NHER 62674 (Monument record) - Early Roman trapezoidal enclosure and other, prehistoric to post-medieval features

February-March 2014. Geophysical Survey.
Magnetometer survey of large proposed development area to west of Queen Elizabeth Way and north of Sandy Lane.
This survey identified a number of anomalies that are likely to represent archaeologically significant sub-surface remains. The most notable of these were a series of linear anomalies in the northernmost part of the field that appear to represent at least one rectilinear enclosure. Additional, smaller enclosures are suggested by fragmentary anomalies to the east and a number of discrete magnetic anomalies within the main enclosures may represent associated features such as pits. Other linear anomalies in this field are also likely to represent field boundaries. These include an extensive north-to-south aligned feature running virtually the length of the field that turns through 90 degree to the west at its southern end. Interestingly the north-to-south aligned boundary appears to both deviate and have a clear interruption adjacent to the group of smaller enclosures, suggesting that these various features may have been associated with a single phase of activity. At least two additional possible field boundaries were detected in the southernmost part of the field.
A north-east to south-west band of disturbance at the eastern edge of the field corresponds with the line of a former track that once ran to the west of Castle Rising Lodge (NHER 18353) - clearly visible on the 1st Edition Ordnance Survey map. Another linear anomaly is probably a land drain and a number of others are likely to be cultivation traces.
Although much of the field was covered with small discrete magnetic anomalies it is likely that the majority were the result of variations in the underlying geology.
See report (S1) for further details.
P. Watkins (HES), 18 April 2018.

October 2014. Trial Trenching.
Evaluation of large proposed development area to west of Queen Elizabeth Way and north of Sandy Lane. This work identified a range of archaeologically significant features, a number of which clearly corresponded with anomalies detected by the preceding geophysical survey.
A small number of the discrete features are thought to have been prehistoric in date and potentially associated with activity during the Early Bronze Age, although it should be noted that dating evidence was limited. The majority of these features were clustered in the central part of the field and included a sub-circular pit with a dark, charcoal-rich fill that produced a single sherd of Early Bronze Age pottery and a large number of burnt flints. Another sherd of Early Bronze Age pottery and a number of burnt flints were also recovered from a nearby large hollow with a similarly dark fill. Three other pits and a natural feature in the vicinity also had dark, charcoal-rich fills and were therefore thought to be of potentially the same date, although finds were limited to a small numbers of worked and burnt flints. Samples taken from the fills of these features produced charcoal but little else in the way of plant macrofossils. A shallow feature towards the southern edge of the field associated with evidence for in situ burning was interpreted as potentially a hearth of Early Bronze Age date. It should be noted that similar features that were also regarded as potentially Early Bronze Age in date were identified in the field to the south (NHER 62675). The small assemblage of worked flints recovered in this field (the bulk of which was residual in later features) is mostly consistent with a Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age date but lacks diagnostic implements.
The trial trenching was able to confirm the presence of a trapezoidal enclosure in the northernmost part of the field, associated with substantial ‘V’-shaped ditches that were between 3.1m and 2.5m wide and up to 1.30m deep. The trenching also suggested that the south-western corner of the enclosure had been open, confirming the impression given by the geophysical survey. The relatively small pottery assemblage recovered from the enclosure and a number of nearby, potentially associated features appears to date exclusively to the 1st century AD. It therefore appears likely that these remains were associated with what was potentially a fairly brief period of activity in the immediate post-conquest period (i.e. during the third quarter of the first century AD). Although it is tentatively suggested that the enclosure may have been associated with the Roman military there is no direct evidence for this and it should be noted that there are now a number of sites in the country where Late Iron Age and post-conquest native settlements have been found to be associated with substantial enclosures. A north-to-south aligned ditch at the northern edge of the site and a number of pits revealed in trenches to the east and south of the main enclosure are likely to have also been related to this 1st-century AD phase of activity. All of the pits had dark, charcoal rich fills and one produced an assemblage of smithing slag (further fragments of which were also recovered from a nearby ditch). One elongated, shallow pit displayed evidence of in situ burning but as it produced no slag its function remains unclear.
Samples taken from the features of probable Late Iron Age/Roman date produced only small plant macrofossil assemblages that were most likely derived from scattered refuse or domestic hearth waste. A small amount of metal-working debris was also noted, providing further evidence for smithing in the vicinity. Other finds of note included a possible spindle whorl or loomweight fragment, part of a probable metal-working crucible and a Late Iron Age brooch.
There was little evidence for subsequent activity on the site, with later features limited to a large probable quarry pit and an east-to-west aligned ditch, both of which were of likely post-medieval date.
Strangely, none of the trenches placed to investigate the more extensive linear geophysical anomalies revealed any evidence for corresponding sub-surface remains.
See report (S2) for further details.
P. Watkins (HES), 18 April 2018.