Sep 28

Live Moor, Whorlton, North Yorkshire

Live Moor – Whorlton – North Yorkshire Moors

“Whorlton, Live Moor, (NZ 496012) A previously unrecorded promontory fort was identified by D. Smith on air photographs and later surveyed by him and G. W. Goodall. A single rampart with external ditch extends across the west-facing spur of Live Moor to enclose an area of approximately 2 acres known as Knolls End. Where best preverved the rampart is 7.5 m wide and 2.3 m high externally and 0.5 m internally, while the ditch is up to 1.5 m wide and 0.6 m deep with a fragmentory counter scarp bank. The work has been mutilated by quarrying and associated trackways, but a gap in the rampart and ditch at NZ 49640126 probably represents an original entrance.” YAJ Vol 51, 1979. P.3.

Sep 28

Staple Howe, West Hesterton, North Yorkshire

Staple Howe – West Hesterton, North Yorkshire

“This small farmstead was established on top of the small chalk hills on the northern edge of the Yorkshire Wolds. The chosen site was a good defensive position with a level oval shaped platform about 54.7m long and 12.2m wide. A timber stockade encircled the site which at first contained a single oval hut 9.1m long and 6.1m accross; probably contructed of chalk rubble walls and a thatched gabled roof. Inside the dwelling were the remains of a hearth and clay oven. At a later date, two other huts were constructed, and also one small square structure placed on the highest point of the enclosure, that may have been used as a granary. The round huts were constructed of timber post walls each having a central load bearing support for their conical thatched roofs. Both dwellings appear to have south east facing porches, and the one at the western end of the enclosure had a diameter of 9.1m. On excavation, large amounts of burnt grain, animal bones, (both wild and domesticated), bone gorges for fishing, pottery, iron and bronze objects were found on the farm site.” Understanding the Countryside – Ron Scholes.

Sep 28

Sutton Common, Doncaster, South Yorkshire

Sutton Common – Doncaster

Sutton Common is an early Iron Age fort/enclosure site just north of Doncaster, A key feature of this “marsh fort” is that it seems to use the surrounding marsh land as part of its defence – a twist on the more common hill fort. A further point of interest is the two enclosures link with a causeway accross the dividing waterway.

Sutton Common has been excavated from 1997. The work is being carried out by the University of Exeter (Department of Archaeology) and Hull (Wetlands Archaeology and Environments Research Centre). Funded by English Heritage, excavations are due to be completed by 2003. Click here to access the University of Essex website for Sutton Common.

Excavation of this site is still ongoing, so this page is expected to develop in line with the excavation.

Air photos of Sutton Common, in both cases, the smaller enclosure is on the left. Also note the other earthworks shown in the left picture. Pictures from English Heritage.

Causeway across the paleochannel Section One Section Two Eastern Entrance Small Enclosure Four-Post Structures

Plan of the enclosures with clickzones for more detail. Based on plan from University of Exeter. The dark brown represents the rampart, which was formed from a timber box filled with earth with a low whitestone facing. The light brown area shows the ditches. Notice that the smaller encolsure has an interior ditch, leading to the suggestion that it was really a gateway enclosure for the main enclosure – it’s defences service to strengthen the latter’s defences, not it’s own. The blue area shows the areas likely to have been waterlogged for most of the year – serving to enhance the defences of the enclosure system.

 

25 July 2002 – English Heritage Press Release.

UNINHABITED “GHOST VILLAGE” FOUND AT YORKSHIRE IRON AGE SITE

English Heritage Dig Reveals Mystery of Country’s Biggest Marshland Fort

An English Heritage funded excavation at Sutton Common near Askern in South Yorkshire is bringing to light remains of a mysterious and unique Iron Age site-almost a “ghost village” of seemingly scarcely inhabited buildings set within the biggest marshland fort in England.

One of the most intriguing finds is the remains of a wooden well with a brushwood floor nearly two metres below the surface-first glimpsed three years ago but now completely uncovered for the first time.

Originally protected by impassable marshes, the fort (which covers the area of two football fields) comprises two enormous and enigmatic enclosures, one with a grand entrance, linked by what appears to be a ceremonial walkway. The site has defied explanation since it was discovered over a century ago. Now archaeologists taking part in the Sutton Common Project, designed to regenerate the landscape in this former coalfields area, have uncovered yet more mysteries in their attempt to solve the puzzle of why the enclosures, which date from about 600 to 400 BC, were built.

Director of excavations Robert Van de Noort of Exeter University said: “Within the ramparts we have uncovered the remains of several round houses, boundaries and a well and also of a wide avenue through the site. But we have found no evidence, such as bone or pottery or of the repair of any of the structures, to show that anyone actually lived here. It is as if this were a kind of ghost village, scarcely ever inhabited, and may mean that Sutton Common was primarily a symbolic or ceremonial place, rather than a political or economic centre.”

Even the well, where it would be usual to find items dropped or thrown in, offers no proof that it was ever used. It appears to be filled with clean sediment.

David Miles, Chief Archaeologist at English Heritage said: “The Sutton Common fort is set to make a significant contribution to our understanding of the Iron Age regionally and nationally. English Heritage is happy to contribute to the Project’s work and will fund further excavations next year with the aim of resolving the enigma of this mysterious and atmospheric site.”

Earlier excavations (some also funded by English Heritage) revealed stone revetted ramparts, a palisade and waterlogged remains in the ditches, including what looks like a wheel and a ladder. The entrance to the larger enclosure would have been highly elaborate and lends credence to the idea that the post-lined avenue over a causeway linking the two was more than simply functional.

Co-director of excavations Henry Chapman of the University of Hull said: “The building techniques and architecture of the ramparts closely resemble those of early Iron Age hillforts elsewhere in England. However, instead of building the fort on a hill, the impassable wetlands were used to create an impregnable site, the biggest marshland fort in England.”

Since 1997 an ambitious conservation programme (The Sutton Common Project)has been under way aimed at restoring the grandeur of the marshland setting and delivering a range of environmental benefits to the region. This includes a re-wetting scheme for the surrounding land.

Ian Carstairs, trustee of landowners CCT, said: “The Sutton Common project represents an unparalleled example of co-operation of government agencies, including English Heritage, English Nature, the Countryside Agency and DEFRA, together with local organisations and people. It is a wonderful example of what can be achieved when we all work together.”

Informed comment on the lack of finds

“There has been some not inconsiderable debate on the possible use of the Sutton Common enclosure for ritual purpose, the proponents for this identify the lack of artifacts as being significant and the main thrust of their argument can be summed up as follows; From the three excavations carried out at the site by Whiting in 1933-35, Sydes and Parker Pearson in 1987-93 and most recently by Van der Noort in 2002, only the excavations by Sydes and Parker Pearson turned up any metal work. A single Bronze Age palstave axe, section of a bronze age Dirk blade, Part of a bronze cauldron rim (?), a segment (terminal end) of a Roman peninsular brooch, a copper alloy ring of undeterminable date, and an unidentifiable Iron object, which was described in the site report as part of a brooch pin (?). All of these objects were surface finds and therefore uncertified.

In terms of datable artefacts several Iron Age type glass beads were found on the surface within the large enclosure, after stripping and several pieces of extremely friable low/unevenly fired pottery were discovered in trenches D and F. On analysis they were thought to be Late Iron age. Recent excavations at sites such as Pickburn Leys and Sykehouse (where a significant amount of I.A pottery has been recovered) have shown that local Iron Age sites were not aceramic and that the lack of pottery is more likely due to soil conditions and the poor quality of locally manufactured wares. Other than the preserved wood fragments there are no datable finds from stratified levels from either of the three series of excavations. The radio carbon dates on the preserved wood have suggested an Early Iron Age date for the construction and reconstruction of the timber and stone palisade/rampart. The Sutton Common ladder (a notched single stake of wood c 2m in length) does have parallels in the Iron Age and the discovery of a saddle quern on the site might back up the argument of Iron Age use of the site prior to c 200 B.C when they are superseded by the beehive quern.

The lack of datable metal stone, bone, glass or any other items from stratified levels on the site is very puzzling especially one views the site as having been occupied either in the Iron age or later. The lack of metal work present in stratified deposits cannot be explained by the activities treasure hunters or other outside infuence, given the overall lack of finds and the large extent of the excavtains to date. The preservation of wood has been generally quite good producing over the years a number of artifacts, such as the wheel (?), the ladder etc, so if the site were inhabited during the Iron Age, why have there not been found pieces of wooden bowls, looms, baskets or found anything in the way of food waste such as seeds, pips, grains or more animal bones (if human skull fragments can survive, why not animal bones, though there were fragments of sheep bone excavated from the ditch of the large enclosure)?

In respect of the projected four poster features in the larger enclosure interpreted as structures, they could possibly be Roman or Romano-British, but this is unlikely for the following reason. A number of sherds of 2nd Century locally produced Roman pottery have been found as surface scatters in the small enclosure, suggesting perhaps a later Iron age habitational use of part of the site, where we can perhaps see native people adopting available Roman goods.

However there is a clear lack of evidence for Romano-British cultural material such as pottery from the large enclosure. If the structures are thought to be Roman, where is the evidence for prolonged or even short term habitation, particularly discarded pottery in the ditches or in post holes or evidence from environmental sampling of food processing or consumption. Square structures are known in Britain before the Roman conquest. There is good evidence from excavations at such sites as Danbury Hill Fort of square structures, which have been interpreted on different sites as granaries, look out or fighting platforms and even as shrines (depending on their situation within or without a site). The idea of the site having been a pagan religious enclosure, which was kept ceremonially clean is not too wild an idea, especially when compared with Stonehenge, which was used successively for thousands of years but has produced very little in the terms of finds. It has long been argued that this site was ritually cleaned which seems a plausible explanation when considering that other henge monuments are rich in cultural material either meaningfully placed or discarded as rubbish.” Peter Robinson, Keeper of Archaeology, Doncaster Museum and Art Gallery. 2002

Other Research

“Carbonised grain is known from four sites in the Trent-Tyne region…. ….The only example west of the wolds is the wheat recovered from a trench through a rampart of one of the enigmatic enclosures on Sutton Common (whiting 1938, Camp B).” Challis and Harding Later Prehistory from the Trent to the Tyne. 1975.

Sep 27

Thornborough Henges, North Yorkshire

Thornborough Ancient Monument Complex – North Yorkshire

Page Under Development – come back for more info!

A site that spans several thousands of years from the Stone Age to at least the Iron Age, the ancient people of the area built one of Britain’s largest ancient sites in Yorkshire, in what was to become the heart of Brigantia.

Location Details.

Thornborough TimeLine

Mesolithic – c. 8,000 to 4,000BC

The Mesolithic period was the end of the Stone Age “hunter gather” times, before the widespread development of agriculture. During this time Thornborough appears to have been one of Britain’s earliest “ritual” locations. To the north of the village of Nosterfield, on the quarry in 2002/3 there was discovered an extensive double pit alignment that has been proven by carbon dating to be of Mesolithic date.

This is a very important discovery, since there are no known double pit alignments from this period anywhere else in the world and shows is potentially Britain’s first communal religious structure.

Mid-Neolithic Age – 4,000BC to 3,500 BC

In the Mid Neolithic period, accross Britain farming practices were beginning to be established and the old hunter gatherer ways were giving way to a more settled existence. In addition the first communal ritual monuments were being built.

At Thornborough, the ritual activities begun in the Mesolithic were dramatically expanded as large areas of land were cleared in order to make way for long cigar shaped cursus enclosures. These were built by digging a ditch to define the cigar shaped space, the earth from the ditch was then heaped outside the ditch to create an enclosing earth bank.

Whilst only one cursus has been confirmed, it would appear that Thornborough had three cursuses, two close to the henges and another to the west at Upsland.

The largest cursus at Thornborough runs beneath the central henge and stretches for 1.2 km. This ceremonial avenue, was discovered from the air. It appears to be bent, travelling in two directions roughly NE/SW. The western section, now mostly quarried out has recently been announced as being aligned to the setting point of the constellation Orion. This is another important part of the Thornborough Complex for it means this cursus may be the oldest known major monument aligned to the constellation Orion in the world.

Late Neolithic Age – c. 3,500 BC to 2,400BC

It was during this period that Thornborough saw a massive expansion of ritual activities, on a scale that indicates manpower was being drawn from far beyond to local area. Whilst it is probably that the construction work lasted for most of the Late Neolithic period and had many stages, it can be divided into two phases.

Phase I – the first henges.

Of these, the central one is the most accessible, the northern one is the best preserved (because it is protected from the plough by trees). Each circle, like those east of Ripon, has a maximum diameter of about 800 ft. They are all nearly circular, with entrances NW and SE. Each has a massive bank, originally about 10ft high, with a ditch inside and outside it, about 65ft. wide and 8 – 10ft deep. The outer ditch of each circle is now filled up by the ploughing. Broad spaces about 40ft wide separate the banks from their ditches – an architectural refinement nowhere else in England. On such a scale. These circles have been built in a straight line orientated NW/SE they are ½ mile apart.

Phase II – The creation of the henges we see today

Excavation in 1952 suggested that when first built each bank had been coated with a deposit of gypsum crystals in an attempt to whiten it. This may have been inspired by the blazing white if similar circles built in the chalk country of Wessex or the Wolds. The gypsum occurs in large deposits a few miles down the Ure.

Bronze Age

Iron Age Square Barrow uncovered close to a four horse burial from the same period, part of the ritual activities at Thornborough taking place in later times.

Iron Age

Roman and later

The Vale of Mowbray “super” monument complex

Whilst the Thornborough Complex is impressive enough, it is actually only one part of a much larger monument complex. In the Vale of Mowbray, from Borroughbridge to Catterick, Eight enormous sacred sites were built in an area over 20 miles long; among them at least 28 barrows were accumulated, together with seven henges, five cursuses and a very impressive alignment of standing stones. The most impressive henge monuments are the 3 Thornborough Circles.

The circles on Hutton Moor and at Cana are less impressive because they have been reduced by ploughing. They should be seen nevertheless, since they are part of a concentration of sacred sites unmatched in the N of England. Recently aerial photographs have revealed the remains of a third circle here, at Nunwick, still visible on the ground about SE/323747. This appears to be a smaller circle with no outer ditch, aligned on the 3 Thornborough Circles. Its diameter is 300ft. These sites must be contemporary with the Thornborough Circles. They are identical in design but their entrances are orientated N/S.

Many barrows can be found close to the circles – the resting places of those chiefs whose people worshipped there. Most are now sadly reduced by ploughing and their surrounding ditches cannot be seen. The Centre Hill barrow (SE/287791), between the central and southern Thornborough Circles is 90ft in diameter and 3ft high. A skeleton was found at its centre, buried in a wooden coffin and furnished with a food vessel and flint knife. There are 3 barrows close together (SE/286801) E of the northern Thornborough circle, S of B6267. One is 80ft in diameter and 31/2ft high, the others are 60ft across and 1ft high. They covered cremation burials. There are 3 badly damaged mounds NW of Hutton Grange (on A61), about SE/347755. These covered cremations, associated with incense cups and larger pots.

Sep 27

Pickhill Mound, North Yorkshire

Pickhill, North Yorkshire.


The hill is called Picts Hill. The vilage – Pickhill takes it’s name from this hill. Pickhill is in the Domesday book.

On the 1st edition OS there is a long mound and a short mound marked in the field next door, as well as some “mound foundations” and an earthwork. None of these are easily spotted today.

“A large artificial mound here, apparently raised for defensive purposes, bears the name of Picts’ Hill, and an improbable belief prevails that the Picts defeated the Romans in battle at a spot, not far off, called Roman Castle. This mound is also known as Money Hill, but, though partially cut away for the construction of the railway, the traditionary hidden treasure was not found.”

Bulmer’s History and Directory of North Yorkshire (1890)

“There is a large artificial mound at Pickhill called Pict’s Hill (or Money Hill), which now forms part of the railway embankment. Mr Longstaffe gives the following particulars, for which, he says, he is indebted to his friend M. M. Milburm, Esq., land agent, Thirsk. Mother Shipton is said to have prophesied that Pickhill would never thrive till a certain family became extinct, and Picks or Money Hill was cut open. Some years ago an old man dreamed that there was an archway in the hill, beneath which was a black chest, with three locks, containing the money which gives the name to the mound. Well, the family did become extinct in 1850, and the Leeds and Thirsk railway Company cut the hill open in 1851 – though it naturally formed part of its embankment, and their line passes over it. Still the directors ordered it to be excavated – the old man, the dreamer, was still alive, and pointed out the spot where the archway lay. The hill was cut through in all directions, but nothing was found, save in the foss, where portions of tile and a small brick, both vitrified on one side, and fragments of urns, and a piece of thin iron, like the crest of a helmet, were discovered. The mound was squarish, 113 by 80 feet, and surrounded by a moat.” Wellans History and Topogrphy of York and North Yorkshire. 1859.

Sep 27

Scorton Cursus, North Yorkshire

Scorton Cursus, North Yorkshire

Scorton Cursus marked in blue on the 1850’2 OS 1st Edition map.

The cursus was originally about 2.1km long and aligned SE-NW. Clustered round the monument were a number of ring ditches, one that was excavated had a single burial with a beaker. This would date the site as being in use from around 3,500BC until at least the Bronze Age c.2,000 BC.

The cursus was cut almost dead straight over it’s entire length and was 37.2m wide. The cursus was constructed by digging two parallel ditches 4.10m wide on the east side and 3.90m wide on the west.

Cursus monuments are thought of as “ceremonial ways” – avenues, carved though the landscape that created a sacred or ritual space. Often these are associated with water, and Scorton is no exception – it sits close by the River Swale and also sits in a remnant alluvial flood plane. At the time when Scorton Cursus was built, it is likely that it sat amongst a large number of lakes. These monuments are often given their “ritual” function due to the fact that burial mounds tend to be placed in close proximity to them.

Almost the entire site was destroyed by quarrying, very little record of it exists yet it is one of the first and largest “communal ritual structures” in the north of england.

Research Notes

“The excavation of a section accross the complete width of the cursus, now reduced to a cropmark, produced evidence from recut ditches of at least two major phases of use. The first was indicated by narrow almost V-profiled ditches, which, having silted, were recut to a wide and shallow form. A low mound of indeterminate shape, possibly upcast from the ditches, was situated in the centre of the cursus, while a pit complete with a ramp was discovered as an external feature of the eastern ditch. A sampling strategy recovered a flaked stone assemblage of flint and chert, which included debris from knapping activities in addition to actual tools. In the area excavated no evidence was recovered for any recognisable form of occupation of any period.” Peter Topping 1978.

“A section cut accross the cursus by P. Topping of Newcastle University showed that both ditches had been re-cut from a norrower almost V-shape to a wide shallow form. A truncated post hole was found dug into the silting of the eastern ditch. A large low mound apparently lay within the ditches at the north west end of the cursus. There was also evidence here os external pits possibly holding upright timbers” YAJ 51, 1978

“NZ240005 Cropmarks revealed in aerial photographs taken by Prof. J. K. F. St. Joseph are threatened by gravel workings. The Richmondshire Excavation Group, directed by Mrs F. Thubron for the DOE sectioned the cursus mark to expose two double ditches 32 m apart, 1 m deep, and from 2-3m wide. Two of these showed evidence of re-cutting. No dating evidence was found. Several sherds of Roman pottery was picked up from plough soil near the circular cropmark.” from Yorkshire Arch. Journal, Vol 48, 1976, P.2.

“The site was discovered by Prof J.K. St Joseph in 1949, and from his series of aerial photographs it was possible to trace the course of the cursus for approximately 2.1 kilometers. Evidence from soil stripping and exacavations has shown that the monument extends even further to the north-west, the north west terminal not as yet having been discovered. The south west terminal, which shows clearly on the aerial photographs, consists of a straight transverse ditch which joins the two main ditches at right angles. Clustering around it was a series of ring-ditch crop marks. The aerial photographs also show a series of bleach marks between the ditches at the southern end of the cursus, which may represent a series of contiguous mounds. This area of the cursus also features what appears to be smaller outer ditches, although they may be restricted to the southern end of the cursus as they were absent in the excavated area.
Another noteworthy feature brought out by aerial photography is the accuracy with which the ditches have been laid out, so they are remarkably straight considering the distance over which they extend”.

“from the evidence available at Rudston, it would appear that cursus monuments in Yorkshire developed during the late Neolithic, and flourished, as can be seen at Rudston in its magnificent complex of monuments, into the Early Bronze Age. It is within this local chronological framework that the cursus at Scorton must have developed, although not to as great an extent as the important centres of Rudston or Thornborough”. Excavation at the Cursus at Scoton North Yorkshire 1978 Peter Topping, Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, Volume 54, 1982

Sep 27

Kirklington Tumulus, North Yorkshire

Kirklington Tumulus

“Prehistoric vessels dug out of the mound at Stapely Hill, Kirklington, in 1903. Fragments of several pottery urns of the Bronze Age, C. 1,000 B.C., one containing cremated human bones” Description and photo’s from Kirklington Church.

“SE 326828 S. White reports that a polished flint axe was found by Mrs J. Fothergill in 1976. The axe is in perfect condition with a cream patination, 14 cm long, 4.4 cm thick and 6 cm wide at the blade. It is of red coastal flint. An examination of the field in November 1977 produced no further finds. In the possession of the finder.” YAS Vol 50, 1978, P.8.

Sep 27

Kirkhaugh, Cumbria

Kirkhaugh – Cumbria

Barrow (NY 704494) 2 miles NNW of Alston. Finds in Museum of Antiquities, Newcastle.

“This mound is 22ft. in diam. and about 3ft high. It has been built upon a natural knoll which makes the barrow look larger than it is. Excavation showed that the mound has an earthy core with a rubble capping. Decayed traces of an unburnt body were found at the centre and amoung the offerings in the mound near the burial there was a basket-shaped gold ear-ring of a type found with beakers in Britain. Date, c. 2,000 – 1,700 BC.

Sep 27

Devil’s Arrows, North Yorkshire

The Devil’s Arrows – BoroughBridge

Introduction

This Bronze Age site comprises of three large standing stones, it is thought originally there were as many as five stones in this alignment. Being Bronze Age little is known about the origin of the Devil’s Arrows, the name reflecting a more recent myth. The monument is strongly linked with an alignment withseveral others covering a line of over 50 miles and heading north south through North Yorkshire.

The site itself, being just off the A1 has been an important communications route for several thousand years and it is likely that in the Iron age the Brigantes adopted this as a centre for religious or tribal gatherings. It’s importance is further indicated by the creation of the tribal capital of Isurium Brigantium in c. 120AD less than three miles away at Aldborough.

Research so far has been limited to a site visit and scans for document records.

In the Brigantium context it is likely that this site, together with the triple henge alignment and cursus of Thornborough some 8-10 miles to the north of the Arrows formed one of the most significant religious and tribla gathering point in Brigantia.

Location

Grid Ref: SE391665, Latitude: 54.092736, Longitude: -1.402114.

Three naturally shaped stones in an alignment thought to have originally included up to five stones. These are almost in a straight line, pointing north to south. The outer stones are 200 and 370ft away from the central stone.

Access to these is relatively simple, they are just off the side of an elevated section of the A1(M) trunk road at Jct 48 to Boroughbridge.

The stones have heights of 18ft (northern stone), and 22ft. They are of millstone grit which was quarried at Knaresborough, 6.5 miles to the SW. The grooving is the result of weathering.

The Devils Arrows are the centre of the most important alignment of standing stones, henges and other remains in Yorkshire, all running N/S alongside the ancient line of the A1, Stretching from Hutton Moor to Thornborough and beyond. Current estimates indicate they were erected during the Bronze Age c. 2,200 – 1,400 BC.

Views of the northern and central stone

Left, central stone and northern stone, right.

southern-most stone

Other research

The name stems from a legend traced back to 1721, where the Devil was supposed to have thrown the stones, aiming at the next town of Aldborough. He stood on Howe Hill and shouted,

“Borobrigg keep out o’ way,

For Aldborough town

I will ding down!”

But obviously his aim was not that good, and so they landed short of their mark.

At their maximum of 22 feet in height, The Devil’s Arrows are the tallest standing stones in the United Kingdom apart from the Rudston Monolith.


Since Antiquarian William Stukeley’s time it has been believed that the arrows are in a straight line, running North to South. The fact is that they’re visibly not. When they were dragged across from miles of countryside from Knaresborough (seven miles away), the stones where constructed to not be in line, but to be slightly “westward.”

In the 1970’s Paul Devereux wrote in The Ley Hunter’s Companion that “the functions of the monoliths was to act as a multi-directional sighting or reference instrument.” Devereux also quotes G Bernard Wood on “the Devil’s arrows stand in line “with an ancient ford across the River Ure.”

The Devils Arrow alignment. Ref: Lines on the Landscape, Devereux and Pennick

This place is remarkable for those monuments called the Devils Arrows, but whether Roman or British, is uncertain. “Here was, in the British times,” says Dr. Stukeley, “the great Panegyre of the Druids, the Midsummer meeting of all the country round, to celebrate the great quarterly sacrifice; accompanied with sports, games, races, and all kinds of exercises, with universal festivity. This was like the Panathenian, the Olympian, Nemean meetings, and games among the Grecians. These obelisks were as the Metae of the Races; the remembrance hereof is transmitted in the present great Fair held here, on St. Barnabas Day.”

In Leland’s time there were four, but in the seventeenth century, one of them was pulled down; the remaining ones are placed at unequal distances from each other. The tallest one is 30 feet 6 inches from the bottom, about 6 feet of which are buried in the ground; its greatest circumference 16 feet.

Richard Frank, a singular traveller, and famous peripatetic angler, in his tour to the northern parts of Scotland, to enjoy his favourite amusement, which he published in 1694, says that he saw near Boroughbridge, seven of these stones, in which he must have been mistaken, as it is not likely that they have increased since the days of Leland. Evident marks of the chisel appear below the surface of the earth. It is of the common coarse rag stone or mill grit; a large rock of this stone from which, probably these obelisks were taken, is at Plumpton, near Knaresborough. Doctor Stillingfleet considers them as British Deities: Leland, Camden, and Drake, suppose them to have been the work of the Romans, and erected by that people as trophies, to commemorate some important victory.

Near this place, in 1322, that unfortunate Prince, Thomas Earl of Lancaster, with some of the nobility, disgusted with the royal favourites, the Spencers, made stand against the forces of his nephew, Edward II. but was taken by Sir Andrew de Harcla, who, being insensible to entreaties and solicitations, and after suffering every possible indignity that cruelty could suggest, was mounted on a sorry horse, and brought before the King, who ordered, without any form of trial, his head to be struck off, on an eminence near Pontefract. One of his partisans, the powerful John de Bohun, Earl of Hereford, in passing over the bridge, then made of wood, was run through with a spear, by a soldier, cowardly placed beneath for that execrable purpose. It sends two Members to Parliament, a privilege it derived from Queen Mary in 1553.

[From Langdale’s Topographical Dictionary of Yorkshire. (1822)]

Sep 27

Knockfarrel, Ross and Cromarty

Knockfarrel

Knockfarrel (Gaelic, cnoc, hill; faire, watch, or guard)
Ross & Cromarty
2 1/2 miles west of Dingwall
NH 505585

Vitrified Fort

This had substantial ramparts made of stones with a timber frame, enclosing a large area and making good use of the natural defences of the hill-top.. At some time, the timber of the walls was set on fire, creating enough heat to melt the rock. This vitrification can be seen all around the perimeter of the fort.

Contact Us
close slider

    What is 5 + 6 ?