Most of what I've posted on this site comes from written sources. As you go farther back in history, the written sources get fewer and fewer. And, there's a part of history for which there are no written sources at all. So here we have to look and see what the twin disciplines of archaeology and landscape archaeology have to tell us.
The first archaeologists, motivated by curiosity about sites like Stonehenge and Avebury, worked in the 17th and 18th centuries. They were men of wealth and could employ local labourers as diggers. As the 19th century progressed, so archaeology evolved into a discipline, and excavations were conducted systematically. Over the latter years of the 20th and into the 21st century, technological advances such as aerial photography, radiocarbon dating, CT scanning, ground penetrating radar and LiDAR (light detection and ranging), as well as the use of drones, have allowed spectacular advances. Since 1990, Planning Policy Guidance Note 16 has ensured that archaeology is considered when determining planning applications. In and around Great Shelford an increasing number of archaeological assessments and/or digs have taken place. As a result, far more is known about the wider parish than even 50 years ago.
At Nine Wells
Multiple springs rise at Nine Wells, which made it of interest when Cambridge was looking for a clean water supply in the early 17th century. But archaeological investigation has confirmed that the springs were a focus of activity long before then. This isn't surprising - water has always been a vital resource. In and after 2014, archaeologists selected a series of quadrats (squares), 20m x 20m, for field-walking. The quadrats yielded a total of 66 worked flints, plus a hammerstone, pieces of burnt flint and burnt stone. The archaeologists concluded that these are "likely to be the product of Neolithic flint working and includes pieces likely to be of both early and late Neolithic date", and that the material was probably part of a wider area of scatter, evidence of a long period of prehistoric activity in the area around the springs.
At the same time, interesting cropmarks were identified in an arable field just to the east of Nine Wells. These were identified as a ring-ditch, effectively a roughly circular ditch dug into the soil, with a bank on the outside. Over the centuries, the ditch had filled in and was buried by layers of material which had washed down the slope from Whitehill. Lines of boreholes were sunk across different parts of the ditch. These showed a ditch which was in many places 2.5m deep and 6-8m wide. There was an entrance on the north-eastern side. There were limited finds, but these suggest that the ditch belonged to the Iron Age, possibly the early 4th century BC. No conclusions could be drawn as to its reason for existence, though the report on it commented on the "degree of architectural ‘aggrandisement’" suggested by its size and by some of its other features.
Matters were slightly complicated by the presence of another, linear cropmark - a dich and bank - running roughly north-east to south-west, through and beyond the ring-ditch on either side. It's not clear when this was built, or what purpose it served.
As always, the conclusion arrived at was that it deserved more archaeological investigation.
Source:
Boreham, Steve, Boreham, Julie and Billington, Lawrence (2021). The Nine Wells Ring-ditch, Great Shelford. Proceedings of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society, 110, p. 25-38.
You can read the full report here archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archiveDS/archiveDownload?t=arch-1895-1/dissemination/pdf/PCAS/PCAS2021_publish2024/PCAS_CX_2021_025-038_Boreham_Boreham_Billington.pdf