Findings on Preservation Under Tracks at Barrow Clump
1. **Unexpected Preservation**: Despite the pressure from
military vehicles (e.g., tanks and farm machinery), archaeological remains
under the tracks were remarkably well-preserved. For instance, a female
skeleton was uncovered directly beneath a vehicle track, accompanied by two
small-long brooches, beads, and a knife, all intact. Similarly, a male warrior
burial was found with a shield boss, spearhead, and sword, also under a track,
showing minimal disturbance to the skeletal remains and artifacts.
2. **Compaction as a Protective Mechanism**: The weight of
vehicles appeared to compact the soil above the burials, creating a hardened
layer that shielded the remains from deeper degradation. This compaction
limited the penetration of water, oxygen, and biological activity (e.g., plant
roots or burrowing animals like badgers), which are common causes of decay in
archaeological contexts. Badger setts, a significant threat at Barrow Clump,
were less active directly under the tracks, further aiding preservation.
3. **Localized Damage**: While preservation was generally
good, some superficial damage was noted. The pressure from vehicles
occasionally caused minor crushing or displacement of artifacts and bones near
the surface. However, this was not extensive enough to destroy the integrity of
the burials, which remained identifiable and rich in contextual information.
4. **Contrast with Untracked Areas**: In areas not subjected
to vehicle traffic, badger activity and natural erosion had caused more
significant disturbance. The tracked zones, by contrast, acted as a stabilizing
cap, protecting deeper deposits from these threats.
These findings were detailed in the 2018 Defence
Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) and Wessex Archaeology monograph, as well as
in Richard Osgood’s *Broken Pots, Mending Lives* (2023), which notes the
"surprisingly good preservation" under tracks as a counterintuitive
outcome of military activity.
### Extrapolation and Recommendations for Managing Similar
Tracks
Based on the Barrow Clump evidence, the preservation of
archaeological remains under vehicle tracks suggests a complex interplay
between human activity and site conservation. This can inform management
strategies for similar contexts—military training grounds, agricultural lands,
or other areas with vehicle traffic overlaying potential archaeological sites.
Here’s a recommendation framework:
1. **Assessment and Mapping**:
- **Action**:
Conduct geophysical surveys (e.g., ground-penetrating radar or magnetometry)
and targeted test excavations to identify archaeological remains beneath
existing tracks.
- **Rationale**:
The Barrow Clump findings indicate that tracks may unknowingly cap significant
sites. Mapping these areas prevents inadvertent destruction during unrelated
land use changes and identifies zones warranting protection.
2. **Maintain Controlled Traffic**:
- **Action**: Where
tracks already exist over archaeological deposits, maintain current vehicle use
patterns rather than abandoning or rerouting them, provided the traffic remains
consistent and does not intensify.
- **Rationale**:
The compaction effect at Barrow Clump suggests that stable, ongoing pressure
can preserve remains by limiting environmental exposure. Sudden cessation of
traffic might destabilize this balance, exposing sites to erosion or
bioturbation (e.g., badgers), while increased traffic could risk deeper damage.
3. **Monitor Load and Frequency**:
- **Action**:
Regulate the weight and frequency of vehicles using the tracks, avoiding heavy
machinery beyond what the soil and remains can withstand.
- **Rationale**:
While Barrow Clump showed resilience under military vehicles, excessive loads
could fracture bones or artifacts, as seen in minor surface damage.
Establishing load thresholds (e.g., based on soil type and burial depth)
ensures preservation without compromising site integrity.
4. **Protective Layering**:
- **Action**: In
areas with known but unexcavated remains under tracks, consider adding a
controlled layer of soil or gravel before resuming traffic, if feasible.
- **Rationale**:
Enhancing the compacted layer could mimic Barrow Clump’s protective cap,
distributing vehicle weight more evenly and reducing localized pressure points,
especially for shallow deposits.
5. **Mitigation for New Tracks**:
- **Action**: For
proposed tracks in archaeologically sensitive areas, undertake pre-construction
excavations or reroute to avoid direct impact. If avoidance isn’t possible,
install a geotextile barrier beneath the track to cushion remains.
- **Rationale**:
Barrow Clump’s preservation was a fortunate outcome, not a predictable one.
Proactive measures can replicate this effect intentionally, preventing damage
during initial track establishment when remains are most vulnerable.
6. **Long-Term Monitoring**:
- **Action**:
Periodically reassess tracked areas using non-invasive methods (e.g., drone
surveys for surface changes or soil sampling for degradation markers) and
intervene if preservation conditions deteriorate.
- **Rationale**:
Environmental shifts (e.g., climate change altering soil moisture) or increased
bioturbation could undermine the protective effect over time, necessitating
adaptive management.
### Practical Example
For tracks in the Stonehenge and Avebury WHS the Council
could designate "archaeological track zones" where vehicle use
continues under strict guidelines (e.g., light vehicles only, regular
maintenance to prevent ruts and no subsoil disturbance). If expansion or change
is needed, preemptive excavation or protective layering could safeguard
unstudied remains, balancing operational needs with heritage conservation.
This approach leverages the Barrow Clump anomaly—where human
activity inadvertently preserved history—as a model for intentional
stewardship, turning a potential threat into a tool for protection and should
be applied to the Byways in the WHS.
