Virtual Museum Neolithic Gallery Display 7 Link - Possible Henge monuments of Thanet Link

This is a brief exploration of the excavated ring-ditch monuments which may have been (or started life as) Late Neolithic ceremonial enclosures, otherwise known as 'Henges'.

Several show evidence of having more than one phase of activity which demonstrate an Early Bronze Age refurbishment and re-use of an earlier monument.

Rescue Excavation instigated and conducted by John Villette, assisted by the Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit.

Part of a Causewayed ring-ditch monument seems to have been encountered during the construction of the multi-storey car park in Margate. Overall the monument comprised two ditches, with the outer one having a causeway. The inner ditch (possibly shallow) had apparently been backfilled with chalk and subsequently re-cut. At the centre of the monument were 'radiating slots' (not deep) which may have represented the base of a Post-Mill.

A grave containing a crouched inhumation burial was found cut into the surface of the causeway. The grave also produced finger-tip decorated pottery which may have been Mid/Late Neolithic Peterborough Ware.

Similar sherds of an 'incomplete pot' of apparent Peterborough Ware were also found in the fill of the terminus of the outer ditch (at the point of the causeway, by the burial).

On current evidence this monument could have been a Late Neolithic Henge. The grave could represent either a foundation deposit or perhaps a blocking deposit.

Excavation led by Nigel Macpherson Grant, Thanet Archaeological Unit; (LOM I).

A Four-Phase triple ring-ditch monument.

Phase 1 (Later Neolithic?): the large outer ditch was dug first and allowed to infill, perhaps after a period of abandonment. There was no evidence for a causeway.

Phase 2 (Beaker, circa 1950-1850 BC): the infilled outer ditch was subsequently re-cut during the Beaker Period. Pit F1 was also dug. A single inhumation burial (1A) beyond the outer ditch, contained within a chalk 'cocoon' likely belongs to this phase.

Phase 3 (possibly circa 1800-1750 BC): The re-cut outer ditch began to infill again and then a rectangular grave (G5) and the inner ditch (a roundbarrow) was dug. The grave contained the crouched inhumation burials interpreted as that of a 'father and daughter'. No clearly dateable finds.

Phase 4 (possibly circa 1700-1500 BC): Once the inner ditch was half filled the middle ditch was constructed with a causeway to the south-east. Six burials comprising one cremation (G6, a cord-decorated pot, possibly a Food Vessel, containing the ashes of a baby and accompanied with a barbed and tanged flint arrowhead) and five single crouched inhumations (G1-4 and 7) were deposited. Finally the causeway was 'blocked' by the digging of a trench across it.

Disarticulated human bone was recovered from both the lower and upper fills of all three ditches with the exception of the upper fill of the final, middle ditch. Carved chalk objects were recovered from the primary silts of the inner ditch (a 'cup/lamp'), the middle ditch (a 'cup/lamp' and two blocks with criss-cross carvings) and the outer ditch (a 'cup/lamp').

Ges Moody (pers comm.) has recently noted that this site lies within a slight dip in the landscape. Building a monument in a more 'hidden' or private location seems to echo a trend that has been seen in the siting of some Earlier Neolithic monuments elsewhere in the Country. This trend was subsequently reversed when generally more prominant and highly visible sites were selected as locations for the construction of roundbarrows. A reason behind this could lie in the differences between the functions of these two monument classes.

A comparison of the differences (if any) of the locations for the roundbarrows and the potential Henge monuments on Thanet is the next task (watch this space).

Excavation led by Nigel Macpherson Grant and David Perkins, Thanet Archaeological Unit; (LOM IID).

A Three Phase, single ring-ditch monument with a causeway in the south-west and slots cut into the base of the ditch. Within the enclosure were the hollows, pits, a platform of rammed chalk, a semi-circular flint bank, a hearth, occupation debris including Beaker pottery and the post-holes of a pentagonal structure with an entrance corridor (associated with the chalk platform and flint bank).

It is not certain if there was a significant timelapse between the cutting of the ditch (Phase 1) and the creation of the internal features (Phase 2A). A later central crouched inhumation burial covers one of the post-holes and may be associated with a renewal of the post-hole structure.

Phase One (Late Neolithic?): the causewayed enclosure ditch was excavated, with the spoil forming an inner bank. Slots were cut into the bottom of the ditch, but possibly not completed. Evidence of an episode of tree clearance may also belong to this phase. Considerable quantites of densely patinated worked flints (similar to those recovered from LOM I) were recovered.

Phase 2A (circa 1950-1800 BC): this may have seen the construction of the rammed chalk floor, flint bank, hearth and post-hole structures. A few sherds of undecorated pottery which overlay the hearth are similar to the Beaker sherds of LOM I Phase 2.

Phase 2B (circa 1950-1850 BC): Some of the posts of the timber structure were renewed. The various intenal pits could have been dug at this time.

Phase 3 (?): A rectangular grave containing a single crouched inhumation burial was cut close to the centre of the monument, sealing one of the Phase 2A post-holes.

Excavation led by Nigel Macpherson Grant and David Perkins, Thanet Archaeological Unit; (LOM III).

A single ring-ditch monument with a causeway to the south. A subsequent Early Bronze Age cremation burial (at its time the seventh to be discovered in Kent; Dr. I.H. Longworth in Perkins 1980) and later Anglo-Saxon graves were cut within the monument.

The skull of small-headed female (about 12-15 years old and possibly a dwarf) was found on the base of the ditch to the east. The skull had a boar’s rib placed through the foramen magnum at the back of her head (Macpherson Grant). It is not certain at present whether this act of ritual deposition is related to the original or later Early Bronze Age phase of use of the monument (one might suspect the former).

Phase 1 (Late Neolithic, circa 2000 BC): the circular ditch with a causewayed entrance was constructed. Two pits (F7 and 8; containing a few flints and fragments of animal bone and charcoal) were probably dug at this time. The floor of the ditch on either side of the causeway was deepened and then the causeway was narrowed drastically. The site is abandoned and the ditches began to infill (rapidly at first).

Phase 2 (circa 1400 BC): the part-infilled ditch was recut intermittently, both internally and externally, possibly to provide material for a central mound which covered a Collared Urn cremation burial (B2). The inverted urn had been placed in the middle of a pit upon a small heap of flints. Subsequent infilling of the recut ditch proceeds slowly.

Phase 3 (Late Iron Age 'Belgic'): Iron Age ploughing speeds the rate of infilling of the ditches. A 'Belgic' coin was found on the chalk surface adjacent to the plough marks.

Phase 4 (circa 6-8th C AD): later Anglo-Saxon burials cut into the edge of an extant barrow mound. They also disturb one of the internal Prehistoric pits (F1).

The final destruction of the mound probably occurred in the Mid 19th century.

Excavation led by David Perkins; Thanet Archaeological Unit (LOM V).

Single ring-ditch monument, possibly with a causeway in the unexcavated portion of the ditch. Two similar monuments nearby have a causeway in alignment with this unexcavated portion. Aerial photographs also suggest the presence of a causeway.

Phase 1 (?): the circular enclosure was constructed and subsequently abandoned.

Phase 2 (?): the infilled ditch was re-excavated with recuts spaced alternately on the inside and outside. This was possibly to provide material for a central mound. Slots were also cut into the base of the ditch.

Phase 3 (?): a central 'ossuary' pit was dug and filled with the selected remains of five individuals. The angle of the pit suggests that a mound may have been present. To the west was the burial of an ox, orientated at right angles to the central burial. It is not certain where this particular burial features in the sequence of events.

Phase 4 (Anglo-Saxon): subsequent Anglo- Saxon burials were cut to the south and south-west of the monument, with only one (surviving) being within the bounds of the ring-ditch.

Evaluation led by Ges Moody of the Trust for Thanet Archaeology; (BSD06). Excavation led by Diccon Hart of Archaeology South East; (DPB06).

A large, single ring-ditch monument with a small, narrow causeway (0.55m wide) to the west. The diameter of the ring-ditch ranged from approximately 31.36m-32.73m (D.Hart 2006), though in an area adjacent to some later quarry pits it reached a maximum of 34.09m. Here the monument featured a broad, shallow outer edge beyond the steep ditch-cut; one that may have resulted from the later pit-cutting episode, though it that hardly qualifies as a pit and its purpose in this sense is unclear.

The surface of the causeway had been cut 0.55m below the level of the natural chalk. It would seem likely that the original causeway was 'slighted', being cut down and narrowed at its surface (leaving a rounded and somewhat precarious track into the centre of the monument) as an act of blocking and closure once it went out of use. Evidence from the sections may be inconclusive in this regard however.

Several (relatively small and shallow) rectangular and oval pits were discovered in the interior; a rectangular pit lay at the centre. No burials or finds of any significance were discovered.

Though this monument has been referred to as a 'large Bronze Age round barrow' (D.Hart 2006) and may have had a barrow phase (the burial evidence of which may be largely lost to us) there is also a possibility that it may have started life as a late Neolithic ceremonial enclosure or Henge.

The large dimensions of this feature may add weight to such an interpretation. It is the largest single and largest Causewayed ring-ditch monument excavated so far on Thanet. Only the double ring-ditched Monkton-Minster III is larger (at 35m in diameter; Fisk 2003). The ditch-depth is likely the deepest yet recorded on Thanet, while the ditch-width may be second only to LOM III (and at its potential full extent is the largest). As a whole the monument is comparable to LOM III, which likely founded in the Late Neolithic.

The Bradstow monument may also have provided a focus for the three certain (and possibly four) roundbarrows which were constructed to the north and north-east.

The information presented here will be reviewed and updated when a report on the excavations by Diccon Hart is published by ASE. This will also permit the posting of a page giving a more detailed review (with many photographs) on this interesting site.

The dimensions of the ditch are derived from measurements taken by the author during ASE's excavation. This was done with the kind permission of Diccon Hart. The maximum diameter of the monument has been measured from a site plan published in the KAS Newsletter (D. Hart 2006).

The opinions presented are my own and must not be thought the considered, published opinions of Archaeology South East (report forthcoming). I would like to thank Diccon Hart for allowing me to take measurements and photographs of this monument. I hope to update and present a more pictorial piece on this feature once the initial report is published.

Immediately to the west of the central burial was a round pit which had been filled with small nodules of burnt flint and capped by large slabs of tabular flint and sandstone (possibly non-local Greensand/Ragstone). This feature seems to represent an act of purposeful deposition and could have been connected with rituals associated the central burial or the founding of the monument. The relationship between the flint pit and the central burial is unclear, but it may be that the grave-cut respects the pit and thus could be later.

Cut into the bottom of the ditch, close to the causeway, was the well preserved grave of a small child. A large fragment of whale bone had been laid across the surface of south-eastern side of the grave.

NGR 639700 169252.

Boast, Gardner and Moody 2006; Fisk 2003.

Particular thanks goes to Pip Fisk for her work on compiling a thorough, comprehensive and invaluable gazetteer on the ring-ditch and roundbarrow monuments excavated on Thanet (Fisk 2003). The time which has been saved by consulting this document is immeasureable and it has had a profound impact on the labour taken to make the observations and presentations of the potential Henge monuments published here.

I would also like to thank Thanet Trust's Director Emma Boast for the reproduction of the plans from the excavations at North Foreland.


		Neolithic 4200 - 2000 BC
Return to Possible Henge monuments of Thanet Display Contents Possible Henge monuments of Thanet Link - Excavated sites Summary ?Late Neolithic Mill Lane Margate LOM I LOM IID LOM III Date uncertain LOM V Bradstow School IV Mini-Henge? North Foreland III		Possible Henge monuments of Thanet Link - Excavated sites The excavation of Lord of the Manor I in 1976 by the Isle of Thanet Archaeological Unit (photographer unknown) Summary This is a brief exploration of the excavated ring-ditch monuments which may have been (or started life as) Late Neolithic ceremonial enclosures, otherwise known as 'Henges'. Several show evidence of having more than one phase of activity which demonstrate an Early Bronze Age refurbishment and re-use of an earlier monument.



Maximum diameter Mill Lane Margate: ? LOM I: 30.0m. LOM III: 30.0m. LOM IID: 23.0m. LOM V: 32.5m. Bradstow School: 32.73m. (possibly 34.09m.) North Foreland: 10.5m. Causeways Mill Lane Margate: Yes (1) LOM I: No LOM III: Yes (1) LOM IID: Yes (1) LOM V: Probably (1) Bradstow School: Yes (1) North Foreland: Yes (1) External bank evidence Mill Lane Margate: ? LOM I: No LOM III: No LOM IID: No LOM V: No Bradstow School: No North Foreland: No Internal bank evidence Mill Lane Margate: ? LOM I: No LOM III: No LOM IID: Yes LOM V: No Bradstow School: No North Foreland: No Ditch recut Mill Lane Margate: ? LOM I: Yes LOM III: Yes LOM IID: No LOM V: Yes Bradstow School: No North Foreland: No Pits and post-holes Mill Lane Margate: ? LOM I: No LOM III: Yes LOM IID: Yes LOM V: No Bradstow School: Yes North Foreland: Yes Burials/Contemporary (ie. no significant time lapse) Mill Lane Margate: Yes/? LOM I: Yes/No LOM III: Yes/No LOM IID: Yes/No? LOM V: Yes/No Bradstow School: No North Foreland: Yes/?		The sites of Mill Lane Margate, Lord of the Manor I, IID, III and V, together with the recent discovery at Bradstow School (monument IV) provide our best potential Henge or Hengi-Form monuments. The first four appear to have been founded in the Late Neolithic or Beaker Period; the last two are undated at present (the report on the Bradstow School excavations is forthcoming). All except the Lord of the Manor I monument have a causeway (though a cut-down causeway would have been invisible on the surface and could have been present, as at Bradstow School IV). All appear to have employed a single causeway only. Dimensions and orientations vary. All except LOM IID are over 30m in diameter and have few internal features aside from graves. None of these graves can be considered as certainly contemporary with the founding of the monument however. Only Bradstow School IV failed to produce any in-situ human graves. Of particular interest perhaps is the skull recovered from the bottom of the ditch at LOM III (but see below) and the disarticulated multiple burial from LOM V (accompanied by an animal grave), types of deposits which could be reflecting Neolithic traditions perhaps. As far as other types of features (in the 30m monuments) are concerned these are only found at LOM III and Bradstow School IV. In both these cases the features comprise largely unproductive and undateable pits. At 23m in diameter LOM IID is the smallest of the more conventionally sized 'Henge' monuments, but contains the most interesting and varied series of internal features, including the post-holes of a wooden pentagonal structure (see below). A small Causewayed roundbarrow discovered at the site of the former St. Stephen's College, North Foreland (North Foreland III) also contained some interesting (but undateable) internal features and could potentially represent an example of a Mini-Henge or Hengi-Form monument. It was 10m in diameter and contained three inhumation burials, one of which was cut into the base of the ditch near the causeway and capped by a piece of whalebone. The other internal features included a couple of small shallow pits and post-holes, the most interesting of which was a circular pit packed with small nodules of burnt flint, capped by larger tabular slabs of flint and non-local sandstone. The relationship between the pit, the burials and the rest of the monument is not clear. There are few stratigraphic relationships and this monument is undated at present. Whether any of the Causewayed ring-ditch monuments described here can be thought of as representing a Henge or Mini-Henge depends on the parameters for the definition of such a monument. The classic definition of a causewayed ditch with an outer bank would apply to none of Thanet's known excavated sites (though Mill Lane is an unknown quantity at present). Much variation exists in the nature of Henges countrywide and it is quite possible that the individuals who constructed Thanet's potential Henge or Hengi-Form monuments might have done so according to their own designs/local traditions. Comparisons are useful and informative but we should also be careful of relying too heavily on well published examples from other parts of the Country which may have little relevance to the situation here. Ultimately the true function and place of Henges in Late Neolithic, Beaker and Early Bronze Age society can only be guessed at and much waits to be discovered! Top
		The sites presented below have been ordered according to the likely date of the founding of the monument and the year of their excavation. Some unfortunately remain undated at present.

		? Late Neolithic 3000-2000 BC
Ditches: 2 Outer ditch Diameter: ? Width top: ? Width base: ? Depth: ? Recut: ? Inner ditch Diameter: ? Width top: ? Width base: ? Depth: ? Recut: Yes Causeways: 1 (Outer ditch) Causeway orientation: ? Causeway width: ? Causeway slighted: ? Orientation: ? Height: ?		(I) Mill Lane Margate, 1975. Rescue Excavation instigated and conducted by John Villette, assisted by the Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit. Part of a Causewayed ring-ditch monument seems to have been encountered during the construction of the multi-storey car park in Margate. Overall the monument comprised two ditches, with the outer one having a causeway. The inner ditch (possibly shallow) had apparently been backfilled with chalk and subsequently re-cut. At the centre of the monument were 'radiating slots' (not deep) which may have represented the base of a Post-Mill. A grave containing a crouched inhumation burial was found cut into the surface of the causeway. The grave also produced finger-tip decorated pottery which may have been Mid/Late Neolithic Peterborough Ware. Similar sherds of an 'incomplete pot' of apparent Peterborough Ware were also found in the fill of the terminus of the outer ditch (at the point of the causeway, by the burial). On current evidence this monument could have been a Late Neolithic Henge. The grave could represent either a foundation deposit or perhaps a blocking deposit. NGR 635435 170622. John Villette pers comm. Mynot 1975. Top
Ditches: 3 Outer ditch Diameter: 30.0m. Width top: 3.0m. Width base: ? Depth: 1.5m. Recut: Yes Inner ditch Diameter: 12m. Width top: 1.5m. Width base: ? Depth: 0.8m. Recut: No Middle ditch Diameter: 19m. Width top: 2.0m. Width base: ? Depth: 0.57-1.3m. Recut: No Causeways: 1 (Middle ditch) Causeway orientation: SE Causeway width: 8.5m. Causeway slighted: Yes Orientation: SW facing slope Height: 41m OD.		(II) Lord of the Manor I, 1976.
Plan of the LOM complex (TAU)		Excavation led by Nigel Macpherson Grant, Thanet Archaeological Unit; (LOM I). A Four-Phase triple ring-ditch monument. Phase 1 (Later Neolithic?): the large outer ditch was dug first and allowed to infill, perhaps after a period of abandonment. There was no evidence for a causeway. Phase 2 (Beaker, circa 1950-1850 BC): the infilled outer ditch was subsequently re-cut during the Beaker Period. Pit F1 was also dug. A single inhumation burial (1A) beyond the outer ditch, contained within a chalk 'cocoon' likely belongs to this phase. Phase 3 (possibly circa 1800-1750 BC): The re-cut outer ditch began to infill again and then a rectangular grave (G5) and the inner ditch (a roundbarrow) was dug. The grave contained the crouched inhumation burials interpreted as that of a 'father and daughter'. No clearly dateable finds.
(TAU)		Phase 4 (possibly circa 1700-1500 BC): Once the inner ditch was half filled the middle ditch was constructed with a causeway to the south-east. Six burials comprising one cremation (G6, a cord-decorated pot, possibly a Food Vessel, containing the ashes of a baby and accompanied with a barbed and tanged flint arrowhead) and five single crouched inhumations (G1-4 and 7) were deposited. Finally the causeway was 'blocked' by the digging of a trench across it. Disarticulated human bone was recovered from both the lower and upper fills of all three ditches with the exception of the upper fill of the final, middle ditch. Carved chalk objects were recovered from the primary silts of the inner ditch (a 'cup/lamp'), the middle ditch (a 'cup/lamp' and two blocks with criss-cross carvings) and the outer ditch (a 'cup/lamp'). Ges Moody (pers comm.) has recently noted that this site lies within a slight dip in the landscape. Building a monument in a more 'hidden' or private location seems to echo a trend that has been seen in the siting of some Earlier Neolithic monuments elsewhere in the Country. This trend was subsequently reversed when generally more prominant and highly visible sites were selected as locations for the construction of roundbarrows. A reason behind this could lie in the differences between the functions of these two monument classes. A comparison of the differences (if any) of the locations for the roundbarrows and the potential Henge monuments on Thanet is the next task (watch this space). NGR 635507 165430. Fisk 2003. Macpherson Grant 1977. Top
Ditches: 1 Diameter: 22.0-23.0m. Width top: 2.0-4.0m. Width base: 0.3-2.0m. Depth: 1.20-1.60m. Recut: No Causeways: 1 Causeway orientation: SW Causeway width: 5.80m. Causeway slighted: No Orientation: SW facing slope Height: 39m OD.		(III) Lord of the Manor IID, 1976.
Plan of the LOM complex (TAU)		Excavation led by Nigel Macpherson Grant and David Perkins, Thanet Archaeological Unit; (LOM IID). A Three Phase, single ring-ditch monument with a causeway in the south-west and slots cut into the base of the ditch. Within the enclosure were the hollows, pits, a platform of rammed chalk, a semi-circular flint bank, a hearth, occupation debris including Beaker pottery and the post-holes of a pentagonal structure with an entrance corridor (associated with the chalk platform and flint bank). It is not certain if there was a significant timelapse between the cutting of the ditch (Phase 1) and the creation of the internal features (Phase 2A). A later central crouched inhumation burial covers one of the post-holes and may be associated with a renewal of the post-hole structure. Phase One (Late Neolithic?): the causewayed enclosure ditch was excavated, with the spoil forming an inner bank. Slots were cut into the bottom of the ditch, but possibly not completed. Evidence of an episode of tree clearance may also belong to this phase. Considerable quantites of densely patinated worked flints (similar to those recovered from LOM I) were recovered.
(TAU)		Phase 2A (circa 1950-1800 BC): this may have seen the construction of the rammed chalk floor, flint bank, hearth and post-hole structures. A few sherds of undecorated pottery which overlay the hearth are similar to the Beaker sherds of LOM I Phase 2. Phase 2B (circa 1950-1850 BC): Some of the posts of the timber structure were renewed. The various intenal pits could have been dug at this time. Phase 3 (?): A rectangular grave containing a single crouched inhumation burial was cut close to the centre of the monument, sealing one of the Phase 2A post-holes. NGR 635463 165370. Fisk 2003; Macpherson Grant 1980. Top
Ditches: 1 Diameter: 30.0m. Width top: 3.0-5.5m. Width base: 1.0-2.0m. Depth: 1.70m (max 1.56m below chalk ?) (max 1.85m.+ topsoil) Recut: Yes Causeways: 1 Causeway orientation: S Causeway width: 4.0m / 0.6m. Causeway slighted: Yes Orientation: SW facing slope Height: 39m OD.		(IV) Lord of the Manor III, 1977/1989.
Plan of the LOM complex (TAU)		Excavation led by Nigel Macpherson Grant and David Perkins, Thanet Archaeological Unit; (LOM III). A single ring-ditch monument with a causeway to the south. A subsequent Early Bronze Age cremation burial (at its time the seventh to be discovered in Kent; Dr. I.H. Longworth in Perkins 1980) and later Anglo-Saxon graves were cut within the monument. The skull of small-headed female (about 12-15 years old and possibly a dwarf) was found on the base of the ditch to the east. The skull had a boar’s rib placed through the foramen magnum at the back of her head (Macpherson Grant). It is not certain at present whether this act of ritual deposition is related to the original or later Early Bronze Age phase of use of the monument (one might suspect the former). Phase 1 (Late Neolithic, circa 2000 BC): the circular ditch with a causewayed entrance was constructed. Two pits (F7 and 8; containing a few flints and fragments of animal bone and charcoal) were probably dug at this time. The floor of the ditch on either side of the causeway was deepened and then the causeway was narrowed drastically. The site is abandoned and the ditches began to infill (rapidly at first).
(TAU)		Phase 2 (circa 1400 BC): the part-infilled ditch was recut intermittently, both internally and externally, possibly to provide material for a central mound which covered a Collared Urn cremation burial (B2). The inverted urn had been placed in the middle of a pit upon a small heap of flints. Subsequent infilling of the recut ditch proceeds slowly. Phase 3 (Late Iron Age 'Belgic'): Iron Age ploughing speeds the rate of infilling of the ditches. A 'Belgic' coin was found on the chalk surface adjacent to the plough marks. Phase 4 (circa 6-8th C AD): later Anglo-Saxon burials cut into the edge of an extant barrow mound. They also disturb one of the internal Prehistoric pits (F1). The final destruction of the mound probably occurred in the Mid 19th century. NGR 635525 165288. Fisk 2003; Perkins 1980. Top

		Date uncertain
Ditches: 1 Diameter: 32.5m. Width top: 3.0m. Width base: 1.0m. Depth: 1.6m. Recut: Yes Causeways: 1 possible Causeway orientation: (?) NW Causeway width: ? Causeway slighted: ? Orientation: SW facing slope Height: 40m OD.		(V) Lord of the Manor V, 1981.
Plan of the LOM complex (TAU) (TAU)		Excavation led by David Perkins; Thanet Archaeological Unit (LOM V). Single ring-ditch monument, possibly with a causeway in the unexcavated portion of the ditch. Two similar monuments nearby have a causeway in alignment with this unexcavated portion. Aerial photographs also suggest the presence of a causeway. Phase 1 (?): the circular enclosure was constructed and subsequently abandoned. Phase 2 (?): the infilled ditch was re-excavated with recuts spaced alternately on the inside and outside. This was possibly to provide material for a central mound. Slots were also cut into the base of the ditch. Phase 3 (?): a central 'ossuary' pit was dug and filled with the selected remains of five individuals. The angle of the pit suggests that a mound may have been present. To the west was the burial of an ox, orientated at right angles to the central burial. It is not certain where this particular burial features in the sequence of events. Phase 4 (Anglo-Saxon): subsequent Anglo- Saxon burials were cut to the south and south-west of the monument, with only one (surviving) being within the bounds of the ring-ditch. NGR 635601 165292. Fisk 2003. Top
Ditches: 1 Diameter: 31.36-32.73m. (possibly to 34.09m.) Width top: 3.40-5.10m. (possibly to 6.78m.) Width base: 0.95-1.26m. Depth: 1.50-1.72m. (possibly 1.80m.) Recut: No Causeways: 1 Causeway orientation: WNW Causeway width: 0.55m. Causeway slighted: Probably Orientation: SE facing slope Height: 42m OD.		(VI) Bradstow School IV, 2006.
Copyright Archaeology South East Reprodued from the KAS newsletter (D.Hart 2006)		Evaluation led by Ges Moody of the Trust for Thanet Archaeology; (BSD06). Excavation led by Diccon Hart of Archaeology South East; (DPB06). A large, single ring-ditch monument with a small, narrow causeway (0.55m wide) to the west. The diameter of the ring-ditch ranged from approximately 31.36m-32.73m (D.Hart 2006), though in an area adjacent to some later quarry pits it reached a maximum of 34.09m. Here the monument featured a broad, shallow outer edge beyond the steep ditch-cut; one that may have resulted from the later pit-cutting episode, though it that hardly qualifies as a pit and its purpose in this sense is unclear. The surface of the causeway had been cut 0.55m below the level of the natural chalk. It would seem likely that the original causeway was 'slighted', being cut down and narrowed at its surface (leaving a rounded and somewhat precarious track into the centre of the monument) as an act of blocking and closure once it went out of use. Evidence from the sections may be inconclusive in this regard however. Several (relatively small and shallow) rectangular and oval pits were discovered in the interior; a rectangular pit lay at the centre. No burials or finds of any significance were discovered.
Copyright Archaeology South East Reprodued from the KAS newsletter (D.Hart 2006)		Though this monument has been referred to as a 'large Bronze Age round barrow' (D.Hart 2006) and may have had a barrow phase (the burial evidence of which may be largely lost to us) there is also a possibility that it may have started life as a late Neolithic ceremonial enclosure or Henge. The large dimensions of this feature may add weight to such an interpretation. It is the largest single and largest Causewayed ring-ditch monument excavated so far on Thanet. Only the double ring-ditched Monkton-Minster III is larger (at 35m in diameter; Fisk 2003). The ditch-depth is likely the deepest yet recorded on Thanet, while the ditch-width may be second only to LOM III (and at its potential full extent is the largest). As a whole the monument is comparable to LOM III, which likely founded in the Late Neolithic. The Bradstow monument may also have provided a focus for the three certain (and possibly four) roundbarrows which were constructed to the north and north-east. The information presented here will be reviewed and updated when a report on the excavations by Diccon Hart is published by ASE. This will also permit the posting of a page giving a more detailed review (with many photographs) on this interesting site. NGR 639399 167038. The dimensions of the ditch are derived from measurements taken by the author during ASE's excavation. This was done with the kind permission of Diccon Hart. The maximum diameter of the monument has been measured from a site plan published in the KAS Newsletter (D. Hart 2006). The opinions presented are my own and must not be thought the considered, published opinions of Archaeology South East (report forthcoming). I would like to thank Diccon Hart for allowing me to take measurements and photographs of this monument. I hope to update and present a more pictorial piece on this feature once the initial report is published. Plan - D.Hart 2006. Top

		A Mini-Henge monument ? (Undated)
Ditches: 1 Diameter: 10.0m-10.50m. Width top: 0.78-1.03m. Width base: 0.57-0.81m. Depth: 0.36-0.53m. Recut: No Causeways: 1 Causeway orientation: NNE Causeway width: 0.40m Causeway slighted: No Orientation: NW facing ridge Height: 40m OD.		(VII) North Foreland III, 1999.
Plan of the excavations at the former St. Stephen's College, North Foreland (TTA) The Causewayed barrow is to the left of the scale		Excavation led by Dave Perkins, Trust for Thanet Archaeology and Mike Diack, Canterbury Archaeological Trust; latterly concluded by the Trust for Thanet Archaeology; (NFB99). A single ring-ditch monument with a narrow causeway (0.40m wide) to the north. Within the roundbarrow were two graves (one central; one to the south-east) and a pit, while a third grave was cut into the bottom of the ditch to the west of the causeway. Both internal graves were shallow and poorly preserved. The rectangular central burial held the remains of an adult, laid on their left-hand side with the head to the south, facing west. The individual may have been laid within a coffin-structure. To the south-east of the first grave lay the even more poorly preserved burial of an individual laid within an oval grave.
(TTA)		Immediately to the west of the central burial was a round pit which had been filled with small nodules of burnt flint and capped by large slabs of tabular flint and sandstone (possibly non-local Greensand/Ragstone). This feature seems to represent an act of purposeful deposition and could have been connected with rituals associated the central burial or the founding of the monument. The relationship between the flint pit and the central burial is unclear, but it may be that the grave-cut respects the pit and thus could be later. Cut into the bottom of the ditch, close to the causeway, was the well preserved grave of a small child. A large fragment of whale bone had been laid across the surface of south-eastern side of the grave. NGR 639700 169252. Boast, Gardner and Moody 2006; Fisk 2003. Top

		If you would like to see some extra information and pictures from some of these sites please visit the Display on the Causewayed roundbarrows and ring-ditches of Thanet, which is linked to the Roundbarrows Display in the Bronze Age Gallery, or click here.
		Top
		Abbreviations ASE - Archaeology South East. TAU - Thanet Archaeological Unit. TTA - Trust for Thanet Archaeology.
(Fisk 2006)		Acknowledgments Particular thanks goes to Pip Fisk for her work on compiling a thorough, comprehensive and invaluable gazetteer on the ring-ditch and roundbarrow monuments excavated on Thanet (Fisk 2003). The time which has been saved by consulting this document is immeasureable and it has had a profound impact on the labour taken to make the observations and presentations of the potential Henge monuments published here. I would also like to thank Thanet Trust's Director Emma Boast for the reproduction of the plans from the excavations at North Foreland.
		The text is the responsibility of the author; the plans are by the Thanet Archaeological Unit and the Trust for Thanet Archaeology unless otherwise stated.
		Paul Hart Version 1 - Posted 26.09.06 Version 2 - Posted 16.12.06 Top
All content © Trust for Thanet Archaeology