1

Little Chalfield Lawns

Member’s Project

Rob Arkell

2

Summary

Resistance and magnetometry surveys were carried out in the grounds of Little Chalfield Manor to

look for evidence of earlier medieval buildings. The magnetometry survey revealed a portion of a

circular feature twenty metres in diameter. A trench through the feature discovered a ditch

containing bronze age pottery in the ditch fill. This suggests the feature is the remains of a ploughed

out round barrow similar to others in the vicinity. The resistivity survey did not show any linear high

resistance features which could be interpreted as walls but one pattern of low resistance was

investigated. A trench across the feature contained demolition rubble (mortar, plaster, window glass

and building stone fragments) which indicated that a building, thought to be the medieval manor

which was demolished in 1830, had stood nearby.

Background

Little or West Chalfield is one of the two manors at Chalfield recorded in Domesday, the other being

Great or East Chalfield (Fig.1). The current manor house was built in the 1830s and replaced an

earlier Tudor manor house referred to by Sir Richard Colte-Hoare (ref.2). The Tudor manor house

itself replaced or developed from an earlier medieval manor house whose stained glass is referred to

in the Tropenell Cartulary (1464-1488) (ref.3). A chapel associated with the medieval manor has

never been located. The list of incumbents ran from before 1296 to 1537 and there is no record of

the chapel in a religious context after this date. It is thought to have been demolished before 1674

(ref.4). An Inquisition Post Mortem of 1331 records a dovecote worth two shillings (Ref 5), and this is

placed near the manor house in a survey of the early 1700s. (Ref 6)

The purpose of the project is to establish whether a geophysical survey will reveal any evidence of

the earlier medieval manor house, chapel or dovecote.

©Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 917065

Fig.1 Map - Little and Great Chalfield to the north-east of Bradford on Avon

3

List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1 Map - Little and Great Chalfield to the north-east of Bradford on Avon

Figure 2 Envelope of Survey Area

Figure 3 Magnetometry in walled garden

Figure 4 Resistivity on lawns

Figure 5 Magnetometry Survey Results

Figure 6 Resistivity Survey Results

Figure 7 Local ring ditches

Figure 8 Mag. Survey feature and Trench 1

Figure 9 Res. Survey feature and Trench 2

Figure 10 Plan and Sections Trench 1

Figure 11 Trench 41 Primary

Figure 12 Trench 1 Primary west edge with upper and lower fill dividing line

Figure 13 Trench 1 extension with upper fill (contexts 1102, 1103) removed

Figure 14 Trench 2 section

Figure 15 Context 103 - Rim of Bronze Age collared urn

Figure 16 Context 103 - Bronze Age - shelly limestone temper

Figure 17 Context 103 - Bronze Age pig bones (humerus - top, tibia – below)

Figure 18 Flint scraper (spoil heap)

Figure 19 Context 102 - Medieval coarseware

Figure 20 Context 1103 – slag typical of copper smelting

Figure 21 Context 203 - patinated window glass Context 204 – mortar

Figure 22 Context 204 – mortar

Figure 23 Context 204 - Wall plaster

Figure 24 Context 204 - Whitewashed worked oolitic limestone, possible window surround

(face and back)

Figure 25 Context 204 - Roughly worked oolitic limestone

Figure 26 Context 205 - Medieval Roof Tile 13th C or later (glazed face, back and edge)

Figure 27 Context 205 - Medieval coarseware

Table 1 Recorded layer sequence for Trench 1

Table 2 Finds in Trench 1 Primary

Table 3 Finds in Trench 1 Extension

Table 4 Recorded layer sequence for Trench 2

Table 5 Finds in Trench 2

4

Geophysics 27th & 28th June 2017

©Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 917065

Fig 2: Envelope of Survey Area

Seventeen 20m x 20m grids from a possible twenty-five were surveyed where the terrain permitted

within a 100m by 100m square shown in Fig.2. The resistance survey used a TR/CIA Twin Probe

Resistance Meter and a Geoscan RM15 Resistance Meter. The magnetometry survey used a

Bartington Grad 601 Magnetometer. The area surveyed comprised lawn and mown rough grass. The

results are shown in figures 5 and 6.

Photo: Rick Buettner Photo: Rick Buettner

Fig 3: Magnetometry in walled garden Fig 4: Resistivity on lawns

5

Fig 5: Magnetometry Survey Results

6

Fig 6: Resistance Survey Results

7

Discussion of Geophysics Results

The magnetometry survey was criss-crossed by underground cables and pipes and point magnetic sources giving a halo effect. A part circular feature with a diameter of approximately 20m was identified in grid squares F and L (Fig 5). This was too large to be the dovecote and other possible interpretations were considered. The Wiltshire and Swindon Historic Environment Record shows four ring ditches within one kilometre of the survey area (Fig 7).

©Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 917065

Fig 7: Local ring ditches

MWI 73494 has a diameter of 21.7m. The larger of MWI 1928 has a diameter of 19.6m. Referring to Historic England’s website these ditches would be expected to surround a bowl or bell barrow containing burials or cremated remains (Ref 7). Copies of the magnetic survey were circulated to the County Archaeologist and to Historic England for comment. Additional input from Historic England was that the feature might be an Iron Age round house, which had been discounted because of the size. It was noted that an equine dressage ring has a 20m diameter.

The resistance survey (Fig 6) did not show any linear high resistance features typical of walls. Most low resistance patterns were thought to be artefacts of the grid layout or natural features, but a possible robbed-out wall pattern was visible in grid square K in the walled garden (Fig 8). Fragments of wall plaster had previously been found in this area.

8

Fig 8: Mag. Survey feature and Trench 1 Fig 9: Res. Survey feature and Trench 2

Excavations

It was decided that trenches to try to identify the features would be dug in the two locations where

the survey indicated there might be underground features, Trench 1 over the circular feature in grid

square F (Fig 8) and Trench 2 over a possible robbed out wall in grid square K (Fig 9).

Location 1: ST 384982,163465 Trench 1 Primary (4m x 1m)

Trench 1 Extension (1.48m x 0.5m)

Location 2: ST 385056, 163457 Trench 2 (2m x 1m)

Dates: Trench 1 August and September 2017

Trench 2 November 2017 and January 2018

Geology: Stony Brown Calcareous Soil (cornbrash), over Jurassic shelly limestone above clay.

Trench 1 was aligned to cut radially through the circular feature at 45 degrees to the survey grid.

Trench 2 was aligned east to west parallel to the survey grid.

9

Methodology

The turf was removed and placed to one side and all further material was removed by trowel. Excavation was undertaken down to a natural geological deposit. The recorded layer sequence is summarised in Tables 1 and 4.

Results

Trench 1

Fig 10: Plan and Sections Trench 1

10

Photo: Rick Buettner

Fig 11: Trench 41 Primary

Context Depth Description Interpretation

101 0 – 10cm Turf Turf

102 and 1102 10 – 41cm

Loose loamy brown

soil. Lowest level of

earthworm stone

burying effect

Topsoil changing to subsoil

103 41 – 94cm Light-brown soil with

many stones

Subsoil with limestone rubble

104 34/37 – 87cm Limestone rubble

with pale silt

Natural stratum

105 Below 87/94cm Yellow-grey clay Natural clay stratum

1103 (Extension only) 41 – 42/65cm Light-brown soil with

many stones

Upper ditch fill. Subsoil with limestone rubble

1104 (Extension only) 42/65 - 94 Light-brown soil with

many stones

Lower ditch fill. Subsoil with limestone rubble

Table 1: Recorded layer sequence for Trench 1

11

Main Trench Context

DESCRIPTION 102 103 TOTAL

Bone Number 13 8 21

Weight (g) 46.28 30.1 76.38

Ceramic Building Material Number 0 12 12

Weight (g) 0 12.9 12.9

Ceramic Roof Tile Number 1 0 1

Weight (g) 19.69 0 19.69

Flint (excludes scraper found in spoil heap)

Number 13 9 22

Weight (g) 96.84 55.51 152.35

Iron Nails Number 4 0 4

Weight (g) 21.94 0 21.94

Pottery (Bronze Age) Number 2 2 4

Weight (g) 2.1 2.22 4.32

Pottery (Medieval) Number 34 1 35

Weight (g) 83.92 0.59 84.51

Pottery (Post-Medieval) Number 1 0 1

Weight (g) 0.94 0 0.94

Slag Number 3 0 3

Weight (g) 17.33 0 17.33

Teeth Number 1 0 1

Weight (g) 3.95 0 3.95

Tusk Number 1 0 1

Weight (g) 2.27 0 2.27

Table 2: Finds in Trench 1 Primary

After the main trench (4m x 1m) had been dug it was noticed that both the east and west ditch sections showed two distinct soil colours, with the upper fill being a lighter colour than the lower fill (Fig 12).

Photo: Rick Buettner

Fig 12: Trench 1 Primary west edge with upper and lower fill dividing line

12

An extension over the east side of the ditch 0.5m wide was dug with care being taken to segregate finds from the upper and lower fills (Fig 13).

Fig 13: Trench 1 extension with upper fill (contexts 1102, 1103) removed

Extension Context

UPPER FILL LOWER FILL

DESCRIPTION 1102 1103 1104 TOTAL

Bone Number 3 0 1 4

Weight (g) 5.54 0 0.6 6.14

Ceramic Building Material Number 2 0 18 20

Weight (g) 1.71 0 8.93 10.64

Flint Number 4 3 3 10

Weight (g) 38.19 27.56 5.45 71.2

Pottery (Bronze Age) Number 5 1 4 10

Weight (g) 9.96 2.28 16.42 28.66

Pottery (Medieval) Number 3 0 1 4

Weight (g) 8.04 0 3.85 11.89

Slag Number 0 1 0 1

Weight (g) 0 21.98 0 21.98

Teeth Number 1 1 0 2

Weight (g) 4.85 0.32 0 5.17

Table 3: Finds in Trench 1 Extension

13

Finds Discussion Trench 1

Photographs of finds relevant to the identification of the ditch are shown in the Appendix. Only one comment will be made on the finds in contexts 102 and 1102 as they are typical of previous trenches dug in the vicinity of the house and reflect post medieval occupation. There was only one piece of post medieval pottery which suggests that this area of the lawns had been part of the adjacent field until after the Victorian era. The pottery in the ditch fill was very degraded but two pieces were large enough to attempt identification (Figs 13, 14) and one was identified as the rim of a collared urn. Collared urns were in use between 2000 and 1500 BC so the ditch would be expected to be from this period or earlier than 2000 BC.The difference in finds between contexts 102 and 103 suggests that the ditch was filled in before the medieval period. The presence of the medieval pottery (examples Fig 17) down to 41cm in the ditch is assumed to be due to the action of worms and an absence of cultivation. The lower fill (context 1104) is a darker colour than the upper fill (context 1103) indicating that it came from nearer the surface. The absence of a humic boundary line between the two layers indicates that the outer fill was added very shortly after the inner fill since no vegetation had an opportunity to form and decay. The presence of the pig bones in the ditch fill (Fig 15) and their appearance suggest that they are also from the same period as the pottery. The flint scraper (Fig 16), found in the spoil heap, is also suggestive of Bronze Age use of the site. Four pieces of metal-working slag were found, one of which is shown in Fig 20, which appear similar to copper smelting slag. Some charcoal was visible in the ditch fill and larger discolorations were recovered but were too friable to record.

Conclusions Trench 1

The presence of the Bronze Age pottery in the ditch fill strongly suggests that the feature is the remains of a ploughed out round barrow similar to others in the vicinity. The presence of bronze age pottery in both fills suggests that they both came from the centre of the ring ditch where a collared urn might have been expected to be used for the inhumation of cremated remains. In the light of this interpretation then the pattern on the western side of the ditch (Fig 8) is likely to be burial pits on either side of an entrance.

14

Trench 2

Fig 14: Trench 2 section

Context Depth Description Interpretation

201 0 – 10cm Turf Turf

202 10 – 20cm

Medium brown loamy

soil with some stones

becoming paler with

increased depth

Topsoil merging into subsoil

203 20 - 30cm Larger stones with

sandy-clay soil

Subsoil

204 30 – 40cm Larger stones with

sandy-clay soil

Subsoil

205 40 – 52cm Larger stones with

sandy-clay soil

Subsoil

206 Below 52cm Limestone rubble Natural stratum

Table 4: Recorded layer sequence for Trench 2

TRENCH 2 Context

Description

Total 202

Total 203

Total 204

Total 205 Total

Bone Number 3 0 6 10 19

Weight (g) 3.15 0 6.87 11.47 21.49

CBM Number 1 1 8 2 12

Weight (g) 1.6 1.94 18.42 15.37 37.33

15

Ceramic Roof Tile Number 0 0 0 1 1

Weight (g) 0 0 0 10.65 10.65

Flint Number 4 9 3 1 17

Weight (g) 6.46 25.28 9.36 1.13 42.23

Glass (Window)

16

rectangular section indicating that they are probably pre-Victorian. The oolitic limestone (Figs 24, 25)

is not the local shelly limestone and would have been brought to the site as building stone. The

worked fragment (Fig 24), possibly a window surround, is whitewashed indicating that it came from

within a building.

Conclusions Trench 2

The mortar, plaster, window glass and building stone fragments found indicate that a building,

thought to be the medieval manor demolished in 1830, stood nearby.

Future Work

Most Wiltshire barrows excavated have been dug into chalk. It would add to our knowledge if a

barrow dug in cornbrash was excavated for comparison. Further trenches to investigate the centre

of the ring ditch and the entrance are justifiable but would need to be sufficiently well resourced to

deal with human remains which are highly likely to be found.

A watching brief is being kept on any trenching or building work in the area of the house to see if the

remains of any earlier buildings are present.

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Anthony and Julia Fuller for allowing access to the walled garden and lawns. Thanks

to the following members of BACAS who carried out the surveys.

John Oswin, Rick Buettner, Janet Pryke, John Knapper, Terri Knapper, Owen Dicker

Thanks again to Rick Buettner for help with the excavations, Lorraine Mepham for identifying the

pottery and Roy Canham for providing guidance.

References

1. C and F.Thorn, 1979 p25 Domesday Book, Chichester, Phillimore

2. Sir Richard Colt-Hoare, 1837 p57 The Modern History of Wiltshire, Volume 5, Hundred of

Frustfield, London: John Bowyer Nichols & Son

3. J.Silvester Davies, 1908 p278 The Tropenell Cartulary vol.1, Devizes, Wiltshire Archaeological

and Natural History Society

4. R.B.Pugh and E.Crittall (ed) 1953 pp59-66 A History of the County of Wiltshire Vol 7, London,

Oxford University Press

5. Wiltshire Inquisitiones Post Mortem Edward III, WANHS, Devizes

6. Somerset Heritage Centre DD/SF/3162

7. https://content.historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/iha-prehistoric-barrows-

burial-mounds/prehistoricbarrowsandburialmounds.pdf

17

Appendix: Finds Photographs

Pottery attribution - Lorraine Mepham (L.M) - Wessex Archaeology (excludes roof tile (Figs 26))

Trench 1

Fig 15: Context 103 - Rim of Bronze Age collared urn Fig 16: Context 103 - Bronze Age - shelly

limestone temper

Fig 17: Context 103 - Bronze Age pig bones (humerus - top, tibia – below)

18

Fig 18: Flint scraper (spoil heap) Fig 19: Context 102 - Medieval coarseware

Figs 20.1, 20.2: Context 1103 – slag typical of copper smelting

19

Trench 2

Fig 21: Context 203 - patinated window glass Fig 22: Context 204 – mortar

Fig 23: Context 204 - Wall plaster

20

Figs 24.1, 24.2: Context 204 - Whitewashed worked oolitic limestone, possible window surround

(face and back)

Fig 25: Context 204 - Roughly worked oolitic limestone

21

Figs 26.1, 26.2, 26.3: Context 205 - Medieval Roof Tile 13th C or later (glazed face, back and edge)

Fig 27: Context 205 - Medieval coarseware

Rob Arkell October 2018

Email: robert@arkells.force9.co.uk