The Wessex Hillforts Project

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Wessex Hillforts Project 1 Hillfort studies and the Wessex Project by Andrew Payne The Wessex Hillforts Project was initiated in effort and organisation must have been 1996 to answer a need for more wide-rang­ involved in their construction, the reasons ing data on hillfort interiors for the purposes why they were constructed are more difficult of placing their future management on a to comprehend. The term hillfort has been sounder footing and enhancing knowledge applied to many different types of site and of the internal character of the various hill- their varying sizes, morphologies and situa­ fort types represented in Wessex. It was tions strongly suggest a range of different hoped that the combined results of the pro­ motives for their construction, spanning a ject would considerably extend academic considerable date range (Fig 1.1). understanding of the socio-economic role of We usually associate hillforts with the hillforts in southern England during the 1st Iron Age, the period when many new hill- millennium BC, thereby allowing a greater forts were built, but the origins of hillfort level of interpretation to be offered to visi­ building lie at least as far back as the Bronze tors at those sites with public access. Age. During the 800 years before the The primary methodology employed by Roman invasion of Britain (the period that the project was geophysical survey supple­ we conventionally term the Iron Age) the mented by examination of aerial photo­ role of hillforts seems to have changed. New graphic evidence, documentary research and evidence is only gradually being uncovered selective digital modelling of site micro- that helps to extend our understanding and topography. The examination of each hillfort we still have very little information about was to be as comprehensive as possible with­ hillfort interiors in general and the range of out resorting to more costly and unnecessar­ functions they might have fulfilled. ily destructive intrusive techniques. Generally, but not exclusively, set on ele­ vated or other locations conferring natural The context of the study defensive advantages, sites classed as hill- forts in southern Britain can range in size Hillforts have attracted archaeological inter­ from less than one hectare to many tens of est for much of the last century and debate hectares. Their structural complexity varies on their function and significance continues from simple univallate earthworks to vast to be central to the academic study of the multivallate fortresses with labyrinthine later Bronze Age and Iron Age (broadly the entrance passages. Although hillforts are 1st millennium BC). Although some hillforts among the most numerous of all our surviv­ have been damaged by development or ing prehistoric monuments – nearly 1500 levelled through ploughing, those that were listed in the Ordnance Survey’s 1962 remain are some of the most impressive Map of Southern Britain in the Iron Age alone ancient monuments still visible in the coun­ (Fig 1.2) – our knowledge of the majority of tryside today. Such prominent landmarks sites is still quite limited because often their naturally attracted the interest of antiquaries sheer scale is such that there have seldom and pioneers in archaeology from earliest been sufficient resources for extensive exam­ times, an interest that has continued with ination of their interiors. the development of scientific field tech­ Conventionally, hillforts have always niques and modern methods of excavation. been seen as primarily constructed for Writing on social organisation in Iron Age defence, but their disparate sizes, topo­ Wessex, Haselgrove (1994, 1) concluded, graphical settings and architectural forms, ‘there can be little doubting the significance suggest that this need falls far short of pro­ of Iron Age hillforts, given the labour viding a wholly adequate explanation for all invested in their construction, so under­ of them (Harding 1979; Ralston 1996). The standing their role is clearly vital’. While it is vast majority of the sites examined in this clear from the scale of these sites that great project are classic hillforts occupying highly 1 Fig 1.1 1. LARGE HILLTOP ENCLOSURES The major categories of hillfort types represented in Southern Britain illustrating the broad three-phased development of hillfort forms within the region of Wessex (from Cunliffe 1991 and Sharples 1994). 2. EARLY IRON AGE HILLFORTS A B C G H I Based on Darvill 1987, Figure 80. N D J K L N M Based on Cunliffe 1991, Figure 14.24 E F Based on Sharples 1994, Figure 26.2 3. DEVELOPED HILLFORTS O P Q R rampart A Bathampton Down, Avon B Balksbury Camp, Hampshire C Martinsell Hill Camp, Wiltshire G Quarley Hill, Hampshire K Danebury, Hampshire O South Cadbury Castle, Somerset D Norbury Camp, Gloucestershire H Yarnbury Castle, Wiltshire L The Trundle, W Sussex P Maiden Castle, Dorset ALL PLANS TO SCALE I Chalbury, Dorset M Maiden Castle, Dorset Q Hod Hill, Dorset E Walbury Camp, Berkshire 0 500 1000m F Bozedown Camp, Oxfordshire J Figsbury Rings, Wiltshire N Blewburton Hill, Oxfordshire R Hambledon Hill, Dorset HILLFORT STUDIES AND THE WESSEX PROJECT 1.2 - 6 hectares Over 6 hectares 0 200 kms visible elevated positions dominating their and chronology and, with a few exceptions, Fig 1.2 surroundings (such as ridge ends or escarp­ fieldwork was concentrated on the compara­ Hillfort distribution in south­ ment edges), where the hillfort ramparts tively small-scale excavation of hillfort ern Britain (based on Cun­ enhance an already naturally defensible defences and gate structures. The question liffe 1991 without revision) position. A minority of the sites examined of the function of the hillfort in its social and – not intended to be defini­ possess defences that are of hillfort propor­ economic environment was hardly voiced tive. Non-verified, less visible tions but are situated in locations that confer (Collis 1981, 66). hillfort-type sites probably little or no altitudinal advantage. Clearly Although some hillforts had been dug exist in the survey area; defence was not always the primary consid­ into before 1900 by pioneers of field archae­ evidence for some is discussed eration and it is likely that the wide spec­ ology such as Augustus Lane Fox (better in Chap 2. Classification as trum of sites to which we apply the term known as Pitt Rivers), it was not until the hillforts of newly or recently hillfort performed a range of functions of early years of the 20th century that archaeo­ identified ploughed-out sites which defence was but one. logical interest was sufficiently awakened for depends on how strict our Until the 1960s hillfort studies were major campaigns of excavation to be organ­ definition is. ‘Hillfort’ is often dominated by problems of cultural affinity ised on regional groupings of sites. Between applied loosely to some low-lying sites and sites of less obvious defensive character. THE WESSEX HILLFORTS PROJECT 1907 and the 1940s the combined work of 4th century BC. Originating from Spain and Maud Cunnington in Wiltshire, E Cecil Brittany (Armorica) these invaders initially Curwen in Sussex and Christopher Hawkes thrust into the western parts of Britain, in Hampshire was instrumental in trans­ spreading into Dorset and the Cotswolds, forming knowledge of the many examples of where they built hillforts characterised by hillforts in these areas. The lack of a profes­ massive multivallate defences. This second sional infrastructure and resources for fund­ wave was assigned to the Iron Age B period. ing and employing archaeological staff at Finally, some time around 75 BC, Belgic this point in time did not allow for long term invaders entered the Thames Valley and or extensive programmes of archaeological Kent, spreading into Essex, while a little investigation. They nevertheless provided a later, as a result of Caesar’s military con­ useful sample of evidence from a large num­ quests in Gaul, refugees from northern ber of sites. France landed on the shores of the Solent The first serious attempt to bring and moved into central southern Britain. together the evidence amassed through these These invaders were defined as the Iron Age excavations in a nationwide synthesis was a C peoples. During this period in the south­ paper entitled simply ‘Hill-Forts’ published east of England, hillforts declined and dis­ by C F C Hawkes in the journal Antiquity in appeared to be replaced by large fortified 1931. The paper reflected the historical par­ towns, usually in more low-lying situations adigm then current among prehistorians, commanding river crossings, as for example which sought to explain changes in the at Orams Arbour in Winchester (Whinney archaeological record and defensive architec­ 1994). In territory that fringed the areas of ture at hillfort sites during the Iron Age as a Iron Age C penetration, such as Dorset, the product of successive waves of population continuation of old style hillforts marked movements (or invasions) from continental native resistance to the Belgic influence. Europe (Hawkes 1931; Wheeler 1943). Under the historical paradigm the most Invasionist theories of this nature are no important question was ‘when?’ and longer widely accepted as the explanation involved the dating of hillfort horizons as for cultural change in the British Iron Age, indicators of political change. The excava­ but at the time they seemed to provide a tion methods of the pre-Second World War plausible model against which to interpret era were almost entirely orientated to this the archaeological evidence. The view that problem with great emphasis on the trench­ there had been large-scale invasions in the ing of ramparts and the clearance of prehistoric period had analogies with the entrances, but little work on the interiors historical period with its invasions of Nor­ (Collis 1981, 66). Excavations of this nature mans, Vikings, Saxons and Romans; and provide information concerning the Caesar, writing of Britain in the 1st century chronology and structural history of individ­ BC, talked of incursions of Belgae from ual sites and are a necessary prelude towards northern France and the Low Countries understanding a site, but were rarely taken into the south-east of the country.
Recommended publications
  • Ompras Dorset
    www.visit-dorset.com #visitdorset Bienvenido Nuestro pasado más antiguo vendrá a tu encuentro en Dorset, desde los acantilados jurásicos plagados de fósiles en los alrededores de Presentación de Dorset la romántica Lyme Regis hasta el imponente arco en piedra caliza Más información sobre cómo llegar hasta Dorset: ver p. 23. conocido como la Puerta de Durdle en la espectacular costa que ha sido declarada Patrimonio de la Humanidad. En el interior, Dorset Más lugares para visitar en Dorset: cuenta con acogedoras poblaciones conocidas tradicionalmente www.visit-dorset.com por sus mercados, ondulantes colinas de creta blanca en la parte Síguenos en: norte y el misterioso Gigante de Cerne Abbas. Vayas donde vayas tendrás consciencia del profundo sentido histórico de este condado, VisitDorset enmarcado por una fascinante belleza escénica. Descubre la colorida historia del Castillo de Highcliffe en Christchurch, visita el Puerto de #visitdorset Portland, donde tuvieron lugar las competiciones de vela de los Juegos Olímpicos y Paralímpicos de Londres en 2012, recorre los caminos OfficialVisitDorset de los acantilados en la Isla de Purbeck para disfrutar de magníficas VisitDorsetOfficial vistas de Old Harry Rocks o relájate en las interminables playas de la Bahía de Studland. Sal de picnic con la familia para pasar un día inolvidable en las resguardadas playas de Weymouth o Swanage, deja que el viento acaricie tu rostro en la rocosa playa de Chesil, o trepa por la empedrada Gold Hill en Shaftesbury para ver las privilegiadas vistas panorámicas del valle de Blackmore. Dorset te depara todo esto y más, incluyendo las brillantes luces de las cercanas Bournemouth y Poole y las rutas de senderismo del Parque Nacional de New Forest.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Medieval Dykes (400 to 850 Ad)
    EARLY MEDIEVAL DYKES (400 TO 850 AD) A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities 2015 Erik Grigg School of Arts, Languages and Cultures Contents Table of figures ................................................................................................ 3 Abstract ........................................................................................................... 6 Declaration ...................................................................................................... 7 Acknowledgments ........................................................................................... 9 1 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY ................................................. 10 1.1 The history of dyke studies ................................................................. 13 1.2 The methodology used to analyse dykes ............................................ 26 2 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DYKES ............................................. 36 2.1 Identification and classification ........................................................... 37 2.2 Tables ................................................................................................. 39 2.3 Probable early-medieval dykes ........................................................... 42 2.4 Possible early-medieval dykes ........................................................... 48 2.5 Probable rebuilt prehistoric or Roman dykes ...................................... 51 2.6 Probable reused prehistoric
    [Show full text]
  • WILTSHIRE Extracted from the Database of the Milestone Society
    Entries in red - require a photograph WILTSHIRE Extracted from the database of the Milestone Society National ID Grid Reference Road No. Parish Location Position WI_AMAV00 SU 15217 41389 UC road AMESBURY Church Street; opp. No. 41 built into & flush with churchyard wall Stonehenge Road; 15m W offield entrance 70m E jcn WI_AMAV01 SU 13865 41907 UC road AMESBURY A303 by the road WI_AMHE02 SU 12300 42270 A344 AMESBURY Stonehenge Down, due N of monument on the Verge Winterbourne Stoke Down; 60m W of edge Fargo WI_AMHE03 SU 10749 42754 A344 WINTERBOURNE STOKE Plantation on the Verge WI_AMHE05 SU 07967 43180 A344 SHREWTON Rollestone top of hill on narrow Verge WI_AMHE06 SU 06807 43883 A360 SHREWTON Maddington Street, Shrewton by Blind House against wall on Verge WI_AMHE09 SU 02119 43409 B390 CHITTERNE Chitterne Down opp. tank crossing next to tree on Verge WI_AMHE12 ST 97754 43369 B390 CODFORD Codford Down; 100m W of farm track on the Verge WI_AMHE13 ST 96143 43128 B390 UPTON LOVELL Ansty Hill top of hill,100m E of line of trees on Verge WI_AMHE14 ST 94519 42782 B390 KNOOK Knook Camp; 350m E of entrance W Farm Barns on bend on embankment WI_AMWH02 SU 12272 41969 A303 AMESBURY Stonehenge Down, due S of monument on the Verge WI_AMWH03 SU 10685 41600 A303 WILSFORD CUM LAKE Wilsford Down; 750m E of roundabout 40m W of lay-by on the Verge in front of ditch WI_AMWH05 SU 07482 41028 A303 WINTERBOURNE STOKE Winterbourne Stoke; 70m W jcn B3083 on deep verge WI_AMWH11 ST 990 364 A303 STOCKTON roadside by the road WI_AMWH12 ST 975 356 A303 STOCKTON 400m E of parish boundary with Chilmark by the road WI_AMWH18 ST 8759 3382 A303 EAST KNOYLE 500m E of Willoughby Hedge by the road WI_BADZ08 ST 84885 64890 UC road ATWORTH Cock Road Plantation, Atworth; 225m W farm buildings on the Verge WI_BADZ09 ST 86354 64587 UC road ATWORTH New House Farm; 25m W farmhouse on the Verge Registered Charity No 1105688 1 Entries in red - require a photograph WILTSHIRE Extracted from the database of the Milestone Society National ID Grid Reference Road No.
    [Show full text]
  • White Horse Trail Directions – Westbury to Redhorn Hill
    White Horse Trail Route directions (anti-clockwise) split into 10 sections with an alternative for the Cherhill to Alton Barnes section, and including the “short cut” between the Pewsey and Alton Barnes White Horses S1 White Horse Trail directions – Westbury to Redhorn Hill [Amended on 22/5, 26/5 and 27/5/20] Maps: OS Explorer 143, 130, OS Landranger 184, 173 Distance: 13.7 miles (21.9 km) The car park above the Westbury White Horse can be reached either via a street named Newtown in Westbury, which also carries a brown sign pointing the way to Bratton Camp and the White Horse (turn left at the crossroads at the top of the hill), or via Castle Road in Bratton, both off the B3098. Go through the gate by the two information boards, with the car park behind you. Go straight ahead to the top of the escarpment in the area which contains two benches, with the White Horse clearly visible to your right. There are fine views here over the vale below. Go down steps and through the gate to the right and after approx. 10m, before you have reached the White Horse, turn right over a low bank between two tall ramparts. Climb up onto either of them and walk along it, parallel to the car park. This is the Iron Age hill fort of Bratton Camp/Castle. Turn left off it at the end and go over the stile or through the gate to your right, both of which give access to the tarmac road. Turn right onto this.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Defensive Earthworks Fortified
    CONGRESS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETIES IN UNION WITH THE SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF LONDON. SCHEME FOR RECORDING ANCIENT DEFENSIVE EARTHWORKS AND FORTIFIED ENCLOSURES. 1903. COMMITTEE FOR RECORDING ANCIENT DEFENSIVE EARTHWORKS AND FORTIFIED ENCLOSURES. LORD BALCARRES, M.P., F.S.A., Chairman. W. J. ANDREW, F.S.A. F. HAVERFIELD, F.S.A., MA. F. W. ATTREE (Lt.-Col. R.E.), W. H. ST. J. HOPE, M.A. F.S.A. BOYD DAWICINS (Prof.), F.R.S., J. HORACE ROUND, M.A. F.S.A. SIR JOHN EVANS, K.C.B., F.R.S., O. E. RUCK (Lt.-Col. RE.), V.P.S.A. F.S.A.Sc. A. R. GODDARD, B.A. W. M. TAPP, LL.D. BERTRAM C. A. WINDLE (Prof.), F.R.S., F.S.A. I. CHALKLEY GOULD, Hon. Sec. {Royal Societies' Club, St. James's Street, London.) EXTRACT from the Report of the Provisional Committee to the Congress of Archaeological Societies :— "There is need, not only for schedules such as this Committee is appointed to secure, but also for active antiquaries in all parts of the country to keep keen watch over ancient fortifications of earth and stone, and to endeavour to prevent their destruction by the hand of man in this utilitarian age." SCHEME FOR RECORDING ANCIENT DEFENSIVE EARTHWORKS AND FORTIFIED ENCLOSURES. » T the Congress of the Archaeological Societies, held on A July ioth, 1901, a Committee was appointed to prepare a scheme for a systematic record of ANCIENT DEFENSIVE EARTHWORKS AND FORTIFIED ENCLOSURES. It was suggested that the secretaries of the various archaeological societies, and other gentlemen likely to be interested in the subject, should be pressed to prepare schedules of the works in their respective districts, in the hope that lists may eventually be published.
    [Show full text]
  • Bath's 'Foundered Strata' - a Re-Interpretation
    Bath's 'foundered strata' - a re-interpretation Physical Hazards Programme Research Report OR/08/052 BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PHYSICAL HAZARDS PROGRAMME RESEARCH REPORT OR/08/052 Bath's 'foundered strata' – a re-interpretation P.R.N. Hobbs and G.O. Jenkins The National Grid and other Ordnance Survey data are used Contributor with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. A. Forster Ordnance Survey licence number Licence No:100017897/2004. Keywords Bath, landslides, cambering, foundering, geohazards, slope stability, mass movement. Front cover Cover picture details, delete if no cover picture. Bibliographical reference P.R.N. HOBBS AND G.O. JENKINS. 2008 Bath's 'foundered strata' - a re-interpretation. British Geological Survey Research Report, OR/08/052. 40pp. Copyright in materials derived from the British Geological Survey’s work is owned by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) and/or the authority that commissioned the work. You may not copy or adapt this publication without first obtaining permission. Contact the BGS Intellectual Property Rights Section, British Geological Survey, Keyworth, e-mail [email protected] You may quote extracts of a reasonable length without prior permission, provided a full acknowledgement is given of the source of the extract. © NERC 2008. All rights reserved Keyworth, Nottingham British Geological Survey 2008 BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY The full range of Survey publications is available from the BGS British Geological Survey offices Sales Desks at Nottingham, Edinburgh and London; see contact details below or shop online at www.geologyshop.com Keyworth, Nottingham NG12 5GG The London Information Office also maintains a reference collection of BGS publications including maps for consultation.
    [Show full text]
  • Further Prehistoric and Romano-British Activity at Poundbury Farm, Dorchester, Dorset
    Further Prehistoric and Romano-British activity at Poundbury Farm, Dorchester, Dorset Online Publication Report WA ref: 60027.02 April 2019 wessexarchaeology © Wessex Archaeology Ltd 2019, all rights reserved. Portway House Old Sarum Park Salisbury Wiltshire SP4 6EB www.wessexarch.co.uk Wessex Archaeology Ltd is a company limited by guarantee registered in England, No. 1712772 and is a Registered Charity in England and Wales, No. 287786; and in Scotland, Scottish Charity No. SC042630. Registered Office: Portway House, Old Sarum Park, Salisbury, Wilts SP4 6EB Further Prehistoric and Romano-British activity at Poundbury Farm, Dorchester, Dorset By Kirsten Egging Dinwiddy with contributions by Phil Andrews, Alistair J. Barclay Dana Challinor, Nicholas Cooke, Phil Harding, L. Higbee, Lorraine Mepham, Jacqueline I. McKinley, Rachael Seager Smith, and Sarah F. Wyles and illustrations by Rob Goller, S.E. James and Nancy Dixon Wessex Archaeology 2019 List of Figures Figure 1 Site location and plan Figure 2 Site plan within surrounding archaeological setting Figure 3 Site plan detail Figure 4 Section and plan of urned cenotaph 9105 within grave 9104 Figure 5 a) Romano-British grave 9052 with burial remains 9051 and bone pin ON 7023 b) Durotrigian grave 9090 with burial remains 9089 and vessel ON 7024/5 Figure 6 a) Romano-British grave 9094 with burial remains 9093 and sheep ABG 9109 b) Romano-British grave 9125 with remains of decapitation burial 9124 and sheep ABG 7167 Figure 7 a) Romano-British grave 9126 with burial remains 9127, a coffin reconstruction
    [Show full text]
  • Hallam Fields, Birstall, Leicestershire
    An Excavation of an Iron Age Settlement at Hallam Fields, Birstall, Leicestershire The Lithics Lynden Cooper Results Some 151 worked flints were recovered from the excavation. A large proportion (83%) was from Middle Iron Age features and are likely to be residual. However the finds from two Early Bronze Age pit fills probably represent contemporary activity. Five pieces (3%) displaying bladelet technology can be regarded as Mesolithic. Two blades also may be Mesolithic. The microlith fragment has inverse basal retouch, a feature commonly seen in Honey Hill type assemblages from the Midlands (Saville 1981). These are suspected to chronologically fall between the earliest and latest Mesolithic in the Midlands (Myers 2006). Taking the remaining flints as a group they can be split into 119 flakes (83%), five pieces of shatter (3%), five cores (3%) and 15 tools (10%). The tools contain few chronologically diagnostic types. There is a possible example of an unfinished Laurel Leaf that would be of Neolithic date. A large fragment of a discoidal scraper is similar in form and flint type to Late Neolithic examples from Eye Kettleby and Rothley. There are some indications for later Bronze Age activity from the concave scrapers and the scraper with straight-edge retouch. Another scraper used an older (slightly patinated) flake support. Such recycling has been seen at other later Bronze Age sites in the area e.g. Willow Farm, Castle Donington and Cossington barrows (Cooper 2008). The technological aspects of the debitage would also fit within a broad Neolithic-Bronze Age date. The stratified flint from context (643) is remarkably fresh and sharp, further suggesting that it is contemporary.
    [Show full text]
  • Settlement Hierarchy and Social Change in Southern Britain in the Iron Age
    SETTLEMENT HIERARCHY AND SOCIAL CHANGE IN SOUTHERN BRITAIN IN THE IRON AGE BARRY CUNLIFFE The paper explores aspects of the social and economie development of southern Britain in the pre-Roman Iron Age. A distinct territoriality can be recognized in some areas extending over many centuries. A major distinction can be made between the Central Southern area, dominated by strongly defended hillforts, and the Eastern area where hillforts are rare. It is argued that these contrasts, which reflect differences in socio-economic structure, may have been caused by population pressures in the centre south. Contrasts with north western Europe are noted and reference is made to further changes caused by the advance of Rome. Introduction North western zone The last two decades has seen an intensification Northern zone in the study of the Iron Age in southern Britain. South western zone Until the early 1960s most excavation effort had been focussed on the chaiklands of Wessex, but Central southern zone recent programmes of fieid-wori< and excava­ Eastern zone tion in the South Midlands (in particuiar Oxfordshire and Northamptonshire) and in East Angiia (the Fen margin and Essex) have begun to redress the Wessex-centred balance of our discussions while at the same time emphasizing the social and economie difference between eastern England (broadly the tcrritory depen- dent upon the rivers tlowing into the southern part of the North Sea) and the central southern are which surrounds it (i.e. Wessex, the Cots- wolds and the Welsh Borderland. It is upon these two broad regions that our discussions below wil! be centred.
    [Show full text]
  • Character Appraisal
    Main Heading Aston Tirrold & Aston Upthorpe Conservation Area Character Appraisal The conservation area character appraisal - this sets the context for the proposals contained in Part 2. Part 1 was adopted by Council in September and is included for information only. May 2005 Aston Tirrold and Aston Upthorpe Conservation Area Character Appraisal The Council first published the Aston Tirrold and Aston Upthorpe Conservation Area Character Appraisal in draft form in July 2004. Following th a period of public consultation, including a public meeting held on 12 nd August 2004, the Council approved the Character Appraisal on the 2 September 2004. Contents Introduction . .1 1 Aston Tirrold and Aston Upthorpe The history of the area . .3 Introduction . .3 Aston Tirrold . .3 Aston Upthorpe . .5 Aston Tirrold and Upthorpe from the nineteenth century . .6 2 The established character . .7 Chalk Hill . .9 Aston Street . .9 Baker Street . .12 Spring Lane . .14 The Croft . .16 Fullers Road . .16 Thorpe Street . .19 Important open spaces outside the conservation area . .21 3 Possible areas for enhancement and design guidance for new development . .22 Introduction . .22 The need for contextual design . .22 Grain of the village . .22 Appearance, materials and detailing . .22 Boundary treatments . .23 Scale . .24 Extensions to existing buildings . .24 Repairs . .24 Negative elements . .24 Services . .24 Street furniture . .25 4 South Oxfordshire Local Plan adopted by Council, April 1997 . .26 5 Summary of the conservation policies contained within the 2011 Second Deposit Draft local Plan . .28 6 Acknowledgements and bibliography . .31 ASTON TIRROLD & ASTON UPTHORPE CONSERVATION AREA CHARACTER APPRAISAL i South Oxfordshire District Council ii ASTON TIRROLD & ASTON UPTHORPE CONSERVATION AREA CHARACTER APPRAISAL South Oxfordshire District Council Part 1 Introduction 2.
    [Show full text]
  • PR Box 1 Transcriptions
    Pitt-Rivers papers Transcriptions Not all of the letters have been transcribed. A full listing is available here. The decision about which letters were ‘worth’ transcribing was taken by the transcriber (Alison Petch) alone based upon her research into Pitt-Rivers’ life and career and also her catalogue of the Pitt-Rivers papers and therefore reflects (to some degree) her personal bias. All notes about aspects of the letters were also prepared by the transcriber. Note that unlike the catalogue order (or the order they were kept in by Pitt-Rivers), these transcriptions are listed together in on-going communication order so that a conversation about a site or set of sites can be followed. The relevant sites are shown below as titles in bold Transcriptions and notes were prepared between November and December 2014. Berwickshire Box 1/ B3 [On blue paper, copy letters][1] Services – Ancient Monuments A 14235 / 1882 Subject: Guardianship of Ancient Monuments in Berwickshire Drafted by CHW [or HW] Copied by F Wilson Examined by CHW [or HW] Dispatched by G.W.D. Entred L. WR 14/ Page 156 To D. M. Home Esq [2] Convenor of Berwickshire Milne Graden Coldstream. Sir, With reference to your letter of the 27th ult. relative to the guardianship of various Ancient Monuments in the County of Berwickshire, I am directed to acquaint you that no appointment has yet been made of an Inspector under the Ancient Monuments Protection Act 1882 but that any communication addressed to this office will receive attention. I am &c N.J.C. [On outside of folded paper] A.M.P.A.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Study of Faunal Assemblages from British Iron Age Sites
    Durham E-Theses A comparative study of faunal assemblages from British iron age sites Hambleton, Ellen How to cite: Hambleton, Ellen (1998) A comparative study of faunal assemblages from British iron age sites, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/4646/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FAUNAL ASSEMBLAGES FROM BRITISH IRON AGE SITES The copyright of this thesis rests witli the author. No quotation from it should be published without tlie written consent of the author and information derived from it should be acknowledged. Ellen Hambleton Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Archaeology University of Durham 1998 t 3 M 1999 STATEMENT OF COPYRIGHT The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without their prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged.
    [Show full text]