Eversley Quarry Finchampstead, Wokingham Berkshire
Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design
for The Guildhouse Consultancy on behalf of Cemex UK Operations Ltd
CA Project: 9095 CA Report: 12300
October 2012
Eversley Quarry Finchampstead, Wokingham Berkshire
Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design
CA Project: 9095 CA Report: 12300
Author: Alan Hardy
Approved: Martin Watts Signed: …………………………………………………………….
Issue: 01 Date: 16.10.2012
This report is confidential to the client. Cotswold Archaeology accepts no responsibility or liability to any third party to whom this report, or any part of it, is made known. Any such party relies upon this report entirely at their own risk. No part of this report may be reproduced by any means without permission.
© Cotswold Archaeology Building 11, Kemble Enterprise Park, Kemble, Cirencester, Gloucestershire, GL7 6BQ t. 01285 771022 f. 01285 771033 e. [email protected]
1 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
CONTENTS
SUMMARY 5
1 INTRODUCTION 6
Location, topography and geology ...... 6 Archaeological background ...... 6
2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 7
3 METHODOLOGY 8
4 RESULTS 9
Fieldwork summary ...... 9
5 FACTUAL DATA AND STATEMENTS OF POTENTIAL 12
Stratigraphic Record: factual data ...... 12 Stratigraphic record: statement of potential ...... 12 Artefactual record: factual data ...... 13 Artefactual record: statements of potential ...... 15 Biological record: factual data ...... 15 Biological record: statements of potential ...... 16
6 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF POTENTIAL 16
7 STORAGE AND CURATION 17
8 UPDATED AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 17
Objective 1: Refine the chronology of the site...... 17 Objective 2: Clarify the likely function of the pits ...... 18 Objective 3: Characterise the ironmaking process and its context ...... 18 Objective 4: Characterise the medieval activity ...... 19
9 PUBLICATION 19
Synopsis of Proposed Report ...... 20
10 PROJECT TEAM 21
2 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
11 TIMETABLE 22
12 REFERENCES 23
APPENDIX 1: SUMMARY STRATIGRAPHIC QUANTIFICATION ...... 24
APPENDIX 2: ABSOLUTE DATING (SUERC) ...... 26
APPENDIX 3: FLINT BY E.R. MCSLOY...... 27
APPENDIX 4: POTTERY BY E.R. MCSLOY ...... 28
APPENDIX 5: ARCHAEOMETALLURGICAL RESIDUES BY T.P. YOUNG ...... 29
APPENDIX 6: PLANT MACROFOSSIL AND CHACOAL REMAINS BY S. COBAIN ...... 45
APPENDIX 7: OASIS REPORT FORM ...... 59
3 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Fig. 1 Site location plan (1:25,000) Fig. 2 Site (centre) trench and feature plan (1:2000) Fig. 3 Site (east) trench and feature plan (1:2000) Fig. 4 Site (west) trench and feature plan (1:2000) Fig. 5 Plan of Iron Age roundhouse and smelting furnace 105363 (1:100) Fig. 6 Selection of pit features
4 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
SUMMARY
Site Name: Eversley Quarry Location: Finchamstead, Berkshire NGR: SU 7890 6230 Type: Evaluation/Excavation/Monitoring Date: May to December 2009 (CA) Location of archive: Reading Accession Number: REDMG 2008.694 Site Code: FHF09
A programme of archaeological investigation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology (CA) between May and December 2009 at the request of The Guildhouse Consultancy (on behalf of Cemex UK Operations Ltd) at Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Berkshire (SU 7890 6230). The comprised evaluation, excavation and monitoring, and was carried out across an area designated for quarry expansion.
The work recovered evidence for two main phases of activity, specifically a phase of iron smelting and charcoal production dating to the middle-later Iron Age, and a phase of medieval charcoal production dating to between the 11 th and the 13 th centuries.
Slight evidence of a Mesolithic presence and Bronze Age activity was also found, along with post-medieval and modern landscape management in the form of a scatter of field ditches and drains.
A further programme of ‘strip-and-record’ was carried out by Wessex Archaeology (WA) in 2010 and 2011, on a total of 10.62ha in the south-western part of the CA investigation area, and bordering the north bank of the River Blackwell. An assessment report for this work was produced in December 2011 (Wessex Archaeology 2011). Agreement was reached between the client, the curator and Wessex Archaeology to incorporate the Wessex Archaeology results into a single Cotswold Archaeology publication report.
This document presents a quantification and assessment of the evidence recovered from the investigations. It considers the evidence collectively in its local, regional and national context, and presents an updated project design for a programme of post-excavation analysis to bring the results to appropriate publication.
5 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Between May and December 2009 Cotswold Archaeology (CA; then Cotswold Archaeological Trust) carried out programme of archaeological investigation at the Eversley Quarry, (centred on NGR: SU 7890 6230; Fig. 1). The work was undertaken at the request of The Guildhouse Consultancy (on behalf of Cemex UK Operations Ltd), in respect of Condition 7 of the planning permission MIN/2007/2622, in accordance with Local Plan Policy 7 & Wokingham Local Plan Policy WNC 6. A detailed Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) was produced by CA (2009) and approved by the LPA acting on the advice of Mary O‘Donaghue. The fieldwork also followed the Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Field Evaluation issued by the Institute of Field Archaeologists (1999), Berkshire Archaeology: general standards for Archaeological fieldwork Projects (Berkshire Archaeology 2008) and the Management of Archaeological Projects II (EH 1991). It was monitored by Fiona McDonald of Berkshire Archaeology, including periodic site visits.
Location, topography and geology 1.2 The site is approximately 0.5ha in area and lies to east of Eversley and west of Finchampstead, bordered to the south by the River Blackwater, a tributary of the Thames, and to the north by woodland. (Fig. 1). The site lies at approximately 50m AOD, with a slight slope to the south.
1.3 The site overlies fluvial gravels and silts within the floodplain (BGS 2000 Sheet 268 Reading). Pleistocene alluvial silts, and seams of gravel and sand and peat have also been recorded.
1.4 Prior to mineral extraction the site was under pasture, divided into 12 fields.
Archaeological background 1.5 The archaeological potential of the area can be summarised by period:
Mesolithic 1.6 Two extensive Mesolithic flint scatters were identified at Park Farm, Binfield (around 10km north-east of the study area) close to later Iron Age and Romano-British settlement (Roberts 1998). Characteristically Mesolithic worked flints have been found sealed beneath peat and alluvium deposits in a number of Thames tributaries,
6 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
including the Kennet, Colne, and Wey, although no such sites have been identified in the valley of the River Blackwater in the vicinity of the study area.
Neolithic/Bronze Age 1.7 No Neolithic finds have been made in the area but there is Bronze Age cemetery evidence from Watmore Farm (CA 1999).
Iron Age/Roman 1.8 The nearest known Iron Age settlement evidence is at Arborfield Garrison, 4km to the northwest of the site. A Roman road (‘The Devil’s Highway’) lies 1.5km to the north of the site.
Anglo-Saxon/medieval 1.9 No Anglo-Saxon activity is noted in the area. The manor of Finchamstead was held by Earl Harold, then by William I at Domesday.
Post-medieval and Modern 1.10 Both Finchampstead to the east of the site and Eversley to the west of the site were inaccessible by road from the southern side of the River Blackwater until the 19 th century. Thus the area of the site has remained very isolated until recent years.
2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
2.1 The aims of the excavation were to establish the character, quality, date, significance and extent of any archaeological remains or deposits surviving within the site.
2.2 The objectives of the excavation were laid out in a Project Design produced by CA (2009) in accordance with brief specification, as follows:
Identify, investigate and record any archaeological remains revealed
• establish the dates, chronology and character of the identified activity was it continuous or episodic? when did it start and end? what can be discovered about the nature of any structures on the site? how were they built? what function did they perform?
• analyse the economic base and resource exploitation of the site
7 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
what technological and craft processes were carried out? Is there any evidence to allow environmental reconstruction and how reliable is that evidence? What categories of material are present/absent and why? What was the source of raw materials? Is there any evidence for trade relationships in the artefactual material or raw materials? How local or extensive were any such links?
Test the model of activity and settlement in the area Does the site have a specialist function within that model? How does it fit within the chronology of sites in the area?
Provide information on the survival and quality of the archaeological resource to assist in the management of the resource in similar physical locations How truncated are features and deposits? What types of material evidence may be expected and what has survived?
Record and investigate the palaeochannels representing former channels of the River Blackwater and its tributaries (where these are demonstrably associated with human activity) Are the palaeochannels stratigraphically or spatially associated with the evidence for human activity? If so, can the contents of the palaeochannels help to elucidate the broader environment relating to that human activity?
Prepare an archaeological archive of the site including the treatment and preservation of any finds, and the detailed analysis and publication of results to an appropriate level
3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Following an initial programme of evaluation trenching (CA 2008), further targeted work was undertaken as follows:
8 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Phase 1a/1b : The machine stripping of the phase 1a/1b areas (including High- Level Monitoring areas 1, 3 and 4) and of the conveyor/access route along the southern boundary of these areas Phase 2 : The machine stripping of a westward extension to the conveyor/ access route Phase 4: The machine stripping of a conveyor/access route, a borrow pit and two subsoil bunds at the north of the working area
3.2 All stripping was undertaken by a mechanical excavator with a toothless ditching bucket, operated under archaeological supervision.
3.3 The archaeological features thus exposed were subjected to hand-excavation to the bottom of archaeological stratigraphy. All features were planned and recorded in accordance with CA Technical Manual 1: Excavation Recording Manual (CA 1996). Deposits were assessed for their environmental potential and sampled appropriately in accordance with CA Technical Manual 2: The taking of samples for paleoenvironmental and palaeoeconomic analysis from archaeological sites (CA 2003). All artefacts recovered from the excavation were retained in accordance with CA Technical Manual 3: Treatment of finds immediately after excavation (CA 1995).
4 RESULTS
Fieldwork summary (Figs 2 to 4)
General 4.2 A Lidar survey conducted before the fieldwork began showed a number of possible variants of paleochannels, indicating that the River Blackwater has followed a dynamic course over time. This was confirmed during the evaluation and topsoil stripping, when palaeochannels were recorded in plan and section, particularly in the eastern sections of the investigation area. Very few archaeological features of any date were recorded here, and none stratigraphically pre-dated the identified palaeochannels.
4.3 Mechanical stripping of the topsoil indicated that negative archaeological features survived; the area had been subject to ploughing.
9 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
4.4 An area of bog iron ore was revealed in the southern part of Area 1A, measuring approximately 25m x 10m. Small fragments of ore were found in many of the feature fills throughout the central part of the site.
Archaeological activity 4.5 Two principal phases of activity were in evidence, the earliest comprising a roundhouse gully and associated features, and in addition a scatter of ditches and approximately 180 pits. A modest quantity of modern tile and pottery in the ditch fills suggest these features all represent medieval or post-medieval land management. In contrast, artefactual dating for all of the pit features was absent. A suite of 10 radiocarbon dates were recovered, seven of them from pit features (see Appendix 2). A general lack of stratigraphic relationships means that at this stage phasing of most of the pit features is not possible.
Iron Age 4.6 Activity was focused around a small roundhouse, defined by a subcircular eaves drip gully, with an entrance break on the southeast side (see Fig. 5). Within the circuit were a number of shallow pits, and further pits and short gullies were identified within close proximity. Within the entrance break of the roundhouse was an irregular feature interpreted to be the site of a small bowl-shaped iron–smelting furnace (105363). A substantial deposit of bog-iron ore was revealed some 60m to the south, which presumably was the raw material source for the furnace. A C14 date of 399 ─209 cal BC was recovered from charcoal within the furnace fill. All the features within and close by the roundhouse contained charcoal, iron ore and varying quantities of slag. Only one sherd of datable pottery (3 rd ─1st century BC) was recovered from any of these features. A C14 date of cal. AD 990 ─1155 was recovered from charcoal from a pit within the roundhouse; while this could represent later material intruding into the upper fill of an Iron Age feature, it could also indicate that the feature is medieval, and coincidentally sited within the roundhouse footprint. In the area east of the roundhouse a fairly loose grouping of 16 sub-circular shallow pits, many with charcoal-rich fills, may indicate related and contemporary charcoal- making, although there was no artefactual evidence to confirm this chronological association. However one further indicator of Iron Age activity was investigated some 80m to the east, the shallow pit 105078 yielding a C14 date of cal. AD 179 ─1.
Medieval 4.7 A scatter of shallow pits were identified across the site, concentrated in the central area (Fig. 2). Most were sub-circular with charcoal-rich fills, and were interpreted to
10 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
represent charcoal-making. There did not appear to be any spatial correlation between the varying density of the pits and the distribution of the ditches, suggesting that they were not necessarily contemporary. A number of pits were irregular in shape, and appear to represent tree throws. Six C14 dates from the pits and from a shallow ditch suggest this activity took place between the 11 th and the 13 th centuries.
Other activity 4.8 A single subcircular shallow pit, close to the eastern boundary of the site, yielded a C14 date of 1849-1773 cal BC. Its character and fill were very similar to the possible Iron Age pits to the west.
4.9 A small assemblage of residual worked and burnt flint was recovered from the excavated features, indicating a probable Mesolithic presence.
4.10 A few post-medieval and modern field-boundary or drainage ditches were recorded, some datable from modern brick fragments or pottery. They indicate fairly recent landscape management.
Wessex Archaeology investigation 4.11 The investigation revealed a scatter of discrete and linear archaeological features. Over 150 shallow irregular and sub-circular pits were recorded, and 40 were sample excavated. They were provisionally interpreted as probable tree-throw holes, and thought likely to be of medieval date, representing one or more episodes of land clearance adjacent to the river. The linear features were interpreted as post- medieval field and drainage ditches. A modest assemblage of worked flint was recovered from the site, suggesting a Mesolithic presence in the area, but no archaeological features were assigned to this period. Some burnt flint was also recovered, all considered to be residual in medieval or later features. While there was some evidence of bog iron ore in some of the feature fills, there was no evidence of iron making.
4.12 Detailed summaries of the finds and environmental samples (biological evidence) are to be found in appendices 1, 2 etc. respectively.
4.13 All radiocarbon determinations cited in this report are quoted at the 95.4% probability range.
11 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
5 FACTUAL DATA AND STATEMENTS OF POTENTIAL
Stratigraphic Record: factual data 5.1 Following the completion of the fieldwork an ordered, indexed, and internally consistent site archive was compiled in accordance with specifications presented in the Management of Archaeological Projects (EH 1991). A database of all contextual and artefactual evidence and a site matrix was also compiled and cross-referenced to spot-dating. The fieldwork comprises the following records:
Context sheets 592 Plans (1:10, 1:20, 1:100) 16 Sections (1:10, 1:20) 230 Sample sheets 67 Monochrome Films 10 Digital photographs 11 Matrices 12
5.2 The survival and intelligibility of the archaeological remains, represented by negative features, was generally good. However, the lack of artefactual dating and stratigraphy is problematic, with regard to distinguishing between the prehistoric and medieval features. In addition, provisional interpretation of these features is not consistent between the WA and CA investigations.
Absolute dating
5.3 A suite of 10 radiocarbon dates were obtained for features on the CA site, all but one from pit features (see Appendix 2). A single ditch fill produced a medieval date. Two of the nine pit fill dates were Iron Age, and one produced a Bronze Age date.
5.4 Two radiocarbon dates were obtained from a single pit on the WA site, both fitting into a 11 th to 13 th century range.
Stratigraphic record: statement of potential
5.5 While there is little potential in further stratigraphic analysis to elucidate the chronology of the site, the origin and function of the sub-circular pit features would warrant further examination, judging by the disparity between the WA and the CA provisional interpretations.
5.6 If, as is suggested in the Wessex report, such features are probably tree-throws, then the activity on the site seems to be focused on land clearance for agricultural purposes. The term ‘tree-throw’ is one that is commonly used in archaeological
12 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
interpretation, but often as a catch-all definition to conveniently account for any shallow pit feature. The mechanics of the creation of a tree-throw hole, and the characteristics of the resulting feature have been studied in detail. A good summary of the current thinking can be found in Barclay et al . 2003 (60-2). On gravel terraces in the Thames Valley, they are almost invariably irregular both in plan and profile, and their fills are not usually homogeneous.
5.7 The provisional view favoured by he CA excavators was that the pit features (whether Iron Age or medieval) were dug for the making of charcoal? Some charcoal-making traditions, for instance in Ireland (Kenny and Dolan, 2009) involve the digging of a shallow pit, within which is constructed the clamp of timber for burning. At the end of the burning process the charcoal is recovered, leaving the shallow pit full of ash. More commonly in England, the site of the charcoal clamp is merely cleared of surface vegetation (ibid.). The ‘pit’ that left as the archaeological feature is actually the smoothly contoured footprint of intense burning at the base of the clamp, which carbonises the humic topsoil directly under the stack and reduces it to ash. This may explain why most of the sub-circular pits, of whatever period, are virtually identical in depth and profile (see Figure 6).
5.8 There is definitely potential, therefore, in addressing these two questions of identity and function with regard to the pit features. Closer examination of the plan form, profile and fills of the pits will enable the tree throw holes to be separated, and possibly a distinction to be drawn between prehistoric pits and medieval ones. If Iron Age pits can be identified, it will confirm that the smelting operation was deliberately situated near both the resource (the ore) and the fuel (the charcoal). The recently excavated site at Sadlers End (Lewis et al. 2011) concluded that the charcoal preparation took place close by the furnace site, even if (as they suggest) in that instance the ore resource was brought in from elsewhere.
Artefactual record: factual data
5.9 All finds collected during the excavation have been cleaned, marked, quantified and catalogued by context. All metalwork has been x-rayed and stabilised where appropriate.
13 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Cotswold Archaeology Type Category Count Weight (g) Pottery Prehistoric 1 25 Post-medieval/modern 2 107 Total 3 132 Flint Worked 25 149 Burnt 332 Fired Clay All 12 449 Vitrified Clay 9 712 Brick/tile All 30 2284 Glass Vessel (modern) 1 6 Metals Iron 1 285 Slag 94 Stone Burnt 13 128
Wessex Archaeology (summary) Type Category Count Weight (g) Pottery Post-medieval/modern 4 75 Flint Worked 23 284 Burnt 182 Brick/tile (CBM) All 5 230
Worked flint 5.10 On both sites, quantities of prehistoric worked flint were recovered as residual finds in later features. Typologically they indicate Mesolithic activity in the area, but no features could be confidently assigned to that period.
Pottery 5.11 A single sherd of 3 rd – 1st century BC pottery was recovered from a context associated with the roundhouse. On both sites a small assemblage of post-medieval pottery and CBM was recovered from the linear feature fills.
Metalworking 5.12 A total of 39 contexts, primarily pit fills, were assessed for metalworking residues. The greatest concentration of residues was from features in the vicinity of the roundhouse.
5.13 No metalworking residues were identified from the eastern part of the site, or from the western part of the site (during either the CA or the WA investigations), although fragments of bog iron ore were noted in many features.
5.14 The identifiable archaeometallurgical residues were all from iron smelting. No pieces were certainly from smithing. The assemblage is noteworthy for the predominance of
14 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
pieces of furnace bottom (FB). The FB is typically a large slag block, formed below the bloom, in a non-slag tapping furnace.
Artefactual record: statements of potential
Worked flint 5.15 Given that the material is all residual, there is no potential for further study.
Pottery 5.16 The Iron Age sherd helps to confirm the chronology of the roundhouse and assiated metalworking. As an assemblage, the post-medieval material confirms the chronology of the land management of the area, but has no potential for further study.
Metalworking residues 5.17 This site can play a key role in improving understanding of the smelting process because it has both an excellent suite of residues and surviving bog iron ore, which should permit construction of a full mass-balance description, and because the operation appears to have been a simple, single, short-lived process.
Biological record: factual data 5.18 All ecofacts recovered from the excavation have been cleaned, marked, quantified and catalogued by context. A total of 30 bulk samples were taken for the recovery of environmental remains.
Type Category Count Samples (CA) Environmental 30 Samples (WA) Environmental 4
Plant macrofossils and charcoal 5.19 From the CA samples, charcoal and plant macrofossils were submitted for assessment from 60 flots taken from Bronze Age, Iron Age and medieval features. No plant macrofossils were recovered with the exception of a single possible hawthorn seed from medieval pit 105599. The charcoal was abundant but largely poorly preserved. Fragments identified in features across all periods consisted of oak as the dominant species with smaller numbers of alder/hazel, ash, willow/poplar, yew and hawthorn/rowan/crab apple fragments present.
5.20 From the WA samples four were processed, recovering only a single hazelnut shell and bud.
15 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Biological record: statements of potential
Plant macrofossil and charcoal 5.21 No further analysis of plant macrofossil material is recommended, from either suite of samples.
5.22 The charcoal was poorly preserved and selection of samples for further work is based on samples well enough preserved to allow further work. Full analysis on charcoal from Iron Age pits 105196 and 105078 and medieval pit 105259 will hopefully reveal evidence of round wood charcoal fragments which will present additional evidence for the use of the pits for charcoal production. The dominance of alder/hazel in pit 105078 may indicate alder/hazel being used to produce charcoal. Identification of other species will hopefully provide evidence for kindling, thereby make available some information regarding local vegetation/woodland.
6 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF POTENTIAL
6.1 The site has produced clear evidence of small–scale iron smelting, situated close to a likely source of ore, dating to a short period between the 3 rd and the 1 st centuries BC. Possibly associated with this are a number of pit-features related to the manufacture of charcoal. No evidence of associated domestic occupation was found.
6.2 A phase of pit features associated with the manufacture of charcoal and dating to between the 11 th and the 13 th centuries AD, along with a number of possible tree throws indicate a period of (episodic?) charcoal-making and possibly related land clearance. The produced charcoal was not apparently used on site. No evidence for domestic activity was found.
6.3 Several elements of post-medieval land management were found, in the form of gullies and ditches.
6.4 The original objectives have largely been met, and provisional work has established at least a framework understanding of the chronology and development of the site. However, the potential of some aspects of the evidence invites further study to provide a more refined narrative. The following additional questions can be addressed:
16 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
• Can a clear distinction be made across the site between the charcoal pits and the tree throw holes?
• Can the close analysis of the character of the charcoal pit fills across the site allow some of the pits to be confidently related to the Iron Age?
• How does this apparently short episode of Iron Age metalworking compare to other known sites in the county, such as at Sadlers End and Hartshill?
• What does the absence of smithing activity or domestic occupation on the site say about the social context of making iron in the middle Iron Age?
6.5 The outcome of this analysis will be publication in the appropriate journal ( Berkshire Archaeological Journal ).
7 STORAGE AND CURATION
7.1 The archive is currently held at CA offices, Kemble, whilst post-excavation work proceeds. Upon completion of the project and with the agreement of the legal landowners, the site archive and artefactual collection will be deposited with Reading Museum (accession number: REDMG 2008.694), which has agreed in principle to accept the complete archive upon completion of the project.
8 UPDATED AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
8.1 To fulfil the potential of the site data, the following updated objectives have been set out to provide a framework for the proposed further analysis:
Objective 1: Refine the chronology of the site 8.2 Two of the radiocarbon samples recovered from the CA site produced possibly anomalous dates. One (from pit 105200) produced a Bronze Age date, far earlier than any of the others. The other, a pit 105324, within the footprint of the Iron Age
17 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
roundhouse, produced a medieval date. Two repeat radiocarbon dates of these features should be sought, to test the veracity of these features’ dating.
8.3 A further 8 radiocarbon dates will be sought from within the loose grouping of pit features to the east of the focus of the Iron Age smelting. All were recorded as ‘charcoal rich’, although there is visual variation in the character of their fills. If at least some of these features produce Iron Age dates, it will confirm the organisation of the fuel-producing regime of the Iron Age smelting episode and possibly help to determine a generic differentiation between the prehistoric pits and the medieval pits across the rest of the site (see below).
8.4 While the dating of the roundhouse and furnace are fairly confidently understood, the great majority of the pit features, both sub-circular and irregular in plan are undated. Most of the radiocarbon dated pit features have so far returned medieval dates, but their surviving fills are varied in colour and character, meaning that it is at this stage problematic to try to distinguish between medieval features and Iron Age features (see for instance the examples in Figure 6).
8.5 A closer survey of the feature fills and their plan and profile form may enable at least some distinction to be made between the medieval features and any Iron Age features. Comparison with similar known IA and medieval features on nearby sites - for instance Sadler’s End (TVAS 2011) may help to clarify this distinction.
Objective 2: Clarify the likely function of the pits 8.6 The interpretation of the function of the pits – particularly those of a sub-circular plan form, is open to some debate. Are they charcoal-making pits, rubbish pits, or tree throw holes? Again, comparison with other sites will aid a definitive conclusion.
Objective 3: Characterise the ironmaking process and its context 8.7 The evidence seems to point towards possibly only a single episode of Iron Age industry in this location. Domestic evidence is absent, a phenomenon which is consistent with the impression given by current understanding, that blooms of semi- processed iron, or possibly ingots, were brought in by settlements from specialised smelting sites (Lambrick et al. 2009, 219). The Solent Thames Research Framework Assessment highlights the apparent separation between the locations of the production of iron (smelting) and the working of iron (smithing), and the possibility of a degree of centralised control over the process; the Research Agenda (Lambrick, 2010) emphasises the need to clarify this issue. The absence of any evidence of
18 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
smithing on the site at Eversley might simply be because the smithing was taking place in a nearby settlement, but it might also suggest that the iron was being produced for trade. The context of sites such as Sadlers End, and Hartshill will establish whether Eversley fits into a pattern in this regard, or is an exception. If the further radiocarbon dating samples can confirm the presence of Iron Age charcoal making, the further analysis on charcoal samples from pits 105196 and 105078 may shed light on aspects of related woodland management (see Section 5.19).
Objective 4: Characterise the medieval activity 8.8 The organisation of medieval charcoal production in general is short of supportive evidence. Are the medieval pits at Eversley Quarry evidence of systematic land clearance and exploitation of the timber resource, or is this a more episodic phenomenon, possibly itinerant charcoal makers exploiting managed (manorial) woodland, and trading their product in nearby settlements? The full analysis of the charcoal from medieval pit 105259 (see Section 5.19), may help to clarify the degree to which the woodland resource was managed.
9 PUBLICATION
9.1 The results from the investigations of Eversley Quarry are of at least regional significance and merit publication. In itself it provides valuable information about the process of iron smelting in the middle Iron Age, and set against recent discoveries in the county it adds to the understanding of the regional development of metal production and its social context in this part of the Thames Valley. It is proposed that a full report is published in the Berkshire Archaeological Journal . The report will incorporate the results of the Wessex Archaeology investigation (WA 2011).
9.2 In finds categories where no further analysis is recommended (ie pottery and flint) an edited version of the assessment report will be included in the publication report.
19 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Synopsis of Proposed Report
Archaeological Investigations at Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead Berkshire: 2009-11 by Steve Sheldon and Tim Young Words Acknowledgements 150 Summary 250 Introduction Location, topography and geology 100 Archaeological background 250 Project background 250 Excavation Results Chronological narrative of the major phases and features of the site 1000 Artefactual evidence Pottery (Ed McSloy) 150 Metal (Ed McSloy) 100
Metallurgical residues (Tim Young) 2000 Plant macrofossil and charcoal (Sarah Cobain) 800 Discussion Iron Age industry and resources 800 Medieval activity and post-medieval land management 400 Conclusion 150 Bibliography 300 Appendices
Finds catalogues 200 Total words 6900 Approximate pages @ 800 words/page 9
9 Pages Tables Metalworking residues 2 Plant macrofossil and charcoal 1 Radiocarbon dating results 1 Illustrations Location of site 1 Site plan with phasing 1 Iron Age roundhouse + furnace section 1 Selection of pit photos and smelting furnace 1
Total publication estimate 17 pages
20 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
10 PROJECT TEAM
10.1 The analysis and publication programme will be quality assured by Martin Watts MIfA (Head of Publications: HoP) and managed by Alan Hardy (Post-Excavation Manager: PXM), who will contribute to the discussion as senior author and co- ordinate the work of the following personnel:
Steve Sheldon AIfA (Project Officer): Post-excavation phasing, draft report preparation, research and archive
Ed McSloy MIfA (Finds Officer: FO): Specialist report preparation and liaison
Sarah Cobain AIfA (Environmental Officer: EO) Specialist report preparation plant macrofossil and charcoal and liaison
Peter Moore MIfA (Senior Illustrator: ILL): Production of all site plans, sections and artefact drawings
10.2 Contributions by the following external consultants will be managed by the Finds Officer:
• Dr Tim Young FSA FGS (GeoArch): Archaeometallurgical residues • Karen Barker : Metalwork conservation
10.3 Contributions by the following external consultants will be managed by the Environmental Officer:
• SUERC (East Kilbride): Radiocarbon dating
10.4 The final publication report will be edited and refereed internally by CA senior project management, and externally refereed by Dr Tom Moore (University of Durham).
21 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
10.5 Task list
TASK PERSONNEL DURATION/ COST Project Management SPM 4 Stratigraphic Analysis PO 6
Research, comparanda 2
Pottery Analysis and report FO 1
Metal artefacts Conservation Specialist Transport Report preparation FO 1 Metallurgical residues analysis and report FEE Radiocarbon dati ng (10 no. samples) SUERC FEE RC material processing Arch 1 RC material preparation and despatch EO 1 Plant macrofossils and charcoal EO 3 Liaison with specialists SPO 1 Preparation of publication report Abstract and introduction PO 1
Excavation results PO 3 SPO 1 Compilation of specialist reports, tables etc. PO 2 Discussion, conclusions PO 4 Illustrations SI 4 Acknowledgements, bibliography PO 1 QA HoP 1 Submission to external referees Editing SPM 2 Revisions PO 1 SUBMISSION OF P UBLICATION TEXT Archive Research archive completion Arch 2
Microfilm FEE Deposition FEE Publication Printing SANHS FEE
11 TIMETABLE
11.1 CA would normally aim to have completed a publication draft within one year of approval of the Updated Project Design. A detailed programme can be produced if desired on approval of the publication project design.
22 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
12 REFERENCES
Barclay, A., Lambrick, G., Moore, J. and Robinson, M. 2003 Lines in the Landscape: cursus monuments in the Upper Thames Valley Oxford Archaeology Thames Valley Monograph 15 CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 1999 Watmore Farm, Eversley, Hampshire. Archaeological Excavation (Report 991011)
CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2008 ‘Fleet Hill Farm, Finchampstead, Wokingham Borough: Archaeological Evaluation’. CA unpublished report 08031
CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2009 Land at Fleet Hill Farm, Finchampstead, Wokingham Borough; General Project Design for Archaeological Works
Kenny, N. and Dolan, B. (no date) Traditional Charcoal Making http://charcoal.seandalaiocht.com (accessed 08.10.2012)
Lambrick, G., with Robinson, M. 2009 The Thames through Time. The Archaeology of the Gravel terraces of the Upper and Middle Thames 1500BC – AD50 , Oxford Archaeology Thames Valley Landscapes Monograph 29
Lambrick, G. 2010 Solent Thames Research Framework Research Agenda: the Later Bronze Age and Iron Age Agenda http://thehumanjourney.net/pdf_store/sthames/phase3/ Research%20Agendas/Late%20Bronze%20Age%20and%20Iron%20Age%20Rese arch%20Agenda.pdf (accessed 04.10.2012)
Lewis, J., Crabb, S. and Ford, S. 2011 Sadler’s End, Sindlesham, Wokingham, Berks: Archaeological Excavation (Draft publication report)
Roberts, N. 1998 The Holocene (Second edition)
Wessex Archaeology 2011 ‘Eversley Quarry, Fleet Hill Farm, Finchampstead, Berkshire. Archaeological Assessment Report’
23 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
APPENDIX 1: SUMMARY STRATIGRAPHIC QUANTIFICATION
A total of 642 contexts was recorded during the evaluation, watching brief and excavations by CA and WA as detailed below:-
CA 124 pit features excavated 4 tree throw holes excavated 20 linear features excavated
WA 150 pit features surveyed (approx) 40 pit features excavated 9 linear features excavated
24 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Appendix 1 Table of results of sample processing Key to quantity codes A (<200), B (100-200), C (50-100), D (10-50), E (1-10) Sample Context Volume Feature Context Charred Mineralised Wood Pot Fired Burnt Slag Magnetic Metal Other processed number type plant plant charcoal clay flint material Residues in litres remains remains 2 105046 6 105045 pit fill A A C D C 4 105077 8 105078 pit fill B C D C Iron Ore (C) 6 105185 7 105186 pit fill D A (bog ore/charcoal?) (B) 10 105188 8 1095189 pit fill A A 12 105199 6 105200 pit fill D D Iron Ore (D) 14 105197 8 105196 pit fill A B A 16 105202 8 105203 pit fill A A 18 105205 10 105204 pit fill B E D Iron Ore (D) 19 105207 8 105203 pit fill A D 20 105214 8 105214 pit fill D C Iron Ore (D) 24 105233 8 105233 pit fill A B 26 105240 8 105241 pit fill C C Iron Ore (D) 28 105309 8 105310 ditch fill E D A A 29 105323 10 105324 pit fill C E C Iron Ore (D) 31 105317 8 105318 ditch fill D B E A A 32 105315 8 105316 ditch fill D C 36 105327 8 105328 pit fill C B Iron Ore (C) 38 105325 4 105326 pit fill C Iron Ore (B) 39 105361 6 105363 pit fill D C Iron Ore (C) 42 105385 8 105387 ditch fill C A 43 105383 8 105384 ditch fill D 44 105353 10 105354 ditch fill D D D Iron Ore (C) 47 105459 6 105460 pit fill B B 48 105467 6 105468 pit fill A C 49 105474 6 105475 pit fill C C Iron ore (C) 65 105258 6 105259 pit fill B C A Iron Ore (A) (bog ore/charcoal?) (A)
25 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
APPENDIX 2: ABSOLUTE DATING (SUERC)
Table 1: Radiocarbon dates from Eversley Quarry (CA and WA samples)
Feature Context Lab No. Material δ 13 C Radiocarbon Age 95% 68% Area 6: Fill of pit 105077 SUERC- Hazel charcoal ( Corylus -26.8‰ 2070 ± 30 yr BP 174-19 BC (92.3% of area) plus 156-136 BC (12.6% of area) plus 105078 39925 avellana ) 13-1 AD (3.1% of area) 114-45 BC (55.6% of area) GU27016 Area 1B: Fill of 105240 SUERC- Alder/hazel charcoal ( Alnus -26.6‰ 910 ± 30 yr BP 1034-1189 AD (92.8 % of area) plus 1045-1098 AD (40.0% of area) plus pit 39927 glutinosa/ Corylus 1198-1207 AD (2.6% of area) 1119-1142 AD (16.3% of area) plus 105241 GU27018 avellana ) 1147-1164 AD (12.0% of area) Area 1a(RH): Fill 105323 SUERC- Alder/hazel charcoal ( Alnus -26.9‰ 985 ± 30 yr BP 990-1057 AD (51.2% of area) plus 1016-1046 AD (39.0% of area) plus of pit 105324 39931 glutinosa/ Corylus 1076-1155 AD (44.2% of area) 1093-1121 AD (23.2% of area) plus GU27019 avellana ) 1140-1148 AD (6.0% of area) Area 1a(RH): Fill 105361 SUERC- Hawthorn/rowan/crab apple -25.5‰ 2270 ± 30 yr BP 399-350 BC (46.9% of area) plus 303- 394-358 BC (41.6% of area) plus of pit 39932 charcoal ( Crataegus 209 BC (48.5% of area) 282-257 BC (20.2% of area) plus 105363 GU27020 monogyna/Sorbus 245-235 BC (6.4% of area) spp/ Malus sylvestris ) Area Conveyor: 105467 SUERC- Oak charcoal ( Quercus -24.8‰ 940 ± 30 yr BP 1025-1160 AD (95.4% of area) 1035-1052 AD (13.7% of area) plus Fill of pit 39933 spp) 1080-1152 AD (54.5% of area) 105468 GU27021 Area 4: Fill of 105533 SUERC- Alder charcoal ( Alnus -27.5‰ 855 ± 30 yr BP 1051-1082 AD (7.7% of area) plus 1160-1220 AD (68.2% of area) ditch 105532 39934 glutinosa ) 1125-1136 AD (1.8% of area) plus GU27022 1151-1259 AD (86.0% of area) Area HMLA4: Fill 105593 SUERC- Oak charcoal ( Quercus -28.3‰ 880 ± 30 yr BP 1042-1106 AD (26.8% of area) plus 1056-1076 AD (13.6% of area) plus of pit 39935 spp) 1117-1221 AD (68.6% of area) 1154-1213 AD (54.6% of area) 105595 GU27023 Area HMLA4: Fill 105598 SUERC- Hawthorn seed ( Crataegus -26.5‰ 840 ± 30 yr BP 1058-1073 AD (1.8% of area) plus 1154- 1165-1225 AD (68.2% of area) of pit 39936 monogyna ) 1265 AD (93.6% of area) 105599 GU27024 Area 1a: Fill of 105258 SUERC- Oak charcoal ( Quercus -24.3‰ 825 ± 30 yr BP 1163-1265 AD (95.4% of area) 1188-1199 AD (9.1% of area) plus pit 105259 39937 spp) 1207-1258 AD (59.1% of area) GU27025 Area 1a: fill of pit 105199 SUERC- Alder/hazel charcoal ( Alnus -25.0‰ 3505 ± 30 yr BP 1911-1746 BC (95.4% of area) 1884-1865 BC (13.1% of area) plus 105200 39926 gl utinosa/ Corylus 1849-1773 BC (55.1% of area) GU27017 avellana ) Wessex Archaeology Area 1B fill of pit 10018 SUERC- Quercus sapwood -27.5‰ 935 ±30 yr BP 1020-1170 AD (95% of area) 10013 36687 Area 1B fill of pit 10018 SUERC- Charred hazelnut shell -24.9‰ 880 ±30 yr BP 1040-1230 AD (95% of area) 10013 36688
26 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
APPENDIX 3: FLINT BY E.R. MCSLOY
A total of 25 pieces of worked flint (149 g) was recovered, together with a quantity (332 g) of unworked, heat- affected flint. Almost all of the latter comprises material from later prehistoric features in the area of ring gully structure RH1 and recovered from bulk soil samples. This material, which is incompletely burnt, is presumed to represent material accidentally burnt as part of heat intensive metallurgical processes undertaken in the area.
Raw material among the worked lithics comprises good quality flint of grey-brown, dark brown and light ‘honey’ brown. Condition is mixed, though most material exhibits light or moderate edge damage. None is patinated.
The worked lithics comprise mainly flake 18 or blade-like removals (6) without secondary working. There is a single tool; a backed microlith (no. 1) from pit fill 22005 (evaluation trench 22). This, together with a number of blade/bladelets indicate a Mesolithic element in the group, though all of the worked flint can be considered to be re-deposited.
Catalogue No.1 Microlith of Clark’s Group B backed form. Abrupt retouch extends the length of one edge and is partial to that opposite. Dark brown flint.
27 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
APPENDIX 4: POTTERY BY E.R. MCSLOY
Only a single sherd (25 g) of Iron Age pottery was recovered. It came from the pit 105367, part of a complex series of features located in the southern part of ring gully structure RH1. The sherd, from the lower part of a vessel probably of globular for, occurs in a handmade, fine sandy fabric (below).
The pottery adds a little to our understanding of the Late Prehistoric activity. The fabric and probable vessel form are most consistent with a Middle Iron Age date ( c. 400–100 BC). Such a date is supported by radiocarbon determination from associated feature 105363 (399–209 Cal. BC at 95% confidence). The scarcity of pottery or other domestic detritus from the Iron Age features are evidence for specialised use and possibly seasonal occupation.
Fabric description QZ1 Fine sandy. Dark grey surfaces with red brown margin and core. Soft with finely irregular fracture and smooth feel. Contains abundant fine, well-sorted quartz sand (0.1–0.3mm).
28 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
APPENDIX 5: ARCHAEOMETALLURGICAL RESIDUES BY T.P. YOUNG
Abstract Residues from Fleethill Farm derived from two broad classes of contexts: firstly, contexts associated with a penannular gully, probably from a roundhouse and secondly from large, but shallow, circular pits scattered across the floodplain.
The first group are residues derived from iron smelting in a large non-slag tapping ‘slagpit’-style furnace. This assemblage is dominated (in terms of weight) by four large fragments of furnace bottoms (FBs), three of which each weight almost 20kg. Other residues include flow slags, fired/vitrified furnace lining and bog iron ore fragments.
The furnace itself (or at least a furnace) may probably be identified with cut [105363]. The furnace pit appears to have been constructed as a sub-circular cut 0.60m in diameter, apparently cut through earlier metalworking pits. Relations with adjacent contexts are not entirely clear and it is possible that the furnace possessed an arch on its NW side, communicating with elongate pit [105367]. Charcoal from this possible furnace gave a calibrated 14C date of 399-350 BC or 303-209 BC. Although it is always dangerous to place too much reliance on a single 14C date on wood charcoal, this 3rd-4th century BC date is entirely compatible with the observed iron-smelting technology. The mounting evidence for early-middle Iron Age smelting in the Berkshire-Surrey-North Hampshire area is discussed briefly. The key significance of this site is its good evidence for the nature of the exploited ore resource.
The second group are mostly interpretable as charcoal pits and their residues are mainly small fragments and granules of bog iron ore together with mineralised charcoal - essentially charcoal coated with bog iron ore. In these cases the iron mineralisation is probably a mixture of residual material and bog ore that has grown subsequent to pit infilling. The pits gave dates mainly in the 11 th -12 th centuries, although a few prehistoric dates were also recorded. The archaeological record of early charcoal manufacture is poor and this is a significant addition. The pits have a similar size and shape to those identified as charcoal pits in other regions.
Methods All materials were examined visually with a low-powered binocular microscope where required. As an evaluation, the materials were not subjected to any high-magnification optical inspection, nor to any form of instrumental analysis. The identifications of materials in this report are therefore necessarily limited and must be regarded as provisional. The summary catalogue of examined material is given in Table 1.
Results The descriptions of the assemblage are provided in Table 1 and a summary by context in Table 2.
Description of the residues The identifiable archaeometallurgical residues were all from iron smelting. No pieces were certainly from smithing.
The assemblage is noteworthy for the predominance of pieces of furnace bottom (FB). The FB is typically a large slag block, formed below the bloom, in a non-slag tapping furnace. Slag may flow past the FB to accumulate in
29 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
the lower part of the slag pit as discrete flow slags. The FB may either be massive (often the case if the pit was shallow) or may have the texture of amalgamated flow slags, often capped by a denser slag ‘puddle’.
The largest fragments of FB were recovered from part of the gully fill (105353). These blocks are all incomplete, but provide good evidence for the nature of a complete example. The FBs appear to have been approximately 450mm in diameter and 130mm thick. On the proximal side they show a well developed burr 230-200mm wide, indicating the blowing area. The burr shows a raised lip (maximum reserved height) of deeply vitrified material rising towards the blowhole. The top of the FB on the proximal side is a flat, smooth-topped slag puddle, which extends in a narrow zone across the centre of the cake. On either side there tends to be a raised zone of charcoal-rich slag. Below the burr the base of the FB is inclined, reaching the full 130mm thickness about 100mm in from the margin. The bases of the FBs are obscured by secondary deposits in most cases, but show prills amongst large wood/charcoal moulds. Each of the large fragments weighs a little under 20kg, suggesting a full FB would have been perhaps a little over 30kg. The small fragments shows dense flow slags between large wood (?) moulds, the largest of which was at least 30x55mm in section and over 70mm long.
Smaller fragments of flow slags are a persistent feature of the assemblage, but the overall weight of such material is low. This suggests that the FB approached the pit base, rather than having much ‘free’ space below. Some of the basal flow slag fragments (e.g. c105364) indicate flow on subsoil. The angle of the FB base below the proximal side also supports such an interpretation, although one isolated fragment hints at a more discrete floor-wall angle (105323).
The assemblage includes many fragments of vitrified furnace wall. None of these supplied any useful information about shaft size or morphology, mostly being highly indurated low wall fragments. No fragments of blowhole were recovered.
Bog iron ore was common in many of the contexts. In some cases this was in large blocks, clearly extracted for smelting, and deposited along with other residues in ‘waste’ contexts. In other cases the ore particles were small, and probably present through entirely natural agency.
Distribution of the residues Table 2 provides a summary of the distribution of archaeometallurgical residues and associated materials.
Assemblages have been classified in Table 2 as ‘M’ having abundant or significant iron melting residues, ‘m’ having low or trace levels of metallurgical residues, ‘C’ having residues likely to indicate charcoal burning only and ‘?’ assemblages not indicative of any particular process, having only residual bog iron ore.
Only three samples bearing metallurgical residues were identified from outside the Area 1A RH area, two of which had only trace levels of microscopic slag fragments (pits 105241 and 105468) and one (pit 105259, less than 50m from the ring gully) contained a single large block of vitrified furnace wall. None of these occurrences need indicate contemporaneity between the containing charcoal pits and the iron smelting (although an origin of some pits during ore extraction is likely).
Where the probable charcoal pits produced possible residues these appeared to be a mixture of residual bog iron ore (presumably present in the host sediment) and new-formed iron minerals over-growing charcoal fragments. These latter materials indicate on-going process of iron concentration in this environment.
30 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Although some of the bog iron ore from these features had enhanced magnetic properties, it did not occur in sufficient quantities to suggest that the pits had been employed for roasting ore. Indeed, most of the ore recovered from the RH area was un-roasted – indicating the roasting did not normally occur at the point of extraction, but, if practiced, it probably happened close to the furnace.
Metallurgical features The size of the FBs indicates that the basal pits of the smelting furnaces must have been at least 450mm in diameter and probably a little more. Within the ring gully area, there are only two significant sub-circular features: pit 105323 and pit 105361.
Pit 105323 is unusual in being shallow, approximately 1m in diameter and apparently ringed by a series of stake holes. The pit fill included approximately just 1.5kg of iron smelting residues and also provided a medieval 14C date. Although preliminary interpretation of the feature suggested the date may have been taken from intrusive charcoal, an alternative explanation would be that this is one of the charcoal pits which has a slag-rich fill simply as a product of the nature of the residual material at this location. In either case this feature is unlikely to be a smelting furnace because of its size and there is no additional evidence from the enclosed residues as to its function.
Pit 105361 is a component of a complicated series of intercut deposits, lying mostly within the larger cut 105367/105481. This feature is 600mm in diameter and 180mm deep, precisely the sort of size suggested by the dimensions of the FB fragments. The excavators interpretation was that cut 105361 is late in the series and was cut into pre-existing deposits rich in metallurgical debris. Inspection of the photograph of the relevant section suggests an alternative interpretation is possible – and that the furnace base (cut 105361) might have been contemporary and that the fired clay visible in the section below the supposed cut for 105361 might be a collapsed arch. It would appear quite likely that cut 105367/105481 represents a working hollow and other furnace cuts may be, or may have been, present within its limits.
Other features within the RH area also have slag-rich fills, particularly the ring gully itself, but none is clearly a metallurgical feature as such.
The widely distributed pits with a charcoal-rich fill found across the site have proved so far to be of rather controversial origin. Most appear to have a rather neat sub-circular form with a dished profile. This sits rather uneasily with an interpretation simply as the product of the grubbing out of woodland. The neat regular shape is much more similar to records of charcoal pits from elsewhere. Pits appear to have been the dominant form of charcoal production structure until the widespread adoption of the larger-volume platform techniques in the post- medieval period. Such structures are only slowly becoming recognised in Britain, but are now widely recognised in Ireland (Young, 2005b; O’Sullivan & Downey, 2009; Kenny, 2010). In Ireland, the greatest frequency of such pits has been dated to the 9th to 13th centuries (O’Sullivan & Downey 2009 p. 24). Although various shapes appear to have been utilised in Ireland, sub-rectangular forms probably dominate over sub-circular examples. More locally, an example was recognised at Saddler’s End (Lewis et al. 2011) – this was subcircular and of similar size to the present examples. It date is uncertain, with a 14C on undisclosed wood charcoal giving a Middle Saxon age, but it also contained a sherd of medieval pottery.
31 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Most of the Fleet Hill Farm charcoal pits are undated, but there are 14C dates from a good number and these are essentially 10 th to 13 th century.
Two pits within the ring gully area (105280 and 105301) were of a suitable size to be potential charcoal pits as an alternative explanation to being integral components of the Iron Age site. One of these (105301) yielded 4.7kg of residues and ore, but the potential for residuality in this area of the site must be borne in mind and the stratigraphic record should be checked to determine whether these are likely to be Iron Age or medieval features.
One interesting, if problematic, example is pit 105352, which lies about 40m NW of the ring gully. This pit yielded a block of vitrified furnace wall and a piece of iron bar. If the iron bar were a product of the local smelting (i.e. it is residual along with the furnace wall in this probably medieval pit), it would be a very interesting addition to the assemblage.
Interpretation Fleet Hill Farm lies with a belt of known Iron Age iron production sites, all probably exploiting bog iron ores (although formerly believed to have worked iron ores within the Tertiary sand)s. There are four clusters of sites, presumably reflecting the quality of local bog ore development.
In the western part of this area, the sites at Hartshill Copse (Collard et al. 2006; Young 2005a) and Dunston’s Park (Fitzpatrick 1995) lie close to the River Kennet near Thatcham. The Dunston’s Park activity has been dated as 7th century BC, Hartshill Copse at 5-6th century BC (with a contentious, probably incorrectly claimed, early phase in the 10th BC).
Closer to Eversley are the smelting sites at Heckfield (4th century BC on the basis of pottery; Dungworth 2007), Baird Road, Arborfield (3 radiocarbon dates with a range of 390-200 Cal BC; Hammond, forthcoming), Whitehall brickworks (late Iron Age to Roman ironmaking; Pine, forthcoming) Three Mile Cross (Ford et al. 2011) and Sadler’s End (7km N, 1 st -6th century BC?; Lewis et al. 2011). A site at Risely, west of Eversley, also yielded Iron Age slags, though probably of smithing rather than smelting (McDonnell 1984).
Approximately 15km east of Eversley lies a third cluster of sites around the Surrey Heath area. These are mainly the result of amateur investigations by the Surrey Heath Archaeology & Heritage Trust and little detail is published. Sites included one at West End, Bagshot Village, one at Ashleigh Farm, Windlesham, another at Windlesham Arboretum and a large site at Lightwater (http://heathhist.pbworks.com/ ArchaeologyIronAge, http://www.chobham.info/ashleigh_farm.htm ).
The fourth cluster lies in the Staines/Weybridge area 29km east of Eversley, with published sites at Brooklands (Hanworth & Tomalin 1977) and Thorpe Lea (Starley 1998). Brooklands appears to be early in date.
The furnace at Eversley was a non-slag tapping furnace with a basal pit (i.e. a slagpit furnace). The pit had a wide diameter (of at least 450mm, probably rather larger) in keeping with the sizes of other earlier Iron Age slagpit furnaces in Britain (e.g. Young 2005a) and Ireland (see Young 2011b for a discussion of furnace sizes and their dating in Ireland).
The pit appears to have been fairly shallow, leading to a well-formed FB and a low proportion of isolated flow slags. The pit packing (slagpit furnaces have their pits packed with a combustible organic material quite distinct
32 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
from the main charcoal fuel prior to smelting) was apparently of spilt wood. This is the most common pit packing in the Iron Age of Britain and Ireland, with a packing of grass or cereals much less common (cf. Leda Cottages, Kent; Paynter 2007, Figure 4).
The evidence for furnace type corresponds well with that from the unpublished excavations at Hartshill Copse, Upper Bucklebury (Young 2005a), where an intact FB was preserved in a furnace pit. This FB measured 500mm x 420mm x 200mm thick and weighed 33.8kg. The furnace at Hartshill is currently undated, but similar residues are stratified within an adjacent part of the site in 5 th -6th century BC contexts (Collard et al. 2006).
The form and height of the shaft is unknown, but the high degree of vitrification of sizeable fragments from the lower shaft suggests at least of moderate height.
If the alternative interpretation of the furnace base were to be verified, and it was determined that it did have an arch, then it would more closely resemble some rather later Iron Age forms from Ireland (e.g. Young 2008) and N. Wales (described, and reconstructed by Crew 1987,1989, 1991, 1998). In these examples, the arch served as a portal for cleaning cold slag from the furnace base after the smelt, rather than as a means of tapping slag. The possibility of such an interpretation of the available data is only extremely tentative, but illustrates the problems of appropriate field recording of these subtle structures. The evidence for medieval charcoal production is important, for this is poorly documented in Britain. Charcoal use in medieval Britain was high, and it is not usually appreciated that this was mainly for domestic purposes rather than metallurgy (Rogers 1902). Given the location of this site away from medieval centres of metalworking, use of the charcoal for cooking or heating is very likely and it would be common for such charcoal to be sold on for use in distant towns.
Evaluation of potential The Eversley site has enormous potential to advance understanding of Iron Age smelting in this area. Part of that potential comes from the fact that the site appears relatively simple. It provides a good range of smelting residues and most importantly, plenty of evidence for the local ore.
Understanding of the techniques of non-slag tapping iron smelting has advanced rapidly in recent years, although that hasn’t always been reflected in the quality of reporting of sites and slag assemblages from the area. None of the sites investigated in recent years has had significant archaeometallurgical input, with the only rigorous modern work in this area being the report by Dungworth (2007) of slags from Heckfield. This present site has the potential to provide some much-needed detail.
The only negative factor associated with the assemblage is the assemblage is the moderately high degree of weathering present in some of the slag, and careful selection of samples will be required.
The site provides good evidence for ore, furnace materials, a full range of smelting slags and possibly some finished iron. The site lacks evidence for the refining/working of the raw blooms into finished iron – and it likely that this happened elsewhere.
Accordingly, a thorough analytical investigation of the smelting residues and associated ores is recommended.
33 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
References
COLLARD, M, DARVILL, T. & WATTS, M. 2006. Ironworking in the Bronze Age? Evidence from a 10th century BC settlement at Hartshill Copse, Upper Bucklebury, West Berkshire. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 72, 367-421.
CREW, P. 1987. Bryn y Castell Hillfort – a Late Prehistoric Iron Working settlement in north-west Wales. In: SCOTT, B.G. & CLEERE, H. (eds) The Crafts of the Blacksmith. 91-100.
CREW, P. 1989. Crawcwellt West excavations 1986- 1989. A late prehistoric ironworking settlement. Archaeology in Wales, 29, 11-16.
CREW, P. 1991. The Experimental Production of Prehistoric Bar Iron, Historical Metallurgy, 25, 21-36.
CREW, P. 1998. Excavations at Crawcwellt West, Merioneth, 1990-98: A late prehistoric upland ironworking settlement. Archaeology in Wales, 38, 22-35.
DUNGWORTH, D. 2007. Heckfield, Hampshire. An examination of Middle Iron Age smelting slags. English Heritage Research Department Report Series no 104-2007.
FORD, S, PINE, J & WEALE, A, 2011, Middle Iron Age occupation and iron production and a late Saxon hearth at Grazeley Road, Three Mile Cross, Reading, Berkshire, TVAS draft publication report 03/01b, Reading.
FITZPATRICK, A P, BARNES, I & CLEAL, R M J, 1995, An early Iron Age settlement at Dunston Park, Thatcham, in: I Barnes, W A Boismier, R M J Cleal, A P Fitzpatrick and M R Roberts (eds), Early Settlement in Berkshire: Mesolithic–Roman Occupation Sites in the Thames and Kennet Valleys, Wessex Archaeology Rep 6, Salisbury, 65–92
HAMMOND, S, (draft), The excavation of a Middle Iron Age occupation and iron smelting site at Baird Road, Arborfield (TVAS monograph 9)
HANWORTH, R. & TOMALIN, D.J. 1977. Brooklands, Weybridge: the excavation of an Iron Age and medieval site 1964-5 and 1970-1, Research Volume of the Surrey Archaeological Society no 4. Surrey Archaeological Society, Guildford.
KENNY, N. 2010. Charcoal production in medieval Ireland, In: M. Stanley, E. Danaher & J. Eogan (eds), Creative Minds: production, manufacturing and invention in ancient Ireland. National Roads Authority.
LEWIS, J., CRABB, S. & FORD, S., 2011. Bronze Age urns, Iron Age iron smelting and Saxon charcoal production at Sadler’s End, Sindlesham Wokingham, Berkshire. Draft Publication Report, Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd.,57pp.
McDONNELL, J.G. 1984. Interim Report. Slags, Risely Farm, Berkshire. English Heritage Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 4422.
34 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
O’SULLIVAN, M. & DOWNEY, L. 2009. Charcoal production sites. Archaeology Ireland, 23 (4), 22-25.
PAYNTER, S., 2007. Innovations in bloomery smelting in Iron Age and Romano-British England, pp. 202–210, in: S La Niece, D Hook and P Craddock (eds), Metals and Mines. Studies in Archaeometallurgy (London).
PINE, J, forthcoming, The excavation of a late Iron Age/Roman settlement and iron production site at Whitehall Brick and Tile Works, Arborfield Garrison, Berkshire, Berkshire Archaeological Journal.
ROGERS, J.E.T. 1902. A history of agriculture and prices in England. Vols 1-8, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
STARLEY, D. 1998. Analysis of metalworking debris from Thorpe Lea Nurseries, near Egham, Surrey 1990- 1994. English Heritage Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 1/1998.
YOUNG, T.P. 2005a. Evaluation of metallurgical residues from Hartshill Copse (HCB01). GeoArch Report 2005/06. 7pp + 2 figs.
YOUNG, T.P. 2005b. Evaluation of archaeometallurgical residues from the Heath-Mayfield N7 development (03E0151, 03E0966, 03E0461, 03E0603, 03E0633, 03E0679, 03E0602, 03E0635). GeoArch Report 2005/12. 28pp.
YOUNG, T.P. 2008. Detailed recording of furnace C397, Derrinsallagh 4 (E2180), M7/M8 Contract 2. GeoArch Report 2008/34, 10pp.
YOUNG, T.P., 2011a. Archaeometallurgical residues from the M1 Northern Motorway (J2009): Lagavooren 7, Co. Meath (00E0914). GeoArch Report 2011/14. 25pp.
YOUNG, T.P., 2011b. Archaeometallurgical residues from the N7 Castletown to Nenagh scheme, Camlin 3 (E3580), Co. Tipperary. GeoArch Report 2011/23. 62 pp.
Glossary Bleb: a small rounded particle or textural component, often a droplet or prill
Bloomery: a furnace for smelting iron from ore in which iron is produced as a solid material. The bloomery process was employed mainly prior to the introduction of the later blast furnace from the late 15 th century.
Bog Iron Ore: hydrated iron oxide ores formed in superficial sediments (including, but not limited to bogs) through the oxidation of iron-bearing groundwaters.
Flow slag: a slag showing evidence for having flowed, often as an elongate prill, but which does not show evidence of having been tapped from the furnace. Often a major component of assemblages from the lower part of the pit of a slagpit furnace.
35 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Furnace bottom (FB): a large slag block forming below the bloom in a non-slag tapping furnace.
Goethite: a hydrated iron III oxide, FeO.OH.
Prill: a small aggregate of a material, either a spheroidal droplet or a runnel, formed from a melted liquid and either occurring as a discrete particle or as an inclusion within another material.
Slagpit Furnace: a variety of bloomery iron smelting furnace in which much of the slag formed during the smelt drains into a pit below the shaft (rather than being tapped outside the furnace).
Vesicle: a void, usually rounded and formed as a preserved gas bubble in a solidified melt.
Figure 1. Photograph 204 - section of cut [105363] with fills 105362 (lower) and 105361 (upper) to the left (east) and cut [105367] with fills 105366, 105365 and 105364 to the right (west).
36 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Table 1: Summary catalogue by context and sample Context Sample Label Wt (g) No. Description 105046 2 magnetic material, 1.0mm,1 of 2.99 assm. charcoal, ore granules, flint/chert, 2 cemented sand; some ore appears reddened 105046 2 magnetic material, 1.0mm, 2 of 2.48 assm. charcoal, ore and relatively abundant 2 flint/chert 105046 2 iron ore, 2mm, 1 of 2 14 assm. iron ore granules, charcoal ,charcoal- bearing ferruginous concretion, small amount of fired clay 105046 2 slag, 10mm, 1 of 2 100 assm. concretions of charcoal debris in fine iron- rich clay. 10-40mm lumps 105046 2 slag, 10mm 146 assm. concretions of charcoal debris in fine iron- rich clay. 10-40mm lumps 105077 4 magnetic residue, 1.0mm, 1 of 52.55 assm. mainly fine ore granules with abundant 2 charcoal, some fired clay particles (probably) and some haematised ore. 105077 4 magnetic material, 1.0mm 30.1 assm. dominated by charcoal, some fired clay, ore granules and possible cemented sand 105077 4 iron ore, 2mm, 1 of 2 62 assm. ore, some reddened and mineralised, concreted charcoal 105077 4 iron ore, 2mm, 2 of 2 40 assm. iron ore (some reddened), charcoal and charcoal-bearing ferruginous concretion 105077 4 slag? 2mm, 1 of 2 0.61 1 small limey sandy concretion rich in fine charcoal 105077 4 slag, 2mm, 2 of 2 0.53 assm. stone, concretion (partially melted?? - or just lime coated??) 105077 4 residue, 2mm, 10% iron ore 758 assm. >60% ore granules by weight, rest 90% mineralised plant charcoal. Much is mildly concretionary remains, 1 of 4 with charcoal debris. Coarse grained to 15mm 105077 4 iron ore, 10mm, 1 of 2 8 assm. 4 pieces of bog ore plus charcoal 105077 4 iron ore, 10mm, 2 of 2 42 assm. 12 pieces of bog ore, 1 piece of charcoal, 1 piece of charcoal-bearing ferruginous concretion 105185 6 magnetic material 12.27 assm. ore granules, abundant charcoal, some chert 105188 10 magnetic material 18.71 assm. ore granules, some chert, rare charcoal 105197 14 magnetic material 6.85 assm. charcoal, ore granules, flint, cemented sand 105199 12 magnetic material 9.73 assm. well polished ore granules, some reddened, some charcoal, rather rich in chert 105199 iron ore? 25.56 assm. mineralised charcoal, ore, chert, charcoal 105202 16 magnetic material 70 assm. mainly fired clay, charcoal, some ore 105205 18 magnetic 320 assm. coarse assemblage of ore granules, most dark shiny, some pale, a few reddened. Lots of charcoal 105207 19 magnetic material 1.11 assm. small assemblage of ore granules, many strongly reddened, some charcoal, rare quartz/chert 105207 19 iron ore 338 assm. concretions of charcoal debris in fine iron rich clay. 10-25mm lumps 105214 20 magnetic material 7.08 assm. dominated by charcoal, also ore granules and fired clay with some chert 105214 20 iron ore 20 assm. bog iron ore granules of a 'polished' appearance 105233 24 magnetic material 8.18 assm. ore granules, some reddened, few fragments of chert 105240 26 magnetic material, 0.5mm 5.48 assm. mainly iron ore fragments and rounded granules, some charcoal, some fired clay 105240 26 magnetic material, 1.0mm 12.32 assm. indeterminate grains dominate - could be ore/slag/fired clay; fired clay and lining slag present, moderate chert and moderate charcoal 105240 26 magnetic material, 2.0mm 88 assm. ore granules, fired clay, charcoal
37 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
105258 vitrified clay 256 1 large block of pale grey lining with smooth, well-preserved black glass on front. 105258 65 industrial waste - slag 296 assm. moderately large fragments (to 80mm) of bog iron ore with granular texture, small fragments of charcoal 105258 65 magnetic material 34.22 assm. dark and strongly magnetic assemblage, probably mainly ore, but also some probable fired clay, chert and charcoal 105300 vitrified clay 18 2 vitrified lining - appears almost pure sand 105300 slag 380 5 well-formed dense flow slags, mostly with good tapslag -like surfaces 222 3 well vitrified lining, largest piece very dense for lining 68 1 small slag fragment, charcoal rich on one side - on the other voids show large skeletal olivine up to at least 10x8mm 102 2 concretions 226 4 bog iron ore 1345 8 irregular dense slag fragments - probably all from FBs 105309 28 magnetic 798 assm. coarse assemblage of slag fragments, minor flow slags and droplets, slags with charcoal impressions, charcoal, ore, roasted ore and charcoal 105309 28 slag, 10mm 4640 total 2265 31 dense flow slags 150 23 vitrified lining 16 2 lime-cemented fragments 10 1 round wood charcoal lump 698 8 slab-like pieces of slag with fuel impressions remainder many indeterminate small slag pieces 105313 slag 32 1 small piece of complexly lobed flow slag 194 9 bog iron ore 105315 32 magnetic material 76.03 assm. ore, roast ore, lining slag, lining, greenish glass, flow slags in low density slag, - all quite coarse. Finer material less certain, includes ore, roast ore and lining materials 105317 31 magnetic material 14.2 assm. mostly indeterminate brown particles, probably mainly ore, some slag, certain lining slag, rare charcoal, fired clay 105317 31 industrial waste -slag 1910 total 470 many small fragments - mainly charcoal-bearing slag but encrusted so many uncertain 716 many dense flow slags 512 many vitrified lining, pale with dark purple glass 196 10 granular bog ore
105323 29 magnetic material 76 assm. dominated by indeterminate granules and fragments - both ore and slag particles present, lining slag, occasional oxidised ore, blue-green glassy slag, charcoal, fired clay 105323 29 magnetic material, 0.5mm 12.38 assm. brown indeterminate grains- possibly ore, but dirty. Some charcoal, a few tiny flint fragments, one hollow (fuel ash?) sphere. 105323 29 iron ore, 2mm 218 assm. assemblage largely iron ore, but has many flow slag droplets and prills, together with other slag fragments, some vitrified lining and some charcoal 105323 29 slag, 10mm 972 total 182 6 flow slags
38 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
432 1 large block of FB, 70mm thick, from basal pit-wall angle? 118 1 dimpled crust with large fuel moulds above - probably from base of FB 24 1 angular dense slag fragment 210 16 lining and lining slags - almost all well reduced 105323 29 iron ore, 10mm 266 assm. mostly iron ore, but contains some small flow slag prills and fragments of vitrified and fired lining. Some pieces of ore appear to mimic wood moulds - have these formed post- IA? 105325 38 magnetic material 17.78 assm. pale ore, rare charcoal, rare flint, some possible slag fragments, at least one definite lining slag chip 105327 36 magnetic material, 0.5mm 0.83 assm. small poorly sorted sample. Mostly ore, including some large granules, some bright red particles, lots of charcoal and a few poor slag scraps 105327 36 magnetic material, 1.0mm 63.76 assm. dominated by small indeterminate particles, has some fresh ore, some haematised ore, some slag and moderate charcoal 105327 36 slag, 10mm 222 total 98 8 flow slag 46 5 bog ore 6 2 concretions of small slag particles 76 7 lining - deeply vitrified 105327 36 iron ore, 10mm 240 total 28 2 ore 102 16 slag - mainly flow slag 52 12 vitrified lining and fired clay remainder small fragments - probably iron-concretions on slag and corroded slag 105331 vitrified clay 82 1 deeply-vitrified lining section - possibly vitrified on rear fracture surface 40-50mm behind face too, very vesicular, front glaze largely altered to white limey material, inner glaze fresh dark 30 3 two small lumps of vitrified lining, one piece rounded vitrified on all surfaces - failed or inclusion in fuel?
105331 slag 910 1 large gently curved block from FB wall - not quite a proper burr but similar, 30mm thick 'crust' 416 1 flow-lobed dense slag formed around a very large wood clast at least 30x55mm in section and 70mm length seen 105351 slag 100 1 deeply vitrified rounded lump of lining - failed block? 105351 metal object 286 1 bent iron bar, best preserved section is slightly concavo-convex, 50mm wide and iron c. 7-10 mm thick, 150mm long total 105353 44 magnetic material, 0.5mm, 2 of 5.53 assm. indeterminate fine grains, some lining 2 slag, abundant blue-grey glassy slag chips, flint/chert, fired clay 105353 44 magnetic material, 1.0mm,1 of 24.88 assm. dominated by indeterminate rusty 2 particles - includes some ore but may not be in majority, lining slags, fired clay, reddened ore, a few slag droplets, blue- grey glassy slag chips 105353 44 magnetic residue,1.0mm, 2 of 23.36 assm. indeterminate brown grains, slag, lining 2 slag, blue-green glass chips, some ore grains
39 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
105353 44 slag, 2.0mm, 1 of 2 24 assm. mainly 5-10mm particles of fired clay and vitrified lining, 1 piece of duck egg blue glass 105353 44 slag, 2.0mm, 1 of 2 16.01 assm. mostly vitrified lining, a few flow slag fragments, a few duck egg vesicular glass fragments, green glass bleb, glazed small stones? 105353 44 iron ore, 2.0mm 192 assm. much is iron ore, but also lot of ferruginous concretion, rare lining slag, rare flow slag, moderate charcoal 105353 44 iron ore, 2.0mm 226 assm. mostly charcoal-bearing ferruginous concretion, sometimes with glassy FAS, rare ore, rare flow slag, some vitrified lining 105353 44 iron, 10mm, 2 of 2 20.4 3 flow slags 105353 44 slag, 10mm, 2 of 2 116 total 64 12 slagged or vitrified lining 14 3 small slag fragments 20 1 dense flow slag 6 1 ferruginous soft material shot through with green-grey glassy, FAS-like, vesicular material 18 1 contorted lining slag, tending to green glass, in ferruginous soft matrix 105353 44 iron ore, 1of 2 380 total 142 many ferruginous concretions with slag, blue- green glass, charcoal 64 9 poor flow slags 118 11 slag fragments 26 7 fired sandy clay 28 7 vitrified lining 105353 44 iron ore, 10mm, 2 of 2 620 assm. some ore, some possibly with stalk and leaf impressions (which might be secondary), most is ferruginous concretion on slag and much is slag (mainly flow slag), moderate amount of vitrified/fired lining 105353 FB #1 8000 1 very weathered and accreted so difficult to determine morphology – appears to be a c. 80mm sheet of dense, moderately charcoal-rich slag with up to 50mm raised zone on upper surface; overall 260x190x130mm FB #2 18700 1 Main sheet of charcoal mould rich-slag is 130mm thick; the base is fractured but FB probably did not reach base of pit. Burr slopes in 100mm over the 130mm fall to the base and rises in a 30mm lip above FB top. FB top masked by iron rich concretion (up to 50mm thick) in distal area and by collapsed wall around lateral margins. Overall 320mm from back of burr to distal edge, 310mm wide; burr well formed on chord of 230mm. FB #3 19500 1 All charcoal-rich material, no burr, edge shows radius of c240mm, c130mm thick, side appears to curve downwards to base of rough charcoal moulds of 130mm diameter; overall 450x320x170mm, raised charcoal rich top obscures a lower surface - parts of lower top have larger round dimples FB #4 19600 1 Burr chord at least 300mm, 55mm out, 330mm long 360mm wide but broken, at least 380mm wide if symmetrical about centre of burr. Central flat top has deep
40 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
dimples, with raised charcoal-rich slag either side; burr side slopes in 70mm over 100mm depth, burr lip broken at top level but originally must have been stood proud. 105361 39 industrial waste 1330 assm. iron ore (568g largest lump), 218g 16 pieces of flow slag, 20g of vitrified lining (3 pieces), 32g furnace floor concretion, few tiny pieces of charcoal, remainder fine ore fragments/granules 105361 39 magnetic 1105 assm. assemblage of ore, roasted ore, charcoal, but dominated by fine rusty irregular grains of concretionary material with charcoal and rust/ore dust 105362 slag 1105 10 bog iron ore 298 3 flow slags - good dense flows around broad flat wood fragments close to pit base 50 1 slag fragment rich in fine charcoal 152 1 dense slag with rounded voids and localised secondary reddening 105364 vitrified clay 188 3 fragments of deeply vitrified wall, one has strongly embayed section, one has 'wrinkles' in the glaze and one does not show surface well 105364 slag 348 1 block of FB with large fuel moulds 376 1 curved base of FB with very large fuel moulds - suggests flow on subsoil 262 1 block of FB rich in fine and some coarse charcoal 152 1 bog iron ore 276 1 block of FB with large moulds and sandy area suggestive of wall contact 146 4 flowed slags 60 1 bog iron ore, glossy granules on base grading up into diffusely-mottled material with some mineralised plant fragments 10 7 slag bits 105364 slag 370 1 very dense burr fragment - attached to thin lining skim and has charcoal-rich material on interior 488 1 irregular lump of very dense vesicle-free slag around some large fuel moulds 164 1 bog iron ore 126 1 irregular slag lump with charcoal 190 2 well formed flow slags, 1 complex lobes between fuel, the other a tapslag-like flow on fine charcoal 198 11 ore 105365 vitrified clay 160 1 vitrified lining block with oxidised rear - front shows ridges in glazed surface which is purple and also a small droplet of attached iron slag 228 1 lining block from near blowhole - variably vitrified, shows old oxidised surface overlain by at least 30mm of newer sandy clay, all irregularly vitrified suggesting some failure and vitrification along cracks 105365 slag 230 1 block of dense flow slag, penetrating between wood fragments, slightly freer lobes on upper surface 105379 slag 2805 16 vitrified lining - dark black / purple glaze with mainly reduced wall (most here are somewhat 604 8 oxidised fired sandy ceramic , well-sorted concreted) sandy fabric, rare coarser quartz grains and some minor fine organic material
41 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
58 1 concentrically structured concretion c. 50mm diameter - probably a completely corroded iron lump 3750 8 dominantly massive dense slags, few fuel clasts 1520 3 dense massive slags with sediment attachment indicating they are from burr region 226 1 charcoal rich slag with sediment attached indicating it is from the burr region 2915 10 dense slags with significant moulds of fuel/wood clasts 1920 11 dense slags forming flows between fuel/wood moulds 358 1 well-formed small birds-foot structure 892 18 concretions - some probably simply broken from other pieces others are cored on slag 105383 43 slag 10mm 1820 assm. bog iron ore fragments - mottles, granules and crusts 105383 43 slag 1795 total 488 5 deeply vitrified reduced lining 40 1 reduced fired lining 210 4 oxidised fired lining 478 8 rusted charcoal rich slags - probably FB fragments 118 1 irregular slightly spiky but rounded mass of rather low density slag 444 3 dense slags with wood impressions 105383 43 slag 10mm 6020 assm. bog iron ore - in blocks up to 150mm 105385 42 magnetic material 22.8 assm. coarse, large particles to 15mm: ore, granular, and rare charcoal 105459 47 iron ore? 22 assm. iron ore 105467 47 magnetic material 10.03 assm. mostly indeterminate particles, probably mainly ore, but there is certainly some slag, rare stones, some charcoal. 105467 48 iron ore? 80 assm. iron ore, some reddened - but much is very low iron 105474 49 magnetic material 0.5mm 0.35 assm. fired clay, iron ore, charcoal 105474 49 magnetic material 1.0mm 5 assm. ore granules, rare chert 105474 49 iron ore magnetic material 756 assm. mostly ferruginous concretion material on 2mm plant (charcoal?) debris - probably secondary ore on charcoal deposit 105258 65 industrial waste - slag 296 assm. moderately large fragments (to 80mm) of bog iron ore with granular texture, small fragments of charcoal 105258 65 magnetic material 34.22 assm. dark and strongly magnetic assemblage, probably mainly ore, but also some probable fired clay, chert and charcoal 105590 slag 12.55 total 3.92 many fragmented fired clay with variable buff- grey reduction 8.86 1 bog ore 105591 slag 30 2 bog iron ore 1 1 small fragment of fired clay with coarse rounded sand, variable reduction 105593 slag 20 1 bog iron ore
WA Samples 10018 1 Burnt natural? 18 assm. granules of bog ore Residue 2 + 1 + 0.5mm 260 assm. granules of bog ore, chert, mineralised charcoal, some reduced fired clay 10066 2 Burnt natural? 20 assm. granules of bog iron ore and iron cemented sand Residue 2 + 1 + 0.5mm 994 assm. Mainly chert and other siliceous grains, sandy bog ore, mineralised charcoal
42 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Table 2: Summary commentary on contexts. C = charcoal-dominated materials, m = trace of metallurgical materials, M = abundant/significant metallurgical materials, ? = no indicative materials C Wt. description C14 Date Class 10018 278 sandy bog ore/iron pan, mineralised charcoal, chert, quartz, SUERC-36687 AD1020-1170 C pit 10013 some fired clay SUERC-36688 AD1040-1230 10066 1014 sandy bog ore/iron pan, mineralised charcoal, chert, quartz C tree throw 10065 105046 265 charcoal, partially concreted/mineralised, bog iron ore (some C pit 105045, 1A burnt), some fired clay 105077 994 charcoal, bog iron ore, much slightly concreted charcoal SUERC-39925 170BC – AD10 C pit 105078, 6 105185 12 ore granules, abundant charcoal, some chert C pit 105186, 1A 105188 19 ore granules, some chert, rare charcoal C pit 105189, 1A 105197 7 charcoal, ore granules, flint, cemented sand C pit 105196, 1A 105199 35 well polished ore granules, some reddened, some charcoal, SUERC-39926 1920-1740BC C pit 105200, 1A much mineralised, rich in chert 105202 70 mainly fired clay, charcoal, some ore C pit 105203, 1A 105205 320 coarse assemblage of ore granules, most dark shiny, some C pit 105204, 1A pale, a few reddened, charcoal 105207 339 10-25mm concretions of charcoal in fine iron- rich clay, fine C pit 105208, 1B ore granules, many reddened 105214 7 bog iron ore granules of a 'polished' appearance, much C pit 105215, 1B charcoal and fired clay with some chert 105233 8 ore granules, some reddened, few fragments of chert C pit 105234, 1B 105240 106 iron ore fragments/rounded granules; fired clay and lining SUERC-39927 AD1030-1210 m pit 105241, 1B slag, moderate chert and charcoal 105258 586 large block of vitrified lining, fragments (to 80mm) of granular SUERC-39937 AD1160-1270 M pit 105259, 1A bog ore, charcoal, fired clay, chert 105300 4704 FB fragments, flow slags, vitrified lining, bog ore lumps, M pit 105301, 1A concretionary material (RH) 105309 5438 dense flow slags, probable FB fragments, vitrified lining, bog M ditch 105310, iron ore lumps, concretions 1A (RH) 105313 226 small piece of complexly lobed flow slag, 9 pieces of bog ore m gully 105314, 1A (RH) 105315 76 ore, roast ore, lining slag, lining, greenish glass, flow slags in m gully 105316, low density slag 1A (RH) 105317 1924 dense flow slags, vitrified lining, bog ore fragments and lots of M gully 105318, finer slag debris 1A (RH) 105323 1544 flow slags, FB fragments, vitrified lining, lining slags, iron ore SUERC-39931 AD990-1160 M pit 105324, 1A fragments, concretions (RH) 105325 18 pale ore, rare charcoal, rare flint, some possible slag m pit 105326, 1A fragments, at least one lining slag chip (RH)
43 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
105327 527 small pieces of flow slag, vitrified lining, fired clay, bog iron M pit 105328, 1A ore, with concretions and charcoal (RH) 105331 1438 FB fragment, large flow slag block, vitrified lining and lining M ditch 105332, slag 1A (RH)
105351 386 iron bar fragment, deeply vitrified rounded lump of lining - m pit 105352, 1A failed block? (RH) 105353 67448 large FB pieces, flow slags, vitrified lining, duck egg glass, M gully 105354, iron ore, glazed stones, concretions 1A (RH) 105361 2435 iron ore, flow slag, vitrified lining, furnace floor concretion, tiny SUERC-39932 400-200BC M pit 105363, 1A charcoal, fine ore fragments (RH) 105362 1605 bog iron ore, flow slags, charcoal rich slag M pit 105363, 1A (RH) 105364 3354 FB fragments, flow slags, vitrified lining, bog ore lumps, M pit 105367, 1A concretionary material (RH) 105365 618 vitrified lining, flow slag M pit 105367, 1A (RH) 105379 15048 substantial pieces of FB, flow slags and vitrified wall, possible M pit 105382, 1A iron lump (gromp?) (RH) 105383 1820 bog iron ore fragments, some large, with some vitrified lining M ditch 105384, and flow slags 1A (RH) 105385 23 coarse, large particles to 15mm: ore, granular, and rare ? ditch 105387, charcoal 1A (RH) 105459 22 bog iron ore ? pit 105460, conveyor 105467 90 mostly indeterminate particles, mainly ore, but there is some SUERC-39933 AD1020-1160 m pit 105468, slag, stones, charcoal. conveyor 105474 761 ferruginous concretion material on plant (charcoal?) debris, C pit 105475, 1A fired clay, iron ore, charcoal, chert 105590 13 bog ore and fragmented fired clay with variable buff-grey ? pit 105592, reduction HLMA 4 105591 31 bog iron ore, some fired clay ? pit 105592, HLMA 4 105593 20 bog iron ore SUERC-39935 AD1040-1270 ? pit 105595, HLMA 4
44 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
APPENDIX 6: PLANT MACROFOSSIL AND CHACOAL REMAINS BY S. COBAIN
Introduction A total of 30 bulk soil samples were retrieved for plant macrofossil and charcoal assessment taken from a series of pits, ditches and a gully across the site. The aim of this assessment is to determine the type, preservation and quantity of plant macrofossil and charcoal remains recovered and use this to assess the potential of these remains to provide evidence of socio-economic activities being undertaken on the site (crop husbandry, diet, living conditions of communities, exploitation of woodlands for fuel, woodland management), and to infer the composition of the local flora and woodlands.
Methodology Following flotation (CA Technical Manual No 2), the residue was dried and sorted by eye, the floated material scanned and seeds identified using a low power stereo-microscope (Brunel MX1) at magnifications of x10 to x40. Identifications were carried out with reference to images and descriptions by Cappers et al. (2006), Berggren (1981) and Anderberg (1994). Nomenclature follows Stace (1997).
A selection of charcoal fragments were fractured by hand to reveal the wood anatomy on radial, tangential and transverse planes. The pieces were then supported in a sand bath and identified under an epi-illuminating microscope (Brunel SP400) at magnifications from x40 to x400. Identifications were carried out with reference to images and descriptions by Cutler and Gale (2000) and Heller et al. (2004) and Wheeler et al. (1989). Nomenclature of species follows Stace (1997).
Results The results are presented in tabular form (Tables 1 - 6) and are discussed below. SS refers to the Soil Sample number.
Bronze Age Pit 105200 (SS 12) contained oak charcoal fragments and a single fragment of alder was identified. No plant macrofossils were identified.
Iron Age Roundhouse area Six samples were taken from ditches 105310 (SS 28), 105318 (SS 31), 105316 (SS 32), 105387 (SS 42), 105384 (SS 43), 105354 (SS 44). No plant macrofossils were identified within these samples. The charcoal recovered was abundant but poorly preserved. Oak was the dominant species identified with one fragment positively identified as heartwood in ditch 105387 and one fragment of alder/hazel in ditch 105316. No charcoal was recovered from ditch 105384.
Four samples were taken from pits 105324 (SS 29), 105328 (SS 36), 105326 (SS 38) and 105363 (SS 39). No plant macrofossils were recovered. The charcoal was abundant and poorly preserved. Again the majority of the charcoal was identified as oak with one fragment of heartwood identified in both pits 105324 and 105328 and some alder/hazel and hawthorn/rowan/crab apple in pit 105324.
45 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Pits A total of seven pits dating to the Iron Age were sampled. There were no plant macrofossil identified and the charcoal was abundant, but moderate to poor in preservation. Pits 105045 (SS 2), 105078 (SS 4), 105168 (SS 6), 105189 (SS 10), 105196 (SS 14) and 105204 (SS 18) contained broadly similar charcoal assemblages consisting of oak (some heartwood identified), alder/hazel, ash, willow/poplar and yew. All pits with the exception of pit 105078 appeared to be dominated by oak. Pit 105078 was dominated by alder/hazel.
Medieval There were 12 samples retrieved from pits dating to the medieval period. Pit 105259 (SS 65), 105208 (SS 19), 105216 (SS 20), 105233 (SS 24), 105241 (SS 26), 105460 (SS 47), 105468 (SS 48), 105475 (SS 49), 105530 (SS 52), 105534 (SS 53), 105595 (SS 60) and 105599 (SS 64) contained no plant macrofossil remains with the exception of a single possible hawthorn seed in pit 105599. The charcoal was abundant in all pits and moderately to poorly preserved. The charcoal was dominantly oak with some heartwood identified. A single fragment of alder/hazel was identified in pit 105534.
Discussion There were no carbonised plant macrofossils recovered with the exception of a single poorly preserved possible hawthorn seed in pit 105599. The charcoal was recovered in large quantities but was largely poorly preserved with many fragments encrusted with an orange residue (bog ore?) which made identification very difficult. As a result no plant macrofossil and only three charcoal samples have been recommended for full analysis. This selection has been made based on samples that are well enough preserved to allow further work. It is proposed that for charcoal samples 100 fragments are identified with equal proportions from sieve sizes >4mm and >2mm.
Bronze Age As only a single pit of Bronze Age date has been identified no further work is recommended.
Iron Age Charcoal production pits are usually found to be circular or rectangular in shape and contain roundwood charcoal fragments. The pits excavated here were categorised as charcoal production pits, although recent nearby evaluation work by Wessex Archaeology (WA 2011, 16) found similar pits which contained a high frequency of mature wood with little evidence of roundwood fragments. These were concluded to be result of burning tree stumps from woodland clearance. The charcoal from the pits from this phase of work contained little evidence of round wood fragments although the charcoal was highly fragmented which may have obscured evidence of curved growth rings within the fragments. This together with the regular shape of the pits (with no evidence of roots) and in comparison with charcoal production pits at Sadler’s End, Wokingham (Lewis et al. 2011, 13) the similarity in shape of these pits suggests they are likely to be charcoal production pits.
As identified in the Solent Thames Research Framework a priority for further research is to investigate the use of fuel and impact of industrial work on the environment and to define the composition and management of woodlands (Lambrick 2010, 6). As most of the charcoal recovered from the features consisted of oak wood, there is limited scope for characterising the local woodland resource (and impact on it) during this period. However further work on pits 105196 and 105078 will hopefully reveal evidence of round wood charcoal fragments which will present additional evidence for the use of the pits for charcoal production. The dominance of alder/hazel in pit 105078 may indicate alder/hazel being used to produce charcoal. Identification of other species will hopefully provide evidence for kindling, thereby make available some information regarding local vegetation/woodland.
46 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Medieval A series of pits, similar in character to those dated to the Iron Age were also excavated and have been characterised as charcoal production pits. As with the Iron Age material the charcoal was identified dominantly as oak with few roundwood fragments identified. The Solent Thames Research Framework outlines that further research is required into identifying iron working sites (of which charcoal production is a large component) and the provision of firewood and charcoal (Munby 2010, 3, 10). Further work is recommended on the sample from pit 105259 in order to hopefully reveal evidence of round wood charcoal fragments. The identification of species in addition to oak will hopefully provide evidence for kindling and thereby infer some of the local vegetation/woodland species present.
Recommendations for further work:
Charcoal Analysis Identifications 4 samples for full analysis – 1.5 days - EO
Analysis Reporting Charcoal data entry and reporting – 1.5 days – EO
Word count 800
Number of tables 1 x A4 page
No further sample processing required.
References
Anderberg A-L. 1994 Atlas of seeds: Part 4, Swedish Museum of Natural History, Uddevalla, Risbergs Tryckeri AB
Berggren, G. 1981 Atlas of seeds: Part 3, Swedish Museum of Natural History, Arlöv, Berlings
Cappers, R.T.J., Bekker R.M., and Gronigen, J.E.A. 2006 Digital seed atlas of the Netherlands, Archaeological Studies 4 Barkhuis Publishing, Eelde, The Netherlands www.seedatlas.nl (accessed 2012)
Cutler, D.F. and Gale, R. 2000 Plants in archaeology – identification manual of artefacts of plant origin from Europe and the Mediterranean Kew, Westbury Scientific Publishing
Heller, I., Kienast, F., Schoch, W., Schweingruber, F. H. 2004 Wood anatomy of Central European species www.woodanatomy.ch (accessed 2012)
Lambrick, G. 2010 Solent Thames research framework research agenda. The later Bronze Age and Iron Age period http://thehumanjourney.net/pdf_store/sthames/phase3/
47 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Research%20Agendas/Late%20Bronze%20Age%20and%20Iron%20Age%20Research%20Agenda.pdf (accessed 28/09/2012)
Lewis, J., Crabb, S. and Ford, S. 2011 Bronze Age urns, Iron Age smelting and Saxon charcoal production at Sadler’s End, Sindlesham, Wokingham, Berkshire TVAS draft publication report 05/87
Munby, J. 2010 Solent Thames research framework research agenda. Later medieval period http://thehumanjourney.net/pdf_store/sthames/phase3/Research%20Agendas/Later%20Medieval%20Res earch%20Agenda.pdf (accessed 28/09/2012)
Stace, C. 1997 A new British flora Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
WA (Wessex Archaeology) 2011 Eversley Quarry, Fleet Hill Farm, Finchampstead, Berkshire Archaeological Assessment Report 74221.01
Wheeler, E.A., Baas, P. and Gasson, P.E . (eds) 1989 ‘IAWA list of microscopic features for hardwood identification’, IAWA Bulletin ns, 10 , 219-332
48 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Table 1: Bronze Age - charcoal identifications
Context number 105199
Feature number 105200
Sample number 12
Flot volume (ml) 578
Sample volume (l) 6
Soil remaining (l) 10
Charcoal quantity ++++
Charcoal preservation Moderate
Recommendations for full analysis
Family Species Comm on Name
Betulaceae Alnus glutinosa Alder 1
Fagaceae Quercus robur/petraea Sessile/pedunculate oak 9
Indeterminate
Number of Fragments: 10
13 Co 14 B15 O16 S17 E18 L19 M20 S21 I 22 T 23 W 24 U 25 ntext no. OS /C US QU M M M ND otal eight (g) nburnt urnt 26 20 27 - 28 2 29 - 30 - 31 - 32 - 33 - 34 5 35 7 36 4 37 y 38 5 2 4 6 28.18 es o 39 22 40 - 41 - 42 543 - 44 - 45 - 46 - 47 - 48 5 49 7 50 y 51 2 5.60 es o 52 28 53 - 54 3 55 - 56 - 57 158 - 59 - 60 - 61 4 62 5 63 y 64 4 8.31 es o 65 20 66 567 - 68 - 69 - 70 - 71 - 72 - 73 - 74 5 75 3 76 y 77 17 42.86 es o 78 40 79 - 80 - 81 - 82 - 83 - 84 - 85 - 86 4 87 4 88 0. 89 n 90 50 2 2 86 o es
49 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
13 Co 14 B15 O16 S17 E18 L19 M20 S21 I 22 T 23 W 24 U 25 ntext no. OS /C US QU M M M ND otal eight (g) nburnt urnt 91 40 92 - 93 - 94 - 95 - 96 - 97 - 98 - 99 8 100 8 101 0. 102 n 103 88 12 o es 104 41 105 - 106 - 107 - 108 - 109 - 110 - 111 - 112 3 113 3 114 1. 115 n 116 49 6 6 18 o es 117 41 118 - 119 - 120 - 121 - 122 - 123 - 124 - 125 1 126 1 127 1. 128 n 129 64 63 o es 130 41 131 - 132 - 133 - 134 - 135 - 136 - 137 - 138 7 139 7 140 3. 141 n 142 65 9 9 09 o es 143 42 144 - 145 - 146 - 147 - 148 - 149 - 150 - 151 7 152 7 153 3. 154 n 155 80 38 o es 156 42 157 - 158 - 159 - 160 - 161 - 162 - 163 - 164 1 165 1 166 0. 167 n 168 94 17 o es 169 43 170 1171 - 172 - 173 - 174 - 175 - 176 - 177 4 178 5 179 4. 180 y 181 22 55 es o 182 43 183 2184 - 185 - 186 1 187 9188 - 189 - 190 - 191 1 192 1 193 y 194 27 2 78.48 es o 195 43 196 - 197 - 198 - 199 2 200 - 201 - 202 - 203 - 204 2 205 5 206 y 207 50 6.99 es o 208 45 209 - 210 - 211 - 212 - 213 - 214 - 215 - 216 8 217 8 218 4. 219 n 220 50 2 2 38 o es 221 46 222 - 223 - 224 - 225 - 226 - 227 - 228 1229 - 230 1 231 0. 232 n 233 02 46 o es 234 46 235 - 236 - 237 - 238 - 239 - 240 - 241 - 242 4 243 4 244 0. 245 n 246 59 09 o es 247 46 248 - 249 - 250 - 251 - 252 - 253 - 254 - 255 1 256 1 257 0. 258 n 259 60 0 0 24 o es 260 47 261 - 262 - 263 - 264 - 265 - 266 - 267 - 268 9 269 9 270 0. 271 n 272 31 20 o es 273 47 274 - 275 - 276 - 277 - 278 - 279 - 280 - 281 6 282 6 283 0. 284 n 285 42 34 o es 286 47 287 - 288 - 289 - 290 - 291 - 292 - 293 - 294 1 295 1 296 0. 297 n 298 45 42 o es 299 48 300 - 301 - 302 - 303 - 304 - 305 - 306 - 307 5 308 5 309 3. 310 n 311 01 5 5 45 o es 312 48 313 - 314 - 315 - 316 - 317 - 318 - 319 1320 2 321 3 322 2. 323 n 324 32 92 o es
50 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
13 Co 14 B15 O16 S17 E18 L19 M20 S21 I 22 T 23 W 24 U 25 ntext no. OS /C US QU M M M ND otal eight (g) nburnt urnt 325 48 326 - 327 - 328 - 329 - 330 1331 - 332 - 333 3 334 4 335 8. 336 y 337 61 13 es es 338 48 339 - 340 - 341 - 342 - 343 - 344 - 345 - 346 4 347 4 348 0. 349 n 350 69 82 o es 351 48 352 - 353 - 354 - 355 - 356 - 357 1 358 - 359 - 360 1 361 0. 362 n 363 96 43 o es 364 49 365 - 366 - 367 - 368 - 369 3370 - 371 - 372 - 373 3 374 1 375 y 376 04 6.29 es o 377 49 378 - 379 - 380 - 381 - 382 - 383 - 384 - 385 1 386 1 387 0. 388 n 389 66 6 6 19 o es 390 50 391 - 392 - 393 - 394 - 395 - 396 - 397 - 398 2 399 2 400 0. 401 n 402 76 49 o es 403 51 404 - 405 - 406 - 407 - 408 - 409 - 410 - 411 3 412 3 413 0. 414 n 415 34 06 o es 416 61 417 - 418 - 419 - 420 - 421 1422 - 423 - 424 - 425 1 426 1. 427 n 428 20 24 o es 429 61 430 - 431 - 432 - 433 - 434 - 435 - 436 - 437 4 438 4 439 1. 440 n 441 74 1 1 41 o es 442 62 443 - 444 - 445 - 446 - 447 - 448 - 449 - 450 4 451 4 452 2 453 n 454 04 98 98 5.57 o es 455 62 456 - 457 - 458 - 459 - 460 - 461 - 462 - 463 4 464 4 465 0. 466 n 467 07 23 o es 468 62 469 - 470 - 471 - 472 - 473 - 474 - 475 - 476 4 477 4 478 0. 479 n 480 56 13 o es 481 62 482 - 483 - 484 - 485 - 486 - 487 - 488 - 489 2 490 2 491 0. 492 n 493 59 4 4 70 o es 494 63 495 - 496 - 497 - 498 - 499 - 500 - 501 - 502 1 503 1 504 2. 505 n 506 13 7 7 20 o es 507 TO 508 8509 2 510 5511 3 512 1513 3 514 2515 1 516 1 517 1, 518 1 519 TAL: 5 5 ,015 ,076 225.79 0.69% 9.31% 520 We 521 4522 4 523 7524 1 525 1526 0 527 0528 9 529 1 530 - 531 9 532 ight: 16.53 04.59 5.60 19.67 11.89 .96 .63 5.92 ,225.79 5.05% .95%
51 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Table 2: Iron Age - charcoal identifications
Context number 105046 105077 105185 105188 105197 105202 105205 105309 105315
Feature number 105045 105078 105186 105189 105196 105203 105204 105310 105316
Sample number 2 4 6 10 14 16 18 28 32
Flot volume (ml) 26 64 63 39 386 499 291 4 32
Sample volum e (l) 6 8 7 8 8 8 10 8 8
Soil remaining (l) 20 30 10 10 10 10 10 0 0
Charcoal quantity ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++ (s) +++
Charcoal preservation Poor Moderate Poor Poor Moderate Poor Poor Poor Poor
Recommendations for full analysis
Family Species Common Name
Alnus glutinosa/Corylus Betulaceae Alder/hazel 6 1 avellana
Corylus avellana Hazel 1
Fagaceae Quercus robur/petraea Sessile/pedunculate oak 3 2 10 1 4 5 5 3
Querc us robur/petraea Sessile/pedunculate oak 6 9 4 6 4 h/w h/w
Quercus robur/petraea Sessile/pedunculate oak 1 1
52 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
r/w r/w
Oleaceae Fraxinus excelsior Ash 3
Salicaceae Salix spp/ Populus spp Willow/poplar 1
Taxaceae Taxus baccata Yew 3
Indeterminate 3 15
Number of Fragments: 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 5 4
Table 2 (cont)
Context number 105317 105323 105325 105327 105353 105361 105383 105385
Feature number 105318 105324 105326 105328 105354 105363 105384 105387
Sample number 31 29 38 36 44 39 43 42
Flot volume (ml) 15 151 6 20 15 20 2 32
Sample volume (l) 8 10 4 8 10 6 8 8
Soil remaining (l) 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Charcoal quantity ++ (s) ++++ ++++ +++ ++++ ++++ N/A +++
Char coal preservation Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor N/A Poor
Recommendations for full analysis
Family Species Common Name
Alnus glutinosa/Corylus Betulaceae Alder/hazel 2 avellana
Fagaceae Quercus robur/petraea Sessile/pedunculate oak 3 6 10 9 10 10 9
Quercus robur/petraea Sessile/pedunculate oak 1 1 1 h/w h/w
Rosaceae Crataegus Hawthorn/rowan/ crab 1
53 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
monogyna/Sorbus apple spp /Malus sylvestris
Indeterminate
Nu mber of Fragments: 3 10 10 10 10 10 0 10
Table 3: Medieval - charcoal identifications
Context number 105207 105214 105233 105240 105258 105459 105467
Feature number 105208 105215 105234 105241 105259 105460 105468
Sample number 19 20 24 26 65 47 48
Flot volume (ml) 86 903 259 412 100 617 36
Sample volume (l) 8 8 8 8 6 6 6
Soil remaining (l) 10 10 10 10 0 10 30
Charcoal quantity ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
Charcoal preservation Poor Poor Poor Poor Moderate Poor Poor
Recommendations for f ull analysis
Family Species Common Name
Fagaceae Quercus robur/petraea Sessile/pedunculate oak 5 2 10 8 7 9
Sessile/pedunculate oak Quercus robur/petraea h/w 5 7 10 1 h/w
Quercus robur/petraea r/w Sessile/pedunculate oak r/w 1 1 3 1
Indeterminate
54 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Number of Fragments: 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Table 3 (cont)
Context number 105474 105531 105533 105593 105598
Feature number 105475 105530 105534 105595 105599
Sample number 49 52 53 60 64
Flot volume (ml) Missing 231 88 1455 2655
Sample volume (l) 6 9 7 8 7
Soil remaining (l) 30 10 0 30 10
Charcoal quantity ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
Charcoal preservation Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor
Recommendations for full analysis
Family Sp ecies Common Name
Betulaceae Alnus glutinosa Alder 1
Fagaceae Quercus robur/petraea Sessile/pedunculate oak 6 5 7 7 8
Quercus robur/petraea h/w Sessile/pedunculate oak h/w 4 4 2 2 2
Quercus robur/petraea r/w Sessile/pedunculate oak r/w 1 1
Indeterminate
55 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Number of Fragments: 10 10 10 10 10
Key h/w = heartwood r/w = roundwood
Table 4: Bronze Age - plant macrofossil identifications
Context number 105199
Feature number 105200
Sample number 12
Flot volume (ml) 578
Sample volume (l) 6
Soil remaining (l) 10
Plant macrofossil preservation N/A
Recommendations for full analysis No
Habitat Code Family Species Common Name
Total identified: 0
Table 5: Iron Age - plant macrofossil identifications
Context number 105046 105077 105185 105188 105197 105202 105205 105309 105315
Feature number 105045 105078 105186 105189 105196 105203 105204 105310 105316
Sample number 2 4 6 10 14 16 18 28 32
56 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Flot volume (ml) 26 64 63 39 386 499 291 4 32
Sample volume (l) 6 8 7 8 8 8 10 8 8
Soil remaining (l) 20 30 10 10 10 10 10 0 0
Plant macrofossil preservation N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Recommendations for full analysis No No No No No No No No No
Habitat Code Family Species Common Name
Total identified: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 5 (cont)
Context number 105317 105323 105325 105327 105353 105361 105383 105385
Feature number 105318 105324 105326 105328 105354 105363 105384 105387
Sample number 31 29 38 36 44 39 43 42
Flot volume (ml) 15 151 6 20 15 20 2 32
Sample volume (l) 8 10 4 8 10 6 8 8
Soil remaining (l) 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plant macrofossil preservation N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Recommendations for full analysis No No No No No No No No
Habitat Code Family Species Common Nam e
Total identified: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 6: Medieval - plant macrofossil identifications
Context number 105207 105214 105233 105240 105258 105459 105467
Feature number 105208 105215 105234 105241 105259 105460 105468
Sample number 19 20 24 26 65 47 48
57 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
Flot volume (ml) 86 903 259 412 100 617 36
Sample volume (l) 8 8 8 8 6 6 6
Soil remaining (l) 10 10 10 10 0 10 30
Plant macrofossil preservation N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Recommendations for full analysis No No No No No No No
Hab itat Code Family Species Common Name
Total identified: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 6 (cont)
Context number 105474 105531 105533 105593 105598
Feature number 105475 105530 105534 105595 105599
Sample number 49 52 53 60 64
Flot volume (ml) Missing 231 88 1455 2655
Sample volume (l) 6 9 7 8 7
Soil remaining (l) 30 10 0 30 10
Plant macrofossil preservation N/A N/A N/A N/A Poor
Recommendations for full analysis No No No No No
Habitat Code Family Species Common Name
HSW Rosaceae cf Crataegus monogyna cf hawthorn cf 1
Total identified: 0 0 0 0 1
Key HSW = hedgerow/scrub/woodland species
58 Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire: Post-Excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design © Cotswold Archaeology
APPENDIX 7: OASIS REPORT FORM
PROJECT DETAILS
Project Name Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire Short description (250 words maximum) Archaeological investigation (comprising evaluation, excavation and monitoring) was carried out across a 48 ha area designated for quarry expansion by Cotswold Archaeology (CA) at the request of The Guildhouse Consultancy (on behalf of Cemex UK Operations Ltd) in compliance with an approved WSI (CA 2009).
The work recovered evidence for two main phases of activity, specifically a phase of iron smelting and charcoal production dating to the middle-later Iron Age (3 rd ̶ 1 st centuries BC), and a phase of medieval charcoal production dating to between the 11 th and the 13 th centuries. Slight evidence of a Mesolithic presence and Bronze Age activity was also found, along with post-medieval and modern landscape management in the form of a scatter of field ditches and drains. A further programme of ‘strip-and-record’ was carried out by Wessex Archaeology (WA) in 2010 and 2011, on a total of 10.6 ha in the south-western part of the CA investigation area, and bordering the north bank of the River Blackwell. Project dates May-Dec 2009; April 2010 – June 2011 Project type Strip,map, sample, and monitor (e.g. desk-based, field evaluation etc)
Previous work None (reference to organisation or SMR numbers etc)
Future work Unknown PROJECT LOC ATION Site Location Eversley Quarry, Finchampstead, Wokingham, Berkshire Study area (M 2/ha) 58.6 ha Site co-ordinates (8 Fig Grid Reference) SU 7890 6230
PROJECT CREATORS Name of organisation Cotswold Archaeology Project Brief originator Berkshire Archaeology Project Design (WSI) originator Cotswold Archaeology
Project Manager Laurent Coleman Project Supervisor Steven Sheldon MONUMENT TYPE Field SIGNIFICANT FINDS Iron Age smelting furnace and shelter, Medieval charcoal making PROJEC T ARCHIVES Intended final location of archive Content (e.g. pottery, (museum/Accession no.) animal bone etc) Reading/REDMG 2008.694
Physical ceramics, pottery, slag, fired clay Paper Context sheets, matrices Plans, sections, registers Digital Database, digital photos BIBLIOGRAPHY
59