Quote
This has been bugging me for years. In Wiltshire there's an enormous man made mound called Silbury Hill - much bigger than any burial mound. I think it's more than 2000 years old. There's nothing else like it in England (at least, not on that scale) and its purpose seems to be a mystery.
Years ago, I read a report from the Chronicle TV program (fantastic TV prog, why was it ever axed?!) which asked much the same questions. The mound has never been satisfactoraly excavated (it's just too big - the summit doubles as a cricket field!) but from what they could discover, it's an enigma. It seems to be solid, i.e no hollow chamber, and built like a step pyramid, i.e in 'tiers' of chalk or stone, before being covered with earth to give it its smooth profile. It stands alone on a great plain and tho' I've never seen it the photos are awesome!
The step pyramid similarity seems to be significant to me, but there are no other structures like it anywhere - as far as I know - in the UK. Also, it seems to be solid. Of course, geophysics has made enormous advances since that Chronicle doc of the early 70's. But aside from that one report I've never heard anything more. Can anyone enlighten me on this? Has it ever been explored using modern geophys methods and, if so, what was found? Have there been any theories put forward as to its purpose? I know one theory was it marked the burial place of a great king (altho he'd have to be a giant!) and I wonder if the mound does cover a burial chamber, located underground. But WHY though? Then again, it's not too far from Stonehenge which again is unique in the UK, so is it possible both had the same architect?
Whatever, I think this definitely comes under the heading of 'Mysteries of the ancient world' so please, someone, put me out of my mystery misery!
"There have been several excavations of the mound and William Stukeley wrote that a skeleton and bridle had been discovered during tree planting on the summit in 1723. It is probable that this was a later, secondary burial however. The first purposeful excavation came when a team of Cornish miners led by the Duke of Northumberland sunk a shaft from top to bottom in 1776. This was followed in 1849 when a tunnel was dug from the edge into the centre. Others were held in 1867, 1886 and William Flinders Petrie investigated the hill after the First World war. In 1968-70 professor Richard Atkinson undertook work at Silbury in front of BBC television cameras. This last work revealed most of the environmental evidence known about the site including the remains of winged ants which indicate Silbury was begun in August.
Atkinson dug numerous trenches at the site and reopened the 1849 tunnel, finding material suggesting a Neolithic date although none of his radiocarbon dates are considered reliable by modern standards. He argued that the hill was constructed in steps, each tier being filled in with packed chalk, and then smoothed off or weathered into a slope. Others have identified a spiralling path climbing to the top and prefer to see the construction as being more incremental with the benefit of also providing a processional route to the summit.
Few prehistoric artefacts have ever been found on Silbury Hill: at its core there is only clay, flints, turf, moss, topsoil, gravel, freshwater shells, mistletoe, oak, hazel, sarsen stones, ox bones, and antler tines. Roman and medieval items have been found on and around the site since the nineteenth century and it seems that the hill was reoccupied by later peoples.
In 2000, a collapse of the 1776 excavation shaft caused a hole to form in the top of the hill. English Heritage undertook a seismic survey of the hill to identify the damage caused by earlier excavations and determine the hill's stability. Repairs were undertaken though the site remains closed to the public. English Heritage's archaeologists also excavated two further small trenches as part of the remedial work and made the important discovery of an antler fragment, the first from a secure context at the site. This produced a reliable radiocarbon date of c. 2490-2340 BC, dating the second mound convincingly to the Late Neolithic. Other recent work has focused on the role of the surrounding ditch which may not have been a simple source of chalk for the hill but a purposeful water-filled barrier placed between the hill and the rest of the world."
From the Wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silbury_HillIt would seem that the purpose of the hill is not yet known. There have been precious few artifacts found, giving us little to go on. What there is, is a great deal of is rumor and conjecture. However, long story short: no one knows.
As to the Stonehenge connection, it seems unlikely, but it is possible, to the extent that some of the stonehenge work has been dated to roughly the same period as the second mound (the mound is believed to have been built in two phases). However, parts of stonehenge are actually much older. It too is believed to have been constructed in phases. However, this could be coincidence, as sites of ritual importance would likely be used, reused, and improved over the centuries. There is no direct evidence linking Silbury to stonehenge.
-Pilgrim
3
the top of the hill is truncated. Thus, the best that we could say is that the hill might fit inside the pyramid, again if it were hollow (which it isn't). There are many, many hills, both natural and manmade, that would be small enough to fit inside the great pyramid, so this is not truly very compelling.
