stonehenge - English Heritage

047-120 section 2.qxd 6/21/05 4:18 PM Page 49
Henge-enclosures are large sub-circular enclosures,
usually beside rivers and in valley-bottom or valley-side
locations. Durrington Walls is one of the four known prime
examples, all of which lie within the catchment of the
Hampshire Avon (the others are at Mount Pleasant,
Knowlton, and Marden). Durrington Walls was extensively
excavated in 1966–8 when the main A345 road through the
site was realigned. This work revealed the presence of two
multi-phase circular timber structures, a midden, and
internal boundaries of various sorts (Wainwright and
Longworth 1971). Parts of the site were well preserved
below colluvial deposits. Geophysical surveys suggest that
other similar structures exist within the site (David and
Payne 1997, 91–4). A great deal of Grooved Ware pottery
was found during the 1966–8 excavations while the
radiocarbon dates suggest that the main earthwork was
constructed around 2600 BC, with the remodelling of the
timber structures continuing down to around 2100 BC. Much
debate has surrounded the interpretation of the timber
structures, with some authorities seeing them as roofed or
part-roofed buildings and others as formal arrangements of
freestanding posts (Piggott 1940; Musson in Wainwright and
Longworth 1971, 362–77; Parker Pearson 1993, figure 58;
Gibson 1998a, 97–121). Likewise, the use and role of the
site has been hotly contested, with the excavator favouring
an essentially residential/habitational interpretation
(Wainwright 1975; 1977) while others interpret the
distribution of finds as indicating essentially ritual activities
and feasting (Richards and Thomas 1984, 214–15; Albarella
and Serjeantson 2002). However, such binary distinctions
between domestic and ritual activity are not especially
helpful in the prehistoric context; at such a large site, which
has evidence of diversity in the scale and nature of the
structures represented, more integrative interpretations
deserve further exploration.
In addition to Stonehenge itself, three other classichenges
have been identified in the Stonehenge Landscape:
Coneybury, Woodhenge, and Winterbourne Stoke (Map H).
All have a single entrance so belong to Class I henges in the
typology expanded by Atkinson (1951, 82, following Piggott
and Piggott 1939).
Coneybury lies on high ground west of the Avon and was
for many years regarded as a ploughed-out round barrow.
Aerial photography in the 1950s called this view into
question and its status was confirmed through surveys and
a carefully designed sample-excavation in 1980 as part of
the Stonehenge Environs Survey (Richards 1990, 123–58).
Grooved Ware pottery was found in the primary ditch fill and
internal features while Beaker pottery was common in
secondary contexts. The central area of the monument was
probably occupied by a timber building (Pollard 1995b, 124).
Radiocarbon dates focus on the early third millennium BC
and thus suggest contemporaneity with Stonehenge Phases
1 and 2.
Woodhenge also occupies high ground on the west side
of the Avon, immediately south of, and partly intervisible
with, Durrington Walls. It was identified through aerial
photography in December 1925. The interior and cuttings
through the boundary earthwork were excavated by Captain
and Mrs Cunnington in 1926–8 (Cunnington 1929). A new
section through the bank and ditch was cut in 1970 (Evans
and Wainwright 1979). The site has a broad ditch and
narrow external bank with its single entrance opening to the
northeast. The interior is occupied by six oval concentric
rings of postholes generally believed to be the foundations
of a large timber structure although as at Durrington Walls
there is considerable debate about how it should be
reconstructed (Pollard 1995a). A grave containing the burial
of a child was found near the centre of the site and two
sockets for stones were located on the southeast side.
Grooved Ware was found in many of the internal features
and in the ditch fill. Radiocarbon dates suggest the
construction and use of the site in the later third millennium
BC, contemporary with Stonehenge Phase 3i–v and the use
of Durrington Walls. Analysis of the distribution of finds
within the site suggests spatial patterning to the social use
of space and considerable similarity to the patterns found in
other comparable structures (Pollard 1995a).
Another possible Class I classic-henge has been defined
by geophysical survey at Winterbourne Stoke (David and
Payne 1997, figure 13A). Like Coneybury this site has for
many years been listed as a round barrow (Winterbourne
Stoke 74). The single entrance opens to east-northeast; no
internal features have been detected.
Mini-henges (also known as hengi-form monuments) are
small versions of the classic-henges, typically less than 10m
across. They are often found in close association with other
later Neolithic monuments such as classic-henges and
cursus monuments. The best example in the Stonehenge
Landscape is at Fargo Plantation some 100m south of the
Stonehenge Cursus. Excavated in 1938 (Stone 1939) the
structure comprises a slightly oval ditch broken by a pair of
opposing entrances. The internal space measures about 4m
by 6m; in the centre was a pit containing an inhumation and
two cremations. Beaker pottery was associated with the
inhumation. Other examples probably await discovery and
there are a few tantalizing hints of possible examples on
geophysical surveys and plots of the cropmarks represented
on aerial photographs.
A pit-circle comprising at least four rectangular pits
arranged in a ring about 10m across was found at
Butterfield Down in the early 1990s (Rawlings and
Fitzpatrick 1996, 37), the smallest of a group of similar
structures known singly or as components of multi-phase
monuments. A pit-circle about 50m in diameter that
comprised a single ring of more than 30 pits, some
containing postholes, was found at Boscombe Down in
2004 (Fitzpatrick 2004b). Rather similar is the ring of 56 socalled
Aubrey Holes arranged in a circle some 87m in
diameter just inside, and concentric with, the Phase 1
earthwork at Stonehenge (Cleal et al. 1995, 94–107). Some
of these may also have contained postholes; some were
certainly used for the deposition of cremations. A third pitcircle
having a single ring of pits has been identified from
aerial photographs of the area immediately north of the
egg-shaped enclosure at Woodhenge (McOmish 2001, figure
4.3). A double ring of pits or unused stone sockets is
represented by the Y and Z holes assigned to Phase 3vi of
the construction sequence at Stonehenge (Cleal et al. 1995,
256–65). Each ring comprised 30 pits, the inner circle (Z
holes) being c.40m in diameter, the outer circle (Y holes)
being c.53m across. Both rings are tentatively dated to the
early second millennium BC. More complicated still is the
set of four concentric rings of pits dug into the top of the
postholes forming phases 2A and 2B of the Southern Circle
at Durrington Walls (Wainwright and Longworth 1971, 23–41
and Appendix VIII; and M Parker Pearson pers. comm.). The
outermost of these rings, broadly following Circle 2B of the
earlier post-built structure, is about 18m in diameter; the
inner ring following Circle 2E is 7.6m in diameter.
49