On Some Ancient Battle-Fields in Lancashire: And Their Historical, Legendary, and Aesthetic Associations.Hardwick, Charles
History
On Some Ancient Battle-Fields in Lancashire: And Their Historical, Legendary, and Aesthetic Associations.
Hardwick, Charles
Battles -- England; Great Britain -- History -- Anglo-Saxon period, 449-1066; Lancashire (England) -- History
Canon Raines states that the "large mound" removed by Thomas Hubbertsty,
in 1836, was situated "about five hundred yards from the bank of the
Ribble," and that the tumulus that had been previously opened was only
two hundred yards distant from that stream. The "large mound" of Canon
Raines, removed in 1836, in which remains were found, seems to have been
a smaller affair than the other tumuli. This is affirmed by Mr. Abram,
in a very able paper on the history of the township of Billington, in
the Lancashire and Cheshire Historical Society's Transactions, otherwise
he says, "the farmer would hardly have undertaken to level it." The
tumuli on the right bank or north-west side of the river are named
"lowes" on the six-inch Ordnance map, and "mounds" on the smaller one.
The former name is evidently the Anglo-Saxon _hlœw_, a conical hill or a
sepulchral mound, or tumulus, in the latter sense a synonym of _beorh_
or _bearw_, a barrow. Although these large tumuli are on the north-west
side of the river, the nearest is scarcely half a mile distant from the
site of the removed one near Bullasey-ford on the south-east.
There is some confusion in the various descriptions of these mounds. Mr.
Abram says, referring to the large tumulus called the "Lowe" on the
north-west side of the Ribble--"Into this mound Whitaker had some
excavation made about the year 1815, but he found the work heavy and
gave it up without reaching the centre of the tumulus, where the relics
of sepulture might be expected to be found." As Dr. Whitaker expressly
says, he saw no remains of the battle except "a large tumulus near
Hacking Hall," he must not only have been ignorant of the character of
its immediate neighbour, as well as of the one on the Langho side of the
river, near Bullasey-ford, if this "lowe" was the mound he but partially
disturbed. This can scarcely be the tumulus referred to by Canon Raines
if the distance (two hundred yards) from the river be correct. Neither
can the five hundred yards distance of Mr. Hubbertsty's mound
be reconciled with the site of the tumulus at Brockhall, near
Bullasey-ford. Perhaps his figures have been accidently transposed. I
had previously laboured under an impression that Hubbertsty had merely
completely cleared away the mound but imperfectly excavated by Dr.
Whitaker.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account