Although originally classed as a stone circle, this site should more accurately be described as a form of cairn circle, as burial remains were found in the middle. This is noted by both Aubrey Burl (2000) and John Barnatt (1989), who thought it to be a kerbed cairn. It’s only a small circle aswell, about 5 yards across and is found not far from other burial cairns in the neighbourhood.
First discovered around Easter in 1965 by the then owners of the farm, Mr & Mrs K. Jarman, parts of the circle were dug into by their children, who subsequently informed Sheffield City Museum of their finds. Subsequently, the circle was then described in a short article by J. Radley (1969) in ‘Notes on Archaeological Finds’ for the Yorkshire archaeology group. He wrote:
“The circle is 15ft in diameter and is made of ten stones which protrude a few inches above the turf cover. Inside the circle the ground is slightly concave. A two-feet wide trench was dug across the circle and a large stone was revealed at the centre. On the stone was a fragmented urn, remains of a cremation, and one fragment of flint. There are signs of burning on the stone, and also under the stone, but no other burial has been discovered. The whole burial was so shallow that it was in the root zone of the overlying grass. The survival of many pieces of bone in such a wet location suggests that the area must have been protected by a mound until quite recent times…
“The urn is too fragmentary to be restored. Of the hundreds of fragments, only a few retain both faces, and these are generally one centimetre thick. The urn appears to have been made of a fine clay with large grits and has a smooth brown surface marked in places with impressions of blades of grass. The urn may have been biconical in form with bands of horizontal grooves around the upper part, with vertical grooves below them.”
References:
Barnatt, John, The Stone Circles of Britain – volume 2, British Archaeological Reports: Oxford 1989.
Burl, Aubrey, The Stone Circles of Britain, Ireland and Brittany, Yale University Press 2000.
Radley, J., “A Stone Circle on Kirkmoor Beck Farm, Fylingdales,” in Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, part 167, volume 42, 1969.
From Marsden itself, take the A62 road west and where the road bends round, the large hill rising on your left is where you’re heading. There’s a parking spot near the bottom of the highest part of the hill. From here, walk right to the top, up whichever route you feel comfortable with. At the very top is an intrusive modern monolith (dedicated to somebody-or-other, which the fella wouldn’t approve of if he really loved these hills*). About 10 yards east of the stone is a small grassy mound with a bittova dip in the middle. That’s it!
Archaeology & History
This is a little-known prehistoric site, whose remains sit upon a very well-known and impressive hill on the western edges of Marsden. Described in Roy Brook’s (1968) excellent survey on the history of Huddersfield as “the most important site” from the Bronze Age in this region, it seems curious that the attention given to it has been relatively sparse and scattered. The tops and edges of the hill have been cut into and worked upon by the uncaring spade of industrialism (of which there is much evidence), aswell as much of the peat being used for fuel over countless centuries — some of which appears to have been cut close to the all-but-lost remains of this once-important burial site.
The first description of the hill itself seems to be in 1426, where it was named in the Ramsden Documents, “past’ voc’ le Pole.” (Smith 1961) It wasn’t until appearing as Puil Hill on the 1771 Greenwood map that the title we know of it today began to take form. Local people would alternately call it both Pule and Pole Hill. But its name is somewhat curious, as the word appears to derive from the variant Celtic and old English words, peol, pul and pol,
“meaning a pool or marsh, especially one that was dry in the summer. Pole Moor therefore means Pool or Marsh Moor…and Pule Hill = the hill in the marsh.” (Dyson 1944)
Remains of mound looking NWSmall mound at left-centre
However, in Smith’s English Place-Name Elements, he gives an additional piece of word-lore which seems equally tenable, saying the word may be “possibly also ‘a creek'”, which could be applied to the water-courses immediately below the west side of the hill. We might never know for sure. But the archaeological remains on top of Pule Hill have a more certain history about them…
The burial site first appears to have been mentioned in a short article by Henry Fishwick (1897), who wrote:
“Whilst searching for…flints on the summit of Pule Hill a few weeks ago a discovery was made which is of considerable antiquarian interest. On the highest point of the hill, and from 12 to 18 inches below the surface, were found two human skeletons lying on their sides almost directly east and west, the knees of both being drawn up. Near to them were two small circular urns measuring 4¾ inches high, 5 inches across the top, and 6 inches in diameter at the widest part, the base being 3 inches across. These are made of native clay very slightly burnt, and are ornamented with short lines (apparently cut with some sharp instrument) which forms a rough herring-bone pattern. On the centre band are four ears or small handles which are pierced so as to admit a small cord. The urns contained animal matter and a few calcined human bones.
“Since the discovery of these two urns another has been exhumed from the same place. It measures 3½ inches in height and 7 inches in diameter at the widest part, which is just below the rim of the mouth. Its ornamentation is similar to the others, but quite so elaborately executed; the base is made with four feet or claws. On one side of the urn is an ear or handle pierced with a small hole in the direction of a double-groove, in which it is placed; there is a second double-groove near the bottom. When found this urn only contained sand. Fragments of a fourth urn were discovered on the same spot… The discoverers of these were Mr G. Marsden and Mr F. Fell.”
As a consequence of this, a couple of years later members of the Yorkshire Archaeology Society took it upon themselves to have a closer look at the place — and they weren’t to be disappointed. They cut a large trench across the top of the site from east to west, digging down until they hit the bedrock of the very hill; then dug an equal trench as much as 30 yards to the north, and on the southern side to the edge of the hill near where it drops. They came across,
“In three places were found distinct cavities…driven into the rock to a depth of about eighteen inches, the dimensions of which…averaged three feet long by two feet wide.”
Drawings of urns & bowls (Manby 1969)Mr Petch’s old photos of the bowls & urns
Within these rock cavities they found small portions of bone, charcoal and flint. It was also found that the urns which were described earlier by Mr Fishwick, had been found laid on their sides “at the places where the cavities were subsequently discovered.” Inside the urns, the remains of various human bones were discovered and reported on by Mr Boyd Dawkins: a craniologist of some repute in his time.
The discoveries were remarked upon a few years later — albeit briefly — in D.F.E. Sykes (1906) excellent history work of the area, where he told us that it was one of his esteemed friends, “George Marsden of Marsden…who was fortunate enough in August, 1896, to find” the ancient remains. But perhaps the most eloquent description of the Pule Hill remains was done by James Petch (1924) of the once-fine Tolson Museum archaeology bunch in Huddersfield (still open to the public and very helpful indeed). Mr Petch wrote:
“Several Bronze Age interments have been found in the locality. Of these the most important is that discovered on the summit of Pule Hill and excavated in 1896 by the late Mr. George Marsden. The finding of an arrowhead led to digging and four urns containing burnt human remains, and so-called “incense cup” were uncovered and removed (Figures 24, above, and 25, below) . In 1899 the site was again opened up for further examination. It was then noted that the urns had been set in cavities dug into the rock to a depth of about 18 inches. The type of the urn fixes the interment as belonging to the Bronze Age, and characteristic of such interments are the rock-cavities. The site is however somewhat exceptional in that no trace was found of the mound which was usually heaped over an interment. As the site is very exposed, the mound may have been weathered away, leaving no traces visible to-day. Along with the urns were found an arrowhead, one or two scrapers, a disc, a few pygmies and a number of flakes and chippings. It is important to note that these flints are mostly the relics of a Mas d’Azil Tardenois workshop which existed long before the interment was made on the summit of Pule Hill, and that they have no necessary connection with the Bronze Age burial…
“Owing to the generosity of the late Mr. George Marsden, the discoverer, and his family, the urns are now in the Museum. They form one of the most striking exhibits in the Prehistoric section. They are illustrated in Figures 24 and 25, above.
“The smallest of the group (Figure 24, 1 and 2, above) belongs to the type known as “incense-cups,” this name being the result of a somewhat fanciful attempt to account for the perforations the examples always show. It is quite evident and widely recognized now that this explanation – that they were in fact censers – is unsatisfactory, and that the use of this peculiar type of vessel is a problem as yet unsolved. Nos. 3 and 4 and Fig 25, 1 and 2 (above), are styled “food vessels,” such as may have been their ordinary use.
“No. 3 is ornamented with slight indentations, and without lugs; it has two strongly marked beads around the mouth, with a distinct groove between them. No. 4 has two slight lugs opposite to one another, which appear to have been pinched up from the body of the vessel; they were perforated but the holes have been broken out. Fig. 25, Nos 1 and 2 (above), is the best of the series, it is ornamented with small cone-shaped indentations and shows several unusual features; the width is great in proportion to the height; the lugs are not opposite and were attached to the vessel after it was made; the one on the left is seen to be perforated, and the position of the second is above the figure 2 in the illustration. The four feet were attached in a similar manner, and are not solid with the body of the vessel. All the vessels are hand made and show no indication of the potter’s wheel.”
Ceremonial bowl from the site (J. Petch 1924)
The site has subsequently been listed in a number of archaeology works, but there’s been no additional information of any worth added. Manby (1969) noted that of the four vessels from this prehistoric ‘cemetery’, one bowl was of a type more commonly found in East Yorkshire — though whether we should give importance to that single similarity, is questionable.
One thing of considerable note that seems to have been overlooked by the archaeological fraternity (perhaps not too surprising!) is the position of these burial deposits in the landscape. To those people who’ve visited this hill, the superb 360° view is instantly notable and would have been of considerable importance in the placement and nature of this site. The hill itself was probably sacred (in the animistic sense of things) and is ideal for shamanistic magickal practices. The communion this peak has with other impressive landscape forms nearby – such as the legendary West Nab — would also have been important.
For heathens and explorers amongst you, this is a truly impressive place indeed…
Barnes, Bernard, Man and the Changing Landscape, Eaton: Merseyside 1982.
Brook, Roy, The Story of Huddersfield, MacGibbon & Kee: London 1968.
Clark, E. Kitson, “Excavation at Pule Hill, near Marsden,” in Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, volume 16, 1902.
Cowling, Eric T., Rombald’s Way, William Walker: Otley 1946.
Dyson, Taylor, Place Names and Surnames – Their Origin and Meaning, with Speicla Reference to the West Riding of Yorkshire, Alfred Jubb: Huddersfield 1944.
Elgee, Frank & Harriet, The Archaeology of Yorkshire, Methuen: London 1933.
Faull, M.L. & Moorhouse, S.A. (eds.), West Yorkshire: An Archaeological Guide to AD 1500 – volume 1, WYMCC: Wakefield 1981.
Fishwick, Henry, “Sepulchral Urns on Pule Hill, Yorkshire,” in Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, volume 16, 1897.
Manby, T.G., “Bronze Age Pottery from Pule Hill, Marsden,” in Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, volume 42, part 167, 1969.
Petch, James A., Early Man in the District of Huddersfield, Tolson Memorial Museum: Huddersfield 1924.
Smith, A.H., The Place-Names of the West Riding of Yorkshire – volume 2, Cambridge University Press 1961.
Sykes, D.F.E., The History of the Colne Valley, F. Walker: Slaithwaite 1906.
Watson, Geoffrey G., Early Man in the Halifax District, HSS: Halifax 1952.
Acknowledgements: Huge thanks to Ben Blackshaw, for guiding us to this and other sites in the region!
* To be honest, I think it’s about time that these increasing pieces of modern detritus that keep appearing in our hills, dedicated to whoever, should be removed to more appropriate venues, off the hills, keeping our diminishing wilderness protected from them in ways that real lovers of the hills deem necessary. Such modern impositions are encroaching more and more and intruding upon the places where they simply don’t belong. I’ve come across many hill walkers who find them unnecessary and intrusive on the natural environment, so they should be discouraged. There is a small minority of sanctimonious individuals who seems to think it good to put their clutter onto the landscape, or want to turn our hills into parks – but these personal touches should be kept in parks, instead of adding personal touches where they’re not needed. Or even better, put such money into things like schools, hospitals or communal green energy devices. People would much prefer to be remembered by giving the grant-money to the well-being of others, instead of being stuck on a stone on a hill (and if not, well they definitely don’t belong to be remembered in the hills!). What if everyone wanted to do this?! Or is it only for the ‘special’ people. Please – keep such things off our hills!
Cup-Marked Stone: OS Grid Reference – ST 9583 0294
Also Known as
Badbury Rings Carving
Shapwick 6a carving
Archaeology & History
Badbury Barrow carving (after J.F.S. Stone 1958)
Amidst what was once a veritable gathering of prehistoric tombs on the ground immediately west of the Badbury Rings hillfort — a small necropolis no less! — one particular tumulus which Leslie Grinsell named as ‘Shapwick 6a‘ was in the process of being destroyed at the end of October, 1845, but was fortunate in receiving the quick attention of a local historian called John Austen, who gave us the first known account of the place. (a fuller profile of the Badbury Barrow can be found here) Inside the churned-up remains of Badbury Barrow, which measured 62 feet across and 9 feet high, Mr Austin found a fascinating number of urns and other remains and, shortly after, this rare example of a petroglyph was identified. The stone now lives in the British Museum where, the last I knew, you could certainly check it out. But it’s not its original size, as sections of the stone were broken off. As Aubrey Burl (1987) told us, the stone was originally about half-a-ton in weight, on which,
“were carvings of five cupmarks, two bronze daggers and two flat, triangular axes of early Breton type.”
Grinsell’s more detailed description of the carving from his work on Dorset Barrows (1959) tells a little more of the design found on this seeming ‘tomb-stone’:
“Sandstone slab, probably from stone cist, decorated with pecked carvings of two daggers with hilts, resembling those on stone 53 at Stonehenge; two triangular objects probably intended to be flat bronze axe-heads expanding at their cutting-edge; and five cup-shaped hollows. The existing decorated fragment (in British Museum) is 1ft 10in long, and was detached from the original slab which weighed probably more than half a ton. The size suggests, perhaps, a cover-slab.”
It may well have been. Certainly it had some relationship to death! The design was suggested in the 19th century to perhaps have been influenced by Greek imagery, when such notions were in vogue. As Grinsell tells,
“In the centre according to Durden…was the well-known large slab of sandstone which was decorated with carvings of daggers and axes, the former of type similar to those from Stonehenge, conjectured to be of Mycenean type.”
But the Mycenean nature of the carvings is highly unlikely. What is intriguing with this carving is the appearance of cup-markings (commonly associated in or adjacent to prehistoric tombs) alongside defined symbols of daggers. We could infer a magickal relationship between the two symbols here: one of which, the cups, comes from a much earlier period than the dagger-design. A more in-depth analysis of the human remains within the tumulus and a plan of the site would perhaps be more revealing…
…to be continued…
References:
Austen, John H., “Archaeological Intelligence,” in Archaeological Journal, volume 3, 1846.
Burl, Aubrey, The Stonehenge People, Guild: London 1987.
Grinsell, Leslie V., Dorset Barrows, Dorset Natural History & Archaeological Society 1959.
Knight, Peter, Ancient Stones of Dorset, Power: Ferndown 1996.
Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, England, An Inventory of the Historical Monuments in the County of Dorset – Volume 5: East Dorset, HMSO: London 1975.
Stone, J.F.S., Wessex Before the Celts, Thames & Hudson: London 1958.
Warne, Charles, The Celtic Tumuli of Dorset, John Russell Smith: London 1866.
Highlighted on the 1909 OS-map of the area, on the top of the hill a short distance from the roadside, about 250 yards northwest of the Acrehowe Hill site (now at the edge of the golf course) could once be seen another prehistoric burial mound. The rediscovery of this tumulus was first announced briefly in the January 1905 edition of the Bradford Scientific Journal (issue no.3). A few months later the local writer and historian William Preston (1905) wrote a more detailed article on the site, telling the following information:
“A discovery of considerable interest to local archaeologists was made early in December, 1904, on the summit of the spur of moorland on the northwest of Baildon Moor, known as Pennythorn Hill.
“A workman engaged in removing stones from an extension of the golf course, unearthed an ancient cinerary urn containing calcined human bones, a flake of flint which may have served the purpose of an arrow point, a bronze instrument, and a perforated piece of bone, unfortunately broken during calcination. An examination of the site of the discovery revealed the remains of a tumulus, the upper part at some time removed, with a diameter as near as it was possible to tell, of about fifteen feet. In point of construction it differed little from others which are to be found in the locality. The vessel had been placed in an inverted position over the calcined bones, in a hole made in the sandy subsoil. There was no indication of the urn having rested in a cist.
“The earth beneath the urn bore no evidences of fire, and it is likely that the funeral pyre on which the corpse was reduced to ashes was not erected on the spot. It may be assumed from the association of the weapons named that the bones are those of a male person.
“The height of the urn is twelve and a half inches, it is eight and a quarter inches in diameter, and taper in the lowest third of its height to a base of about three inches in diameter. In the course of its excavation it was broken by the workmen, but it has been excellently restored in the laboratory of the Hull Museum…
“The urn belongs to the early British type and its date is, probably, well before the Roman invasion of the island. The general outline of the urn is very similar to that of some urns found by Canon Greenwell in the course of his exploration of the barrows of the north of England… The surface of the urn is divided into three zones. The upper part of the vessel consists of a raised border, about four inches wide, decorated with horizontal and vertical lines alternately arranged, and produced by pressing a twisted thong up0n the clay of which it was composed… Beneath the border and upon the central part of the body, a different form of decoration has been carried out. A zig-zag line scratched in the clay has been carried around the body, forming a number of triangular compartments, which were filled in with diagonal lines, giving he appearance of a herring-bone pattern. The counterpart this design does not appear on any of the urns figured by Canon Greenwell in his records of digging in British barrows.”
References:
Greenwell, William, British Barrows, Clarendon Press: Oxford 1877.
Preston, William E., “The Discovery of a Cinerary Urn on Baildon Moor,” in Bradford Scientific Journal, no.4, April 1905.
Wardell, James, Historical Notes of Ilkley, Rombald’s Moor, Baildon Common, and other Matters of the British and Roman Periods, Joseph Dodgson: Leeds 1869. (2nd edition 1881)
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.
Same directions as the Slade 01 carving. But once you reach the upstanding stone cairn on the rocky hill, walk 220 yards (less than 200m) WSW and look around. You’re damn close! If you find the large cup-marked Slade 03 carving, walk back east about 10-20 yards and you can’t really miss it!
Archaeology & History
This is just one of at least seven previously undiscovered carvings on this section of moorland – and it’s worth looking for! The two other names we gave it — ‘owl’ and ‘sunset’ — come from the very notable design: owl thanks to it having the appearance of large owl-like eyes, and sunset as the two cup-and-rings are etched on the western edge of the rock and, when we found it yesterday, the sun was setting (albeit to the NW) and the image prompted talks of setting suns, the land of the Dead and other such worldwide indigenous religious myths (Harvey 2000) — for without recourse to such ingredients, these carvings are vacuous archaeocentric museum pieces and nothing more. And this carving at least deserves much more than mere cataloguing! The internationally renowned archaeologist, O.G.S. Crawford (1957) would have entered this carving into his ‘eye’ and ‘owl’ motif, representative of goddesses or spirit-forms, as would Gimbutas. (1989)
…and from above
But this carving is archetypal, as we can see, though would appear to have no other etched features on the stone’s surface. It is very close (if not within) the prehistoric graveyard that is plainly evident 30-40 yards south in the burnt heather and would very likely have had some mythic relationship with the dead (a symbiosis we have found in many cup-and-rings). We plan further ventures here in the coming weeks in the hope that we can unearth other prehistoric remains.
References:
Crawford, O.G.S., The Eye Goddess, Phoenix House: London 1957.
Gimbutas, Marija, The Language of the Goddess, Harper Collins: New York 1989.
Harvey, Graham (ed.), Indigenous Religions, Cassell: London 2000.
From Blubberhouses church by the crossroads, walk up the slope (south) as if you’re going to Askwith, for 100 yards or so, taking the track and footpath past the Manor House and onto the moor. Once you hit the moorland proper, take the footpath that bears left going down into heather and keep going till you hit the dead straight Roman Road path running west onto Blubberhouses Moor. Go on here for nearly a mile until you hit the stream and nearby Eagle Stone boulder. Walk upstream from here, on its eastern (right-hand) side for 100 yards, then walk up onto the level moor, scattered with rushes. Keep up here, heading towards the upright cairn open the skyline to the north. Once here, walk 80 yards (73m) WNW and you’ll note a number of flat stones embedded in the heather around you. You’re damn close!
Archaeology & History
Off-path and takes some finding and will all-but disappear when the heather grows back, so this one’s probably only for the purists amongst you. But I like it anyway! This is one of at least seven newly-discovered cup-marked stones hereby, including the nearby ‘Owl Stone’ with it’s big eyes! There are just two cup-marks on the flat surface: one an archetypal large cup 3 inches across and a half-inch deep; the other, a small faint cup less than 2 inches wide and very shallow which is easily missed if you pay little attention. On the photo here, the fainter cup is slightly above right of the centre. The carving appears to be on the far eastern edges of the Slade Cairnfield. Other undiscovered remains are likely to be found here.
Follow the directions to reach the Lippersley Pike cup-marked stone, then keep walking westwards, but go up the slope immediately on your right (north) and walk upwards along the path to the notable stone structure at the top-end of the ridge a coupla hundred yards ahead. Once there, you’re standing on it!
Archaeology & History
Lippersley Pike & shooter’s butt
A little known site with some excellent 360° views all round, reaching as far west as Pendle Hill, north past Simon’s Seat, and east onto the far reaches of the North York Moors. The landscape here is truly superb! And humans have been here since, it would seem, mesolithic periods at least, if Cowling’s finds are owt to go by! For although he described the much denuded tomb that we can still see under the herbage and recently-built shelter, there was also, “on the northern slope…a small occupation immediately below the summit on the northern side.” We found remains of it on our visit here the other day. But of the tomb itself — which Mr Cowling thought was neolithic in age — he wrote:
“The highest point of Lippersley Pike, on Denton Moor, is crowned by a stone cairn 1083 feet above sea level, and overlooks, on the northern side, a small site which appears to have been occupied by the ‘Broad Blade’ people, for there occur several pieces of patinated flint, along with scrapers and worked blades.”
Aerial view of Lippersley Pike
Cowling then describes a number of flints and other prehistoric working utensils that he found all round here. The remains of the cairn measure some 25 feet east-west and 23 feet north-south. There has been no excavation here, although the fella’s who dug out much of the stone to build the shooter’s butt on its top may have found summat, but have kept it quiet!
The cairn is an ancient marker along the boundary line marking the townships of Denton and Great Timble and was visited in perambulation walks in previous centuries. Grainge (1871) describes the extensive perambulation in his Knaresborough Forest work. ‘Lippersley’ itself first appears in records from 1576, although A.H. Smith (1963:5) does not suggest an etymology. The place is worth visiting as a good starting point to explore the other little-known prehistoric remains on these moors, including the Crow Well settlement, the Heligar Pike tomb, etc, etc.
References:
Cowling, E.T., Rombald’s Way: A Prehistory of Mid-Wharfedale, William Walker: Otley 1946.
Grainge, William, The History and Topography of Harrogate and the Forest of Knaresborough, John Russell Smith: London 1871.
Grainge, William, The History and Topography of the Townships of Little Timble, Great Timble and the Hamlet of Snowden, William Walker: Otley 1895.
Smith, A.H., The Place-Names of the West Riding of Yorkshire – volume 5, Cambridge University Press 1963.
John Dixon took a bunch of us on a pleasant amble here via the Fair Oak Circle site. From Fair Oak, go round the back of the farm and past the small cluster of hidden cottages, then bear right down the dirt-track and up the slope, then cross the field in front of you, going over the stile, following the footpath round the eastern edge of the slightly limestone New Laund Hill, and down again, thru the gate. From here, head diagonally across the field 150 yards towards the fencing at the woodland edge. Over the fence, into the trees, head halfway down the steep-ish slope and keep your eyes peeled for the rocky outcrop nearly halfway down. Alternatively, an easier way here is apparently from the Inn at Whitewell. Go across the river via the stepping stones (or wade!) and follow the footpath uphill towards a farm, where you’ll find a large steel gate on the left that leads into the woods. Here there are 2 paths: follow the higher of the two until it starts bearing to the right. Once here, look up the hill to the right you’ll see the rock outcrop. The caves are there!
Archaeology & History
Smaller Fairy Hole
There are at least 3 caves here, close to each other along the edge of the small footpath a few yards apart. The small rounded entrance of the northernmost one (photo, right) is reported by English Heritage to have had no human remains found therein, but further investigation is required here. The main cave however is where intriguing prehistoric finds were located. It appears that the entrance was deliberately built-up and blocked by stone walling a few yards inwards, giving the remains found therein a state of protection and sanctity. Writer and historian John Dixon (2004) tells what was in the cave:
“In 1946, an excavation was carried out on the site by the archaeologist Reginald C. Musson. In front of the larger cave is a flat platform on which evidence of Bronze Age daily life was found. This included animal bones, a pebble pounder (used to extract marrow from bones) and shards of a food vessel.
“All that survived of this tripartite collared urn was a large rim-collar shard, two fragments displaying neck/shoulder/body elements and five smaller pieces, probably from the base of the body. This is the only collared urn to have been found in a cave in Lancashire. Its tripartite Pennine form assigns it to an early Bronze Age date.”
The main Fairy HolePlan of cave chamber (after J.Dixon 2004)
The artificial walled entrance may not merely have been an ingredient giving sanctity to the place, but this could well have been a site for ritual shamanic practices, including prolonged rites of passage and death rituals (authentic ones, not the modern pagan nonsense). The ‘ritual death’ elements are highly probable here for, as John Michell (1975) told, caverns and crevasses are “most responsive to the necromancer’s invocation”. It’s geomancy, spirit association and the archaeological finds therein are strongly suggestive of this usage. (Eliade 1989, 1995; Maringer 1960, etc) Bearing this in mind, it is of some concern regarding the individual who thought it wise to spray-paint his name against the wall of the cave entrance (see photo); for many are those even in these days of shallow minds who fall prey to the car-crashes and creeping madness brought upon themselves by desecrating ancestral sites of ritual magick. It would be intriguing to keep a prolonged eye on the ‘Forsh’ who painted his ego in this cave of dead spirits…
Folklore
Not surprisingly, the little people hold legend here. Jessica Lofthouse (1946) found tales of these ancient peoples in several places close by, but at the Fairy Caves specifically,
“everyone knew that these little caves in the limestone at Whitewell were the homes of the little folk.”
…And in relation to the ingredient mentioned above, about ritual use of the cave in ancient times: are there any serious ritual magickians who’ve spent time working in this cave, overnight or longer, and who can let us know of their encounters here? (long shot, I know – but it’s worth asking, considering the probable use of the place) Or perhaps spontaneous encounters of other people here…
Very close to the once impressive Dorchester Cursus, this double-ringed prehistoric monument can no longer be seen thanks to the self-righteous arrogance of modern industrialists who care little for the ancestral monuments of the British people, destroying all traces of the site — an activity which, in this case, astonishingly started in more ancient times, as Jean Cook (1985) told: “The banks and the ditches had been levelled through agricultural activity, possibly in the Iron Age”!
Big Rings ground-plan1938 photo of the Big Rings, by Major George Allen
The destruction of this environment continues to this day, destroying many important archaeological remains with little care. Thankfully we we’ve got a good account of the site due to the archaeological excavations of R.J.C. Atkinson (1951) and his team in the late-1940s, from whom Cook and just about everyone else gets most of their data regarding the site.
The Big Rings Henge was probably built sometime in the middle of the second millenium BC. It was an important prehistoric ritual site and, most likely, had some relevance to the adjacent cursus monument. A number of important mortuary and ritual sites were also built close to the site over a period of nearly two thousand years, showing the importance this landscape had to our ancestors.
Jean Cook (1985) described the Big Rings henge as follows:
“The ditches, of which there were two, had opposed entrances on the NNW and SSE. They were about 7.6m wide and 1.8m deep with flat bottoms. Originally there seems to have been a broad low bank on the inner side of each ditch. The southern entrance incorporated an existing monument, consisting of a ring ditch which enclosed a large four-post setting and contained a cremation and a stone axe. Just outside the north entrance was a round barrow, containing a central oval burial pit which produced a crouched inhumation, together with a well-preserved beaker, two small copper or bronze knives and a rectangular wrist-guard of greenstone. The Big Rings ditches themselves contained pottery belonging to the middle or late Beaker period. Although the area within the ditches was trenched, there was no evidence of internal timber structures.”
References:
Atkinson, R.J.C., “The Henge Monuments of Great Britain,” in Atkinson, Piggott & Sandars’ Excavations at Dorchester, Oxon (Department of Antiquities: Oxford 1951).
Atkinson, R.J.C., Piggott, C.M. & Sandars, N.K., Excavations at Dorchester, Oxon, Department of Antiquities: Oxford 1951.
Cook, Jean, “The Earliest Evidence,” in Dorchester through the Ages, Oxford University 1985.
Harding, A.F., Henge Monuments and Related Sites of Great Britain, BAR 175: Oxford 1987.
Harding, Jan, The Henge Monuments of the British Isles, Tempus: Stroud 2003.
Wainwright, Geoffrey J., The Henge Monuments: Ceremony and Society in Prehistoric Britain, Thames & Hudson: London 1989.
