The Alfred Theory
However, despite the connection to the pre-Roman Conquest coins, the Iron Age theory did no catch on. Instead, the Reverend Francis Wise, the Radcliffe Library’s librarian, took himself off on a trip to White Horse Hill. He came back with a theory: everything he saw there was related to the Battle of Ashdown, a relatively minor battle involving pagan invaders, the Danes, the forces of King Aethelred and Wise’s hero, Alfred, the King’s brother.
Today historians dispute the location of the battle – it may have taken place along the Ridgeway but further to the east. The roles played by the King and his brother are also debated. But to Francis Wise all was clear: prehistoric hillforts were the camps of the rival forces, Wayland’s Smithy the burial place of the Danish leaders, and the White Horse a memorial of the Christian English victory. Evidence was there none. But never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
In the later 18th and 19th centuries, King Alfred had Greatness thrust upon him. He had saved and built the nation, was credited with founding Oxford University and the English navy, and promoting the Church. A statue to him still stands in the market place of Wantage, his birthplace, which lists his achievements. And because of the connection to him, the White Horse thrived in the sunshine of this English myth.
Changing Theories
But spoilsports were on the march. As the study of antiquities became more academic, the evidence based on the observation of Iron Age coins was resurrected. Even Thomas Hughes, the author of the novel The Scouring of the White Horse (1859), eventually changed camps and shockingly admitted that the Alfred story was unlikely. In 1930 the final nail was hammered into that coffin by Stuart Piggott. As a young prehistorian, he wrote a fluent, well argued and ‘modern’ article entitled ‘The Uffington White Horse’ published in the then fashionable journal Antiquity. In it, he argued convincingly for a Late Iron Age date, again emphasising the stylistic similarity with some Iron Age coins.
Other Ideas
As Piggott's career and influence grew, he became one of the trinity of senior prehistorians – Graham Clark at Cambridge, Christopher Hawkes in Oxford, and Piggott himself of Edinburgh. Thanks to his reputation, the Late Iron Age Horse became generally accepted in the 20th century. Then a new challenger emerged, not an archaeologist but a student of folklore, Diana Woolner.
She wrote a couple of well-argued articles suggesting an early Anglo-Saxon origin for the Horse – after all Hengist and Horsa, the first invaders, were supposed to have planted their White Horse banner in Kent, where it still remains the county’s symbol. She challenged Piggott’s theory of a Celtic style horse. She claimed to be able to see a sturdier, more natural Horse in the turf. According to Ms Woolner, over generations the scourers had not done their job very well, and as a result we were left with the stylised version. Professor Hawkes in Oxford rather approved of the new theory, probably because it cocked a snook at his Edinburgh rival.
In 1949, historian Morris Marples published White Horses and Other Hill-figures, where he proposed a Bronze Age date for the White Horse, but was largely ignored.
So in the late 20th century there we stood. A White Horse that was certainly old. But how old? As a result of the uncertainty, the Uffington Horse remained in a kind of limbo. A famous icon but rarely discussed, or even mentioned, in text books on British prehistory; more likely to feature in books with titles such as Mysteries of Britain.