Land off Laburnum Close, Ambrosden near Bicester, Oxfordshire · Land off Laburnum Close, Ambrosden...
Transcript of Land off Laburnum Close, Ambrosden near Bicester, Oxfordshire · Land off Laburnum Close, Ambrosden...
Land off Laburnum Close, Ambrosden near Bicester, Oxfordshire
An Archaeological Evaluation
for Annington Developments Limited
by Stephen Hammond and Steve Ford
Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd
Site Code AHB 05/27
April 2005
i
Summary
Site name: Land off Laburnum Close, Ambrosden, near Bicester, Oxfordshire Grid reference: SP 6020 1938 Site activity: Field evaluation Date and duration of project: 23rd–30th March 2005 Project manager: Steve Ford Site supervisor: Stephen Hammond Site code: AHB 05/27 Area of site: c. 6000 sq m Summary of results: Five trenches were excavated. A post-medieval tunnel previously located in an earlier archaeological evaluation was investigated further and its course and construction recorded. A limestone culvert wall and robber trench which were also uncovered are considered to be the remnants of the former manor houses on the site. All the deposits were of later post-medieval date. Monuments identified: Tunnel, walls, culvert, robber trenches Location and reference of archive: The archive is presently held at Thames Valley Archaeological Services, Reading and will be deposited with Oxfordshire Museums Service in due course. This report may be copied for bona fide research or planning purposes without the explicit permission of the copyright holder Report edited/checked by: Steve Preston 15.04.05
1
Land off Laburnum Close, Ambrosden, nr Bicester, Oxfordshire An Archaeological Evaluation
by Stephen Hammond and Steve Ford
Report 05/27
Introduction
This report documents the results of an archaeological field evaluation carried out at land off Laburnum Close,
Ambrosden, Bicester, Oxfordshire (SP6020 1938) (Fig. 1). The work was commissioned by Mr Clive Warlow of
Annington Developments Ltd, 1 Eaglethorpe Barns, Peterborough Road, Warmington, Peterborough, PE8 6TL.
Planning permission (04/02435/F) has been gained from Cherwell District Council to construct new
housing and associated car parking on the site. A brief provided by Oxfordshire County Archaeological Service
(Fluck 2005) highlighted the potential of the site. In summary, the site lies within the historic core of Ambrosden
and includes the likely sites of the manor houses, one built c. 1675 and demolished in 1768 and its 1797
replacement. As a consequence of the possibility of archaeological deposits on the site which may be damaged
or destroyed by groundworks, a field evaluation comprising trial trenching and survey by ground penetrating
radar was requested. These investigations located some deposits of archaeological interest but could not fully
explore the site because of various access restrictions. The one success of the evaluation was in the location of
the top of a brick-capped tunnel which formed part of a complex of subterranean works for the later manor
house. Consequently, further trenching was requested to record the tunnel and to cover areas that were
previously not fully investigated.
This is in accordance with the Department of the Environment’s Planning Policy Guidance, Archaeology
and Planning (PPG16 1990), and the District’s policies on archaeology. The field investigation was carried out
to a specification approved by Ms. Hannah Fluck, Planning Archaeologist with Oxfordshire County
Archaeological Service, advisers to the District. The fieldwork was undertaken by Stephen Hammond with the
assistance of Sarah Coles and Simon Cass and the site code is AHB 02/57. The archive is presently held at
Thames Valley Archaeological Services, Reading and will be deposited with Oxfordshire Museums Service in
due course.
Location, topography and geology
The site comprises an L-shaped parcel of land off Laburnum Close, Ambrosden, near Bicester, Oxfordshire. It is
currently open ground. The land is at a height of approximately 68m above Ordnance Datum and can be seen to
2
have been landscaped to make it relatively flat across much of the site area before dropping off towards south-
east and south-west. The underlying geology according to the Geological Survey (BGS 1994) is a limestone
cornbrash formation. This was confirmed during the evaluation.
Archaeological background
The archaeological background to the project has been detailed in a brief for the project (Fluck 2005). In
summary, the site of the proposed development lies within the historic core of Ambrosden as shown on the Davis
map of 1797. The site is located within in an area likely to contain the manor houses of Sir William Glynne
(built 1673 or soon after) and Sir Edward Turner (built to a Sanderson Miller design in 1740 and demolished
1768). The Glynne house replaced a dilapidated medieval manor house though the location of the latter is
unclear. The Page-Turner (as the family later became) house had extensive cellars and underground offices that
were entered from a covered passage opening some distance from the house. It also possessed an extensive
formal park with lakes, statues, etc. The ruins of the basement were uncovered in 1819 with a view to rebuilding
but this project was abandoned and they were backfilled again (VCH 1957, 15–16).
A 17m stretch of this tunnel was examined in 1972 (information from Oxfordshire SMR) but ‘a much
greater length’ running between the site of the house and St Mary’s church could not be examined as it had
collapsed and was blocked with rubbish. The top of this tunnel was rediscovered by Oxford Archaeology in July
2003 and noted to be on a WSW–ENE alignment heading towards the church situated just beyond the site
boundary. However, the tunnel was not further investigated nor was its full height established. The presence and
location of the remains of the manor house(s) could also not be established.
Objectives and methodology
The purpose of the evaluation was to determine the presence/absence, extent, condition, character, quality and
date of any archaeological deposits within the area of development. This work was to be carried out in a manner
which would not compromise the integrity of archaeological deposits which warrant preservation in situ, or
might be better excavated under conditions pertaining to full excavation. The specific research aims of this
project are:
• To determine if archaeologically relevant levels have survived on the site of the manor house.
• To determine if archaeological deposits of any period are present.
• To determine if archaeological deposits representing medieval occupation of the site are present.
3
• To determine if any elements of the post-medieval manor house are present.
• To produce a record of the cross section of the tunnel.
In order to achieve these aims it was intended to dig four trenches, two 10m long within the potential footprint of
the manor houses and two more at between 5 to 10m long, designed to produce two transverse sections of the
tunnel previously uncovered. The trenches were proposed to be initially 1.6m wide with the intention of making
them wider and to be stepped, shored or battered to enable safe access should it be required. A contingency for
an additional 5m of trenching was included within the proposal should this be required to clarify the nature of the
initial findings. Machining was carried out under constant archaeological supervision using a JCB-type machine
fitted with a ditching bucket to expose either the archaeologically sensitive levels or the highest naturally
occurring geological horizon, depending on the contents of the individual trench.
A complete list of trenches giving lengths, breadths, depths and a description of sections and geology is
given in Appendix 1.
Results (Figs 3–6, Pls 1–4)
Five trenches were eventually dug ranging in length from 5m to 14.65m as shown on Figure 3. Several of the
trenches were partially widened to facilitate better examination of deposits or battered for safe access.
Trench 1 (Pls 1 and 2)
This trench was 14.65m long and up to 2.7m deep and was located in the area where the former manor houses
were thought to have stood. Three features of interest were noted beneath various deposits of made ground. The
made ground was of a considerable thickness up to 2.5m above the natural geology. The most striking structure
uncovered was a small tunnel, or more probably a culvert (1) aligned NW–SE (Pl. 2). The culvert is made from
limestone block walls with an arched top and a stone floor, largely set in a cut into the natural geology. It is 0.6m
wide and 1m deep at the maximum. The blocks range from 0.10m x 0.15m x 0.05m thick to 0.20m x 0.20m by
0.10m thick and consist of 9 to 10 courses set in pale grey-yellow lime mortar in irregular bonding. The arch is
formed of the same materials (52), some of the blocks here being larger.
Above the culvert a second arch has been constructed of brick which stands proud of the natural geology.
The top of this upper arch is 1.5m below the surface.
Just 1.5m to the south-west of the culvert on the same alignment is a mortared limestone wall or foundation
(7) which is 1m wide and cuts the natural geology to a depth of 0.5m. This consists of similar blocks to the
4
culvert walls bonded in a yellow limestone mortar. It is overlain by made ground which also overlies the culvert
and the wall will have been robbed out before the upper arch of the culvert was constructed (Fig. 5, Pl. 2). To the
north-east was a vertical sided cut (2) 1.7m wide and 2m deep into the natural geology, backfilled with clean
grey clay which overlay limestone blocks (Pl. 1). It is considered that this a robber trench, and can be supposed
to mark the location of one of the manor houses. There was no evidence to date this feature.
Trench 2 (Pl. 3)
This trench was 10.00m long and at 2.65m deep was of similar depth to Trench 1. It too was located in the area
where the former manor houses are thought to have stood. A considerable thickness of made ground was
revealed overlying the natural geology but no structures of interest were noted.
Trench 3 (Pl. 4)
This trench was 5m long and up to 4.5m deep and was mostly occupied by a brick-built tunnel (3) with vertical
sides, an arched brick roof and a stone (or natural stone) floor, all beneath 1.2m of overburden. The bricks of the
roof (53) are mid-to-dark reddish brown, unfrogged, 0.22m x 0.11m by 0.06m thick laid in header and stretcher
bond with pale yellow-white lime mortar. The tunnel was aligned NW–SE. It is possible that the walls (54) are
made from limestone or from rendered brick, but this could not be confirmed during the investigation. Neither
the number of courses nor the wall bond could be ascertained safely. The tunnel was 2.2m wide and 3.2m high at
the top of the arch. The tunnel had been mostly backfilled with rubble. On either side of the tunnel at the height
of the overlying brick arch were two parallel brick-built, enclosed channels interpreted as drains. Deposits to
either side of the tunnel were of made ground but were presumably backfill of a construction cut.
Trench 4
This trench was 9.7m long and up to 2.3m deep. It was positioned as far as practicable to intercept obliquely the
projected line of tunnel (3) found in Trench 3 but did not unambiguously do so. Beneath 1.3m of topsoil and
rubble/overburden a line of rough stonework was revealed on the north-west side of the trench. The trench was
extended northwards and revealed that the rough stonework was backfill of a construction trench with a mortared
stone wall beyond. Further beyond this was loose rubble backfill thought to be infill of a former tunnel.
The new wall was on a different alignment from the tunnel discovered in Trench 3 suggesting either a bend
of about 40o in the line or another passageway.
5
Trench 5
This trench was 6m long and up to 1.7m deep. Its purpose was to confirm the alignment of the tunnel(s) found in
the trenches to the west. Topsoil and made ground were relatively thin with a depth of only 0.4m above the top
of structural deposits. The natural geology was not encountered and the lowest levels of the structural remains
were not uncovered. To the north-west was a brick wall (5) at least 0.4m wide which may be capping for a
limestone wall. Just 2m to the south east was a robber trench (6) backfilled with stone and brick rubble but with
some in situ brickwork. Between the two features was further brick and limestone rubble, indicating that the
stone work of the south eastern wall had been robbed subsequent to the infilling of the void between the two. It
is considered that this feature is also a tunnel which has been collapsed and been robbed, but is otherwise of
similar width to the tunnel uncovered in Trench 3 to the south-west. If the tunnel segments identified in these
three trenches are one and the same structure, the findings in Trench 5 confirm the change in its orientation as
already indicated by the findings in Trench 4.
Finds
No finds were recovered from the evaluation.
Conclusion
The evaluation trenches have revealed various deposits and structures of later post-medieval date and confirmed
their nature and location on the site. No finds or deposits of earlier periods, such as representing the presence of
a late medieval manor house, were revealed. Previous work on the site and documentary sources indicated the
presence of tunnels and other subterranean features and the trenches here have located and recorded one or
possibly two such tunnels. It is probable that only a single tunnel is present but if so, the tunnel changes
alignment towards the eastern end of the site. The tunnel has been infilled with rubble but survives as an intact
structure in one area, but has been robbed or collapsed in others.
Other deposits found appear to relate directly to one or other of the post-medieval manor houses with a
culvert, wall and robbed out wall present towards the north of the site. These deposits are deeply buried beneath
1m or more of made ground. It was not possible to establish to which of the building phases these belonged.
References
BGS, 1994, British Geological Survey, 1:50000, Sheet 237, Solid and Drift Edition, Keyworth Fluck, H, 2005, ‘04/02435/F - Land adj. To Laburnum Close, Ambrosden; Design Brief for Archaeological
Recording Action’, Oxfordshire County Council PPG16, 1990, Archaeology and Planning, Dept of the Environment Planning Policy Guidance 16, HMSO
6
VCH, 1957, Victoria History of the Counties of England; Oxfordshire, vol 6, London
7
APPENDIX 1: Trench details 0m at S/W end
Trench No. Length (m) Breadth (m) Depth (m) Comment 1 14.65 1.6 2.70 0-0.55m topsoil; 0.55-1.25m made ground (clay with rubble); 1.25-
2.5m made ground (various sloping layers); 2.55m+ natural geology (limestone) Culvert (1), wall (7), robber trench (2) [Plates 1 and 2]
2 10.00 1.6 2.65 0-0.31m topsoil; 0.31-0.72m made ground (limestone/brick rubble); 0.72-2.59m made ground (clay with some rubble in layers); 2.59-2.62m buried topsoil (grey/brown clayey silt); 2.62m+ Natural limestone [Plate 3]
3 5.00 1.6 4.50 0-0.3m topsoil; 0.3-4.5m made ground (clay with some rubble);4.5m+ made ground (clay with limestone (natural geology not observed but possibly base of tunnel). Tunnel (3) [Plate 4]
4 9.70 1.6 2.30 1.5m (W) 1.6m (E)
0-0.1m topsoil; 0.1-0.35m made ground (clay with some rubble); 0.35m+ made ground/rubble (natural geology not observed). Tunnel wall (4) and robbed wall (5)
5 6.00 1.6 1.70 0-0.4m topsoil; 0.4-1.4m made ground (clay with some rubble); 1.4m+ silty clay with limestone (natural geology not observed). Tunnel (6)
APPENDIX 2: Catalogue of features Feature Trench Comment 1 1 Culvert 2 1 Robber trench 3 3 Tunnel and drain 4 4 construction cut and tunnel wall 5 5 Tunnel wall 6 5 Robber trench (tunnel wall) 7 1 Wall
Land off Laburnum Close, Ambrosden, near Bicester, Oxfordshire, 2005
Archaeological Evaluation
Figure 1. Location of site within Ambrosden andOxfordshire.
Reproduced from Ordnance Survey Pathfinder 1093 SP61/71at 1:12500
Ordnance Survey Licence 100025880
SITE
18000
19000
SP61000 62000 AHB05/27
SITE
Figure 2. Location of site
Laburnum Close, Ambrosden, near Bicester, Oxfordshire, 2005
AHB 05/27
0 50m
Willow Road
Laburnum Close
SITE
SP60200
19400
19500
St Mary's
N
N
Figure 3. Location of trenches
Laburnum Close, Ambrosden, near Bicester, Oxfordshire, 2005
AHB 05/27
Laburnum Close
1
2
3 4
5
TunnelAlignment(projected)
0 50m
SP60200
19400
culvert
wall
robbertrench
N
Figure 4. Plans of trenches
Laburnum Close, Ambrosden, near Bicester, Oxfordshire, 2005
AHB 05/27
0 5m
N
Trench 1
Trench 3
Trench 4
Trench 5
NaturalCulvert
Natural Natural
Robber trench (clayabove stone base)
0m 3m 7m 9m
Backfill of tunnel/culvert
Mortared stone wall
Stone rubble
Brick/mortar cap
Buried topsoil Natural Buried topsoil
Buried topsoil Brick rubble
Brick rubble
Brick/brick capped stone
wall
0m 5m
MadeGround
3Drain
Void/backfill
3
MadeGround
N
0m 9m
0m 5m
Drain
1 2
4
6 5
robber trench
Brick wall
brick arch
Wall Wall
Machined out
66.79m
67.16m
66.96m 65.00m 67.03m
68.75m
67.30m
68.84m
68.52m67.70m
67.71m
65.73m 66.34m
67.40m
67.15m
65.52m
65.66m
67.73m
66.92m
66.88m
66.48m66.45m
7
N
Figure 5. Sections
Laburnum Close, Ambrosden, near Bicester, Oxfordshire, 2005
AHB 05/27
Trench 1
Topsoil
Made groundMid brown
Made groundMid brownish yellow
Made groundblack
Wall 7 Natural
Mid brownsilty clay
Palebrownishyellow
Natural
Dark brownclayey silt
Paleyellowsand
52
50
Brick
Limestone
battered back section
66.81m AOD
SW
NE
1
0 2.5m
Figure 6. Sections
Laburnum Close, Ambrosden, near Bicester, Oxfordshire, 2005
AHB 05/27
Made ground Brick/limestone rubble
Limestone/brickrubble
Buried topsoilRubble
Wall 5
SubsoilMade groundTopsoil
543
53
MadeGround
MadeGround
Made ground
Topsoil
SE NW
Trench 3
Trench 5
Brick
68.75m AOD
SW NE
natural stone
0 5m
0 2.5m
Drain Drain
6