to speak for the ‘British Aboriginals’, and state the case for their land claim to Stonehenge. The construction of megaliths is clearly in the ancestry of the Welsh, not the English. His claim is not only of displacement from their ancient territories but cultural misappropriation to boot. ‘First they took our land, and our old monuments onit. . . as they took our land, so they took our history’ (pages 86-7). In his account of the development of Druidism, Sebastian (Secular Arch-Druid, apparently) has a go at them all — Julius Caesar, Lord Montagu, the Chief Constable of Wil- tshire, Salisbury Museum and others are castigated for a variety of sins in a chapter both lunatic and enter- taining. He describes the proposals made by the Solstice Trust for a World Garden Site, ‘an arena for all’ where police helicopters will no longer be used to mar Druidic ceremonies. . . The array of viewpoints is rounded out by Fowler in a survey of academic claims and responsibilities. Conscious of the proposals for a new visitor centre he is anxious to establish a base-line; reason must pre- vail, public presentation of Stonehenge must be based on scientific observation; reason is the starting point, but where people end up in their private explorations is up to them. Fowler devotes his second chapter to Stonehenge in a democratic society. The stopping of the festival in 1985 and the horrific scenes associated with it were done allegedly in the interests of archaeo- logy. Not a few were traumatized by what they saw, aghast that the authorities resorted to such measures. Fowler puts together a chronology of the 1980s. We see how as a society we drifted into this situation. He restates the many queries that have been voiced on the roles and interrelationship of the police, English Heritage and the National Trust in redefining the arrangements for access to the stones. REVIEWS Stonehenge Tomorrow — the seventh and final chapter — bring Chippindale and Fowler together to face the future. Two significant proposals are placed before us — provision of a site for the Festival within 10 miles of the monument, and the appointment of a Stonehenge manager, who will provide an integrated approach to the management of the monument in its setting. ‘Who Owns Stonehenge?’ is exceedingly readable and benefits from an excellent choice of photographs and other illustrations. It is well produced at a price which will, one hopes, give it the wide attention that it deserves. ROY CANHAM Anthony Clark. Seeing Beneath the Soil. Pros- pecting Methods in Archaeology. B.T. Batsford, London, 1990; 176 pages; 119 figures. £29.95, hard- back. ISBN 0 7134 5858 5. The name of Anthony Clark is synonymous with archaeological geophysical prospection and related techniques in this country. One of his pioneering surveys was undertaken in Wiltshire at the Roman town site of Cunetio where the position of the fourth century defences was fixed using the prototype Martin-Clark resistivity meter. In the preface the author makes clear that the book is intended to appeal to both professional and general interest reader alike, and restricts itself primarily to development within this country. Chapter | charts the development of archaeological prospection from Pitt-Rivers to the introduction of microcomputers by way of the Megger Earth Tester in its mahogany and brass box. Successive chapters deal with the details of resistivity, magnetometry, magnetic susceptibility and ‘other methods’ (includ- ing ground radar, metal detectors and geochemical methods). Each of these sections covers the principles of use, instrumentation, application to archaeology and actual survey examples. Readers of WAM will find a number of Wiltshire sites used to illustrate certain points of particular interest; these include the defences of Cunetio (Figure 5), the Boscombe villa (Figure 110), and the recent survey on the line of the Latton by-pass (Figure 105). Further chapters cover choice of method/choice of site, interpretation and presentation (which this re- viewer found particularly useful), and survey logis- tics. Of interest in the chapter dealing with magnetic 175 susceptibility is the example given at Tadworth in Surrey, where manipulation of the field data to compensate for downhill soil drift caused by the plough has radically altered the interpretation of the results (pp. 107-9). Following a somewhat short bibliography there are a useful glossary and a list of addresses of manufac- turers of the equipment referred to in the text. The style of the book is very much a personal view of the subject which, given the author’s involvement in the field since its inception in this country, is hardly surprising. There are no doubt many who find the technical aspects of geophysics incomprehensible and in this respect Clark’s long experience and deep understanding of the subject are used to great effect. Explanations of the principles of the methods featured are lucid and complex mathematical formulae kept to a minimum. The volume is well produced and the standard of the illustrations is particularly high. In aiming to produce a work on a subject of increasing importance which will appeal to both the professional archaeologist and the general reader the author has been largely successful. Further reference to developments in other parts of the world, especially Europe, would have been useful, but this does not detract from the overall value of the book. The price, at £29.95, is relatively expensive, and to reach the wide readership which the volume deserves it is to be hoped that the publishers will consider a paperback edition. A general work covering the appli- cation of geophysics and related fields to archaeology has been long overdue; Anthony Clark has filled a vacuum and is to be congratulated. MARK CORNEY Nick Griffiths and Anne Jenner with Christine Wilson. Drawing Archaeological Finds: A Hand- book. Achtype Publications, 1990; 120 pages, illus- trated. £17.95. ISBN 1 873132 00 X. Nick Griffiths and Anne Jenner, together with Christine Wilson, have produced an essential aid for any aspiring illustrator. Archaeologists often present very inadequate drawings for publication. If this book does nothing more than raise this standard to the minimum acceptable it will be worthwhile. The intro- duction states that it is aimed at all students and others regardless of their level of ability or previous experience. It should enable those with modest artistic ability to reach a fair standard and those of 176 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE greater ability a very high standard of illustration. That the authors have taught is reflected in the text; even the smallest details of drawing technique are carefully explained without ambiguity and with sup- porting drawings. It is a pleasant feature of the book that unnecessary mystique is avoided, straightforward methods of drawing are suggested and clear guidelines given to conventions which should be followed. The historical background, general principles of illustration and explanation of tools and materials are covered in the first chapter. The main body of the handbook is divided into sections which cover the whole range of illustration. The first, drawing objects, encompasses metals and a variety of materials includ- ing those of organic origin such as bone, wood and leather, with plenty of exemplary drawings to illus- trate each rendering. This section also explains the conventions of colour, and how to show combinations of materials, and textiles. Ceramic vessels are covered in the following section with clear instructions on areas such as handles, spouts and lips where diffi- culties may be encountered. The depiction of glass vessels is also explained. Christine Wilson has described the illustration of flint and stone tools. Again the techniques are clearly illustrated and explained although one or two of the drawings are rather dark. Pasting up, numbering and marking up for the printer comprise the final section of the book which concludes with a general bibliography and a list of publications where examples of illustration styles may be studied. The handbook is written in a friendly and modest style, only possible with considerable experience. Its 120 pages are packed with helpful advice but can be easily referred to as the text is divided into clearly headed sections with a more or less equal proportion of text to illustrations. The drawings are both an inspiration and a teaching aid. There is no index but a fully detailed list of contents possibly makes this unnecessary. This is an essential buy for anyone who needs to draw archaeological finds and one that will certainly be well used. DIANE ROBINSON Katharine M. Jordan. The Folklore of Ancient Wiltshire. Wiltshire County Council Library and Museum Service, 1990; 68 pages, illustrations. £5.95, paperback. ISBN 0 86080 194 2. This book deals with the legends and beliefs that have become attached to the prehistoric stones and earth- works of Wiltshire. The first chapter describes all the kinds of monuments to be found in the county: henges, round barrows, hill forts etc., a useful re- minder for those of us who are not specialists in archaeology, and then goes on to outline the main themes of the folklore that have become associated with them: giants, significant numbers, treasure and so on. Each subsequent chapter takes one kind of monument and gives an account of the associated tales that have been reported. For instance, chapter two is entitled ‘Folklore of Round Barrows’ and is preceded by a map of the county showing, by means of symbols, what kind of legend is attached to each round barrow. This pattern is repeated in the next three chapters which are devoted to long barrows and barrow hills, earthworks and standing stones, and henges. These chapters are followed by an ‘afterword’, relating folklore to modern tumes, an index and a bibliography. The book is lavishly illus- trated by full-page black and white photographs taken by Michael Marshman. The lack of colour does not detract at all from these pictures as they are mainly of shapes, such as barrows on the skyline, and in the case of the stones it brings out the weathering and their rugged appeal. Such a book could easily have become a mere list which would have made demands on the reader’s patience, but interest is constantly maintained by Miss Jordan’s stories, such as the one in which a doctor lays a ghost with his medicine (p. 24), and by her wide-ranging references to other parts of England or other cultures. Miss Jordan’s approach is scholarly and she has done her research thoroughly, moving easily between older sources, such as Aubrey, and modern ones. But it is true to say that the whole book is greater than the sum of its parts. This kind of information is found piecemeal in books on topogra- phy and only when it is gathered together in this way is it possible to obtain an overall view. Therein lies the value of the book. The most interesting aspects for me were the activities that became associated with the various sites — the fairs, the games, the dancing through Marlbo- rough. I particularly liked the description of the Palm-Sunday Fair held at Silbury Hill (p. 35). As for the beliefs, there seems to be a certain paucity of imagination. The same old themes crop up again and again: the many golden objects that are buried, whether it be a chair, a table or even a wheelbarrow; the dumping of a spadeful of earth by the Devil to account for an isolated hill (not confined to Wiltshire REVIEWS — this is the supposed origin of the Wrekin in Shropshire); going round something seven times to raise a giant or a ghost; the supposed immovability of huge stones; the noise of a ghostly battle. Even Miss Jordan finds the seven circuits that are needed to raise the giant at the Giant’s Grave above Milton Lilbourne ‘monotonously predictable’. This brings us to another question which Miss Jordan does not cover as it is really outside the scope of her book — the status of these beliefs in men’s minds. Did they really believe them? Or were they tales of a moment, useful to impress the stranger or to amuse? As a native of Oare, Miss Jordan has always known that if you run seven times round the Giant’s Grave, the giant will come out. But has she ever tried it and if so with what result? Did the former inhabi- tants of Oare ever try it? Or did they know deep down it would be a waste of time? Again, there are the tales of inanimate objects moving when they hear the church bells ring. This tale is current today with regard to the gudgeon on the Blindhouse in Bradford on Avon. One solemnly assures strangers that when the gudgeon hears the church clock strike twelve it jumps into the river and has a swim, safe in the knowledge that a metal fish cannot hear. (It is abso- lutely necessary to use the word ‘hear’. In three of the four examples that are given in the book, ‘hear’ is used.) Was this kind of tale any more to our ancestors than the joke it is today? Did they ever organise a dig to retrieve that golden coffin that would have meant untold wealth for the village? Miss Jordan rightly points out that we have our folklore today, especially in relation to UFOs. If coming generations thought that any more than a tiny minority really believed in them they would be quite wrong. It is easy to see past generations as credulous babies, but were they? The characters that appear in Chaucer and Shakespeare do not support the facts. Let us leave the last word to Shakespeare. In Hamlet, Act I, Sc. I, Marcellus recounts a number of beliefs about Christmas, such as, that the cock crows all night long. Horatio, the scholar, replies diplomatically ‘So have I heard, and do in part believe’. Whether we believe in part, as a whole or not at all is an individual choice, but this book will make it much easier to decide. NORMAN ROGERS Julian Richards et al. The Stonehenge Environs Project. Archaeological Report no. 16. English Heri- tage, 1990; xiii + 297 pages; 160 figs.; 137 tables; 2 microfiche. £36, paperback. ISBN 1 85074 269 3. 177 Stonehenge may fairly be said to have received its rightful due in print over the centuries from a host of antiquaries and other observers, though clearly with some reservations concerning its excavators. The same can hardly be said of the remarkable collection of sites and monuments, upstanding and plough- levelled, that lie within its vicinity, although Stukeley, Cunnington and Colt Hoare did much to bring the more readily visible to the notice of their contemporaries and of posterity. More recently a survey by the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England, published under the title Stonehenge And Its Environs (Edinburgh U.P., 1979), brought matters up to date and drew attention to the need for further investigation. This, in turn, provided the essential sumulus for the work reviewed here. The Stonehenge Environs Project, commissioned and substantially funded by English Heritage, was iniuated by Dr Anne Ellison, then Director of the Wessex Archaeological Unit (now the Trust for Wessex Archaeology). Fieldwork was carried out between 1980 and 1984 under the overall direction of Julian Richards with the assistance of a wide range of helpers, to which the many contributors noted on the title page of the report bear witness. The main brief of the project was to identify the prehistoric settlements in the Stonehenge region, essentially those within c. 4 km of the monument, and to establish their state of preservation with a view to the Department of the Environment developing a management strategy for them. Finds of flint, pottery and other occupation debris, both from surface scatters and from past excavations of specific dates, had already indicated the presence of such settlements in a landscape dominated visually by ceremonial and funerary monuments and suggested the need for a more organised and syste- matic approach to their discovery. Additional object- ives of the project concerned environmental matters, the investigation of linear boundary ditches and re- search into the Neolithic landscape around the causewayed enclosure at Robin Hood’s Ball (continu- ing and not reported on here). Within the modern cultivated landscape that sur- rounds Stonehenge, areas of prehistoric activity were located by ‘field walking’, the surface collection of human artefacts from ploughed land. Initially this was undertaken on an extensive basis and involved the systematic collection of a c. 10% sample of artefacts from within large sample areas. In all 39 individual collection areas, totalling some 752 ha, were exam- ined. More intensive collecting of total surface assem- blages was carried out for more limited areas on specific monuments or within areas of human activity 178 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE initially identified by extensive surface collection. Investigation of specific sites was further enhanced by geophysical (magnetometer) survey and geochemical (phosphate analysis) survey. Sample excavation for- med the final stage of investigation of both defined monuments and surface scatters of material and with one exception involved the gridded manual excavation of all deposits overlying natural chalk. Sample exca- vation was also carried out on a number of dry valley sites to test the potential of colluvial deposits within the study area. The ensuing report is devoted very largely to a detailed account of the methodology, the surface collections, the excavations and the analysis of the finds with a concluding section devoted to the theme of landscape and social evolution through time. Given the limited nature (quantity is not lacking) of the settlement evidence for the Neolithic and the Bronze Age, the methodology developed during the project has been substantially vindicated. Within the sample areas the analysis of surface collections, mainly of worked flint, has revealed an intensity of domestic and industrial activity, hitherto at best only suspec- ted, and has helped dispel the notion that the early landscape around Stonehenge was reserved almost entirely for burial and ceremonial purposes. Such information, together with the results from the sample excavations (and other recent work in the area), has provided a substantial body of comparative data — economic, environmental and technological — which, linked to a series of radiocarbon dates, has been presented in a valuable sequence of phased landscape studies. The report is well printed and produced and the information within it clearly and logically presented. One is grateful for the numerous illustrations, especi- ally the excellent series of maps devoted to the various surface collections and to the landscape phases. Of particular value among the many tables is that presenting all the calibrated radiocarbon dates from the study area although it is unfortunate that lack of space has prevented the inclusion of derivations on the accompanying Figure 156. To conclude, this is a report for the specialist, or at least for those already familiar with Stonehenge and the sites and monuments in its vicinity. Those who lack such familiarity and who seek an up to date introduction to the subject can do no better than begin with Julian Richards’ more recent publication, English Heritage Book of Stonehenge (Batsford, 1991). D.J. BONNEY Julian Richards. English Heritage Book of Stonehenge. Batsford, 1991; 141 pages; illustrations. £25.00, hardback. Also in paperback. ISBN 0 7134 6141 1. With Julian Richards’ volume, the country’s best known prehistoric monument is included in an ex- panding series of publications by English Heritage which seeks to cover an extensive geographical and temporal range. Taking into account the author’s extensive fieldwork in the area, Stonehenge is the obvious monument to use to introduce landscape archaeology to the general public. The author emphasises the continuity of landscape development, and the longev- ity of the monument is used as a framework which helps to give substance to the idea of continuing processes. Indeed, this theme is so strong that the almost complete absence of Iron Age sites and mon- uments becomes an intriguing question, perhaps one that could have been expanded upon. Within the dust-cover English Heritage proudly proclaims this to be ‘the complete companion to Stonehenge’. One does pause to wonder, however, if it is possible to have a complete companion, and for whom exactly is it intended. ‘Students’ with more than a cursory interest in the area will probably have already purchased The Stonehenge Environs Project, also by Julian Richards (1990). On the other hand, would someone with only a cursory interest in this subject pay £25 for the hard-back edition of this volume? But perhaps I am missing the point and it is just underpaid archaeologists who don’t have the money to spend on this type of book. In general, the book is well-presented with plenty of good clear line-illustrations and several excellent colour plates (especially 1 and 2). The monochrome plates are less praiseworthy and unfortunately, in my copy, figures 69 and 71 of the Lesser Cursus are abysmal, though I assume that this results from a printing problem. Despite this, the illustrations are well dispersed within the text and help to make the book very readable. Where, however, is part C of figure 3: could it be figure 5? My only real complaint with the text is that I found the chronology a little confusing. Whilst this is partly due to the seemingly intractable problems of ‘fitting’ archaeological period terminology to radio-carbon dates, it is also due to some apparent inconsistencies in the text. On page 18, The Neolithic period is assigned a date bracket c. 4,000— c. 2,000 BC. Yet in figure 6 (same page), the range is +4,000-2,500 BC: do 500 years count as circa? Also, having introduced REVIEWS the idea of early, middle and late divisions of the Neolithic and Bronze Ages, chapters 5-9 employ the terms ‘earlier’ and ‘later’; ‘developing Neolithic’ is also used. Whilst the reasons for this are explained in chapter 5, greater consistency is desirable. In conclusion, the overall approach has much to commend it and the general impression is of an accessible volume which will, it is to be hoped, allow the public to view Stonehenge in a wider context. C. PLACE Peter and Eleanor Saunders. Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Medieval Catalogue Part 1. Sal- isbury Museum, 1991; 192 pages, 450 illustrations. £19.95, paperback. ISBN 0 947535 13 6. Brian Spencer. Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Catalogue Part 2: Pilgrim Souvenirs and Secular Badges. Salisbury Museum, 1990; 144 pages, 327 illustrations. £12.95, paperback. ISBN 0 947535 12 8. These are the first two in a series of catalogues of the important medieval collections in Salisbury Museum. Both are dedicated to the memory of Hugh Shortt, Curator of the Museum from 1937 to 1975, and the first volume begins with an appreciation of his life and work by his successor, Peter Saunders. A high pro- portion of the items included in the catalogue come from Salisbury, which in the fourteenth century was probably the sixth most populous English provincial town. Other major assemblages included are from Old Sarum, Clarendon Palace and Gomeldon deserted medieval village. Obviously, if a major post-war series of excavations had taken place in Salisbury, as in many other English towns and cities, the catalogue would have been considerably larger. Nevertheless, the first two volumes are extensive and comprehensive in their scope. The several authors are all specialists in their individual fields so that the overall text is authoritative throughout. All the illustrations are by Nick Griffiths and could not be bettered. Part 1, the second volume to be_ published, comprises a miscellany of medieval subjects — coins (but not jetons and coin-weights), spurs (but not surrups), finger rings (but not brooches), floor tiles and domestic stonework (but not architectural stonework), arms and armour, harness pendants, seal matrices, steelyard weights and textiles. Many of the items covered, such as the coins and floor tiles and the heraldic pendants, are well known from previous, 179 fairly recent, publications but they benefit from up- to-date and authoritative revisions of the text. Although in some fields the collections are weak — such as arms and armour (essentially arrowheads plus five knives, a few sword quillons, two axes and three spearheads) and steelyard weights (two examples) — the volume will nevertheless be of particular interest and use to all those concerned with medieval artefacts. Some areas are strong, such as the section on spurs, where the catalogue provides information not readily available elsewhere. The introductions to each section are particularly valuable and the format makes the catalogue easy as well as satisfying to use. Part 2: Pilgrim souvenirs and secular badges, by Brian Spencer, published first, is certainly the most welcome and arguably the most important individual museum publication in England to have appeared for many years. The two subjects of this catalogue are linked not only in material and general appearance but also in the probability that some of the secular leaden or alloy trinkets were made side by side and sold with religious souvenirs. Most were found under sorry circumstances between 1975 and 1987 in the River Avon or the Mill Stream: well preserved, thanks to the anaerobic properties of the river mud. Salisbury Museum’s major collection is not only one of the most important provincial collections of these items, it is the only comprehensive collection from Western England. The catalogue is scholarly, detailed and readable. It is accurate in correcting the errors published in Mitchener’s Medieval Pilgrim and Secu- lar Badges (1986) and is certainly indispensable on the shelf of every museum curator and medieval historian/ archaeologist. The book is a major contribution to our knowledge of worship by the common man and woman in Salisbury in the later Middle Ages, and the import- ance of Salisbury and, to a lesser extent, Wilton as places of pilgrimage at this time. The author identifies for the first time pilgrim souvenirs specifically associ- ated with the veneration of St Osmund, saintly foun- der of the cathedral, as well as the Virgin Mary, its patron, reminding us that by the late fourteenth century the fame of Our Lady of Salisbury had spread far beyond the neighbourhood of the city. On the Continent, for example, Salisbury was considered one of the principal places of pilgrimage in England. Equally exciting is the cautious identification of souvenirs relating to the veneration of St Edith of Wilton. The non-local pilgrims’ souvenirs show that the people of Salisbury mostly visited religious centres 180 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE that could be reached, there and back, within three weeks; places including Windsor, Chester, Poulton, Ely, Walsingham, Bury St Edmunds, Norwich, Lon- don and St Albans. The most adventurous still jour- neyed to more far away places in Germany, the Low Countries, France, Italy and Spain. In the introduc- tion, the author gives a detailed and informative summary of the pilgrimage in the later Middle Ages and the use of these pilgrim badges. He points out that vast numbers were made in contrast to the handful that have now survived from England. While he states that in Paris in 1504 such ordinary badges cost one sou per dozen, it would have been interesting to relate this to prices in England. If they did cost a fraction of a silver penny only, how did the pilgrim purchase them — or might he have purchased more than one at a time, perhaps to give some away on his return to Salisbury? PAUL ROBINSON Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, vol. 85 (1992), pp. 181-185 Obituaries Martin Heath, who died on | February 1991, at the age of 70, was Secretary of the Society for three years from 1984-1987 and his death will be deeply felt by all those who worked in or used the Museum during his years of office. Educated at Rugby, with a scholarship in America, and at Trinity Hall Cambridge, he served in the Army and was wounded in the Reichwald forest. After completing his degree at Cambridge his career was in the manufacturing industry, finally with the Avon Rubber Company at Melksham untl his retirement in 1980. Martin brought to the Society enormous adminis- trative skills. It is not always understood how vital these skills are to a Society like this, embracing, as it does, so many differing ambitions and interests among its members and staff, and producing adminis- trative problems out of all proportion to its financial size. Although not always totally sympathetic to the excesses (as he saw them) of the archaeologists and matured historians, the fact that he was not only highly respected but deeply loved by all at the Museum is a testimony to the honesty and straight- forwardness he brought to all the problems with which he had to deal. Since he ceased to be Secretary he continued to support the Society both on its Council and as an always willing and super-efficient volunteer. He faced his last illness with a courage and fortitude that won the admiration of all. The sympa- thy of the members and, indeed, of a much wider circle, for his wife and two daughters was demon- strated by the large congregation at the thanksgiving service at St John’s, Devizes. HUGH SEYMOUR Arnold Walter Lawrence, known as A.W. or Law- rence, eminent archaeologist, generous benefactor and Honorary Member of this Society, died on 31 March 1991, after three peaceful and happy years at the end of his life, in Devizes. Born on 2 May 1900, the youngest of five sons, his elder brother by 12 years was T.E. Lawrence of Arabia. Through T.E., whom he resembled in a number of characteristics, and his father, Lawrence gained an early fascination for archaeology and antiquarian pursuits. Educated at New College, Oxford, where he was awarded the Diploma in Classical Archaeology (1920), he studied at the British Schools at Rome and Athens, furthering his researches in the fields of Greek sculpture and architecture which also led him to other countries of the Classical world, including the Near East. In 1925 he married Barbara Thompson; they had one daughter. In 1927 he published Later Greek Sculpture and its Influence, followed, in 1929, by Classical Sculpture. At the remarkably early age of 30, he was appointed Reader in Classical Sculpture at Cambridge where, apart from his teaching, he pre- pared a revision of Rawlinson’s Herodotus, published in 1935. It was in 1935, after the death of his brother, that Lawrence also took on the exacting task of literary editor and trustee of T.E.’s estate. His sympathetic understanding of the man behind the myth was to lead to a lifelong and successful defence of his brother’s reputation, which included editing a number of publications of his and other related works, the first of which was T.E. Lawrence by his Frnends (1935 and 1954). After the Second World War, during a part of which he served in military intelligence in Egypt and Palestine, Lawrence held the Laurence Chair of Archaeology at Cambridge from 1944 to 1951, with a professorial fellowship at Jesus College. Breaking away from the — to him — somewhat claustrophobic atmosphere of Cambridge, he became Professor of Archaeology at the University of the Gold Coast in 1951, where he remained until his retirement in 1957 at the time when the independent country of Ghana was formed. There, in spite of enormous difficulties, he successfully set up a new department and estab- lished the National Museum in Accra. He continued to publish important works, before and during re- tirement, among them Greek Architecture (1957); an edited edition of letters to T.E. Lawrence from his friends (1962); Trade Castles and Forts of West Africa (1963); Greek and Roman Sculpture (1972) and Greek Aims in Fortification (1979). As one of the trustees of a fund financed by royalties from T.E.’s Seven Pillars of Wisdom, for charitable and research purposes, Lawrence was able to give quiet financial assistance and personal encour- agement to many students and worthy projects in various fields, including archaeology, the arts and 182 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE sciences and architecture. It was as a trustee of the Seven Pillars Fund that Lawrence was able to make the first of his instrumental efforts to preserve the Avebury landscape: he was largely responsible, in the late 1930s, for diverting a proposed housing scheme away from Waden Hill and helped to raise money for the National Trust’s purchase of the main monument. In recent years he took great interest in the fight to rescue Avebury from the pressures of inappropriate commercial development and discreetly provided the vital financial impetus for the National Trust’s latest purchases at West Kennett. Avebury’s debt to the Lawrence brothers is immeasurable. That our Society and his Wiltshire friends have been enriched by Lawrence’s presence 1n Devizes 1s due to the kindness of Peggy Guido, who rescued him from a sad existence after the death of his wife in 1986, restoring him with the comfort of her home and affection, and enabling him to return, with the help of Hugh Seymour, to a re-working of his 1935 edition of Herodotus. My own brief acquaintance with this exceptional man has allowed me to recognise, in the many published and unpublished tributes to him in recent months, those qualities which others also found in a person of great presence and intellectual gifts: a questing and independent spirit, direct in thought and action, showing honesty and integrity in dealing with philosophical argument as well as with all sorts of people. His extraordinary charm, generous and com- passionate nature and infectious joie de vivre were obvious in a man who loved to please and enjoyed the company of others. I recall visiting him not long ago in hospital, by mistake on the day he had returned home: the small ward was full of subdued patients, all lamenting the loss of their lively companion, and none of them with any idea of who he was or of his famous connections. Among the quotations gleaned from recent tributes to Lawrence, two used by himself remain in mind, for they are also entirely characteristic of the man. In 1962, he wrote of his brother T.E.: ‘He could not be beholden to authority; he would not accept the ma- terial value of possessions, he wanted to travel light and travel truthfully’. And, under ‘recreations’ in his entry for Who’s Who, he gave: ‘going to and fro in the earth and walking up and down in it’ (Job 1:7). Also characteristic was an acknowledgement, draf- ted by Lawrence not long before he died ‘of these better men who by example helped towards making me’: the list includes writers, academics, poets and military men; among them his brother T.E. Law- rence, Siegfried Sassoon, Col. Alan Dawnay and two Argentinians, distinguished writers and freedom fighters, Victoria Ocampo and Maria Rosa Oliver, who helped him to ‘appreciate the New World’s divergence from the Old’. KATE FIELDEN John Langford Rowland, a Member of our Council and a generous benefactor of the Society and its Museum, died in October 1990 at the age of 70. The following address was given by Admiral Sir William O’Brien at his memorial service on 7 November 1990. My qualification for addressing you on this sad oc- casion derives solely from my association with John in the Kennet & Avon Canal Trust. That organisation, however, does not just have a professional life in restoring the canal but also a social life in which its members join in friendship and fellowship. So we have seen a good deal of one another over the years. I first got to know John in the early ’70s when I joined the Canal Trust, shortly after my retirement from the Navy, though, of course, like other cus- tomers of Slopers we had some earlier contact. When Rita and I first came to Devizes in 1966 it was sull served by several traditional, relatively unchanged retailers: Mr Lewis the Grocer, Mr Burt the Ironmonger and, preeminently, Slopers under John’s avuncular management, where a lady could still spend 15 minutes selecting a particular shade of thread and have an assistant patiently beside her all the ume. It was the last example, in my experience, of that essential to any country town, the ladies’ haber- dashery cum department store. If one loved John for nothing else, one would love him for keeping operational that marvellous cash system which winged one’s invoice and money from every corner of the shop to the cashier, sitting proudly in her tower in the centre, who sent it zinging back with the change along the overhead wire. When Slopers had gone and this centralized cash system, so evocative of the childhood of people of my age, had also gone — for ever, I thought — I was delighted to meet it again in a shop in Tauranga, Bay of Plenty, New Zealand. I do not know if they ever applied to Devizes Museum for spare parts — I told them to — because that is where John deposited this piece of machinery, in the Museum to which he devoted much of his time in recent years. Indeed, John has been a generous benefactor of the Museum and many items that you will see in the Local History gallery were donated by him. He was OBITUARIES largely responsible for obtaining the grants, donations and planning approval for the cleaning and restoration of the outside of the Museum, opening the donation list himself with a generous convenanted payment. His wide range of friends and his local knowledge were invaluable to the Museum, both in the money he raised for this and other projects and in the liaison he performed with the Chamber of Commerce, Town and District Councils. John was a dedicated member of the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society — on the Executive Committee and the Projects and Staff Sub-Committees. This dedication, allied with his business acumen and financial advice, will be much missed by the Society. A replacement will be hard to find. John’s particular service to this town embraced not only his interest in the canal that traverses it and the commerce that sustains it (he was an enthusiastic Member of the Chamber of Commerce and its Presi- dent from 1955 to 1957) but also its Rugby Football Club which he had joined on leaving Framlingham School, where his love of the game was born. He played for the Club before and after the War and when his playing days were over, he continued to the end of his life as an outstanding supporter of the Club, serving for many years on the Committee and as Club Chairman from 1962 to 1965. The last time I saw John was at the reopening of the canal by Her Majesty the Queen to whom he was, very properly, presented. John was a very early member of the Kennet & Avon Canal Association, from which the present Trust evolved, and was closely associated with that other distinguished Devizes citizen, Dr Bernard Hancock, in the for- mulation and delivery of the petition to the Queen to prevent the canal’s closure by Act of Parliament in the 1950s. He was for many years on the Committee of the Devizes Branch of the Trust, served a period as Chairman and was one of the longest-serving mem- bers of the Trust Council. For several years now he has been one of our Vice-Presidents. He, of all people, should have been present last Friday when the Town Council honoured the Devizes Branch with the grant of a civic honour. I do not think that John really enjoyed being a - Branch Chairman. He preferred to work away for the Canal Trust quietly in the background, and he was for many years a loyal lieutenant to General Sir Hugh Stockwell, my predecessor, to whom he was devoted. Indeed, in the General’s day, when the Trust had no office and everyone worked from his own house, Slopers became a sort of substitute headquarters for 183 the Trust and for the distribution of its Magazine, The Buity, and a meeting place where we could transact business. John had a special role as adviser and peacemaker in umes of difficulty. In a voluntary organisation people do not always agree with what the Chairman or others do. John would point the way to the com- promise that was needed or he might say: ‘Don’t you worry Bill, leave it to me: P’ll have a word with him’. I would smile to myself at this because, you know, John was quite incapable of having ‘a’ word with anyone but, at whatever length he expressed himself, he did so with sincerity. We all knew that he was a thoroughly good and well-intentioned person and we respected him. I often marvelled at John’s encyclopaedic knowledge on so many diverse subjects. Whatever topic might be raised, John seemed to have a view on it, know its history, how it worked, where it came from, where it was going. I was not surprised, therefore, on one occasion when he was driving me to Newbury for some meeting, to be given detailed and explicit directions about what I should have to do to the dozen Dorset Horn sheep I had just bought to graze my meadow. Dosing, dagging, shearing, dip- ping, lambing, liver-fluke, footrot: he took me through the cycle of disasters that would strike. They did — John had known it all. He always seemed to. John has a special place in my wife’s affections because of the courtesy he always showed her. I have sometimes (she would probably say often) neglected her at social functions, getting myself engrossed in discussion with someone on the current problems of the K & A. John would always come over to talk to her, get her a drink, make charitable excuses to her for my bad manners and make her feel at home. He was a kind and thoughtful man. I am conscious that I have covered John’s life most inadequately. I am sure there must be much to tell of his early years and of his service in the Royal Wilt- shire Yeomanry during the War. The large congrega- tion here at his memorial service is the most telling tribute to this man whom we will all miss. Bowmont Weddell, known to generations of ento- mologists in Wiltshire as Bow, died recently at the age of 96. He moved to Trowbridge from Scotland in 1931, where he had been in the woollen trade, to join Palmer and Mackay’s as a designer. He remained with the firm until 1963, finishing his career with them as a director. 184 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE His association with the Society began formally in 1948, if not before, when he became its Entomological Recorder, a post he held until 1975, when he was over 80. His knowledge and experience of butterflies and moths in Wiltshire was exceptional and he travelled widely all over the county and further afield in search of particular species. He laid the foundation of Baron de Worms’ invaluable Macrolepidoptera of Wiltshire, published in 1962, by card indexing each species with its individual records, largely gleaned from local collectors and residents in Wiltshire, and incorporat- ing with these his own extensive records. For many years he held moths evenings for Society members all over the county and became a regular speaker on the subject, enthusing many a young ‘bug-hunter’, as the term then was, to convert his interest into a serious study of the larger or micromoths. It is only within recent years and the arrival of the Biological Record Centre and its computers that the formal annual selection of species constructed by him and published in the Society’s journals has been superseded. He made a very extensive collection of species, which with typical foresight he gave away before he died. The Society itself has benefitted by a useful series of moths taken in Wiltshire, presented by him and kept in the reserve collections. His outstanding assemblage of microlepidoptera, of which he was particularly proud, was given to the Edinburgh Natural History Museum and what remained of his collection he donated to the World Wildlife Fund, for them to dispose of. Amongst his other interests, he will be remembered particularly for his association with the Tabernacle (later the United Church) of Trowbridge; his work as a founder member of Oxfam in the town, which he served as its first Chairman, and as a performer with, and latterly vice president of, Trowbridge Orchestra. With his many concerns and willingness to undertake charitable work, it was not surprising that he was one of the earliest and most deserving recipients, in 1973, of the Trowbridge Civic Award. He leaves a large family of two daughters, two grandsons and nine great grandchildren, and will be remembered with affection by many naturalists and entomologists, many of whom owe their interest to his encouragement. JOHN D’ARCY Major-General Sir John Willoughby, KBE, CB died on 23 February, 1991. His distinguished career as a soldier was matched in retirement by his love of Wiltshire’s archaeological past. John Edward Francis Willoughby was born on 18 June 1913. He came from West Knoyle. Educated at the Nautical College, Pangbourne, and at Sandhurst, he was commissioned into the Middlesex Regiment. He went with the BEF to France in 1939 and returned in the evacuation from Dunkirk. In 1943 he became officer commanding 2nd Middlesex and subsequently GSO1 of 220 Military Mission, visiting America, the Pacific and Burma. He commanded the Ist Dorsets in the North-West Europe campaign. After the war he became an instructor at the Staff College, Camberley, later serving in Hong Kong as a company commander again with the Middlesex Regiment. In the 1950s he saw frontline action in the Korean War and then became GSO1 3 Infantry Division with Middle East Land Forces. He commanded the Ist Middlesex in Austria and the Middle East and from 1956 to 1957 he was in Cyprus. From 1959 to 1965 he was Colonel of the Middlesex Regiment; in 1961 he became Chief of Staff, Land Forces, Hong Kong and from 1963 to 1965 was GOC 48 Infantry Division (TA) and the West Midlands Division. From 1965 to 1967 he was GOC Land Forces Middle East Command. In 1966 he led the mission to study the logistics of getting troops into Zambia when Harold Wilson had agreed with President Kaunda that a token force should be ready to intervene in Rhodesia should the Smith regime collapse. In Aden he had the unenviable task of maintaining security in the area when the British presence there had been called into question. His effective leadership was such that his period in office might have been extended but instead, from 1968 to 1971, he was adviser on defence to the then Federation of Arab Emirates, in which capacity he strove to create a common defence force based on the former Trucial Oman Scouts. John Willoughby was appointed OBE in 1953, CBE in 1963, CB in 1966 and KBE in 1967 (an exceptional distinction for a major-general). His interests ranged from athletics and fencing, at which he represented the army in his younger days, to painting and archaeology. His involvement as an amateur archaeologist included the recording of mon- uments on Salisbury Plain in the 1970s and 1980s, support for those struggling to achieve better protec- uon for those monuments, service on Salisbury Plain Conservation groups and the CBA Group 12 Salisbury Plain Sub-Committee and the recording of archaeo- logical collections in Salisbury Museum. From 1984 until his death Sir John was a Trustee of Salisbury Museum. He served on its Management OBITUARIES Committee and occasionally represented the Museum on the Council of the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society. He was the perfect volun- teer: he did all that was asked, instinctively knew what you dared not ask and did it, provided a constant fund of humour (often at someone else’s expense though always without malice) and was enthusiastic when lesser mortals were flagging. He never stood on ceremony, being just as much at home painting showcases as preparing catalogues. He was anxious never to let one down and, despite his ill-health latterly, continued bravely to support others when he was doubtless feeling most in need of support himself. His huge experience, incisive mind and wicked sense of humour (he once swam the length of a swimming pool in a dinner jacket and more recently fired a potato from a model ballista at a less than well-liked 185 reured officer) brought cheer in later life to his younger friends and doubtless to his men in earlier days. He never allowed his status to come between himself and the common man and all who knew him were enriched by his humanity. His generosity and doggedness of spirit impressed me most. I particularly recall his visiting me late one day on a remote rescue excavation on the military ranges. Seeing the provisions were lacking but hours of work remained he drove off miles away to his home at Codford and returned, apparently without ever a glance at his speedometer, with an ample supply of hot sausages. To me those sausages sum up the genius of the man. PETER SAUNDERS Index NOTE: Wiltshire places are indexed under civil parishes. The subscription list, pp.90—-2, has not been indexed. Abbot’s Worthy, Hants, 29 acid rain, 136~7 Acle, Reynold de, 76 AERE, Isotope Geoscience Section, 140 Aesop, 64 Aethelric II (Bishop of Selsey), 70 agriculture, Bronze Age, 173 Ailesbury, Charles Bruce, Marquis of, 94, 98 Albin, John, 80 Alexander, Mr (of Avebury), 169; William, 107 Alfred the Great, 167 Allee, William, 85 Allington, Boscombe villa, 175 Alresford, Hants, 88; see also New Alresford Alton, Alton Barnes, 83, 87 Alton, Hants, 53 Amery, Parkes, Macklin and Co., 117 Amesbury, 82; Abbess of, 66; note on barrows 61 and 72, 140-1; barrow 147, 14; barrow G58, 13; barrow G85, 13; Butterfield Down, 156; King Barrows, 156; Luxen- borough Plantation, 156; Park, grave group, 14; priory, 72, 78; see also Stonehenge amphorae, Roman, 41 Anderson, A.S., 147-8 Andrews, John, 90 Anne (Queen of Richard II), 78 Anstey’s New Bath Guide, 110 Anuquaries, Society of, 101, 109 Antwerp, Belgium, 155 Architectural Antiquities of Great Britain, 108-9 Armagh, Ireland, 88 arms and armour, medieval, 179 army trenches, 3, 5, 6, 8 Arne, Thomas, 99 Arreton Down, Isle of Wight, 14 Ashbee, Paul, note on radiocarbon from Amesbury barrows, 140-1; work reviewed, 173 Ashley, Sir John, 77 Asser, Bishop, 173 Astley, Francis Dugdale, 84 Atkinson, Richard J.C., 140, 163 Aubrey, John, 105, 111, 140, 154, 163-72, 174, 176 Austin, John, 78 Australia, 174 Avebury, 87, 130; Beckhampton avenue, 165, 166, 168, 169; Cove, 165, 166, 168, 170-1; Devil’s Chair, 168; ‘Devil’s Quoits’, 166, 169; early plans, 163-72; Keiller Museum, 141; Kennet avenue, 165, 168, 169; Longstones, 169; note on human remains from barrows, 141-4; Portal stones, 168-9; Sanctuary, 168; Silbury Hill, 64, 65, 168, 176; Swindon Stone, 168; West Kennett, 156-7 Avon: see Butcombe, Camerton, Chew, Marshfield, Sea Mills Avon, River (Bristol Avon), 27, 29 Avon Valley, 82, 87 Awdry, Ambrose, 84 Ayliffe family, 29 Bacchus, collegium for worship, 146 badges, pilgrim and secular, 179-80 Baker, Mr (Southampton bookseller), 80 Bale, Joseph, 88 bands, Wiltshire militia, paper on, 93-100 Bannaventa, Northants, 60 barn, post-medieval, 158 Barnes, I., 158, 159, 161 Barrett, Mr (of Derby), 119 barrows, 156; bell, 8, 141-4; bowl, 1, 9, 140-1; disc, 8; ditches, 3—9; folklore of, 176; long, 1; pond, 173; round, 159; saucer, 140-1 Bartlett, W.H., 107, 108 Basire, James, 107 Bath, 102, 110, 164 Bayeux tapestry, 64 Bayly, Capt (Wiltshire militia), 94 Baynton, Sir Edward, 78 Beauchamp, Richard (Lord St Amand), 78; Roger, 77; Thomas, 78 Beauties of England and Wales, 107-8 Beauties of Wiltshire, 105-7 Beaven, Thomas, 84 Beckford, William, 110 Belgium, Antwerp, 155 Bell, M., work reviewed, 173 belt hook, Early Bronze Age, 5, 8, 9, 12-14 Berkshire, 81, 88; see also Churchill, Newbury, Windsor Berwick St Leonard, 151 : Bicknor, John of, 77 Bighton, Hants, 88 Billings, R.W., 107 birds, as messengers, 152 Birkede, Denmark, 171 Birmingham, New Street Station, 116 Blackstone, Sir William, 88 Blake, R.H.D., 153 Blandford, Marquis of, 95 Blois, Henry of, 73,74 Blore, Edward, 107 Blowe, Hugh, 72 Blunsdon, Blunsdon House Hotel, 157; Broad Blunsdon, Sy Bodinaar, Sir John, 114 Bolton, Duke of, 80 bone, animal, 6, 157, 159 Bonner, D., 158 Bonney, D.J., review by, 177-8 book-mounts, late Saxon, 63 Boscawen-Un, Cornwall, 167 Bosham, West Sussex, 64 Boss Hall, Suffolk, 149, 150 Boucher, Mrs Mary, 89 boundaries, field, Romano-British, 9 Bowood, 87, 89, 106 Box, Three Shires Stones, mount from, 68, 69 Boyes, Robert, 83, 85, 88; Sarah, 85 Bradford on Avon, 87; Barton Farm, 151; Bearfield Farm, 157; Blindhouse, 17; Catsholehill, 151; Hermitage, 151; mount from, 64-5; Tory Chapel, 151 Bradley, Edward, 85 Braughing, Herts, 59 INDEX Braydon, 29; Ravensroost, 27; Forest, 27, 29 Brayley, Edward Wedlake, 105, 107, 108, 109 Breadhower, Mr (Portsmouth bookseller), 80 bricks, Romano-British, 39 brickworks, 34 Bridges, Henry, 78 Brinkworth, excavation of Roman kiln site, 27-50; agri- culture, 27, 29; Brook, 27; Callow Hill, 27; Causeway End, 27, 29; Grittenham, 29; Longman’s Street Farm, 34; Ramps Hill, 27; The Common, 27; Walter’s Leaze, 29; Webb’s Plot, 29; Windmill Leaze, 29 Bristol, 73, 102; Cathedral, 109; St Mary Redcliffe Church, 110 British Lichen Society, 130 British Museum, 149 Britton, John, paper on, 101-13; Mary, 101 Brixton Deverill, Cold Kitchen Hill, 51, 61 Brockworth, Glos, 51 Bromham, St Edith’s Marsh, 157 brooches, Roman, 9, 21-3, 51-62; Aucissa-Hod Hill brooches, 59-60; Colchester derivatives, 51-8; plate, 60-1; Polden Hill type, 53-4; strip, 58-9 Brothwell, Don, note on human remains from Avebury, 141-4 Brounckner, Lord, 164 Brown, John, 84 Brown Candover, Hants, 88 Bruce family, 95; Charles, 94, 98; Lord Thomas, 82, 94, 95, 97 Buchan, William, 104 Buckinghamshire, 81, 87, 121; see also Maids-Moreton; Milton Keynes Buckler, John C., 101, 107, 112 Buckner, John Adam, 95, 96, 97 Burdon, John, 85 Burl, Aubrey, note on the Heel Stone, 140; review article on Avebury plans, 163-72 Burleigh, Rev (of Brown Candover), 88 Burn, Maj-Gen Andrew, 80 Burnett, Andrew, note on clipped solidus, 148-9 Burrough family, 83; J., 88; Thomas, 81, 85 Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, 180 Butcombe, Avon, 53 Bute, Lord, 88 Butler, John, 88 Butterworth, C.A., report on Norton Bavant excavations, 1-26 Byrt family, 82 Cadwalla, King, 29 Caerleon, Gwent, 53 Calnan, Christopher, 13 Calne, Lansdowne Strand Hotel, 114; Woodlands, paper on, 114-20 Calne Without: Lower Beversbrook Farm, 158; Quemer- ford, 97 Cambridge, 87 Cambridgeshire: see Cambridge, Ely; Peterborough; Wil- lingham Camden, William, 105, 107, 167, 168, 171 Camerton, Avon, 53, 54, 56 Canham, Roy, review by, 174-5 Canterbury Cathedral, 109 Card, Robert, 96 Carey, Maj-Gen (of Eltham), 80 Carlisle, 116 Carter, John, 111 Carteret, Earl, 81 187 Cassiobury Park, Herts, 110 Castle Combe, 158 castles at Marlborough and Ludgershall, paper on, 70-9; Castle Combe, 158 Cathedral Antiquities of Great Britain, 109-10 Catsgore, Somerset, 19, 20, 58 Cattermole, George, 107, 108; Richard, 109 cemeteries, Anglo-Saxon, 150, 160 Chandler, Chris, 161; John, 153; work reviewed, 173-4 Chapman, Mr (theatre manager), 105 Charles II, 163, 164, 167, 168, 170 Charlesworth, Frederick, 117; Lilian, 114-15, 117, 118; May, paper on, 114-20; Mrs Miriam, 116, 117, 119-20; Violet Gordon (alias May), 114~20 Charleton, Walter, 163-72 Charlotte, Queen, 88 Charlton (near Pewsey), 169 Chatterton, Thomas, 112 Cherhill, Oldbury Hillfort, 158 Cherubini, 99 Cheselden, William, 104 Chester, 180 Chesterfield, Derbs, 119 Chew, Avon, 53, 54, 56, 58 Cheyney, Roger de, 77 Chichester, West Sussex, 22, 56 Chilcombe, Hants, 88 Chilmark, Eyewell Farm, 158-9 Chilton Foliat, Chilton House, mount from, 66, 67 Chippenham, 82, 102; College, 158 Chippindale, Christopher, work reviewed, 174-5 Chitterne, 159 Chorley, Lancs, 120 Christ of the Trades, wall-painting, 153 Chubb, William, 83 Churchill, Berks, 37 Chute, 78; forest, 70 Cirencester, Glos, 19, 37, 38, 39-46, 47-8, 51, 66 Cladonia spp., 135, 137-8 Clarence, Duke of, 78 Clarendon Palace, 179 Clark, Alan J., work reviewed, 163-72; Anthony, work reviewed, 175; Lord Kenneth, 108; Thomas, 112 Cleal, R.M.J., report on Norton Bavant grave goods, 9-14 clergymen, 87 Clifford, Roger de, 76-7 Clwyd: see Prestatyn; Rhyl; St Asaph Clyffe Pypard, 73 Codford, 159 coins, Anglo-Saxon, 150; hoard, 156; medieval, 179; Romano- British, 156 Colchester, Essex, 22 collegium for Bacchus worship, 146 Collingbourne Ducis, 14 Collingbourne Kingston, 87 Collingbourne, William, 78 Collins, Benjamin C., 80, 81 colluvial deposits, Bronze Age, 159 Colvin, Howard, note on Wilton House gardens, 154 Colymbosaurus, 125, 126 Conybeare, J., 80 Cooke, Miss (of Enford), 88; William (senior), 81, 87; William, 81—3 Coombes, T., 80 Cooper, Mrs Frances, 89 Cooper, Robert, 83, 84 Copper-Plate Magazine, 105 Copyright Acts, 111 188 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE | Cornaro, William Luigi, 104 Corney, Mark, reviews by, 173, 175 Cornish, E.G., 149 Cornwall: see Boscawen-Un; Hurlers; Nor’ Nour Corsham, 106; Boyd’s Farm, mount from, 66—7; Gastard, 147-8, Roman brooches from, 51-62; House, 110 Cotman, J.S., 107 Cotswold Archaeological Trust, 160 Cox, Thomas, 105 Coxe, William, 109 Crambe, North Yorks, 37 Crawford, O.G.S., 163 Crayford, Kent, 68 cremations, Bronze age, 141-4; pyre, 141 Cricklade, 82, 158; burghal defences, 160 Crispen, Miles, 29 Cromarty, Scotland, 115 cropmarks, 1, 3 Crouch, William, 89 Cryptocleidus, 125, 126 Cumberland, 87 Cumbria: see Carlisle; Cumberland; Kendal Cunningham, Hugh, 99 Cunnington, William (I), 106, 112, 177; William (IIT), 112 Currie, C.K., report on Brinkworth excavations, 27-50 Curtoys, Charles, 87 d’Arcy, John, obituary by, 183—4 daggers, Early Bronze Age, 5, 9-12 Daily Chronicle, 115, 117 Dalby, Charles Edward, 89; Frances, 89; Joseph, 89 Danbye, Henry, Earl, 29 Darling, Mr Justice, 119 David, Andrew, work reviewed, 163-72 Dayes, Edward, 107 de Caus, Isaac, 154 de Savary, Peter, 146 Defoe, Daniel, 105, 107, 174 Delair, J.B., paper on Swindon plesiosaurs, 121-7 Denmark, 167, 171; see also Birkede; Sonderholm; Velds Dennison, Lynda, 153 Denton, Dale and Sons, 115 Derby, 116, 119, 120 Derbyshire: see Chesterfield; Derby; Stanton Moor Despenser, Hugh le, 73, 77 Devereux, Paul, work reviewed, 174-5 Devizes, 82, 83, 84, 87, 90, 97, 112; paper on subscription list from, 80-92; Bancroft charity, 88; Bear Club, 84; Bear Hotel, 87; castle, 73, 74; freemasonry, 83; Market Place, 173; New Park Street, 158; St John’s Church, 84, 87; Wiltshire Archaeological Society Library, 81, 89 Devizes and Wiltshire Gazette, 95 Devizes Improvement Commission, 83 Devon: see Exeter; Plymouth Didmarton, Glos, 87 Dillon, Patrick, paper on Fyfield Down lichens, 128-39 disease, childhood deficiency, 141-4 Distin family (musicians), 99 ditches, prehistoric, 161; Romano-British, 3, 6, 159, 160, 161 Dodd, William, 104 Dodsworth, William, 109,110 Domvile, Rev Dr (of Dublin), 88 Dorchester, Dorset, 24 Dorset, 81, 87, 121, 173; see also Dorchester; Evershot; Frampton; Halstock; Hengistbury Head; Hod Hill; Maiden Castle; Ower; Poundbury; Shaftesbury; Shap- wick; Sixpenny Handley; Stoke Abbot Dortmund, Germany, 148 Down Husbourne, Hants, 85 Downton, 83 drawings, archaeological, 175-6 Drelincourt, Charles, 104 Dreux, Robert de, 74 drier, ceramic, Romano-British, 36—7 Drinkwater, John, 80 Druidism, 174 Dublin, 88 Ducklington, Oxon, 153 Dudley, Edward, 78 Duffett, Sgt (Wiltshire militia), 96 Dunstanville, Walter de, 74 Durrington Walls, 169 Dury, Andrew, 90 Dyer, C.A., 157, 160, 161-2 East Kennett, 156-7, 168 Eastlake, C.L., 110 Easton, John of, 76 Edinburgh, 116, 118 Edith, Saint, 179 Edward I, 72 Edward of Salisbury, 70 Edward, St, 151 Edwards, John, note on Purton wall-paintings, 153 Eleanor of Provence (Queen of Henry III), 72, 77, 78 Elizabeth (Queen of Edward IV), 78 Elizabeth (Queen of Henry VII), 78 Ellison, Anne, 177 Elstub hundred, 83 Eltham, Kent, 80 Ely, Cambs, 180; Cathedral, 166 enclosures, palisade, late Neolithic, 156-7 Enford, 81, 82, 83, 87, 173; Longstreet, 83 English Heritage, 174 Er-Lannic, France, 170 Erlestoke Sands Golf Course, 160 Ernle, Sir Edward, 88 Essex: see Colchester; Waltham Cross Essex, — (painter of watch-faces), 105 Esturmy, Henry, 76; John, 77; William, 78 Ethelred, King, 151 Eustace (son of King Stephen), 74 Evans, — (publisher), 105 Evercreech, Som, 88 Everett, David, 163 Everleigh, 83, 87, 88 Evershot, Dorset, 88 Evesham, battle of (1265), 77 Exeter Cathedral, 109 Eyles family, 83 Fairford, Glos, 158 Farwell, Dave, 161 fibula, Romano-British, 146 Fielden, Kate, obituary by, 181-2 Fielding, Copley, 107 Fiennes, Celia, 174 Figgins family, 83 Figheldean, Knighton Farm, mount from, 66, 67 Fishbourne, West Sussex, 39-46 Fittleton, 83, 88 FitzHubert, Robert, 73 FitzJohn, Gilbert, 76 FitzPeter, William, 74 flagons, Romano-British, 27, 36, 39-41, 43-5, 48 INDEX flintwork, Mesolithic, 158; Neolithic, 160; prehistoric, 24-5, 156 Flower, George, 84 folklore, of ancient sites, 176-7 Fonthill Abbey, 110; Splendens, 110 Foot, James, 87 Ford, Northumb, 14 Fortrose, Scotland, 115, 116 Fosse Way, 69 Fowler, Peter, work reviewed, 174; Richard, 169 Frampton, Dorset, 14 France, 105, 180; see also Er-Lannic; Fresnay-sur-Sarthe; Kerlescan; Normandy; Paris Freefolk, Hants, 85 freemasonry, 83 Fresnay-sur-Sarthe, France, 76 Freston, Suffolk, 150 Fromund, Stephen, 76 fulling-mills, 153 Fyfield, paper on lichens from Fyfield Down, 128-39 Fyfield Down National Nature Reserve, 128 Gale, John, 83 Gandy, Joseph, 107 garden features, Post-Medieval, 159 Garget, Hugh, 76 garnets, 150 Garth family, 83; Charles, 89 Gent family, 83 geomancy, 174 George III, 81, 88 George, William, 146 Germany, 180; see also Dortmund; Kiel Gilbert the Marshal, 73 Gilebert (donor of pendant), 152 Giraldus Cambrensis, 166 Glamorgan, 82 Glasgow, 116 glass, Romano-British, 23-24 Gloucester, 89; Cathedral, 109 Gloucester Archaeological Unit, 48 Gloucester, Duke of, 78 Gloucestershire, 82, 87, 88, 105; see also Brockworth; Ciren- cester; Didmarton; Fairford; Kemble; Oldbury; Poulton; Prinknash; Stroud; Toddington Gnadenstuhl Trinity, 153 Goddard family, 82; E.H., 101 Godfrey, R., 75 Godwin, George, 111, 112 gold pendant, from Pewsey, 149-50 Goodey, Christine, paper on Fyfield Down lichens, 128-39 Gordon, General, 116 Gore, Charles, 124 Gothic Revival, 110 Graham, Alan, 156 Gratton, Mr, 117, 118 grave goods, Early Bronze Age, 5, 8-14 Great Bedwyn, 70 Great Cheverell, 87 Great Somerford, 27 Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, 88 Gregory, J., 161 Griffiths, Nick, 51, 149, 179; note on a medieval pendant, 151-2; work reviewed, 175-6 Grittleton, Foscote, 102 Grove, Thomas, 87 Guernsey, 80 Guido, Peggy, 182 189 Guildford, Surrey, 117 Gwent: see Caerleon; Newport Gwynedd: see Penmaenbach; Penmaenmawr Hague, The, Netherlands, 63 hair-powder tax, 105 Halcomb, John, 95 Halloran, L. Boutcher, 80 Halstock, Dorset, 58 Hammond, Lieut, 154 Hampshire, 82, 85, 87, 90; see also Abbot’s Worthy; Al- resford; Alton; Avon Valley; Bighton; Brown Candover; Chilcombe; Down Husbourne; Freefolk; New Alresford; Overton; Portsmouth; Romsey; South Tidworth; South- ampton; Upham; Upper Clatford; Warblington; Weyhill; Wherwell; Wield; Winchester; Winnall Down Hampton, Mr (of Erlestoke), 160 Harding (late Saxon landowner), 66 Harding, Phil, 159, 160 Harling, Norfolk, 69 harness pendants, Medieval, 179 Harris family, 114; Mrs Ann, 114; C. and T. (Calne) Ltd., 114; John, 114; William, 85 Harrison, John, 88 Hasthorpe, Sir William, 77 Hatcher, Henry, 109 Hatchwell, Richard, paper on John Britton, 101-13 Havering, John of, 77 Hawkins, Tim, 173 Hay, Lady Catherine, 89 Haycock, Lorna, paper on Devizes subscription list, 80-92 Haydon, Benjamin, 108 Healy, F., report on Norton Bavant flintwork, 24-5 Hearne, Thomas, 107 Heath, Martin, obituary of, 181 Heathcote, Josiah Eyles, 84 Heathfield Park, Sussex, 89 Hellesdon, Norfolk, 66, 67 Hengistbury Head, Dorset, 24 Henry I, 70, 73 Henry II, 70, 74, 76 Henry III, 70, 72, 74, 76 Henry IV, 78 Henvill, Philip, 89 Herbert, Sir William, 78 Hereford, Bishop of, 88 Hereford Cathedral, 109 Hertfordshire: see Braughing; Cassiobury Park; Little Amwell; Puckeridge; St Albans; Verulamium; Ware Hervey, James, 104 Hethersett, Norfolk, 69 Heytesbury, 112, 159; House, 159; Tytherington, 9; West Hill Farm, 159 Hill, Dr (of London), 89; Mr (of Calne), 116 hillfort, Iron Age, 161 Hillier family, 104, 105; George, 83, 85; Isaac, 83, 85; Samuel, 104 Hoare, Sir Richard Colt, 101, 106, 107, 110, 112, 177 Hockwold-cum-Wilton, Norfolk, 60 Hod Hill, Dorset, 21-2 Holand, Thomas de (Earl of Kent), 77 Hollar, Wenceslaus, 107 Horne, George, 81; Louisa, 81 Horsal, Reuben, 169 Horsham, St Faith, Norfolk, 66 Hosking, William, 110, 112 house, town, Medieval, 158 Hudson, W.H., 174 190 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Huish (Hewish), 49, 87 Humphrey (Domesday tenant), 29 Hungerford family, 101; Thomas, 77; Sir Walter, 78 Hunter, Michael, work reviewed, 163-72 Huntingford, Mr (of New College, Oxford), 88 Hurlers, Cornwall, 167 Hussey, William, 84 ice house, 158 Ide, Isabel, note on Jenny Haniver, 155 Idmiston, Gomeldon, 179 Ilchester, Som, 19, 20, 54 Ingham, Sir Oliver de, 77 inhumations, Early Bronze Age, 3, 5, 14-18; Bronze Age, 141-4; Late Bronze Age, 3, 6, 9, 14, 18; Iron Age, 160; Romano-British, 158-9 Innes, Rev (of Devizes), 84; Rev (of Stockton), 87 Inverness, Scotland, 116 Ipswich, Suffolk, 61 Ireland, 82, 166; see also Armagh; Dublin Isabel (daughter of Edward III), 78 Isabel (Queen of Edward IT), 77 Isabel (Queen of John), 74 Italy, 105, 180 Jackson, J.E., 101, 111 Jamaica, 102 jars, Romano-British, 42-3, 44-6 Jefferies, Richard, 174 Jeffery, Paul, 157, 160, 161 Jenner, Anne, work reviewed, 175-6 Jenny Haniver, 155 Jersey, 80 Jervis, Thomas, 87; William, 87 Joan (daughter of Edward I), 77 Joan (Queen of Henry IV), 78 John, King, 70, 72, 74, 76 John the Marshal, 73, 74, 76 Jones, Dr Hughes, 117, 119; Inigo, 167, 169, 171; Rhys, work reviewed, 174-5; T.E., 111; W.H.Rich, 151 Jope, E.M., 163 Jordan, Katharine M., work reviewed, 176-7 Julius Caesar, 174 Jullien’s band, 99 Junius, 110 Keevil, 151 Kemble, Glos, 29 Kemsley Down, Kent, 67 Kendal, Cumbria, 116 Kennedy, James, 89 Kennet and Avon Canal Trust, 182-3 Kennet, River, 70, 146, 160, 168 Kennet Valley, 19 Kent: see Canterbury; Crayford; Eltham; Kemsley Down; Risley; Sibertswold; Tunbridge Wells Kent, Earl of, 77 Kerlescan, France, 170 Kiel, Germany, 80 Kieselbach, Mr (of Camberwell), 80 kiln, Romano-British, 27—50 Kilvert, Francis, 174 Kingston Deverell, Monkton Deverell, note on a pendant, 151-2 Kingston, Richard of, 77 Kington St Michael, 101, 102, 113; Easton Piercy, 105 Knook, 160; Horse Hill West, 159; shrunken settlement, 159 Lambeth, treaty of (1217), 76 Lamyatt Beacon, Som, 60 Lancashire, Chorley, 120 Lancaster, Humphrey (Duke of Gloucester), 78 Lansdowne, Marquess of, 106 Latton, bypass, 160, 175 Lawrence, Arnold W., obituary of, 181-2; T.E., 181-2; Thomas, 87 Le Keux, Henry, 108, 111; John, 108, 111 Lea and Cleverton, Garsdon, 88 Lee, Harry, 87 Leicester, 116 Leland, John, 78, 168, 174 Leonard, Saint, 151 Lester, Mr (of St Luke’s, London), 89 Lewes, battle of (1264), 76 Lewis, Samuel, 80 lichens on Fyfield Down sarsens, paper on, 128-39 lichens, saxicolous, 128-39 Lichfield Cathedral, Staffs, 109, 153 Liddington, 97 Lincoln, 68, 73 Lincolnshire: see Lincoln; Stamford Lindegren, Andrew, 80 Lionberg, Mr (of Kiel), 80 Lisle, Robert de, 76, 77 Literary Fund, 111 Little Amwell, Herts, 58 Little Cheverell, 87 Littlecote Roman Research Trust, 146, 160 Liverpool, 116 Lobb, S., 158 Loft, M.A., report on Brinkworth pottery, 38-49 Lomas, M.J., paper on Wiltshire militia bands, 93-100 London, 73, 76, 82, 87, 88, 89, 95, 99, 104, 110, 116, 180; Burton Street, 111; Camberwell, 80, 108; Clerkenwell Green, 104; Euston Station, 117; Fleet Street, 117; Gray’s Inn, 105; Great Fire, 172; Hatton Garden, 105; Haymar- ket, 105; Institute of Archaeology, 158; Islington, 119; Norwood Cemetery, 112; Pimlico, 88; Richmond, 111; Smithfield, 105; St John’s Square, 104; Westminster Bridge Road, 119 London Institution, 111 London Society of Architects and Antiquaries, 111 Long family, 82; Col James, 164, 166; Sir James, 94, 102; Sir James Tylney, 83; William, 88 Longleat, 108 Longman, Messrs (publishers), 108 loom weight, Romano-British, 9, 22-4 Louis VIII (King of France), 74, 76 Low Countries, 180 Lucas, John, 89 Ludgershall, paper on castle, 70-9 Ludlow, William, 78 Lydiard Millicent, Webb’s Wood, 27 MacDermott, K.H., 97 Mackenzie, Frederick, 107, 108, 109 Mackreth, D.F., paper on Gastard Roman brooches, 51-62 Maiden Castle, Dorset, 59 Maids-Moreton, Bucks, 88 Male, John de, 29 Malmesbury, Abbey, 29, 108; Market Cross, 108 Malone, Caroline, 163 Manchester, Duke of, 83 Manningford, 97 Mare, Henry de la, 76 Margaret (Queen of Henry VI), 78 INDEX Margaret of France (Queen of Edward I), 77 Markes, T., 87 Market Lavington, Grove Farm, 160 Marlborough, 89, 95, 96, 97, 164, 168, 176; paper on castle, 70-9; Common, 70; House, 75; High Street, 70; Statute of (1267), 77 Marshal family, 73; William (elder), 74, 76; William (younger), 74, 76 Marshfield, Avon, 56 Marshman, Michael, 176 Mary (daughter of Edward I), 78 Matilda, Empress, 73, 74 Maud (Queen of Stephen), 73 Mayo, William, 87 Meisi, Robert de, 76 Melksham, 84; clipped solidus from, 148-9 Melksham Without, Beanacre, 157; Forest Farm, 157; Lower Woodrow, 157-8; Rhotteridge Barn,155 Mendham, Mr (wine merchant), 104 Mepham, L.N., reports on Norton Bavant pottery and metalwork, 18—23 Merchant, Robert, 88 metalwork, Romano-British, 21-3, 156 Methuen family, 106 Michell, John, 174 Middleton, John, 89; Mrs. Mary, 89 Mildenhall, Cunetio, 37, 41, 45, 175 Mildenhall, Suffolk, 63 military camp, Roman, 146 militia, Wiltshire, 83, 84; paper on bands, 93-100 Miller, A., 161 Mills, Jo, 18 Milsome, — (Wiltshire militia), 96 Milston, 87 Milton Keynes, Bucks, 150 Milton Lilbourne, Broomsgrove, 38; Giant’s Grave, 177 Minety, 30, 37, 38, 48, 151; Oaksey Nurseries, 38 Minsheu, John, 80 Montagu family, 83; Lord, 174 Montfort, Simon de, 73, 76 Monthemer, Sir Ralph, 77 More, Hannah, 81, 88 Morgan, Sgt (Wiltshire militia), 96 Morning Leader, 117, 118 Morris, E.L., reports on Norton Bavant pottery and metal- work, 18-23 Morris, William, 174 mortaria, Romano-British, 27, 36, 39-40, 42-3 Mortimer, C., report on Norton Bavant daggers, 11-12 Morville, John, 78 mosaic, Roman, 146 Moseley, — (Baptist Minister), 102 mounts, late Saxon, paper on, 63-9 Mucegros, Robert de, 76 Muraenosaurus truncatus, 127 Muraenosaurus, 125 Murray, W., report on Norton Bavant grave goods, 9-13 music, 93-100 musical instruments, 97-8 Nadder Valley, 83, 87 nails, iron, Romano-British, 158 Nash, Frederick, 107, 109; John, 98 National Trust, 156, 174 needle, bone, Early Bronze Age, 5, 8, 9, 12-14 Netheravon, 87, 174 Netherlands, 105, 154; see also Hague, The Nettleton, 53, 58, 60 19] Neville, Alan de, 74; Hugh de, 74, 76 New Alresford, Hants, 83, 85; see also Alresford Newbery, Francis, 89 Newbolt, John Monk, 87, 88 Newbury, Berks, 89, 117 Newman, Richard, 158, 159, 160, 161 Newport, Gwent, 117 Newstead, Scotland, 53 Nichols, John, 110 Nicholson, Francis, 101 Noli me tangere wall-painting, 153 nonconformity, 83 Nor’ Nour, Isles of Scilly, 53, 56, 61 Norfolk, 53; see also Great Yarmouth; Harling; Hellesdon; Hethersett; Hockwold-cum-Wilton; Horsham St Faith; Walsingham Normandy, 111 North Tidworth, 73 North Yorkshire, 121; see also Crambe; Wycliffe Northampton, 76 Northamptonshire, Bannaventa, 60 Northey, William, 94, 96 Northumberland, Ford, 14 Norton, Maidford, 102 Norton Bavant, borrow pit excavations, 1-26 Norwich, 110, 116, 180; Bishop of, 81; Cathedral, 109, 110 Oban, Scotland, 117, 118 O’Brien, Sir William, obituary by, 182-3 occupations, eighteenth century, 84 Ogbourne St Andrew, Horse Meadow, mount from, 68, 69; Rockley, 168 Oldbury, Glos, 87 Orpheus mosaic, 146 Osmund, Saint, 179 Ottley, Mrs., 174 oven, Romano-British, 159 Overton, Lockeridge, 168; Overton Down, 128, 130-4; Overton Hill, 168 Overton, Hants, 88 Overton, Thomas, 89 Owen, David, 88 Ower, Dorset, 54 Oxford, 73, 81, 87, 105; Balliol College, 88; Bishop of, 88; Cathedral, 109; Magdalen College, 81, 83, 88; New College, 81, 83, 87, 88; Oriel College, 83; St John’s College, 88; University, 81, 83, 87, 88; Wadham College, 88 Oxfordshire, 82, 105; see also Ducklington; Oxford; Rollright Stones; Rousham; Thame, 87 papermakers, 85 Paris, 110, 180 Park, David, 153 Parker and Wise (law firm), 105 Parr, Catherine (Queen of Henry VIII), 78 Peck, William, 94, 96, 97 Peltigera spp., 135, 137-8 Pembroke, Countess of, 76; Earl of, 154 pendant, Anglo-Saxon, note on, 149-50; Medieval, 151-2 Penmaenbach, Gwynedd, 116, 117 Penmaenmawr, Gwynedd, 116 Pepys, Samuel, 164, 168 Perth, Scotland, 116 Peterborough, 67; Cathedral, 109 Pevsner, Nikolaus, 107 Pewsey, Blacknall Field, 150; Brunkard’s Yard, 149; North Hill, mount from, 64, 65; note on Anglo-Saxon pendant from, 149-50 192 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Pewsey Vale, 82, 87 Pewsham forest, 72 Philip, A., 80 Philippa (Queen of Edward III), 77, 78 Phillips, John, 84 Pickering, Sir Edward, 78 pilgrimage, 179-80 pin, bone, Early Bronze Age: see needle Pipard family, 74; William, 73 pipe, clay, 162 pits, Late Bronze Age, 3, 6; Iron Age, 160; Romano-British, Pitt-Rivers, A.H.L.F., 175 Place, C., review by, 178-9 Plantagenet, George (Duke of Clarence), 78 plesiosaurs, Portlandian, paper on, 121-7 ‘Plesiosaurus brachyspondylus’, 126 Plymouth, Devon, 116 Pole, Michael de la (Earl of Suffolk), 77 Polhill, Edward, 87 Poore family, 83; Capt (Wiltshire militia), 96; Edward, 84 Portal, Joseph, 85, 88 Portlandian strata, 121 Portsmouth, Hants, 80, 116 Potterne, Late Bronze Age pottery from, 19 pottery, Neolithic, 156; Grooved Ware, 157; Beaker, 157; Early Bronze Age, 5, 12-14, 18; Bronze Age, 173; Late Bronze Age, 18-21; Iron—Bronze Age, 158; Iron Age, 160; Romano-British, 9, 18-21, 27-50, 147-8, 156, 157, 158, 160; Black Burnished Ware, 19, 21; Grog-Tempered, 19-20; Samian Ware, 19; Savernake Ware, 19, 37, 38, 48; Severn Valley Ware, 45, 48; Medieval, 20, 34, 38, 46-7, 48-9, 157, 158, 159, 161, 162; Naish Hill, 157; Selsey Common Ware, 34; Post-Medieval, 20, 158 Poulton, Glos, 180 Poundbury, Dorset, 22, 24 Powell family, 83; John, 83 Power, Roger, 77 Powick, Thomas, 78 precipitation, 130-4, 136-7 Preshute, Clatford Bottom, 128, 130; Granham Hill, 70; paper on Marlborough Castle, 70-9 Preshute, Nicholas of, 77 Prestatyn, Clwyd, 116 Preston, Nicholas, 83, 87 Price, F., 89 ‘Primrose, Deborah’, 174 Prinknash, Glos, 153 Proudfoot, E., work reviewed, 173 Prout, Samuel, 107, 108 Puckeridge, Herts, 59 Pugin, Augustus, 111 Purton, 30, 36, 37, 97, 158; note on wall-paintings, 153 Pyle, Dominick, 154 Quakers, 83 Quelch, William, 97, 98 quern, Romano-British, 22-3 Quincy, Thomas de, 104 rabbits, 130, 137 radiocarbon dates from Amesbury, 140-1 Radnor, Earl of, 107 Raikes, Mary, 89; Robert, 89; Thomas, 89 Ramsbury, Littlecote, 146, 160-1; note on excavations, 144-7 Ramshill, William, 77 Rhodes, Richard, 109 Rhyl, Clwyd, 117 Richard I, 70, 74, 76 Richard II, 77 Richards, Julian, 156; works reviewed, 177-9 Richmond, Earl of, 78 ridge and furrow, 29, 34, 157, 158 ring ditches: see barrow ditches Ringerike style, 66 rings, finger, Medieval, 179 Risley, Kent, 150 Rivaux, Peter de, 76 roads, Roman, 27, 29 Robinson, Diane, review by, 175-6 Robinson, Paul, 149, 157; paper on late Saxon mounts, 63—9 Roches, Sir John de, 77 Rodbard, William, 88 Rodney, James, 85 Rogers, K.H., review by, 173-4; Nicholas, 153; Norman, review by, 176-7 Rollright Stones, Oxon, 167 Roman, Mr (of Upper Clatford), 88 Romsey, Hants, 80, 85 Rossini, 98-9 Rousham, Oxon, 87 Rowland, John L., obituary of, 182-3 Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, 156, 159, 177 Royal Geographical Society, 111 Royal Institute of British Architects, 111, 113 Royal Institution, 111 Royal Society, 163, 164 run-off, 130-4, 136~7 Rushall, 84 Russell, Robert, 77 Rutter, John, 110 Ryton, Salop, 88 St Albans, Herts, 180 St Amand, Almeric de, 78; Anthony, 78; Lord (Richard Beauchamp), 78 St Asaph, Clwyd, 115, 116, 118 St John, Sir Paulet, 85 Salisbury, 82, 90, 105, 112, 179; Cathedral, 89, 109; freemasonry, 83; Great Woodbury, 161; Harvard Hospi- tal, 161; Infirmary, 83; Mill Stream, 179; Museum, 174; Old Sarum, 179; Our Lady of, 179; River Avon, 179; St Edmund’s Church, 84; Trinity Hospital, 89 Salisbury, Patrick of, 74; Sibyl of, 74, 76 Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum, 174; medieval catalogue, 179-80 Salisbury Fournal and Devizes Mercury, 81 Salmon family, 83 Samian, imitation, note on, 147-8 sarsen stones, lichens on, paper on, 128-39 Saunders, Eleanor, work reviewed, 179-80 Saunders, Peter, obituary by, 184-5; work reviewed, 179-80 Savernake, Brimslade, 88; forest, 37, 38, 95 Sawer, William, 89 saxicolous substratum, 130—4 Scotland: see Cromarty; Edinburgh; Fortrose; Glasgow; Inverness; Newstead; Oban; Perth; Stenness; Tobermory; Wick Scrope, J., 89; Sir William (Earl of Wiltshire), 77 Sea Mills, Avon, 147 Seager-Smith, Rachael, 18 seal matrices, medieval, 179 seals, medieval, 152 Sealy, Henry, 85 Sebastian, Tim, work reviewed, 174-5 INDEX Seend, 84, 97; Great Thornam Farm, mount from, 67-8 Semley, 151 settlements, Romano-British, 146, 156, 160; Saxon, 146, 160; Medieval, 146 Seymour, Hugh, obituary by, 181; Lord Francis, 88 Shaftesbury, Dorset, 110, 151 Shakespeare, William, 110, 177 shale object, Romano-British, 9, 22, 23 Shapwick, Dorset, 60 Sharp, Stephen, 80; William, 85 Shaw, Henry, 107 Shelburne, Earl of, 87 Sherston, 161 Shortt, Hugh, 179 Shrewton, 89; barrow 5K, 13; Robin Hood’s Ball, 177 Shropshire, 82, 87, 88, 105; see also Ryton; Stiperstones; Wrekin; Wroxeter Shuttleworth, Francis, 83 Sibertswold, Kent, 149 Simpson, Joseph, 88; Mr (attorney), 105; Mr (of War- blington), 87 Sixpenny Handley, Dorset, 173 Skeggs, Siobhan, paper on Fyfield Down lichens, 128-39 Skinner, Raymond J., paper on the Charlesworth Case, 114-20 slag, iron-working, 22, 23 Slocombe, Pamela, note on Tory Chapel, Bradford on Avon, 151 Smith, A.C., 170; Isobel F., 163; John, 140; Mrs Martha, 119; Sydney, 174 solidus, clipped, note on, 148-9 Somerset, 82, 87, 88; see also Catsgore; Evercreech; IIches- ter; Lamyatt Beacon; Wells Sonderholm, Denmark, 63, 66 Sotwell, Roger, 78 South Glamorgan, Whitton, 56 South Tidworth, Hants, 83 Southampton, 80 Spain, 84, 180 Sparrow, William, 102, 107 species distribution model, 129 Spencer, Brian, work reviewed, 179-80; Mrs Margarata, 89 spindle whorl, Romano-British, 9, 23-4 Sporting Magazine, 105 spurs, medieval, 179 Stafford, 116 Stafford, Marquis of, 110 Staffordshire: see Lichfield; Stafford Stamford, Lincs, 80 Stanton Fitzwarren, 151 Stanton Moor, Derbs, 14 Starky, Samuel, 87 steelyard weights, medieval, 179 Stenness circle henge, Scotland, 165 Stephen, King, 73, 74 Stephens, Lieut (Wiltshire militia), 84 Stert, 83 Stevenson, Janet H., paper on Marlborough and Lud- gershall castles, 70-9 _ Stiperstones, Salop, 166, 167 surrup-mounts, Late Saxon, 63-9 Stockton, 87 Stoke Abbot, Dorset, 58, 59 stone, worked, Late Bronze Age, 22, 23; Romano-British, 22-4 Stonehenge, 87, 107, 112, 163, 164, 167-71, 174-5, 178-9; Environs Project, 177—8; Friar’s Heel, 140; note on the Heel Stone, 140 193 Stonehouse, Rev Dr, 87, 88 stonework, domestic, medieval, 179 Storer, Rev Dr (prebend of Canterbury), 80 Stourhead, 106, 107, 112 strap-ends, Late Saxon, 63 Stratford on Avon, Warwicks, 110 Stratton, — (schoolmaster), 102; John, 29 Strigoil, Isabel de (Countess of Pembroke), 76 Stroud, Glos, 66 Stukeley, William, 75, 107, 140, 163, 169, 177 Stumpe family, 29 Suffolk: see Boss Hall; Bury St Edmunds; Freston; Ipswich; Mildenhall Suffolk, Earl of, 77 Suffolk and Berkshire, Earls of, 29 Surrey, 82; see also Guildford; Tadworth Surrey, Archdeacon of, 88 Sussex, 82, 87, 88; see also Heathfield Park Sutton, Willy, 84 Sutton Benger, Draycot Cerne, 102 Sutton Veny, 9, 151; borrow pits see Norton Bavant; Pit Meads villas, 1, 9 Swindon, 82, 174; Coate, 121; Commonweal School, 121, 124; Hesketh Play Area, 161; Museum, 124; Okus Quarry, 121, 124; plesiosaurs from, paper on, 121-7; quarries, 121; Toothill Farm, 30, 37; Town Council, 124; Whitehill Farm, 30, 37, 38, 48 Switzerland, 105 Tadworth, Surrey, 175 Tamworth, Sir Nicholas, 77 Tavener, David, 173 Taylor, Josiah, 108 Temple, Sir Wiiliam, 81 terricolous substratum, 130, 134-6 textiles, medieval, 179 Thame, Oxon, 87 Thamesdown Archaeological Unit, 157, 160, 161 Thomas, Alban, 88; Edward, 173; James, paper on Devizes subscription list, 80-92; Robert, 88 Thompson, E.P., 95 tiles, Romano-British, 27-50; Medieval, 179 Timby, Jane, note on imitation Samian, 147-8 Times, The, 119 Tisbury, 121 Tissot, Samuel, 104 Tobermory, Scotland, 117 Tocotes, Sir Roger, 78 Toddington, Glos, 110 Tomlins, Rev (of Collingbourne Kingston), 87 Towers, Dr (bookseller), 105 Tristram, E.W., 153 Trotter, Thomas, 101 Trusler, Dr John, 105 Trust for Wessex Archaeology, 1, 156, 158, 159, 160, 161, 177 Tudor, Edmund (Earl of Richmond), 78 Tunbridge Wells, Kent, 110-11, 164 Tunnicliff, William, 89 Tunstall, Cuthbert, 89; Marmaduke Cuthbert, 89 Turner, Dawson, 112; J.M.W., 101, 107 Tweeddale, Marchioness of, 81, 89 Twining, Thomas, 169 Ucko, Peter J., work reviewed, 163-72 United Kingdom Review Group on Acid Rain, 136-7 Upavon, 82 Upham, Hants, 87 194 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE : Upper Clatford, Hants, 88 Upton Lovell, Well Bottom, 159 Vaughan, R.F., paper on Swindon plesiosaurs, 121-7 Velds, Denmark, 63 Vernon and Hood (publishers), 107 Verulamium, Herts, 45, 46, 53 Vilett family, 82 villas, Romano-British, 1, 146, 160, 161 Wagstaff, C.E., 103 Walerand, Robert, 76 Wales, 174; see also individual places Walker, John, 105; K.E., report on Norton Bavant metal- work, 21-3 Walrend, Richard, 29 Walsingham, Norfolk, 180 Walter, Hubert, 74, 76 Walters, Bryn, note on Littlecote excavations, 144-7 Waltham Cross, Essex, 110 Wanborough, 37, 39, 41, 45; Callas Hill, mount from, 66, 67 Ware, Herts, 60 Warren Springs Laboratory, 130 Warwickshire, Stratford on Avon, 110 Wascelin, Roger, 76 watercourses, medieval, 161 Watkins, Alfred, 174; S., report on Norton Bavant grave goods, 9-13 Watts, — (chauffeur), 114-16, 117 Weaver, John, 80 Weddell, Bowmont, obituary of, 183-4 Wells, 88; Cathedral, 109 Wesley, John and Charles, 84 West Knoyle, mount from, 68 West Lavington, 87 West Sussex: see Bosham; Chichester; Fishbourne Westbury, Angel Mill, 161 Weyhill, Hants, 88 Wheatley, W.W., 101 Wheble, — (publisher), 105 Wherwell Abbey, Hants, 74 whetstone, Early Bronze Age, 5, 9, 12-14 White, — (Wiltshire militia), 95 Whitear, William, 85 Whittle, Alasdair, 156-7, 163 Whitton, South Glam, 56 Wick, Scotland, 116 Wield, Hants, 88 Wight, Isle of, 67, 68; see also Arreton Down Wilcot, Oare, 43, 45, 177 William I, 70 Williams, Alfred, 174; Benjamin, 89; Daniel, 87; Phil, 160 Willingham, Cambs, 153 Willis, Browne, 109 Willoughby, Sir John, obituary of, 184-5 Wills, Sir Seton, 146 Wilsford, 169; Wilsford Down, 56 Wilsford-cum-Lake, Bush Barrow, 14;-Normanton Down ( barrow group, 14; Wilsford Shaft, 173 Wilson, Christine, work reviewed, 175-6 Wilton, 179; House, 89, 154 Wiltshire, Chief Constable of, 174 Wiltshire, Earl of, 77 Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, 112; see also Devizes Wiltshire Lichen Studies Discussion Group, 130 Wiltshire Rescue Archaeology Project, 27, 30 Wiltshire Society, 111 Wiltshire Topographical Library, 112 Wiltshire Topographical Society, 111 Winchester, 29, 63, 64, 66, 73, 85, 87, 88; Bishop of, 83; Cathedral, 109; College, 83, 85, 87; Dean and Chapter of, 83; Diocese, 83; Wolvesey Palace, 74 Windsor, Berks, 180 Winnall Down, Hants, 22 Winter, Gordon, 173 Winterbourne Bassett, 174 Winterbourne Stoke, barrow G47, 13 Wood, J., 103 Woodbridge Brook, 27 wooden features, medieval, 161 Wootten, Lynn, 21; report on Norton Bavant grave gocds, 9-13 Wootton Bassett, 27, 48, 96-7; Priory Cottage, 161-2 Wootton Rivers, 87 Worcester, 60; Cathedral, 109 Worm, Ole, 167, 171 Wrekin, Salop, 177 Wroxeter, Salop, 53 Wyatt, Digby, 113 Wycliffe, North Yorks, 89 Wykeham, William of, 87 Wylye, River, 1, 159 Wylye, River (?North Wilts), 29 Wylye Valley, 83, 87 Yatton Keynell, 102 York, 69; Minster, 109 Yorke, Gary, 51 Young, Edward, 104 Youngs, Susan, note on Anglo-Saxon pendant, 149-50 as wes oe a Beer ee sepa 2 Sess eee ai SSE Stes sees weparass Sy 3 3 AGaty a 3 foe sat 5 “ z = J pare ones meeps PEE ae, sae Since pea Palpitnebarrapeitace ieee