T H A M E S V A L L E Y ARCHAEOLOGICAL S E R V I C E S

Land at Newtown Road, ,

Archaeological Desk-based Assessment

by Richard Tabor

Site Code NRR14/164

(SU 2824 7170) Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire

Archaeological Desk-based Assessment

for Rectory Homes

by Richard Tabor

Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd

Site Code NRR 14/164

September 2014 Summary

Site name: Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire

Grid reference: SU 2824 7170

Site activity: Archaeological desk-based assessment

Project manager: Steve Ford

Site supervisor: Richard Tabor

Site code: NRR 14/164

Area of site: c. 2.83 ha Summary of results: The assessment has found no recorded heritage assets within the proposal site and few of interest in immediately adjacent areas. However, the site occupies a relatively large parcel of land within the archaeologically rich Kennet Valley. Once a planning consent has been gained, it is considered that it may be necessary to provide further information on the archaeological potential of the site by means of field evaluation. Such a scheme could be carried out by an appropriately worded condition attached to any consent gained

This report may be copied for bona fide research or planning purposes without the explicit permission of the copyright holder. All TVAS unpublished fieldwork reports are available on our website: www.tvas.co.uk/reports/reports.asp.

Report edited/checked by: Steve Ford 19.09.14

i

Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd, 47–49 De Beauvoir Road, Reading RG1 5NR Tel. (0118) 926 0552; Fax (0118) 926 0553; email: [email protected]; website: www.tvas.co.uk Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire Archaeological Desk-based Assessment

by Richard Tabor

Report 14/164 Introduction

This report is an assessment of the archaeological potential of approximately 2.8ha of land located between

Newtown Road and Whittonditch Road on the eastern side of Ramsbury, Wiltshire (SU 2824 7170; Fig. 1). The project was commissioned by Mr Dan Moore of Rectory Homes, Rectory House, Thame Road, Haddenham,

Aylesbury Bucks, HP17 8DA and comprises the first stage of a process to determine the presence/absence, extent, character, quality and date of any archaeological remains which may be affected by redevelopment of the area.

Planning consent is to be sought from for residential development of a field. This assessment will accompany the application in order to inform the planning process with regard to potential archaeological and heritage implications. This is in accordance with the Department for Communities and Local

Government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2012) and the Council’s heritage policies.

Site description, location and geology

The village of Ramsbury lies in the Kennet Valley near the border with . It is c. 9km east of

Marlborough and 7km west of (Fig. 1). The proposal site is an irregularly polygonal field on a south-facing slope. From the southern end, close to the floor of the valley and to the , the ground rises fairly evenly from c. 111m above Ordnance Datum (aOD) to c. 129m aOD at the boundary with

Whittonditch Road to the north. The field is enclosed entirely by hedges with wooden fences (Pl. 1), apart from a strip along the north of the eastern side where a fence alone separated it from another field. Newtown Road is immediately beyond the southern hedge and the grounds of larger houses occupy the southern end either side of the western (Pl. 2) and eastern boundaries (Pl. 3). The gardens of houses beyond the north boundary are mainly long and narrow (Pl. 4). One such strip forms part of the site and extends to Whittonditch Road, giving its northernmost limit. The site lies on Seaford Chalk Formation (BGS 2014). At the time of a site visit on 20th

August 2014 the entire field was under grass.

1 Planning background and development proposals

The Department for Communities and Local Government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2012) sets out the framework within which local planning authorities should consider the importance of conserving, or enhancing, aspects of the historic environment, within the planning process. It requires an applicant for planning consent to provide, as part of any application, sufficient information to enable the local planning authority to assess the significance of any heritage assets which may be affected by the proposal. The Historic Environment is defined (NPPF 2012, 52) as:

‘All aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged, and landscaped and planted or managed flora.’ Paragraphs 128 and 129 state that:

‘128. In determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary. Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation. ‘129. Local planning authorities should identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal (including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset) taking account of the available evidence and any necessary expertise. They should take this assessment into account when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal.’ A ‘heritage asset’ is defined (NPPF 2012, 52) as

‘A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. Heritage asset includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing).’ ‘Designated heritage asset’ includes (NPPF 2012, 51) any

‘World Heritage Site, Scheduled Monument, Listed Building, Protected Wreck Site, Registered Park and Garden, Registered Battlefield or Conservation Area designated under the relevant legislation.’

‘Archaeological interest’ is glossed (NPPF 2012, 50) as follows:

‘There will be archaeological interest in a heritage asset if it holds, or potentially may hold, evidence of past human activity worthy of expert investigation at some point. Heritage assets with archaeological interest are the primary source of evidence about the substance and evolution of places, and of the people and cultures that made them.’

Specific guidance on assessing significance and the impact of the proposal is contained in paragraphs 131 to 135:

2 ‘131. In determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of:

the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness.

‘132. When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to or loss of designated heritage assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional.

‘133. Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss, or all of the following apply:

the nature of the heritage asset prevents all reasonable uses of the site; and no viable use of the heritage asset itself can be found in the medium term through appropriate marketing that will enable its conservation; and conservation by grant-funding or some form of charitable or public ownership is demonstrably not possible; and the harm or loss is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use.

‘134. Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use.

‘135. The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.

Paragraph 139 recognizes that new archaeological discoveries may reveal hitherto unsuspected and hence non- designated heritage assets

‘139. Non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest that are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled monuments, should be considered subject to the policies for designated heritage assets.’ Paragraph 141 requires local planning authorities to ensure that any loss of heritage assets advances understanding, but stresses that advancing understanding is not by itself sufficient reason to permit the loss of significance:

‘141. Local planning authorities should make information about the significance of the historic environment gathered as part of plan-making or development management publicly accessible. They should also require developers to record and advance understanding of the significance of any heritage assets to be lost (wholly or in part) in a manner proportionate to their importance and the impact, and to make this evidence (and any archive generated) publicly accessible. However, the ability to record evidence of our past should not be a factor in deciding whether such loss should be permitted.’

3 In determining the potential heritage impact of development proposals, ‘significance’ of an asset is defined (NPPF 2012, 56) as:

‘The value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting.’ while ‘setting’ is defined as:

‘The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.’

In the case of Scheduled Ancient Monuments (and their settings), the provisions of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act (1979) also apply. Under this legislation, development of any sort on or affecting a Scheduled Monument requires the Secretary of State’s Consent.

The Planning (Listed Building and Conservation) Act 1990, requires the following to be treated as a listed building:

‘(a) any object or structure fixed to the (listed) building ‘(b) any object or structure within the curtilage of the building which although not fixed to the building forms part of the land and has done since before 1st July 1948 is treated as being part of the listed building.’

The Wiltshire and Structure Plan 2016 (WCC/SBC, adopted 2006) Policy HE2 states:

'Features of archaeological or historic interest and their settings should be protected from inappropriate development. Where nationally important archaeological or historic remains, whether scheduled sites or not, are affected by proposed development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation "in situ"'.

The Local Plan 2011 (KDC, adopted 2004) includes policies concerning the historic environment, several of which are relevant. The site lies within a conservation area with respect to which Policy HH5 ‘Development in Conservation Areas’ states:

‘Development in Conservation Areas will only be permitted where it would preserve or enhance their character or appearance. Proposals which would adversely affect the setting of a Conservation Area will not be permitted.’

While the proposal would not directly affect any listed building or building of local interest, it may affect the settings of several listed buildings, which makes Policy HH8 relevant:

'Planning permission will not be granted for any proposal which would harm the historic or architectural qualities of a listed building, its curtilage or setting.'

Potentially relevant also are HH1 and HH2.

Policy HH1 – ‘Protection of Archaeological Remains' states: 'Planning permission will not be granted for development which would have an adverse impact on the archaeological deposits or remains on or under a site of national importance (whether scheduled or not) or its character or setting. Sites of significant regional or local importance, especially those which make a positive contribution to the historic landscape, will also be protected from inappropriate development.'

4 Policy HH2 – ‘Development on sites with Archaeological potential' states: ‘Proposals for development involving ground disturbance on sites with archaeological potential will only be permitted if: a) it can be demonstrated that the development will not have an adverse impact on any archaeological deposits or remains; or b) appropriate mitigation measures are agreed to protect the archaeological interest of the site'

These measures are explained in paragraphs 6.06 - 6.08: '6.06 - Where evidence from the Sites and Monuments Record indicates that a development proposal is likely to have an impact upon an archaeological site the Council will request applicants to undertake an archaeological assessment. This desk-based exercise will require more detailed research and analysis of existing information (aerial photographs, historic maps, etc.) and will normally be carried out by an archaeological consultant employed by the applicant. '6.07 - Where the desk-based assessment indicates that archaeological features or deposits might be present on the site the applicant may be requested to carry out an archaeological field evaluation. This is a programme of fieldwork designed to supplement and improve existing information to a level of confidence at which planning recommendations can be made. The Council will set out the techniques to be utilised and the broad approach to be followed and will normally supply a brief for such an evaluation. If an applicant wishes to produce a brief or specification this will be permissible on condition that it is agreed with the Council before fieldwork commences. If a field evaluation is not carried out according to the brief or below acceptable standards, the Council may request further work or refuse the planning application. '6.08 - Where the process of assessment and field evaluation demonstrate the existence of archaeological deposits which are of importance, planning permission may be refused if an appropriate mitigation strategy cannot be agreed with the Council. When formulating a mitigation strategy applicants will be expected to prepare a Programme of Archaeological Works. This document should utilise the results of the field evaluation and set out in detail how the archaeological issues will be resolved. For example, it might include a detailed approach to the investigation of the site or details of design to avoid damage to archaeological deposits.'

These policies will be superseded by the Wiltshire Core Strategy which is currently under review and is due to be published later this year 2014.

Methodology

The assessment of the site was carried out by the examination of pre-existing information from a number of sources recommended by the Institute for Archaeologists paper ‘Standards in British Archaeology’ covering desk-based studies. These sources include historic and modern maps, the Wiltshire and Swindon Historic

Environment Record (HER), geological maps and any relevant publications or reports.

5 Archaeological background

General background

The proposal site lies within the archaeologically rich Kennet Valley and to the east of the equally rich

Marlborough Downs, yet in contrast to these zones further west, prehistoric remains are sparse and poorly documented in the general study area. However, there have been important discoveries from later periods

(McMahon 2004, 6-8).

There have been few Palaeolithic finds in the Kennet Valley generally, and none around Ramsbury, although gravels at Knowle Farm, Little Bedwyn, have produced over 2000 handaxes in a dry valley converging with the Kennet only 4km south-west of the site (Wymer 1999, 88-9 and 173). There are a handful of isolated

Mesolithic findspots in the area, the most significant of which are two varied assemblages from nearby

Knighton (Wymer 1977, 342). Demonstrably Neolithic remains are unrecorded in the area but barrows, ditches and a field system of possible Bronze Age date are known to the east of the parish (VCH 1983). A local historical account mentions a crouched burial from within the village but there are no surviving records relating to it (McMahon 2004. 6). The presence of a hillfort 4km north-east of the site at Membury suggests that the wider area, at least, would have had a significant Iron Age population.

Similarly, a prestigious villa at Littlecote on the side south of the Kennet only 1.5km to the south-east would suggest a productive rural landscape during the Roman period during it which it was readily accessible via Ermine Street, which passed near to the north of the parish (VCH 1983). Although finds of re-deposited decorative metalwork (Henig 1998, 140) and Roman brick (Haslam 1980, 24) from within the village may have been brought into it they are unlikely to have arrived from any great distance. The Saxon population has proved more visible, starting from the 5th or sixth century. A remarkable group of four iron smelting furnaces in a stratified sequence spanning the late 8th and early 9th centuries was excavated in Ramsbury’s High Street in

1974. Analysis revealed clear evidence for technological development of the process over the few decades during which they were in use (Haslam 1980, 29-30). Ramsbury itself became a bishopric in AD909 (Chandler

2104). During this period it became the second largest non-royal estate in Wiltshire. It remained a bishopric with a cathedral until it was subsumed into the dioceses of Salisbury between 1075 and 1078 (VCH 1983). The impact of the move on the local economy may have been mitigated by a preference of successive bishops of

Salisbury to retreat to the manor up until the 16th century, although a market taking place in 1219 was never firmly established. It is not mentioned after 1319 (McMahon 2004, 5). The manor house and grounds lay to the

6 west of the village (VCH 1983). The bishops and their secular successors to the estate, encouraged easterly growth of the village (Chandler 2014).

During the Medieval and Post-medieval periods Ramsbury retained a quasi-urban appearance with a wide range of industries supplied by and servicing many smaller settlements elsewhere in the parish, including leather and cloth production (VCH 1983). The village suffered two devastating fires, loosing 130 dwellings in 1648 and a further 40 or so in 1781 (McMahon 2004, 6). However, it remained prosperous, reinforced by it situation on the route of the main Bath to London road (Chandler 2014). During the mid-19th century a foundry producing agricultural tools was established in the Newtown area. During the 20th century Newtown has been a preferred location for the construction of larger houses on the periphery of the village, continuing a tradition of eastward expansion (VCH 1983).

Wiltshire Historic Environment Record

A search was made on the Wiltshire Historic Environment Record on 15th September 2014 for a radius of 1km around the proposal site. Records were held concerning 25 monuments, 8 archaeological interventions (events) and 44 listed buildings. All monuments within the radius are summarized in Appendix 1 and their locations are plotted on Figure 1. Listed buildings were included depending upon their proximity or potential impact upon the site.

Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic, Bronze Age No Palaeolithic worked stone has been found within the search radius and but a of scatter of Mesolithic flintwork is fairly typical of this part of the Kennet valley. The three closely grouped findspots [Fig 1: 1, 2, 3] are spread along the spring line within the apex of the confluence of a tributary and the River Kennet.

Characteristically Neolithic flintwork is confined to the same area [1, 3]. Undiagnostic worked flint has been found immediately to the north of the spring feeding the tributary [4].

Ring ditches (levelled round barrows) [5] and a possible barrow mound [6] have been identified from air photographs on the gentle lower valley slopes overlooking the Kennet from the south and are likely to be of

Bronze Age date. Air photography has shown a well-defined oval enclosure [7] which may be of similar date midway up slopes overlooking the tributary from the east and the Kennet from the north. A bronze dagger fragment of the period [8] has been found by a detectorist on a slope overlooking the tributary valley from the western side.

7 Roman No demonstrably Iron Age remains have been found within 1km of the site and such Roman finds as are known are largely a consequence of metal detecting, hence lacking contextual information. They include coins spanning the 1st to 4th centuries as well as other unspecified metalwork [1] from the area associated with

Mesolithic and Neolithic flint; a bronze appliqué hound’s head plaque from north-west of that area [9]; and a decorated ball weight from beside the B4193 south of Whittonditch [10]. A scatter across the slope overlooking the site from 500m to the north includes: an undiagnostic amphora sherd from a slope overlooking the site [11]; a 3rd century coin [12]; a second to 3rd century coin [13] and a lead spindle whorl [14]. The plaque, weight and amphora are all finds which are typical of higher status sites. It has been suggested that finds such as Roman brick used in one of the Saxon furnaces may have been imported from a villa such as that at Littlecote

(McMahon 2004, 6) and a similar explanation might apply to these items.

Saxon The furnaces mentioned above lie slightly beyond the western periphery of the study area. Once again, Saxon finds in the landscape reflect the range of detectorist activity rather than archaeological investigation and so tend to be metal. They include a copper alloy stud [1], a gilt pin [8] from near the Bronze Age dagger, a silver ring

[16] and a localised scatter of objects including a bronze brooch, a brass stud and a piece of silver [17]. The variety and number of objects from the latter might be indicative of settlement or possibly a cemetery. The SMR notes that Ramsbury is a settlement with Saxon origins and a 9th century bishopric although no evidence for such early ecclesiastical association is cited [15].

Medieval Once again detecting is a significant determinant in the distribution of finds, hence frequently close to place where earlier artefacts have been collected. Finds from north of the site include a beehive thimble [12] and a buckle plate [13] to the north of the site and various pieces of personal attire [17, 19, 20, 21], a pottery sherd

[22], jetton [21] and coins [23] to the east. The Grade I-listed 13th century Church of the Holy Cross is the only extant building of the period and lies a full 800m west of Newtown Road. Howe Mill is a milling site dating back to at least 13th century, and it was mentioned as Hughmulle in 1331 [18]. The grounds of include a Medieval fishpond.

Post-medieval, Victorian, Modern Apart from a coin of Charles II [23] found amongst Medieval metal in the area to the east of the site most records for the Post-medieval period concern listed buildings. There is a considerable number in the western

8 area of Ramsbury reflecting its core growth during the 17th and 18th centuries but only those to the east, within approximately 300m, of the site have been are treated here. A group adjacent to the southern end of the site’s eastern boundary includes a 17th century detached cottage, a row of three 17th to 18th century cottages and a cottage which may pre-date the 19th century [26]. A detached cottage south of Newtown Road, near the site’s south-western corner, is of early to mid 19th century date [29]. A pottery sherd was found during an archaeological evaluation on the site of a 16th to 17th demolished cottage [25] south-east of the church and nearby excavations encountered stone wall foundations and a sill beam which appeared to be part of a large building [27]. A single listing of water meadows [28] on the south of the village centre and of the Kennet understates their extent which reaches eastwards beyond the southern end of the site. The village centre is overlooked by the site of possible World War 2 slit trenches observed in air photographs [30].

Scheduled Monuments

There are no Scheduled Monuments within the bounds of the site or discernibly intervisible with it.

Cartographic and documentary sources

The place-name Ramsbury derives from OE Hraefn, raven, and bury, the dative of burh meaning a fortification.

In this instance Hraefn may be a personal name (Mills 1998, 283). Early references to Ramsbury in the Anglo-

Saxon chronicles are ecclesiastical. A copy of a document dated to the year AD 905 gives an account of the consecration of seven bishops, one thought to be of Ramsbury, and has been treated as authentic (O'Donovan

1972, 34-5). No doubts have been expressed concerning grants of land in Northamptonshire by Edmund to

Ælfric, in AD 944. It is referred to as Rammesburi in AD 947 (Gover et al. 1970, 288-9).

As noted above, by 1078 Ramsbury had ceased to be a bishopric in its own right. Domesday Book records that

Ramsberie was held by the . At that time it was taxed on 90 hides. Of these, 30 hides were in demesne to the bishop with the remainder divided in smaller plots ranging from 4 to 12 hides. The estate include land for 54 ploughs, 80 acres of meadow, 14 furlongs by 5 furlongs of pasture and 16 furlongs by 4 furlongs of woodland. A total of 151 people are mentioned in association with the estate. The bishop's land was valued at

£52 15s and the remainder at £17 5s (Williams and Martin 1992, 166 ).

A bishop of Salisbury had a market at Ramsbury in 1219 but its insecure status is underlined by the need for the king to order the sheriff to permit it, so long as it did not undermine other markets. Within two years it had been prohibited because it was competing with the market at Marlborough. Wrangling over the market, or

9 its possible substitution by fairs, continued through the century but no markets are recorded after 1319 (VCH

1983). Documents from between 1274 and 1284 show that during that time Howe Mill was processing corn on the northern side of the river near the south-eastern corner of the site. It appears to have remained a mill site until the mid 19th century (VCH 1983). Newtown was first mentioned as such in 1781 in connection with houses there. In the 1850s it became the site of a brass and iron foundry producing agricultural tools, remaining active until World War I.

A range of Ordnance Survey and other historical maps of the area were consulted at Wiltshire and

Swindon History Centre in order to ascertain the character of the site’s later history and whether this may have affected any possible archaeological deposits within the proposal area (see Appendix 2).

Ramsbury is marked correctly on the north side of the River Kennet between Marlingesboro

(Marlborough) and Chilton (Foliat) on Saxton’s 1576 map of Wiltshire (Fig. 3). Andrews and Drury's map of

1773 is the first to offer sufficient detail to enable an approximate outlining of the site, notably due to the plot of a house east of the southern end of the eastern boundary (Fig. 5). The already ancient site of How Mill is marked very clearly further to the south-west. Only five years later a 'Map of the Town of Ramsbury and Lands

Adjacent', with 'New Allotments and many Old Enclosures' is of sufficient quality to show that the modern site is made of the parts from three plots of that time (Fig. 6). The only features within the site are a west to east boundary forming a junction with a south to north boundary. The site's limits coincide with its boundaries with

Newtown Road and Whittonditch Road, more than half of the southern section of its eastern side and with the boundary furthest to the west.

The tithe map of 1839 was unchanged (Fig. 7), with the exception of the removal of the south to north subdivision which was reinstated in the first edition Ordnance Survey map of 1886 (Fig. 8). However, the latter map shows no boundary coinciding with the central northern end of the eastern boundary. The boundaries and internal arrangement of the site was unchanged in 1924 (Fig. 9). Up to this time the site and areas beyond it from the west, through he north and to the north-east were open fields. The 1:10,560 map of 1960 is the first to show infilling of the open space. A large house and drive west of the southern end of the site created a new boundary which in part coincides with that of the site, whilst the plots for houses beyond its northern end created a stepped boundary. The central northern section of the eastern boundary was re-introduced. The greater detail of the map of 1974-5 (Fig. 10) may reflect the larger scale as much as real change, although differences in the outline of the grounds of Ravensfield to the west of the southern end may reflect change on the ground. By this time the only part of the site subdivided from the rest was the narrow strip projecting from the northern end.

10 No changes affecting the internal layout of the site or its boundaries were shown in 1994 (Fig. 2) but subsequently the division of the northern projection and the structure shown within it have been removed.

Listed buildings

Development would have no impact on the historic setting of listed buildings in the western and central parts of the village, including the Grade I-listed Church of the Holy Cross [15]. The character of the historical setting of the 19th century cottage south of Newtown Road and views from it is determined more by the vista across the river than by the proposal site north of the road [29]. Although there would not be any direct physical impact upon the buildings east of the site’s southern end [26] their setting would be altered from that of an isolated group to houses on the fringe of an estate. However, their outlook is also more towards the river and Littlecote

Park as the developed hedge and trees along the site’s eastern boundary would largely exclude intervisibility with the new houses from ground level and significantly reduce it from the first floor.

Registered Parks and Gardens; Registered Battlefields

There are no registered parks and gardens or registered battlefields within close proximity of the site. However, the houses on the eastern side of the proposed development might possibly be visible from the extensive Grade

II-listed parks and gardens of Littlecote House from a distance of over 1km [29]. Whatever impact there might be would be greatly mitigated by the developed trees growing in the mature hedge on the eastern side of the site.

Historic Hedgerows

The Hedgerows Regulations 1997, Schedule 1, Part II, defines an 'historic' hedgerow as one marking 'the boundary, or part of the boundary, of at least one historic parish or township' which existed before 1850 (among other criteria, not relevant here). Regressive map analysis has shown that only two lengths of boundary have been in continuous use since before 1850, as documented by the maps of 1778 (Fig. 6) and 1839 (Fig. 7). One is the north to south boundary on the extreme western site of the site, the other the similarly oriented southern end of the eastern boundary. There is no evidence that either bounded an historic parish or township hence they would not meet the ‘historic’ criteria.

11 Aerial Photographs

A search of the Air Photograph archive of the English Heritage National Monuments was made for a radius of approximately 500m radius of the site (Appendix 3). No photographs have been viewed which show evidence of archaeological remains within the site.

Discussion

There are no known heritage assets within the proposed site and there few assets of any sort immediately nearby but with a wide range of metal detected finds further east .

In considering the archaeological potential of the study area, various factors must be taken into account, including previous land-use and disturbance, and future land-use including the proposed development. The cartographic evidence suggests a stable pattern of long term agricultural use of the field with no building or other deeply invasive ground disturbing activities present so that the prospects for the survival of archaeological cut features would be good, should they be present.

The impact upon the visual setting of the few known extant heritage assets close enough to be affected by the proposal, none of them of national importance, is mitigated significantly by the well-developed hedge along the southern end of the site’s eastern boundary. The site is entirely obscured from those to its west, including the

Grade I listed church.

Given the relative size of the site and it's location within the rich Kennet Valley, there is the possibility of encountering archaeological deposits (unknown heritage assets) simply by chance. It is therefore anticipated that it will be necessary to provide further information about the potential of the site from field observations in order to draw up a scheme to mitigate the impact of development on any below-ground archaeological deposits if necessary. If requested, a scheme for this evaluation will need to be drawn up and approved by the archaeological advisers to the Council and carried out by a competent archaeological contractor. Such a scheme could be implemented by an appropriately worded condition attached to any consent gained.

References

BGS, 2014, British Geological Survey, 1:50,000. http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html (accessed: 11th September 2014) Chandler, J, 2014, 'Ramsbury Concise History', from Chandler, 2001, Marlborough and Eastern Wiltshire http://history.wiltshire.gov.uk/community/getconcise.php?id=188 (accessed: 10th September 2014

12 Chisham, C, 2006, Thames and Solent Research Framework: The Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Berkshire, http://oxfordarchaeology.com/images/pdfs/Solent_Thames/Resource_assessment/ (accessed: 11th September 2014) Electronic Sawyer, 2014, Online Catalogue of Anglo-Saxon Charters, http://www.esawyer.org.uk/ (accessed: 12th September 2014) Gover, J, Mawer, A and Stenton, F, 1970, The Place-names of Wiltshire, English Place-name society vol. XVI Hey, G, 2010, Thames and Solent Research Framework: The Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic, http://oxfordarchaeology.com/images/pdfs/Solent_Thames/Resource_assessment/ (accessed: 11th September 2014) KDC, 2004, Kennet District local Plan 2011 - Adopted 2004, Kennet District Council Haslam, J, 1980, ‘A Middle Saxon Iron Smelting Site at Ramsbury, Wiltshire’, Medieval Archaeology 24, 1-68 Henig, M, 1998, ‘An Appliqué Head of a Hound found at Ramsbury’, Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 91, 140 Keynes, S, 1980, The Diplomas of King Æthelred ‘the Unready’ 978–1016: a Study in their Use as Historical Evidence, Cambridge McMahon, P, 2004, The Archaeology of Wiltshire’s Towns, An Extensive Urban Survey: Ramsbury, http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archiveDS/archiveDownload?t=arch-906-1/dissemination/pdf/EUS_ Texts/Ramsbury.pdf (accessed: 11th September 2014) Mills, A D, 1998, Dictionary of English Place-Names, Oxford NPPF, 2012, National Planning Policy Framework, Dept Communities and Local Govt, The Stationery Office, Norwich O'Donovan, M, 1972, 'An Interim Revision of Episcopal Dates for the Province of Canterbury, 850- 950', Anglo-Saxon 1, 23-44 VCH, 1983, Victoria History of the County of Wiltshire, xii, 192-8, London WCC/SBC, 2006, Wiltshire and Swindon Structure Plan 2016: A Joint Structure Plan Alteration covering the Administrative Ares of Swindon Borough Council and Wiltshire County Council, Wiltshire County Council and Swindon Borough Council Webster, C, 2008, The Archaeology of : South West Archaeological Research Framework Resource Assessment and Research Agenda, Somerset County Council. Williams, A and Martin, G, 1992, Domesday Book, A Complete Translation, London Wymer, J, 1977, Gazetteer of Mesolithic sites in England and Wales, CBA research report 20 Wymer, J, 1999, The Lower Palaeolithic Occupati9on of Britain volume 1, Salisbury

13 APPENDIX 1: Wiltshire and Swindon Historic Environment Record and recent excavated evidence within a 750m search radius of the centre of the proposal site.

No SMR No Grid Ref (SU) Type Period Comment 1 MWI19674 2870 7160 Findspot Mesolithic Group of cores, flakes, scraper, blades and waste 1 MWI19719 2870 7160 Findspot Neolithic Collection of Neolithic flint tools including circular flint scraper 1 MWI19767 2870 7160 Metal detector Roman 1st to 4th century coins and other metalwork, mainly of earlier period 1 MWI19805 2870 7160 Metal detector Saxon Copper alloy stud 1 MWI19836 2870 7160 Metal detector Medieval Scatter of coins and other metalwork 2 MWI19656 2890 7150 Findspot Mesolithic 25 micro and blade cores, scraper, microlithic blade and flakes and core rejuvenation flakes 3 MWI19890 2880 7150 Findspot Mesolithic, Flint, 2 microliths and 3 scrapers Neolithic 3 MWI19717 2880 7155 Findspot Neolithic Flint core and scrapers 4 MWI19672 2890 7208 Findspot Prehistoric Undated worked flint 5 MWI19896 2802 7124 Photographic Bronze Age Cropmarks of ring ditches, RAF air photograph 1972 6 MWI19897 2798 7117 Photographic Bronze Age? Mound, possibly barrow 7 MWI19900 2920 7166 Photographic Prehistoric? Cropmarks of oval enclosure, RAF air photograph 1972 8 MWI19736 2852 7243 Metal detector Bronze Age Dagger blade fragment 8 MWI19806 2850 7240 Metal detector Saxon Gilt pin 8 MWI19838 2850 7240 Metal detector Medieval Scatter of coins and metalwork 8 MWI19823 2850 7240 Documentary Medieval Settlement with Medieval origins 9 MWI19794 2860 7170 Findspot Roman Appliqué plaque in form of hound head 10 MWI19788 2900 7200 Findspot Roman Decorated ball weight 11 MWI19894 2830 7231 Findspot Roman? Amphora of unknown type,hence possibly pre or post Roman 12 MWI19787 2800 7240 Findspot Roman 3rd century radiate coin 12 MWI19862 2800 7240 Metal detector Medieval Beehive thimble 13 MWI19784 2787 7225 Metal detector Roman 2nd to 3rd century coin 13 MWI19863 2790 7230 Metal detector Medieval Gilt buckle plate 14 MWI19786 2850 7230 Metal detector Roman Lead spindle whorl 14 MWI19879 2850 7230 Metal detector Post-medieval Bristol trade token 15 MWI19797 2738 7164 Documentary Saxon Town with Saxon origins. Ninth century bishopric 15 DWI435 27382 71592 Listed building Medieval, Church of the Holy Cross, 13th, early 14th, 15th and late 19th LB 1365476 Post-medieval centuries. Grade I listed 16 MWI19798 2790 7190 Findspot Saxon Silver ring 17 MWI19799 2870 7170 Metal detector Saxon Scatter of metalwork including bronze brooch, brass stud and fragment of silver 17 MWI19841 2865 7180 Metal detector Medieval Bronze leather mount 18 MWI19829 2832 7153 Documentary Medieval Howe Mill. Small settlement documented as Hughmulle in 1331 19 MWI19831 2795 7198 Findspot Medieval Enamelled copper pendant 20 MWI19842 2860 7180 Findspot Medieval Buckle fragment 21 MWI19843 2870 7180 Metal detector Medieval Strap-end, buckle and jetton 22 MWI19876 2740 7150 Findspot Medieval Pottery sherd 23 MWI19860 2870 7190 Metal detector Medieval, Medieval and Charles II coins and beehive thimble Post-medieval 24 MWI20558 2979 7030 Registered Medieval Littlecote House registered gardens and park. Includes fishpond RPG1451 to Modern (Medieval), and Ha Ha, park, garden, walled garden icehouse and gazebo ranging in date from early 17th century to 20th century 25 MWI19869 2745 7156 Evaluation Post-medieval Pottery sherd on site of 16th to 17th century cottage demolished in 1924 26 DWI435 28338 71551 Listed building Post-medieval Detached cottage, 17th century and later LB 1300406 26 DWI455 27824 71616 Listed building Post-medieval Cottage, 19th century and probably earlier LB1184010 26 DWI456 27825 71654 Listed building Post-medieval Row of 3 cottages, 17th to 18th centuries LB1034063 27 MWI19887 2745 7165 Excavation Post-medieval Possible stone foundations and sill beam of large building 28 MWI64024 2740 7134 Photographic Post-medieval Water meadow 29 DWI436 28210 71561 Listed building Post-medieval Detached cottage, early to mid 19th century LB1034100 30 MWI32064 2735 7192 Photographic World War 2 Slit trenches, possibly World War 2. May be associated airfield at Membury Listed Buildings Grade II unless stated

14 APPENDIX 2: Historic and modern maps consulted

1576 Saxton, Wiltshire (Fig. 3) 1648 Blaeu, Wiltshire (Fig. 4) 1773 Andrews and Drury, Wiltshire (Fig. 5) 1778 Ramsbury estate, enclosure (Fig. 6) 1796 Baker, Wiltshire 1801 Taylor, Wiltshire 1839 Ramsbury tithe (Fig. 7) 1886 Ordnance Survey First Edition (Fig .8) 1900 Ordnance Survey Second Edition 1924 Ordnance Survey (Fig. 9) 1960 Ordnance Survey 1974-5 Ordnance Survey (Fig. 10) 1994 Ordnance Survey

APPENDIX 3: Aerial photographic catalogue

Vertical (non-specialist)

Sortie Frame Date flown NGR (SU) RAF/106G/TUD/UK/1406 4100 11 April 1946 272 718 OS C/72/224 064 1972 292 717 OS C/72/224 065 1972 292 717 OS C/72/224 173 1972 280 712 OS C/72/224 174 1972 280 712 Wiltshire Council 37 2001 274 713

15 Swindon SITE Chippenham

Bradford- Calne Marlborough on-Avon Devizes

8 Trowbridge 12

14 11 13 Salisbury

SITE 4

72000 19 10 30 16 23

20 17 21

9 7 15 27 25 26 1 29 3 18 2 22

28

5 6

71000

24

SU28000 29000 NRR 14/164 Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Figure 1. Location of site in relation to Ramsbury and within Wiltshire showing HER locations Reproduced from Ordnance Survey Explorer 129 at 1:12500 Ordnance Survey Licence 100025880 71900

SITE

71800

71700

28

71600 4 3 2 1

71500

SU28100 28200 28300 NRR 14/164 N Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Figure 2. Detailed location of site in relation to Newtown Road, Ordnance Survey 1994 Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital mapping under licence. Crown copyright reserved. Scale 1:2500 SITE

28

NRR 14/164 N Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Figure 3. Saxton, 1576, map of Wiltshire SITE

28

NRR 14/164 N Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Figure 4. Blaeu, 1648, map of Wiltshire Approximate outline of site

28

NRR 14/164 N Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Figure 5. Andrews and Drury, 1773, map of Wiltshire SITE

28

NRR 14/164 N Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Figure 6. Enclosure map of Ramsbury, 1778 SITE

NRR 14/164 N Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Figure 7. Tithe map of Ramsbury, 1839 SITE

NRR 14/164 N Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Figure 8. Ordnance Survey, 1886. SITE

NRR 14/164 N Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Figure 9. Ordnance Survey, 1924. SITE

NRR 14/164 N Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Figure 10. Ordnance Survey, 1974-5. Plate 1. The southern end of the eastern boundary, looking eastwards

Plate 2. The eastern boundary, looking north-eastwards NRR 16/164

Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Plates 1 and 2. Plate 3. The central area of site, looking northwards

Plate 4. The western boundary of the site, looking north-westwards NRR 16/164

Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire, 2014 Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Plates 3 and 4. TIME CHART

Calendar Years

Modern AD 1901

Victorian AD 1837

Post Medieval AD 1500

Medieval AD 1066

Saxon AD 410

Roman AD 43 BC/AD Iron Age 750 BC

Bronze Age: Late 1300 BC

Bronze Age: Middle 1700 BC

Bronze Age: Early 2100 BC

Neolithic: Late 3300 BC

Neolithic: Early 4300 BC

Mesolithic: Late 6000 BC

Mesolithic: Early 10000 BC

Palaeolithic: Upper 30000 BC

Palaeolithic: Middle 70000 BC

Palaeolithic: Lower 2,000,000 BC Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd, 47-49 De Beauvoir Road, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 5NR

Tel: 0118 9260552 Fax: 0118 9260553 Email: [email protected] Web: www.tvas.co.uk