‘Past ritual and present heritage in Wessex

landscapes’Landscaping Change Conference

Death, Memory and Landscape Panel 30:03:16

John Robb

Independent scholar and former Lecturer in Geography, BSU.

‘Ritual landscape’; from academic concept to grand day out?

• Monuments and natural features,

• Cumulative,

• Commemorative.

Source: Author’s lecture slide, based on Robb (1998) p. 162.Robb (1998); Parker Pearson & Ramilisonina (1998) Pryor, (2004); Parker Pearson et al. (2008); Parker Pearson (2012)

3

How far has this idea been incorporated into modern heritage experiences?What has changed since 1998?

• New extensive empirical techniques

• Ethnographic parallels

• Phenomenology

Source: Author’s lecture slide, (2004).

Barrett, Bradley and Green, (1991); Exon et al. (2000); Bradley (2000); Tilley (1994)

3

A new focus on movement

• Procession, pilgrimage and learning from the landscape as text,

• Prehistoric landscapers, having their say and making sense of their ancestors’ inscriptions,

• Modern movement through ritual landscapes can ‘see’ cumulated messages from the deep past (Tilley).

Lawson (2007); Harding (2012); Tilley (2008); Leary and Kador (2016)

West Kennet Avenue, Avebury. Source: Author (2005).

3

• Subtle phasing in monument construction (e.g. earliest Silbury Hill),

• Group collaboration or competition; a ‘project’ rather than focussed on a ‘finished’ monument,

• Linkages sought with older sites,

• The raising of stones seems to have ‘closed’ projects.

The Sanctuary, Avebury. Source: Author (2005)

Green (2000); Gillings et al. (2000); Pitts (2000); Bradley (2002; 2007); Chadwick and Gibson (2013).

Memory: new perspectives

4

A river runs through it…• Parker Pearson and Ramilisonina’s

integrated conception links different sites,

• Three phases: the evolution and hardening of the monuments,

• Were the monuments ‘plugged in’ to pre-existing networks of solar and river alignments?

• Importance of river movement: first people with ash or bones, later just the spirits?

Parker Pearson and Ramilisonina (1998a, 1998b); Parker Pearson et al. (2008); Pryor (2012); Parker Pearson (2012).

Domain of the Ancestors, Phase III. Source: author’s sketch adapted from Parker Pearson (2008: 163) and Pryor (2012: 245). 4

Avebury and Stonehenge: how far has the ritual landscape concept been incorporated into the construction of modern visitors’ experiences?

• Thirty years since Unesco inscription,

• Separated, 30 Km apart, though interaction in prehistory is becoming clear,

• Should Marden be in or out?

Parker Pearson (2012: 300); Simmonds and Thomas (2015).

Wiltshire location map. Source: Author’s sketch, based on Simmonds and Thomas (2015: 296)3

Spatial parsimony

The current WHS boundaries at both Avebury and Stonehenge have ‘...little significance in archaeological or visual terms’.(Simmonds and Thomas, 2015: p. 15)

Avebury ritual landscape defined. Source: Author’s lecture slide, based on Robb (1998) p. 162, and sketched from Simmonds and Thomas, 2015: p.308 .

1

Planning for a landscape experience?‘For the first time in over a century, it has become rewarding to seek out Stonehenge in the landscape that gave it birth’ (Pitts, 2014, 18).

1

Land ownership, access and conservation.

• 50% of monuments in the combined WHS have statutory protection… (Plan, p. 97)

• There are 1 118 in combined WHS, (Plan, p. 18)

• Stonehenge: cultivation affects 33% monuments, Avebury: 37% (Plan, pp. 107-8),

• The ‘vast majority’ managed by private land owners with incentives from agri-environment schemes. (Plan, p. 98).

‘Plan’ = Simmonds and Thomas (2015) Land ownership and the Stonehenge landscape. Source: author’s sketch based on Simmonds and Thomas (2015: 300 and 301)

4

Tunnel to topophilia?• The A303 is recognised as a major

barrier to modern phenomenologies,

• National Trust open access is limited mostly to the northern half of the ‘site’,

• Rights of way are not aligned with the ritual landscape, though some progress made.

Access to the Stonehenge landscape. Source: author’s sketch based on Simmonds and Thomas (2015: 300 and 301)

Simmonds and Thomas (2015)

Robin Hood’s Ball

Barrow cluster

(schematic)

3

• NT estate based on ‘Keillerland’ –the legacies of Alexander Keiller,

• ‘Core and periphery’ reflects the focus on the Great Henge and West Kennet Avenue,

• Recent acquisition of Waden Hill a major expansion on the Avenue alignment.

Simmonds and Thomas (2015) Land ownership and the Avebury landscape. Source: author’s sketch based on Simmonds and Thomas (2015: 311 and 312)

National Trust open land expanded at Avebury

3

Where can we go?• Inclusion of East Kennet long

barrow remains isolated from access,

• Main roads are intrusive and dangerous at Avebury too,

• The needs of the disabled visitor remain a challenge even at the key sites,

• The rivers need their own interpretation.

Land ownership and the Avebury landscape. Source: author’s sketch based on Simmonds and Thomas (2015: 311 and 312)Simmonds and Thomas (2015)

4

Conclusions• awareness of the ritual landscape as an integrated whole,

• spatial fragmentation and the initial reliance on modern boundary markers is recognized,

• ‘underbounding’ of the two spaces has been addressed by extensions, but no vision of an optimum ‘boundedness’,

• managerial strategies working to promote wider movement,

• natural features require inclusion in the landscape as represented now.

5

‘Past ritual and present heritage in Wessex landscapes’. John Robb

For the list of references and full discussion see the formal paper, copies available.