Printed from the APC web site: navigation and non-essential images removed.
Please view on-line for full content (URL at end of document).

Assessment of the palaeoecological potential of The Flasks, Nosterfield

Antony Long & Jim Innes

Professor Antony Long and Dr Jim Innes,
Department of Geography, Durham University
September 15 th 2005

At the request of Mike Griffiths and Associates, we provide below an assessment of the potential of the Flasks site for further palaeoecological analyses. The area to which our opinion relates is restricted to "The Flasks". The stratigraphic data available to us include the stratigraphy of five test pits in the east of the area (TP1-5), as well as the logs and sediments of a core known as "The Flasks 69", which was retrieved from close to the fence between TP4 and the mound.
We understand that additional boreholes have been completed across the Flasks, and that these identify the near surface peat as a typically thin deposit, less than 0.75 m in most places. Available radiocarbon results from the upper levels of the peat in four of the five test pit locations yielded radiocarbon ages of between 8970±40 BP (TP3) and 9510±50 BP ((TP4). The equivalent age from the "The Flasks 69" was 8725±45 BP. One test pit age (TP2) yielded a modern age.
Visually, the upper levels of the peat observed in the test pit monolith tins appears to have abrupt contacts with the overlying surface material, probably indicating removal or non-deposition of overlying sediments at these sites. This may be because of several processes, including non-deposition, erosion by natural processes (including dessication and agricultural processes), as well as peat cutting. We are unable to resolve which of these processes is the most probable.
We have analysed "The Flasks 69" for pollen analysis at between 3 cm and 5 cm intervals. The sample core covers the period from c. 11,000 to 8700 radiocarbon years BP. We have no reason to believe this is not representative of the ages of the peat in the other test pit samples or elsewhere in The Flasks where thin (<0.75 m) near-surface peats occur. There is no evidence in the pollen record for prehistoric activity at this site, although we note that micro-charcoal is present throughout the profile. On this basis, we have no evidence that early Mesolithic activity existed close to this sample site, although of course such negative environmental evidence can not rule out the possibility of archaeological material existing in the area in question. There is no strong case to increase the sampling interval for the pollen analysis, given the sedimentation rates observed and the changes recorded in communities.
It is our opinion, therefore, that on palaeoecological grounds there is no requirement for further palaeoecological analyses from either "The Flasks 69" or the other Test Pit samples. We also do not consider further palaeoecological analyses of the thin near-surface peats at The Flasks necessary. This opinion is subject to the following two caveats:

That we have not had sight of the additional stratigraphic results from boreholes completed in The Flasks. We note, however, that we were guided to "The Flasks 69" by Mike Griffiths and Associates because previous coring across The Flasks indicated that the deepest sequence of sediments was preserved here. Further test pit data appear to confirm this.
That the topography of the sub-surface across The Flasks may be quite variable. Sink holes are known to exist in the immediate vicinity and these act as important sediment traps throughout the Holocene, including periods of archaeological activity. These features may be small in size (perhaps only a couple of meters across). Their identification will only become obvious following a very dense grid of coring (probably not justifiable), or through a careful watching brief during surface sediment removal. If encountered, such sites should be carefully excavated, sampled, and examined for further palaecological evidence.