land at low farm, drayton, p norfolk: an archaeological ... application/706… · evaluation august...

P C A

PRE-CONSTRUCT ARCHAEOLOGY ENF141033 REPORT NUMBER: R12592

Land at Low Farm, Drayton,

Norfolk:

An Archaeological Trial Trench

Evaluation

August 2016

exyar

0212

Land at Low Farm, Drayton, Norfolk: An Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation © Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited, August 2016

PCA Report Number: R12592 Page 1 of 46

Land at Low Farm, Drayton, Norfolk: An Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation

Local Planning Authority: Broadland District Council Planning Reference: TBC Central National Grid Reference: TG 1841 1332 Site Code: ENF141033 NHER Enquiry No. 16_08_26 Report No. R12592 Written and researched by: Mary-Anne Slater Project Manager: Taleyna Fletcher Commissioning Client: CgMs Consulting Contractor: Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd

Central Office The Granary Rectory Farm Brewery Road Pampisford Cambridgeshire CB22 3EN

Tel: 01223 845522 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.pre-construct.com

©Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd August 2016

The material contained herein is and remains the sole property of Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd and is not for publication to third parties without prior consent. Whilst every effort has been made to provide detailed and accurate information, Pre-

Construct Archaeology Ltd cannot be held responsible for errors or inaccuracies herein contained.



CONTENTS

CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... 2

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ 4

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 5

2 GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY ........................................................................ 6

3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND ................................................................. 7

4 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................ 9

5 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SEQUENCE .................................................................... 11

6 THE FINDS AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE ............................................ 18

7 DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................... 26

8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................. 28

9 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................ 29

10 APPENDIX 1: PLATES ...................................................................................... 38

11 APPENDIX 2: CONTEXT INDEX ....................................................................... 42

12 APPENDIX 3: POTTERY CATALOGUE ............................................................ 43

13 APPENDIX 4: OASIS FORM ............................................................................. 44

TABLE 1 POTTERY QUANTIFICATION BY FABRIC. ............................................. 19

TABLE 2 POTTERY TYPES PRESENT BY FEATURE/CONTEXT. ........................ 20

TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF THE FAUNAL REMAINS FROM DITCH [118] ................. 22

TABLE 4 ASSESSMENT OF FLOTS ....................................................................... 24

TABLE 5 PRELIMINARY IDENTIFICATION OF SEEDS AND MOLLUSCS ............ 25

FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION .................................................................................... 32

FIGURE 2 DETAILED SITE LOCATION .................................................................. 33

FIGURE 3 TRENCHES 4-5 ...................................................................................... 34

FIGURE 4 TRENCHES 8-9 ...................................................................................... 35

FIGURE 5 TRENCHES 10-11 .................................................................................. 36

FIGURE 6 SECTIONS ............................................................................................. 37



PLATE 1: TRENCH 4, VIEW EAST.......................................................................... 38

PLATE 2: DITCH [118], VIEW NORTH .................................................................... 38

PLATE 3: TRENCH 8, VIEW NORTH-WEST ........................................................... 39

PLATE 4: PIT [112], VIEW NORTH-EAST ............................................................... 39

PLATE 5: PIT [124], VIEW SOUTH-WEST .............................................................. 40

PLATE 6: DITCH [121], VIEW SOUTH-EAST .......................................................... 40

PLATE 7: TRENCH 11, VIEW SOUTH-WEST ......................................................... 41

PLATE 8: QUARRY PIT [108], VIEW NORTH-WEST .............................................. 41



ABSTRACT

This report describes the results of an archaeological trial trench evaluation carried

out by Pre-Construct Archaeology on land at Low Farm, Drayton, Norfolk (NGR TG

1841 1332) between the 1st and the 3rd August 2016. The archaeological work was

commissioned by CgMs Consulting prior to a proposed new residential development.

The aim of the work was to characterise the archaeological potential of the proposed

development area.

The principal result of the evaluation was the discovery of two Roman ditches in a

narrow band along the southern edge of the site. The quantity of pottery present

suggests that a Roman settlement may be in the vicinity of the site, possibly to the

east or south-east. Two small pits containing Iron Age pottery were also uncovered

in the south-eastern corner of the site, indicating Iron Age activity previously

unknown in Drayton. Intense post-medieval quarrying for sand was present in the

eastern side of the site.



1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 An archaeological trial trench evaluation was undertaken by Pre-Construct

Archaeology Ltd (PCA) on land Low Farm, Drayton, Norfolk (centred on

Ordnance Survey National Grid Reference (NGR) TG 1841 1332) from the

1st to the 3rd August 2016 (Figure 1).

1.2 The archaeological work was commissioned by CgMs Consulting prior to a

proposed new residential development.

1.3 The evaluation was carried out in accordance with a Written Scheme of

Investigation (WSI) prepared by Adam Garwood of PCA (Garwood 2016).

1.4 The aim of the evaluation was to determine the location, date, extent,

character, condition and quality of any archaeological remains on the site, to

assess the significance of any such remains in a local, regional, or national

context, as appropriate, and to assess the potential impact of the

development proposals on the site’s archaeology.

1.5 A total of 11 trial trenches were excavated and recorded.

1.6 This report describes the results of the evaluation and aims to inform the

design of an appropriate archaeological mitigation strategy. The site archive

will be deposited at Norwich Castle Museum.



2 GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY

2.1 Geology 2.1.1 The bedrock geology of the proposed development area is Lewes Nodular

Chalk Formation, Seaford Chalk Formation, Newhaven Chalk Formation and

Culver Chalk Formation. A Sedimentary Bedrock formed approximately 71 to

94 million years ago in the Cretaceous Period. The chalk substrate is

overlain by superficial deposits of Sheringham Cliffs Formation, sand and

gravel river deposits formed up to 3 million years ago in the Quaternary

Period (BGS; Website 1).

2.2 Topography 2.2.1 The site lies at a short distance to the north-west of Norwich City centre,

along, and on the south and western facing slopes of the Wensum river

valley. The site lies on the edge of the village of Drayton and to the south-

east of the church of St Margaret. It is situated in an area of gravels, but the

valley sides expose the underlying chalk before giving way to the alluvium,

on the floor of the valley.

2.2.2 The development area is located between 15 and 25m OD.



3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

3.1 General 3.1.1 This archaeological and historical background has been drawn from a

search of the Norfolk HER and the WSI.

3.1.2 The Wensum valley has historically produced evidence of early prehistoric

activity, although later quarrying has impacted upon levels of survival. A Late

Bronze Age socketed axehead was found on a building site at the junction of

Boundary Road and Drayton Road, although there is a possibility that the

axe was not in situ and may have been brought to the site with building

materials. A Neolithic flint axe from Drayton was exhibited by Mr Fitch in

1882 and a polished axe from Drayton was exhibited by FH English in 1920.

Surface collection of flints including a massive quantity of working debris

have been found near to Drayton as were a barbed and tanged arrowhead

and Neolithic flint implements. Excavations at the former David Rice Hospital

comprising 50 test pits and 15 trenches recorded prehistoric finds from a

tree-throw/hollow and pit.

3.1.3 The place name Drayton appears to come from either of two possible

meanings, derived from the element dray, meaning to drag or pull, either:

referring to the portage of boats from the river, or from a stiff hill (Ekwall

1971, 150-1). Either possibility seems appropriate for Drayton, close to the

river and at the foot of the slopes here. The ton element might suggest a

subsidiary place, possibly of later Saxon origin.

3.1.4 An Anglo Saxon cremation cemetery occupied the brow of the hill above the

Wensum close to the medieval Drayton Lodge (TG11SE10) and adjacent to

the main Drayton - Norwich Road on the south side. It was discovered about

1848-9 while trenching a plantation for firs. Some 40 urns were found. They

were filled with calcined human bones, but there were no coins, weapons or

other objects. The pottery suggests that they are early Anglian.

3.1.5 Domesday Book (Brown 1984) shows that Drayton was held as a single

manor, with a church, therefore presumably the precursor to St Margaret and

probably on the same site. Drayton continued as a single manor, but usually



with an absentee landowner (Blomefield 1809, 409-413). The manor was

probably run by a bailiff, possibly based at Manor Farm (or its precursor),

next to the parsonage. Drayton Lodge a ruined lodge built in c.1437 lies

adjacent to the proposed site while the parish church incorporates medieval

fabric, although it was mainly rebuilt in the 19th century.



4 METHODOLOGY

4.1 Excavation and Sampling 4.1.1 The Written Scheme of Investigation for the evaluation proposed the

excavation of 11 trial trenches distributed across the site (Figure 2). Due to

constraints including water pipes and trees, Trenches 1, 8 and 10 were

moved slightly.

4.1.2 Ground reduction was carried out under archaeological supervision using a

21-ton tracked mechanical excavator fitted with a 1.8m-wide toothless

ditching bucket. Topsoil and subsoil deposits were removed in spits down to

the level of the undisturbed natural geological deposits where potential

archaeological features could be observed and recorded. Exposed surfaces

were cleaned by trowel and hoe as appropriate and all further excavation

was undertaken manually using hand tools. Overburden deposits were set

aside beside each trench and examined visually and with a metal-detector

for finds retrieval.

4.1.3 Metal-detecting was carried out during the topsoil and subsoil stripping and

throughout the excavation process. Archaeological features and spoilheaps

were scanned by metal-detector as they were encountered/ created.

4.1.4 Field excavation techniques and recording methods are detailed in the PCA

Fieldwork Induction Manual (Operations Manual I) by Joanna Taylor and

Gary Brown (2009).

4.1.5 Features were investigated and recorded in order to properly understand the

date and nature of the archaeological remains on the site and to recover

sufficient finds assemblages to assess the chronological development and

socio-economic character of the site over time.

4.1.6 Linear features were excavated by means of a 1m slot, discrete features

such as pits were 50% excavated. A sample of quarry pits were excavated to

establish their nature.



4.2 Recording Methodology 4.2.1 The limits of excavations, heights above Ordnance Datum (m OD) and the

locations of archaeological features and interventions were recorded using a

Leica 1200 GPS rover unit with RTK differential correction, giving three-

dimensional accuracy of 20mm or better.

4.2.2 Section drawings of archaeological features and deposits were drawn at an

appropriate scale (1:10 or 1:20).

4.2.3 Deposits or the removal of deposits judged by the excavating archaeologist

to constitute individual events were each assigned a unique record number

(often referred to within British archaeology as ‘context numbers’) and

recorded on individual pre-printed forms (Taylor and Brown 2009).

Archaeological processes recognised by the deposition of material are

signified in this report by round brackets (thus), while events constituting the

removal of deposits are referred to here as ‘cuts’ and signified by square

brackets [thus]. The record numbers assigned to cuts and deposits are

entirely arbitrary and in no way reflect the chronological order in which

events took place. All features and deposits recorded during the evaluation

are listed in Appendix 2. Artefacts recovered during excavation were

assigned to the record number of the deposit from which they were retrieved.

4.2.4 High-resolution digital photographs were taken at all stages of the evaluation

process.

4.2.5 Artefacts and ecofacts were collected by hand and assigned to the record

number of the deposit from which they were retrieved, receiving appropriate

care prior to removal from the site (CIfA 2014; Walker 1990; Watkinson

1981).



5 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SEQUENCE

5.1 Introduction 5.1.1 The trenches are described below in numerical order, with technical data

tabulated. Archaeological features and deposits were sealed by the subsoil,

unless otherwise stated.

5.2 Trench 1 5.2.1 No archaeological features were present in this trench.

TRENCH 1 Figure 2 Plate N/A

Trench Alignment: NW-SE Length: 50m Level of Natural (m OD): 13.51-15.64

Deposit Context No. Average Depth (m)

NW End SE End

Topsoil (100) 0.28 0.24

Subsoil (101) 0.28-0.54 0.24-0.38

Natural (102) 0.54+ 0.8+

Summary

Trench 1 was located close to the northern boundary of the site.

No archaeological features were present.



Trench Alignment: N-S Length: 50m Level of Natural (m OD): 16.17-18.63


N End S End

Topsoil (100) 0.24 0.21

Subsoil (101) 0.24-0.41 0.21-0.4

Natural (102) 0.41+ 0.4+

Summary

Trench 2 was located close to the western boundary of the site.






Trench Alignment: E-W Length: 50m Level of Natural (m OD): 14.86-16.71


E End W End

Topsoil (100) 0.33 0.37

Subsoil (101) 0.33-0.46 0.37-0.48

Natural (102) 0.46+ 0.48+

Summary



5.5 Trench 4 5.5.1 The trench contained one north-south aligned ditch.

5.5.2 Ditch [118] (Plate 2; Figure 3, Section 7) measured 1.68m wide and was

0.23m deep with moderately-sloping rounded sides and a flattish base. It

had a single fill of mid-reddish brown silty sand (117), which contained four

sherds (275g) of Roman pottery, Mesolithic-Neolithic flint flakes and animal

bone.

TRENCH 4 Figures 2-3 Plates 1-2



E End W End

Topsoil (100) 0.28 0.4

Subsoil (101) 0.28-0.44 0.4-0.98

Natural (102) 0.44+ 0.98+

Summary

Trench 4 was located close to the southern boundary of the site.

One Roman ditch was present.



5.6 Trench 5 5.6.1 The trench contained one undated east-west aligned ditch.

5.6.2 Ditch [127] (Figure 3, Section 9) measured 1.78m wide and was 0.24m deep

with shallow to moderately-sloping rounded sides and a flattish base. It

contained two fills: a basal fill of light brownish yellow sand and gravel (126)

and an upper fill of mid-reddish brown silty sand (125).

TRENCH 5 Figures 2-3 Plate N/A



N End S End

Topsoil (100) 0.38 0.21

Subsoil (101) 0.38-0.74 0.21-0.38

Natural (102) 0.74+ 0.38+

Summary

Trench 5 was located close to the centre of the site.

One undated ditch was present.





NW End SE End Topsoil (100) 0.31 0.32

Subsoil (101) 0.31-0.87 0.32-0.51

Natural (102) 0.87+ 0.51+

Summary









N End S End

Topsoil (100) 0.28 0.39

Subsoil (101) 0.28-0.52 0.39-0.59

Natural (102) 0.52+ 0.59+

Summary

Trench 7 was located close to the centre of the site.


5.9 Trench 8 5.9.1 This trench contained one northwest-southeast aligned ditch and three pits.

5.9.2 Ditch [121] (Plate 6; Figure 4, Section 11) measured 1.7m wide and was

0.64m deep with steep sides and a flattish base. It had a single fill of light

brownish grey silty sand (122), which contained 359g of Roman pottery

dated to AD 150-200 and Mesolithic-Early Neolithic and Bronze Age or Iron

Age flints.

5.9.3 Pit [112] (Plate 4; Figure 4, Section 5) measured 1.27m wide and 0.56m

deep with moderate sides and a concave base. It had a single fill of mid-

yellowish brown silty sand (111), which contained three sherds (10g) of Iron

Age pottery.

5.9.4 Pit [124] (Plate 5; Figure 4, Section 8) measured 1.01m wide and 0.23m

deep with moderately sloping sides and a flattish base. It had a single fill of

mid-orangish brown sandy silt (123), which contained one sherd (7g) of Iron

Age pottery.

5.9.5 Quarry Pit [128] (Figure 4, Section 12) measured 0.7+m wide and 0.42m

deep with steep convex sides and a flattish base. It had a single fill of mid-

greyish brown silty sand (129).

TRENCH 8 Figures 2, 4 Plates 3-6





NW End SE End

Topsoil (100) 0.32 0.31

Subsoil (101) 0.32-0.61 N/A

Natural (102) 0.61+ 0.31+

Summary

Trench 8 was located close to the southern boundary of the site.

One Roman ditch, two Iron Age pits and a quarry pit were present.

5.10 Trench 9 5.10.1 The trench contained one undated east-west aligned ditch.

5.10.2 Ditch [119] (Figure 4, Section 10) measured 0.96m wide and was 0.1m deep

with moderately-sloping rounded sides and an irregular base. It had a single

fill of mid-greyish brown silty sand (120).

TRENCH 9 Figures 2, 4 Plate N/A



N End S End

Topsoil (100) 0.28 0.41

Subsoil (101) 0.28-0.57 0.41-0.77

Natural (102) 0.57+ 0.77+

Summary

Trench 9 was located close in the eastern half of the site.

One undated ditch was present.

5.11 Trench 10 5.11.1 Four quarry pits were present in Trench 10, two were excavated.

5.11.2 Pit [110] (Figure 5, Section 4) measured 2.07m long, 0.63m wide and 0.49m

deep, with vertical sides and a flat base. It had a single fill of mid-reddish

brown silty sand (109).

5.11.3 Pit [116] (Figure 5, Section 6) measured 4.3m long, 1.28m wide and 1m

deep, with vertical sides and a flat base. It had three fills: an upper fill of

mottled brown and yellow sand (113), a middle fill of mid-reddish brown silty



sand (114) and a lower fill of mid-greyish brown silty sand (115). One sherd

of 16th-17th century pottery was present in (114).

TRENCH 10 Figures 2, 5 Plate N/A



E End W End

Topsoil (100) 0.3 0.37

Subsoil (101) 0.3-0.66 0.37-0.68

Natural (102) 0.66+ 0.68+

Summary

Trench 10 was located close in the eastern half of the site.

Four quarry pits were present, of which two were excavated.

5.12 Trench 11 5.12.1 The trench contained six quarry pits, three were excavated.

5.12.2 Pit [103] (Figure 5, Section 1) measured 1.07+m wide and 0.8m deep, with

vertical sides and a flat base. It had a single fill of mid-greyish brown silty

sand (104).

5.12.3 Pit [105] (Figure 5, Section 2) measured 5m wide and 058+m deep, with

steep sides and a concave base. It had a single fill of mid-greyish brown silty

sand (106).

5.12.4 Pit [108] (Plate 8; Figure 5, Section 3) measured 1.2m wide and 0.84m deep,

with vertical sides and a flat base. It had a single fill of mid-orangish brown

sandy silt (107), which contained two sherds (6g) of 18th century pottery,

CBM and clay pipe.

TRENCH 11 Figures 2, 5 Plates 7-8 Trench Alignment: NE-SW Length: 50m Level of Natural (m OD): 22.89-24.93


NE End SW End

Topsoil (100) 0.3 0.35

Subsoil (101) 0.3-0.66 0.35-0.57



Natural (102) 0.66+ 0.57+

Summary

Trench 11 was located close to the eastern boundary of the site.

Six quarry pits were present, of which three were excavated.



6 THE FINDS AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE

6.1 The Flint Barry Bishop

6.1.1 Sample <1> from fill (117) of ditch [118] produced two small complete flakes,

a flake fragment, four pieces of micro-debitage and a fragment of burnt flint.

The two complete flakes are from core trimming and not dateable but the

flake fragment appears to be quite competently struck which might suggest a

Mesolithic or Neolithic rather than later date. The micro-debitage suggests

core working occurring in the vicinity.

6.1.2 Fill (122) of ditch [121] produced five pieces; a decortication flake, a

complete flake, a flake fragment and two pieces of micro-debitage. None of it

is diagnostic but the decortication flake and the flake are both rather crudely

and unskilfully struck, possibly indicating a Bronze or even Iron Age date.

The flake fragment might be part of a blade and if so is likely to be a bit

earlier, perhaps Mesolithic or Early Neolithic, and is also in a bit more of a

chipped condition than the others which might also suggest it’s earlier.

Again, the presence of micro-debitage suggests core working in the vicinity.

6.2 Pre-Roman and Post-Medieval Pottery Sue Anderson

Introduction

6.2.1 Seven sherds of pottery weighing 33g were collected from four contexts.

Table 1 shows the quantification by fabric; a summary catalogue by context

is included as Appendix 3.

Description Fabric Date range No Wt(g) MNV

?Iron Age flint tempered IAFT Iron Age 2 9 2

?Iron Age fine flint IAFF Iron Age 1 7 1

Prehistoric PREH Prehistoric 1 1 1

Total prehistoric 4 17 4

Cologne/Frechen stoneware GSW4 16th-17th c. 1 10 1

Iron-glazed blackware IGBW 16th-18th c. 1 4 1

Staffs-type white salt-glazed stoneware SWSW 18th c. 1 2 1



Total post-medieval 3 16 3

Total 7 33 7

Table 1 Pottery quantification by fabric.

Methodology

6.2.2 Quantification was carried out using sherd count, weight and estimated

vessel equivalent (eve). A full quantification by fabric, context and feature is

available in the archive. All fabric codes were assigned from the author’s

fabric series, which includes East Anglian and Midlands fabrics, as well as

imported wares. Form terminology follows MPRG (1998). 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.

Pottery by period

Prehistoric (?Iron Age)

6.2.3 Three abraded sherds were recovered from pit fill (111) in Trench 8. Two

were flint-tempered, including a rim fragment from a vessel with thumbing

along the inner edge. One other tiny ‘sherd’ with a ferrous inclusion and

large voids may be pottery or fired clay but was too small to be certain.

6.2.4 An unabraded sherd of handmade pottery with fine flint tempering was found

in pit fill (123), also in Trench 8, and was almost certainly of Iron Age date.

Post-medieval (16th–18th c.)

6.2.5 A body sherd of 16th/17th-century Frechen stoneware was recovered from

pit fill (114) in Trench 10. It was slightly abraded.

6.2.6 Two sherds from pit fill (107) in Trench 11 comprised a body sherd of an

iron-glazed blackware tankard, and a body sherd of white salt-glazed

stoneware, suggesting an 18th-century date for the fill.

Pottery by context

6.2.7 A summary of the pottery by context is provided in Table 2.



Trench Feature Context Type Fabric Spotdate

4 117 118 Ditch RBGW 2nd-4th c.

8 112 111 Pit IAFT PREH Iron Age?

124

121

123

122

Pit

Ditch

IAFF

VRWW

NVGW

Iron Age

2nd-3rd c.

2nd-3rd c.

10 116 114 Pit GSW4 16th-17th c.

11 108 107 Pit IGBW SWSW 18th c.

Table 2 Pottery types present by feature/context.

6.2.8 All context groups were small, but potentially indicate the presence of

prehistoric and post-medieval activity on the site.

Discussion

6.2.9 Seven sherds from four contexts suggested activity on the site from an early

period, but the wide date range and wide distribution of the sherds do not

allow for further interpretation.

6.3 The Roman Pottery Eniko Hudak

6.3.1 The evaluation at Low Farm, Drayton, Norfolk (ENF141033) produced a

small assemblage of Roman pottery. There are a total of 42 sherds weighing

634g from two contexts in Trenches 4 and 8. There are a minimum of eight

different vessels represented in the assemblage, in four different fabrics.

6.3.2 Ditch fill (122) contained one sherd in Verulamium Region White Ware

(AD50-200), and two different vessels (including a complete rim) in a light

grey fabric, which is very likely to be Nene Valley Grey Ware dated to

AD150-300. There are also seven sherds in a micaceous grey fabric, which

compare well to those described in the Colchester pottery report, but could

not be dated any closer than AD50-400 (Symonds and Wade 1999: 418). All

sherds are abraded, but there is no other sign of use-wear such as sooting

or limescale.

6.3.3 Ditch fill (117) in Trench 4 contained four sherds of two or three Roman



greyware vessels. All were in fine sandy fabrics with smoothed or burnished

surfaces. One fragment was a complete base which may have been

smoothed at the broken edges and re-used. Another large fragment of base

was found, and a body sherd and everted rim fragment were possibly from

the same vessel. These sherds are most likely to be of 2nd–4th-century

date.

6.3.4 Interpretation of the assemblage is limited by its size, but in case the site

goes to excavation comparing the assemblages to those of nearby sites

could provide an insight into the nature of Roman activity at the site.

6.4 Faunal Remains Stephanie Emra

Introduction

6.4.1 The site had a NISP (number of identified specimens) of 11 bone fragments

with a total weight of 486g. 9 (81.8%) fragments were identified down to an

animal size category, of which 7 were identified down to a species level.

Assemblage chronology

6.4.2 Bone was only retrieved from one context from the site, which was a shallow

ditch in trench 4 (117) fill of [118] which possibly contains refuse material.

Other finds from the ditch include Roman pottery, which gives us a possible

date.

Methodology

6.4.3 The assemblage was recovered by hand collection. The assemblage was

identified with reference to a modern reference collection as well as

reference to Hillson (1999), Schmid (1972) and France (2008). All

anatomical elements were identified to species where possible, any

unidentifiable fragments were assigned to general size or taxonomic

categories (e.g. Cattle sized, bird etc.). Where appropriate the following

Context SC Wt(g) EVEs Spotdate

122 38 359 1.38 AD150-200

117 4 275 0.05 AD100-400



information was recorded for each fragment; element, anatomical zone,

tooth eruption/wear (after Grant 1982, Payne 1987, Levine 1982, Greenfield

& Arnold, 2008, Hillson 2008), butchery marks, metrical data (after von den

Driesch 1976), gnawing, burning, surface weathering and pathology.

6.4.4 Caprines (sheep/goat) were differentiated based on the criteria of Boessneck

(1969), Halstead et al. (2002), Payne (1987), Prummel and Frisch (1986)

and Zeder and Lapham (2010). The sexing of pelvises followed Greenfield

(2006).

Assemblage Composition

6.4.5 A summary of the faunal remains found are in Table 3. The level of

preservation on all of the faunal remains is very poor, likely due to the sand

and gravel superficial deposits that the site lies on, which explains the small

assemblage size across the site. The assemblage consists of 2 elements

from a horse, both from the right-hand side and could potentially articulate

and a number of sheep/goat teeth and a mandible fragment, all of which

could be from the same mandible.

Taxa: Taxa: Element: NISP:

Horse Equus caballus Tibia 1

Horse Equus caballus Metatarsal 1

Cattle-sized Long-bone fragment 1

Sheep/Goat Ovis aries/ Capra hircus Tooth 1



Sheep-sized Tooth 1

Sheep-sized Mandible 1

Unidentified Unidentified 3

Total: 11

Table 3 Summary of the faunal remains from ditch [118]

Summary and Recommendations

6.4.6 The assemblage sample is far too small to make any real conclusions, but

the majority of the fragments consist of a fragmented sheep/goat mandible

and the hind limb of a horse. No further work is recommended.



6.5 Environmental Assessment Kate Turner

Introduction

6.5.1 This report summarises the findings from the rapid assessment of two bulk

samples taken from ditches excavated during an archaeological evaluation

on land at Low Farm, Drayton.

6.5.2 The aim of this assessment is to: 1) give an overview of the contents of the

assessed samples, 2) determine the environmental potential of these

samples and 3) indicate whether any further analysis needs to be carried

out.

Methodology

6.5.3 Two bulk samples consisting of twenty litres of sediment each were

processed using the flotation method; material was collected using a 300µm

mesh for the light fraction and a 1mm mesh for the heavy residue. The

heavy residue was then dried, sieved at 2, 5 and 10mm and sorted to extract

artefacts and ecofacts. The abundance of each category of material was

recorded using a non-linear scale where ‘1’ indicates occasional occurrence

(1-10 items), ‘2’ indicates occurrence is fairly frequent (11-30 items), ‘3’

indicates presence is frequent (31-100 items) and ‘4’ indicates an

abundance of material (>100 items).

6.5.4 The light residue (>300 µm), once dried, was scanned under a low-power

binocular microscope in order to quantify the level of environmental material,

such as seeds, chaff, charred grains, molluscs and charcoal. Abundance

was recorded as above. A note was also made of any other significant

inclusions, for example roots and modern plant material. The results of this

assessment are shown in Table 4.

Sample

number

Context

number

Vol

(liters)

Vol

(ml)

Flot

Char

coal

>1m

Charco

al

<1mm

Seeds

(un-

charred) Grains Mollusca Other



m

1 117 20 5 3 4 1 2 Land (3)

Coal (1) Roots (1)

Straw/grass (1) Insect

remains (1) Snail eggs (2)

Insect eggs (3) Hammer-

scale (1)

2 122 20 20 2 2 1 Land (4)

Coal (2) Snail eggs (2)

Insect remains (1) Insect

eggs (1) Roots (3)

Key: 1- Occasional, 2- fairly frequent, 3- frequent, 4- abundant

Table 4 Assessment of flots

Results and Discussion

Residues

6.5.5 No environmental artefacts were identified in the heavy residues.

Flots

6.5.6 Samples <1> and <2> produced flots; 5ml and 20ml in volume respectively.

Preservation of environmental remains was generally poor, with the

exception of wood charcoal; fine fragments of which were present in both.

None of the pieces were of a suitable size to be identified to species. A small

amount (<30 specimens) of heavily charred and mineralised grain was also

discovered in sample <1>, the majority of which was too distorted to be

identified to species, though several grains of Triticum spp. (indeterminate

wheat) could be distinguished. Additionally, both samples contained low

concentrations of flowering plant seeds, including specimens of

Chenopodium album (fat-hen) and Stellaria media (chickweed), both of

which are commonly found on waste or cultivated ground.

6.5.7 Shells of the burrowing snail Cecilioides acicula (blind snail) were present in

both samples, along with minimal numbers of Nesovitrea hammonis (rayed

glass snail) Lauria cylindracea (common chrysalis snail) and Euconulus cf.

(hive snails). Cecilioides acicula is an introduced species and, when found in

archaeological deposits, is generally interpreted to be an indication of



bioturbation.

6.5.8 Further evidence of contamination in these samples was found in the form of

plant roots and modern snail and insect eggs; these, along with the

abundance of modern snail shells suggest a substantial degree of post

depositional disturbance may have taken place.

Conclusions

6.5.9 A rapid assessment of the samples from Low Farm has revealed a paucity of

environmental material, along with significant evidence for bioturbation. As a

result of this, no further work is recommended on these samples.

Sample Number 1 2

Sample Number 1 2

Un-charred seeds

Snail species

Atriplex spp. 1

Cecilioides acicula 66 127

Chenopodium album 4 3

Euconulus cf. 1

Erucastrum spp. 1

Lauria cylindracea 1

Silene spp. 1

Nesovitrea hammonis 3 3

Stellaria media 1 5

Juveniles (miscellaneous) 4

Table 5 Preliminary identification of seeds and molluscs



7 DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS

7.1 Prehistoric Activity 7.1.1 Residual Mesolithic-Neolithic flint flakes were found in the Roman ditches in

Trenches 4 and 8. Activity of this date is known in the area, with a Neolithic

flint working site located c.400m to the south-east of the site.

7.2 Iron Age Activity 7.2.1 In the south-eastern corner of site a small area of Iron Age activity was seen.

Two small pits with abraded sherds of Iron Age pottery were uncovered in

the eastern end of Trench 8. Potential Iron Age flint flakes were also found in

the Roman ditch in the same trench. There is very little recorded evidence of

Iron Age activity in Drayton. An Iron Age or Roman decorated Bronze object

found in the south-east of the parish is the only evidence confirmed to date

(NHER 25514).

7.3 Roman Activity 7.3.1 Roman activity was present on the top of the hill along the southern edge of

the site. In Trench 8 a large northwest-southeast aligned ditch was present,

potentially mid-late 2nd century in date. A large north-south ditch was

present in Trench 4, which dated to the 2nd-4th century. The large quantity

of Roman pottery in the ditches suggests that a Roman settlement was

present in this area, likely to the east or south-east of the site on the higher

ground.

7.4 Post-Medieval Activity 7.4.1 An area of post-medieval activity was seen in the eastern part of the site.

Large quarry pits were dug to extract the sand, which may have been used

to construct houses in the expanding Drayton.

7.5 Undated 7.5.1 An east-west aligned ditch was seen in Trenches 5 and 9, but no dating was

recovered from it.

7.6 Conclusions 7.6.1 The trial trench evaluation has identified features reflecting three broad



periods of activity on the site: Iron Age, Roman and post-medieval, as well

as an indication of Mesolithic-Neolithic activity in the area.

7.6.2 The archaeological features and deposits from the Iron Age, Roman and

post-medieval periods are relatively well-preserved and associated with

moderate assemblages.

7.6.3 The densest concentration of archaeology was the quarrying in the east of

the site, which would have removed any earlier activity. A band of Iron Age

and Roman activity was seen along the southern boundary of the site.

Trench 8 revealed evidence for Iron Age and Roman activity, with a further

Roman ditch seen to the west in Trench 4. An undated east-west aligned

ditch was present in Trenches 5 and 9.



8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

8.1 Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd would like to thank Paul Clark of CgMs

Consulting for commissioning the work and LK Construction Eastern for

providing the plant and operator. The author would like to thank Taleyna

Fletcher for managing the project and the project team: Sam Corke, Harvey

Furniss and Lucy Robinson for their hard work, and finally PCA’s CAD

department for preparing the figures.



9 BIBLIOGRAPHY

9.1 Printed Sources

Boessneck, J. 1969 Osteological differences between sheep (Ovis aries

Linné) and goat (Capra hircus Linné). Science in archaeology, 331, 58.

Cappers, R.T., Bekker, R.M. and Jans, J.E., (2012). Digitale Zadenatlas van

Nederland/Digital seed atlas of the Netherlands (Vol. 4). Barkhuis.

France, D. L. 2008 Human and nonhuman bone identification: a color atlas.

CRC Press.

Garwood, A. 2016 Written Scheme of Investigation for an Archaeological

Evaluation of Land at Low Farm, Drayton, Norwich, Norfolk. Pre-Construct

Archaeology (unpublished)

Grant, A. 1982 The use of tooth wear as a guide to the age of domestic

ungulates. Ageing and sexing animal bones from archaeological sites, 109,

91-108.

Greenfield, H. J. 2006, Sexing fragmentary ungulate acetabulae. Recent

advances in ageing and sexing animal bones, 68-86.

Greenfield, H. J. & Arnold, E. R. 2008 Absolute age and tooth eruption and

wear sequences in sheep and goat: determining age-at-death in

zooarchaeology using a modern control sample. Journal of Archaeological

Science, 35(4), 836-849.

Halstead, P., Collins, P., & Isaakidou, V. 2002 Sorting the Sheep from the

Goats: Morphological Distinctions between the Mandibles and Mandibular

Teeth of AdultOvis and Capra. Journal of Archaeological Science, 29(5),

545-553.

Hillson, S. 1999, Mammal bones and teeth: an introductory guide to methods



of identification. Institute of Archaeology.

Hillson, S. 2005 Teeth. Cambridge University Press.

Kerney, M.P. 1999. Atlas of the Land and Freshwater Molluscs of Britain and

Ireland. Colchester. Harley.

Levine, M. A. 1982 The use of crown height measurements and eruption-

wear sequences to age horse teeth. In Ageing and sexing Animal Bones

from Archaeological sites (Vol. 109, pp. 223-250). BAR British Series.

MPRG, 1998 A Guide to the Classification of Medieval Ceramic Forms.

Medieval Pottery Research Group Occasional Paper 1.

Payne, S. 1987 Reference codes for wear states in the mandibular cheek

teeth of sheep and goats. Journal of Archaeological Science, 14(6), 609-614.

Prummel, W. & Frisch, H. J. (1986) A guide for the distinction of species, sex

and body side in bones of sheep and goat. Journal of Archaeological

Science, 13(6), 567-577.

Schmid, E. 1972 Atlas of animal bones (p. 159). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Stace, C, 1991. New flora of the British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

Symonds, R. P. & Wade, S. 1999 Roman pottery from excavations in

Colchester 1971-86, Colchester Archaeological Reports 10, Colchester:

Colchester Archaeological Trust Ltd.

Von Den Driesch, A. 1976 A guide to the measurement of animal bones from

archaeological sites: as developed by the Institut für Palaeoanatomie,

Domestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Tiermedizin of the University

of Munich (Vol. 1). Peabody Museum Press.



Zeder, M. A & Lapham, H. A. 2010 Assessing the reliability of criteria used to

identify postcranial bones in sheep, Ovis, and goats, Capra. Journal of

Archaeological Science, 37(11), 2887-2905.

9.2 Websites

1) British Geological Survey - Geology of Britain Viewer (Accessed 05/08/16)

http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html

The Site

N

618000/315000

618000/312000

0 1km

Lowestoft

Great

Wymondham

Diss

Southwold

BecclesBungay

N O R F O L K

A47

A11

A140

A146

A143

A12

A47

A140

A1151

A1067

A143

Yarmouth

NORWICH

Drayton

E S S E X

S U F F O L K

N O R F O L K

Norwich

L I N C S

C A M B S

Figure 1Site Location

1:2,000,000; 625,000 & 25,000 at A4

Pre-Construct Archaeology Ltd 2016a09/08/16 CF

Contains Ordnance Survey data Crown copyright and database right 2015a

30

60

58

10

24

80

3158a

19

27

34

50

20

70

Trench 1

Trench 2

Trench 3

Trench 6

Trench 7

Trench 10

Trench 11

Trench 4

Trench 9

Trench 8

Trench 5

Drayton High Road

0 50m

N

618400/313240

618400/313390

Archaeological Features

Figure 2Detailed Site Location

1:1,250 at A4


Crown copyright 2016. All rights reserved. License number PMP36110309a

[118]

[127]

Trench 4

Trench 5

S7

S9

Archaeological Feature

Excavated Slot

0 10m

N

Figure 3Plan of Trenches 4 and 5

1:250 at A3


[119]

[112][124]

[121]

[128]

Trench 9

Trench 8

S.10

S5

S8

S11

S12

N


Excavated Slot

0 10m


1:250 at A3


[110]

[105]

[103]

[108]

Trench 10

Trench 11

S6S4

S2

S1

S3

[116]


Excavated Slot

0 10m

N


1:250 at A3


[104][103]

Section 1North East FacingTrench 11

NWSE

[106] [105]

Section 2West FacingTrench 11

SN

[107]

[108]

SENW

Section 3South West FacingTrench 11

[109]

[110]

Section 4South East FacingTrench 10

NESW

[111]

[112]

Section 5South West FacingTrench 8

SENW[100]

[101]

[113][114]

[115]

Section 6South FacingTrench 10

EW

[117]

[118]

Section 7South FacingTrench 4

EW

[123]

[124]

Section 8North East FacingTrench 8

NWSE

[100]

[101]

[125]

[126]

[127]

Section 9East FacingTrench 5

NS

[119][120]

SN

Section 10West FacingTrench 9

[121]

[122]

Section 11North West FacingTrench 8

NE SW

[129]

[128]

Section 12East FacingTrench 8

NS

0 1m

Figure 6Sections 1-12

1:25 at A3




10 APPENDIX 1: PLATES

Plate 1: Trench 4, view east

Plate 2: Ditch [118], view north



Plate 3: Trench 8, view north-west

Plate 4: Pit [112], view north-east



Plate 5: Pit [124], view south-west

Plate 6: Ditch [121], view south-east



Plate 7: Trench 11, view south-west

Plate 8: Quarry Pit [108], view north-west



11 APPENDIX 2: CONTEXT INDEX Context Number Cut Trench Type Category Period

100 Layer Topsoil

101 Layer Subsoil

102 Layer Natural Geology

103 103 11 Cut Pit post-medieval

104 103 11 Fill Pit post-medieval







111 112 8 Fill Pit Iron Age

112 112 8 Cut Pit Iron Age





117 118 4 Fill Ditch Roman

118 118 4 Cut Ditch Roman

119 119 9 Cut Ditch undated

120 119 9 Fill Ditch undated

121 121 8 Cut Ditch Roman

122 121 8 Fill Ditch Roman

123 124 8 Fill Pit Iron Age

124 124 8 Cut Pit Iron Age



127 127 5 Cut Ditch undated





12 APPENDIX 3: POTTERY CATALOGUE

Context Trench Fabric Type No Wt/g MNV Form Rim Base Decoration Glaze

int

Glaze

ext

Rim

diam

Rim

percent Abrasion Notes

107 11 IGBW D 1 4 1 TK DB DB +

107 11 SWSW U 1 2 1 W W

111 08 IAFT U 1 2 1 ++

111 08 IAFT R 1 7 1 JR? UPRIGHT thumbed

rim

+

111 08 PREH U 1 1 1 ++ tiny, poss fired clay

114 GSW4 D 1 10 1 B +

117 RBGW B 1 122 1 F + broken edge poss rubbed? Nearly

complete base,fresh break at one

edge

117 RBGW B 1 132 1 F surface slightly burnished?

117 RBGW RU 2 21 1 JR EV 210 5 + burnished

124 08 IAFF U 1 7 1



13 APPENDIX 4: OASIS FORM

OASIS ID: preconst1-260363

Project details

Project name Land at Low Farm, Drayton, Norfolk: Archaeological Trial Trench

Evaluation

Short description of

the project

This report describes the results of an archaeological trial trench

evaluation carried out by Pre-Construct Archaeology on land at Low

Farm, Drayton, Norfolk (NGR TG 1841 1332) between the 1st and

the 3rd August 2016. The archaeological work was commissioned by

CgMs Consulting prior to a proposed new residential development.

The aim of the work was to characterise the archaeological potential

of the proposed development area. The principal result of the

evaluation was the discovery of two Roman ditches in a narrow band

along the southern edge of the site. The quantity of pottery present

suggests that a Roman settlement may be in the vicinity of the site,

possibly to the east or south-east. Two small pits containing Iron Age

pottery were also uncovered in the south-eastern corner of the site,

indicating Iron Age activity previously unknown in Drayton. Intense

post-medieval quarrying for sand was present in the eastern side of

the site.

Project dates Start: 01-08-2016 End: 03-08-2016

Previous/future work No / Not known

Any associated

project reference

codes

ENF141033 - Sitecode

Type of project Field evaluation

Site status None

Current Land use Cultivated Land 1 - Minimal cultivation

Monument type DITCH Roman

Monument type PITS Iron Age

Monument type PITS Post Medieval

Monument type DITCH Uncertain



Significant Finds POTTERY Iron Age

Significant Finds POTTERY Roman

Significant Finds POTTERY Post Medieval

Methods &

techniques

''Sample Trenches''

Development type Rural residential

Prompt Planning condition

Position in the

planning process

Not known / Not recorded

Project location

Country England

Site location NORFOLK BROADLAND DRAYTON Land at Low Farm, Drayton

Study area 2.7 Hectares

Site coordinates TG 1841 1332 52.673014592007 1.230914997661 52 40 22 N 001

13 51 E Point

Project creators

Name of

Organisation

Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited

Project brief

originator

none

Project design

originator

Adam Garwood

Project

director/manager

Taleyna Fletcher

Project supervisor Mary-Anne Slater

Project archives

Physical Archive

recipient

Norwich Museum

Physical Archive ID ENF141033



Physical Contents ''Animal Bones'',''Ceramics''

Digital Archive

recipient

Norwich Museum

Digital Archive ID ENF141033

Digital Contents ''none''

Digital Media

available

''Database'',''Images raster / digital photography'',''Survey'',''Text''

Paper Archive

recipient

Norwich Museum

Paper Archive ID ENF141033

Paper Contents ''none''

Paper Media

available

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

Project bibliography

1

Publication type

Grey literature (unpublished document/manuscript)

Title Land at Low Farm, Drayton, Norfolk: An Archaeological Trial Trench

Evaluation

Author(s)/Editor(s) Slater, M.

Date 2016

Issuer or publisher Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited

Place of issue or

publication

Cambridge

P C A

PCA SOUTH UNIT 54

BROCKLEY CROSS BUSINESS CENTRE 96 ENDWELL ROAD

BROCKLEY LONDON SE4 2PD

TEL: 020 7732 3925 / 020 7639 9091 FAX: 020 7639 9588

EMAIL: [email protected]

PCA NORTH UNIT 19A

TURSDALE BUSINESS PARK DURHAM DH6 5PG TEL: 0191 377 1111 FAX: 0191 377 0101


PCA CENTRAL THE GRANARY, RECTORY FARM BREWERY ROAD, PAMPISFORD

CAMBRIDGESHIRE CB22 3EN TEL: 01223 845 522 FAX: 01223 845 522


PCA WEST BLOCK 4

CHILCOMB HOUSE CHILCOMB LANE

WINCHESTER HAMPSHIRE SO23 8RB

TEL: 01962 849 549 EMAIL: [email protected]

PCA MIDLANDS 17-19 KETTERING RD

LITTLE BOWDEN MARKET HARBOROUGH

LEICESTERSHIRE LE16 8AN TEL: 01858 468 333


mailto:[email protected]�





land at low farm, drayton, p norfolk: an archaeological ... application/706… · evaluation august...

Documents