Hardy’s Henge Given Protected Status

Through the window of Hardy’s Max Gate house, you can see a Prehistoric Sarsen Stone, originally part of a neolithic stone circle or henge. (bottom right window pane, top left corner). Photo: Kevin Flude

Author of ‘Tess of the d’Urbervilles’ Thomas Hardy was an architect and designed his own house. During the work on Max Gate, the builders came across a large block of sandstone of the type called ‘Sarsen’ at Stonehenge. Hardy, who loved history, had it relocated into his garden and called it his ‘druid stone’. One of the most famous scenes in Tess is when she is sleeping on the Altar Stone at Stonehenge as the Police move in to arrest her for murder. Hardy loved history, and how glad he would have been to know his house was in the middle of an important Henge. The Altar Stone, by the way, has very recently been discovered to be from Scotland. A discovery that confirms that Stonehenge was an immensely important site in the Neolithic and Bronze Age.

Hardy’s Henge (aka Flagstones) turns out to be older than Stonehenge. In the 1982, a geophysical survey in advance of the Dorchester Bypass, found evidence of a circular enclosure outside Hardy’s house. But there was an excavation in 1987-8 which discovered a large circular bank, 100m in diameter, from the Neolithic period. The other half of Flagstones, is largely preserved beneath Max Gate, and has now been official listed and therefore protected. The excavations suggested a date of construction of 3,000 BC, about the time of Stonehenge’s first construction.

Max Gate, Hardy’s House on the outskirts of Dorchester, Dorset. Photo Kevin Flude

In 2022, targeted excavation designed to explore the other half of the circle revealed further dating evidence that proposes it was built 500 years before Stonehenge, earlier than 3,500BC, making it one of the earliest in the South West. It was giving listed protection on the August 19th, 2024.

The enclosure consists of a single ring of unevenly spaced pits, forming an interrupted ditch system roughly circular, but the dating evidence does not prove that this circuit was built before 3,500 BC, but shows there was a neolithic presence on the site at an early date. Burials were found in the bottom of the pits forming the enclosure and in four of the pits were found markings on the lower pit walls cut by flint forming pictograms of varying forms from curvilinear, to linear. There was little activity in the Late Neolithic and the site seems to have been reused for funerary and ‘other practices’ during the Bronze, Iron Ages and Roman period.

The site is built on a ridge parallel with the River Frome. Dorchester is another ‘ritual landscape’ like Stonehenge, where there are a cluster of important Neolithic and Bronze Age monuments. In the centre of the Town, a couple of miles from Max Gate, was found evidence of a massive wooden circle. The postholes are found marked on the floor of the town centre car-park as shown below. The Great Henge is 360m in diameter, covering much of the much later Town Centre and built in around 2100 BC.

Neolithic Circle in Dorcester (photo Kevin Flude)

Just outside of Dorchester is a Roman Amphitheatre which began life as another Neolithic circular enclosure with an external bank, and an inner Ditch in which were dug 44 tapering pits, up to 10m in depth. Antler picks, chalk objects, including chalk phalluses, were found.

Maumbury Rings – Neolithic Enclosure, Roman Amphitheatre, place of execution, Civil War defense, and fictional meeting place of the Mayor of Casterbridge and his estranged wife, Susan Newson (or Henchard!)

A few miles away, at the Iron Age Hill Fort of Maiden Castle, is a Neolithic Causewayed Enclosure.

Maiden Castle. Iron Age Hillfort. the East End was originally a Neolithic Causewayed Enclosure

Together, with evidence from Stonehenge, Avebury, Heathrow and elsewhere shows a clustering of ritual places in important landscapes, which suggests, possible evidence of regional organisation. Stonehenge, however, continues to lead the way for evidence of an importance that drew people, or objects from not only England, Scotland and Wales, but also from the continent.

For further details of the Flagstones listing and excavation, here is the official listing document:

https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1489792?section=official-list-entry

Upton Lovell Shaman becomes a Goldsmith

‘Materials in movement: gold and stone in process in the Upton Lovell G2a burial’

Upton lovell 'shaman' display wiltshire museum
Screenshot from Wiltshire Museum web site

The journal Antiquity reports amazing discoveries in a paper called : Materials in movement: gold and stone in process in the Upton Lovell G2a burial and citing that the paper is

‘advancing a new materialist approach, we identify a goldworking toolkit, linking gold, stone and copper objects within a chaîne opératoire,

Setting aside what ‘new materialism’ and ‘chaîne opératoire’ are for the moment. Briefly, their analysis of the objects found in the Bronze Age burial of two people evidence that the person(s) identified as a ‘shaman’ on the basis of clothing/jewellery was (as well?) a gold worker. What is amazing is that they were using Neolithic axes which would have been hundreds of years old to make gold sheets. There was also evidence interpreted as tattooing instruments. As Upton Lovell is 12 miles from Stonehenge it means this is big news in the archaeological world, making most of the newspapers.

The authors dig deeper into the meaning of ‘New materialism’:

‘This approach advances on traditional technological studies in two ways. First, whereas materials are usually approached as having fixed properties, new materialists argue that these properties emerge relationally; they change through time and in combination with other materials, people and places (cf. Barad Reference Barad2007; Bennett Reference Bennett2010). Second, ‘making’ is seen not as the simple imposition of the will of a maker on an inert material but, instead, materials play an active role in the process.’

Widipedia gives a definition of chaîne opératoire

To put it more simply objects have complicated histories and contexts. You might also like to look at the original article (link below) which is written in a very strange style which gives the objects agency ‘an active role in the process’. Below is the conclusions of the article.

Conclusions

Drawing on microwear, residue analysis and new materialist theory, we have reassessed the Upton Lovell G2a grave assemblage. The empirical techniques attend to the materials, which are reinvigorated by situating them within this emergent theoretical landscape. These approaches reveal how the grave goods disclose an intertwining set of processes. Never static, these objects changed and shifted, requiring modification, repair and reuse. They speak to a complex interweaving of bodies—human and non-human—and their varied histories. There is far more complexity here, in relations, histories, gestures and processes, than could ever be captured under the label ‘shaman’, ‘metalworker’ or ‘goldsmith’. Grave goods are more than representations of a person’s identity. They are more even than critical relations in the construction of identity (cf. Brück Reference Brück2019). What these grave goods stress, when attention is paid to their stories, is quite different. They speak of material journeys, the colour of stone and the texture of gold capturing relations that flow across landscapes. Collectively, as an assemblage, these stone tools reveal a process of goldworking. But this goldworking involves as much the working of stone, in the shaping and upkeep of tools, as it does of metal. Here, we emphasise the repetitive and iterative nature of our chaîne opératoire, each action calling into being further moments of renewal of the polished stone surfaces so essential to the qualities other materials elicited. This goldworking chaîne opératoire is multi-material; it is as much a process in stone working as it is in the working of metal. From this perspective, the similarities in processing and working gold and stone mean that the former emerges as far more like the latter than our modern taxonomies would suggest.’

Materials in movement: gold and stone in process in the Upton Lovell G2a burial

If we analyse this conclusion based on the literary idea of ‘Point of View‘ you will see that the POV of the piece above is just bonkers. There is the ‘we’ of the authors, and the ‘they’ of the objects. ‘They’ are speaking to ‘bodies – human and non-human’. ‘They’ even have the ability to ‘stress’ an issue once ‘attention is paid to their stories’ and to be ‘reinvigorated’.

But its a very interesting find and analysis and does remind us that things are much more complicated than we realise.

I have republished my post of the Chinese New Year which you can see here:

I have republished my post of the Chinese New Year which you can see here:

I have republished my post of the Chinese New Year which you can see here:

STONEHENGE EXHIBITION AT THE BRITISH MUSEUM

The Nebra Disc

What an Exhibition! The BM has pulled together an international array of treasures from the Stonehenge era. It is stunning , the objects are amazing. Stonehenge itself is there in the labels but it is not at the forefront – the objects are left to speak for themselves. The labels are there to give some details and some context but they never dominate.

It is beautifully lit and mounted, and really a triumph. I will go back again to see how the labels and information tell their stories and report back at greater length.