THE 'ROTHERWAS RIBBON': A FOUR THOUSAND YEAR OLD LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION NEAR HEREFORD

The archaeological recording project underway since April this year has been carried out under contract by the Worcestershire Historic Environment and Archaeology Service, whom Herefordshire Archaeology staff have briefed and monitored (WHEAS project manager Simon Woodiwiss; site director Simon Sworn).

The 'Ribbon' comprises a sinuous linear monument up to 10m in width. It crosses the route of the modern road under construction, almost at the perpendicular (road route west-east, 'ribbon' alignment south-north).

The feature, provisionally dated to the Early Bronze Age c.2000 BC, is made up in places of one single, and in places two successive, laid surfaces of deliberately fire-cracked stones apparently derived (quarried or collected) from a natural deposit forming a ridge half a kilometre to the west. The stones would have been heated up and then dropped into a pit or trough filled with cold water somewhere nearby. This would have transferred the heat to the water but will also have served to shatter the rock into usable pieces.

The 'source' ridge lies on the other (western) side of a settlement (also discovered in the project, but at the end of 2006) that included at least one Beaker period house (2-3 centuries either side of 2000 BC) and with activity (pits, buildings) probably spanning the later Neolithic to Early Bronze Age period 3000-1800BC.

The 'Ribbon' is not laid upon an entirely flat surface, but one that has been deliberately sculpted to 'undulate' as the feature descends the slight slope from a small range of hills bordering the floodplain of the Wye and its confluence with the Lugg.

The 'Ribbon' was rebuilt at least once. A new surface was laid directly above the original surface, but this upper, later, surface only survives today in patches.

The locations of former timber upright posts have been revealed and investigated in close proximity to the monument and on both sides of it. At least one of these posts was burned in situ, and another appears to have been laid, burning, on the 'paved' surface.

A pit containing Bronze Age human cremation material (presumably scooped up from a pyre site nearby) was also investigated close by.

A small number of finds including struck flints and some sherds of seemingly Early Bronze Age pottery have been retrieved along with a small quantity of bone and other debris from the silts immediately overlying the feature.

The 'Ribbon' aligns upslope and to the south upon the ridge-end that supports Dinedor Camp, an Iron Age hillfort with evidence for earlier activity.

Fire-cracked stones are familiar from the (mostly) Middle Bronze Age (around 1500-1300 BC) 'cooking sites' with troughs and adjacent mounds of such stones. It has been presumed that these stones were left as a residue from the heating of water to cook joints of meat (an activity reconstructed from Irish Medieval literary accounts). Such mounds are common throughout the west and north of Britain and Ireland, and examples are known also from the West Midlands.

Beyond this, and small paved areas by standing stones, but with larger and sometimes pitched stone set edgeways in the ground (such as at Stackpole Warren, Pembrokeshire), there are no known parallels for the Rotherwas structure. A stone covered bank excavated recently in the Isle of Man is also associated with a nearby settlement and is of similar date, but quite different form.

The practice of rebuilding (or more properly resurfacing) of the structure is of some significance potentially. It has similarities with the process of creation/recreation of the Uffington White Horse on the Berkshire Downs established a while ago as of later Bronze Age origin by Oxford Archaeology, and it is possible that the Rotherwas structure was also designed to be seen prominently in the landscape.

With its series of linked opposed arcs in plan, and its apparently deliberate three-dimensional 'sculpting', it is difficult to avoid the impression that the Rotherwas Ribbon might be a representation of a serpentine form.

This impression is reinforced by the possible treatment of a 'tail' at the southern end of the exposed area. As such, the closest parallels internationally are with the 'Great Serpent Mound' and related sites of the Hopewellian phase (c.200BC to AD400) of the Middle Woodland period in Ohio USA - clearly a completely different and unrelated cultural and historical context (and, at 382m in length, different scale also). However, the ceremonial purposes of such widely separated human monuments could well have had some similarities.

The 'Ribbon' was eventually covered up naturally by soil washing down the hill but remained a recognisable feature in the landscape such that by Roman times or slightly earlier, in the Iron Age, a boundary ditch was cut along part of its length. Ironically, it was investigation of this ditch early in 2007 that led the archaeologists to discover the much earlier feature.

Protecting the 'Rotherwas Ribbon'

As soon as its significance was fully realised, it was decided to preserve the 'Ribbon' below the road.

An approach has been devised that will see the 'Ribbon' sealed within a protective structure beneath the carriageway and associated works as built.

Part of the 'Ribbon' as so far revealed will therefore lie beneath the road, and parts on either side of this will be preserved beneath earth screening bunds.

The extra cost of this operation will be borne within the project costs, but will be offset by a reduced need for further archaeological investigation.

Archaeological service, Herefordshire Council, 5th July 2007

Back to Top

THE ‘ROTHERWAS RIBBON’: SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED - 10th JULY 2007

Back to Top

What is it?

A deliberately laid surface of fire-shattered stones ‘draped’ over a pre-shaped course within the landscape. The surface undulates across its 8m to 10m width, and also as the structure descends the slope along the 60 metres so far uncovered. It descends in a series of slight curves as it descends the slope.

How old is it? How do you know?

Our present estimate is that it dates to the Early Bronze Age, around 2,000BC. A ditch in use in Roman times cuts across it, so it must be more than 2000 years old. By then it had been buried for some time, because silt had already washed down the hill to cover it. Worked flints and pieces of pottery in the earliest silts covering the surface are typical of the specific forms of object being used in the early Bronze Age. Radiocarbon dates on samples taken from the burning associated with parts of the monument will provide further dating clues.

What was it for? How long was it used for? Was it designed to be seen?

We have some clues from associated features, but no definite answers. There were large timber posts set upright in the ground at intervals down the course of the monument. Some at least of these were burned in place. Other timbers were laid on the surface during a phase of rebuilding, and one of these appears to have been burned where it lay. The monument may only have been ‘open’ for a short while, perhaps originally prepared for a single event. It was then resurfaced at a later date, but probably not long after its original construction. However, it would have remained a visible and probably very ‘resonant’ feature – not least for the residents of the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age settlement immediately to the west of it.

It was not necessarily designed to be seen from a distance, but it does seem to have been aligned roughly upon the ridge on which Dinedor hillfort (a later, Iron Age, enclosure dating from around 500BC) stands. The curves of the ‘ribbon’ could represent an animate form (such as a snake), or could have been seen as a symbolic, twisting path. Only further exploration beyond what can be seen at the moment will help to establish its full extent and exact form.

Why is it thought to be important?

Its importance derives from the fact that use of burnt stone ‘technology’ in this way is very unusual (usually such fire-shattered stones are found in heaps and presumed to be associated with cooking) – and indeed on this scale and this kind of sculpted form, so far unique. It is also somewhat early for use of this material, since ‘burnt mounds’ only become common some 500 years later.

How long have you known it is there?

The first hint of an unusual find came during the present project, but some two months ago. A small part of the surface was revealed then. It has taken a very slow and careful uncovering of the covering layers of ancient silt by staff of the Worcestershire Historic Environment service to fully reveal it within the road corridor. It is only as the excavation of this site has proceeded slowly over the intervening time that the extraordinary nature of the site emerged. Its ‘ribbon’ or ‘snake’ like twisting course only became evident when excavations were extended to the north under the ‘haul road’ for the road project. It was then necessary to establish the feasibility of protecting the site under a deliberately created ‘cushion’ of introduced material.

Why does it have to be covered up?

The surface is very fragile. Even its exposure within the road corridor over the past three weeks or so has led to some surface erosion. Even if it were not in the midst of a road building programme, unless it was possible to begin building a protective structure over it ‘tomorrow’, it would have to be covered over to protect it. Even with a project to create a full building over it, the nature of the structure would/will present huge problems for conservation and future management if open to display.

Surely the archaeological community and wider heritage lobby is outraged by the covering over of the site? Or should be?

Archaeologists both locally and more widely are very excited by this find, because it serves to highlight a lot of questions about how prehistoric people in Britain were organising themselves around 2000BC – what were their beliefs and ceremonies? But as Phil Mackie on Radio 4’s ‘Today’ programme put it, it also indicates that, far from being a ‘backwater’ in those far off days, Hereford and the Wye valley was an important focus for settlement and ritual activity.

That is very different of course from the questions about what to do about the discovery at this time, in this place, during a major and economically important infrastructure project.

Some of the alternative ‘options’ (such as bridging over the monument but leaving it exposed) would not achieve the desired aims, and could have very detrimental ‘side effects’ – as anyone who has ever built a bridge – or seen one being built - will understand). Of course, with unlimited resources, all sorts of solutions could be implemented. But our ‘brief’ is to achieve a balance between the economic and cultural needs of the present and future generations.

What more could be done to ‘share’ the monument with everyone, and to enable us to understand its full extent and nature? How can we ‘experience’ it?

We live in a digital age, and the monument as so far exposed has been very fully recorded. The aim is to make available a CD-Rom (production of this was built into the revised brief for the recording process in June) that enables you to see the feature from all angles, and graphically. Further forms of presentation of the data in yet more sophisticated ways can be explored. Discussions are also already underway concerning further survey work and test excavations in fields to the north of the present excavation and outside the road corridor, but this will depend upon availability of funding and permission from the landowners.

How and when can we find out more?

The Council websites (the main site and ‘Historic Herefordshire On Line’) will carry more information in the near future. Herefordshire Archaeology have nearly a decade’s track record of making information and news available to the wider public, and this will continue into any further exploration (with landowners’ permission and subject to the availability of funding) of the ‘Rotherwas Ribbon’.

Archaeological service, Herefordshire Council, 10th July 2007

Back to Top

MORE CHANCES TO SEE THE 'ROTHERWAS RIBBON'

Back to Top

Herefordshire Council has unveiled details of arrangements to allow more people to view the recently unearthed Rotherwas Ribbon.

The Ribbon is a Bronze Age surface of cracked stones discovered as a result of the archaeological investigations carried out prior to the construction of the Rotherwas access road, located just south of Hereford city.

The council ran a session on Saturday, July 7, during which 200 people were bussed to the site. A further 200 are due to visit the site this afternoon, Tuesday, July 10.

Due to popular demand, similar escorted visits have now been arranged to run between 1pm and 4.30pm from Monday to Saturday next week, July 16 to July 21.

Anyone wanting to book a place should contact Herefordshire Council’s switchboard on (01432) 260000 between 11am and 5pm.

Visitors will be taken to the site from Unit Three on the Rotherwas Industrial Estate for escorted visits before being transported back to their cars.

Only those who have booked will be allowed to visit the site, up to a maximum of 25 per half-hour visit.

Visitors should arrive at least ten minutes prior to their selected time as they will need to complete a form setting out health and safety requirements.

They should also wear stout shoes, and if the weather is wet, they should consider bringing Wellingtons.

Herefordshire Council, 10th July 2007

Back to Top

Back to Top

More information: What is it? How old is it?

Work has continued to complete the recording of the paved structure on site, and to analyse the finds back in the Worcestershire Archaeology Service’s offices. Preliminary assessments have been made of the artefacts and information retrieved from the site investigations. Additionally, a number of leading British prehistorians were invited to visit and comment upon its potential significance, and some took advantage of the invitation and gave us the benefit of their experience and reflections.

The area on either side of the monument appears to show little evidence of contemporary activity, while the areas to the east and west of this contain pits and other features representing evidence for activity – mostly of later Neolithic date. This suggests that the structure is likely to be earlier than the date of 2000BC tentatively ascribed to it on the basis of finds from its surface. A sinuous ditch devoid of finds in the area examined is also clearly cut by the surfaced structure – and this may represent a first phase to the monument.

So far, there have been no finds from within the cracked stone construction matrix, or from beneath the structure. To obtain information by further excavation of the monument where it is currently exposed, would in effect involve considerable dismantling of it. In the meantime, samples of charcoal have been taken for carbon 14 dating, and a careful procedure is being followed to obtain maximally reliable dates for key contexts from this process. It will therefore be some time before the results of this programme are available. The dating programme includes dividing samples for independent dating by two different laboratories.

More information: how extensive is it? What was it used for?

There are some subtle indications in the landscape to the south and to the north of the structure as so far revealed that suggest that it may extend southwards up the slope towards the Dinedor ridge, and well into the field to the north. Only further archaeological survey and investigation would establish this with any certainty. The possibility of such further work is being explored.

It is possible that what has been exposed is part of an extensive linear monument created for ceremonial use that involved passage (but not frequent passage) along its length. Some timber structures were seemingly built or incorporated along its length to direct and guide such movement.

Its form in relation to its landscape context

The sinuous, winding character of the structure as so far revealed has been likened to both a ribbon and a serpent. As yet, not enough of the structure has been revealed to determine whether the winding course represents a ‘model’ of a stream course, or a ‘writhing’ serpentine form – or both simultaneously, or neither. It does seem likely that its placement partly within, partly alongside, and partly across a deliberately ‘sculpted’ linear hollow was intended actually to facilitate the controlled flow of water along its course – not continually, but perhaps on particular occasions. It is conceivable that there was a deliberate ‘invocation’ of both fire (stone transformed through burning) and water (for cracking the stones, and/or for a down-slope controlled flow across its form) in its creation and use (see Gordon Noble, ‘Neolithic Scotland: Timber, Stone, Earth and Fire’ Edinburgh University Press 2006 for an exploration of similar themes).

In what ways is it important, and why?

No evidence has been brought to the attention of the archaeologists investigating the site of an exact parallel for the ‘Rotherwas Ribbon’. Some parallels for the use of broken stone to pave short causeways at both Neolithic and Bronze Age sites elsewhere are being checked. Correspondents are invited to contact us via this website with suggestions of parallels they have heard of – or preferably have themselves seen. It would be appreciated if such information is authored rather than anonymous, and that reference to any form of published notice of such discoveries is given, so that they can be researched. The source of any such information, where the investigating archaeologists do not already know it, will be acknowledged in any subsequent publication.

In the meantime, we think that the structure is of very considerable importance in its use of deliberately burnt stone to pave a purposely-sculpted surface. Its very likely representation of a specific form (snake/cord/symbolic river) is also remarkable. The re-surfacing or re-inscription (at least in part) of the monument is also very unusual. In its possession of all these aspects together, it is so far unique, and considerably expands the known repertoire of monumentality in Neolithic/Early Bronze Age Europe. Its presence in Herefordshire should and will provoke a considerable re-think of the erstwhile widely supposed ‘peripheral’ character of Neolithic and Bronze Age activity here (see Keith Ray ‘The Neolithic in the West Midlands: an overview’ in Paul Garwood ‘The Undiscovered Country: the Earlier Prehistory of the West Midlands’ Oxbow Books, forthcoming 2007, for a re-appraisal of the importance of the region in general in this period of prehistory, and for notice of some other relevant recent discoveries in Herefordshire).

Does the Council realise how important it is?

The presence of the monument was only detected due to vigilance and acute observation on the part of the archaeologists from both Herefordshire Archaeology and Worcestershire Historic Environment and Archaeology Service who have directed and been involved in the project, and a highly co-operative attitude and approach from the project team responsible for road construction. The importance of the monument has only become apparent as the project to investigate and record archaeological features has unfolded in its later stages. From the point when it became clear that the structure was of major significance, the project team and senior officers supported the approach that appropriate action to preserve that part of the monument affected by the road scheme should be discussed – with especial focus upon a ‘design solution’ along the lines of one that had recently been devised to protect major prehistoric features on Salisbury Plain in Wiltshire.

The only aspect of the discovery on which the Council has sought to make a clarification is that comparisons with Stonehenge visually are not appropriate because the structure as revealed lacks the standing upright stones and dramatic encircling presence of the justifiably renowned Wiltshire monument. Archaeological and cultural advice has highlighted the difficulties of both conserving and displaying a structure of this nature, but that does not mean that such display cannot be achieved and the tourism potential of such a discovery realised somewhere within the course of the monument.

The ‘groundswell’ of public concern

There has been some misapprehension that the whole monument is affected by the road scheme course, and that the intention is to destroy the monument. Neither of these is true. There have been many well-informed contributions to the debate, many interesting perceptions shared, and a widespread belief that this discovery represents an opportunity for the county to develop its resource of important heritage sites. The latter in particular should give good pause for thought more widely than this monument. The Iron Age fort at Dinedor Camp itself is, for instance, in Council ownership, and plans have been in formulation for some time to make more of this important local heritage resource.

This is an important discovery both locally and more widely, and adds a new dimension to our understanding of Herefordshire’s remote past. Along with discoveries to either side of the structure within the road corridor (pits and especially the post-holes of a timber circular building) it firmly puts Herefordshire on the map of earlier prehistoric Britain – a place it already has in respect of its celebrated later prehistoric hillforts.

Some intended and possible developments

One development, perhaps during 2007, may involve some careful survey and test investigation of the further course of the monument. If supported and enacted, this operation will also further help to set the monument in context, and hopefully enable confirmation of its exact date.

With further assessment of the importance of the Rotherwas monument, and its extent and associations, the question of its possible partial display and interpretation (in the sense of explanation within a display area or structure) can be addressed. This should perhaps be seen more as an educational resource, using the panoply of digital and visual imaging to recapture the essence of its original form and use. Such display might usefully be linked to other such emergent resources (as at Dinedor Camp) and to the important surviving elements of the historic landscape at Rotherwas: the Royal Ordnance Factory, the English Heritage protected Chapel and the site of the former mansion and formal gardens.

Herefordshire Council, 7th August 2007

Back to Top

Back to Top

CONTENTS

1. Headlines

2. Protecting the structure: interim measures

3. An interim statement concerning the discoveries

4. Further scientific studies

5. Review of archaeology and development advice

6. The adequacy of the ‘preservation in situ' scheme

7. Proposals for ‘Stage 2’ ‘Rotherwas Ribbon’ investigations

8. Proposals for ‘Stage 3’ ‘Rotherwas Ribbon’ investigations

9. The Cabinet decision: archaeological aspects

10. Further studies and a strategy for the Rotherwas environs

1. Headlines Back to Top or Back to Contents

• Since the last news bulletin in August, the ‘Ribbon’ monument as exposed within the Rotherwas Access Road ‘corridor’ has been sealed within the primary elements of a protective covering (see 2).
• The site excavators and Herefordshire Council archaeology staff have produced an interim statement giving more details about the discoveries (summarised in 3).
• A series of scientific studies and assessments have been carried out at the suggestion of English Heritage specialist staff, to consider the possibility that the paved structure and the hollow in which it was laid might have been naturally formed (see 4).
• Following a request from Councillors attending a meeting of Cabinet in August, an independent planning policy peer review was requested and carried out to consider whether the advice received by the Council from its archaeological advisors about the road scheme and the discovery and conservation of the ‘Ribbon’ represented best practice (see 5).
• English Heritage have issued a statement confirming the adequacy of the proposed ‘preservation in situ' methodology (developed by the Council’s engineering consultants, Owen Williams, in consultation with specialist consultants and English Heritage staff) for that part of the ‘Ribbon’ within the road scheme corridor (see 6).
• The Council’s archaeologists have made an application to English Heritage for funding for further exploratory work beyond the limits of the road scheme corridor to determine the extent and understand more fully the nature of the ‘Ribbon’ monument (see 7).
• The Council’s archaeologists have presented a further proposal to the Environment Director for funding for studies to set the monument in its wider landscape context and to assess the potential for the creation of interpretative facilities within the Rotherwas Industrial Estate (see 8).
• The Council’s Cabinet met on 6th September to consider alternative options for the ‘preservation in situ' of the structure, and to decide upon a course of action regarding the Rotherwas Access Road.
• The decision was made to continue to build the road on its present course, preserving the structure beneath the road sealed within a protective carapace rather than attempt to avoid the exposed section by some means (see 9).
• While pursuing all available means to further define the ‘Ribbon’ structure, the Council’s archaeologists are also developing a strategy to achieve a better understanding, future conservation and study of the important prehistoric sites in the ‘south Wye’ area between Hereford city and the Dinedor ridge. This work includes developing studies already planned concerning, for instance, the future management of Dinedor Camp, and looking also at later heritage sites (see 10).

2. Protecting the structure: interim measures Back to Section 1 or Back to Contents

• The first stages of the preservation in situ scheme devised for the structure as exposed within the road scheme were put in place as soon as ground conditions permitted, early in August.
• The specifications for the work so far implemented represent the primary elements of the scheme as prepared by the Council’s engineering consultants, Owen Williams, in consultation with specialists from Giffords UK and English Heritage.
• This has involved the placing of a geotextile membrane directly over the structure, followed by a sterile sand deposit, followed by a further geotextile membrane, followed by a deposit of crushed material. Measures have been taken to prevent spreading of the sand and the ingress of water from upslope, and vibration monitors have been placed within the structure to assess any future effects upon the structure when/if sealed beneath the road carriageway and landscaping earthworks.

3. An interim statement concerning the discoveries Back to Section 1 or Back to Contents

• This is in effect an interim report on the work to date, and was produced as part of the project design submitted to English Heritage for funding for archaeological survey works beyond the road corridor.
• It describes the discoveries in more detail, and considers the possible interpretation of the ‘Ribbon’ structure more fully. Included within it, for instance, is a discussion of why the idea that the structure represents a spread ‘burnt mound’ is not tenable.

4. Further scientific studies Back to Section 1 or Back to Contents

• As a result of ‘assessment’ visits by English Heritage staff during July (see their website for details) some specialist studies have been carried out to consider three specific questions. The first of these was whether the ‘linear hollow’ in which the structure is partly located was formed naturally or artificially (that is, deliberately by people). The second question was whether the stones themselves had been cracked through a natural or artificial process. The third question was whether the stones were laid artificially or through a natural agency such as hill-slope erosion.
• It should be stated clearly that the view of both the excavators and the Herefordshire Council archaeologists from the outset was that the hollow had been deliberately created, because its character was ‘designed’, and was very different from natural watercourses examined locally. These archaeologists believe that the stones were cracked through a process of heating followed by dramatic ‘quenching’ in cold water – given that most if not all the stones included in the surfaces were very similar to shattered stones found in ‘burnt mound’ sites. Thirdly, their configuration on the ground strongly suggested that a ‘surface’ of these stones had been deliberately placed.
• An academic geomorphologist whose specialism is the Ice Ages in Herefordshire made a visit to the site and provided a report on his observations. This specialist, Dr. Andrew Richards of the University of Worcester, stated unequivocally that the hollow was not a natural formation, that the stones were not likely to be the result of a natural agency such as frost-shattering, and that they were not at all likely to have been transported and distributed in the manner observed, as a result of any natural process.
• Two separate studies were carried out by an independent consultant and by English Heritage laboratory staff, examining samples of the burnt stone to see whether they had been heat-treated. The conclusion of both of these thermal studies was that the stones had been deliberately heated before they became shattered (written reports on these studies are awaited).

5. Review of archaeology and development advice Back to Section 1 or Back to Contents

• ·Council officers asked Dr. Stewart Bryant, Head of Historic Environment services at Hertfordshire County Council, to carry out a peer review of the archaeology and development planning advice provided to Herefordshire Council by officers of the county archaeological service in respect of the road scheme from its inception. This was carried out within a two-week period in late August and early September, and a variety of documentation was provided for review.
• In his report, Dr. Bryant stated that “in almost all respects the guidance within PPG 16 (government planning guidance on archaeology and development) was adhered to”. He went on to specify exactly what procedures had been correctly followed, concluding: “In particular, the ability of Herefordshire Council to achieve a scheme for preservation in situ of the archaeological remains to the north of Camp Farm is to be commended and is an example of best practice.”
• Dr. Bryant also nonetheless found that lessons could be learned, in particular in respect to the extent of pre-determination archaeological evaluation achieved (although he acknowledged that this was often limited by access restrictions during local government road schemes), and the conduct of risk assessments for the discovery of important remains at a late stage in the development process (although he accepted that this was with the benefit of hindsight in this instance).

6. The adequacy of the ‘preservation in situ' scheme Back to Section 1 or Back to Contents

• English Heritage was at pains to point out that the decision as to whether to proceed or not with the road scheme at this (or at any other) stage was one for Herefordshire Council. It was not for English Heritage to say that the scheme should or should not proceed.
• English Heritage nonetheless unequivocally stated that their advice was that, whether the scheme continued or not, the prehistoric remains uncovered should be preserved in situ.
• Furthermore, English Heritage confirmed that the scheme for preservation in situ of the exposed section of the Ribbon proposed by the Council and its consultants would be adequate to the task, subject to monitoring facilities being put in place.

7. Proposals for ‘Stage 2’ ‘Rotherwas Ribbon’ investigations Back to Section 1 or Back to Contents

• English Heritage further expressed a view that any decision on the Scheduling of the monument either within the road corridor or beyond it would depend upon further characterisation of its attributes. In this regard, they have stated that they would welcome an approach from the Council for funding for such further work.
• Early in August, therefore, proposals were submitted for geophysical survey and test excavations both north and south of the road corridor. In parallel, an approach was made to the landowners concerned for access to carry out these archaeological explorations. A decision on the principle of funding such an exercise is anticipated soon.

8. Proposals for ‘Stage 3’ ‘Rotherwas Ribbon’ investigations Back to Section 1 or Back to Contents

• Given the nature and orientation of the ‘Ribbon’ it is quite possible that it continues for some distance northwards of the section exposed in the road corridor. There are slight topographical indications that this could once have encompassed a course that took the monument into the area occupied in the early and middle years of the 20th century by the Royal Ordnance Factory. This is now the Rotherwas Industrial Estate and several areas of the site are owned by Herefordshire Council. An historic environment consultant’s report commissioned in 2000 by Herefordshire Council investigated the historic assets of the Estate, and this study is now being reviewed in light of the prehistoric discoveries nearby.
• In the meantime, the county archaeological service has brought forward a proposal for studies exploring the implications of the ‘Ribbon’ discoveries in a number of directions.
• The first concern is to establish whether, if the ‘Ribbon’ or associated features did once exist within the Estate, they might still to some extent survive there. The immediate plan would be to carry out surveys and exploratory excavations to see whether this could be proven.
• The second concern would be to begin to sketch out a management plan for the ‘Ribbon’ complex - including features revealed in any further explorations carried out in the near future (2007-8).
• The third concern would be to begin to define and characterise the wider ‘heritage landscape’ of the Rotherwas - Dinedor area, to consider the implications for development, education, recreation and tourism of a complex of features that are distinctive to the area to the south of Hereford city from a number of eras in the past, but ‘foregrounded’ by the remarkable prehistoric sites now known to have existed in the area.
• The fourth concern would be to carry out a feasibility study specifically of the potential for a visitor centre of some kind within the Industrial Estate where the heritage of the whole area could be presented, explained and ‘experienced’ using the full panoply of modern technological presentation techniques.

9. The Cabinet decision: archaeological aspects Back to Section 1 or Back to Contents

• On September 6th, the Cabinet chose not to abandon the road scheme, in part on grounds that the decision to proceed would result in the covering over of the exposed section of the ‘Ribbon’ and not its destruction. Alternative options to re-route, to bridge over or to tunnel beneath the monument were discounted as either impracticable or too costly. The balance between the perceived immediate needs of economic development and the very uncertain possibilities for spatially contiguous display of the monument was seen to weigh strongly in favour of the former.
• The Cabinet also voted not to delay construction of the Access Road pending the results of further studies. This was based in part upon archaeological advice that the likelihood is very high that important archaeological remains exist widely in the vicinity of the uncovered section of the road, so issues of preservation would very probably emerge in the consideration of any alternative road lines.

10. Further studies and a strategy for the Rotherwas environs Back to Section 1 or Back to Contents

• The further studies in the immediate vicinity of the ‘Ribbon’ monument should add considerably to our understanding not only of this remarkable structure, but also the wider late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age landscape of the area between Dinedor and the Wye.
• There are clues from work already carried out on development sites in this zone that a variety of prehistoric monuments may have existed here, contributing to the idea that the Wye-Lugg confluence area may have had a special significance 4000 years ago.
• This is an area that may see increasing development pressures in the coming years, and it will therefore be important to try to characterise the local prehistoric heritage in particular, so that both preservation of monuments and the potential for access, both physical and intellectual, can be explored and planned for at an early stage in the development process.
• A strategy that both organises for such exploration and flags up the means to secure optimal futures for the unique heritage of the area is an essential component of the way forward.
• The ‘Rotherwas Ribbon’ remains a so far unique structure within prehistoric Britain, but further features of this kind may exist locally. The presence too of fine Grooved Ware pottery of ‘Durrington Walls’ type and of a very rare form of Bronze Age ‘barrow’ in this ‘south Wye’ zone echoes facets of the Stonehenge landscape, and we need to establish the full significance of both the area and its monuments in British – and indeed European - prehistory.
  

Herefordshire Council, 18th September 2007

Back to Top