DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 8.0 Cultural Heritage

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 8.0 Cultural Heritage CHAPTER 8.0 CULTURAL HERITAGE 8.0 CULTURAL HERITAGE ................................................................................. 8-1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 8-1 Legislation, Policy and Guidance .................................................................... 8-2 Consultation .................................................................................................. 8-11 Parameters Used for Assessment ................................................................. 8-18 Assessment Methodology ............................................................................. 8-19 Baseline ........................................................................................................ 8-31 Incorporated Mitigation ................................................................................. 8-49 Additional Mitigation ...................................................................................... 8-68 Residual Effects ............................................................................................ 8-70 Summary ...................................................................................................... 8-70 FIGURES (bound separately in Volume 2) Figure 8.1 ................................ Non-Designated Heritage Assets within 1km of the Site Figure 8.2 ................................ Designated Heritage Assets within 2km of the Site and .............................................................................. Ditton Conservation Area Figure 8.3 .................. Designated Heritage Assets within Aylesford Conservation Area Figure 8.4 .................................... Selected Heritage Assets Beyond 2km from the Site Figure 8.5 .................................................... Extract from Ordnance Survey map, 1897 Figure 8.6 ............................................................ Historic Landscape Character Types APPENDICES (bound separately in Volume 3) Appendix 8-1 ............................................................................. Cultural Heritage Plates Appendix 8-2 ............................................................................................ Site Gazetteer Appendix 8-3 .............. Summary of Heritage Assets Excluded from Further Assessment Please note that a full list of acronyms is provided in the context to this PEIR and should be referred to when reading this Chapter. 2565-01 / Proposed Extension to the Allington IWMF PEIR Main Report July 2020 8-i 8.0 CULTURAL HERITAGE Introduction 8.1.1 This Chapter provides an assessment of the likely significant effects of the construction, decommissioning and operational phases of the Proposed Extension upon archaeological and Cultural Heritage Assets (Assets). This includes the effects upon the setting of Assets which may result from the Proposed Extension. 8.1.2 Each Asset referred to within this Chapter is listed in Appendix 8-2 (Gazetteer). The location of the Assets contained within the Appendix 8-2 are also illustrated on Figures 8.1 to 8.4. Competence 8.1.3 AOC Archaeology Group is a Registered Organisation of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), which ensures that there is regular monitoring and approval by external peers of internal systems, standards and skills development. 8.1.4 AOC Archaeology Group conforms to the standards of professional conduct outlined in the CIfA’s Code of Conduct1, Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk Based Assessment2 and Standard and Guidance for Commissioning Work or Providing Consultancy Advice on the Historic Environment3 8.1.5 In addition, AOC is ISO 9001:2015 accredited, in recognition of the Company’s Quality Management System. 1 CIfA (2014). Chartered Institute for Archaeologists' (CIfA) Code of Conduct (available at: https://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/CodesofConduct.pdf ) 2 CIfA (2017). Standard and guidance for historic environment desk-based assessment The Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (available at: http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/CIfAS%26GDBA_3.pdf ) 3 CIfA 2014b Standard and guidance for Commissioning Work or Providing Consultancy Advice on the Historic Environment. The Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (available at: http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/CIfAS&GCommissioning_1.pdf ) 2565-01 / Proposed Extension to the Allington IWMF PEIR Main Report July 2020 8-1 Legislation, Policy and Guidance 8.2.1 Where any development may have a direct or indirect effect on designated Assets, there is a legislative framework to ensure the proposals are considered with due regard for their impact on the historic environment. This Section outlines the legislative framework and national, local and regional planning policy and guidance. Legislation 8.2.2 Statutory protection for archaeology is outlined in the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 as amended by the National Heritage Act 1983. A schedule of nationally important archaeological sites subject to legal protection is maintained by Historic England (HE), which is a statutory consultee in the planning process. 8.2.3 Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas receive protection under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. National Policy National Policy Statements 8.2.4 As outlined in Chapter 3, the relevant National Policy Statements (NPSs) provide the primary basis for decisions by the Secretary of State (SoS) on Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects. 8.2.5 Section 5.8 of NPS EN-1, ‘Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy’ sets out the policy position for the assessment of impacts on the heritage environment in relation to nationally significant infrastructure projects. It sets out the following requirements of relevance to the assessment of the Proposed Extension: • Paragraph 5.8.2 of the NPS states that “The historic environment includes all aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged, landscaped and 2565-01 / Proposed Extension to the Allington IWMF PEIR Main Report July 2020 8-2 planted or managed flora. Those elements of the historic environment that hold value to this and future generations because of their historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic interest are called “heritage assets”. A heritage asset may be any building, monument, site, place, area or landscape, or any combination of these. The sum of the heritage interests that a heritage asset holds is referred to as its significance”. • The NPS EN-1 states that “as part of the ES, the applicant should provide a description of the significance of the heritage assets affected by the proposed development and the contribution of their setting to that significance. The level of detail should be proportionate to the importance of the heritage assets and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on the significance of the heritage asset.” • Para. 5.8.4 of the NPS states that Assets which are demonstrably of equivalent significance should be considered subject to the same policy considerations. As such NPS recognises that “There are heritage assets with archaeological interest that are not currently designated as scheduled monuments, but which are demonstrably of equivalent significance”. • Para. 5.8.6 of the NPS states that “Potential impacts on other non- designated heritage of lesser value than designated heritage should also be considered by the Secretary of State, on the basis of “clear evidence that the assets have a heritage significance that merits consideration in its decisions”. • Para. 5.8.14 states “There should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets and the more significant the designated heritage asset, the greater the presumption in favour of its conservation should be. Once lost heritage assets cannot be replaced and their loss has a cultural, environmental, economic and social impact. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. Loss affecting any designated heritage asset should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a grade II listed building park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to or loss of designated assets of the highest significance, including Scheduled Monuments; registered battlefields; grade I and II* listed buildings; grade I and II* registered parks and gardens; and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional.” 2565-01 / Proposed Extension to the Allington IWMF PEIR Main Report July 2020 8-3 8.2.6 NPS EN-3, ‘Overarching National Policy Statement for Renewable Energy Infrastructure’, outlines the impact assessment principles relevant to biomass/waste combustion plant applications. In relation to significant adverse effects to nationally recognised designations, consent for renewable energy projects should only be granted ‘‘Where it can be demonstrated that the objectives of designation of the area will not be compromised by the development, and any significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the area has been designated are clearly outweighed by the environmental, social and economic benefits” (para. 2.5.33). 8.2.7 EN-3 continues at paragraph 2.5.34 to states that the decision taker should
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Medway Megaliths and Neolithic Kent
    http://kentarchaeology.org.uk/research/archaeologia-cantiana/ Kent Archaeological Society is a registered charity number 223382 © 2017 Kent Archaeological Society THE MEDWAY MEGALITHS AND NEOLITHIC KENT* ROBIN HOLGATE, B.Sc. INTRODUCTION The Medway megaliths constitute a geographically well-defined group of this Neolithic site-type1 and are the only megalithic group in eastern England. Previous accounts of these monuments2 have largely been devoted to their morphology and origins; a study in- corporating current trends in British megalithic studies is therefore long overdue. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN BRITISH MEGALITHIC STUDIES Until the late 1960s, megalithic chambered barrows and cairns were considered to have functioned purely as tombs: they were the burial vaults and funerary monuments for people living in the fourth and third millennia B.C. The first academic studies of these monuments therefore concentrated on the typological analysis of their plans. This method of analysis, though, has often produced incorrect in- terpretations: without excavation it is often impossible to reconstruct the sequence of development and original appearance for a large number of megaliths. In addition, plan-typology disregards other aspects related to them, for example constructional * I am indebted to Peter Drewett for reading and commenting on a first draft of this article; naturally I take responsibility for all the views expressed. 1 G.E. Daniel, The Prehistoric Chamber Tombs of England and Wales, Cambridge, 1950, 12. 2 Daniel, op. cit; J.H. Evans, 'Kentish Megalith Types', Arch. Cant, Ixiii (1950), 63-81; R.F. Jessup, South-East England, London, 1970. 221 THE MEDWAY MEGALITHS GRAVESEND. ROCHESTER CHATHAM r>v.-5rt AYLESFORD MAIDSTONE Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origins of Avebury 2 1,* 2 2 Q13 Q2mark Gillings , Joshua Pollard & Kris Strutt 4 5 6 the Avebury Henge Is One of the Famous Mega
    1 The origins of Avebury 2 1,* 2 2 Q13 Q2Mark Gillings , Joshua Pollard & Kris Strutt 4 5 6 The Avebury henge is one of the famous mega- 7 lithic monuments of the European Neolithic, Research 8 yet much remains unknown about the detail 9 and chronology of its construction. Here, the 10 results of a new geophysical survey and 11 re-examination of earlier excavation records 12 illuminate the earliest beginnings of the 13 monument. The authors suggest that Ave- ’ 14 bury s Southern Inner Circle was constructed 15 to memorialise and monumentalise the site ‘ ’ 16 of a much earlier foundational house. The fi 17 signi cance here resides in the way that traces 18 of dwelling may take on special social and his- 19 torical value, leading to their marking and 20 commemoration through major acts of monu- 21 ment building. 22 23 Keywords: Britain, Avebury, Neolithic, megalithic, memory 24 25 26 Introduction 27 28 Alongside Stonehenge, the passage graves of the Boyne Valley and the Carnac alignments, the 29 Avebury henge is one of the pre-eminent megalithic monuments of the European Neolithic. ’ 30 Its 420m-diameter earthwork encloses the world s largest stone circle. This in turn encloses — — 31 two smaller yet still vast megalithic circles each approximately 100m in diameter and 32 complex internal stone settings (Figure 1). Avenues of paired standing stones lead from 33 two of its four entrances, together extending for approximately 3.5km and linking with 34 other monumental constructions. Avebury sits within the centre of a landscape rich in 35 later Neolithic monuments, including Silbury Hill and the West Kennet palisade enclosures 36 (Smith 1965; Pollard & Reynolds 2002; Gillings & Pollard 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • The Medway Valley Prehistoric Landscapes Project
    AST NUMBER 72 November 2012 THE NEWSLETTER OF THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY Registered Office University College London, Institute of Archaeology, 31–34 Gordon Square, London WC1H 0PY http://www.prehistoricsociety.org/ PTHE MEDWAY VALLEY PREHISTORIC LANDSCAPES PROJECT The Early Neolithic megalithic monuments of the Medway valley in Kent have a long history of speculative antiquarian and archaeological enquiry. Their widely-assumed importance for understanding the earliest agricultural societies in Britain, despite how little is really known about them, probably stems from the fact that they represent the south-easternmost group of megalithic sites in the British Isles and have figured - usually in passing - in most accounts of Neolithic monumentality since Stukeley drew Kit’s Coty House in 1722. Remarkably, this distinctive group of monuments and other major sites (such as Burham causewayed enclosure) have not previously been subject to a Kit’s Coty House: integrated laser scan and ground-penetrating landscape-scale programme of investigation, while the radar survey of the east end of the monument only significant excavation of a megalithic site in the region took place over 50 years ago (by Alexander at the The Medway Valley Project aims to establish a new Chestnuts in 1957). The relative neglect of the area, and interpretative framework for the Neolithic archaeology its research potential, have been thrown into sharper of the Medway valley, focusing on the architectural relief recently by the discovery of two Early Neolithic forms, chronologies and use-histories of monuments, long halls nearby at White Horse Stone/Pilgrim’s Way and changes in environment and inhabitation during the on the High Speed 1 route, and by the radiocarbon period c.
    [Show full text]
  • Neolithic Report
    RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORT SERIES no. 29-2011 ISSN 1749-8775 REVIEW OF ANIMAL REMAINS FROM THE NEOLITHIC AND EARLY BRONZE AGE OF SOUTHERN BRITAIN (4000 BC – 1500 BC) ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES REPORT Dale Serjeantson ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Department Report Series 29-2011 REVIEW OF ANIMAL REMAINS FROM THE NEOLITHIC AND EARLY BRONZE AGE OF SOUTHERN BRITAIN (4000 BC – 1500 BC) Dale Serjeantson © English Heritage ISSN 1749-8775 The Research Department Report Series, incorporates reports from all the specialist teams within the English Heritage Research Department: Archaeological Science; Archaeological Archives; Historic Interiors Research and Conservation; Archaeological Projects; Aerial Survey and Investigation; Archaeological Survey and Investigation; Architectural Investigation; Imaging, Graphics and Survey; and the Survey of London. It replaces the former Centre for Archaeology Reports Series, the Archaeological Investigation Report Series, and the Architectural Investigation Report Series. Many of these are interim reports which make available the results of specialist investigations in advance of full publication. They are not usually subject to external refereeing, and their conclusions may sometimes have to be modified in the light of information not available at the time of the investigation. Where no final project report is available, readers are advised to consult the author before citing these reports in any publication. Opinions expressed in Research Department Reports are those of the author(s) and are not necessarily those of English Heritage. Requests for further hard copies, after the initial print run, can be made by emailing: [email protected]. or by writing to English Heritage, Fort Cumberland, Fort Cumberland Road, Eastney, Portsmouth PO4 9LD Please note that a charge will be made to cover printing and postage.
    [Show full text]
  • Maidstone Area Archaeological Group, Should Be Sent to Jess Obee (Address at End) Or Payments Made at One of the Meetings
    Maidstone Area Archaeological Group Newsletter, March 2000 Dear Fellow Members As there is a host of announcements, I will hold over the Editorial until the next Newsletter, due in May (sighs of relief all round). David Carder Subscriptions and Membership Cards Subscriptions for the year beginning 1st April 2000 are now due. Please use the renewal form enclosed with this Newsletter, and complete as much as of it as possible - that way we can establish what members' interests really are. Return the form with your cheque by post to Jess Obee (address at end), or hand it with cheque or cash to any Committee Member who will give you a receipt. Renewing members will receive a handy Membership Card with the May Newsletter, giving details of indoor meetings, subscription rates, and contacts. In order to comply with the data protection legislation, we have included on the form a consent that your details may be held on a computer database. This data is held purely for membership administration (e.g. printing of address labels and registration of subscription payments). It will not be used for other purposes, or released to outside parties without your express consent. If you have any queries or concerns over this, please write to the Chairman. Notice of Annual General Meeting - Friday 28th April 2000 This year's AGM will be held at 7.30 pm on Friday 28th April 2000 (not 21st as previously published) at the School Hall, The Street, Detling. The Agenda is as follows : 1. Chairman's welcome 2. Apologies for absence 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Aylesford to Maidstone Walk
    Saturday Walkers Club www.walkingclub.org.uk Aylesford to Maidstone walk Ancient sites and a fine viewpoint on Kent's North Downs Length Main Walk: 19 km (11.8 miles). Four hours 45 minutes walking time. For the whole excursion including trains, sights and meals, allow at least 9½ hours. Circular Walk, returning to Aylesford: 17½ km (10.9 miles). Four hours 20 minutes walking time. OS Map Explorer 148. Aylesford, map reference TQ720587, is in Kent, 5 km NW of Maidstone. Toughness 5 out of 10. Features Although only a small village on the banks of the River Medway, Aylesford has a long history. In this area there are neolithic burial sites, memorials to battles from the Roman and Anglo-Saxon eras, a medieval bridge and many ancient buildings. There are also reminders of brick, tile and cement manufacturing, paper mills and quarrying, but many of these old industrial sites are being redeveloped for housing and the only significant blot on the landscape is a large paper recycling plant across the river in Snodland. Aylesford station is 1 km from the village centre and the walk starts with a fine view across the river to The Friars, a Carmelite priory which was dissolved by HenryⅧ and used as a private residence until the main house burnt down in the 20thC. The site was then bought back by the Carmelites and restored to its former use; it is open to the public daily (free entry) except on Christmas week. The route crosses the river on a new road bridge for a picture-postcard view of the village's medieval bridge and other historic buildings.
    [Show full text]
  • Events, Processes and Changing Worldviews from the Thirty-Eighth to the Thirty-Fourth Centuries Cal
    Article Building for the Dead: Events, Processes and Changing Worldviews from the Thirty-eighth to the Thirty- fourth Centuries cal. BC in Southern Britain Wysocki, Michael Peter, Barclay, A, Bayliss, A, Whittle, A and Sculting, R Available at http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/10756/ Wysocki, Michael Peter, Barclay, A, Bayliss, A, Whittle, A and Sculting, R (2007) Building for the Dead: Events, Processes and Changing Worldviews from the Thirty-eighth to the Thirty-fourth Centuries cal. BC in Southern Britain. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 17 (S1). pp. 123-147. It is advisable to refer to the publisher’s version if you intend to cite from the work. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0959774307000200 For more information about UCLan’s research in this area go to http://www.uclan.ac.uk/researchgroups/ and search for <name of research Group>. For information about Research generally at UCLan please go to http://www.uclan.ac.uk/research/ All outputs in CLoK are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law, including Copyright law. Copyright, IPR and Moral Rights for the works on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Terms and conditions for use of this material are defined in the http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/policies/ CLoK Central Lancashire online Knowledge www.clok.uclan.ac.uk Building for the Dead Building for the Dead: Events, Processes and Changing Worldviews from the Thirty-eighth to the Thirty-fourth Centuries cal. bc in Southern Britain Alasdair Whittle, Alistair Barclay, Alex Bayliss, Lesley McFadyen, Rick Schulting & Michael Wysocki Our final paper in this series reasserts the importance of sequence.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society Dates, Diet, and Dismemberment: Evidence from the Coldrum Megalithic Monume
    Article Dates, Diet, and Dismemberment: Evidence from the Coldrum Megalithic Monument, Kent Wysocki, Michael Peter, Griffiths, Seren, Hedges, Robert, Bayliss, Alex, Higham, Tom, Fernandez-Jalvo, Yolanda and Whittle, Alasdair Available at http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/10742/ Wysocki, Michael Peter, Griffiths, Seren, Hedges, Robert, Bayliss, Alex, Higham, Tom, Fernandez-Jalvo, Yolanda and Whittle, Alasdair (2013) Dates, Diet, and Dismemberment: Evidence from the Coldrum Megalithic Monument, Kent. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 79 . pp. 61-90. ISSN 0079-497X It is advisable to refer to the publisher’s version if you intend to cite from the work. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ppr.2013.10 For more information about UCLan’s research in this area go to http://www.uclan.ac.uk/researchgroups/ and search for <name of research Group>. For information about Research generally at UCLan please go to http://www.uclan.ac.uk/research/ All outputs in CLoK are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law, including Copyright law. Copyright, IPR and Moral Rights for the works on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Terms and conditions for use of this material are defined in the policies page. CLoK Central Lancashire online Knowledge www.clok.uclan.ac.uk Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society http://journals.cambridge.org/PPR Additional services for Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here Dates, Diet, and
    [Show full text]
  • SERF Papers Chris Hayden
    South East Research Framework resource assessment seminar White Horse Stone and the earliest Neolithic in the South East Chris Hayden Oxford Archaeology Introduction The starting point of this article is a pair of early Neolithic rectangular, post-built structures or longhouses found not far from Maidstone, in a dry valley on the southern edge of the North Downs in Kent. The structures were found on adjacent sites called White Horse Stone (in reference to the large sarsen stones found nearby, sometimes thought to have been part of a megalithic monument) and Pilgrim’s Way (after the trackway which separates the sites). Although numerous naturally-occurring sarsen stones occur in and around the site, and there is nothing to indicate that the Upper and Lower White Horse Stones were anything other than natural, the two structures do lie close to the eastern group of the Medway Megaliths: Little Kit’s Coty is just 600 m to the west; Kit’s Coty House 650 m to the north-west; and the possible tomb at Warrens Farm only 100 m to the north-east. The two post-built structures were excavated by Oxford Archaeology as part of the much larger archaeological project carried out in advance of the construction of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link. Figure 1: Location of the White Horse Stone and Pilgrim’s Way sites Chronologically, my discussion is limited to the period in which these structures were in use: the earliest Neolithic, the first two or three centuries of the fourth millennium BC, predating the causewayed enclosures which are discussed by Healy, in an accompanying article.
    [Show full text]
  • Neolithic of Europe.Indb
    THE NEOLITHIC OF EUROPE PAPERS IN HONOUR OF ALASDAIR WHITTLE THE NEOLITHIC OF EUROPE PAPERS IN HONOUR OF ALASDAIR WHITTLE Edited by PENNY BICKLE, VICKI CUMMINGS, DANIELA HOFMANN AND JOSHUA POLLARD Oxford & Philadelphia Published in the United Kingdom in 2017 by OXBOW BOOKS The Old Music Hall, 106–108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JE and in the United States by OXBOW BOOKS 1950 Lawrence Road, Havertown, PA 19083 © Oxbow Books and the individual authors 2017 Hardcover Edition: ISBN 978-1-78570-654-7 Digital Edition: ISBN 978-1-78570-655-4 (epub) A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library and the Library of Congress All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the publisher in writing. Printed in Malta by Gutenberg Press Ltd Typeset in India by Lapiz Digital Services, Chennai For a complete list of Oxbow titles, please contact: UNITED KINGDOM Oxbow Books Telephone (01865) 241249, Fax (01865) 794449 Email: [email protected] www.oxbowbooks.com UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Oxbow Books Telephone (800) 791-9354, Fax (610) 853-9146 Email: [email protected] www.casemateacademic.com/oxbow Oxbow Books is part of the Casemate Group Front cover: Alleskoven dolmen, Denmark (Vicki Cummings). Back cover: La Table des Marchands, France (Vicki Cummings); a reconstructed LBK longhouse in the Paris basin (Penny Bickle); Carrowmore, Ireland (Vicki Cummings); an excavation in progress at the Herpaly tell, Hungary (Pál Raczky).
    [Show full text]
  • Great Tottington's Sarsen Stones
    PAPER No. 0001-02 GREAT TOTTINGTON’S SARSEN STONES PAUL ASHBEE This paper has been downloaded from www.kentarchaeology.ac. The author has placed the paper on the site for download for personal or academic use. Any other use must be cleared with the author of the paper who retains the copyright. Please email [email protected] for details regarding copyright clearance. The Kent Archaeological Society (Registered Charity 223382) welcomes the submission of papers. The necessary form can be downloaded from the website at www.kentarchaeology.ac Whereas the sarsen stone-built long barrow remains on Blue Bell Hill have been noticed and described since the sixteenth century (Ashbee 1993), no more than incidental mention has been made of the many stones, grouped and isolated, which were at one time to be seen on the lower land skirting Great Tottington. Spreads of substantial stones, brought down from the heights by periglacial solifluxion, were to be found in Westfield Wood and behind the Lower Bell Inn, while, at one time, there were scattered boulders from Burham to Boxley and Bearsted. At Tottington, in the nineteenth century, an array of stones, large and small, were seen to lie around the farmyard; while others, some substantial, rested on the banks and in the spring-head which fed the pools and moat. Similarly, such sarsen stones were also a feature of the Cossington spring-head, almost a mile to the east. From the eighteenth century onwards, antiquarians and various archaeologists have speculated, regarding these as erstwhile circles and avenues. Sadly, Great Tottington’s sarsen stones, like those higher upon Blue Bell Hill, have been neither planned nor examined in detail.
    [Show full text]
  • Alistair Barclay Wessex Archaeology
    South East Research Framework resource assessment seminar Ceramics of the south-east: new directions Alistair Barclay Wessex Archaeology Introduction The South East region contains a complete ceramic sequence, although overall the distribution of various ceramic styles is varied, with marked concentrations along the coastal regions of Sussex and Kent, and along the corridor of the Thames (Surrey). Since the 1990s the impact of developer funded archaeology has added significantly to the number of known assemblages, although the distribution of the new material tends to reflect those areas that have seen most development. In this respect it is not surprising that considerable new assemblages have been found in parts of Kent where there have been major infrastructure projects. The Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), for example, which passes through the Medway Valley (an area with major groups of monuments) and then crosses the North Downs dip slope to the coast (an area devoid of Neolithic monuments) (see Ashbee 2004, 11), has produced 11 assemblages of earlier prehistoric pottery. Notable sites include Sandway Road, Cobham, Tutt Hill, Whitehill Road, Beechbrook Wood and Saltwood Tunnel (Barclay and Edwards 2007), and the dry valley at White Horse Stone/Pilgrim’s Way (see Hayden this web site). Important too is the discovery of sites under colluvium, perhaps the most significant of which are White Horse Stone with its early Neolithic buildings, late Neolithic stake and post circles and multiple pit deposits, and Holywell Coombe with its Beaker settlement. Developer-funded projects have also added a number of new causewayed enclosures to areas of Kent, notably on the Isle of Sheppey (Kingsborough Farm) and at Ramsgate (Healy, this web site; Lievers, this web site).
    [Show full text]