Linear banks

1997 saw the excavation of three trenches designed to investigate a sub-rectangular stone banked enclosure and an overlying linear stone bank (see F and P on the plan). The enclosure is situated on sloping ground upon and to the west of the Redmire Flags outcrop. Predating many nearby features, the enclosure was later incorporated into the prehistoric field system which now surrounds it. Fragments of stone banks to the south-east may represent similar but less well-preserved enclosures. The linear bank crosses the shelf at right angles to the topography, stopping at a field system to the west and a peat filled stream gully to the east.

The joint PPJPB and RCHME survey identified the variable character of the enclosure bank along its length, with differing dimensions and styles of build. Some of this variation had been interpreted as the result of robbing for the later linear stone bank. These characteristics were confirmed by excavation, when it became clear that variations in the bank were also a product of the clearance of stone from adjacent areas. Within Trenches 2 and 3, the enclosure bank immediately north of the linear appears to have been very heavily robbed.

To the south of the linear, there is a marked contrast between the eastern (upslope) and western (downslope) sides of the enclosure. The eastern side comprises two outer edges of boulders infilled with smaller stones which becomes wider as it runs north towards the linear. The uniform appearance of its surface and survival in similar condition under the linear suggests that it survives with little or no robbing. Continuing west, between Trenches 1 and 3, the build of the bank appears to change, becoming more ephemeral in character. It is a less-formally built structure in Trench 3 as it approaches the linear bank.

As in Trench 2, the enclosure bank survives in a similar form below the linear, which suggests that we are seeing variation in the build of the enclosure bank rather than robbing per se. An additional feature is also worth noting here. As the bank runs south through Trench 1 and turns to run west, away from the outcrop, excavation revealed an entrance comprising one in-turned and one out-turned bank. This entrance was eventually blocked by a prehistoric stone field bank which runs south along the Redmires Flags ridge. The orientation of the entrance indicates a pattern of access on to a low, more gently sloping section of the outcrop.

Excavation also revealed complex patterns of clearance associated with the enclosure and with the subsequent development of the adjacent field system and linear bank. Soils on either side of the enclosure in Trenches 1 and 3 were cleared of stone and potentially cultivable. In Trench 2, the land had been cleared outside the enclosure and to the north of the linear.

Within the enclosure on the south side of the linear, the soil was densely packed with boulders. Initially at least, stone cleared from within the enclosure appears to have been used in the build of the bank. There are also clearance heaps overlying and against the bank in various places along its eastern side. These appear to have been thrown against or over the bank from outside the enclosure. Also on this side is a linear spread of heavily burnt gritstone cobbles which were added to the outer edge of bank. This material was not burnt in situ.

The entrance to the enclosure was blocked by a linear, discontinuous, stone bank that continues to the south of Trench 1 along the outcrop of Redmires Flags. The line of the bank was moved away from its alignment further south to meet the entrance and appears to have been deliberately widened within the entrance. The excavated stone bank and clearance heaps form part of the field system situated along and adjacent to the outcrop. This system comprises linear clearance banks, clearance cairns, house platforms and the occasional more formally constructed cairn.

The linear bank was investigated at the two locations in Trenches 2 and 3 where it overlay the enclosure bank. The linear changes orientation to form a dog-legged course where it crosses the enclosure. The crossing point is further emphasised in Trench 3 where a gap was left between two off-set lengths of the linear directly on top of the enclosure bank.

Beyond the enclosure in both directions, the linear follows two straight courses. These changes in direction where the linear crosses the enclosure bank imply differences in build. They may be the result of sections being built by different communities. Alternatively, they may indicate that the linear was built towards the enclosure from either side and then connected across the interior. Although it lacked any consistent, formal facing, the linear was constructed by the initial laying-down of stones which formed an edge/edges against which other material was piled.

These initial stones are larger than the rest of the build along its northern side in Trench 3 and its southern side in Trench 2 where large boulders were used. Here again, this variability in construction hints at a stadial or 'gang-like' character to the build. The main body of the linear was then rapidly built as shown by the presence of numerous voids between stones. In Trench 2 the profile of the bank is asymmetrical, with a gentle north-facing slope and a much steeper south-facing edge.

An upright stone was incorporated into the bank immediately downslope of the enclosure bank in Trench 2 which was not visible prior to excavation. A second upright was identified by survey at the eastern end of the linear. The body of the bank post-dates the excavated upright suggesting that it may have been a marker stone for setting out the line of the linear or the remains of a pre-existing stone alignment. This invites parallels with a recently excavated boundary bank at North Ings on the North York Moors, where a line of orthostats was found buried beneath an earthen bank (Vyner, 1995).

Later, a clearance cairn was created on the crest of the linear in Trench 2, sub-rounded gritstone cobbles being added to the pre-existing feature from the northern side. Stones were also added against its north side in Trench 3, perhaps as a result of further clearance. Activity within the enclosure which post-dated the construction of the linear resulted in the formation of a modest lynchet against and over the inner (upslope) side of the enclosure bank. Soil associated with this feature also encroached upon the southern side of the linear. No lynchets or brown earth horizons were present north of the linear in Trench 3. The enclosure bank had also been heavily robbed in this area.

These differences indicate significant contrasts in the character and history of land use on either side of the linear. Two hypotheses can be put forward to account for this difference. On the one hand, the lack of soil to the north may suggest less activity in the area after the linear bank had been constructed. Alternatively, the heavy robbing of the bank in this area may indicate that cultivation or stock husbandry over an extended period eventually led to substantial soil loss. Here again, the results of ongoing soil surveys should allow us to adjudicate between these two models.

Flint, chert and pottery were found in all trenches. Unfortunately, very few artefacts were recovered from secure contexts and only a small number are truly diagnostic of particular periods. These include a fine late Neolithic/early Bronze Age scraper from the interior of the enclosure in Trench 1. Pottery sherds are generally heavily abraded and only occur outside of the enclosure in Trench 2. One rim sherd from this area is likely to be late Bronze Age/early Iron Age in date (Pauline Beswick, pers comm). Other artefacts include a small gritstone hammerstone/burnishing tool and a quern fragment from the enclosure bank in Trench 1 and a saddle quern on the edge of the linear bank in Trench 3.

Taking the evidence discussed above, we have a demonstrable, if complex, sequence of activity in this immediate area. Much of this material hints at an organic reworking of the landscape over time; a piecemeal process which probably unfolded from one year and one generation to another. The only evidence that we have for a more radical break with the past may be the linear bank.

The sub-rectangular enclosure is the earliest feature in our sequence. Although an absolute date for the first phases of construction still eludes us, the patterning of pottery in the area suggests that it was probably established by the middle/later Bronze Age. This structure underwent changes in character and function reflected in the addition of clearance piles, the blocking of the entrance and bisection by the linear bank.

Due to a lack of excavation of surrounding features the character of land-use during the creation and early use of the enclosure is currently unclear. It may have been constructed in relative isolation in an otherwise unenclosed landscape. On the other hand, it may be the best surviving example of a series of similar irregularly shaped conjoined enclosures, traces of which may still exist further to the south-west. Alternatively, the enclosure may be broadly contemporary with the more sub-rectangular fields along the ridge to the north and south, its history of use overlapping with the development of nearby stone banks and other clearance features.

Further work will be needed to elucidate these crucial relationships. The character and position of the entrance could suggest that at an early stage at least, the use of the enclosure involved movement between the immediate area and the clay soils below Birchen Edge. Whether these soils were cultivated at this stage has yet to be determined by ongoing soil survey. However, it may be that the early use of the enclosure was tied to the pounding and management of livestock.

The blocking of the entrance by a stone field bank may indicate that the surrounding field systems developed some time after the enclosure had been established. However, we certainly should not rule out the possibility of some contemporaneity between the two; the blocking of the entrance reflecting a shift in the character of use for the enclosure and/or minor modification to the field systems.

What is clear is that the bank of the enclosure became a focus for the dumping of clearance material associated with cultivation or the improvement of pasture in its environs. The small size of much of this material may favour interpretation as stone moved during hand tillage. The interior may still have been used for livestock or for cultivation at this stage. However, further sampling across the interior will be needed to resolve this issue and to determine whether or not any buildings were ever established within its bounds.

The construction of the linear bank divided the enclosure into two. How this development relates to the surrounding field system is as yet unclear, but clearance onto the linear from the north suggests that at least part of that system was still in use (or used later) after this extensive bank was built. The southern part of the enclosure interior was also used after the linear was built, as evidenced by patterns of soil loss and lyncheting in Trench 3.

This soil movement may have been the result of the pounding of livestock or crop cultivation. The character of this bank invites parallels with linear banks and ditches in areas such as the North York Moors or Salisbury Plain. (Bradley et al. 1994, Spratt 1993, Vyner 1995). Where excavated, many of these features show evidence for a stadial or 'gang-like' construction, and for multiple and varied episodes of recutting, rebuilding and elaboration over time.

The majority also date to a broad period spanning the later Bronze Age and early Iron Age. Whether the bank on Gardom's Edge dates to this same broad phase is still open to debate. However, the fact that it is demonstrably late in our sequence suggests that this may be the case.

The positioning of the bank also raises questions concerning the manner in which communities defined a sense of tenure with the land and their relations with others. Drawing a line which runs from the peat filled stream gully in the East to a cairn field system in the West, this bank effectively divides the moor. Stock continued to be managed and crops were still grown on either side of this feature. Yet it may be that the construction of the bank involved a reworking of customary patterns of movement and activity by different communities. Further work, including detailed surface characterisation, will be needed to develop these arguments beyond the preliminary comments made here.