Cannington Flood Defence Scheme Cannington Somerset Archaeological Evaluation

for Environment Agency

CA Project: 4591 CA Report: 13617

November 2013

Cannington Flood Defence Scheme Cannington Somerset

Archaeological Evaluation

CA Project: 4591 CA Report: 13617

prepared by Steven Sheldon, Project Officer

date 20 November 2013

checked by Richard Young, Project Manager

date 25 November 2013

approved by Laurent Coleman, Principle Project Manager

signed

date 26 November 2013

issue 01

This report is confidential to the client. Cotswold Archaeology accepts no responsibility or liability to any third party to whom this report, or any part of it, is made known. Any such party relies upon this report entirely at their own risk. No part of this report may be reproduced by any means without permission.

Cirencester Milton Keynes Andover Building 11 Unit 4 Stanley House Kemble Enterprise Park Cromwell Business Centre Walworth Road Kemble, Cirencester Howard Way, Newport Pagnell Andover, Hampshire Gloucestershire, GL7 6BQ MK16 9QS SP10 5LH t. 01285 771022 t. 01908 218320 t. 01264 347630 f. 01285 771033 e. [email protected] © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

CONTENTS

SUMMARY ...... 3

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 4

The site ...... 4 Archaeological background ...... 5 Archaeological objectives ...... 6 Methodology...... 7

2. RESULTS (FIGS 2-14) ...... 8

The finds ...... 11

3. DISCUSSION ...... 12

4. CA PROJECT TEAM ...... 14

5. REFERENCES ...... 14

APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS ...... 17 APPENDIX B: THE FINDS ...... 21 APPENDIX C: OASIS REPORT FORM ...... 22

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1 Site location plan (1:25,000) Fig. 2 Trench location plan, showing geophysical survey results (1:4000) Fig. 3 Trenches 1 to 6, showing archaeological features and geophysical survey results (1:1000) Fig. 4 Trenches 6 to 12, showing archaeological features and geophysical survey results (1:1000) Fig. 5 Trenches 12 to 17, showing archaeological features and geophysical survey results (1:1000) Fig. 6 Trench 1: plan, section and photograph Fig. 7 Trench 2: plan, section and photograph Fig. 8 Trench 5: plan, section and photograph Fig. 9 Trench 6: plan, section and photograph Fig. 10 Trench 8: plan, section and photograph Fig. 11 Trench 9: plan, section and photograph

1 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

Fig. 12 Trench 11: plan, section and photograph Fig. 13 Trench 12: plan, section and photograph Fig. 14 Trench 14: plan, section and photograph Fig. 15 Trench 15: plan, section and photograph Fig. 16 Trench 16: plan, section and photograph Fig. 17 Trench 17: plan, section and photograph

2 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

SUMMARY

Project Name: Cannington Flood Defence Scheme Location: Cannington, Somerset NGR: ST 25391 38920 Type: Evaluation Date: 21-29 October 2013 Location of Archive: To be deposited with Somerset County Museum Site Code: CFDS 13

An archaeological evaluation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology in October 2013 at Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset. Seventeen trenches were excavated.

The evaluation identified a number of archaeological features across the site; these comprised ditches and a single pit or posthole. These features generally correlated well with the results of a preceding geophysical survey.

A curving ditch, identified in the eastern part of site, may be prehistoric in date and could represent the remains of a ring ditch, circular drip gully or stock enclosure associated with possible funerary or settlement activity. However, the limited exposure of this feature along with a lack of dating evidence and associated features makes the exact date and function of this ditch unclear at present.

A number of ditches, identified in the central part of site, appear to confirm the presence of a postulated Roman ladder settlement previously identified by the geophysical survey. Pottery ranging in date from the Late Iron Age/ 1st century AD to the 2nd to 4th-century AD was recovered from the fills of these ditches.

Ditches of post-medieval date were identified in two trenches and would appear to relate to agricultural activity and/or land division.

Undated ditches were identified in six trenches. The exact function of these features remains unclear although they are likely to relate to land management or drainage. An undated pit/posthole was identified in Trench 15. However, due to its isolated nature the exact function of this feature remains unclear.

3 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 In October 2013 Cotswold Archaeology (CA) carried out an archaeological evaluation for the Environment Agency at Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset (centred at NGR: ST 25391 38920; Fig. 1). An archaeological evaluation of the site was recommended by Dr. Richard Brunning, Senior Levels and Moors Heritage Officer, Somerset County Council Heritage Service, Somerset County Council (SCC) prior to the commencement of groundworks associated with the construction of a flood relief channel to the south of Cannington.

1.2 The evaluation was carried out in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) produced by CA (2013) and approved by Dr. Brunning. The fieldwork also followed the Standard and guidance for archaeological field evaluation (IfA 2009), the Heritage Service Archaeological Handbook (SCC 2009), the Management of Archaeological Projects 2 (English Heritage 1991) and the Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment (MORPHE): Project Manager’s Guide (EH 2006). It was monitored by Dr. Brunning, including a site visit on 25 October 2013.

The site 1.3 The proposed development area comprises agricultural land, bounded to the north, east and west by the A39 and to the south by further agricultural land. The trenches were target on the location of a proposed flood defence channel and bund. The site lies at approximately 19m AOD, with the ground level dropping away to the east.

1.4 The underlying bedrock geology of the area is mapped as Mercia mudstone of the Triassic period (BGS 2013). Borehole investigations in the northern part of the site, adjacent to the A39, revealed the natural mudstone at a depth of between 1.4m and 1.65m below present ground level (bpgl). This was sealed by alluvial deposits measuring between 0.6m to 0.95m in thickness (WYG 2013). The natural substrate, comprising mid red brown sandy gravel with frequent patches of light brown silty sand, was identified in all of the excavated trenches.

4 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

Archaeological background 1.5 Few artefacts of early prehistoric date have been found within the vicinity of the site, consisting of a small collection of Mesolithic flints allegedly found near Brymore School (HER 10296). A tanged bronze knife was also found at Cynwit Castle to the north (HER 16250). Immediately to the north of the current site a large sherd of Bronze Age pottery was recovered from the subsoil during trial trenching undertaken by CA in 2010 (CA 2010a).

1.6 1.5km to the north of the site lies the Scheduled Iron Age hill fort of Cynwit Castle (HER 10439), which has been investigated several times in the last hundred years (AMEC 2010). An associated extra-mural farmstead has also been excavated to the north of the Castle (HER 10302), and a further Scheduled Iron Age settlement and related field system lies to the south-east of the hill fort.

1.7 Evidence for Roman occupation has been found 1.5km to the north of the site. A layer of Roman material and a possible Roman structure were uncovered during an excavation of Cynwit Castle (HER 12770) suggesting that the hillfort had been reoccupied during the Roman period. The site of a probable Roman settlement also lies 1.5km to the south-west of the study area at Ashford Farm (NMR 191082).

1.8 A large early Christian inhumation cemetery (HER 10503) dating from the Late Roman to the Early Medieval period was identified at Cannington Park Quarry 1.5km to the north of the site. It was in use from AD 350-800, and is considered to be important for understanding the Roman/post-Roman transition period (Webster 2007). There are no known settlement sites of this period in the vicinity, although an unlocated Saxon 'herpath' or military road reputedly passes to the south of Cannington (AMEC 2010).

1.9 A deserted medieval settlement (HER 10298) is located approximately 250m to the south of the eastern end of the site at Chiltern Trivet Farm. A second probable deserted medieval settlement lies at Knoll Green 1.5km to the north-west of the site (HER 10325), whilst earthworks and crop marks east of Edbrook 1.7km to the north- west of the site indicate a possible shrunken village (HER 10317). Local medieval structures include the site of the Benedictine Nunnery within the centre of Cannington (HER 10300), and Blackmore Farm, a Grade I Listed building c. 650m to the south-west of the site.

5 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

1.10 Cooks Mill near the western end of the site was formerly named Chiltern Mill (HER 10319) and is first recorded in 1494 when it was attached to Trivet Manor and utilised Cannington Brook which runs through the western part of the site. The mill may have been a fulling mill in 1599 and was used to crush spar (baryte) during the First World War.

1.11 Numerous cropmarks are visible in an area the east of Rice’s Farm, some of which may be field boundaries or enclosures (HER 11892). The eastern end of the route of the proposed channel will intrude into the northern part of this area.

1.12 An evaluation of land to the west of Cannington (CA 2010b) and 100m to the north of the current site identified deposits dating from the Early Bronze Age to the modern period. Within the southern part of the site, and immediately north of the western end of the proposed route of the channel, a large linear feature, potentially a metalled track, was identified running north-east/south west, from which pottery dating to the 11th to 14th centuries AD was recovered. A possible enclosure containing late prehistoric pottery was identified within the northern part of the site. A series of potential quarry pits, and a wall, both of which contained pottery dating from the Late Iron Age to Roman period were identified within the centre of the site as well as three other walls in very close proximity, one of which contained a sherd of post-medieval pottery.

1.13 A recent geophysical survey (Stratascan 2013), undertaken over a 16ha area of land at the site, identified a number of anomalies of probable archaeological origin. These comprised a probable Roman ladder settlement as well as a number of anomalies likely to relate to former enclosures and field boundaries. Further anomalies, of likely modern origin, were identified on the site. These included areas of agricultural activity, land drains and underground services and an area of made ground towards the eastern boundary of the site.

Archaeological objectives 1.14 The objectives of the evaluation are to provide information about the archaeological resource within the site, including its presence/absence, character, extent, date, integrity, state of preservation and quality. In accordance with the Standard and guidance for archaeological field evaluation (IfA 2009), the evaluation has been designed to be minimally intrusive and minimally destructive to archaeological

6 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

remains. The information gathered will enable Somerset County Council to identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset, consider the impact of the proposed development upon it, and to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the development proposal, in line with the National Planning Policy Framework (DCLG 2012).

Methodology 1.15 The fieldwork comprised the excavation of 17 trenches, each measuring 30m in length and 1.8m in width, in the locations shown on the attached plan (Fig. 2). Trench 12 was moved slightly from its original position due to its proximity to overhead power lines, with the approval of Dr. Brunning. Trenches were set out on OS National Grid (NGR) co-ordinates using Leica GPS and surveyed in accordance with CA Technical Manual 4 Survey Manual (2012).

1.16 All trenches were excavated by mechanical excavator equipped with a toothless grading bucket. All machine excavation was undertaken under constant archaeological supervision to the top of the first significant archaeological horizon or the natural substrate, whichever was encountered first. Where archaeological deposits were encountered they were excavated by hand in accordance with CA Technical Manual 1: Fieldwork Recording Manual (2007).

1.17 Deposits were assessed for their palaeoenvironmental potential in accordance with CA Technical Manual 2: The Taking and Processing of Environmental and Other Samples from Archaeological Sites (2003). No deposits were identified that required sampling. All artefacts recovered were processed in accordance with Technical Manual 3 Treatment of Finds Immediately after Excavation (1995).

1.18 The archive and artefacts from the evaluation are currently held by CA at their offices in Kemble. Subject to the agreement of the legal landowner the artefacts will be deposited with Somerset County Museum, along with the site archive. A summary of information from this project, set out within Appendix C, will be entered onto the OASIS online database of archaeological projects in Britain.

7 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

2. RESULTS (FIGS 2-14)

2.1 This section provides an overview of the evaluation results; detailed summaries of the recorded contexts and finds are to be found in Appendices A and B respectively.

2.2 The natural geological substrate within each of the excavated trenches comprised mid red brown sand gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand. This was overlain by between 0.15m and 0.38m of subsoil which was itself overlain by topsoil measuring between 0.15m and 0.31m in thickness. All identified archaeological features cut the natural substrate.

2.3 No features or deposits of archaeological significance were identified within Trenches 3, 4, 7 and 13. A number of irregular pit-like features were identified in Trench 10. However, subsequent excavation revealed that these features had poorly defined edges and contained sterile clay fills, similar in nature to the underlying geological substrate and they were interpreted as localised changes in geology.

Trench 1 (Figs 2, 3 & 6) 2.4 Narrow, shallow ditch/gully 103 was identified towards the north-eastern end of the trench. It was aligned north/south, had a broadly ‘U’-shaped profile and contained a single undated fill, 104 (Fig. 6, Section AA). This feature was not identified by the geophysical survey.

Trench 2 (Figs 2, 3 & 7) 2.5 Shallow ditch/gully 203 was identified towards the south-western end of the trench. It was aligned north-west/south-east, had an open ‘U’-shaped profile and contained a single undated fill, 204 (Fig. 7, Section BB). This feature was not identified by the geophysical survey.

Trench 5 (Figs 2, 3 & 8) 2.6 Shallow ditch 503 was located towards the centre of the trench. It was aligned north/south, had an irregular profile and contained two undated fills, 505 and 504 (Fig. 8, Section CC). This feature broadly corresponded with the alignment of a linear anomaly identified by the preceding geophysical survey but was located slightly to the west of this anomaly.

Trench 6 (Figs 2, 3 & 9) 2.7 Shallow, narrow ditch 603 was identified in the north-western half of the trench. It was aligned north-west/south-east, had a shallow ‘U’-shaped profile and contained a

8 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

single fill, 604, which contained a single sherd of 18th or 19th-century pottery and an iron nail (Fig. 9, Section DD). Ditch 603 correlates closely with the alignment of a linear anomaly identified to the south of the trench by the preceding geophysical survey.

2.8 Narrow linear feature 605 was identified towards the south-eastern end of the trench. It was interpreted as a localised change in geology.

Trench 8 (Figs 2, 4 & 10) 2.9 Parallel, east-west aligned ditches 803 and 807 were identified towards the centre of the trench. Both ditches corresponded to anomalies identified by the geophysical survey. Two further linear anomalies, identified by the geophysical survey at the northern end of the trench, were not identified.

2.10 Ditch 803 had a ‘V’-shaped profile and contained three fills, 804, 805 and 806 (Fig. 10, Section EE). Two sherds of pottery of Roman date were recovered from secondary fill 805. A single sherd of pottery of Roman date was recovered from tertiary fill 806.

2.11 Ditch 807 had flat-based profile with moderately sloping sides and contained two distinct fills, 808 and 809 (Fig. 10, Section FF). Four sherds of pottery of Late Iron Age to 1st-century AD date were recovered from secondary fill 808.

Trench 9 (Figs 2, 4 & 11) 2.12 Intercutting east/west aligned ditches 903 and 905 were identified towards the southern end of the trench. Both ditches broadly correspond to a linear anomaly identified by the geophysical survey. A further linear anomaly identified by the geophysical survey, located towards the centre of the trench, was not identified.

2.13 Shallow ditch 905 had an irregular stepped profile and contained two fills, 907 and 906 (Fig. 11, Section GG). Four sherds of 3rd to 4th-century AD pottery were recovered from the latest of these fills, 906. Fill 906 was cut by ditch 903 along its northern edge. Ditch 903 had a shallow ‘U’-shaped profile and contained single fill 904, from which thirty-nine sherds of 2nd to 4th-century AD pottery were recovered (Fig. 11, Section GG).

9 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

Trench 11 (Figs 2, 4 & 12) 2.14 Shallow, narrow ditch 1103 was located towards the centre of the trench. It was aligned north-east/south-west, had an open ‘U’-shaped profile and contained single undated fill 1104 (Fig. 12, Section HH). This feature corresponds closely with a linear anomaly identified by the preceding geophysical survey.

Trench 12 (Figs 2, 4 & 13) 2.15 Shallow ditch 1203 was identified towards the western end of the trench and corresponds closely with the line of a linear anomaly identified to the south of the trench by the preceding geophysical survey. It was aligned north-west/south-east, had an irregular profile and contained two fills, 1205 and 1204 (Fig. 13, Section II). A fragment of post-medieval tile was recovered from secondary fill 1204.

Trench 14 (Figs 2, 4 & 14) 2.16 Shallow ditch 1403 was identified in the northern half of the trench. It was aligned east/west, had an open ‘U’-shaped profile and contained single undated fill 1404 (Fig. 14, Section JJ). This feature was not identified by the geophysical survey.

Trench 15 (Figs 2, 4 & 15) 2.17 Small pit/posthole 1503 was identified towards the northern end of the trench. It contained two undated fills, 1504 and 1505 (Fig. 15, Section KK). This feature was not identified by the geophysical survey.

Trench 16 (Figs 2, 4 & 16) 2.18 Curving ditch 1602 was located within the south-eastern half of the trench. It had a flat base with moderately sloping sides and contained a single undated fill 1603 (Fig. 16, Section MM). This feature was not identified by the geophysical survey.

2.19 Ditch 1606 was partially exposed at the south-eastern end of the trench. It was aligned north-east/south-west and contained three undated fills, 1607, 1608 and 1609 (Fig. 116, Section LL). This feature was not identified by the geophysical survey.

Trench 17 (Figs 2, 4 & 17) 2.20 Shallow ditch 1703 was identified towards the centre of the trench. It was aligned north-west/south-east, had an irregular stepped profile and contained two undated fills, 1704 and 1705 (Fig. 17, Section NN). This feature corresponds closely with a linear anomaly identified by the preceding geophysical survey.

10 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

The finds 2.21 Finds recovered during the evaluation include pottery, ceramic building material and metal objects.

Pottery: Late Iron Age to 1st century AD 2.22 Pottery dating to this period, which spans the Late Iron Age/Early Roman transition, amounts to 16 sherds. Four sherds of pottery in a quartz tempered fabric were recovered from ditch fill 808. These included a rimsherd and joining bodysherd from a high-shouldered jar with a bead rim. Twelve unfeatured bodysherds in a handmade leached limestone-tempered fabric were also recovered from ditch fill 808. Limestone-tempered/calcitic fabrics (Group 3) are a feature of late prehistoric assemblages locally (Peacock 1969, 48).

Roman 2.23 A total of three sherds of Dorset Black-burnished ware were recovered from ditch fills 904 and 906. This pottery type typically dates to the 2nd to 4th centuries AD. A rimsherd from fill 906 is identifiable as from a Type 3 everted rim jar, a form common to the later 3rd-4th centuries (Seager Smith and Davies 1993, 230-231).

2.24 A total of 42 sherds of a coarse greyware fabric were recovered from ditch fill 806, and ditch fills 904 and 906. The 38 sherds from fill 906 represent a single vessel, identifiable as a lid with a T-shaped rim. The form is similar to an example from Fosse Lane, Shepton Mallet, Somerset which was dated to the mid-2nd to mid-3rd centuries (Evans 2001, 124-125). A single unfeatured bodysherd from ditch fill 805 occurred in a reduced fabric with sandstone inclusions. It is broadly dated to the Late Iron Age or Roman periods.

Post-medieval 2.25 Ditch fill 604 produced one sherd of refined whiteware. This pottery type dates to the late 18th to 19th centuries.

Ceramic building material 2.26 A fragment of post-medieval tile was recovered from ditch fill 1204.

Metal objects 2.27 A fragment of an iron nail was recovered from ditch fill 604.

11 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

Animal Bone 2.28 Four fragments of animal bone (weighing a total of 7g) were recovered from deposit 604 (the fill of ditch 603). The fragments were unidentifiable to species, but were clearly animal. They had been burnt, with their calcined nature indicating a temperature of at least 800 degrees Celsius. It is highly likely that the condition of the bone results from the burning of refuse on site. However, as bone ignites rapidly at this temperature, it is possible that it was also employed as source of fuel. Given the small size and condition of the assemblage, it was not possible to obtain any further useful interpretative data.

3. DISCUSSION

3.1 The evaluation has identified a number of archaeological features throughout the proposed development area. Where linear archaeological features were encountered there was a good correlation with the results of the preceding geophysical survey. However, the targeting of some geophysical anomalies in Trenches 8 and 9 revealed no archaeological features, although observed changes in the natural substrate noted in these trenches may explain some of the ditch-like anomalies. Features identified in Trenches 15 and 16 were not identified by the geophysical survey- however areas of magnetic disturbance identified by the geophysical survey in the vicinity of these trenches may explain this discrepancy.

Late Iron Age/ Roman 3.2 Evidence for Late Iron Age/ Roman activity was identified in Trench 8 where the secondary fill of ditch 807 produced a small quantity of pottery of Late Iron Age to 1st century AD date. This ditch appears to confirm the presence of a probable ladder settlement identified by the preceding geophysical survey (see archaeological background above), and suggests that at least some elements of it are of a Late Iron Age or Early Roman date.

3.3 Further elements of the postulated ladder settlement appear to be represented by ditches 803, 903/905 and 1103, identified in trenches 8, 9 and 11 respectively. Pottery of Roman date was recovered from the secondary and tertiary fills of ditch 803 identified in Trench 8, whilst pottery of 2nd to 4th-century AD date was recovered

12 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

from ditches 903 and 905 identified in Trench 9. It is conceivable, given the wide date range of the pottery recovered from these ditches during the current evaluation, that the settlement was occupied and/ or remodelled from the Late Iron Age into the later Roman period.

3.4 Ladder settlements have been previously defined as; complexes of settlement enclosures, paddocks and fields often close to roadsides or trackways regularly containing domestic and subsidiary structures of traditional Iron Age or Romano British construction (Taylor 2007, 64). However, during the current evaluation, no definitive settlement evidence associated with the enclosure ditches located in Trenches 8, 9 and 11 was identified.

Post-medieval 3.5 Ditches of post-medieval date were identified in Trenches 6 and 12 and would appear to relate to agricultural activity or land division.

Undated 3.6 Undated ditches were identified in Trenches 1, 2, 5, 14, 16 and 17. The exact function of these features remains unclear although they are likely to relate to land management or drainage. None of the ditches identified in these trenches correlate closely to field boundaries depicted by available historic mapping.

3.7 The function of undated pit/posthole 1503, identified in Trench 15, remains unclear due to its isolated nature. The absence of further discrete features across the site suggests that they were either not exposed by the evaluation or that they do not survive, possibly due to later truncation by the employment of modern agricultural methods.

3.8 Curving ditch 1602, located in Trench 16, was not identified by the preceding geophysical survey. Although a circular form cannot be definitively attributed to this feature at present due to the limited view afforded by evaluation trenching, it is conceivable that it may represent part of a ring ditch that once surrounded a now ploughed-out barrow, a circular drip/construction gully associated with a roundhouse or a circular stock enclosure. No dateable material was recovered from this feature; however its probable circular form suggests a prehistoric date. The lack of artefacts recovered from this ditch, along with an absence of associated postholes, pits, hearths etc. makes a clear interpretation as a settlement feature impossible. The

13 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

possibility that these features were removed by later ploughing must also be considered. A funerary association for this ditch is also possible, especially due to its location on a slight natural promontory. However, no burnt or unburnt bone was discernible and no internal cremation pits or inhumation burials were encountered during the course of the evaluation. It is also on the small size for such a feature (Darvill 2006, 35 and 41).

4. CA PROJECT TEAM

Fieldwork was undertaken by Mark Brett, assisted by Charlotte Haines, Noel Boothroyd, Gary Baddeley and Sam Wilson. The report was written by Steven Sheldon. The illustrations were prepared by Lucy Martin. The archive has been compiled by Mark Brett, and prepared for deposition by Jon Hart. The project was managed for CA by Richard Young.

5. REFERENCES

AMEC 2010 Cannington Bypass Associated Development: Cultural Heritage Desk-Based Assessment.

BGS (British Geological Survey) 2011 Geology of Britain Viewer http://maps.bgs.ac.uk/geology viewer_google/googleviewer.html Accessed 17 October 2013

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2010a Land at Cannington, Somerset; Archaeological Evaluation. Report No. 10071

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2010b Land for the Cannington bypass, Somerset:: Archaeological Evaluation. CA typescript report 11008

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2013 Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Written Scheme of Investigation for an Archaeological Watching Brief

Davies, B., Richardson, B. and Tomber, R. 1994. The archaeology of Roman London Volume 5: A dated corpus of early Roman pottery from the City of London. CBA

14 © Cotswold Archaeology Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation

Research Report 98. London. Museum of London and Council for British Archaeology.

Darvill, T. 2006 Early Prehistory in Holbrook, N. and Jurica, J., 2006, 5-60

DCLG (Department of Communities and Local Government) 2012 National Planning Policy Framework

Evans, J. 2001. ‘The Pottery’ in Leach, P. and Evans, C. J. 2001, 107-169.

Holbrook, N. and Jurica, J., 2006 Twenty Five Years of Archaeology in Gloucestershire

Leach, P. and Evans, C. J. 2001. Excavation of a Romano-British Roadside Settlement in Somerset: Fosse Lane, Shepton Mallet, 1990. English Heritage Britannia Monograph Series No. 18. London. Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies.

Peacock, D. P. S. 1969. ‘Contribution to Study of Glastonbury Ware’. The Antiquaries Journal. XLIX, Part 1, 41-61.

Seager Smith, R. and Davies, S. M. 1993. ‘Roman Pottery’, in Woodward et al 1993, 202- 214.

Stratascan 2010 Geophysical Survey Report: Hinkley Off Site Developments Unpublished Stratascan report No. J2676

Stratascan 2013 Geophysical Survey Report: Cannington Unpublished Stratascan report No. J5754

Taylor, J., 2007 An Atlas of Roman Rural Settlement

Webster, C, 2007 The Archaeology of South West England: South West Archaeological Research Framework Resource Assessment and Research Agenda. Taunton: Somerset County Council

Woodward, P. J., Davies, S. M. and Graham, A. H. 1993. Excavations at The Old Methodist Chapel and Greyhound Yard, Dorchester, 1981-4. Dorset Natural History and Archaeology Society Monograph Series: Number 12. Dorchester.

WYG Planning and Environment, 2013, Cannington FDS Ground Investigation

APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS

Trench Context Type Fill of Context Description L(m) W Depth/ Spot-date No. No. Interpretati (m) thickn on ess (m) 1 100 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.3 clay silt 1 101 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.18 clay silt 1 102 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.2 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 1 103 Cut Ditch/gully N/S aligned >1.8 0.49 0.16 ditch/gully 1 104 Fill 103 Fill Single fill of >1.8 0.49 0.16 ditch/gully 103 2 200 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.2 clay silt 2 201 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.18 clay silt

2 202 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.38 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 2 203 Cut Ditch/gully NW/SE aligned >1.8 1.3 0.24 ditch/gully 2 204 Fill 203 Fill Single fill of >1.8 1.3 0.24 ditch/gully 203 3 300 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.23 clay silt 3 301 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.25 clay silt 3 302 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.48 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 4 400 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.22 clay silt 4 401 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.24 clay silt 4 402 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.1 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 5 500 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.16 clay silt 5 501 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.27 clay silt 5 502 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.05 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 5 503 Cut Ditch N/S aligned ditch >1.8 1.3 0.42 5 504 Fill 503 Fill Upper fill of ditch 503 >1.8 1.3 0.2 5 505 Fill 503 Fill Lower fill of ditch 503 >1.8 0.89 0.22 6 600 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.15 clay silt 6 601 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.35 clay silt 6 602 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.1 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 6 603 Cut Ditch NW/SE aligned ditch >1.8 0.62 0.19

6 604 Fill 603 Fill Single fill of ditch 603 >1.8 0.62 0.19 LC 18-C19 6 605 Cut Geological N/S aligned >1.8 1.15 0.23 feature geological feature 6 606 Fill 605 Fill Single fill of >1.8 1.15 0.23 geological feature 605 7 700 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.17 clay silt 7 701 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.38 clay silt 7 702 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.1 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 8 800 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.31 clay silt 8 801 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.15 clay silt 8 802 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.1 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 8 803 Cut Ditch E/W aligned ditch >1.8 1.54 0.58 8 804 Fill 803 Fill 1st fill of ditch 803 >1.8 0.43 0.15

8 805 Fill 803 Fill 2nd fill of ditch 803 >1.8 0.79 0.2 RB 8 806 Fill 803 Fill 3rd fill of ditch 803 >1.8 1.54 0.24 RB

8 807 Cut Ditch E/W aligned ditch >1.8 1.65 0.82 8 808 Fill 807 Fill 1st fill of ditch 807 >1.8 1.65 0.5 LIA-C1

8 809 Fill 807 Fill 2nd fill of ditch 807 >1.8 1.65 0.32 9 900 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.17 clay silt 9 901 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.35 clay silt 9 902 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.1 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 9 903 Cut Ditch E/W aligned ditch >1.8 1.38 0.48

9 904 Fill 903 Fill Single fill of ditch 903 >1.8 1.38 0.48 C2-C4 9 905 Cut Ditch E/W aligned ditch >1.8 1.3 0.5

9 906 Fill 905 Fill 2nd fill of ditch 905 >1.8 1.3 0.3 C3-C4

9 907 Fill 905 Fill 1st fill of ditch 905 >1.8 1.3 0.2

10 1000 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.26 clay silt 10 1001 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.18 clay silt 10 1002 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.2 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 11 1100 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.28 clay silt 11 1101 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.22 clay silt 11 1102 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.1 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand

11 1103 Cut Ditch E/W aligned ditch >1.8 0.82 0.12 11 1104 Fill 1103 Fill Single fill of ditch >1.8 0.82 0.12 1103 12 1200 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.31 clay silt 12 1201 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.25 clay silt 12 1202 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.2 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 12 1203 Cut Ditch NW/SE aligned ditch >1.8 1.7 0.38

12 1204 Fill 1203 Fill 2nd fill of ditch 1203 >1.8 1.7 0.38 Post-medieval

12 1205 Fill 1203 Fill 1st fill of ditch 1203 >1.8 0.2 0.07

13 1300 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.28 clay silt 13 1301 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.2 clay silt

13 1302 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.1 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 14 1400 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.31 clay silt 14 1401 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.11 clay silt 14 1402 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.1 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 14 1403 Cut Ditch E/W aligned ditch >1.8 1.04 0.22 14 1404 Fill 1403 Fill Single fill of ditch >1.8 1.04 0.22 1403 15 1500 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.3 clay silt 15 1501 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.15 clay silt 15 1502 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.05 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 15 1503 Cut Pit/posthole Pit/posthole 0.55 0.5 0.2

15 1504 Fill 1503 Fill 1st fill of pit/posthole 0.55 0.5 0.2 1503 15 1505 Fill 1503 Fill 2nd fill of pit/posthole 0.3 0.32 0.05 1503 16 1600 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.2 clay silt 16 1601 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.1 clay silt 16 1602 Cut Ditch Curving ditch >7 0.5 0.26

16 1603 Fill 1602 Fill Single fill of ditch >7 0.5 0.26 1602

16 1604 Cut Void Void N/A N/A N/A

16 1605 Fill 1604 Void Void N/A N/A N/A

16 1606 Cut Ditch NE/SW aligned ditch >2.7 >1.8 0.84

16 1607 Fill 1606 Fill 1st fill of ditch 1606 >2.7 1 0.26

16 1608 Fill 1606 Fill 2nd fill of ditch 1606 >2.7 1.6 0.43

16 1609 Fill 1606 Fill 3rd fill of ditch 1606 >2.7 1.6 0.48

16 1610 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.3 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 17 1700 Layer Topsoil Mid-light grey brown >30 >1.8 0.3 clay silt

17 1701 Layer Subsoil Mid orange brown >30 >1.8 0.22 clay silt

17 1702 Layer Natural Mid red brown sand >30 >1.8 >0.1 substrate gravel with frequent patches of light brown silt sand 17 1703 Cut Ditch NW/SE aligned ditch >1.8 2.2 0.39

17 1704 Fill 1703 Fill 1st fill of ditch 1703 >1.8 0.74 0.14

17 1705 Fill 1703 Fill 2nd fill of ditch 1793 >1.8 1.8 0.25

APPENDIX B: THE FINDS

Table 1: Finds concordance Context Description Count Weight(g) Spot-date 604 Post-medieval pottery: refined white ware 1 4 LC18-C19 Iron object: nail 1 24 805 Roman pottery: sandstone-tempered fabric 1 8 RB 806 Roman pottery: greyware 2 20 RB 808 Late prehistoric pottery: black-firing, sand-tempered fabric 4 127 LIA-C1 Late prehistoric pottery: limestone-tempered fabric 8 904 Roman pottery: Black-burnished ware 1 300 C2-C4 Roman pottery: greyware 38 906 Roman pottery: Black-burnished ware 2 60 C3-C4 Roman pottery: greyware 2 1204 Post-medieval ceramic building material: tile 1 30 Post-medieval

APPENDIX C: OASIS REPORT FORM

PROJECT DETAILS

Project Name Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset Short description An archaeological evaluation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology in October 2013 at Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset. Seventeen trenches were excavated. The evaluation identified a number of archaeological features across the site; these comprised ditches and a single pit or posthole. These features generally correlated well with the results of a preceding geophysical survey. A curving ditch, identified in the eastern part of site, may be prehistoric in date and could represent the remains of a ring ditch, circular drip gully or stock enclosure associated with possible funerary or settlement activity. However, the limited exposure of this feature along with a lack of dating evidence and associated features makes the exact date and function of this ditch unclear at present. A number of ditches, identified in the central part of site, appear to confirm the presence of a postulated Roman ladder settlement previously identified by the geophysical survey. Pottery ranging in date from the Late Iron Age/ 1st century AD to the 2nd to 4th- century AD was recovered from the fills of these ditches. Ditches of post-medieval date were identified in two trenches and would appear to relate to agricultural activity and/or land division. Undated ditches were identified in six trenches. The exact function of these features remains unclear although they are likely to relate to land management or drainage. An undated pit/posthole was identified in Trench 15. However, due to its isolated nature the exact function of this feature remains unclear. Project dates 21-29 October 2013 Project type Field evaluation Previous work Geophysics: Stratascan 2013 Future work Unknown PROJECT LOCATION Site Location Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset Study area (M2/ha) 16ha Site co-ordinates ST 25391 38920 PROJECT CREATORS Name of organisation Cotswold Archaeology Project Design (WSI) originator Cotswold Archaeology

Project Manager Richard Young Project Supervisor Mark Brett MONUMENT TYPE None SIGNIFICANT FINDS None PROJECT ARCHIVES Intended final location of archive Content (museum/Accession no.)

Physical Somerset County Museum Pottery, animal bone, metal, CBM Paper Somerset County Museum Context sheets, trench recording forms, section drawings, photographic registers Digital Somerset County Museum Digital photos, survey data BIBLIOGRAPHY CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2013 Cannington Flood Defence Scheme, Cannington, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation. CA typescript report 13617