Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

ARCHAEOLOGICAL DESK-BASED ASSESSMENT

LAND AT BREDE LANE SEDLESCOMBE EAST SUSSEX TN33 0PS

SEPTEMBER 2016

Local Planning Authority: Rother District Council

Site centred at: TQ 7847 1808

Authors: Peter Reeves BA (Jt Hons) MCIfA Duncan Hawkins BA (Hons) MSc FSA MCIfA

Approved: Duncan Hawkins BA (Hons) MSc FSA MCIfA

Report Status: FINAL

Issue Date: September 2016

CgMs Ref: PR/DH/16190

No part of this report is to be copied in any way without prior written consent.

Every effort is made to provide detailed and accurate information, however, CgMs Limited cannot be held responsible for errors or inaccuracies within this report.

© Ordnance Survey maps reproduced with the sanction of the controller of HM Stationery Office. Licence No: AL 100014723 Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

CONTENTS

Executive Summary 1.0 Introduction and Scope of Study 2.0 Development Plan Framework 3.0 Geology and Topography 4.0 Archaeological and Historical Background 5.0 Site Conditions and the Proposed Development 6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

APPENDIX 1: HER Plot APPENDIX 2: Geophysical Survey

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1 Site location Fig. 2 Gardner and Gream, 1795 Fig. 3 Ordnance Survey, 1808 Fig. 4 C & J Greenwood, 1825 Fig. 5 Tithe Map, 1841 Fig. 6 Ordnance Survey, 1872 Fig. 7 Ordnance Survey, 1898 Fig. 8 Ordnance Survey, 1909 Fig. 9 Ordnance Survey, 1939 Fig. 10 Ordnance Survey, 1961 Fig. 11 Ordnance Survey, 1977 Fig. 12 Ordnance Survey, 2013 Fig. 13 Google Earth, 2013

CgMs Ltd © 1 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Any proposed development of the study site would be unlikely to have either a significant or widespread archaeological impact. However, unknown archaeological remains of local importance could potentially be represented.

The site is thought to have a low archaeological potential for all past periods of human activity, though small quantities of residual finds of Mesolithic and Neolithic date may be represented, together with evidence of land division and agricultural activity spanning the Medieval period to the present.

The extreme western edge of the site is noted as being located within an archaeological notification area (ANA) as defined by Rother District Council. The ANA denotes the conjectured line of the Hastings to Ashford Roman Road) however no evidence for this feature was found by the geophysical survey.

The geophysical survey identified a curvilinear feature of unknown origin, possibly archaeological, crossing the site from west to east. However, this anomaly coincides with the 100ft contour as shown on the 1961 Ordnance Survey and conforms to the underlying banded geology.

On the basis of all the available evidence, we would suggest that if the Local Planning Authority requires any further archaeological mitigation measures, these could follow planning consent secured by an appropriately worded planning condition.

CgMs Ltd © 2 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF STUDY

1.1 This archaeological desk-based assessment has been prepared by Duncan Hawkins BA (Hons) MSc FSA MCIfA, of CgMs Consulting and updated by Peter Reeves BA (Jt Hons) MCIfA on behalf of MJH Executive Homes Limited.

1.2 The subject of this assessment, also referred to as the study site, is land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS. The study site is centred on grid reference TQ 7847 1808 (Figure 1).

1.3 In accordance with government policy on archaeology and heritage (NPPF), and Rother District Council’s planning policies, MJH Executive Homes Ltd have commissioned this archaeological desk-based assessment in order to establish the archaeological interest of the site, the extent of any past impacts, and to assess the potential archaeological impact of the proposed development.

1.4 As a result, this desk-based assessment enables relevant parties to assess the extent of any archaeological survivals across the site, the potential archaeological impact of the proposed development and the need or otherwise for archaeological mitigation measures.

1.5 Subsequent to the compilation and submission of the desk-based assessment in 2014 the archaeological officer for Rother District Council has requested that the desk-based assessment is updated and that a geophysical survey be undertaken on the site. This report includes updated data from the Historic Environment Record (HER, Appendix 1) and the completed geophysical survey is appended as Appendix 2.

CgMs Ltd © 3 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

2.0 PLANNING BACKGROUND AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FRAMEWORK

2.1 In March 2012, the government published the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which replaced previous national policy relating to heritage and archaeology (PPS5: Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment). The NPPF Planning Practice Guidance was published online 6th March 2014 and updated 10 April 2014 (http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk).

2.2 The Planning Practice Guide previously issued in support of PPS5, together with accompanying English Heritage documentation, was cancelled 25 March 2015, to be replaced by three Good Practice Advice (GPA) documents published by Historic England: GPA 1: The Historic Environment in Local Plans; GPA 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment, and GPA 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets.

2.1.1 Section 12 of the NPPF, entitled Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment provides guidance for planning authorities, property owners, developers and others on the conservation and investigation of heritage assets. Overall, the objectives of Section 12 of the NPPF can be summarised as seeking the:

 Delivery of sustainable development  Understanding the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits brought by the conservation of the historic environment  Conservation of England's heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance, and  Recognition of the contribution that heritage assets make to our understanding of the past.

2.1.2 Section 12 of the NPPF recognises that intelligently managed change may sometimes be necessary if heritage assets are to be maintained for the long term. Paragraph 128 states that planning decisions should be based on the significance of the heritage asset, and that the level of detail supplied by an applicant should be proportionate to the importance of the asset and should be no more than sufficient to review the potential impact of the proposal upon the significance of that asset.

2.1.3 Heritage Assets are defined in Annex 2 of the NPPF as: a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape positively identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions. They include designated heritage assets (as defined

CgMs Ltd © 4 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

in the NPPF) and assets identified by the local planning authority during the process of decision-making or through the plan-making process.

2.1.4 Annex 2 also defines Archaeological Interest as a heritage asset which holds or potentially could 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.

2.1.5 A Designated Heritage Asset comprises a: World Heritage Site, Scheduled Monument, Listed Building, Protected Wreck Site, Registered Park and Garden, Registered Battlefield or Conservation Area.

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

2.1.7 In short, government policy provides a framework which:

 Protects nationally important designated Heritage Assets (which include World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Ancient Monuments, Listed Buildings, Protected Wreck Sites, Registered Parks and Gardens, Registered Battlefields or Conservation Areas)  Protects the settings of such designations  In appropriate circumstances seeks adequate information (from desk based assessment and field evaluation where necessary) to enable informed decisions  Provides for the excavation and investigation of sites not significant enough to merit in-situ preservation.

2.2 The NPPG reiterates that the conservation of heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance is a core planning principle, requiring a flexible and thoughtful approach. Furthermore, it highlights that neglect and decay of heritage assets is best addressed through ensuring they remain in active use that is consistent with their conservation. Importantly, the guidance states that if complete, or partial loss of a heritage asset is justified, the aim should then be to capture and record the evidence of the asset’s significance, and make the interpretation publically available. Key elements of the guidance relate to assessing harm. An important consideration should be whether the proposed works adversely affect a key element of the heritage asset’s special

CgMs Ltd © 5 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

architectural or historic interest. Additionally, it is the degree of harm, rather than the scale of development, that is to be assessed. The level of ‘substantial harm’ is considered to be a high bar that may not arise in many cases. Essentially, whether a proposal causes substantial harm will be a judgment for the decision taker, having regard to the circumstances of the case and the NPPF. Importantly, harm may arise from works to the asset or from development within its setting. Setting is defined as the surroundings in which an asset is experienced, and may be more extensive than the curtilage. A thorough assessment of the impact of proposals upon setting needs to take into account, and be proportionate to, the significance of the heritage asset and the degree to which proposed changes enhance or detract from that significance and the ability to appreciate it.

2.3 In considering any planning application for development, the planning authority will be mindful of the framework set by government policy, in this instance the NPPF, by current Development Plan Policy and by other material considerations.

2.4 The Local Plan Framework is provided by the Rother District Local Plan which was adopted in 2006, the Plan was reviewed following publication of the NPPF and existing policies were found to be compliant and were therefore unchanged, the Plan contains the following relevant policy:

POLICY GD1

ALL DEVELOPMENT SHOULD MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:

VIII) IT DOES NOT PREJUDICE THE CHARACTER, APPEARANCE OR SETTING OF HERITAGE FEATURES, NOTABLY SCHEDULED ANCIENT MONUMENTS AND SITES OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE, LISTED BUILDINGS, CONSERVATION AREAS, REGISTERED HISTORIC PARKS AND GARDENS, THE REGISTERED BATTLEFIELD AT BATTLE, OR OTHER BUILDINGS AND SPACES OF HISTORIC IMPORTANCE;

CgMs Ltd © 6 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

3.0 GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY

Geology

3.1 The underlying Bedrock geology consists of Ashdown Formation comprising bands of Sandstone, Siltstone and Mudstone.

3.2 Superficial deposits of Head comprising clay, silt, sand and gravel may be present on the extreme west and south of the site.

Topography

3.3 The site slopes down from north to south from around 38.5m AOD to around 25m AOD. South of the site ground level continues to fall to the River Brede. A number of springs feeding miniature tributaries of the Brede are present to the south of the site.

CgMs Ltd © 7 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

4.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Timescales used in this report.

Prehistoric

Palaeolithic 450,000 - 12,000 BC Mesolithic 12,000 - 4,000 BC Neolithic 4,000 - 2,200 BC Bronze Age 2,200 - 700 BC Iron Age 700 - AD 43

Historic

Roman AD 43 - 410 Saxon/Early Medieval AD 410 - 1066 Medieval AD 1066 - 1485 Post Medieval AD 1486 - 1799 Modern AD 1800 - Present

4.1 Prehistoric

4.1.1 Despite numerous small scale archaeological interventions within a 1km radius of the study site, no clear evidence for Prehistoric activity has been identified. The Roman iron working site at Footlands, Whatlington has however been suggested to have Iron Age origins (HER Ref: DES 9373; TQ 7712 1977).

4.1.2 The geophysical survey has found no evidence for the presence of archaeological anomalies that are consistent with structures or activities commonly associated with the prehistoric period.

4.1.3 Overall the archaeological potential of the study site for the Prehistoric period can reasonably be defined as low. Small quantities of residual flint artefacts from the Mesolithic and Neolithic may be represented together with evidence of agricultural activity from the Bronze Age and Iron Age.

CgMs Ltd © 8 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

4.2 Roman

4.2.1 The Roman Road linking Rochester, Maidstone and Hastings runs through Sedlescombe (HER Ref: MES 2461, TQ 8056 2150). A possible branch Roman Road to the Ironworks at Footlands is also recorded (HER Ref: ME 2408; TQ 7736 1926).

4.2.2 Sedlescombe appears to have been a focus of the Roman iron industry. An extensive Roman iron works and bloomeries are recorded in Oaklands Park (HER Ref: MES 2572; TQ 785 175, also MES 21620; TQ 7849 1743).

4.2.3 The extreme western edge of the site is noted as being located within an archaeological notification area (ANA) as defined by Rother District Council. The ANA (DES9299, Appendix 1) denotes the conjectured line of the Hastings to Ashford Roman Road) however no evidence for this feature was found by the geophysical survey (Appendix 2).

4.2.4 The numerous small scale archaeological interventions carried out in Sedlescombe in recent years have revealed no clear evidence for local intensive settlement and activity in this period.

4.2.5 Overall the archaeological potential of the study site for this period can reasonably be defined as low though evidence for land division and agricultural activity may be represented.

4.3 Anglo Saxon and Early Medieval

4.3.1 The Domesday Book of 1086 records a number of entries for Sedlescombe.

“Walter son of Lambert holds Sedlescombe from the Count. Leofsi held it from Countess Goda. It answered fro 1 hide and 3 virgates outside the Rape; now for 1 hide. Land for 4 ploughs. In Lordship 1. 6 villagers (villeins) with 2 smallholders have 5 ploughs. Meadow, 7 acres; woodland, 6 pigs; a small church (value) before 1066, 60s; later 20s, now 40s”

and

“In Sedlescombe Walter Son of Lambert holds 1 virgate it never paid tax; it was always outside the Rape, land for 1 plough. It is there in lordship. Meadow 3 acres; woodland, 1 pig (value) then and later 10s; now 20s”

CgMs Ltd © 9 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

and

“There also Canon Geoffrey holds ½ hide. It lay in Sedlescombe (lands). It answered for ½ hide, 2 smallholders with 1 plough. Woodland, 3 pigs value 10s; it was waste” (Domesday Book, Sussex ed. John Morris 9, 122, 125, 127, 1976)

4.3.2 The place name Sedlescombe is thought to mean ‘valley of the residence’ (HER Ref: MES 19357; TQ 7770 1876). There is very unlikely to have been a ‘village’ at Sedlescombe at this time and it is more likely that there were a dozen or so farms scattered throughout the parish (HER Ref: MES 19356; TQ 7817 1796).

4.3.3 A very large Anglo Saxon coin hoard is recorded from Sedlescombe in 1876 (HER Ref: MES 2411; TQ 7803 1806). Around two to three thousand coins were recovered and these are thought to have been part of the bullion reserve of the Hastings Mint hidden at the time of the Norman invasion.

4.3.4 During these periods the study site is likely to have lain in agricultural land and overall it is reasonable to identify a low archaeological potential for these periods.

4.4 Late Medieval, Post Medieval and Modern

4.4.1 Although there are a large number of late Medieval, post Medieval and Modern entries for Sedlescombe on the East Sussex Sites and Monuments record, none of these actually has any relevance for the study sites archaeological potential.

4.4.2 Gardner and Gream’s map of 1795 (Figure 2), the 1806 Ordnance Survey (Figure 3) and the Greenwood map of 1825 (Figure 4) all show the study site in agricultural land.

4.4.3 The Sedlescombe Tithe Map of 1841 (Figure 5) records the study site as divided between:

367 - Gate Field - Arable 368 - Mill Field - Arable 461 - Broomfield - Arable 462 - Bath Meadow - Meadow

CgMs Ltd © 10 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

4.4.4 Subsequent maps show numerous changes to the field boundaries within the site until the present when the site essentially comprises one large field on the south and one small field on the north (Figures 6 to 13).

4.4.5 Overall the study site can reasonably be defined as having a low archaeological potential for this period.

4.5 Geophysical Survey

4.5.1 Consultation with the archaeological officer for Rother District Council requested further non-intrusive investigation of the site following submission of the original desk-based assessment submitted in 2014.

4.5.2 The geophysical survey, attached as Appendix 2, found no conclusive evidence for archaeological anomalies.

4.5.3 The geophysical survey identified a curvilinear feature of unknown origin crossing the site from west to east. However, this anomaly coincides with the 100ft contour as shown on the 1961 Ordnance Survey and conforms to the underlying banded geology. The anomaly is shown as A1 in Figure 5, Appendix 2.

4.5.4 The survey did identify Post-Medieval features (Figures 6 and 7 in Appendix 2) which comply with the demolished farm buildings noted in the HER (MES31367 and MES31368) and annotated in Appendix 1.

4.5.5 The geophysical survey has not identified any anomalies that are conclusively archaeological in origin.

4.5.6 On the basis of anomaly A1’s position on the 100 foot contour and the underlying banded geology it is recommended that should further intrusive investigation be required this requirement should be secured as an appropriately worded condition following planning consent.

CgMs Ltd © 11 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

5.0 SITE CONDITIONS AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Site Conditions

5.1 The site consists of agricultural pasture land between the core of the settlement of Sedlescombe to the west and the settlement extension around East View Terrace to the east.

5.2 Site observation observed no earthworks or surface artefacts of any date prior to the Post-Medieval and Modern periods.

5.3 Map evidence indicates the study site has consisted of agricultural land since at least the eighteenth century. Past archaeological impacts will relate to past ploughing and moderate but widespread impacts can be anticipated.

Proposed Development

5.4 The development proposal would see the extreme east of the site only developed, to the rear of existing properties on Brede Lane.

5.5 The proposed development will comprise 16 dwellings with associated car parking and access with the remainder of the site to be retained as school playing fields.

5.6 The location of the proposed dwellings, in the small parcel of land at the eastern end of the site, is above the 19th century anomalies recorded by the geophysical survey. The demolished remains of 19th century farm buildings are of low significance.

5.7 On the basis of all the available evidence, the proposed development would be unlikely to have a significant or widespread archaeological impact.

CgMs Ltd © 12 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS has been assessed for its archaeological potential.

6.2 The site has been the subject of an archaeological desk-based assessment of which this is a revised and updated report.

6.3 The site has been the subject of a geophysical survey the results of which are appended as Appendix 2.

6.4 The extreme western edge of the site is noted as being located within an archaeological notification area (ANA) as defined by Rother District Council. The ANA (DES9299, Appendix 1) denotes the conjectured line of the Hastings to Ashford Roman Road) however no evidence for this feature was found by the geophysical survey (Appendix 2).

6.5 The geophysical survey identified a curvilinear feature of unknown origin, possibly archaeological, crossing the site from west to east. However, this anomaly coincides with the 100ft contour as shown on the 1961 Ordnance Survey and conforms to the underlying banded geology.

6.6 The study site can reasonably be assessed as having a low archaeological potential for all past periods.

6.7 The proposed development, restricted to the eastern end of the site, is assessed as being unlikely to have either a significant or widespread archaeological impact.

6.8 On the basis of all the available evidence, we would suggest that if the Local Planning Authority requires any further archaeological mitigation measures, these could follow planning consent secured by an appropriately worded planning condition.

CgMs Ltd © 13 PR/DH/16190

Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

SOURCES CONSULTED

British Library Domesday Book, Sussex ed. John Morris 9, 122, 125, 127, 1976 East Sussex County Record Office East Sussex Historic Environment Record

CARTOGRAPHIC

Gardner and Gream, 1795 Ordnance Survey, 1808 C & J Greenwood, 1825 Tithe Map, 1841 Ordnance Survey, 1872 Ordnance Survey, 1898 Ordnance Survey, 1909 Ordnance Survey, 1939 Ordnance Survey, 1961 Ordnance Survey, 1977 Ordnance Survey, 2013

CgMs Ltd © 14 PR/DH/16190

N:\16000-16999\16190 - Sedlescombe\Figures\Mapping\GIS\Projects\A4 Figure 1 Landscape.mxd MB / 31.10.13 119000

Kent

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

East Sussex Site Boundary 118500

Staplecross A28 118000 John's Cross Cripp's Corner

Sedlescombe ROTHER DISTRICT A28 ± Whatlington

Scale at A4: 1:10,000 0 300 m 117500 BATTLE

Battle Westfield Figure 1: Telham Site Location

A28

HASTINGS DISTRICT 578000 578500 579000 © Ordnance Survey maps reproduced with the sanction of the controller of HM Stationery Office. Licence No: AL 100014723 Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right [2013] N:\16000-16999\16190 - Sedlescombe\Figures\Mapping\CAD\01 current\Drawing1.dwg MB / 31.10.13

C O N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Approximate Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 2: Gardner and Gream, 1795

CO N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Approximate Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 3: Ordnance Survey, 1808

CO N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Approximate Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 4: C & J Greenwood, 1825

© Ordnance Survey maps reproduced with the sanction of the controller of HM Stationery Office Licence No: AL 100014723 N:\16000-16999\16190 - Sedlescombe\Figures\Mapping\CAD\01 current\Drawing1.dwg © Ordnance Survey maps reproduced with the sanction of controller HM Stationery Office Licence No: AL 100014723 Planning O C Tithe Map, 1841 Illustrative Only www.cgms.co.uk Not to Scale: Site Boundary N Figure 5: S N I T L U

● N Heritage MB / 31.10.13 MB / G N:\16000-16999\16190 - Sedlescombe\Figures\Mapping\CAD\01 current\Drawing1.dwg MB / 31.10.13

CO N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 6: Ordnance Survey, 1872

CO N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 7: Ordnance Survey, 1898

CO N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 8: Ordnance Survey, 1909

CO N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 9: Ordnance Survey, 1939

CO N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 10: Ordnance Survey, 1961

CO N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 11: Ordnance Survey, 1977

CO N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 12: Ordnance Survey, 2013

CO N S ULTIN G

Planning ● Heritage www.cgms.co.uk

Site Boundary

Not to Scale: Illustrative Only

Figure 13: Google Earth, 2013

© Ordnance Survey maps reproduced with the sanction of the controller of HM Stationery Office Licence No: AL 100014723 Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

APPENDIX 1: HER Plot

CgMs Ltd © 15 PR/DH/16190

N:\16000-16999\16190 - Sedlescombe\Figures\Mapping\GIS\Projects\Appendix 1 05.09.16.mxd KP / 06.09.16

MES31358 119000

EES17286 DES11235 - Hurst Farm, ANA PlanningHeritage● MES20135 www.cgms.co.uk

!( !( MES31614 MES19357 !( DES9218 - Sedlescombe, Site Boundary ANA MES19357 Search Radius 1km !( Designated Assets:

MES31615 Conservation Area MES19346 EES16506 MES19357 $+ Listed Building !( Archaeological Notification Area DES11235 - Hurst Farm MES2461 118500 EES14776 DES9165 - Sedlescombe !( Historic Core DES9218 - Sedlescombe MES31362 MES31363 !( EES14776 DES9249 - Pestalozzi MES31619 !( EES14419 Village Roman centre EES14774 DES9299 - Hastings to MES19356 EES16496 EES14774 Ashford Roman road MES19356 MES31367 Non-Designated Assets: EES14776 !( EES14736 EES14676 EES14459 !( HER Record (Point) MES26227 FG Find Spot EES17437 EES17004 EES15041 !( MES31368 MES31369 !( Monument EES14449 MES25033 MES2411 FG EES16498 EES14565 HER Record (Linear) EES16393 FG !( EES14289 Building EES14842 !( EES14565 EES15196 EES15550 MES31366 !( Monument

118000 MES31370 MES22420 EES14847 EES15322 EES16500 MES17144 EES14491 HER Record (Polygon) Sedlescombe, CA EES16476 MES16408 !( Building FG EES14864 EES16507 EES14483 Monument EES16510 EES16508 EES14639 DES9249 - Pestalozzi !( EES15774 EES16160 MES19356 Village Roman centre, ANA Previous Archaeological EES16492 !( EES15733 Work: EES15774 MES31371 MES26237 !(FG!( EES14423 ") Event Record (Point) DES9165 - Sedlescombe EES16488 !( Historic Core, ANA MES8484 EES16848 !( MES24607 Event Record (Linear) EES16487 MES21094 MES24609 EES15146 EES15147 Event Record (Polygon) MES2463 !( EES15189 MES24608 MES2456 EES15727 EES16892 MES24613 MES25693 MES2463 EES16991 MES33456 !( MES25692 !( MES2572 MES25692 !(FGFG MES25694 EES15147 EES15727 EES15559 EES15147 EES16991 FG DES9299 - Hastings to MES25623 !( !( MES25624 MES31621 Ashford Roman road, ANA !( MES29581

117500 MES31372 MES25623 !( !( EES17415 MES31373 !( EES15147 MES21620 ±

Scale at A3: 1:8,000 0 250m

Appendix 1: HER Plot

577500 578000 578500 579000 579500 © Ordnance Survey maps reproduced with the sanction of the controller of HM Stationery Office. Licence No: AL 100014723 © English Heritage 2016. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2016 The Dataset contained in this material was obtained on 05.09.16 Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex TN33 0PS

APPENDIX 2: Geophysical Survey

CgMs Ltd © 16 PR/DH/16190

Archaeology South-East ASE

Detailed Magnetometer Survey Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex

Site Code: BRS16

NGR: 578480 118100 (TQ 78480 18100)

ASE Project No: 6648 ASE Report No: 2016338

By John Cook

Detailed Magnetometer Survey Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex

Site Code: BRS16

NGR: 578480 118100 (TQ 78480 18100)

ASE Project No: 6648 ASE Report No: 2016338

By John Cook

Senior Prepared by: John Cook Geophysicist

Reviewed and Project Andy Margetts approved by: Manager

Date of Issue: September 2016

Revision:

Archaeology South-East Units 1 & 2 2 Chapel Place Portslade East Sussex BN41 1DR

Tel: 01273 426830 Fax: 01273 420866 Email: [email protected] www.archaeologyse.co.uk Archaeology South-East Detailed Magnetometer Survey: land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex ASE Report No:2016338

Abstract

Archaeology South-East was commissioned by CgMs Consulting Ltd to conduct a magnetometer survey on a site totalling approximately 4.6 hectares of land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex. The work was undertaken between Monday 22nd and Wednesday 24th August 2016.

Evidence for possible archaeological features was represented by moderate positive and negative anomalies. Broad linear anomalies cross the site. They may represent evidence for enclosure or boundary ditches, however, they could equally be the result of the underlying banded geology. Anomalies in the east of the site relate to a trackway and field boundaries shown on the tithe. They are post-medieval or earlier in date. These extend northwest towards areas of magnetic debris. This likely represents near surface ferrous material, demolished buildings, ground disturbance or made ground in the area of agricultural buildings or a farmyard shown on the tithe.

Statement of Indemnity

Geophysical survey is the collection of data that relate to subtle variations in the form and nature of soil and which relies on there being a measurable difference between buried archaeological features and the natural geology. Geophysical techniques do not specifically target archaeological features and anomalies noted in the interpretation do not necessarily relate to buried archaeological features. As a result, magnetic and earth resistance detail survey may not always detect sub-surface archaeological features. This is particularly true when considering earlier periods of human activity, for example those periods that are not characterised by sedentary social activity.

i Archaeology South-East Detailed Magnetometer Survey: land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex ASE Report No:2016338

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

3.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY

4.0 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY RESULTS

5.0 CONCLUSIONS

Bibliography Acknowledgements

HER Summary Appendix: Raw survey data (CD)

Figures

Figure 1: Site location Figure 2: Site plan Figure 3: Raw data Figure 4: Processed data Figure 5: Interpretation Figure 6: Interpretation with features noted on historical mapping Figure 7: Google Earth images oblique

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Site background

1.1.1 Archaeology South-East was commissioned by CgMs Consulting Ltd to conduct a magnetometer survey on a site totalling approximately 4.6 hectares of land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex, henceforth referred to as ‘the site’ (NGR. 578480 118100; Figure 1).

1.1.2 A formal planning application for residential development will be submitted to Rother District Council (RDC) in the near future. Initial consultation with RDC’s Archaeological Advisor (Casper Johnson, East Sussex County Council, hereafter ‘the ESCC Archaeologist’) has established that the application should be supported with a geophysical survey. This report will be submitted to the ESCC Archaeologist and RDC in order to allow informed decisions to be made as to whether or not any planning consent granted for the site should be subject to an archaeological planning condition or if there is justification to undertake intrusive investigation (e.g. trial trenching) ahead of determining planning consent.

1.2 Geology and topography

1.2.1 According to the British Geological Survey (BGS 2016a) 1:50,000 scale geological mapping the bedrock geology of the site comprises Ashdown formation - sandstone, siltstone and mudstone. No superficial deposits are recorded. No boreholes are recorded on the BGS Borehole Viewer (BGS 2016b) on or in the immediate vicinity of the site.

1.2.2 The survey area was approximately 4.6 hectares and consisted of pasture land, bounded by housing to the west, north and south, and by farmland to the south (Figures 2 and 7).

1.3 Aims of geophysical investigation

1.3.1 The general aim of the programme of geophysical survey was to obtain a better understanding of the archaeological potential of the site. This work will allow informed decisions to be made as to the need, nature and scope of any further intrusive investigations and/or mitigation measures that may be required.

1.3.2 The geophysical survey comprised a detailed magnetometer survey within all accessible areas shown on Figure 2. The survey aimed to detect any anomalies of archaeological origin that are within the boundaries of the survey area. The features detected were naturally limited to those features that produce a measurable response to the instrumentation used

1.4 Scope of report

1.4.1 The scope of this report is to detail the findings of the survey. The project was conducted by John Cook with the assistance of Chris Russel. The project was managed by Paul Mason (fieldwork) Jim Stevenson and Andy Margetts (post- fieldwork).

2.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

2.1 The following information is paraphrased from the Desk-Based Assessment (CgMs 2013). For a more detailed historical background please refer to this document .

2.2 Despite numerous small scale archaeological interventions within a 1km radius of the study site, no clear evidence for Prehistoric activity has been identified.

2.3 Sedlescombe appears to have been a focus of the Roman iron industry. An extensive Roman iron works and bloomeries are recorded in Oaklands Park (HER Ref: MES 2572; TQ 785 175, also MES 21620; TQ 7849 1743) The numerous small scale archaeological interventions carried out in Sedlescombe in recent years have revealed no clear evidence for local intensive settlement and activity in this period.

2.4 A very large Anglo Saxon coin hoard is recorded from Sedlescombe in 1876 (HER Ref: MES 2411; TQ 7803 1806). Around two to three thousand coins were recovered and these are thought to have been part of the bullion reserve of the Hastings Mint hidden at the time of the Norman invasion.

2.5 Gardner and Gream’s map of 1795, the 1806 Ordnance Survey and the Greenwood map of 1825 all show the study site in agricultural land.

3.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY

3.1 Geophysical survey

3.1.1 A fluxgate gradiometer (magnetometry) survey was undertaken across two parcels of land, as depicted on Figure 2 (NGR 578480 118100). The work was undertaken between Monday 22nd and Wednesday 24th August 2016 during dry, clear and hot weather.

3.2 Applied geophysical instrumentation

3.2.1 The Fluxgate Gradiometer employed was the Bartington Instrumentation Grad 601-2. The Grad 601-2 has an internal memory and a data logger that store the survey data. This data is downloaded into a PC and is then processed in a suitable software package.

3.2.2 30m x 30m grids were set out using a GPS (see below). Each grid was surveyed with 1m traverses; samples were taken every 0.25m.

3.2.3 Data was collected along north-south traverses in a zigzag pattern beginning in the south west corner of each grid, following the contours of the site.

3.3 Instrumentation used for setting out the survey grid

3.3.1 The survey grid for the site was geo-referenced using a Leica Viva Smartrover. The GPS receiver collects satellite data to determine its position and uses the mobile phone networks to receive corrections, transmitting them to the RTK Rover via Bluetooth to provide a sub centimetre Ordnance Survey position and height. Each surveyed grid point has an Ordnance Survey position; therefore the geophysical survey can be directly referenced to the Ordnance Survey National Grid.

3.4 Data processing

3.4.1 All of the geophysical data processing was carried out using TerraSurveyor published by DW Consulting. Minimally processed data was produced using the following schedule of processing. Due to the very high positive readings of some of the magnetic disturbance, the values were replaced with a dummy value so as to avoid detrimentally affecting the dataset when further processed. The first process carried out upon the data was to apply a DESPIKE to the data set which removes the random ‘iron spikes’ that occur within fluxgate gradiometer survey data. A ZERO MEDIAN TRAVERSE was then applied to survey data. This removes stripe effects within grids and ensures that the survey grid edges match.

3.5 Data presentation

3.5.1 Data is presented using images exported from TerraSurveyor into Autocad software and inserted into the geo-referenced site grid. Data is presented as raw and processed data greyscale plots.

4.0 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY RESULTS

4.1 Description of site

4.1.1 The survey area was approximately 4.6 hectares and consisted of pasture land, bounded by housing to the west, north and south, and by farmland to the south.

4.2 Survey limitations

4.2.1 Physical obstructions encountered on site included nettles, hidden dips and wire fences (Figure 2). Obstructions for each area are noted in the results. In addition, the effectiveness of magnetometer surveys depends on a contrast between the absolute magnetic susceptibility of the topsoil to the underlying subsoil (Clark 1996). Features may also be difficult to detect where there has been significant primary silting and development of significant overburden. Areas where physical obstructions form a barrier to survey, or a health and safety issue, have been omitted. The site lies over mudstone geology. An average response to magnetometer is possible, although results may be variable (English Heritage 2008).

4.3 Introduction to results

4.3.1 The results should be read in conjunction with the figures at the end of this report. The types of features likely to be identified are discussed below.

4.3.2 Positive Magnetic Anomalies Positive anomalies generally represent cut features that have been in-filled with magnetically enhanced material.

4.3.3 Negative Magnetic anomalies Negative anomalies generally represent buried features such as banks or compacted ground that have a lower magnetic signature in comparison to the background geology.

4.3.4 Magnetic Disturbance Magnetic disturbance is generally associated with interference caused by modern ferrous features such as fences and service pipes or cables.

4.3.5 Magnetic Debris Low amplitude magnetic debris consists of a number of dipolar responses spread over an area and is indicative of ground disturbance.

4.3.6 Dipolar Anomalies Dipolar anomalies are positive anomalies with an associated negative response. These anomalies are usually associated with discreet ferrous objects or may represent buried kilns or ovens.

4.3.7 Bipolar Anomalies Bipolar anomalies consist of alternating responses of positive and negative magnetic signatures. Interpretation will depend on the strength of these responses; modern pipelines and cables typically produce strong bipolar responses.

4.3.8 Thermoremanence Thermoremanence is most commonly encountered through the magnetizing of clay through the firing process although stones and soils can also acquire thermoremanence.

4.3.9 Magnetism from ferromagnetic materials (iron) and from thermoremanence are forms of permanent magnetism and in most cases a magnetometer will not enable the separation of anomalies into the two categories. The interpretation of these anomalies into either category relies on field strength within an area. Magnetic anomalies due to iron normally rise and fall rapidly, forming a ‘spike’ in the data.

4.4 Interpretation of fluxgate gradiometer results (Figures 3-7)

4.4.1 The interpretation of fluxgate gradiometer results should be read in conjunction with the figures at the end of the report. Specific examples of anomaly types are numbered in the figures and text but not all anomalies are numbered.

4.4.2 Evidence of possible archaeological activity included the following described anomalies (Figure 5). The most obvious possible archaeological anomalies are the linear and discrete moderate positive anomalies, noted as A1, A2, A4 and A5, and likely to be due to cut features such as a ditches. These are associated with negative anomalies (A3) that may relate to archaeological features such as banks and earthworks. However, negative anomalies may also stem from the dipolar effect of certain magnetic anomalies.

4.4.3 A number of discrete moderate positive (A6) anomalies may indicate cut features such as pits. However, these anomalies may also relate to in filled natural features.

4.4.4 Negative linear magnetic anomalies (A7) are observed that may relate to drainage features and correspond to a number of positive linear anomalies and may indicate alternating forms of drainage feature.

4.4.5 Magnetic debris (A8) may relate to a scattering of near surface ferrous material, demolished buildings, former field boundaries, ground disturbance or made ground.

4.4.6 Closely spaced linear anomalies run down the slope (A9) and are probably the result of ploughing.

5.0 CONCLUSIONS

5.1 Discussion

5.1.1 Evidence for possible archaeological features was represented by moderate positive and negative anomalies (A1 to A6). A broad linear anomaly (A1) crosses the site following the contours of the slope and overlooking the valley to the south. This anomaly (along with weak positive and negative anomalies A2 and A3), may represent evidence for enclosure or boundary ditches and a bank. These anomalies are, however, mirrored by local bands of mudstone within the local underlying geology (BGS 2016a). Though they could have an archaeological origin, they may equally be the result of the natural geology. None of these features appear on the 1841 tithe map, where the land parcel is largely shown as being cultivated for arable, nor do they appear on later Ordnance Survey or other historic mapping.

5.1.2 Anomalies A4 (in the east of the site) relate to a trackway and field boundaries shown on the tithe (1841; Figure 6). They are post-medieval or earlier in date. These extend northwest towards areas of magnetic debris (A8). This likely represents near surface ferrous material, demolished buildings, ground disturbance or made ground in the area of agricultural buildings or a farmyard shown on the tithe (1841; Figure 6).

5.1.3 Anomaly A5 relates to a field boundary shown on the tithe (1841; Figure 6). It is post-medieval or earlier in date. The fact that it is orientated collinear with other field boundaries in the surrounding landscape (Figure 7) and on historic mapping indicates that it may mark the line of a former routeway, track or hollow way.

5.1.4 Possible cut features such as pits are indicated across the site (A6). However, these may relate to infilled natural features or to previous agricultural activity.

5.1.5 A negative linear anomaly (A7) corresponds to a boundary on the 1977 OS map (Figure 6) but not on the 1961 OS map. A series of parallel positive and negative linear magnetic anomalies are observed on the same alignment that may relate to drainage features from this period.

5.1.6 Former ploughing (A9) is noted running down the slope.

5.1.7 In conclusion a number of possible archaeological features were encountered across the site including, former routeways, field boundaries, possible building remains and potential cut features such as pits. Whilst some could be identified on historic mapping, anomalies A1, A2 and A3 possibly relate to a bank and ditch(s) following the contours of the slope or are the result of the natural underlying geology. They predate any historic cartography in the area.

Bibliography

BGS 2016a. Geology of Britain Viewer http://www.bgs.ac.uk/discoveringGeology/geologyOfBritain/viewer.html?src=topNav Accessed 31st August 2016

BGS 2016b. British Geological Survey, Borehole Scans http://www.bgs.ac.uk/data/boreholescans/home.html Accessed 31st August 2016

Clark, A. 1996. Seeing Beneath the Soil. (2nd edition). London: Routledge.

CgMs 2013. Land at Brede Lane Sedlescombe East Sussex Desk Based Assessment. CgMs unpublished report

English Heritage 2008 Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field Evaluation 2nd Edition Swindon: English Heritage

Acknowledgements

Archaeology South-East would like to thank CgMs Consulting Ltd for commissioning the survey.

HER Summary

HER enquiry N/A number

Site code BRS16 Project code 6648 Planning reference

Site address Land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex

District/Borough East Sussex NGR (12 figures) 578480 118100 Geology Ashdown formation - sandstone, siltstone and mudstone Fieldwork type Survey

Date of fieldwork 22nd – 24th August 2016 Sponsor/client CgMs Consulting Ltd Project manager Paul Mason Project supervisor John Cook Period summary

Project summary Archaeology South-East was commissioned by CgMs Consulting Ltd to conduct a magnetometer survey on a site totalling approximately 4.6 hectares of land at Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex. The work was undertaken between Monday 22nd and Wednesday 24th August 2016. Broad linear anomalies cross the site. These may represent evidence for enclosure or boundary ditches or may equally be the result of the underlying banded geology. Anomalies in the remainder of the site relate to trackways, field boundaries and agricultural buildings shown on the tithe (1841). They are post- medieval or earlier in date. Museum/Accession N/A No.

578000 Project Ref: 6648 Ref: Project Report Ref: 2016338 Ref: Report © Archaeology South-East Archaeology 0.25 km The Site Drawn by: JC by: Drawn August 2016 August Brede Lane, Seddlescombe, East Sussex East Seddlescombe, Lane, Brede Site location Site

579000 Fig. 1 Fig. N 27.2m

LB TCB

578290, 118280 139 N

35.1m

1 131

Transmitter Lay-by

pole 7

BREDE LANE Nettles 12

38.5m Field Cottage

30.1m

26.2m

STREETLANDS 10

578670, 118040 Surveyed area

0 90m

Archaeology South-East 7 Drawn by: JC Brede Lane, Sedlescombe, East Sussex N Raw data -3SD 0 mean Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf HMSO. © Crown copyright and database right [2011]. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence no. AL 503 10 A 30m 3SD Fig. 3 -5nT 0nT 5nT 30.1m 38.5m

Archaeology South-East 7 Drawn by: JC Brede Lane, Seddlescombe, East Sussex N Processed data -3SD 0 mean Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf HMSO. © Crown copyright and database right [2011]. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence no. AL 503 10 A 30m 3SD Fig. 4 -10nT 10nT 0nT LB TCB

578290, 118280 139 Strong positive anomaly(Possible archaeology) Moderate positive anomaly (Possible archaeology) 35.1m N Weak positive anomaly (Possible archaeology)

1 Moderate negative anomaly 131 Weak negative anomaly Magnetic disturbance

Lay-by Magnetic debris Dipolar anomaly (Possible archaeology/Modern)

Possible thermoremanent anomaly 7 Linear anomaly land drain/former field boundary BREDE LANE Linear anomaly agricultural activity

0 90m 12

30.1m A8

4 A4

26.2m

STREETLANDS

A5 10 A7

A3 578670, 118040 A9 A2

578290, 118280 139 Anomalies corresponding to features on 1841 Tithe Anomaly associated with boundary on 1977 OS map 35.1m N Moderate positive anomaly (Possible archaeology)

1 Weak positive anomaly (Possible archaeology) 131 Weak negative anomaly Magnetic disturbance

Lay-by Magnetic debris Dipolar anomaly (Possible archaeology/Modern)

Possible drainage (similar alignment to 1977 OS) 7 Linear anomaly agricultural activity BREDE LANE

0 90m 12

30.1m

26.2m

STREETLANDS 10

578670, 118040

578290, 118280 139 Anomalies corresponding to features on 1841 Tithe Anomaly associated with boundary on 1977 OS map 35.1m N Moderate positive anomaly (Possible archaeology)

1 Weak positive anomaly (Possible archaeology) 131 Weak negative anomaly Magnetic disturbance

Lay-by Magnetic debris Dipolar anomaly (Possible archaeology/Modern)

Possible drainage (similar alignment to 1977 OS) 7 Linear anomaly agricultural activity BREDE LANE

0 90m 12

30.1m

26.2m

STREETLANDS 10

578670, 118040

© Archaeology South-East Brede Lane, Seddlescombe, East Sussex Fig. 6 Project Ref: 6648 August 2016 Interpretation with features noted on historical mapping Report Ref: 2016338 Drawn by: JC Fig. 7a Oblique Google Earth imagery

Fig. 7b Oblique Google Earth 3D imagery with geophysical survey data overlain