saxon rise 2 northampton road brixworth northamptonshire€¦ · rise 2 site, the remainder of ich...

Saxon Rise 2 Northampton Road

Brixworth Northamptonshire

Archaeological Evaluation

July 2014

for

Barratt Northampton

CA Project: 660201 CA Report: 14297

Saxon Rise 2 Northampton Road

Brixworth Northamptonshire

Archaeological Evaluation

CA Project: 660201 CA Report: 14297

prepared by Peter James Project Supervisor

date 1 July 2014

checked by Derek Evans Project Manager

date 4 July 2014

approved by John Dillon, Head of Office

signed

date 4 July 2014

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 Milton Keynes Andover Building 11 Unit 4 Stanley House Kemble Enterprise Park Cromwell Business Centre Walworth Road Kemble, Cirencester Howard Way, Newport Pagnell Andover, Hampshire Gloucestershire, GL7 6BQ MK16 9QS SP10 5LH t. 01285 771022 t. 01908 218320 t. 01264 347630 f. 01285 771033

e. [email protected]


1

Saxon Rise 2, Northampton Road, Brixworth, Northants: Archaeological Evaluation

CONTENTS

SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 2

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 3

The site .............................................................................................................. 3

Archaeological background ................................................................................ 4

Archaeological objectives ................................................................................... 5

Methodology....................................................................................................... 6

2. RESULTS .......................................................................................................... 6

The finds evidence ............................................................................................. 12

3. DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................... 13

4. CA PROJECT TEAM .......................................................................................... 14

5. REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 14

APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS ................................................................... 16

APPENDIX B: THE FINDS ............................................................................................. 20

APPENDIX C: OASIS REPORT FORM .......................................................................... 23

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1 Site location plan (1:25,000)

Fig. 2 Trench location plan, showing archaeological features and geophysical survey

results (1:1500)

Fig. 3 Trench 17: Plan, sections and photographs ((1:200 & 1:20)

Fig. 4 Trench 22: Plan and sections (1:200, 1:50 & 1:20)

Fig. 5 Trench 29: Plan, section and photograph (1:200 & 1:20)

Fig. 6 Trench 26: Plan, section and photograph (1:200 & 1:50)

Fig. 7 Trench 27: Plan and sections (1:200 & 1:20)

Fig. 8 Trench 28: Plan, sections and photograph (1:200 & 1:20)

Fig. 9 Trench 23: Plan and section (1:200 & 1:20)


2


SUMMARY

Project Name: Saxon Rise 2, Northampton Road

Location: Brixworth, Northamptonshire

NGR: SP 7494 6939

Type: Evaluation

Date: 16–23 June 2014

Location of Archive: Currently held by Cotswold Archaeology (Milton Keynes Office)

Site Code: NHB14

In June 2014, Cotswold Archaeology carried out an archaeological evaluation of the

proposed site of the Saxon Rise 2 residential development, off Northampton Road,

Brixworth, Northamptonshire. Fourteen trenches were excavated.

Previous archaeological investigations to the immediate north of the site had recorded a

complex of mainly Iron Age features, including a series of enclosure and boundary ditches.

Geophysical surveys of the present evaluation site indicated the presence of similar features

throughout the site.

The evaluation recorded a series of ditches and a small number of pits, as well as the

remnants of a stone wall. These features displayed a broad correspondence with the results

of the geophysical surveys. Artefactual material indicated that the features were mainly Iron

Age and Roman in date, although there was also limited evidence for Mesolithic and Bronze

Age activity at the site. The features exposed by the present evaluation were broadly similar

in nature and date to the features recorded previously to the immediate north of the site,

although there was a greater amount of Roman material from the present site. The site

appears to have been in continuous occupation in the Iron Age and Roman periods,

although the limited evidence for activity after the 3rd century AD suggests that the site was

abandoned in the later Roman period.


3


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 In June 2014, Cotswold Archaeology (CA) carried out an archaeological evaluation

of the proposed site of the Saxon Rise 2 residential development, off Northampton

Road, Brixworth, Northamptonshire (centred on NGR: SP 7494 6939; Fig. 1). This

work was commissioned by Barratt Northampton.

1.2 The archaeological evaluation will inform a planning application for residential

development of the land which is to be made to Daventry District Council (DDC; the

local planning authority). The scope of the evaluation was agreed in discussions with

Lesley-Ann Mather, Northamptonshire County Council’s Archaeological Advisor.

1.3 The evaluation was carried out in accordance with a written scheme of investigation

(WSI) produced by CA (2014) and approved by Lesley-Ann Mather. The fieldwork

also followed the Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Field Evaluation (IfA

2009), the Management of Archaeological Projects (English Heritage 1991) and the

Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment (MORPHE): Project

Manager’s Guide (English Heritage 2006). The fieldwork was monitored by Lesley-

Ann Mather, including a site visit on 18 June.

The site

1.4 The proposed development site encloses an area of approximately 3.3ha. It is

located to the immediate south of Brixworth village and approximately 4km north of

Northampton town centre. The site is a triangular plot of land bounded by

Northampton Road to the west, the A509 to the south-east, and allotments and the

Saxon Rise 1 residential development site to the north. At the time of the evaluation,

the site comprised two wheat fields divided by an east/west embankment.

1.5 The site is situated on a spur of high ground which slopes very gradually to the

south and south-east, with the ground level descending from c. 123m above

Ordnance Datum (aOD) in the north-western corner of the site to c. 117m aOD in

the south.


4


1.6 The underlying bedrock geology of the site is mapped as Northampton Sand

Formation ooidal ironstone of the Jurassic Era. No superficial deposits are recorded

(BGS 2014).

Archaeological background

1.7 The Saxon Rise 1 residential development lies to the immediate north of the current

evaluation site. A number of archaeological investigations were undertaken prior to

the commencement of construction at Saxon Rise 1. These comprised: a desk-

based heritage assessment (CA 2012a), a geophysical survey (Stratascan 2012), an

archaeological evaluation (CA 2012b) and an archaeological excavation (CA,

forthcoming). The geophysical survey also included the northern part of the Saxon

Rise 2 site, the remainder of which was covered by a second survey (Stratascan

2014). The following text has been synthesised and summarised from these

documents.

Prehistoric (pre-AD 43)

1.8 Fieldwalking surveys of the evaluation site have recovered prehistoric flints.

Archaeological investigations undertaken prior to construction of the modern

housing estate which lies to the immediate north of Saxon Rise 1 recorded a

Neolithic pit and recovered a small assemblage of worked flint.

1.9 The archaeological investigations of the Saxon Rise 1 site uncovered a substantial

boundary ditch of probable Bronze Age date and a complex of Iron Age enclosures

and associated features, including a four-post structure and a ring ditch. The

geophysical surveys of the current evaluation site indicate that similar enclosures

and associated features are present throughout the site.

Roman (AD 43 – AD 410)

1.10 There are no known Roman remains within the site, although Northampton Road is

thought to follow the line of the Roman road between the small Roman town at

Duston and the civitas capital at Leicester (Ratae Corieltauvorum). Late Iron Age

and Roman remains, including the site of a possible settlement, were found during

the construction of the A508 Brixworth Bypass, which runs along the eastern site


5


boundary, and Roman pottery was found during the archaeological work associated

with the modern housing estate to the immediate north of Saxon Rise 1.

Saxon (AD 410 – 1066) and medieval (1066 – 1539)

1.11 The archaeological investigations to the north of Saxon Rise 1 recorded the remains

of a Saxon settlement, comprising five post-built structures and four sunken-floored

structures dating to the 5th–6th centuries AD. There was some evidence for activity

continuing until the mid-9th century AD.

1.12 In the medieval period, the site lay outside of the main area of settlement at

Brixworth, within the surrounding open fields. The Saxon Rise 1 archaeological

investigations recorded a number of medieval furrows, and the geophysical surveys

of the current evaluation site indicated that similar furrows were present within the

northern half of the site at least.

Post-medieval and modern (post-1539)

1.13 The site remained in agricultural use throughout the post-medieval and modern

periods. Ironstone quarrying took place at the Saxon Rise 1 site in this era, but the

geophysical survey results suggested that this quarrying did not extend southwards

into the current evaluation site.

Archaeological objectives

1.14 The objectives of the evaluation were to provide information about the

archaeological resource within the site, including its presence/absence, character,

extent, date, integrity, state of preservation and quality, in accordance with the

Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Field Evaluation (IfA 2009). This

information will enable DDC to identify and assess the particular significance the

site’s heritage resource, consider the impact of the proposed development upon that

significance, and avoid or minimise conflict between heritage resource conservation

and any aspect of the development proposal, in line with the National Planning

Policy Framework (DCLG 2012).


6


Methodology

1.15 The fieldwork comprised the excavation of 14 trenches (Trenches 16–29, Fig. 2).

The trench numbering carried on from that of the Saxon Rise 1 evaluation (Trenches

1–15, CA 2012b). Four trenches were 40m long and the remainder were 30m long.

All trenches were 1.8m wide. Some of the trenches were broken into segments in

order to preserve established agricultural plant tramways through the crops. The

trenches were located to sample potential archaeological features identified by the

geophysical surveys, as well as to test some of the apparently blank areas.

1.16 All trenches 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). All

trenches were excavated by a 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 (2013).

1.17 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). No deposits were identified that required

sampling. All recovered artefacts were processed in accordance with CA Technical

Manual 3: Treatment of Finds Immediately after Excavation (1995).

1.18 There is currently no archaeological archive depository able to accept material from

this part of Northamptonshire. The project archive will therefore be held by CA at

their offices in Milton Keynes until such time as a suitable depository is available. A

summary of information from this project, as set out within Appendix C, will be

entered onto the OASIS online database of archaeological projects in Britain.

2. RESULTS

2.1 This section provides an overview of the evaluation results. Detailed summaries of

the recorded contexts and retrieved finds are to be found in Appendices A and B,


7


respectively. Figure 2 shows the evaluation trenches overlain on the geophysical

survey results.

2.2 The evaluation exposed the well-preserved remains of a series of ditches and a

small number of pits, as well as the remnants of a stone wall. Associated artefactual

material indicated that the majority of these features were Iron Age and Roman in

date.

General stratigraphy

2.3 In general, the natural substrate comprised medium red-brown sandy clay. It was

exposed in all trenches at a depth of 0.22m–0.4m below the present ground level. In

all but T28, the natural substrate was sealed directly by the topsoil, without any

intervening subsoil layer. T28 was in the southern tip of the site, at the base of the

slope, and featured a 0.16m-thick silty sand colluvial layer (2801) between the

natural substrate and the topsoil.

Blank trenches

2.4 Few of the trenches contained no archaeological features, and those that did were

all located in the site’s northern field. The blank trenches were as follows:

• T16: sampled geophysical anomalies indicative of furrows;

• T19: sampled a linear geophysical anomaly interpreted as being of probable

archaeological origin;

• T20: sampled two geophysical anomalies interpreted as being of possible

archaeological origin; and

• T21: sampled a geophysical anomaly interpreted as the possible below-ground

remains of a bank or other earthwork.

Early prehistoric (pre-700 BC)

2.5 Pit 2403 (T24) was 1.2m wide and 0.3m deep. This pit had not been detected by the

geophysical survey. It contained a single fill, which yielded a worked flint bladelet of

Mesolithic date (10,000–4000 BC). This bladelet exhibited some edge damage,

which might indicate that it was redeposited within the pit.


8


2.6 Ditch 2215 (T22; Fig. 4) had largely been truncated by Iron Age ditch 2217 (see

below) and by ditch 2212, which yielded six sherds of pottery dating to the Early–

Middle Bronze Age (1500–1100 BC). Ditch 2212 was north/south-aligned. It had

itself been truncated by a Roman ditch (2207; see below), but survived to a depth of

0.8m and a width of 1.5m. These intercutting ditches corresponded in location with

part of a possible enclosure identified by the geophysical survey.

Iron Age (700 BC–AD 43)

2.7 North/south-aligned ditch 2217 (T22; Fig. 4) truncated earlier prehistoric ditch 2215

(see above) and was itself truncated by a Roman ditch (2207; see below). As noted

above, these intercutting ditches corresponded in location with part of a possible

enclosure identified by the geophysical survey. Ditch 2217 contained Iron Age

pottery. It survived to width of 1.45m and was excavated to a depth of 0.8m without

its base being reached.

2.8 North-west/south-east-aligned ditch 2612 (T26, Fig. 6) was truncated by Roman

foundation trench 2607 (see below). It survived to a width of 2.4m and was over

0.37m in depth, and contained Iron Age pottery. T26 also contained intercutting

ditches 2601 and 2604 (Fig. 6). Both of these features were undated artefactually,

but ditch 2604 was also cut by Roman foundation trench 2607, and it is therefore

possible that 2601 and 2604 were Iron Age in date. North/south-aligned ditch 2601

survived to 1.15 in width and 0.23m in depth. It had been largely removed by ditch

2604, which lay on the same alignment and survived to 1.95m in width and 0.6m in

depth. Ditches 2612, 2601 and 2604 were all to the immediate west of a linear

geophysical anomaly on the same alignment. There was no feature in T26 which

exactly matched this anomaly.

2.9 Ditch 2702 (T27; Fig. 7) was approximately 1.29m wide and 0.75m deep. It

contained pottery dating to the Middle Iron Age. Its north-north-east/south-south-

west alignment matched that of a linear geophysical anomaly which lay to the

immediate north, suggesting that ditch 2702 is a geophysically-undetected

continuation of this feature.

2.10 Ditch 2814 (T28; Fig. 8) was aligned north/south. It was 0.63m wide and 0.2m deep,

and contained Middle Iron Age pottery. It had not been detected by the geophysical

survey.


9


Iron Age/Roman transition (1st century AD)

2.11 Intercutting ditches 2822 and 2818 ran through T28 (Fig. 8) on a north-west/south-

east alignment. Ditch 2822 had been re-cut by ditch 2818. Ditch 2822 survived to

1.4m in width and was over 0.7m in depth. It contained pottery dating to the early–

mid 1st century AD. Ditch 2818 was 2.4m wide and over 0.7m deep, and was

undated artefactually. These intercutting ditches were in the broad location of a

linear geophysical anomaly.

2.12 North-west/south-east-aligned ditch 2906 (T29; Fig. 5) was 0.58m deep and

survived to a width of 1.33m. It had been re-cut by ditch 2904, which lay on the

same alignment and was 1.1m wide and 0.32m deep. These intercutting ditches

were within an area of geophysical anomalies, although these anomalies appeared

pit-like in nature rather than linear. One of the middle fills (2909) of earlier ditch 2906

contained two sherds of pottery dating to the early–mid 1st century AD; its upper fill

(2910), however, yielded five pieces of pottery and glass dating to the 19th or earlier

20th centuries. Furthermore, later ditch 2904 contained eight sherds of Middle Iron

Age pottery in its single fill (2905). It is likely that the modern material in the upper fill

of ditch 2906 was intrusive and the Middle Iron Age material in ditch 2904 was

residual.

2.13 Ditch 2902 was also exposed in T29 (Fig. 5). Although undated artefactually, this

ditch ran on the same north-west/south-east alignment as intercutting ditches

2906/2904 and may have been associated with them. Ditch 2902 was not

excavated. It was located in an area of geophysical anomalies of an apparently pit-

like nature.

Roman (AD 43–AD 410)

2.14 North/south-aligned ditch 2207 (T22; Fig. 4) was 2.8m wide and 0.77m deep. It

truncated Bronze Age ditch 2212 and Iron Age ditch 2217 (see above). Its upper fill

(2210) contained two sherds of Roman pottery, and two sherds of 19th- or earlier

20th-century pottery. Given the lack of subsoil and the shallow depth of topsoil in

this area of the site, it is likely that the modern pottery was intrusive. These

intercutting ditches corresponded in location with part of a possible enclosure

identified by the geophysical survey.


10


2.15 West-south-west/east-north-east-aligned ditch 2302 (T23; Fig. 9) was partially

truncated by undated ditch 2306 (see below). Ditch 2302 survived to a width of

3.56m and was 0.8m deep. It contained a sequence of three silty fills, one of which

(2304) yielded Roman pottery. A second, roughly parallel ditch (2308) was not

excavated, but Roman pottery was recovered from its upper surface. Ditches 2302

and 2308 both displayed a broad correlation with linear anomalies recorded by the

geophysical survey.

2.16 T26 (Fig. 6) contained the remains of a limestone wall (2608) aligned north/south.

The foundation trench for this wall (2607) cut through earlier ditches 2604 and 2612

(see above) and contained pottery sherds spanning the late 1st–3rd centuries AD.

The wall was 0.9m wide and was exposed to a height of 0.75m. It was comprised of

unworked limestone rubble with no visible bonding agent. This wall lay to the west of

a linear geophysical anomaly on the same alignment.

2.17 Ditch 2711 was partially exposed in T27 (Fig. 7). This north-east/south-west-aligned

ditch was over 3.8m wide and was excavated to a depth of 0.88m without its base

being reached. It contained a sequence of three silty fills, two of which yielded

pottery dating from the late 1st–3rd centuries AD. Ditch 2709 lay to the north-west of

ditch 2711 on a similar alignment. Although unexcavated, ditch 2709 was 5.6m wide

and pottery dating from the late 1st–3rd centuries AD was recovered from its

surface. Ditches 2711 and 2709 displayed a broad correspondence with two arms of

a sub-rectilinear enclosure detected by the geophysical survey. An undated pit

(2715; 1.2m in diameter and 0.49m in depth) lay between ditches 2711 and 2709

and may have been an associated internal feature.

2.18 Parallel ditches 2806 and 2809 (T28; Fig. 8) ran through T28 on a north-west/south-

east alignment. Ditch 2806 was 0.38m wide and 0.21m deep, and contained pottery

dating from the late 1st–3rd centuries AD; ditch 2809 was 0.37m wide and 0.08m

deep and contained more broadly dateable Roman material. Neither of these ditches

had been detected by the geophysical survey.

2.19 Curved ditch 2811 (T28; Fig. 8) was 0.81m wide and 0.24m deep and yielded

pottery dating to the 3rd or 4th century AD, making it the latest securely-dated

feature at the site. Ditch 2811 was truncated by probable ditch 2820, which was

aligned north-west/south-east. Ditch 2820 was unexcavated, but redeposited Middle


11


Iron Age pottery was recovered from its upper surface. Neither if these ditches had

been detected by the geophysical survey.

Undated

2.20 Trench 17 (Fig. 3) exposed three ditches. North-west/south-east-aligned ditch 1703

was 0.53m wide and 0.23m deep. It had not been identified by the geophysical

survey. Ditch 1705 had been almost entirely removed by ditch 1709, which lay on an

east/west alignment. Ditch 1709 was 3.3m wide and 1.2m deep. Intercutting ditches

1705/1709 corresponded in location with a broadly linear anomaly recorded by the

geophysical survey.

2.21 Ditch 1803 (T18) was aligned north-east/south-west. It was approximately 2.04m

wide and 0.58m deep. It was located within an area of pit-like geophysical

anomalies.

2.22 Intercutting ditches 2203 and 2205 (T22; Fig. 4) were aligned broadly north/south.

Ditch 2203 survived to 0.8m in width and 0.56m in depth. It had been truncated by

ditch 2205, which was 0.46m deep and more than 1.2m wide. These ditches were

sealed by a spread of sandy clay 2202, which was 0.18m thick. This material may

have represented the remnants of a former bank. The ditches and the spread of

material corresponded in location to an area of amorphous geophysical survey

responses.

2.23 Roman ditch 2302 (T23; Fig. 9) was truncated along its southern edge by ditch

2306, which was 0.7m wide and 0.3m deep. These intercutting ditches

corresponded to a linear geophysical anomaly. T23 also contained pit 2310, which

was not excavated.

2.24 In addition to possible Mesolithic pit 2403 (see above), T24 contained possible ditch

terminus 2405 and pit 2411. Neither of these features had been detected by the

geophysical survey, although they were both within an area of anomalies interpreted

as being of likely archaeological origin. Ditch terminus 2405 was 1.7m wide and

0.48m. Pit 2411 was not excavated.

2.25 East/west-aligned ditch 2501 (T25) was relatively substantial. It measured

approximately 9m in width and was excavated to a depth of 0.9m without its base


12


being reached. It corresponded broadly in location with a short linear geophysical

anomaly, although ditch 2501 appeared to be more substantial than the anomaly

suggested.

2.26 Ditch 2803 (T28; Fig. 8) was aligned north-east/south-west, but featured a curve to

the south-east at its south-western end. This ditch was approximately 0.8m wide and

0.24m deep. It was in the approximate location of a linear geophysical anomaly.

Medieval (1066–1539)

2.27 The evaluation recorded no below-ground traces of the medieval furrows detected

by the geophysical survey in the northern part of the site.

The finds evidence

2.28 This section presents a summary of the finds evidence from the evaluation. A

detailed report on the recovered artefacts is given in Appendix B. Artefactual

material was recovered from 25 contexts. The bulk of this material was pottery of

Iron Age and Roman date.

Early prehistoric (pre-700 BC)

2.29 A Mesolithic worked flint bladelet was recovered from pit 2403 (fill 2404; T24). This

artefact exhibited some edge damage and was probably redeposited.

2.30 Ditch 2212 (fill 2214, T22) contained six sherds of early to Middle Bronze Age

pottery.

Iron Age (700 BC–AD 43)

2.31 Iron Age pottery was recovered from 10 contexts, although a proportion of this

material was almost certainly redeposited. This group is well fragmented and

contains few closely dateable elements, although some sherds could be dated to the

Middle Iron Age.


13


Iron Age/Roman transition (1st century AD)

2.32 Ditches 2818 (fill 2819; T28) and 2906 (fill 2909; T29) contained “transitional” pottery

types known to span the Late Iron Age/early Roman period.

Roman (AD 43–AD 410)

2.33 Roman pottery was recorded from 12 deposits. Most of this material comprised

coarseware types of local manufacture, including sandy reduced fabrics which are

typical of production in the Upper Nene Valley area across the later 1st–3rd

centuries AD. The base from a beaker in Lower Nene valley colour-coated ware was

the only British fineware represented. It probably dates to the 3rd or 4th centuries

AD, and as such is a rare indicator of later Roman activity in the group.

Metallurgical residue

2.34 A small fragment of ironworking slag was recorded from Roman ditch 2302 (fill 2304;

T23).

3. DISCUSSION

3.1 The evaluation recorded the well-preserved remains of series of ditches and a small

number of pits, as well as the remnants of a stone wall. These features displayed a

broad correspondence with the results of the previous geophysical surveys. The

surveys show that the ditches recorded by the evaluation are part of a system of

large enclosures and other presumably associated features. It is likely that these

features represent the remains of a farmstead. The presence of a stone wall at the

site also suggests that the farmstead was of some minor status.

3.2 Artefactual material recovered during the evaluation indicated that the features were

mainly Iron Age and Roman in date, although there was also limited evidence for

earlier prehistoric (Mesolithic and Bronze Age) activity at the site. The features

recorded by the present evaluation were similar in nature and date to those

investigated during the archaeological works associated with the Saxon Rise 1

development (CA 2012b and forthcoming), although the present evaluation did


14


uncover a larger amount of Roman material than was recorded by the Saxon Rise 1

works.

3.3 There was no clear spatial division between the Iron Age and Roman features; they

often occurred in close proximity to each other, and there were instances of Iron Age

ditches being re-cut in the Roman period. This indicates that the site was in

continuous occupation in the Iron Age and Roman periods, although the limited

evidence for activity after the 3rd century AD suggests that the site was abandoned

in the later Roman period. This is consistent with other evidence that the post-

Roman focus of settlement in the area shifted northwards (such as the Saxon

settlement evidence known to the north of the Saxon Rise 1 development; see

Historic background, above).

4. CA PROJECT TEAM

Fieldwork was undertaken by Peter James, assisted by Jeremy Mordue, Paulo

Clemente, Dan Riley, James Coyne, Dan Wojcak, Juan Talens-Bou and Emily

Evans. The report was written by Peter James. The illustrations were prepared by

Dan Bashford. The archive has been compiled by Emily Evans, and prepared for

deposition by Nicola Powell. The project was managed for CA by Derek Evans.

5. REFERENCES

BGS (British Geological Survey) 2014 Geology of Britain

Viewer http://maps.bgs.ac.uk/geology viewer_google/googleviewer.html Accessed

11 January 2014

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2012a Land east of Northampton Road, Brixworth,

Northamptonshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment CA report 11242

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2012b Land East of Northampton Road, Brixworth,

Northamptonshire: Archaeological Evaluation CA report 12128

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2014 Land East of Northampton Road, Brixworth,

Northamptonshire (Phase 2): Written Scheme of Investigation for an Archaeological

Evaluation

http://maps.bgs.ac.uk/geology%20viewer_google/googleviewer.html


15


DCLG (Department of Communities and Local Government) 2012 National Planning Policy

Framework

Stratascan 2012 Geophysical Survey Report: Northampton Road, Brixworth,

Northamptonshire Stratascan report J3040

Stratascan 2014 Geophysical Survey Report: Northampton Road, Brixworth,

Northamptonshire Stratascan report J6400


16


APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS

Trench No.

Context No.

Type Fill of Context interpretation

Description L (m) W (m)

Depth/ thickness

(m)

Spot-date

16 1600 Layer - Topsoil Medium grey brown silty sand - - 0.36 16 1601 Layer - Natural Medium red brown sandy clay

with few sub-angular ironstone - - -

17 1700 Layer - Topsoil Medium grey brown silty sand - - 0.22 17 1701 Void - Void Void - - -

17 1702 Layer - Natural Medium red brown sandy clay with few sub-angular ironstone

- - -

17 1703 Cut - Ditch Ditch. NW-SE aligned >1.9 0.53 0.23

17 1704 Fill 1703 Fill of ditch Medium red brown silty clay - - 0.23

17 1705 Cut - Ditch Ditch. E-W aligned >1.9 0.53 0.25

17 1706 Fill 1705 Fill of ditch Light red brown silty clay - - 0.07


17 1708 Fill 1705 Fill of ditch Medium red brown silty clay 0.08

17 1709 Cut - Ditch Ditch E-W aligned >1.9 3.33 1.2

17 1710 Fill 1709 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown silty clay - - 0.53







18 1800 Layer - Topsoil Medium grey brown silty sand - - 0.4


- - -

18 1802 Void - Void Void - - -

18 1803 Cut - Ditch Linear ditch. N-S aligned. >1.9 2.04 0.58

18 1804 Fill 1803 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown silty clay with few sub-angular ironstone

- - 0.65


19 1901 Layer - Natural Medium red brown sandy clay - - -

19 1902 Layer - Geology Medium red brown clay - - -


20 2001 Layer - Natural Medium red brown sandy clay with sub-angular ironstone

- - -



- - -


22 2201 Layer - Natural Medium red brown sandy clay with outcrops of iron stone

- - -

22 2202 Layer - Buried soil Medium red brown sandy clay - - 0.18

22 2203 Cut - Ditch Ditch. N-S aligned >1 0.9 0.57

22 2204 Fill 2203 Fill of ditch Medium red brown sandy clay - - 0.57



22 2207 Cut - Ditch Re-cut of ditch. N-S aligned >1 2.8 0.77

22 2208 Fill 2207 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown sandy clay - - 0.34

22 2209 Fill 2207 Fill of ditch Medium yellow brown sandy clay

- - 0.44

22 2210 Fill 2207 Fill of ditch Light yellow brown sandy clay - - 0.33 C19–EC20


17


Trench No.

Context No.



Depth/ thickness

(m)

Spot-date


22 2212 Cut - Ditch Re-cut of ditch. N-S aligned >1 1.53 0.83

22 2213 Fill 2212 Fill of ditch Dark red brown sandy clay - - 0.39

22 2214 Fill 2212 Fill of ditch Dark grey brown sandy clay - - 0.81 E–MBA



- - 0.17



- - 0.22 IA


22 2220 Fill 2217 Fill of ditch Medium yellow brown silty clay - - 0.55


23 2301 Layer - Natural Medium red brown silty clay - - -

23 2302 Cut - Ditch Ditch. NW-SE aligned >1.9 3.56 0.8

23 2303 Fill 2302 Fill of ditch Medium yellow brown silty sand

- - 0.48

23 2304 Fill 2302 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown silty sand - - 0.28 R


23 2306 Cut - Ditch Ditch. NW-SE aligned >1 0.72 0.3


23 2308 Cut - Ditch Ditch. NW-SE aligned >1.9 3 -

23 2309 Fill 2308 Fill of ditch Medium red brown silty clay - - - R

23 2310 Cut - Pit Sub-circular pit. 0.6 >0.2

-

23 2311 Fill 2310 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown silty clay - - -

24 2400 Layer - Topsoil Medium grey brown silty clay - - 0.30

24 2401 Layer - Natural Medium red brown silty sand with few sub-angular ironstone

- - -

24 2402 Layer - Geology Medium yellow brown clay - - -

24 2403 Cut - Pit Sub-oval pit >0.87 1.21 0.30

24 2404 Fill 2403 Fill of pit Medium red brown sandy clay - - 0.30

24 2405 Cut - Ditch terminus Ditch terminus. N-S aligned >2.5 >1.3 0.48


24 2407 Fill 2405 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown silty sand - - 0.11




24 2411 Cut - Pit Sub-oval pit 0.6 >0.2

-

24 2412 Fill 2411 Fill of pit Medium yellow brown sandy clay

- - -

25 2500 Layer - Topsoil Medium red brown silty sand - - 0.35

25 2501 Cut - Ditch Linear ditch. E-W aligned >1 9 >0.90

25 2502 Fill 2501 Fill of ditch Light yellow brown silty sand - - >0.29

25 2503 Fill 2501 Fill of ditch Medium red brown silty sand - - >0.88



25 2506 Layer - Natural Medium red brown sandy clay with outcrops of ironstone

- - -


26 2601 Cut - Ditch Ditch. N-S aligned >1 >1.1 >0.50



18


Trench No.

Context No.



Depth/ thickness

(m)

Spot-date

26 2603 Fill 2601 Fill of ditch Light grey brown silty clay - - 0.40

26 2604 Cut - Ditch Ditch. N-S aligned >1 >1.9 0.65



26 2607 Cut - Foundation cut Foundation cut. N-S aligned >1 >1.6 0.78

26 2608 Wall 2607 Wall Large sub-angular limestone - - 0.73

26 2609 Fill 2607 Fill of foundation trench

Medium grey brown silty clay - - 0.37 LC1–C3


Medium grey brown silty clay - - 0.20 C2


Medium grey brown silty clay - - 0.17 R

26 2612 Cut Ditch Ditch. NE-SW aligned >2.4 >0.37

26 2613 Fill 2612 Fill of ditch Light brown silty clay - - >

26 2614 Fill 2612 Fill of ditch Dark grey brown silty clay - - >0.36 IA

26 2615 Layer Natural Medium red brown sand clay with outcrops of ironstone and yellow brown clay

- - -


Grey-brown silty clay >0.22

27 2700 Layer - Topsoil Medium grey brown sandy clay - - 0.34 IA

27 2701 Layer - Natural Medium red brown sandy clay with outcrops of flint and ironstone

- - -




27 2705 Fill 2702 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown silty sandy clay

- - 0.20



27 2708 Fill 2702 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown sandy clay - - 0.19 MIA

27 2709 Cut - Ditch Ditch. NW-SE aligned >1.8 6 -


- - - LC1-C3

27 2711 Cut - Ditch Ditch. E-W aligned >1 >1.5

>0.88


27 2713 Fill 2711 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown clayey silt - - 0.47 LC1–C3

27 2714 Fill 2711 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown silty clay - - 0.22 LC1–C3

27 2715 Cut - Pit Sub-circular pit. - 1.2 0.49



28 2801 Layer - Colluvium Medium yellow brown silty sand

- - 0.16

28 2802 Layer - Natural Medium yellow brown silty sand with outcrops of flint, ironstone and yellow brown clay

- - -

28 2803 Cut - Ditch Ditch. N-S aligned >2.8 0.8 0.24


- - 0.11




- - 0.21

28 2808 Fill 2806 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown sandy silt - - 0.19 LC1–C3


19


Trench No.

Context No.



Depth/ thickness

(m)

Spot-date


28 2810 Fill 2809 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown silty sand - - 0.09 R

28 2811 Cut - Ditch Ditch. NE-SW aligned >4.8 0.81 0.24

28 2812 Fill 2811 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown sandy silt - - 0.24

28 2813 Fill 2811 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown sandy silt - - 0.16 C3–C4

28 2814 Cut - Ditch Ditch. N-S aligned >2.2 0.63 0.20

28 2815 Fill 2814 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown sandy silt - - 0.18

28 2816 Fill 2814 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown silty clay - - 0.20 MIA


28 2818 Cut - Ditch Ditch. N-S aligned >0.8 >1 0.72

28 2819 Fill 2818 Fill of ditch Medium red brown silty sand - - 0.72 E–MC1

28 2820 Cut - Ditch Ditch. E-W aligned >2.2 4.4 -

28 2821 Fill 2820 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown silty sand - - - MIA

28 2822 Cut - Ditch Ditch. N-S aligned >0.8 >1.4 0.72




- - -

29 2902 Cut - Ditch Ditch. NW-SE aligned >1.8 1.5 -

29 2903 Fill 2902 Fill of ditch Light red brown sandy clay - - -


29 2905 Fill 2904 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown sandy clay - - 0.34 MIA


29 2907 Fill 2906 Fill of ditch Dark grey brown sandy clay - - 0.27


29 2909 Fill 2906 Fill of ditch Light red brown sandy clay - - 0.22 E–MC1

29 2910 Fill 2906 Fill of ditch Medium grey brown sandy clay - - 0.30 C19–EC20


20


APPENDIX B: THE FINDS

By Ed McSloy, CA Artefactual material was recovered from 25 contexts. This material comprised mainly pottery of late prehistoric and Roman date. Pottery codings for Roman material (used below in parenthesis and in Tables B1 and B2) correspond to the Northamptonshire Roman pottery type series (summarised in Perrin 2006). Pottery: Prehistoric One deposit (ditch fill 2214, T22) produced pottery of earlier prehistoric type. A total of six bodysherds in a handmade coarse grog-tempered fabric was recorded from this deposit. Early to Middle Bronze Age date is suggested based on fabric/firing characteristics and sherd thickness. Pottery which is considered of Late Prehistoric (Late Bronze Age to Iron Age) type was recorded from 10 deposits, although a proportion of this material was certainly redeposited (see Table B1). All of this material occurs in handmade fabrics, characterised by quartz or calcareous (limestone or fossil shell) inclusions, or less-commonly, grog. The late prehistoric group is well fragmented and contains few closely dateable elements. Sherds featuring scored surface treatments (ditch fills 2816 and 2905; T28 and T29, respectively) are suggestive of Middle Iron Age dating (Elsdon 1992). Identifiable vessel/rim forms comprise vessels with ovoid or globular profiles, upright necks and simple (rounded) rims noted from ditch fills 2708 (T27) and 2801 (T28). Such elements are also consistent with Middle Iron Age dating (c. 4th to 1st centuries BC). Roman Roman pottery was recorded from 14 deposits. Included with this grouping are quantities of ‘transitional’ types known to span the Late Iron Age/early Roman period in the early/middle 1st century AD. The transitional types, which were recorded from ditch fills 2819 (T28) and 2909 (T29), comprise mainly bodysherds in a wheelthrown grog-tempered fabric (type A). Also recovered from deposit 2919 was a rim sherd in shell-tempered fabric (type B) identifiable as a channel-rimmed jar, a form common locally and typically present in middle 1st century and later deposits (Friendship Taylor 1999). The bulk of the remainder of the pottery consists of coarseware types of local manufacture. Most common are sandy reduced fabrics (types C4, C10, C11, C17, C19 and C20), which are typical of production in the Upper Nene Valley area across the later 1st to 3rd centuries AD. Identifiable forms comprise medium-mouth necked jars (deposits 2710 and 2713; both T27) which are broadly dateable. Also represented are white or pink-firing ‘developed’ grog-tempered fabrics (fabrics A1 and A3), which are also common to the Upper Nene valley area and are dateable across the later 1st to 2nd or earlier 3rd centuries. Identifiable forms in these types comprise large storage jars (ditch fills 2710 and 2714; both T27), including an example from deposit 2710 with scored wavy decoration to its shoulder. Shell-tempered fabrics (type B) are representative of a long-lived tradition, which major production known from a site at Harrold, north Bedfordshire (Brown 1994). A rimsherd in this fabric from a necked jar with rilled body and everted/flat rim from deposit 2210 (T22) is typical of forms recorded from excavations at Brixworth villa (Woods 1970). The base from a beaker in Lower Nene valley colour-coated ware (fabric D1) was the only British fineware represented. It probably dates to the 3rd or 4th centuries AD, and as such is a rare indicator of later Roman activity in the group. Continental finewares are represented by a sherd of central Gaulish samian (D52) from the backfill of foundation cut 2607 (T26). The form is probably a plainware dish (Drag 18/31 or 31) dateable to the 2nd century AD. Modern Small quantities of modern pottery were recovered from deposits 2210 (T22) and 2910 (T29). The transfer-printed refined whitewares and Late English stonewares represented are suggestive of 19th or earlier 20th century activity. Other finds: worked flint A worked flint bladelet in unpatinated grey/brown flint was the only find from deposit 2404 (T24). Bladelets (defined here as a removal with length/breadth ratio of greater than 2:1 and less than 10mm wide) are common to the Mesolithic period. The item from deposit 2404 exhibits some edge damage and is probably re-deposited. Metallurgical residue A small fragment of indeterminate (smelting or smithing-derived) ironworking slag was recorded from Roman-dated deposit 2304 (T23).


21


Table B1: Finds concordance Context Description Count Weight(g) Spot-date 2210 Roman pottery: C19

Roman pottery: B Modern pottery: Refined white

1 1 2

23 19 2

RB;C19

2214 Prehistoric pottery: coarse grog 6 158 EMBA? 2218 Prehistoric pottery: fine quartz

Prehistoric pottery: grog/quartz 2 3

17 5

IA

2304 Roman pottery: C20 Metallurgical residue: ironworking slag

1 1

12 23

RB

2309 Roman pottery: C19 1 13 RB 2404 Worked flint: bladelet 1 1 - 2609 Roman pottery: C4

Roman pottery: C17 1 2

4 15

LC1-C3

2610 Roman pottery: D52 Roman pottery: C17 Roman pottery: C17 Roman pottery: C10 Roman pottery: D1

1 1 1 8 1

7 15 15 33 28

C2

2611 Roman pottery: C (burnt) 1 6 RB 2614 Prehistoric pottery: fine quartz

Prehistoric pottery: fine quartz/vesicular 1 1

7 6

IA

2700 Prehistoric pottery: fine quartz/limestone Fired clay

3 1

5 1

IA

2708 Prehistoric pottery: limestone/organic Prehistoric pottery: fine shell/limestone

3 11

18 108

MIA

2710 Roman pottery: C20 Roman pottery: C11 Roman pottery: C19 Roman pottery: B Roman pottery: A1

1 1 1 1 1

62 8 56 7 91

LC1-C3

2713 Prehistoric pottery: fine shell/limestone Roman pottery: C19 Roman pottery: A1

2 3 1

14 19 2

LC1-C3

2714 Roman pottery: A1 Roman pottery: C

1 1

174 60

LC1-C3

2808 Roman pottery: C20 Roman pottery: A3 Roman pottery: B

1 1 1

35 42 11

LC1-C3

2810 Roman pottery: D3 1 4 RB 2813 Roman pottery: D1 1 48 C3-C4 2816 Prehistoric pottery: limestone 1 2 MIA 2819 Prehistoric/Roman pottery: A

Prehistoric/Roman pottery: B 2 1

21 5

EMC1

2821 Prehistoric pottery: fine shell/limestone 1 6 MIA 2905 Prehistoric pottery: fine quartz/organic

Prehistoric pottery: quartz/flint 7 1

70 9

MIA

2908 Fired clay 5 6 - 2909 Prehistoric pottery: fine shell/limestone

Prehistoric/Roman pottery: A 1 1

24 5

EMC1

2910 Prehistoric pottery: vesicular Modern pottery: late stoneware Modern pottery: transfer-printed refined whiteware Modern pottery: refined brown glazed Modern window glass

2 1 2 1 1

2 24 2 2 1

C19-EC20

Table B2: Roman pottery codes summary

Fabric code Description A ‘Belgic’ wheelthrown grog-tempered A1 Hard cream-coloured grogged (‘developed’ grog-tempered) A3 Hard pink-coloured grogged (‘developed’ grog-tempered) B Shell-tempered C4 Sandy greyware with pale grey core (Upper Nene Valley) C10 Coarse sandy greyware C11 Dark grey with pale core (Upper Nene Valley)


22


Fabric code Description C15 Sandy greyware with red/brown core C17 Sandy greyware with pale grey/dark grey ‘sandwich firing’ (Upper Nene Valley) C19 Coarse dark grey/black throughout C20 Sandy greyware (grey throughout) D1 Lower Nene Valley colour-coated ware D3 Fine sandy oxidised D52 Central Gaulish (lezoux) samian

References Brown, A. 1994 ‘A Romano-British shell-tempered pottery and tile manufacturing site at Harrold, Bedfordshire’, Bedfordshire Archaeol. J. 21, 19–107 Elsdon, S.M. 1992 ‘East Midlands Scored Ware’, Trans. Leics. Archaeol. Hist. Soc. 66, 83–91 Friendship-Taylor, R.M. 1999 ‘;Late La Tène Pottery of the Nene and Welland Valleys of Northamptonshire: with particular reference to Channel-rim Jars’ Brit. Archaeol. Rep. Brit. Ser. 280, Oxford, British Archaeological Reports Parry S.J. 2006 Raunds Area Survey: An Archaeological Study of the Landscape of Raunds, Northamptonshire 1985-94 Oxford, Oxbow Books Perrin, J.R. 2006 ‘Romano-British pottery’, in Parry 2006, 84–91 Woods, P. J.1970 ‘Brixworth Excavations: Vol. I The Romano-British villa, 1965–70 (Part 1. the Roman Coarse pottery and decorated samian ware)’, re-printed from Journal 8 of the Northampton Museum and Art Gallery, 3–102


23


APPENDIX C: OASIS REPORT FORM

PROJECT DETAILS Project Name Saxon Rise 2, Northampton Road, Brixworth, Northamptonshire:

Archaeological Evaluation Short description (250 words maximum)

In June 2014, Cotswold Archaeology carried out an archaeological evaluation of the proposed site of the Saxon Rise 2 residential development, off Northampton Road, Brixworth, Northamptonshire. Fourteen trenches were excavated. Previous archaeological investigations to the immediate north of the site had recorded a complex of mainly Iron Age features, including a series of enclosure and boundary ditches. Geophysical surveys of the present evaluation site indicated the presence of similar features throughout the site. The evaluation recorded a series of ditches and a small number of pits, as well as the remnants of a stone wall. These features displayed a broad correspondence with the results of the geophysical surveys. Artefactual material indicated that the features were mainly Iron Age and Roman in date, although there was also limited evidence for Mesolithic and Bronze Age activity at the site. The features exposed by the present evaluation were broadly similar in nature and date to the features recorded previously to the immediate north of the site, although there was a greater amount of Roman material from the present site. The site appears to have been in continuous occupation in the Iron Age and Roman periods, although the limited evidence for activity after the 3rd century AD suggests that the site was abandoned in the later Roman period.

Project dates 16–23 June 2014 Project type (e.g. desk-based, field evaluation, etc.)

Field evaluation

Previous work (reference to organisation or SMR numbers etc)

Geophysical surveys (Stratascan 2012 and 2014)

Future work Unknown PROJECT LOCATION Site Location Northampton Road, Brixworth, Northamptonshire Study area (M2/ha) 3.3ha Site co-ordinates (8 Fig Grid Reference) SP 7494 6939 PROJECT CREATORS Name of organisation Cotswold Archaeology Project Brief originator Northamptonshire County Council Project Design (WSI) originator Cotswold Archaeology Project Manager Derek Evans Project Supervisor Peter James MONUMENT TYPE None SIGNIFICANT FINDS None PROJECT ARCHIVES Intended final location of archive

(museum/Accession no.) Content (e.g. pottery, animal bone, etc.)

Physical Currently held by Cotswold Archaeology (Milton Keynes Office)

Ceramics, animal bone, etc.

Paper Currently held by Cotswold Archaeology (Milton Keynes Office)

Context sheets, trench sheets, section drawings, etc.

Digital Currently held by Cotswold Archaeology (Milton Keynes Office)

Digital photos, etc.

BIBLIOGRAPHY CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2014 Saxon Rise 2, Northampton Road, Brixworth, Northamptonshire: Archaeological Evaluation CA typescript report 14297

Northamptonshire

CotswoldArchaeology

Cirencester 01285 771022

Milton Keynes 01908 218320

Andover 01264 326549

w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk

e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

FIGURE NO.DATEREVISIONSCALE@A4

PROJECT NO.DRAWN BYAPPROVED BY

N

0 1km

Site location plan

Saxon Rise 2, Brixworth, Northamptonshire

660201DJBLM 1

Reproduced from the 2006 Ordnance Survey Explorer map with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109

c

27-06-2014001:25,000

0 10m

Trench 17

A

A

ditch1703

ditch1709

N

B

B

1704

ditch1703

115.75mAOD

SW NE

Section AA

0 1m

116.0mAOD

S N

Section BB

0 1m

1700

1710

1712

1714 1716

17151706

1708

ditch1705

1707

1713

1711

ditch1709

East facing section of ditches 1705 and 1709 (scale 2m)

CotswoldArchaeology



Andover 01264 347630


e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE



27-06-2014001:200 1:20

660201DJBLM 3


Trench 17: Plan, sections and photograph

Trench 22ditch2207

ditch2203

layer2202

C

C

DD

0 10m

2210

22082213

221422192220

2211

2218

2200

2209

ditch2207

2216ditch2215

ditch2217

0 2m

114.0mAOD

E W

Section CC

0 1m

ditch2205

ditch2203

114.0mAOD

W E

Section DD

2200

2202

2206

2204

CotswoldArchaeology



Andover 01264 347630


e [email protected]

N

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE



27-06-2014001:200 1:50 1:20

660201DJBLM 4


Trench 22: Plan and sections

Trench 29

ditch2904

ditch2906

ditch2902

0 10m

N

29052910

2908

2907

ditch2904

2909

ditch2906

114.75mAOD

NE SW

Section EE

0 1m

North-west facing section of ditches 2904 and 2906 (scale 2m)

E

E

CotswoldArchaeology



Andover 01264 347630


e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE



03-07-2014001:200 1:20

660201DJBLM 5


Trench 29: Plan, section and photograph

0 10m

N

Trench 26

ditch2604

ditch2607

wall2608

ditch2612

FF

East facing section of walling 2608 (scale 1m)

0 2m

2600

wall2608

2609

26102611

2614

2614

2606

26022603

cut2607

ditch2604

26132616

ditch2601

foundationcut 2607

110.5mAOD

W E

Section FF

CotswoldArchaeology



Andover 01264 347630


e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE



27-06-2014001:200 1:50

660201DJBLM 6


Trench 26: Plan, section and photograph

0 1m

2708

2707

2706

2705

2703

ditch2702

2704

107.75mAOD

SW NE

Section HH

0 1m

2700

2714

2713

2712

ditch2711

108.75mAOD

SW NE

Section GG

Trench 27

pit2715

ditch2711

ditch2709

ditch2702

G

G

0 10m

N

H

H

CotswoldArchaeology



Andover 01264 347630


e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE



27-06-2014001:200 1:20

660201DJBLM 7


Trench 27: Plan and sections

Trench 28

ditch2818

ditch2822

ditch2803

ditch2809

ditch2811

ditch2814

ditch2820

ditch2806

0 10m

N

IL

L

I

J

J

K

K

0 1m

107.5mAOD

NW SE

Section II

2805

2804

ditch2803

0 1m

107.5mAOD

NW SE

Section JJ

2813

2812ditch2811

2808

2807

2810

ditch2809

ditch2806

107.75mAOD

S N

Section KK

0 1m

0 1m

2823 2819

ditch2818

ditch2822

107.75mAOD

SW NE

Section LL

South facing section of ditch 2814 (scale 0.5m)

CotswoldArchaeology



Andover 01264 347630


e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE



27-06-2014001:200 1:20

660201DJBLM 8


Trench 28: Plan, sections and photograph

ditch2302

0 10m

N

Trench 23

M

M

ditch2308

pit2310

ditch2306

2300

230323052307 2304

ditch2306 ditch

2302

0 2m

112.25mAOD

NW SE

Section MM

CotswoldArchaeology



Andover 01264 347630


e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE



03-07-2014001:200 1:20

660201DJBLM 9


Trench 23: Plan and section

saxon rise 2 northampton road brixworth northamptonshire€¦ · rise 2 site, the remainder of ich...

Documents