Abstract
The Overton Down Experimental Earthwork, constructed in 1960
on the chalk downs of Wiltshire, was conceived as one of archaeology’s most
ambitious long-term scientific experiments. Designed to reveal how earthworks
and buried materials change over time, it followed a geometric excavation
schedule at 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 and 128 years. While the experiment generated
landmark insights during the first five excavation phases (1962–1992), the
scheduled 64-year section in 2024 has not taken place and no future excavation
is currently planned. This article reviews the history of the project, explores
the reasons behind the lapse, assesses the scientific costs of missing the
64-year data point, and outlines practical steps that could restore momentum to
this unique experimental resource.
1. Introduction
The Overton Down Experimental Earthwork remains a
cornerstone of experimental archaeology. Constructed in 1960 and first
excavated in 1962, it was designed to test processes of degradation,
preservation, erosion, soil formation and artefact movement within a precisely
controlled artificial monument. The experiment’s strength lay in its long-term
design: scheduled excavations at geometrically increasing intervals would allow
archaeologists to chart both the rapid initial changes and the much slower
processes expected to dominate over decades.
Up to the mid-1990s the project retained impressive
continuity, culminating in the comprehensive synthesis published as CBA
Research Report 100 (Bell, Fowler & Hillson 1996). That volume looked
ahead confidently to the 64-year excavation in 2024. However, despite the
earthwork remaining intact and accessible, no such excavation has occurred and
no successor body has taken responsibility for the project’s continuation.
2. Origins and Design of the Experiment
The earthwork was initiated by the British Association for
the Advancement of Science (now the British Science Association) under the
guidance of its Experimental Earthworks Committee. The aim was simple but
innovative: to construct a full-scale prehistoric-style monument using
authentic tools and materials, bury a wide variety of organic and inorganic
items in known positions, and observe precisely how natural processes
transformed it.
2.1 Construction and Layout
In 1960 a chalk-cut ditch was excavated on Overton Down and
the upcast chalk formed into a bank revetted with stacked turf. A cleaned berm
separated ditch and bank. A parallel experiment was established on acidic
heathland at Wareham, Dorset, to provide a contrasting depositional environment
(Macphail & Cruise 2001).
2.2 Buried Materials and Monitoring
Hundreds of items were buried under controlled conditions:
textiles, leather, wood, bone, pottery, metal coins, modern materials and
Lycopodium spore tablets used as tracers. Soil chemistry, vegetation
succession, molluscan assemblages, biological activity and geomorphological
change were monitored over the decades (Jewell & Dimbleby 1966; Ashbee
& Jewell 1967).
3. Results of the 2–32 Year Excavations (1962–1992)
Between 1962 and 1992 five scheduled excavations took place:
- 2
years (1962)
- 4
years (1964)
- 8
years (1968)
- 16
years (1976)
- 32
years (1992)
Combined, these offered unprecedented insights into
experimental taphonomy and earthwork dynamics. Key findings included:
3.1 Structural Change
- Rapid
initial slumping and silting of the ditch.
- Early
stabilisation of the turf-faced bank.
- Development
of biological and geomorphological equilibrium after roughly 30 years.
3.2 Artefact and Ecofact Preservation
- Chalk
conditions yielded excellent preservation of bone and some organics,
though fungal and microbial attack was significant (Denys 2002).
- Seed
burial experiments demonstrated varying levels of long-term viability,
with some species surviving even after 32 years (Hendry, Thompson &
Band 1995).
3.3 Broader Archaeological Applications
Data from Overton Down informed interpretations of
prehistoric monuments such as Avebury, Maiden Castle and the Dorset Cursus,
enabling more accurate reconstructions of ditch profiles, erosion rates and
taphonomic pathways.
The cumulative work up to 1992 established Overton Down as
the gold standard for controlled experimental earthworks.
4. The Missing 64-Year Excavation (2024)
Despite the clear schedule laid out in the 1996 synthesis,
the 64-year excavation planned for 2024 did not occur. Searches of Historic
England records, ADS archives, institutional research pages and grant databases
reveal no evidence of proposals, funding bids or excavation reports relating to
a continuation of the experiment.
4.1 Probable Causes
The most plausible explanation is institutional attrition.
By the early 2000s many founding researchers were retired or deceased, and the
original Experimental Earthworks Committee appears to have become inactive.
Without a dedicated institution or ring-fenced funding, responsibility for the
project’s long-term stewardship effectively dissolved.
4.2 Consequences of Administrative Drift
Long-term experiments depend on continuity of oversight more
than continuity of personnel. The failure to designate a successor body—whether
a university department, the CBA, Historic England, or a consortium—meant that
when generational handover arrived, the project quietly lost momentum.
5. Scientific Implications of Missing the 64-Year Cut
The absence of the 64-year data point has significant
scientific repercussions.
5.1 Broken Geometric Sequence
The doubling interval (2 → 4 → 8 → 16 → 32 → 64 → 128 years)
was fundamental to the project’s design. Missing the scheduled excavation not
only breaks the sequence but leaves a 32-year gap that reduces the power of
long-term modelling.
5.2 Loss of Knowledge about Long-Term Process Rates
By 32 years, many processes—bank consolidation, ditch
infilling, phosphate migration, and microbially driven decay—seemed to be
approaching equilibrium. The 64-year excavation would have clarified whether
genuine stability had been reached or whether slow, cumulative processes
persist over longer timescales.
5.3 Reduced Relevance for Modern Archaeological Science
Current taphonomic modelling, environmental reconstruction
and cultural resource management depend on quantified long-term datasets.
Overton Down remains the global benchmark for controlled earthwork experiments,
but the longer the interval continues unexamined, the less confidently its
earlier findings can be extrapolated.
6. Why Continued Excavation Matters
The value of long-term experiments lies not only in the data
already gathered but in their extended trajectories. Delays in excavation
introduce several risks:
6.1 Degradation of Buried Materials
Organic materials continue to decay, sometimes
exponentially. Even small shifts in soil chemistry or hydrology can render
long-term comparisons less meaningful (Armour-Chelu & Andrews 1994).
6.2 Loss of Temporal Resolution
Each missed interval compromises the interpretive power of
previous sections. Seed viability experiments, for example, show measurable
changes over multi-decade timescales (Hendry et al. 1995).
6.3 Diminished Return on Investment
More than sixty years of labour, planning and monitoring
were intended to culminate in a multi-century dataset. Interrupting the
sequence undermines the original scientific rationale and wastes accumulated
potential.
7. What Can Still Be Done?
The 2001 Archaeological Research Agenda for the Avebury
World Heritage Site https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/archaeological-research-agenda-avebury/archaeological-res-agenda-avebury-whs/
(compiled by the Avebury Archaeological
& Historical Research Group and published by English Heritage) devotes
substantial attention to the Overton Down Experimental Earthwork, describing it
in detail as a flagship long-term project located on Overton Down within the
broader Avebury landscape and explicitly framing it as a vital research asset
for the WHS.
Key points from the document include:
- Recognition
of the earthwork as the longest-running programme of the Experimental
Earthworks Committee (established 1958), designed to study denudation,
silting, and the deterioration of buried materials under controlled
conditions (with a sister site at Wareham, Dorset).
- Emphasis
on its interdisciplinary value, providing directly comparable data for
interpreting prehistoric monuments in the chalk downland environment that
defines much of the Avebury WHS.
- Specific
observations already yielding archaeological insights (e.g. rapid initial
stabilisation of the ditch, implications for deliberate backfilling of
Neolithic ditches, contamination risks illustrated by Roman pottery in
early erosion layers, and vegetation succession relevant to downland
management).
- An
isometric drawing (Fig. 21) and explicit recommendations to continue
monitoring and planned interventions at the 64-year and subsequent
sections (including 128 years), while sustaining the team approach and
adding new analyses without compromising the original design.
Given this clear endorsement in the foundational 2001
Research Agenda – a document that directly shaped the current Stonehenge and
Avebury WHS Research Framework https://www.stonehengeandaveburywhs.org/assets/WHS-Research-Agenda-and-Strategy.pdf
– and https://www.stonehengeandaveburywhs.org/assets/Avebury-Resource-Assesment.pdf
the Avebury and Stonehenge Archaeological and Historical Research Group
(ASAHRG) has a strong precedent and obligation to act; it should designate
revival of the Overton Down experiment as a high-priority objective in the next
full update of the joint Research Framework. It should seek to obtain landowner permission to initiate low-cost
non-destructive monitoring (drone LiDAR, geophysics, vegetation quadrats, and
soil sampling), and coordinate with Historic England, the British Science
Association, universities, and the landowner to secure funding and oversight
for a delayed (e.g. 66- or 70-year) excavation, thereby preventing irreversible
loss of this uniquely time-controlled dataset that remains central to
understanding site-formation processes across the World Heritage Site.
8. Conclusion
The Overton Down Experimental Earthwork is not a failed
experiment but a dormant one. Its first 32 years produced some of the most
rigorous, influential and widely applied data in experimental archaeology. The
failure to conduct the 64-year excavation threatens the integrity of the
long-term dataset but does not diminish the site’s potential. With renewed
attention, modest funding and coordinated leadership, Overton Down can still
fulfil the vision of its creators and continue contributing to archaeological
science for decades—indeed, centuries—to come.
References
Armour-Chelu, M. Jane. and Andrews, P. (1994). Some
effects of bioturbation by earthworms (oligochaeta) on archaeological
sites. J Archaeol Sci 21 (4). Vol 21(4), pp. 433-443.
Ashbee, P. and Cornwall, I.W., 1961. An experiment in
field archaeology. Antiquity, 35(138), pp.129-134.
Ashbee, P. and Jewell, P. (1998) ‘The Experimental
Earthworks revisited’, Antiquity, 72(277), pp. 485–504.
doi:10.1017/S0003598X00086920.
Bell, M., Fowler, P.J. & Hillson, S.W. (eds) (1996) The
Experimental Earthwork Project, 1960–1992. York: Council for British
Archaeology. Research Report 100.
1996. £36.00’, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society https://doi.org/10.5284/1081763.
Crabtree, K. (1971). Overton Down experimental earthwork,
Wiltshire, 1968: geomorphology of the ditch section. Proc Univ Bristol
Spelaeol Soc 12 (3). Vol 12(3), pp. 237-244.
Crowther, J., Macphail, R. I. and Cruise, G. M. (1996).
Short-term, post-burial change in a humic rendzina soil, Overton Down
Experimental Earthwork, Wiltshire, England. Geoarchaeology. Vol
11(2), pp. 95-117
Denys, C. (2002), Taphonomy and experimentation.
Archaeometry, 44: 469-484. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-4754.00079
Hendry, G.A.F., Thompson, K. and Band, S.R., 1995. Seed
survival and persistence on a calcareous land surface after a 32‐year
burial. Journal of Vegetation Science, 6(1),
pp.153-156.
Jewell, P.A. ed., 1963. The Experimental
Earthwork on Overton Down, Wiltshire, 1960: An Account of the Construction of
an Earthwork to Investigate by Experiment the Way in which Archaeological
Structures are Denuded and Buried. British Association for the Advancement
of Science.
Jewell, P.A. and Dimbleby, G.W., 1966, December. The
experimental earthwork on Overton Down, Wiltshire, England: the first four
years. In Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society (Vol. 32, pp.
313-342). Cambridge University Press.
