Woodsmith Mine Sneaton North Yorkshire · 2019. 11. 29. · Woodsmith Mine Sneaton North Yorkshire Archaeological Watching Brief CA Project: 660829 CA Report: 18716 Document Number:

Woodsmith Mine Sneaton

North Yorkshire

Programme of Archaeological Work

for

Collins Earthworks

on behalf of Sirius Minerals PLC

CA Project: 660829 CA Report: 18716

Document Number: TBC

December 2018

Woodsmith Mine Sneaton

North Yorkshire

Archaeological Watching Brief

CA Project: 660829 CA Report: 18716

Document Number: TBC

This report is confidential to the client. Cotswold Archaeology accepts no responsibility or liability to any third

party to whom this report, or any part of it, is made known. Any such party relies upon this report entirely at their own risk. No part of this report may be reproduced by any means without permission.

© Cotswold Archaeology

Document Control Grid

Revision Date Author Checked by Status Reasons for revision

Approved by

A 18/11/2018 Ed Grenier SRJ Internal review

Quality Assurance SRJ


1

Woodsmith Mine, Sneaton, North Yorkshire: Programme of Archaeological Works

CONTENTS

SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 3

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 4

2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND ................................................................ 5

3. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................... 9

4. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 10

5. RESULTS (FIGS 2-22) ....................................................................................... 10

6. DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................... 25

7. CA PROJECT TEAM .......................................................................................... 26

10. REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 27

APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS .................................................................... 29

APPENDIX B: OASIS REPORT FORM........................................................................... 33


2


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1 Site location plan (1:25,000)

Fig. 2 Site location plan, showing area of observed groundworks and archaeological

features (1:5000)

Fig. 3 Plan of observed groundworks, showing location of archaeological features (1:1500)

Fig. 4 Plan of observed groundworks, showing location of archaeological features (1:300)

Fig. 5 Trench 11, looking north-east (photograph)

Fig. 6 Trench 22, looking north-east (photograph)

Fig. 7 Ditch 2010: section (scale 1:20)

Fig. 8 Wheel ruts 2012 & 2014, looking west (photograph)

Fig. 9 Ditch 2016 and wheel ruts 2012 & 2014 (photograph)

Fig. 10 Lidar, showing palaeochannels 2004 and 2018 and ditch 2016

Fig. 11 Trench 23, looking north-west (photograph)

Fig. 12 Palaeochannel 2004, looking west (photograph)

Fig. 13 Ditch 2002, looking west (photograph)

Fig. 14 Ditch 2002: section (1:20)

Fig. 15 Trench 24, looking south-west (photograph)

Fig. 16 Trench 25, looking north-west (photograph)

Fig. 17 Trench 25, showing disturbance prior to site strip (photograph)

Fig. 18 Wheel ruts 1007, looking east (photograph)

Fig. 19 Ditch 1002, looking north (photograph)

Fig. 20 Pit 1014: section (1:20)


Fig. 22 Trench 26, looking east (photograph)

Fig. 23 Culvert 5003, looking south-east (photograph)


3


SUMMARY

Project Name: Woodsmith Mine

Location: Sneaton, North Yorkshire

NGR: 489446 505168

Type: Programme of Archaeological Works

Date: June to December 2018

Planning Reference: North York Moors Park Authority Planning Reference:

NYM/2014/0676/MEIA

Location of Archive: To be deposited with Scarborough Museum

Site Code: DNF 17

An Archaeological Watching Brief was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology between June

and December 2018 at Woodsmith Mine, Sneaton, North Yorkshire. The fieldwork was

undertaken to satisfy the requirements of condition 95 of planning permission

NYM/2014/0676/MEIA.

Archaeological interest in the site is derived from its location within the North York Moors

National Park, which is known to contain extensive examples of Late Neolithic rock art and is

rich in well preserved prehistoric funerary and settlement remains.

The works comprised a watching brief during the mechanical stripping of overburden from

six areas down to the natural geological substrate.

This revealed two sinuous features, interpreted as silted palaeochannels, as well as partial

elements of at least two field systems. Although these field systems remained undated

artefactually, they have been assigned to either the pre-medieval period or the post-

medieval period based on their relationships with one another, their morphological

characteristics and cartographic analysis

In addition, a stone lined culvert of probable post-medieval date and two undated pits were

also identified.


4


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Between June and December 2018, Cotswold Archaeology (CA) carried out a

programme of archaeological works at Woodsmith Mine, Sneaton, North Yorkshire

(centred at NGR: 489446 505168; Fig. 1). The programme of archaeological works

was commissioned by Collins Earthworks on behalf of Sirius Minerals PLC.

Fig. 1 Site location plan (1:25,000)

1.2 The programme of archaeological works was undertaken to fulfil a condition

(Condition 95) attached to a planning consent granted by North York Moors National

Park Authority (NYMNPA; the local planning authority) for the winning and working

of polyhalite by underground methods (Planning reference: NYM/2014/0676/MEIA).

1.3 The planning condition requiring a WSI was approved by the NYMNPA via a

commitment by Sirius Minerals to follow the methodology as previously approved

within detailed Written Schemes of Investigation (WSI) produced by CA (2016 &

2017) and approved by the NYMNPA acting on the advice of Graham Lee. The


5


fieldwork also followed Standard and guidance: Archaeological watching brief (CIfA

2014) and Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Excavation (CIfA 2014).

The site

1.4 The consented site is situated approximately 5km to the south of Whitby and 20km

to the north-west of Scarborough. The site encompasses an area of approximately

50ha (Fig. 2); the north-western part of which comprised a series of rectilinear fields,

with an associated farmhouse and ancillary farm buildings. The south-eastern part of

the site is occupied by a combination of Whinny Wood and the Haxby and Belt

Plantations. The site lies at approximately 212m above Ordnance Datum aOD in the

west and south, sloping downwards to approximately 170m aOD in the north-east.

1.5 The underlying bedrock geology of the area is mapped as sandstone and mudstone

of the Moor Grit, Scarborough, Cloughton and Saltwick Formations, formed during

the Jurassic Period. This comprised siltstone and mudstone in the west of the site

and mudstone, sandstone and siltstone in the east of the site (BGS 2018). The

encountered geological substrate comprising firm mid-yellow orange to mid-blue

grey sandy clay was observed across the site.

2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

2.1 The site has been the previous subject of desk-based assessments (CA 2012a,

2012b and 2014a), and an Environmental Statement (Royal Haskoning DHV 2014).

A geophysical survey has also been undertaken (GSB Prospection 2012) as well as

watching briefs (CA 2014b) and archaeological monitoring (CA 2018). The following

section is summarised from these sources.

2.2 A small number of non-designated heritage assets have been identified within the

mine head development area.

Prehistoric (pre-43 AD)

2.3 A prehistoric findspot has been recorded beyond the immediate south-eastern

boundary of the site within the Haxby Plantation. This comprised an unstratified

assemblage of Mesolithic and later material, including Bronze Age arrowheads,

scrapers and knives. Within the wider landscape, Ugglebarnby Moor, located to the

immediate west of the site, contains a dense concentration of recorded prehistoric

sites.


6


Insert Fig 2


7


2.4 Moorland within this part of the North York Moors National Park contains extensive

examples of Late Neolithic rock art. Moorland within the Park is also typically rich in

well preserved prehistoric funerary and settlement remains. This includes cairns,

barrows, and numerous other features, particularly of Bronze Age and Iron Age date

(2400 BC to AD 43).

Roman (AD 43) to modern

2.5 There are no recorded heritage assets of Roman or early medieval date within the

site. However, the parish boundary between Sneaton and Eskdaleside-cum-

Ugglebarnby may have its origins in the medieval period. By the middle of the 11th

century the village of Sneaton, in the Hundred (Saxon administrative division) of

Langbaurgh, had a population of 40 villagers, three smallholders and eight freemen

(Domesday Book). It is not known when the area of Dove’s Nest Farm was first

enclosed from the surrounding moorland for cultivation.

2.6 The site is likely to have continued in agricultural use throughout the medieval

period, with areas of ridge and furrow agriculture and medieval settlements such as

Sneatonthorpe, known locally.

2.7 An embanked boundary survives as an overgrown earthen bank c. 1m in height. It

forms the boundary between Haxby Plantation and the Belt Plantations to the south.

2.8 Ordnance Survey mapping shows little change within the site from the middle of the

19th century to the present day. The road defining the western boundary of the site

was in existence from this time, as was Dove’s Nest Farm, its associated fields and

Haxby Plantation.

Undated

2.9 Several undated features have been identified, including a cluster of five circular

earthworks located within Haxby Plantation, within the south-east of the site. These

earthworks comprise depressions defined by low earthen banks, comparable to

Bronze Age ring cairns observed elsewhere within the National Park. An earthwork

platform was also identified in association with one of these possible ring cairns. A

further earthwork was identified c. 100m to the east of these features. A pond, of

uncertain origin, was identified to the north-east, also within Haxby Plantation.


8


2.10 A possible low, earthen mound was identified in the north-east of the proposed

development site during Lidar survey (Furgo 2014), and this was confirmed during a

follow-up field survey. The possible mound is oval in plan, and measures c.17m by

c. 15m. Field assessment found it to be no greater than c. 0.3m-0.5m in height.

2.11 An oval-shaped enclosure is located in the north-east of the site. The north/south

oriented enclosure measures c. 30m by c. 20m, and comprises a semi-oval, water-

filled ditch (c. 2m wide), partially enclosing a central island. The ditch is broken to

the north by a causeway, allowing access to the interior. It is uncertain what function

this enclosure serves, though it is associated with a modern drain and probably

relates to water management. A small enclosure has been identified on aerial

photographs, on the northern boundary of the site. A second enclosure has also

been identified on Ugglebarnby Moor, c. 600m west of the site, and a linear feature,

probably a modern service, has been recorded to the north-west of site.

Previous archaeological investigation

2.12 Geophysical survey of much of the minehead area has been undertaken (GSB

Prospection 2012); a few anomalies of potential archaeological significance were

identified, which were further investigated during limited trial pitting.

2.13 Archaeological watching briefs were undertaken by CA prior to the construction of

temporary drilling rig platforms at Doves Nest Farm (CA 2013). No significant

archaeological features, finds or deposits were identified during these works. Further

watching briefs were conducted during the excavation of 48 trial pits. These

revealed undated features, comprising three ditches, a probable pit and two

postholes. Two of the ditches are on a similar alignment, and in a similar location, to

an anomaly identified during the geophysical survey. A mound identified from the

Lidar survey was found to be of probable geological origin (CA 2014b).

2.14 A further Programme of Archaeological Works was undertaken at the site by

Cotswold Archaeology between September 2015 and October 2017 (CA 2018). No

archaeological remains predating the post medieval/modern periods were found

during the course of this fieldwork. The remains of two ditches and two pits were

revealed. The watching brief concluded that the ditches form part of a post-

medieval/modern field system, with the ditches either depicted on historic Ordnance

survey mapping or forming the apparent continuation of depicted boundaries.

Although no dating evidence was recovered, the cartographic evidence and


9


morphological characteristics suggests a date within the post-medieval/modern

period for the field system.

2.15 A watching brief carried out during the demolition of Dove’s Nest Farmhouse

confirmed it is of modern construction. The First Edition Ordnance Survey map of

1853 depicts the farmhouse, with an associated access track leading from a road

defining the western boundary of the site. Fields associated with the farm and Haxby

Plantation are also depicted.

3. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

3.1 The objectives of these archaeological works remain the same as those detailed

within the previous WSI produced by CA encompassing the Phase 2 and 3 works

(CA 2016 and 2017). These were to:

Preserve by record archaeological deposits;

record the nature of the main stratigraphic units encountered;

assess the overall presence, survival and potential of structural and industrial

remains;

assess the overall presence, survival, condition, and potential of artefactual

and ecofactual remains.

3.2 The specific aims of the work were to:

Research the development of prehistoric monument complexes;

Investigate the development of funerary monuments and changing burial and

memorial practices;

Prospect for Iron Age settlement in upland areas;

Study the production, distribution and use of artefacts and support the

dissemination and synthesis of information on Iron Age and Roman finds;

record any evidence of past settlement or other land use;

recover artefactual evidence to date any evidence of past settlement that

may be identified;

sample and analyse environmental remains to create a better understanding

of past land use and economy.


10


4. METHODOLOGY

4.1 No separate WSI was prepared for this stage of fieldwork, which followed the

previously agreed methodology set out within the WSI (CA 2016 and 2017). An

archaeologist was present during intrusive groundworks comprising the stripping of

overburden (topsoil and subsoil) down to the natural substrate in the areas shown

on the attached plan (Fig. 2).

4.2 Where archaeological deposits were encountered written, graphic and photographic

records were compiled in accordance with CA Technical Manual 1: Fieldwork

Recording Manual.

4.3 The archive from the evaluation is currently held by CA at their offices in Milton

Keynes and following completion of the project will be deposited with Scarborough

Museum. A summary of information from this project, set out within Appendix B, will

be entered onto the OASIS online database of archaeological projects in Britain.

5. RESULTS (FIGS 2-22)

5.1 This section provides an overview of the fieldwork results (Figs 3 & 4). Detailed

summaries of the recorded contexts are to be found in Appendix A. The programme

of archaeological work recorded two sinuous features, interpreted as silted

palaeochannels, as well as two pits, six ditches and a stone-lined culvert, all of

which remained undated. No archaeological finds, features or deposits predating the

modern period were observed within Trenches 11 and 24.

Trench 11 (Figs 2, 3 & 5)

5.2 Trench 11 was situated on flat ground within an area of plantation woodland (Haxby

Plantation; Fig. 5). The natural substrate (3001), comprising light yellow red clay was

encountered at a depth of 0.28m below present ground level (bpgl). This was sealed

by dark brown black silty clay topsoil (3000), which contained a high organic content.

No finds, features or deposits of archaeological significance were encountered

within this trench.


11


Fig. 3


12


Fig. 4


13


Fig. 5 Trench 11, looking north-east

Trench 22 (Figs 2, 4 & 6 to 10)

5.3 Trench 22 was located in a rough pasture field at the northern limit of the site. The

natural substrate (2001), comprising light yellow grey sandy clay, with occasional

rounded stones, was encountered at a depth of 0.3m bpgl (Fig. 6). This was overlain

by mid grey brown silty clay topsoil (2000).

Fig. 6 Trench 22, looking north-east


14


5.4 Located at the north-eastern corner of the trench was feature 2026, which

superficially had the appearance of a pit in plan. Investigation of the feature found it

was amorphous in form, with an asymmetrical profile, irregular sloping sides and an

uneven base. It was filled by a sterile brown silt fill (2027) from which no dateable

material was recovered. It is interpreted as representing a naturally formed feature.

5.5 North-west/south-east orientated ditch 2010 (Fig. 7; section DD) was identified for a

length of 18m, cutting the natural substrate (2001). It measured 0.41m wide and

0.14m deep with steeply sloping concave sides and a slightly irregular base. No

finds were recovered from its mid grey brown silt fill (2011). Sealing fill 2011 was

topsoil 2000.

Fig. 7 Ditch 2010: section (scale 1:20)

5.6 Cutting the topsoil and subsequently the fill 2011 of ditch 2010 were parallel

east/west orientated features 2012 and 2014 (Fig. 8), interpreted as probable wheel

ruts. They were identified for a length of approximately 30m, separated from each

other by a c. 1.25m gap. Both contained a similar mid grey brown silty clay fill (2013

& 2015 respectively) and remained unexcavated.

Fig. 8 Wheel ruts 2012 & 2014, looking west (1m scales)


15


5.7 Located approximately 16m to the south of wheel ruts 2012 and 2014 was similarly

east/west orientated feature 2016 (Fig. 9). Although parallel with these wheel ruts

(2012 & 2014), ditch 2016 is considered likely to represent a field boundary ditch,

forming an element of the medieval/post-medieval field system. Ditch 2016

coincides with a feature depicted on the Lidar survey (Fig. 10)

Fig. 9 Ditch 2016 and wheel ruts 2012 & 2014 (Google Earth imagery 2018)

Fig. 10 Lidar, showing palaeochannels 2004 and 2018 and ditch 2016

Wheel ruts 2012 and 2014

Ditch 2016

Ditch 2016

Palaeochannels 2004 and 2018


16


5.8 Emanating from the western baulk of Trench 22 was north-east/south-west

orientated ditch 2020. It measured 14.85m long with a light grey brown sandy silt fill

(2021) from which no finds were recovered.

5.9 Coincidental with the south-eastern end of ditch 2020 was sinuous feature 2018,

interpreted as a probable palaeochannel. It was identified for a length of

approximately 30m, emanating from the western baulk of the trench. No finds were

recovered from its light grey brown silt fill (2019). Palaeochannel 2018 corresponds

with a sinuous feature identified through on the Lidar (Fig. 10) and geophysical

surveys. The relationship between ditch 2020 and palaeochannel 2018 could not be

determined.

Trench 23 (Figs 2, 4, & 11 to 14)

5.10 Trench 23 was located to the immediate south of Trench 22 in a rough pasture field

towards the northern limit of the site. The natural substrate (2001), comprising light

yellow grey sandy clay, with occasional rounded stones, was encountered at a depth

of 0.3m bpgl (Fig. 11). This was overlain by mid grey brown silty clay topsoil (2000).

All identified features cut the natural substrate and were sealed by the topsoil unless

otherwise stated.

Fig. 11 Trench 23, looking north-west (1m scale)


17


5.11 North-west/south-east orientated paleochannel 2004 was revealed for a length of

approximatley 60m extending from the southern baulk of the trench and exiting

through the western baulk (Fig. 12). It measured between approximately 10m and

20m wide. No finds were recovered from its mottled light brownish red and dark

reddish brown silty clay fill (2005).

Fig. 12 Palaeochannel 2004, looking west (2m scale)

5.12 Cutting the fill 2005 of palaeochannel 2004 was north-west/south-east orientated

ditch 2002 (Fig 13 & 14; section CC). It was revelaed for a legth of c. 60m eminating

from the western baulk of the trench and terminating approximately 4m from the

southern baulk. It measured 0.47m wide and 0.25m deep with moderately steeply

sloping uneven sides and a tapered base. No finds were recovered from its dark

grey brown silty clay fill (2003).


18


Fig. 13 Ditch 2002, looking west (0.5m scale)


Trench 24 (Figs 2, 3 & 15)

5.13 Trench 24 was situated on flat ground within an area of plantation woodland (Haxby

Plantation; Fig. 15). The natural substrate (4002), comprising light brownish grey

clay was encountered at a depth of 0.81m below present ground level (bpgl). This

was overlain by grey brown silty clay subsoil (4001), measuring 0.16m thick, which

was in turn sealed by sealed by dark grey brown silty clay topsoil (4000), which

contained a high organic content. No finds, features or deposits of archaeological

significance were encountered within this trench.


19


Fig. 15 Trench 24, looking south-west

Trench 25 (Figs 2, 3 & 16 to 21)

5.14 Located towards the south-western corner of the site, Trench 25 was located within

an area of former arable land. The natural geological substrate (1001), comprising

light orange yellow clay was encountered at a depth of 0.24m bpgl (Fig. 16). This

was overlain by mid grey brown silty clay topsoil (1000) which measured 0.24m

thick. The majority of the possible features identified within this Trench likely relate

to modern wheel ruts associated with the current development or previous

agricultural use of the site (Fig. 17).


20


Fig. 16 Trench 25, looking north-west

Fig. 17 Trench 25, showing disturbance prior to site strip (Google Earth Imagery

2018)

5.15 Emanating from the eastern baulk of the trench was probable wheel rut 1004, it was

recorded for a length of approximately 11m before terminating. The continuation of

this feature was identified c. 14m to the north-west as parallel wheel ruts 1007 (Figs

17 & 18).

5.16 No finds were recovered from their respective dark grey brown silty clay fills (1005

and 1008), which were derived from topsoil.


21


Fig. 18 Wheel ruts 1007, looking east (1m scales)

5.17 North/south orientated feature 1002 was located centrally within the trench (Fig. 19).

It had the appearance of a ditch in plan and follows the alignment of the surrounding

field system. On excavation it shared characteristics indicative of wheel ruts

excavated elsewhere on site, however, it is tentatively interpreted as the highly

truncated base of a field boundary ditch. No finds were recovered from its dark grey

brown silty clay fill (1003), which is derived from gradual natural silting.


22


Fig. 19 Ditch 1002, looking north (0.5m scale)

5.18 Located approximately 60m to the south-west of wheel ruts 1007 were further wheel

ruts 1012 and 1010 (Fig. 17).

5.19 Located within the south-western part of the site was circluar pit 1014 (Fig. 20;

section AA). It measured 0.5m long, 0.6m wide and 0.19m deep with steeply sloping

sides and an uneven base. No finds were recoverd from its single dark grey brown

silty clay fill (1015).

Fig. 20 Pit 1014: section (1:20)


23


5.20 Located to the immediate east was pit 1016. It was sub-oval in plan and measured

0.95m long, 0.55m wide and 0.17m deep, with moderately steeply sloping sides and

an uneven base. No finds were recovered from its single dark grey brown clay silt fill

(1017).

5.21 Located on the boundary between Trench 25 and Trench 26 was broadly north-

east/south-west orientated ditch 1018 (Fig. 21; section BB). It was recorded for a

length of 5.8m, measuring 0.5m wide and 0.11m deep. It had an asymmetrical

profile, with a steeply sloping south-eastern side and a gradually sloping north-

western side. No finds were recovered from its single light grey brown clay silt fill

(1019).

5.22 This feature corresponds with a field boundary first depicted on the 1853 Ordnance

Survey Map and shown on current mapping.


Trench 26 (Figs 2, 3, 20 & 21)

5.23 Located towards the south-western corner of the site, Trench 26 was located within

an area of former arable land. The natural geological substrate (5002), comprising

brownish yellow sandy clay was encountered across the majority of the trench at a

depth of 0.5m bpgl (Fig. 22), however, in places the natural was not revealed. The

natural substrate was overlain by grey brown silty clay subsoil (5001), measuring

0.2m thick. This was in turn sealed by dark grey brown clay silt topsoil (5000) which

measured 0.3m thick.


24


Fig. 22 Trench 26, looking east

5.24 Revealed for a length of 35m, emanating from the southern baulk of the trench was

north-west/south-east orientated culvert 5004 (Fig. 23). It measured 0.67m wide and

0.2m deep, with moderately steeply sloping sides and a flat base. Within the

construction cut were two parallel rows of deliberately placed sandstone blocks,

placed on edge, with a c. 0.2m gap between. These were capped by a further

sandstone block.

Fig. 23 Culvert 5003, looking south-east (0.3m scale)


25


6. DISCUSSION

6.1 The programme of archaeological works identified limited archaeological remains

within the area of observed groundworks. The watching brief has demonstrated that

archaeological remains relating to prehistoric funerary and settlement remains were

not present within the site.

6.2 No archaeological remains conclusively predating the post medieval/modern periods

were found during the course of this watching brief. The remains of six ditches, two

pits, two palaeochannels, one culvert and extensive modern disturbance in the form

of wheel ruts were revealed.

Field Systems

6.3 The watching brief identified ditches and agricultural features across the site. The

alignments of the ditches form at least two co-axial field systems. The ditches have

been grouped into those oriented north-west/south-east (Field System 1) and those

orientated broadly north/south and east/west (Field System 2).

6.4 Field System 1, comprised ditches 2016, 1002 and 1018. Although no dating

evidence was recovered, the cartographic evidence and morphological

characteristics suggests a date within the post-medieval/modern period for the field

system, with the ditches either depicted on historic Ordnance survey mapping or

conforming to the pattern of the established field systems as depicted on current and

historic Ordnance Survey mapping. The surrounding field systems predominantly

relate to Parliamentary Enclosures of the post-medieval period, with surviving

elements of earlier medieval strip fields also present.

6.5 Field System 2, comprised ditches 2010, 2020 and 2002. No dateable material was

recovered from the fill of these ditches, which could not be attributed to the putative

post-medieval field system. As such it remains difficult to confidently date the field

system, although given its differing alignment to the current field arrangement, it is

suggested that it pre-dates the post-medieval period.

Post-medieval (1540 to 1800)

6.6 A culvert of likely post-medieval date was identified within Trench 26. This was

broadly parallel with the B1416 road, located approximately 250m to the south-west.


26


Modern (1800 to present)

6.7 Evidence of modern disturbance was identified across the site, presumably

associated both with the sites former agricultural uses and the current development,

as evidenced by wheel ruts identified penetrating the natural substrate. It is not

considered that this has had an adverse effect on any potential buried

archaeological features or deposits.

Undated

6.8 It was not possible to attribute undated pits 1014 and 1016, recorded in Trench 25,

to any of the identified phases of activity and they remain undated.

Natural Features

6.9 An extensive, sinuous, but broadly linear feature (2004), on a broadly north-

west/south-east alignment, was exposed during the watching brief. The feature was

interpreted as a probable palaeochannel based on its morphology and fill

characteristics. It was recorded in Trench 23 as feature 2004, measuring between

approximately 10m and 20m wide. A further palaeochannel or winterbourne (2018),

probably of more recent date was recorded in Trench 22.

6.10 The absence of significant archaeological deposits within the area of observed

groundworks may indicate that any potential remains associated with prehistoric

activity either do not extend as far as the development, were not exposed by the

development, or have been removed by previous activity.

7. CA PROJECT TEAM

7.1 Fieldwork was undertaken by Ed Grenier, Molly Day and Robert Falvey. The report

was written by Stuart Joyce. The illustrations were prepared by Tom Brown. The

archive has been compiled by Emily Evans and prepared for deposition by Hazel

O’Neill. The project was managed for CA by Stuart Joyce.


27


10. REFERENCES

BGS (British Geological Survey) 2018 Geology of Britain Viewer

http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html Accessed 23 January 2018

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2012a Doves Nest North, North York Moors: Heritage Desk-

Based Assessment. CA Report No. 12385

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2012b Potash Exploration, Dove’s Nest, Sneaton, North York

Moors: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment. CA Report No. 12108

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2013 Potash Exploration, North Yorkshire: Programme of

Archaeological Works (Phase 2). CA typescript report 13504

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2014a Minehead at Land at Doves Nest Farm, Sneaton, North

Yorkshire, Archaeological Watching Brief (Phase 4; June to July 2014). CA

typescript report no 14309

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2014b Potash Minehead, Doves Nest Farm, North York Moors:

Heritage Desk-Based Assessment. CA Report No. 14146

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2016 Minehead at Land at Doves Nest, Sneaton, North

Yorkshire: Written Scheme of Investigation for a Programme of Archaeological

Works. Document number: 660829/D

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2017 Woodsmith Mine, Sneaton, North Yorkshire Phase 3:

Written Scheme of Investigation for an Archaeological Watching Brief, Document

number: 40-COT-WS-70-EN-PL-0003

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2018 Woodsmith Mine, Sneaton, North Yorkshire Phases 2 & 3:

programme of Archaeological Work, Document number: 40-COT-WS-8324-EN-PD-

00001_Rev 1

CIfA, 2014 Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Watching Brief. Chartered Institute for

Archaeologists (Reading)

http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html


28


CIfA 2014 Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Excavation. Chartered Institute for

Archaeologists (Reading)

Furgo 2014 York Potash Pipeline Ariel LiDAR Survey: Survey report

GSB Prospection Ltd 2012 Geophysical Survey at Potash Minehead Site North York Moors:

Geophysical Survey Report 2012/63

RHDHV (Royal HaskoningDHV) 2014 York Potash Project Mine, MTS and MHF

Environmental Statement: Part 2, Chapter 13 Cultural Heritage Ref:

PB1110/303688/Lond


29


APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS

Trench Number

Context Type Fill of

Context Interpretation

Context Description Length (m)

Width (m)

Thickness (m)

11 3000 Layer Topsoil Dark brown black silty clay with a high organic content

0.28

11 3001 Layer Natural Substrate

Light yellow red clay -

22/23 2000 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silty clay 0.3

22/23 2001 Layer Natural Substrate

Light yellow grey sandy clay, with occasional rounded stones

23 2002 Cut Ditch North west/south-east

orientated. Moderately steeply

sloping uneven sides and a tapered base

60 0.47 0.25

23 2003 Fill 2002 Fill of ditch Dark grey brown silty clay 60 0.47 0.25

23 2004 Cut Paleochannel North-west/south-east orientated

60 10-20

23 2005 Fill 2004 Paleochannel mottled light brownish red and dark reddish brown silty clay

60 10-20

22 2010 Cut Ditch Steeply sloping concave sides and a slightly irregular base

0.41 0.14

22 2011 Fill 2010 Fill of ditch Mid grey brown silt 0.41 0.14

22 2012 Cut Wheel ruts

22 2013 Fill 2012 Fill of wheel ruts Mid grey brown silty clay

22 2014 Cut Wheel ruts

22 2015 Fill 2014 Fill of wheel ruts Mid grey brown silty clay

22 2016 Cut Ditch Linear, diffuse edges

22 2017 Fill 2016 Fill of ditch Mid brown silt with occasional stones

22 2018 Cut Palaeochannel Amorphous in plan, orientated broadly nw/se

30

22 2019 Fill 2019 Fill of palaeochannel

light grey brown silt 30

22 2020 Cut Ditch North east/south-west orientated

14.85

22 2021 Fill 2020 Fill of ditch Light grey brown sandy silt fill 14.85

22 2026 Cut Natural feature Asymmetrical profile, irregular sloping sides and an uneven base

22 2027 Fill 2026 Natural fill sterile brown silt

24 4000 Layer Topsoil dark grey brown silty clay 0.65

24 4001 Layer Subsoil grey brown silty clay

0.16

24 4002 Layer Natural light brownish grey clay


30


25 1000 Layer Topsoil mid grey brown silty clay 0.24

25 1001 Layer Natural Light orange yellow clay

25 1002 Cut Ditch Nw/se orientated field boundary ditch

0.38 0.05

25 1003 Fill 1002 Fill of ditch Light grey black silty clay 0.38 0.05

25 1004 Cut Wheel rut

25 1005 Fill 1004 Fill of wheel rut dark grey brown silty clay fills

25 1007 Cut wheel rut






25 1014 Cut Pit Circular pit with steeply sloping sides and an uneven base

0.5 0.6 0.19

25 1015 Fill 1015 Fill of pit Dark grey brown silty clay 0.5 0.6 0.19

25 1016 Cut Pit Sub-oval in plan, with moderately steeply sloping sides and an uneven base

0.95 0.55 0.17

25 1017 Fill 1016 Fill of pit dark grey brown clay silt 0.95 0.55 0.17

25 1018 Cut Ditch Broadly north-east/south-west orientated. Asymmetrical profile, with a steeply sloping south-eastern side and a gradually sloping north-western side

5.8 0.5 0.11

25 1019 Fill 1018 Fill of ditch Light grey brown clay silt 5.8 0.5 0.11

26 5000 Layer Topsoil dark grey brown clay silt

0.3

26 5001 Layer Subsoil grey brown silty clay 0.2

26 5002 Layer Natural brownish yellow sandy clay

26 5003 Masonry Stone culvert Two parallel rows of deliberately placed sandstone blocks, placed on edge, with a c. 0.2m gap between. These were capped by a further sandstone block.

35 0.67 0.2

26 5004 Cut Cut of culvert Moderately steeply sloping sides and a flat base

35 0.67 0.2

26 5005 Fill 5004 Fill of cut Brown grey clay silt 35 0.67 0.2


31



32



33


APPENDIX B: OASIS REPORT FORM

PROJECT DETAILS

Project Name Woodsmith Mine, Sneaton, North Yorkshire: Programme of Archaeological Works

Short description

An Archaeological Watching Brief was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology between June and December 2018 at Woodsmith Mine, Sneaton, North Yorkshire. The fieldwork was undertaken to satisfy the requirements of condition 95 of planning permission NYM/2014/0676/MEIA. Archaeological interest in the site is derived from its location within the North York Moors National Park, which is known to contain extensive examples of Late Neolithic rock art and is rich in well preserved prehistoric funerary and settlement remains. The works comprised a watching brief during the mechanical stripping of overburden from six areas down to the natural geological substrate. This revealed two sinuous features, interpreted as silted palaeochannels, as well as partial elements of at least two field systems. Although these field systems remained undated artefactually, they have been assigned to either the pre-medieval period or the post-medieval period based on their relationships with one another, their morphological characteristics and cartographic analysis In addition, a stone lined culvert of probable post-medieval date and two undated pits were also identified.

Project dates June to December 2018

Project type Watching Brief

Previous work

Watching Brief (CA 2013) Geophysical survey (GSB 2014) Programme of Archaeological Works (CA 2017)

Future work Unknown

PROJECT LOCATION

Site Location Woodsmith Mine, Sneaton, North Yorkshire

Study area (M2/ha) 50 ha

Site co-ordinates 489446 505168

PROJECT CREATORS

Name of organisation Cotswold Archaeology

Project Brief originator Organisation who wrote the brief

Project Design (WSI) originator Cotswold Archaeology

Project Manager Stuart Joyce

Project Supervisor Ed Grenier, Molly Day and Robert Falvey

MONUMENT TYPE none

SIGNIFICANT FINDS none

PROJECT ARCHIVES Intended final location of archive Content

Physical none none

Paper Scarborough Museum WSI, Pro-forma recording sheets and registers

Digital Scarborough Museum Digital photographs, digital survey records.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2018 Woodsmith Mine, Sneaton, North Yorkshire: Programme of Archaeological Work. CA typescript report 18716

34

Documents

Woodsmith Mine Sneaton North Yorkshire · 2019. 11. 29. · Woodsmith Mine Sneaton North Yorkshire Archaeological Watching Brief CA Project: 660829 CA Report: 18716 Document Number: