Room for a view | Forum — The Modern Antiquarian

T

tiompan Sep 2, 2012 10:41:37

Replying to Littlestone

Littlestone wrote:

Putting aside the rights and wrongs of climbing Silbury, I have to disagree with both The Eternal and Sanctuary when they say (to paraphrase) the view from the top is great and helps put the monument within its landscape. The view from the top isn’t that great actually because you can’t see much further than the downs immediately surrounding the monument. There’s a much better view of both Silbury and the surrounding landscape from the top of Waden Hill – from there the monument is truly in the landscape (ditto the views from the Sanctuary and Windmill Hill).

I agree with Sanctuary on the point he makes however that, “...the builders of the Complex no doubt looked down from [the top] at some stage to admire much of what they had accomplished with great pride.” (and for that reason have always believed that the top was always flat though of course not as flat as now).

What happened after completion however is maybe the interesting bit; was it reserved for special ceremonies with only an elite few allowed access, was it open to all at any time, or was it a combination of both when it was out of bounds to most people most of the time but opened up a few times a year for special occasions.

Who knows (and as always it’s fun to speculate) but I think we can be pretty sure of one thing (already outlined in JC’s the Game of Silbury) it was constructed to be seen (and marvelled at?) from many different view points.

One spot in the Palisaded enclosure gives a fine view of a sun roll .

S

Sanctuary Sep 2, 2012 13:51:18

Replying to Littlestone

Littlestone wrote:

What happened after completion however is maybe the interesting bit; was it reserved for special ceremonies with only an elite few allowed access, was it open to all at any time, or was it a combination of both when it was out of bounds to most people most of the time but opened up a few times a year for special occasions.

Or was it just left alone by the builders as the job was done? We know it was 'used' by others later but maybe it served a non working purpose to the builders and was simply part of a larger picture. No Neolithic/BA burials have been found so it may have served no ceremonial type purpose on its own. I have my own thoughts but I'm away off to Penwith in 5 minutes so will see you all on my return. Play nicely :-)

T

The Eternal Sep 8, 2012 23:22:48

Replying to Littlestone

Littlestone wrote:

Putting aside the rights and wrongs of climbing Silbury, I have to disagree with both The Eternal and Sanctuary when they say (to paraphrase) the view from the top is great and helps put the monument within its landscape. The view from the top isn’t that great actually because you can’t see much further than the downs immediately surrounding the monument. There’s a much better view of both Silbury and the surrounding landscape from the top of Waden Hill – from there the monument is truly in the landscape (ditto the views from the Sanctuary and Windmill Hill).

Littlestone,

I agree that the view from the top of Silbury Hill isn't the best view of the area. However, I think that the view from there is very relevent to the meaning of its construction. And if we are denied that view, then we can't possibly have a credible opinion of why Silbury Hill was built. Surely, the view from the top is crucial to the debate on why it was built. It's like saying that the orientation of the Stonehenge Avenue means nothing with respect to the construction of that monument.

Silbury Hill is a hill. Why is it a hill? That is the question. It's big, and has a flat top, so that has to be important. Is it for a view, or is it for size? If just for size, then why such a flat top?

As for access to the top, well, that is a topic worthy of debate. Control is necessary, but access has to be within that control. Otherwise, why preserve something that no-one can see?

Cheers,
TE.

E

Evergreen Dazed Sep 10, 2012 10:28:47

Replying to Littlestone

I think that giving some thought to the Marlborough Mound and Silbaby could be helpful when thinking about the 'function' of Silbury, if indeed the people at the start of the construction had a specific function in mind.

It seems curious that another mound (Silbaby) should be required so close to Silbury. Or was it? Was Silbaby an abandoned project in favour of Silbury? If that was so you might imagine Silbaby would have been levelled.
Or perhaps Silbaby IS finished and at the required height for whatever purpose?
Theres too many unknowables.

S

Sanctuary Sep 10, 2012 13:50:04

Replying to Littlestone

Littlestone wrote:

Putting aside the rights and wrongs of climbing Silbury, I have to disagree with both The Eternal and Sanctuary when they say (to paraphrase) the view from the top is great and helps put the monument within its landscape. The view from the top isn’t that great actually because you can’t see much further than the downs immediately surrounding the monument. There’s a much better view of both Silbury and the surrounding landscape from the top of Waden Hill – from there the monument is truly in the landscape (ditto the views from the Sanctuary and Windmill Hill).

I agree with Sanctuary on the point he makes however that, “...the builders of the Complex no doubt looked down from [the top] at some stage to admire much of what they had accomplished with great pride.” (and for that reason have always believed that the top was always flat though of course not as flat as now).

What happened after completion however is maybe the interesting bit; was it reserved for special ceremonies with only an elite few allowed access, was it open to all at any time, or was it a combination of both when it was out of bounds to most people most of the time but opened up a few times a year for special occasions.

Who knows (and as always it’s fun to speculate) but I think we can be pretty sure of one thing (already outlined in JC’s the Game of Silbury) it was constructed to be seen (and marvelled at?) from many different view points.

This is a good read covering most aspects of the hills history. I didn't realise that a fair deal of the Atkinson tunnel was backfilled with road stone!

http://www.archaeology.co.uk/articles/features/silbury-hill-a-last-look-inside.htm

S

Sanctuary Sep 10, 2012 22:09:03

Replying to Littlestone

No matter which way you look at it, the building of Silbury Hill was one hell of an undertaking wasn't it. It may or may not have had a blueprint but it still had to be initially planned in some form; the workforce arranged; the feeding of the workers dealt with; accommodation provided and most of all, a reason for doing it! I wonder if it all went smoothly or was there often discontent amongst the workers. Was there a single person in charge or was it an area community project? In an age where by all accounts you only lived until your mid 30's many must have died whilst working on it surely. When you think of those turves that were placed on the early build. They were actually handled by a living person some 4,500 years ago and placed into position. Were they willing workers, were they 'paid' or provided with food and shelter for themselves and family. We tend to forget about all those things when we discuss whether it is right or wrong to walk up the hill that they built for themselves (not us) for what must have been a really special reason at that time, but we now tear apart from the inside out because we can't leave things lie and must have an answer to everything! The answer will NEVER be found by digging into the hill alone, we must look at a much larger picture to understand how they lived, loved, believed and died. That's why when I climbed the hill I realised that it is only one part of a huge jigsaw that has to be assembled correctly to understand it all. Many people have had a shot of solving that puzzle and we now wait for others to have theirs and one day, God willing, it will all fall into place and the real truth revealed. Will it change anything? No it won't, as that was then and this is now!

S

Sanctuary Sep 12, 2012 20:27:45

Replying to Littlestone

In the article Silbury Hill: A Last Look Inside that I linked to earlier, it says;-

'There are plans to venture beyond previous discussions of Silbury and consider the later uses of the hill. Atkinson reported finding pottery from the Late Saxon/Norman period on the hilltop, and the present excavation found further evidence of this activity. One of the most exciting new theories to have emerged from the project is that the hill’s iconic shape may be the result of significant modification by the placement of a large Saxon or Norman military structure on top; archaeologists believe it may have originally been domed, rather than flat-top as we see today. If so, where was the top of the hill dumped, and what could possibly be found in that material?'

Could it be Weedon/Silbaby?