Worlebury: the Iron Age Hill Fort at Weston-Super-Mare
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Bryan Moore 2006 Worlebury: The Iron Age Hill Fort at Weston-super-Mare. Grid ref: ST 310 625 Lat: 51:21:23N (51.3565) Lon: 2:59:22W (-2.9894) NMR Number ST 36 SW 1 Introduction Worlebury hill fort is a large multivallate fort located to the west of Weston Hill (known locally as Worlebury hill), Weston super Mare, Somerset. Weston Hill is a 109m high Carboniferous Limestone headland that is three miles long and 0.75 miles wide jutting out into the Bristol Channel. The hill is surrounded by a flood plain with the town of Weston-super-Mare extending from the southern slopes. Figure 1. Location of Worlebury. Source: Ordinance Survey. Worlebury, which is a scheduled monument, is located at the westerly end of Weston Hill. The boundaries of the hill fort enclose an area of just over 4 hectares. The height of the enclosure varies from 64m to 82m and slopes toward the south. The eastern end is higher and the surface is irregular. The east of the enclosure has a linear ditch that runs Page 1 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 north-south forming the ‘annex’ (figures 2 and 4.) Worlebury’s interior had a maximum dimension of 690m from east-west and 200m from north-south. Figure 2. Worlebury, based on Dymonds Plan of 1880. Source: Evans (1980, 21) To the north there were natural defences overlooking steep natural sea cliffs. The west of the headland provided clear visibility over the Bristol Channel and inland marshes. The antiquarians believed there were three entrances to the site; the southern entrance (figure 2) is contemporary while the other two are not so conclusive. In addition, there may have been steps to the northwest leading down to fresh water at Spring Cove. Collinson first described Worlebury in History of Somerset in 1791 as ‘Caesar’s Camp’ (Cunliffe, 1983, 12). It was one of the first hill forts to attract archaeological investigation in the country. The first survey was conducted in 1805 by George Cumberland and the first known description of it occurred in the diaries of the Reverend Alexander Catcott in 1758 (Richards, 2006). Page 2 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 History of Excavations. In 1851-1852, Reverend Francis Warre carried out excavations with a team of four friends (Edwin Martin Atkins, D. Tomkins, Reverend H.G. Tomkins, Dr Pring and Dr Thurnam) who excavated 93 pits and part of the ruined walls (Dymond, 1886, 8). Atkins surveyed and described the banks and ditches that disappeared after housing development that occurred prior to C.W. Dymonds work. In 1881, Dymond completed the most recent excavations of Worlebury. Dymond believed that Warre’s conclusions had been built upon ‘erroneous data’ and ‘superficial examination’ (Dymond, 1886, 9). Dymond surveyed the site for five months starting in 1880 and completing his work in 1881. He exposed all the entrances, and some faces were exposed, measured and then re-covered. Ditches were ‘cleared out’ and sections of ditches and 50+ pits were emptied and ‘probed’. Dymond published his survey incorporating Atkins’ data (Figure 3). Page 3 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 Figure 3 Most Recent Survey of Worlebury. (Dymond, 1886, plate 2.) Page 4 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 In 1987-1988 (Table 1) both cross ditches and banks were sectioned; however, only a single sheet was written up and printed for private circulation (Richards, 2006). Subject(s) Period Intervention Project dates Hillfort, pit, burial Iron Age. Excavation 1851 - 1852 Hillfort Iron Age. Excavation 1880 - 1881 Linear earthwork, cross dyke Iron Age. Excavation 1987 - 1988 Feature Post Medieval. Evaluation 1999 Table 1. History of excavations at Weston Hill. Source: http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/search/resFormat.cfm, AHDS Archaeology, accessed 12th February 2006. Figure 4. The interior cross ditch forming the 'annex'. Source: Bryan Moore Page 5 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 Occupation The first evidence of human activity comes from the earliest flint work that was pronounced by Roger Jacobi as dating from Late Upper Palaeolithic (Richards, 2006), with some flint arrowheads and stone axes dated to the Neolithic era (Figure 5) (Evans, 1980, 2). Figure 5. Neolithic artefacts from Weston Hill (Evans, 1980, 2). Evidence of human presence during the middle and late Bronze Age also exists. Bronze Age flint arrowheads, bronze spear heads and axe heads have been recovered from various locations upon Weston Hill (figure 6), and Bronze Age burial urns have been discovered on the southern slopes of Weston Hill. The ‘chieftain’s hut’ described by Evans is a Bronze Age barrow (Richards, 2006). Figure 6. Middle and late Bronze Age artefacts from Weston Hill (Evans, 1980, 2). Page 6 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 There was a tumulus at the base of the westerly tip of Weston Hill, and one to the south of the hill. The tumulus to the east is Castle Batch and was a Norman Motte (Figure 7). The tumulus to the west of Weston Hill was described in 1829 by John Rutter (cited by Dymond) as “surrounded by a low ditch”, but had disappeared by 1881. Figure 7. Weston Hill in 1881. (Dymond, 1881, viiii) The excavations to date have not determined the chronology of the site. However, based on knowledge of other Iron Age hill forts, parallels with Worlebury can be made. There is evidence the site was redeveloped sometime between 300 and 100 BC (Costen, 1992, 16), which is contemporary with reorganisations discovered at other sites, such as Maiden Castle (Shaples, 1991, 17), Danebury (Cunliffe, 1983, 76), and Cadbury Castle (Alcock, 1972, 133). Two 2m deep interrupted ditches run north-south across the Weston Hill; the western ditch may have continued to curve clockwise to meet the ditch that runs through Page 7 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 Worlebury (figure 4), while the eastern ditch sweeps eastward then back to the hill fort (figure 2). The ditches are not on the same alignment as the hill fort and may be earlier. The ‘annex’ might be an earlier phase that was then extended and elaborated prior to 100 BC. The walls Figure 8. South Wall, facing east from the entrance. Bryan Moore Today the walls of Worlebury are large heaps of local limestone (figure 8). The individual stones are small enough to have been hand carried. Dymond cleared some of the stone near to the south entrance and recorded the remaining construction (figure 10). He recorded two buttresses 1.2m in height either side of the central 5m high and 11m wide wall, (Green, 1996, 61) (figure 10). The wall to the east, being the most vulnerable to attack, was elaborated with an additional stone wall with a series of five ditches and banks (figures 11, 12). There was also evidence of similar elaborations (figure 3) noted at the western entrance by Atkins in 1852. The structure of the dry stone walls of Worlebury had parallels with other structures due to its maritime connections with Brittany and southern Gaul (Harding, 1976, 269). These constructions are well represented in walled promontory forts in western and southern Page 8 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 Ireland (Harding, 1976, 269) and are characterised by multiple built faces, known as a murus duplex construction (Green, 1996, 63) (figure 10), which also occurs in Gwenedd at Pen-y-Gaer, Wales (Harding, 1976, 269). Dymond compared the wall thickness of Pen-y-Gaer and found similarities with Worlebury (Dymond, 1886, 52). The evidence therefore suggests there was a connection with Gaul and Ireland. Doleburys’ stone walls were not a murus duplex construction. Figure 9. Wall to the west of the south entrance. Bryan Moore. At regular positions along the wall, there was evidence of widened platforms, interpreted by Dymond as being for using slings (figure 3). Dymond also recorded several concave ‘bowls’ constructed in the top of the wall at regular intervals (figure 10); their purpose is not understood, nor are the triangular platforms ‘scattered in assailable positions’ outside the walls (Dymond, 1881, 6). Page 9 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 Figure 10. Sections of the walls. (Dymond, 1886, Plate V) There was probably a timber gate entrance, although no evidence of this has been uncovered. The arrangement of the entrance was a passage of just under 17m long and 4m wide (Evans, 1980, 12). The passage ran northwest to southeast, with the outer wall extending to the eastern end along the southern wall, ensuring that the unprotected right side of the visitor would be exposed upon entry (figure 9). There may also have been guard chambers at the entrance (Evans, 1980, 12). Page 10 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 Figure 11. Banks and ditches at eastern end of Worlebury looking East. Bryan Moore Figure 12. Section of banks and ditches at eastern end of Worlebury looking South. Bryan Moore. Page 11 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 The Interior The interior of Worlebury is characterised by many pits (figure 13); Warre had emptied many of these pits in 1850. The underlying geology of the limestone rock determined the shape and size of the pits. Figure 13. Pits in the interior of Worlebury. Bryan Moore. The pits vary in diameter from 1.8m to 2.4m, with a depth of 1.8m (Evans, 1980, 5). Of the 93 pits excavated, information exists on nine. One of these can be identified today: ‘pit 9’ (figure 2), the ‘steined pit’, which has a stone lining that reduces in diameter at the base where a ‘quantity of wheat mixed with barley’ was found (Evans, 1980, 5). Page 12 of 17 Bryan Moore 2006 Figure 14. Pit 9 and contents. (Evans, 1980, 5) Grains, including barley, spelt wheat, oats, and brome, were also present in other pits (Evans, 1980, 5).