land to the rear of 1-6 park ane cranford hounslow … · excavated later bronze age field systems...

LAND TO THE REAR OF 1-6 PARK LANE CRANFORD HOUNSLOW

GREATER LONDON

ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVALUATION

DECEMBER 2008

For

on behalf of

OLIVER BRIDGE ARCHITECTURE

CRANFORD PROJECTS LTD

CA PROJECT: 2485 CA REPORT: 08003

LAND TO THE REAR OF 1-6 PARK LANE CRANFORD HOUNSLOW

GREATER LONDON

ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVALUATION

CA PROJECT: 2485 CA REPORT: 08003

prepared by Mark Brett, Senior Project Officer

date 15 January 2008

checked by Laurent Coleman, Project Manager

date 30 October 2008

approved by Mark Collard, Head of Contracts

signed

date 11 December 2008

issue 01

This report is confidential to the client. Cotswold Archaeology accepts no responsibility or liability to any third party to whom this report, or any part of it, is made known. Any such party relies upon this report entirely

at their own risk. No part of this report may be reproduced by any means without permission.

© Cotswold Archaeology Building 11, Kemble Enterprise Park, Kemble, Cirencester, Gloucestershire, GL7 6BQ

Tel. 01285 771022 Fax. 01285 771033 E-mail: [email protected]

© Cotswold Archaeology

1

Land to the rear of 1-6 Park Lane, Cranford, Hounslow, Greater London: Archaeological Evaluation

CONTENTS

SUMMARY........................................................................................................................2

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 3

2. RESULTS ............................................................................................................ 5

3. DISCUSSION....................................................................................................... 7

4. CA PROJECT TEAM ........................................................................................... 8

5. REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 8

APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS ..................................................................... 10 APPENDIX B: FINDS CONCORDANCE .......................................................................... 11 APPENDIX C: THE PALAEOENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE ......................................... 12 APPENDIX D: OASIS REPORT FORM............................................................................ 13

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1 Site location plan (1:50,000)

Fig. 2 Trench location plan (1:500)

Fig. 3 Trench 1; plan and section (1:50 and 1:20)

Fig. 4 Trench 3; plan and section (1:50 and 1:20)


2


SUMMARY

Project Name: Land to the rear of 1-6 Park Lane

Location: Cranford, Hounslow, Greater London

NGR: TQ 1026 7750

Type: Evaluation

Date: 19-20 December 2007

Planning Reference: 00855/G/P3

Location of Archive: To be deposited with the London Archaeological Archive and

Research Centre (LAARC)

Site Code: PLF 07

An archaeological evaluation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology in December 2007

at the request of Oliver Bridge Architecture on behalf of Cranford Projects Ltd on land to the

rear of 1-6 Park Lane, Cranford, Hounslow, Greater London. Four trenches were excavated.

The evaluation identified part of a probable prehistoric ring ditch and a Roman pit.


3


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 In December 2007 Cotswold Archaeology (CA) carried out an archaeological

evaluation for Oliver Bridge Architecture on behalf of Cranford Projects Ltd on land

to the rear of 1-6 Park Lane, Cranford, Hounslow, Greater London (centred on NGR:

TQ 1026 7750; Fig. 1). The evaluation was undertaken in compliance with a

condition of planning permission for the construction of six houses.

1.2 The evaluation was carried out in accordance with a communication issued by Kim

Stabler, Archaeology Advisor to the Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service

(GLAAS), English Heritage and with a subsequent detailed Written Scheme of

Investigation (WSI) produced by CA (2007) and approved by the LPA acting on the

advice of Kim Stabler, archaeological advisor to the LPA. The fieldwork also

followed the Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Field Evaluation issued by

the Institute of Field Archaeologists (2001), the Archaeological Guidance Papers

(GLAAS 1998) and the Management of Archaeological Projects (English Heritage

1991). It was monitored by Kim Stabler, including a site visit on 20 December 2007.

The site

1.3 The site lies to the rear of residential properties fronting onto Park Lane and the

High Street, to the south and east respectively. It is bounded to the west by the open

fields of Cranford Park and to the north by further residential gardens (Fig. 2). The

site lies at approximately 23m AOD with a slight rise to the north.

1.4 The site occupies an area of approximately 0.17ha and is currently undeveloped and

under heavy vegetation.

1.5 The underlying solid geology of the area is mapped as drift deposits of Taplow

Gravel (BGS 1981) the natural substrate, comprising grey silty clay was identified in

all four trenches.

Archaeological background

1.6 Archaeological interest in the site arises from the close proximity of ridge and furrow

earthworks (ADS ref: 050784) as well as an unidentified, possibly medieval,

settlement (ADS ref. 054627) both immediately to the west of the site. Aerial photos

have identified a series of ditches of possible Bronze Age date within the field


4


adjacent to the site and there is a strong background of prehistoric activity in the

area, including the findspot of a tranchet axe (Stabler, pers. comm.).

Archaeological objectives

1.7 The objectives of the evaluation were to provide data on the date, character, quality,

survival and extent of the archaeological deposits within the application area in order

that an informed decision on their importance in a local, regional or national context

can be made. This information will clarify whether any remains are of sufficient

importance to warrant consideration for preservation in situ, or alternatively form the

basis of mitigation measures that may seek to limit damage to significant remains in

accordance with the advice in PPG16.

Methodology

1.8 The fieldwork comprised the excavation of 4 trenches (numbered 1-4), each 10m in

length and 1.8m in width, in the locations shown on the attached plan (Fig. 2).

Trenches 1, 2 and 3 were located within the proposed footprints of the new houses

and trench 4 was located within the proposed access road.

1.9 All trenches were excavated by mechanical excavator equipped with a toothless

grading bucket. All machine excavation was undertaken under constant

archaeological supervision to the top of the first significant archaeological horizon or

the natural substrate, whichever was encountered first. Where archaeological

deposits were encountered they were excavated by hand in accordance with CA

Technical Manual 1: Fieldwork Recording Manual (2007).

1.10 Deposits were assessed for their palaeoenvironmental potential in accordance with

CA Technical Manual 2: The Taking and Processing of Environmental and Other

Samples from Archaeological Sites (2003) and were sampled and processed. All

artefacts recovered were processed in accordance with CA Technical Manual 3:

Treatment of Finds Immediately After Excavation (1995).

1.11 The archive and artefacts from the evaluation are currently held by CA at their

offices in Kemble. Subject to the agreement of the legal landowner the artefacts will

be deposited with the London Archaeological Archive and Research Centre

(LAARC), along with the site archive. A summary of information from this project, set

out within Appendix D, will be entered onto the OASIS online database of

archaeological projects in Britain.


5


2. RESULTS (FIGS 3-4)

2.1 This section provides an overview of the evaluation results; detailed summaries of

the recorded contexts, finds and environmental samples (palaeoenvironmental

evidence) are to be found in Appendices A, B and C respectively.

2.2 Significant archaeological features were identified within trenches 1 and 3. Trench 2

was devoid of any archaeological deposits or features and trench 4 contained a

modern posthole. The fills of the archaeological features and the natural substrate

were generally overlain overlain by subsoil and topsoil layers. Make-up layers and a

buried topsoil were identified in trench 1.

Trench 1 (Fig. 3)

2.3 Part of a circular pit 106 was revealed, the majority of which extended beyond the

eastern edge of the trench. The single fill 105 of the feature contained sherds of

pottery and tile, dating to the 1st to 2nd centuries AD. An environmental sample

recovered from this feature contained charcoal, fired clay and pieces of struck flint.

Tree root disturbance (one feature containing a sherd of residual Roman pottery)

was also identified.

Trench 2

2.4 No features of archaeological significance were identified within this trench.

Trench 3 (Fig. 4)

2.5 The south-eastern part of irregularly-cut sub-circular gully 303 was identified. The

exposed part of the feature measured 4.5m across and the gully itself varied in width

and depth and was filled by a single deposit 304, from which numerous sherds of

prehistoric pottery were recovered Appendix B.

Trench 4

2.6 No features of archaeological significance were identified within this trench.


6


The Finds and Palaeoenvironmental Evidence

2.7 A small assemblage of prehistoric pottery was recovered from deposit 304, the

single fill of gully 303. A total of 39 sherds (plus fragments), weighing 512g, was

hand-recovered from this deposit, with a further 9 sherds (30g) retrieved from soil

sample 1. The pottery is in moderate to poor condition; a few large sherds are

present but the majority are small in size and exhibit rounded edges indicative of

some abrasion due to re-deposition. No conjoining sherds were identified and the

number of individual vessels present is difficult to estimate, again indicative of

secondary deposition. The majority of sherds are undiagnostic body sherds; only

one definite base fragment is present and one shoulder sherd with traces of a

fingertip impressed row decorating the carination.

2.8 All of these fabric types are typical of assemblages from the West London gravel

terraces and are locally produced using the brickearth or alluvial clay derived from

reworking the brickearth (Rayner 2006). Flint-tempered fabrics have a long tradition

in this area (as in much of south-east England) and appear in use from the Early

Neolithic through to the Middle Iron Age. This can make dating of undiagnostic body

sherds problematic but certain characteristics do appear to relate to particular

periods and can be taken as an indication of date.

2.9 This range of fabrics, in conjunction with the presence of a single fingertip decorated

coarseware jar shoulder sherd, suggest a Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age date for

this material, probably in the region of 8th–6th centuries BC.

2.10 This small assemblage is typical of pottery of this period from the West London

gravel terraces. Large groups of Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age pottery have been

recovered from nearby around Heathrow Airport, notably at Cranford Lane (Rayner

forthcoming), Perry Oaks (Every and Mepham 2006), and the recent T5 excavations

(Framework Archaeology forthcoming). Given the sites close proximity to the

excavated Later Bronze Age field systems at Cranford Lane it seems likely that the

gully identified here relates to that wider agricultural landscape.

2.11 Two bodysherds in reduced (Early Roman Micaceous Sandy ware) and oxidised

(Verulamium Region whiteware) fabrics from deposits 105 and 108 date to the Early

Roman period, between mid 1st and 2nd centuries AD. Both sherds are sooted,

suggesting use as cooking vessels (Appendix B).


7


2.12 A single fragment of Roman roofing tile was recovered from fill 105 of circular pit

106. The tile is from Radlett, Hertfordshire, but of the coarser type (fabric 3023b)

and is dated c. AD 170-230.

2.13 A single small sherd of transfer-print decorated china was recovered from posthole

fill 403. It dates to no earlier than the 19th century.

2.14 A bulk sample from deposit 304, the fill of curvilinear gully 303 was taken for the

purposes of confirming the presence of biological remains and gauging their state of

preservation in order to assess the potential for analysis towards reconstructing

former economies and environments. One 10 litre environmental sample from this

deposit was processed.

2.15 The sample from gully fill 304 contained a moderate quantity of charcoal (27g), nine

sherds (30g) of Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age pottery, 60 fragments of

miscellaneous fired clay (80g) and two pieces of struck flint weighing 2g (Appendix

B).

3. DISCUSSION

3.1 The remains of part of ring ditch of probable Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age date

were identified in trench 1. Two pits of the same date were identified during a

watching brief in Cranford Park (MoLAS 1995). Settlement activity and a field

system dating to the Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age were also identified at Cranford

Lane, Harlington (together with Neolithic and Roman activity) (MoLAS 1994). The

activity identified during the evaluation may represent funerary and/or ritual activity

within a broader agricultural landscape.

3.2 A pit of probable Roman date was also identified. Although no settlement activity

dating to the Roman period was identified at Cranford Lane, the distribution of

artefacts suggested that a settlement dating to this period may have been located to

the south-east of the excavation area, towards Cranford Park and this site.


8


4. CA PROJECT TEAM

Fieldwork was undertaken by Mark Brett, assisted by Rob Elliott and Caroline Butler.

The report was written by Mark Brett. The illustrations were prepared by Jemma

Elliot. The archive has been compiled by Mark Brett, and prepared for deposition by

Kathryn Price. The project was managed for CA by Laurent Coleman.

5. REFERENCES

BGS (British Geological Survey) 1981 Geological Survey of Great Britain (England and

Wales), Sheet 269: Windsor

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2007 Land to the rear of 1-6 Park Lane, Cranford, Hounslow,

Greater London: Written Scheme of Investigation for an Archaeological Evaluation

Davies, B., Richardson, E. and Tomber, R. 1994 A Corpus of Early Roman Pottery from the

City of London, Archaeology of Roman London 5, Council for British Archaeology

Research Rep. 98, York, CBA

Framework Archaeology forthcoming Heathrow Terminal 5 Excavations, Volume 2

Framework Archaeology Monograph

Lewis, J. 2006 Landscape Evolution in the Middle Thames Valley: Heathrow Terminal 5

Excavations: Volume 1, Perry Oaks, Framework Archaeology Monograph 1

MoLAS (Museum of London Archaeology Service) 1994 Cranford Lane, Harlington

http://www.molas.org.uk/pages/siteSummariesDetailsAll.asp?year=summaries1994

(accessed 29 October 2008)

MoLAS (Museum of London Archaeology Service) 1995 Cranford Park, Cranford

http://www.molas.org.uk/pages/siteSummariesDetailsAll.asp?year=summaries1995&1996

(accessed 29 October 2008)

Every, R. and Mepham, L. 2006 ‘Prehistoric Pottery’, in Lewis 2006, CD ROM

Rayner, L.J. 2006 Neolithic Peterborough Wares: Characterisation, Manufacture and

Technology of Vessels from West London, unpublished MSc Dissertation, UCL


9


Rayner, L.J. forthcoming The Prehistoric Pottery from Cranford Lane, Hillingdon


10


APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS

Trench 1 (current ground level: 23.66m – 23.68m AOD) No. Type Description Length

(m) Width (m)

Depth (m)

Spot-date

101 Layer Topsoil. Dark greyish brown clayey silt. 0.1 102 Layer Dumped deposit. Light orangish brown clay and

gravel. <0.3

103 Layer Dumped deposit. Dark grey clayey silt. <0.3 104 Layer Buried topsoil. Mid brown clayey silt. <0.25 105 Deposit Fill of 106. Mid yellowish brown silty clay. 0.45 Roman 106 Cut Rounded pit. Irregular, steep sides and irregular

base. >1 >0.55 0.45

107 Layer Natural brickearth. Light brownish yellow. n/k n/k n/k 108 Deposit Fill of 109. Mid yellowish brown silty clay. 0.45 Roman 109 Cut Irregularly-shaped anomaly. Probably geological. >2.7 >1.8 0.45 Trench 2 (current ground level: 23.36m – 23.8m AOD) No. Type Description Length

(m) Width (m)

Depth (m)

Spot-date

200 Layer Topsoil. Dark greyish brown sandy silt. 0.1 201 Layer Dumped deposit. Light orangish brown clay and

gravel. <0.3

202 Layer Buried topsoil. Mid greyish brown clayey silt. <0.2 203 Layer Natural brickearth. Light brownish yellow. n/k Trench 3 (current ground level: 23.3m – 23.41m AOD) No. Type Description Length

(m) Width (m)

Depth (m)

Spot-date

300 Layer Topsoil. Dark greyish brown clayey silt. <0.3 301 Layer Subsoil. Mid orangish brown silty clay. 0.15 302 Layer Natural brickearth. Light brownish yellow. n/k 303 Cut Curvilinear gully. Moderately-sloping sides; flat

base. >5m <1.3 <0.15

304 Deposit Fill of 303. Mid yellowish-grey clayey silt. Charcoal-rich.

<0.15 LBA/EIA

Trench 4 (current ground level: 23.3m – 23.46m AOD) No. Type Description Length

(m) Width (m)

Depth (m)

Spot-date

400 Layer Topsoil. Mid greyish brown clayey silt. 0.25 401 Layer Subsoil. Mid greyish yellow silty clay. 0.3 402 Layer Natural brickearth. Light brownish yellow. n/k 403 Deposit Fill of 404. Light yellowish grey silty clay. 0.12 404 Cut Square posthole. Vertical sides and flat base. 0.3 0.28 0.12


11


APPENDIX B: FINDS CONCORDANCE

Prehistoric and Roman Pottery (L.J. Rayner)

A small assemblage of pottery of Late Bonze Age/Early Iron Age type was recovered from gully fill 304 (see

main report). A total of 39 sherds (plus fragments), weighing 512g, was hand-recovered from this deposit, with a

further 9 sherds (30g) retrieved from soil sample 1. Prehistoric fabrics are all flint-tempered to a greater or lesser

extent. Sherd fabrics were examined with a x20 microscope and preliminary fabric groups defined.

The fabric groups present can be described as:

IOFL1: Coarse calcined flint temper (up to 5.0mm) in a silty matrix with common sub-rounded iron-rich oxide

inclusions. These oxides are naturally occurring in the brickearth clays that were exploited for pottery production

throughout the prehistoric period in the West London area and as a fabric type is widely paralleled in

assemblages from other sites.

FLIN1: Medium calcined flint temper (up to 1.0mm) in a silty matrix; rare rounded quartz (0.2–0.5mm)

FLIN2: Fine silty matrix with rare fine to medium calcined flint temper (0.5–1.0mm)

QUFL1: sandy matrix with very rare flint (up to 1.0mm); quartz grains visible on unpolished surface

Fabric Form Dec Ct Wt(g) IOFL1 2 162 FLIN1 JAR FTD 1 52 FLIN1 3 34 FLIN2 32 159 QUFL1 1 13 POT - 92 Total 39 512

Table B1: Quantification of (hand-recovered) Prehistoric

assemblage [304] by fabric type

Two sherds of Roman pottery (10g) were recovered: one each from deposits 105 and 108. The sherd from pit fill

105 is a sandy grey ware, most probably the unsourced ‘Early Roman Micaceous Sandy ware’ (ERMS) which

appears in the Roman city of Londinium dated AD 50–100 (Davies et al. 1994, 89). The sooted external surface

suggests the sherd derives from a jar used in cooking.

The second sherd, from deposit 108 has a fine sandy oxidised fabric; it is possibly a white ware from the

Verumlamium kilns although the quartz size is finer than usual for this fabric. This sherd also has a sooted

exterior surface. It is likely to date to the 1st to 2nd centuries.

As undiagnostic body sherds little more can be said related to the form or use of these vessels. As such they

appear to evidence domestic activity in the 1st to 2nd centuries AD.


12


Ceramic Building Material (Kevin Hayward)

A single fragment of Roman roofing tile was recovered from fill 105 of circular pit 106. The tile is from Radlett,

Hertfordshire, but of the coarser type (fabric 3023b) and is dated AD 170–230.

Worked Flint (Ed McSloy)

Two pieces of worked flint, a small broken flake or blade (proximal end) and a chip were recovered from gully fill

304. Both pieces were retrieved from soil sample 1. Neither piece exhibits secondary working or is otherwise

diagnostic of a particular (Prehistoric) period. The broken flake retains some cortical coverage and this suggests

derivation from a secondary (gravel) source.

APPENDIX C: THE PALAEOENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE

A bulk sample from deposit 304, the fill of curvilinear gully 303 was taken for the purposes of confirming the

presence of biological remains and gauging their state of preservation in order to assess the potential for analysis

towards reconstructing former economies and environments. One 10 litre environmental sample was processed

in total.

Samples were taken using sealable plastic tubs and transported to the CA offices for processing. The entire 10

litre sample was processed for purposes of assessment. The environmental sample was processed by means of

wash-over flotation utilising meshes of 250µm and 500µm for the flot and residue respectively. Residues and flots

were dried in a low temperature drying cabinet prior to sorting. The dried flots were scanned under a low power

binocular microscope for charred plant, molluscan material and artefacts.

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES

The sample from gully fill 304 contained a moderate quantity of charcoal (27g), nine sherds (30g) of prehistoric

pottery, 60 fragments of fired clay (80g) and two pieces of struck flint (2g).


13


APPENDIX D: OASIS REPORT FORM

PROJECT DETAILS Project Name Land to the rear of 1-6 Park Lane, Cranford,

Hounslow, Greater London Short description (250 words maximum)

An archaeological evaluation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology in December 2007 on land to the rear of 1-6 Park Lane, Cranford, Hounslow, Greater London. Four trenches were excavated. The evaluation identified part of a probable prehistoric ring ditch and a Roman pit.

Project dates Project type (e.g. desk-based, field evaluation etc)

Archaeological evaluation.

Previous work (reference to organisation or SMR numbers etc)

None.

Future work Unknown.

PROJECT LOCATION Site Location 1-6 Park Lane, Cranford, Hounslow, Greater

London. Study area (M2/ha) 0.17ha Site co-ordinates (8 Fig Grid Reference) TQ 1026 7750

PROJECT CREATORS Name of organisation Cotswold Archaeology Project Brief originator English Heritage Project Design (WSI) originator Cotswold Archaeology

Project Manager Laurent Coleman Project Supervisor Mark Brett PROJECT ARCHIVES Intended final location of

archive

Content

Physical LAARC Pottery, cbm, flint Paper LAARC Context sheets,

matrices, drawings, registers, b/w photos and colour slides

Digital LAARC Digital photos BIBLIOGRAPHY

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2008 Land to the rear of 1-6 Park Lane, Cranford, Hounslow, Greater London: Archaeological Evaluation, CA typescript report 08003

London

Hounslow

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

N

SCALEDRAWN BY PROJECT NO. FIGURE NO.

COTSWOLD ARCHAEOLOGY

0 5km

Site

Reproduced from the 1990 Ordnance Survey Landranger map with the permissionof Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeological Trust 100002109 c

Land to the rear of 1-6 Park LaneCranford, Hounslow, Greater London

Site location plan

1:50,000@A4 2485JE 1

102

770

TQTQ

T1

T2

T3

T4gully303

pit106

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

N

SCALEDRAWN BY PROJECT NO. FIGURE NO.


0 50m

site

evaluation trench

Reproduced from the 2007 Ordnance Survey Sitemap with the permissionof Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeological Trust 100002109 c


Trench location plan

1:500@A4 2485JE 2

mAOD

topsoil101

deposit102

deposit103

buried topsoil104

105

pit106

natural107

S N24

feature109

tree-rootholes

pit106

Trench 1; plan

Trench 1; section AA

A

A

tree-rootholes

105

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

N

SCALE@A4DRAWN BY PROJECT NO. FIGURE NO.


0 5m

0 2m


Trench 1; plan and section

1:50 and 1:20 2485JE 3

BB

gully303

304

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

N

SCALE@A4DRAWN BY PROJECT NO. FIGURE NO.


0 5m

0 1m


Trench 3; plan and section

1:50 and 1:20 2485JE 4

mAOD

WE

304

gully303

23

Trench 3; section BB

Trench 3; plan

land to the rear of 1-6 park ane cranford hounslow … · excavated later bronze age field systems...

Documents