Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire

GLOUCESTER SOUTH-WEST BYPASS, CASTLE MEADS SECTION, GLOUCESTERSHIRE

ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVALUATION

C.A.T JOB: 0937 C.A.T REPORT: 991092

DATE: NOVEMBER 1999

This report has been researched and compiled with all reasonable skill, care, and attention to detail within the terms of the project as specified by the Client and within the general terms and conditions of Cotswold Archaeological Trust Ltd. The Trust shall not be liable for any inaccuracy, error or omission in the report or other documents produced as part of the Consultancy and no liability is accepted for any claim, loss or damage howsoever arising from any opinion stated or conclusion or other material contained in this report or other documents supplied as part of the Consultancy.

This report is confidential to the Client. Cotswold Archaeological Trust Ltd accept no responsibility whatsoever to third parties to whom this report, or any part of it is made known. Any such party relies upon this report entirely at their own risk.

Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

CONTENTS

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ...... 2

SUMMARY ...... 3

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 4

1.1 Introduction ...... 4 1.2 Geology and Topography ...... 4 1.3 Archaeological and Historical Background ...... 5 1.4 Field Methodology ...... 7

2. EVALUATION RESULTS ...... 9

2.1 General ...... 9 2.2 The Oxlease section ...... 9 Trenches 2 and 3. Test-pit 6 ...... 10 Test-pits 1-5 ...... 11 Trench 1 ...... 12 Trench 4 ...... 13 2.3 The Castle Meads section ...... 13

3. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 15

3.1 General ...... 15

4. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... 18

5. BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 18

APPENDIX 1 ...... 22

Trench and test-pit catalogues ...... 22

APPENDIX 2 ...... 30

The paleo-environmental evidence ...... 30

1 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig.1 Location plan ...... 19 Fig.2 Trench and test-pit location plan ...... 20 Fig.3 Trenches 2 & 3; plans and section ...... 21

2 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

SUMMARY

In October 1999 Cotswold Archaeological Trust was commissioned by Gloucestershire County Council to undertake an archaeological evaluation along the proposed route of the Gloucester South-West Bypass, Gloucestershire.

The evaluation was successful in identifying a large linear feature, which may represent the western line of the 17th century defences.

The evaluation also identified significant modern dumped deposits, probably dating from the late 18th century onward, together with possible dredging activity, along the northern part of the proposed bypass route. At the northern extent of the route, the evaluation may also have encountered the Hereford & Gloucester Canal, dating from the end of the 18th century.

The results also demonstrated the paucity of significant archaeological deposits along the southern part of the evaluated area.

3 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 This report presents the results of an archaeological evaluation conducted by Cotswold Archaeological Trust (CAT) between 18th and 25th October 1999, along the proposed route of the Gloucester South-West Bypass, Gloucestershire. The route runs between Over Causeway at NGR SO 8223 1913 and Severn Road at SO 8235 1821 (Fig.1).

1.1.2 The evaluation was undertaken in advance of the submission of a planning application for the aforementioned bypass and follows the procedure outlined in a project design and approved by the Senior Archaeological Officer of Gloucestershire County Council (CAT 1999).

1.2 Geology and Topography

1.2.1 The underlying geology of the study area comprises Lower Lias of the Lower Jurassic period overlain by estuarine alluvial deposits associated with the nearby River Severn. The natural substrate was encountered in the northern part of the site.

1.2.2 The land traversed by the proposed bypass route is generally flat, lying at a height of approximately 10m OD, except where the ground level has been artificially raised for the installation of the electricity transforming station (centred on NGR SO 8238 1882) in 1933, and at the southern end of the route, where a power station was constructed in 1943, now the site of a large car park.

1.2.3 The majority of the proposed bypass route is currently under pasture, although it does cross a small area of recently planted woodland (Richard’s

4 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

Wood) at its northern extent, a small area which is currently part of the Gloucester All Blues Rugby Club grounds, and the car park area at its southern extent. It also follows part of the line of the causeway where this runs to the east of the electricity transforming station.

1.2.4 At the time the fieldwork was undertaken, the majority of the bypass route which lies in the Castle Meads section (as opposed to the northern Oxleaze section) was under a certain amount of standing water.

1.3 Archaeological and Historical Background

1.3.1 An archaeological assessment of the proposed route and its environs was produced in 1998 by the Archaeology Service of Gloucestershire County Council (Cox 1998). It identified that archaeological knowledge of the evaluated area was extremely limited. The only reference to the immediate locality in the Gloucestershire Sites and Monuments Record (SMR) is to the recovery of Roman ceramic building material and 1st century pottery from a layer of silt at a depth of 2.5m below ground level (SMR 14490). The location on the bank of the east channel of the River Severn (NGR: SO 8260 1880) may indicate that the material had washed down-river rather than being in situ.

1.3.2 Over Causeway, immediately to the north of the study area is likely to follow a similar line to the road providing access to the west gate of the Roman fortress and subsequent colonia at Gloucester.

1.3.3 There is no evidence for the use of the study area during the Anglo-Saxon period, but the use of the area between the two channels of the Severn as pasture is well documented in the medieval period and later. The northern part of the study area was flood meadows known as Nun Ham (later Oxlease), held by the Abbey of St Peter, Gloucester. The southern portion derives its name of Castle Meads from its award to the constables of Gloucester Castle,

5 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

soon after the Norman Conquest. In 1136 it was granted to Llanthony Priory, but returned to the ownership of the castle after 1268 (Cox 5).

1.3.4 Much of the area passed into private hands in the post-medieval period, but rights of common were exercised by city freemen in Oxlease until the city corporation took over management early in the twentieth century (Cox 6). The area is first mapped by Speed in 1610 when a single ditch and line of trees is shown dividing Oxlease and ‘The Castle Mead’ (trees are depicted on the latter). This boundary appears to correspond with the modern boundary running south-west from the electricity transforming station.

1.3.5 In common with most early maps, Speed shows the city of Gloucester walled on only three sides, the western defences being formed by the Severn. This agrees with a number of contemporary accounts of the siege in 1643, but the Hall and Pinnell map of 1780 shows what (from their form) appear to be seventeenth century defensive works crossing Oxlease. This portrayal has undergone considerable attention in recent years and it had been concluded that the map is based upon a representation of a post-siege proposal for strengthening the defences, subsequently lost. It has been put forward that the proposals were only partially carried out (Atkin 1993). This interpretation and the supporting evidence will be more fully discussed later in this report.

1.3.6 The northern part of the bypass route crosses the line of the Hereford and Gloucester Canal. It was sanctioned by Act of Parliament in 1791 and its construction commenced at Gloucester, where it left the Severn near the Oxlease/Castle Meads boundary, reaching Newent by 1795 and Ledbury by 1798. Soon after, the section lying between the two channels of the Severn at Alney Island (i.e. within Oxlease) was abandoned and eventually silted up (Cox 1998).

1.3.7 More recently, in 1943 a power station was constructed in the southern part of Castle Meads. This closed in 1970 and has subsequently been demolished. A large car park now occupies the site.

6 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

1.4 Field Methodology

1.4.1 The location of 14 test pits and 4 trenches were set out along the route of the proposed bypass. In addition a further trench was positioned adjacent to the River Severn in an area of proposed groundworks in association with flood alleviation and targeting the postulated line of the Civil War defences (Fig.2).

1.4.2 Four of the trenches (1-4) were 25m in length and Trench 5 was 50m long. All were 2m in width. The test pits were all 2m in width, with their lengths varying between 2.5m and 2.8m.

1.4.3 All test pits were mechanically excavated to a depth of 1.2m, whereupon their stratigraphy was recorded. Excavation then continued downwards, until it was deemed impractical to continue. For Health and Safety reasons any further recording was undertaken from outside each pit.

1.4.4 Each trench was mechanically excavated to a depth of 1.2m.

1.4.5 All mechanical excavation was carried out under archaeological supervision.

1.4.6 The work was carried out in accordance with the ‘Standard and Guidance for Field Evaluation’ issued by the Institute of Field Archaeologists (IFA, 1994) and the ‘Statement of Standards and Practices appropriate for Archaeological Fieldwork in Gloucestershire’ issued by the Gloucestershire County Council Archaeology Section.

1.4.7 All identified deposits were recorded in accordance with the CAT Technical Manual 1 Field Recording Manual (1996).

1.4.8 A full written, drawn and photographic record of the evaluation was compiled in accordance with the archaeological project design.

7 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

1.4.9 Environmental samples were recovered in accordance with CAT Technical Manual 2 The Taking of Samples for Palaeoenvironmental/Palaeoeconomic Analysis from Archaeological Sites (CAT 1994).

1.4.10 The completed site archive and the finds, with the legal landowners’ consent, will be deposited with Gloucester City Museum.

8 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

2. EVALUATION RESULTS

2.1 General

2.1.1 The proposed bypass route is sub-divided into two parts by a field boundary running south-west from the electricity transforming station. The northern section of the route lies within the Oxlease, the southern part within Castlemeads. Each area is dealt with separately below. The test-pits and the trenches run in number order, from the northern end of the proposed bypass route to its southern extent (Fig.2).

2.2 The Oxlease section

2.2.1 Trenches 1-4 and test-pits 1-6 were located in the northern, ‘Oxlease’ part of the study area.

2.2.2 A stiff blue clay, probably representing the natural lias substrate, was identified at a depth of 3.05m in Test-pit 3 and at 3.35m in Test-pit 4. No inclusions were visible within this deposit.

2.2.3 Elsewhere in this northern part of the study area, the earliest deposits encountered consisted of a homogenous pink-brown alluvium containing very occasional small abraded fragments of brick or tile and charcoal flecks, but providing no readily datable artefactual material. This alluvium was generally encountered at a depth of between 0.85m and 1.1m below the present ground level across the Oxlease part of the site, except in trenches 2 and 3, where it was encountered at a depth of 0.35m.

9 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

Trenches 2 and 3. Test-pit 6

2.2.4 A large linear feature was encountered running NW/SE through trenches 2 and 3, which were positioned to bisect each other (Fig.3). Its northern edge was also identified in Test-pit 6. This feature; [205] in Trench 2, [307] in Trench 3 and [6005] in Test-pit 6, transpired to measure some 5.2m in width and would appear to represent a substantial ditch. Its sides were even and sloped at around 45 degrees. Its base was not encountered during the evaluation, as it lay below the excavation limits and the water table, although Test-pit 6 showed that it extended to at least 1.7m below present ground level.

2.2.5 In Trench 2, the top of the southern side of the ditch was recorded at a depth of 0.35m from the present ground level, where it was truncated by a further wide linear feature containing a ceramic drain [214]. Its opposite, northern edge was cut from a depth of 0.65m. The cut was identified at a depth of some 0.45m in Test-pit 6, although its uppermost limit lay outside the pit.

2.2.6 It was evident that this feature had been deliberately backfilled, and from the arrangement of the fills, this appears to have been effected for the most part from the northern edge of the feature. Here, a fairly ‘clean’ deposit of mixed clays (213) had been deposited into the ditch, against its northern side, and a shallow layer of the same material overlay the alluvium (204). A further deposit (211) of redeposited alluvium then appeared to have been dumped over the top of the clays. This deposit again contained very occasional abraded fragments of brick/tile, but once more provided no datable artefactual material. A layer of brick-earth (212) then appeared to abut deposit (211) and overlay (213), although it was not clear whether this material was contemporary with the backfilling of the ditch or represented a later intrusive feature.

2.2.7 A further backfill deposit (210) lay at the base of the trench, butting up against fill (211). This consisted of a loose pink-grey silt, with a high content of grit. It also contained very frequent inclusions of brick-earth lumps, fired clay fragments and charcoal flecks and patches. Again, no

10 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

readily datable material was recovered from this deposit, which extended below the limit of excavation.

2.2.8 It was apparent that the remaining extent of the ditch had been filled by a further deposit of redeposited alluvium (209). This material was essentially the same in character as (204), but slightly darker. Once more, no dating evidence was recovered from this deposit, which was in turn truncated by the cut of drain [214].

2.2.9 No dating evidence was recovered from corresponding contexts in Trench 3, where only the northern edge of the ditch was visible.

2.2.10 In Test-pit 6, the two visible fills of the ditch (6006) and (6007) were identical in character to deposits (209) and (210) in Trench 2. As elsewhere, no artefactual material was recovered from these contexts, but samples were taken for analysis.

Test-pits 1-5

2.2.11 Excavation of Trench 1 and test-pits 1-5 demonstrated that this northern part of the site had been subjected to pitting for the disposal of domestic and industrial waste. There was also evidence of dumped spreads of material of the same nature, as well as possible dredged deposits from the nearby River Severn.

2.2.12 The alluvial substrate encountered in trenches 2 and 3 and in Test-pit 6, was encountered elsewhere across this part of the site at between 0.85m and 1.1m below the present ground level, except in Trench 1 and test-pits 1 and 5 where it was apparent that it had been cut by later features. Where the alluvium was encountered at the higher level, it was overlain in each test-pit by up to seven layers of dumped material, up to 1.1m in total depth. These layers could, for the most part, be separated into three distinct types; domestic waste, industrial waste and probable dredged material.

11 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

2.2.13 Inclusions such as china, glass and brick within the domestic and industrial waste deposits allowed these to be interpreted as fairly modern in date. Indeed the latter almost certainly emanate from the former power station to the south. It would appear that the dumping of domestic waste may have begun in the late 18th/early 19th centuries and continued until earlier this century.

2.2.14 A slightly different stratigraphical sequence was encountered in Test-pit 1 and in Trench 1.

2.2.15 In Test-pit 1, the topsoil (1001) overlay two modern deposits, (1002) consisting of industrial waste material and (1003) representing an episode of domestic waste disposal. At a depth of 0.95m from the existing ground level, a deposit of dark grey/black sandy silt (1004) was encountered, extending below the limit of excavation, which lay at 1.9m. This material contained a certain amount of organic-looking matter, as well as fragments of glass, china, mortar and apparently modern pottery. Although this deposit was evidently fairly recent in date, it may represent material dredged from the Severn, dumped into cut features, or it possibly represents the silted up canal.

Trench 1

2.2.16 Trench 1 was positioned to bisect the proposed bypass route, in an area of unknown archaeological potential. The earliest deposit encountered in Trench 1 (109) consisted of a dark grey homogeneous silt, reminiscent of (1004) in Test-pit 1, except that there were no visible inclusions. This material may again represent an episode of dredging of the nearby river. Here, this deposit was apparently cut by a large feature [110], containing a further similar deposit (107) of grey clay. These deposits were then overlain by further dumped ’spreads’ of material (101)-(106).

12 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

Trench 4

2.2.17 Trench 4 was located to the north-east of trenches 2 and 3, across the existing causeway, adjacent to the west bank of the eastern channel of the Severn itself. It was positioned to target the postulated line of the Civil War defences, as shown on the Hall and Pinnell map of 1780.

2.2.18 The alluvial substrate, as recorded in the previous trenches and test-pits was present only in the NW end of the trench, at a depth of around 0.7m to 0.95m. This was then overlain by a layer of silt (406) containing modern inclusions of brick, glass and pottery. This layer was in turn cut by a series of substantial pits [410], [414], [417] and [420] and a foundation trench [408], partially filled with concrete. The pits all contained similar fills, consisting mainly of redeposited blue lias clay, with modern inclusions such as tin cans and milk bottles. These features were in turn sealed by a series of further modern layers.

2.2.19 There was no sign of the postulated Civil War defences and no dating evidence was recovered from the earliest, alluvial deposit (407).

2.3 The Castle Meads section

2.3.1 Test-pits 7 to 13 were positioned at intervals along the line of the proposed bypass route in the Castle Meads section of the site. Trench 5 was positioned to bisect the route and test for the presence of the postulated Civil War defences, near the southern extent of the route. In addition, Test-pit 14 was located on the raised ground to the west of the existing causeway, near the car park at the southern extent of the route.

2.3.2 Trench 5 and test-pits 7 to 12 all exhibited similar stratigraphical sequences. All test-pits were excavated to between 1.6m and 2.6m in depth, depending upon the depth they became unstable and/or waterlogged. Trench 5 was excavated to a depth of 1.2m.

13 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

2.3.3 Generally, there was a layer of topsoil, up to 0.35m in depth, overlying homogenous alluvial deposits. There was an interface of around 0.25m, between the topsoil and the ‘clean’ alluvium. The alluvium in this section had very few inclusions, only occasional pieces of abraded brick or tile. No other dating evidence was recovered from these deposits, which changed very gradually with depth to a more grey colour.

2.3.4 No archaeological features or deposits were identified in this part of the site.

2.3.5 Test-pit 14 was excavated to a depth of 2.8m. A mixed deposit of black clinker and dark brown silt (14003) was identified at a depth of 2.2m. This contained some large limestone pieces as well as whole modern bricks and fragments of the same. It is probable that this deposit represents dumped make-up material.

2.3.6 Overlying deposit (14003) was a substantial mixed deposit of bright yellow clay, sand and gravel (14002), 2m deep. Apart from occasional large pockets of green/blue lias clay, this deposit was visibly quite ‘clean’, and probably represents imported material used for raising the ground level, if not for the construction of the power station, then for the installation of the causeway, built to supply the power station.

2.3.7 Deposit (14002) was then overlain by a modern topsoil layer, 0.2m in depth.

14 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

3. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

3.1 General

3.1.1 The blue lias clay encountered in test-pits 3 and 4 in the northern part of the site may be indicative of an island of natural substrate above the river floodplain, and as such has potential to contain archaeological deposits. It is interesting to note the considerable difference between the depth at which this material was encountered in the northern part of the site during the evaluation, and the depth at which it was recorded in the southern part of the site by an earlier borehole survey. In the southern part of the site it was encountered at between 9.3 and 10.8m below the existing ground level, around 6-7m lower than in the northern part of the study area.

3.1.2 The evaluation demonstrated that along the whole route of the proposed bypass there was a considerable build up of alluvium, clearly resulting from innumerable episodes of flooding by the Severn. Unfortunately, due to the paucity of any inclusions within this material it was not possible to date any of these deposits.

3.1.3 The large linear ditch identified in trenches 2 and 3 and also in Test-pit 6 corresponds with the postulated line of the Civil War defences as suggested by Hall and Pinnell’s map of Gloucester, dated 1780.

3.1.4 The actual existence of any such defences in the Oxlease/Castlemeads area has been the subject of much contention. It is well documented that at the time of the siege of Gloucester in 1643, its defences mainly followed the line of those constructed in the Roman period, with subsequent upgrades and modifications, as well as limited works raised at the time. The modifications continued until 1651 (Atkin and Howes 1993). It is widely held that Hall and Pinnell’s map is probably based on a plan of intent (now lost) drawn up by David Papillon, a Parliamentarian engineer commissioned in 1646 (i.e. after the siege) by the Governor of Gloucester and members of the House of

15 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

Commons Committee of Gloucester to look at ways of improving the city’s defences. The subsequent scheme suggested by Papillon comprised a double ditched circuit with a series of bastions, two of which were positioned in the meadows known as Oxlease and Castle Meads.

3.1.5 Surviving documentation provides evidence that the City Council were somewhat hesitant about Papillon’s proposals, despite his claim that ‘I dare maintain before the best enginiers in this kingdome, that this way is the stronguest, the most rigulary; and the most frugal way to fortify this city’ and that ‘with five hundred pounds……..it may be maide one of the strongest and one of the most compliate garrisons in this kingdom’ (Atkin, 159,163).

3.1.6 Documentary evidence also proves that some work was completed. Indeed, Papillon’s own accounts show that he received over £190 for work carried out.

3.1.7 Direct reference is made by Papillon to the Oxlease/Castle Meads part of the scheme. He writes on 12th April 1646: ‘you are forth with to draine out the water of the smale Medow that the winde and the sunne may dry and fitt the ground to erect these three new boulworke and line spoken off; for other wise it will not be possible to erect the same because the Medowe being drained will be like a quagimyre; for the present; and will not be fitt to worke upon before the latter end of may’ (Atkin, 158).

3.1.8 The location of the large linear feature encountered in trenches 2 and 3 and in Test-pit 6 strongly suggests that it represents a section of the defences that was completed. However, given that it lies on a different alignment to that suggested by Hall and Pinnell’s map, it may have been part of a drainage system, implemented in accordance with Papillon’s proposals, prior to the anticipated construction of the defences, which in fact were never realised on this side of the river. This theory is supported by the fact that no trace of any further defensive features was found in other parts of the study area, namely to the south where Trench 5 was specifically positioned to bisect the

16 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

postulated line of the defences in two separate places and to the east in Trench 4 where it might have been expected to exist.

3.1.9 Results of the analysis of the samples of material taken from the fills of the ditch in Test-pit 6 have proved inconclusive (see Appendix 2). It may be the case that the ditch was open for some time and gradually silted up to some extent before being deliberately backfilled as part of the same activities which resulted in the dumping of material across much of Oxlease. Its survival as a ditch or slight earthwork may have been a factor in the location of the field drain.

3.1.10 The Castle Meads section of the investigation (test-pits 7-13, Trench 5) revealed no evidence of the dumping which took place in Oxlease. In this area the ground level has risen through apparently natural flooding episodes. The contrasting depositional history of Oxlease may be a product of the easier access to it through the West Gate of the city and across Over Causeway or, in fact, the material may arise from repeated attempts to maintain road access into Gloucester from the west and water transport from the north.

3.1.11 The only deposit possibly relating to the short-lived Hereford and Gloucester Canal was encountered in Test-pit 1. Although this substantial deposit cannot be dismissed as dredged material from the river, it was evident in an area which corresponds to the mapped line of the canal and may represent the general silting of this feature.

3.1.12 All artefactual material encountered during the course of the evaluation was either identified as fairly modern in date or considered as being undiagnostic, therefore no finds were retained.

17 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

4. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Cotswold Archaeological Trust would like to thank Mr J P Tiffney, Network Improvement Unit, Gloucestershire County Council, Mr P Caine and Ms L Kitchener, both of Halcrow UK Ltd and Mr C Parry, Senior Archaeological Officer, Gloucestershire County Council for their assistance during the course of this project.

This project has been managed for CAT by Niall Oakey. The fieldwork was carried out by Mark Brett and William Connock. This report has been compiled by Mark Brett with illustrations by Peter Moore.

5. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Atkin, M. 1993 ‘David Papillon and the Civil War Defences of Gloucester’ TBGAS CXI 147-64

Atkin, M. and Howes R. 1993 ‘The use of archaeology and documentary sources in identifying the Civil War defences of Gloucester’ Post-Medieval Archaeology 27 15-41

CAT, 1999 Gloucester South West Bypass, Castlemeads Section, Gloucestershire. Project Design for an Archaeological Evaluation

Cox, S.K. 1998 Gloucester South West Bypass: Castle Meads Section. An Archaeological Assessment Unpublished report No 19914

18 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

Fig.1 Location plan

19 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

Fig.2 Trench and test-pit location plan

20 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

Fig.3 Trenches 2 & 3; plans and section

21 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

APPENDIX 1

Trench and test-pit catalogues

Trench 1 Present ground level = 9.805m-10.20m OD Context No. Depth Description

(101) <0.20m Topsoil; mid brown silt with occasional modern inclusions. (102) <0.20m Very light grey sandy gravel. No visible inclusions. (103) <0.30m Dark brown/black clay silt. Includes frequent clinker and occasional modern brick, glass, china etc. Domestic waste. (104) <0.45m Dark grey sandy clay, compact. Includes occasional pockets of green lias clay. (105) <0.75m Mixed light/dark brown silty clay with occasional modern inclusions. (106) >0.80m Mottled mid green-grey/light green clay.with patches of mid grey sandy silt. Contains very frequent 19th/20th century inclusions, including whole glass bottles. Domestic waste dump. (107) >0.40m Mid-light grey clay, with no visible inclusions. Uppermost fill of [110]. ?Dredged material. (108) >0.30m Mid orange gravels within a silty clay matrix. Fill of [110]. No visible inclusions. (109) >1.00m Dark grey sandy silt. No visible inclusions. ?Dredged material. [110] >0.40m ?Pit cut. Southern edge only visible within trench; fairly straight, slopes at c.75 degrees.

Trench 2 Present ground level = 9.725m-9.945m OD Context No. Depth Description

(201) <0.30m Topsoil; black sandy silt with c.50% clinker, occasional slag and other modern inclusions. (202) 0.10m Mid green-grey sandy silt. Includes occasional brick and slag, as well as frequent charcoal flecks. (203) <0.15m Mottled mid orange/mid brown sand. Very frequent inclusions of charcoal, coal and modern brick/tile. (204) >1.00m Mid pink-brown alluvium, becoming lighter in colour with depth. Includes very occasional abraded pieces of brick/tile. [205] >0.90m Large linear feature. Straight sides, sloping c.45 degrees. 5.2m in width, >15m in length. Runs on NW/SE alignment. Ditch of Civil War defences?

22 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

(206) <0.35m Very mixed dark green-brown sandy silt. Many modern inclusions. Backfill of drainage feature [214]. (207) 0.05m Shallow lens of degraded light pink limestone mortar. Contains frequent inclusions of brick/tile fragments. Fill of [214]. (208) <0.55m Dark green-brown gritty silt with frequent modern inclusions. Primary backfill of [214] (209) >0.70m Dark pink-brown silt. Includes occasional abraded brick fragments, as well as charcoal flecks and patches. Ultimate backfilled deposit of ditch [205] (210) >0.35m Dark pink-grey gritty silt. Includes very frequent brick-earth and pieces of fired clay, as well as very frequent charcoal flecks and patches. Fill of [205]. (211) >0.50m Light pink-brown alluvium. No visible inclusions. (212) <0.40m Mid orange-brown brick-earth. Includes frequent slag, stone and charcoal lumps. ?Industrial waste. (213) >0.65m Mottled light olive green/mid orange clay. Includes occasional charcoal flecks. Redeposited lias clay. ?Primary backfill deposit of ditch [205]. [214] 0.80m Wide linear feature carrying ceramic drain. 4.5m in width, with shallow, irregular sides. Cut into top of ditch [205].

Trench 3 Present ground level = 9.835m-10.025m OD Context No. Depth Description

(301) <0.20m Topsoil; black sandy silt with c.50% clinker, occasional slag and other modern inclusions. (302) 0.30m Mid orange-brown brick-earth. Includes frequent slag, stone and charcoal lumps. ?Industrial waste. (303) <0.23m Mottled light olive green/mid orange clay. Includes occasional charcoal flecks. Redeposited lias clay. (304) >0.90m Light pink-brown alluvium. No visible inclusions. (305) <0.45m Black clinker, loose. Industrial waste. (306) <0.20m Mid brown silt. Frequent inclusions of modern brick/tile fragments, as well as occasional charcoal flecks. [307] >0.60m Northern edge of large ditch; same as [205] in Trench 2. (308) >0.60m Mottled light olive green/mid orange clay. Includes occasional charcoal flecks. Redeposited lias clay. ?Primary backfill deposit of ditch [307].

23 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

Trench 4 Present ground level = 10.135m-10.15m OD Context No. Depth Description

(401) <0.25m Topsoil; mid brown silt with occasional modern inclusions. (402) <0.35m Mid orange-brown silt. Occasional coke, slate and brick inclusions. (403) <0.25m Mid orange-brown sandy silt, compact. Very frequent modern inclusions. (404) <0.25m Mid orange-brown silt with occasional inclusions of stone and modern brick. (405) <0.35m Mixed mid blue-grey/pink/light green clays and silts. Frequent inclusions of stone and charcoal, as well as modern brick. (406) <0.35m Mottled mid grey/orange-brown silt, with very occasional modern inclusions. (407) >0.50m Light pink-brown alluvium with very occasional charcoal flecks. [408] >0.20m Vertical cut of modern foundation trench. In turn, cut by pit [410]. (409) >0.50m Green lias clay mixed with mid orange-brown and very dark brown silts. Occasional modern inclusions. Backfill of foundation trench [408]. [410] >0.55m Sub-circular pit. Northern side almost vertical, southern side slopes c.70 degrees. Modern. (411) >0.55m Mixed light pink-brown alluvium and mid blue-grey lias clay. Fill of pit [410]. Occasional modern inclusions. [412] <0.35m Pit, cut through (405) and into top of pit [410]. Concave sides and base. Modern. (413) <0.35m Very mixed mid brown sandy silt and blue lias clay. Contains a dump of whole modern bricks. [414] >0.75m Circular pit. Sides straight, both sloping at 75 degrees. Modern. (415) >0.75m Mid blue-grey lias clay with frequent pockets of yellow gravel. Includes large blocks of concrete and moulded limestone, as well as a whole modern milk bottle. (416) <0.30m Very dark grey-green sandy silt, compact. Frequent modern inclusions. [417] >0.80m Sub-circular pit. Sides both vertical. (418) <0.35m Light pink-brown alluvium. Includes very occasional small brick/tile fragments. Uppermost fill of pit [417]. (419) >0.60m Mid grey silt. Very occasional limestone inclusions. Fill of pit [417]. [420] >0.80m Irregularly shaped pit. Northern side only visible within trench; vertical.

24 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

(421) >0.80m Light pink-brown alluvium mixed with blue-grey lias clay. Very occasional modern inclusions. Fill of pit [420].

Trench 5 Present ground level = 8.72m-8.83m OD Context No. Depth Description

(501) c.0.30m Topsoil; mid pink-brown silt with very occasional charcoal flecks. (502) >0.90m Light pink-brown alluvium, becoming more grey with depth. No visible inclusions.

Test-pit 1 Present ground level = 9.27m OD Context No. Depth Description (1001) 0.25m Topsoil; mid brown silt with occasional modern inclusions (1002) 0.45m Dark brown clinker, loose, with modern inclusions; industrial waste (1003) <0.25m Mid orange-brown silt and clinker, loose, with very frequent 19th/20th century inclusions; domestic waste. (1004) >0.80m Dark grey/black sandy silt, loose-friable. Includes organic matter and frequent modern inclusions. ?Dredged material.

Test-pit 2 Present ground level = 9.445m OD Context No. Depth Description

(2001) <0.10m Topsoil; as in (1001). (2002) <0.20m Mid brown sandy silt, loose, with many modern inclusions. domestic waste. (2003) <0.10m Mid orange-brown gritty gravels with frequent modern inclusions. Industrial waste. (2004) <0.30m Mid pink-grey sand with frequent modern inclusions. Waste spread. (2005) <0.10m Mid blue-grey shale, loose. No visible inclusions. (2006) <0.15m Mid orange-brown gritty gravels with frequent modern inclusions. Domestic waste. (2007) >2.2m Light pink-brown alluvium. No visible inclusions.

Test-pit 3 Present ground level = 9.605m OD Context No. Depth Description

(3001) <0.20m Topsoil; as in (1001).

25 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

(3002) <0.15m Mid brown silt with very frequent modern inclusions. Domestic waste. (3003) <0.15m Mottled dark grey/orange-brown sand. Clean, with no visible inclusions. (3004) <0.50m Mixed black/orange clinker and sand, wet and very loose. Includes organic material and frequent modern inclusions. ?Domestic waste. (3005) 2.05m Light pink-brown alluvium, as in (2007). No visible inclusions. (3006) >0.20m Mid blue-grey lias clay. ?Natural substrate.

Test-pit 4 Present ground level = 10.255m OD Context No. Depth Description

(4001) 0.08m Topsoil; as in (1001) (4002) 0.05m Light brown gritty clay. (4003) 0.20m Dark grey-purple clinker, loose. Frequent inclusions of slag. Industrial waste. (4004) <0.07m Light grey-green clay with frequent stone chippings. (4005) 0.10m Dark orange ?iron shavings with frequent slag. Includes occasional modern ceramic tile fragments and pockets of shale. Industrial waste. (4006) 0.20m Mid grey sandy silt with frequent stone chippings and charcoal flecks. Also includes occasional clinker and brick/tile fragments. Modern. (4007) 0.35m Mottled light green/grey clay. Redeposited lias mixed with sandy silt. (4008) 0.06m Very dark grey clinker and slag, loose. Industrial waste. (4009) 2.25m Mid grey brown alluvium, changing to light pink-brown with depth. No visible inclusions. (4010) U/k Mid blue-grey lias clay. ?Natural substrate.

Test-pit 5 Present ground level = 10.115m OD Context No. Depth Description

(5001) 0.2m Black clinker. No visible inclusions. Industrial waste. (5002) 0.25m Dark green/grey sandy clay, compacted. Frequent modern inclusions. (5003) <0.07m Mid orange-brown sand, compact. Includes occasional charcoal flecks. (5004) <0.60m Dark grey silt with frequent pockets of green lias clay. Also includes frequent modern brick/tile fragments and charcoal flecks.

26 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

(5005) <0.30m Light grey silty sand, very compact. Includes frequent brick fragments and stone chippings, as well as occasional charcoal flecks. (5006) 1.60m Dark grey silt. Includes occasional brick/tile fragments. ?Dredged material. (5007) U/k Light pink-brown alluvium, as in (2007). No visible inclusions.

Test-pit 6 Present ground level = 9.935m OD Context No. Depth Description

(6001) 0.2m Topsoil; black sandy silt with c.50% clinker. Includes frequent slag. Industrial waste. (6002) <0.40m Light tan clay silt with yellow mottling. Includes occasional charcoal and stone pieces. (6003) <0.45m Mid orange-brown silt with very frequent brick-earth inclusions. Also contains very frequent brick fragments, frequent charcoal and occasional clinker. (6004) <0.35m Mid pink-brown redeposited alluvium. Includes frequent small fragments of brick/tile, pockets of green lias clay and patches of the underlying alluvial deposit (6006). [6005] <0.60m Cut of linear feature, same as [205] in Trench 2 and [307] in Trench 3. Only northern edge visible in test-pit, straight, slopes at 45 degrees. Ditch of Civil War defences? (6006) <0.40m Mid pink-grey alluvium with frequent charcoal flecks. Uppermost fill of [6005]; same as (209) in Trench 2. (6007) <0.60m Mixed mid grey sand and orange brick-earth, loose. Fill of [6005]; same as (210) in Trench 2. Includes frequent brick fragments. (6008) <2.10m Light pink-brown alluvium, as in (2007). No visible inclusions. (6009) U/k Mid blue-grey lias clay. ?Natural substrate.

Test-pit 7 Present ground level = 9.26m OD Context No. Depth Description

(7001) 0.35m Topsoil; mid pink-brown silt with very occasional charcoal flecks. Also contains patches of stone chippings and yellow clay. (7002) >2.25m Light pink-brown alluvium with very occasional small fragments of brick/tile.

Test-pit 8 Present ground level = 9.31m OD Context No. Depth Description

(8001) c.0.3m Topsoil; mid pink-brown silt with very occasional charcoal flecks.

27 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

(8002) >2.2m Light pink-brown alluvium, becoming more grey with depth. No visible inclusions.

Test-pit 9 Present ground level = 9.165m OD Context No. Depth Description

(9001) c.0.3m Topsoil; mid pink-brown silt with very occasional charcoal flecks. (9002) >2.3m Light pink-brown alluvium, becoming more grey with depth. No visible inclusions.

Test-pit 10 Present ground level = 8.66m OD Context No. Depth Description

(10001) c.0.3m Topsoil; mid pink-brown silt with very occasional charcoal flecks. (10002) >1.3m Light pink-brown alluvium, becoming more grey with depth. No visible inclusions.

Test-pit 11 Present ground level = 8.84m OD Context No. Depth Description

(11001) c.0.3m Topsoil; mid pink-brown silt with very occasional charcoal flecks. (11002) >1.3m Light pink-brown alluvium, becoming more grey with depth. No visible inclusions.

Test-pit 12 Present ground level = 8.81m OD Context No. Depth Description

(12001) c.0.3m Light pink-brown alluvium with very occasional small fragments of brick/tile. (12002) >1.7m Light pink-brown alluvium with very occasional small fragments of brick/tile at interface with (12001).

Test-pit 13 Present ground level = 8.64m OD Context No. Depth Description

(13001) c.0.3m Topsoil; mid pink-brown silt with very occasional charcoal flecks. (13002) >0.3m Light pink-brown alluvium. No visible inclusions. N.B.-Test-pit 13 abandoned at a depth of 0.6m due to waterlogging.

28 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

Test-pit 14 Context No. Depth Description

(14001) 0.20m Mid red-brown sandy silt with very frequent rounded/sub-rounded pebbles. Includes occasional fragments of modern building materials. (14002) 2.00m Bright yellow mix of clay, sand and gravel. Fairly ‘clean’ other than occasional pockets of green/blue lias clay. Imported modern make-up. (14003) >0.6m Mixed black clinker and mid brown silt. Includes large pieces of limestone (<0.35m in length), frequent brick fragments and whole bricks. Imported make-up.

29 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

APPENDIX 2

The paleo-environmental evidence

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 Two bulk samples were taken from the site from contexts (6006) and (6007).

1.1.2 The purpose of taking the samples was to determine how and if biological remains were preserved on the site, and their potential for reconstructing former economies and environments.

1.2 Methodology

1.2.1 All samples were taken from fills of negative features according to the guidelines outlined by Wilkinson (1994). All samples were of a standard 10L size, and were taken in sealable, 10L volume plastic tubs and transported to the CAT offices for processing.

1.2.2 The samples were processed using the flotation technique using meshes of 500µm and 1mm for the flot and residue respectively. Both residues and flots were air dried prior to sorting. The dried flots were scanned under a low power binocular microscope for charred plant and molluscan material.

1.3 Results

1.3.1 Both samples were contaminated by roots particularly the sample from context (6007), which also produced a modern weed seed.

1.3.2 Both samples consisted mainly of charcoal fragments and particularly large pieces were observed in the sample from context (6007). This sample also contained several large brick and coal fragments and a quantity of slag (<50 pieces).

1.3.3 The sample from context (6006) produced 25 molluscs and a further 4 were found in the sample from context (6007). No carbonised grain or weed seeds were found in either sample.

30 Gloucester South-West Bypass, Castle Meads Section, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation

1.4 Discussion

1.4.1 The occurrence of slag, brick and coal suggests that context (6007) contains industrial waste, but it has no potential for use in the reconstruction of the past economies or environment of the site. However, the small quantity of molluscs in context (6006) may have a limited use in the reconstruction of the past localised environment.

31 820 190

Trench TP 1 Test-pit TP 2 Study area

Route of former Hereford & Gloucester canal TP 3 Approximate line of fortifications as shown on map of 1780 Field boundaries/drains shown on 1st Ed. O S map Trench 1 Proposed road OXLEASE TP 4

TP 5

Trench 3 Trench 2 Trench 4

TP 6

0 250m

825

185

TP 7

TP 8

TP 9

TP 11 TP 10 CASTLEMEADS TP 13 TP 12

TP 14 Trench 5

Fig. 2 Trench and test-pit location plan (based on a survey provided by Halcrow UK)