The Recent Excavations at Avebury

Keiller, Alexander; Piggott, Stuart

doi:10.1017/s0003598x00012114

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Then, once the stones were lowered into position, concrete was poured around to the level of the natural chalk and covered with soil and turf (Cunnington 1913). Later concreters claimed the West Kennet megalith was concreted into the wrong hole, while 'Adam' had been re-erected upside down (Keiller and Piggott 1936).…”

Section: <1> From Cementing To Concreting Megaliths 1901 -1921mentioning

confidence: 99%

Concrete Prehistories

Wickstead¹,

Barber²

2015

JCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After water, concrete is the most consumed substance on earth. Every year enough cement is produced to manufacture around six billion cubic metres of concrete 1 . This paper investigates how concrete has been built into the construction of modern prehistories. We present an archaeology of concrete in the prehistoric landscapes of Stonehenge and Avebury, where concrete is a major component of megalithic sites restored between 1901 and 1964. We explore how concreting changed between 1901 and the Second World War, and the implications of this for constructions of prehistory. We discuss the role of concrete in debates surrounding restoration, analyze the semiotics of concrete equivalents for the megaliths, and investigate the significance of concreting to interpretations of prehistoric building. A technology that mixes ancient and modern, concrete helped build the modern archaeological imagination.

show abstract

Section: <1> From Cementing To Concreting Megaliths 1901 -1921mentioning

confidence: 99%

Concrete Prehistories

Wickstead¹,

Barber²

2015

JCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are hints that shape may have been an important criteria in the selection of stones and their arrangement within the Avebury complex. Keiller and Piggott were of the view that two basic types of stone could be identified -a tall, perpendicular variety (A), and a broad form approximating to an asymmetrical diamond (B) (Keiller and Piggott 1936).There are claims that these were deliberately set as opposing pairs along the course of the West Kennet Avenue; that 'well-defined examples appear to have been set in the most conspicuous places within the circles'; and that each form may be identified as male and female symbols respectively (Smith 1965,197). Such a strict typology may not be fully supported by the evidence, but it does hint at deliberate and considered selection of sarsen blocks, and draws attention to the possibility that the physical qualities of sarsen as a material may have held a special significance for the builders of the Avebury complex.…”

Section: The Architecture Of Stonementioning

confidence: 99%

Romancing the stones

Pollard¹,

Gillings²

1998

Arch. Dial.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The late Neolithic monument complex at Avebury, Wiltshire, continues to elicit much curiosity and attention. However, with excavation unlikely to occur in the near future, new and non-destructive means of exploring the monument complex are required. Although a number of such investigations have been undertaken, to date no concerted effort has been made to consolidate the results within a single framework. The opening stages of such a project, involving innovative research using GIS and Virtual-Reality technologies within an explicitly theoretical interpretative agenda, are described here.

show abstract

“…The recumbent-stone circles of Old Keig and Loanhead of Daviot in Aberdeenshire are thought to have been originally beaker monuments. 14 The freestanding stone circles in Arran may be monuments of the food vessel culture: Keiller and Piggott (1936). 12 0 Rfordain (1951), p. 74.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Excavation of a Stone Alignment and Circle at Cholwichtown, Lee Moor, Devonshire, England

Eogan¹,

Simmons

1964

Proc. Prehist. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The site (National Grid Reference 3X584622) stands on a westward spur of the Penn Beacon ridge near the southern edge of Dartmoor. As is common throughout the moor the underlying rock is granite and in the neighbourhood of Cholwichtown this has altered to ‘china’ clay. There are a number of outcrops, but in most places the granite has a light covering of soil on which a thin layer of black raw humus, peat-like in appearance, has formed. This now produces coarse grass. From the evidence provided by the small dumps of upcast at socket no. 72 it appears that only a very thin layer of humus, about an inch in thickness, covered the soil at that point when the monument was constructed.Excavation has shown that the structure consisted of an alignment 235 yards long and having originally at least ninety-one uprights and a circle 16 feet in diameter that originally had eight orthostats. Dr Simmons has shown (Appendix) that the monument was built in a clearing, then either grassland or heathland, among the woodland and scrub, but as he points out the pollen analysis does not give any indication of date: it is not known if these clearances were made by the people who constructed the alignment and circle or if the structure was built on land cleared at an earlier date.The monument is not situated in a conspicuous position but, nevertheless, commands a reasonably extensive view, especially towards the south and south-west.

show abstract

The Recent Excavations at Avebury

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Concrete Prehistories

Concrete Prehistories

Romancing the stones

The Excavation of a Stone Alignment and Circle at Cholwichtown, Lee Moor, Devonshire, England

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About