2016/1313 St George’s Court, Globe Street, …...2016/01/04 · Overview Andrew Crowson Draft John Ames 09.03.2016 Graphics David Dobson 10.03.2016 Edit Andrew Crowson 11.03.2016

nps archaeology

2016/1313

St George’s Court, Globe Street, Methwold, Norfolk, IP26 4PQ

Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation

Prepared for: Windsor Architectural

ENF 139988

March 2016

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

nps archaeology

QUALITY ASSURANCE

Job Number 01-04-16-2-1313

Overview Andrew Crowson

Draft John Ames 09.03.2016

Graphics David Dobson 10.03.2016

Edit Andrew Crowson 11.03.2016

Review David Adams 14.03.2016

Issue 1

John Ames MCIfA Author, digitising

Sue Anderson BA MPhil MCIfA FSA Scot Pottery

Julie Curl HND ACIfA Animal bone and shell

Rebecca Sillwood BA, ACIfA Finds recording, metal finds

Louise Weetman BA Finds processing

Disclaimer This document has been prepared in good faith on the basis of information available at the date of publication without any independent verification for the exclusive use and benefit of the named client and for the sole purpose for which it is provided. NPS Archaeology does not guarantee the accuracy, reliability, completeness, or currency of the content of this document nor its usefulness in achieving any purpose. This document is not intended to nor should it be relied upon by any third party. NPS Archaeology accepts no responsibility nor liability should this document be used for any alternative purpose other than for which it is intended nor to any third party. NPS Archaeology will not be liable for any loss, damage, cost, or expense incurred or arising by reason of any person using or relying on information in this document.

nps archaeology Scandic House 85 Mountergate Norwich NR1 1PY T 01603 756150 F 01603 756190 E [email protected] W nau.nps.co.uk © NPS Archaeology Ltd 2016, all rights reserved

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

nps archaeology St George’s Court, Globe Street, Methwold, Norfolk Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation

Contents

Summary ........................................................................................................ 1

Introduction.............................................................................................................. 1

Project Background ......................................................................................... 1

Planning Background ...................................................................................... 1

Geology and Topography ........................................................................................ 3

Geology .......................................................................................................... 3

Topography ..................................................................................................... 3

Archaeological and Historical Background .............................................................. 4

Sources ........................................................................................................... 4

HER data ........................................................................................................ 4

Methodology ............................................................................................................ 7

Objectives ....................................................................................................... 7

Methods .......................................................................................................... 7

Archive ............................................................................................................ 8

Results .................................................................................................................. 10

Trench 1 ........................................................................................................ 10

Trench 2 ........................................................................................................ 16

Trench 3 ........................................................................................................ 18

Trench 4 ........................................................................................................ 23

Trench 5 ........................................................................................................ 26

Archaeological Finds ............................................................................................. 31

Pottery .......................................................................................................... 31

Metal Finds ................................................................................................... 32

Faunal Remains ............................................................................................ 33

Environmental Remains ........................................................................................ 36

Discussion ............................................................................................................. 37

Acknowledgements ....................................................................................... 38

Bibliography and Sources ............................................................................. 39

Appendix 1a: Context Summary ................................................................... 40

Appendix 2a: Finds by Context ..................................................................... 43

Appendix 2b: Finds Summary ....................................................................... 43

Appendix 3: Pottery Catalogue ..................................................................... 43

Appendix 4: Animal Bone Catalogue ............................................................ 44

Appendix 5: Historical and Archaeological Periods ....................................... 45

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Appendix 6: OASIS Report Summary .......................................................... 46

Appendix 7: Archaeological Specification .................................................... 50

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Figures

Figure 1 Site location with selected HER data

Figure 2 Location of trenches

Figure 3 Trench 1, plan

Figure 4 Trench 1, sections 1-9

Figure 5 Trench 2, plan and sections 1-2



Figure 8 Trench 4, plan and section 1



Plates

Cover View of the site, looking southwest

Plate 1. General shot of the site, looking southeast

Plate 2. Trench 1. Ditches 28 and 30, looking north

Plate 3. Trench 3. Post-hole 52 and ditches 50, 58 and 60, looking southeast

Plate 4. Trench 3. Showing chalk deposit 64, looking south

Plate 5. Trench 4. West-facing section north end

Plate 6. Trench 4. Sondage 70, looking west

Plate 7. Trench 5. Ditches 13 and 15, looking south

Tables

Table 1 Site archive quantification

Table 2 Pottery quantification by fabric

Table 3 Pottery distribution by context

Table 4 Quantification of the faunal assemblage by context number, spot date, weight in grams and fragment count

Table 5 Quantification of the faunal assemblage by context, species and NISP

Table 6 Quantification of the shell assemblage by context and species

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 1

Client: Windsor Architectural

Location: St George’s Court, Globe Street, Methwold, Norfolk

District: King’s Lynn and West Norfolk

Planning Reference: N/A

Grid Reference: TL 73015 95006

HER No.: ENF 139988

OASIS ID: norfolka1a-242138

Dates of Fieldwork: 15-18 February 2016

Summary

NPS Archaeology was commissioned by Windsor Architectural on behalf of Mulberry Tree Homes Ltd to carry out archaeological trial trench evaluation ahead of planned construction of residential housing at St George’s Court, off Globe Street, Methwold, Norfolk (TL 73015, 95006).

The proposed development site encompasses an area of 0.42 ha. Five trial trenches were situated to provide a c. 5% sample of the site. The archaeological works took place on 15 to 18 February 2016.

The trenches revealed an arrangement of inter-cut ditches, pits and post-holes, some of which were of 9th-11th-century date and others of 11th-14th-century date. Although there was limited evidence for settlement occupation at the site, Late Saxon pottery and artefacts of medieval and post-medieval date suggest that activity had occurred within the vicinity of the site intermittently across several centuries.

It is considered likely that the evidence recovered situates the evaluation site on the north edge of a shrunken medieval village, known from surrounding fields by earthworks of tofts, enclosures and fishponds.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 3

INTRODUCTION

Figure 1

Project Background

1 A proposal to construct residential housing with associated parking to be known as St George’s Court, at Globe Street in Methwold, Norfolk (TL 73015 95006) required a programme of archaeological works to support it through the planning process.

2 NPS Archaeology was commissioned by Windsor Architectural and funded by Mulberry Tree Homes Ltd to carry out the archaeological work.

3 At the time of the work the evaluation site was under grass. It is situated on the western fringe of the historic core of Methwold and encompasses c. 0.42ha.

4 The archaeological brief (Hamilton 2012, updated Dack 2015) notes that the evaluation site is situated within an area with high archaeological potential.

5 There are no records of previously identified archaeological remains at the site, although fishponds, enclosures and other earthwork features of suspected medieval date are noted to the southwest and west of the site. These earthworks may extend into the proposed development site.

6 Other known archaeological assets in the vicinity of the site include prehistoric flint tools, the site of an Iron Age-Roman settlement, a possible Late Anglo-Saxon foundation church, and a supposed medieval castle or hall.

7 The evaluation comprised five trial trenches, consisting of 3no. 20.00m x 1.60m, 1no. 1.00m x 1.60m, and 1no. 10.00m x 1.60m.

Planning Background

8 The current work was undertaken to fulfil planning conditions set by Kings Lynn and West Norfolk District Council and a Brief for Archaeological Evaluation by Trial Trenching issued by Norfolk Historic Environment Service (NHES) (Hamilton 2012, updated Dack 2015). The work was conducted in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation prepared by NPS Archaeology (01-04-16-2-1313/Hobbs 2016).

9 The programmer of work was designed to assist in defining the character and extent of any archaeological remains within the proposed development area, following principles set out in National Planning Policy Framework (Department for Communities and Local Government 2012).

10 The results of the evaluation will enable decisions to be made by the Local Planning Authority about the treatment of any archaeological remains found.

11 The recipients of this report will be Windsor Architectural, NHES and King’s Lynn and West Norfolk District Council.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

Thornham Farm

H

o

g

g

a

r

d

'

s

D

i

k

e

(

T

r

a

c

k

)

Pond

Pond

Tanks

Farm

Sycamore

Sycamore Farm

T

H

O

R

N

H

A

M

R

O

A

D

Elden's Lane (T

rack)

D

r

a

i

n

D

ra

in

1

1

a

1

7

6

7

11.0m

Path

(um

)

Elden's Lane (T

rack)

Hall Farm

D

ra

in

Fish Pond

Fishpond

6

1

P

a

t

h

(

u

m

)

Pond

ELD

EN

'S

LA

NE

1

9

10

P

a

t

h

(

u

m

)

Drain

P

a

t

h

(

u

m

)

P

a

t

h

(

u

m

)

P

a

t

h

(

u

m

)

Hall Farm

Bungalow

1

1

8

8

7.6m

B

1

1

1

2

14

3

5

GP

Methwold

B

1

1

1

2

House

3

6

9.9m

1

The

Beeches

5

3

0

3

7

2

3

8

8

3

4

H

Y

T

H

E

R

O

A

D

Dalkieth

B

M

1

1

.

3

2

m

T

h

e

B

a

r

n

H

O

L

M

E

S

'S

L

A

N

E

Stone

Pond

Meadow

4.9m

BM 6.23m

2

6

View

Well

Stone

High School

Methwold

2

2

2

0

1

9

1

8

1

4

2

1

Cara Cottage

Holmebrink Farm

1

2

3

Well

1

Well

9

7.6m

5

4

1

1

5

0

Tennis Courts

4

0

5

1

5

7

4

1

G

L

O

B

E

S

T

R

E

E

T

4

6

3

6

a

3

2

2

8

3

8

3

6

2

9

3

5

1

1

.

1

m

G

L

O

B

E

St George's

Church

P

a

th

Recreation Ground

(site of)

Old Hall

Vicarage

2

1

1

5

7

1

1

5

MARKET

PLACE

S

T

R

E

E

T

1

7

F

a

i

r

v

i

e

w

P

a

t

h

1

2

2

0

1

6

8

Lancaster Park

Pump

C

R

O

W

NS

T

R

E

E

T

1

9

2

7

Pavilion

11.6m

Vicarage

2

6

2

1

P

O

The

Old

2

15.87m

BM

PW

CH

AP

EL LA

NE

Cross

(remains of)

4b

1

4

1

1

Sun

Sch

1

5

.5

m

7

3

9

7

T

ra

c

k

Allotment Gardens

Well

1

9

2

1

11

1

5

Rooms

(PH)

2

6

The

Hall

B 1112

2

16.4m

3

0

1

72

4

George

GP

16.0m

Auction

6

T

C

B

H

I

G

H

S

T

R

E

E

T

LB

4

2

2

1

2

7

Methwold

Club

2

4

0

C

H

A

L

K

W

A

Y

1

7

Track

5

5

6

3

6

4

6

1

57

Hythe Court

4

3

4

6

2

3

3

4

0

52

B

M

6

.5

2

m

4

2

6.4m

B

1

1

1

2

2

7

Haymeadow

Barn

3

4

2

8

6.8m

1

3

BM 7.44m

GP

1

0

Pond

1

8

Cloughs Farm

7

1

0

5

2

1

4

6

V

E

N

T

U

R

A

C

L

O

S

E

El Sub Sta

3

1

8

24

7

28

V C School

6

1

0

6

O

L

D

F

E

L

T

W

E

L

L

R

O

A

D

4

2

3

6

7

10

3

1

1

2

T

R

E

N

T

V

C

C

L

O

S

E

3

0

B

U

N

T

I

N

G

'

S

L

A

N

E

4

1

3

3

3

1

9

1

7

11

2

3

2

5

3

3

31

3

4

House

P

a

t

h

Bramley

3

5

Farm

Prospect

45351

4790

4941

4887

4935

4888

6424

6415

ENF 139988

32250

24980

23669

36370

23668

23685

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 100019340

Figure 1. Site location with selected HER data. Scale 1:5000

N

500m0

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 3

GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY

Geology

12 Solid geology in the area of the proposed development site at Globe Street consists of Zig–Zag Chalk Formation, a sedimentary bedrock formed up to 94–100 million years ago in the Cretaceous period in a local environment dominated by warm chalk seas (British Geological Survey 2016).

13 The chalk is overlain by superficial deposits of Head (a mix of clay, silt, sand and gravel). The Head deposits formed up to 3 million years ago in the Quaternary period in a local environment dominated by subaerial slopes (British Geological Survey 2016).

Topography

14 Methwold is situated on the southeast edge of the Fenland Basin, and the parish straddles chalk upland in the east and present and former peat fens in the west.

15 The village occupies a point at the very edge of the upland and is located c. 14.50km southeast of Downham Market, 16.50km southwest of Swaffham c. 17.50km northwest of Thetford, and 23km northeast of Ely.

16 The development site constitutes an almost rectangular parcel of land c. 0.42ha in area that is bounded by housing to the east and open grassland to the south and west. To the north of the site are allotment gardens.

17 The site occupies relatively flat ground ranging between 5.35m OD to the south, 5.49m OD to the north and 5.81m OD to the east.

Plate 1. General view of site, looking southeast

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 4

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Sources

18 Methwold and its environs have a rich history, represented by evidence from prehistory through to modern times. Some periods, in particular the prehistoric, Roman and medieval periods are well represented in the archaeological and historical record, whilst evidence of other periods, notably the Iron Age and Anglo-Saxon periods, is more ephemeral, consisting of isolated finds of pottery and metalwork.

19 The primary source for archaeological evidence in the county of Norfolk is the Norfolk Historic Environment Record (HER), which details archaeological discoveries and sites of historical interest. In order to characterise the likely archaeological potential of the development site, HER record data was purchased from Norfolk Historic Environment Record for a 500m radius around the site centred on TL 73015 95006.

20 A reference table listing dates for historical and archaeological periods described in this report is provided in Appendix 5.

HER data

21 The HER data that are most relevant, or are closest to the current site are summarised and referenced below in broad chronological order, along with details of previous archaeological work in the vicinity. The records that are located in closest proximity to the development site are shown in Figure 1. The information presented that is sourced from Norfolk Historic Environment Record remains copyright of Norfolk County Council.

Prehistoric

22 A possible Neolithic axehead and a small Bronze Age axehead were recovered from Methwold churchyard (HER 4887). A handful of prehistoric worked flints and pottery was collected to the west of the evaluation site in 1987 (HER 23668, 23669).

Iron Age

23 Iron Age gullies and pits containing domestic waste including pots, a loom weight and a crucible were recovered by an excavation in 1988. The excavation site lies c. 300m northeast of the proposed development site (HER 4790). Iron Age pottery has also been found on the surface of arable fields to the northwest of the site, along with worked and burnt flint (HER 23685).

Roman

24 Alongside the evidence for Iron Age activity from the excavation noted above, Roman-period finds from the same location indicate a settlement of this date. Conjectural evidence for a villa and building include finds of hypocaust, pottery, wall painting and silver metal working debris (HER 4790).

25 A chalk pit southeast of the parish church and 600m southeast of the site produced a Roman brooch and terracotta (HER 4888). Roman pottery has been collected to the northwest of the evaluation site amongst material of other periods (HER 23685).

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 5

Anglo-Saxon

A possible post-Conquest church lies c. 380m south of the proposed development site (HER 6415). Its exact location remains uncertain as reports from 1888 locate it only as “opposite the school in The Buntings”. A separate account relates the discovery of post-Conquest church foundations and Perpendicular-style capital bases recovered from beneath the remains of a “Stuart mansion”. Excavations at the site in the 1980s recovered sherds of pottery suggesting activity here in the 12th–13th centuries.

Medieval

26 In the field to the west, adjacent to the evaluation site, rectangular-shaped earthworks and perhaps earthworks of other, smaller features are known (HER 32250). The main earthwork is aligned approximately east–west and measures c. 60.00m x 40.00m. There are no records of the earthworks being examined archaeologically, and their interpretation is as either a medieval moated site, or else as a fishpond. Prior to 1974, the earthworks are not indicated on Ordnance Survey maps, but from 1974 the principal rectangular earthwork is marked as Fish Pond in gothic script. It is noted, and it may be coincidence, that modern boundaries within the evaluation site follow the position and alignment of the east–west arms of the earthwork.

27 To the south of the evaluation site, the extensive earthwork (and cropmark) remains of a shrunken medieval village have been recorded from aerial photographs, observations and field survey (HER 24980). The remains extend for 400m in a line southwest from the evaluation site boundary and encompass an area approaching 5ha. The earthworks are visible as a series of rectangular banked and ditched enclosures (amongst other features, including a probable former watercourse) and are interpreted as fishponds and medieval tofts. The tofts represent small property divisions that would have included a house and a small portion of adjoining arable land or garden. Comparable earthworks have been surveyed at Hockwold, 6km to the south, and the shrinkage of the formerly prosperous medieval village there is charted in documents of the 15th–17th centuries (Cushion and Davison 2003, 6); a similar picture of steady desertion can be envisaged here at Methwold.

28 The ground plan of the possible site of a medieval castle, or hall has been identified from cropmarks showing on aerial photographs of Methwold Recreation Ground. Surrounding features including fishponds are also visible, and some remains were reportedly still upstanding in the 19th century. The hall site lies c. 160m southeast of the proposed development site (HER 4935). It is marked on all editions of Ordnance Survey maps from 1885–1974 as Old Hall (site of), after which time it is no longer indicated.

29 Low densities of pottery finds from fields to the west of the evaluation site indicate a wider background of medieval activity in the area and perhaps the extent of land under cultivation at that time (HER 23668, 23669, 23685.

30 The parish church of St George is Perpendicular in style and mostly dates to the 14th century, although the base of the church appears to be older (HER 4941). The church is renowned for its fine carvings in the roof. The church lies c. 270m southeast of the proposed development site.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 6

Post-medieval

31 Cropmarks recorded from aerial photographs of two rectangular enclosures situated to the west of the shrunken village remains described by HER 24980, are thought to represent ditched features associated with post-medieval activity at nearby Hall Farm (HER 36370). It remains possible that they are further elements of the medieval landscape, however. Features which are considered likely to represent the enclosures are shown on the Tithe map of the area dated to c. 1840–50 (Norfolk County Council 2016).

32 A 15th-century timber-framed jettied house is located c. 315m to the southeast of the evaluation site (HER 6424). The house has 16th- and 17th-century additions with very ornate detailing. The south range of the house is 18th century in date and built of clunch. Other early post-medieval buildings are located close by.

33 William Faden’s map of Norfolk in 1797 shows the location of the site at the eastern tip of Methwold Common (Macnair 2016). The common is substantial, plainly an intake of peat fen (which persists to its west and south), but not yet enclosed by larger land holdings. Notably, however, the common, which otherwise has a generally smooth, flowing boundary, has an abrupt, stepped and angular edge where it borders the land immediately north of the evaluation site. This is taken to represent the boundary (perhaps an intake from the common) of property potentially associated with the medieval lands described by the old hall, earthworks and tofts. The outline shown by Faden is still recognisable in the layout of roads and field boundaries today, which have grown up around and fossilised the ancient property boundary.

Modern

34 RAF Methwold was built as a satellite airfield to RAF Feltwell in 1939 (HER 4937). The surviving concrete runways were installed in 1944, though the airfield was closed at the end of the War in 1945. Monuments associated with the airfield include an aircraft hangar and aircraft obstructions, likely anti-glider ditches. The south edge of the site has a well-preserved battle headquarters and some gun pits, along with a number of air raid shelters. .

35 On 6 January 1942 at 05.20 hrs a Wellington bomber taking off from RAF Methwold crashed at Holme Brink Farm. The crash site is 300m from the evaluation site (HER 45351).

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 7

METHODOLOGY

Figure 2

General

36 Methodology for the evaluation followed the agreed Written Scheme of Investigation (01-04-16-2-1313/Hobbs 2015), where the mitigation strategy for the works is presented in full (Appendix 7).

37 Archaeological procedures conformed to guidelines issued by the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA 2014a) and the evaluation was conducted within the context of the relevant regional archaeological framework (Medlycott 2011).

Objectives

38 The objective of the evaluation was to determine as far as reasonably possible the presence or absence, location, nature, extent, date, quality, condition and significance of any surviving archaeological deposits within the development area.

39 The archaeological project aimed to provide appropriate and adequate data to permit informed decisions regarding any requirement for future archaeological mitigation work at St George’s Court, Globe Street, Methwold and to make the results of the work accessible.

Methods

40 The sample required by the Brief for Archaeological Evaluation resulted in the excavation of five trial trenches in the area of the planned development. The siting of trenches followed the overall layout shown in the Written Scheme of Investigation (01-04-16-2-1313/Hobbs 2016), but the exact length varied slightly due to ground conditions.

41 Trenches were located in relation to the Ordnance Survey National Grid. Site survey was carried out by NPS Land Survey using a Leica GPS9000 surveying system.

42 The temporary benchmarks that were used during the course of the work were placed at either end of the trenches and transferred from the Leica GPS9000 surveying station with the highest value of 6.27m OD recorded in the southeast part of the site, and the lowest value of 5.35m OD in the south.

43 Prior to mechanical excavation, each trench location was scanned with a CAT to check for buried services. The areas to be stripped of topsoil were examined for surface features and for archaeological artefacts prior to any excavation.

44 Machine excavation was carried out by a hydraulic 360˚ excavator equipped with a toothless ditching bucket. All mechanical excavation was constantly and directly monitored by a suitably experienced archaeologist. Machining was halted at the first identifiable archaeological deposits or natural geology.

45 All trench surfaces revealed by machine were hand-cleaned and any archaeological deposits were excavated by hand. Upon completion of the work all trenches were backfilled by machine.

46 Spoil, exposed surfaces and features were scanned with a metal-detector. All metal-detected and hand-collected finds, other than those that were evidently modern,

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 8

were retained for examination. All retained finds were identified by context number to a specific deposit and were processed and recorded in line with relevant guidelines for archaeological finds (CIfA 2014b).

47 All archaeological features and deposits were recorded using NPS Archaeology pro forma. Trench locations, plans and sections were recorded at appropriate scales. Monochrome 35mm negatives and digital photographs were taken of all relevant archaeological features and deposits where appropriate.

48 Site conditions were good and the work took place in fine weather with good access to the trenches.

49 All site work was undertaken with respect to Health and Safety provision. Hard hats, high-visibility vests and steel toe-capped boots were worn by all staff at all times.

Archive

50 The site archive is currently held at the offices of NPS Archaeology. Upon completion of the project, the documentary archive will be prepared and indexed following guidelines obtained from the relevant Museum and relevant national guidelines (CIfA 2014c). The archive, consisting of all paper elements created during recording of the archaeological site, including digital material, will be deposited with Norfolk Museums Service

51 Subject to written consent and donation by the landowner, all archaeological finds recovered by the current work will be deposited with Norfolk Museums Service.

52 A summary form of the results of this project has been completed for Online AccesS to the Index of archaeological investigationS (OASIS) under the reference norfolka1-, and this report will be uploaded to the OASIS database.

53 The contents of the site archive are summarised in Table 1.

Item Quantity.

Contexts 73

Files/paper record sheets 1/81

Plan and section sheets 8

Photographs 1 x 35mm monochrome film; 106 digital images

Finds 25

Table 1. Site archive quantification

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

Trench 1

Trench 2

Trench 3

Trench 4

Trench 5


Figure 2. Location of trenches. Scale 1:400

N

0 40m

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 10

RESULTS

54 The results for each Trench are tabulated below in numerical order. A photograph of each trench accompanies the trench description with additional images of features presented where appropriate.

55 Plans are provided for each trench along with section drawings of excavated features and the sequence of deposits.

Trench 1

Figures 2, 3 and 4; Plate 2

Location

Orientation North–south

North end 573001, 295030

South end 572997, 295010

Dimensions

Length 20.00m

Width 1.60m

Depth 0.70m

Levels

North top 5.49m OD

South top 5.48m OD

Context Type Description and Interpretation Thickness

01 Deposit Mid-greyish brown silty sand 0.60m

02 Deposit Light grey chalky sandy clay 0.10m

28 Cut North–south aligned ditch 0.18m

29 Deposit Fill of 28 0.18m





34 Cut East–west aligned ditch 0.30m


36 Cut Post-hole 0.20m




40 Cut Northeast–southwest aligned ditch 0.15m

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 11

Trench 1


42 Cut Post-hole or small pit 0.10m


44 Cut ?Pit 0.35m






74 U/S Unstratified finds

Discussion

Trench 1 was located in the west of the site. The trench was excavated to natural deposits at 0.70m below the ground surface between 5.92m OD (north end) and 5.48m OD (south end). The overburden above geological mid-greyish white chalk consisted of homogeneous mid-greyish brown silty sand topsoil 01 and mid-grey chalky clayey sand subsoil 02 (Fig. 4, section 4).

The trench contained six ditches 28, 30, 32, 34, 38, 40 and 46=48, a rounded feature 44, a post-hole 36 and a probable post-hole or small pit 42 (Figs 3 and 4, sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9). Two excavated sections in 32 and 44 produced a total of four pottery sherds, of which two were late 9th–10th-century (32) and two were sherds of late 12th–14th-century pottery (44). A single sherd of 11th–12th-century pottery was recovered from an unstratified context 74, as well as a medieval buckle plate (SF2) and a possible post-medieval pewter buckle (SF1).

A north–south aligned feature ran from the north to the central part of the trench over a distance of c. 11.00m, where it joined an east-west aligned ditch feature. The north end of the feature occupied the entire width of the trench. To the south it became narrow, whilst its east edge was outside the east limit of excavation. A section placed across the widest, north part revealed two ditches 28 and 30 (Plate 2).

Plate 2. Trench 1. Ditches 28 and 30, looking north

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 12

Trench 1

The west ditch 28 was 0.56m wide x 0.18m deep, with gradually sloping sides and a concave base. The excavated portion of the east ditch 30 revealed that it was at least 0.65m wide x 0.30m deep, with a gradually sloping west edge (Fig. 4, section 1). Both ditches contained similar fills 29 and 31 consisting of light grey clay with chalk flecks. No finds were recovered from the features.

In plan, it appears that ditch 28 may terminate close to the north end of the trench. The feature that continues southwards is thought likely to be 30 alone.

At the south end of ditch 30 (where it was recorded as 32), it intersected with an east–west ditch 34. Although excavation could not conclusively establish the sequence of construction of the two ditches, the section of the west-facing trench side suggested that ditch 34 truncated ditch 32 (Fig. 4, section 2).

The excavated segment of ditch 32 measured 0.65m wide x 0.22m deep, with a gradual sloping west edge and contained a single fill of light grey clay with chalk and flint inclusions 33. Two sherds of pottery were recovered from fill 33. One sherd was Late Saxon Thetford-type ware dated to the late 9th–11th century, and the other sherd was Grimston-type green- glazed pottery dated to the late 12th–14th century. A single bone fragment of a metatarsal from a neonatal equid was also recovered. No butchering evidence was present on the bone and it may be possible that the foal represented was a natural still birth.

Ditch 34 was aligned east–west, though it had slightly curving edges. Ditch 34 measured 1.60–1.80m wide x 0.30m deep, with gradually sloping sides and a predominantly flattish base (Fig. 4, section 2). The fill was of firm, mid-greyish brown clay with occasional flint 35. No finds were recovered from the feature.

A single post-hole 36 was recorded north of 34 and west of 30=32 in the central part of the trench. Post-hole 36 was 0.36m in diameter x 0.16m deep, with gradual sloping sides and a concave base (Fig. 4, section 9). No finds were recovered from the light grey sandy clay fill 37.

To the south of ditch 34 and parallel to it, there was another east–west ditch 38. Ditch 38 measured 1.10m wide x 0.12m deep, with gradually sloping sides and an undulating base which rose in the central part to give the appearance of two slightly concave bases (Fig. 4, section 4). No finds were recovered from its mid greyish brown silty sand fill 35.

A group of four features was located south of ditch 38.

A section was excavated across a northeast–southwest ditch 40 and a probable post-hole or small pit 42 to identify any relationship between the two features. The excavated portion of ditch 40 demonstrated that it was 0.60m wide x 0.16m deep, with gently sloping sides and a concave base (Fig. 4, section 5). No finds were recovered from its mid-brownish grey sandy clay fill 41. To the immediate south of ditch 40 post-hole or small pit 42 was only partially revealed within the trench. The excavated section shows that the feature was 0.40m wide x 0.10m deep, with gently sloping side and a concave base (Fig. 4, section 5). The fill consisted of mid-greyish brown sandy clay 43. No finds were recovered from the post-hole or pit feature and no relationship was established between it and ditch 40.

The south-most features consisted of an east–west ditch 46=48 and a rounded feature 44 roughly aligned north–south. A section was excavated against the east trench side to gain a full profile of ditch 46 (Fig. 4, section 6). The excavated portion of ditch 46 measured 0.35m long x 0.70m wide x 0.20m deep, with gradually sloping sides and a concave base. The fill was mid-brownish grey sandy clay 47. No finds were recovered from the feature.

To the west of ditch 46 was a rounded feature 44 which appeared to terminate to the north in the vicinity of ditch 48. As feature 44 was only partially revealed, its function has only been tentatively interpreted as a pit. This is mainly because of its visible shape and form, although the possibility of a wide ditch terminus cannot be ruled out. A section placed to intersect ditch cut 48 and feature 44 revealed that feature 44 truncated ditch 48 (Fig. 4, section 7). The excavated segment of feature 44 and ditch 48 measured 0.90m north–south x 0.75m wide east–west. The excavations demonstrated that 44 was 0.46m deep, with a gradually sloping east edge and contained a single mid-grey sandy silt fill 45. A small abraded sherd of 11th–12th-century pottery and three fragments of animal bone were recovered from fill 45. Cattle remains consisted of the articular

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 13

Trench 1

end of a scapula and a large fragment of pelvis including a small talus which had been chopped, with cut marks on the talus suggesting that the cow had been skinned. A single fragment of bird bone was also recovered, but could not be positively identified as no diagnostic zones were present.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

30

28

36

32

34

38

40

42

46

44

S. 1

S. 9

S. 2

S. 3

S. 4

S. 5

S. 6

S. 8

S. 7

44

48

Figure 3. Trench 1 plan. Scale 1:75

N

0 5m

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

28

29

30

31

Ditches 28 and 30.

36

37

Post-hole 36.

WestEast

North

South-facing section 7

West East

44

45

48

49

West-facing section 4

38

39

2

1

40

41

42

43

North South


North South

45

46

47

South North

44

East-facing section 8


West East

32

33

South North



34

32

33 35

South

5.76m OD 5.96m OD

5.96m OD

5.88m OD

5.89m OD

5.87m OD

5.79m OD

5.79m OD

5.79m OD

Southwest-facing section 1

Ditches 32 and 34.

Ditch 32

Ditch 32

Ditch 40 and post-hole 42

Ditch 46

Ditch 46 and pit 44

Pit 44

South


North

Figure 4. Trench 1. Sections 1-9. Scale 1:20

02mSUBJE

CT TO APPROVAL


Page 16

Trench 2

Figures 2 and 5

Location

Orientation East–west

East end 573046, 295026

West end 573027, 295030

Dimensions

Length 7.00m

Width 1.60m

Depth 1.20m

Levels

East top 6.23m OD

West top 5.80m OD


01 Deposit Topsoil 0.80m

02 Deposit Subsoil 0.40m

66 Cut East-west aligned ditch 0.10m


68 Cut East-west aligned ditch 0.25m



79 Deposit Coarse sand overlaying chalk geology 0.05m

Discussion

Trench 2 was located in the east of the site. The trench was excavated to natural deposits at 1.20m below the ground surface i.e. between 6.23m OD (east) and 5.80m OD (west). The overburden above the geological mid-greyish white chalk consisted of homogeneous mid-brown silty sand topsoil 01, mid-grey chalky clayey sand subsoil 02, and coarse mid-brown silty sand 79.

The trench contained a single ditch which ran along the entire length of the trench. No dating evidence was recovered from two excavated sections. However, a copper-alloy button and a copper-alloy fork, both of which are dated to the post-medieval period, were recovered from an unstratified context 75.

One east-west aligned ditch 66=68 was recorded in Trench 2. The width of the ditch was not fully revealed as it was partially obscured along the north side of the trench. The visible part of the ditch measured 7.00m long. The excavated segments were 0.50m wide x 0.20m deep and 0.60m wide x 0.12m deep. The ditch contained a single fill 67=69 consisting of mid-grey clay with frequent chalk lumps (Fig. 5, sections 1 and 2). It was noted that the ditch cut through coarse silty sand deposit 79 and the underlying chalk geology. Deposit 79 was observed throughout the trench with the excavated edge demonstrating that it was 50mm deep. A similar deposit to 79 may have been present in Trench 3.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

66

68

S. 1

S. 2

North South

Trench 2 Ditch 66


66

67

68

69

South North

4.73m OD 4.63m OD

Trench 2 Ditch 68


N

Figure 5. Trench 2. Plan scale 1:50. Sections 1 and 2 scale 1:20

5m0

0 1m

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 18

Trench 3

Figures 2, 6 and 7; Plates 3 and 4

Location


North end 573018, 295013

South end 573015, 294994

Dimensions

Length 20.00m

Width 1.60m

Depth 0.90m

Levels

North top 5.60m OD

South top 5.91m OD



02 Deposit Subsoil 0.10m









58 Cut Shallow ditch/undulation 0.15m


60 Cut East–west aligned curvilinear ditch 0.25m


62 Cut Pit 0.15m


64 Cut East-west aligned linear chalk deposit NA

65 Deposit Fill of 64 NA


Discussion

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 19

Trench 3

Trench 3 was located in the centre of the site. The trench was excavated to natural deposits at 0.90m below the ground surface i.e. between 5.60m OD (north) and 5.91m OD (south). The overburden above the mixed geology of mid-greyish white chalk and pure orange sand consisted of homogeneous mid-greyish brown silty sand topsoil 01 and mid-grey chalky clayey sand subsoil 02.

The trench contained two ditches 50 and 60, one probable ditch 58, three post-holes 52, 54 and 56, a pit 62, and a linear chalk deposit 64 (Plate 3). Dating evidence from the excavated sections was limited to a single sherd of 11th–12th-century pottery from ditch 50. Finds recovered from an unstratified context 76 included a medieval copper-alloy buckle (SF7), a medieval/post-medieval copper-alloy vessel foot or leg (SF5), and a copper-alloy jetton dated to the post-medieval period (SF6).

Trench 3. Post-hole 52 and ditches 50, 58 and 60, looking southeast

The geology in the north end of the trench consisted of orange sand, which extended south of pit 62; thereafter it consisted of chalk. It was noted that the archaeological features in this trench were confined to the area of sand, and in retrospect chalk deposit 64 appears to be incongruous with the surrounding sand (Plate 4).

Plate 4. Trench 3. Showing chalk deposit 64, looking south

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 20

Trench 3

To the south of 64 two post-holes 52 and 54 were recorded.

Post-hole 52 measured 0.30m east–west x 0.50m north–south x 0.14m deep, with a gradual slope and concave base (Fig. 7, section 1). Although no datable finds were recovered from the mid-brown clayey sand fill 53, a single piece of cattle bone was found.

Post-hole 54 was 0.20m in diameter x 0.10m deep, with a gradual slope and a concave base. No finds were recovered from the mid-brown clayey sand fill 55 (Fig. 7, section 2).

South of the post-holes 52 and 54 there was an east-west aligned feature and a partially exposed sub-circular pit-like feature. A 1.10m-wide section was excavated across the features and post-hole 52 (Fig. 7, sections 1 and 3).

The excavations carried out in the east-west feature revealed two ditches 50 and 60, a shallow linear cut 58 and a probable post-hole 56.

The north-most ditch 50 was 0.68m wide x 0.16m deep (east) and 0.30m deep (west). The east part of the ditch had a gradual slope and a concave base (Fig. 7, section 1). The base of the ditch sloped east–west with an oblique slope to the west and a tapered base (Fig. 7, section 3). A single sherd of early medieval ware pottery dated to the 11th–12th-century was recovered from dark brown clayey sand fill 51.

To the south of 50 was a shallow ditch 58. The west-facing section demonstrated that it was c. 0.60m wide x 0.14m deep, with a gradual sloping side to the southeast whilst the northeast side merged imperceptibly into the southeast side of ditch 50 (Fig. 7, section 1).

As with 50, the base of feature 58 sloped east–west with a probable post-hole 56 recorded in the east-facing section. The excavated portion of post-hole 56 demonstrated that it was at least 0.16m long (east–west) x 0.30m wide x 0.16m deep, with a gradual slope and a concave base (Fig. 7, section 3). No finds were recovered from the dark brown clayey sand fill 57.

South of 58, ditch 60 measured between 1.40m (east) and 1.15m (west) wide x 0.40m deep. The west-facing section demonstrated that it had a stepped south side and a long gradual sloping side to the north and a concave base (Fig. 7, section 1). The east-facing section had a gradual slope and a concave base (Fig. 7, section 3). No finds were recovered from the mid-orange silty sand fill 61.

The south-most feature was pit 62. Its west edge was outside the limit of excavation. The excavated section demonstrated that it was at least 0.70m long (east–west) x 1.60m wide x 0.14m deep, with a long gradual sloping side to the south and a flat base. No finds were recovered from dark brown silty sand fill 63.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

64

54

52

50

56

58

60

62

S. 3

S. 1

S. 2


N

0 5m

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

52

53

South North

62

60

61

56

57

50

51

54

55

West East

North

50

51 59

58 60

61

4.84m OD

4.84m OD

South

Ditches 50 and 60, pit 62 and post-hole 56


Ditches 50, 58 and 60 and post-hole 52 West-facing section 1

Post-hole 54

North-facing section 2

4.72m OD

Figure 7. Trench 3. Sections 1, 2 and 3. Scale 1:20

02m

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 23

Trench 4

Figures 2, 8; Plates 5 and 6

Location


North end 573038, 295013

South end 573034, 294978

Dimensions

Length 10.00m

Width 1.60m

Depth 0.80m

Levels

North top 6.11m OD

South top 6.20m OD



71 Deposit Dark grey clay 0.62m

72 Deposit Light brown clayey sand 0.42m

73 Deposit Light grey clay and chalk lumps 0.30m


Discussion

Trench 4 was located in the southeast of the site. The trench was excavated to 1.90m below the ground surface at 6.11m OD (north) and 1.20m below the ground surface at 6.20m OD (south). The overburden consisted of homogeneous mid-greyish brown silty sand topsoil 01. No subsoil was observed in the trench.

A post-medieval lamp fitting was recovered from unstratified context 77.

Trench 4 was machined from south–north. No geological deposits were exposed in the south 10.00m of the trench, as excavation would have exceeded a safe working depth of (generally a maximum of) 1.20m below ground surface. It was therefore decided to evaluate the depth of natural ground by machine. Under controlled conditions further machining was undertaken at the north end of the trench, revealing that geological clays were not reached until 1.90m below ground level at 6.11m OD (Plate 5).

A sondage measuring 1.50m north–south x 1.00m east–west x 0.95m deep was excavated in the south end of the trench (Plate 6). The excavated slot did not reach natural ground, although three deposits 71, 72 and 73 were present. The deposits are likely to represent deliberate in-filling of a possible pond-like feature, or perhaps a large extraction pit.

Below the topsoil 01 was a dark grey clay with frequent chalk lumps measuring 0.58m deep. Beneath 71 was a light brown clayey sand 72 with frequent chalk lumps measuring 0.38m deep. It is considered that the lighter sandy clay soil and the possibility of rooting or worm action in deposit 72 suggests that this deposit represents a former ground surface. Deposit 72 overlay a light grey clay with frequent chalk lumps 73. Limited excavation was undertaken of deposit 73, so it remains unclear whether this deposit forms a primary feature fill overlying natural ground (Fig. 8, section 1).

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 24

Trench 4

Plate 5. Trench 4. West-facing section north end

Plate 6. Trench 4. Sondage, looking west

A single fragment of sheep proximal phalange, which had been cut during the skinning process was recovered from deposit 72. The bone was heavily burnt, leaving it oxidised with a white appearance.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

71

73

73

72

71

S. 1

South

01

71


North

71

72

73

72

4.27m OD

N

Figure 8. Trench 4 plan scale 1:50 and Section 1 scale 1:20

5m0

0 1mSUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 26

Trench 5

Figures 2, 9 and 10; Plate 7

Location

Orientation East–west

East end 573007, 294981

West end 572987, 294985

Dimensions

Length 20.00m

Width 1.60m

Depth 0.70m

Levels

East top 5.91m OD

West top 5.35m OD


01 Deposit Topsoil

02 Deposit Subsoil

















19 Cut Pit 0.30m


SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 27

Trench 5






26 Cut Small pit 0.22m



Discussion

Trench 5 was located in the southwest of the site. The trench was excavated to 1.20m below the ground surface at 5.91m OD (east) and 5.35m OD (west). The overburden consisted of homogeneous mid-greyish brown silty sand topsoil 01 and subsoil 02.

A total of eight ditches 03, 05, 07, 09, 11, 13, 15, 17, a pit 19 and two possible post-holes or small pits 24 and 26 were recorded in the trench. The only datable find from the excavated sections was a sherd of 9th–10th-century pottery recovered from ditch 17. Unstratified finds 78 included a medieval copper-alloy buckle plate (SF10) and a post-medieval button (SF9).

An undated irregular feature 05 was recorded in the west of the trench. In plan, this feature had a curved appearance, was aligned broadly east–west and measured 2.00m x 0.70m x 0.24m deep. It contained a single fill consisting of pale brown silty sand 06. It appeared from the section that feature 05 truncated ditch 07 and was truncated by ditch 03 (Fig. 10, sections 1 and 2).

The west-most ditch 03 measured 1.60m wide x 0.25m deep, with a gradual slope and a concave base. No finds were recovered from its single fill of mid–dark brown sandy silt 04 (Fig. 10, section 1).

Irregular feature 05 was seen in section to truncate the west edge of ditch 07. Ditch 07 measured 0.40m wide x 0.26m deep, with a gradual eastern slope and a concave base. No finds were recovered from the pale brown sandy silt fill 08 (Fig. 10, section 2).

To the east of ditch 07 two parallel ditches 09 and 11 were recorded. Ditch 09 truncated the earlier ditch 11. Ditch 09 measured 0.40m wide x 0.12m deep, with a gradual slope and a concave base. It contained a single fill consisting of mid–dark brown sandy silt 10. Ditch 11 was the larger of the two ditches measuring 0.50m wide x 0.25m deep, with a gradual slope and a concave base. It contained a single fill of mid-brownish grey sandy silt 12 (Fig. 10, section 3). No finds were recovered from either of the two ditches.

In the central part of the trench, ditch 15 was recorded truncating ditch 13. Both were aligned north–south. The earlier of the two ditches 13 measured 0.80m wide x 0.40m deep, with an oblique east slope and slightly stepped west slope and a concave base. The later ditch 15 measured 1.17m wide x 0.42m deep, with a gradual slope and a flat base (Fig. 10, section 4, Plate 7).

A large irregular feature was observed east of ditches 13 and 15. A section was placed across the widest part of the feature revealing a linear feature 17, a pit 19 and a probable small pit or post-hole 22.

In section, ditch 17 truncated the west part of pit 19. Ditch 17 measured 0.65m wide x 0.10m deep, with a broad, shallow profile (Fig. 10, section 5). A single sherd of 9th–10th-century pottery was recovered from the mid-brown sandy fill 18.

Pit 19 lay partly outside the north limit of excavation. The excavated section measured 2.90m east–west x 1.05m north–south x 0.60m deep, with a gradual east slope and a flattish base. It contained two deposits consisting of an upper fill of mid-greyish brown sandy silt 21

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 28

Trench 5

and a lower fill of mid-greyish brown sandy silt 20 (Fig. 10, section 5). No finds were recovered from the pit.

Plate 7. Trench 5. Ditches 13 and 15, looking south

It was uncertain whether a small pit or post-hole 22 recorded in the north-facing section was a variation in the south side of pit 19, or whether it was a genuinely unique feature cut into the south edge of pit 19. Small pit or post-hole 22 measured 0.40m wide x 0.20m deep, with a gradual east slope and a concave base. No finds were recovered from its mid-brown sandy silt fill 23 (Fig. 10, section 6).

A small pit and a post-hole were recorded in the east of the trench. Post-hole 24 measured 0.30m in diameter x 0.14m deep, with a gradual slope and a flat base. No finds were recovered from its mid-brown sandy silt fill 25 (Fig. 10, section 7).

Small pit 26 measured 0.75m east–west x 0.40m north–south x 0.22m deep, with a gradual slope and a flat base. No finds were recovered from the mid-brown sandy silt fill 27 (Fig. 10, section 8).

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

03

05

07

09

11

13

15

17

19

24

26

S. 1

S. 2

S. 4

S. 5

S. 7

S. 8

S. 3

22

S. 6

05


N

0 5m

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

05

06

East West

04

03

Ditche 03 and feature 05.


05

06

07

08

West East

Ditches 05 and 07.


09

10

11

12

Ditches 09 and 11.


West East East West

15

16

13

14

Ditches 13 and 15.


North South

24

25

Pit 24.


26

27

East

West

Pit 26.


4.84m OD

17

20

West

Post-hole 17 and pit 19.


4.87m OD

East

19

2221

18

23

Post-hole 22.


4.87m OD

East West

4.78m OD

4.84m OD

4.91m OD

4.94m OD

4.96m OD

Figure 10. Trench 5. Sections 1 to 8. Scale 1:20.

02m

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 31

ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDS

56 The archaeological finds were washed, dried, marked and bagged and were recorded by count and weight. Data was entered onto a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, which forms part of the project archive.

57 A discussion of each material type is given below. Appendix 2a comprises a list of all archaeological materials found by the evaluation in context number order.

Pottery

Introduction

58 Seven sherds (636g) of post-Roman pottery were recovered from five contexts. Table 2 shows the quantification by fabric; a summary catalogue by context is included as Appendix 3.

Description Fabric Date range No Wt/g Eve MNV

Thetford-type ware THET L.9th–11th c. 1 2 1

Stamford Ware Fabric A STAM L.9th–10th c. 1 7 1

Early medieval ware EMW 11th–12th c. 2 42 0.16 2

Yarmouth-type ware YAR 11th–12th c. 1 3 1

Grimston-type ware GRIM L.12th–14th c. 2 9 2

Table 2 Pottery quantification by fabric

59 The assemblage ranges from Late Saxon to high medieval in date.

Methodology

60 Quantification was carried out using sherd count, weight and estimated vessel equivalent (eve). The minimum number of vessels (MNV) within each context was also recorded, but cross-fitting was not attempted unless particularly distinctive vessels were observed in more than one context. A full quantification by fabric, context and feature is available in archive. All fabric codes were assigned from the author’s post-Roman fabric series, which includes East Anglian and Midlands fabrics, as well as imported wares. Form terminology for medieval pottery is based on MPRG (1998), and identification of wares is based on Jennings (1981). Recording uses a system of letters for fabric codes together with number codes for ease of sorting in database format. The results were input directly onto an Access database.

The assemblage

61 One body sherd of Thetford-type ware was found in ditch fill 33, in association with medieval pottery. A body sherd of pale green/yellow glazed Stamford Ware (Fabric A) was found in ditch fill 18. These sherds indicate activity of the Late Saxon period on the site.

62 The early medieval period was represented by a small, abraded fragment of Yarmouth-type ware in ditch fill 45, an abraded body sherd of early medieval ware in ditch fill 51, and a large fragment of an early medieval ware jar rim of simple everted form with thumbed decoration on the outer edge, unstratified in Trench 1.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 32

63 Two sherds of Grimston-type green glazed pottery were recovered from ditch fills 33 and 45. The latter was possibly decorated with applied decoration and an incised line.

Pottery by context

64 A brief catalogue of the pottery by context is provided in Appendix 3. Table 3 provides a summary spot dating list.

Trench Context Feature Fabrics Spot date

1 33 Ditch 32 THET GRIM L.12th-14th c.

1 45 Ditch 44 YAR GRIM L.12th-14th c.

1 74 U/S EMW 11th–12th c.

3 51 Ditch 50 EMW 11th–12th c.

5 18 Ditch 17 STAMA L.9th–10th c.

Table 3. Pottery distribution by context

65 The distribution of pottery across the site suggests potential for activity of later 9th–14th century across at least three trenches. None of the pottery is heavily abraded, suggesting that it had not moved far from the original point of deposition.

Discussion

66 Although this is a small assemblage, it is the first to include Late Saxon pottery from the centre of Methwold village. Both Thetford and Stamford wares are present, and whilst Thetford ware is not surprising in this location, Stamford ware is a less common find in rural East Anglia, perhaps attesting to the importance of this fen-edge settlement at the time.

67 The medieval wares include handmade early medieval types, which may have been made and used well into the 13th century in west Norfolk, and Grimston-type ware from northwest Norfolk. Both types are common in this area.

Metal Finds

68 Ten copper-alloy and one possible pewter find were recovered by the evaluation. All metalwork was unstratified, and came from Trenches 1–5. A full catalogue is available in the Appendix.

69 The earliest pieces recovered were a buckle (SF7) and two buckle plates (SF2 and SF10). The buckle is an asymmetrical double-loop example and came from Trench 3. This is likely to be dated to between c. 1350 and 1450 (Whitehead, 1996, 87, no. 540). Both of the plates are rectangular sheet examples, plain and simple, and cannot be more closely dated than medieval. These pieces were found in Trenches 1 and 5 respectively.

70 A late medieval–early post-medieval solid bronze vessel leg (SF5) was recovered from Trench 3. The leg is triangular in plan and tapers down to a sub-rounded ‘foot’. The upper part of the leg is sooted and blackened with use.

71 A jetton (SF6) was recovered, and although slightly misstruck, it appears to be complete, and is legible. This was recovered from Trench 3 and can be identified as a jetton of Hans Schultes III, dating to between 1608 and 1612, and minted in Nuremberg.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 33

72 The remaining metal finds include a fork (SF4), two buttons (SFs 3 and 9) and an oil lamp fitting (SF8). The possible pewter buckle (SF1) is oval, but has no apparent drilling for a separate pin, and so the identification of this piece remains uncertain.

Faunal Remains

Animal Bone

Introduction and Methodology

73 The bone in the assemblage consists of hand-collected remains. This is a small assemblage and in relatively poor condition, and an initial rapid scan showed little potential for further work. A summary assessment has therefore been produced. All of the bone was identified to species wherever possible using a variety of comparative reference material. Where a complete identification to species was not possible, bone was assigned to a group, such as ‘sheep/goat’ or ‘mammal’ whenever possible. The bones were recorded using a modified version of guidelines described in Davis (1992).

74 Any butchering was recorded, noting the type, such as cut, chopped or sawn and location. Bones were examined for any burning, gnawing or pathologies. Other modifications were recorded, such as any possible industrial or craft working waste.

75 Weights and total number of pieces counts were also taken for each context, along with the number of pieces for each individual species present (NISP), and these are given in Appendix 4. As this is a small assemblage, all of the information was input directly into a catalogue in the appendix for this report.

The faunal assemblage

Quantification, provenance and preservation

76 The bone is in reasonable condition, but with much of the remains showing a little wear and erosion, probably due to some acidity in the soil and perhaps some exposure to weathering prior to burial.

Context Spot date Weight (g) Count

16 Undated 14 1

33 Late Saxon/medieval 60 1

45 Medieval 216 4

53 Undated 183 1

72 Undated 1 1

Totals 474 8

Table 4. Quantification of the faunal assemblage by context number, spot date, weight in grams and fragment count

77 The single sheep phalange from deposit 72 had been heavily burnt, leaving it fully oxidised and white in appearance. This level of burning might suggest the inclusion of some sheep remains in a cremation, but the bone may have been left in a domestic fire for a time and left heavily burnt.

78 No canid gnawing was seen in the assemblage, which may suggest a lack of dogs or scavengers.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 34

Species and modifications

79 At least four species are present in the assemblage. Table 5 shows the quantification of species by context.

Context Species NISP

16 Sheep/goat 1

33 Equid 1

45 Cattle 3

Bird 1

53 Cattle 1

72 Sheep 1

Total 8

Table 5. Quantification of the faunal assemblage by context, species and NISP

80 Cattle were recorded from ditch fill 45 and post-hole fill 53. The remains in 45 consist of the articular end of a scapula, a large fragment of pelvis and a relatively small talus. The scapula and pelvis had been chopped and cut marks were noted on the talus, which suggested this cow had been skinned. The cattle metatarsal from 53 had been chopped; the metapodial is very robust and probably from a mature bull.

81 Sheep/goat were seen in two contexts. A sheep/goat radius, which had been chopped, was produced from ditch fill 16. A sheep proximal phalange was recovered from deposit 72, which had been cut during the skinning process and the bone was heavily burnt leaving it with a white appearance.

82 A single metatarsal from a very young (neonatal) equid was found in ditch fill 33. No butchering was seen on the bone. It may be possible that this young foal was from a natural still birth.

83 There was a single fragment of bird bone from ditch fill 45, which could not be identified to species as no diagnostic zones were present.

84 There were no bones present that showed any pathological conditions that may indicate the health of the stock or uses of the animals. None of the bone in this assemblage was sufficiently complete for any measurements to be taken which might allow estimation of stature, breed or species.

Discussion and conclusions

85 This is a small assemblage that is mostly derived from the butchering and food waste. The range of bone and elements show good preservation at this site.

86 The cattle and sheep/goat remains at the site clearly suggest the provision of skins and meat. The neonatal equid bone was found in association with Late Saxon and medieval ceramics, which might suggest equid breeding during this time at Methwold. It was not possible to determine if the bird in this assemblage was of wild or domestic origin.

Shell

87 Two species of shell were identified, both from pit fill 20, which are quantified by context in Table 6.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 35

Context Feature Species Species Count

Context Count

Context Weight

20 Pit Mussel 2 3 5

Ramshorn snail 1

Totals 3 3 5

Table 6. Quantification of the shell assemblage by context and species

88 The two mussels are of marine origin and are likely to have been collected for food.

89 The species of snail found is the Great Ramshorn or Trumpet snail (Planorbuarius corneus), the larger and most common of the four species of Ramshorn snails in Britain. The Ramshorn snail is a freshwater aquatic species of snail, commonly found in ponds, lakes and slow-moving water. These species are not known to have been used for human consumption.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 36

ENVIRONMENTAL REMAINS

90 Soil samples taken from archaeological features for palaeoenvironmental analysis have not been processed at time of writing. The unavoidable omission of the environmental report has been accepted by NHES, and a report on the environmental remains will form part of the final issue of this report.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 37

DISCUSSION

91 The evaluation undertaken by NPS Archaeology at St George’s Court, Globe Street, Methwold, has demonstrated good survival of archaeological features and deposits beneath a substantial overburden. The presence of low densities of artefacts in Trenches 1, 3 and 5 suggests historical occupation in this area is likely to date between the 9th–14th-centuries. Occasional finds of post-medieval material suggest that the site has not been unduly disturbed in the recent past.

92 The evaluation recorded a remarkable number of perpendicular ditches on north–south and east–west alignments. This arrangement of ditches can be seen to broadly follow that of the moated site or fishpond adjacent to the west side of the site, and perhaps also that of the medieval tofts and fishponds known to the southwest. Apparent re-cutting of the ditches to maintain divisions and drainage indicates lengthy use of the site. The ditches may relate to the demarcation of small properties, but other functions are not discounted.

93 Small numbers of post-holes in Trenches 3 and 5 may indicate the presence of post-built structures, and hence may constitute evidence of settlement alongside the occupational activities represented by the ditch features, and by pits.

94 Finds from the excavated features were few, but perhaps can be taken to characterise them as being of medieval origin. The presence of small numbers of medieval pottery sherds supports a view of low density occupational activity on the edges of the known medieval settlement areas to the south.

95 Although the pottery assemblage was small in number and weight it is the first site from Methwold village to include Late Saxon material. The evidence that the sherds of pottery were not heavily abraded suggests that they had not moved far from their original place of deposition and may therefore indicate activity or occupation at the site prior to the medieval period, which would be a significant discovery for the developmental history of settlement here.

96 In conclusion, it seems reasonable to assume that the archaeological features and finds recorded by the evaluation constitute an element of the well-documented earthworks and ditched features related to the shrunken medieval village of Methwold. Without further archaeological work at the site it is not possible to expound further on the function and arrangement of the buried features, but it is plain that they can be viewed within a context of small-scale medieval settlement and farming. It is considered likely that the range, date and character of the archaeology recorded by the evaluation is representative of the site as a whole.

97 Recommendations for further archaeological mitigation work (if required, based on the evidence presented in this report) will be made by NHES.

SUBJE

CT TO APPROVAL


Page 38

Acknowledgements

NPS Archaeology would like to thank Mr David Waters for support and consideration during the archaeological works.

The project was commissioned by Windsor Architectural and funded by Mulberry Tree Homes Ltd.

The fieldwork was undertaken by the author, Tom Baxter-Campbell, Gary Collyer and Robby Copsey.

The finds were processed by Louise Weetman. Metal finds were reported on by Rebecca Sillwood, pottery was identified by Sue Anderson and the faunal remains were reported on by Julie Curl. Rebecca Sillwood prepared the finds report.

Special thanks are given to Ken Hamilton of NHES for his help and understanding, especially in regards to the depths of machining in Trenches 2 and 4.

The work was overseen for NPS by Andrew Crowson who also edited the draft text. Figures for this report were prepared by the author and finalised by David Dobson.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 39

Bibliography and Sources

British Geological Survey 2015. Geology of Britain viewer. [online] Available at: http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html. [Accessed 8 January 2016]

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) 2014a. Standard and guidance for archaeological field evaluation/an archaeological watching brief/archaeological excavation

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) 2014b. Standard and guidance for the collection, documentation, conservation and research of archaeological materials

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) 2014c. Standard and Guidance for the creation, compilation, transfer and deposition of archaeological archives

Cushion, B. and Davison, A. 2003. Earthworks of Norfolk. East Anglian Archaeology 104

Department for Communities and Local Government 2012. National Planning Policy Framework

Medlycott, M. (ed.) 2011. Research and Archaeology Revisited: a Revised Framework for the East of England. East Anglian Archaeology Occasional Paper 24

Davis, S. 1992. A Rapid Method For Recording Information About Mammal Bones From Archaeological Sites. English Heritage AML Report 71/92

Hillson, S.1992. Mammal bones and teeth. The Institute of Archaeology, University College, London

Jennings, S. 1981. Eighteen Centuries of Pottery from Norwich. East Anglian Archaeology 13

Macnair, A. 2016. Faden’s Map of Norfolk. [online] Available at: http://www.fadensmapofnorfolk.co.uk/mapBrowserNew.asp. [Accessed 11 March 2016]

MPRG. 1998. A Guide to the Classification of Medieval Ceramic Forms. Medieval Pottery Research Group Occasional Paper 1

Norfolk County Council 2016. Map Explorer. [online] Available at: http://historic-maps.norfolk.gov.uk/. [Accessed 11 March 2016]

Pfleger, V. 1990. A Field Guide in colour to Molluscs. Blitz

Whitehead, R. Buckles 1250-1800. Greenlight Publishing

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 40

Appendix 1a: Context Summary

Context Category Cut Type Fill Of

Description Period Trench

1 Deposit Subsoil 1 to 5

2 Deposit Subsoil 1 to 5

3 Cut Ditch 5

4 Deposit 3 Ditch fill 5

5 Cut Ditch 5


7 Cut Ditch 5


9 Cut Ditch 5


11 Cut Ditch 5


13 Cut Ditch 5


15 Cut Ditch 5


17 Cut Ditch 5


19 Cut Pit/natural feature

5

20 Deposit 19 Pit/natural feature fill 5

21 Deposit 19 Pit/natural feature fill 5

22 Cut Post-hole 5

23 Deposit 22 Post-hole fill 5

24 Cut Post-hole 5


26 Cut Post-hole/small pit

5

27 Deposit 26 Post-hole/small pit fill 5

28 Cut Ditch 1


30 Cut Ditch 1


32 Cut Ditch 1


34 Cut Ditch 1


36 Cut Post-hole 1


38 Cut Ditch 1

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 41




40 Cut Ditch 1


42 Cut Post-hole 1


44 Cut Pit 1

45 Deposit 44 Pit fill 1

46 Cut Ditch 1


48 Cut Ditch 1


50 Cut Ditch 3


52 Cut Post-hole 3


54 Cut Post-hole 3


56 Cut Post-hole 3


58 Cut Shallow ditch/undulation

3


60 Cut Ditch 3


62 Cut Ditch 3


64 Cut Linear chalk deposit

3

65 Deposit 64 Chalk deposit 3

66 Cut Ditch 2


68 Cut Ditch 2


70 VOID 4

71 Deposit Deposit in sondage 4



74 U/S Finds

Unstratified finds 1

75 U/S Finds


76 U/S Finds


SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 42



77 U/S Finds


78 U/S Finds


79 Deposit Coarse sand deposit 2

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 43

Appendix 2a: Finds by Context

Context Material Qty Wt Period

06 Animal bone 1 9g Unknown

06 Brick/tile 2 2g Post-medieval

06 Pottery 1 19g Post-medieval

06 Stone 1 14g Unknown

22 Pottery 4 617g Post-medieval

26 Pottery 2 1,305g Post-medieval

Appendix 2b: Finds Summary

Period Material Total

Post-medieval Brick/tile 2

Pottery 7

Unknown Animal bone 1

Stone 1

Appendix 3: Pottery Catalogue

Context Fabric No Wt/g MNV Form Rim Date

18 STAMA 1 7 1 Late 9th–10th century

33 THET 1 2 1 Late 9th-11th century

33 GRIM 1 6 1 Late 12th-14th century

45 YAR 1 3 1 11th-12th century

45 GRIM 1 3 1 Late 12th-14th century

51 EMW 1 8 1 11th-12th century

74 EMW 1 34 1 JR SEV 11th-12th century

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 44

Appendix 4: Animal Bone Catalogue

Key: NISP = Number of Individual Species elements Present Age j = juvenile (older than 1 month), neo = less than one moth from birth Butchering = c = cut, ch = chopped Elements: L = limb, MP = metapodial, sk = skull, man = mandible, t = tooth, f = foot bone, s/p = scapula/pelvis, v/r = vertebrae/ribs, hc = horncore. Count = Countable following Davis, 1992.

Conte

xt

Ctx

t Q

ty

Wt (g

)

Specie

s

NIS

P

Sp W

t (g

)

Adu

lt

Juv

Neo

L

MP

Sk

Man

T

F

S/P

V/R

HC

Count

Butc

heri

ng

Comments

16

1 14 Sheep/

goat 1 14 1 1

Chopped

Radius

33

1 60 Equid 1 60 1 1 1 Metatarsal

(3rd)

45

4 216

Cattle 3 215 3 1 2 3

Cut and chopped

Scapula (articular end), pelvic fragment, talus with cuts

45

Bird 1 1 1 1 Shaft

fragment

53

1 183

Cattle 1 183 1 1 1 Chopped

Very robust metatarsal – mature bull

72

1 1 Sheep 1 1 1 1 .5

Cut

Proximal phalange with fine cuts from

skinning. Bone has

been heavily burnt/cremated, resulting in

a fully oxidised

white element.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 45

Appendix 5: Historical and Archaeological Periods

Period Date From Date To

Prehistoric -500,000 42

Early Prehistoric -500,000 -4,001

Palaeolithic -500,000 -10,001

Lower Palaeolithic -500,000 -150,001

Middle Palaeolithic -150,001 -40,001

Upper Palaeolithic -40,000 -10,001

Mesolithic -10,000 -4,001

Early Mesolithic -10,000 -7,001

Late Mesolithic -7,000 -4,001

Late Prehistoric -4,000 42

Neolithic -4,000 -2,351

Early Neolithic -4,000 -3,001

Middle Neolithic -3,500 -2,701

Late Neolithic -3,000 -2,351

Bronze Age -2,350 -701

Early Bronze Age -2,350 -1,501

Beaker -2,300 -1,700

Middle Bronze Age -1,600 -1,001

Late Bronze Age -1,000 -701

Iron Age -800 42

Early Iron Age -800 -401

Middle Iron Age -400 -101

Late Iron Age -100 42

Roman 42 409

Post Roman 410 1900

Saxon 410 1065

Early Saxon 410 650

Middle Saxon 651 850

Late Saxon 851 1065

Medieval 1066 1539

Post-medieval 1540 1900

Modern 1900 2050

World War One 1914 1918

World War Two 1939 1945

Cold War 1945 1992

Unknown -- --

after English Heritage Periods List, recommended by Forum on Information Standards in Heritage

available at: http://www.fish-forum.info/inscript.htm

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 46

Appendix 6: OASIS Report Summary

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

OASIS DATA COLLECTION FORM:England

List of Projects | Manage Projects | Search Projects | New project | Change your details | HERcoverage | Change country | Log out

Printable version

OASIS ID: norfolka1-242138

Project details

Project name St Georges Court, Globe Street, Methwold, Norfolk

Short descriptionof the project

NPS Archaeology was commissioned by MCP Law on behalf of WindsorArchitectural to carry out an archaeological trial trench evaluation ahead ofplanned construction of residential housing at St George's Court, off GlobeStreet, Methwold, Norfolk (TL 73015, 95006). The proposed development siteencompasses an area of 0.42ha. Five trial trenches were situated to provide asample of c. 5% of the site. The archaeological works took place on 17-19January 2016. The trenches revealed an arrangement of inter-cut ditches, pitsand post-holes, some of which were of 9th-11th-century date and others of11th-14th-century date. Although there was limited evidence for settlementoccupation at the site, Late Saxon pottery and artefacts of medieval and post-medieval date suggest that activity had occurred within the vicinity of the siteintermittently across several centuries. It is considered likely that the evidencerecovered situates the evaluation site on the north edge of a shrunken medievalvillage, known from surrounding fields by earthworks of tofts, enclosures andfish ponds.

Project dates Start: 17-02-2016 End: 19-02-2016

Previous/futurework

Not known / Not known

Any associatedproject referencecodes

139988 - HER event no.

Type of project Field evaluation

Site status None

Current Land use Grassland Heathland 5 - Character undetermined

Monument type PIT Uncertain

Monument type DITCH Medieval

Monument type POST-HOLE Uncertain

Significant Finds POTTERY Early Medieval

Significant Finds POTTERY Medieval

Methods &techniques

''Targeted Trenches''

Developmenttype

Rural residential

Prompt National Planning Policy Framework - NPPF

Page 1 of 3OASIS FORM - Print view

14/03/2016http://oasis.ac.uk/form/print.cfm

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

Position in theplanning process

Pre-application

Project location

Country England

Site location NORFOLK KINGS LYNN AND WEST NORFOLK METHWOLD St GeorgesCourt, Globe Street, Methwold

Study area 0.42 Hectares

Site coordinates TL 73015 95006 52.5249988367 0.550635513791 52 31 30 N 000 33 02 EPoint

Project creators

Name ofOrganisation

NPS Archaeology

Project brieforiginator

Norfolk Historic Environment Service

Project designoriginator

NPS Archaeology

Projectdirector/manager

John Ames

Project supervisor NPS Archaeology

Project archives

Physical Archiverecipient

Norfolk Museums Service

Physical Contents ''Ceramics'',''Worked stone/lithics''

Digital Archiverecipient

NPS Archaeology

Digital Contents ''other''

Digital Mediaavailable

''Images raster / digital photography'',''Images vector'',''Spreadsheets'',''Text''

Paper Archiverecipient

Norfolk Museums Service

Paper Contents ''other''

Paper Mediaavailable

''Context sheet'',''Plan'',''Report'',''Section''

Projectbibliography 1

Publication typeGrey literature (unpublished document/manuscript)

Title St George's Court, Globe Street, Methwold, Norfolk, IP26 4PQ. ArchaeologicalTrial Trench Evaluation

Author(s)/Editor(s)

Ames, J.

Otherbibliographicdetails

2016/1313

Date 2016



SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

Issuer orpublisher

NPS Archaeology

Place of issue orpublication

Norwich

Entered by a ([email protected])

Entered on 14 March 2016



SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL


Page 50

Appendix 7: Archaeological Specification

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

nps archaeology

01-04-16-2-1313

St George’s Court, Globe St, Methwold, Norfolk, IP26 4PQ

Archaeological Evaluation by Trial Trenching Written Scheme of Investigation

Prepared for: Windsor Architectural

Planning Ref: N/A

February 2016

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

nps archaeology

QUALITY ASSURANCE

Job Number 01-04-16-2-1313

Client Windsor Architectural

Location St George’s Court, Globe Street, Methwold, IP26 4PQ, Norfolk

District King’s Lynn and West Norfolk

Planning Reference N/A

Grid Reference TL 73015 95006

Compiled Ben Philip Hobbs 05-02-2016

Reviewed David Adams 08-02-2016

Issue 1

Revised Andrew Crowson 09-02-2016

Issue 2

Disclaimer This document has been prepared in good faith on the basis of information available at the date of publication without any independent verification for the exclusive use and benefit of the named client and for the sole purpose for which it is provided. NPS Archaeology does not guarantee the accuracy, reliability, completeness, or currency of the content of this document nor its usefulness in achieving any purpose. This document is not intended to nor should it be relied upon by any third party. NPS Archaeology accepts no responsibility nor liability should this document be used for any alternative purpose other than for which it is intended nor to any third party. NPS Archaeology will not be liable for any loss, damage, cost, or expense incurred or arising by reason of any person using or relying on information in this document.

nps archaeology Scandic House 85 Mountergate Norwich NR1 1PY T 01603 756150 F 01603 756190 E [email protected] W nau.nps.co.uk © NPS Archaeology Ltd 2016, all rights reserved

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

1

Archaeological Evaluation by Trial Trenching

Written Scheme of Investigation

Introduction

Background

1 Proposals to develop land to be known as St George’s Court, off Globe Street, Methwold, Norfolk, IP26 4PQ (centre: TL 73015 95006), require a programme of archaeological work to support and inform the planning application for the site.

2 The area of proposed development (subsequently ‘the site’) has been identified by Norfolk County Council Historic Environment Service (NHES) as potentially containing heritage assets of archaeological interest, primarily because of its position adjacent to—and potentially amongst—an extensive group of earthworks. The earthworks are considered to represent a range of archaeologically important features of likely medieval date, including fishponds, enclosures and tofts (see para. 7).

3 All available historical maps show the site as undeveloped land, and therefore any potential archaeological remains are likely to be undisturbed. It is noted that two east–west field boundaries within the plot, which are visible on modern aerial photography, are in approximate alignment with the fishpond earthworks to the west. Similar division of the site is recorded as early as c. 1840 on the Methwold Tithe map. If earthwork structures extend into, or formerly extended into the site it is considered likely that evidence may survive below ground in the form of archaeological features.

4 There are no records of previously identified archaeological remains at the site and its archaeological potential is not confirmed. However, there is substantial evidence relating to historical human occupation in many of the surrounding fields.

5 A prehistoric flint tool found c. 200m to the north-west and a Neolithic axe head and Bronze Age axe located 200m south of the site provide evidence of prehistoric activity nearby.

6 Other known archaeological assets in the vicinity of the development include the site of an Iron Age–Roman settlement 300m to the north-east, a possible Late Anglo-Saxon foundation church 350m to the south, and Anglo-Saxon and early medieval pottery located 200m to the south.

7 The fishponds, enclosures and other earthwork features noted above extend over a distance of 200m to the southwest and west of the site, and may feasibly be associated with a supposed castle or medieval hall 150m to the south-east of the site. This location is recorded on the 1880 Ordnance Survey map as Old Hall (site of), and the footprint of a substantial building or buildings is clearly visible on a 1946 RAF aerial photograph of the area.

8 In addition, the field 270m to the north-west has produced multi-period finds including artefacts and pottery sherds from the prehistoric, Iron Age, Roman and medieval periods.

9 Archaeological trial trench evaluation at the site will be carried out in line with a generic brief for Archaeological Evaluation by Trial Trenching (Hamilton 2012, updated Dack 2015) issued by NHES, in accordance with the Borough Council of King’s Lynn and

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

2

West Norfolk Core Strategy (adopted July 2011) Policy CS12, and in regard to the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (Department for Communities and Local Government 2012).

10 The objective of the archaeological trial trenching (detailed in the Aims section of this document) is to identify the presence, extent, date, state of preservation and hence significance of any heritage assets at the site. The trial trench evaluation will be sufficient to characterise any heritage assets identified and the results will be assessed by NHES to determine whether further investigations would be necessary should archaeological remains be found at the site which cannot be preserved by design.

11 Windsor Architectural has requested that NPS Archaeology prepares this Written Scheme of Investigation to outline an appropriate programme of archaeological works that will satisfy the NHES requirements for the archaeological trial trenching.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

3

Aims

12 The Programme of Archaeological Work requested by NHES is required to recover, by archaeological evaluation, information relating to the extent, date, phasing, character, function, status and significance of the site. A determination of the state of preservation of any features, deposits and structures is also required.

13 The aims of the archaeological work may therefore be summarised as:

i. To establish the presence or absence of archaeological remains within the proposed development site.

ii. To determine the extent, condition, nature, quality and date of any archaeological remains occurring within the site and the possible impacts of the proposed development on them.

iii. Ensure that any archaeological features discovered during trial trenching are identified, sampled and recorded.

iv. To establish, as far as possible, the extent, character, stratigraphic sequence and date of archaeological features and deposits, and the nature of the activities which occurred at the site during the various periods or phases of its occupation.

v. To establish the palaeoenvironmental potential of subsurface deposits by ensuring that any deposits with the potential to yield palaeoenvironmental data are sampled and submitted for assessment to the appropriate specialists.

vi. To explore evidence for social, economic and industrial activity.

vii. To disseminate the archaeological data recovered by the evaluation in the form of a report which will provide a basis for any decisions regarding further archaeological intervention and mitigation proposals should they be necessary.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

4

Method Statement

Introduction

14 A three-stage evaluation strategy will be undertaken to assess the archaeological potential of the proposed development site. The stages of this strategy may be summarised as follows.

i. Trial Trenching. Machine and manual excavation will be employed to investigate the presence, condition, character and date of any sub-surface archaeological deposits and features occurring at the site. Any archaeological features identified will be cleaned and sample excavated to determine function, form and relative date.

ii Post-Fieldwork Processes. The drawn and written stratigraphic/structural record will be cross-referenced and analysed to provide a synthesis of the results of the work. Cleaning and cataloguing of any artefacts and ecofacts recovered will be carried out throughout the duration of the fieldwork. The finds will be cleaned, marked and packaged in accordance with the archive requirements of Norfolk Museums Service.

iii. Report and Archive. The report will describe the results of the trial trenching with data presented in tabular, graphic and appendix form. Copies of the reports will be submitted to the client and to NHES.

15 The procedures and methodology for each of the stages outlined above are described in detail below.

Trial Trenching

16 Trial trenching will be concerned with establishing the condition, character and date of any sub-surface archaeological features and deposits present. Guidelines set out in the documents Standard and guidance for archaeological field evaluation (Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 2014) and Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England (Gurney 2003) will be followed.

17 The trench evaluation is formulated on a 5% sample of the entire site area. This will consist of five trenches measuring 20m by 1.80m to provide the required sample results and located to provide an efficient distribution of assets to locate potential archaeological features. It is considered that the trench plan attached as Figure 1 will provide for an appropriate investigation of the potential archaeology at the site.

18 Based on information supplied by the client, no known obstructions, Tree Preservation Orders, contamination issues or other constraints are known at the site, but the final locations of some trenches may be determined on the basis of surface or below ground obstructions and Health and Safety considerations identified at the time of the work.

19 The trenches will be set out in relation to the Ordnance Survey National Grid by NPS Archaeology and scanned by CAT prior to excavation.

20 Excavation will be by mechanical excavator equipped with a toothless bucket in 100mm spits until natural geological ground or archaeological deposits are identified.

21 Initial excavation will be undertaken to the top of any undisturbed archaeological deposits or the surface of the underlying natural geological deposits, whichever is the highest. If neither is encountered it may be necessary to excavate to a maximum depth of 1.20m below the present ground surface in line with Health and Safety guidance for trenches with unsupported sides. If further depth of excavation is required, the trench sides may need to be locally stepped or shored. The requirement for and the scope of

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

5

works below 1.20m will be determined by NHES and agreed and costed as a contingency.

22 If the deposits in the trenches extend too deep to evaluate safely, or below the likely level of any development impacts, a hand auger may be used to retrieve information about the characteristics of the lower deposits.

23 The trenches will be fenced around using Netlon high-visibility fencing and applicable warning signs will be displayed where these measures are appropriate.

24 Spoil from the trenches will not be removed from site. The trenches will not be backfilled until agreement to do so is given by NHES. Backfilling will be undertaken by NPS Archaeology and all trenches will be left in a safe condition.

25 Exposed surfaces and archaeological features and deposits will be excavated by hand and screened by metal detector. The metal detector will be utilised to scan excavated spoil and in situ horizons with the operator ensuring that it is used in a correct fashion. All artefacts and ecofacts will be collected and bagged by unique context number.

26 All archaeological deposits, features and layers will be assigned individual context numbers and recorded on standardised forms employing the NPS Archaeology pro forma recording system. The records will include full written, graphic and photographic elements with site and context numbering compatible with the NHES Record numbering system.

27 Plans will be made at a scale of 1:50, with provision for 1:20 and 1:10 drawings. Sections will be recorded at scales of 1:10 and 1:20 depending on the detail considered necessary. A photographic record in 35mm monochrome film and digital formats will be maintained of all archaeological deposits, layers and features to record their characteristics and relationships. Photographs will be taken to record the progress of the evaluation.

28 Human remains will be left in situ unless otherwise instructed by NHES. If any human remains or burials are discovered that must be removed, an application for a Licence for the Removal of Human Remains will be made in compliance with the Burial Acts 1857 and 1981 and all relevant Ministry of Justice guidelines. Backfilling of features containing human remains will be carried out manually to ensure that the remains are appropriately protected from any damage or disturbance.

29 Any finds of gold and silver shall be removed to a safe place and reported to the local coroner according to the procedures set out in the 1996 Treasure Act (and amendments). Where removal cannot be effected on the same working day as the discovery, suitable security measures will be taken to protect the finds from theft. NPS Archaeology will inform NHES and the Portable Antiquities Scheme's Finds Liaison Officer of such discoveries as soon as is reasonably practical.

30 Detailed strategies for levels of sampling of buried soils, structures, pits, post-holes and ditches will be determined on site. Allowance will be made for total recovery where appropriate; percentage sampling will apply in areas where complex stratified deposits are encountered. In general, the feature/deposit sampling strategy will be employed throughout the evaluation in accordance with Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England (Gurney 2003).

31 Soil samples for palaeoenvironmental materials will be collected if suitable sealed and well-dated deposits are identified. Standard 20 litre bulk soil samples, column or monolith samples and Kubiena tins will be collected from such deposits as appropriate,

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

6

in consultation with the Historic England Science Advisor for the East of England and/or other consultant environmentalists if appropriate. Buried soils will be sampled by sieving to determine artefact densities. In all instances, sampling procedures will follow guidance issued by English Heritage (Historic England) in Environmental Archaeology 2nd edition (2011). Full written, graphic and photographic sample records will be made using NPS Archaeology’s pro forma recording system.

Post-Fieldwork Processes

32 The drawn and written stratigraphic/structural record will be cross-referenced and analysed to provide a synthesis of the results of the work.

33 The cleaning and cataloguing of any artefactual materials recovered will be undertaken on completion of the trial trenching. All retained materials will be cleaned, marked and packaged in accordance with the requirements of Norfolk Museums Service (NMS).

34 Post-fieldwork analyses will start upon completion of the finds processing and will involve the identification and description of the artefactual materials recovered by the relevant specialists. In general, the following strategies will be employed in the analysis of the artefactual materials recovered:

Pottery. Analysed to determine date and tabulated by context unit

Worked flint. Sorted and tabulated by context unit

Metal artefacts. Assessed for dating and significance, catalogued by context unit and where necessary conserved within four weeks of completion of fieldwork, in accordance with UKIC Conservation Guidelines 3 (1984)

Faunal remains. Sorted and tabulated by context unit. Assessed for the potential for further analysis and for sieving for the recovery of smaller bird and fish bones

Environmental samples. Processed and assessed for content and significance

Other categories of artefactual materials will be analysed in a similar fashion.

35 All finds work will follow the procedures set out in Standard and guidance for the collection, documentation, conservation and research of archaeological materials (Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 2014). Finds data will be entered on a spreadsheet to aid analysis and report preparation.

36 All archaeological materials, excepting those covered by the Treasure Act 1996, will remain the property of the landowners. NPS Archaeology will seek to reach formal agreement with the landowners for donation of materials to NMS.

Report and Archive

37 An evaluation report will be prepared that presents the stratigraphic, structural, artefactual and environmental evidence and analyses, and a synthesis of the results of the trial trenching.

38 The report will present data in written, tabular, graphic and appendix form. A list of archive components generated by the work and a reference to the intended place of archive deposition will be included in the report. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, NPS Archaeology will retain copyright in and ownership of all documentation and other

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

7

materials prepared by NPS Archaeology. NPS Archaeology may publish or jointly publish any description or illustration of the works with the prior consent of the client.

39 A draft copy of the report will be presented to the client and to NHES for approval within eight weeks of the completion of the evaluation. An advance (interim) report for the purpose of expediting planning applications may be supplied upon request by the client and by agreement with NHES. Multiple copies of the approved report will be produced as appropriate and presented to the client and one digital and one paper copy to NHES. One copy of the report may be sent to the Historic England Science Advisor for the East of England, if considered appropriate.

40 An online OASIS record will be initiated immediately prior to the start of fieldwork and completed when the final report is submitted to NHES. This will include a pdf version of the final report.

41 A single integrated archive for all elements of the work will be prepared according to the recommendations set out in Environmental standards for the permanent storage of excavated material from archaeological sites (UKIC Conservation Guidelines 3, 1984) and Archaeological Archives: a guide to best practice in creation, compilation, transfer and curation (Brown 2007), and in accordance with NMS requirements for archive preparation, storage and conservation.

42 The archive will be fully indexed and cross-referenced It will also be integrated with the NMS Project accession number and the NHES numbering system. Deposition of the archive and archaeological materials (by prior agreement with the landowners) will take place after completion of the final report and confirmed in writing to NMS. A full listing of archive contents and finds boxes will accompany the deposition of the archive and finds.

43 If NMS are not making new archive accessions and no confirmation is provided of when new archives will be accepted, NPS Archaeology reserve the right to make alternative arrangements. From 1 January 2016 NPS Archaeology may charge for storage of prepared archaeological archives.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

8

Timetable and Resources

44 The different stages of archaeological work have different time and staff requirements. The timetable for fieldwork assumes that there are no major delays to the work programme caused by factors outside of NPS Archaeology’s reasonable control. Such circumstances would include without limitation: long periods of adverse weather conditions, flooding, repeated vandalism, ground contamination, delays in the development programme, unsafe buildings, conflicts between the archaeological recording methods and the protection of flora and fauna on the site, disease restrictions, and unexploded ordnance.

45 The proposed earliest start date for the archaeological work is one working week upon notification from the client.

46 It is estimated that the fieldwork will take up to one week with a team of three to four archaeologists, dependent on archaeological remains present.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

9

Project Staff

47 A Project Manager will assume overall responsibility for the delivery of the project. The practical aspects of the project will be co-ordinated by a Senior Project Officer who will be dedicated to the project throughout its duration. The fieldwork will be conducted by a Project Officer who will have substantial experience in trench evaluation and post-excavation analysis.

48 Other members of staff involved in the project will be Experienced Excavators and a Finds Officer. Experienced Excavator staff will have experience in excavation and experience with NPS Archaeology’s pro forma recording system or similar systems. The Project Officer and/or Experienced Excavator staff will be experienced metal detector users.

49 NPS Archaeology staff associated with the project will be:

Project Management

Project Manager Andrew Crowson

Project Staff

Senior Project Officer Peter Crawley

Project Officer Rob Brown

Finds Officer Rebecca Sillwood

Experienced Excavators To be nominated

50 NPS Archaeology reserves the right to change its nominated personnel at any time should project programmes change.

51 The analysis of artefacts and ecofacts will be undertaken by NPS Archaeology or nominated external specialists. Nominated NPS Archaeology and external specialists and their areas of expertise are:

Research Field

Metal-detectorist; numismatic items Andrew Barnett

Worked flint Sarah Bates

Palaeoenvironmental remains; worked stone Frances Green

Faunal remains Julie Curl

Post-Roman ceramics, brick and tile Sue Anderson

Materials conservation Debbie Harris

Metalwork Ian Riddler Rebecca Sillwood

Plant and animal macrofossils Val Fryer

Prehistoric and Roman ceramics Andrew Peachey

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

10

Conditions

52 NPS Archaeology will not commence work until a written order or signed agreement is received from the client. Where the commission is received through an agent, the agent is deemed to be authorised to act on behalf of the client. NPS Archaeology reserve the right to recover unpaid fees for the service provided from the agent where it is found that this authority is contested by said client.

53 NPS Archaeology expect information on any services crossing the site to be provided by the client.

54 A 7.4 hour working day is normally operated by NPS Archaeology, although their agents may work outside these hours.

55 NPS Archaeology expect the client to arrange suitable access to the site for its staff, plant and welfare facilities on the agreed start date.

56 NPS Archaeology expect any information concerning the presence of TPOs and/or protected flora and fauna on the site to be provided by the client prior to the commencement of works and accept no liability if this information is not disclosed. No excavation will take place within 8.00m or canopy width (whichever is the greater) of any trees within or bordering the site.

57 NPS Archaeology shall not be held responsible for any delay or failure in meeting agreed deadlines resulting from circumstances beyond its reasonable control. Such circumstances are detailed in para. 44.

58 Whether or not CDM regulations apply to this work, NPS Archaeology expect the client to provide information on the nature, extent and level of any soil contamination present. Should unanticipated contaminated ground be encountered during the trial trenching, excavation will cease until an assessment of risks to health has been undertaken and on-site control measures implemented. NPS Archaeology will not be liable for any costs related to the collection and analysis of soils or other assessment methods, on-site control measures, and the removal of contaminated soil or other materials from site.

59 Should any disease restrictions be implemented for the area during the evaluation, fieldwork will cease and staff redeployed until they are lifted. NPS Archaeology will not be liable for any costs related to on-site disease control measures and for any additional costs incurred to complete the fieldwork after the restrictions have been removed.

60 NPS Archaeology will not accept responsibility for any tree surgery, removal of undergrowth, shrubbery or hedges or reinstatement of gardens. NPS Archaeology will endeavour to restrict the levels of disturbance of to a minimum but wishes to bring to the attention of the client that the works will necessarily alter the appearance of landscapes and especially gardens.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

11

Quality Standards

61 All staff employed or sub-contracted by NPS Archaeology will be employed in line with the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists’ Code of Practice.

62 The guidelines set out in the document Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England (Gurney 2003) that remain current will be adhered to. Provision will be made for monitoring the work by NHES in accordance with the procedures outlined in the document Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment (MoRPHE) (English Heritage [now Historic England] 2006). Monitoring opportunities for each phase of the project are suggested as follows:

a) during archaeological trial trenching

b) during post-fieldwork analysis

c) upon receipt of the final report

63 A further monitoring opportunity will be provided at the end of the work upon deposition of the integrated archive and finds with NMS.

64 NPS Archaeology operates under a recognised Quality Management System and is accredited with BS EN ISO 9001:2008.

65 NPS Archaeology operates a Project Management System. Most aspects of this project will be co-ordinated by a Project Officer who has the day-to-day responsibility for the successful completion of the project. Overall responsibility for the successful delivery of the project lies with the Archaeology Manager who has responsibility for all of NPS Archaeology's work and ensures the maintenance of quality standards within the organisation.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

12

Health and Safety

66 NPS Archaeology will ensure that all work is carried out in accordance with NPS Property Consultants Limited's Health and Safety Policy, to standards defined in the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 and The Management of Health and Safety Regulations 1992, and in accordance with the health and safety manual Health and Safety in Field Archaeology (SCAUM 2007).

67 A site-specific risk assessment will be prepared for the fieldwork. All staff will be briefed on the contents of the risk assessment and required to read it. Protective clothing and equipment will be issued and used as required.

68 NPS Archaeology will provide copies of NPS Property Consultants Limited's Health and Safety policy on request.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

13

Insurance

69 NPS Archaeology’s Insurance Cover is:

Employers Liability £5,000,000

Public Liability £50,000,000

Professional Indemnity £5,000,000

70 Full details of NPS Archaeology's Insurance cover will be supplied on request.

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

D

ra

in

6

7

Fish Pond

Fishpond

61

Well

5

4

5

0

5

1

5

7

G

L

O

B

E

S

T

R

E

E

T

N

0 100m


01-04-16-2-1313 St Georges Court, Globe Street, Methwold. Proposed trench location

5 x 20m x 1.8m trenches

Scale 1:1000 at A4

SUBJECT TO A

PPROVAL

Documents

2016/1313 St George’s Court, Globe Street, …...2016/01/04 · Overview Andrew Crowson Draft John Ames 09.03.2016 Graphics David Dobson 10.03.2016 Edit Andrew Crowson 11.03.2016