NHER 64842 (Monument record) - Roman, medieval to post-medieval, and undated features

September 2015. Geophysical Survey.
Magnetometer survey of proposed development site.
The responses of most obvious archaeological interest were a series of apparently interconnected north-north-west to south-south-east and east-north-east to west-south-west aligned positive linear anomalies that appeared to define a rectilinear field or enclosure and a series of apparently contemporary field boundaries to the east and south. Thanks to cartographic research undertaken in 2018 as part of a desk-based assessment of land to the north-west (S1) it is now known that the enclosure corresponds with a rectangular field shown on a 1726 map of Gayton (S2). It is clear from this and subsequent maps that the northern side of this enclosure is fossilised in the northern boundary of the site, its north-west corner corresponding with the pronounced kink at TF 7258 1917. The various positive anomalies that appeared to be contemporary with the main enclosure also probably coincide with boundaries on the 1726 map. It is likely that some of the east-north-east to west-south-west aligned earthwork features recorded in the field to the east also correspond with boundaries shown on this map (see NHER 35473). Subsequent maps document the gradual loss of many of the boundaries present in the early 18th century. Of those that the correlate with geophysical anomalies only one was still associated with an extant feature by the time the Gayton tithe map was produced in 1842 (S3) - a north-north-west to south-south-east aligned boundary parallel to the eastern edge of the field.
A number of weaker and more fragmentary linear anomalies in the south-western part of the site are of a more uncertain nature, particularly as it is noted that the pattern of some is potentially more suggestive of a system of field drains than archaeologically-significant remains. The linear anomalies in this part of the site also included a small number that are on markedly different alignments to the others.
Other responses of note include a sub-circular anomaly at the southern edge of the site that may represent some form of ring-ditch, although a natural origin is also possible.
It is noted that there were broad areas of positive/negative magnetic disturbance across much of the site which may well have obscured the responses of any discrete archaeological features present. A number of isolated dipolar responses identified were most likely caused by modern magnetic debris in the topsoil, although it is possible that the stronger anomalies were associated with archaeological features.
See report (S4) for further details.
P. Watkins (HES), 7 April 2021.

December 2015. Trial Trenching.
Evaluation of proposed development site (Trenches 4-14).
The eleven trenches excavated were primarily placed to target the previously identified geophysical anomalies. Numerous linear and discrete features were exposed, although unfortunately dating evidence was generally scarce and as a result these remains are mostly undated.
As expected, the various linear anomalies that appeared to represent a broadly contemporary group of field boundaries were all found to be associated with reasonably substantial ditches. Dating evidence was recovered came from the ditches that appear to have formed the western and southern sides of the large field or enclosure that took up much of the northern half the site, plus a potentially contempory boundary to the south. These produced two (presumably residual) Saxon pottery sherds and five medieval sherds. It should be noted that the southern ditch may continue the line of a similarly-aligned bank that is one of several potentially medieval earthworks that survive in the grassed paddocks to the west (NHER 35473). A deposit observed beneath the subsoil to the north of the excavated ditch could represent the surviving traces of an associated bank, particularly as it appears to correspond with an extensive band of magnetic disturbance identified by the geophysical survey that runs parallel to the ditch. An east-north-east to south-south-west aligned ditch adjacent to the western enclosure ditch may represent the continuation of a feature associated with another earthwork bank recorded in the adjacent paddocks. This ditch was truncated by two other linear features, one of which produced a brick of medieval date. Although limited, the dating evidence recovered is consistent with the suggestion that both the boundary ditches in this field and the earthwork features to the west were medieval in date. It also seems likely that the ditched boundaries at this site had once also been associated with similar earthwork banks that have been largely lost due to recent agricultural practices.
As noted above, a map of 1726 reproduced in (S1) suggests that boundaries associated with many of these features had persisted well into the post-medieval period. It is also potentially of interest that an enclosure map of 1813 (S5) marks this area simply as 'Old Inclosed Land'.
Additional ditches revealed by the trial trenching lay primarily to the west and south of the enclosure, with a number likely to correspond with fragmentary linear anomalies identified by the geophysical survey. These features were undated.
Although a number of scattered pits and possible post-holes were also identified these were mostly undated – the single exception being a probable pit that produced a sherd of medieval pottery.
Samples taken from the fills of the potentially medieval ditches produced little in the way of charred plant remains, which is unusual for a site of this period and indicates it was probably not particular close to an area of habitation. This is also suggested by limited nature of the find assemblage recovered.
The small number of features that could be tentatively identified as potentially associated with an earlier phase of activity included a series of parallel narrow linear features in the central part of the site. These had steep sides and flat bases, suggesting that they were drainage or cultivation features rather than regular ditches (several corresponded with linear geophysical anomalies that had been suggested as possible drainage features). Although similarly-aligned to the adjacent potentially medieval enclosure, the dating evidence from these features consisted of a single Early Iron Age pottery sherd and four Roman sherds (which represented the entirety of the prehistoric and Roman material recovered).
A trench placed across the circular geophysical anomaly at the southern end of the site demonstrated that this was not associated with archaeologically-significant remains.
Unstratified finds were limited to a small number of medieval pottery sherds, with metal object notably absent.
See report (S6) for further details.
P. Watkins (HES), 8 April 2021. Amended 14 September 2025.