Nationally significant pits found
Reconstruction the late Mesolithic landscape looking along the Ouzel Brook (by Cecily Marshall)
Perhaps the most exciting discovery within c.100ha of archaeological investigations undertaken by Albion in advance of the Linmere development to the north of Houghton Regis is that of a dozen large Mesolithic pits. This was an unexpected discovery and is highly significant given the rarity of features of this period – they represent the largest group of such features found to date in England.
A total of 12 large pits are believed to date to the late Mesolithic period. Four contained suitable material and returned late Mesolithic radiocarbon dates but the similarity in form and location of the other eight pits suggests that they are likely to be contemporary. The presence of features of this date had not been predicted by the evaluation and, due to the absence of typologically late Mesolithic artefacts, the pits’ dates were not known at the time of hand excavation. Following the radiocarbon dating, a preliminary report was immediately produced for circulation to other organisations undertaking fieldwork in the area to flag up the significance of the results. Partly because of this, MOLA identified additional large pits on an adjacent excavation, three of which were radiocarbon-dated to the late Mesolithic (R. Atkins, MOLA pers. comm.).
Archaeological investigations with construction work underway in the background
The pits were 2.1–5m in diameter and 1.0–1.7m deep. All had steep sides but with a mix of concave and flat bases. Six pits produced animal bone and two produced struck flint. The latter was small (15 pieces) and only comprised blades; none is closely dated. The majority of the animal bone assemblage (8kg, c.400 fragments) derived from just two pits and was dominated by aurochs. Other identified species comprised red deer, roe deer and pig, represented in all cases by just one bone or tooth. Four pits yielded five fragments of animal bone that were suitable for radiocarbon dating and all returned late Mesolithic determinations: four in the mid-7th millennium and one in the later 6th millennium.
Half-excavated late Mesolithic pit with auroch bone visible in section (the pit was subsequently fully excavated)
Joshua Pollard at the University of Southampton proposed in an article published in 2017 that a number of Mesolithic pits found in Britain ‘can be isolated from the rest by virtue of their substantial size (generally in excess of 1m in diameter and 0.5m in depth), complex fills, occasional grouping into linear arrangements, and virtual absence of material culture’. This description fits well with the twelve large pits excavated by Albion. When Josh wrote his article only half a dozen sites with large pits radiocarbon-dated to the Mesolithic were known in Britain, with none in eastern England. Of these sites, only two (Stonehenge car park and Warren Field, Crathes, Aberdeenshire) contained multiple large pits. Subsequently, the excavations at Milltimber on the Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route added a third site with multiple pits and the discovery at Houghton Regis has now added a fourth.
The pits found by Albion and MOLA were spread across an 8ha area and were clustered around the three palaeochannels. The precise nature, origins and dating of the palaeochannels are uncertain. However, they appeared to lead down to the Ouzel Brook, suggesting that they may have been created by seasonal springs or run-off from the higher ground to the south. An association between the palaeochannels and the large pits seem highly likely as, despite extensive investigations in the area, no such pits have been found away from this part of the Ouzel Brook.
Aerial view of one of the excavation areas with a palaeochannel clearly visible
In contrast to Britain, hundreds of large Mesolithic pits have been found in France and, to a lesser extent, in the Netherlands and Germany. On the Continent, there is a wide-held belief that these pits were dug as animal traps. This is partly because of their size, topographical location, absence of nearby habitation and, in contrast to the British examples, the presence of a central stake/post. The association of the pits at Houghton Regis with palaeochannels could suggest that they were deliberately dug here because such areas would have attracted watering animals, specifically aurochsen. However, if this was the case then one might have expected pits to have been dug nearer the Ouzel Brook. In addition, some of the pits were relatively shallow compared to their diameter and other had concave profiles; which might cast doubt on their effectiveness as animal traps.
Pollard believes that it is ‘inherently unlikely they served a purpose as pit-fall traps, extraction or storage features’. He sees the pits as the focus for repeated returns and intervention (i.e. filling, recutting). In the absence of decisive arguments, and in the presence of sometimes conflicting data, a symbolic role seems most likely for the pits at Houghton Regis. They may have been dug at a location of significance to the hunter-gatherer communities in the area, i.e. near the source of the Ouzel Brook, then becoming the focus for ritual activity over hundreds and possibly thousands of years.
The results of several investigation by Albion near Houghton Regis, including the Mesolithic pits, will be published in the next Albion Archaeology Monograph (nb 11) which is due out in print early in Summer 2023. It is also intended that a separate article on all Mesolithic pits at Houghton Regis, including any new radiocarbon dates and scientific analysis, will be produced in collaboration with MOLA and Joshua Pollard/University of Southampton.