Printed from the APC web site: navigation and non-essential images removed.
Please view on-line for full content (URL at end of document).
A preliminary archaeological survey of the area of the proposed quarry was commissioned by Tilcon Limited in July 1991. This concluded that the recorded archaeology of the site was of a minor character and should not constitute a major constraint on any proposed development. It did, however, identify an area of pasture and peat, known as the Flasks, where it was considered that the potential existed for important palaeoenvironmental data to survive.
As a consequence an additional scheme of work was initiated to investigate the Flasks' area. This included an initial peat sample with the objective of establishing its condition and an evaluation of its potential for palaeoenvironmental and archaeological data. The survey confirmed that it was of significance as it represented a phragmites peat which had developed in the early post glacial period and continued to form until the Boreal period.
The archaeological significance of the peat was identified when a small quantity of flint artefacts and flakes was found in the upper peat deposit indicating a phase of human activity potentially stratified within the peat horizons. An associated field survey suggested, however, that this is a localised, and possibly transient, activity.
Despite the extremely restricted extent of the flint deposit it is proposed to identify the whole of the area of peat and its immediate shorelines as one of potential archaeological significance. It is therefore recommended that development of this area should only be implemented after a detailed scheme of archaeological and palaeoenvironmental analysis and investigation has been agreed with the Local Planning Authority and carried out to their satisfaction.
In view of the minor nature of the archaeology of the remainder of the area it is recommended that the Local Planning Authority should be given notice of proposals to topsoil strip and afforded access during and after topsoil stripping to permit them to undertake any archaeological recording which they may consider necessary and appropriate.
The area proposed for mineral extraction lies to the north of the B6267 and encompasses an area of gently sloping ground falling northwards towards a stream known as the Ings Goit. The surface of the area is generally gently undulating with a number of very small hillocks and intervening gullies. The whole surface suggests that the area consists of glacial deposits dissected by later water courses. The presence of the peat, and evidence from aerial photographs and placenames underlines this interpretation and suggest that the areas adjacent to the Ings Goit and around Lingham Hills may well have remained poorly drained until relatively recent times.
The majority of the site is currently under arable cultivation, including cereal and root crops. There is one major area of permanent pasture known as the Flasks. Surface evidence would suggest that some effort may have been made in the recent past to improve this area through drainage though there is none to suggest that it has ever been heavily cultivated.
The assessment of the archaeological potential of the area at Nosterfield which is proposed for quarrying included an examination of the records held by the North Yorkshire County Site and Monuments Record, the County Archives, local history collections, aerial photographic sources, ground inspection and sampling of the area known as the Flasks. The work was undertaken between July 1991 and January 1992.
The initial study was limited to an examination of the documentary evidence and records held by the County Sites and Monuments Record. This indicated that only a limited amount of archaeological evidence was known from the site. Field survey and information contained in a soil survey undertaken in 1987, however, identified an area of pasture known as the Flasks as having possible palaeoenvironmental significance. The peat deposits in the area were considered to have the potential to cast light on the impact of man on the surrounding area, in particular the agrarian changes of the Neolithic.
As a consequence the area of the Flasks was subjected to a general surface survey including, in addition to the pasture, an area of arable; the collection and sieving of samples of eroded and disturbed peat; the extraction of a 1 metre monolith; and a surface and sub-surface contour survey of the peat.
The reported archaeology of the area is dominated by the three late Neolithic or early Bronze Age henges which are laid out along a north-west to south-east axis to the south-east of the village of Nosterfield. These three monuments, scheduled as ancient monuments, are merely the most obvious components in a once extensive prehistoric ritual complex which also contained at least one cursus, a number of major pit alignments and scatters of burial monuments.
The boundaries of this complex are relatively well defined to the west and south by the River Ure. Its eastern boundary has never been adequately defined, however, and may extend several miles towards the Al to include the henges at Hutton and Cana and the standing stones known as the Devil's Arrows near Boroughbridge. Its northern boundary was almost certainly the wet lands along the Ings Goit which also forms the approximate northern boundary of the area proposed for mineral extraction. As a consequence it must be assumed that the area of the proposed extraction lies within, though probably at the extreme margins of, the main prehistoric ritual landscape.
Evidence for later prehistoric activity is very limited though it is possible that some of the field systems, trackways and small settlements which have been revealed on the Magnesian Limestone may date to the Iron Age, or Romano British periods. The villa at South Stainley and the possible villa or temple at Well clearly indicate a relatively high degree of Romanisation in the area.
The archaeological evidence for Anglo Saxon and Danish exploitation is equally limited though the possible two cemeteries, one pagan and one Christian, near Carthorpe, underline the strong evidence from place names. Taking the evidence of the Domesday Survey it would appear that most of the settlement elements had been established by the late Saxon period.
The foundation of the village of Nosterfield, however, appears to be relatively late in date since it is not mentioned in the Domesday Survey and the earliest traceable documentary reference is one of 1204. At that time it was identified as Nosterfeld, which in old English means 'at the sheep fold field'. This probably indicates that in the Early Middle Ages the area was given over to sheep rearing and that the village is a relatively late development.
Its creation was possibly associated with the general expansion of agricultural exploitation and settlement in the 12th and 13th centuries when an improvement in climate aided the reclamation of land which had previously been marginal. By 1301 Nosterfield had grown to become a small settlement of at least eight households which were valued for tax purposes as higher than a number of neighbouring settlements, including Thornborough.
Evidence from place names, such as the Flasks, Ings Goit and Snape Mires, points to the fact that substantial areas of ground were wet and boggy. These probably remained unattractive to settlement even when the climatic improvements and population pressures gave an impetus to colonising previously marginal land.
The present landscape of the area is probably partly medieval in origin with a large element of post medieval land enclosure. With little or no exception it remains unchanged since it was portrayed on an enclosure map of 1799.
The presence of the prehistoric monuments has attracted considerable interest from archaeologists for many years, most recently as part of programmes of routine survey from the air. The relatively small amounts of archaeological field work which have been reported have concentrated on the cursus and barrows and largely been a response to threats to these sites either from agricultural activity or mineral extraction. Most recent work has been a direct response to the continuing programmes of permitted mineral extraction in the area.
It is through the medium of aerial photography that our knowledge of the character and extent of the archaeology associated with the henges has been most developed. This has happened despite the area being close to, and partially affected by, an area of military flying restrictions. In fact the area around Nosterfield and Thornborough is, according to the records held by the County SMR, one of the most intensively flown and most productive areas in North Yorkshire.
The archaeological aerial photographic coverage of the proposed quarry area is, despite this general intensity, remarkably limited and consists largely of oblique photographs which were taken more to illustrate the general archaeological landscape rather than to identify specific archaeological features.
The area of the proposed mineral extraction is not recorded as having any archaeological features which have been or are currently visible as upstanding earthworks.
Prior to the current survey the archaeological evidence of the area of the proposed mineral extraction was dominated by an area of former fields immediately to the north of the village of Nosterfield. These are visible as the remains of ditches identifiable from aerial photographs and at least in part appear to represent a system of enclosed fields which predate the present system, NYCC SMR SE 28 APs 44 and 46. The sinuous line of some of the main north/south boundaries suggests a medieval date. The main elements of the present field layout is at least 18th century in date and may represent a late medieval or post medieval enclosure of former common or open fields. It seems less likely that the earlier ditched field system relates to pre-medieval exploitation of the area.
The County Record makes reference to a possible small enclosed ditched feature in the area of the Lingham Hills. Unfortunately the relevant photograph was not traceable, NYCC SMR SE 28 AP 27, when the SMR was inspected.
The area in question is in fact an area of undulating ground and contains a number of small hillocks and depressions. The Ordnance Survey map indicates that it has been an area of marshy heathland during the present century. Such ground conditions might well give rise to natural features which could be mistaken, certainly on a low level oblique aerial photograph, for an archaeological feature. A more recent series of non-archaeological photographs, Airfotos C 9108-2810, clearly shows a mass of small geological marks in the Lingham Hills area.
A further series of ditches visible on aerial photographs and marked on the SMR maps undoubtedly relate to relatively modern drainage, NYCC SMR SE 28 AP 52. They can be traced as extant features immediately to the north of the proposed site running down to the Ings Goit.
Survey and probably represents agricultural expansion of the 12th century it is unlikely that there will be any Saxon settlement in the immediate area.
Field inspection of the area of the proposed quarry in July and August 1991 showed that the site was the subject of a number of different cultivation practices with part under cereal cultivation and others under root crop. Had the area been under a fixed regime of cultivation over the last twenty years the different potential of these crops to produce marks might have been considered to be a significant factor in the development of the archaeological record. It is clear, however, from a comparison of past aerial photographic records and current, 1991, crop regimes that a system of rotation has been practised.
It is, therefore, unlikely that any area would have been constantly under a crop regime which would have precluded or limited the formation of cropmarks. The repetitive nature of aerial survey of the general area around the henges should have meant that any significant formation of cropmarks in the proposed quarry area would have been recorded. It seems reasonable to assume that the limited nature of the aerial photographic evidence is a true reflection of the limited amount of archaeology existing in that area.
A soil survey of the Rushwood Estate undertaken in 1987 identified an area of peat associated with soils assigned to the Colthrop series. Regrettably the published information apparently related to only a single test pit in the Flasks' area. It was impossible from this information to establish whether the peat represented the fill of a series of small hollows and undulations or formed part of a more extensive area of water such as a lake or major water course.
It was obvious, however, that given its proximity to the major prehistoric complex centred on the henges that it might contain indicators of human activity in the area. As a potential source of palaeoenvironmental data it was considered that it could add substantially to an understanding of the chronology and processes of land clearance and exploitation associated with the development of the henges and their predecessors. Examination of the available geological and aerial photographic evidence suggested that it was unlikely that other potential areas would be identified in closer proximity to the main monument complex.
It was not clear from the available evidence if the potential of the peat to contain palaeoenvironmental data was real or had been in any way lessened or even removed by continued drainage of the general area both for agricultural and quarrying purposes. It was deemed essential to establish the current condition of the peat.
A monolith was, therefore, removed in October 1991 from the site and taken away for examination. It was clear from the initial examination in the field that the peat was relatively well preserved, though not waterlogged, and still retained a high potential to produce palaeoenvironmental data. It further established that in this specific area the peat deposit was considerably deeper than had been identified by the earlier soil survey.
Subsequently more detailed analysis of the monolith showed that:
The archaeological potential of the area was also highlighted at the time when the monolith was recovered by the chance discovery of a number of items of flint, including three probable tools and two flakes, on the soil surface close to the test pit. These had been revealed by a collapse in the peat and topsoil which had produced a depression measuring about 3 metres across. They were subsequently identified as probably being of Mesolithic origin.
It was agreed, therefore, to expand the investigation and survey of the area of the peat and adjacent areas of raised dry ground to establish the extent and nature of the peat deposits and examine other areas of ground disturbance for evidence of human activity.
The area of pasture was systematically walked and every disturbance from moles, ditch digging and natural contraction of the peat was examined. Several other depression similar to that which had produced the flint were noted. In no instance was any material identified other than that associated with modern activity.
At 12 separate locations samples of exposed peat/soil were collected and bagged, approximately 2 kilogrammes in each case, and these were taken away for more detailed examination. They were subsequently wet sieved but produced no identifiable artefactual evidence of any period other than some small fragments of modern brick or tile.
An area of arable within the area of the Flasks was also examined at this time. Despite the presence of stubble, ground visibility was reasonable and no artefactual material was identified.
Within the area of pasture a number of minor earthworks were noted. They consisted of linear ditches and appeared to relate to former field boundaries.
Whilst the initial peat survey had established the condition of the peat and surface indications gave some indication of its extent it was not possible to determine how the deposits had formed. The exposure of flint at the surface also raised questions as to the depth and variability of the peat across the site. A sampling programme to determine the extent and subterranean nature of the peat was therefore instigated. This involved an examination of the presumed area of peat using a combination of a soil augur and test pits to establish the relative depths and overall profile of the topsoil, peat and subsoils. This was complemented by a surface contour survey.
This second survey confirmed that:
In addition to establishing the general character of the peat deposit the sampling operation revealed a further two items of flint, both flakes, in the same location as the earlier find. These were found at depths of 100 mm and 340 mm below the surface of the peat.
The results of the peat survey and related fieldwork suggest that the peat is relatively confined in terms of its area and possibly relates originally to a series of channels which cut deep into the silt and later, after a dry period, developed as part of a pool or small lake. The peat certainly extends to the north beyond the area proposed for mineral extraction. It is unclear if this represents a continuation of an expanse of open water or once formed another series of pools.
Deposition of the peat apparently ceased suddenly, possibly during the Later Mesolithic period, and prior to the development of the complex of major prehistoric monuments to the south east of Nosterfield. It is therefore highly unlikely that it will contribute anything to our understanding of the later Neolithic and Early Bronze Age development of the area as a major ritual complex. Its apparently abrupt end may be of considerable significance, however, if it relates either to environmental factors or human influence.
The known importance of the peat deposit lies in its potential to contribute to a better understanding of the post glacial environment of the area. It contains significant plant and other remains which could cast light on the process of climatic and related vegetational change which occurred during this period. The presence of the flint within the peat indicates some degree of human activity in the area, apparently in the Late Mesolithic period, and if this is substantial enough in its scale it is possible that traces of human impact may be recorded in the environmental evidence.
The small assemblage of flint recovered from the peat suggests, both from its position and character, that it was deposited in the Later Mesolithic period. The manner of its deposition is less clear. Its occurrence some considerable distance out onto the surface of the reed swamp, though presumably in very shallow water, and the lack of any other flint from the surrounding areas would indicate that it relates to a short lived activity, possibly the butchery of an animal or simply the loss of a toolkit, rather than any form of more substantial settlement.
The potential for contemporary and more permanent exploitation occurring in the immediate area remains undefined. Evidence from Early Mesolithic sites such as those in the Vale of Pickering shows that they might be expected to occur on the relatively gently sloping shorelines of areas bordering on, or with access, to open water. These settlements also generate very large quantities of waste flint.
Whilst the conditions revealed by the peat survey and the results of the surface and sub-surface examination do not suggest that the general characteristics associated with the more permanent type of Mesolithic site exist in the area of the Flasks the possibility cannot be totally excluded. The occurrence of numerous small tracts of water and reed swamp would certainly have represented an attractive hunting area.
With the exception of the area of peat and the deposit of flint in the Flasks' area, the known and potential archaeological value of the proposed site is low. It is limited to features associated with the agricultural exploitation of the area, all of which appear to date to the medieval or later period. They should not, therefore, constitute any form of constraint on the proposed development.
The peat deposits in the Flask area are without doubt of considerable value in terms of their potential to contribute to a better comprehension of the process of environmental change which succeeded the last glaciation. Though they appear to cease abruptly in the Late Mesolithic period there is some slight possibility that this is as a consequence of human activity such as land clearance. If this was to prove to be the case it would make a dramatic contribution to an understanding of human impact at the transition from hunter gatherer communities to those of farmers.
The peat deposits are, however, not stable. Quarrying to the south of the area, drainage and farming to the north, combined with a prolonged period of low rainfall, are already causing some drying out and shrinkage. The exposure of the flints on the surface appears to be a consequence of such a process, possibly compounded by increased animal activity. It is probable that even if the area remains in its current non-intensive agricultural use contraction and drying will continue with a progressive loss of potential of palaeoenvironmental data. This will be most critical in terms of the upper peat horizons which are most likely to contain the evidence or human activity in the area. Clearly any ploughing of the site or improvements to its drainage would accelerate the destruction and loss of potential.
The circumstances leading to the deposition of the flint are probably highly localised and transient. As such the flint may prove to be relatively insignificant in its own right. Certainly the underlying ground conditions revealed by the peat survey suggest that it would be unlikely to attract the type of settlement known from areas such as the Vale of Pickering for instance. If the site proves to be no more than a small kill or butchery site its impact on the environmental record will have been virtually nil beyond the immediate area of the action.
Despite these caveats it is clear that the areas of peat are significant in terms of their potential to provide palaeoenvironmental evidence of the post glacial period and their loss without an appropriate record would be unacceptable. It is also likely that current land management practices could seriously jeopardise the value of the deposits.
The area of peat in the Flasks' area should be considered as one of potential archaeological and environmental significance. Its inclusion in any programme of development should be conditional upon a detailed and comprehensive scheme of archaeological and palaeoenvironmental study being devised and implemented before development begins. In line with the recommendations in PPG 16 this could be achieved by identifying the area of sensitivity and excluding it from development until such a time as the terms of an appropriate condition have been met. Given that the peat exhibits indications that it is already decaying as a result of both natural and man influenced processes a timetable for such work should constitute an element in any such condition.
The archaeology of the remainder of the site displays little potential for contributing to archaeological studies even of a local nature. It is possible, however, that the Local Planning Authority may wish to have an opportunity to inspect the site during or after periods of topsoil stripping to record any archaeological features which might be revealed by these operations. Such a requirement could be accommodated by provision of a further archaeological condition requiring advanced notice of topsoil stripping and access for approved archaeologists in line with the recommendations in PPG 16.