Prehistoric Henges and Circles On 1st April 2015 the Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England changed its common name from English Heritage to Historic England. We are now re-branding all our documents. Although this document refers to English Heritage, it is still the Commission's current advice and guidance and will in due course be re-branded as Historic England. Please see our website for up to date contact information, and further advice. We welcome feedback to help improve this document, which will be periodically revised. Please email comments to [email protected] We are the government's expert advisory service for England's historic environment. We give constructive advice to local authorities, owners and the public. We champion historic places helping people to understand, value and care for them, now and for the future. HistoricEngland.org.uk/advice Introductions to Heritage Assets Prehistoric Henges and Circles May 2011 INTRODUCTION In the 3rd and early 2nd millennia BC a remarkable reflecting considerable variation in their size, shape series of circular monuments was built across Britain, and layout. comprising varying combinations of earthwork banks Standing stones, whether single or paired, may be and ditches, timber posts and standing stones. Although better discussed with stone alignments, but they can be archaeologists have traditionally classified these considered here because they are broadly of the same monuments into different categories of henges, stone period, demonstrate the same upright principle, and circles and timber circles, the types cannot always be some are directly associated with stone circles. clearly differentiated and may occur as components of the same site; it seems to be their shared circular form Distributions of stone circles and henges are largely that is most significant. They represent a new type of distinct, which in part reflects the availability of arena for ritual practices and social gatherings. different building materials (Figure 5). Stone circles are concentrated in the uplands of the north and Unlike earlier causewayed enclosures and chambered west (Figure 3), especially Cumbria, the Peak District, tombs, or later round barrows, henges (Figure 1) and Devon and Cornwall. Standing stones (Figure 4) have circles (Figures 2 and 3) are almost entirely an insular a similar distribution but their main concentration is phenomenon of Britain and Ireland; superficially henge- in the south-west; a few eastern outliers include the like circular ditched enclosures from central Europe huge monolith at Rudston in Yorkshire. In contrast, are now known to be much older and unrelated henges, timber circles and pit circles are generally to the British sites. The origins of henges are much found in the downland and river valleys of the south debated, but a small number of circular and penannular and the Midlands, though they too are rare in parts enclosures from the period around 3000 BC, often of the south-east. With odd exceptions, such as the with segmented ditches in the style of causewayed Stripple Stones in Cornwall and Dyffryn Lane in enclosures, must have played a role. The best-known of Powys, combined stone circle-henges generally occur these is the first-phase ditch and bank at Stonehenge along the boundary between the two zones, in central in Wiltshire, which predates the familiar sarsen stone southern England and the Peak District. settings; the three henges at Thornborough in Yorkshire also have outer ditches of segmented form which may Stone circles are the most common type of be early in date. The atypical henge A at Llandegai in monument in this category, with at least 176 known in north Wales and the stone circle-henges of Stenness England, out of up to 1,300 from Britain and Ireland as and Brodgar in Orkney seem to be part of this a whole1. The number of standing stones is less certain, formative milieu as well. Meanwhile, megalithic features but probably of a similar order. The most recent known as coves (box-like arrangements of three or national surveys list about 50 more-or-less certain four stones resembling unroofed megalithic chambers) henges in England and 60 timber and pit circles2; new are a possible link between chambered tombs and discoveries have since augmented both lists and more stone circles, though their chronology is very uncertain. sites no doubt await detection. Henges (or henge monuments) are enclosures where, unlike those with a defensive purpose, the ditch lies inside the bank (although this is not the case at early sites like Stonehenge I – even though it gives its name to the type! – or Llandegai A). Some of them enclosed circles of upright timbers or stones, though most such circles are not associated with henge earthworks. Timber circles comprise one or more rings of post-holes marking where wooden posts once stood (Figure 2). Pit circles are similar in present-day appearance but comprise rings of pits which can be shown by excavation never to have held posts, though they often contain other types of deposit. Stone circles are among the most familiar of prehistoric monuments 1. the number of confirmed and extant stone circles in England from John Barnatt’s survey; but also among the least well understood; nevertheless, the higher figure is from Aubrey Burl’s synthesis (see Further Reading) 2. numbers from Anthony Harding’s and Alex Gibson’s surveys respectively they have been categorised into various sub-types, (see Further Reading) English Heritage Introductions to Heritage Assets Prehistoric Henges and Circles 2 Fig. 1. Arbor Low henge, Derbyshire, from the air; note the circle of fallen stones inside Fig. 2. This modern reconstruction of a timber circle from Durrington Walls, Wiltshire, the henge ditch. shows how the posts would have obscured views into the monument. DESCRIPTION in the size and spacing of the stones. These variations probably reflect a combination of regional traditions and the properties Although based on simple and related principles, henges and of the available stone (of the English circles only Stonehenge circles show great variations in size, the materials used and the has stones that were brought from a distance). arrangement of their components. These combined to produce monuments of very different appearance. The extent to which Timber circles can be divided into single (for instance, discrete sub-types can or should be identified remains a matter Ferrybridge, Yorkshire) and multiple concentric types (for of debate: for some, detailed classifications aid interpretation; instance, Durrington Walls, Wiltshire), or those with for others, they may become a substitute for it. Within each wide-spaced (for instance, Boscombe Down, Wiltshire) type there are also apparently unique sites, such as the ring of and close-spaced (for instance, Abingdon, Oxfordshire) posts. deep shafts cut through the henge ditch at Maumbury Rings in While concentric stone circles have up to four rings, timber Dorset, or the ‘sunburst’ pit circle at Catholme, Staffordshire. circles had as many as nine (at Stanton Drew, Somerset). Each individual monument is best understood as the result of Unlike standing stones, the wooden posts would have people drawing selectively on a broad architectural tradition to decayed over time, though in some cases they may have been produce a site that fitted its surroundings; thus all are somewhat deliberately removed or burnt. In the absence of surviving alike but no two are precisely the same. Archaeological structural elements reconstructions remain speculative but the investigations can inform us about sequences, chronology and timbers are usually interpreted as free-standing; the idea that the types of activities that took place. Some sites, including the some sites, such as the Sanctuary near Avebury, represent the sarsen circle at Stonehenge, may never have been finished and remains of roofed buildings has fallen out of favour, although perhaps the activity of building was an end in itself. the stone settings at Stonehenge imply that timber circles could also have supported lintels. Most henges have one or (more commonly) two entrances and are up to 110m in diameter. A few, however, are much Too little is known about pit circles to classify them in a larger, irregular in shape and may have several entrances: the meaningful way, but the pits can be widely spaced, like the four largest such ‘henge enclosures’ are all in Wessex: Avebury ring around a large central pit at Monkton-up-Wimbourne, (Figure 7), Durrington Walls, Marden and Mount Pleasant. or contiguous and forming something like a henge ditch, as at The profiles of henge ditches sometimes show evidence that Wyke Down, both in Dorset. they were gang-dug in sections. The term ‘hengiform’ was originally applied to small monuments of similar type but has Variations in the shape and size of standing stones have yet since become a catch-all name for almost any small prehistoric to be systematically assessed but some are closely related to enclosure and has therefore ceased to be useful; henges with a henges or circles as ‘portal’ stones or outliers, such as Long Meg, diameter of less than 15-20m should be termed ‘mini-henges’. (Figure 4) while others are apparently isolated or associated Henges tend to take different forms in different regions, with other types of monument. Single free-standing timber while unusual sites may reflect inter-regional contacts, e.g. the posts probably existed too but there is no defined monument ditchless henge of Irish type at Mayburgh in Cumbria. class for these. Stone circles have traditionally been divided into at least five Where different types of circle form components of the same types: small; large irregular (for instance, Long Meg and Her site the most common sequence was for an original timber Daughters, Cumbria); large regular (for instance, The Hurlers monument to be replaced or added to in stone, as at the on Bodmin Moor); concentric (for instance, The Druid’s Temple, Sanctuary: at least 40% of stone circles were preceded by Cumbria); and four-poster3; there is also considerable variability timber structures.