Plot A Bath Business Park Peasedown St John BaNES Archaeological Evaluation for Hartwell plc and Cubex Land (Wellow Vale) Ltd CA Project: 3904 CA Report: 12350 November 2012 Plot A Bath Business Park Peasedown St John BaNES Archaeological Evaluation CA Project: 3904 CA Report: 12350 prepared by date checked by date approved by Steven Sheldon, Project Supervisor 19 November 2012 Simon Cox, Head of Fieldwork 27 November 2012 Simon Cox, Head of Fieldwork signed date 27 November 2012 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 Cirencester Building 11 Kemble Enterprise Park Kemble, Cirencester Gloucestershire, GL7 6BQ t. 01285 771022 f. 01285 771033 Milton Keynes Unit 4 Cromwell Business Centre Howard Way, Newport Pagnell MK16 9QS t. 01908 218320 e. [email protected] Andover Office 49 Basepoint Business Centre Caxton Close, Andover Hampshire, SP10 3FG t. 01264 326549 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation CONTENTS SUMMARY........................................................................................................................ 2 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 3 The site ................................................................................................................ 3 Archaeological background.................................................................................. 4 Archaeological objectives .................................................................................... 4 Methodology ........................................................................................................ 5 2. RESULTS (FIGS 2-5) .......................................................................................... 6 3. DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................... 8 4. CA PROJECT TEAM ........................................................................................... 11 5. REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 11 APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS..................................................................... 13 APPENDIX B: GEOARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT.............................................. 15 APPENDIX C: LEVELS OF PRINCIPAL DEPOSITS ...................................................... 17 APPENDIX D: RADIOCARBON DATING........................................................................ 18 APPENDIX E: OASIS REPORT FORM ........................................................................... 20 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Fig. 1 Site location plan (1:25,000) Fig. 2 Trench location plan showing archaeological features, previous archaeological works and geophysical survey results (1:4000 & 1:500) Fig. 3 Trenches 28 and 29, showing graves/probable graves (1:200) Fig. 4 Sections and photographs Fig. 5 Extract from 1843 tithe map showing current site (1:8000 approx.) 1 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation SUMMARY Project Name: Plot A, Bath Business Park Location: Peasedown St John, BaNES NGR: ST 71210 57215 Type: Evaluation Date: 6-9 November 2012 Location of Archive: To be deposited with Roman Baths Museum, Bath Accession Number: BATRM 2012.43 Site Code: PBA 12 An archaeological evaluation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology in November 2012 on land known as Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES. Three trenches were excavated. The evaluation has identified a number of archaeological features within the proposed development area; these features were shown to survive at a depth of between 0.44m and 0.52m below the modern ground surface. A total of 20 probable graves, forming part of a cemetery identified by an earlier archaeological evaluation, were identified in the north-eastern half of Trench 28 and the north-western half of Trench 29. A single leg bone was recovered from one of the identified graves for the purposes of radiocarbon dating. Two undated ditches, previously thought to form part of the cemetery boundary, were also identified during the evaluation. However, a grave was shown to cut the northernmost of these ditches suggesting that they may relate to a separate phase of activity on the site. A small number of undated pits were revealed in the central and eastern parts of the site. However, the exact function of these pits and their relationship to the other archaeological features identified remains unclear. 2 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 In November 2012 Cotswold Archaeology (CA) carried out an archaeological evaluation for Hartwell plc and Cubex Land (Wellow Vale) Ltd on land known as Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES (centred on NGR: 71210 57215; Fig. 1). The evaluation was undertaken to assist in the design of a proposed car dealership that will form part of the ongoing development of Bath Business Park, on land now known as Plot A. The business park development has been the subject of numerous previous archaeological investigations, and is subject to a Section 106 Agreement with Bath and North East Somerset Council (BaNESC) which requires the preservation in situ of sensitive archaeological remains over a large part of Plot A. The evaluation was designed to provide further information with which to define the extent, depth and nature of the sensitive archaeological remains, and to enable the design of a development within Plot A which will preserve the most important archaeological remains in situ. The evaluation ran concurrently with a geotechnical trial pit investigation, which was monitored archaeologically to ensure test pit locations were adjusted so as not impinge upon sensitive archaeological deposits, and ultimately to ensure their preservation in situ. 1.2 The evaluation was carried out in accordance with a detailed Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) produced by CA (2012) and approved by Mr Richard Sermon, Archaeological Officer BaNES Council. The fieldwork also followed the Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Field Evaluation (IfA 2009), the Management of Archaeological Projects 2 (English Heritage 1991) and the Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment (MORPHE): Project Manager’s Guide (English Heritage 2006). The site 1.3 The proposed development area encloses an area of approximately 0.5ha, and comprises a single field of ungrazed rough pasture bounded to the north by the A367, to the south and west by Bath Business Park and to the east by arable fields. The site lies on a gentle south-easterly facing slope and lies at approximately 142m AOD. 1.4 The underlying bedrock geology of the area is mapped as Ooidal Limestone from the Inferior Oolite Group of the Jurassic era (BGS 2012). The overlying soils are from the Sherborne association consisting of a Brown Redzina (Soil Survey of 3 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation England and Wales, 1983). The natural substrate, comprising light yellow grey clay with occasional limestone outcrops, was identified in Trenches 27 and 28 and across the north-western half of Trench 29. Limestone bedrock was identified across the south-eastern half of Trench 29. Archaeological background 1.5 An archaeological evaluation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeological Trust between April and June 2000 at the Bath Business Park site (CAT 2000a). Twentysix trenches were excavated, of which four (Trenches 1, 6, 7 and 11) were within the current proposed area of development. The evaluation revealed a number of undated pits of likely prehistoric date, a possible colluvial deposit measuring up to 0.29m thick present across the whole of the current area of investigation, a cemetery of possible Roman or later date containing a minimum of sixteen graves and a ditch conceivably forming part of the cemetery boundary. However, the nature of the relationship between the colluvial deposit and the grave cuts remained unclear. 1.6 Subsequent excavations were undertaken over the rest of the Bath Business Park site (excluding Plot A) by Cotswold Archaeology between 2004-5, revealing Middle Bronze Age burials, a possible Middle Iron Age ditch, a late Roman enclosure and a Middle Saxon D-shaped enclosure, as well as 11th to 13th-century activity. Further burials to the south of Plot A were undated, but thought likely to represent a continuation of the cemetery revealed in the 2000 evaluation, and likely to relate to Late Saxon and early medieval settlement to the north at Eckweek (Rowe and Alexander 2010). 1.7 A geophysical and metal detecting survey of the Plot A site undertaken in 2012 (AS 2012) as part of the current phase of evaluation revealed two parallel linear anomalies that may relate to former ditches and several discrete anomalies that may indicate pit–like features, a number of which appear to correlate with unexcavated grave cuts revealed during the previous evaluation. Archaeological objectives 1.8 The objectives of the evaluation are to provide additional information about the archaeological resource within the site, in particular the extent and date of the cemetery, its stratigraphic relationship with the colluvial layer previously identified, and to ascertain whether the ditches revealed in the former evaluation and subsequent geophysical survey are related to the cemetery limits, or represent a 4 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation separate phase of land use. In accordance with the Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Field Evaluation (IfA 2009), the evaluation has been designed to be minimally intrusive and minimally destructive to archaeological remains. The information gathered will enable Bath and North-East Somerset Council to identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset, consider the impact of the proposed development upon it, and to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the development proposal, in line with the National Planning Policy Framework (DCLG 2012). Methodology 1.9 The fieldwork comprised the excavation of three archaeological evaluation trenches and the monitoring of six geotechnical trial pits, in the locations shown on the attached plan (Fig. 2). Trenches 27 and 29 measured 50m in length and 1.8m in width, Trench 28 measured 40m in length and 1.8m in width, trial pits 1-6 measured 2m in length and 0.6m in width. Trial Pit 4 was moved from its original position to avoid archaeological features identified in Trench 28. The trenches and trial pits were set out on OS National Grid (NGR) co-ordinates using Leica GPS and surveyed in accordance with CA Technical Manual 4 Survey Manual (2012). 1.10 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). 1.11 Following machining, grave 2927 (previously identified during the 2000 evaluation as grave 110) was partially re-opened and one leg bone was recovered for radiocarbon dating in order to assist in understanding the date of the cemetery. This was conducted under the appropriate burial licence, following the provisions of the Coroners Unit in the Ministry of Justice. 1.12 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, a single monolith sample was recovered from Trench 29 by Keith Wilkinson of ARCA. All artefacts recovered were 5 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation processed in accordance with Technical Manual 3 Treatment of Finds Immediately after Excavation (1995). 1.13 The archive from the evaluation is currently held by CA at their offices in Kemble. It will be deposited with Roman Baths Museum, Bath under accession number BATRM 2012.43. A summary of information from this project, set out within Appendix E, will be entered onto the OASIS online database of archaeological projects in Britain. 2. RESULTS (FIGS 2-5) 2.1 This section provides an overview of the evaluation results; detailed summaries of the recorded contexts are to be found in Appendix A. A Geoarchaeological Assessment can be found in Appendix B, and details of the relative heights of the principal deposits and features expressed as metres Above Ordnance Datum (m AOD) appear in Appendix C. 2.2 The natural geological substrate, comprising light yellow-grey clay with occasional limestone outcrops, was identified in Trenches 27 and 28 and across the northwestern half of Trench 29; limestone bedrock was identified across the southeastern half of Trench 29. The natural substrate was overlain by silt clay subsoil, ranging from c. 0.21m to c. 0.28m in thickness, which was in turn overlain by modern topsoil, ranging from c. 0.2m to c. 0.3m in thickness. All identified archaeological features were sealed by subsoil and cut the natural substrate. 2.3 Trench 27 (Figs 2 & 4) Narrow, shallow ditch 2704 was identified towards the south-eastern end of the trench. It was aligned north-east/south-west, had an irregular profile and contained a single undated fill, 2703, which was similar to the overlying subsoil. It was not identified by the geophysical survey. However, it is possible that it represents a continuation of ditches 2825 and 2934 identified in Trenches 28 and 29 respectively, and may be a continuation of the linear north-east/south-west aligned anomaly depicted by the geophysics. 2.4 Trench 28 (Figs 2, 3 & 4) Narrow, north-east/south-west aligned, ditch 2825 was identified towards the southwestern end of the trench. It was not identified by the geophysical survey however; it 6 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation is possible that it represents a continuation of ditches 2704 and 2934 identified in Trenches 27 and 29 respectively and may be a continuation of the linear northeast/south-west aligned anomaly depicted by the geophysics . It was not excavated within Trench 28 and no finds were recovered from the surface of the feature within this trench. 2.5 Towards the centre of the trench, pit/ditch terminal 2821 and irregular pit 2819 were partially exposed. Both features contained single undated fills which were similar to the overlying subsoil. Neither feature was identified by the geophysical survey. 2.6 At the north-western end of the trench a group of seven probable graves were identified. These features contained a light yellow grey clay fill which appeared to represent redeposited natural substrate. All, with exception of possible grave 2817, appeared to be aligned approximately north-east/south-west. Possible grave 2805 was partially excavated and found to contain poorly preserved human bone. The remaining features remained unexcavated and no human bone was recovered from the surface of these features within this trench. The graves were sealed by between 0.21m and 0.28m of subsoil, which was in turn overlain by between 0.2m and 0.3m of topsoil. 2.7 Trench 29 (Figs 2, 3 & 4) Pit 2936 was partially exposed towards the centre of the trench. It had an irregular profile and contained a single undated fill, 2937, which was similar to the overlying subsoil. To the north-west, north-east/south-west aligned ditch 2934 was identified. It had a shallow U-shaped profile and contained a single undated fill. It corresponds closely to a linear anomaly depicted by the geophysical survey, possibly forming part of the cemetery boundary, and may represent a continuation of ditches 2704 and 2825 seen in Trenches 27 and 28 respectively. 2.8 Immediately to the north-west, irregular pit 2932 was identified. It had an irregular profile and contained a single, undated fill, 2933, which was similar to the overlying subsoil. It corresponds with a pit-like anomaly depicted by the geophysical survey. 2.9 In the north-western third of the trench a group of thirteen probable graves were identified. These features were aligned approximately north-east/south-west and contained a light yellow grey clay fill which appeared to represent redeposited natural substrate. Grave 2927, previously identified in the 2000 evaluation as Grave 7 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation 110, was excavated to a depth of approximately 0.08m partially revealing in situ and articulated skeletal remains 2928. A single leg bone was recovered from this grave and submitted for radiocarbon dating, the results revealing a mid 7th to mid 8thcentury date (Appendix D). No further potential graves were excavated within the trench however; probable human bone was observed on the surface of possible graves 2917 and 2903. 2.10 North-east/south-west aligned ditch 2930 was identified towards the north-western end of the trench. It was partially excavated and found to contain a single undated fill, 2931, which was cut by probable grave 2919. Ditch 2930 correlated closely with a linear anomaly identified by the preceding geophysical survey and may represent part of the postulated cemetery boundary. 2.11 Archaeological features were identified at a depth of between 0.44m and 0.52m below the present ground surface during the current evaluation. The possible colluvial deposit, identified by the previous archaeological evaluation in 2000 (CAT 2000a), was investigated on site and is considered to be more likely a ploughsoil. A monolith sample was taken from an exposed section above grave 2917 in Trench 29 and this suggests that the grave cuts do not survive within this ploughsoil (Appendix B). 3. DISCUSSION General 3.1 The evaluation has identified a number of archaeological features, comprising pits, ditches and graves, within the proposed development area. The stratigraphic sequence identified during the course of the evaluation indicated that these features survive at a depth of between 0.44m and 0.52m below the modern ground surface. 3.2 The majority of archaeological features identified were located in the north-eastern half of Trench 28 and the north-western half of Trench 29. Where linear archaeological features were encountered there was a good correlation with the results of the preceding geophysical survey. A more variable correlation between the geophysics and the graves identified by the current evaluation is apparent. However, the similarity of the grave fill to the underlying natural substrate may account for this discrepancy. The geophysical survey also identified the location of Trench 1 and 8 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation showed it to be slightly further south than previously suggested by the 2000 evaluation report. The position of Trench 1 on Figs 2 and 3 has therefore been adjusted to a ‘best fit’ based on the findings of the 2012 evaluation trenching and geophysical results. Middle Saxon 3.3 A total of 20 probable graves were identified during the current evaluation. These were located in two distinct groups; at the north-eastern end of Trench 28 and at the north-western end of Trench 29. All were aligned approximately north-east/southwest, with the exception of probable grave 2817, identified in Trench 28, which was aligned north-west/south-east. After their exposure, no further excavation of the graves ensued, with the exceptions of grave 2805, located in Trench 28, which was investigated to confirm the presence of human remains and grave 2927 (grave 110 of the 2000 evaluation), located in Trench 29, where parts of the lower legs were exposed to enable the recovery of a single leg bone for radiocarbon dating. The results of the radiocarbon dating, detailed within Appendix D suggest a Middle Saxon date, broadly contemporary with the D-shaped enclosure revealed during earlier excavations at the business park to the west of the cemetery, and a couple of centuries earlier than the Late Saxon/early medieval settlement at Eckweek further to the north (Rowe and Alexander 2010). 3.4 The previous archaeological evaluation suggested that the cemetery may have been organised in two rows of graves on an approximately north-south alignment (CAT 2000a). It further suggested that, because none of the identified graves intercut, they may have been marked on the ground surface by a grave marker or mound of earth. However, the current evaluation suggests that the graves are more densely packed than previously thought and may be organised into small groups or clusters. Equally, some evidence of the graves intercutting was identified in both Trench 28 and Trench 29 suggesting that graves may not have been marked as formerly suggested. Undated 3.5 The evaluation revealed a small number of undated pits in Trenches 28 and 29. Similar features were identified by the previous archaeological evaluation (CAT 2000a) and it was suggested that they may have been prehistoric in date. The evaluation also demonstrated that at least one pit had been cut by a later grave, and therefore likely pre-dates the Middle Saxon period. Despite this, the exact date and 9 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation function of the pits identified during the current evaluation, and the nature of their relationship to the other archaeological features identified remains unclear. 3.6 Undated ditches 2704, 2825, 2930 and 2934 (located in Trenches 27, 28 and 29 respectively) confirm the presence of two parallel linear anomalies identified by the preceding geophysical survey (AS 2012). It has been previously suggested that these ditches may have formed part of the cemetery boundary. However, whilst the vast majority of the graves identified during the evaluation appeared to be located between these two ditches, the fill of ditch 2930 identified in Trench 29 was clearly cut by a probable grave, suggesting that the northernmost of these two ditches either pre-dates, or is certainly no later than, the Middle Saxon period. Depth and state of preservation 3.7 The evaluation has demonstrated that the depth of overburden above the exposed archaeological features ranges between 0.44m below the current ground level in Trench 29 to 0.52m below the current ground level in Trench 27 (see Appendix C). This is considerably deeper than suggested by the preceding archaeological evaluation (CAT 2000a) which indicated that archaeological features survived at a depth of c. 0.28m below the current ground level. On-site assessment, in conjunction with Keith Wilkinson of ARCA (Appendix B), suggests that the possible ‘colluvial deposit’ identified across Plot A by the previous archaeological evaluation in 2000 (CAT 2000a) is more likely a ploughsoil. This interpretation is supported by evidence from the 1843 Tithe Map for the area (Fig. 5) the apportionment for which indicates that the site was under arable cultivation by this date (CAT 2000b, 13). All features identified during the current evaluation, including the probable graves identified in Trenches 28 and 29, appear to be sealed by this ploughsoil. The presence of human bone recorded within the ploughsoil in the 2000 evaluation, combined with results of the Geoarchaeological assessment (Appendix B), strongly suggests that all archaeological features revealed have been subject to a degree of truncation by past ploughing of the site, although the extent of such truncation cannot be ascertained at this stage. Nevertheless, the presence of articulated human skeletal remains, with sufficient collagen survival to obtain a radiocarbon date, suggests a comparable or better state of preservation than found during earlier archaeological excavations within the business park (Rowe and Alexander 2010). In the earlier works the depth of topsoil was generally very shallow, and there was little or no ploughsoil present. In addition, attempts to obtain radiocarbon dates from human remains failed due to a lack of sufficient collagen survival. However, the 10 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation moderate depth of ploughsoil identified on the Plot A site, whether or not derived originally from colluvial build-up, may have afforded archaeological features additional protection here. 4. CA PROJECT TEAM Fieldwork was undertaken by Steven Sheldon, assisted by Anthony Beechey and Hazel O’Neill. The report was written by Steven Sheldon. The illustrations were prepared by Jon Bennett. The archive has been compiled by Steven Sheldon, and prepared for deposition by James Johnson. The project was managed for CA by Simon Cox. 5. REFERENCES AS (Archaeological Surveys) 2012 Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, Bath and North East Somerset: Magnetometer Survey Report. AS ref. 437 BGS (British Geological Survey) http://maps.bgs.ac.uk/geology 2012a Geology of viewer_google/googleviewer.html Britain Viewer Accessed 16 November 2012 BGS (British Geological Survey) 2012b The BGS Lexicon of named rock units. http://www.bgs.ac.uk/lexicon/ (accessed 7 November 2012) CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2012 Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Written Scheme of Investigation for an Archaeological Evaluation CAT (Cotswold Archaeological Trust) 2000a Land at Peasedown St. John, Bath and NorthEast Somerset: Archaeological Assessment. CAT Report 001141 CAT (Cotswold Archaeological Trust) 2000b Land at Peasedown St. John, Bath and NorthEast Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation. CAT Report 001184 DCLG (Department of Communities and Local Government) 2012 National Planning Policy Framework 11 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation Jones, A.P., Tucker, M.E. and Hart, J.K. 1999 Guidelines and recommendations. In Jones, A.P., Tucker, M.E. and Hart, J.K. (Eds.) The description and analysis of Quaternary stratigraphic field sections. Quaternary Research Association technical guide 7, London, 27-76. Munsell Color 2000 Munsell soil color charts. Munsell Color, New Windsor (NY). Rockware 2005 RockWorks v2004. http://www.rockware.com (Accessed 7 February 2006). Rowe, M. and Alexander, M. 2010 ‘Multi-Period Activity at Peasedown St John, North-East Somerset: Excavations at Bath Business Park, Wellow Lane, 2004–5’, Proc. Somerset Archaeol. Natur. Hist. Soc. 154, 51-68 Soil Survey of England and Wales, 1983, Soils of England and Wales, Sheet 5, South West England Tucker, M.E. 1982 Sedimentary rocks in the field. Wiley, Chichester. 12 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS Trench No. Context No. Type 27 27 27 2700 2701 2702 layer layer layer Fill of Context interpretation Description L (m) W (m) Topsoil Subsoil Natural Mid grey brown silt clay Mid orange brown silt clay Light yellow grey clay with frequent limestone patches >50 >50 >50 >1.8 >1.8 >1.8 Depth/ thickness (m) 0.2 0.28 >0.5 Single fill of 2704 NE/SW ditch Mid grey brown silt clay Mid orange brown silt clay Light yellow grey clay with frequent limestone patches >1.8 >1.8 >50 >50 >50 0.71 0.71 >1.8 >1.8 >1.8 0.18 0.18 0.3 0.21 >0.3 Fill of grave 2805 Skeleton in grave 2805 Grave Fill of probable grave 2807 >1.3 N/A >1.3 >0.3 0.45 N/A 0.45 >0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A Probable grave >0.3 >0.1 N/A Fill of probable grave 2809 >0.6 >0.3 N/A Probable grave >0.6 >0.3 N/A Fill of probable grave 2811 Probable grave >0.2 >0.2 >0.3 >0.3 N/A N/A Fill of probable grave 2813 >0.2 >0.4 N/A Probable grave >0.2 >0.4 N/A Fill Fill of probable grave 2815 >0.8 0.35 N/A Probable Probable grave >0.8 0.35 N/A Fill of probable grave 2817 >0.3 0.28 N/A Probable grave >0.3 0.28 N/A Fill Single fill of 2819 >0.9 0.99 0.12 Pit Irregular pit >0.9 0.99 0.12 Fill Pit/ditch Single fill of 2821 Pit/ditch terminal 1.01 1.01 0.21 0.21 sub str ate 27 27 28 28 28 2703 2704 2800 2801 2802 Fill Cut layer layer layer 2704 Fill Ditch Topsoil Subsoil Natural sub str ate 28 28 28 28 2803 2804 2805 2806 Fill Fill Cut Fill 28 2807 Cut 2805 2805 2807 Fill Fill Grave Fill Probable gra ve 28 2808 Fill 28 2809 Cut 2809 Fill Probable gra ve 28 28 2810 2811 Fill Cut 2811 Fill Probable gra ve 28 2812 Fill 28 2813 Cut 2813 Fill Probable gra ve 28 2814 Fill 28 2815 Cut 2815 gra ve 28 2816 Fill 28 2817 Cut 2817 Fill Probable gra ve 28 2818 Fill 28 2819 Cut 28 28 2820 2821 Fill Cut 2819 2821 ter min al 28 28 2822 2823 Fill Cut 2823 Fill Geological Single fill of 2823 Shallow, irregular geological feature 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.01 0.01 Single fill of 2825 NE/SW ditch Mid grey brown silt clay Mid orange brown silt clay >1.6 >1.6 >50 >50 0.68 0.68 >1.8 >1.8 N/A N/A 0.3 0.21 fea tur e 28 28 29 29 2824 2825 2900 2901 Fill Cut layer layer 2825 Fill Ditch Topsoil Subsoil 13 © Cotswold Archaeology 29 2902 Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation layer Light yellow grey clay with frequent limestone patches >50 >1.8 >0.8 Probable grave >0.7 0.38 N/A Fill of probable grave 2903 Probable grave >0.7 >0.3 0.38 0.34 N/A N/A Fill of probable grave 2905 Probable grave >0.3 >0.4 0.34 0.37 N/A N/A Fill of probable grave 2907 >0.4 0.37 N/A Probable grave >0.3 0.31 N/A Fill of probable grave 2909 Probable grave >0.3 >0.1 0.31 0.2 N/A N/A Fill of probable grave 2911 Probable grave >0.1 >0.5 0.2 0.4 N/A N/A Fill of probable grave 2913 >0.5 0.4 N/A Probable grave >0.8 0.42 N/A Fill of probable grave 2915 Probable grave >0.8 >1.5 0.42 0.65 N/A N/A Fill of probable grave 2917 Probable grave >1.5 >0.4 0.65 0.32 N/A N/A Fill of probable grave 2919 >0.4 0.32 N/A Probable grave >0.4 0.3 N/A Fill of probable grave 2921 >0.4 0.3 N/A Probable grave >0.8 0.45 N/A Fill of probable grave 2923 Probable grave >0.8 >0.3 0.45 0.32 N/A N/A Fill Fill of probable garve 2925 >0.3 0.32 N/A Grave Skeleton Fill Ditch Fill Pit Fill Ditch Fill Pit Grave Partially expoosed skeleton in 2927 Fill of grave 2927 NE/SW ditch Single fill of 2930 Irregular pit Single fill of 2932 NE/SW ditch Single fill of ditch 2934 Irregular pit >0.8 N/A >0.8 >1.8 >1.8 >0.4 >0.4 >1.8 >1.8 >0.3 0.78 N/A 0.78 1.45 1.45 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.46 >0.08 N/A >0.08 >0.1 >0.1 0.38 0.38 0.36 0.36 0.22 Fill Single fill of 2936 >0.3 1.46 0.22 Natural sub str ate 29 2903 Cut Probable gra ve 29 29 2904 2905 Fill Cut 2903 Fill Probable gra ve 29 29 2906 2907 Fill Cut 2905 Fill Probable gra ve 29 2908 Fill 29 2909 Cut 2907 Fill Probable gra ve 29 29 2910 2911 Fill Cut 2909 Fill Probable gra ve 29 29 2912 2913 Fill Cut 2911 Fill Probable gra ve 29 2914 Fill 29 2915 Cut 2913 Fill Probable gra ve 29 29 2916 2917 Fill Cut 2915 Fill Probable gra ve 29 29 2918 2919 Fill Cut 2917 Fill Probable gra ve 29 2920 Fill 29 2921 Cut 2919 Fill Probable gra ve 29 2922 Fill 29 2923 Cut 2921 Fill Probable gra ve 29 29 2924 2925 Fill Cut 2923 Fill Probable gra ve 29 2926 Fill 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 2927 2928 2929 2930 2931 2932 2933 2934 2935 2936 Cut Fill Fill Cut Fill Cut Fill Cut Fill Cut 29 2937 Fill 2925 2827 2827 2930 2933 2934 2936 14 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation APPENDIX B: GEOARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT Keith Wilkinson, ARCA Introduction A visit was made to an evaluation being conducted by Cotswold Archaeology at Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St. John, BANES on 8 November 2012. The Cotswold Archaeology archaeological evaluation was being carried out in the northwest corner of the Business Park to determine the stratigraphy overlying and depth of burials found during a previous evaluation in 2000. The purpose of the author's visit was to examine strata lying between the uppermost fill of the graves and beneath the present topsoil, and by so doing to assess its mode of genesis. Geographic and geological setting The site lies to the south of both the village of Peasedown St John and the A367 Radstock-Bath road. It is positioned on the upper reaches of a gentle (<1o) south-facing slope with an elevation of +143m OD. The British Geological Survey (BGS 2012) map the site as lying at the transition between mudstones of the Lower Fuller's Earth Member (Mid Jurassic) to the north and limestones of the Inferior Oolite Group (Mid Jurassic) in the south. Indeed the transition between the two rock units was also noted in the field within Trench 29 – the northern part of the trench resting on Fuller's Earth and the south on Inferior Oolite. Methodology Although there were three evaluation trenches open at the time of the visit, attention was focussed on Trench 29 where >10 grave cuts had been identified (two containing visible human bone). A detailed description was made using standard geological conventions (Tucker 1982, Jones et al. 1999, Munsell Color 2000), of strata in the eastern section of the trench at the point where it was cut by grave [2917] (Figs 3 & 4). The trench was then inspected to see if there was any variation in the sequence (there was none), after which a single monolith sample was collected from the previously logged location. The latter was taken in a 500x100x100mm stainless steel tin that was inserted into strata comprising the Fuller's Earth geology (2902), the upper fill (2918) of grave cut [2917], an overlying stratum previously interpreted as subsoil and/or colluvium (2901) and the basal part of the modern topsoil (2900). Results The field descriptions of the strata are reproduced in the table below: Context 2900 Depth 0.00-0.20m 2901 0.20-0.55m 2918 0.55m+ 2902 0.55m+ Description 10 YR 4/3 Brown humic silt in medium pebble, fining to fine pebble sized aggregate. Fine roots occur throughout, while rare cobble-sized sub-rounded oolitic limestone clasts also occur. Diffuse boundary to 10 YR 6/4 Light yellowish brown clay in fine pebble-granular -sized aggregates at top, but rapidly disappearing and becoming homogeneous downwards. Occasional pebble-sized patches of 10 YR 7/6 Yellow clay as granular-medium sand sized aggregates appear in the middle and towards the base of the stratum [derived from the underlying Fuller's Earth (2902)]. Diffuse boundary marked by an increase in concentration of derived Fuller's Earth particles, to: 10 YR 5/6 Yellowish brown compact clay with frequent pebble-sized patches of 10 YR 7/6 Yellow clay in granular-medium sand sized aggregates. Occasional cobble-sized human bone fragments appear towards the base of the exposed section 10 YR 7/6 Yellow compact Yellow clay in granular-medium sand sized aggregates. Interpretation Modern soil O/A horizons Ploughed subsoil (B horizon) Grave fill Fuller's Earth As previously noted this same broad sequence was noted throughout Trench 29, the only variations being: a. A slight thickening of (2901) from 0.35 at the point of sampling to c. 0.50m by the southernmost point of the trench. b. The replacement of Fuller's Earth (2902) with limestones of the Inferior Oolite Group as the geological substrate about half way along the trench. 15 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation Interpretation The strata in Trench 29 are most logically explained as a soil profile that has been truncated by ploughing. The parent material for the soil is a combination of Fuller's Earth (mudstone, i.e. a mixture of calcareous silts and clays) and Interior Oolite (limestone). When rocks of these types weather the calcareous element enters into solution and is washed into adjacent watercourses, leaving an insoluble residue. The latter is composed of ironrich clays of a distinct reddish hue. Such weathering both precedes, but is also part of the soil forming process and is likely to have been initiated following the cessation of periglacial conditions at the end of the Devensian (last cold stage) Late Glacial. Over time and as the soil continued to develop within the Fuller's Earth and Inferior Oolite, the weathered horizon will have increased in thickness. At the same time fermentation and elluviation processes taking place within the biologically active A horizon will have caused the migration of clay particles down profile to form a Bt horizon. It is in this soil profile that the graves are most likely to have been cut. The cuts will therefore have extended through the then A and B horizons and into the underlying parent material (the Fuller's Earth and Inferior Oolite). Further pedogenesis is likely to have later taken place following the infilling of the graves, during which time additional weathering of the underlying rocks will have resulted in the thickening of the B horizon, while bioturbation will have blurred the grave cuts within the A and B horizons. Two lines of evidence suggest that the soil profile has been subsequently truncated following. Firstly the present B horizon (2901) is comprised of only a poorly developed aggregate structure while it lacks any obvious illuvial horizon. Both observations suggest that the soil is relatively immature and certainly too young to have been constantly developing since the Early Medieval period. Secondly context (2901) contains particles of >2mm size that have clearly been derived (i.e. moved upwards) from the underlying Fuller's Earth. While worms regularly surface cast and thereby move particles <1.4mm upwards through a soil profile, they cannot ingest and redistribute coarser particles. The Fuller's Earth particles therefore are most likely to have been moved by mechanical rather than biological means. In all probability both the truncation event and the disturbance/re-working of the Fuller's Earth is a result of ploughing. Such cultivation will have acted to homogenise the A and B horizons and the upper fills of the graves, while it is also highly likely to have extended downwards to erode the top of the underlying bedrock. Such a process would also explain why human bone was found in the lateral equivalents of (2901) during the 2000 evaluation. The pedogenic evidence do not enable the dating of the truncation event, but it is notable that the 1843 Tithe Map apportionment for the area shows the site as being under arable cultivation. Recommendations ARCA have retained the single monolith sample taken from Trench 29. However, no laboratory works are recommended, and it is proposed that this sample will be discarded. Acknowledgements ARCA would like to thank Sarah Cobain, Simon Cox and Steve Sheldon for their help prior to and during the field visit. 16 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation APPENDIX C: LEVELS OF PRINCIPAL DEPOSITS Levels are expressed as metres below current ground level and as metres Above Ordnance Datum (AOD). Current ground level Top of archaeological deposits Top of probable grave fill Trench 27 0.00m (142.68m) 0.52m (142.16m) N/A Trench 28 0.00m (142.66m) 0.49m (142.17m) 0.49m (142.17m) Trench 29 0.00m (142.89m) 0.44m (142.45m) 0.44m (142.45m) Upper figures are depth below modern ground level; lower figures in parentheses are metres AOD. 17 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation APPENDIX D: RADIOCARBON DATING Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre Director: Professor R M Ellam Rankine Avenue, Scottish Enterprise Technology Park, East Kilbride, Glasgow G75 0QF, Scotland, UK Tel: +44 (0)1355 223332 Fax: +44 www.glasgow.ac.uk/suerc (0)1355 229898 RADIOCARBON DATING CERTIFICATE 30 November 2012 Laboratory Code SUERC-43201 (GU29075) Submitter Sarah Cobain Cotswold Archaeology Building 11 Kemble Enterprise Park Cirencester GL7 6BL Site Reference Context Reference Sample Reference Peasedown St John 2928 PBA122928 Material Bone : Human, right tibia, adolescent 13 δ C relative to VPDB δ15N relative to air C/N ratio (Molar) -21.4 ‰ 7.9 ‰ 3.5 Radiocarbon Age BP 1311 ± 29 N.B. The above 14C age is quoted in conventional years BP (before 1950 AD). The error, which is expressed at the one sigma level of confidence, includes components from the counting statistics on the sample, modern reference standards, background standards and the random machine error. The calibrated age ranges are determined using the University of Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit calibration program OxCal 4.1 (Bronk Ramsey 2009). Terrestrial samples are calibrated using the IntCal09 curve while marine samples are calibrated using the Marine09 curve. Samples with a SUERC coding are measured at the Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre AMS Facility and should be quoted as such in any reports within the scientific literature. Any questions directed to the Radiocarbon Laboratory should also quote the GU coding given in parentheses after the SUERC code. The contact details for the laboratory are email [email protected] or Telephone 01355 270136 direct line. 18 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation Conventional age and calibration age ranges calculated by :- Date :- Checked and signed off by :- Date :- The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401 The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336 Calibration Plot 19 © Cotswold Archaeology Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation APPENDIX E: OASIS REPORT FORM PROJECT DETAILS Project Name Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES Short description An archaeological evaluation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology in November 2012 on land known as Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES. Three trenches were excavated. The evaluation has identified a number of archaeological features within the proposed development area; these features were shown to survive at a depth of between 0.44m and 0.52m below the modern ground surface. A total of 20 probable graves, forming part of a cemetery identified by an earlier archaeological evaluation, were identified in the north-eastern half of Trench 28 and the north-western half of Trench 29. A single leg bone was recovered from one of the identified graves for the purposes of radiocarbon dating. Two undated ditches, previously thought to form part of the cemetery boundary were also identified during the evaluation. However, a grave was shown to cut the northernmost of these ditches suggesting that they may relate to a separate phase of activity on the site. A small number of undated pits were revealed in the central and eastern parts of the site however, the exact function of these pits and their relationship to the other archaeological features identified remains unclear. 6-9 November 2012 Field Evaluation Project dates Project type Previous work Field Evaluation CAT (Cotswold Archaeological Trust) 2000 DBA CAT (Cotswold Archaeological Trust) 2000 Geophysics, Statascan 2000 and AS (Archaeological Surveys) 2012 Future work Unknown PROJECT LOCATION Site Location Study area (M2/ha) Site co-ordinates (8 Fig Reference) PROJECT CREATORS Name of organisation Project Design (WSI) originator Project Manager Project Supervisor MONUMENT TYPE SIGNIFICANT FINDS PROJECT ARCHIVES Physical Paper Digital BIBLIOGRAPHY Grid Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES 0.5ha ST 71210 57215 Cotswold Archaeology Cotswold Archaeology Simon Cox Steven Sheldon None Human remains Intended final location of archive (museum/Accession no.) Roman Baths Museum/BATRM 2012.43 Roman Baths Museum/BATRM 2012.43 Content Human bone Context sheets, trench recording forms, section drawings, photographic registers, skeleton recording sheets Digital photographs Roman Baths Museum/BATRM 2012.43 CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2012 Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St John, BaNES: Archaeological Evaluation. CA typescript report 12350 20 N Cirencester 01285 771022 Cotswold Archaeology Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Andover 01264 326549 w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected] PROJECT TITLE Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St. John, Bath and North East Somerset FIGURE TITLE Site location plan Bath and North East Somerset 0 1km Reproduced from the 1997 Ordnance Survey Explorer map with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office c Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109 PROJECT NO. 3904 JB DRAWN BY APPROVED BY PJM DATE 16-11-2012 00 REVISION SCALE@A4 1:25,000 FIGURE NO. 1 Trench 27, section AA Trench 28, section BB topsoil 2700 W 142.5m AOD topsoil 2800 WSW 142.5m AOD E ENE SW NE ploughsoil 2801 ploughsoil 2701 2818 2703 ditch 2704 pit 2819 0 0 1m 1m Trench 28, section CC NE 142.5m AOD Skeleton 2928, showing preservation of bone SW topsoil 2800 ploughsoil 2801 probable grave 2809 probable grave 2805 probable grave 2810 Trench 29, looking south-west (scales 1m) probable grave 2813 probable grave 2817 3m 0 Trench 29, section DD NE 142m AOD topsoil 2900 ploughsoil 2901 ditch 2934 monolith 1 sample location topsoil 2900 previous evaluation trench 1 probable grave 2924 probable grave 2925 grave 2927/110 SW ploughsoil 2901 2918 probable grave 2917 probable grave 2915 probable grave 2911 probable grave 2907 probable grave 2903 ditch 2930 probable grave 2919 3m 0 Cirencester 01285 771022 Trench 29, section EE Cotswold Archaeology Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Andover 01264 326549 w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected] topsoil 2900 grave or probable ploughsoil 2901 NW 142m AOD PROJECT TITLE SE Plot A, Bath Business Park, Peasedown St. John, Bath and North East Somerset FIGURE TITLE 2933 2935 pit 2932 previous evaluation trench 2937 pit 2934 Sections and photographs pit 2936 0 1m PROJECT NO. 3904 DRAWN BY JB APPROVED BY PJM DATE 16-11-2012 REVISION 00 SCALE@A3 1:20 and 1:50 FIGURE NO. 4 N Cirencester 01285 771022 Cotswold Archaeology Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Andover 01264 326549 w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected] PROJECT TITLE site area of current evaluation Plot A, Bath Buisness park, Peasedown Bath and North East Somerset FIGURE TITLE Extract from 1843 tithe map showing current site PROJECT NO. 3904 JB DRAWN BY APPROVED BY PJM DATE 16-11-2012 REVISION 00 SCALE@A4 1:8,000 (approx.) FIGURE NO. 5
© Copyright 2024