The Perils of Pits: Further Research at Durrington Walls Henge (2021–2025)

Gaffney, V., Baldwin, E., Allaby, R., Bates, M., Bates, R., Finlay, A., Gaffney, C., Hansford, T., Kinnaird, T., Neubauer, W., Löcker, K., Sparrow, T., Trinks, I., Wallner, M. and Ch’ng, E. 2025 The Perils of Pits: further research at Durrington Walls henge (2021-2025), Internet Archaeology 69. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.69.19

Figure 1: Plan of the pit structure associated with Durrington Walls Henge. Features 1A–9A form an 'arc' south of Durrington Walls in Amesbury parish, while 10D–16D (formerly v) form a northern 'arc' in Durrington parish. Four additional features, noted from other sources including aerial photographs, excavation or topographic modelling, are annotated with roman numerals i–iv. Lidar derived digital surface model (shaded) with OS 10K overlay © Environment Agency copyright and database right 2024. All rights reserved. Lidar (composite sources) DTM 1m resolution, Scale 1:4000 with gaps filled by DTM 2m resolution, Scale 1:8000 – Ordnance Survey (100025252)/EDINA supplied Service. http://digimap.edina.ac.uk

Gaffney et al. (2025) present results from five years of targeted investigations into enigmatic large pits encircling Durrington Walls henge, a Late Neolithic monument within the Stonehenge World Heritage Site. Building on initial geophysical detections from 2010–2020, the study confirms 16 pits in southern (1A–9A) and northern (10D–16D) arcs, probing their status as deliberate prehistoric features or mere geological quirks. Led by Vincent Gaffney, the team deploys an array of geophysical and analytical tools to settle the matter, framing the pits as key to a broader ritual landscape. Amid scepticism branding them sinkholes, this work underscores the 'perils' of hasty dismissal in Chalk country archaeology.

Fieldwork integrated non-invasive geophysics with invasive sampling across selected pits. Fluxgate gradiometry and ground-penetrating radar mapped circular anomalies 14–20 m in diameter, while electrical resistance tomography profiles revealed low-resistivity voids up to 5 m deep (Figures 4–18; Tables 3–7). Borehole coring at sites including 1A, 13D, and 16D supplied sediment sequences for inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectroscopy, yielding chemostratigraphic correlations via ratios like CaO/K₂O and P₂O₅/K₂O (Figure 20; Table 9). Optically stimulated luminescence dating fixed infilling to c. 3000–2500 BCE (Table 10), and sedimentary ancient DNA profiling detected Bos signals universally alongside Ovis in southern pits, implying animal deposition (Figure 22). These uniform dimensions—16–18 m diameters within Head deposits—signal consistent anthropogenic intervention (Table 5).

The pits emerge as engineered components of a Neolithic enclosure, their arcs potentially aligning with solstitial paths to Stonehenge - see Gaffney (2020). Phased infills, from chalk bases to clay caps, align with OSL clusters at 2800–2600 BCE, evoking structured rituals tied to the henge's feasting legacy (Table 10). SedaDNA hints at selective offerings, recasting Durrington Walls as a monumental hub for territorial or ceremonial demarcation, akin to causewayed enclosures. This interpretation elevates the pits beyond anomalies, illuminating Late Neolithic landscape agency.

Vincent Gaffney and colleagues strike back forcefully at detractors like Ruggles and Chadburn (2024) and Leivers (2021), who peg the features as natural solution hollows lacking artefactual proof. The team counters with multi-proxy rigour: uniform magnetic dipoles, ERT voids, and non-random chemo-zones defy sinkhole variability, while Neolithic dating precludes coincidence (Figures 24–26). 'Even if natural basins played a part,' they retort, 'modification into arcs betrays intent'—a direct riposte to claims of geological determinism. Hybrid models are entertained but sidelined by the pits' symmetry and shared fills, exposing flaws in single-method critiques that ignored 2021 data.

Affirming the pits as cultural artefacts, the study bolsters narratives of Neolithic connectivity and ritual scale (Bradley 1998, 2012), with Larkhill's outlier chalked up to modern meddling (Figure 7). It champions open data via the Archaeology Data Service, urging caution in Chalk interpretations to safeguard heritage. Gaffney et al. thus not only vindicate their 'pits as pits' stance but equip future probes with a blueprint for disentangling nature from Neolithic design. 

Ref: Gaffney, V. et al. 2020 A Massive, Late Neolithic Pit Structure associated with Durrington Walls Henge, Internet Archaeology 55. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.55.4