13 Roman Way, Thetford, Norfolk ENF 129788
13 Roman Way, Thetford, Norfolk ENF 129788
Archaeological Monitoring Report SCCAS Report No. 2012/172
Client: John Mayes Engineers Ltd Author: Rob Brooks November/2012 © Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service
13 Roman Way, Thetford, Norfolk ENF 129788 Archaeological Monitoring Report SCCAS Report No. 2012/172 Author: Rob Brooks Contributions By: Andy Fawcett and Justine Biddle Illustrator: Gemma Adams Editor: Richenda Goffin Report Date: November/2012
HER Information Site Code:
ENF 129788
Site Name:
13 Roman Way
Report Number
2012/172
Planning Application No:
3PL/2012/0586/F
Date of Fieldwork:
25th September – 9th October, 2012
Grid Reference:
TL 8688 8479
Oasis Reference:
suffolkc1-134300
Curatorial Officer:
James Albone
Project Officer:
Rob Brooks
Client/Funding Body:
John Mayes Engineers Ltd
Client Reference:
N/A
Digital report submitted to Archaeological Data Service: http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/library/greylit
Disclaimer Any opinions expressed in this report about the need for further archaeological work are those of the Field Projects Team alone. Ultimately the need for further work will be determined by the Local Planning Authority and its Archaeological Advisors when a planning application is registered. Suffolk County Council’s archaeological contracting services cannot accept responsibility for inconvenience caused to the clients should the Planning Authority take a different view to that expressed in the report.
Prepared By:
Rob Brooks
Date:
27/11/2012
Approved By:
John Craven
Position:
Project Officer
Date:
27/11/2012
Signed:
Contents Summary Drawing Conventions 1.
Introduction
1
2.
Geology and topography
1
3.
Archaeology and historical background
2
4.
Methodology
5
5.
Results
6
5.1
Introduction
6
5.2
Trench results
6
Trenches 5 and 6
6
Trenches 8
7
6.
Finds and environmental evidence
8
6.1
Introduction
8
6.2
Pottery
8
Prehistoric pottery
8
6.3
Worked flint
8
6.4
Discussion of material evidence
9
7.
Discussion
10
8.
Conclusions
10
9.
Archive deposition
11
10. Acknowledgements
11
11. Bibliography
11
List of Figures Figure 1. Site location
3
Figure 2. Trench plan and sections
4
List of Tables Table 1. Finds quantities Table 2. Soil profiles
8 Appendix 4
List of Plates Plate 1. Ditches 0010 (left) and 0004, Section 1, 2m scale
List of Appendices Appendix 1.
Brief and specification
Appendix 2.
Context list
Appendix 3.
OASIS form
Appendix 4.
Soil profiles
7
Summary Archaeological monitoring of foundation trenches for an extension of a warehouse at 13 Roman Way, in Thetford, Suffolk, revealed three ditch cuts, all of which produced low levels of later prehistoric worked flint. Further struck flint pieces, as well as a single sherd of heavily abraded Late Bronze Age to Iron Age pottery, were retrieved from a subsoil layer. There were varying levels of disturbance across the site.
Drawing Conventions
Plans Limit of Excavation Features Break of Slope Features - Conjectured Natural Features Sondages/Machine Strip Intrusion/Truncation S.14
Illustrated Section Cut Number
0008
Archaeological Features
Sections Limit of Excavation Cut Modern Cut Cut - Conjectured Deposit Horizon Deposit Horizon - Conjectured Intrusion/Truncation Top of Natural Top Surface Break in Section Cut Number Deposit Number Ordnance Datum
0008 0007 18.45m OD
1.
Introduction
Eighteen square trenches for concrete pads (numbered 1-18), as well as thirteen connecting trenches, were excavated to extend an existing warehouse on its northern side, at 13 Roman Way, in Thetford, Norfolk (Fig. 1). An archaeological monitoring was required for the project in order to record any archaeological features and recover any finds that could otherwise be uncovered or destroyed by the groundworks. The work was carried out to a Brief issued by James Albone, (Norfolk County Council Historic Environment Service – Appendix 1) and to a Written Scheme of Investigation by John Craven (2012). The client, John Mayes Engineers Ltd., funded the work that was carried out between the 25th September and 9th October, 2012.
2.
Geology and topography
The site’s topography is flat with levels on site recorded at 50.1-50.2m above the Ordnance Datum. The general area gently slopes from the north to the south between the 50m and 45m Ordnance Survey contours. The recorded geology for the site consists of superficial deposits of Lowestoft Formation sand and gravel. This material overlies bedrock formations of Lewes Nodular Chalk, Seaford Chalk, Newhaven Chalk Formation and Culver Chalk (BGS, 2012). On site, the geology presented itself as mottled patches of orangey-yellow sand, with angular flints throughout.
1
3.
Archaeology and historical background
The site lies in an area of known archaeological interest, with several nearby sites being recorded on the Norfolk Historic Environment Record. Close to the site are several prehistoric sites, including two possible Bronze Age barrows (NHER 5744 and 5745), the former also being the site of a post-medieval gallows (Gallows Hill). The Scheduled Monument of Fison Way (an Iron Age and Roman religious temple site), is less than 100m to the north-west (NHER 5853, see Gregory, 1992). This site also produced Late Neolithic or Early Bronze Age cremations. The medieval town of Thetford lies c.1km to the south. Maps and photographic survey data available on the Norfolk County Council E-Map Explorer (http://www.historic-maps.norfolk.gov.uk) show the recent history of the site, which appears to have been open farmland to the north of the town during the postmedieval period, with the surrounding industrial estate having developed since the mid 20th century (as shown on the 1946 and 1988 aerial photographs). The mid 19th century tithe map shows the site as a field. The development of the industrial estate itself appears to have followed the 19th/20th field boundary layout.
2
NORFOLK
Suffolk
Essex
0
25km
0
0.5
1km
587000
586800
586600
N
285000
A
ud ley
Co ur t
Site Lodge Way
284800
an Rom
ay 's W
TL
Sewe ll Clo se
y Wa
0
tt wl e
284600
los e
Ho
rt C l Fo Hil
Anna
e len nt H Sai
Industrial Estate
y Wa
100
rd Bai
Edith Cavell Close
y Wa
200m
©Crown Copyright. All Rights Reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2012
Figure 1. Site location
3
N S.1
SW
S.1
0004
0010
NE
0001 0002 Tr.8
0003
Tr.10
Nat sand.
0008 0010
Tr.9
0004
0004
S.3 0006
Tr.15
0008
S.2
Tr.7 Tr.14
Tr.6 Tr.13
Tr.5
Tr.16
Tr.12 Tr.11
Tr.4
4 Tr.17
Tr.3 Tr.18
N
Tr.2
S.2
S
S
S.3
N
0009 0007
0009 0005
0008
0006
Tr.1 0 © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2012
Figure 2. Trench plan and sections
Section Scale 1:40
1.00m
2.00m
0
Plan Scale 1:250
10m
4.
Methodology
The groundworks were all excavated using a mechanical digger equipped with a toothed bucket. Initially the topsoil was removed by machine, with hand excavation of any remaining subsoil to reveal the natural geology. The trenches were then fully machined to depths of 0.6-1.5m below ground level. The works were monitored by the supervising archaeologist, with upcast spoil being examined for finds. Sections were cleaned down by hand and then drawn at 1:20 scale, with the trenches surveyed using a GPS working within 0.05m accuracy tolerances. Digital colour photographs were taken of features, soil stratigraphy and the site in general at a resolution of 3216 x 4288 pixels. The site was recorded using a single context continuous numbering system (Appendix 2), and it measured 1408sqm in total. No environmental bulk samples were taken due to the lack of dating evidence. Site data has been input onto an MS Access database and recorded using the Norfolk Landscape Archaeology Event Number ENF 129788. An OASIS form has been completed for the project (reference no. suffolkc1-134300, Appendix 3) and a digital copy of the report submitted for inclusion on the Archaeology Data Service database (http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/library/greylit). The site archive is to be deposited with Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service, and a copy of the digital archive retained by SCCAS.
5
5.
Results
5.1
Introduction
Across the site 0.07-0.11m of truncated topsoil was usually recorded, although in places it had already been fully stripped by the developer. In some of the trenches the topsoil overlaid subsoil 0009. Layer 0009 was up to 0.17m deep and present in Trenches 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 15. It consisted of mid to pale greyish-brown silty-sand that contained occasional flint pebbles throughout, as well as fragments of modern brick in places. In the area of Trenches 8 and 13 a more substantial subsoil deposit, 0002, was recorded in what appeared to be a natural shallow hollow (Fig. 2). This material was described as orangey-brown silty-sand (between 0.08-0.24m deep), containing occasional natural angular flints, one piece of very abraded Late Bronze Age to Iron Age pottery and five pieces of later prehistoric struck flint. Full details of the soil profiles are given in Appendix 4. Three ditches were recorded across the site, as well as two substantial modern pits in Trenches 1 and 9. In Trench 8 a large concrete block was removed, which had truncated the features in this area. All of the square trenches were excavated to 1.2-1.5m deep, whilst the connecting trenches were 0.6m deep. None of the connecting trenches revealed archaeological deposits, except the path of ditch 0006/0008 between square Trenches 5 and 6.
5.2
Trench results
Trenches 5 and 6 Ditches 0006 and 0008 Running on a south-west to north-east alignment through Trenches 5 and 6 was a ditch cut, recorded as 0006 and 0008, which was overlaid by up to 0.14m of subsoil 0009, where this layer was not truncated. The profile was shallow and apparently quite truncated, particularly at its south-west end, where it became increasingly poorly defined. The sides varied from 40-80°, and were either concave or slightly convex, whilst the base was concave. The cut was 0.38-0.54m wide x 0.17m deep. Fill 0005 was present in cut 0006 and fill 0007 was recorded in cut 0008, both consisted of pale yellowish-grey-brown silty-sand and occasional small stones. Two finds were retrieved;
6
a thin flint flake from fill 0005 and a broken flint flake from fill 0007, both of which were later prehistoric.
Trenches 8 Ditches 0004 and 0010 Two ditch cuts appeared to cross within Trench 8, overlaid by 0.08-0.24m of subsoil 0002 (Pl. 1). These had an unclear relationship and both ran on a roughly north-west to south-east alignment. Ditch 0004 was the deeper of the two cuts, with a narrow, steep sided u-shape profile with a narrow, concave base. It was 0.28m wide x 0.33m deep. In comparison, ditch 0010 had a shallow profile with concave sides and a slightly concave base. This cut was 0.5m wide x 0.16m deep. Where excavated in Section 1, the fills of both features could not be differentiated, and as a result they were given a single context number, 0003, which was pale greyish-brown silty-sand that contained low quantities of sub-angular flint pebbles, as well as one later prehistoric struck flint flake.
Plate 1. Ditches 0010 (left) and 0004, Section 1, 2m scale
7
6.
Finds and environmental evidence
Andy Fawcett
6.1
Introduction
A single fragment of pottery and a small quantity of worked flint were recovered from the monitoring. These were recorded in one subsoil layer (0002, Tr.8) and three ditch fills (0003, Tr.8, 0005, Tr.5 and 0007, Tr.6). A table of the finds by context is shown below (Table 1). Context No 0002 0003 0005 0007 Total
Pottery No 1
Pottery Wt (g) 1
1
1
Flint No 5 2 1 1 9
Flint Wt (g) 48 60 11 14 133
Table 1. Finds quantities
6.2
Pottery
Prehistoric pottery A single very small and abraded fragment of flint-tempered pottery (HMF) was recorded in the subsoil layer 0002. The sherd is not heavily tempered with flint and has quite a sandy texture; also present within the fabric are burnt out organic voids. The fragment is dated from the Late Bronze to Iron Age although the inclusion suite within the fabric suggests that it may be dated from around the Early to Middle Iron Age. Worked flint dated to the later prehistoric period was also noted in this context.
6.3
Worked flint
Identified by Justine Biddle A total of nine worked flints (133g) was recovered from the four contexts with finds. All of the flints are dated to the later prehistoric period. A summary of the assemblage by context can be seen below.
8
0002 The five pieces of worked flint from this subsoil deposit include two unpatinated squat and broken flakes with no use wear or retouch. In addition, one lightly patinated small thin flake with negative flake scars on the dorsal face also with no use wear or retouch and one unpatinated long thin flake were identified. This has two negative flake scars on the dorsal face and also exhibits retouch on one edge. It was possibly used as a scraper. An unpatinated squat flake with retouch on one edge to form a notch was also recovered.
0003 A lightly patinated squat flake with negative flake scars on the dorsal face was identified in this ditch fill. No retouch or use wear is present. One unpatinated shatter piece was also collected.
0005 An unpatinated thin flake with negative flake scars on the dorsal face was recovered from this ditch fill. It also displays limited use wear on one edge and was possibly used as a scraper.
0007 An unpatinated and broken flake was identified in the fill of ditch 0008. It has a hinge fracture and light retouch on four edges, indicating its possible reuse at a later date.
6.4
Discussion of material evidence
The finds assemblage is primarily made up of later prehistoric worked flint from the subsoil. The size and condition of the single pottery sherd suggests that it has been through several cycles of deposition. However it provides an indication that Iron Age activity took place on or around the immediate vicinity of the current site.
9
7.
Discussion
Monitoring of the groundworks has recorded the presence of scattered archaeological deposits across the site, which had been truncated in places. Although none of the features have been securely dated, it is possible that ditch cuts 0004 and 0010 are contemporary, judging by their similar alignments and identical fills. However the profiles of the cuts varied significantly. Ditch 0006/0008 may also have been contemporary with these cuts. It appears to meet them at a roughly 90° angle and does not appear on the other side of Trench 8, suggesting it terminates on encountering them. Whilst the dating of all three cuts is unclear, they do not match any ditches recorded on the Tithe map, thus indicating a pre-19th century date and they may well be associated with local later prehistoric or Roman activity. The site was clearly truncated before the excavation of the trenches in the monitoring, and this presumably relates to the original construction of the industrial estate, as well as ploughing of the area prior to this.
8.
Conclusions
The site has surviving archaeological remains, possibly dating from the later prehistoric and Roman periods, and contemporary with the nearby activity at the Fison Way site. While the nature of this occupation is unclear, the low levels of finds and features may indicate short-lived occupation or agricultural usage, as opposed to domestic settlement.
10
9.
Archive deposition
The paper, finds and digital archive will be deposited with the Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service. A further digital archive and paper copy of the report will be kept at SCCAS Bury St Edmunds as detailed below. Additional digital archive: SCCAS R:\Environmental Protection\Conservation\ Archaeology\ Archive\Norfolk\ENF 129788 13 Roman Way, Fison Way Additional digital photographic archive: SCCAS R:\Environmental Protection\ Conservation\Archaeology\Catalogues\Photos\HRA-HRZ\HRI 65-99 and HRJ 1-45
10. Acknowledgements The fieldwork was carried out by Andy Beverton, John Craven and Simon Cass and directed by Andy Beverton. Project management was undertaken by John Craven who also provided advice during the production of the report. Post-excavation management was provided by Richenda Goffin. Finds processing was undertaken by Jonathan van Jennians, and the specialist finds report was produced by Andy Fawcett, with additional specialist advice provided by Justine Biddle. The report illustrations were created by Gemma Adams and the report was edited by Richenda Goffin.
11. Bibliography BGS, 2012, Information obtained from http://www.bgs.ac.uk/products/digitalmaps/ and reproduced with the permission of the British Geological Survey ©NERC. All rights Reserved. Craven, J., 2012, 13 Roman Way, Fison Way Industrial Estate, Thetford, Archaeological Monitoring, Written Scheme of Investigation and Risk Assessment, Bury St Edmunds: SCCAS unpublished document Gregory, T., 1992, Excavations in Thetford 1980-82, Fison Way, East Anglian Archaeology 53
11
THE BRIEF The Archaeological Contractor should confirm that the Monitoring of Works Under Archaeological Supervision and Control will be undertaken in accordance with the following: 1. Provision will be made for monitoring the development, including, where appropriate, the following:• all areas of below-ground disturbance, including excavations, foundation trenches, service trenches, drains and soakaways. • above-ground remains when the development affects a building of historic importance • pipeline and cable trenches. 2. Monitoring will be undertaken at the level indicated i.e. occasional visit, regular visit or constant attendance. 3. Where appropriate, topsoil or spoil will be scanned by metal-detector before and during its removal. 4. All archaeological contexts and artefacts exposed, examined or excavated will be fully recorded on appropriate context, finds and sample sheets, on plans and sections and by photographic record. 5. Provision will be made for an appropriate level of analysis, including identification of artefacts, specialist reports if appropriate, production of archive and report, donation of finds to an appropriate museum, transfer and storage of artefacts and archive in an acceptable form to an appropriate museum, conservation and inclusion of the results of the project in the County Historic Environment Record. 6. Indicate that any areas of environmental potential will be sampled, as advised by the environmental specialist. 7. The results will be presented in a report, the nature of which should be commensurate with the findings. 8. The report should include appropriate scale plans showing the locations of all features and finds, and detailed plans and sections where necessary. 9. The report should include comprehensive details of all finds. 10. Three hard copies and a PDF copy on CD of the Report should be supplied to the Historic Environment Service for the attention of the Senior Archaeologist (Planning) within eight weeks of the completion of the fieldwork on the understanding that this will become a public document after an appropriate period of time (generally not exceeding six months). Two hard copies and the PDF file will be deposited with the Norfolk Historic Environment Record, and the third hard copy will be forwarded to the Local Planning Authority. 11. At the start of work (immediately before fieldwork commences) an OASIS online record http://ads.ac.uk/project/oasis/ must be initiated and key fields completed on Details, Location and Creators forms. When the project is completed, all parts of the OASIS online form must be completed for submission to the Norfolk Historic Environment Record. This will include an uploaded .pdf version of the entire report Hard copies of the report must still be provided as specified 12. A copy of the OASIS form must be included in the final report 13. Hard copies of the report must also be provided, as specified below. 14. All works will be carried out in full accordance with the appropriate sections of Gurney, D., 2003, ‘Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England’, as adopted by the Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers for the East of England Region and published as
East Anglian Archaeology Occasional Paper 14. This is available as a PDF file on the web at www.eaareports.org.uk. Archaeological Contractors should note that the Standards document stipulates basic methodological standards. It is considered axiomatic that all contractors will strive to achieve the highest possible qualitative standards, with the application of the most advanced and appropriate techniques possible within a context of continuous improvement aimed at maximising the recovery of archaeological data and contributing to the development of a greater understanding of Norfolk’s historic environment. Monitoring officers will seek and expect clear evidence of commitment to the historic resource of Norfolk, with specifications being drawn up within a context of added value. 15. The Archaeological Contractor will contact the HER Officer of the Historic Environment Service in advance of work starting to obtain a HER number for the site or, if a number is already given on the Brief, to ensure that it is still applicable. 16. The Archaeological Contractor will give the Historic Environment Service not less than two weeks’ written notice of the commencement of the work so that arrangements for monitoring the project can be made. THE MONITORING OF WORKS UNDER ARCHAEOLOGICAL SUPERVISION AND CONTROL This means that you will need to commission an archaeological contractor to ensure that an archaeologist is present during certain phases of the development to record any features exposed or any archaeological finds. This does not mean that the development programme will be stopped or delayed by the archaeologist, who will work alongside other contractors on site to ensure that any necessary archaeological records are made. In the unlikely event of the discovery of unanticipated remains of very great importance, discussions will take place on how these might be preserved or recorded. WHAT YOU NEED TO DO You should forward a copy of this Brief to one or more Archaeological Contractors, and discuss with them the timing and costs. Your appointed contractor should be asked to confirm in writing to the Historic Environment Service that this brief will be adhered to. The Historic Environment Service does not see Contractors' costings, nor do we give advice on costs. You may wish to obtain a number of quotations or to employ the services of an archaeological consultant. Details of archaeological contractors based in Norfolk and beyond may be found in the Institute for Archaeologists Yearbook & Directory, available from the I.F.A., University of Reading, 2 Earley Gate, PO Box 239, Reading RG6 6AU. Tel: 0118 931 6446. Fax: 0118 931 6448. Email: [email protected]. Website: www.archaeologists.net.
FOR FURTHER HELP, INFORMATION AND ADVICE CONTACT James Albone Planning Archaeologist Norfolk Historic Environment Service Union House,Gressenhall Dereham,Norfolk NR20 4DR Tel: 01362 869279 Email: [email protected] Norfolk Historic Environment Service is responsible for safeguarding the County's archaeological heritage. The Historic Environment Service is consulted by Planning Authorities and provides advice on archaeological work that may be required as a result of development proposals.
Appendix 2.
Context list
Context No Feature No Grid Sq. Feature Type Layer
0001
Description
Length Width Depth Small Finds Cuts
-Layer of topsoil remaining after the removal of scrub. The layer is a dark greyish-brown silty-sand that contained rare inclusions of angular flint pebbles. The soil has a soft and friable nature. Modern metal and brick were identified within the layer.
Cut by
Over
--
0.18m
0002, NAT., 0009
--
--
0.24m
0003
--
0.84
0.33m
--
0.28
--
0.54
Under
Finds Sample No
No
0001
Yes
No
0004, 0010
0002
Yes
No
0.33m
NAT.
0003
No
No
0.17m
0006
0009
Yes
No
Surface finds have been assigned to this context. Modern topsoil layer. Layer
0002
An orangey-brown silty-sand subsoil was identified in the section of trench 8. The context was soft and friable and contained occasional inclusions of unsorted, angular flints (diameter: 0.01 to 0.04m). Several pieces of flint debitage were recovered from this layer over the area of ditch 0010. This subsoil differs to subsoil 0009 in colour and matrix. It seems likely that this subsoil is surviving in a shallow hollow, this accounts for its larger than average thickness also.
0003
0004
Ditch Fill
The fill of ditches 0004 and 0010 was a pale greyishbrown silty-sand of a soft and friable nature that contained rare quantities of sub-angular flint pebbles. The context is likely to be comprised of two separate fills for 0004 and 0010 but no difference or boundary between the two could be identified. The fill contained two pieces of scrappy flint debitage that look to be Iron Age. Fill of ditches 0004 and 0010.
0004
0004
Ditch Cut
A narrow ditch feature was seen in the NW and SE section of trench 8. The ditch profile was a narrow, steep sided u-shape. The breaks of slope were not apparent but the ditch had moderately straight sides and a smooth yet abrupt break of base that lead to a narrow, concave base. Narrow ditch/gully feature that could be part of a boundary system. The ditch is undated but contained struck flint.
0005
0006
Ditch Fill
The fill of ditch 0006 is a pale yellowish-grey-brown silty-sand of a soft and friable nature. The fill had fairly clear horizons and contained occasional angular and sub-angular flint pebbles as well as a flake of struck flint. Pale silty-sand fill of ditch that is likely derivative of slumped topsoil.
Group No Phase Spotdate
Context No Feature No Grid Sq. Feature Type 0006
0006
Ditch Cut
Description
Length Width Depth Small Finds Cuts
A linear planned ditch running NE-SW across trench 5 (also recorded as 0008 in trench 6).
--
0.54
--
Cut by
Over
Under
Finds Sample
0.17m
NAT.
0005
No
No
0.38
0.17m
0008
0009
Yes
No
--
0.38
0.17m
NAT.
0007
No
No
--
--
0.17m
0005, 0007
0001
No
No
--
0.5m
0.16m
NAT.
0003
No
No
--
--
--
0001, 0004, 0006, 0008, 0010
No
No
The ditch has a shallow concave profile with average breaks of slope, shallow concave sides and a smooth break of base leading to a very shallow concave base. The base of the ditch rises towards the western end of trench 5 causing it to peter out and indicating that a fair degree of truncation has occurred. Ditch feature running NE-SW across trenches 5 and 6. Probably the remains of a boundary ditch. 0007
0008
Ditch Fill
The fill of ditch 0008 is a pale yellowish-grey-brown silty-sand of a soft and friable nature. The fill had fairly clear horizons and contained occasional angular and sub-angular flint pebbles. Fill of ditch 0008, this fill is also recorded as 0005 in ditch 0006 at trench 5.
0008
0008
Ditch Cut
A portion of a linear planned ditch ran NE-SW across the northern end of trench 6. The ditch had a shallow dish-shaped section with shallow breaks of slope and concave and straight sides at is north-western and south-eastern sides respectively. The base of the ditch had smooth breaks and narrow concave form. This ditch is likely to be a boundary ditch and is undoubtedly the same feature as the ditch (0006) seen in trench 5.
Layer
0009
A mid to pale greyish-brown silty-sand subsoil was identified in trenches 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9. The subsoil contained rare inclusions of angular and sub-angular flint pebbles spread evenly throughout. Fragments of modern brick were observed from this layer in trench 15. Subsoil layer occurring across the majority of the site.
0010
0010
Ditch Cut
This shallow ditch was originally recorded as part of 0004 until trench 8 was extended southwards and identified it as a separate feature. The ditch has a shallow concave profile with slightly steep breaks of slope, concave sides and a shallow concave base with abrupt breaks. The ditch is filled with the same context as 0004 as no cut lines could be identified. Shallow remains of a -probably- truncated ditch. Relationship with ditch 0004 is unclear.
NAT.
The undisturbed natural was a moderately fine orangey-yellow sand with moderate inclusions of angular flints (diameter: ~0.03m) that were generally spread evenly throughout but were also slightly localised in patches. Natural geology.
Group No Phase Spotdate
Appendix 3.
OASIS form
OASIS ID: suffolkc1-134300 Project details Project name
13 Roman Way, Fison's Way Industrial Estate, Thetford
Short description of Archaeological monitoring of foundation trenches for an extension of a the project warehouse at 13 Roman Way, in Thetford, Suffolk, revealed three ditch cuts, all of which produced low levels of later prehistoric worked flint. Further struck flint pieces, as well as a single sherd of heavily abraded Late Bronze Age to Iron Age pottery, were retrieved from a subsoil layer. There were varying levels of disturbance across the site. Project dates
Start: 25-09-2012 End: 09-10-2012
Previous/future work
No / No
Any associated project reference codes
ENF 129788 - Sitecode
Any associated project reference codes
3PL/2012/0586/F - Planning Application No.
Any associated project reference codes
2012/172 - Contracting Unit No.
Type of project
Recording project
Site status
Area of Archaeological Importance (AAI)
Current Land use
Other 13 - Waste ground
Monument type
DITCH Uncertain
Significant Finds
POT Late Prehistoric
Significant Finds
LITHIC IMPLEMENTS Late Prehistoric
Investigation type
''Watching Brief''
Prompt
Direction from Local Planning Authority - PPS
Project location Country
England
Site location
NORFOLK BRECKLAND THETFORD ENF 129788, 13 Roman Way Monitoring, Fison Way Industrial Estate
Postcode
IP24 1XB
Study area
658.00 Square metres
Site coordinates
TL 8688 8479 52 0 52 25 43 N 000 44 56 E Point
Height OD / Depth
Min: 49.80m Max: 50.00m
Project creators Name of Organisation
Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service
Project brief originator
Local Authority Archaeologist and/or Planning Authority/advisory body
Project design originator
James Albone
Project director/manager
John Craven
Project supervisor
A Beverton
Type of sponsor/funding body
Architect on behalf of client
Name of sponsor/funding body
Architectural Services Anglia Ltd
Project archives Physical Archive recipient
Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service
Physical Archive ID ENF 129788 Physical Contents
''Ceramics'',''Worked stone/lithics''
Digital Archive recipient
Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service
Digital Archive ID
ENF 129788
Digital Contents
''Ceramics'',''Worked stone/lithics'',''other''
Digital Media available
''Database'',''Images raster / digital photography'',''Survey'',''Text''
Paper Archive recipient
Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service
Paper Archive ID
ENF 129788
Paper Contents
''Ceramics'',''Worked stone/lithics'',''other''
Paper Media available
''Context sheet'',''Plan'',''Report'',''Section'',''Survey ''
Project bibliography 1 Publication type
Grey literature (unpublished document/manuscript)
Title
13 Roman Way, Thetford, Norfolk, ENF 129788, Archaeological Monitoring Report
Author(s)/Editor(s)
Brooks, R.
Other bibliographic SCCAS Report No. 2012/172 details Date
2012
Issuer or publisher
SCCAS
Place of issue or publication
Bury St Edmunds
Description
A4, comb bound, white card covers, in colour, with four appendices. Also available as a pdf.
Entered by
Rob Brooks ([email protected])
Entered on
23 November 2012
OASIS:
Please e-mail English Heritage for OASIS help and advice © ADS 1996-2012 Created by Jo Gilham and Jen Mitcham, email Last modified Wednesday 9 May 2012 Cite only: http://www.oasis.ac.uk/form/print.cfm?ID=138148 for this page
Appendix 4. Trench number 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Soil profiles
Description 0.22m of subsoil 0009 above natural sand 0.18m of topsoil 0001 above natural sand 0.11m of topsoil, above 0.17m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.04m of topsoil, above 0.08m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.06-0.14m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.08-0.14m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.1m of topsoil 0001, above 0.08-0.24m of subsoil 0002, above natural sand 0.1m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.1m of topsoil 0001, above 0.09m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.09m of topsoil 0001, above 0.14m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.08m of topsoil 0001, above 0.17m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.09m of topsoil 0001, above 0.16m of subsoil 0002, above natural sand 0.07m of topsoil 0001, above 0.17m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.1m of topsoil 0001, above 0.19m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.07m of topsoil 0001, above 0.19m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.11m of topsoil 0001, above 0.12m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand
Table 2. Soil profiles
Archaeological services Field Projects Team Delivering a full range of archaeological services
•
Desk-based assessments and advice
•
Site investigation
•
Outreach and educational resources
•
Historic Building Recording
•
Environmental processing
•
Finds analysis and photography
•
Graphics design and illustration
Contact:
Rhodri Gardner Tel: 01473 265879 Fax: 01473 216864 [email protected] www.suffolk.gov.uk/Environment/Archaeology/
Archaeological Monitoring Report SCCAS Report No. 2012/172
Client: John Mayes Engineers Ltd Author: Rob Brooks November/2012 © Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service
13 Roman Way, Thetford, Norfolk ENF 129788 Archaeological Monitoring Report SCCAS Report No. 2012/172 Author: Rob Brooks Contributions By: Andy Fawcett and Justine Biddle Illustrator: Gemma Adams Editor: Richenda Goffin Report Date: November/2012
HER Information Site Code:
ENF 129788
Site Name:
13 Roman Way
Report Number
2012/172
Planning Application No:
3PL/2012/0586/F
Date of Fieldwork:
25th September – 9th October, 2012
Grid Reference:
TL 8688 8479
Oasis Reference:
suffolkc1-134300
Curatorial Officer:
James Albone
Project Officer:
Rob Brooks
Client/Funding Body:
John Mayes Engineers Ltd
Client Reference:
N/A
Digital report submitted to Archaeological Data Service: http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/library/greylit
Disclaimer Any opinions expressed in this report about the need for further archaeological work are those of the Field Projects Team alone. Ultimately the need for further work will be determined by the Local Planning Authority and its Archaeological Advisors when a planning application is registered. Suffolk County Council’s archaeological contracting services cannot accept responsibility for inconvenience caused to the clients should the Planning Authority take a different view to that expressed in the report.
Prepared By:
Rob Brooks
Date:
27/11/2012
Approved By:
John Craven
Position:
Project Officer
Date:
27/11/2012
Signed:
Contents Summary Drawing Conventions 1.
Introduction
1
2.
Geology and topography
1
3.
Archaeology and historical background
2
4.
Methodology
5
5.
Results
6
5.1
Introduction
6
5.2
Trench results
6
Trenches 5 and 6
6
Trenches 8
7
6.
Finds and environmental evidence
8
6.1
Introduction
8
6.2
Pottery
8
Prehistoric pottery
8
6.3
Worked flint
8
6.4
Discussion of material evidence
9
7.
Discussion
10
8.
Conclusions
10
9.
Archive deposition
11
10. Acknowledgements
11
11. Bibliography
11
List of Figures Figure 1. Site location
3
Figure 2. Trench plan and sections
4
List of Tables Table 1. Finds quantities Table 2. Soil profiles
8 Appendix 4
List of Plates Plate 1. Ditches 0010 (left) and 0004, Section 1, 2m scale
List of Appendices Appendix 1.
Brief and specification
Appendix 2.
Context list
Appendix 3.
OASIS form
Appendix 4.
Soil profiles
7
Summary Archaeological monitoring of foundation trenches for an extension of a warehouse at 13 Roman Way, in Thetford, Suffolk, revealed three ditch cuts, all of which produced low levels of later prehistoric worked flint. Further struck flint pieces, as well as a single sherd of heavily abraded Late Bronze Age to Iron Age pottery, were retrieved from a subsoil layer. There were varying levels of disturbance across the site.
Drawing Conventions
Plans Limit of Excavation Features Break of Slope Features - Conjectured Natural Features Sondages/Machine Strip Intrusion/Truncation S.14
Illustrated Section Cut Number
0008
Archaeological Features
Sections Limit of Excavation Cut Modern Cut Cut - Conjectured Deposit Horizon Deposit Horizon - Conjectured Intrusion/Truncation Top of Natural Top Surface Break in Section Cut Number Deposit Number Ordnance Datum
0008 0007 18.45m OD
1.
Introduction
Eighteen square trenches for concrete pads (numbered 1-18), as well as thirteen connecting trenches, were excavated to extend an existing warehouse on its northern side, at 13 Roman Way, in Thetford, Norfolk (Fig. 1). An archaeological monitoring was required for the project in order to record any archaeological features and recover any finds that could otherwise be uncovered or destroyed by the groundworks. The work was carried out to a Brief issued by James Albone, (Norfolk County Council Historic Environment Service – Appendix 1) and to a Written Scheme of Investigation by John Craven (2012). The client, John Mayes Engineers Ltd., funded the work that was carried out between the 25th September and 9th October, 2012.
2.
Geology and topography
The site’s topography is flat with levels on site recorded at 50.1-50.2m above the Ordnance Datum. The general area gently slopes from the north to the south between the 50m and 45m Ordnance Survey contours. The recorded geology for the site consists of superficial deposits of Lowestoft Formation sand and gravel. This material overlies bedrock formations of Lewes Nodular Chalk, Seaford Chalk, Newhaven Chalk Formation and Culver Chalk (BGS, 2012). On site, the geology presented itself as mottled patches of orangey-yellow sand, with angular flints throughout.
1
3.
Archaeology and historical background
The site lies in an area of known archaeological interest, with several nearby sites being recorded on the Norfolk Historic Environment Record. Close to the site are several prehistoric sites, including two possible Bronze Age barrows (NHER 5744 and 5745), the former also being the site of a post-medieval gallows (Gallows Hill). The Scheduled Monument of Fison Way (an Iron Age and Roman religious temple site), is less than 100m to the north-west (NHER 5853, see Gregory, 1992). This site also produced Late Neolithic or Early Bronze Age cremations. The medieval town of Thetford lies c.1km to the south. Maps and photographic survey data available on the Norfolk County Council E-Map Explorer (http://www.historic-maps.norfolk.gov.uk) show the recent history of the site, which appears to have been open farmland to the north of the town during the postmedieval period, with the surrounding industrial estate having developed since the mid 20th century (as shown on the 1946 and 1988 aerial photographs). The mid 19th century tithe map shows the site as a field. The development of the industrial estate itself appears to have followed the 19th/20th field boundary layout.
2
NORFOLK
Suffolk
Essex
0
25km
0
0.5
1km
587000
586800
586600
N
285000
A
ud ley
Co ur t
Site Lodge Way
284800
an Rom
ay 's W
TL
Sewe ll Clo se
y Wa
0
tt wl e
284600
los e
Ho
rt C l Fo Hil
Anna
e len nt H Sai
Industrial Estate
y Wa
100
rd Bai
Edith Cavell Close
y Wa
200m
©Crown Copyright. All Rights Reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2012
Figure 1. Site location
3
N S.1
SW
S.1
0004
0010
NE
0001 0002 Tr.8
0003
Tr.10
Nat sand.
0008 0010
Tr.9
0004
0004
S.3 0006
Tr.15
0008
S.2
Tr.7 Tr.14
Tr.6 Tr.13
Tr.5
Tr.16
Tr.12 Tr.11
Tr.4
4 Tr.17
Tr.3 Tr.18
N
Tr.2
S.2
S
S
S.3
N
0009 0007
0009 0005
0008
0006
Tr.1 0 © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2012
Figure 2. Trench plan and sections
Section Scale 1:40
1.00m
2.00m
0
Plan Scale 1:250
10m
4.
Methodology
The groundworks were all excavated using a mechanical digger equipped with a toothed bucket. Initially the topsoil was removed by machine, with hand excavation of any remaining subsoil to reveal the natural geology. The trenches were then fully machined to depths of 0.6-1.5m below ground level. The works were monitored by the supervising archaeologist, with upcast spoil being examined for finds. Sections were cleaned down by hand and then drawn at 1:20 scale, with the trenches surveyed using a GPS working within 0.05m accuracy tolerances. Digital colour photographs were taken of features, soil stratigraphy and the site in general at a resolution of 3216 x 4288 pixels. The site was recorded using a single context continuous numbering system (Appendix 2), and it measured 1408sqm in total. No environmental bulk samples were taken due to the lack of dating evidence. Site data has been input onto an MS Access database and recorded using the Norfolk Landscape Archaeology Event Number ENF 129788. An OASIS form has been completed for the project (reference no. suffolkc1-134300, Appendix 3) and a digital copy of the report submitted for inclusion on the Archaeology Data Service database (http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/library/greylit). The site archive is to be deposited with Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service, and a copy of the digital archive retained by SCCAS.
5
5.
Results
5.1
Introduction
Across the site 0.07-0.11m of truncated topsoil was usually recorded, although in places it had already been fully stripped by the developer. In some of the trenches the topsoil overlaid subsoil 0009. Layer 0009 was up to 0.17m deep and present in Trenches 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 15. It consisted of mid to pale greyish-brown silty-sand that contained occasional flint pebbles throughout, as well as fragments of modern brick in places. In the area of Trenches 8 and 13 a more substantial subsoil deposit, 0002, was recorded in what appeared to be a natural shallow hollow (Fig. 2). This material was described as orangey-brown silty-sand (between 0.08-0.24m deep), containing occasional natural angular flints, one piece of very abraded Late Bronze Age to Iron Age pottery and five pieces of later prehistoric struck flint. Full details of the soil profiles are given in Appendix 4. Three ditches were recorded across the site, as well as two substantial modern pits in Trenches 1 and 9. In Trench 8 a large concrete block was removed, which had truncated the features in this area. All of the square trenches were excavated to 1.2-1.5m deep, whilst the connecting trenches were 0.6m deep. None of the connecting trenches revealed archaeological deposits, except the path of ditch 0006/0008 between square Trenches 5 and 6.
5.2
Trench results
Trenches 5 and 6 Ditches 0006 and 0008 Running on a south-west to north-east alignment through Trenches 5 and 6 was a ditch cut, recorded as 0006 and 0008, which was overlaid by up to 0.14m of subsoil 0009, where this layer was not truncated. The profile was shallow and apparently quite truncated, particularly at its south-west end, where it became increasingly poorly defined. The sides varied from 40-80°, and were either concave or slightly convex, whilst the base was concave. The cut was 0.38-0.54m wide x 0.17m deep. Fill 0005 was present in cut 0006 and fill 0007 was recorded in cut 0008, both consisted of pale yellowish-grey-brown silty-sand and occasional small stones. Two finds were retrieved;
6
a thin flint flake from fill 0005 and a broken flint flake from fill 0007, both of which were later prehistoric.
Trenches 8 Ditches 0004 and 0010 Two ditch cuts appeared to cross within Trench 8, overlaid by 0.08-0.24m of subsoil 0002 (Pl. 1). These had an unclear relationship and both ran on a roughly north-west to south-east alignment. Ditch 0004 was the deeper of the two cuts, with a narrow, steep sided u-shape profile with a narrow, concave base. It was 0.28m wide x 0.33m deep. In comparison, ditch 0010 had a shallow profile with concave sides and a slightly concave base. This cut was 0.5m wide x 0.16m deep. Where excavated in Section 1, the fills of both features could not be differentiated, and as a result they were given a single context number, 0003, which was pale greyish-brown silty-sand that contained low quantities of sub-angular flint pebbles, as well as one later prehistoric struck flint flake.
Plate 1. Ditches 0010 (left) and 0004, Section 1, 2m scale
7
6.
Finds and environmental evidence
Andy Fawcett
6.1
Introduction
A single fragment of pottery and a small quantity of worked flint were recovered from the monitoring. These were recorded in one subsoil layer (0002, Tr.8) and three ditch fills (0003, Tr.8, 0005, Tr.5 and 0007, Tr.6). A table of the finds by context is shown below (Table 1). Context No 0002 0003 0005 0007 Total
Pottery No 1
Pottery Wt (g) 1
1
1
Flint No 5 2 1 1 9
Flint Wt (g) 48 60 11 14 133
Table 1. Finds quantities
6.2
Pottery
Prehistoric pottery A single very small and abraded fragment of flint-tempered pottery (HMF) was recorded in the subsoil layer 0002. The sherd is not heavily tempered with flint and has quite a sandy texture; also present within the fabric are burnt out organic voids. The fragment is dated from the Late Bronze to Iron Age although the inclusion suite within the fabric suggests that it may be dated from around the Early to Middle Iron Age. Worked flint dated to the later prehistoric period was also noted in this context.
6.3
Worked flint
Identified by Justine Biddle A total of nine worked flints (133g) was recovered from the four contexts with finds. All of the flints are dated to the later prehistoric period. A summary of the assemblage by context can be seen below.
8
0002 The five pieces of worked flint from this subsoil deposit include two unpatinated squat and broken flakes with no use wear or retouch. In addition, one lightly patinated small thin flake with negative flake scars on the dorsal face also with no use wear or retouch and one unpatinated long thin flake were identified. This has two negative flake scars on the dorsal face and also exhibits retouch on one edge. It was possibly used as a scraper. An unpatinated squat flake with retouch on one edge to form a notch was also recovered.
0003 A lightly patinated squat flake with negative flake scars on the dorsal face was identified in this ditch fill. No retouch or use wear is present. One unpatinated shatter piece was also collected.
0005 An unpatinated thin flake with negative flake scars on the dorsal face was recovered from this ditch fill. It also displays limited use wear on one edge and was possibly used as a scraper.
0007 An unpatinated and broken flake was identified in the fill of ditch 0008. It has a hinge fracture and light retouch on four edges, indicating its possible reuse at a later date.
6.4
Discussion of material evidence
The finds assemblage is primarily made up of later prehistoric worked flint from the subsoil. The size and condition of the single pottery sherd suggests that it has been through several cycles of deposition. However it provides an indication that Iron Age activity took place on or around the immediate vicinity of the current site.
9
7.
Discussion
Monitoring of the groundworks has recorded the presence of scattered archaeological deposits across the site, which had been truncated in places. Although none of the features have been securely dated, it is possible that ditch cuts 0004 and 0010 are contemporary, judging by their similar alignments and identical fills. However the profiles of the cuts varied significantly. Ditch 0006/0008 may also have been contemporary with these cuts. It appears to meet them at a roughly 90° angle and does not appear on the other side of Trench 8, suggesting it terminates on encountering them. Whilst the dating of all three cuts is unclear, they do not match any ditches recorded on the Tithe map, thus indicating a pre-19th century date and they may well be associated with local later prehistoric or Roman activity. The site was clearly truncated before the excavation of the trenches in the monitoring, and this presumably relates to the original construction of the industrial estate, as well as ploughing of the area prior to this.
8.
Conclusions
The site has surviving archaeological remains, possibly dating from the later prehistoric and Roman periods, and contemporary with the nearby activity at the Fison Way site. While the nature of this occupation is unclear, the low levels of finds and features may indicate short-lived occupation or agricultural usage, as opposed to domestic settlement.
10
9.
Archive deposition
The paper, finds and digital archive will be deposited with the Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service. A further digital archive and paper copy of the report will be kept at SCCAS Bury St Edmunds as detailed below. Additional digital archive: SCCAS R:\Environmental Protection\Conservation\ Archaeology\ Archive\Norfolk\ENF 129788 13 Roman Way, Fison Way Additional digital photographic archive: SCCAS R:\Environmental Protection\ Conservation\Archaeology\Catalogues\Photos\HRA-HRZ\HRI 65-99 and HRJ 1-45
10. Acknowledgements The fieldwork was carried out by Andy Beverton, John Craven and Simon Cass and directed by Andy Beverton. Project management was undertaken by John Craven who also provided advice during the production of the report. Post-excavation management was provided by Richenda Goffin. Finds processing was undertaken by Jonathan van Jennians, and the specialist finds report was produced by Andy Fawcett, with additional specialist advice provided by Justine Biddle. The report illustrations were created by Gemma Adams and the report was edited by Richenda Goffin.
11. Bibliography BGS, 2012, Information obtained from http://www.bgs.ac.uk/products/digitalmaps/ and reproduced with the permission of the British Geological Survey ©NERC. All rights Reserved. Craven, J., 2012, 13 Roman Way, Fison Way Industrial Estate, Thetford, Archaeological Monitoring, Written Scheme of Investigation and Risk Assessment, Bury St Edmunds: SCCAS unpublished document Gregory, T., 1992, Excavations in Thetford 1980-82, Fison Way, East Anglian Archaeology 53
11
THE BRIEF The Archaeological Contractor should confirm that the Monitoring of Works Under Archaeological Supervision and Control will be undertaken in accordance with the following: 1. Provision will be made for monitoring the development, including, where appropriate, the following:• all areas of below-ground disturbance, including excavations, foundation trenches, service trenches, drains and soakaways. • above-ground remains when the development affects a building of historic importance • pipeline and cable trenches. 2. Monitoring will be undertaken at the level indicated i.e. occasional visit, regular visit or constant attendance. 3. Where appropriate, topsoil or spoil will be scanned by metal-detector before and during its removal. 4. All archaeological contexts and artefacts exposed, examined or excavated will be fully recorded on appropriate context, finds and sample sheets, on plans and sections and by photographic record. 5. Provision will be made for an appropriate level of analysis, including identification of artefacts, specialist reports if appropriate, production of archive and report, donation of finds to an appropriate museum, transfer and storage of artefacts and archive in an acceptable form to an appropriate museum, conservation and inclusion of the results of the project in the County Historic Environment Record. 6. Indicate that any areas of environmental potential will be sampled, as advised by the environmental specialist. 7. The results will be presented in a report, the nature of which should be commensurate with the findings. 8. The report should include appropriate scale plans showing the locations of all features and finds, and detailed plans and sections where necessary. 9. The report should include comprehensive details of all finds. 10. Three hard copies and a PDF copy on CD of the Report should be supplied to the Historic Environment Service for the attention of the Senior Archaeologist (Planning) within eight weeks of the completion of the fieldwork on the understanding that this will become a public document after an appropriate period of time (generally not exceeding six months). Two hard copies and the PDF file will be deposited with the Norfolk Historic Environment Record, and the third hard copy will be forwarded to the Local Planning Authority. 11. At the start of work (immediately before fieldwork commences) an OASIS online record http://ads.ac.uk/project/oasis/ must be initiated and key fields completed on Details, Location and Creators forms. When the project is completed, all parts of the OASIS online form must be completed for submission to the Norfolk Historic Environment Record. This will include an uploaded .pdf version of the entire report Hard copies of the report must still be provided as specified 12. A copy of the OASIS form must be included in the final report 13. Hard copies of the report must also be provided, as specified below. 14. All works will be carried out in full accordance with the appropriate sections of Gurney, D., 2003, ‘Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England’, as adopted by the Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers for the East of England Region and published as
East Anglian Archaeology Occasional Paper 14. This is available as a PDF file on the web at www.eaareports.org.uk. Archaeological Contractors should note that the Standards document stipulates basic methodological standards. It is considered axiomatic that all contractors will strive to achieve the highest possible qualitative standards, with the application of the most advanced and appropriate techniques possible within a context of continuous improvement aimed at maximising the recovery of archaeological data and contributing to the development of a greater understanding of Norfolk’s historic environment. Monitoring officers will seek and expect clear evidence of commitment to the historic resource of Norfolk, with specifications being drawn up within a context of added value. 15. The Archaeological Contractor will contact the HER Officer of the Historic Environment Service in advance of work starting to obtain a HER number for the site or, if a number is already given on the Brief, to ensure that it is still applicable. 16. The Archaeological Contractor will give the Historic Environment Service not less than two weeks’ written notice of the commencement of the work so that arrangements for monitoring the project can be made. THE MONITORING OF WORKS UNDER ARCHAEOLOGICAL SUPERVISION AND CONTROL This means that you will need to commission an archaeological contractor to ensure that an archaeologist is present during certain phases of the development to record any features exposed or any archaeological finds. This does not mean that the development programme will be stopped or delayed by the archaeologist, who will work alongside other contractors on site to ensure that any necessary archaeological records are made. In the unlikely event of the discovery of unanticipated remains of very great importance, discussions will take place on how these might be preserved or recorded. WHAT YOU NEED TO DO You should forward a copy of this Brief to one or more Archaeological Contractors, and discuss with them the timing and costs. Your appointed contractor should be asked to confirm in writing to the Historic Environment Service that this brief will be adhered to. The Historic Environment Service does not see Contractors' costings, nor do we give advice on costs. You may wish to obtain a number of quotations or to employ the services of an archaeological consultant. Details of archaeological contractors based in Norfolk and beyond may be found in the Institute for Archaeologists Yearbook & Directory, available from the I.F.A., University of Reading, 2 Earley Gate, PO Box 239, Reading RG6 6AU. Tel: 0118 931 6446. Fax: 0118 931 6448. Email: [email protected]. Website: www.archaeologists.net.
FOR FURTHER HELP, INFORMATION AND ADVICE CONTACT James Albone Planning Archaeologist Norfolk Historic Environment Service Union House,Gressenhall Dereham,Norfolk NR20 4DR Tel: 01362 869279 Email: [email protected] Norfolk Historic Environment Service is responsible for safeguarding the County's archaeological heritage. The Historic Environment Service is consulted by Planning Authorities and provides advice on archaeological work that may be required as a result of development proposals.
Appendix 2.
Context list
Context No Feature No Grid Sq. Feature Type Layer
0001
Description
Length Width Depth Small Finds Cuts
-Layer of topsoil remaining after the removal of scrub. The layer is a dark greyish-brown silty-sand that contained rare inclusions of angular flint pebbles. The soil has a soft and friable nature. Modern metal and brick were identified within the layer.
Cut by
Over
--
0.18m
0002, NAT., 0009
--
--
0.24m
0003
--
0.84
0.33m
--
0.28
--
0.54
Under
Finds Sample No
No
0001
Yes
No
0004, 0010
0002
Yes
No
0.33m
NAT.
0003
No
No
0.17m
0006
0009
Yes
No
Surface finds have been assigned to this context. Modern topsoil layer. Layer
0002
An orangey-brown silty-sand subsoil was identified in the section of trench 8. The context was soft and friable and contained occasional inclusions of unsorted, angular flints (diameter: 0.01 to 0.04m). Several pieces of flint debitage were recovered from this layer over the area of ditch 0010. This subsoil differs to subsoil 0009 in colour and matrix. It seems likely that this subsoil is surviving in a shallow hollow, this accounts for its larger than average thickness also.
0003
0004
Ditch Fill
The fill of ditches 0004 and 0010 was a pale greyishbrown silty-sand of a soft and friable nature that contained rare quantities of sub-angular flint pebbles. The context is likely to be comprised of two separate fills for 0004 and 0010 but no difference or boundary between the two could be identified. The fill contained two pieces of scrappy flint debitage that look to be Iron Age. Fill of ditches 0004 and 0010.
0004
0004
Ditch Cut
A narrow ditch feature was seen in the NW and SE section of trench 8. The ditch profile was a narrow, steep sided u-shape. The breaks of slope were not apparent but the ditch had moderately straight sides and a smooth yet abrupt break of base that lead to a narrow, concave base. Narrow ditch/gully feature that could be part of a boundary system. The ditch is undated but contained struck flint.
0005
0006
Ditch Fill
The fill of ditch 0006 is a pale yellowish-grey-brown silty-sand of a soft and friable nature. The fill had fairly clear horizons and contained occasional angular and sub-angular flint pebbles as well as a flake of struck flint. Pale silty-sand fill of ditch that is likely derivative of slumped topsoil.
Group No Phase Spotdate
Context No Feature No Grid Sq. Feature Type 0006
0006
Ditch Cut
Description
Length Width Depth Small Finds Cuts
A linear planned ditch running NE-SW across trench 5 (also recorded as 0008 in trench 6).
--
0.54
--
Cut by
Over
Under
Finds Sample
0.17m
NAT.
0005
No
No
0.38
0.17m
0008
0009
Yes
No
--
0.38
0.17m
NAT.
0007
No
No
--
--
0.17m
0005, 0007
0001
No
No
--
0.5m
0.16m
NAT.
0003
No
No
--
--
--
0001, 0004, 0006, 0008, 0010
No
No
The ditch has a shallow concave profile with average breaks of slope, shallow concave sides and a smooth break of base leading to a very shallow concave base. The base of the ditch rises towards the western end of trench 5 causing it to peter out and indicating that a fair degree of truncation has occurred. Ditch feature running NE-SW across trenches 5 and 6. Probably the remains of a boundary ditch. 0007
0008
Ditch Fill
The fill of ditch 0008 is a pale yellowish-grey-brown silty-sand of a soft and friable nature. The fill had fairly clear horizons and contained occasional angular and sub-angular flint pebbles. Fill of ditch 0008, this fill is also recorded as 0005 in ditch 0006 at trench 5.
0008
0008
Ditch Cut
A portion of a linear planned ditch ran NE-SW across the northern end of trench 6. The ditch had a shallow dish-shaped section with shallow breaks of slope and concave and straight sides at is north-western and south-eastern sides respectively. The base of the ditch had smooth breaks and narrow concave form. This ditch is likely to be a boundary ditch and is undoubtedly the same feature as the ditch (0006) seen in trench 5.
Layer
0009
A mid to pale greyish-brown silty-sand subsoil was identified in trenches 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9. The subsoil contained rare inclusions of angular and sub-angular flint pebbles spread evenly throughout. Fragments of modern brick were observed from this layer in trench 15. Subsoil layer occurring across the majority of the site.
0010
0010
Ditch Cut
This shallow ditch was originally recorded as part of 0004 until trench 8 was extended southwards and identified it as a separate feature. The ditch has a shallow concave profile with slightly steep breaks of slope, concave sides and a shallow concave base with abrupt breaks. The ditch is filled with the same context as 0004 as no cut lines could be identified. Shallow remains of a -probably- truncated ditch. Relationship with ditch 0004 is unclear.
NAT.
The undisturbed natural was a moderately fine orangey-yellow sand with moderate inclusions of angular flints (diameter: ~0.03m) that were generally spread evenly throughout but were also slightly localised in patches. Natural geology.
Group No Phase Spotdate
Appendix 3.
OASIS form
OASIS ID: suffolkc1-134300 Project details Project name
13 Roman Way, Fison's Way Industrial Estate, Thetford
Short description of Archaeological monitoring of foundation trenches for an extension of a the project warehouse at 13 Roman Way, in Thetford, Suffolk, revealed three ditch cuts, all of which produced low levels of later prehistoric worked flint. Further struck flint pieces, as well as a single sherd of heavily abraded Late Bronze Age to Iron Age pottery, were retrieved from a subsoil layer. There were varying levels of disturbance across the site. Project dates
Start: 25-09-2012 End: 09-10-2012
Previous/future work
No / No
Any associated project reference codes
ENF 129788 - Sitecode
Any associated project reference codes
3PL/2012/0586/F - Planning Application No.
Any associated project reference codes
2012/172 - Contracting Unit No.
Type of project
Recording project
Site status
Area of Archaeological Importance (AAI)
Current Land use
Other 13 - Waste ground
Monument type
DITCH Uncertain
Significant Finds
POT Late Prehistoric
Significant Finds
LITHIC IMPLEMENTS Late Prehistoric
Investigation type
''Watching Brief''
Prompt
Direction from Local Planning Authority - PPS
Project location Country
England
Site location
NORFOLK BRECKLAND THETFORD ENF 129788, 13 Roman Way Monitoring, Fison Way Industrial Estate
Postcode
IP24 1XB
Study area
658.00 Square metres
Site coordinates
TL 8688 8479 52 0 52 25 43 N 000 44 56 E Point
Height OD / Depth
Min: 49.80m Max: 50.00m
Project creators Name of Organisation
Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service
Project brief originator
Local Authority Archaeologist and/or Planning Authority/advisory body
Project design originator
James Albone
Project director/manager
John Craven
Project supervisor
A Beverton
Type of sponsor/funding body
Architect on behalf of client
Name of sponsor/funding body
Architectural Services Anglia Ltd
Project archives Physical Archive recipient
Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service
Physical Archive ID ENF 129788 Physical Contents
''Ceramics'',''Worked stone/lithics''
Digital Archive recipient
Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service
Digital Archive ID
ENF 129788
Digital Contents
''Ceramics'',''Worked stone/lithics'',''other''
Digital Media available
''Database'',''Images raster / digital photography'',''Survey'',''Text''
Paper Archive recipient
Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service
Paper Archive ID
ENF 129788
Paper Contents
''Ceramics'',''Worked stone/lithics'',''other''
Paper Media available
''Context sheet'',''Plan'',''Report'',''Section'',''Survey ''
Project bibliography 1 Publication type
Grey literature (unpublished document/manuscript)
Title
13 Roman Way, Thetford, Norfolk, ENF 129788, Archaeological Monitoring Report
Author(s)/Editor(s)
Brooks, R.
Other bibliographic SCCAS Report No. 2012/172 details Date
2012
Issuer or publisher
SCCAS
Place of issue or publication
Bury St Edmunds
Description
A4, comb bound, white card covers, in colour, with four appendices. Also available as a pdf.
Entered by
Rob Brooks ([email protected])
Entered on
23 November 2012
OASIS:
Please e-mail English Heritage for OASIS help and advice © ADS 1996-2012 Created by Jo Gilham and Jen Mitcham, email Last modified Wednesday 9 May 2012 Cite only: http://www.oasis.ac.uk/form/print.cfm?ID=138148 for this page
Appendix 4. Trench number 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Soil profiles
Description 0.22m of subsoil 0009 above natural sand 0.18m of topsoil 0001 above natural sand 0.11m of topsoil, above 0.17m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.04m of topsoil, above 0.08m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.06-0.14m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.08-0.14m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.1m of topsoil 0001, above 0.08-0.24m of subsoil 0002, above natural sand 0.1m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.1m of topsoil 0001, above 0.09m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.09m of topsoil 0001, above 0.14m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.08m of topsoil 0001, above 0.17m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.09m of topsoil 0001, above 0.16m of subsoil 0002, above natural sand 0.07m of topsoil 0001, above 0.17m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.1m of topsoil 0001, above 0.19m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.07m of topsoil 0001, above 0.19m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand 0.11m of topsoil 0001, above 0.12m of subsoil 0009, above natural sand
Table 2. Soil profiles
Archaeological services Field Projects Team Delivering a full range of archaeological services
•
Desk-based assessments and advice
•
Site investigation
•
Outreach and educational resources
•
Historic Building Recording
•
Environmental processing
•
Finds analysis and photography
•
Graphics design and illustration
Contact:
Rhodri Gardner Tel: 01473 265879 Fax: 01473 216864 [email protected] www.suffolk.gov.uk/Environment/Archaeology/
