somerdale, keynsham bath and north east somerset new...

Somerdale, Keynsham Bath and North East Somerset

New Fry Club and F1 Pitch

Archaeological Excavation and Watching Brief

for EDP

on behalf of

Taylor Wimpey (Bristol) Ltd

CA Project: 4845 CA Report: 15279

August 2015

Somerdale, Keynsham Bath and North East Somerset

New Fry Club and F1 Pitch

Archaeological Excavation and Watching Brief

CA Project: 4845 CA Report: 15279

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

Document Control Grid Revision Date Author Checked by Status Reasons for

revision Approved

by A 05/08/15 Greg Crees Richard

Young Internal review

Ian Barnes

B 15/09/15 Greg Crees Richard Young

Internal review

Consultant comment

Ian Barnes


1

Somerdale, Keynsham, BANES, New Fry Club and F1 Pitch: Archaeological Excavation &Watching Brief

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 4

2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND ................................................................ 5

3. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................... 5

4. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 6

5. RESULTS (FIGS 2-9) ......................................................................................... 6

6. THE FINDS ........................................................................................................ 10

7. THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE .......................................................................... 13

8. DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................... 15

9. CA PROJECT TEAM .......................................................................................... 17

10. REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 17

APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS .................................................................... 20

APPENDIX B: THE FINDS .............................................................................................. 25

APPENDIX C: THE PALAEOENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE ......................................... 26

APPENDIX D: OASIS REPORT FORM .......................................................................... 27


2


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Fig. 1 Site location plan (1:25000)

Fig. 2 Site location plan showing trench areas, archaeological features and geophysical

survey (1:2000)

Fig. 3 Trench 2 detailed trench plan showing archaeological features and geophysical

survey results (1:125)

Fig. 4 Group 1: sections AA – DD and photographs (1:20)

Fig. 5 Group 1: sections EE – JJ and photographs (1: 20)

Fig. 6 Group 1: sections KK – PP and photographs (1:20)

Fig. 7 Group 2: sections QQ – VV and photographs (1:20)

Fig. 8 Group 2 sections WW – YY and photographs (1:20)

Fig. 9 Trench 4: photograph

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Pottery summary.

Table 2: Identified animal species.


3


Summary

Project Name: New Fry Club and F1 pitch, Somerdale

Location: Keynsham, BANES

NGR: ST 6562 6912

Type: Excavation and Watching Brief

Date: 30th April to 29th August 2014

Planning Reference: 13/01780/EOUT Location of Archive: To be deposited with Roman Baths Museum

Site Code: SMK 14

An archaeological excavation and watching brief was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology

in April and August 2014, before and during groundworks associated with the redevelopment

of the former Cadbury Factory and surrounding land at Somerdale, Keynsham, Bath and

North East Somerset. An area for a new groundsman’s compound was subject to

archaeological excavation and a watching brief was undertaken on other associated

groundworks.

Archaeological features cutting natural deposits and sealed below subsoil were identified in

the excavation of the area of the groundsman’s compound and within a service trench to the

north. No archaeological deposits, other than modern intrusions, were present in the

trenches excavated within the area of the former Cadbury Factory. The excavation and

watching brief were undertaken on the western edge of an extensive Roman small town,

possibly that of Traiectus, previously identified through excavation and geophysical survey.

The small town was scheduled by English Heritage (now Historic England) on 29 May 2014.

All archaeological works have been completed with the approval of Historic England and the

Senior Archaeological Officer, Bath and North East Somerset Council. The features

identified during the archaeological works formed part of an enclosure, holding area, and

droveway more than likely for the management of livestock. Datable evidence suggests the

features were in use until c. 150AD.


4


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Between April to August 2014 Cotswold Archaeology (CA) carried out an

archaeological excavation and watching brief for The Environmental Dimension

Partnership (EDP) on behalf of Taylor Wimpey (Bristol) Ltd at Somerdale,

Keynsham, Bath and North East Somerset (BANES) (centred on NGR: ST 6562

6912; Fig. 1). The excavation and watching brief was undertaken to fulfil conditions

attached to a planning consent for the redevelopment of the area of the former

Cadbury Factory and surrounding land granted by Bath and North East Somerset

Council (ref: 13/01780/EOUT, Conditions 39, 40, 41, 44 and 45). The works that this

document report upon were undertaken within the area of the new Fry Club and F1

football pitch.

1.2 The excavation and watching brief were carried out in accordance with conditions

recommended by Richard Sermon, Archaeological Officer, BANES Council, the

archaeological advisor to BANES Council and with a subsequent detailed Written

Scheme of Investigation (WSI) produced by EDP (2014a) and approved by Mr

Sermon. The fieldwork also followed the Standard and guidance for an

archaeological watching brief (IfA 2009), Standard and Guidance: Archaeological

Excavation (CIfA 2014), the Management of Archaeological Projects (English

Heritage 1991) and the Management of Research Projects in the Historic

Environment (MORPHE): Project Manager’s Guide (EH 2006).

The site

1.3 The development site is located to the north of Keynsham at the former Cadbury

Factory, Keynsham Hams and lies between approximately 10 and 15m AOD. The

observed groundworks were for the redevelopment of former playing fields for the

new Fry Club and F1 pitch. These covered approximately 2.15ha, which included a

targeted excavation undertaken within the footprint of the new groundsmans hut,

and archaeological monitoring for associated works undertaken to the south and

north of the excavation area (Fig. 2).

1.4 The underlying solid geology of the area is mapped as Rugby Mudstone Member,

comprising limestone and mudstone, with no superficial deposits recorded (BGS

2014). The natural substrate observed during this phase of works was river terrace

gravels.


5


2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

2.1 A detailed archaeological background is provided in the WSI (EDP 2014a, 7-8). This

section contains a summary of the information presented there.

2.2 Limited prehistoric activity has been identified within the area, including a Bronze

Age enclosure to the west of the site.

2.3 Roman activity is widespread to the immediate west and north of the site, with an

extensive Roman small town, possibly that of Traiectus, being identified through

excavation and geophysical survey (AC 2012, AS 2009). This was scheduled by

English Heritage on 29 May 2014.

2.4 Recent work c.100m to the south of the site has revealed part of a large prehistoric

or later enclosure, and other prehistoric, Roman and undated activity, including a

Roman cremation (CA 2015).

2.4 There is little evidence for medieval or post-medieval activity in the wider area,

despite the proximity to the former Keynsham Abbey. Recent work in the recreation

ground, to the south, identified medieval quarrying (AC 2013). Ridge and furrow

cultivation and historic boundaries are recorded on the Hams.

3. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

3.1 The objectives of the archaeological works were:

• to monitor groundworks, and to identify, investigate and record all significant buried

archaeological deposits revealed on the site during the course of the development

groundworks;

• at the conclusion of the project, to produce an integrated archive for the project work

and a report setting out the results of the project and the archaeological conclusions

that can be drawn from the recorded data.


6


4. METHODOLOGY

4.1 The fieldwork comprised excavation of a 0.5ha area corresponding with the footprint

of the new groundsman’s hut that adjoins the northern edge of the new F1 pitch

(Trench 2). Excavation of Trench 2 followed the methodology set out within the WSI

(EDP 2014a).

4.2 The archaeological monitoring of other intrusive groundwork followed a methodology

that had been set out in a separate WSI (EDP 2014b). These works were the

demolition and ground reduction for a temporary access route and for the F1 pitch

(Trench 3 and 4 respectively), the removal of hedgerows adjacent to the Trench 2

excavation area (Trench 5), a topsoil strip next to the excavation area (Trench 6),

and other associated drainage works (Trenches 7 and 8) (Fig. 2).

4.2 Where archaeological deposits were encountered written, graphic and photographic

records were compiled in accordance with CA Technical Manual 1: Fieldwork

Recording Manual.

4.3 The archive and artefacts from the evaluation are currently held by CA at their

offices in Kemble. Subject to the agreement of the legal landowner the artefacts will

be deposited with the Roman Baths Museum under accession number BATRM

2014.189, along with the site archive. A summary of information from this project set

out within Appendix D will be entered onto the OASIS online database of

archaeological projects in Britain.

5. RESULTS (FIGS 2-9)

5.1 The natural geological substrate 202, 401, 709 and 810, consisting of river terrace

gravels and occasional clay deposits, was revealed within Trenches 2, 4, 7, and 8.

Natural substrate was not observed in Trenches 3, 5, and 6 due to the shallow

depths of intrusion.

5.2 Overlying the river terrace gravels, a sterile soil horizon of natural origin 706, 707

and 809, comprising reddish brown silty clay was identified intermittently across

large parts of the monitored areas. The same deposit in-filled various natural

features within Trench 2, a number of these which had been hand excavated. This


7


deposit had been encountered during previous trial trenching to the south (AC 2013)

and analysis by Allen Environmental Archaeology determined that it filled features of

probable periglacial origin, comprising solution and ice features within the surface of

the gravels (ibid).

5.3 Overlying the natural geological deposits was silty clay subsoil which was on

average 0.25m thick. This was overlain by topsoil which was also 0.25m thick on

average.

5.4 Archaeological features cutting natural deposits and sealed below subsoil were

identified in Trenches 2 and 7. No archaeological deposits, other than modern

intrusions, were present in the other trenches (see for example Fig. 9 showing

Trench 4).

5.5 The spot dating evidence indicates that the archaeological activity on site dates to

the early Roman period or later, specifically from the mid to late 1st-Century through

to the 2nd-Century, with little indication that it extends beyond AD 150. (Later

prehistoric material is also occasionally present but only as residual finds within

Roman features - see Section 6). Given the confined span of time this represents,

and combined with the fairly sparse finds evidence, further refinement of the

chronological phasing is not possible based purely on datable evidence. Therefore

the features have been put into two groups characterised by purpose and reflect the

broad chronological order and spatial relations of the features (Fig. 3). There are no

stratigraphic relations between the Groups; stratigraphic relations are present within

Group 1 only and evidence successive re-cutting/maintenance episodes within the

group, but do not represent a meaningful chronological sequence. The two groups

that have been identified broadly date to the following periods or later:

Group 1 features: Enclosure, holding area and droveway

• Roman: mid to late 1st-Century AD to early 2nd-Century AD

Group 2 features: Other features/sub-divisions

• Roman: late 1st-Century to 2nd-Century AD

Group 1 5.6 Group 1 comprises ditch cuts forming an enclosure, holding area and droveway for

animals, the majority of which are aligned N/S or E/W (Fig. 3: highlighted in pink).


8


Stratigraphically some of the earliest features within the group are ditch 257/268 and

ditch 223. Ditch 257/268 was curvilinear shaped. It was located within the north of

the trench and cut by ditch 216 (Fig. 4; section AA - BB). Ditch 223 was a larger

ditch located on the eastern side of the trench, cut by smaller ditch 242 which may

be remains of a repair or a drainage channel. Ditch 223 had slightly irregular

moderate sloping sides and a flat base, with a channel dug along its western side

measuring >0.65m wide and was >0.15m deep. This gives a total dimension for the

ditch (including the ‘channel’) as 2.95m wide and 0.65m deep. It contained a

sequence of dumped and naturally silted deposits. All deposits except the earliest

deposit (259) contained pottery dating to the mid-1st to early 2nd century AD. Five

fills were identified (Fig. 4; sections CC - DD).

5.7 The earliest fill was dumped deposit 259 comprising compact material with burnt

clay inclusions. A palaeo-environmental sample of this material proved not to

contain anything to indicate what activity the burnt clay may represent (see Section

7). Deposit 259 was overlain by natural silt/erosion deposit 266 which was present

throughout the lower portion of the ditch including the smaller ditch channel, and this

implies that the main course of the ditch and channel were in use together during at

least the final period of their use. As well as pottery it contained fired clay and slag,

possibly representing refuse from smithing and hearth debris. Deposit 266 was

overlain by fill 225, a dumped deposit containing a high concentration of Roman

pottery debris and fired clay fragments (see Fig. 4: photograph). Fill 265 also

contained a high proportion of Roman pot sherds and also contained residual sherds

of late prehistoric pottery. Its silty composition suggests the deposit derives from the

gradual in filling of the ditch through natural water born silting and erosion with small

periodic episodes of domestic waste dumping. Fill 224 represents the final (tertiary)

silting/slumping in of the ditch during a much later period as it contained post-

medieval clay tobacco pipe.

5.8 Ditches 257/268 and 223 had an obvious spatial relationship with the north-eastern

corner of a rectilinear or L-shaped ditched enclosure (ditch cuts 203, 205, 207, 209,

216, 219, 221, 251, 255, 262, 276, 278) broadly dated by pottery sherd fragments to

the mid-1st to early 2nd century. A possible drove way is formed between the

enclosure and ditch 223 to its eastern side (Fig. 3). The northern arm of the

rectilinear enclosure was composed of intercutting ditch segments that evidence

piecemeal maintenance to it. Stratigraphically, the earliest of these intercutting

features was ditch 203. Based on similarity of fills, 203 was possibly the same ditch


9


as 219. Ditch 203 was truncated by a wider shallow ditch segment 205 on its

southern side (Fig. 5; section EE). Ditch 219 was cut by later ditch segments 216

and 221 (Fig. 5; section FF). The other ditch segments that formed the enclosure did

not have stratigraphic relations but did have a clear linear spatial relationship with

one another. Cut 219 contained human juvenile remains within its fill (220).

5.9 The enclosure ditch profiles varied; periodic ‘maintenance’ resulted in uneven recuts

and its segmented appearance is superficial, resulting from the shallow depth of

survival of its cuts (e.g. cuts 207, 248, and 240, Fig. 5; sections GG - JJ). Shallow

preservation means a good representation of their dimensions is not preserved.

Some appear fairly symmetrical and rounded, e.g cuts 209 (not illustrated), 251,

255, 262, and 278 (Fig. 6; sections KK - NN), some have flat or irregular bases, e.g.

cuts 242 and 276 (Fig. 6; section OO & PP). Differential/shallow survival may

explain why ditch segment 207 doesn’t neatly join with ditch cuts 262 or 278 (and it

is uncertain whether an entrance to the enclosure existed here). Cuts 255 and 251

were substantial and therefore convincing enough to represent a possible eastern

entrance to the enclosure at that point. Cut 242 could also be a terminus; conversely

the shallowness of cut 240 at its other end suggests the ditch originally continued

further to the north.

5.10 As mentioned previously (Section 5.9), the rectilinear enclosure appears to have

been laid out to form part of a possible drove way with ditch 223. This droveway

measured up to 2.7m in width. Curvilinear ditch 257/268 could be interpreted as

forming a holding area to the north end on the droveway. Together they infer the

moving and selection of animals that were run down the droveway from the south

into a small holding area which then led into a paddock or field enclosure (the

rectilinear enclosure). In turn these features are clearly part of a much larger field

enclosure system mapped by the geophysical survey: Ditches 257/268 and 223 both

correspond to positive linear anomalies that continue northwards beyond the trench

area, ditch 257/268 curves round to join or terminate with ditch 223, and 223

continues further northwards where it joins with another ditch to form the southern

side of what appears to be another much larger E/W aligned drove way (Fig. 2).

5.11 A large ditch recorded in Trench 7 (Fig. 2) may also be considered to be part of this

Group. It appears to correlate with a positive linear anomaly depicted on the

geophysical survey situated to the northern side of the large E/W drove way. It

measured approximately 6m at its top and was not excavated to base. Two fills were


10


identified; the lowest fill 704 was a silty clay backfill deposit containing rare charcoal

fragments, and its upper fill 705 was a silty deposit that looked like a naturally silted

fill which produced Roman pottery sherd dated to the later-1st century to early-2nd

century, and one hob nail and one nail (both undated).

.

Group 2 5.12 Possibly the earliest datable feature was curvilinear feature 236/249/280 (Fig. 3

highlighted in brown). It was well defined in plan but shallow in profile. It measured

0.39m to 0.76m wide, with a depth ranging from 0.05m to 0.12m. Its single fill (250)

produced a sherd of Roman pottery and a ceramic disc which dates it to the mid to

late-1st century (Fig. 6; sections QQ & RR).

5.13 Three small linear shaped ditch ‘segments’ appear to align as remnants of a NE/SW

and NW/SE field boundary and/or drainage ditch system (Fig. 3; highlighted in

brown); ditches 211, 213, 270, 274 (Fig. 7: sections SS – VV), and 272 (not

illustrated). Ditch segment 274 produced a single sherd of Roman pottery of the late-

1st to early-2nd centuries. It is possible that they functioned as sub-divisions to

Group 1 (subdividing the rectilinear enclosure).

5.14 Three clusters of post holes and/or pits form a possible NE/SW alignment; features

226, 228, 230, 233, 235, and 253 (Fig. 3; highlighted in brown, Fig. 8; sections WW

– YY). Post hole 235 was cut by later post hole 233, which may be a replacement or

repair. Post holes 226 and 228 were cut by a later undated pit or post hole 230.

One sherd of Roman pottery dating to the 2nd century was retrieved from the fill of

230.

6. THE FINDS

Pottery 6.1 Moderate quantities of late prehistoric and Roman pottery were recovered (table 1).

The assemblage has been fully recorded; scanned by context, sorted by fabric and

quantified according to sherd count/weight and rim EVEs (estimated vessel

equivalents). In addition vessel form/rim morphology have been recorded when

applicable, as have evidence for use in the form or carbonised and other residues

and post-firing alteration. Fabric codes created for this project are defined (table 1)

and a concordance has been provided matching types to the Bath pottery type


11


series (summarised in Brown 2007) and, where applicable, to National Roman

Fabric Reference Collection (Tomber and Dore 1998).

6.2 A total of 42 sherds weighing 284g (0.19 EVEs) comprises handmade pottery of late

prehistoric type. The remainder, some 335 sherds, weighing 2.7kg (2.24 EVEs),

dates to the Roman period. A significant proportion (229 sherds of Roman date and

a further 38 sherds from the late prehistoric) was derived from a single feature,

north-south aligned ditch 223. The condition of this group and of much of the

Roman assemblage is moderately good; although burial conditions have resulted in

some surface loss. The average sherd weight for the late prehistoric group, most or

all of which appears to be re-deposited, is low at 6.8g. The equivalent figure for the

Roman material is slightly higher (8.2g) but appears reflective of a moderately well

broken-up assemblage.

Assemblage summary and dating: Late Prehistoric

6.3 The small quantities of late prehistoric material appears to be wholly re-deposited,

from within Roman-dated features. Most comprises bodysherds occurring in

handmade limestone-tempered fabrics. The small number of rim sherds are

suggestive of jar-proportioned vessels simple or bead-like rims which are

characteristic of many Middle or Late Iron Age assemblages.

Roman

6.4 The composition of the assemblage is set out in table 1. Wheelthrown grog-

tempered wares (fabric GT) are probably locally made and date to the early decades

of the Roman period (before c. 70/80 AD). The single identifiable vessel form, a

shouldered bowl from ditch fill 249 is typical of the ‘Belgic’ style bowls common for

such pottery from the wider area. Savernake grog-tempered ware (SAV GT), from

northeast Wiltshire occur mainly as thick-walled sherds probably from the large

storage jars which commonly characterise this type. Savernake ware is moderately

widespread in the region across the mid-1st to earlier 2nd centuries and is certainly

known in this period from Bath (Brown 2007, 35–6).

6.5 Reduced (grey or black-firing) coarsewares, which are almost certainly all local in

origin, make up the bulk of the Roman group. Most common are wheelthrown black-

firing wares (LOC BS) of the type well-known from the north Wiltshire and Bath

areas and which are dateable across the mid-1st and 2nd centuries. Production of

comparable material is attested at Wesbury, Wilts (Corney et al. 2014), although its


12


abundance across the region suggests production was widespread. Vessel forms in

this type from deposits 225 include shouldered bowls similar to examples dating to

the mid-1st to earlier 2nd century from Cirencester (Rigby 1982, fig. 52, nos 91,

100). The greywares (GW1–4) comprise sandy fabrics (GW typical of material

known locally and spanning the Roman period. An absence of the heavily

micaceous types which dominate after the late 2nd century, and of specifically Late

Roman vessel forms is probably significant. Represented forms among the

greywares comprise mainly medium-mouthed necked jars and, from ditch fill 224, a

tankard. The latter is of a straight-sided form close to examples in Severn Valley

ware of later 1st to 2nd century dating (Webster 1976, 30).

6.6 The modest quantities of Severn Valley ware present appears to be is typical of the

Roman period locally (Brown 2007, 38). Identifiable forms comprise tankards (ditch

fills 208 and 225) also of Webster’s earlier Roman straight-sided styles, and a

necked ‘storage jar’ of long-lived type (ibid. 22–6) also from deposit 225. Small

quantities occur in a sandy oxidised fabric (OXf) and a fine oxidised flagon fabric

(OXff) which may originally have been white-slipped. Both types are probably

local/north Wiltshire in origin. A ring-necked flagon in fabric OXff from ditch fill 275 is

a type produced across the late 1st and early/middle 2nd centuries.

6.7 Regional pottery types are represented only by the small numbers of Southeast

Dorset Black-burnished ware bodysherds from ditch fills 206 and 255-66. Their

scarcity is a good indication that 2nd century or later activity at the site is limited; this

type being common in the area after the early 2nd century. Continental types are

represented as small quantities of Gaulish samian. The prevalence of South Gaulish

(LGF SA) over Central Gaulish (LEZ SA2) sourced material is notable and a further

indication that most activity pre-dates the 2nd century. Vessel forms were

identifiable only among the South Gaulish samian and comprise Dr.18 dishes and a

Dr. 27 cup which suggest Flavian dating (c. 70–100 AD).


13


Summary 6.8 Evidence for pre-Roman activity is present as pottery of later Iron Age type, all of

which appears to be re-deposited. The Roman group, although modest in size and

seemingly well broken up, presents consistent evidence for a phase of Early Roman

activity, with little indication that this extends beyond c. AD 150. Although the

presence of some South Gaulish samian is notable, there are no indications of

elevated status which might be expected from a wider range of imported wares,

and ‘specialist’ types including mortaria

Lithics

6.9 The single worked flint item, from undated ditch fill 252, is a retouched flake or

piercer made on a thick flake blank in uncorticated grey-brown flint. The secondary

working consists of abrupt retouch from the ventral surface to three edges. Its

thickness and overall crudeness hints at ‘late’, probably Bronze Age dating.

Other finds Metalwork

6.10 Objects of metal comprised three nail fragments (Roman-dated ditch fills 264 and

275) and a shoe cleat or staple fragment (undated ditch fill 247), all of iron.

7. THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE

Animal Bone

7.1 A collection of animal bones numbering 148 fragments (1962g) was recovered by

hand excavation from 16 deposits in association with finds dating to the Roman

period. The bones were generally well preserved, however historical and modern

damage has rendered 65% of the assemblage unidentifiable beyond the level of

‘large’ or ‘medium mammal’. For the purpose of this report, the bones were identified

to species and skeletal element using an osteological reference collection (Cotswold

Archaeology Ltd) as well as standard reference literature (Schmid 1972, Hillson

1996), and quantified by fragment count and weight. Where modern breakage was

observed and re-fitting was possible, those fragments were recorded as a single

bone.

7.2 It was possible to identify the remains of cattle (Bos taurus), sheep/goat (Ovis

aries/Capra hircus), pig (Sus scrofa domesticus), horse (Equus callabus) and dog


14


(Canis familiarus). Of these, the meat-producing animals are represented mainly by

those more robust and generally meat-poor skeletal elements such as the loose

molar teeth and the bones of the lower leg and feet. The presence of these bones,

almost to the exclusion of other more meat-rich areas of the skeleton, does suggest

that the assemblage represents the waste from the dressing of animal carcasses.

However, the remains of dog have also been identified and much of the assemblage

displays clear gnaw marks. Therefore a taphonomic bias in the results cannot be

ruled out. Horse remains were revealed in such low numbers that no useful

inference as to their presence can be made.

Human Bone 7.3 A selection of human bone was recovered from fill 220 within ditch 219. The skeletal

remains were those of a neonate and comprised the back of the cranium, upper

arms, torso and upper legs.

7.4 All skeletal material was examined and recorded in accordance with national

guidelines (Hillson 1996; Brickley and McKinley 2004; Mays et al. 2004). The

individual was a subadult, and the multi-method approach taken with adults was not

possible. Subadults are aged using long bone length, epiphyseal fusion and dental

eruption (Table 1), and metrical measurements of long bones were used to estimate

the age of the subadult remains. Nonmetric mesurements are (where observable)

the presence or absence of frequently recorded non-metrical cranial and post-cranial

traits were scored (Berry and Berry 1967; Schwartz 1995; Hillson 1996). Subadults

are defined as individuals below 20 years of age, and there are no accepted

methods to sex subadults (Cox and Mays 2000).

7.5 The completeness of the skeleton was classified as a percentage of the whole and

divided in to four groups , 0-25% 25-50% 50-75% and 75+%. The condition of the

bone surface of the skeletal remains was recorded in detail with reference to

different anatomical areas (skull, arms, hands, legs and feet) after McKinley (2004,

16) and given an overall summary score. No dentition was present, but skeletal

pathology and/or bony abnormalities were described and differential diagnoses

explored with reference to standard texts (Ortner and Putschar 1981; Resnick 1995;

Aufderheide and Rodriguez-Martin 1998).


15


Summary 7.6 This individual was estimated to have died at 36-44 weeks gestation (normal

gestation is 38-42 weeks), or, at or around the time of birth. This was based on

femoral bone length, 70 mm, (Gowland 2002, Jeanty 1983) and places it in the

neonate category. There was no dentition present to confirm the age estimation. In

addition to both femurs there were also parts of the arms, ribs, a single fragment of

vertebrae, fragments of ilium and the occipital bone were also present for analysis.

These were all consistent in size and unfused as expected for a neonate. It is

estimated that 0-25% of the skeleton was present and the bone was in excellent

condition (grade 0 bone surface). The bone did not display any features suggestive

of pathology, which is not unusual for a neonate.

Plant Macrofossils

7.7 A single environmental sample (22 litres of soil) was retrieved and fully processed

with the intention of recovering evidence of industrial or domestic activity and

material for radiocarbon dating. The sample was processed by standard flotation

procedures (CA Technical Manual No. 2)

7.8 The sample was taken from primary fill 259 within ditch 223. It produced 0.5ml of flot

and contained no plant macrofossil or charcoal material. The absence of any

ecofactual evidence means no further interpretation of feature function is possible.

8. DISCUSSION

8.1 Archaeological features cutting natural deposits and sealed below subsoil were identified in the excavation of the area of the groundsman’s compound and within a service trench to the north. No archaeological deposits, other than modern intrusions, were present in the trenches excavated within the area of the former Cadbury Factory.

Roman 8.2 The excavation and watching brief recorded features situated at the western edge of

the Scheduled area of the Roman small town. The features form part of a field

enclosure and other divisions, likely used to facilitate management of livestock.

Later prehistoric pottery sherds was occasionally present as residual finds within

Roman features. All the features recorded appear to date to between the mid-1st to

2nd centuries AD, with an apparent cessation of activity around AD 150.

Chronological phasing was not possible given the patchy intercutting sequence and


16


limited artefactual recovery, and it may be that all the features are roughly

contemporary with one another. The features were therefore put into two groups

characterised by purpose (Fig. 3).

Group 1: Enclosure, holding area and droveway 8.3 Group 1 comprises ditch cuts that form part of a broadly NS and EW orientated

rectilinear enclosure with associated holding area and droveway situated along its

northern and eastern side respectively. This group could be interpreted as a field or

paddock with a holding area used for the selection and holding of animals received

via the droveway from the south. In turn this group may be a partitioning or side-part

to a larger field enclosure system mapped by geophysical survey (the Scheduled

area thought to represent part of the Roman town of Traiectus), which includes the

ditch recorded in Trench 7 during the watching brief.

Group 2: Other features/sub-divisions 8.4 Group 2 comprises a possible row of post holes and remnants of possible field

boundary or drainage ditches. It also includes part of a curvilinear shaped ditch

(possibly the south-western portion of a drip gulley for a small circular building).

Subject to dating evidence (or rather, the lack of), these features may be

subdivisions to Group 1.

Summary

8.5 Both Groups appear to function as parts of Roman livestock management, however

the excavated area represents only a small sample of the wider archaeological

landscape known from geophysical survey. As such, interpretation can only be

provisional. There are no stratigraphic relationships between the groups, and

stratigraphic relations present within Group 1 do not represent a discernible

chronological sequence within the group, but rather evidences the re-cutting and

maintenance of features within the group that could be better interpreted as

seasonal maintenance to stock yards e.g. stock is grazed on Summer pasture, and

selectively wintered in paddocked areas which required seasonal maintenance (e.g.

ditch recutting etc). The middle Iron Age to Roman period site of Thornhill Farm in

Gloucestershire provides a comparable site located on the first river terrace gravels

of the Thames where enclosures of non-domestic function were interpreted as

paddocks and seasonal pens used in stock management. Situated on the gravel


17


terrace of the river Avon, which is a floodplain currently liable to flooding during the

colder months of the year, the lower part of the Keynsham Hams are located to the

north of the excavation area and may have been suited for Summer grazing but not

for holding animals during winter periods (during times of flood). The excavated area

is some 5m higher than the lower Hams, and therefore may have been a suitable

location for wintering animals.

8.6 Aside from indicating a strict time frame for the groups, the overall finds evidence is

sparse, although this may simply reflect the ephemeral nature of the surviving

evidence. Dumped deposits from the larger of the Group 1 ditches contained finds

that hint at surrounding domestic occupation and industry, and the overall

impression given by the finds assemblage as a whole is of locally based

interactions, with only occasional references to the wider region. Faunal remains

collected did evidence the presence of meat-producing animals one would expect

for pastoral areas, but the evidence was limited.

.

9. CA PROJECT TEAM

Fieldwork was undertaken by Tim Havard, assisted by CA site personnel. The report

was written by Greg Crees. The finds and biological evidence reports were written

by Ed McSloy, Andy Clarke, Sarah Cobain and Sharon Clough. The illustrations

were prepared by John Bennett and Aleksandra Osinska. The archive has been

compiled by Greg Crees, and prepared for deposition by Hazel O’Neill. The project

was managed for CA by Richard Young.

10. REFERENCES

AC (AC Archaeology) 2012 Somerdale Factory Sports Fields, Keynsham Hams, Bath and

Northeast Somerset AC report no. ACW486/3/0

AC (AC Archaeology) 2013 Somerdale Factory Recreation Grounds and Car Park,

Keynsham: Bath and Northeast Somerset AC report no. ACW488/2/0 AS (Archaeological Surveys Ltd) 2009 Cadbury Somerdale Factory Keynsham Bath & North

East Somerset Magnetometer Survey Report AS report no. 278


18


Aufderheide, A, C and Rodríguez-Martin, C, 1998 The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Human

Palaeopathology, Cambridge

Berry, R and Berry, A, 1967 Epigenetic variation in human cranium Journal of Anatomy 101:

361-379

BGS (British Geological Survey) 2015 Geology of Britain Viewer

(http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html) Accessed 28 May 2015

Brickley M and McKinley, M 2004 Guidelines to the standards for recording of human

remains; IFA Paper No 7

Brown, L. 2007 ‘Early Roman Pottery’, in Davenport et al. 2007, 34–48

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) Somerdale, Keynsham, BANES, Phase I: Archaeological

Watching Brief CA typescript report 14454

Corney, M., Charlton, M. and Morris, N. 2014 ‘A Romano-British pottery production centre at

Short Street, Westbury, Wiltshire’ Wilts Archaeol. and Natur. Hist. Mag. 107, 66–76

Cox, M and Mays ,S. 2000. Human osteology in Archaeology and forensic science.

Greenwich medical media. London

Davenport, P., Poole, C. and Jordan, D. 2007 Archaeology in Bath: Excavations at the New

Royal Baths (The Spa), and Bellot’s Hospital 1998–1999, Oxford, Oxford

Archaeology Monog. 3

EDP (Environmental Dimension Partnership) 2014a Somerdale, Keynsham Written Scheme

of Investigation for an Archaeological Excavation H_EDP1601_06

EDP (Environmental Dimension Partnership) 2014b Somerdale, Keynsham Written Scheme

of Investigation for an Archaeological Excavation H_EDP1601_08

Gowland, R. L. & Chamberlain, A.T. (2002). A Bayesian Approach to Ageing Perinatal

Skeletal Material from Archaeological Sites: Implications for the Evidence for

Infanticide in Roman-Britain. Journal of Archaeological Science 29(6): 677-685.

Hillson, S 1996: Dental Anthropology. Cambridge University Press

http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html

https://www.dur.ac.uk/archaeology/staff/?mode=pdetail&id=4567&sid=4567&pdetail=45798




19


Hoppa, R D 1992 Evaluating human skeletal growth: an Anglo-Saxon example International

Journal of Osteoarchaeology 2 275- 288

Maresh, MM 1970 Human growth and development CC Thomas: Springfield

Mays, S, Brickley, M, and Dodwell, N, 2004 Human bones from archaeological sites -

Guidelines for producing assessment documents and analytical reports, English

Heritage

McKern, T.W. and Stewart, T.D. 1957 Skeletal Age Changes in Young American Males,

Analysed from the Standpoint of Identification, Natick, Massachusetts Quartermaster

Research and Development Command Technical Report EP-45.

McKinley, J 2004. Compiling a skeletal inventory: disarticulated and co-mingled remains. In

Guidelines to the standards for recording human

Moorees, C F A, Fanning E A, and Hunt, E E, 1963 Age variation of formation stages for ten

permanent teeth Journal of Dental Research 42 1490-1502

Ortner, D J, and Putschar, W G J, 1981 Identification of pathological conditions in human

skeletal remains Smithsonian Institute Press

Resnick, D, 1995 Diagnosis of Bone and Joint Disorders. 3rd. ed. 6 vols. W.B. Saunders

Company, London

Rigby, V., 1982. ‘The Coarse Pottery’ in Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 153-204

Tomber, R. and Dore, J. 1998 The National Roman Fabric Reference Collection: a

handbook London: Museum of London Archaeology Service

Wacher, J. and McWhirr, A. 1982 Cirencester Excavations I: Early Roman Occupation at

Cirencester Cirencester Excavation Committee, Gloucester, Alan Sutton

Webster, P.V. 1976 ‘Severn Valley ware: A Preliminary Study’, Trans. Bristol

Gloucestershire Archaeol. Soc. 94, 18–46

Webb, P A. Owings and Suchey, J M 1985 Epiphyseal union of the anterior iliac crest and

medial clavicle in a modern multiracial sample of American males and females.

American Journal of Physical Anthropology Volume 68, Issue 4, pages 457–466


20


APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS

Area Ctx Ctx_type Fill of Ctx comment Ctx description L (m) W (m)

D (m) Spot Date

2 200 Layer topsoil Friable mid grey brown clay silt, rare sub-angular stones , rare charcoal

0.3

2 201 Layer subsoil Compact mid brown grey silt clay, rare sub-angular stone

0.05-0.25

IA +

2 202 Layer Natural substrate; river terrace gravels

Mixed light grey and pinkish clay with bands of light to mid brown sandy clay

2 203 Cut Ditch, E-W aligned

Linear, gentle concave symmetrical profile, imperceptible b.o.s. to flatish base

>1.95 0.95 0.24

2 204 Fill 203 Compact mid red brown clay, <1% angular-sub-angular stone, charcoal flecks

>1.95 0.95 0.24


Linear, gentle to moderate concave asymmetrical U-shaped profile, imperceptible b.o.s. to rounded base

>1.8 0.3 0.35

2 206 Fill 205 Compact mid brown grey clay, <1% angular to sub-angular stone, charcoal flecks, pot sherd, animal bone

>1.8 3.7 0.12 C2


Linear, sides undetermined as shallow surviving, rounded base, 1.25m excavated

>1.25 0.57 0.05

2 208 Fill 207 Compact mid brown grey silty clay, <1% angular to sub-angular stone, charcoal flecks, pot sherd, animal bone

>1.26 0.57 0.05 MC1 – C2

2 209 Cut Ditch, N-S aligned

Linear, moderate slightly concave symmetrical profile, imperceptible b.o.s. to flatish base, 1m excavated

>1 0.49 0.14

2 210 Fill 209 Compact mid brown sandy clay, <1% sub-angular stone, charcoal flecks

>2 0.49 0.14 IA+

2 211 Cut Ditch, N/W-S/E aligned

Linear, sides undetermined as shallow surviving, rounded base, 2m excavated

>2 0.38 0.07

2 212 Fill 211 Compact mid brown grey clay, <1% angular to sub-angular stone, charcoal flecks, pot sherd

>2 0.38 0.07

2 213 Cut Ditch terminus, N/W-S/E aligned

Linear, steep concave profile, imperceptible to sharp b.o.s. to rounded base, 0.87m excavated

>0.87 0.34 0.15

2 214 Fill 213 Compact mid grey brown silty clay, <5% stone 4-25mm, <1% charcoal flecks, animal bone

>0.87 0.34 0.15

2 215 Fill 213 Part of/within top of 214

Large flat/tabular limestone, unworked, 140-360mm

>0.87 0.34 0.15


Linear, gentle to steep/irregular sides, asymmetrical profile, imperceptible to sharp b.o.s. to flat base, 2 interventions excavated

>0.87 0.56 (1.34)

0.32

2 217 Void C1

218 Fill 216 Compact dark grey brown silty clay, <5% stone <60mm, <1% charcoal <10mm, pot sherd, animal bone

>0.87 0.56 0.32 LC1


Linear, moderate to steep side, gradual b.o.s. to rounded base, 2.2m excavated

>2.2 >0.3 (0.6)

0.28


21


2 220 Fill 219 Compact mid orange brown silty clay, <5% stone <60mm, <1% charcoal flecks, pot sherd, glass, animal bone

>2.2 >0.3 (0.6)

0.28 LC1+


Linear, steep sides, gradual b.o.s. to flat base, 1m excavated

>1 >0.23 0.14

2 222 Fill 221 Compact dark blackish brown silty clay, <5% stone <50mm, charcoal flecks, burnt clay fragments, pot sherd

>1 >0.23 0.14 LC1 + EC2


Linear, moderate, slightly irregular sides, gradual to sharp b.o.s. to flat even base; smaller 0.6m wide x 0.14m deep channel on base of western side, 2m excavated

>2 2.95 0.65

2 224 Fill 223 5th fill (tertiary silting/slumping within ditch

Compact mid brown grey silty clay, <5% stone <10mm, pot sherd

>2 2.95 0.21 LC1 – C2

2 225 Fill 223 3rd fill (dump/backfill deposit within ditch)

Compact mid greenish brown silty clay, 15% potsherd, 10% stone <5-400mm, %% animal bone, 1% charcoal flecks

0.8 1.35 0.16 C2

2 226 Cut Possible post hole

Square, steep side, sharp b.o.s. to flat base

>0.18 0.34 0.08

2 227 Fill 226 Compact mid grey brown silt clay, small lumps re-deposited natural clay

>0.18 0.34 0.08


Circular?, moderate concave side, gradual to imperceptible b.o.s. to slightly rounded base

0.3 >0.2 0.1

2 229 Fill 228 Compact mid brown grey silty clay, 1% stone <80mm

0.3 >0.2 0.1

2 230 Cut Pit Circular, moderate concave side, gradual to imperceptible b.o.s. to slightly rounded base

0.64 >0.3 0.2

2 231 Fill 230 Compact mid brown grey silty clay, 1% stone <40mm

0.64 >0.3 0.2 C2

2 232 Fill 233 Friable dark yellow grey clayey silt 0.63 0.5 0.15

2 233 Cut (Intercutting?) pit/post holes

Sub-oval/multi-faceted, moderate to steep concave irregular sides, gradual to imerceptible b.o.s. to irregular concave base

0.63 0.5 0.15

2 234 Fill 235 Friable dark brown grey clay silt 0.25 0.22 0.12


Sub-circular, vertical U-shaped symmetrical profile, imperceptible b.o.s. to rounded base

0.25 0.22 0.12

2 236 Cut Ditch, curving N/W-S/E-N/E

Curvilinear, sides undetermined as shallow surviving, rounded base, 0.5m excavated

>0.5 0.6 0.08

2 237 Fill 236 Compact mid brown clay, <1% rounded stone 10mm

>0.5 0.6 0.08

2 238 Cut Possible post hole or rooting/natural peri-glacial feature

Amorphous with tapering vertical/steep sides

0.6 to 0.05 d

0.3

2 239 Fill 238 Mixed brown red grey clay, 0.6 to 0.05 d

0.3

2 240 Cut Ditch (possible terminus?), N/S aligned

Linear, gentle sides, gradual b.o.s. to flat base, 0.8m excavated

>0.8 0.46 0.05

2 241 Fill 240 Compact light brown silty clay, 1% stone

>0.8 0.46 0.05

2 242 Cut Ditch (possible terminus?), N/S aligned

Linear, gentle sides, gradual b.o.s. to flat base, 1m excavated

>1 0.7 0.15

2 243 Fill 242 Compact light brown silty clay, 1% stone

>1 0.7 0.15


Linear, 1m excavated for relationship with 242

>1 >0.2 >0.15


22


2 245 Fill 244 Compact light brown clay silt >1 >0.2 >0.15

2 246 Deposit Geological deposit

2 247 Fill 248 Friable mid brown grey clay, silt <5% stone, charcoal <50mm

>0.6 0.55 0.1


Linear, moderate sides, gradual to imperceptible b.o.s. to rounded base, 0.6m excavated

>0.6 0.55 0.1


Curvilinear, gentle to steep asymmetrical sides with imperceptible to gradual b.o.s. to flat base, 1m excavated

1 0.76 0.12

2 250 Fill 249 Compact mid to dark brown grey clay, <1% stone, charcoal, animal bone, potsherd

1 0.76 0.12 MLC1

2 251 Cut Ditch terminus, N/S aligned

Linear, moderate sides, gradual to imperceptible b.o.s. to flatish base, 1m excavated

1 0.6 0.18

2 252 Fill 251 Compact light brown clay,silt, 1% stone, one worked flint

1 0.6 0.18

2 253 Cut Post hole Oval, vertical/steep sides, sharp b.o.s. to flat base

0.3 0.23 0.2

2 254 Fill 253 Loose mid to dark grey sandy clay, 50% stone 20mm

0.3 0.23 0.2

2 255 Cut Ditch terminus, N/S aligned

Linear, moderate sides, symmetrical profile,imperceptible b.o.s. to flatish base, 1m excavated

1 0.7 0.2

2 256 Fill 255 Compact light brown silty clay, 1% stone, one quern fragment

1 0.7 0.2

2 257 Cut Ditch, curving S/W-N/E

Curvilinear, moderate to steep slightly irregular sides but fairly symmetrical profile with imperceptible to gradual b.o.s. to rounded base, 1m excavated

1 1.16 0.43

2 258 Fill 257 Compact mid orange brown silty clay, 1% stone <60mm

1 1.16 0.43

2 259 Fill 223 1st fill (dump/backfill deposit within ditch)

Compact mid greyish yellow silty clay, <50% fired clay fragments 5-20mm

1 0.52 0.08

2 260 Fill 223 Stone dump within 261

Grey angular and sub-angular limestone up to 150 x 150 x 100mm

0.7 0.7 0.15

2 261 Fill 223 Equivalent to fill 224

Compact mid brown grey silty clay, <5% stone <10mm, pot sherd

0.7 0.7 0.15 C1


Linear, moderate to steep concave sides, asymmetrical U-shaped profile, imperceptible b.o.s. to rounded base, 1m excavated

>1 0.6 0.25

2 263 Fill 262 1st (primary fill) of 262

Compact light brown clay silt, <1% charcoal flecks

>1 0.24 0.05

2 264 Fill 262 2nd (secondary fill) of 262

Compact dark grey black clayey silt, 1% stone, animal bone, pot sherd

>1 0.6 0.22 LC1 – EC2

2 265 Fill 223 4th fill (secondary silting within ditch)

Compact mid-dark red brown silty clay, 1% stone 5-100mm, charcoal flecks

>2 2.43 0.3 C2

2 266 Fill 223 2nd fill (dumped/backfill deposit within ditch)

Compact light greenish grey silty clay, <5% stone 15-160mm

>2 2.5 0.44 C2

2 267 Void

2 268 Cut Ditch, curving S/W-N/E

Curvilinear, moderate to steep slightly irregular sides but fairly symmetrical profile with gradual b.o.s. to rounded base, 1.55m excavated

1.55 >0.52 0.36


23


2 269 Fill 268 Compact mid orange brown (with pinkish white clay patches) silty clay, 1% stone <50mm

1.55 >0.52 0.36


Linear, moderate to steep sides, gradual b.o.s. to irregular base, 0.6m excavated

>0.6 0.35 0.13

2 271 Fill 270 Compact light to mid grey brown silty clay, <1% gravel sized stone

>0.6 0.35 0.13


Linear, gentle to moderate sides, gradual b.o.s. to irregular base, 0.25m excavated

>0.25 0.26 0.09

2 273 Fill 272 Compact mid to dark brown grey silty clay, <1% gravel sized stone

>0.26 0.26 0.09

2 274 Cut Ditch terminus, N/W-S/E aligned

Linear, moderate sides, summetrical profile, gradual to imperceptible b.o.s. to rounded base, 0.62m excavated

>0.62 (1.3)

0.32 0.14

2 275 Fill 274 Compact dark blackish brown grey silty clay, 20% charcoal flecks and <5% fired clay fragments

>0.62 (1.3)

0.32 0.14 LC1 – EC2


Linear, moderate slightly concave sides, symmetrical profile, sharp to gradual b.o.s. to flatish/irregular base, 1m excavated

>1 0.5 0.17

2 277 Fill 276 Compact mid brown grey silty clay, 1% stone 1-70mm

>1 0.5 0.17


Linear, moderate irregular sides/profile, sharp to gradual b.o.s. to uneven base, 1m excavated

>1 0.73 0.22

2 279 Fill 278 Compact mid grey brown silty clay, 1% stone gravel sized

>1 0.73 0.22


Curvilinear, sides undetermined as shallow surviving (possibly gentle sloping), imperceptible b.o.s. to rounded base, 0.84m excavated

>0.84 0.39 0.05

2 281 Fill 280 Compact mid grey brown silt clay >0.85 0.39 0.05

3 300 Layer Topsoil Friable mid grey brown clay silt 0.2

3 301 Layer Modern made ground

Mixed demolition rubble, clay, concrete

>0.8

4 400 Layer Modern made ground

Mixed demolition rubble, clay, concrete

<1.2

4 401 Layer Natural substrate

Mixed yellow grey clay and limestone patches, bands of light to mid brown sandy clay

5 500 Layer Topsoil Friable mid grey brown clay silt, rare sub-angular stones , rare charcoal

0.25

5 501 Layer Subsoil Compact mid brown grey silt clay, rare sub-angular stone

>0.05

6 600 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown clay silt 0.25

7 700 Layer Topsoil Friable mid grey brown clay silt, 1% sub-angular stones , rare charcoal

0.25

7 701 Layer Subsoil Compact mid brown grey silt clay, rare sub-angular stone

0.2

7 702 Layer Natural deposit (alluvial/or peri-glacial deposit)

Friable to compact mid red brown sandy clay, 1% sub-angular stone

0.37-0.5

7 703 Cut Ditch, N/E-S/W aligned

Linear, moderate to steep sides, not excavated to base, 1.2m excavated

>1.2 >6.98 >0.8

7 704 Fill 703 Backfill deposit within of ditch

Friable mid grey red brown silt, 25% sub-angular stones , rare charcoal

>1.2 1.84 0.62

7 705 Fill 703 Friable dark grey brown silty clay, 1% stone <60mm

>1.2 6.98 >0.8


Friable mid red brown sandy clay, 1% sub-angular stone

<0.5


24



Mid white grey sandy clay, observed at eastern end of trench only

0.23

7 708 Layer Made ground Compact rubble/hardcore, incl. modern brick, concrete, and mid grey brown silt

7 709 Layer Natural deposit Compact light greenish grey clay

800 void

8 801 Layer Made ground 50% modern rubble, 50% angular linestone capped with modern road/paving stone

1.2

8 802 Fill 803 Backfill of service trench

Mixed dark brown/orange sandy gravel

>1.1

8 803 Cut Modern service trench

Vertical sided, not excavated to base >1.1

8 804 Fill 805 Backfill of service trench

Mixed dark brown/orange sandy gravel

1.7

8 805 Cut Modern service trench

Vertical sided, not excavated to base 1.7

8 806 Layer Relic topsoil, C20th

Compact dark grey brown sandy silt, 5% gravel

0.12m

8 807 Layer/Deposit

Dumped deposit Compact mixed dark grey brown clayey silt, 25% gravel, 1% charcoal flecks

0.2

8 808 Layer Relic (buried) subsoil

Compact dark grey brown sandy silt, 5% gravel

0.22

8 809 Layer Natural alluvial/peri-glacial deposit

Compact orange brown silt clay, 1% gravel

0.11

8 810 Layer Natural substrate; river terrace gravels

Compact light yellow sandy gravel


25


APPENDIX B: THE FINDS

Table 1: Pottery summary.

Quantification by fabric shown as sherd count/weight/rim EVEs Date FABRIC Description Bath* NRFRC† Ct. Wt. EVEs IA LI c Coarser limestone-tempered - - 19 99 .12 LI f Fine limestone-tempered - - 16 171 .05 VES vesicular - - 7 14 .02 RB BUFF Soft, buff-firing - - 3 18 - DOR BB1 Southeast Dorset Black-burnished BB1 SED DOR BB1 4 22 - GT wheelthrown grog-tempered SOB GT - 17 334 .07 GT q wheelthrown grog/quartz-tempered - - 2 16 - GT v wheelthrown grog/vesicular - - 2 16 .03 GW1 Sandy greyware (red margins) - - 2 9 - GW2 Fine sandy with buff margins FIRW - 54 302 .47 GW3 Coarser sandy, some limestone/ iron GRANRW - 26 647 - GW4 Medium sandy greyware, grey throughout CRW - 9 107 .28 LOC BS local black sandy SANDRW - 107 378 .41 OX f Fine sandy oxidised FIORW - 20 70 .22 OXff Fine oxidised flagons (white-slipped?) FLA - 8 75 .23 SAV GT Savernake grog-tempered SAV GT SAV GT 12 259 - SAV GTf Savernake grog-tempered (finer) SAV GT SAV GT 1 16 - SVW OX2 Severn Valley ware SVW OX2 SVW OX2 49 432 .37 SVW OXO Severn Valley ware (charcoal inclusions) - - 1 19 - WHf Fine whiteware FIWW - 1 1 - LEZ SA2 Central Gaulish (Lezoux) samian - LEZ SA2 2 7 - LGF SA South Gaulish (La Graufesenque) samian - LGF SA 5 30 .16 Total 377 3042 2.43 * Bath fabric type codes (in Brown 2007); † National Roman Fabric Reference Collection codes (Tomber and Dore 1998)


26


APPENDIX C: THE PALAEOENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE

TABLE 2: Identified animal species

Analysed by fragment count (NISP), weight and context.

Cut Fill BOS O/C SUS EQ Canid LM MM Total Weight (g) 105 1 1 15 205 206 1 1 2 4 36 207 208 1 1 92 213 215 1 1 7 217 1 1 3 216 218 1 5 20 26 112 219 220 1 2 2 5 54 221 222 1 6 7 29 223 224 4 3 1 1 4 11 24 295 223 225 1 1 1 3 58 249 250 1 1 188 223 261 3 1 12 1 17 236 262 264 1 5 1 2 17 7 33 306 223 265 2 2 4 1 9 194 223 266 2 2 1 7 12 336 274 275 3 3 1 Total 18 29 4 3 1 67 26 148 Weight 810 151 94 287 27 528 65 1962 BOS = Cattle; O/C = sheep/goat, SUS = pig; EQ= horse; Canid = dog; LM= large sized mammal; MM = medium sized mammal


27


APPENDIX D: OASIS REPORT FORM

PROJECT DETAILS Project Name Keynsham, BANES, New Fry Club and F1 Pitch: archaeological

Excavation and Watching Brief Short description

An archaeological excavation and watching brief was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology in April and August 2014, before and during groundworks associated with the redevelopment of the former Cadbury Factory and surrounding land at Somerdale, Keynsham, Bath and North East Somerset. An area within the footprint of a new groundsman’s hut was subject to archaeological excavation and a watching brief was undertaken on other associated groundworks. The features recorded in the excavation and watching brief are situated at the western edge of an extensive Roman small town, possibly that of Traiectus, previously identified through excavation and geophysical survey. The features formed part of an enclosure, holding area, and droveway more than likely for the management of livestock. Datable evidence suggests the features were in use until c. 150AD.

Project dates 30th April – 29th August 2014 Project type Excavation and Watching Brief Previous work

Cotswold Archaeology Phase 1 Watching Brief 2015 CA report no. 14454 Archaeological Surveys Ltd. Geophysical survey 2009 AS report no. 278 AC Archaeology Archaeological Evaluation Trial Trenching 2012 AS report no. ACW486/3/0 AC Archaeology Archaeological Evaluation Trial Trenching 2013 AS report no. ACW488/2/0

Future work Watching Brief

PROJECT LOCATION Site Location Somerdale, Keynsham, BANES, Study area (M2/ha) 2.15ha Site co-ordinates (8 Fig Grid Reference) ST 9247 8849 PROJECT CREATORS Name of organisation Cotswold Archaeology Project Brief originator BANES (Bath and North East Somerset) County Council Project Design (WSI) originator EDP (Environmental Dimension Partnership)

Project Manager Richard Young Project Supervisor Tim Havard MONUMENT TYPE None SIGNIFICANT FINDS None PROJECT ARCHIVES Intended final location of archive

Content

Physical ceramics, lithics, animal bone

Paper Proforma field recording sheets and field drawings, site matrices

Digital Raw survey data, digital photos

BIBLIOGRAPHY

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2009 Somerdale, Keynsham, BANES, New Fry Club and F1 Pitch: archaeological Excavation and Watching Brief CA typescript report 15279

Bath and North EastSomerset

CotswoldArchaeology

Andover 01264 347630

Cirencester 01285 771022

Exeter 01392 826185

Milton Keynes 01908 564660

w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk

e [email protected]

N

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

FIGURE NO.PROJECT NO.DATESCALE@A4

DRAWN BYCHECKED BYAPPROVED BY

0 1km

Reproduced from the 2004 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

484515/05/20151:25,000

DJB/AOJBREY 1

New Fry Club and F1 pitch, Somerdale, Keynsham, BANES

Site location plan

(site of)

ROMAN VILLA

Stone

Green

Bowling

T

e

n

n

i

s

C

o

u

r

t

s

C

R

O

S

S

S

T

R

E

E

T

New Fry Club

and

F1 pitch

65

5

695

ST

P:\4845 S

om

erdale K

eynsham

B

AN

ES

M

ulti\Illustration\D

rafts\4845_F

ry club and pitch_C

A -June 2015\4845 S

om

ersdale B

AN

ES

F

ry club_F

ig02 v2.dw

g

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey digital mapping with the permission of

Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office

© Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109.

N

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

FIGURE NO.

New Fry Club and F1 pitch

site boundary

previous site boundary

excavated area

archaeological feature

JB/AO

JB

REY

4845

05/08/2015

1:2000

New Fry Club and F1 pitch, Somerdale

Keynsham, BANES

Site location plan showing trench

areas, archaeological features and

geophysical survey

2

Andover

Cirencester

Exeter

Milton Keynes

www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk

[email protected]

w

e

01264 347630

01285 771022

01392 826185

01908 564660

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY

APPROVED BY

PROJECT NO.

DATE

SCALE@A3

100m0

Positive anomaly - probable cut feature of

archaeological origin

Negative anomaly - probable bank or earthwork of


Negative anomaly - other

Positive anomaly - magnetically enhanced material

Strong dipolar anomaly - ferrous object

Magnetic debris - spread of magnetically

thermoremnant/ferrous material

Linear anomaly

Positive anomaly - possible cut feature

Geophysics Key (Archaeological Surveys Ltd.)

Somerdale Factory

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey 2015 mapping with the permission of

Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office

© Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109.

P:\4845 S

om

erdale K

eynsham

B

AN

ES

M

ulti\Illustration\D

rafts\4845_F

ry club and pitch_C

A -June 2015\4845 S

om

ersdale B

AN

ES

F

ry club_F

ig03 onw

ards v2.dw

g

N

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY

APPROVED BY

JB

GC

SC

PROJECT NO.

DATE

SCALE@A3

4845

02/06/2015

1:125

PROJECT TITLE

New Fry Club and F1 pitch, Somerdale,

Keynsham, BANES

FIGURE TITLE

Trench 2, detailed trench plan showing

archaeological features and

geophysical survey results

FIGURE NO.

3

site boundary

excavation area

Group 1: Romano-British Mid

to Late 1st century AD to

Early 2nd century AD

Group 2: Romano-British

Late 1st century AD to 2nd

century AD

modern feature

geological feature

section location

B B

Andover

Cirencester

Exeter

Milton Keynes

www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk

[email protected]

w

e

01264 347630

01285 771022

01392 826185

01908 564660

5m0

Positive anomaly - probable cut feature of


Positive anomaly - possible cut feature

Geophysics Key (Archaeological

Surveys Ltd.)

1:200 1m

Curvi-linear ditch 257, looking north-east (scale 1m)

218269

ditch216

269 ditch268ditch

268

11.75mAOD

W E N S E W

Section BB

11.5mAOD

NW SE

Section AA

curvi-linear ditch257

258

Ditch 223, looking north-west (scale 1m)

Ditch 223, looking south (scale 1m)

Ditch 223; Deposits 259, overlain by 225 (Scale 1m)

12mAOD

E W

Section CC

224

265

225

ditch223

224

265

266266

ditch223

259

12mAOD

W E

Section DD

CotswoldArchaeology

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

FIGURE NO.

4

New Fry Club and F1 pitch, Somerdale Banes

Group 1: sections and photographs

PROJECT NO.DATESCALE@A3


484505/08/20151:20

JBGCREY

Andover 01264 347630


Exeter 01392 826185



e [email protected]

1:200 1m

11.8mAOD

N S

Section EE

206

204 ditch205

ditch203

Ditches 203 and 205, looking east (scale 1m)

222

218

269

220

ditch219

ditch221

ditch268ditch

216

1.75mAOD

S N W SNE

Section FF

11.8mAOD

W E

Section GG

208

terminus of ditch207

11.8mAOD

N S

Section II

208

ditch207

241

ditch terminus240

12mAOD

E W

Section JJ

247

gully248

12.2mAOD

E W

Section HH

Ditch terminus 240, looking south (scale 0.3m)

CotswoldArchaeology

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

FIGURE NO.

5

New Fry Club and F1 pitch, Somerdale, Banes




484502/06/20151:20

JBGCREY

Andover 01264 347630


Exeter 01392 826185



e [email protected]

1:200 1m

ditch251

25212mAOD

E W

Section KK

Ditch 251, looking south (scale 0.3m)

256

ditch terminus255

12mAOD

W E

Section LL

11.8mAOD

S N

Section MM

264

263

ditch terminus262

Ditch 262, looking west (scales 0.3m and 0.4m)

12mAOD

E W

Section NN

279

ditch278

243 245

gully terminus242 ditch

244

12.2mAOD

W E

Section OO

277

ditch276

12.5mAOD

W E

Section PP

CotswoldArchaeology

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

FIGURE NO.

6





484505/08/20151:20

JBGCREY

Andover 01264 347630


Exeter 01392 826185



e [email protected]

1:200 1m

12mAOD

NE SW

Section SS

212ditch211

214

linear213

linear21512m

AOD

NE SW

Section TT

12mAOD

NE SW

Section UU

271

270

Diitch 213, looking south (scale 0.3m)

CotswoldArchaeology

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

FIGURE NO.

7





484505/08/20151:20

JBGCREY

Andover 01264 347630


Exeter 01392 826185



e [email protected]

12.2mAOD

N S

Section QQ

250

ditch249

Curvi-linear ditch 249, looking east (scale 1m)

Gully terminus 280, looking north-east (scale 0.3m)

12mAOD

NW SE

Section RR

281

ditch terminus280

1:200 1m

12mAOD

E W

Section WW

231

postholes 230postholes

226postholes

228

229 227

12mAOD

NW SE

Section XX

232234

postholes233

postholes235

254

posthole253

12mAOD

E W

Section YY

CotswoldArchaeology

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

FIGURE NO.

8





484505/08/20151:20

JBGCREY

Andover 01264 347630


Exeter 01392 826185



e [email protected] 235 and 233, looking south-west (scale 0.2m)

275

ditch274

12.2mAOD

NW SE

Section VV

Ditch 274, looking north-east (scale 0.3m)

CotswoldArchaeology

PROJECT TITLE

FIGURE TITLE

FIGURE NO.

9

9


9 Trench 4, looking south-west

Trench 4: photograph



484516/09/2015N/A

AOLM/DJBREY

Andover 01264 347630


Exeter 01392 826185



e [email protected]

somerdale, keynsham bath and north east somerset new...

Documents