More information : ST 848122 Neolithic Camp (NR). (1)
"(19) Neolithic Causewayed Camp, on Hambledon Hill (849122), consists of a single enclosure of nearly 20 acres embracing the domed central summit of the hill, here reaching 640 ft above OD, and three multiple cross-dykes situated on spurs radiating to the S and E (see also plan on p xxxix and Plate 131). The earthworks have been much disturbed in the past by tracks and diggings for flint gravel, particularly the interior of the enclosure, and recently have been almost completely destroyed by ploughing. The site was first fully described in Crawford and Keiller, Wessex from the Air (1928), 44-7. The enclosure was examined in a test excavation by G de G Sieveking in 1951 (Dorset Procs LXXIII (1951), 105-6) and the cross-dykes were investigated by this Commission in 1958-60. A radiocarbon date of 2790 BC <> 90 was provided by a carbon sample from the bottom of the inner ditch of cross-dyke 1.
In plan the enclosure is a rounded triangle, up to 1000 ft across and surrounding the hilltop at about 600 ft, although scarcely taking full advantage of the contours in the way that a hill-fort might. Before destruction it was defined by a scarp, varying in height from 2 ft to 6 ft, surmounted by a low bank, 15 ft across and 6 ins high, visible only on the S and E sides. Outside was a causewayed or interrupted ditch, but this, due to silting, appeared for much of its length as a terrace about 10 ft across. On the N side soiled creep and thick scrub masked the line of the enclosure. The whole of the interior was pocked by numerous pits and hollowed, the result of flint digging for road-metal over many years.
Cross-dyke I lies on gently sloping ground 40 yds S of the enclosure and facing outwards from it. It comprises a double line of banks and ditches, 600 ft long and extending in a gentle curve across the neck of the S spur from shoulder to shoulder. It has been disfigured by tracks and flint digging but the interrupted nature of the inner ditch is still visible. The banks, now little more than scarps, still stand over 5 ft above the ditch bottoms.
Cross-dyke 2, of similar length and construction, lies across the neck of the E spur, within 100 ft of the enclosure and following its curve. It is now almost completely destroyed.
Cross-dyke 3 lies further down the E spur, 1/4 m away from the enclosure and at a point where the slope steepens; it extends for nearly 1000 ft in a broad convex curve from shoulder to shoulder. A 100 ft gap half-way along it is almost certainly not original. To the S of the gap the dyke is a single bank and ditch, but N of it, where the natural slope is very steep, it is cetainly double.
Excavation showed that, owing to weathering, very little of the original banks remained, at most 6 ins. All the ditches were comparatively small, fairly steep-sided and, with the exception of the outer ditch of cross-dyke I, clearly flat bottomed; the exception was more V-shaped. The ditches varied in width between 11 ft and 14 ft, except in cross-dyke 2 where they were both 7 ft. In depth they varied between 3 ft and 7 ft, except the enclosure ditch which shallowed to a mere scrape on the steeper slope; here the effect of a bank was produced by scarping and a quarry ditch form material was hardly necessary.
Neolithic pottery of simple form, akin to that from Maiden Castle, was found scattered throughout the filling of the ditches and was the only pottery from the lower filling; it included a very degenerate example of a trumpet-lug. Other finds included chipped and polished flint axes, leaf-shaped arrowheads, large coarse scrapers, a bone chisel or gouge, animal bones, chiefly of cattle, and two human skulls from the ditch bottoms of cross-dyke 2. Within the upper part of the ditch fillings occasional abraded 'B' beaker and rusticated sherds appeared; they were abundant in the shallow inner ditch of cross-dyke 2, where a Beaker pit had been cut into the earlier filling. (2-3)
Since 1974, the 'Causewayed Camp' on Hambledon Hill has been excavated by R Mercer following denudation by ploughing. So far, ninety pits containing pottery, greenstone implements, flint tools, red deer antler and quernstones, have been found in the interior. The causewayed ditches of the enclosure, and the inner ditches of cross-dykes 1 and 2, contained deposits of animal bone and pottery, as well as the remains of about 25 human skulls and two infant
burials. Many had been placed under flint cairns, as primary deposits, and suggest that the site was used for funerary rituals. A linear flint cairn formed a secondary deposit. The outer ditches of cross-dykes 1 and 2 were sterile and probably served as 'boundaries'.
The bank of cross-dyke 3 revealed a possible double palisade and timber gateway which suggest a contemporary fortification to the enclosure.
Field survey has shown the existence of further double ditched outworks across the spur, to the east of cross-dyke 3 (at ST 85541210 to ST 85541240 and ST 85701210 to ST 85711240). Also on Stepleton Spur to the south, a double-ditched enclosure (ST 847117 to ST 855116) proved on excavation to be Neolithic. (4-5). (See ST 81 SE 52). (4-5)
Enclosure (see plan (2)) remnant between ST 84761230 to ST 84931210. The portion lying in Child Okeford parish remains as a scarp, 1.5 m high, with slight traces of a bank in the south. The ditch is defined by a 3.0 m wide terrace with vestigal causeways, especially in the south.
ST 84931210 to ST 85051234. The portion in Iwerne Courtney parish has been either completely destroyed or denuded by ploughing to an unsurveyable scarp.
Detail deleted on 1:2500 MSD. Extant portion surveyed at 1:2500 on MSD.
'Cross-dyke 1' (see plan (2)) ST 84811202 to ST 84971207. Extant and as described by RCHM (2).
Surveyed at 1:2500 on MSD.
'Cross-dyke 2' (see plan (2)) ST 85101225 to ST 85051242. Entirely destroyed by ploughing.
Detail deleted from MSD.
'Cross-dyke 3' (see plan (2)) ST 85431215 to ST 85361240. Part north of gap is extant and as descrbed by RCHM (2). Lower scarp ploughed out, ditch remains as a terrace, 1.9 m below crest of scarp, with identifiable traces of causeways at south end. Poorly defined on OS air photographs (6).
Surveyed at 1:2500 on MSD.
'Outwork 2' (see Mercer's plan (4)). The field is under plough and there are no visible traces of its alignment to the east of a strong natural scarp.
'Outwork 3' (see Mercer's plan (4)). The field is under plough and there are no visible traces of its alignment.
Centred ST 85551208. On a very steep slope, of unploughed downland, a series of scarps, 1 to 3 m high, are possible continuations of outworks 2 and 3, but their appearance is more typical of an Iron Age field system. Visible on OS air photographs (6). (6-7)
The final season of excavation of the Neolithic enclosure complex showed a considerable extension of the Neolithic outwork system bringing the whole length of outwork ditch to over 3km, and a total enclosure area exceeding 160 acres. The existence of a possible Neolithic enclosure within the Iron Age hillfort on the North spur of the hill was also investigated, without conclusive results. (8)
Radiocarbon dates for the main enclosure give a date of 2790+/-90 bp and the outwork as 2870+/-80 (HAR - 2378). (9)
Summary of excavation results up to 1979. The minimum of 70 individual human skeleton located in the 20% of the main enclosure ditch excavated so far, suggest a 'dead' population for the complete cicuit of 350 or more. Skulls were deliberately placed within the ditch, but the remainder of the skeletal material appears to have been incorperated accidentally. Mercer desribes the main enclosure as a 'vast reeking open cemetery', and it may be that skeletal material was removed from this "necropolis" to a nearby long-barrow once the bodies had been reduced to a skeletal state. The inner cross-ditches to the East and South of the enclosure have almost identical sequences to the main enclosure, but the outer cross-ditch in both cases was found to be remarkably clean, perhaps indicating that it formed the site boundary and was peripheral to the activities within the main enclosure. (10)
MAIN CAUSEWAYED ENCLOSURE:
PARENT RECORD FOR NEOLITHIC COMPLEX ON HAMBLEDON HILL
(ST 8492 1226) Between late May and late August 1996, the Cambridge and Exeter offices of RCHME carried out an earthwork survey and aerial photographic interpretation of the complex of monuments on Hambledon Hill as part of the project to record Industry and Enclosure in the Neolithic period (10). To enhance the record, the outworks and cross-ridge dykes formerly described with the main enclosure were assigned new NMR numbers (ST 81 SW 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64), though it may be appropriate to regard them as parts of a single causewayed enclosure with three circuits, interrupted by the natural topography. The terms used by Roger Mercer and Rog Palmer in describing the site have been preferred over those used previously by RCHME. The Stepleton enclosure was already described separately, as ST 81 SE 52. The main causewayed enclosure was chosen as the parent record for the complex as a whole given its central location and arguably focal role.
The enclosure is basically as described by previous sources. It is a rounded triangle in plan, ranging between the 168m and 185m contours of the central domed summit of Hambledon Hill, with an internal area of 8.3ha. The corners of the triangle coincide with the three spurs which radiate from the hill; these relatively level approaches are re-inforced on the east and south by causewayed cross-dykes (respectively ST 81 SW 62 and 63). A third such cross-dyke may have been destroyed or concealed by the outworks of the Iron Age hillfort (ST 81 SW 10); see full Level 3 Client report for further discussion. A short long barrow lies between the enclosure and the southern cross-dyke (ST 81 SW 18), and a possible Bronze Age round barrow on the summit of the hill (ST 81 SW 57).
The western third of the enclosure, in Child Okeford parish, is now preserved under permanent pasture under the management of English Nature. The remainder is still under plough, though vestigial scarps survive in places. In the western third, RCHME recorded at least 18 ditch segments and 12 bank segments. The ditch is up to 0.2m deep and the bank up to 0.4m high, with a more prominent scarp along its outer face, up to 1.0m high. The earthwork is best preserved around the southern corner. Here a continuous counterscarp bank is visible for at least 50m, this appears to result from an episode of re-cutting and may be contemporary with a similar modification to the Southern cross-dyke. Although recorded by Mercer as an earthwork, this was not encountered in his Trench P. A minimal scarp running c.13m inside the enclosure earthwork may be a second circuit, but is not certainly associated.
A Digicart aerial photographic transcription of the plough-levelled section of the enclosure was carried out by RCHME subsequent to the earthwork survey. This offers greater accuracy than has been possible previously through the use of AERIAL software, but essentially confirms the form of the enclosure as described above.
Extensive ground photography was also carried out by RCHME: see negative numbers AA 96/2861, 2865;
The gravel diggings mentioned by the sources above are recorded as SW 81 SE 68.
For further details, see RCHME Level 3 client report, which includes interpretative plans, and earthwork plan surveyed at 1:1000 scale, held in archive. (11)
Additional references. (12-22)
A full history, description, and analysis of the monument is presented in this publication, including a full chronological modelling based on analysis of radiocarbon dates. (23)
Hambledon Hill was included in a research project on the dating of early Neolithic enclosures of southern Britain and Ireland. Using radiocarbon dates and Bayesian modelling the following chronologies and conclusions were proposed:
Period 1A
In the central area, the estimated dates for the construction of the main enclosure, the inner east cross-dyke, and the south long barrow are very similar, falling in the mid-37th century cal BC, and centred on the 3650s and 3640s cal BC. It is possible that all these earthworks were built at the same time, or at least within 30 years of each other. Comparison of the dates of the first and last earthworks to be constructed suggests that they were perhaps the efforts of a single generation. The north long barrow is also placed in this period.
Period 1B
After a generation or two the construction of earthworks resumed. Away from the central area, the Shroton spur outwork, the Stepleton enclosure, and the middle Stepleton outwork cluster in the second half of the 37th century cal BC or the first decades of the 36th century cal BC. The construction of earthworks in period 1 as a whole probably spanned 35-80 years.
Period 2
After an interval of probably of 5-60 years after the latest of the period 1 earthworks was constructed, the inner Stepleton outwork was built. It is possible that the builders of the inner outwork included individuals who remembered or had taken part in the construction of the Stepleton enclosure.
The inner Stepleton outwork was burnt and had at least partly collapsed immediately after its construction. It may have been built in anticipation of attack. A mature male found lying on the ditch base may have been a victim of the catastrophe in which the defences were fired, and a neonate placed in a crevice at the ditch base must have died very close to this time. A young adult male was buried with scorched chalk rubble, burnt clay, charcoal, and charred hazelnuts. The only observed source for the burnt chalk and burnt clay was the then freshly burnt rampart, suggesting that his death was also associated with this event. Five radiocarbon dates on the skeletons indicate that all three burials are part of the same event. The inner Stepleton outwork was most probably constructed probably in 3580-3535 cal BC. This single episode involved proportionally less labour.
The north-western part at least of the outer Hanford outwork may have been built before the period 4 outworks which linked the Hanford outworks to those on the Stepleton spur. This event could have occurred in period 2 or period 3.
Once the main enclosure was built, individual segments infilled at different rates, although in a consistent sequence. There may have been natural silting as well as recutting, deposition, and backfilling in individual segments or groups of segments.
Period 3
After perhaps up to 40 years, various features on the hill were built: the inner south cross-dyke, the putative inner north cross-dyke, perhaps the north-west part of the Hanford outwork, and the outer Stepleton outwork. Possibly with the exception of the construction of the outer Hanford spurwork, this activity is all significantly later than periods 1 and 2, falling in the 36th or 35th centuries cal BC. Period 3 probably spanned 85-200 years.
Period 4
After probably 35-110 years, the last known Neolithic modifications to the complex were made: the outer of the two outworks linking the Hanford and Stepleton spurs, the western outwork, perhaps the outer cross-dykes, and perhaps the rebuilding of the Shroton spur gateway. These date to the second half of the 34th century cal BC. The western outwork may have been constructed during this period. The undated outer south cross-dyke is also placed here. A possible rebuilding of the Shroton spur outwork gateway may have been part of larger works represented by an incomplete and undated outer bank and ditch. These final modifications to the complex appear to have been made in a single generation. They required over a third of the total labour input of the whole process.
Duration of activity and processes
The model outlined suggests that earlier Neolithic activity on the hill began probably in the 3660s or 3650s cal BC and ended probably in 3335-3315 cal BC. This period of use lasted probably for between 320-350 years.
The model also estimates the dates at which early Neolithic activity ceased in the two enclosures, and hence the period of use of each. The main enclosure was probably built in the 3650s or 3640s cal BC. The main enclosure went out of use probably in 3345-3325 cal BC, giving a span of probably 300-335 years. These estimates suggest that the main enclosure remained in use throughout the earlier Neolithic frequentation of the hill.
The Stepleton enclosure was probably built in 3640-3615 cal BC. It went out of use in probably 3410-3375 cal BC. Overall the Stepleton enclosure was in use for probably for 195-250 years. It is almost certain that the main enclosure was constructed before the Stepleton enclosure. The Stepleton enclosure was probably built 10-60 years after it.
Implications for the site
The conclusions drawn were that the enclosure was little used, and when it was used, was occupied for short periods, at specific seasons, for short-term activities involving feasting and deposition.
Mercer now estimates that the main enclosure could have been built in two years by a workforce of 100 working for two months in late summer/early autumn, and almost any other individual earthwork in one year on the same basis, the whole seen as `not a major undertaking for a population of 1000 (100 families) who thought that it was important enough¿. Combined with indications that people may have come to the hill from 40 km or more away, this could be consistent with a fairly thinly scattered population. At another level, we can see that construction was not evenly distributed through the site periods. When the overall timespan is divided into 25-year blocks it was calculated that the majority of the initial labour input was in the 75 years between 3675 and 3600 cal BC - in periods 1a and 1b. Thereafter, construction continued episodically across the generations of periods 2 and 3, down to 3350 cal BC, but at a much reduced level.
A period of renewed earthwork construction is visible in 3350-3325 cal BC. This increase in activity may have consumed even more resources than the main enclosure. This massive undertaking, coming towards the end of the sequence of construction, emphasises that, while both enclosures and at least one long barrow were built in period 1, it was outworks which continued to be built in the following centuries, although the enclosures continued to be re-worked. Perhaps the need to impress and defend lasted beyond the driving force to enclose.
These period 4 outworks have distinctive characteristics beyond their size. Their predecessors seemed to have had strong connections with the west, which may even have been the area from which many of its visitors came. The outworks of periods 1-3 were almost all built to be visible from the east, with which the complex may have had relatively few links, leaving the hill open to the west, probably an important part of its catchment. The construction in period 4 of outworks of a different kind and orientation could suggest that the complex was then appropriated to the expanding and developing ceremonial focus then emerging in Cranborne Chase to the east.
Period 4 could be seen as a final effort of the enclosure tradition on Hambledon Hill, or part of the new focus on the Chase. It is probable that there was a short gap between the end of the main Neolithic use of Hambledon Hill and the construction of the Dorset cursus, but they can be seen as part of one design.
The violent events on the Stepleton spur in periods 2 and 3 may have been preceded by another in period 1 on the Shroton spur. It may be relevant that the Shroton and Stepleton spurs provide the easiest approaches to the hill. A number of factors could have been at work. The gathering of otherwise scattered populations could have resulted in unusually large concentrations of people. This might have fuelled any existing tensions resulting in the outbreak of fighting. The scale and explicit importance of the Hambledon complex could also have made its users particularly conspicuous and vulnerable. These factors could have prompted the construction of defences, but would not have been the enclosures sole purpose. It is notable that more episodes of violence were not recorded given the long timescales involved. (24)
Scheduled. (25)
See the National Heritage List for England for onlince access to a statutory map. (26)
|