DOCSLIB.ORG

1. World Heritage Property Data 2. Statement of Outstanding Universal

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Periodic Report - Second Cycle Section II-Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites 1. World Heritage Property Data Comment ASSUME EH WORLD HERITAGE TEAM WILL CORRECT 1.1 - Name of World Heritage Property THIS SECTION FOR ALL SITES? English Heritage Christopher Young Correct job title - "Head of International Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites Advice" DCMS Francesa Conlon, 4th Floor, 100 Parliament Comment St, London SW1A 2QB + 44 (0) 20 7211 6117 The steering groups for the property are considering whether [email protected] to propose a name change 1.6 - Property Manager / Coordinator, Local Institution / 1.2 - World Heritage Property Details Agency State(s) Party(ies) Sarah Simmonds United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Wiltshire Council Avebury World Heritage Site Coordinator Type of Property Amanda Chadburn cultural English Heritage Identification Number Lead Adviser, Stonehenge 373bis Beth Thomas Year of inscription on the World Heritage List Stonehenge Administration Office 1986 Comment Sarah Simmonds Job title "Avebury World Heritage Site 1.3 - Geographic Information Table Officer" email is: [email protected] ie omit 2 Name Coordinates Property Buffer Total Inscription in email address Amanda Chadburn Job role "Lead Adviser, (longitude / (ha) zone (ha) year Stonehenge" no longer exists. Please delete contact. Beth latitude) (ha) Thomas Job role "Stonehenge World Heritage Site 0 / 0 ? ? ? Coordinator" is missing 0 / 0 ? ? ? Stonehenge and 51.179 / -1.825 2608.2 ? 2608.2 1986 1.7 - Web Address of the Property (if existing) Associated 1. View photos from OUR PLACE the World Heritage Monuments , Wiltshire , England , collection United Kingdom of 2. Stonehenge (English Heritage) Great Britain and 3. Avebury (National Trust) Northern Irela 4. Map of the World Heritage site (MAGIC Map server) Avebury and 51.429 / -1.854 2377.2 ? 2377.2 1986 Associated 5. Avebury World Heritage Site Avebury World Heritage Monuments , Site Avebury World Heritage Site Wiltshire , England , United Kingdom of Comment Great Britain and Please add as number 2. Stonehenge and Avebury WHS Northern Irela website www.stonehengeandaveburywhs.org and reorder the Total (ha) 4985.4 0 4985.4 remaining website addresses. 1. - 4. details are correct 5. Comment Please update website address to the following This does not reflect minor boundary review of 2008. Decision http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/artsheritageandlibraries/museumhi 32COM 8B.71 Total value for Avebury should be Property (ha) storyheritage/worldheritagesite.htm 6. Please add the 2546 and Total (ha) 2546 The total for both parts of WHS is following address: Stonehenge (National Trust) 5154 ha If figures should be rounded to the nearest ha then http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/stonehenge-landscape/ Stonehenge should read 2608 ha. 1.8 - Other designations / Conventions under which the 1.4 - Map(s) property is protected (if applicable) Title Date Link to Comment source Avebury WHS is part of the North Wessex Downs AONB. Stonehenge and associated monuments, scale 24/12/1985 SSSI in both Stonehenge and Avebury National Nature 1:25000 Reserve (Fyfield Down) Scheduled Monuments in both parts Avebury and associated sites, scale 1:50000 27/02/2009 of the site. 1.5 - Governmental Institution Responsible for the 2. Statement of Outstanding Universal Value Property Christopher Young 2.1 - Statement of Outstanding Universal Value / English Heritage Statement of Significance Head of World International Advice Paul Blaker Statement of Significance Department for Culture, Media and Sport The Stonehenge, Avebury, and Associated Sites World Head of World Heritage Heritage property is internationally important for its complexes of outstanding prehistoric monuments. It comprises two areas of chalkland in Southern Britain within which complexes of Neolithic and Bronze Age ceremonial and Page 1 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 (9:17:36 AM CEST) Periodic Report - Section II-Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Centre Periodic Report - Second Cycle Section II-Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites funerary monuments and associated sites were built. Each The megalithic and earthen monuments of the World Heritage area contains a focal stone circle and henge and many other Site demonstrate the shaping of the landscape through major monuments. At Stonehenge these include the Avenue, monument building for around 2000 years from c 3700 BC, the Cursuses, Durrington Walls, Woodhenge, and the densest reflecting the importance and wide influence of both areas. concentration of burial mounds in Britain. At Avebury, they Since the 12th century when Stonehenge was considered one include Windmill Hill, the West Kennet Long Barrow, the of the wonders of the world by the chroniclers Henry de Sanctuary, Silbury Hill, the West Kennet and Beckhampton Huntington and Geoffrey de Monmouth, the Stonehenge and Avenues, the West Kennet Palisaded Enclosures, and Avebury sites have excited curiosity and been the subject of important barrows. study and speculation. Since early investigations by John The World Heritage property is of Outstanding Universal Value Aubrey, Inigo Jones, and William Stukeley, they have had an for the following qualities: unwavering influence on architects, archaeologists, artists, Stonehenge is one of the most impressive prehistoric and historians. The two parts of the World Heritage Site megalithic monuments in the world on account of the sheer provide an excellent opportunity for further research. size of its megaliths, the sophistication of its concentric plan Today, the Site has spiritual associations for some. and architectural design, the shaping of the stones, uniquely Criterion (iii): The complexes of monuments at Stonehenge using both Wiltshire Sarsen sandstone and Pembroke and Avebury provide an exceptional insight into the funerary Bluestone, and the precision with which it was built. and ceremonial practices in Britain in the Neolithic and Bronze At Avebury, the massive Henge, containing the largest Age. Together with their settings and associated sites, they prehistoric stone circle in the world, and Silbury Hill, the form landscapes without parallel. largest prehistoric mound in Europe, demonstrate the The design, position, and inter-relationship of the monuments outstanding engineering skills which were used to create and sites are evidence of a wealthy and highly organised masterpieces of earthen and megalithic architecture. prehistoric society able to impose its concepts on the There is an exceptional survival of prehistoric monuments and environment. An outstanding example is the alignment of the sites within the World Heritage site including settlements, Stonehenge Avenue (probably a processional route) and burial grounds, and large constructions of earth and stone. Stonehenge stone circle on the axis of the midsummer sunrise Today, together with their settings, they form landscapes and midwinter sunset, indicating their ceremonial and without parallel. These complexes would have been of major astronomical character. At Avebury the length and size of significance to those who created them, as is apparent by the some of the features such as the West Kennet Avenue, which huge investment of time and effort they represent. They connects the Henge to the Sanctuary over 2km away, are provide an insight into the mortuary and ceremonial practices further evidence of this. of the period, and are evidence of prehistoric technology, A profound insight into the changing mortuary culture of the architecture, and astronomy. The careful siting of monuments periods is provided by the use of Stonehenge as a cremation in relation to the landscape helps us to further understand the cemetery, by the West Kennet Long Barrow, the largest Neolithic and Bronze Age. known Neolithic stone-chambered collective tomb in southern Criterion (i): The monuments of the Stonehenge, Avebury, and England, and by the hundreds of other burial sites illustrating Associated Sites World Heritage Site demonstrate outstanding evolving funerary rites. creative and technological achievements in prehistoric times. The State Party also proposes the revision of the brief Stonehenge is the most architecturally sophisticated description as follows: prehistoric stone circle in the world. It is unrivalled in its design The Stonehenge, Avebury, and Associated Sites World and unique engineering, featuring huge horizontal stone lintels Heritage Site is internationally important for its complexes of capping the outer circle and the trilithons, locked together by outstanding prehistoric monuments. Stonehenge is the most carefully shaped joints. It is distinguished by the unique use of architecturally sophisticated prehistoric stone circle in the two different kinds of stones (Bluestones and Sarsens), their world, while Avebury is the largest in the world. Together with size (the largest weighing over 40t), and the distance they inter-related monuments and their associated landscapes, were transported (up to 240km). The sheer scale of some of they help us to understand Neolithic and Bronze Age the surrounding monuments is also remarkable: the ceremonial and mortuary practices. They demonstrate around Stonehenge Cursus and the Avenue are both about 3km long, 2000 years of continuous use and monument building while Durrington Walls is the largest known henge in Britain, between c. 3700 and 1600 BC. As such they represent a around 500m in diameter, demonstrating the ability of unique embodiment
Recommended publications
  • THE SANCTUARY from Exploring Avebury: the Essential Guide

    THE SANCTUARY from Exploring Avebury: the Essential Guide

    NOTES ON THE SANCTUARY from Exploring Avebury: The Essential Guide www.exploringavebury.com Page 116 - Rediscovering the Sanctuary Maud Cunnington excavated the Sanctuary in 1930 with her husband Ben and a small team of workmen under the direction of Will Young. But first the Sanctuary had to be located. A few years earlier the Cunningtons had excavated Woodhenge, which was discovered from aerial photographs; the Sanctuary though, was not visible from the air and its exact location was unknown. Cunnington wrote that she attempted to find it first by using Stukeley’s 1723 sketch, but “it gave little help.” She eventually followed up Stukeley’s claim that the head of his imagined serpent (the Sanctuary) could be seen from its tail. Stukeley believed that the Beckhampton Avenue had once terminated near a group of round barrows at Fox Covert, three- quarters of a mile west of the Beckhampton roundabout. Stukeley had described this as the “serpent’s tail” terminating “near a fine group of barrows under Cherhill-hill” and claimed that “in this very point only you can see the temple on Overton-hill, on the south side of Silbury-hill.” Cunnington reported: “On going to this spot it was found that a small triangular patch of Mill Field, 2½ miles away, could be seen, and by counting the telegraph poles visible along the roadside, it became easy to define the possible area on which the Sanctuary must have stood.” (“The “Sanctuary” on Overton Hill, near Avebury” by M.E. Cunnington, WAM 45, pp. 300 – 335.) Stukeley and Cunnington both described viewing the Sanctuary from a specific place but neither supplied a map reference for it.
  • Stonehenge Bibliography

    Stonehenge Bibliography

    Bibliography Abbot, M. and Anderson-Whymark, H., 2012. Anon., 2011a, Discoveries provide evidence of Stonehenge Laser Scan: archaeological celestial procession at Stonehenge. On-line analysis report. English Heritage project source available at: 6457. English Heritage Research Report http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/news/latest/ Series no. 32-2012, available at: 2011/11/25Nov-Discoveries-provide- http://services.english- evidence-of-a-celestial-procession-at- herita ge.org.uk/Resea rch Repo rtsPdf s/032_ Stonehenge.aspx (accessed 2 April 2012). 2012WEB.pdf Anon., 2011b, Stonehenge’s sister? Current Alexander, C., 2009, If the stones could speak: Archaeology, 260, 6–7. Searching for the meaning of Stonehenge. Anon., 2011c, Home is where the heath is. National Geographic, 213.6 (June 2008), Late Neolithic house, Durrington Walls. 34–59. Current Archaeology, 256, 42–3. Allen, S., 2008, The quest for the earliest Anon., 2011d, Stonehenge rocks. Current published image of Stonehinge (sic). Archaeology, 254, 6–7. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural Anon., 2012a, Origin of some of the Bluestone History Magazine, 101, 257–9. debris at Stonehenge. British Archaeology, Anon., 2006, Excavation and Fieldwork in 123, 9. Wiltshire 2004. Wiltshire Archaeological Anon., 2012b, Stonehenge: sourcing the and Natural History Magazine, 99, 264–70. Bluestones. Current Archaeology, 263, 6– Anon., 2007a, Excavation and Fieldwork in 7. Wiltshire 2005. Wiltshire Archaeological Aronson, M., 2010, If stones could speak. and Natural History Magazine, 100, 232– Unlocking the secrets of Stonehenge. 39. Washington DC: National Geographic. Anon., 2007b, Before Stonehenge: village of Avebury Archaeological and Historical wild parties. Current Archaeology, 208, Research Group (AAHRG) 2001 17–21.
  • Stonehenge and Avebury WHS Management Plan 2015 Summary

    Stonehenge and Avebury WHS Management Plan 2015 Summary

    Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Site Management Plan Summary 2015 Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Site Management Plan Summary 2015 1 Stonehenge and Avebury World Heritage Site Vision The Stonehenge and Avebury World Heritage Site is universally important for its unique and dense concentration of outstanding prehistoric monuments and sites which together form a landscape without parallel. We will work together to care for and safeguard this special area and provide a tranquil, rural and ecologically diverse setting for it and its archaeology. This will allow present and future generations to explore and enjoy the monuments and their landscape setting more fully. We will also ensure that the special qualities of the World Heritage Site are presented, interpreted and enhanced where appropriate, so that visitors, the local community and the whole world can better understand and value the extraordinary achievements © K020791 Historic England © K020791 Historic of the prehistoric people who left us this rich legacy. Avebury Stone Circle We will realise the cultural, scientific and educational potential of the World Heritage Site as well as its social and economic benefits for the community. © N060499 Historic England © N060499 Historic Stonehenge in summer 2 Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Site Management Plan Summary 2015 Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Site Management Plan Summary 2015 1 World Heritage Sites © K930754 Historic England © K930754 Historic Arable farming in the WHS below the Ridgeway, Avebury The Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage Site is internationally important for its complexes of outstanding prehistoric monuments. Stonehenge is the most architecturally sophisticated prehistoric stone circle in the world, while Avebury is Stonehenge and Avebury were inscribed as a single World Heritage Site in 1986 for their outstanding prehistoric monuments the largest.
  • Stonehenge OCR Spec B: History Around Us

    Stonehenge OCR Spec B: History Around Us

    OCR HISTORY AROUND US Site Proposal Form Example from English Heritage The Criteria The study of the selected site must focus on the relationship between the site, other historical sources and the aspects listed in a) to n) below. It is therefore essential that centres choose a site that allows learners to use its physical features, together with other historical sources as appropriate, to understand all of the following: a) The reasons for the location of the site within its surroundings b) When and why people first created the site c) The ways in which the site has changed over time d) How the site has been used throughout its history e) The diversity of activities and people associated with the site f) The reasons for changes to the site and to the way it was used g) Significant times in the site’s past: peak activity, major developments, turning points h) The significance of specific features in the physical remains at the site i) The importance of the whole site either locally or nationally, as appropriate j) The typicality of the site based on a comparison with other similar sites k) What the site reveals about everyday life, attitudes and values in particular periods of history l) How the physical remains may prompt questions about the past and how historians frame these as valid historical enquiries m) How the physical remains can inform artistic reconstructions and other interpretations of the site n) The challenges and benefits of studying the historic environment 1 Copyright © OCR 2018 Site name: STONEHENGE Created by: ENGLISH HERITAGE LEARNING TEAM Please provide an explanation of how your site meets each of the following points and include the most appropriate visual images of your site.
  • World Heritage 32 COM

    World Heritage 32 COM

    World Heritage 32 COM Distribution Limited WHC-08/32.COM/8B.Add Paris, 25 June 2008 Original: English/French UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE Thirty second Session Quebec City, Canada 2 – 10 July 2008 Item 8B of the Provisional Agenda: Nominations to the World Heritage List Nominations to the World Heritage List SUMMARY This Addendum presents the Draft Decisions concerning 5 nominations of properties deferred or referred back by previous sessions of the World Heritage Committee, 21 minor modifications to the boundaries and 29 revisions of Statements of Significance or Statements of Outstanding Universal Value of already inscribed properties and 1 change of criteria to be examined by the World Heritage Committee at its 32nd session in 2008. Decision required: The Committee is requested to examine the Draft Decisions presented in this Addendum and take its Decisions in accordance with paragraphs 153, 155, 163 and 164 of the Operational Guidelines. I. Changes to criteria of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List The World Heritage Committee at its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006) approved 17 changes of criteria numbering for Natural and Mixed properties inscribed for geological values before 1994 (Document WHC- 06/30.COM/8D). For only two properties (see table below), in the group of properties that was inscribed under natural criteria (ii) before 1994, was no change in criteria numbering requested at that time, as the State Party asked for further time to consult the stakeholders concerned. Following consultations with the stakeholders and IUCN, it was agreed that the criteria should be as shown in the table here below.
  • Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present

    Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present

    Parker Pearson, M 2013 Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present. Archaeology International, No. 16 (2012-2013): 72-83, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/ai.1601 ARTICLE Researching Stonehenge: Theories Past and Present Mike Parker Pearson* Over the years archaeologists connected with the Institute of Archaeology and UCL have made substantial contributions to the study of Stonehenge, the most enigmatic of all the prehistoric stone circles in Britain. Two of the early researchers were Petrie and Childe. More recently, colleagues in UCL’s Anthropology department – Barbara Bender and Chris Tilley – have also studied and written about the monument in its landscape. Mike Parker Pearson, who joined the Institute in 2012, has been leading a 10-year-long research programme on Stonehenge and, in this paper, he outlines the history and cur- rent state of research. Petrie and Childe on Stonehenge William Flinders Petrie (Fig. 1) worked on Stonehenge between 1874 and 1880, publishing the first accurate plan of the famous stones as a young man yet to start his career in Egypt. His numbering system of the monument’s many sarsens and blue- stones is still used to this day, and his slim book, Stonehenge: Plans, Descriptions, and Theories, sets out theories and observations that were innovative and insightful. Denied the opportunity of excavating Stonehenge, Petrie had relatively little to go on in terms of excavated evidence – the previous dig- gings had yielded few prehistoric finds other than antler picks – but he suggested that four theories could be considered indi- vidually or in combination for explaining Stonehenge’s purpose: sepulchral, religious, astronomical and monumental.
  • Preliminary Outline Assessment of the Impact of A303 Improvements On

    Preliminary Outline Assessment of the Impact of A303 Improvements On

    Preliminary Outline Assessment of the impact of A303 improvements on the Outstanding Universal Value of the Stonehenge Avebury and Associated Sites World Heritage property Nicola Snashall BA MA PhD MIfA National Trust Christopher Young BA MA DPhil FSA Christopher Young Heritage Consultancy August 2014 ©English Heritage and The National Trust Preliminary Outline Impact Assessment of A303 improvements on the Outstanding Universal Value of the Stonehenge and Avebury World Heritage property August 2014 Executive Summary The Government have asked the Highways Agency to prepare feasibility studies for the improvement of six strategic highways in the UK. One of these is the A303 including the single carriageway passing Stonehenge. This study has been commissioned by English Heritage and the National Trust to make an outline preliminary assessment of the potential impact of such road improvements on the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage property. A full impact assessment, compliant with the ICOMOS guidance and with EU and UK regulations for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) would be a much larger task than this preliminary assessment. It would be prepared by the promoter of a road scheme and would require more supporting material and more detailed analysis of impacts. The present study is an outline preliminary assessment intended to inform the advice provided by the National Trust and English Heritage to the Highways Agency and the Department for Transport. It deals only with impact on Outstanding Universal Value and does not examine impacts on nationally or locally significant heritage. The objectives of the study can be summarised as: 1. Review changes in international and national policy and in our understanding of the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage property to set the context for the assessment of impact of potential options for improvement of the A303; 2.
  • Stonehenge and Ancient Astronomy Tonehenge Is One of the Most Impressive and Best Known Prehistoric Stone Monuments in the World

    Stonehenge and Ancient Astronomy Tonehenge Is One of the Most Impressive and Best Known Prehistoric Stone Monuments in the World

    Stonehenge and Ancient Astronomy tonehenge is one of the most impressive and best known prehistoric stone monuments in the world. Ever since antiquarians’ accounts began to bring the site to wider attention inS the 17th century, there has been endless speculation about its likely purpose and meaning, and a recurring theme has been its possible connections with astronomy and the skies. was it a Neolithic calendar? A solar temple? A lunar observatory? A calculating device for predicting eclipses? Or perhaps a combination of more than one of these? In recent years Stonehenge has become the very icon of ancient astronomy, featuring in nearly every discussion on the subject. And yet there are those who persist in believing that it actually had little or no connection with astronomy at all. A more informed picture has been obtained in recent years by combining evidence from archaeology and astronomy within the new interdiscipline of archaeoastronomy – the study of beliefs and practices concerning the sky in the past and the uses to which people’s knowledge of the skies were put. This leaflet attempts to summarize the evidence that the Stonehenge monument was constructed by communities with a clear interest in the sky above them. Photograph: Stonehenge in the snow. (Skyscan/english heritagE) This leaflet is one of a series produced by the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS). An electronic version is available for download at www.ras.org.uk. It has been written by the following members of the RAS Astronomical Heritage Committee: Clive Ruggles, Bill Burton, David Hughes, Andrew lawson and Derek McNally.
  • Report on the Joint World Heritage Centre / Icomos Advisory Mission to Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites 27-30 October 20

    Report on the Joint World Heritage Centre / Icomos Advisory Mission to Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites 27-30 October 20

    REPORT ON THE JOINT WORLD HERITAGE CENTRE / ICOMOS ADVISORY MISSION TO STONEHENGE, AVEBURY AND ASSOCIATED SITES Stonehenge October 2015 copyright UNESCO 27-30 OCTOBER 2015 Chris Barker, Civil Engineer, ICOMOS Nathan Schlanger, Archaeologist, ICOMOS Marie-Noël Tournoux, Project Officer Europe and North America Unit, World Heritage Centre Stonehenge October 2015 copyright UNESCO 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ……………………………………………………………….…… 4 1 INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………..… 5 2 MISSION REPORT ……………………………………………………………………….. 7 3 MISSION CONCLUSIONS ………………………………………………………………. 24 4 MISSION RECOMMENDATIONS ………………………………………………...…...... 24 5 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………... 28 6 ANNEXES…………....……………………………………………………………………... 29 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The joint World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS mission thanks the State Party for the arrangements for the Advisory Mission and the preparation of all the necessary relevant materials, together with the good will in its advancement. Particular thanks are due to DCMS and Historic England and more specifically to Keith Nichol and Hannah Jones from DCMS and Henry Owen-John and Phil McMahon from Historic England, our main focal points. The mission would like to acknowledge and to commend the investment and professionalism of our hosts in addition to logistics and hospitality. The assistance gladly provided by Historic England, English Heritage Trust, the National Trust, and their representatives, be it at organizational level or on the ground, including notably Chris Smith, Historic England, and Heather Sebire, Properties Curator West English Heritage Trust, Kate Davies, Stonehenge General Manager, English Heritage Trust, Beth Thomas & Sarah Simmonds, World Heritage site Coordinator, Nicola Snashall, National Trust WHS archaeologist for Stonehenge & Avebury, Cassandra Genn, Senior project and Stakeholder Manager, Ian Wilson, Assistant Director of Operations, Ingrid Samuel, Historic Environment Director, Janet Tomlin, National Trust, as well as the Wiltshire Council.
  • Stonehenge's Avenue and Bluestonehenge

    Stonehenge's Avenue and Bluestonehenge

    Stonehenge’s Avenue and Bluestonehenge Michael J. Allen1, Ben Chan2, Ros Cleal3, Charles French4, Peter Marshall5, Joshua Pollard6, Rebecca Pullen7, Colin Richards8, Clive Ruggles9, David Robinson10, Jim Rylatt11, Julian Thomas8, Kate Welham12 & Mike Parker Pearson13,* Stonehenge has long been known to form part of a larger prehistoric landscape (Figure 1). In particular, it is part of a composite monument that includes the Stonehenge Avenue, first mapped in 1719–1723 by William Stukeley (1740) who recorded that it ran from Stonehenge’s northeast entrance for over a kilometre towards the River Avon, bending southeast and crossing King Barrow Ridge before disappearing under ploughed ground. He also noted that its initial 500m-long stretch from Stonehenge was aligned towards the midsummer solstice sunrise. Archaeological excavations during the 20th century revealed that the Avenue consists of two parallel banks with external, V-profile ditches, about 22m apart. The dating, phasing and extent of the Avenue, however, remained uncertain. Its length could be traced no closer than 200m from the River Avon (Smith 1973), and the question of whether the Avenue’s construction constituted a single event had not been entirely resolved (Cleal et al. 1995: 327). Our investigations were part of a re-evaluation of Stonehenge and its relationship to the River Avon in 2008–2009, involving the re-opening and extension of trenches previously dug across the Avenue during the 20th century and digging new trenches at West Amesbury beyond the then-known limit of the Avenue. The result of this work was the discovery of a new henge at West Amesbury, situated at the hitherto undiscovered east end of the Avenue beside the River Avon.
  • Prehistoric Avenues and Alignments Introductions to Heritage Assets Summary

    Prehistoric Avenues and Alignments Introductions to Heritage Assets Summary

    Prehistoric Avenues and Alignments Introductions to Heritage Assets Summary Historic England’s Introductions to Heritage Assets (IHAs) are accessible, authoritative, illustrated summaries of what we know about specific types of archaeological site, building, landscape or marine asset. Typically they deal with subjects which have previously lacked such a published summary, either because the literature is dauntingly voluminous, or alternatively where little has been written. Most often it is the latter, and many IHAs bring understanding of site or building types which are neglected or little understood. This IHA provides an introduction to prehistoric avenues and alignments, which date to the Neolithic period (about 4000-2500 BC). There are several types of prehistoric monument particularly notable for their length. This document is mainly concerned with the most numerous and widespread – cursus monuments. Two other types – avenues and stone alignments – are dealt with more briefly. A brief chronology is included. Cursus monuments have important associations with a range of other categories of archaeological monument and these are explored here. A list of in-depth sources on the topic is suggested for further reading. This document has been prepared by Martyn Barber and edited by Joe Flatman and Pete Herring. It is one of a series of 41 documents. This edition published by Historic England October 2018. All images © Historic England unless otherwise stated. Please refer to this document as: Historic England 2018 Prehistoric Avenues and Alignments: Introductions to Heritage Assets. Historic England. Swindon HistoricEngland.org.uk/listing/selection-criteria/scheduling-selection/ihas-archaeology/ Front cover The plough-levelled Stonehenge Lesser Cursus, Wiltshire, showing as a soil mark.
  • 04 Sims and Fisher

    04 Sims and Fisher

    THE MARRIAGE OF ASTRONOMY AND CULTURE: THEORY AND METHOD IN THE STUDY OF CULTURAL ASTRONOMY A special issue of Culture and Cosmos Vol. 21 no. 1 Spring/Summer 2017 Copyright © 2017 Culture and Cosmos All rights reserved Published by Culture and Cosmos & Sophia Centre Press England www.cultureandcosmos.org In association with the Sophia Centre for the Study of Cosmology in Culture, University of Wales Trinity Saint David, Faculty of Humanities and the Performing Arts Lampeter, Ceredigion, Wales, SA48 7ED, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue card for this book is available from the British Library All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Publishers. ISSN 1368-6534 Printed in Great Britain by Lightning Source Through the Gloomy Vale: Underworld Alignments at Stonehenge Lionel Sims and David Fisher Abstract: Three recent independently developed models suggest that some Neolithic and Bronze Age monuments exhibit dual design properties in monument complexes by pairing obverse structures. Parker Pearson’s1 materiality model proposes that monuments of wood are paired with monuments of stone, these material metaphors respectively signifying places of rituals for the living with rituals for the dead. Higginbottom’s2 landscape model suggests that many western Scottish megalithic structures are paired in mirror-image landscape locations in which the horizon distance, direction and height of one site is the topographical reverse of the paired site – all in the service of ritually experiencing the liminal boundaries to the world.