1.1 Introduction 1.2 Topography, geology and land …...The Fisheries, Brook Farm, Harescombe:...

The Fisheries, Brook Farm, Harescombe: Archaeological Evaluation

1

CONTENTS

List of Illustrations Glossary Summary 1. INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF 6 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Topography, geology and land-use 1.3 Archaeological background 1.4 Methodology 2. EVALUATION RESULTS 10 3. CONCLUSIONS 12 4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 13 5. BIBLIOGRAPHY 13 Illustrations


2

ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1 Location plan Fig. 2 1st edition OS map, 25", 1885 Fig. 3 Proposed lake positions, known archaeology and trench locations. Fig. 4 Trench 1 plan and section


3

GLOSSARY ARCHAEOLOGY For the purposes of this project, archaeology is taken to mean the study of past human societies through their material remains, from prehistoric times to the modern era. No rigid upper date limit has been set, but AD 1900 is used as a general cut-off point. CAT Cotswold Archaeological Trust COLLUVIUM Blanket term for sediments accumulating as a result of gravitational movement caused by slope instability. CONTEXT The simplest level of excavated archaeological data, ie a context could be the cut of a ditch (shown as - [1]), or its fill (shown as (2)). GCC Gloucestershire County Council MEDIEVAL Taken here as the period from the Norman invasion in AD 1066 to approximately AD 1500. MODERN The period following the Post-Medieval period. NATURAL Defined in archaeological terms this refers to the undisturbed natural geology of a site, eg. lower Lias clay, river terrace gravels etc. NEOLITHIC A chronological division of the prehistoric period during which agriculture and domestic animals were introduced to Britain. It is dated between c 4500 - 2000 BC. NGR National Grid Reference given from the Ordnance Survey Grid. OD Ordnance Datum; used to express a given height above mean sea level. PERIGLACIAL A type of climate existent immediately beyond the margins of glaciers and characterised by seasonally frozen ground.


4

POT-SHERD A fragment of a pottery vessel. ROMANO-BRITISH Term used to describe a fusion of indigenous late Iron Age traditions with Roman culture. It is traditionally dated between AD 43 and c. AD 400. SMR Sites and Monument Register. SOLIFLUCTION Deposits forming in a periglacial climate as a result of spring/summer thaw of frozen ground, and consequent mass movement downslope under gravity. TBGAS Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society.


5

SUMMARY

An archaeological field evaluation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeological Trust on

land at Brook Farm, Harescombe, Glos, in January 1996. The work was commissioned by

Christopher Ractcliffe to fulfil a post-consent planning condition for a programme of

archaeological fieldwork prior to the creation of three fishing lakes on the site.

The southern part of the proposed development area lies approximately 200m to the east of

the site of a known Roman villa. Romano-British and medieval pottery has also been

recovered alongside Daniel's Brook, in close proximity to the intended positions of two of

the three lakes.

Excavation of two evaluation trenches alongside the upper and middle pool sites revealed no

archaeological features to which a Roman or medieval date could be attributed. One trench

solely contained a modern animal-burial, whilst the other revealed part of an undated ?linear

feature. Although the limited area exposed precluded certainty of its form and character the

the feature could be of geological rather than archaeological origin.

Should further archaeological work be required it is considered that a limited watching-brief

should be sufficient to identify and record any archaeological remains within the

development area.


6

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 This report presents the results of an archaeological evaluation carried out in January

1996 at Brook Farm, Harescombe, Gloucestershire (centred on NGR: SO 838 092)

(Fig. 1). Fieldwork was commissioned by Nigel Cant on behalf of Christopher

Ractcliffe to fulfil a condition for archaeological works attached to a planning consent

for the development of farmland alongside Daniel's Brook, as a series of three fishing

lakes with associated woodland planting.

1.1.2 The evaluation was conducted according to a project specification prepared by

Cotswold Archaeological Trust, in line with the Standards and Guidance for

Archaeological Field Evaluations issued by the Institute of Field Archaeologists. No

archaeological brief has been issued by the Planning Authority. The details of the

specification were discussed and agreed by telephone between G Walker of Cotswold

Archaeological Trust and J Hunter of Gloucestershire County Council on 28.11.95

(CAT 1995). A site monitoring visit was made by Mr Hunter on 2nd January 1996.

1.1.3 The objective of the evaluation was to determine whether any archaeological deposits

were present within the study area and, if so, to assess their nature and importance.

This would provide information on the date, character, quality, survival and extent of

the archaeological deposits and provide data to assist the Planning Authority to devise

appropriate mitigation action where necessary.

1.2 Topography, geology and land-use

1.2.1 The application area lies equidistant between Scottsquar and Haresfield Hill within a

stream incised north-facing valley. It is bounded on its western, southern and northern

sides by the steep-sides of the combe, and has Daniel's Brook running on a north-south


7

line through the site.

1.2.2 The geology of the area is mapped by the British Geological Survey (1/50,00 sheet

234; Green 1992) as `landslip and foundered strata'. However through a combination

of extrapolation from nearby known geological strata and site observation of orange-

brown silt/clay and grey-green clays the geological unit present appears to be Lower

Jurassic Lias; either Middle Lias (Dyrham silts) as noted at Cliftwell House or, more

probably, Upper Lias clay.

1.2.3 The proposed development area currently lies under improved pasture as a series of

undulating fields.

1.3 Archaeological background

1.3.1 The site lies in an area of considerable archaeological interest. The Gloucestershire

SMR lists a number of archaeological sites and findspots within Harescombe parish

ranging in date from the prehistoric to the post-medieval period. Of these entries, three

PRN's lie either within or in close proximity to the application area; and suggested that

occupation-related features might lie within the areas of proposed development.

1.3.2 PRN 3584 (NGR: SO 38400 20913) has been assigned to Haresfield, or Stockend,

Roman villa; which is situated near the head of the combe on high ground

approximately 200m to the east of Daniel's Brook, at approximately 150m OD. The

presence of a well-appointed house is known from the discovery of roof and flue tiles,

tesserae, opus signinum floor fragments, painted wall-plaster, pottery, two stone

column sections and a silver coin of Theodosius (Gray 1964). The presence of a villa

was first documented by Witt in 1883 in his Archaeological Handbook of the County

of Gloucester, and cartloads of stone appear to have been regularly removed from the

site prior to that date for local road repairs (RCHM(E) 1976).

1.3.3 Two SMR entries actually lie within the proposed application area. PRN 4857 and


8

4858 (NGR: SO 38375 20915) record the findspot at Randalls Farm, Stockend, in

ploughsoil and the stream bed, of twenty-seven sherds of Roman pottery, including

samian, Severn Valley, colour-coated and black-burnished wares, along with several ?

Roman nails and a Roman coin (PRN 4857). Medieval pottery and a brooch, possibly

of fourteenth century date, were also found at the same location (PRN 4858).

1.3.4 Although Harescombe parish has not yet been documented by the Victoria County

History the post-medieval history of the site can be traced from cartographic sources,

the proposed development area being shown on the 1839 Tithe map. The field in which

evaluation trenching for pools 2 and 3 was conducted was then known as `Funk

Ground'; surrounded by a network of pasture fields associated with Randalls Farm,

Tump Farm, Park Farm and Brook Farm and lying close to an outbuilding, referred to

as `The Funk' and `Funk Shed' on the OS 1st and 2nd edition 25" maps of 1885 (Fig. 2)

and 1903. The word `Funk' is not included amongst a list of principal field-name

derivations for Harescombe and Scottsquar Hill areas or the list of place-name

elements (Smith 1964); and any archaeological significance to the name is unclear.

The building is not mentioned on the 3rd edition map, though its position is marked in

outline form on modern maps and its plot boundaries still survive. The OS 1st, 2nd and

3rd edition maps shows a strong consistency with field boundaries across this area to

the present day.

1.4 Methodology

1.4.1 A preliminary data-search was undertaken prior to fieldwork commencing, to elucidate

the archaeological background to the study area. The Gloucestershire SMR,

Gloucestershire Record Office and Local Studies Library were consulted for readily

available published sources and cartographic information.

1.4.2 The CAT project design to evaluate the archaeological potential of the site, approved

by J Hunter of Gloucestershire County Council, involved the machine-cutting of two

investigative trenches. These were sited to cut across the position of the dams for pools


9

2 and 3. Should the results of trenching have indicated that archaeological remains

were present and appeared to be descending the valley a third trench would have been

cut in the position of the pool 1 dam.

1.4.3 Both trenches were 1.5m wide and cut by a JCB equipped with a toothless ditching

bucket. Slight variation in the position and length of trenches was made necessary by

the steepness of ground, the soft ground conditions and machine-access requirements.

The final position and size of the trenches is recorded on Fig. 3.

1.4.4 All trenches were excavated under archaeological supervision to the top at the first

archaeological horizon or to the natural substrate. All archaeological features

encountered were then planned at an appropriate scale, sampled and recorded in

accordance with the CAT Technical Manual 1 Site Recording Manual 1993.

1.4.5 Following completion of the evaluation both trenches were backfilled on the 3rd

January 1996. A short publication note will be submitted to an appropriate local

journal.. Subject to agreement with the legal landowner CAT will make arrangements

with Stroud Museum for the deposition of the site archive. No artefacts were

recovered.


10

2. EVALUATION RESULTS

2.1 The natural geological substrate was encountered in both trenches, and consisted of a

variably blue-grey to yellow-brown Lias clay (102) and (203). Where tested in trench 1

this overlay a red-brown silty-clay (107).

Trench 1

2.2 Cutting through the natural clay a broadly linear feature, [105], was recognised;

running on an oblique alignment through the trench (Fig. 4). Whilst its southern edge

could be traced the limited area exposed precluded a proper understanding of its full

dimensions, form and character. Following cleaning of its surface the feature was

carefully investigated by a combination of further hand-sampling and machine-

excavation. At the western, upslope, end of the trench [105] was cut shallowly into the

Lias clay to less than 0.15m in depth; but at the downslope, eastern, end investigation

revealed the depth of the feature to be approximately 1.3m. The southern edge where

tested sloped sharply, before curving more gently to a flat base. The cutting of a 4m

long supplementary trench, counter to the orientation of feature [105], failed to reveal a

corresponding northern edge.

2.3 Fill (106) consisted of a poorly-sorted limestone pellet gravel in a silt/clay matrix that

has obviously accumulated as a result of colluvial processes (be they archaeological or

geological). Initial hand-cleaning and subsequent sampling of the feature revealed no

artefactual material, though relatively localised but profuse charcoal flecking was

noted within the fill. A site visit was made by CAT's Environmental Officer to

examine the feature and to help determine whether it was of geological origin.

2.4 Interpretation of feature [105] is somewhat problematic. Whilst the irregularity of its

form and the fact that no artefacts were found in its uniform fill (106) both suggest a

geological origin, the presence of charcoal within the fill may argue for human activity

during its deposition. Possible geological processes that could form such a large

feature


11

(Over 5m wide and running the whole length of the evaluation trench) include

periglacial spring sapping (channel formation) or frost cracking (rare on such a scale in

southern Britain). It is possible that the charcoal within the fill - which in the above

scenario would be solifluction deposited as a result of freeze thaw episodes - could

have formed as a result of natural fires, eg. through lightning strikes. However, if this

was the case it is difficult to envisage how the charcoal survived subsequent

fragmentation by the violent depositional process and by expansion during colder

periods. despite sampling and examination of large quantities of periglacial solifluction

in southern Britain, nowhere has charcoal been recovered. A second mode by which

the feature could have formed is as a result of faulting in the Lias clay leading to

unconformities (ie. a sudden drop in level), but if this is the case it is not known in the

nearby strata.

2.5 Possible archaeological explanations for the feature are a hollow way or terracing. The

second can probably be dismissed as the feature is not parallel to the valley contours.

Similarly hollow ways do not normally run at 90 degrees to the direction of slope and

often have compacted, or even cobbled, surfaces; absent from the present feature.

Therefore perhaps the most likely explanation is that the feature formed as a result of

geological processes, but was filled (or re-filled) by more recent material. The absence

of artefactual material and uniform morphology may argue against the latter part of

this hypothesis, but colluvium of Neolithic date with such properties is known from the

south-east.

2.6 One other feature was noted within trench 1. Extending out by 0.05m from, and visible

in, the north-facing section was a feature [103] with a v-shaped profile, of uncertain

extent and form; containing a single fill (104) of orangey-yellow lias gravels. The

feature was sealed by topsoil (101) and was cut down through subsoil (108). Although

no artefactual material was encountered the clean, gravelly fill, and its cutting from

high in the section, suggested a modern feature such as a form of drain.

2.7 Overlying all deposits was a thin subsoil/hillwash deposit (108) and a 0.20-0.30m thick

topsoil horizon (101), comprised of fine brown loam soil, devoid of artefactual


12

material.

Trench 2

2.8 Cut into the mottled grey-blue to yellow-brown Lias clay (203) a single feature was

noted. A sub-square machine-cut pit [204] was noted containing a fill (205) of dirty

yellow-brown clay. Hand-excavation revealed this to be the burial pit for a modern

animal burial, and this was later confirmed by the client to be the remains of a calf

buried within the last 15-20 years.

2.9 No other archaeological features were present within the trench, the remaining

stratigraphy consisting of a subsoil/hillwash deposit (202) overlain by dark brown

loam topsoil. The absence of significant archaeological remains within this trench

meant it was unnecessary to cut the contingency trench at the intended position of pool

1.

3. CONCLUSIONS

3.1 Although significant archaeological remains are known to lie in the vicinity of the

study area, the archaeological evaluation has detected no evidence for Romano-British

or medieval occupation or activity in the areas sampled.

3.2 Whilst one cannot discount the possibility that features associated with occupation of

the nearby Roman villa may extend into the application area the evaluation trenching

suggests that any occupation-related features are not intensively distributed, and do not

descend northwards along the combe. Should there be any requirement for further

archaeological works it is felt that a watching brief would provide an appropriate level

of mitigation action to counter any effects of the development on any archaeological

remains present.


13

1.1 Introduction 1.2 Topography, geology and land …...The Fisheries, Brook Farm, Harescombe:...

Documents

Transcript of 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Topography, geology and land …...The Fisheries, Brook Farm, Harescombe:...