Little Chalfield Lawns Member’S Project Rob Arkell

Little Chalfield Lawns Member’s Project Rob Arkell

Summary

Resistance and magnetometry surveys were carried out in the grounds of Little Chalfield Manor to look for evidence of earlier medieval buildings. The magnetometry survey revealed a portion of a circular feature twenty metres in diameter. A trench through the feature discovered a ditch containing bronze age pottery in the ditch fill. This suggests the feature is the remains of a ploughed out round barrow similar to others in the vicinity. The resistivity survey did not show any linear high resistance features which could be interpreted as walls but one pattern of low resistance was investigated. A trench across the feature contained demolition rubble (mortar, plaster, window glass and building stone fragments) which indicated that a building, thought to be the medieval manor which was demolished in 1830, had stood nearby.

Background

Little or West Chalfield is one of the two manors at Chalfield recorded in Domesday, the other being Great or East Chalfield (Fig.1). The current manor house was built in the 1830s and replaced an earlier Tudor manor house referred to by Sir Richard Colte-Hoare (ref.2). The Tudor manor house itself replaced or developed from an earlier medieval manor house whose stained glass is referred to in the Tropenell Cartulary (1464-1488) (ref.3). A chapel associated with the medieval manor has never been located. The list of incumbents ran from before 1296 to 1537 and there is no record of the chapel in a religious context after this date. It is thought to have been demolished before 1674 (ref.4). An Inquisition Post Mortem of 1331 records a dovecote worth two shillings (Ref 5), and this is placed near the manor house in a survey of the early 1700s. (Ref 6)

The purpose of the project is to establish whether a geophysical survey will reveal any evidence of the earlier medieval manor house, chapel or dovecote.

©Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 917065

Fig.1 Map - Little and Great Chalfield to the north-east of Bradford on Avon 3

List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1 Map - Little and Great Chalfield to the north-east of Bradford on Avon Figure 2 Envelope of Survey Area Figure 3 Magnetometry in walled garden Figure 4 Resistivity on lawns Figure 5 Magnetometry Survey Results Figure 6 Resistivity Survey Results Figure 7 Local ring ditches Figure 8 Mag. Survey feature and Trench 1 Figure 9 Res. Survey feature and Trench 2 Figure 10 Plan and Sections Trench 1 Figure 11 Trench 41 Primary Figure 12 Trench 1 Primary west edge with upper and lower fill dividing line Figure 13 Trench 1 extension with upper fill (contexts 1102, 1103) removed Figure 14 Trench 2 section Figure 15 Context 103 - Rim of Bronze Age collared urn Figure 16 Context 103 - Bronze Age - shelly limestone temper Figure 17 Context 103 - Bronze Age pig bones (humerus - top, tibia – below) Figure 18 Flint scraper (spoil heap) Figure 19 Context 102 - Medieval coarseware Figure 20 Context 1103 – slag typical of copper smelting Figure 21 Context 203 - patinated window glass Context 204 – mortar Figure 22 Context 204 – mortar Figure 23 Context 204 - Wall plaster Figure 24 Context 204 - Whitewashed worked oolitic limestone, possible window surround (face and back) Figure 25 Context 204 - Roughly worked oolitic limestone Figure 26 Context 205 - Medieval Roof Tile 13th C or later (glazed face, back and edge) Figure 27 Context 205 - Medieval coarseware Table 1 Recorded layer sequence for Trench 1 Table 2 Finds in Trench 1 Primary Table 3 Finds in Trench 1 Extension Table 4 Recorded layer sequence for Trench 2 Table 5 Finds in Trench 2

Geophysics 27th & 28th June 2017

©Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 917065

Fig 2: Envelope of Survey Area

Seventeen 20m x 20m grids from a possible twenty-five were surveyed where the terrain permitted within a 100m by 100m square shown in Fig.2. The resistance survey used a TR/CIA Twin Probe Resistance Meter and a Geoscan RM15 Resistance Meter. The magnetometry survey used a Bartington Grad 601 Magnetometer. The area surveyed comprised lawn and mown rough grass. The results are shown in figures 5 and 6.

Photo: Rick Buettner Photo: Rick Buettner

Fig 3: Magnetometry in walled garden Fig 4: Resistivity on lawns 5

Fig 5: Magnetometry Survey Results 6

Fig 6: Resistance Survey Results

Discussion of Geophysics Results

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

©Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 917065

Fig 7: Local ring ditches

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

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

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

Excavations

It was decided that trenches to try to identify the features would be dug in the two locations where the survey indicated there might be underground features, Trench 1 over the circular feature in grid square F (Fig 8) and Trench 2 over a possible robbed out wall in grid square K (Fig 9).

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

Trench 1 Extension (1.48m x 0.5m)

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

Dates: Trench 1 August and September 2017

Trench 2 November 2017 and January 2018

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

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

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

Methodology

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

Results

Trench 1

Fig 10: Plan and Sections Trench 1

Photo: Rick Buettner Fig 11: Trench 41 Primary

Context Depth Description Interpretation 101 0 – 10cm Turf Turf 102 and 1102 10 – 41cm Loose loamy brown Topsoil changing to soil. Lowest level of subsoil earthworm stone burying effect

103 41 – 94cm Light-brown soil with Subsoil with limestone many stones rubble 104 34/37 – 87cm Limestone rubble Natural stratum with pale silt 105 Below 87/94cm Yellow-grey clay Natural clay stratum 1103 (Extension only) 41 – 42/65cm Light-brown soil with Upper ditch fill. many stones Subsoil with limestone rubble 1104 (Extension only) 42/65 - 94 Light-brown soil with Lower ditch fill. many stones Subsoil with limestone rubble Table 1: Recorded layer sequence for Trench 1

Main Trench Context DESCRIPTION 102 103 TOTAL Number 13 8 21 Bone Weight (g) 46.28 30.1 76.38 Number 0 12 12 Ceramic Building Material Weight (g) 0 12.9 12.9 Number 1 0 1 Ceramic Roof Tile Weight (g) 19.69 0 19.69 Flint (excludes scraper Number 13 9 22 found in spoil heap) Weight (g) 96.84 55.51 152.35 Number 4 0 4 Iron Nails Weight (g) 21.94 0 21.94 Number 2 2 4 Pottery (Bronze Age) Weight (g) 2.1 2.22 4.32 Number 34 1 35 Pottery (Medieval) Weight (g) 83.92 0.59 84.51 Number 1 0 1 Pottery (Post-Medieval) Weight (g) 0.94 0 0.94 Number 3 0 3 Slag Weight (g) 17.33 0 17.33 Number 1 0 1 Teeth Weight (g) 3.95 0 3.95 Number 1 0 1 Tusk Weight (g) 2.27 0 2.27 Table 2: Finds in Trench 1 Primary

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

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

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

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

Extension Context UPPER FILL LOWER FILL DESCRIPTION 1102 1103 1104 TOTAL Number 3 0 1 4 Bone Weight (g) 5.54 0 0.6 6.14 Number 2 0 18 20 Ceramic Building Material Weight (g) 1.71 0 8.93 10.64 Number 4 3 3 10 Flint Weight (g) 38.19 27.56 5.45 71.2 Number 5 1 4 10 Pottery (Bronze Age) Weight (g) 9.96 2.28 16.42 28.66 Number 3 0 1 4 Pottery (Medieval) Weight (g) 8.04 0 3.85 11.89 Number 0 1 0 1 Slag Weight (g) 0 21.98 0 21.98 Number 1 1 0 2 Teeth Weight (g) 4.85 0.32 0 5.17 Table 3: Finds in Trench 1 Extension

Finds Discussion Trench 1

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

Conclusions Trench 1

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

Trench 2

Fig 14: Trench 2 section

Context Depth Description Interpretation 201 0 – 10cm Turf Turf 202 10 – 20cm Medium brown loamy Topsoil merging into soil with some stones subsoil becoming paler with increased depth

203 20 - 30cm Larger stones with Subsoil sandy-clay soil 204 30 – 40cm Larger stones with Subsoil sandy-clay soil 205 40 – 52cm Larger stones with Subsoil sandy-clay soil 206 Below 52cm Limestone rubble Natural stratum Table 4: Recorded layer sequence for Trench 2

TRENCH 2 Context Total Total Total Total Description 202 203 204 205 Total Number 3 0 6 10 19 Bone Weight (g) 3.15 0 6.87 11.47 21.49 Number 1 1 8 2 12 CBM Weight (g) 1.6 1.94 18.42 15.37 37.33 15

Number 0 0 0 1 1 Ceramic Roof Tile Weight (g) 0 0 0 10.65 10.65 Number 4 9 3 1 17 Flint Weight (g) 6.46 25.28 9.36 1.13 42.23 Number 2 7 2 4 15 Glass (Window) <2mm Weight (g) 0.43 5.71 1.46 2.88 10.48 Number 2 0 0 2 4 Glass Bottle (Patinated) Weight (g) 26.33 0 0 11.32 37.65 Number 9 6 2 0 17 Iron Nails Weight (g) 32.66 38.73 8.81 0 80.2 Number 0 0 4 1 5 Mortar Weight (g) 0 0 229.8 28.74 258.54 Number 0 0 2 0 2 Oolitic Limestone Weight (g) 0 0 406 0 406 Number 0 0 1 0 1 Ox shoe Weight (g) 0 0 89.8 0 89.8 Number 9 20 82 38 149 Plaster Weight (g) 24.66 91 728.26 257.3 1101.22 Number 1 1 5 23 30 Pottery (Medieval) Weight (g) 8.78 2.13 14.42 88.52 113.85 Number 11 15 9 0 35 Pottery (Post Medieval) Weight (g) 26.76 55.12 58.72 0 140.6 Number 0 0 0 1 1 Teeth Weight (g) 0 0 0 18.9 18.9 Number 0 0 0 1 1 Tusk Weight (g) 0 0 0 1.43 1.43 Number 1 4 3 0 8 Welsh Slate Weight (g) 0.46 6.16 8.54 0 15.16 Table 5: Finds in Trench 2

Comment on Resistance Survey Result at Trench 2

There was no discernible difference in the composition of the soil layers across the length of the trench to account for the variation in the resistance signal and the depth to the limestone surface was roughly equal across the length of the trench. Thus the theory that this was a robber trench must be discounted.

Finds Discussion Trench 2

The presence of plaster fragments (Fig 23) in all contexts indicates a mixing of deposited layers as might be expected in a garden. Despite this the bulk of the plaster was found in contexts 204 and 205. The presence of the plaster, mortar (Fig 22) and window glass fragments (Fig 21) indicates that a building has been demolished at or near the location. If the plaster came from the Tudor period manor then the presence of the medieval pottery (Fig 27) indicates that the trench location was probably outside the footprint of an earlier medieval manor. The roof tile (Figs 26) would have been used on a high status building. Two of the 9 iron nails had a circular section and the remainder had a 16

rectangular section indicating that they are probably pre-Victorian. The oolitic limestone (Figs 24, 25) is not the local shelly limestone and would have been brought to the site as building stone. The worked fragment (Fig 24), possibly a window surround, is whitewashed indicating that it came from within a building.

Conclusions Trench 2

The mortar, plaster, window glass and building stone fragments found indicate that a building, thought to be the medieval manor demolished in 1830, stood nearby.

Future Work

Most Wiltshire barrows excavated have been dug into chalk. It would add to our knowledge if a barrow dug in cornbrash was excavated for comparison. Further trenches to investigate the centre of the ring ditch and the entrance are justifiable but would need to be sufficiently well resourced to deal with human remains which are highly likely to be found.

A watching brief is being kept on any trenching or building work in the area of the house to see if the remains of any earlier buildings are present.

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Anthony and Julia Fuller for allowing access to the walled garden and lawns. Thanks to the following members of BACAS who carried out the surveys.

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

Thanks again to Rick Buettner for help with the excavations, Lorraine Mepham for identifying the pottery and Roy Canham for providing guidance.

References

1. C and F.Thorn, 1979 p25 Domesday Book, Chichester, Phillimore 2. Sir Richard Colt-Hoare, 1837 p57 The Modern History of Wiltshire, Volume 5, Hundred of Frustfield, London: John Bowyer Nichols & Son 3. J.Silvester Davies, 1908 p278 The Tropenell Cartulary vol.1, Devizes, Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society 4. R.B.Pugh and E.Crittall (ed) 1953 pp59-66 A History of the County of Wiltshire Vol 7, London, Oxford University Press 5. Wiltshire Inquisitiones Post Mortem Edward III, WANHS, Devizes 6. Somerset Heritage Centre DD/SF/3162 7. https://content.historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/iha-prehistoric-barrows- burial-mounds/prehistoricbarrowsandburialmounds.pdf

Appendix: Finds Photographs

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

Trench 1

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

Fig 17: Context 103 - Bronze Age pig bones (humerus - top, tibia – below) 18

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

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

Trench 2

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

Fig 23: Context 204 - Wall plaster 20

Figs 24.1, 24.2: Context 204 - Whitewashed worked oolitic limestone, possible window surround (face and back)

Fig 25: Context 204 - Roughly worked oolitic limestone 21

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

Fig 27: Context 205 - Medieval coarseware

Rob Arkell October 2018

Email: [email protected]