West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 1: Jackson
1
Pits, Pots, Places and People: approaching the Neolithic at
Wellington Quarry
Robin Jackson
Worcestershire Archaeological Service
Rjackson@worcestershire.gov.uk
Background
Archaeological investigations by Worcestershire Archaeological Service have been
undertaken since 1986 at Wellington Quarry, Herefordshire, on behalf of Lafarge Redland
Aggregates Ltd. The quarry is located at NGR SO 508 479 and lies between the villages of
Marden and Wellington, 7 kms north of Hereford. It is situated on the broad floodplain of the
River Lugg, to the west of the river and adjacent to one of its tributaries, the Wellington
Brook. Slight undulations in the modern pasture fields reflect former courses of the Lugg or
the Wellington Brook. Approximately 52 ha of quarrying have been completed at the time of
writing.
Initial interest focussed on Romano-British structures and deposits, first recognised in 1986,
which led to the site forming a major focus of an English Heritage funded project, the
Hereford Valleys Survey. This carried out research into techniques for identifying and
evaluating deeply alluviated sites (Dinn & Roseff 1992), alongside which research for a
doctoral thesis examined the nature of the alluvium and associated palaeochannel (Roseff
1992). Limited programmes of salvage recording and interim reporting followed until 1996,
when a detailed programme of salvage recording commenced, informed and directed by the
PPG16 led planning process.
Using the results and the lessons from Wellington, this paper explores:
 The nature of the palaeoenvironmental and alluvial sequence;
 The evidence for Neolithic and Beaker period activity recorded within this sequence;
 The character of this activity and its impact on the local environment;
 Its contribution to the wider understanding of patterns of earlier prehistoric activity in the
region;
 The methodological and curatorial difficulties of approaching such sites.
The evidence
The alluvial sequence
A working model for the development of deposits in the Lugg Valley has been established
over the years. This indicates that the late Glacial Lugg basin was crossed by a pattern of
braided streams, which laid down deep gravel beds (Terra Nova 2002). Gradually the Lugg
rationalised into fewer channels and finally into a single channel which today runs east of the
quarry. At least one major former channel and numerous smaller channels survived as
sinuous depressions within the quarry. The deepest of these probably remained as seasonal
streams and all were gradually filled by silt and clay during overbank flooding.
West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 1: Jackson
2
Overbank flooding has deposited a significant accumulation of alluvium across the whole
floodplain. Over a long period of time this has in some places raised the valley floor by over
2 metres. This alluvium comprises three basic units, although more complex deposits tend to
be present over depressions in the underlying gravel. The different units of alluvium appear,
however, to reflect simple stratigraphic variations resulting from a range of processes. These
include differences in parent material, in the way and speed at which they were deposited,
and in post-depositional processes. These have considerably affected the appearance and
survival of alluvial and archaeological deposits as well as removing much of the associated
stratigraphy. Consequently, it is only by understanding these processes that we can hope to
understand the archaeological deposits contained within the sequence.
Finally, quite different deposits occupying former channels occasionally interrupt the basic
sequence. These are usually coarser and occasionally include pottery, bone and charcoal.
Some contain waterlogged peat and organic rich deposits towards their base. These have been
extensively sampled for environmental analysis.
The palaeoenvironmental evidence
Analysis and assessment of pollen from two monoliths taken from palaeochannels has
produced evidence of environmental change in the valley floor. The first of these was taken
from an early course of the River Lugg (dated c.14400-11700 cal BC; Brown & Hatton 2001)
but it is the second which is of relevance to this paper. This was recovered from deposits in
an early post-glacial course of the Lugg. Assessment of a pollen sample from this major
palaeochannel (Greig 2002) has revealed the following sequence:

Woodland at c.6800 BP (5000 BC) with alder carr in the valley base and oak, lime and
elm beyond.

At c.5000 BP (3000 BC), oak charcoal and the slight presence of cereal and plantain
suggest first human impact, but in very wooded environment of lime, oak, elm and hazel.
Local environment is of wetland with alder, hazel, elder, sloe and a range of herbs.

Phases of clearance and increasing signs of arable farming follow but it is not until
considerably later that there are signs of elm decline and then oak and lime with cereals,
grasses and grassland indicators increasing.

The sequence ends with alluvium filling the upper levels of the former channel. This can
be broadly dated to the later first millennium AD.
Along with waterlogged plant macrofossil remains, coleoptera and molluscan remains,
analysis of this sample should provide a detailed model for the environmental history of the
Lugg Valley from the Mesolithic onwards.
The Early Neolithic pit group
A group of 13 Neolithic pits provide the most important evidence for early human activity at
the quarry (although a small quantity of Mesolithic material attests to earlier activity). The
pits are all circular to sub-circular. They measure between 0.60 and 1.24 metres across and up
to 0.50 metres deep, although some truncation may have occurred. The pits had steep sloping
sides or were slightly ‘bag-shaped’.
West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 1: Jackson
3
The associated pottery assemblage comprised nearly 1000 sherds, weighing almost 10 kg.
The majority was present in two of the pits, with approximately 20 vessels in one and about
10 in the other. Three others also produced limited quantities. The pottery is in a quartz
tempered fabric with variable quantities of temper present (Gibson 2002). Surface finish
varies with some sherds having large angular quartz inclusions breaking the surface and
readily visible. Others are, however, well-finished with burnished surfaces. The vessels
represented are open and carinated bowls, occasionally with fluted rims. They are typical of
the bowl traditions of the 4th millennium BC, which are widespread over Britain, Ireland and
continental Europe.
The pits rich in pottery also included broken quartz pebbles, some apparently burnt and
crushed. These closely resembled the principal temper used. This raises the potential that
pottery was manufactured at the site, a possibility supported by presence of three stone
burnishers or smoothers.
Ten pits contained flint with a total assemblage of 443 pieces and numerous unquantified
spalls from sieved samples. Most of the flint was good quality material which, allied to a
paucity of core preparation flakes, suggests that prepared cores might have been imported to
the site (Bellamy 2002). Diagnostic retouched forms include leaf-shaped arrowheads, a
serrated flake, scrapers and flake knives, which are consistent with the dating, provided by
the pottery. The assemblage provides evidence of a range of activities including flint
knapping, hunting, the preparation of foodstuffs and the working of other materials.
Although conditions of preservation for animal bone were poor, cattle, pig and sheep or goat
were represented in small quantities. Charred plant remains were also present, including
hazelnut shells and a small quantity of cereal, which where identifiable was emmer wheat.
Later Neolithic pits
Further pits and associated features provide evidence of later Neolithic (associated with
Peterborough ware) and Beaker period activity. The Peterborough ware was in a quartztempered fabric and represents two vessels, probably of the Mortlake substyle. Beaker and
possibly earlier pottery has also been recovered as residual material in Late Bronze Age
dumps in former channels/ponds.
Funerary deposits
A ring-ditch fragment was identified to the north of the Early Neolithic pit group. This had
been machine truncated but a 7 metre length of the ditch survived. This produced a rim from
a Fengate substyle vessel. This probably dates to c.3000 cal BC. Further potential ringditches were identified to the east and are also present to the north as cropmarks.
The most significant burial is an intact Bell Beaker grave dating to c.2750-2500 BC
(Harrison, Jackson & Napthan 1999). The grave contained a poorly-preserved crouched adult
inhumation and had no signs of a ditch or barrow. Apart from a complete Maritime All-OverOrnamented Bell Beaker, the grave contained a tanged copper knife, a shale wristguard
fragment, four barbed and tanged arrowheads, three arrowhead blanks, three flint knives, two
triangular points or small daggers and four flint flakes. Different states of wear and
completeness indicate that the items had different biographies and had been carefully selected
either because of their resonance to the deceased or those who selected them.
West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 1: Jackson
4
Spreads of Neolithic and Beaker material
Aside from the pits and funerary features, a scatter of Neolithic and Beaker material
including both barbed and tanged and leaf-shaped arrowheads, knives and scrapers, polished
axe fragments and a pebble hammer have been recorded from alluvial deposits and as
unstratified material. Pottery has also been recovered including some whipped cord maggot
decorated sherds. These finds attest to widespread use during the early prehistoric period of
virtually the whole of landscape covered by the quarry.
The character and importance of the activity
In terms of understanding funerary monuments, Wellington adds little to the regional picture.
Although the Beaker burial is one of wealthiest in region and indicates the importance of the
site to the prehistoric population, it is an isolated find while the ring-ditches are poorly
preserved and no burials have been recovered. More important evidence lies in the Early
Neolithic pit group, the associated palaeoenvironmental assemblage, and the longevity and
changing use of the landscape represented. A number of areas of regional research potential
can be identified:
1. The Early Neolithic pits at Wellington provide one of the best examples of this type of
site for the period. Pits, such as these, are encountered on sites with little or no other
evidence of contemporary occupation or other activities. These features typically have
single fills and varied patterns of apparently carefully selected cultural material (Thomas
1999, 64). These provide a primary form of evidence for settlement representing
temporary camps or seasonal bases at which structures were only flimsily constructed and
at which repeated occupations may have occurred (Whittle 1999, 64).
2. Wellington provides an example of a place that appears to have developed a domestic or
social significance for the local population during the Neolithic, thus attracting episodes
of occupation over a long period of time. Unlike contemporary ceremonial sites, there
was no obvious attempt at formalising space or inscribing a presence on the landscape at
such sites. However, as a repeatedly used space they appear to have developed symbolic
importance as a place, either as a result of attachment of memories, usefulness,
superstition or even observation of the traces of previous occupants.
3. The material assemblages provide an opportunity to examine a significant assemblage of
cultural material of this date in the region. They also provide an opportunity to consider
local systems of belief and practice through study of relatively large and securely
stratified assemblages of material. Some pits contain apparently nothing (although of
course organic remains may have been present), yet other seemingly similar features
include large quantities of artefacts. Such selective depositional practice can be viewed as
a means of using the material world to create a specific meaning for a place or event and
thus perhaps formalise a connection between people and place or even transform the way
it was perceived (Thomas 1999, 87, 224). Another possibility is that the burial or planting
of material culture in disturbed ground reflects an attempt to ensure the continuation of
supply of resources (Gibson 1999). In other words these items might have been perceived
as having lifecycles similar to plants. Consequently, these had to be maintained and
encouraged through returning them to the earth from which they derived in the hope of
‘renewal, regeneration and return’ (Edmonds 1999, 29).
4. Wellington provides an opportunity for examining issues of continuity or discontinuity,
West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 1: Jackson
5
through comparison with earlier sites and practices. A strong sense of continuity from the
Mesolithic can be suggested, for instance in the transient nature of occupation and
repeated possibly symbolic use of certain sites (Mithen 1999, 51; Whittle 1999, 59).
Furthermore, Mesolithic sites with pits and tree-throws containing material culture are
common and certain elements of deliberate deposition and selection might be suggested.
This may indicate that, although Neolithic activity often occurs in apparently previously
unused areas and uses a more extensive and complex repertoire of material, their use in
some respects may reference earlier belief systems and practices.
5. Comparison may also be made with later sites. An increasing complexity in the range,
patterns and manner of material deposition extends throughout the Neolithic. As well as
reflecting a degree of continuity, analysis of artefactual and ecofactual assemblages from
a range of sites has the potential to reveal how the use and deposition of material
assemblages was modified and elaborated through time according to local conditions and
strategies (Thomas 1999, 222).
6. The association of early prehistoric occupation deposits at Wellington with a
palaeoenvironmental and alluvial sequence means that the site has high potential to reveal
evidence for local economic strategies and resource exploitation. Evidence is also present
for local and wider human impact on the landscape, for instance through episodes of
woodland clearance and the introduction of cereals, the charred remains of which have
been recorded in the Early Neolithic pit group.
The regional context
Locally, few sites have produced Neolithic pits and those identified are mostly of Middle to
Late Neolithic date. Sites with Early Neolithic plain ware assemblages are rare, but include
Warwick, Baginton, Sharpstones Hill and Bromfield, as well as recently discovered sites near
Hereford (Keith Ray pers comm), and at Church Lawford Area ‘D’ and King’s Newnham
Area ‘C’ in Warwickshire (Stuart Palmer pers comm). However, these assemblages and
associated material are not of comparable size and range to that from Wellington (although
Warwick, published only in interim form, has produced a large assemblage).
The range and quantity of Early Neolithic material from Wellington is thus unparalleled in
the West Midlands and has great importance for the study of regional material culture,
strategies and practice, as well as for comparison with both Mesolithic and later Neolithic
sites in the region. Charred cereals, collected plant foods and evidence of domesticates
provide additional data on the use and availability of resources at the site. Associated
palaeoenvironmental and alluvial sequences have the potential to provide significant
information on the exploitation and adaptation of the wider environment. Since no
comparable sequences have been recovered from the West Midlands, these considerably add
to the regional research potential of the site.
Wellington is also of importance for understanding wider patterns of Neolithic activity in the
region, supporting evidence from other sites for trends in practice. At Moele Brace and
Bromfield pit groups represent the first human activity identified. These have been
interpreted as ‘the first marking out’ of sites which later assume importance as burial sites
(Hughes and Buteux 1995). This initial inscription of a landscape can be seen at Wellington,
where the site’s importance extends over several millennia, to include Beaker, Late Bronze
Age, Iron Age, Romano-British and early medieval activity. The choice of location at a
West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 1: Jackson
6
confluence is also echoed at Bromfield and other sites and may be significant.
Within the region where Neolithic pits provide the earliest evidence of activity, as at
Wellington, Meole Brace and Bromfield (as well as several sites in the Central Severn
Valley), there is no evidence for the development of communal ceremonial or monumental
complexes. Indeed there are very few such sites in the Central Severn Valley or the
Herefordshire Basin as a whole. However, they are represented in adjacent upland areas and
in the Avon Valley to the east where early pits often accompany or ‘mark out’ sites which
develop as ceremonial complexes such as Barford. This pattern reflects that of the Upper
Thames Valley (Hingley 1999) where clusters of monuments occur along the length of the
river, particularly at confluences (Thomas 1999). Aerial photographic evidence suggests that
this pattern can be extended into the area of the Worcestershire Avon but no further. This
absence may reflect archaeological coverage or masking by alluvium. However, broad areas
of gravel terrace are present and extensive aerial photographic coverage has produced many
cropmark complexes (eg. Whimster 1987). Thus the paucity of evidence for early monument
complexes may be a true phenomenon. One possibility is that there were different cultural
groupings in the Central/Southern Severn Valley and Hereford Basin with their own
diagnostic traditions. Alternatively, the pattern could reflect the use of valley floors as
seasonal grazing areas by communities who also frequented the surrounding uplands where
they constructed larger communal monuments.
Methodology
Sites such as Wellington are rarely encountered and are typically characterised by dispersed
and sometimes deeply buried remains. As a result they pose important methodological
challenges in terms of prospection, recording and analysis.
Fieldwork approaches
Evaluation techniques are particularly important since these provide the basic tool for
identifying and protecting sites. A recent review of evaluation and sampling techniques
considered 8 large area excavations. The one period represented on each was the earlier
prehistoric, even though deposits of this date were not the ‘target’ of the excavations (Hill &
Lacey 2001). From this several observations can be made:
1. Earlier prehistoric sites might be more common than is often assumed.
2. As highlighted by the survey, higher trenching sample levels than the commonly applied
2% should be used on to improve chances of detection of sites especially where dispersed
and ephemeral remains were anticipated (Hey & Lacey 2001, 48-51). One suggested
approach is the use of an initial 3-4 % sample with further problem-oriented investigation
to follow (ibid, 51).
For alluviated sites additional problems exist, since remains may be deeply buried. A number
of techniques have been adopted at Wellington and other sites. These include:
1. Wide trenches should be encouraged to enable sufficient areas of deeply buried horizons
to be examined and thereby improve chances of revealing deposits relating to early
prehistoric human activity.
2. Trenching should be both preceded and supplemented by the use of borehole data, test
West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 1: Jackson
7
pits, augering and geoarchaeological specialists to facilitate deposit modelling and
assessment of potential areas of activity.
On alluviated sites the need to comprehend the alluvial sequence has a number of
implications for any mitigation strategies developed following evaluation (over and above
those normally applied):
1. In areas of higher potential, an archaeologically-determined approach to overburden
stripping should be adopted which provides alternating long sections and areas in plan.
The areas revealed in plan provide ‘normal’ conditions for the identification and
investigation of deposits while the long sections allow recording of the alluvial sequence.
2. The depth of stripping to reveal areas in plan may need to be varied, as the depths at
which archaeological remains occur can vary widely across a valley floor. The process
should be informed by the evidence from the long sections and the previous strip.
Provision should be made for excavation to more than one plan horizon during any one
strip since significant deposits may occur at different levels within one area.
3. Alluvium recording is specialised, usually requiring the availability of a geoarchaeologist
on site. This is expensive and impractical in that few specialists are available and sites are
often worked over many months each year. At Wellington, David Jordan of Terra Nova
has worked with the field team to create a system for recording alluvial sequences and
trained them to use it. In brief, the deposits revealed in section are drawn, and detailed
alluvial profiles are recorded at regular intervals using specially designed pro-forma.
Alongside a ‘traditional’ context-based stratigraphic record, these provide details of
subtle variations in sediment structure, ped structure, staining, mottling, panning, coatings
and evidence of rooting, cracking and worm action. Photographs, box samples and
monoliths are taken to accompany the record. Periodic visits by the specialist team ensure
that the system is being properly used and that atypical alluvial strata can be examined.
This ensures that the resultant archive can be used to determine whether the boundaries of
texture and colour relate to parent material, depositional, or post-depositional processes,
rather than conventional archaeological interpretations of apparent stratigraphy.
4. Contingencies allow for the excavation and recording of any areas of important
archaeological deposits revealed. Since these are often isolated and comprise small single
filled features they can be relatively rapidly excavated with bulk sampling ensuring the
maximum retrieval of artefacts and ecofacts.
Post-fieldwork approaches
There are also challenges in analysis and interpretation of early prehistoric deposits and
associated cultural material. One example is the development of a detailed understanding of
the biographies of artefacts, for instance through pottery residue analysis and flint microwear
analysis. Dating is also important as the introduction and longevity of ceramic traditions can
be variable between regions. Overall the lesson is that it is important that a wide range of
techniques are used to analyse early prehistoric sites that produce high quality artefactual and
ecofactual assemblages. Naturally this has implications for funding which need to be taken
into account. However, the potential of such approaches has been demonstrated regionally at
Walton Basin in Radnorshire (Gibson 1999). Here examination of Peterborough Ware and
Grooved Ware assemblages has revealed different uses and ranges of activity associated with
West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 1: Jackson
8
the different pottery styles, despite similar contexts of deposition. This implies that different
social practices and strategies may have been employed in circumstances which otherwise
appear similar.
Management approaches
Lastly, informed decisions are needed by archaeologists involved in the process of
evaluation, investigation and protection of such sites. At Wellington, co-operation between
Curator and Contractor has been a key factor in the development of appropriate strategies.
Elsewhere, personal experience and anecdotal evidence suggest that problems arise from a
poor understanding of the character, importance and potential of early prehistoric sites
(especially those sites where funerary practices or major ceremonial features are not present).
Whether this comes from Curators, Consultants or Contractors, it is clearly poor for the
image of the profession, not to mention the proper management, protection or investigation of
the archaeology, if there is conflicting understanding of the potential of a site.
References
Bellamy, P, 2002 The flint. In Jackson, R & Edwards, R, 2002 Wellington Quarry, Marden,
Herefordshire (1986-96): assessment and updated project design. Worcestershire County
Archaeological Service, P1564, unpublished typescript
Brown, AG, & Hatton, J, 2001 Pollen analysis of palaeochannel (5603) sediments from
Wellington Quarry (School of Geography and Archaeology, University of Exeter)
Dinn, J & Roseff, R, 1992 Alluvium and archaeology in the Herefordshire Valleys.In
Needham, S & Macklin, MG (eds), Alluvial Archaeology in Britain (Oxford: Oxbow
Monograph 27), 141-51
Edmonds, M, 1999 Ancestral geographies of the Neolithic: landscapes, monuments and
memory (London: Routledge)
Gibson, A, 1999 The Walton Basin Project: excavation and survey in a prehistoric
landscape (CBA Res Rep 118)
Gibson, A, 2002 The Neolithic pottery. In Jackson, R & Edwards, R, 2002 Wellington
Quarry, Marden, Herefordshire (1986-96): assessment and updated project design.
Worcestershire County Archaeological Service, P1564, unpublished typescript
Greig, J, 2002 Pollen assessment. In Jackson, R & Edwards, R, 2002 Wellington Quarry,
Marden, Herefordshire (1986-96): assessment and updated project design. Worcestershire
County Archaeological Service, P1564, unpublished typescript
Harrison, RJ, Jackson, R & Napthan, M, 1999 A rich bell Beaker burial from Wellington
Quarry, Marden, Herefordshire, Oxford J Arch, 18, 1-16
Hey, G & Lacey, M, 2001 Evaluation of archaeological decision-making processes and
sampling strategies (Kent County Council)
West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 1: Jackson
Hingley, R, 1996 Prehistoric Warwickshire: a review of the evidence, Trans Birmingham
Warwickshire Arch Soc, 100, 1-24
Jackson, R & Edwards, R, 2002 Wellington Quarry, Marden, Herefordshire (1986-96):
assessment and updated project design. Worcestershire County Archaeological Service,
P1564, unpublished typescript
Mithen, S, 1999 Hunter Gatherers of the Mesolithic. In Hunter, J & Ralston, I (eds), The
Archaeology of Britain (London: Routledge)
Roseff, R, 1992 A Study of Alluviation in the River Lugg Catchment, Herefordshire. PhD
thesis, University of Birmingham
Terra Nova, 2002 A geoarchaeological evaluation of deposits at Wellington Quarry,
Hereford
Thomas, J, 1999 Understanding the Neolithic (London: Routledge)
Whimster, R, 1987 The emerging past: air photography and the buried landscape
Whittle, A, 1999 The Neolithic period. In Hunter, J & Ralston, I (eds), The Archaeology of
Britain (London: Routledge)
9