Archaeological Watching Brief at Waldridge Manor, Owlswick Road, Ford,

R. J. Ivens BA PhD FSA MIFA

Puxley House, Puxley, Potterspury, Northants, NN12 7QS

Tel: 01908 569308

Prepared on behalf of: Wilde Spooner Raleigh, 88 Easton Street, , Buckinghamshire, HP11 1LT

September 2002

Archaeological Watching Brief at Waldridge Manor, Owlswick Road, Ford, Buckinghamshire

Contents

1 Summary 1 2 Introduction 1 3 Background to the Development Site 3 4 The Watching Brief 4 4.1 Watching Brief 4 4.2 Archive Index: 6 Context records Plan and Section drawings Photographs Artefacts 5 Conclusions 7

Bibliography 7

Appendices 1 Brief for an Archaeological Watching Brief (Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service) 2 Proposals for Archaeological Watching Brief 3 Department for Culture, Media and Sport: Schedule Entry List of illustrations 1 Location of Waldridge Manor and the Development Site (Scale 1 : 25000) 2 Waldridge Manor in 1885 (Scale 1 : 2500) 3 Plan of Waldridge Manor showing the New Build Site (Scale 1 : 2500) 4 Waldridge Manor: pre-excavation plan of site of New Build (Scale 1 : 50) 5 Waldridge Manor, New Build Site: plan of modern drains after removal of 20cm of topsoil (Scale 1 : 50) 6 Waldridge Manor, New Build Site: plan of foundation trench and modern disturbances (Scale 1 : 50) 7 Waldridge Manor, New Build Site: Sections A-B, B-C and C-D (Scale 1 : 25)

i

Archaeological Watching Brief at Waldridge Manor, Owlswick Road, Ford, Buckinghamshire R. J. Ivens

1 Summary A Watching Brief was carried out during the stripping of the site for the construction of a new conservatory, and during the excavation of the foundation trenches.

The site was found to have been disturbed in modern times by an earlier extension to the existing house and by numerous modern drains. Evidence was also found indicating that much of the area investigated had been disturbed in post-medieval times.

No remains were identified which could be confidently associated with the sixteenth or early seventeenth century manor house and no medieval or earlier remains were noted.

2 Introduction Mr and Mrs M. H. D. Barlow of Waldridge Manor, , Bucks HP17 9UH have been granted planning permission to erect a conservatory to the rear of their house (Planning Application 00/02770), Figs 1 and 3-4.

Mr D. Radford, Archaeological Officer, Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service, has issued a brief requiring an Archaeological Watching Brief to be carried out during the groundworks for the new build (Appendix 1). The evaluation was considered necessary because the development affects a Grade II* listed manor house which is associated with scheduled deserted medieval village (SAM 29414; Appendix 3).

Wilde Spooner Raleigh of 88 Easton Street, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP11 1LT (acting for the applicants) appointed R. J. Ivens to carry out the required Archaeological Watching Brief (23rd July 2002).

A Project Design (Appendix 2) detailing the proposed investigation was submitted to Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service on 17th July 2002. Approval of

1

the scheme was granted by Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service on 18th July 2002.

The field investigation was carried out by R. J. Ivens between 25th and 26th July 2002.

This report, which was entirely prepared by R. J. Ivens, summarises the findings of the Watching Brief.

The site archive will be retained by the fieldworker until completion of the project, after which it will be deposited in an appropriate museum/archive, probably Buckinghamshire County Museum.

2

3 Background to the Development Site Waldridge Manor (formerly Upper Waldridge Farm) is situated in the South-east of the parish of Dinton with Ford and Upton (NGR: SP 78175 07275) about 2.25km South of the village of Ford, in a fairly flat area of Vale. The geology consists mainly of Gault formations (grey mudstones) intermittently overlain with head (British Geological Survey Sheet 237).

The remains of a deserted medieval village (SAM 29414) lie immediately to the East of the gardens and yards of the manor; see Appendix 3 for a location map and description of the remains.

The Grade II* listed manor house, itself, was probably built in the late sixteenth or early seventeenth century of timber and brick, partly refaced with brick at the end of the seventeenth century and enlarged in the eighteenth century (RCHM 1912, 126). At the beginning of the twentieth century the house had a T-shaped plan (ibid. and Fig. 2) with the cross wing facing South-west, and the RCHM surveyors suggested that it originally extended further to the South-east. The South-east corner was substantially rebuilt and extended c. 1940 (date-stone and pers. comm. Mr. Barlow) and it seems probable that this extension has destroyed or at least masked any evidence of the postulated South-east extension of the T-shaped house.

North-east of the house are a series of farm buildings, cottages and yards while the South-west side of the property is occupied by lawns, garden beds, ponds and a tennis court. To the South-east of the house is a sunken lawn, bordered to the North- east by a timber barn. At the end of the nineteenth century two further ranges of buildings occupied the South-west border of this area (Fig. 2) and it seems likely that this lawn occupies the site of a former farmyard.

South-east of the suggested farmyard site is a modern ornamental pond, modified from an earlier and larger pond (compare Figs 2 and 3). The suggestion that the site was once moated (RCHM 1912, 126) is presumably based on this and the linear pond to the North-west.

3

The new development consists of a single storey conservatory (7 x 2.8m) built on to the South-west face of the modern extension to the South-east corner of the early post-medieval house.

4 The Watching Brief 4.1 The Watching Brief Figs 3-7 Immediately prior to the start of the groundworks the development site consisted of an area of lawn, separated from the South-west face of the South-east corner of the house by an 85cm wide gravel and stone (Type 1) path, which excavation proved to the upper fill of a drain trench (4), Figs 3-4. Three rainwater gullies were set in this path.

The stripping and foundation excavations were carried out, mechanically, by the building contractors (Bleriot Construction Ltd), under continuous archaeological observation.

The entire site was first reduced by 20-30cm and then the foundation trenches were excavated. The foundation trenches were c. 50cm wide and c.1.1m deep.

The stripping involved the partial removal of topsoil (1) from the lawn area, the gravel and stone path (2) and part of a shingle layer (3) found beneath layer 2, Fig, 7, Sections A-B and C-D. In the course of this work two separate drainage systems were revealed, Figs 5 and 7, Sections A-B and C-D. The first consisted of a network of plastic rainwater drainpipes (10), set within topsoil and connected to gullies (see above). The second was a salt-glazed drain (5) from the existing kitchen. Drain 5 was encased in layer 3 and ran along the entire length of development site about 50- 60cm from the house wall. The rainwater pipes were removed but the kitchen drain (5) was left in situ, for future use. At this stage the greater part of the site was covered by remnant topsoil, the only exception being the shingle-filled trench (4) for the kitchen drain. No further excavation was carried out, except for the foundation trenches.

Excavation of the foundation trenches showed that the kitchen drain (5) was set in a trench (4) filled with shingle (3) and capped by a layer of gravel and stone (2) which

4

doubled as a path, Fig. 7, Sections A-B and C-D. Immediately below drain trench 4, another drain was revealed (6) which proved to be the foul drain for the house, Figs 6 and 7, Sections A-B and C-D. This drain ran the entire length of the development site, was set tight against the cinder block (7) foundations of the house, and was left in situ for future use.

The complex of retained drains alongside the existing house effectively precluded any possibility of examining the house foundations or adjacent strata in any detail, but the brickwork (8) and cinder blocks (7) indicate the house foundations are of very recent date.

A land drain (13) was found to run down the whole length of the long (south- western) foundation trench and this had disturbed all deposits in this section of the site, Figs 6 and 7, Sections A-B and C-D.

Two other features were also recorded.

A small pit or ditch (17) was observed in both faces of the long (south-western) trench, Fig. 7, Section B-C. This feature was cut into layer (11) and its fill (16) contained fragments of tile/brick and blue slate, and is presumably, therefore, of quite recent date.

The eastern 2.5m of the site was occupied by a large cut feature (19) which was observed in both faces of the south-western and south-eastern trenches, Fig. 7, Sections B-C and C-D. This feature was cut into layer (11) and its fill (18) contained tiny fragments of ceramic tile, brick and clay pipe stems, and must be of seventeenth century or later date. The fill of this feature contained many large pieces of limestone and it appeared to have been deliberately infilled. Its original extent and function are unknown but it could have been a pond, of which there are many examples in the vicinity of Waldridge Manor, Fig. 3.

Summary Context Descriptions 1 Topsoil, black and humus rich, c. 30cm thick, extended over entire site except where cut by 4. Sealed 11, 12, 15, 16 18,.cut by 4, contained 10. 2 Layer of gravel and Type 1 stone, c. 10cm thick, 85-90cm wide, extended along length of site. Fill of 4, sealed 3, abutted 8. 3 Layer of shingle, c. 31cm thick, 80cm wide, extended along length of site. Fill of 4, sealed by 2, contained 5, sealed 7, abutted 8.

5

4 Cut of trench for drain 5, flat bottom, steep western side, 90cm wide, 44cm deep, extended along entire length of site, cut into 1, filled with 2-3 and 5. 5 Salt-glazed drain pipe, contained within 3. 6 Salt-glazed foul drain pipe sealed by 3 (pre-dates 4), abuts 7, set in 9. 7 Cinder block foundations to brick wall of existing house (8). Sealed by 3 and 6. It was not possible to examine this in any detail. 8 Brick wall of existing house. Three courses were revealed below ground level, set on 7, abutted by 2 and 3. 9 Un-excavated section below drain 6. 10 Plastic rainwater drains. Contained within 1. 11 Layer of grey and rather sandy clay containing 10% small pieces of limestone, but no artefacts or other inclusions. This layer only occurred over the south-western 80cm of the site and thickened towards both West and South, from 2-3cm up to 50cm. Sealed 15, sealed by 1, cut by 14, 17 and 18. 12 Fill, mixed earth and dirty grey clay containing many pieces of brick, tile, etc, 31-2 cm wide, 47cm deep, extended along entire length of site. Fill of 14, contained 13, sealed by 1. 13 Red earthenware land drain, extended along entire length of site. Contained within 12. 14 Cut for drain 13, narrow v-section profile, 31-2 cm wide, 47cm deep, extended along entire length of site. Filled with 12-13, cut into 11 and 18. 15 Natural, hard, sandy grey clay with green mottling, no inclusions or artefacts, extended over entire site except where cut away by 19. Sealed by 1 and 11 16 Fill, dirty grey clay with admixture of topsoil, containing 5% small (3-4cm).pieces of limestone and occasional small pieces of brick, blue slate and charcoal, up to 117cm wide, at least 50cm long and 70cm thick. Fill of 17, sealed by 1. 17 U-sectioned cut with slightly flattened bottom, up to 117cm wide, at least 50cm long and 70cm deep. Cut into 11, filled with 16. 18 Fill, dirty grey, loose and rather sandy clay containing many (20%) pieces of limestone (up to 30cm across) and occasional pieces of brick/tile and clay pipe stem., at least 2.5 x 2.8m and 75cm thick. Fill of 19, sealed by 1, cut by 4, 14 and probably by 6-8. 19 Cut, steeply sloping northern edge, and markedly sloping bottom, at least 2.5 x 2.8m and 75cm thick. Filled with 18, cut into 11.

4.2 Archive Index Context records Pro-forma context record for each context (summarised above)

Plan and Section drawings 1 Location map showing position of New Build (1:2500). 2 Location plan showing position of New Build (1:50) 3 Trench Plan (1:50). 4 Sections A-B, B-C and C-D (1:20) Photographs Colour and monochrome (carry suffix m) 1 General view of site from South-east. 2 North-west foundation trench from South-east. 3 South-west foundation trench from North-east. 4 South-east foundation trench from North-west. Artefacts No pre-modern artefacts were recovered.

6

5 Conclusions A Watching Brief was carried out during the stripping of the site for the construction of a new conservatory, and during the excavation of the foundation trenches.

The site was found to have been disturbed in modern times by an earlier extension to the existing house, numerous modern drains and a modern pit or ditch. Evidence was also found indicating that much of the area investigated had been disturbed in post-medieval times by a large feature, possibly a pond.

If the seventeenth century house did extend to the South-east, as suggested by RCHM, then the modern extension is likely to have destroyed or at least obscured any remains.

No remains were identified which could be confidently associated with the sixteenth or early seventeenth century manor house and no medieval or earlier remains were noted.

Bibliography of cited works British Geological Survey Map 237 (1994). OS. Various dates. Maps of the Ordnance Survey. RCHM(E) 1912 An Inventory of Historical Monuments in Buckinghamshire I (London).

7 Appendix 1 Brief for an Archaeological Watching Brief (Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service)

Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service

Brief for an Archaeological Watching Brief

Project: Waldridge Manor, Owlswick Road, Ford

Development: Conservatory

Planning Application: 00/02770

Local Planning Authority: Aylesbury Vale District Council

Brief issued: 8.7.2002

The case officer for this project is: David Radford

DEFINITION The definition of an Archaeological Watching Brief is a formal programme of observation and investigation conducted during any operation carried out for non-archaeological reasons. This will be within a specified area or site on land ... .or underwater, where there is a possibility that archaeological deposits may be disturbed or destroyed. The programme will result in the preparation of a report and ordered archive. (IFA, 1999). REQUIREMENT FOR A WATCHING BRIEF Planning Policy Guidance 16 (Archaeology and Planning) (DoE, 1990) states that where a planning authority has decided to permit a development which would destroy archaeological remains it may satisfy itself before granting planning permission that the developer has made appropriate and satisfactory provision for archaeological recording and the publication of the results. Requirements for watching briefs are normally secured by means of a “negative condition” and must be specified in a “written scheme of investigation” which has been agreed in writing by the County Archaeological Service and approved by the local planning authority prior to commencing fieldwork. The “written scheme of investigation” should comprise this brief combined with the archaeological contractor’s project design (see below). Archaeological planning conditions will not be discharged until all fieldwork and post-excavation work has been completed, the archive has been deposited and publication secured. An archaeological watching brief is considered necessary for this site because the application affects a grade II* listed late 16th/17th century manor house which is associated with a scheduled deserted medieval settlement (SAM 29414). Groundworks may therefore affect important buried archaeological remains of medieval and/or post medieval date. A summary of the known archaeology and history of the site is provided by the schedule entry (Appendix 3).

1 PROCEDURE AND PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS Archaeological Watching Briefs must be undertaken in accordance with the Standard and Guidance for archaeological watching briefs published by the Institute of Field Archaeologists (IFA, 1999). Each watching brief must be governed by a project design which has been agreed in writing by the County Archaeological Service. The project design should be based on a thorough study of all relevant background information (especially any assessment or evaluation reports or, in their absence, data held or referenced in the SMR). It should conform to the requirements set out in paragraph 3.2.12 of the IFA guidelines and should in particular include:

• The project’s objectives. • A description of the proposed works and an assessment of their archaeological impact with an accompanying plan. • Details of the methodology for implementing the watching brief indicating those works which are to be observed, the frequency of observation (permanent/daily visits etc) and any archaeological control over the developer’s operating procedures. • An assessment of the potential for, and possible nature of, any “unexpected discoveries”1 with details of contingency arrangements for salvage recording. • Procedures for project management (to follow the principles set out in Management of Archaeological Projects (MAP) (English Heritage, 1991). • The expertise of the project team. The project manager should be a named Member of the Institute of Field Archaeologists (MIFA) validated in Archaeological Field Practice. The composition and experience of the project team should be described. Specialists should be identified where required (e.g. for finds and environmental work). In some cases it will also be necessary to identify academic advisors. CVs should be supplied outlining the relevant qualifications and experience of key personnel - where relevant this should include specific reference to knowledge of particular periods and local regional traditions. Note: Specialists should be able to demonstrate a relevant qualification and track record of at least 3 years continuous relevant work (or equivalent, and appropriate publication. In appropriate circumstances, less experienced staff may conduct work under the supervision of well-established and widely recognised specialists. • An outline of the proposed timetable and staff resources - this must be non-binding and presented “for information only”. • Reporting and Archiving arrangements.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES Identify and record any archaeological features revealed by the groundworks, paying particular regard to the potential for medieval-post medieval occupation associated with the manor and village.

FIELDWORK METHODOLOGY Procedure Watching briefs require that the archaeologist(s) are present on site during works in the following circumstances: comprehensive/detailed (present during all works which may affect archaeological remains); intensive (present during specified sensitive works); intermittent (viewing immediately after each specified phase of works). In this case, a detailed watching brief should be maintained during the excavation of new footings.

1 The term “unexpected discovery” covers features whose existence and/or significance was unknown at the outset of the watching brief but subsequently prove to be potentially of county or national importance. 2 The presence/absence of archaeological features should be noted. If features are identified then sufficient work should be done to date, characterise and record the remains in accordance with the project objectives. If an “unexpected discovery” is made then the County Archaeological Service and the developer should be informed as soon as possible. Initially consideration should be given to preservation in situ but if this is not practical then such discoveries may give rise to a salvage excavation funded from the contingency (see below). Recording In principle, recording standards should be the same as for formal excavations but the particular practical difficulties and constraints of watching brief recording are acknowledged. Features should be recorded in plan at an appropriate scale and accurately located in relation to the National Grid. Each context should be recorded on pro-forma records which should include the following minimum details: character; contextual relationships; detailed description (dimensions and shape; soil components, colour, texture and consistency); associated finds; interpretation and phasing as well as cross-references to the drawn, photographic and finds registers. Normally each context should be recorded on an individual record. Sections should be drawn through all significant cut features and levelled to ordnance datum. A black and white photographic record should be maintained including photos of all significant features and overall photos of each watching brief area. Selected colour transparencies should also be taken. Artefact and Ecofact collection and recording All stratified finds should be collected by context or, where appropriate, individually recorded in 3 dimensions. Unstratified finds should only be collected where they contribute significantly to the project objectives or are of particular intrinsic interest. Finds of “treasure” must be reported to the Coroner in accordance with the Treasure Act procedures. Collection policies for structural remains and industrial residues have been set out by the Society of Museum Archaeologists (SMA, 1993). The presence of such materials within a context should always be recorded and, where they are considered to be of importance, the evaluation strategy should aim to quantify,’ their occurrence, even where comprehensive retention is not considered appropriate. Contingency and salvage excavation Contingency arrangements must be specified in the project design and should take account of the nature of possible “unexpected discoveries” and the likely impact of the development upon them. Arrangements should include the demarcation of the area for excavation, the period of temporary cessation of development works within this area and the resources (expressed in person-days, specialist input etc.) available to undertake the excavation. Human remains should be left in situ, covered and protected. Excavation can only take place under appropriate Home Office and environmental health regulations and, if appropriate, in compliance with the Disused Burial Grounds (Amendments) Act 1981. The only exception is where excavations are being undertaken in a churchyard under a faculty issued by the Chancellor of Oxford Diocese (in such cases the faculty requirements should be followed). Provision should be made within the contingency for: conservation (lifting and treatment) of fragile objects and the collection and analysis of environmental and scientific (including dating) samples. Sampling is to be carried out in accordance with a strategy which is related to the project objectives and has been agreed with English Heritage’s Regional Adviser in Archaeological Science.

POST-EXCAVATION METHODOLOGY For most watching briefs it will be sufficient to complete an archive report for the SMR, publish a summary note and deposit the archive (see below). For projects which have produced results of significant county, regional or national importance, an 3 illustrated interim report together with a post-excavation assessment and updated project design (MAP Stage 3) should be submitted by the archaeological contractor and approved by the County Archaeological Service within 6 months of the completion of fieldwork. Post-excavation analysis and report preparation should proceed in accordance with the agreed updated project design unless subsequent variations are agreed by the County Archaeological Service.

PUBLICATION For all projects, a summary report (including illustrations where appropriate) should be sent to the editors of South Midlands Archaeology and Records of Buckinghamshire not later than three months after the end of the calendar year in which the work is undertaken. For projects which have produced results of significant county, regional or national importance, an illustrated final report which meets the guidelines set out in MAP Appendix 7 and is suitable for publication in an approved archaeological journal (normally Records of Buckinghamshire) should be provided to the County Archaeological Service within one year of the completion of fieldwork (unless a longer time period has been agreed in the updated project design). The overall content of the report should be agreed with the County Archaeological Service. The report should be clearly referenced in all respects to all work on the site, evaluation, excavation, watching briefs, building recording, background research including aerial photography etc, in order that a coherent picture may be presented. It should place the site in its local archaeological, historical and topographical context and include a clear location map. Each plan included should clearly relate to some other included plan of an appropriate scale and should normally include national grid references. Two bound offprints of the final publication and a digital copy of the text, ideally in Word format, must be supplied to the County Sites and Monuments Record. A further offprint should accompany the archive. A copy of any specialist papers relating to the site should also be supplied to the County Archaeological Service. A publication grant should be provided to the publishers of the report in accordance with their requirements.

ARCHIVING The archaeological contractor should endeavour to ensure that the site archive (including any artefacts recovered) are deposited in an acceptable condition with a museum which is registered with the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council and approved for the storage of archaeological archives. The preferred archive for Buckinghamshire is the County Museum. The procedures and requirements which must be followed for the deposit of archaeological archives with Buckinghamshire County Museum are documented in the Museum’s Procedures for Deposit of Archaeological Archives (B CM, 1999), available from the Collections and Information Manager (address below). A storage grant should be provided to the museum in accordance with their requirements. The archaeological contractor should arrange for the archive to be copied on microfiche to the standard required by the National Monuments Record. One copy should be deposited with the NMR and a second copy with the County Sites & Monuments Record.

MONITORING Monitoring is carried out by the County Archaeological Service, normally acting on behalf of the local planning authority, to ensure that projects are being carried out in accordance with the brief and approved project design, to enable the need for modifications to the project to be independently considered and validated and to control and validate the use of available contingencies. A programme of monitoring should be agreed with the County Archaeological Service prior to the commencement of fieldwork. The archaeological contractor should keep the County Archaeological Service regularly informed of the project’s progress and facilitate the monitoring of the project at each stage, including post-excavation. In particular, there should be no substantial modification of the

4 approved brief and project design without the prior consent of the County Archaeological Service and no fieldwork should be carried out without the service’s knowledge and approval. All monitoring visits will be documented by the County Archaeological Service and the archaeological contractor will be informed of any perceived deficiencies. The County Archaeological Service should be informed at the earliest opportunity of any unexpected discoveries, especially where there may be a need to vary the project design. The archaeological contractor should carry out such reasonable contingency works as requested by the County Archaeological Service within the resources defined in the project design.

HEALTH AND SAFETY AND OTHER CONSTRAINTS Health and Safety must take priority over archaeological requirements. It is essential that all projects are carried out in accordance with safe working practices and under a defined Health and Safety Policy. Risk Assessments must be carried out for every field project. If the risk assessment indicates it is necessary, the requirements of the brief can be varied in the interests of health and safety (the County Archaeological Service must be consulted and the proposed changes agreed in such cases). The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 (CDM) will apply to archaeological work undertaken on many construction (and demolition) projects.

BIBLIOGRAPHY BCM, 1999 Procedures for deposit of archaeological archives DoE, 1990 Planning Policy Guidance: Archaeology and Planning. (PPG16) English Heritage, 1991 Management of Archaeological Projects. English Heritage, 1996. Waterlogged wood. Guidelines on the Recording, Sampling, Conservation and Curation of Waterlogged Wood IFA, 1999 Standard and Guidance for archaeological watching brief SMA,, 1993 Selection, Retention and Dispersal of Archaeological Collections.

CONTACTS Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service, Environmental Services, County Hall, Walton Street, Aylesbury HP2O 1UY. Fax 01296-382823. Alexander (Sandy) Kidd MA MIFA, Senior Archaeological Officer Tel: 01296-382927. E-mail: [email protected] Julia Wise BA, Archaeological Officer (SMR Administrator) Tel: 01296-382072. E-mail: juwise~buckscc.gov.uk David Radford MA, Archaeological Officer Tel: 01296-383798. E-mail: [email protected]. uk Please note that the SMR operates an appointment system and there is a charge for commercial enquiries.

Buckinghamshire County Museum Technical Centre Brett Thorn. Curator of Archaeology, Bucks County Museum, Technical Centre, Tring Road, Halton, Aylesbury, Bucks, HP22 5PJ. Tel & Fax: 01296 624519. Buckinghamshire Archaeology Society (Records of Buckinghamshire) Mr Michael Farley, Archaeological Editor, 112 Walton Way, Aylesbury, Bucks, HP21 7JR. Tel& Fax: 01296 482411. Council For British Archaeology South Midlands Group (South Midlands Archaeology) Mr Barry Home, Hon.Editor, “Beaumont”, Church End, Edlesborough, Dunstable, Beds, LU6 2EP.

5 English Heritage Regional Adviser in Archaeological Science (South East Region) Dr Dominique de Moulins, Institute of Archaeology, University College London, 31-34 Gordon Square, London WC1H OPY. Tel: 0171-3911539; Fax: 0171-3832572; e-mail:[email protected]

6 Appendix 2 Proposals for Archaeological Watching Brief Waldridge Manor, Owlswick Road, Ford, Buckinghamshire Planning Application 00/02770 Objectives To identify and record any archaeological remains, paying particular regard to those which might be related to the medieval and post-medieval manor and village of Waldridge. Method Topsoil stripping (if carried out) of the footprint of the extension and digging of foundation trenches (500mm wide and c. 1m deep) will be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist (R. J. Ivens or an assistant acting under his direction). It is proposed to carry out continuous monitoring of the excavations, although this level of investigation may be reduced where areas of modern disturbance are encountered; it is known that much of the site has been disturbed by foul and storm drains. In view of the small scale and character of the work, and very limited disturbance of the site, no provision has been made for further investigation, however, if significant remains are encountered then Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service will be consulted. The position of the development will be accurately recorded on plan and related to the National Grid. All archaeological deposits will be planned where possible (1 : 20 or larger) and described. Levelled section drawings (normally at 1 : 10) and a photographic record will be made where appropriate. Any artefacts or other remains will be recorded by context and removed for further study. All archaeological work will be carried out to the relevant standards of the Institute of Field Archaeologists and according to the specification laid out in the Brief prepared by Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service. Artefacts and Samples Medieval and later artefacts will be examined and assessed by R. J. Ivens and Saxon and earlier artefacts jointly by R. J. Ivens, B. Hurman and C. Woodfield. Should any significant environmental remains or other finds requiring more specialised knowledge be recovered then arrangements will be made to take appropriate advice. Reports Two printed and one digital copy of the report will be submitted to Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service. The report will consist of an account of the findings of the Watching Brief, as specified in the Brief prepared by Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service. Additional copies will be made available to the client and the local planning authority. A summary report will also be submitted for publication in South Midlands Archaeology and Records of Buckinghamshire. Archive Original site records and all artefacts (unless retained by the landowner) will remain with the excavator until completion of the project, after which they will be deposited with Buckinghamshire County Museum, or other appropriate museum/archive. Digital copies of the archive will also be made available to the NMR and BCAS.

1 Appendix 3 Department for Culture, Media and Sport: Schedule Entry DEPARTMENT FOR CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT BATCH NUMBER: 10308 FILE REFERENCE: AA 60072/1 SCHEDULE ENTRY COPY ENTRY IN THE SCHEDULE OF MONUMENTS COMPILED AND MAINTAINED BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE UNDER SECTION 1 OF THE ANCIENT MONUMENTS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREAS ACT 1979 AS AMENDED. MONUMENT: Nucleated medieval settlement east of Waldridge Manor PARISH: DINTON-WITH-FORD AND UPTON DISTRICT: AYLESBURY VALE COUNTY: BUCKINGHM4SHIRE NATIONAL MONUMENT NO: 29414 NATIONAL GRID REFERENCE(S) : SP78500724 DESCRIPTION OF THE MONUMENT The monument includes the buried and visible remains of a small medieval village situated within the Vale of Aylesbury between the modern villages Owlswick and Ford, some 4km to the north west of and the Chiltern Escarpment. The settlement earthworks are largely contained within a pasture of approximately 14ha located between Waldridge Manor and the Ford to Meadle road to the east. The central feature of the settlement is the main street, a broad hollow way which traverses the gentle north facing slope across the centre of the field before turning to the south and running parallel with Stockwell Lane. The area contained within the angle of the hollow way (some 5.5ha) is divided into an irregular pattern of rectangular enclosures separated by shallow ditches and worn trackways. The majority of these enclosures follow a north east-south west alignment and are considered to represent stock enclosures and paddocks, although the site of at least one former building is marked by a more pronounced enclosure set within the bend in the hollow way. The ditch, or moat, surrounding this small enclosure measures up to 8m in width and 1.8m in depth, and the slightly raised and embanked interior contains minor undulations believed to indicate the presence of buried structural remains. Other buildings may be represented by five or six smaller and less distinct enclosures and terraces arranged along the northern side of the main hollow way to the south of the moated site, although evidence for habitation is more clearly defined on the opposite side of this street. Four crofts (enclosures which contained buildings, working areas and paddocks) can be identified on this side, the structures represented by low platforms flanking the street frontage. Low undulations, representing the continuation of the settlement area, can be identified to the south of the main pasture, within the narrow area of improved grassland to either side of the driveway to Waldridge Manor. This however, appears to coincide with the southern limit of habitation, as aerial photography has shown only evidence of the medieval open field system (Continued ..) ------AUTHORISED BY: A Middleton On behalf of the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport under batch no: 10308

1 DEPARTMENT FOR CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT BATCH NUMBER: 10308

Continued from previous page .. NATIONAL MONUMENT NO: 29414

DESCRIPTION OF THE MONUMENT (Continued) continuing southwards in the presently cultivated fields. From the air, this system, a patchwork of furlongs of ridge and furrow cultivation, can also be identified extending north east and south east from the settlement site, and a partial furlong (not included in the scheduling) remains visible on the ground to the north west. A small area of surviving ridge and furrow in the pasture to the north east of the hollow way is of particular interest and is included in the scheduling. The earthworks in this area are thought to be a remnant from an early furlong, which aerial photography has shown to have been isolated by the final development of the field pattern to the north. The denuded appearance of cultivation earthworks in this area may have resulted from the conversion to pasture during the lifetime of the settlement, and this possibility is supported by traces of enclosures superimposed over the pattern of ridges, or lands. The settlement is poorly documented, although the history of the manor to which it was attached is better recorded. The manor of Waldridge is known to have been held by two sokemen (free tenants) prior to the Norman Conquest, one of whom owed allegiance to Alveva, the sister of Earl Harold. After the Conquest the land was granted to the Bishop of Bayeux, and held throughout the medieval period by a number of under tenants, beginning with the bishop’s steward and continuing under the later overlordship of the Munchesney family and the Earls of Pembroke. The date and cause of the settlement’s demise is similarly obscure, although it may have been related to the construction of Upper Waldridge Farm (now Waldridge Manor) in the early 17th century. By the time William Serjeant died — seised of the capital messuage (the principal dwelling of the manor) in 1615 the settlement may have already declined, perhaps as a result of the expansion of sheep farming which caused depopulation in many other Aylesbury Vale settlements during the previous century. The last (and only) record of property rents from the manorial lands dates from 1622. All fences, gates, horse jumps and water troughs are excluded from the scheduling, although the ground beneath these features is included. ASSESSMENT OF IMPORTANCE Medieval rural settlements in England were marked by great regional diversity in form, size and type, and the protection of their archaeological remains needs to take these differences into account. To do this, England has been divided into three broad Provinces on the basis of each area’s distinctive mixture of nucleated and dispersed settlements. These can be further divided into sub-Provinces and local regions, possessing characteristics which have gradually evolved during the past 1500 years or more. This monument lies in the Inner Midlands sub—Province of the Central Province, an area characterised by large numbers of nucleated settlements, both surviving and deserted, many of which are thought to have been established in Anglo-Saxon times. Most of the sub-Province’s thinly scattered dispersed (Continued) ------AUTHORISED BY: A Middleton On behalf of the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport under batch no: 10308

2 DEPARTMENT FOR CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT BATCH NUMBER: 10308 Continued from previous page .. NATIONAL MONUMENT NO: 29414

DESCRIPTION OF THE MONUMENT (Continued) ASSESSMENT OF IMPORTANCE (Continued) settlements were created in post—medieval times, but some of the local regions are characterised by higher proportions of dispersed dwellings and hamlets, which probably mark the patchy survival of older landscapes. The site of the medieval village near Waldridge Manor is clearly defined by an area of earthworks in which evidence for the nature of the settlement remains very well preserved. The crofts and building platforms will contain buried evidence for houses, barns and other structures, accompanied by a range of features such a boundaries, refuse pits and drainage channels. Artefacts found in association with these features will provide insights into the date and duration of occupation, the lifestyle of the inhabitants and the economy of the settlement. Environmental evidence may also be recovered, illustrating the appearance of the landscape in which the settlement was established and providing further information about its agricultural regime. The South Midlands local region is large, and capable of further subdivision. Strongly banded from south west to north east, it comprises a broad succession of clay vales and limestone or marlstone ridges, complicated by local drifts which create many subtle variations in terrain. The region is in general dominated by nucleated villages of medieval origin, with isolated farmsteads, mostly of post—medieval date, set in the spaces between them. Depopulated village sites are common, and moated sites are present on the claylands. Many modern villages in the local region have medieval origins, although in most cases later development has obscured much of the archaeological evidence for earlier settlement. Depopulated examples, such as that to the east of Waldridge Manor, provide valuable opportunities to study the nature of these earlier communities and, in areas such as the Vale of Aylesbury, where the abandoned settlements are comparatively common, opportunities to examine and compare the reasons for their failure. MAP EXTRACT The site of the monument is shown on the attached map extract outlined in black and highlighted in red. SCHEDULING HISTORY Monument included in the Schedule on 6th April 1956 as: COUNTY/NUMBER: Buckinghamshire 70 NAME: Deserted Village (site of) near Upper Waldridge Farm

Scheduling amended on 18th March 1964 to: COUNTY/NUMBER: Buckinghamshire 70 NAME: Deserted village (site of) at or near Waldridge Manor (otherwise or formerly known as Upper Waldridge Farm) (Continued) ------AUTHORISED BY: A Middleton On behalf of the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport under batch no: 10308

3 DEPARTMENT FOR CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT BATCH NUMBER: 10308 Continued from previous page .. NATIONAL MONUMENT NO: 29414

SCHEDULING HISTORY (Continued)

------The reference of this monument is now: NATIONAL MONUMENT NUMBER: 29414 NAME: nucleated medieval settlement east of Waldridge Manor

SCHEDULING REVISED ON 08th December 1997 AUTHORISED BY: A Middleton On behalf of the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport under batch no: 10308

4