Recorded as a quarry in archaeological registers during the late twentieth century, it occupies that quietly awkward category of places that were once considered significant enough to document, but which subsequent scrutiny could not confirm as anything definite at all.

The site was listed as a quarry in two successive records, the first in 1988 and again in 1998, suggesting it attracted enough attention across a decade to be carried forward from one register to the next. Yet the evidence, whatever form it took, never met the threshold required to classify the location as a genuine archaeological monument. That distinction matters. A confirmed monument carries legal protections and invites further investigation; a site that fails to meet the standard occupies a kind of limbo, noted but unresolved, present on the map without quite belonging to history.