Wellington Quarry, Herefordshire (1986-96): Investigations of a Landscape in the Lower Lugg Valley

By Robin Jackson and Darren Miller

This volume presents the results of the first 10 years of archaeological investigation at Wellington Quarry, Herefordshire. During this time a regionally unique archaeological and palaeoenvironmental sequence was recorded covering nearly 8000 years of interrelated human activity and landscape change in the Lower Lugg Valley. Starting with use by Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, the heavily wooded floodplain witnessed periods of sporadic occupation and activity throughout early prehistory. A mid 4th millennium BC pit group provided a detailed insight into a wide range of seasonally based activities, while later funerary deposits included a wealthy Beaker burial. From the start of the 2nd millennium BC, an increasingly open and cleared landscape existed beyond the floodplain, on which activity was evidenced by occasional finds from former watercourses. Ritual deposition of human remains and artefacts in the later prehistoric period included a rare Iron Age double inhumation, though by this time a more settled and farmed landscape had emerged. By the 2nd century AD, a streamside settlement had been established. Expansion and intensification of this settlement led to the construction, by the 4th century, of one or more well-appointed stone buildings indicating that at least some of the inhabitants lived a highly Romanised lifestyle, rare on rural sites in this region. The settlement was abandoned by the late 4th to early 5th century but, until at least the 12th to 14th centuries, arable cultivation continued. During the post-medieval period there was a shift towards an enclosed landscape of pasture and meadow, a pattern maintained until the onset of mineral extraction in the 1980s.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Oxbow Books
• Release date: Mar 15, 2011
• ISBN: 9781842175859

Robin Jackson

Robin Jackson is a Senior Project Manager with Worcestershire Archives and Archaeological Services. He has extensive experience in commercial archaeology in designing and implementing fieldwork and research, and managing major archaeologiccal projects, especially mineral extraction large-scale infrastructure projects. His particular research interests lie in prehistoric archaeology and river valley landscapes.

Book preview

Published by

Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK

© Oxbow Books, Humber Archaeology Partnership, Worcestershire County Council and the authors 2011

ISBN 978-1-84217-366-4

ISBN 9781842175873 (epub)

ISBN 9781842175866 (prc)

A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library

This book is available direct from

Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK

(Phone: [phone]; Fax: [phone])

and

The David Brown Book Company

PO Box 511, Oakville, CT 06779, USA

(Phone: [phone]; Fax: [phone])

or from our website

www.oxbowbooks.com

This book is published with the aid of a grant from English Heritage.

           Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Jackson, Robin.

Wellington Quarry, Herefordshire (1986-96): investigations of a landscape in the Lower Lugg Valley / Robin Jackson and Darren Miller; with contributions by Ian Baxter … [et al]

       p. cm.

   Includes bibliographical references.

ISBN 978-1-84217-366-4 (hardback)

1. Wellington Quarry Site (England) 2. Quarries and quarrying--Lugg Valley (Wales and England) 3. Excavations (Archaeology)--Lugg Valley (Wales and England) 4. Neolithic period--Lugg Valley (Wales and England) 5. Iron Age--Lugg Valley (Wales and England) 6. Lugg Valley (Wales and England)--Antiquities. I. Miller, Darren. II. Title.

GN776.22.G7J33 2011

936.2’42--dc22

                                                     2010051382

Front cover reconstruction illustration by Steve Rigby

Printed in Great Britain by

Short Run Press, Exeter

Contents

List of Figures

List of Tables

Contributors

Summary

Zusammenfassung

Résumé

Acknowledgements

PART 1. INTRODUCTION

1. Background

2. Location

3. Historical and archaeological context

4. Project history

5. Aims

6. Fieldwork methodology

7. Fieldwork and management approaches: future directions

8. Post-excavation analysis

9. The archive

PART 2. DATING, LANDSCAPE AND ENVIRONMENT

10. The scientific dating programme – John Meadows, Alex Bayliss, Chris Bronk Ramsey, Gordon Cook and Robin Jackson

11. Geology and drift

12. Alluvium and palaeochannels

13. Geoarchaeology – Richard Payne and David Jordan

14. Prehistoric limewoods of Herefordshire: pollen and seeds from Wellington Quarry – James Greig

PART 3. EARLIER PREHISTORIC ACTIVITY

15. Deposits

16. The Neolithic pottery – Alex Gibson

17. Organic residue analysis – Robert Berstan and Richard P. Evershed

18. The flaked stone – Peter S. Bellamy

19. Microwear analysis – Randolph E. Donahue and Adrian A. Evans

20. Other finds

21. Environment – Elizabeth Pearson

22. Interpretation and discussion

PART 4. LATER PREHISTORIC AND ROMANO-BRITISH ACTIVITY

23. Bronze Age activity

24. Iron Age deposits

25. Roman deposits

26. The Roman pottery – Laura Griffin

27. Ceramic building material – Laura Griffin

28. Other finds – Laura Griffin

29. The cremated bone – Darlene Weston

30. Environmental remains – Elizabeth Pearson

31. Overview of Romano-British settlement and activity

PART 5. MEDIEVAL AND POST-MEDIEVAL ACTIVITY

32. Medieval activity

33. Post-medieval and modern activity

PART 6. SYNTHESIS

34. Transition and change

35. Conclusions

Appendices

1. Geoarchaeological observations by site area – Richard Payne

2. Petrological analysis – Robert A. Ixer

3. Skeletal inventory – Darlene Weston

Bibliography

List of Figures

1.1 Location of Wellington Quarry.

1.2 View across the site (SR5. 1993. Facing west).

1.3 Topography.

1.4 Sites in the vicinity.

1.5 Interpretive plot of cropmarks in the vicinity (after A.P.S. 2001).

1.6 Sequence of fieldwork.

1.7 Fieldwork in the ‘core area’.

1.8 Investigating a long south facing section (SR1. 1989).

1.9 Recording in plan (SR5. 1993. Facing east).

1.10 Area salvage excavation (SR3. 1990. Facing north-east).

2.1 Calibration of the pooled mean radiocarbon age of the four samples from Neolithic pit fills.

2.2 Calibration of the pooled mean of the two results from the unaccompanied inhumations.

2.3 Calibration of the pooled mean of the two results from the charred archaeobotanical assemblage in pit fill 3606.

2.4 Calibrated radiocarbon results from the Wellington Quarry pollen column and willow fragments from the gravel bed of Palaeochannel A.

2.5 Palaeochannels.

2.6 Sections across palaeochannels and alluvium (after Dinn and Roseff 1992).

2.7 Characteristic sequence of alluvial deposits revealed in a south facing section (SR1. 1989).

2.8 North facing section across Palaeochannel B (SR3. 1990).

2.9 Shallow sequence typical of deposits in the northwest of the quarry (SR4. 1992. North-west facing section).

2.10 Complex sequence including Roman features (SR1. 1989. South facing section).

2.11 Calibrated date range/depth curve from the pollen profile, from which date estimates for desired horizons can be read off.

2.12 Pollen diagram.

3.1 Summary of early prehistoric activity.

3.2 Early Neolithic pits under excavation (SR5. 1993. Facing north).

3.3 Early Neolithic pit group (SR4 & SR5).

3.4 Characteristic dark fill of Early Neolithic pit 3853.

3.5 Burnt stone dump in Early Neolithic pit 3866.

3.6 Paired Early Neolithic pits 3853 (left) and 3855 (right).

3.7 Early Neolithic pits 3839, 3849 and 3851.

3.8 Early Neolithic pits 3853 and 3855.

3.9 Early Neolithic pits 3857 and 3860.

3.10 Early Neolithic pits 3862, 3864 and 3866.

3.11 Early Neolithic pits 3868 and 3870.

3.12 Middle Neolithic feature group.

3.13 Middle Neolithic feature sections.

3.14 Location of ring-ditches.

3.15 Ring-ditch fragment 3820.

3.16 Sections across ring-ditch 3357.

3.17 Sections across ring-ditch 3358.

3.18 Beaker burial.

3.19 Beaker burial assemblage.

3.20 Potential causeway (SR6. 1994. South-east facing section).

3.21 Early Neolithic pottery.

3.22 Early Neolithic pottery.

3.23 Early and Middle Neolithic pottery.

3.24 Partial gas chromatogram of the trimethylsilylated lipids extracted from potsherd AR20.

3.25 Histograms showing the acyl carbon number distributions of triacylglycerols identified in the lipid.

3.26 The ketonic decarboxylation of free fatty acids.

3.27 A plot of the δ¹³C values obtained from the C16:0 and C18:0 fatty acids.

3.28 A plot showing the difference between δ¹³C values obtained from the C16:0 and C18:0 fatty acids (δ¹³C18:0 – δ¹³C16:0) extracted from the potsherds compared with values obtained from modern reference fats.

3.29 Length-breadth data of flakes and blades from pits 3853 and 3855.

3.30 Flints.

3.31 Flints.

3.32 Box and whisker plots of ridge widths from each feature.

3.33 Smoother from Early Neolithic pit 3855.

4.1 Later prehistoric activity.

4.2 Late Bronze Age pottery from context 3503.

4.3 The Mid to Late Iron Age double inhumation.

4.4 The Mid to Late Iron Age double inhumation under excavation.

4.5 Iron Age pottery.

4.6 Skeleton 3530.

4.7 Skeleton 3531.

4.8 Early to Mid Roman activity.

4.9 Later Roman activity.

4.10 Late Roman buildings (facing north-west).

4.11 Late Roman buildings.

4.12 Late Roman building – detail of construction of wall 162 (facing south-east).

4.13 Corndrier or malting kiln 3093 (facing south).

4.14 Roman pottery.

4.15 Roman pottery.

4.16 Roman tile.

4.17 Other Roman finds.

4.18 Roman knife.

5.1 Medieval and post-medieval activity.

5.2 Medieval oven 3631.

5.3 Medieval oven 3631 (facing west).

5.4 Post-medieval sheepwash.

5.5 Post-medieval sheepwash (facing north).

List of Tables

1.1 Assessment of quality of fieldwork record.

2.1 Radiocarbon results.

2.2 Stratigraphy of the profile sampled for pollen and macrofossils.

2.3 Radiocarbon dates obtained from the main palaeochannel (A).

2.3 Radiocarbon samples and their macrofossil content.

2.5 Results from macrofossil samples recovered from trimming the monoliths before taking the pollen samples.

2.6 Summary of events shown by the pollen diagram.

2.7 Comparison of the events from the Wellington and the Cookley pollen results.

3.1 Summary of contents of the Early Neolithic pit group.

3.2 Summary of the Beaker grave assemblage.

3.3 Catalogue of Neolithic ceramics.

3.4 Lipid concentrations and compositions from potsherds from Wellington Quarry.

3.5 Assignments of origins for the absorbed lipid residues.

3.6. Total flaked stone assemblage.

3.7. Flaked stone assemblage from the Neolithic pit group.

3.8 Flaked stone assemblage from pits 3853 and 3855.

3.9 Reduction sequence of the flakes from pits 3853 and 3855.

3.10 Length of flakes and blades from pits 3853 and 3855.

3.11 Breadth of flakes and blades from pits 3853 and 3855.

3.12 Thickness of flakes and blades from pits 3853 and 3855.

3.13 Butt types from pits 3853 and 3855.

3.14 Termination types from pits 3853 and 3855.

3.15 Tool assemblage composition of pits 3853 and 3855.

3.16 Use of lithic artefacts as identified through microwear analysis.

3.17 Summary of artefacts examined for use-wear.

3.18 Summary of ridge rounding for artefacts from the different contexts.

3.19 Relationship of artefact use with archaeological context.

3.20 Relationship of artefact categories and artefact use.

3.21 Relationship of formal tool types and tool use.

3.22 Tool use distributions for a sample of Neolithic sites in Britain.

3.23 Stone from Neolithic contexts.

3.24 Plant remains from the Early Neolithic pit group.

3.25 Plant remains from Middle Neolithic to Early Bronze Age contexts.

3.26 Quantification of hand-collected mammal and bird bones (N.I.S.P.) from prehistoric contexts.

3.27 Number of animal bones (N.I.S.P.) in the sieved assemblage.

4.1 Iron Age pottery.

4.2 Quantification of Roman pottery fabrics.

4.3 Relative proportions of vessel types within the assemblage by Rim Equivalent E.V.E.

4.4 Quantification by vessel form and fabric (E.V.E. by R.E. measurement).

4.5 Quantification of Severn Valley ware forms by fabric (sherd count).

4.6 Quantification of Black Burnished ware I forms by fabric (sherd count).

4.7 Summary of all forms of Samian vessels by fabric (maximum numbers).

4.8 Summary of Samian vessels (maximum 30) by date of manufacture.

4.9 Quantification of Roman tile by fabric (unidentified tile has been omitted).

4.10 Stone from Roman contexts.

4.11 Weights of cremated bone from cremation deposit 3832 and maximum bone fragment size.

4.12 Weights of identified cremated bone from cremation deposit 3832 and maximum bone fragment size.

4.13 Weights of cremated bone from cremation deposit 3842 and maximum bone fragment size.

4.14 Plant remains from Roman contexts.

4.15 Number of hand-collected mammal and bird bones (N.I.S.P.) from Roman contexts.

5.1 Quantification of the medieval pottery by fabric type.

5.2 Charred plant remains from medieval contexts.

5.3 Uncharred plant remains from medieval contexts.

5.4 Quantification of post-medieval and modern pottery by fabric type.

Contributors

ROBIN JACKSON, DARREN MILLER, LAURA GRIFFIN,

DEREK HURST, ELIZABETH PEARSON, CAROLYN HUNT,

STEVE RIGBY AND LAURA TEMPLETON

Worcestershire County Council

Historic Environment and Archaeology Service

Woodbury

University of Worcester

Henwick Grove

Worcester WR2 6AJ

IAN BAXTER

4 Moor View

Newbiggin-by-the-Sea

Northumberland NE64 6DH

ALEX BAYLISS, CHRIS BRONK RAMSEY, GORDON COOK

and JOHN MEADOWS

Scientific Dating Team

English Heritage

1 Waterhouse Square

138–142 Holborn

London EC1N 2ST

PETER S. BELLAMY

The Granary

Ilsington Farm House

Tincleton

Dorchester

Dorset DT2 8QW

RICHARD P. EVERSHED and ROBERT BERSTAN

School of Chemistry

University of Bristol

Cantocks Close

Bristol BS8 1TS

RANDOLPH E. DONAHUE and ADRIAN A. EVANS

Department of Archaeological Sciences

University of Bradford

Richmond Road

Bradford

West Yorkshire BD7 1DP

ALEX GIBSON

Department of Archaeological Sciences

University of Bradford

Richmond Road

Bradford

West Yorkshire BD7 1DP

JAMES GREIG

7 Southwold Avenue

King’s Norton

Birmingham B30 3RJ

ROBERT A. IXER

1A Haunchwood Drive

Walmley

Sutton Coldfield

West Midlands B76 1JF

DAVID JORDAN AND RICHARD PAYNE

Institute of Archaeology

University of Bern

Langasse Strasse 10

3012 Bern

Switzerland

FIONA ROE

Blackthorn Cottage

Vicarage Lane

Hillesley

Wotton under Edge

Glos GL12 7RA

MARGARET WARD

2 Woodfields

Christleton

Chester CH3 7AU

DARLENE WESTON

Department of Human Evolution

Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology

Deutscher Paltz 6

Leipzig

Germany D-04103

Summary

Evaluation and salvage recording at Wellington Quarry, Herefordshire has revealed a long history of human activity on the floodplain of the River Lugg. Associated geoarchaeological evidence and environmental remains have provided a model for the changing landscape of the valley floor, thus giving a wider context for periods of occupation. Supported by evidence from adjacent sites, an important insight has been gained into settlement and landuse histories and adaptation in this river valley from the Mesolithic onwards. Together these strands of evidence provide a regionally unique sequence of interrelated human activity and landscape change over the past 8000 years.

Starting with sporadic use of the floodplain by Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, the area witnessed periods of seasonal occupation and use throughout early prehistory. The most important evidence derives from a mid 4th millennium cal BC pit group indicative of one or more periods of domestic occupation with a wide range of activities represented. Cereals, domesticated animals, dairy products and wild products were utilised by people exploiting the resources of a heavily wooded landscape of dense alder carr, on the wet valley floor, and lime woods beyond. The pollen record provides evidence of small-scale openings, probably reflecting periodic clearances created for grazing and cultivation. Mid to Later Neolithic and Beaker activity includes further pits and also funerary monuments including one of the wealthiest Beaker burials identified outside of southern England. Within the immediate vicinity, other projects have recorded a Middle Neolithic pit circle, further pits, hearths and postholes and widely scattered artefacts. These provide evidence of an increasingly visible human presence, perhaps indicating a desire within the local population to be seen as having an association with this particular location.

From the start of the 2nd millennium cal BC, an increasingly open and cleared landscape existed beyond the floodplain, although periods of woodland regeneration are also evident. On the floodplain, sporadic use by the local human population is evidenced by occasional finds from former watercourses and seasonally flooded hollows. Recent work on adjacent quarry areas to those reported here has revealed Middle Bronze Age activity around a waterhole as well as quantities of Beaker through to Late Bronze Age material dumped into former watercourses. Deposits of the latter period include human remains and set a precedent for later, Iron Age, ritual use of the area for deposition of human remains and artefacts. By this period, although swampy areas of reeds and sedges survived in the wettest parts of the floodplain, the remaining oak and alder woodland had been cleared and meadow, pasture and areas of cultivated land covered most of the valley floor.

Towards the end of the Iron Age, further evidence of a more settled and farmed landscape emerged in the form of field boundaries of Late Iron Age and Early Roman date, however, occupation appears to have lain beyond the investigated areas. By the 2nd century AD, the situation had changed considerably with a streamside settlement established on a rise in the generally flat floodplain. This formed the focus for a range of agricultural and small-scale industrial activities based in and around one or more ditched enclosures and surrounding fields. The expansion and intensification of settlement throughout the 2nd and into the 3rd centuries, led to the establishment by the 4th century of one or more well-appointed stone buildings. Along with associated artefacts, this indicates that at least some of the inhabitants lived in a highly romanised way and utilised a range of goods not normally encountered on rural sites in this region.

The buildings and settlement appear to have abandoned by the late 4th to early 5th century and there is little evidence of any activity until the 11–12th century. However, two substantial 8th century structures have recently been recorded in an adjacent quarry area. At least one of these can be identified as a watermill and it is possible that both were associated with the Mercian royal estate centred on Sutton. Unfortunately neither the pollen nor the geoarchaeological records from the area reported in this volume provide sufficient detail to illuminate this important period.

The later medieval landscape featured meadowland and possibly wasteland, especially from the 11th or 12th century onwards when increasingly regular flooding is evidenced. However, considerable extents of ridge and furrow are also present on the valley floor. Along with corn drying ovens and associated features, these indicate that until at least the 12th to 14th centuries arable cultivation continued to play an important role in the local economy. Later activity includes a sheepwash of 18th century date, while fieldname and cartographic evidence shows an enclosed landscape of pasture and meadow indicative of a shift away from arable cultivation during the post-medieval period, a pattern maintained until the onset of mineral extraction.

Zusammenfassung

Im Rahmen von Voruntersuchungen und Notbergungen in der Kiesgrube Wallington Quarry in der Grafschaft Hertfordshire konnte eine lange Abfolge menschlicher Aktivität im Auenbereich des Flusses Lugg untersucht werden. Anhand geoarchäologischer und paläoökologischer Funde konnte ein Modell der Landschaftsveränderung des Fluβtals entwickelt werden, mit dessen Hilfe die Besiedlungsperioden in einen weiteren Zusammenhang gestellt werden können. Unterstützt durch Ergebnisse benachbarter Fundplätze wurden wichtige Erkenntnisse zu Entwicklung und Wandel der Besiedlung und Landnutzung dieses Fluβtals seit der Mittelsteinzeit gewonnen. Zusammengenommen vermitteln diese verschiedenen Untersuchungsansätze eine regional einzigartige Abfolge sich gegenseitig beeinflußender menschlicher Aktivitäten und Landschaftsveränderungen der vergangenen 8000 Jahre.

Angefangen mit der vereinzelten Nutzung des Auenbereichs durch mittelsteinzeitliche Jäger und Sammler, lassen sich saisonale Besiedlung und Nutzung der Umgebung während der gesamten nachfolgenden prähistorischen Perioden nachweisen. Die wichtigsten Hinweise stammen von einem Grubenkomplex des mittleren 4. Jahrtausends cal BC, die auf eine oder mehrere Besiedlungsperioden mit einem weiten Spektrum an Aktivtitäten schlieβen lassen. Getreide, domestizierte Tiere, Milchprodukte und Wild wurden von einer Bevölkerung genutzt, die die Ressourcen einer stark bewaldeten Landschaft, mit Erlenbruchwald im feuchten Niederungsbereich und daran anschlieβenden Lindenwäldern, nutzte. Anhand der Pollenuntersuchungen lassen sich kleine Lichtungen nachweisen, die wahrscheinlich auf regelmäβig erneuerte, für Beweidung und Ackerbau angelegte Rodungen zurückzuführen sind. Mittel bis später-neolithische und becherzeitliche Aktivitäten sind durch weitere Gruben aber auch Gräber bezeugt, darunter eines der reichsten becherzeitlichen Bestattungen auβerhalb Südenglands. Innerhalb der unmittelbaren Umgebung wurden durch andere Projekte ein mittelneolithischer Grubenkreis, weitere Gruben, Herde und Pfostenlöcher sowie ausgedehnte Artefaktstreuungen erfaβt. Damit läβt sich eine zunehmend sichtbarere Siedlungstätigkeit belegen, die vielleicht den Wunsch der lokalen Bevölkerung andeutet, eine Verbindung mit dieser speziellen Lokalität zu demonstrieren.

Seit Anfang des 2. Jahrtausends cal BC existierte eine zunehmend offene und gelichtete Landschaft über den Auenbereich hinaus, obwohl sich auch Phasen der Wiederbewaldung aufzeigen lassen. Im Auenbereich kann eine sporadische Landnutzung durch die lokale Bevölkerung anhand vereinzelter Funde aus ehemaligen Wasserläufen und saisonal überschwemmten Senken belegt werden. Neuere Arbeiten in benachbarten Kiesgruben berichten von mittelbronzezeitlichen Aktivitäten im Bereich eines Wasserlochs sowie von becher- bis spätbronzezeitlichem Material, das in ehemalige Wasserläufe gekippt wurde. Unter den Deponierungen der letzteren Periode befinden sich auch menschliche Reste, die somit die spätere, eisenzeitliche, rituelle Nutzung dieses Bereichs für die Deponierung menschlicher Reste und Artefakte vorwegnehmen. Obwohl Schilf und Seggen in den feuchtesten Stellen des Auenbereichs bis zu dieser Periode überlebten, war der verbliebene Eichen- und Erlenwald gerodet worden, und Wiesen, Weiden und ackerbauliche genutzte Bereiche erstreckten sich nun über weite Teile der Niederung.

Gegen Ende der Eisenzeit finden sich Hinweise auf eine Zunahme der Besiedlung und landwirtschaftlichen Nutzung der Landschaft in der Form von Feldrainen späteisenzeitlicher und frühkaiserzeitlicher Zeitstellung, die Besiedlung scheint jedoch auβerhalb der untersuchten Flächen gelegen zu haben. Spätestens mit Beginn des 2. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. hat sich die Situation nachhaltig geändert, als eine Siedlung auf einer kleinen Erhebung in der sonst flachen Niederung entlang eines Wasserlaufs angelegt wurde. Diese bildete den Mittelpunkt für eine Reihe landwirtschaftlicher und handwerklicher Aktivitäten geringen Ausmaβes im Bereich einer oder mehrerer, von Gräben umgebenen, Einfriedungen und umliegenden Feldern. Die Ausdehnung und Intensivierung der Besiedlung während des 2. und 3. Jahrhunderts gipfelte in der Errichtung eines oder mehrerer gut ausgestatteter Steinbauten. Zusammen mit den vergesellschafteten Funden deutet sich an, dass zumindest ein Teil der Bewohner einen ausgeprägt romanisierten Lebenstil führte und eine Auswahl an Gütern zur Verfügung hatte, die nicht zum gewöhnlichen Inventar ländlicher Siedlungen dieser Region gehörten.

Die Gebäude und die Siedlung scheinen gegen Ende des 4. bis frühen 5. Jahrunderts verlassen worden zu sein, und es gibt kaum Hinweise auf Aktivitäten irgendwelcher Art vor dem 11.–12. Jahrhundert. Es wurden allerdings vor kurzem zwei umfangreiche Strukturen des 8. Jahrhunderts in einer benachbarten Kiesgrube entdeckt. Bei wenigstens einer dieser Strukturen handelt es sich um eine Wassermühle, und es ist möglich, dass beide Teil eines mercischen Königsguts waren, desssen Mittelpunkt sich in Sutton befand. Leider lieferten weder die Ergebnisse der Pollen- noch der geoarchäologischen Untersuchungen aus dem in diesem Band vorgelegten Untersuchungsgebiet ausreichend Material, um diesen wichtigen Zeitabschnitt näher zu beleuchten.

Die mittelalterliche Landschaft war von Grass- und möglicherweise Brachland geprägt, vor allem seit dem 11. oder 12. Jahrhundert, einem Zeitpunkt, von dem an zunehmend regelmäßigere Überflutung nachzuweisen sind. Andererseits finden sich aber auch ausgedehnte Wölbackerflächen im Niederungsbereich. Zusammen mit Getreidedarren und zugehörigen Befunden verdeutlichen diese, dass Ackerbau zumindest bis zum 12. bis 14. Jahrhundert eine wichtige Rolle in der lokalen Wirtschaft gespielt hat. Zu den späteren Befunden gehört eine Schafwaschstelle des 18. Jahrhunderts, während nach Ausweis der Feldnamen und kartographischer Zeugnisse eine parzellierte Landschaft mit Wiesen und Weiden existierte, was eine Abwendung von ackerbaulicher Landwirtschaft im Verlaufe der frühen Neuzeit andeutet; eine Nutzung, die bis zum Beginn des Kiesabbaus beibehalten wurde.

Résumé

Un répertoriage d’évaluation et de sauvegarde de la carrière de Wellington dans le Herefordshire a révélé une longue histoire d’occupation humaine dans la plaine inondable de la rivière Lugg. Des découvertes géoarchéologiques associées et des vestiges environnementaux ont fourni un modéle pour les changements de ce paysage de fond de vallée, nous offrant ainsi un contexte plus étendu pour ses périodes d’occupation. Etayé par les témoignages de sites adjacents, nous avons acquis un important aperçu des histoires de l’occupation, de l’utilisation des terres et de l’adaptation de cette vallée fluviale à partir du Mésolithique. Rassemblées, ces bribes de témoignages constituent une séquence régionale unique de la corrélation entre activité humaine et évolution du paysage s’étalant sur les 8000 dernières années.

Commençant par un usage sporadique de la plaine alluviale par des chasseurs-cueilleurs mésolithiques, cette zone a été témoin de périodes d’occupation et d’utilisation saisonnières tout au long de la préhistoire ancienne. Les découvertes les plus importantes proviennent d’un groupe de fosses datant du milieu du IVe millénaire av. J.-C. en années calibrées attestant d’une ou plusieurs périodes d’occupation domestique représentées par une gamme étendue d’industries. Les occupants utilisaient céréales, animaux domestiques, produits laitiers et produits sauvages, exploitant les ressources d’un paysage intensément boisé de denses bosquets d’aunes, sur le sol humide de la vallée, et de bois de tilleuls plus loin. Le répertoriage pollinique révèle des trouées de petite taille, qui résultent probablement d’un défrichage périodique pour créer des zones de patûrage et de culture. Les activités du Néolithique, moyen et final, et des peuples à vases incluent d’autres fosses et aussi des monuments funéraires, y compris une des plus riches inhumations des peuples à vases jamais identifiée en dehors du sud de l’Angleterre. Dans un endroit tout proche, d’autres projets ont répertorié un cercle de fosses du milieu du Néolithique moyen, d’autres fosses, des foyers et des trous de poteaux, et des objets manufacturés extrèmement éparpillés. Ceux-ci nous ont fourni la preuve d’une présence humaine de plus en plus visible, signe, peut-être, d’un désir parmi la population locale d’être vue comme ayant des liens avec ce lieu particulier.

A partir du début du IIe millénaire av. J.-C. en années calibrées, existait, au-delà de la plaine inondable, un paysage de plus en plus ouvert et défriché, bien que des périodes de régénération de la forêt soient évidentes. Une population humaine locale occupait sporadiquement la plaine inondable, cette présence est attestée par d’occasionnelles découvertes dans d’anciens cours d’eau et des creux inondés en fonction des saisons. De récents travaux dans des zones de carrières adjacentes à celles qui font l’objet de ce rapport ont révélé des activités de l’âge du bronze moyen autour d’un trou d’eau ainsi que des quantités de matériaux déposés dans d’anciens cours d’eau et couvrant la période des peuples à vases jusqu’à l’âge du bronze final. Les dépôts de la deuxième moitié de cette période comprennent des restes humains et servent d’exemple pour l’utilisation rituelle de la zone, plus tard, à l’âge du fer, pour le dépôt de restes humains et objets manufacturés. A cette période, bien que des zones marécageuses de roseaux et de laîches aient survécu dans les parties les plus humides de la plaine inondable, ce qui restait de la forêt de chênes et d’aunes avait été défriché et des prairies, des pâtures et des aires de terres cultivées couvraient la plus grande partie du fond de la vallée.

Vers la fin de l’âge du Fer, de nouveaux témoignages d’un paysage plus stable et plus cultivé émergèrent sous la forme de limites de champs datant de l’âge du fer final et du début de la période romaine, l’occupation, cependant, semble s’être située en dehors des zones étudiées. D’ici le IIe siècle ap. J.-C., la situation avait considérablement changé, une occupation de bord de cours d’eau s’était établie sur un monticule dans la plaine inondable essentiellement plate. Celle-ci constituait un point focal pour une gamme d’activités agricoles et d’industries de petite échelle concentrées dans et autour d’une ou plusieurs enceintes à fossés et les champs alentour. L’expansion et l’intensification du peuplement pendant tout le IIe et le IIIe siècles conduisirent à l’établissement, avant le IVe siècle, d’un ou de plusieurs bâtiments de pierre bien équipés. Avec les objets manufacturés associés, cela indique qu’au moins certains des habitants avaient adopté une manière de vivre fortement romanisée et qu’ils utilisaient une gamme de produits qu’on ne rencontrerait pas normalement dans les zones rurales de cette région.

Les bâtiments et l’occupation semblent avoir été abandonnés avant la fin du IVe ou le début du Ve siècle et il n’existe que peu de témoignages d’activité quelconque avant le XIe ou le XIIe siècle. Cependant, deux structures substantielles du VIIIe siècle ont récemment été répertoriées dans une zone de carrières adjacente. On a pu en identifier au moins une comme étant un moulin à eau et il se peut qu’elles aient toutes les deux eu un lien avec le domaine royal de Mercie dont le centre est à Sutton. Malheureusement, ni le pollen, ni les archives géoarchéologiques de la zone décrite dans ce volume ne fournissent assez de détails pour éclairer cette importante période.

Par la suite le paysage médiéval a offert des prairies et peut-titre des friches, en particulier à partir du XIe ou XIIe siècle, période pour laquelle nous avons des témoignages d’inondations de plus en plus régulières. Cependant, de vastes étendues de sillons et billons sont également présentes au fond de la vallée. Avec les fours pour sécher le blé et leurs indices associés, ils indiquent qu’au moins jusqu’aux XIIe–XIVe siècles les terres labourables ont continué à jouer un rôle important dans l’économie locale. Parmi les activités qui ont suivi, on compte un lavoir à moutons datant du XVIIIe siècle, tandis que les noms de champs et les indices cartographiques témoignent d’un paysage enclos de pâtures et de prairies indiquant qu’on s’éloigne de la culture arable pendant la période post-médiévale, une évolution qui a perduré jusqu’à ce qu’on se lance dans l’ extraction de minerais.

Acknowledgements

This project is the result of the work of many individuals over the years, all of whom have played their part in getting the most out of often difficult circumstances.

First and foremost among these, we would like to thank Denis Finch, who was the Quarry Manager throughout most of this period and who sadly died before this report was completed. His kind co-operation, interest, support and dry humour did much to ensure the success of the project.

The original quarry company, Redlands Aggregates Limited and their successors, Lafarge Aggregates Limited gave access to the quarry and financial support for the fieldwork, both of which were provided between 1986 and 1996 on a voluntary basis. Their generosity and cooperation have done much to allow the work to be undertaken and particular thanks must go to Nigel Weir and Ross Halley from these companies for their co-operation and support.

Ron Shoesmith, Director of the City of Hereford Archaeology Committee, played a key role in initially visiting and recognising the site and subsequently drawing its attention to the County Archaeological Officer.

From English Heritage, several Ancient Monuments Inspectors have played their part including not only Anthony Streeten who supported the original recognition of the significance of the site, but also his successors Kate Clarke, Sue Cole and Dr Paul Stamper. Successive unit monitors and other English Heritage staff have also played their part including Tony Wilmott, Alex Gibson, Kathy Perrin, Kath Buxton and Helen Keeley.

Adrian Tindall, Malcolm Cooper, Malcolm Atkin and Keith Ray, successive County Archaeological Officers, have initiated programmes of work, supported the project and negotiated with the quarry operators throughout. Nick Dean from the Minerals Planning Department has also provided much proactive advice over the years as well as showing considerable interest in our findings.

From the Field Section, particular thanks go to the Project Managers, Field Officers and Site Supervisors who have led the fieldwork at various times and without whose professionalism none of this would have been possible: Tony Clark, Duncan Brown, James Dinn, Rachel Edwards, Luke Fagan, John Hemingway, Mike Napthan, Dominic Shelley, Nigel Topping, Simon Woodiwiss and David Wichbold.

Other site staff have included at various times amongst others: Jeremy Bretherton, Ruth Bruniges, Robert Burrows, Rodney Cotterill, Dave Cox, Paul Godbehere, Pat Marsden, Andy Towle and Nick Vaughan.

During post-excavation many colleagues have provided advice and encouragement, amongst whom we would particularly like to thank Hal Dalwood, Derek Hurst and Simon Woodiwiss, the latter of whom successfully managed the fieldwork for many years on a very tight budget. Claire de Rouffignac, Stephanie Ratkai and Annette Hancocks all played important roles in the processing, quantification and preliminary analysis of the artefactual and ecofactual assemblages.

Mention must also go to Simon Griffin, Laura Griffin and Adam Mindykowski who have provided essential support in developing and undertaking the digital mapping and associated databases which have provided a key tool in analysing and presenting the results of the project.

Lastly many thanks must go to the post-excavation team who have helped to produce this report, to the external referee who provided many constructive comments and to Sarah Phear who provided an invaluable final checking through of the text. Individual text sections have been attributed to author where relevant. The remainder of the report was produced by Robin