At Sizewell C, the Oxford Cotswold Archaeology archaeological team is uncovering remarkable insights into Neolithic life, dating back between 6,000 and 4,200 years ago. Through their dedicated work, they have discovered numerous pits which, though modest in appearance, hold invaluable clues about the people who once lived in this area. These features offer a unique window into the everyday lives and customs of Neolithic communities.

While these pits might not seem as visually striking as other Neolithic structures like long barrows or enclosures, they provide a rare opportunity to understand the daily lives of the individuals who created them. The finds include pottery, worked flint, charcoal, animal bones (where they’ve survived the acidic sandy soil), and charred hazelnut shells. Most of the pits are circular and bowl-shaped, around 1 meter in diameter and 0.5 meters deep, though a few much larger examples—up to 3 meters wide and 2 meters deep—may have served different purposes.

Though often assumed to be domestic waste pits, their function appears to be more complex. They are too small for storage or quarrying, and while they contain everyday items, the quantity and arrangement suggest something beyond mere rubbish disposal. Some finds seem deliberately placed, which may indicate ritual or symbolic significance. It’s possible that these pits marked important moments in the life of the settlement—perhaps serving as a way to claim the land or commemorate an event.

Similar practices have been observed at Durrington Walls, near Stonehenge. There, well-preserved houses were found built over pits; when a house was abandoned, a new pit would be dug through its floor and filled with household refuse—possibly as a kind of farewell ritual. While intriguing, Durrington Walls dates over a thousand years later than the Sizewell pits, so the parallels, while compelling, raise further questions.

A simpler theory is that the pits were latrines later filled with refuse when the settlement was abandoned. Their frequent appearance in pairs or small groups might support this idea, suggesting seasonal reoccupation and reuse of the same areas. To explore this, archaeologists plan to closely analyze the soil in search of microscopic evidence of past human waste.

Interestingly, about half a dozen much larger pits have also been discovered at Sizewell. These are extremely rare in Britain and may have been used to store grain. Such storage pits—with straight sides and flat bottoms—are more commonly associated with the Iron Age, but their presence here is noteworthy. One of the pits contained a quern stone (used for grinding grain), while another held a large, upside-down pot at its base—perhaps used to cover stored food, which was never retrieved.

Pits at Sizewell occur individually, in pairs, in small clusters, or in larger concentrations—patterns which may hold significance. Do larger clusters point to longer-term or more densely populated settlements? One area alone yielded about 300 Early Neolithic pits, a discovery of regional importance. While similar clusters have been found elsewhere in East Anglia—such as Kilverstone and Hurst Fen—such dense concentrations are otherwise unknown in the UK.

Curiously, this region east of the Fens has very few causewayed enclosures, which elsewhere served as communal gathering sites for Neolithic populations. It’s possible that these extensive pit groups functioned in a similar way—serving as places of gathering, ceremony, and exchange, but without monumental architecture.

The development of Sizewell C offers a unique opportunity to investigate these possibilities further. By comparing sites across the landscape, archaeologists hope to uncover broader patterns: Were different flint-working techniques used at different locations? Does the presence of decorated pottery suggest higher-status individuals or sites? Environmental finds, such as charred hazelnut shells, might reveal the seasons in which sites were occupied and provide material for radiocarbon dating—offering insights into how long each site was used, and which ones may have existed simultaneously.