Inscribing space: formal deposition at the later Neolithic monument of Woodhenge, Wiltshire
Inscribing space: formal deposition at the later Neolithic monument of Woodhenge, Wiltshire
This paper presents evidence for intentionally structured deposition at the later Neolithic earthwork and timber setting of Woodhenge, near Amesbury, Wiltshire. Deposition is seen as a process through which a variety of connotations and symbolic references were incorporated in the monument, in addition to contributing towards a complex classification of space that served to order ceremonial and ritual practices. The evidence for formal deposition is also considered in the context of comparable, contemporary, activity at two other extensively excavated monuments in the region — Durrington Walls and Stonehenge I. Finally, complementarity and contrast in such special practices are viewed in relation to individual monument histories and the possibility that, whilst the product of a general sacred tradition, the way in which each of the monuments was used was structured by different sets of meanings.
137-156
Pollard, Joshua
5080faff-bc2c-4d27-b702-e40a5eb40761
January 1995
Pollard, Joshua
5080faff-bc2c-4d27-b702-e40a5eb40761
Pollard, Joshua
(1995)
Inscribing space: formal deposition at the later Neolithic monument of Woodhenge, Wiltshire.
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 61, .
(doi:10.1017/S0079497X00003066).
Abstract
This paper presents evidence for intentionally structured deposition at the later Neolithic earthwork and timber setting of Woodhenge, near Amesbury, Wiltshire. Deposition is seen as a process through which a variety of connotations and symbolic references were incorporated in the monument, in addition to contributing towards a complex classification of space that served to order ceremonial and ritual practices. The evidence for formal deposition is also considered in the context of comparable, contemporary, activity at two other extensively excavated monuments in the region — Durrington Walls and Stonehenge I. Finally, complementarity and contrast in such special practices are viewed in relation to individual monument histories and the possibility that, whilst the product of a general sacred tradition, the way in which each of the monuments was used was structured by different sets of meanings.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: January 1995
Organisations:
Archaeology
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 389669
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/389669
ISSN: 0079-497X
PURE UUID: b457ac3c-8793-4f73-aa62-f942a99f51e7
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 11 Mar 2016 09:44
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:38
Export record
Altmetrics
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics
