Land to the Rear of 10 High Street Winslow

LAND TO THE REAR OF 10 HIGH STREET

WINSLOW, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE

Archaeological Desk Based Assessment

and Evaluation

prepared by

NETWORK ARCHAEOLOGY LTD.

for

SUMMERLEIGH PROPERTY LTD.

Report 275

October 2001 CONTENTS

List of contents List of figures

Summary 1

1 Introduction 2 2 Procedures 3 3 Archaeological and historical background 5 4 Historic map regression 10

5 Evaluation results 12 6 Discussion 14 7 Impact Assessment 16

8 Conclusions 17 9 Archive 18

10 Acknowledgments 19 11 References 20 12 Statement of indemnity 22

Appendix A Table of archaeological contexts Appendix B Table of archaeological finds Appendix C Specialist reports Appendix D Map extracts Appendix E Figures 1 - 7

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Location of 10, High Street, Winslow, Buckinghamshire (1:50,000 scale)

Figure 2: Sites and Monuments Record data, Winslow (1:25,000 scale)

Figure 3: (a) Plan of the proposed development area (1:1250 scale) (b) Location of evaluation trenches 1 - 2 (1:200 scale)

Figure 4: Historic map regression of proposed development area (1:1250 scale)

Figure 5: Plan of Trench 1 (1:50 scale)

Figure 6: North facing section of Trench 1 (1:20 scale)

Figure 7: Sections through postholes 014, 016, 018, 020, 022 and 024

SUMMARY

Two evaluation trenches were excavated on the site of a proposed house at 10, High Street, Winslow, Buckinghamshire.

The site lies within the historic core of Winslow. It is on a narrow plot on the east side of the High Street. The proposed development area is at the east end of the plot, behind the buildings fronting onto the street.

The evaluation trenches were positioned to assess the depth and level of survival of archaeological remains.

The evaluation trenches established evidence of: w foundations of a post-built structure, represented by three post holes, of probable late post medieval or early modern date a fence line, represented by three post holes, of probable late post medieval or early modern date a man-made terrace, which had been backfilled with building rubble, and the foundations of two later walls, of early modern date, and an absence of medieval remains. w w

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Summerleigh Property Ltd. are planning to build a new house on land behind 10, High Street, Winslow, Buckinghamshire (Figure 1).

As part of a predetermination process for the development, archaeological investi- gations have included:

an archaeological desk based assessment, and an archaeological evaluation, the combined results of which form the basis of this report.

1.2 Reasons for the evaluation

The evaluation is considered necessary because the proposed development area (PDA) lies within the presumed historic core of Winslow.

1.3 Proposed development

The PDA, covering c.0.056 ha, is to be the site of a new house, driveway, parking bays and gardens.

1.4 Description of the PDA (figures 3a and 3b)

Winslow stands on the brow of a small ridge of hills lying to the north east of the Claydon Brook (figure 1).

The PDA is situated on a building plot on the east side of Winslow High Street just north of the Market Square. It lies at c.114m AOD (NGR 477020 227610) at the east end of the plot, behind the buildings that front onto the street (figure 3a).

The mapped soil at the site is fine loamy over clayey soils with slowly permeable subsoils (Ashley), overlying chalky till (BGS 1979, SSEW 1983). However, the drift geology is actually glacial sands and gravels. The evaluation trenches encoun- tered a sandy substrate (see 5.1).

Five buildings and associated boundary walls stand on the site. Three of these buildings are listed: A and B (LB6/160) and G (LB6/159). These stand at the western end of the plot and are not affected by the proposed development. Two garage buildings, Q and R, stand in the PDA.

2. PROCEDURES

2.1 Desk based assessment

2.1.1 Objectives

The purpose of the desk-based assessment is to consider the archaeological impli- cations of the proposed development, and to provide a basis for further stages of investigation.

The objectives of the assessment are to:

identify any potential archaeological remains within the PDA; assess the overall impact of the proposed development; guide the evaluation, and prepare a report that addresses the above.

2.1.2 Study Area

Data collection focused mainly within a 500m radius of 10, High Street, Winslow, and included relevant sites just beyond this delineation. Background information for the area was additionally studied to provide a broader archaeological context.

2.1.3 Data Sources

Buckinghamshire County Council Sites and Monuments Records:

county list of known archaeological sites and finds county list of Listed Buildings vertical aerial photographs relevant archaeological reports and journals

Buckinghamshire Record Office

Ordnance Survey maps

Buckinghamshire Local Studies Library

Ordnance Survey maps, county journals and published books.

2.2 Evaluation

2.2.1 Evaluation objectives

The purpose of the evaluation was to establish the potential impact of the proposed development upon significant archaeological remains. Specific objectives were to:

gather sufficient information to establish the presence or absence, extent, condition, character, quality and date of any archaeological remains, paying particular attention to structural remains; determine presence, survival, condition and potential of ecofactual and environmental evidence; determine presence, survival, condition and potential of artefactual evidence, and assist with local type series; assess the need for preservation of archaeological deposits, and produce a report that addresses the above.

2.1.2 Evaluation trenches

Two trenches were excavated by a JCB fitted with a 1.8m wide grading bucket (Figure 3b):

Trench 1 was ‘L’ shaped (10.25m long) and ran east-west across the centre of the proposed house footprint.

Trench 2 (1.5m long by 1m wide) was located 2m south of the eastern end of Trench 1. It was excavated to investigate the extent of the terraced feature discovered on the southern edge of Trench 1. w w Layers which were not deemed significant, and which extended beyond the confines of the evaluation trenches, were removed by machine. w Significant archaeological deposits were sample excavated, and a written, drawn and photographic record made, in accordance with the brief. Finds were retained, washed and then examined by appropriate specialists.

2.1.3 Standards

Network Archaeology Ltd. is a Registered Archaeological Organisation (RAO) with the Institute of Field Archaeologists (IFA).

All work has been undertaken in accordance with current health and safety legisla- tion and in line with the IFA’s:

Code of Conduct (2000) Code of Approved Practice for the Regulation of Contractual Arrangements in Field Archaeology (2000) Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Evaluation (1999) Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Excavation (1999) Standard and Guidance for Finds and Ecofact Studies and Curation (1999) Guidelines for Finds Work (1999)

The management of the project was in accordance with 'Management of Archaeo- logical Projects', second edition (English Heritage, 1991). 3. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND (see figure 2)

The archaeological desk based assessment identified that no previous archaeological fieldwork had been carried out on the site.

3.1 Palaeolithic (c.500,000 years ago)

3.1.1 Palaeolithic culture flourished during the Pleistocene. It was a period of glaciation interspersed with long periods of slightly warmer climate. Britain was still joined to continental Europe at this time. In periods of intense cold, such as the Last Gla- ciation (25,000 – 18,000 years ago), populations retreated to the warmer parts of the continent. Palaeolithic people lived by hunting and gathering. Even during the glacial periods they made seasonal food-gathering forays into the area that is present-day Britain.

3.1.2 An Aecheulian flint flake (CASS 05891) was found resting on boulder clay in a “peat bed at Winslow”. Although the provenance of the axe is uncertain, it does suggest a low level of activity in the area during the Palaeolithic period.

3.2 Mesolithic (c.8,300 BC)

3.2.1 The separation of Britain from the Continent occurred gradually at the end of the last Ice Age. The climate became warmer and wetter encouraging the spread of birch-clumps, followed by coniferous forest, and later, mixed, broad leaved wood- lands of oak, elm and lime. Permanent human occupation of Britain began in this period, and hafted flint axes and fire were used to clear small areas of woodland.

3.2.2 Small communities of hunter-gatherers migrated seasonally between different areas. Their tools were fashioned from stone, wood or bone. Spears were still used, but bows and arrows were now widespread. In addition, greater reliance was placed on composite tools, particularly small flint blades (microliths) set in wooden shafts. 3.2.3 No Mesolithic sites or find spots are known within a half kilometre radius of the development site.

3.3 Neolithic (c.5000 BC) and Bronze Age (c.2,300 BC)

3.3.1 The Neolithic period is characterised by the shift from hunting and gathering to a settled agrarian economy. This change is manifested in the archaeological record by the appearance of new artefact types - querns, sickles, pottery and polished stone axes. These began to replace the microliths, spears and digging sticks used throughout the Mesolithic period. Environmental remains support the artefactual evidence, indicating permanent land clearance by fire and axe, the introduction of wheat and sheep and the domestication of native animals such as cattle and pigs. New types of site emerged, including settlements, and large ceremonial monuments.

3.3.2 The Bronze Age was heralded by the introduction of metalworking technology, new types of flint-tool and new styles of pottery design from continental Europe. The settled farming society established in the Neolithic period, became increas- ingly sophisticated. Cereal crops and stock rearing remained the economic main- stays, whilst trade links forged in the Neolithic continued to develop. Changes in society were reflected in the emergence of new methods of burial, particularly the construction of round barrows as funerary monuments.

3.3.3 Systematic forest clearance which began in the Neolithic period, continued into the Middle Ages.

3.3.4 Bronze Age Hoards have been found at Aylesbury and Waddesdon (Reed 1979) but no finds of the Neolithic or Bronze Age have been recorded from within the study area.

3.4 Iron Age (c.700 BC)

3.4.1 Iron-working was among the new technologies introduced to Britain from the Con- tinent in this period. Population growth and climatic deterioration (colder, wetter summers) led to competition for land and the development of a more organised and territorial society. Hill forts and defensive enclosures are manifestations of this so- cial shift.

3.4.2 Trade contacts and possible influxes/invasions of foreigners from Gaul in the Late (Pre-Roman) Iron Age, brought about cultural changes. New tribal groupings and political organisations emerged during this period, and in the last century BC the Catuvellauni tribe controlled the region.

3.4.3 Archaeological evidence for these changes includes circulation of coinage, wheel thrown pottery, new burial practices and new forms of settlement known as oppida. These incorporated extensive, although minor, linear defences (enclosing areas up to 30-50 ha), designed to protect the houses and cattle enclosures within from at- tack.

3.4.4 No Iron Age sites or find spots are known within a half kilometre radius of the development site.

3.5 Romano-British (AD 43)

3.5.1 Over most of England, the Roman invasion was followed by a rapid implementa- tion of centralised administration based on towns and supported by a network of roads.

3.5.2 Road networks had previously been little more than tracks formed by the feet of people and livestock. Roman army engineers built more substantial roads with met- alled and cambered surfaces, to expedite the movement of soldiers, food and equipment. Naturally these roads were also exploited as trade and communication routes. The prehistoric Icknield Way became an important Roman road, linking the Wye Valley to the Thames. Many Roman settlements have been found alongside the Icknield Way (Ashford 1960). Two major Roman roads run towards London from the north west. Akeman Street lies roughly 9km north of Winslow and Wat- ling Street is a similar distance to the south. Minor routes linked with the more major roads.

3.5.3 Romano-British pottery, including 1st-2nd century material, was found scattered in a ploughed field near Winslow by a metal detectorist and three bronze Constantin- ian coins were recovered from the same area (CASS 05075). In addition, a du- pondius of Vespasian (CASS00759) was discovered in a garden on Missenden Road.

3.6 Early Medieval (AD 410)

3.6.1 Roman rule in Britain and Roman authority began to disintegrate long before the departure of the Romans in AD 410.

3.6.2 After the end of Roman rule, the economy stagnated, coins stopped circulating and much of the Roman infrastructure ceased to be used. South and south-east Britain were brought under Anglo-Saxon control during the later fifth and sixth centuries.

3.6.3 A Winslow surgeon, John Cowley, had a valuable collection of local antiquities, including a “quantity of supposed Saxon coins, found on Dene Hill” (CASS05117). Late in the 8th century, the Mercian king, Offa, founded the monastery of St. Al- bans and granted it his royal estate at Winslow. Lipscomb relates that Winslow was a residence of the Mercian kings and the VCH records that King Offa sojourned at Winslow in c.792.

3.6.4 Winslow was first recorded in as Wineshlauu in the late 8th century. The name means “mound of a man called Wine” and is an Old English formation (personal name + hlaw) (Mills 1996)

3.7 Medieval (AD 1066)

3.7.1 By medieval times, England was divided into tax paying districts, which the Do- mesday survey of 1086 refers to as ‘hundreds’. In the 11th century the central and northern parts of Buckinghamshire had small hundreds because they were relatively intensively settled. In contrast, the large southern hundreds of Chiltern and Desborough had low population densities because they incorporated massive wa- terless chalk hills and dry valleys. Winslow lies in the hundred of Cottesloe.

3.7.2 The twelfth and thirteenth centuries were a period of relative affluence and population growth, but cracks began to show as increasing stress was put on the environ- ment and the agricultural system. Marginal lands were gradually brought under cultivation in order to cope with greater demands for food, but these soils were soon exhausted. The early fourteenth century saw a series of failed harvests due to bad weather, which in turn caused massive inflation and famine. Different epidem- ics affecting human and livestock populations, worsened matters, as did high taxes. Significant amounts of land were abandoned and in 1348 the Black Death caused even more extensive depopulation of the countryside. Following these events, the land became concentrated in fewer hands. Sheep farming on vast, consolidated and enclosed areas of land became prevalent on the lower ground, and there were nu- merous cases of forced abandonment of villages to make way for this type of agri- culture.

3.7.3 Winslow Parish comprises the market town of Winslow and the hamlet of Shipton. The Aylesbury to Buckingham road passes through Shipton and along Winslow High Street. In the 13th century, the Abbot of St. Albans had a small borough at Winslow or Shipton (Page 1969, vol. iii).

3.7.4 In 1234 the Abbot of St. Albans received a grant of a market on Thursdays at his manor of Winslow and a fair on St. Lawrence’s day. The Market Place (CASS 05109) still adjoins the High Street, but the market day was changed to Wednesday in 1858.

3.7.5 The High Street was apparently referred to as the “New Town” in early court rolls. The long, narrow building plots on the east side of the High Street are the shape of typical medieval burgage plots. These may have been laid out following the market grant in 1234 (Reed 1979). The Hundred Rolls of 1279 name ten burgesses whose houses were built when the Market Square was created. The VCH suggests that some of these original burgages lay on Sheep Street.

3.7.6 Watermills had appeared in England by the 8th century, their use spreading throughout the eastern counties and the midlands over the next three hundred years (Hoskins, 1955). All such mills mentioned in the Domesday book are corn mills. The Domesday survey recorded that Buckingham, Aylesbury and Princes Risbor- ough had only two mills apiece (Ashford 1960). In the reign of Edward I there was a windmill in Winslow owned by the Abbey of St. Albans.

3.7.7 There was a church in Winslow as early as 1198, but the present building, St. Law- rence’s Church, dates from c.1320. It was greatly altered in the 15th century (CASS 02355).

3.7.8 Several of the standing buildings in Winslow originated in the medieval period. A stoneware jar found beneath the hearth of 5 Vicarage Road may have buried as a prophylactic measure to prevent witches from entering the house (CASS 04455).

3.8 Post Medieval (1485)

3.8.1 Transport routes saw rapid expansion in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Initially, turnpikes were used to raise money to improve the state of the roads. A railway line linking Oxford to Peterborough was built through Winslow during the 19th century.

3.8.2 A Market House stood at the east end of the Market Square from the early 18th century (Page 1969, vol. iii) and was demolished in 1948 (Foley and Hunt 1997). Nearby was a public well approximately 60’ deep, with a pump. The subsoil is sand and a strong spring in the area feeds many wells in Horn Street, eventually emerging in Spring Close, the field beyond Western Lane.

3.8.3 There are a few 16th and several 17th century buildings in Winslow. Most of the houses on the High Street are timber framed, though several were cement-rendered in the early 19th century. Parts of the street were rebuilt after a great fire of 1775, which started at the Three Pigeons Inn. Nos. 8 and 10 High Street are 17th century timber framed buildings. Both have been refronted, No. 10 between 1800 and 1850 (LB 6/160) and No. 8. In the late 18th century (LB6/159).

3.8.4 There was a malting mill and a water-mill in Winslow in the 16th century (Page 1969, vol. iii).

3.8.5 St. Albans Abbey was dissolved in 1539 and Winslow passed to the Crown. After being leased to a succession of tenants, the estate was sold to Sir John Fortescue, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. In 1599 a map of Fortescue’s Buckingham- shire estates was made. Known as the Salden Map, after Sir John’s mansion near Mursley, the document showed a row of building plots ranged along the south east side of the High Street and a series of buildings behind the farmhouses on Sheep Street, where Winslow Hall now stands.

3.8.6 William Lowndes, a native of Winslow and Secretary to the Treasury, bought the manor of Winslow in 1697. Throughout the 1690s he purchased property on Sheep Street and in 1700 he demolished three farmhouses (Foley and Hunt 1997) and built Winslow Hall (CASS 02020). The building is generally attributed to Sir Christopher Wren, though there are claims that it was designed by Inigo Jones, who died 1652.

3.8.7 Bricks for Winslow Hall were produced at Winslow and there is a reference to the Winslow brickmaker, John Stutsbery, “building ye middle kilne in Norden”. The location of Norden is uncertain, but it has been suggested that it lay to the west of the High Street (CASS 05091).

3.9 Modern

3.9.1 Winslow expanded as modern trunk roads enabled workers to commute to centres such as Aylesbury, Milton Keynes and London.

3.9.2 The railway that linked Winslow to Peterborough and Oxford, was axed by the Beeching reforms of the 1960s.

4. HISTORIC MAP REGRESSION

4.1 Map and Photographic Evidence

4.1.1 All maps showing the layout of the proposed development site date from late nineteenth century onwards. There is no Tithe Award for Winslow and the Inclosure Award has no plan attached.

4.1.2 Vertical aerial photographic coverage of the site from 1963/1964 and 1985 was checked. No oblique photographs were available.

4.1.3 Photographs of the High Street taken in the late 19th and early 20th century show the buildings fronting onto the street but not the arrangement of buildings on the plot behind.

4.2 Evolution of the Site (see figure 4)

4.2.1 1599, Salden Map - There is insufficient accuracy and detail on this map to establish the nature of the development on the site. The buildings on Horn Street, Church Street and Sheep Street appear as tiny stylised houses with doorways, roofs and chimneys, whereas the east side of the High Street appears only as a series of rectangular plots. This could indicate that the High Street had not yet been developed. It certainly suggests that the nature of any development on the High Street differed to that on Horn Street, Church Street and Sheep Street. Behind the proper- ties on the north side of Sheep Street, the map shows a back-lane running from the High Street. It runs parallel to Sheep Street and there are three houses (possibly farmhouses) shown standing on the north side of the lane. These and the lane were evidently destroyed to make way for Winslow Hall. The lane appears to lie in the vicinity of the proposed development area, but the map is not accurate enough to determine whether the lane or any of the buildings along its course lie within the PDA or not.

4.2.2 1835, Turnpike Map - There is not enough detail on this map to establish the nature of the development within the plot, but it appears that the entire street frontage on the east side of the High Street, opposite the Market Place was developed. There are no lanes or alleys marked in this area.

4.2.3 1880, Ordnance Survey Map - Structures A to O appear on this map. However, most of these are located in the western half of the plot. Only boundaries K to O and buildings C, D and I fall within the proposed development area. The proposed house footprint runs across boundaries L to N.

4.2.4 1885, Ordnance Survey Map - There is not enough detail on this map to establish the nature of the development within the plot, but it appears to be shown in the same condition as in 1880.

4.2.5 1899, Ordnance Survey Map - By 1899, wall P had been constructed in the western half of the plot, creating an enclosed yard. No new structures had been built within the proposed development area, but building I had been demolished, along with boundary O and the east-west track leading into the site from Greyhound Lane, which comprised boundary N and the western section of L.

4.2.6 1900, Ordnance Survey Map - There is not enough detail on this map to establish the nature of the development within the plot, but it appears to be shown in the same condition as in 1899.

4.2.7 1925, Ordnance Survey Map - The site is shown in the same condition as in 1899.

4.2.8 1926, Ordnance Survey Map - There is not enough detail on this map to establish the nature of the development within the plot, but it appears to be shown in the same condition as in 1899.

4.2.9 1952, Ordnance Survey Map - This map does not show the small structures D, E and H. This may be due to the fact that it is drawn at a smaller scale than the earlier maps (1:10,000 as opposed to 1:2,500). No other differences to the 1899 map was observed.

4.2.10 1958, Ordnance Survey Map - There is not enough detail on this map to establish the nature of the development within the plot, but it appears to be shown in the same condition as in 1852.

4.2.11 1978, Ordnance Survey Map - Garages Q and R first appear on this map, as do boundaries T and S. Building R stands on the proposed house footprint. By this stage, building C has vanished and there is no trace of the small structures D, E and H, which appeared to have been removed by 1952. The eastern section of boundary L has also been removed.

4.2.12 1985, Ordnance Survey Map - There is not enough detail on this map to establish the nature of the development within the plot, but it appears to be shown in the same condition as in 1978.

5. RESULTS The evaluation trenches are discussed in numerical order. Please refer to:

Appendix A - Table of contexts Appendix B - Table of archaeological finds Appendix C - Specialist reports Appendix D - Map extracts Appendix E - Figures 3(b) and 5 - 7

5.1 Trench 1 (Figures 5 - 7)

This evaluation trench contained a variety of archaeological remains attributed to the late post-medieval period; seven postholes, one terrace feature, two wall foundations and several levelling layers. These have been divided into five phases.

Phase 1 This phase comprised two groups of postholes forming a post-built structure and a fenceline:

Post built structure 014, 016, 024, 026 This group of large postholes, included one which had been recut, possibly forming the south east corner of a post built structure. All the postholes were sub-circular with near vertical sides. The fills were sandy silts with CBM and charcoal inclusions.

Posthole 014 This posthole lay at the western end of the trench and adjacent to the south baulk where it was truncated on its south side by terrace feature 012.

Postholes 016, 026 Although two cut numbers were allocated, it was acknowledged that 016 and 026 might be parts of a single feature since no sign of a cut was visible in the backfill. However, the unevenness of the profile suggested that these were two different features. Posthole 016 lay partly under the south baulk and was significantly deeper than 026. It is uncertain which of the features was cut first, but it seemed that 016 was most likely a recut of 026. The position of 016/026 marks the south east corner of the postulated timber building: Posthole 014 lay 3m to the west and Posthole 024 lay 1.4m to the north.

Posthole 024 This posthole lies to the north of 016 and partly under the north baulk. It is deeper than the other postholes in this phase with a more friable fill.

Fenceline 018, 020, 022 This group of three small postholes at c.1.1m intervals formed a straight line. They were all sub-circular with a moderately steep, concave profile. 018 lay c.2.2m to the east of 026 with the line continuing eastwards to 022. The fills were sandy silts with CBM and charcoal inclusions. They ran ENE-WSW towards the corner of the postulated building of Phase 1. The postholes were broadly aligned with the southern side of the postulated building, formed by postholes 014 and 026.

Phase 2 012 This phase consisted of a vertical sided E-W cut, 0.7 metres high, not fully exposed to depth, forming a terrace down to the south. This feature was excavated to c.1.75 below the existing ground surface in Trench 2. The sides, composed of natural sand (011), could not be self supporting and represented the removal of a retaining boundary wall.

Phase 3 006, 007, 008, 009, 010 This phase comprised a remnant wall foundation (006), horizontal layers 007- 009, and the backfill (010) of the terrace cut. Layer 009 was a remnant of soil overlain by 008, whilst layers 007 and 008 were mixed rubble landscaping. The remnant 006, ran E-W and has been interpreted as the footing of a limestone boundary wall.

Phase 4 003, 004, 005 This phase consisted of a remnant E-W brick boundary wall foundation, 004, with horizontal mixed rubble landscaping layers 003 and 005

Phase 5 001, 002 This phase consisted of modern surface 001 overlying make-up 002.

Natural Deposits Layer 011 was a level deposit of compact-friable mid orange brown sand exposed throughout Trench 1 at c.0.9m below the existing ground surface. This natural, sand substrate is presumed to be Mesozoic or Tertiary.

5.2 Trench 2 (Figure 3)

This evaluation trench was excavated to establish the depth and extent of the terrace cut (012) observed in Trench 1. Trench 2 contained the same broad stratigraphic sequence as Trench 1 (Phases 2-5) and therefore additional context numbers were not assigned, with the exception of layer 025, which equated with layer 010.

5.3 Artefacts (see Appendix C)

Three sherds of late 19th century pottery and nine fragments of ceramic building material were recovered. One of the three fragments of bone recovered had evidence of saw cuts but is believed to be relatively modern.

6. DISCUSSION

Phase 1 The size and arrangement of postholes 014, 016, 024, 026 of Phase 1 suggest that they are load-bearing, and represent the south east corner of a substantial building founded on timber-posts, with the shallower postholes of Phase 1 (018, 020, 022) representing an adjoining fence-line, forming an ENE-WSW aligned boundary. The recut of 026 by 016 suggests a reinforcement or replacement of this post- position or a re-alignment of property boundaries to that used in later phases. Finds from this phase were exclusively ceramic building materials for which precise dating is problematic. The most significant find, a fragment of brick from posthole 014, suggests a nineteenth century date for the postulated post-built structure, although conceivably it could be intrusive as a result of construction or demolition of the terrace (012). A quantity of roof tiles ranging in date from medieval/early post- medieval to nineteenth century probably reflect a trade in recycled roof tiles.

The postulated fenceline and post-built structure are not necessarily contemporary. The stratigraphic evidence shows that the postulated post-built structure predates the terrace (012), while the postulated fenceline predates the landscaping layer 008. Therefore it is conceivable that the postulated fenceline was in existence during the life of the terrace, although their diverging alignments disputes this interpretation.

Phase 2 Later landscaping, beginning with the south facing terrace 012 (Phase 2), has swept away any above-ground structural evidence of the postulated building. The vertical side of the terrace is cut through friable sand (011), suggesting that a retaining wall would have been necessary. This postulated wall was demolished at the time of subsequent backfilling (010) and landscaping.

Cut 012 has been interpreted as a terrace, but there are other plausible interpreta- tions: It is possible that it was one side of a large rectangular feature, such as a cellar. No other sides of the feature were found, but this may have beeen due to the limited nature of the evaluation. If the cut is that of a cellar it is unlikely to belong to a house along the former back-lane running from the High Street (see 4.2.1), as the lane and associated houses were destroyed in 1700 (see 3.8.6), several centuries prior to the cut being backfilled (see 5.3).

The sand into which 012 is cut may have been deliberately quarried, but it is unlikely that this was the primary purpose of the exercise.

The map regression exercise showed that by 1880 there was a track (N) running east across the site from the end of Greyhound Lane and that this had been removed by 1899. The terrace cut (012) lay on the same alignment to this and appears to have been backfilled in the late 19th or early 20th century. Inconsistencies in the mapping mean that it is not certain whether the northern boundary of the track shown on the 1st edition Ordnance Survey map is in fact the terrace 012. Nevertheless, the similarity of alignment and the consistent dating suggest that the terrace is associated with the boundary shown on the 1880 map.

Phases 3 and 4 The terrace (012) truncated posthole 014 of the postulated post built structure (Phase 1), and its alignment was maintained in the wall foundations of Phases 3 and 4. Similar terracing, with retaining walls, can be seen in present-day gardens to the south and east of trench 1.

Medieval activity Although no securely dated medieval material was discovered, some of the tile and brick was potentially of medieval origin and the density of the two bones from 015 suggested they were of some antiquity. The foot-bone in particular indicated a small cow of a size typical of medieval animals. A certain amount of residual medieval material might be expected on the site, owing to its proximity of the site to the medieval core of Winslow.

7. IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.1 Introduction

The desk based assessment showed that there had been several phases of construction, demolition and landscaping during the development of the site in the post- medieval period. This sequence of events has been corroborated by the results of the evaluation.

7.2 Significance

The absence of surviving medieval remains limits the potential significance of the site, which is thought to be of local interest.

7.3 Impact of development

The development consists of three main phases of activity: Demolition, Ground- works and Construction:

Demolition

the two existing buildings (Q and R) and internal floor slabs

Impact of Demolition The demolition of the two modern buildings will have no impact on significant buried archaeological remains.

Groundworks

removal of external ground surfaces ground reduction and landscaping around perimeter of site services - water supply, sewerage, drainage, electricity, etc.

Impact of Groundworks The evaluation has shown that the proposed reduced levels over the site will not af- fect significant buried archaeological remains, although it is conceivable that proposed services could have an impact.

Construction

house hard standing access road

Impact of Construction The construction of hard standing and an access road will have no impact on any significant buried archaeological remains, but the foundations of the proposed building may have a limited impact. 8. CONCLUSIONS

The evaluation has located buried remains of two post-built structures of probable early modern date. Although some of the artefacts may be medieval in origin, they appear to be residual. The absence of medieval features may be due to post- medieval and/or early modern redevelopment on the site. Alternatively, it could indicate that the proposed development area lies just outside the medieval core of Winslow. The Salden Map of 1599 suggests that this part of the High Street was not developed until the post-medieval period, although conceivably, the village could have contracted immediately prior to this date.

A number of conclusions can be drawn from the evaluation:

Archaeological remains of probable early modern date survive at an approximate depth of 1m below the surface of the proposed development area. Foundations for the new buildings and service trenches will have an undetermined impact upon these remains. The proposed development (demolition, groundworks and construction) is unlikely to impact upon significant archaeological remains in areas outside the proposed house footprint.

9. ARCHIVE

The project archive has been prepared in accordance with the guidelines outlined in Management of Archaeological Projects, Appendix 3, English Heritage, 1991. It is currently held at the Buckinghamshire office of Network Archaeology Ltd. It will be deposited at the Buckinghamshire County Museum. 10. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Network Archaeology Ltd. would like to thank:

Terry Goode Summerleigh property Ltd. Julia Wise Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service Sandy Kidd Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service for provision of the brief, SMR data, and monitoring Alan Vince Artefact specialist Richard Moore Bone specialist for undertaking assessment of the finds Frank Martin Network Archaeology Ltd. for undertaking fieldwork

11. REFERENCES

Maps

The Salden Map: Estate of John Fortescue, 1599 (original lost, copy made by Milton Keynes Archaeological Unit)

Wendover and Buckingham Turnpike Road: Proposed Alterations in the Parishes of Winslow and Swanbourn, 1835 (BRO:T/3/76/2)

Ordnance Survey, 1880, Buckinghamshire XIX.10, 25 inches to 1 mile (1st edition)

Ordnance Survey, 1885, Buckinghamshire XIX.SW, 6 inches to 1 mile (1st edition)

Ordnance Survey, 1899, Buckinghamshire XIX.10, 25 inches to 1 mile (2nd edition)

Ordnance Survey, 1900, Buckinghamshire 19SW, 1:10,560 (2nd edition)

Ordnance Survey, 1925, Buckinghamshire XIX.10, 25 inches to 1 mile

Ordnance Survey, 1926, Buckinghamshire XIX.SW, 6 inches to 1 mile

Ordnance Survey, 1952, SP 72NE, 1:10,000

Ordnance Survey, 1978, SP 72NE, 1:2,500

Ordnance Survey, 1985, SP 72NE 1:10,000

British Geological Survey 1974, Solid and Drift Edition, Sheet 255, 1:50 000

British Geological Survey 1979, Geological Survey Ten Mile Map, South Sheet, 1:625 000

Soil Survey of England and Wales 1980, Soils of England and Wales, Sheet 4 - Eastern England, 1:250 000

British Geological Survey (BGS), 1979. Geological Survey, Ten Mile Map; South Sheet. Third Edition (Solid). Scale 1:625,000

Soil Survey of England and Wales (SSEW), 1983. Soils of England and Wales; Sheet 4, Eastern England. Scale 1:250,000

Aerial Photographs

BKS Air Survey Ltd., 925669 Fairey Air Surveys Ltd., N.Bucks: June 1963, 6313 - 3/105-106, 116, 118 Fairey Air Surveys Ltd., N.Bucks: August 1964, 646 - ???

Primary Documentary Sources

Piggot & Co’s Directory of Buckinghamshire 1823-24

Secondary documentary sources

Clear, A. 1894 King’s Village in Demesne or 1,000 Years of Winslow Life

Foley, T. and Hunt, J. 1997, The Archive Photographs Series: Winslow, Chalford

Lipscomb, G. 1847, The History and Antiquities of the County of Buckingham, Volume 2 Robins, J. & W., London

MacGregor A, 1985, Bone, Antler, Ivory & Horn, Croom Helm, London.

Mills, A.D. 1996 A Dictionary of English Place-Names, OUP

Page, William (ed.) 1969, The Victoria County History of The Counties of England. A History of Buckinghamshire (Volumes 1-4) University of London Institute of Historical Research (p347-353)

Reed, 1979, The Making of the English Landscape: The Buckinghamshire Landscape, Hodder and Stoughton

Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England) 1912, An Inventory of the Historical Monuments in Buckinghamshire Volume 1 His Majesty’s Stationary Service (p173)

Saving, N.A., 1973 Glimpses of Past Days being a Historical Survey on the town ans parish of Winslow cum Shipton, Hillier & Sons, Buckingham

Schmid E, 1972 Atlas of Animal Bones, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Sheahan, J.J. 1971, History and Topography of Buckinghamshire Redwood Press, London

12. STATEMENT OF INDEMNITY

Every effort has been taken in the preparation and submission of this report in order to provide as complete an assessment as possible within the terms of the brief, and all statements and opinions are offered in good faith. Network Archaeology Ltd cannot accept responsibility for errors of fact or opinion resulting from data supplied by any third party, or for any loss or other consequences arising from de- cisions or actions made upon the basis of facts or opinions expressed in this report and any supplementary papers, howsoever such facts and opinions may have been derived, or as a result of unknown and undiscovered sites of artefacts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means - electronic, mechanical, photocopy- ing, recording or otherwise - unless the permission of the publisher has been given before- hand.