Kitton Lane, Nether Compton,...

DORSET DIGGERS COMMUNITY

ARCHAEOLOGY GROUP

Kitton Lane, Nether Compton, Dorset

Assessment Report

on an

Archaeological Excavation

By Christopher John Tripp MA PIFA

Kitton Lane,Sherborne,Dorset Assessment Report

1

KITTON LANE, NETHER COMPTON,

DORSET

ASSESSMENT REPORT

ON AN

ARCHAEOLOGICAL

EXCAVATION

BY

CHRISTOPHER JOHN TRIPP MA PIFA

COVER ILLUSTRATION:

EXCAVATION OF TRENCH 1

2015 Dorset Diggers Community Archaeology Group

Kitton Lane, Sherborne, Dorset


2

Kitton Lane, Nether Compton, Sherborne, Dorset

Archaeological Excavation and Assessment of Results

CONTENTS

SUMMARY.............................................................................................. p. 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..............................................................................p. 4

BACKGROUND......................................................................................... p. 5

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES.............................................................................p. 7

METHODS................................................................................................ p. 8

RESULTS.................................................................................................. p. 9

FINDS...................................................................................................... p. 11

DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION..........................................................p. 15

RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER WORK...............................................p. 17

APPENDIX 1 LOCATION MAP............................................................... p. 18

APPENDIX 2 MAGNETOMETRY SURVEY............................................... p. 19

APPENDIX 3 POTTERY ANALYSIS..........................................................p. 20

APPENDIX 4 BONE ANALYSIS............................................................... p. 21

APPENDIX 5 SOIL SAMPLE ANALYSIS................................................... p. 22

APPENDIX 6 TECHNICAL DRAWINGS...................................................p. 23

PLATES.................................................................................................... p. 24

BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................................ p. 29


3

Archaeological Excavation and Assessment of Results

SUMMARY

It was at the instigation of a local resident that the excavation at Nether Compton was

carried out. Elizabeth Adam had asked the Bath & Camerton Archaeological Society to

undertake a geophysical survey to see if there were any features associated with the finding

of a hoard of over 22,500 low denomination coins in 1989.

The discoveries at Nether Compton will be important for the area of Sherborne and Dorset

as a county and be of value for research into Roman activity in this part of 1st century

southwest Britain. Very little has been excavated in this area and this site can be added to

the larger works being carried out at nearby sites around Yeovil and north Dorset.

A substantial ditch and internal features were found in the first trench and although the

area uncovered by the excavated trench was small this ditch produced data of a quality and

quantity to be of value for comparative research. The internal features were two postholes

and a pit commonly found on many other sites, the pits being interpreted as flat bottomed

grain storage pits, which tend to not produce artefacts. It is difficult to say if the postholes

were contemporary with the pit, as they were discrete features, but one posthole was in the

centre of the pit, which has also been excavated and recorded elsewhere. This would

indicate that perhaps some other activity should be associated with these features, if they

are contemporary.

A second feature was looked at further north. A smaller ditch was found that produced only

two flints but was of interest in itself in that at the base of the ditch a small ‘causeway’ was

uncovered that may indicate how these ditches were constructed.

The artefacts, mainly pottery, bone and building materials, indicate that the immediate area

may have been a rich one, with the material being of high quality. So even though the area

of excavation was limited it is possible to answer some questions to give us an insight into

the lives of the people living and passing through Nether Compton at the time of the Roman

Empire taking control of the British Isles in the 1st century.


4

Acknowledgements

This programme of excavation was permitted by the landowner, Mr Roger Foot and with the

cooperation of the farmer, Mr Greg Kellaway, to whom we give thanks.

Dr John Oswin’s 2011 survey and report was made available by kind permission of Bath &

Camerton Archaeological Society.

The excavation was carried out and supervised by the author and members of Dorset

Diggers Community Archaeology Group (DDCAG). The author would like to thank all who

worked on the site and off it, to make this project a success.

DDCAG would like to thank all the specialists who gave their time and expertise as well as

adding text to this report.

DDCAG would also like to thank all those who in the village of Nether Compton who helped

out and visited the village hall for talks and open days, as well as the village hall

coordinators for use of the venue.

Finally DDCAG would like to thank the Heritage Lottery Fund for their support.

Contributors

Rachel Hall – pottery analysis; Martin Fielding – bone analysis; Ellen Simmons – sample

analysis; Astrid Walden – artefacts drawings; Tara Fairclough – maps, sections and plans.

Archive Location

Paper Archive: The Red House, 12 Cattistock Road, Maiden Newton, Dorset DT2 0AG

CD Archive Copies: Dorset County Council; Dorset County Museum

Artefacts: Sherborne Museum


5

1 BACKGROUND (edited from John Oswin’s report and Richard Hood’s research)

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 Between July and October 2014 the Dorset Diggers Community Archaeology Group

carried out an archaeological excavation on the field east of Kitton Lane, Nether

Compton, Dorset (ST 602 171). The excavation was carried out on behalf of the

landowner Mr Roger Foot and with permission of the farmer Mr Greg Kellaway.

1.1.2 Magnetometer surveys were carried out by John Oswin in 2009 and 2011 in the

fields west and east of Kitton Lane and it was in the east field where DDCAG carried

out an investigation of the features indicated by his results. Excavation was targeted

to focus on the areas of particular archaeological significance.

1.2 Site Location, Topography and Geology (Appendix 1)

1.2.1 Nether Compton is a village and civil parish in the English county of Dorset. It lies

within the West Dorset administrative district, and is situated 3 miles west

of Sherborne and 3 miles east of Yeovil in Somerset [see Appendix 1].

1.2.2 The site consists of two fields to the east of Nether Compton, either side of Kitton

Lane, a rough metalled track which branches off the lane from the village through

Stallen to the A30. Kitton Lane rises up a narrow ridge, through a deep hollow way,

emerging at field level at ST602172, up a narrow ridge to a high plateau 130m to

145m OD.

1.2.3 The Tithe map of 1839 shows the west field was named Higher Kitton and the east

field has become an amalgamation of smaller fields.

1.2.4 To the east of the site is a deep narrow re-entrant and to the west the ground falls

away to lowlands, except in the area of John Oswin’s survey, where the west field

juts out on a promontory in the direction of the village. This commands wide views

toward Yeovil, Pen Mill and the settlement at Lyde Road, as well as Glastonbury to

the northwest.

1.2.5 The site sits in the area of the Jurassic belt, with the Middle and Upper Lias giving

way to Inferior Oolite geology. Yellow Sands are found in the lower ground and

Cornbrush on the higher.

1.3 Archaeological Context (general)

1.3.1 The name Compton probably derives from the Anglo-Saxon ‘comp’, meaning a

narrow valley or combe, and ‘ton’, meaning settlement. This place had three royal

charters from Saxon Kings, granting land to the Church in Sherborne. In the

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_parishes_in_England

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_county

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorset

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Dorset

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherborne

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeovil

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset


6

Doomesday Book, Compton was a prosperous agricultural community, although it is

not clear as to where this settlement was. As the names suggest, Over Compton is on

higher ground than Nether Compton; separate villages were referred to in 1163 as

‘Superior’ and ‘Parva’.

1.3.2 Nether Compton is first mentioned with Over Compton as Contone in the Doomsday

book as held by Sherborne Abbey. Reference to the Victoria History of Dorset,

Hutchins History of Dorset and other Dorset histories do not give much information

about early Compton providing more on the Church, interesting buildings and

landowners. However there is mention of ‘Lynchets a on SW slope 1 ½ miles NE of

the Church with six terraces’ and ‘Lynchets in Home Copse 600 yards S of the

Church’. A passing reference to Athuros may relate to nearby South Cadbury and the

Arthurian legend of Camelot.

1.3.3 The records of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society mention

surface finds of worked flint and Romano-British and mediaeval pottery being made

on Charlock Hill one mile to the north east of Nether Compton. Other similar finds

were found SW of Charlock Hill in the parish of Nether Compton, Romano-British

finds being found at the marl pit Map Ref. 61541832. A child’s skull was excavated

from the face of the of the marl pit by Mr C E Bean. Coarse Romano- British ware

along with iron slag was also found indicating possible smelting of local iron bearing

ore having taken place. A hand made bead-rim pottery sherd found in the marl pit

indicates pre Roman activity in conjunction with a settlement site a few hundred

yards to the north excavated by a Mr J Fowler. For more details the Society records

can be inspected in the Dorset History Centre in Dorchester.

1.4 Romano-British

1.4.1 In 1989 a member of the Yeovil Metal Detector Club found a hoard of c.22,500 early

4th century coins in two Grey Ware pots in a field in Nether Compton. At the time

this find did not come under the rules of treasure trove. This was handed over to

Dorset County Museum, but then retrieved and sold by the landowner and finder.

Normally such hoards are isolated finds and there was no indication or record of any

archaeological remains associated with it. There is an unsubstantiated rumour of a

Roman villa in a field to the west of the find.

1.4.2 Further along Kitton Lane there is the large but unexplored Roman settlement of

Charlock, or Chorlock, Hill (Fowler, 1951; Leech 1976).

1.4.3 A Roman fort was discovered by English Heritage at Bradford Abbas, to the south of

our site, in 2010.


7

2 Aims and Objectives

2.1.1 A research design was compiled by Christopher John Tripp providing full details of the

research aims and methods of the project. A brief summary is provided here.

2.1.2 The aims and objectives were:

to date the two main enclosures

to find any internal features in the enclosures and date them

to ascertain the function of the enclosures and internal features

to ascertain if any of the features are earlier, contemporary or later than the

hoard found in the same field

to place the site in archaeological context with other sites in the immediate

area.


8

3 METHODS

3.1 Excavation trenches

3.1.1 Two trenches were opened to target the location of the ditches and any internal

features [see Appendix 2].

3.1.2 The trenches were opened by mechanical digger using a toothless bucket attached

to the back actor of a JCB type excavator, removing the topsoil in spits under

archaeological supervision large enough to expose the features pinpointed by the

geophysical survey.

3.1.3 All archaeological deposits were recorded using pro forma record sheets with a

unique numbering system for individual contexts. Trenches were located by using a

scale map (1:2500) and identifying well-marked permanent field boundary features

visible from the site. A base line was then established.

3.1.4 All archaeological features and deposits were planned at a scale of 1:20 with sections

drawn at 1:10. All principal strata and features were related to the Ordnance Survey

datum.

3.1.4 A full photographic record of the investigations and individual features was

maintained using digital images. The photographic record illustrated both the detail

and general context of the archaeology revealed and the Site as a whole.

3.1.5 At the completion of the work both trenches were reinstated using the excavated

soil.

3.1.6 A unique code (NCEF:14) was agreed prior to commencement of the works. The

archive and all artefacts were subsequently transported to the premises of the Group

in Maiden Newton where they were processed and assessed for this report.


9

4 RESULTS

4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 Details of the excavated contexts and features and of the artefactual and any

environmental assessments are retained in the archive.

4.2 Contexts summery

Trench 1

4.2.1 Trench 1 was located over the northern west-east section of the southern enclosure

ditch as indicated by the geophysics.

4.2.2 A deposit of ploughed topsoil (001) was identified made up of a silty sand with

charcoal flecks, small angular stones and patches of pure sand. The charcoal may be

natural fire debris or the results of steam ploughing.

4.2.3 The subsoil (002) consisted of a light yellow brown silty sand with iron panning which

was probably deposited during numerous depositions during the working of the soil

when this field was divided up into strips, some of which were orchards.

4.2.4 The natural (003) was a light yellow orange silty sand with sandstone fragments and

blocks in bands.

4.2.5 The enclosure ditch [004] was substantial, being 3.56m wide and 1.18m deep. The

sides were stepped, but may be due to the bands of limestone running horizontally

through the natural. The base was flat and sloping north-south.

4.2.6 The ditch was filled by a dark grey brown silty sand (005) with frequent charcoal and

building material fragments. This material was deposited in one action and was

compact.

4.2.7 A circular pit [006] was identified with vertical sides and a flat base.

4.2.8 The circular feature was filled by a friable dark grey brown homogenous silty sand

(007) deposited in one action.

4.2.9 A steep sided posthole [008] was filled with a friable dark grey brown homogenous

silty sand (009).


10

4.2.10 Posthole [010] was situated in the middle of pit [006] and had vertical sides and was

filled by a friable medium yellow silty sand with limestone fragments, which could

have been used as packing.

Trench 2

4.2.11 Enclosure ditch [012] 1.92m wide by 1.86m deep with steep sides and a slightly

concave base in which was found two butt-ends. The butt-end running from the east

seems to have five semi-circular cuts which may indicate how the ditch was cut at

this point. The west running cut is more regular and between them is a shallow raised

section of natural limestone.

4.2.12 The secondary fill (013) of [012] was a friable to firm mid grey brown silt sand with

occasional limestone fragments sitting on the horizon with the lower deposit.

4.2.13 The primary deposit (014) was a mid grey brown silty sand with limestone fragments

of greater quantity than (013).


11

5 FINDS

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 Finds were recovered from both trenches. Trench 1 produced quantities of pottery,

building material and bone from context (005).

5.1.2 Trench 2 produced only two small flint artefacts from (013) and (014) which may be

residual.

5.2 Pottery by Rachel Hall, April 2015 [see Appendix 3]

5.2.1 A total of 80 sherds weighing 1613g, were recovered from a single context from

Trench 1 in the evaluation (see Table 1). The assemblage dates from the Late Iron

Age to Early Romano-British period (700BC- AD150). The sherds are all in a fair

condition with several conjoining sherds with an average sherd size of 20.16g.

5.2.2 The assemblage as a whole was identified as Late Iron Age/ Early Romano-British in date due to the forms and fabrics.

5.2.3 Four different fabrics types were identified including, Calcareous (Limestone

inclusions), Sandy, Greywares and a small amount of Black Burnished Wares. These are all moderately coarse fabrics with burnished and smoothed surfaces. These sherds are all in a fair condition.

5.2.4 The decoration comprises cordoning under the rim and incised pattern in zig-zag

form and generally on the larger bodies of the vessels. There is some sandwich firing on the sandy and greyware vessels. This plainer style of decoration is distinctive of this period of pottery.

5.2.5 A moderate number of diagnostic sherds were also recovered including necked and

bead rim jars, lug handles and pedestal bases. These forms were all made between the Late Iron Age through to the Early Romano-British period and associated with the plain decoration and surface finishes this dates the assemblage. With the lack of finewares and no imports, this coarseware assemblage is fairly low status and the vessels suggest a domestic setting with vessels that were probably made using locally sourced materials.

5.2.6 Addendum: The pottery was also looked at by David Ashford at Dorset County

Museum with the author and it is considered that the assemblage is more likely to be Early Romano-British than Late Iron Age and taking into consideration that it came out of the same context as the plaster and building material.


12

5.3 Building Material 5.3.1 A sample of possible building materials were taken from the fill of (005) and analysed

at Dorset County Museum. It was not possible to distinguish possible wall infill and natural material, but some pieces were alien to the area and thus must have been brought in. It is the authors opinion that this material has been used as packing for walls.

5.3.2 Two pieces of wall plaster were found within the same context (005). These were

possibly rendering, either within or without a building, and as such would be of a Roman date.

5.3.3 A small piece of painted pinkish red plaster was seen, but this disintegrated before

conservation could be undertaken. 5.3.4 A small piece of plaster, of pinkish-red colour, was seen to have finger marks pressed

into it. 5.4 Bone by Martin Fielding, April 2015 [see Appendix 4] 5.4.1 It was noted that some bones have been broken to extract the marrow.

5.4.2 Bovines were represented by vertebra, scapula, jawbone and hindleg (hock) and

made up the largest sample. Next came sheep/goat with vertebra, jawbone and part

of a pelvis identified. A small bone may be that of a rabbit.

5.5 Assessment of charred plant macrofossils and wood charcoal from Nether

Compton, Dorset (DDCAG14) by Ellen Simmons [see Appendix 5].

5.5.1 A flotation sample was taken from a Late Iron Age or Roman ditch fill deposit revealed during archaeological excavations at Nether Compton near Yeovil in Dorset. The flotation sample was assessed in order to determine the concentration, diversity, state of preservation and suitability for use in radiocarbon dating, of any archaeobotanical material present. A further aim of this assessment was to evaluate the potential of this material to provide evidence for the function of the context, the economy of the site or for the nature of the local environment.

Recovery, processing and laboratory methods

5.5.2 The flotation sample was processed for charred plant remains and wood charcoal by GeoFlo Southwest Geophysical and Flotation Services using a water separation machine. Floating material was collected in a 250µm mesh, and the remaining heavy residue retained in a 1mm mesh. The flots and heavy residues were air dried.

5.5.3 The sample was assessed in accordance with English Heritage guidelines for

environmental archaeology assessments (D.M. Jones, 2011). A preliminary assessment of the sample was made by scanning using a stereo-binocular microscope (x10 - x65) and recording the abundance of the main classes of material


13

present. Identification of plant material was carried out by comparison with material in the author’s own reference collection and various reference works (e.g. Cappers et al, 2006). Cereal identifications and nomenclature follow Jacomet (2006). Other plant nomenclature follows Stace (2010). The composition of the sample is recorded below in table 1.

Preservation

5.5.4 A low proportion of intrusive roots were present in the sample. This indicates a reduced likelihood that charred material present in the sample will be intrusive.

5.5.5 Charred cereal grains were generally quite poorly preserved with many exhibiting puffing and distortion and identifiable by gross morphology only. Wood charcoal was generally well preserved with a low incidence of vitrification or mineralisation.

Charred plant remains

5.5.6 Over fifty items of charred crop material were noted as present in the sample. Cereal grains included barley, some of which could be identified as the hulled variety, oats, free threshing wheat and grains with morphological characteristics that were intermediate between emmer wheat and spelt wheat. Cereal chaff included barley rachis internodes and spelt wheat glume bases. No oat chaff was noted as present, so it cannot be determined whether the oat grains represent the wild or cultivated variety. A large seeded legume was also present.

5.5.7 Over thirty wild or weed plant seeds were also present in the sample. Wild vetches

or peas (Vicia / Lathyrus) were the most abundant along with docks (Rumex spp.) and large seeded grasses (>2mm Poaceae). Also noted as present were seeds of field pennycress (Thlaspi arvense), knotgrass (Polygonum arenastrum / aviculare), chickweed (Stellaria media), goosefoot (Chenopodium album), hoary / ribwort plantain (Plantago media / lanceolata), brome / rye grass (Bromus / Lolium) and small seeded grasses (< 2mm Poaceae).

Wood charcoal

5.5.8 Just over fifty fragments of wood charcoal between 2 mm and 4 mm in size were present in the sample, with predominantly ring porous taxa being represented.

Discussion and recommendations for further work.

5.5.9 The crop types present in the sample would be consistent with a Late Iron Age or

Early Roman date for this deposit. Spelt wheat became an increasingly common

crop type cultivated during the Iron Age and Roman period in the South West but

emmer wheat was also still cultivated in the region during the Iron Age (Campbell

and Straker 2003, 21-22). Free threshing wheat was possibly cultivated during the

Late Iron Age in the South West (Campbell and Straker 2003, 23) and is occasionally

present at sites of Roman date, but did not become a widespread crop until the

Saxon period (Straker 2007, 163).


14

5.5.10 Due to the association of the wild or weed plant seeds with charred cereal grains, it

is likely that the wild or weed plant seeds were harvested along with cereal crops and charred as crop processing waste. Other sources of charred wild or weed plant seeds may however also include kindling, animal fodder and waste roofing or flooring material. The assemblage of wild or weed plant seeds includes a number of typical crop weeds or taxa commonly associated with fertile disturbed soils such as field pennycress, chickweed and goosefoot. Leguminous weeds such as vetch / pea have an adaptive advantage where soils are depleted in nitrogen and the frequent occurrence of these taxa in Iron Age archaeobotanical assemblages has been linked to the possible depletion of soil fertility during the Iron Age (M. Jones 1988, 90).

5.5.11 Full sorting, identification and analysis of the sample for charred plant remains

would be recommended in order to provide a fully quantified record of the crop types and other plant remains present. Full sorting and identification would also be expected to result in the recovery of wild or weed plant taxa missed during preliminary scanning and to allow for the identification to species of taxa which could not be identified fully during preliminary assessment. Analysis of the wild or weed plant seed assemblage would also be expected to provide further information concerning crop husbandry and crop processing practices.

5.5.12 Palaeoenvironmental evidence from Dorset and Somerset indicates increasing

woodland clearance and an increase in arable farming during the Iron Age and Roman periods (Straker 2007, Straker et al 2007) and it is likely that pressure on woodland resources for fuel was high. There is also evidence however that woodland remained a significant component of the landscape during the Iron Age and Roman periods in some areas, possibly as managed resource for fuel and timber (Straker at al 2007, 150). Identification of fifty >2mm charcoal fragments using high power microscopy would enable further investigation of the charcoal assemblage composition and therefore the utilisation of the local environment for fuel.

5.5.13 Charred material suitable for radiocarbon dating was present in the sample in the

form of charred cereal grains. Cereal grains are particularly suitable for use in dating as they represent a single year of growth. The low proportion of intrusive roots present in the sample also indicates a reduced likelihood that the charred material present will be intrusive.

5.5.14 If further excavation is to be carried out at the site it would also be recommended

that additional samples are recovered, with a suggested sample volume of thirty litres where possible. The composition of the sample from the ditch fill at Nether Compton suggests that the potential for the recovery of charred plant remains from this site is good. A larger sample volume would be likely to result in the recovery of a greater diversity of material.


15

6 DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION

6.1.1 The pottery analysis above makes the features in Trench 1 difficult to date

definitively, with only a general date range given of Late Iron Age to Early Roman.

However, there is a high probability that this material is of a Romano-British date

considering other finds in the same context. This type of pottery is made pre and

post Roman invasion and on into the post-Roman period.

6.1.2 The shape and dimensions of the ditch would indicate that this is military camp, set

up on high ground and on an existing road, built by the legions pushing west after

the invasion. It is possible that this camp was relatively long lived, or at least the

ditch was open for some time, as the pottery is of good quality, if not high class.

Building materials were represented by plaster rendering, including the small piece

of painted plaster, and would indicate well made houses and farm buildings in the

area, if not within the enclosure.

6.1.3 Roman camps do add to our understanding of the conquest period, much is

enigmatic and speculative, but they can help in building a picture of the immediate

post-invasion activity as the legions pushed into this area of the southwest. Indeed;

“Britain has the largest number of camps from any country or province in the Roman

Empire” (Jones, R.H. p.136)

6.1.4 It has been suggested (Jones, R.H. 2012) that these mid to late 1st century camps

were not all ramparted, with just ditches more commonly used for defence, but

most of the examples are from Wales. The pit and postholes, if they are

contemporary with the ditch, would make a rampart just behind the ditch

impossible.

6.1.5 These flat-based pits with a central posthole are found on other Romano-British sites

and the author was excavating two examples at a site to the east of Yeovil at the

same time as Nether Compton. No explanation for use has been put forward so far

and can only be speculative at best. Those without postholes in the centre have been

interpreted as latrines, rubbish pits, cooking hollows and ovens. They have a

similarity to the Iron Age grain pits in terms of diameter, but not depth. Pits can

rarely be proven as contemporary with enclosures and they tend to be scattered

over an area of the camp. Narrow occupation times make the use of carbon-dating

useless.

6.1.6 Dimensions of ditches vary considerably and other examples have them being cut

through rock “representing a surprising amount of labour for something that was


16

only probably occupied for a short period of time” (Jones, R.H. p.80), although it is

probable that some camps were used for years, and not just weeks or months,

before abandonment. Other examples of rock cut ditches can be found at Burnswark

and Ward Law, Dumfriesshire and Hillside Dunblane, Stirlingshire.

6.1.7 Hyginus states that ditches were mostly “used for the sake of discipline” i.e. to keep

the camp within a controlled space, with ramparts and or staked fencing for added

defence.

6.1.8 Ditches can also exhibit differences in size from one side to the other. This may be

due to the vagaries of survival or adapting to the landscape, geology or directional

threat during construction. It could be that ‘gangs’ digging the ditch worked

differently and this could explain the small ‘causeways’ found at the base of some

ditches. Once again the author was digging such a ditch to the west of Yeovil and

such ‘causeways’ were found in the base of Romano-British ditches.

6.1.9 The Nether Compton enclosures have rounded corners similar to other Roman

examples, although this is also seen during the Iron Age. In the Roman military

examples they are made like this so that it is easier to defend with larger numbers of

defenders on a curve, and thus this potential weak point is made stronger.

6.1.10 The excavation of the ditch and artefacts found in Trench 1, considering the small

area uncovered, has brought up a surprising amount of information. The size and

shape of the ditch is commensurate with other early Roman military ditches and the

pottery and building materials, including stonework and plaster, indicate that this

feature is more likely to be Roman than Iron Age. The backfilling was in one action

and thus the ditch was not open to the elements, where erosion could take place. It

is thus likely that the artefacts can securely date the ditch to post invasion.

6.1.11 The lack of high status pottery, such as samien, would indicate that the surrounding

area may have been dotted with well built farmhouses with plasterwork, some

painted, with people using good quality Grey and Black Burnished Ware ceramic. As

to whether the material came from the interior of the enclosure or the exterior

cannot be said with certainty, but it is more likely that the camp was abandoned and

the local people from the surrounding area used the ditch as a dumping site

immediately after the military authorities left.


17

7 RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER WORK

7.1 Little can be said at this time regarding Trench 2. The ditch cannot be dated and as

such it is planned that further excavation will take place on this feature. This will

concentrate on the possible two termini to the east of Trench 2 and the linear

feature running north-south.

7.1.1 The field to the west cannot be investigated at this time without permission from the

present landowner.


18

Appendix 1: location map


19

Appendix 2: Magnetometry survey – ©2011 Bath & Camerton Archaeological Society


20

Appendix 3: pottery by context, fabric, date, number and weight (g). Context Fabric Date Number Weight (g)

005 calcareous tempered LIRB 6 85

005 Greywares LIRB 29 515

005 Sandy LIRB 36 734

005 BBW LIRB 9 279

TOTAL 80 1613


21

Appendix 4: bone analysis

Cow (vertebra, scapula, jawbone, hindleg (hock) 880 gm

Sheep/Goat (vertebra, jawbone, pelvis-part) 410 gm, 3 individuals

Rabbit (perhaps Rat) 1 gm

Unidentified 250 gm

16/8/14 NCEF 14 (005)

Cow/bovine 170 gm

1 large vertebra

1 portion of large scapula (shoulder bade)

Cow/bovine 140 gm

Cow/bovine 200 gm

Scapula (Shoulder blade)

Cow/bovine – 130 gm

Jawbone – various loose teeth.

Cow 240 gm

Hindleg – 3 parts of hock joint (Tibia, Os Caleis – note these form articulated joint

Rabbit? 1 gm

Humerus (forearm) – only piece so possibly contaminant.

Sheep 160 gm

Ribs

Sheep/Goat 120 gm

Vertebra

Sheep/Goat 80 gm

Jawbones – both sides of one individual, small fragments of a third individual, third larger fragment

of 3rd individuals, jaw articulation from one of the mandibles.

Sheep/Goat 50 gm

Pelvis piece with ‘acetabulum’ – hip joint socket

Bone fragments unidentified 250 gm


22

Appendix 5: sample analysis

Table 1: Archaeobotanical sample scanning table

Archaeobotanical Sample

Scanning Table

SITE: Nether Compton,

Dorset (NCEF:14)

CONTEXT NUMBER (005)

FEATURE NUMBER 4

FLOTATION SAMPLE

NUMBER 1

FEATURE TYPE ditch fill

PROVISIONAL DATE

Early

Roman

SAMPLE VOLUME

(litres) 10

FLOT VOLUME (ml) 20

Charred plant material

(*key - = < 5 items, + = >

5 items, ++ = > 10 items,

+++ = > 30 items, ++++ =

> 50 items, +++++ = > 100

items.)

CROP MATERIAL*

Barley grain (Hordeum

sp.) +

Barley rachis internode

(Hordeum sp.) 1

Oat grain (Avena sp.) 2

Bread / club wheat or rivet

wheat grain (Triticum

aestivo-compactum type /)

(Triticum turgidum) 1

Emmer / spelt wheat grain

(Triticum dicoccum /

spelta) 2

Spelt wheat (Triticum

spelta) glume base ++

glume base indet ++


23

Appendix 6: technical drawings

Trench 1: plan & sections

Trench 2: plan & section


24

PLATES

Plate 1: Trench 1 ditch from the north

Plate 2: Trench 2 ditch from the west


25

Plate 3: Trench 1 pit & posthole

Plate 4: Trench 1 discrete posthole


26

Plate 5: Probable rendering plaster

Plate 6: Plaster fragment


27

Plate 7: jug handle


28

Plate 8: plaster with finger marks


29

Bibliography

Campbell, G. and Straker, V. 2003, Prehistoric plant use and crop husbandry in Southern England:

development and regionality. In K.A. Robson-Brown (ed.) Archaeological Sciences 1999:

Proceedings of the Archaeological Sciences Conference, University of Bristol, 1999. BAR

International Series 1111. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.

Cappers, R.T.J. Bekker, R.M. Jans, J.E.A. 2006, Digital Seed Atlas of the Netherlands. Eelde:

Barkhuis Publishing.

Fowler, J. 1951, Mediaeval Sherborne, Dorchester

Leech, R. 1976, Larger agricultural settlements in the west country, pp142-161, in Branigan and

Flowler, 1976. Also unpublished PhD thesis, University of Bristol, 1980.

Jones, D.M. (ed.) 2011. Environmental Archaeology: a guide to the theory and practice of methods,

from sampling and recovery to post-excavation (2nd

edition). London: English Heritage

Publications.

Jones, R.H. 2012. Roman Camps in Britain. Amberley Publishing.

Jones, M. 1988, The arable field: a botanical battleground. In M. Jones (ed.) Archaeology and the

Flora of the British Isles. Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Oswin, J. 2011, The Nether Compton Roman coin hoard in its archaeological context. Bath &

Camerton Archaeological Society.

Stace, C. 2010, New Flora of the British Isles (3rd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Straker, V. 2007, Early Medieval environmental background. Later Bronze Age and Iron Age

environmental background. In C. J. Webster (ed.) The Archaeology of South West England:

South West Archaeological Research Framework. Resource Assessment and Research

Agenda. Taunton: Somerset County Council. Somerset Heritage Service.

Straker, V, Brown A. Fyfe, R and Jones, J. 2007. Romano-British Environmental background. In C.

J. Webster (ed.) The Archaeology of South West England: South West Archaeological

Research Framework. Resource Assessment and Research Agenda. Taunton: Somerset

County Council. Somerset Heritage Service.


30

DORSET DIGGERS COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY GROUP The Dorset Diggers Community Archaeology Group (DDCAG) was set up in 2012 to further our knowledge of the archaeology of West Dorset through practical “hands-on” historical research and archaeological excavations. Our projects will illuminate hitherto unknown aspects of West Dorset’s past and bring it to life for the inhabitants of the area. New members are always welcome. website; http://dorsetdiggers.btck.co.uk Secretary [email protected] Author: Christopher John Tripp MA PIFA [email protected] Date; July 2015

http://dorsetdiggers.btck.co.uk/

Kitton Lane, Nether Compton,...

Documents

Transcript of Kitton Lane, Nether Compton,...