Tumulus (destroyed): OS Grid Reference – SK 961 052
Also Known as:
Wicheley Warren
Archaeology & History
This tomb and, it would seem, another 200 yards away, have long since been smashed up. The only decent reference to the site comes from Reginald Haines’ address to the Society of Antiquaries in January, 1903, where he told:
“In a quarry worked for freestone on Major Brathwaite’s land…was found in 1900 a skeleton, probably neolithic. The body was in a crouching position, with ‘the knees tucked under the chin,’ at a depth of about 3 feet. Unfortunately, no one interested in such things was at hand, and the remains were incontinently thrown aside and (are) presently buried under a mass of rubbish from the tunnels which were being worked for stone. Mr V.B. Crowther-Beynon was only able to recover a few teeth, though he seems to have found a few fragments of animal bones and bits of pottery at or near the spot.
“In December 1901, at a point about 200 yards from the last, where a fresh excavation was being made, a second interment was found. In this case the soil containing the remains came down in one block, and a few broken fragments of bone came to light, with a lower jaw. The jaw is now in Mr V.B. Crowther-Beyson’s possession, who communicated with Lord Avebury on the subject, sending the jaw, and received the following reply:
“‘to judge from your description (i.e., of the interment) it is certainly probable that the interment you mention belonged to the stone (neolithic) age. This, however, in the absence of weapons or implements, cannot be put higher than a probability. I think that lower jaws like very this might be found among our existing people, though I fear with hardly such good teeth. Their soundness and the way they were worn point strongly to a great antiquity.’
“Near the second interment occurred little patches of burnt soil of a conspicuously red colour. These may have been the sites of hearths.”
Mr Haines makes a final note about the scarcity of prehistoric remains found hereby, saying that “the only other relics of the stone age that claim notice here are an arrow-head of flint, picked up in a field near Market Overton in November 1990, by Mr Wing” — which is quite a distance away!
References:
Haines, “Prehistoric Graves at Wicheley Warren,” in Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, volume 19, no.2, 1903.
Tumulus (destroyed): OS Grid Reference – SD 696 208
Also Known as:
Whitehall Tumulus
Ashleigh Barrow urns (after John Dixon)
Archaeology & History
Early accounts of this site tell of its destruction in the 19th century, but a modern reconstruction of the site has been made close to where it once stood. And this tomb sounded quite impressive! Within the ‘tomb’ were found a large number of urns, one of which was curiously empty. In John Dixon’s excellent Journeys through Brigantia (2003) work he told that,
“Contemporary reports about its excavation state that it was of circular form about 30 yards in diameter, being formed on a naze or promontory of an undulating plateau overlooking the Darwen valley. Its height was said to vary between 10 to 12 feet on the east side and between 2 or 3 feet on the west, the centre being about 6 feet in diameter and consisting of a slight hollow.
“Ten interments appear to have been made, one being just a heap of burnt bones, the others, having been enclosed in urns, the majority of which are badly broken, consisted of ashes and fragments of bone together with unrecognizable pieces of bronze. Two urns also contained ‘incense cups’ and another a 7½-inch bronze knife or dagger.
“The design of the urns is similar to those from the Middle Bronze Age… All but two of the urns were found within an area 21 feet by 14 feet, whilst one was 40 feet away. They were, with one exception, placed in the Earth with the orifice pointing upwards and were covered with slabs, the depth at which they were found varying from 1 to 2 feet.”
Remains of the urns can be seen on display in the Darwen Library.
Folklore
Once again in John Dixon’s (2003) fine Journey’s through Brigantia volume, we read of folklore relating to the respect of the dead which local people used to give this old tomb, telling:
“Many superstitions were attached to the barrow and its destruction in the 1860s, with the country people speaking of the place being haunted by ‘boggarts’ and children having been known to take off their clogs or shoes and walk past it barefoot in the night time.”
References:
Dixon, John, Journeys through Brigantia – volume 11: East Lancashire Pennines, Aussteiger Publications: Barnoldswick 2003.
The site has been known about for nearly 150 years, albeit mistakenly as a series of prehistoric barrows that William Greenwell (1877) told were “near the division between the parishes of Rudston and Burton Agnes” near the crest of the hill. He further told the place to be,
“Two long mounds, almost parallel, their northern end gradually losing themselves in the surface-level, but connected together at the southern end by another long mound.”
South end of Cursus A (after D.P. Dymond)Early photo of Cursus A (after J.K.St Joseph)
Then in 1958 when C. & E. Grantham of Driffield did the first modern excavation here across a section of the western ditch, they found that the long embankment went on much further than ever previously anticipated, for more than half-a-mile downhill in the direction of Rudston village. It wasn’t a long barrow or tombs of any sort, they found! Then in 1961 when Dr. J.K. St. Joseph did aerial survey work over the area, he and his colleagues established that this monument consisted of extensive parallel ditches stretching for at least 1½ miles towards and past the eastern side of Rudston village. It’s nature as a cursus monument was rediscovered after several thousand years in the wilderness… (on St. Joseph’s survey, two other cursus monuments were also found in the vicinity, being Rudston Cursus B and Cursus C) Readers will hopefully forgive me for quoting at some length Mr Dymond’s (1966) article on the site (with minimal editing!):
“The southern end of the cursus lies in the western angle of two roads, Woldgate and Burton Agnes Balk. In plan it is square with rounded corners and consists of a bank with outer ditch. Although the bank has been ploughed for many years, it still remains substantial; it stands up to 4 feet high from the outside and 1-2 feet wide from the inside. The east and west banks decline in height northwards and are now at their greatest height where they join the southern end. The profile of each bank is smooth and rounded and merges on the outside with the broad shallow depression of the silted-up ditch. The south bank is now 170 feet long overall, and spread to a width of 60-80 feet. It stands higher at both ends than in the middle. This fact was noted by Greenwell, who also recorded that at the southwest angle “there was the appearance of a round barrow raised upon the surface of the long mound.” There is no surface evidence today to suggest a secondary round barrow, and to some extent at least the greater height at the angles is probably due to the concentration of upcast inside a fairly sharp corner.
“The south arm of the ditch has been largely destroyed by a chalk-pit, but the southeast turn is quite clear on air-photographs. There is no suggestion on the ground or from the air that the cursus had ever extended further to the south.
“The cursus begins its descent in a due northerly direction, and loses its eastern side for approximately 600 feet under the enclosure road, Burton Agnes Balk. The ditch can be traced intermittently on the western and eastern verges. It then swings gently NNW around the head of a small slack draining northwest. Thus far the cursus is traceable on the ground. The ditches are the most consistent feature, showing as broad shallow depressions 20-40 feet wide and 70-80 yards apart, which when in fallow attract a dark coarse vegetation (particularly thistles and nettles. The banks inside the ditches are sometimes visible in relief though considerably spread. Where the banks have been almost entirely ploughed out, a chalk spread usually marks their position.
“There is a suggestion on the ground that the banks and ditches may have been separated by berms, particularly on the east side near the square end. This appears to be confirmed by the silting of the ditch in the excavated section…
“Proceeding further downhill in the direction of Rudston village, the cursus quite suddenly swings north-NNE, finally crosses Burton Agnes Balk, and passes to the west of Pits Plantation. On the west of the road both banks and ditches are still visible in relief, and the ditches produce a firm crop-mark. East of the road no surface traces are discernible, and only the eastern ditch shows intermittently as a crop-mark.
“For ½-mile across the floor of the Great Wold Valley, there is no trace of the cursus. The area has been ploughed since medieval times, and there is in addition a considerable Romano-British settlement. It is worth noting that in this length, the cursus must have crossed the stream of the Gypsey Race, surely a fact of some importance in any discussion of the function of cursuses.
“Two parallel ditches c.60 yards apart, visible on air photographs in a field immediately north of the modern Rudston-Bridlington road, seem to represent the continuation of the cursus. The ditches travel for approximately 300 yards and end at the Bridlington Gate Plantation. There are no surface traces in the field, but a depression in the plantation may represent the eastern ditch. This depression is crossed obliquely by the remains of a low bank and ditch running along the length of the plantation WSW and ENE. This latter (part) is probably part of the supposedly Iron Age entrenchment system, and has certainly been used as a road from Rudston to Bridlington, as the name of the plantation implies.
“The northern end of the cursus cannot be traced. Possibilities are that the end was in the plantation and has been destroyed by the later earthwork, or that the cursus proceeded NNE for an unknown distance. If the latter hypothesis is accepted, the western ditch must be under the Argam Dykes, a double entrenchment which appears to terminate at the northern side of the plantation, and the eastern ditch is indistinguishable from ploughing lines to which it is parallel…
“Cursus A has its southern end at a height of 254 feet OD, on the forward face of a long chalk ridge running WSW and ENE. From this point the course of the cursus is visible, except for that part west of Pits Plantation. The last known part in Bridlington Gate Plantation, 1½ miles off, is clearly visible. Seen against the contours of the area, the cursus has one end resting on a high ridge, crosses a broad valley, and climbs at least in part, the far side. It appears to pass approximately 300 yards east of the monolith in Rudston churchyard.”
Line of Rudston A
The presence of this and three other cursus monuments close by (Rudston B, C and D) indicates that the region was an exceptionally important one in the cosmology of our prehistoric ancestors. Four of these giant linear cursus monuments occur in relative proximity, and there was an excess of ancient tombs and, of course, we have the largest standing stone in the British Isles stood in the middle of it all. A full multidisciplinary analysis of the antiquities in this region is long overdue. To our ancestors, the mythic terrain and emergent monuments hereby related to each other symbiotically, as both primary aspects (natural) and epiphenomena (man-made) of terra mater: a relationship well known to students of comparative religion and anthropology who understand the socio-organic animistic relationship of landscape, tribal groups and monuments.
…to be continued…
References:
Dymond, D.P., “Ritual Monuments at Rudston, E. Yorkshire, England,” in Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, volume 32, 1966.
Eliade, Mircea, The Sacred and the Profane, Harvest: New York 1959.
Greenwell, William, British Barrows, Clarendon Press: Oxford 1877.
Hedges, John & Buckley, David G., The Springfield Cursus and the Cursus Problem, Essex County Council 1981.
Nicholson, John, Beacons of East Yorkshire, A. Brown & Sons: Hull 1887.
Pennick, Nigel & Devereux, Paul, Lines on the Landscape, Hale: London 1989.
One of the four (known) cursus monuments around Rudston: this one stretches between the Ordnance Survey coordinates TA 081669 near Kilham Grange on the southwestern edge of Rudston, then heads northeast towards the village itself at TA 094675. Described briefly in D.P.Dymond’s essay on (mainly) Cursus A, he said how Cursus B was part of,
Early ground-plan (after D.P. Dymond)Early photo of Rudston B (after J.K.St Joseph)
“a large complex of crop marks. The largest feature is the squared, tapering end of Cursus B, which can be traced for 700 yards in a north-easterly direction. No surface remains seem to survive in an area intensively ploughed, except for a swelling under a hedge on the line of the south-eastern bank (at TA 0834 6703). West of the square end and partly overlying it, are several small rectangular enclosures, which are probably part of a later (?Romano-British) settlement and field-system. Also in this tangle of crop-marks there are four roughly circular shapes, which may well be barrow circles associated with the end of the cursus. On certain barrow just south of the end of the cursus has an inner ring of pits. Where the cursus is lat visible to the north-east, it is headed roughly for the monolith ¾-mile away. The width of Cursus B is approximately 90 yards between ditch centres. It has its square end on the forward slope of a ridge (like Cursus A) at a height of 180 feet OD, and descends towards the village, which is visible from the end, through a shallow valley.”
Dymond’s note about the alignment feature of this cursus, towards the gigantic Rudston monolith, was one echoed in the Hedges & Buckley (1981) survey. They noted:
“At Rudston, the B cursus extended eastwards aligns upon the Rudston monolith in Rudston churchyard. Destruction of standing stones elsewhere may have removed similar associations between the stones and cursuses.”
This alignment feature was also confirmed by cognitive archaeologist and alignment specialist, Paul Devereux (Pennick & Devereux 1989) in his survey of cursus monuments.
Typical of these fascinating antiquities, nothing of any worth has been found along the length of the cursus that can give us any clues to its nature and function. However, the presence of this and three others close by indicates that the region was an exceptionally important one in the cosmology of our prehistoric ancestors. Four of these giant linear cursus monuments occur in relative proximity, and there was an excess of ancient tombs and, of course, we have the largest standing stone in the British Isles stood in the middle of it all. A full multidisciplinary analysis of the antiquities in this region is long overdue. To our ancestors, the mythic terrain and emergent monuments hereby related to each other symbiotically, as both primary aspects (natural) and epiphenomena (man-made) of terra mater: a phenomenon long known to comparative religious students and anthropologists exploring the animistic natural relationship of landscape, tribal groups and monuments.
References:
Dymond, D.P., “Ritual Monuments at Rudston, E. Yorkshire, England,” in Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, volume 32, 1966.
Eliade, Mircea, The Sacred and the Profane, Harvest: New York 1959.
Hedges, John & Buckley, David G., The Springfield Cursus and the Cursus Problem, Essex County Council 1981.
Pennick, Nigel & Devereux, Paul, Lines on the Landscape, Hale: London 1989.
Another one of those rare cup-marked stones from Cornwall, once again found in association with a burial— but once again destroyed, this time by having an airfield built over the tomb! This “cup-marked and perforated slab” was said by Paul Ashbee (1958: 192) to have been unearthed “by Mr C.K. Andrew” in 1941 when he was digging in the Nancekuke round barrow. Yet an earlier reference to the same site by Mr o’ Neil (1948: 26) told that “the grave was rifled c.1926, but in the ditch there were found traces of a Bronze Age wooden shovel and a perforated and cup-marked slate.” For any students studying this arena, the correct date would appear to be the earlier of the two.
I’ve not been able to locate any decent photos or diagrams of this small cup-marked stone and would truly appreciate an illustration of it if anyone could get hold of one.
References:
Ashbee, Paul, “The Excavation of Tregulland Burrow, Treneglos Parish, Cornwall,” in Antiquaries Journal, volume 38, 1958.
o’ Neil, B.H. St. John, “War and Archaeology in Britain”, in Antiquaries Journal, volume XXVIII, January-April 1948.
‘Tumulus’ (destroyed): OS Grid Reference – SE 592 737
Archaeology & History
Bronze Age pottery (after YAJ 1963)
A curious entry inasmuch as it’s difficult to categorize the site correctly. Added to this is the fact that the place has been built over! But despite these misgivings (if that’s the right word!), the site’s deserving of a posthumous entry…
There used to be a curious-looking mound here, immediately east of Intake Lodge, that “was due to be bulldozed so that a field of rough pasture could be brought under cultivation”, killing the indigenous wildlife that was living here. However, before this was done, some inspectorate dood who worked for the Ancient Monuments Commission and the Ministry of Works “decided to excavate”, as he believed that an ancient burial mound was in the field. Mr I.M. Stead (1963) takes up the story, telling:
“”This mound was about 75ft by 90ft diameter and 6ft high, on ground sloping away to the south-east. It had every appearance of being a barrow.
“The excavation, in October 1961, was supervised by the writer (and) assisted by Mr A.L. Pacitto. A trench on the east side revealed layers of sand which appeared to be natural, and a second trench, on the west side, uncovered a capping of stone which confirmed that this was not a barrow. However, it seems that the writer was not the first person to mistake it for an artificial burial mound. A disturbed area in the centre, some 15ft diameter, where there had been an old water-tank, produced a fragment of Bronze Age pottery and a sherd from another Bronze Age vessel was found in a disturbance on the side of the mound. A small area near the centre was cleared in the hope of finding an undisturbed burial, but shortage of funds did not permit more extensive stripping. Judging from the type of pottery (see image) and its situation on the mound, there can be little doubt that one two occasions Bronze Age people placed secondary burials in the natural mound.”
This tells us that although the mound wasn’t a tomb or burial mound in a traditional religious sense, it was instead a sacred hill of the dead for the local people at one time or another in ancient days. And, if Mr Stead had been a decent archaeologist and continued to excavate here without pay (as he should do if he loves his subject), we may have found more beneath this now-lost sacred mound. Unfortunately this didn’t happen and we lost vital clues and information.
References:
Stead, I.M., “An Excavation at Yearsley, North Riding, 1961,” in Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, part 161 (volume 41), 1963.
Tumulus (destroyed): OS Grid Reference – SE 0095 2748
Archaeology & History
Up behind the old pub that was The Mount Skip, high on the ridge above Hebden Bridge and Mytholmroyd, overlooking the Calder Valley for many miles, was once — it would seem — a number of fine prehistoric remains, long since destroyed by the industrial advance of quarrying and such likes. Amidst what seems to have been settlement remains and, perhaps, timber circles, an ancient grave was also known here. In Mr Ling Roth’s (1906) essay on the prehistoric remains of the Halifax region, he wrote:
“In May, 1897, a grave was discovered at a quarry above Mount Skip Inn. The first indications were the rolling down of pieces of urns which the delvers called flower pots. Then in digging into a hole to fix the leg of a crane, human bones were discovered, Mr Crossley Ainsworth told me: “The grave was about 6ft (1.8m) long, from 14 to 18in (35-45.7cm) wide and about 2ft (61cm) deep…the head and feet were almost exactly north and south, with the face right towards the midday sun.” The bones were very brittle and crumbled easily in the hand. There was a lot of charcoal in the grave. In the ends of the grave which were undisturbed, “there appeared to be about 6in (15cm) thick of charred wood and bones mixed together at the bottom. Flints were also found. Also the larger half of a small earthenware vessel which had rolled down into the quarry ; this was picked up by a man named Thos. Greenwood, of Shawcroft Hill.”
The site was mentioned again nearly fifty years later in Geoffrey Watson’s (1952) survey, but with no additional details.
References:
Roth, H. Ling, The Yorkshire Coiners 1767-183; and Notes on Old and Prehistoric Halifax, F. King and Son: Halifax 1906.
Watson, Geoffrey G., Early Man in the Halifax District, Halifax Scientific Society 1952.
In the superb work of the legendary J.R. Mortimer (1905) he tells what was found when him and his team excavated this “remarkable barrow,” as he called it. Although Mortimer’s contemporary researcher, Canon Greenwell (1877), also looked at the site, the “mound was covered with a clump of old fir trees” which prevented further examination at the time. Mortimer and his team seemed to have worked here when the trees had been felled and following “a three-week free use of the pick and shovel during July and August, 1878,” they opened up this prehistoric mound to see what lay within.
Their discoveries here were intriguing: for this wasn’t merely a burial site in its early phase but, moreso, a house of the dead no less, where the people whose bodies, or those who cremated ashes were deposited herein, lived in their spirit-life. It was an abode for the spirits of the dead. Mortimer’s lengthy notes tell the story:
“At the time of opening, it measured 4½ feet from base to summit, and the natural surface of the ground beneath it stood fully 1 foot higher than the present surface of the land for some distance round its margin. It was formed entirely of chalk rubble and soil, mainly obtained from an encircling trench, which on the northwest side was very deep and wide.
“We turned over the whole of this mound except its outskirts. Near the northwest margin there was an excavation (D on the plan) extending 8 to 10 inches below the base of the mound, and measuring 8½ feet by 6½ feet, the floor of which was covered with a film of dark matter, in which were small bits of burnt wood. No relic, nor the slightest trace of an interment was observed. A little west of the centre (at B) there was s still larger excavation, 18 inches deep. It contained rough chalk, but no traces of an interment. East of this was a third excavation (E), oval in form and 3 feet deep. Like the previous one it was filled with chalk and contained no relic or trace of a skeleton. The digging of these had preceded the erection of the mound, as there were no indications of it having been cut through. These excavations were doubtless graves, the bodies having entirely decayed.
“This was not, however, the case with the secondary and comparatively recent interments of six adult skeletons, found at the south-east side of the mound, 1 foot to 2 feet below its base. Though unaccompanied by any relic, the very narrow form of the graves and the extended and slightly flexed position of the interments alone showed them to be Anglo-Saxons.
“Below these secondary graves was an older and far more interesting excavation. Its form and position is shown on the plan at A. At first it was thought to be a huge grave, but as the work proceeded appearances indicating it to have served some other purpose were visible. Its filling-in was peculiar. It consisted of broken chalk, surface soil, and burnt wood, presenting altogether a very unusual arrangement. Along its centre for a distance of about 15 feet were six carbonized uprights of wood, 6 to 9 inches in diameter, at about equal distances and in a row. Wood ashes were also found on the sides and bottom, and scattered in the material filling the excavation.
“Also along the centre many of the large flat pieces of chalk stood on their edges, and at various depths were portions of animal and probably human bone, burnt as well as unburnt, and many fragments of a reddish urn. It was observed that the east end of this excavation became narrower and shallower. It now seemed evident that it was a habitation. Its form, as shown on the (above) plan, was oblong, with a ground floor 25 feet by 4½ feet; and its greatest depth was 6 feet. To its east end was a passage 11 feet long, gradually sloping to the surface.
“”On the south side, commencing at the inner end of the passage and extending inwards for about 12 feet, was a ledge or rock-seat, about 13 inches above the opposite side of the floor, as shown by the dotted lines in the plan and section. The whole width of the floor at the south-west end, for a distance of about 6 feet, was 10 to 12 inches above the centre and lowest part of the floor. The roof of the cave had most probably been formed of horizontal timber, supported by strong uprights of the same material, and then covered with a mound of earth and stones. The roof eventually gave way and the superincumbent earth and stones slid into the dwelling, several of the large flat stones…remaining on their edges.
“The abundance of wood ashes affords unquestionable evidence of the dwelling having been burnt. The preservation of the remains of the six uprights was due entirely to their having been completely charred. The fragments of red pottery are quite plain and belong to three or more vessels, which were probably used for domestic purposes.
“The roof of the cave must have fallen in long previous to the Anglo-Saxon interments, as where the skeletons were found, partly over the cave and partly upon the undisturbed rock, not the slightest distortion was visible, which would have been the case had not the filled-in portion under the bodies become firm. Near the south-side of the dwelling, at about the base of the mound, were several broken human bones and pieces of a dark-coloured urn. Probably these belonged to a disturbed Anglo-Saxon burial.
“We also found in the mound, between the graves E, B, D, a considerable quantity of detached animal and human bones; the latter indicated three or more individuals; a few of the bones showed traces of fire. There were also several small pieces of a dark plain urn.”
Mr Mortimer then commented on the unusual ‘habitation’ section within the mound, not thinking that the dead themselves “lived” here! But we can forgive him this small detail as his work in general was superb. The site was of course a decent East Yorkshire chambered tomb, wherein the dead were laid and, if entrance was ever possible by our tribal ancestors when it was erected, would have paid homage the ancestral figures buried here. Traditional death ceremonies were pretty inevitable I’d say.
References:
Mortimer, J.R., Forty Years Researches in British and Saxon Burial Mounds of East Yorkshire, Brown & Sons: Hull 1905.
Prehistoric petroglyphs are rare things indeed in Leicestershire! But the example that was found here — at the now destroyed prehistoric tomb which archaeologists catalogued as ‘Lockington Barrow VI’ in this small graveyard — shows that such ritual art spreads further afield than previously reported by archaeologists. Yet as with countless other cup-marked stones, it should come as no surprise to be found associated with a tumulus. Death and petroglyphs are common bedfellows – even in this part of Britain!
Lockington cup-marking (courtesy Gwilym Hughes)Lockington cup-marked stone
Found on the northern edge of a ring ditch surrounding this once-fine tomb, the carving was found on a small, triangular-shaped, broken piece of rock , less than 12 inches across along its longest side. The small stone has what seems to be eight cup-marks (5 seem certain) pecked onto the stone: simple, without additional ingredients, akin to the basic forms found at Baildon and other more northern climes. The stone itself didn’t seem to be local and was thought by Hughes (2000) “to be from one of the outcrops of millstone grit to the north of the site in southern Derbyshire.”
Less than 7 feet from this petroglyph, inside the barrow, was a pit containing a hoard of ancient gold and copper ware — though any likely relationship between the carving and the treasure hoard is doubtful. The carving was probably a “portable” relic, carried some distance and put here for some reason or other: perhaps as an offering; perhaps a magickal artifact — we’ll probably never know…
Long since destroyed by the self-righteous advance of the Industrialists, this was a pretty impressive-looking tomb according to the account of D.M. Waterman (1951). Found between the villages of Ainderby Quernhow and Kirklington, right at the side of an important prehistoric trackway—later used by the Romans and known as Leeming Street (on what is now the A1 motorway). Waterman cited it as being “of primary importance in prehistoric times” as it stood on the great plain between the three great henges of Thornborough to the north and those on Hutton Moor to the south, accompanied by a number of other tumuli nearby.
Quernhow tomb on 1856 OS mapThe excavated monument
When Waterman and his team arrived here, the barrow “appeared as a low-spread mound, about 3ft in elevation, the exact limits of which were difficult to define,” due to large parts of it being covered over in mud that’d been dumped there by the local land-owner, aswell as erosion due to other farming or industrial activity. But once the archaeologists had stripped the centuries of soil from the damaged surface of the monument, a most impressive site emerged! At the heart of this great burial mound was found “an imposing stone cairn, more or less flat-topped and with a circular constructed face.” He (1951) continued:
“The material of the cairn was composed of cobbles or boulders, all of local geological origin, ranging in size from a few inches up to a foot in diameter or more. A stone considerably larger in size was occasionally encountered , the largest found measuring 23in by 20in and from 3in to 5in in thickness. The stones were heaped up without any deliberate attempt at producing a stable structure and used indiscriminately, irrespective of size or shape, although there was a tendency for the larger stones to occur towards the perimeter of the cairn. Since the cairn itself was built to a flat surface, and the underlying barrow-mound assumed a saucer-shaped profile, the cobbles perforce increased in depth towards the cairn face; at the very centre they were laid one, occasionally two deep, at the face three or four deep, although irregular size and placing precluded any consistency whatsoever in the work. The standard of the building in fact differed considerably throughout the structure. On the northeast and northwest the facing-stones were quite carefully laid, standing to a height of 22in, the work becoming increasingly shoddy towards the south where the construction had so deteriorated that whole sections of the facing had fallen bodily away from the cairn mass, slipping down the tail of the underlying mound…”
Plan of Quernhow
In the middle of the large cairn were found four small pits and a number of small cremations in and around them. There were also found the usual broken remains of pottery, human bones, charcoal, foods vessels and burnt pieces of oak and other vegetation. Near the centre of the cairn was a curious “four poster” of upright stones, “about 1.4ft long and rather less in breadth and thickness (which) suggest, from consideration of their obviously deliberate and careful placing, some significant function in burial ritual.” The four corners of these stones were close to the cardinal points: north, south, east and west.
References:
Waterman, D.M., “Quernhow: A Food Vessel Barrow in Yorkshire,” in Antiquaries Journal, volume 31, 1951.
