QUARRENDON FIELDS AYLESBURY BUCKINGHAMSHIRE
ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD EVALUATION
Document: 2009/103 Project: BA1519
15th January 2010
Compiled by Checked by Approved by James Newboult Joe Abrams Drew Shotliff
Produced for: Hives Planning
On behalf of: Arnold White Estates Ltd
© Copyright Albion Archaeology 2010, all rights reserved Albion Archaeology Contents
Key Terms...... 4
Preface...... 5
Structure of this Report...... 5
Non-Technical Summary...... 6
1. INTRODUCTION...... 7
1.1 Project background ...... 7
1.2 Location and Archaeological Background...... 8
2. METHODOLOGY...... 9
2.1 Introduction...... 9
2.2 Cropmark Analysis...... 9
2.3 Fieldwalking ...... 9
2.4 Geophysical Survey...... 10
2.5 Trial Trenching ...... 10
3. CROPMARK ANALYSIS RESULTS...... 12
3.1 Introduction...... 12
4. FIELDWALKING RESULTS ...... 14
4.1 Collection Conditions...... 14
4.2 Artefacts...... 14
5. GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY RESULTS...... 16
5.1 Introduction...... 16
5.2 Results...... 16
5.3 Reliability of Results...... 17
6. TRIAL TRENCHING RESULTS...... 18
6.1 Introduction...... 18
6.2 Overburden and Undisturbed Geology...... 18
6.3 Late Iron Age and Roman...... 18
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 1 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology 6.4 Medieval...... 23
7. SYNTHESIS ...... 24
7.1 Introduction...... 24
7.2 Discussion ...... 24
7.3 Preservation...... 27
7.4 Significance...... 27
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 29
9. APPENDIX 1 – TRENCH SUMMARIES ...... 30
10. APPENDIX 2 – FIELDWALKING ARTEFACT SUMMARY ...... 56
10.1 Finds Summary ...... 61
10.2 Ceramic building material ...... 63
10.3 Other finds...... 63
11. APPENDIX 3 – TRIAL TRENCHING ARTEFACT SUMMARY ...... 64
11.1 Introduction...... 64
11.2 Pottery...... 65
11.3 Other finds...... 67
11.4 Animal bone...... 67
12. APPENDIX 4 – ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE REPORT...... 68
12.1 Introduction...... 68
12.2 Methods...... 68
12.3 Results...... 68
12.4 Conclusions and Potential ...... 69
12.5 Recommendations...... 70
12.6 Bibliography ...... 70
13. APPENDIX 5 – HUMAN BONE REPORT ...... 72
13.1 Introduction...... 72
13.2 Methodology ...... 72 Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 2 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology 13.3 Results...... 73
13.4 Recommendations...... 73
13.5 References...... 73
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 3 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
LIST OF FIGURES All figures are bound at the back of the report.
Figure 1: Site location and Development Area Figure 2: DA showing selected cropmarks Figure 3: Development of field-systems (pre-medieval and medieval) Figure 4: Development of field-systems (post-medieval and modern) Figure 5: All findspots identified by fieldwalking survey Figure 6: Magnetic susceptibility overlaid with late Bronze Age to Roman findspots Figure 7: Magnetic susceptibility overlaid with medieval and post-medieval findspots Figure 8: Locations of Archaeological Zones (AZ) Figure 9: Magnetic susceptibility showing areas selected for detailed magnetometry Figure 10: Trial trench plan overlaid onto detailed magnetometry results Figure 11: All features plan overlaid onto detailed magnetometry results Figure 12: Trench 1 Figure 13: Trench 2 Figure 14: Trench 3 Figure 15: Trench 4 Figure 16: Trench 5 Figure 17: Trench 6 Figure 18: Trench 7 Figure 19: Trenches 8-9 Figure 20: Trenches 10-11 Figure 21: Trench 12 Figure 22: Trenches 13-14 Figure 23: Trench 15 Figure 24: Trench 16 Figure 25: Trench 17 Figure 26: Trench 18 Figure 27: Trench 19 Figure 28: Trench 20
Key Terms Throughout this document, the following terms or abbreviations are used:
Albion Albion Archaeology BCC Buckinghamshire County Council BCAS Buckinghamshire Council Archaeology Service Client Hives Planning acting on behalf of Arnold White Estates Ltd DA Development Area ES Environmental Statement IfA Institute for Archaeologists LPA Local Planning Authority ULAS University of Leicester Archaeological Services
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 4 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Preface Every effort has been made in the preparation of this document to provide as complete an assessment as possible, within the terms of the specification. All statements and opinions in this document are offered in good faith. Albion Archaeology cannot accept responsibility for errors of fact or opinion resulting from data supplied by a third party, or for any loss or other consequence arising from decisions or actions made upon the basis of facts or opinions expressed in this document.
This report has been prepared by James Newboult (Project Officer) and checked by Joe Abrams (Project Manager). Fieldwalking was undertaken by Richard Gregson (Supervisor), Christiane Meckeseper, Mark Phillips (Project Officers) and Wiebke Starke (Assistant Supervisor). GPS survey was performed by Mercedes Planas (Souterrain) and geophysical survey by Stratascan.
Trial trenching was undertaken by James Newboult, David Ingham (Project Officers), Ian Turner (Supervisor) and Adam Williams (Assistant Supervisor). Artefact summaries were prepared by Jackie Wells (Finds Officer). Figures were prepared by Joan Lightning (CAD Technician) and James Newboult. Specialist environmental and human bone reports were provided by ULAS. All Albion projects are under the overall management of Drew Shotliff (Operations Manager).
Version History
Version Issue date Reason for re-issue 1.0 15th January 2010 n/a
Albion Archaeology St Mary's Church St Mary’s Street Bedford, MK42 0AS : 01234 294001 Fax: 01234 294008 e-mail: [email protected] Website: www.albion-arch.com
Structure of this Report Section 1 serves as an introduction to the site, describing its location and background. Methodologies are presented in Section 2. The results of cropmark analysis are outlined in Section 3. Section 4 presents the fieldwalking results, Section 5 the geophysical survey results and Section 6 the trial trenching results. Section 7 contains a synthesis of results and assesses their significance. Section 8 is a bibliography.
Sections 9-13 contain the Appendices. Appendix 1 contains technical contextual data relating to the trial trenching. Appendix 2 summarises artefacts recovered during the fieldwalking. Appendix 3 contains a technical summary of artefacts from the trial trenching. Appendices 4 and 5 contain (respectively) specialist reports on environmental samples and human bone.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 5 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Non-Technical Summary Hives Planning, acting on behalf of Arnold White Estates Ltd, are preparing a planning application and Environmental Statement (ES) for the development of land at Quarrendon Fields (previously known as Berryfields East), to the north of Aylesbury. This area is henceforth referred to as the Development Area (DA).
As part of the ES data-gathering process, Arnold White Estates commissioned Albion Archaeology to produce an Archaeological Assessment which included cropmark analysis. The assessment demonstrated that the DA had the potential to contain sub-surface archaeological remains dating from prehistoric to modern times. It also advised on the most suitable techniques currently available to further evaluate the archaeological potential of the DA prior to development.
Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service (BCAS) advises the Local Planning Authority (LPA) on archaeological matters and BCAS requested more information on the sub-surface archaeological potential of the DA, to be obtained using a combination of non- intrusive and intrusive evaluation techniques. In order to provide this information for BCAS, Albion Archaeology produced a written scheme of investigation proposing the use of a suite of techniques: non-intrusive (fieldwalking, magnetic susceptibility and detailed magnetometry) and intrusive (trial trenching).
This document reports on the results of all these techniques. It also presents an updated, integrated analysis of cropmark data in light of the information gathered during the evaluation. The techniques employed in this evaluation have significantly advanced our knowledge of the archaeological resource within the DA and the wider landscape. Given the underlying geology (clay) it has been significant to note the success of combining fieldwalking, geophysical survey and trial trenching; the results from all three techniques support each other, which is not always the case on clay. Specifically, use of these techniques led to the discovery of the, hitherto unknown, remains of a series of contiguous late Iron Age / early Roman rectilinear and curvilinear settlement enclosures. Such remains are relatively rare in Buckinghamshire and are considered to be of high local and regional significance.
Knowledge of the landscape surrounding the medieval and post-medieval settlement of Quarrendon (SAM12004) has also increased. In this instance, the combination of cropmark analysis, geophysical survey and trial trenching has led to a deeper understanding of the history of cultivation and land-division within the DA from pre-medieval to modern times. Analysis of the data has revealed evidence for the layout of the irregular pre-parliamentary enclosure system, known to have been instigated by the Lee family in the mid 16th century. The layout of medieval ridge and furrow cultivation within the DA has also been revealed, enabling the locations of the probable medieval field boundaries to be inferred. Several possible pre-medieval boundaries have also been identified. These remains are considered to be of high local and regional significance.
The project archive (Accession Number 2009:139) will be deposited with Buckinghamshire County Museum, Aylesbury in accordance with the terms and conditions which are to be agreed with the museum in advance of deposition. An OASIS (Online Access to the Index of Archaeological Investigations) form will also be completed and submitted on completion of the project. Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 6 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project background Hives Planning, acting on behalf of Arnold White Estates Ltd, are preparing a planning application and Environmental Statement (ES) for the development of land at Quarrendon Fields (previously known as Berryfields East), to the north of Aylesbury (Figure 1). This area is henceforth referred to as the Development Area (DA).
As part of the ES data-gathering process, Arnold White Estates commissioned Albion Archaeology to produce an Archaeological Assessment (Albion Archaeology 2009a) which included cropmark analysis. The assessment demonstrated that the DA had the potential to contain sub-surface archaeological remains dating from prehistoric to modern times. It also advised on the most suitable techniques currently available to further evaluate the archaeological potential of the DA prior to development.
Buckinghamshire County Archaeological Service (BCAS) advises the Local Planning Authority (LPA) on archaeological matters. Prior to commenting on the development proposals, BCAS requested that certain information be provided (letter to AVDC dated 3rd August 2009). Albion Archaeology produced a written scheme of investigation (2009b) to specifically address point 1 in Table 1 below, which relates to sub-surface archaeological remains.
Table 1: Points raised by BCAS (letter to AVDC dated 5/8/09) The development proposal is…..likely to have significant effects on archaeology and 1 cultural heritage through damage to on-site archaeological remains during construction 2 Loss of historic landscape character 3 Changes to the setting of the Quarrendon scheduled ancient monument Effects on the management the Quarrendon Leas (comprising the SAM and land around 4 it)
In order to provide this information for BCAS, a suite of techniques comprising non- intrusive (fieldwalking and geophysical survey) and intrusive (trial trenching) evaluation were carried out within the DA.
The results of the evaluation have contributed to the formulation of the ES which contains strategies to mitigate the negative impacts in Table 1. Methods of designing positive outcomes relating to each point have been developed. Points 2-4 have also been addressed in the ES, as appropriate.
This document reports on the results of all non-intrusive and intrusive surveys, carried out between September and December 2009. This work comprised fieldwalking, magnetic susceptibility survey, detailed magnetometry survey and trial trenching. It also presents an updated, integrated analysis of cropmark data in light of the new information recovered during the evaluation.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 7 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology 1.2 Location and Archaeological Background The DA is c.92.6ha in extent of which c.80ha will be impacted by the proposed development (Figure 1). It lies c.3km north-west of the centre of Aylesbury, in the parish of Quarrendon and is centred on NGR SP 8010 1673. Its topography varies from 88m OD on the north-eastern edge to c.85m OD in the centre. The southern and western edges of the DA lie at c.70-74m OD. Its western edge is bordered by a tributary of the river Thame and its southern edge by drains flowing into that tributary. The north-eastern edge is bordered by hedgerows.
Underlying geology comprises Jurassic and Cretaceous clay of the Denchworth soil association (SSEW, 1983), sealed beneath clay soils and fine loam. Alluvium is present along the western edge of the DA in the vicinity of the tributary stream.
With the exception of a thin strip of pasture in the southern part of the DA, the majority of the land is currently under an arable regime.
The Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) (Albion Archaeology 2009b) summarises the known archaeological potential of the site prior to this evaluation. In general, evidence pointed to the potential for archaeological remains within the vicinity of the development area dating to the prehistoric, Roman, Saxon, medieval and post- medieval periods. Cropmark analysis, carried out as part of the Archaeological Assessment (Albion Archaeology 2009a) is discussed in Section 3.
Industrial/settlement remains of Roman date (HER6299) were identified in the north- western part of the DA during the laying of a high-pressure gas pipeline (Figure 11). Cropmark analysis also suggested sub-surface remains in this part of the DA (Figure 2). This evidence will be discussed in greater detail in Section 3.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 8 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 Introduction Between September and December 2009, a suite of archaeological survey techniques comprising non-intrusive (fieldwalking and geophysical survey) and intrusive (trial trenching) evaluation was carried out within the DA. Detailed backgrounds to each survey technique were presented in the WSI (Albion Archaeology 2009b). The methodologies during the evaluation are detailed in Sections 2.2-2.5 below.
Throughout the project the standards set out in the following documents were adhered to: • IfA’s Code of Conduct (1999a) • IfA’s Standards and Guidance for Field Evaluation (1999b) • Albion Archaeology’s Procedures Manual for Archaeological Fieldwork and the Analysis of Fieldwork Records (2001) • English Heritage’s Management of Archaeological Projects (1991)
The project archive will be deposited with Buckinghamshire County Museum (Accession Number 2009:139), Aylesbury in accordance with the terms and conditions which are to be agreed with the museum in advance of deposition. An OASIS (Online Access to the Index of Archaeological Investigations) form will also be completed and submitted on completion of the project.
2.2 Cropmark Analysis The results of this technique and a site-specific methodology are presented in the Archaeological Assessment, (Albion Archaeology 2009a, Section 3.5, Appendix 7). The entire DA was evaluated using this technique. Integrated analysis is presented in Section 3 below.
2.3 Fieldwalking From 21st to 22nd September 2009, a programme of fieldwalking was undertaken on 95% of land designated for construction and formal landscaping (Figure 5). 5% was either under pasture or had already been subject to this technique.
The survey was based on the establishment of 20m transects and the systematic collection of surface artefacts within a 2m-wide corridor along the edge of each transect. Differential GPS (dGPS) was used to plot each find-spot, ensuring that artefact concentrations could be accurately located during subsequent stages of evaluation.
Fieldwalking provided information on the location and date of potential archaeological remains. The results were used, in conjunction with those of magnetic susceptibility survey, to agree the location of detailed magnetometry and the layout of trial trenches.
A summary of the results of the survey is presented in Section 4; detailed information on all the artefacts recovered is contained in Appendix 2.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 9 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology 2.4 Geophysical Survey Geophysical survey results provided information on the location and extent of archaeological remains and contributed to the design of the trial trenching strategy. The results of the surveys are presented in a dedicated geophysical report (Stratascan 2009), an integrated summary of which can be found in Section 5.
Two geophysical survey techniques were used: magnetic susceptibility and detailed magnetometry.
2.4.1 Magnetic susceptibility This was undertaken over c.100% of the DA (Figures 6, 7 and 9). Readings were taken at 20m centres along transects 20m apart, with four readings taken at each station. The final reading at each station was taken from an average of the four readings, after any anomalously high readings had been discarded.
2.4.2 Detailed magnetometry Where archaeological remains were identified by magnetic susceptibility and fieldwalking survey, they were subject to detailed magnetometer survey (covering c.40% of the DA (Figure 10).
Readings were taken on a 30m x 30m grid at 1m centres in traverses 0.25m apart. The data was captured in the machine’s internal memory and then downloaded onto a computer. Individual grids were matched together to produce an overall plan of the surveyed area.
2.5 Trial Trenching After consultation with BCAS, it was agreed that intrusive evaluation should be carried out in two distinct phases (Figure 10):
Phase 1: Pre-determination trenching Phase 2: Post-determination trenching
Phase 1 trial trenching took place before the determination of the planning application and was designed to provide limited, specific information on the character, condition, significance and date of sub-surface archaeological remains identified by non- intrusive survey. The results of Phase 1 trenching (presented in this document) informed the ES and will influence the iterative process of master-planning the development.
Phase 2 trial trenching will take place after the determination of the planning application. Its purpose will be to further characterise sub-surface remains within the site and to check apparently “blank” areas. This further work is necessary in order to define the precise limits of any mitigation areas within the DA (should this be appropriate). Phase 2 trenching will provide information on the location, extent, character, condition, significance, and date of any remains not picked up by non- intrusive survey.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 10 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology Phase 1 trial trenching took place between 23rd November and 18th December 2009. All twenty of the proposed trenches were opened. Trenches 1-3, 6, 9, 13, 15 and 17- 20 were affected by partial flooding.
The layout of trenching was designed with particular reference to the results of the detailed magnetometry survey (Figure 10). Trench locations were marked out on the ground in advance of machine excavation. Overburden was removed using a mechanical excavator, fitted with a toothless ditching bucket and operating under close archaeological supervision. These deposits were removed down to either the top of archaeological deposits or undisturbed geological deposits, whichever was encountered first.
The bases and sections of all trenches were cleaned by hand in order to clarify the nature of potential archaeological remains. Due to rapidly deteriorating ground conditions as a result of persistent, heavy rain, all features were planned immediately after cleaning and a strategy for the appropriate targeting of hand investigation was developed with BCAS.
The deposits and any potential remains were noted, cleaned, a selection was excavated by hand and recorded using Albion Archaeology’s pro forma sheets. The trenches were subsequently drawn, and photographed as appropriate. All deposits were recorded using a unique recording number sequence commencing at 100 for Trench 1, 200 for Trench 2 etc.
All investigations were inspected and approved by BCAS prior to the backfilling of trenches.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 11 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
3. CROPMARK ANALYSIS RESULTS
3.1 Introduction Appendix 7 of the Archaeological Assessment (Albion Archaeology 2009a) describes and depicts the location of cropmarks plotted within the DA.
The majority of these cropmarks provide information on hitherto unrecorded elements of Quarrendon’s history, in particular the location of its medieval (pre 16th century) field-systems. The characteristic lines of former furrows reveal a patchwork of ridge and furrow field-systems within the DA (Figure 2). Other cropmarks indicate the layout of larger post-medieval field-systems or pre-medieval boundaries that continued to be used in later periods.
Significantly, none of the extensive Romano-British settlement remains identified by geophysical survey (Section 5) were apparent from the cropmark analysis. The visibility of pre-medieval remains was poor due to two factors. Firstly, land within the DA was under pasture until 1961-1976, preferentially showing the medieval and post-medieval landscape in aerial photographs taken prior to those dates. Secondly, given the heavy clay soils, pre-medieval remains would only be revealed on aerial photographs taken during exceptionally hot summers after the commencement of ploughing from 1961-1976. Those cropmarks considered to represent pre-medieval remains are only visible by virtue of their continued use throughout the medieval, post-medieval and modern periods.
3.1.1 Pre-medieval Two of the anomalies identified by cropmark analysis match up with remains also identified by detailed geophysical survey (Figures 3-4 and 11). The easternmost cropmark broadly follows the line of a late Iron Age/early Roman ditched routeway which heads south-west from AZ5 (Figure 11). This boundary is also respected by probable headlands associated with ridge and furrow fields. It is, therefore, likely that the Romano-British routeway survived in some form through to the formation of the medieval ridge and furrow landscape, the formation of which was influenced by its existence.
The second boundary (Figures 3-4) appears to be aligned with the remains of another undated ditched routeway, revealed by detailed geophysical survey, which protrudes from an extant hedgerow in the centre of the DA. Though the partial remains of the ditches are undated, three sherds of Roman pottery (Group 3 on Figure 6a) were identified adjacent to the extant hedgerow. In addition, their morphology and appearance on geophysical survey results suggests they may form part of the Romano-British settlement. Indeed, with the exception of furrows and land drains, none of the anomalies revealed by geophysical survey were shown to be other than Romano- British in date. This cropmark is tentatively considered to originate from this period. However, further investigation would be necessary to prove this initial hypothesis.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 12 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology A third anomaly (Figure 3a), representing the continuation of the second boundary was identified through analysis of a web-based mapping utility (www.flashearth.com 2010).
3.1.2 Medieval Variability in alignment of the ridge and furrow cropmarks indicates the layout of the field-systems prior to the irregular pre-parliamentary enclosures of the 16th century (Figure 4). Alignments are borne out by the results of detailed geophysical survey (Figure 11). The survival and extent of ridge and furrow cropmarks across the DA is such that blank areas contained within it are considered to be significant. They are likely to indicate contemporary areas of pasture or non-arable land-use interspersed with ridge and furrow (Figure 3b). These field-systems are likely to have been those of the medieval settlement of Quarrendon (SAM12004).
3.1.3 Early post-medieval The patchwork of fields (ridge and furrow) indicated on Figure 3b is very different to that shown on the 1848 Tithe Map, illustrating the extensive remodelling which took place prior to that date. This shift is known to have begun in the 16th century when the Lee family instigated the enclosure of land to the north of the settlement (Albion Archaeology 2009a, Section 3.1.6). The enclosure process in Quarrendon parish is significant as it began four centuries before the Act of (Parliamentary) Enclosure in the mid 19th century.
Cropmarks marked in dark yellow on Figure 4a represent elements of this irregular pre-parliamentary enclosure system that were removed prior to the drawing of the 1848 Tithe map. These cropmarks, in particular, appear to cut across the ridge and furrow fields. Their absence from geophysical survey suggests they do not precede medieval cultivation. Many of the extant boundaries shown in Figure 4 may also date from this period. Others may have medieval or pre-medieval origins.
3.1.4 Undated A series of anomalies were identified within the north-western part of the DA (Figure 2). They appear to the north of HER6299 (Figure 2) and the area of extensive Romano-British settlement revealed by geophysical survey. However, unlike other remains from this period, the majority of these anomalies were not picked up by detailed geophysical survey and their character is uncertain. The exception is a semi- circular anomaly located next to HER6299 (Figure 2) which may be related to the early Roman trapezoidal enclosure within AZ2 (Figures 11-13).
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 13 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
4. FIELDWALKING RESULTS
4.1 Collection Conditions Fieldwalking was carried out on all suitable land within the DA (c. 95%). The weather was windy and dry with ground conditions fairly consistent across the entire area. The ground had been ploughed, harrowed and sown in rows with cereal crops. The crops had not yet emerged leaving good visibility between the rows. Overall, the conditions were suitable for an effective fieldwalking survey. The effects of the presence of heavy clay soils within the DA are considered in the interpretation of the results.
The results of the fieldwalking survey were combined with those of magnetic susceptibility survey (Figures 6-7) in order to identify areas of archaeological potential for detailed geophysical survey and subsequent trail trenching.
4.2 Artefacts The fieldwalking recovered 359 artefacts from 277 findspots, including pottery, various ceramic building materials and two metal objects. The distribution of these artefacts is illustrated in Figure 5 and is summarised below by period.
Appendix 2 contains detailed technical data relating to the artefacts. Each findspot has a unique number related to Appendix 2 and shown in brackets within the main text, e.g. (178).
4.2.1 Prehistoric Prehistoric remains comprised a single sherd of late Bronze Age/early Iron Age pottery (242). This artefact was broadly clustered with late Iron Age/early Roman and Roman pottery (Figure 6). None of the 451 sherds recovered by trial trenching were dated to the late Bronze Age/early Iron Age, suggesting its presence is not significant.
4.2.2 Late Iron Age/early Roman The late Iron Age/early Roman assemblage comprised 8 sherds of undiagnostic late ‘Belgic’ (c. 50BC-AD100) pottery and 31 sherds of Roman pottery of various fabric types (Appendix 2, Table 3).
Unlike artefacts from later periods within the DA, this material was clustered in four distinct areas and showed strong correlations with anomalies identified by magnetic susceptibility survey (Figure 6a). These correlations were used to inform the strategy for detailed geophysical survey (Section 5).
The first and densest artefact cluster (Group 1 on Figure 6a), contained the majority of the late Iron Age/early Roman pottery and was located immediately south of the known Romano-British settlement remains in the north-western part of the DA (HER6299). This group directly corresponded with a large magnetic anomaly revealed by magnetic susceptibility survey.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 14 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology Groups 2 and 3 were located to the south-east of Group 1 and contained fewer, more widely distributed artefacts (Figure 6a). These groups also clustered around magnetic anomalies, indicating the presence of further late Iron Age/early Roman activity in this part of the DA. Group 4 clustered around a weaker magnetic anomaly in the eastern part of the DA (Figure 6). Detailed magnetometry survey confirmed that Groups 1, 2 and 4 were located above significant, sub-surface archaeological remains.
Group 3 was shown to be unrelated to any sub-surface remains and it is possible that the presence of artefacts in this location was a result of down slope movement of material from archaeological remains to the west. However, the proximity of these artefacts to a potential ancient boundary (Figure 3 and 4) may be significant.
4.2.3 Medieval/post-medieval Thirty sherds of medieval pottery were recovered (Figure 7a). Their locations did not significantly correspond with magnetic anomalies and, in general, their density decreased with distance from Quarrendon (SAM12004). This pattern was mirrored in the distribution of pieces of medieval/post-medieval ceramic building material (Figure 7b).
The distribution of medieval and post-medieval artefacts within the DA reflects its juxtaposition with contemporary settlement at Quarrendon. The density of material remains would be expected to decrease with distance from the settlement. The lack of significant artefact concentrations supports historical evidence suggesting that land within the DA was used for agricultural purposes throughout this period. This assertion is further supported by the results of detailed geophysical survey and trial trenching which suggest that ridge and furrow cultivation is the sole, archaeologically visible, form of medieval land-use within the DA.
4.2.4 Success of technique In general, the locations of late Iron Age and Roman pottery showed strong correlations with the anomalies revealed by magnetic susceptibility survey. However, given the size and extent of the settlement remains later identified in these locations, the number of artefacts identified by fieldwalking is considered to be low. This is likely to be a result of the clay geology which may impede the visibility and upward movement of artefacts through the soil. Nevertheless, fieldwalking survey has been successful in identifying sub-surface archaeological remains and revealing general artefact distribution patterns.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 15 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
5. GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY RESULTS
5.1 Introduction Technical data and the results of magnetic susceptibility and detailed magnetic surveys are presented in detail in a separate, dedicated report (Stratascan 2009).
Using the results of non-intrusive surveys, land within the DA was divided and numbered according to the location, density and distribution of identified archaeological remains. These ‘Archaeological Zones’ (AZ) are presented in Figure 8 and are henceforth referred to in the text, e.g. AZ2.
5.1.1 Magnetic susceptibility survey Magnetic susceptibility survey was conducted over the entire DA. The results are presented in Figures 6, 7 and 9 and are discussed in relation to those of the fieldwalking survey in Section 4.
Several areas of high magnetic susceptibility were identified, particularly in the western part of the DA. These areas were identified for detailed magnetic survey. Several areas with weaker magnetic responses were also identified (Figure 9).
5.1.2 Detailed magnetometry The location and extent of detailed magnetic survey was based on the results of the magnetic susceptibility and fieldwalking surveys. A total of c.40% of land within the DA was surveyed, targeting all significant anomalies and artefact concentrations (Figures 6b and 10).
5.2 Results Detailed geophysical survey demonstrated the presence of extensive sub-surface rectilinear and curvilinear remains within the DA (AZ3-5 Figures 8 and 11). Their morphology and the artefactual evidence recovered from fieldwalking suggested they were of late Iron Age/early Roman date. This hypothesis was confirmed by the results of the trial trenching (Section 6).
AZ2 represents the continuation of remains described by HER6299 (location on Figures 2 and 8). It comprises a large trapezoidal enclosure, c.110m by 90m in size with a second c.50m by 50m rectilinear enclosure on its southern edge. Both contain various linear remains within their interiors, likely to have been used to delimit activity areas or control livestock.
AZ3 contains an asymmetrical ‘banjo’ style enclosure c.70m by 80m in size and a larger complex of curvilinear and rectilinear enclosures covering and area of over c.1.7ha. The larger complex is made up of several distinct enclosed areas, suggestive of long-term redefinition, and the remains of a ditched routeway leading north-east from the main area. The morphology of this larger enclosure system and the presence of a ditched routeway suggest it was used for livestock management. The south-east corner of the main complex was not revealed by geophysical survey, suggesting it
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 16 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology may have suffered from truncation in the post-Roman periods. In contrast to AZ2, fewer internal features were visible from detailed magnetometry.
AZ4 comprises the remains of a probable NNE-SSW aligned ditched routeway which projects from an extant hedgerow and a T-shaped pair of ditches forming an enclosure or field-system.
AZ5 comprises a large curvilinear enclosure with a series of internal sub-divisions and discrete remains, covering c.1.1ha. Geophysical survey also revealed the remains of at least three ditched routeways leading out of the main enclosure: the first heading north-east from its northern face, a second heading south-east from the eastern face and a third heading south-west for c.400m towards the river Thame from the south- eastern corner. These are likely to have been used to control the movement of livestock, people and goods within the landscape. The layout of sub-divisions within and around the main enclosure, support the idea of livestock movement/control being an integral part of the design of these enclosures.
AZs 1, 6 and 7 are outlying linear remains spatially associated with AZs 2-5, probably representing field-systems serving the main settlement areas. AZ8 represents the remainder of land within the DA where sub-surface remains are characterised by ridge and furrow cultivation.
5.3 Reliability of Results The majority of archaeological remains identified during trial trenching correlated well with areas highlighted by magnetic susceptibility anomalies and artefact concentrations (Groups 1, 2 and 4, Figure 6a). No sub-surface remains were revealed in Group 3 (Figure 6a), suggesting the magnetic signal was a result of disturbance from the adjacent boundary.
Despite displaying anomalous magnetic signals, Areas 1-5 on Figure 9 were largely shown not to contain sub-surface archaeological remains. The high magnetic responses in Areas 1-2 are considered to be associated with extant hedgerows, track- ways and metallic objects within the soil. The exceptionally low magnetic response of Area 4 is a consequence of its continued use as pasture. The general background levels of magnetic disturbance observed in Areas 1-3 and 5 were shown to be the result of extensive ridge and furrow cultivation.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 17 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
6. TRIAL TRENCHING RESULTS
6.1 Introduction Significant archaeological remains are summarised below within a chronological and spatial framework. Specific reference is made to Archaeological Zones 2-5 (Figures 8 and 11). Detailed technical information on all remains can be found in Appendix 1. Detailed information on artefacts can be found in Appendix 3 whilst specialist reports on environmental samples and human bone can be found in Appendices 4 and 5 respectively.
Allocated context numbers are prefixed with the trench number they were recorded within, e.g. contexts (100) and (101) are from Trench 1.
6.2 Overburden and Undisturbed Geology Overburden across the DA consisted of ploughsoil 0.25m to 0.4m thick. Subsoil was present in thin, sporadic layers in Trenches 4-5, 8, 10-12, 14, 15, 17, 19-20 between 0.05m and 0.15m in thickness. Only Trench 5 contained a significant, even deposit, 0.23m thick. Undisturbed geology consisted of fine yellow and orange clays overlying denser blue clays with stones, which outcropped in Trenches 10 and 11.
6.3 Late Iron Age and Roman The intrusive evaluation was designed to gain information on the extensive settlement remains within Archaeological Zones 2-5, described in Section 5.2. The vast majority of remains investigated within these zones are datable to the late Iron Age/early Roman and Roman periods.
6.3.1 AZ 2 (Trenches 1-3) Trenches 1-3 confirmed the locations of linear anomalies identified by geophysical survey and revealed a quantity of hitherto unknown remains (Appendix 1 Figure 11).
Investigation of trapezoidal enclosure ditch [114] demonstrated that despite being over 3m wide, it was relatively shallow at 0.67m, possibly due to plough truncation within this part of the DA. Its main deposit (116) contained over 1kg of early Roman pottery (including four sherds of samian ware), nearly 1kg of animal bone and several fragments of fired clay. Deposit (116) had a greenish hue and distinctive odour suggesting it contained dung. The composition of deposits within [114], are characteristic of deliberate backfilling, suggesting they represent the disuse of the enclosure. However, the quantities of pottery and animal bone present suggest a significant level of human occupation within and around the enclosure within the early Roman period.
The remains of several internal features were also investigated within this enclosure. These included a group of pit-like features [118], [120], [122], [124], [126] and [128] located toward the centre and northern end of Trench 1 (Figure 12). Pit [118] was very shallow (0.07m) and contained mixed heterogeneous deposits suggestive of backfilling. Surface finds from these features included pottery datable to the early Roman and Roman periods. An iron bolt or arrowhead (RA2) was also recovered from pit [126]. Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 18 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Investigations into two other linear features revealed two groups of intercutting gullies [102, 105, 110, 108/112] and [202, 205, 207] suggesting the re-use and maintenance of boundaries and/or sub-divisions within the main enclosure (Figures 12-13). Both sequences yielded late Iron Age, late Iron Age/early Roman and Roman pottery.
Investigation of linear remains associated with an ‘E-shaped’ geophysical anomaly [211] revealed part of a track-way or plinth (Figure 13). [211] was shallow, with a flat base and contained a single layer of medium and large stones which formed a cobbled surface. This was obscured by a thin clay layer (213) containing over 0.5kg of early Roman pottery. This layer is likely to have formed during the use of the surface. The precise function of [211] is uncertain, but it is likely to have been used as hard standing for a particular activity delimited by the E-shaped geophysical anomaly.
The remains of several probable post-holes [230], [232] and [236] were also identified (Figure 13). Their presence indicates the potential for structural remains despite the extensive plough truncation within AZ2. An amorphous linear feature [209] was also investigated at the eastern end of Trench 2. No artefactual material was recovered from the pale, subsoil-derived deposits. [209] is likely to be the remains of a hedgerow.
The smaller, rectilinear enclosure within AZ2 was investigated in Trench 3. The main enclosure ditch [302] was, like [114], fairly shallow (0.6m deep) and had a similar profile (Figure 14). Its deposit contained a single fragment of animal bone. The only datable artefact from Trench 3 was a small fragment of Roman pottery recovered from the remains of a NE-SW aligned hedgerow or heavily rooted gully [306], not revealed by geophysical survey (Figure 14).
Internal features within this enclosure comprised a series of pits and ditches, probably representing internal sub-divisions (Figure 14). However, the relative scarcity of internal features, surface finds and material remains within [302/310] in comparison to those within the larger enclosure [114/248] to the north is significant. It is likely that the larger enclosure would have been the focus of activity within AZ2. The volumes of pottery and animal bone point to domestic habitation and food preparation. By contrast, the paucity of such remains within the smaller enclosure suggests it may have been less densely occupied or may have been used for other, non-domestic purposes, such as the keeping of livestock. Animals were certainly nearby, given the amounts of bone recovered from Trench 1 (Appendix 2, Table 1).
6.3.2 AZ3 banjo enclosure (Trench 9) In the south-western part of AZ3, the circular ditch of the banjo enclosure [904/918/910] was investigated (Figure 19). Banjo enclosures are defined as ‘sub- circular enclosure[s] with a narrow approach way consisting of parallel ditches’. Few have been excavated and their function is uncertain (Kenney, 2007, 120). The majority have been found in southern England, particularly in Hampshire and are rare in the Buckinghamshire region (Sandy Kidd pers. comm.).
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 19 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology No features were identified in the centre of the enclosure. However, the remains of two narrow ditches [908] and [914] were identified in association with the main enclosure ditches [904/918/910]. Although no artefactual remains were recovered from them, they (stratigraphically) pre-dated the main enclosure ditch.
Investigations into the western part of main ditch [904] revealed a fairly shallow (0.46m), concave profile and deposits containing animal bone and a fragment of lava quern (RA1) of possible Roman date. However, a sherd of late Iron Age pottery was recovered from the surface of the eastern part of ditch [918]. Despite the paucity of datable material, the enclosure’s morphological characteristics suggest it has late Iron Age origins.
The eastern part of the enclosure ditch was more than twice the width of the western part. This and the reduced depth of overburden above [904], suggests plough truncation has caused significant damage to the western part of the banjo enclosure. This may explain the absence of internal features.
6.3.3 AZ3 main enclosure (Trenches 6-8 and 10-12) Trenches 6 and 7 confirmed the presence of all geophysical survey anomalies on which they were targeted (Figures 17-18). Large enclosure ditch [712] was, like [114], relatively shallow compared to its width. It contained late Iron Age/early Roman pottery, animal bone and fragments of fired clay including a fragment of portable kiln furniture. The NW-SE aligned enclosure/dividing ditch [702] yielded a similar assemblage of animal bone, fired clay and fragments of late Iron Age pottery (Appendix 2).
In Trench 6, investigations into the rectilinear enclosure revealed a sequence of three narrow ditches, [606], [608] and [610]. Their backfill contained fragments of animal bone, fired clay, burnt flint and pottery. Earlier ditch [606] contained later pottery than ditch [610] (which truncates it) suggesting residuality or contemporary use of Roman and late Iron Age fabric types.
Several internal features not revealed by geophysical survey were also recorded. These included several ditches (probably representing internal sub-divisions) and the remains of several shallow pits to the west of the enclosure boundary. Three probable post-holes [721], [723] and [725] were also revealed (Figures 17-18, Appendix 1). Also in Trenches 6 and 7, three ‘donut’-shaped features [707], [716] and [641] were identified (Figure 18). Both [707] and [716] were c.0.35m deep and contained (respectively) late Iron Age /early Roman and late Iron Age pottery. Their function is uncertain; dating evidence suggests they are broadly contemporary with the enclosure ditches.
The relative density of features and level of material remains recovered from Trenches 6 and 7 suggest that this area was the focus of activity within the main enclosure. However, plough truncation and the physical position of the trenches may also be factors in the high density of features in this part of AZ3.
Part of the eastern enclosure ditch of the main complex was also investigated in Trench 8 (Figure 19). The locations of both linear geophysical anomalies were
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 20 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology confirmed. Outer ditch [804] was relatively shallow (0.4m) and produced no dating evidence. However, its connections with the remainder of the complex suggest it is broadly late Iron Age /early Roman in date. Two pits, [810] and [812] were also identified. [812] was also shallow (0.35m) and probably represents the truncated basal remains of a once larger feature. It was located to the west of the outer enclosure ditch [810] indicating that human activity spread beyond the confines of the enclosure complex.
Trenches 10 and 11 were dominated by the remains of ridge and furrow cultivation (Section 6.4). The existence of two linear geophysical survey anomalies associated with the main enclosure complex was confirmed. Ditch [1011] and its deeper re-cut [1005] apparently form part of the same enclosure system as [712]. However, they were shallower and narrower, indicating they had suffered significant plough truncation. The deposits of [1011] appeared to have formed through natural processes and yielded only one small fragment of animal bone. However, those of [1005] contained late Iron Age pottery, burnt stone, animal bone and a fragment of kiln furniture, suggesting partial backfilling and further demonstrating its link with [712].
The presence of what appears to be the outer enclosure ditch to the main complex [1104/1203] was confirmed in Trenches 11 and 12 (Figures 20-21). Detailed geophysical survey indicates that [1104] heads north-eastwards and forms part of the double ditched routeway investigated in Trench 12 [1203]. This ditch, like those of the other ditched routeways in AZ5, was very shallow (0.16m) and contained naturally accumulated deposits derived from the surrounding clay. It is possible that [1104] and [1203] represent the truncated basal remains of the enclosure ditch. Truncation may explain the relatively weak magnetic response of the linear remains in the south-eastern part of AZ3.
6.3.4 AZ3 outlying linear remains (Trench 4-5) Trench 4 contained the remains of three linear features and a possible pit (Figure 15). Ditch [407] was not investigated but confirmed the existence of the NNE-SSW aligned linear anomaly identified by detailed magnetometry. It is likely to represent part of an outlying boundary or field-system associated with the main settlements.
Investigations into a large linear feature [405] revealed evidence for a palaeo-channel. Its eastern edge was clearly defined while the western edge was unclear and appeared to flatten out beyond the limits of the trench (Figure 15). Deposits were similar to the surrounding geological deposit and contained the fossilised remains of a (probable) reptile jaw (Edmondson pers. comm.) likely to have been re-deposited from the surrounding Jurassic clay.
Trench 5 contained the remains of three intercutting ditches (Figure 16). Ditch [511/516] was aligned broadly NW-SE and did not appear as a geophysical survey anomaly. It contained a re-cut [514], indicting maintenance and re-use of the boundary after the earlier phase had silted up. The re-cut contained dark deposits suggestive of deliberate backfilling. This boundary was truncated by the larger, N-S aligned curvilinear ditch [507] identified by geophysical survey. It contained a sequence of deposits derived from the surrounding geology, the haphazard formation of which suggests deliberate backfilling (Figure 16). It is possible they had resulted
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 21 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology from the deliberate removal of an associated bank, originally composed of the arisings from the ditch. None of these remains contained datable artefactual material. However, geophysical evidence indicates that [507] forms part of a large boundary ditch connecting AZ2 to AZ3. The origins of the earlier ditch are uncertain.
6.3.5 AZ4 (Trenches 13-14) Investigations in Trench 13 were unable satisfactorily to confirm the locations of an apparent routeway defined by two parallel NE-SW aligned ditches identified by the geophysical survey. Two amorphous linear features [1302] and [1304] showed the anticipated spacing but were several metres eastward of the likely ditched routeway. Even so, these remain the most likely physical remains of this anomaly.
However, the presence of the parallel ditches on the results of the detailed magnetometry and their morphological similarities to other, datable ditched routeways in AZs 3 and 5 suggest they are likely to represent still extant remains, forming part of the late Iron Age/Roman landscape. The implications of these remains for the origins of the extant boundary from which they project have been discussed in Section 3.
Trench 14 contained ditches associated with a ‘T-shaped’ linear anomaly (Figure 22). The northernmost ditch [1405] was flanked by a parallel gully [1407] which contained early Roman pottery. The southernmost ditch [1419] contained Roman pottery and had been re-cut [1417] pointing to the maintenance and re-use of this boundary following a period of silting. A third, shallow boundary ditch [1403], not identified by geophysical survey, was also investigated. It contained no datable artefacts but was morphologically similar to [1405/1407] and is likely to represent a sub-division of the main ditches.
Trench 14 also contained several unexcavated pit-shaped features. [413] and [415] produced surface pottery of Roman date, indicating they are contemporary with the ditches.
6.3.6 AZ5 (Trenches 15-20) Remains encountered in Trenches 15-16 confirmed those identified by geophysical survey (Figures 23-24). The outer enclosure ditch [1503/1617] was 0.58m deep and contained backfilled deposits which yielded a small amount of late Iron Age/early Roman pottery.
A large pit [1506] 4.6m in diameter, located toward the eastern end of Trench 15, contained over c. 1kg of animal bone, c. 0.2kg of fired clay and over 1kg of late Iron Age/early Roman pottery. The bottom of the pit was not reached and investigations ceased at 1.2m. Its size and profile suggest it is likely to have been used as a water pit. The upper deposits were in turn truncated by a ditch terminal [1510/1633] containing a similar assemblage of late Iron Age /early Roman pottery, animal bone and fired clay. Other linear remains and a pit [1602] in Trench 16 contained similar backfilled deposits and all yielded pottery from broadly the same period (Appendix 3, Figure 24).
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 22 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology Several linear features were investigated in Trench 17, all of which contained single, deliberately backfilled deposits producing a spread dates from the late Iron Age to the Roman period (Figure 25). Investigation of linear remains toward the north-east end of the trench revealed a sequence of three gullies [1703], [1705] and [1707] which appear to be related to a feint NW-SE aligned geophysical anomaly. These remains are likely to represent internal sub-divisions of the main enclosure. The presence of sequences of gullies such as [1703/1705/1707] indicates the re-definition and maintenance of some of these internal divisions.
Linear remains in Trench 19 confirm the locations of geophysical anomalies associated with an outlying, less densely occupied extension of the main enclosure (Figure 27). Geophysical evidence suggests that the outer ditches [1908] and [1912] form a broad avenue leading towards/from the enclosure proper. Within this lies a narrower, double ditched routeway [1903] and [1920], like that revealed in Trenches 18 and 20. None of the investigated features contained datable artefacts and it is unclear whether the two ‘avenues’ are contemporary or separate phases of the complex.
Ditch [1908] appears to be a continuation of [1510/1633]. Deposits within it were naturally accumulated, supporting the idea that human occupation was largely confined to the main enclosure where all features contained deposits with a higher organic content.
Immediately to the north-east of ditch [1920] were the remains of four sub-circular features [1905], [1914], [1916] and [1918]. Each contained fragments of burnt bone, possibly derived from cremation deposits. Their profiles suggest they were not dug for this purpose but were stake-holes filled with burnt material after the removal of the stakes. These deposits were sampled and have been analysed in order to assess fully their character and potential (Appendix 5 and Section 7.2).
In Trenches 18 and 20, both routeway ditches identified by geophysical survey were present (Figures 26 and 28). In Trench 18, the northernmost ditch [1802] was shallow and contained naturally accumulated deposits which yielded no datable artefacts. Due to flooding, ditches [2003] and [2005] could not be investigated. However, the clear physical connections between all remains within AZ5, suggest they can all be attributed to the late Iron Age/early Roman period.
6.4 Medieval The locations of medieval ridge and furrow cultivation indicated by crop-mark analysis and geophysical survey were confirmed by trial trenching (Figure 10). Their significance has been discussed in greater detail in Section 3.
The remains of furrows were encountered in AZs 2-5, the best preserved examples being located in Trenches 10, 11, 13, 16, 18 and 19. Several were investigated in order to confirm their character. Indeed, [1611] yielded late-medieval/post-medieval artefacts, comprising a fragment of roof tile and a sherd of pottery (Figure 24). These were the only non-Iron Age or Roman remains recovered by trial trenching.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 23 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
7. SYNTHESIS
7.1 Introduction The suite of intrusive and non-intrusive techniques employed throughout this evaluation has significantly advanced our knowledge of the archaeological resource within the DA and the wider landscape of the medieval and post-medieval settlement of Quarrendon.
Given the underlying geology (clay) it has been significant to note the success of combining fieldwalking, geophysical survey and trial trenching; the results from all three techniques support each other (not always the case on clay). Specifically, use of these techniques led to the discovery of the, hitherto unknown, remains of a series of contiguous late Iron Age/early Roman rectilinear and curvilinear settlement enclosures (AZs3-5, Figures 8 and 11). Such remains are rare in Buckinghamshire and are considered to be of high local and regional significance (Kidd pers. comm.).
The combination of cropmark analysis, geophysical survey and trial trenching has led to a deeper understanding of the history of cultivation and land-division within the DA from pre-medieval to modern times. Analysis of the data has revealed evidence for the layout of the irregular pre-parliamentary enclosure system known to have been instigated by the Lee family in the mid 16th century (Figure 4).
The layout of medieval ridge and furrow cultivation within the DA has also been revealed, enabling the locations of the probable medieval field boundaries to be inferred (Figure 3b). Several possible pre-medieval boundaries have also been identified (Figure 3a).
Trial trenching confirmed the majority of remains identified by geophysical survey. However, a number of discrete and linear archaeological remains, not detected by geophysical survey, were also identified. These generally relate to small, shallow, internal features such as gullies, pits and post-holes within the settlement enclosures. This suggests that the interiors of the settlement enclosures are likely to contain significant numbers of such small features.
7.2 Discussion The following sections should be viewed in conjunction with Figures 8 and 11.
7.2.1 The late Iron Age/early Roman landscape Evaluation has demonstrated that the late Iron Age/early Roman remains, identified during the laying of a high-pressure gas pipeline (HER6299), formed part of a large, double rectilinear enclosure of early Roman date (AZ2).
The interior of the northernmost, trapezoidal enclosure of AZ2 contained a dense network of linear remains, pitting, post-holes and a ‘cobbled’ surface, suggesting the interior had been sub-divided into activity areas. All identified remains contained deliberately backfilled deposits, many of which yielded predominantly early Roman pottery and animal bone with evidence for cess deposits within the main enclosure ditch. The smaller assemblage of earlier, late Iron Age pottery is likely to be residual. Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 24 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology The density of remains and level of artefact recovery suggest settlement occupation within the enclosure. It is likely, given the spread of datable materials, that the settlement fell into disuse in the early Roman period.
The southernmost rectilinear enclosure of AZ2 contained fewer internal remains and only yielded a single sherd of Roman pottery (from a probable hedgerow) and a fragment of animal bone. The remains identified also suggest internal sub-division. However, it is unlikely this enclosure contained human habitation and was probably an ancillary area used for livestock.
The south-western part of AZ3 contained the remains of a probable late Iron Age banjo enclosure. The function of these remains is uncertain, though the dark, backfilled deposits suggest some form of human occupation, despite the lack of internal features. It is possible this lack could be a consequence of plough truncation in the modern era.
AZ3 also contained the remains of a complex series of curvilinear and rectilinear enclosures with an associated ditched routeway heading north-eastward toward AZ4. The morphology of the remains (comprising sub-enclosures, internal divisions and the ditched routeway) indicates their likely use for the management of livestock. Like those of AZ2, the majority of deposits had resulted from deliberate backfilling. Artefacts recovered from across the complex suggest it went out of use in the late Iron Age /early Roman period.
AZ5 represents the most complete settlement enclosure within the DA. It also paints the most complete picture of the use of the landscape within the late Iron Age and early Roman periods. The formation of internal divisions and the presence of ditched routeways are indicative of the movement of people and the control of livestock (Figure 11). The routeway in Trenches 18 and 20 heads in a south-westerly direction, towards the river Thame, which may have been fordable along this route. Evidence of water storage in the form of a large pit was identified in Trench 15 and it is likely that the Thame would have been the principal water source for the settlement.
Evidence for outlying field-systems was revealed in AZ4 and Trenches 4 and 5. The naturally silted deposits of the ‘T-shaped’ ditches in AZ4 contained early Roman pottery. Despite the lack of dating evidence from ditches in Trenches 4 and 5, their morphology and physical relationships with the main settlement enclosures suggest they are contemporary.
All areas of settlement (AZs 2-5) are situated on what is likely to have been relatively dry ground slightly in the lee of the higher ground to the north-east; they are also within a relatively short distance of water courses. The choices of settlement locations within the physical landscape appear to have struck a balance between high ground and proximity to water whilst affording some protection from the north and north-easterly winds.
Dating evidence and morphological characteristics suggest that the remains within AZ2 are likely to be slightly later (early Roman) than those of AZs 3-5 (late Iron Age /early Roman. However, the majority of the deposits across AZs 2-5 were formed as
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 25 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology a result of deliberate backfilling and any differentiation in pottery dates should be treated with caution. If any future investigations are undertaken, stratigraphy will be crucial in determining phasing between the various complex settlement areas.
Based on evidence accumulated thus far, the remains in AZs2-5 are considered to be broadly contemporary, probably representing a contiguous band of settlement spanning the late Iron Age to the early Roman period. Indeed AZs2 and 3 appear to be connected by the large ditch identified in Trench 5 (Figure 16). These settlements are likely to pre-date the 2nd-4th century malt-house and field-systems at Weedon Hill, c. 1km to the south-east (Wessex Archaeology 2009).
7.2.2 Environmental potential A number of environmental samples were taken from across the DA (Appendix 4). They yielded sparse palaeo-environmental evidence including fragments of glume wheat grains, possibly spelt, and a grain of barley (typical of Iron Age sites in the region), charred cereal remains and arable weeds. These remains did not occur in sufficient volumes to draw meaningful conclusions about the nature or locations of activity areas across the DA.
Four backfilled stake-holes [1905], [1914], [1916] and [1918] were sampled due to their potential to contain cremated human bone (Figure 27). Details of their specialist analysis can be found in Appendix 5. Deposits from [1905] contained identifiable fragments of human cranial material and fragments of a radius/and or ulna. None of the bone within the other samples was clearly identifiable as being human and may represent animal bone. However, it is possible these deposits represent parts of one or more cremation burials, or the truncated basal remains of once larger deposits.
The presence of even small amounts of cremated human bone within [1905] indicates the potential for further such remains within AZ5.
7.2.3 Medieval and post-medieval landscapes Evaluation clearly demonstrated the impact of irregular, pre-parliamentary enclosure on the former medieval landscape within the DA.
Prior to enclosure, medieval cultivation consisted of small fields under a ridge and furrow (arable) regime, apparently interspersed with patches of pasture (Figure 3b). Beginning in the mid 16th century, this was transformed into a system of larger fields given over to the grazing of sheep (Figure 4a). Over time, the fields were gradually enlarged and by 1848 had largely assumed their present-day appearance (Figure 4b). Between 1961 and 1976, 95% of these fields had been returned to an arable regime.
Despite these changes, it is likely that at least two extant boundaries, in the centre of the DA, have pre-medieval or medieval origins (Figure 3a). Comparison between the size and layout of the early enclosure system (Figure 4a) and the extant layout of the fields outside the DA suggests that much of the surrounding modern landscape layout may also have originated in the 16th century.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 26 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology 7.3 Preservation Destructive as the 16th-century enclosure would have been to the medieval way of life, the conversion to pasture had the effect of preserving both the ridge and furrow field-systems and the underlying late Iron Age /early Roman remains. Indeed, remains from both periods survived relatively unscathed until 1961 when mechanised ploughing began to destroy them.
The plough truncation of sub-surface archaeological remains is demonstrated by the absence of subsoil in many parts of the DA, particularly within AZ2. It is significant that the majority of late Iron Age and Roman pottery identified by fieldwalking was located above the AZ2 enclosures. Where truncation was less severe, sub-surface remains were identifiable from much smaller scatters of pottery (Figure 6). Furthermore, large differences in the depths of enclosure ditches [904/918] and [712/1005], investigated in more than one location, suggest differential truncation AZ3.
Despite this, the sub-surface remains investigated by trial trenching are considered to be well preserved. However, given the shallow depths of the majority of remains, future ploughing will continue to cause damage.
7.4 Significance The discovery of a series of apparently contiguous late Iron Age /early Roman rectilinear and curvilinear settlement enclosures within the DA represents a significant addition to settlement activity within the region (AZs2-5, Figures 8 and 11). Such remains are rare in Buckinghamshire.
These remains are considered to be of high local and regional importance (Kidd pers. comm.). Research agendas for the Thames and Solent region (of which Buckinghamshire is a part) are as yet unpublished. However, these remains have the potential to address wider research questions regarding long-term settlement change and continuity between the Romano-British and medieval periods (English Heritage 1997, 52). Several site-specific research questions, based on the results of this evaluation, are also outlined below:
• Can contextual and palaeo-environmental evidence reveal clear divisions between domestic, industrial and farming areas within the settlement enclosures? • Is it possible to determine the way in which the wider landscape was divided between arable and pastoral farming? • What is the relationship between settlement location, topography and the position and use of resources? • What is the significance of the material remains of portable kiln furniture recovered? Was pottery production a seasonal activity and where was it taking place?
This evaluation identified hitherto unknown, irregular, pre-parliamentary boundaries related to the mid 16th century Lee family, significantly adding to the post-medieval land-use history of Quarrendon. These remains are considered to be of high local significance.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 27 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology Due to its multidisciplinary approach (specifically cropmark analysis, geophysical survey and trial trenching), the evaluation was also successful in developing a narrative on the development of boundaries and field-systems from the late Iron Age to the present. This narrative is considered to be of high local and regional significance and addresses the following wider research aims:
“Priority needs to be given to recognising the patterns in ancient fields and estate boundaries” (English Heritage 1997, 53).
On a local level, the techniques used in this evaluation could be expanded beyond the DA, to the surrounding field-systems, in order to contribute to a larger scale narrative on the long-term development of the field boundaries to the north of Quarrendon.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 28 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Albion Archaeology 2009a Berryfields East, Aylesbury: Buckinghamshire Archaeological Assessment. 2009/86
Albion Archaeology 2009b Berryfields East, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire: Written Scheme of Investigation for a Programme of Archaeological Evaluation. 2009/93
English Heritage 1991 The Management of Archaeological Projects.
English Heritage 1997 English Heritage, Archaeology Division Research Agenda (Draft).
IFA 1999a. Codes of Conduct, Standards and Guidance for Archaeological Field Evaluation.
IFA 1999b. Guidelines for Finds Work.
Kenny, S 2007 A banjo enclosure and Roman farmstead: excavations at Caldecote Highfields, Cambridgeshire. In: Mills, J and Plamer, R 2007. Populating Clay Landscapes. Tempus, Stroud. pp120-131.
SSEW 1983. Soils of England and Wales. Sheet 6, SE England. Soil Survey of England and Wales
Wessex 2009 A probable Romano-British malt house complex and other remains at Weedon Hill, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire (Draft Report)
http://www.flashearth.com visited on 05/01/2010, 10:00am
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 29 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
9. APPENDIX 1 – TRENCH SUMMARIES
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 30 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 1 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.27 m. Max: 0.28 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79705: Northing: 16974) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79691: Northing: 16927)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
100 Ploughsoil Firm dark brown grey silty clay 0.28m thick 101 Natural Firm mid orange yellow clay 102 Gulley Linear NE-SW profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 1.08m, max depth 0.18m 103 Lower fill Firm mid orange grey clay silt 104 Upper fill Friable dark orange grey clay silt
105 Gulley Linear NE-SW profile: convex base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.48m, max depth 0.31m 106 Lower fill Firm light grey orange clay sand 107 Upper fill Friable dark orange grey clay silt
108 Gulley Linear NE-SW profile: steep base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.64m, max depth 0.16m 109 Fill Friable dark orange grey clay silt
110 Gulley Linear NE-SW profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.3m, max depth 0.13m 111 Fill Friable dark orange grey clay silt
112 Gulley Linear NE-SW profile: convex base: flat dimensions: max breadth 0.35m, max depth 0.05m 113 Fill Friable dark orange grey clay silt
114 Ditch Linear E-W profile: irregular base: concave dimensions: max breadth 3.4m, max depth 0.67m 115 Lower fill Firm light grey yellow clay 116 Secondary fill Firm mid green grey silty clay 117 Upper fill Firm dark green grey clay
118 Pit Oval profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.86m, max depth 0.07m, max length 1.3m 119 Fill Firm mid orange grey clay silt
120 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 2.5m 121 Fill Firm dark brown grey clay silt
122 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 1.m, max length 1.15m 123 Fill Firm dark brown grey clay silt
124 Pit Sub-square dimensions: max breadth 0.75m, max length 1.2m 125 Fill Firm dark brown grey clay silt
126 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 0.85m, max length 2.m 127 Fill Firm dark brown grey clay silt
128 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 1.1m, max length 3.1m 129 Fill Firm dark brown grey clay silt
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 31 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 1 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.27 m. Max: 0.28 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79705: Northing: 16974) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79691: Northing: 16927)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
130 Pit Irregular dimensions: max breadth 0.4m, max length 1.25m 131 Fill Firm dark brown grey clay silt
132 Ditch Linear E-W dimensions: max breadth 2.75m 133 Fill Firm dark brown grey clay silt
134 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 0.4m, max length 1.35m 135 Fill Firm dark brown grey clay silt
136 Gulley Linear E-W dimensions: max breadth 0.65m 137 Fill Firm dark brown grey clay silt
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 32 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 2 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.25 m. Max: 0.3 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79749: Northing: 16944) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79701: Northing: 16958)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
200 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown silty clay 0.3m thick 201 Natural Plastic mid yellow orange silty clay 202 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: concave base: concave dimensions: min breadth 1.15m, max depth 0.27m 203 Lower fill Friable mid orange grey sandy silt 204 Upper fill Friable mid grey clay silt
205 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: concave base: concave dimensions: min breadth 0.55m, max depth 0.2m 206 Fill Friable dark green grey clay silt
207 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.65m, max depth 0.16m 208 Fill Friable mid green grey clay silt
209 Treethrow Linear E-W profile: concave base: uneven dimensions: max breadth 0.85m, max depth 0.16m Hedgerow 210 Fill Firm mid red brown silty clay
211 Trackway Linear NE-SW profile: concave base: flat dimensions: max breadth 2.6m, max depth 0.16m 212 External surface Compact light yellow grey clay frequent large stones Single layer of rough stones/cobbles 213 Layer Firm dark grey silty clay 214 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.85m, max depth 0.16m 215 Fill Firm dark orange grey silty clay
216 Pit Irregular dimensions: max breadth 1.2m, max length 4.m 217 Fill Firm dark grey silty clay
218 Pit Sub-circular dimensions: min breadth 0.45m, max length 0.85m 219 Fill Firm dark grey silty clay
220 Pit Oval dimensions: min breadth 0.5m, max length 0.85m 221 Fill Firm dark orange grey silty clay
222 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.9m 223 Fill Firm dark grey silty clay
224 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.35m 225 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
226 Pit Irregular dimensions: max breadth 1.4m, max length 1.5m 227 Fill Firm dark orange grey silty clay
228 Pit Circular dimensions: max diameter 0.6m 229 Fill Firm dark orange grey silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 33 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 2 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.25 m. Max: 0.3 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79749: Northing: 16944) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79701: Northing: 16958)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
230 Posthole Circular dimensions: max diameter 0.5m 231 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
232 Posthole Circular dimensions: max diameter 0.4m 233 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
234 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 1.2m 235 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
236 Posthole Oval dimensions: min breadth 0.3m, max length 0.4m 237 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
238 Pit Oval dimensions: max breadth 0.5m, max length 0.65m 239 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
240 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.75m 241 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
242 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.95m 243 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
244 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.5m 245 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
246 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 5.4m 247 Fill Firm dark grey silty clay
248 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 3.4m 249 Fill Firm dark grey silty clay
250 Treethrow Irregular dimensions: max breadth 1.3m, max length 1.5m 251 Fill Firm mid orange brown silty clay
252 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 0.45m, min length 0.6m 253 Fill Firm mid orange brown silty clay
254 Posthole Circular dimensions: max diameter 0.2m 255 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 34 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 3 Max Dimensions: Length: 70.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.35 m. Max: 0.35 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79650: Northing: 16919) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79717: Northing: 16899)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
300 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown silty clay 0.35m thick 301 Natural Plastic light yellow orange silty clay 302 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: convex base: concave dimensions: max breadth 2.45m, max depth 0.6m 303 Fill Firm dark yellow grey silty clay
304 Furrow Linear E-W profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.9m, max depth 0.14m 305 Fill Firm mid red brown clay silt
306 Treethrow Linear E-W profile: concave base: uneven dimensions: max breadth 0.9m, max depth 0.1m Hedgerow 307 Fill Firm mid red brown clay silt
308 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.75m, max depth 0.1m 309 Fill Firm mid orange brown clay silt
310 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 3.3m 311 Fill Firm dark orange green silty clay
312 Pit Oval dimensions: min breadth 0.45m, max length 0.65m 313 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
314 Pit Irregular dimensions: min breadth 0.9m, max length 1.7m 315 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
316 Pit Sub-rectangular dimensions: min breadth 1.2m, max length 1.5m 317 Fill Firm dark orange grey silty clay
318 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 1.m 319 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
320 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.5m 321 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
322 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 4.2m 323 Fill Firm dark orange grey silty clay
324 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 0.9m, min length 1.6m 325 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
326 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.5m 327 Fill Firm mid orange brown silty clay
328 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.7m 329 Fill Firm mid orange brown silty clay
330 Pit Sub-square dimensions: max breadth 1.2m 331 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 35 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 4 Max Dimensions: Length: 30.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.33 m. Max: 0.42 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79818: Northing: 16929) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79848: Northing: 16922)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
400 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown clay 0.3m thick 401 Subsoil Firm mid yellow grey silty clay 0.1m thick 405 Ditch Linear N-S profile: concave base: flat dimensions: max breadth 4.65m, max depth 1.1m 402 Upper fill Firm light orange grey silty clay 403 Secondary fill Firm mid grey green clay 404 Primary fill Firm light blue grey clay
407 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 1.5m 406 Fill Firm mid orange grey clay
409 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.45m 408 Fill Firm mid blue grey clay
411 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 1.2m, max length 1.35m 410 Fill Firm light orange grey clay
412 Natural Firm mid blue grey clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 36 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 5 Max Dimensions: Length: 30.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.53 m. Max: 0.53 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79699: Northing: 16829) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79669: Northing: 16827)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
500 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown silty clay 0.3m thick 501 Subsoil Firm mid yellow brown silty clay 0.23m thick 507 Ditch Linear N-S dimensions: max breadth 1.85m, max depth 0.56m 502 Upper fill Firm mid blue grey silty clay 503 Fill Firm mid blue grey silty clay 504 Fill Plastic mid orange grey clay 505 Primary fill Firm mid blue grey clay 506 Primary fill Firm mid blue yellow clay
511 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 1.18m, max depth 0.47m 508 Upper fill Firm mid orange grey clay 509 Secondary fill Firm mid orange yellow clay 510 Primary fill Firm mid yellow grey clay
514 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 0.88m, max depth 0.32m 512 Upper fill Firm light orange grey clay 513 Lower fill Firm mid grey clay
516 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 0.55m, max depth 0.32m 515 Fill Firm mid yellow grey clay
518 Posthole Circular dimensions: max depth 0.22m, max diameter 0.2m 517 Fill Firm mid orange grey clay
519 Natural Plastic mid blue yellow clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 37 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 6 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.25 m. Max: 0.3 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79752: Northing: 16836) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79795: Northing: 16810)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
600 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown grey clay silt 0.3m thick 601 Natural Firm light orange yellow clay 602 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 1.9m, max depth 0.2m 603 Fill Firm dark grey clay silt
604 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 1.85m, max depth 0.25m 605 Fill Firm dark grey clay silt
606 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.65m, max depth 0.14m 607 Fill Firm light grey orange clay
608 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: min breadth 0.65m, max depth 0.14m 609 Fill Firm light orange grey clay
610 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 1.05m, max depth 0.25m 611 Fill Firm mid orange grey clay silt
612 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 1.3m, max depth 0.27m, max length 1.5m 613 Lower fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt 614 Upper fill Friable mid grey orange clay silt
615 Pit Oval dimensions: max breadth 0.55m, max depth 0.1m, max length 0.8m 616 Fill Friable light orange grey clay silt
617 Ditch Linear E-W dimensions: max breadth 0.45m 618 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
619 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 2.m 620 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
621 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.55m 622 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
623 Pit Oval dimensions: min breadth 0.4m, max length 0.55m 624 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
625 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 0.55m 626 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
627 Ditch Linear E-W dimensions: max breadth 0.7m 628 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
629 Ditch Linear E-W dimensions: max breadth 0.8m 630 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
631 Ditch Linear N-S dimensions: max breadth 1.9m 632 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
633 Pit Square dimensions: max diameter 0.5m
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 38 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 6 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.25 m. Max: 0.3 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79752: Northing: 16836) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79795: Northing: 16810)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
634 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
635 Pit Oval dimensions: min breadth 0.4m, max length 0.55m 636 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
637 Furrow Linear E-W dimensions: max breadth 1.6m 638 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
639 Ditch Linear E-W dimensions: max breadth 0.55m 640 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
641 Ditch Linear dimensions: max breadth 1.2m 642 Fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 39 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 7 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.25 m. Max: 0.3 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79795: Northing: 16810) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79772: Northing: 16765)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
700 Ploughsoil Firm dark brown grey silty clay 0.4m thick 701 Natural Firm mid grey yellow clay 702 Ditch Linear NW-SE profile: convex base: v-shaped dimensions: max breadth 2.15m, max depth 0.65m 703 Primary fill Firm light yellow grey clay 704 Secondary fill Friable dark grey clay silt 705 Tertiary fill Firm light yellow grey clay 706 Upper fill Friable mid yellow grey clay silt
707 Ditch Curving linear profile: concave base: flat dimensions: max breadth 1.45m, max depth 0.33m 708 Primary fill Firm mid orange grey clay 709 Main fill Friable dark brown grey clay silt
710 Pit Oval base: flat dimensions: max breadth 0.45m, max depth 0.04m, max length 0.7m 711 Fill Firm mid orange grey clay silt
712 Ditch Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 4.m, max depth 0.87m 713 Primary fill Firm mid grey yellow clay 714 Secondary fill Firm mid grey yellow clay 715 Upper fill Firm mid grey clay silt
716 Ditch Linear N-S profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 1.4m, max depth 0.35m 717 Primary fill Firm mid grey silty clay 718 Main fill Friable mid orange yellow clay
719 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 1.4m 720 Fill Friable mid orange grey silty clay
721 Posthole Circular dimensions: max diameter 0.2m 722 Fill Friable mid orange grey silty clay
723 Posthole Circular dimensions: max diameter 0.25m 724 Fill Friable mid orange grey silty clay
725 Posthole Circular dimensions: max diameter 0.3m 726 Fill Friable mid orange grey silty clay
727 Pit Oval dimensions: min breadth 0.55m, max length 0.7m 728 Fill Friable mid orange grey silty clay
729 Pit Oval dimensions: max breadth 0.3m, max length 0.6m 730 Fill Friable mid orange grey silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 40 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 7 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.25 m. Max: 0.3 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79795: Northing: 16810) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79772: Northing: 16765)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
731 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 3.3m 732 Fill Friable mid orange grey silty clay
733 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 2.6m 734 Fill Friable mid orange grey silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 41 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 8 Max Dimensions: Length: 30.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.33 m. Max: 0.34 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79729: Northing: 16722) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79699: Northing: 16724)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
800 Ploughsoil Firm dark brown clay 0.3m thick 801 Subsoil Firm mid brown yellow clay 0.05m thick 804 Ditch Linear N-S profile: concave base: v-shaped dimensions: max breadth 1.6m, max depth 0.4m 802 Upper fill Plastic dark blue grey clay 803 Lower fill Firm light blue grey clay
806 Pit Sub-oval profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.3m, max depth 0.1m, max length 0.62m 805 Fill Firm mid yellow grey clay
808 Ditch Linear N-S dimensions: max breadth 1.55m 807 Fill Firm mid blue grey clay
810 Pit Sub-circular dimensions: max breadth 0.75m, max length 0.8m 809 Fill Firm mid yellow grey clay
812 Pit Oval dimensions: max breadth 0.35m, max length 0.9m 811 Fill Firm mid yellow grey clay
813 Natural Firm mid blue grey clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 42 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 9 Max Dimensions: Length: 60.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.35 m. Max: 0.35 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79714: Northing: 16683) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79654: Northing: 16680)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
900 Ploughsoil Friable dark grey brown clay silt 0.35m thick 901 Natural Firm light orange yellow clay 902 Natural Firm mid yellow grey clay 903 Natural Firm mid grey orange clay 904 Ditch Linear N-S profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 1.4m, max depth 0.46m 905 Primary fill Friable mid orange grey clay silt 906 Main fill Friable dark green grey clay silt 907 Main fill Friable light green grey clay silt
908 Ditch Linear E-W profile: 45 degrees base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.6m, max depth 0.18m 909 Fill Friable mid grey brown clay silt
910 Ditch Linear N-S dimensions: max breadth 1.7m 911 Fill Firm dark yellow grey silty clay
912 Posthole Oval dimensions: max breadth 0.4m, max length 0.5m 913 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
914 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 0.5m 915 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
918 Ditch Linear N-S dimensions: max breadth 4.m 919 Fill Firm dark yellow grey silty clay
920 Furrow Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 1.1m 921 Fill Firm mid yellow brown silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 43 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 10 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.4 m. Max: 0.35 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79807: Northing: 16733) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79762: Northing: 16712)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1000 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown grey clay silt 0.25m thick 1001 Subsoil Friable light grey brown clay silt 0.1m thick 1002 Natural Friable light grey yellow clay 1005 Ditch Linear NW-SE profile: 45 degrees base: concave dimensions: max breadth 1.15m, max depth 0.65m 1006 Lower fill Firm light grey orange clay 1007 Secondary fill Firm light orange grey clay 1008 Upper fill Firm mid grey brown clay
1009 Natural Irregular 1010 Fill Frequent large stones
1011 Ditch Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: v-shaped dimensions: min breadth 0.95m, max depth 0.5m 1003 Primary fill Firm light orange grey clay 1004 Main fill Firm mid orange grey clay
1012 Furrow Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 2.3m 1013 Fill Firm mid yellow brown silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 44 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 11 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.4 m. Max: 0.45 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79830: Northing: 16689) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79807: Northing: 16733)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1100 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown grey clay silt 0.3m thick 1101 Subsoil Firm light grey brown clay silt 0.1m thick 1102 Natural Firm light grey yellow clay 1104 Furrow Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 1.15m 1105 Fill Firm light orange grey clay
1106 Furrow Linear E-W profile: concave base: flat dimensions: max breadth 1.6m, max depth 0.19m 1103 Fill Firm mid grey brown clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 45 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 12 Max Dimensions: Length: 30.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.33 m. Max: 0.34 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79868: Northing: 16767) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79883: Northing: 16741)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1200 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown clay 0.3m thick 1201 Subsoil Firm mid grey yellow clay 0.05m thick 1203 Ditch Linear E-W profile: 45 degrees base: concave dimensions: max breadth 1.18m, max depth 0.16m 1202 Fill Firm mid blue grey clay
1205 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 2.m 1204 Fill Firm mid blue grey clay
1206 Natural Firm mid blue grey clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 46 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 13 Max Dimensions: Length: 60.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.35 m. Max: 0.35 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79935: Northing: 16817) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79985: Northing: 16785)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1300 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown clay silt 0.35m thick 1301 Natural Firm light orange grey silty clay 1302 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 3.m 1303 Fill Firm mid brown grey silty clay
1304 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 1.1m 1305 Fill Firm mid brown grey silty clay
1306 Furrow Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 1.2m, min breadth 0.65m 1307 Fill Firm mid orange brown silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 47 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 14 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.45 m. Max: 0.47 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80025: Northing: 16806) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80025: Northing: 16756)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1400 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown clay 0.3m thick 1401 Subsoil Firm mid yellow grey clay 0.15m thick 1403 Ditch Linear E-W profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 1.32m, max depth 0.16m 1402 Fill Firm light orange grey clay
1405 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.27m, max depth 0.06m 1404 Fill Firm mid orange grey clay
1407 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: irregular base: concave dimensions: max breadth 1.42m, max depth 0.33m 1406 Fill Firm dark blue grey clay
1409 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 1.35m, max length 2.m 1408 Fill Firm dark orange grey clay
1411 Pit Sub-oval dimensions: max breadth 0.75m, max length 0.9m 1410 Fill Firm mid blue grey clay
1413 Pit Oval dimensions: max breadth 1.6m, max length 1.7m 1412 Fill Firm mid blue grey clay
1415 Pit Irregular dimensions: max breadth 1.45m, max length 1.5m 1414 Fill Firm dark orange grey clay
1417 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 1.m 1416 Fill Firm dark blue grey clay
1419 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 0.5m 1418 Fill Firm mid grey clay
1420 Natural Firm light blue grey clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 48 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 15 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.4 m. Max: 0.45 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80107: Northing: 16742) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80153: Northing: 16722)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1500 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown clay silt 0.4m thick 1501 Subsoil Firm mid orange brown silty clay 0.1m thick. Only present at NW end of trench 1502 Natural Plastic mid brown orange silty clay 1503 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: near vertical base: flat dimensions: max breadth 1.4m, max depth 0.58m 1504 Primary fill Friable dark grey clay silt 1505 Main fill Firm dark grey clay silt
1506 Pit Sub-oval profile: convex dimensions: max breadth 4.6m, min depth 1.2m, min length 1.8m Base of water-pit not reached 1507 Primary fill Firm mid red grey silt 1508 Backfill Firm mid yellow brown silty clay 1509 Fill Firm mid grey clay silt 1512 Fill Firm mid grey clay silt
1510 Ditch Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: v-shaped dimensions: max breadth 2.m, max depth 0.65m 1511 Fill Firm dark brown grey silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 49 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 16 Max Dimensions: Length: 50.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.4 m. Max: 0.4 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80135: Northing: 16675) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80153: Northing: 16722)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1600 Ploughsoil Friable dark brown clay silt 0.4m thick 1601 Natural Plastic mid orange clay 1602 Pit Oval profile: steep base: flat dimensions: max breadth 1.m, max depth 0.19m, min length 1.4m 1603 Fill Firm mid brown grey silty clay
1604 Ditch Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: uneven dimensions: max breadth 2.m, max depth 0.6m 1605 Primary fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay 1606 Main fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
1607 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.7m, max depth 0.13m 1608 Fill Firm dark brown grey silty clay
1609 Ditch Linear ESE-WNW profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.95m, max depth 0.18m 1610 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
1611 Furrow Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: flat dimensions: max breadth 1.2m, max depth 0.1m 1612 Fill Firm mid brown silty clay
1613 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 1.25m 1614 Fill Firm dark grey silty clay
1615 Pit Sub-square dimensions: max breadth 1.65m, max length 1.8m 1616 Fill Firm dark brown grey silty clay
1617 Ditch Linear ESE-WNW dimensions: max breadth 2.3m 1618 Fill Firm dark grey silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 50 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 17 Max Dimensions: Length: 60.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.45 m. Max: 0.48 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80226: Northing: 16763) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80178: Northing: 16727)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1700 Ploughsoil Firm dark grey brown clay silt 0.35m thick 1701 Subsoil Firm mid brown silty clay 0.1m thick 1702 Natural Firm mid orange yellow clay 1703 Gulley Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: concave dimensions: min breadth 0.5m, max depth 0.16m 1704 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
1705 Gulley Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.78m, max depth 0.17m 1706 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
1707 Gulley Linear NW-SE profile: convex base: concave dimensions: min breadth 1.3m, max depth 0.23m 1708 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
1709 Layer Firm mid orange brown silty clay 1710 Ditch Linear E-W profile: concave base: flat dimensions: max breadth 1.75m, max depth 0.17m 1711 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
1712 Ditch Linear NW-SE profile: stepped base: concave dimensions: max breadth 2.35m, max depth 0.58m 1713 Fill Firm dark grey silty clay
1714 Ditch Linear E-W dimensions: max breadth 2.m 1715 Fill Firm mid grey silty clay
1716 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 3.m 1717 Fill Firm mid grey silty clay
1718 Ditch Curving linear dimensions: max breadth 2.25m, min breadth 1.m 1719 Fill Firm mid grey silty clay
1720 Ditch Linear N-S dimensions: max breadth 2.1m 1721 Fill Firm mid grey silty clay
1722 Ditch Linear N-S dimensions: max breadth 1.1m 1723 Fill Firm mid grey silty clay
1724 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 4.25m 1725 Fill Firm mid grey silty clay
1726 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 1.75m 1727 Fill Firm mid grey silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 51 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 18 Max Dimensions: Length: 30.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.35 m. Max: 0.4 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80200: Northing: 16635) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80222: Northing: 16615)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1800 Ploughsoil Firm dark brown grey silty clay 0.38m thick 1801 Natural Firm dark orange yellow clay 1802 Ditch Linear NE-SW profile: 45 degrees base: concave dimensions: max breadth 2.2m, max depth 0.35m 1803 Fill Firm mid grey brown clay
1804 Furrow Linear N-S dimensions: max breadth 2.1m 1805 Fill Firm mid brown orange silty clay
1806 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 3.2m 1807 Fill Firm mid brown grey clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 52 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 19 Max Dimensions: Length: 60.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.55 m. Max: 0.6 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80325: Northing: 16651) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80279: Northing: 16612)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1900 Ploughsoil Firm dark brown grey silty clay 0.35m thick 1901 Subsoil Firm mid grey brown clay 0.15m thick 1902 Natural Firm dark orange yellow clay 1903 Ditch Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 1.15m, max depth 0.36m 1904 Fill Firm mid grey orange silty clay
1905 Posthole Circular profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max depth 0.13m, max diameter 0.25m 1906 Primary fill Firm dark orange yellow clay 1907 Fill Firm dark grey brown silty clay Contains burnt bone
1908 Furrow Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 2.4m, max depth 0.19m 1909 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
1910 Furrow Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 2.1m 1911 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
1912 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 2.25m 1913 Fill Firm mid orange grey silty clay
1914 Posthole Sub-circular profile: near vertical base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.22m, max depth 0.16m, max length 0.24m 1915 Fill Firm dark grey clay silt Contains burnt bone
1916 Posthole Sub-circular profile: near vertical base: concave dimensions: max breadth 0.19m, max depth 0.15m, max length 0.21m 1917 Fill Firm dark grey clay silt Contains burnt bone
1918 Posthole Circular profile: 45 degrees base: concave dimensions: max depth 0.07m, max diameter 0.15m 1919 Fill Firm dark grey clay silt Contains burnt bone
1920 Ditch Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: flat dimensions: max breadth 1.3m, max depth 0.25m 1921 Lower fill Firm mid orange brown silty clay 1922 Upper fill Firm mid brown grey silty clay
1923 Ditch Linear NW-SE profile: concave base: concave dimensions: max breadth 2.5m, max depth 0.6m 1924 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
1925 Ditch Linear NW-SE dimensions: max breadth 0.75m 1926 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
1927 Pit Oval dimensions: max breadth 0.45m, max length 0.8m 1928 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 53 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 19 Max Dimensions: Length: 60.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.55 m. Max: 0.6 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80325: Northing: 16651) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 80279: Northing: 16612)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
1929 Pit Sub-circular dimensions: min breadth 0.75m, max length 1.m 1930 Fill Firm mid brown silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 54 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Trench: 20 Max Dimensions: Length: 30.00 m. Width: 1.80 m. Depth to Archaeology Min: 0.35 m. Max: 0.35 m.
Co-ordinates: OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79970: Northing: 16376) OS Grid Ref.: SP (Easting: 79994: Northing: 16357)
Reason: To test the results of non-intrusive survey and gain new data on the depth, character and date of remains within the DA Context: Type: Description: Excavated: Finds Present:
2000 Ploughsoil Firm dark grey brown silty clay 0.3m thick 2001 Subsoil Firm mid grey brown clay 0.05m thick 2002 Natural Firm mid grey yellow clay 2003 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 1.8m 2004 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
2005 Ditch Linear NE-SW dimensions: max breadth 1.85m 2006 Fill Firm mid grey brown silty clay
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 55 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
10. APPENDIX 2 – FIELDWALKING ARTEFACT SUMMARY
The fieldwalking survey yielded a sizeable artefact assemblage (359 findspots), comprising mainly ceramic building material of late medieval / post-medieval date (Table 1).
Findspot Number Type Number Weight (g) 1 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 13 2 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 3 46 3 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 68 4 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 24 5 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 21 6 Medieval pottery 1 11 7 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 87 8 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 5 9 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 5 10 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 7 11 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 27 12 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 16 13 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 3 29 14 Post-medieval pottery 1 9 15 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 9 16 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 41 17 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 66 18 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 31 19 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 8 85 20 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 9 21 Modern brick 4 273 22 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 165 23 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 31 24 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 31 25 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 4 165 26 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 7 79 27 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 63 28 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 3 35 29 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 4 101 30 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 36 31 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 3 32 Medieval pottery 1 3 33 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 137 34 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 48 35 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 34 36 Post-medieval / modern ceramic building material 1 24 37 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 13 38 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 13 39 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 5 40 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 4 111 41 Stone 1 170 42 Medieval pottery 1 5 43 Medieval pottery 1 3 44 Land drain 1 7 45 Medieval pottery 1 2 Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 56 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Findspot Number Type Number Weight (g) 46 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 57 47 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 150 48 Modern brick 1 235 49 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 152 50 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 36 51 Modern brick 2 17 52 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 30 53 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 5 309 54 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 92 55 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 77 56 Medieval pottery 1 1 57 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 22 58 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 4 119 59 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 130 60 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 38 61 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 45 62 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 371 63 Medieval pottery 1 3 64 Floor tile 1 102 65 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 152 66 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 68 67 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 19 68 Modern brick 1 514 69 Modern brick 1 34 70 Modern brick 1 180 71 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 24 72 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 18 73 Medieval pottery 1 4 74 Medieval pottery 1 2 75 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 87 76 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 15 77 Medieval pottery 1 17 78 Modern brick 1 140 79 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 27 80 Medieval pottery 1 3 81 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 73 82 Medieval pottery 1 6 83 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 31 84 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 84 85 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 4 86 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 17 87 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 44 88 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 35 89 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 24 90 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 31 91 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 56 92 Fossil 1 3 93 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 58 94 Undiagnostic pottery 1 5 95 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 48 96 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 46
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 57 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Findspot Number Type Number Weight (g) 97 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 18 98 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 124 99 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 2 100 Roman pottery 1 22 101 Medieval pottery 1 4 102 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 6 103 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 55 104 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 61 105 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 5 106 Medieval pottery 1 20 106 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 41 107 Medieval pottery 1 7 107 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 14 108 Modern brick 3 83 109 Land drain 1 62 110 Land drain 8 115 111 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 15 112 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 2 113 Medieval pottery 1 34 114 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 100 115 Medieval pottery 1 4 116 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 6 117 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 61 118 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 73 119 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 11 120 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 30 121 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 15 122 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 49 123 Roman pottery 1 8 124 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 1 125 Undiagnostic pottery 1 3 126 Land drain 1 23 127 Medieval pottery 1 2 128 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 78 129 Medieval pottery 1 3 130 Roman pottery 1 8 131 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 42 132 LIA pottery 1 12 133 LIA pottery 1 8 134 Roman pottery 1 3 135 Coin – George III cartwheel penny c. 1797 1 25 136 Medieval pottery 1 4 137 Undiagnostic pottery 1 4 139 Post-medieval pottery 1 6 140 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 30 141 Medieval pottery 1 6 142 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 45 143 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 69 143 Land drain 2 55 144 Modern tile 1 25 145 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 83
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 58 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Findspot Number Type Number Weight (g) 146 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 52 147 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 59 148 Modern brick 1 14 149 Medieval pottery 1 3 150 Undiagnostic pottery 1 9 151 Roman pottery 1 8 152 Undiagnostic pottery 1 7 153 Medieval pottery 1 5 154 Modern tile 1 7 155 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 46 156 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 88 157 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 2 158 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 38 159 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 38 160 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 209 161 Roman pottery 1 15 162 Undiagnostic pottery 1 17 163 Modern brick 1 6 164 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 33 165 Roman pottery 1 16 166 Land drain 1 24 167 Medieval pottery 1 3 169 Modern tile 1 4 170 Modern brick 2 45 171 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 67 172 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 25 173 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 22 174 Roman pottery 1 4 175 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 21 176 Modern brick 1 48 177 Modern tile 1 14 178 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 20 179 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 38 180 Clay pipe stem fragment 1 2 181 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 5 182 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 148 183 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 32 184 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 14 185 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 22 186 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 4 187 Modern tile 1 13 188 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 12 189 Modern tile 1 43 190 Medieval pottery 1 8 191 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 10 192 Modern brick 2 146 193 Modern tile 2 90 194 Medieval pottery 1 4 195 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 7 196 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 85 197 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 11
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 59 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Findspot Number Type Number Weight (g) 198 Modern tile 1 7 199 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 6 200 Modern brick 1 23 201 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 87 202 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 26 203 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 57 204 Roman pottery 1 7 205 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 20 206 Modern brick 1 32 207 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 18 208 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 72 209 LIA pottery 1 4 210 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 49 212 Clay pipe stem fragment 1 5 213 Roman pottery 1 21 214 Roman pottery 2 29 215 Roman pottery 1 10 216 LIA pottery 1 20 216 Roman pottery 1 32 217 Roman pottery 2 63 218 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 14 219 LIA pottery 2 21 220 Horseshoe – Keyhole type c. 1640’s-1700 1 537 221 Medieval pottery 1 4 222 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 9 224 Roman pottery 1 7 225 Roman pottery 1 3 226 Roman pottery 1 2 227 Roman pottery 2 19 228 LIA pottery 1 32 228 Roman pottery 2 27 229 Roman pottery 1 2 230 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 6 231 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 6 261 232 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 76 233 Undiagnostic pottery 1 16 235 Roman pottery 1 5 236 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 32 237 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 325 239 Medieval pottery 1 4 240 Roman pottery 1 8 241 LIA pottery 1 9 242 Late Bronze Age / early Iron Age pottery 1 10 243 Roman pottery 1 3 244 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 99 245 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 86 246 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 229 247 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 6 248 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 38 249 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 18 250 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 25
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 60 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Findspot Number Type Number Weight (g) 251 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 12 252 Post-medieval pottery 1 2 253 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 84 254 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 57 255 Roman pottery 1 8 256 Roman pottery 1 3 257 Land drain 1 12 258 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 16 259 Medieval pottery 1 6 260 Roman pottery 1 5 261 Roman pottery 1 13 262 Land drain 8 127 263 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 5 266 Modern brick 1 587 267 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 23 269 Medieval pottery 1 6 269 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 4 270 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 2 122 271 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 7 272 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 12 273 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 19 274 Undiagnostic ceramic building material 1 6 275 Undiagnostic pottery 1 4 276 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 32 277 Medieval / post-medieval ceramic building material 1 51
10.1 Finds Summary
Pottery Eighty-one pottery sherds weighing 736g were recovered. The sherds are small, with an average weight of 9g, and generally abraded. They survive in a condition consistent with their recovery from plough soil deposits. The pottery ranges in date from the late Bronze Age/early Iron Age to the post-medieval period, with the bulk of the assemblage being of Roman and medieval origin. Eight unidentified sand tempered sherds are either Roman or medieval in origin, but are too small and abraded to be further classified (Table 2).
Pottery date Sherd no. % Pre-Roman 9 11.1 Roman 31 38.3 Medieval 30 37.0 Post-medieval 3 3.7 Unidentified 8 9.9 81 100.0 Pottery by date range and sherd count
Thirty-four fabric types were identified using common names and type codes in accordance with the Bedfordshire Ceramic Type Series, held by Albion Archaeology. Fabrics are listed below (Table 3) in chronological order.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 61 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Fabric Type Common name Sherd Number Findspot number Late Bronze Age/early Iron Age F01C Flint and quartz 1 242 Late Iron Age F06B Medium grog 3 133, 219, 241 F06C Coarse grog 2 216, 219 F09 Sand and grog 2 209, 228 F39 Grog and mica 1 132 Roman R01 Samian ware 1 123 R03C Smooth white ware 1 217 R03E Fine white ware 2 151, 255 R05A Orange sandy 2 225, 240 R05B Fine orange sandy 1 226 R06A Nene Valley grey ware 1 224 R06B Coarse grey ware 3 130, 165, 256 R06C Fine grey ware 6 214 (x2), 216, 217, 227, 228 R06E Calcareous grey ware 1 134 R06I Black-slipped grey ware 1 229 R09A Pink grogged 3 213, 227, 235 R09B Pink grogged with shell 1 228 R10B Fine buff 4 161, 174, 204, 243 R11E Oxford white mortaria 1 215 R13 Shell 1 260 R14 Sandy (red-brown harsh) 1 261 R18B Fine pink 1 100 Medieval B07 Shell 1 167 C09 Brill/Boarstall ware 11 6, 45, 56, 80, 101, 106, 107, 113, 115, 141, 153 C59B Sand 4 43, 63, 73, 149 C60 Hertfordshire-type grey ware 2 74, 77 C63 Sand and flint 5 32, 42, 82, 127, 190 C67 Mixed inclusions 1 194 C Non-specific medieval 3 136, 259, 269 E01 Late medieval reduced ware 1 221 E02 Late medieval oxidised ware 2 129, 239 Post-medieval P01 Fine glazed red earthenware 2 14, 139 P03 Black-glazed earthenware 1 252
UNID Undiagnostic /undatable ware 8 94, 125, 137. 150, 152, 162, 233, 275
Pottery Type Series Pre-Roman pottery comprises a late Bronze Age/early Iron Age flint tempered sherd (10g) and eight undiagnostic grog tempered sherds datable to the late ‘Belgic’ Iron Age (106g).
Thirty-one sherds (351g) are datable to the Roman period. Most are coarse wares in reduced and oxidised sand tempered fabric types of probable local manufacture. Pink-grogged wares, Oxfordshire white wares and single shelly ware and samian sherds, the latter a continental import, comprise the remainder of the assemblage.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 62 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology Diagnostic elements are miscellaneous jar rims and base sherds from coarse ware vessels, and a piece of mortarium (grinding bowl).
The medieval assemblage (30 sherds: 187g) is broadly datable to the 12th-15th centuries and comprises a range of fabrics including early medieval coarse wares tempered with sand, chalk and flint, high medieval Brill/Boarstall ware, Hertfordshire-type greyware and late medieval reduced and oxidised wares. Diagnostic elements derive from glazed jugs, and include single examples of a rod and strap handle.
Post-medieval pottery comprises three glazed red earthenware sherds (17g), likely to derive from large bowls.
10.2 Ceramic building material A total of 248 pieces of ceramic building material (11kg) were collected. Over 89% of this material comprises sand tempered flat roof tile and brick fragments broadly datable to the late medieval / post-medieval periods. A glazed floor tile fragment (102g) with a geometric design may be of late medieval date, although this remains uncertain. Pieces of modern brick and tile constitute the remainder of the assemblage. Fragments have an average weight of 38g and are generally battered and abraded.
Twenty-three pieces of modern land drain (425g) were collected and subsequently discarded.
10.3 Other finds Metal items comprise a copper alloy George III cartwheel penny (c. 1797) and an iron keyhole horseshoe (c. 1640s-1700). Two fragments of post-medieval clay tobacco pipe stem were collected.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 63 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
11. APPENDIX 3 – TRIAL TRENCHING ARTEFACT SUMMARY
11.1 Introduction The evaluation produced a finds assemblage comprising mainly pottery and faunal remains, the majority associated with features in trenches 1, 2 and 15 (see below). The material was scanned to ascertain its nature, condition and, where possible, date range. No finds were recovered from trenches 8, 11-13, 18, or 20.
Tr. Feature Type Context Spot date* Finds Summary 1 102 Ditch 104 Roman Pottery (15g) 105 Ditch 107 Roman Pottery (5g); burnt flint (13g) 110 Ditch 111 LIA Pottery (2g) 114 Ditch 116 Early Roman Pottery (924g); fired clay (51g); animal bone (892g) 114 Ditch 117 Early Roman Pottery (194g) 120 Pit 121 Roman Brick fragment (50g) 122 Pit 123 Roman Pottery (31g) 126 Pit 127 Early Roman Pottery (16g); iron bolt or arrow head (RA2); animal bone (47g) 128 Pit 129 Roman Pottery (38g) 132 Ditch 133 LIA Pottery (70g) 2 202 Ditch 204 LIA-early Roman Pottery (31g); fired clay (47g) 205 Ditch 206 Roman Pottery (177g); animal bone (7g) 207 Ditch 208 Roman Pottery (21g) 213 Layer 213 Early Roman Pottery (675g); animal bone (217g) 214 Ditch 215 Roman Pottery (3g) 216 Pit 217 LIA-early Roman Pottery (166g) 220 Pit 221 LIA-early Roman Pottery (47g) 246 Ditch 247 Early Roman Pottery (203g) 3 302 Ditch 303 Undated Animal bone (12g) 306 Hedgerow 307 Roman Pottery (5g) 4 405 Palaeo 404 Undated Fossilised animal bone (13g) channel 5 507 Ditch 502 Roman Pottery (37g); animal bone (221g) 6 602 ditch 603 Undated Burnt flint (8g) 604 Ditch 605 Undated Burnt flint (19g); animal bone (2g) 606 Ditch 607 Roman Pottery (2g); animal bone (2g) 608 Ditch 609 Undated Fired clay (14g); animal bone (6g) 610 Ditch 611 LIA-early Roman Pottery (153g); burnt flint (12g); animal bone (19g) 612 Pit 613 Undated Animal bone (7g) 615 Pit 616 LIA Pottery (3g) 7 702 Ditch 703 LIA Pottery (37g); fired clay (55g); animal bone (60g) 702 Ditch 705 LIA Pottery (32g); animal bone (20g) 707 Ditch 709 LIA-early Roman Pottery (28g); animal bone (56g) 710 Pit 711 Undated Animal bone (177g) 712 Ditch 713 LIA-early Roman Pottery (102g); fired clay (82g); animal bone (109g) 712 Ditch 714 LIA-early Roman Pottery (176g); fired clay (101g); animal bone (223g) 712 Ditch 715 LIA-early Roman Pottery (142g); animal bone (13g) 716 Ditch 717 LIA Pottery (25g) 716 Ditch 718 LIA Pottery (5g) 9 904 Ditch 905 Undated Animal bone (147g) 904 Ditch 906 Roman Lava quern fragment (RA1); animal bone (354g) 918 Ditch 919 LIA Pottery (13g) 10 1005 Ditch 1007 LIA Pottery (15g); fired clay (30g); animal bone (64g); burnt stone (131g) 1005 Ditch 1008 LIA Pottery (6g); burnt flint (13g); animal bone (49g) 1011 Ditch 1004 Undated Animal bone (5g) 14 1407 Ditch 1406 Early Roman Pottery (20g); animal bone (8g) 1413 Pit 1412 Early Roman Pottery (9g) 1415 Pit 1414 Undated Pottery (4g) 1419 Ditch 1418 Roman Pottery (43g) 15 1503 Ditch 1505 LIA-early Roman Pottery (15g); animal bone (80g) 1506 Water pit 1507 LIA-early Roman Pottery (80g); fired clay (34g); animal bone (374g) 1506 Water pit 1508 LIA-early Roman Pottery (232g); fired clay (49g); animal bone (243g) Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 64 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Tr. Feature Type Context Spot date* Finds Summary 1506 Water pit 1509 LIA-early Roman Pottery (223g); animal bone (103g) 1506 Water pit 1512 LIA-early Roman Pottery (452g); fired clay (167g); animal bone (262g) 1510 Ditch 1511 LIA-early Roman Pottery (296g); fired clay (293g); animal bone (297g) 16 1602 Pit 1603 LIA Pottery (230g) 1604 Ditch 1605 LIA-early Roman Pottery (58g) 1604 Ditch 1606 LIA-early Roman Pottery (271g); fired clay (142g); animal bone (349g) 1607 Ditch 1608 LIA Pottery (14g) 1609 Ditch 1610 LIA-early Roman Pottery (9g); animal bone (9g) 1611 Furrow 1612 Late medieval/post-medieval Pottery (40g); roof tile fragment (100g) 17 1707 Ditch 1708 Roman Pottery (14g) 1709 Layer 1709 LIA Pottery (35g) 1710 Ditch 1711 LIA Pottery (182g) 1712 Ditch 1713 LIA-early Roman Pottery (294g); animal bone (44g) 1923 Ditch 1924 LIA Pottery (8g); animal bone (133g) * - spot date based on date of latest artefact in context
11.2 Pottery A total of 451 pottery sherds weighing 5.9kg were recovered. These were examined by context and quantified using minimum sherd count and weight. Sherds are small, with an average weight of 13g, and generally abraded. Few vessels are represented by more than one sherd. Thirty-seven fabric types were identified in accordance with the Bedfordshire Ceramic Type Series, currently maintained by Albion Archaeology. Fabrics are listed below in chronological order.
Fabric type Common name Sherd No. Context/Sherd No. Late Iron Age F03 Grog and sand 3 (616):1, (1711):2 F06B Medium grog 97 (111):1, (116):15, (204):1, (217):2, (703):3, (705):1, (713):5, (714):5, (715):7, (1007):2, (1505):1, (1507):3, (1508):7, (1509):9, (1511):10, (1512):13, (1605):2, (1606):3, (1608):1, (1709):1, (1713):5 F06C Coarse grog 9 (116):1, (611):1, (705):1, (715):1, (1507):2, (1512):3 F09 Sand and grog 56 (116):9, (117):2, (113):1, (204):1, (217):1, (221):2, (703):1, (705):2, (714):6, (715):4, (717):2, (1508):3, (1509):1, (1511):2, (1512):7, (1603):6, (1606):2, (1608):1, (1610):1, (1713):1, (1924):1 F34 Sand 1 (715):1 F39 Grog and mica 22 (116):2, (703):1, (709):1, (713):1, (714):1, (715):1, (718):1, (919):1, (1008):1, (1507):2, (1508):2, (1511):1, (1512):2, (1605):1, (1606):1, (1709):3 Roman R01 Samian 5 (117):4, (1713):1 R03 White ware 3 (213):1, (217):1, (1512):1 R03B Gritty white ware 17 (116):4, (213):1, (221):1, (1505):2, (1508):4, (1512):1, (1606):1, (1612):1, (1713):2 R03C Smooth white ware 2 (1508):2 R05A Orange sandy 21 (116):4, (206):1, (208):1, (213):4, (1412):1, (1505):1, (1508):4, (1512):2, (1606):1, (1713):2 R05B Fine orange sandy 4 (213):1, (1511):1, (1713):2 R05C Orange sandy micaceous 1 (215):1 R05D Orange sandy white slipped 1 (1713):1 R06B Coarse grey ware 60 (104);1, (116):5, (129):3, (206):1, (213):6, (217):3, (502):1, (611):5, (1508):5, (1509):12, (1511):5, (1512):5, (1606):4, (1610):1, (1713):3 R06C Fine grey ware 45 (104):1, (107):1, (116):4, (123):1, (204):1, (213):8, (217):1, (611):2, (1406):1, (1508):1, 1511):2, (1512):4, (1605):2, (1606):10, (1713):6 R06D Micaceous grey ware 11 (117):1, (213):5, (307):1, (1418):1, (1511):2, (1606):1 R06F Grey ware grog and sand 18 (116):3, (127):1, (217):2, (713):4, (714):6, (1509):1, (1511):1 R06G Silty grey ware 5 (1606):5 R06H Black slipped grey ware 2 (1406):1, (1713):1 R07B Sandy black ware 7 (116):1, (206):1, (213):1, (1605):1, (1606):3 Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 65 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Fabric type Common name Sherd No. Context/Sherd No. R07C Gritty black ware 3 (213):2, (1511):1 R09A Pink grogged 8 (206):1, (213):6, (1406):1 R10A Buff gritty 3 (1713):3 R10B Fine buff 3 (116):1; (1511):2 R10D Buff micaceous 1 (213):1 R11A Oxford white ware 1 (1713):1 R11B Oxford gritted white ware 2 (1708):2 R11E Oxford mortaria (white) 1 (1713):1 R12B Nene Valley colour coat 3 (206):3 R13 Shell 14 (116):8, (117):1, (206):1, (213):1; (247):3 R14 Sandy (red-brown harsh) 12 (213):1, (607):1, (709):1, (1509):6, (1512):2, (1708):1 R17 Smooth orange 1 (1512):1 R22A Hadham oxidised ware 1 (117):1 R35 Grog 5 (213):5 Post-Roman E Non-specific reduced ware 1 (1612):1
UNID Undatable/uncertain 2 (709):1, (1414):1
The assemblage is uniform in character and is mainly datable to the late Iron Age/early Roman period. Grog tempered late Iron Age vessels in the ‘Belgic’ tradition (c. 50BC-AD100) total 42% (by sherd count) of the assemblage and represent the earliest pottery recovered. Vessel forms are jars with simple everted or bead rims, lid-seated and cordoned vessels, narrow-necked jars, a single carinated cup or bowl and a possible strainer. A few vessels have combed decoration and modifications are visible on two body sherds with drilled post-firing holes, to facilitate repair.
The remainder of the diagnostic assemblage is datable to the early Roman period, and mainly comprises sand tempered reduced and oxidised coarse wares of probable local manufacture. Fabrics represented include grey ware products of the Oxfordshire industry and pink grog tempered ware originating from either Buckinghamshire or Northamptonshire. Fourteen shell tempered sherds of uncertain provenance were also identified. Regional imports comprise a small number of sherds from the Verulamium (St Albans) kilns and three later sherds from the Nene Valley. Continental imports are represented by five sherds of samian ware. The latter are datable to the 1st-2nd centuries, and comprise two cups (Forms 27 and 33) and a decorated bowl (Form 37) with a complete stamp.
The diagnostic Roman assemblage is dominated by jars of varying sizes, which have plain everted, triangular and bead rims. Bowls have everted and flanged rims. Less prevalent forms are ‘poppy head’ and folded beakers, plain-necked flagons and single examples of a lid and mortarium (grinding bowl). Decoration is rare and comprises combing, burnishing (overall and lattice design) and slipping.
Post-Roman pottery recovered from furrow [1611] comprises a late medieval/early post-medieval reduced sand tempered base sherd, with a part vitrified glaze.
Forty-four features contained pottery, with the largest assemblages deriving from the deposits of ditch [114] (1.1kg), water pit [1506] (987g) and layer (213) (675g). Thirty-one features (70%) yielded assemblages weighing less than 100g.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 66 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology 11.3 Other finds An abraded Roman brick fragment (50g) was the sole find from pit [120]. Furrow [1611] yielded a piece of sand tempered late medieval/post-medieval flat roof tile (100g). Fired clay fragments (1.1kg) in a fine sand and organic fabric derived from features in trenches 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 15 and 16. They represent pieces of at least twelve hand made slabs or bricks ranging in thickness between 15-34mm. Two joining pieces from a tray with a raised lip/flanged edge (c. 40mm thick), and part of a possible ‘cigar’-shaped fire bar, likely to represent portable oven furniture, were also identified (ditches [712] and [1005] respectively).
Non-ceramic artefacts comprise a lava rotary quern fragment (registered artefact 1) and an incomplete iron bolt or arrow head (registered artefact 2) recovered, respectively, from ditch [904] and pit [126]. Both are likely to be of Roman origin. Six unmodified pieces of burnt flint (64g) and a lump of burnt sandstone (131g) derived from Trenches 1, 6 and10 (ditches [105], [602], [604], [610], and [1005]).
11.4 Animal bone Animal bone fragments weighing 4.6kg was recovered, the majority deriving from the deposits of ditch [114] (Trench 1) and water pit [1506] (Trench 15), which each contained nearly 1kg. Fragments are small (average weight 15g) and bone preservation is variable, with many pieces displaying surface erosion. Diagnostic elements are long bone, rib, scapula, vertebra, skull, mandible and tooth fragments from large mammals, including horse, cow, sheep/goat, pig and dog.
Two fragments of fossilised animal bone were recovered from the lower deposit of probable palaeo-channel [405]. One of the fragments may represent part of the mandible of an extinct reptile, re-deposited from the surrounding Jurassic clay.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 67 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
12. APPENDIX 4 – ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE REPORT By Angela Monckton (ULAS)
12.1 Introduction Small numbers of charred plant remains were recovered and charcoal was present but no other remains were found. The features were of late Iron Age to Roman date.
12.2 Methods Bulk samples were processed to recover plant and animal remains. Single parts of each sample were processed of about 3 to 9 litres in size, to recover burnt bones and to assess if any had the potential to produce sufficient charred plant remains for analysis, i.e. at least 50 items of plant remains.
Samples were wet sieved in a York tank using a 0.5mm mesh with flotation into a 0.3mm mesh sieve. The residues were air dried and then separated on a 4mm riddle and the fractions over 4mm (coarse fractions), were sorted for all finds. In order to minimize damage to the human bones the cremation samples were processed manually with bucket flotation using the same size meshes; the burnt bone was extracted from all residues and considered separately (see below). The fractions below 4mm were reserved for sorting for any remains during the analysis stage if required. The flotation fractions (flots) were transferred to plastic boxes and air dried and then packed carefully in self-seal polythene bags and submitted for this assessment for charred plants and other remains.
All the flots were examined and sorted using a low power stereo microscope and any plant remains were removed to glass specimen tubes stored with the flot. The plant remains were identified by comparison with modern reference material. Charred remains were poorly represented in the samples, charcoal was present in some of the flots. The remains were noted with an estimate of quantity and tabulated below (Table E1).
12.3 Results Charred plant remains excluding charcoal were found in only seven of the fifteen samples in single numbers. Many of the samples contained fragments of modern straw which suggested they had been contaminated by topsoil, and in three of the samples containing rachis and a bread wheat grain may have been modern origin. Bread wheat is uncommon in both Iron Age and Roman periods and it would be unwise to assume this was archaeological in samples with modern straw fragments present.
Samples 1-7 from the south-eastern part of AZ5 included four cremation samples 1-4. These contained no charred plant remains other than charcoal with the exception of a fragment of bread wheat rachis which was possibly modern because modern straw was present in this sample. Samples 5-7 were similarly lacking in plant remains.
Sample 14 from AZ4 also lacked charred plant remains while samples 12 and 15 (AZ2) contained a couple of charred cereal grains each with a few chaff fragments including spelt (Triticum spelta) and occasional weed seeds. Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 68 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Samples 8-11 and 13 were from (AZ3). Nothing was found in samples 8 and 10, and sample 11 contained a bread wheat type grain which may have been intrusive as modern straw was present. Sample 13 contained a fragment of wheat chaff, possibly spelt with a charred buttercup seed (Ranunculus sp). Sample 9 contained the most remains from the site although they were few in number and only at a density of 1.3 items per litre (the greatest density for the site). The remains included glume wheat grains, possibly spelt, and a grain of barley (Hordeum vulgare), with a few weed seeds including clover type (Medicago/Trifolium), large grass (Poaceae), and goosefoots (Chenopodium sp.). This sample also contained some charcoal and probably represents waste from food preparation removed from a domestic hearth and dumped or accumulated in the feature.
Uncharred Duckweed seeds (Lemna sp.) were found in samples 12 and 9. Because they are silicaceous seeds, they are sometimes preserved in sediments such as clay. This plant only sets seed in standing water and may indicate that the features were wet in the past, however, no other waterlogged evidence was found and such seeds may be washed in during flooding.
These charred cereal remains and arable weeds are at a very low density in the samples and compare with some Iron Age sites where cereals are present but in small numbers. These may represent domestic waste from hearths. Spelt and barley are the main cereals in the Region in both Iron Age and Roman times so could be from either period (Greig 1991). The few weeds found are also typical of both periods.
12.4 Conclusions and Potential These samples contain insufficient remains for further analysis of charred plant remains but they have some potential to provide information about the distribution of activities on the site. Of the AZ5 samples, the cremations contained no charred plant remains other than charcoal with the exception of a frament of bread wheat rachis which was possibly modern because modern straw was present in this sample. The rest of the samples from this area and to its west lacked remains suggesting the land from which these samples derive is some distance away from the area of occupation, or other cereal related activities. This may be expected in land set aside for funerary activity.
The samples from AZ3 and AZ5 contained a very low density of remains in five of the seven samples, single numbers of chaff fragment with wheat glumes including spelt in three samples, cereal grains in four of the samples with a few weed seeds. These may represent a scatter of domestic waste from food preparation of spelt and barley with a maximum density of 1.3 items per litre of soil on the site. Remains are often at a low density in Iron Age samples, a scatter of charred cereal grains, spelt wheat chaff and weed seeds is usually found as domestic waste from food preparation (Monckton 2004). Roman sites tend to produce concentrations of remains where cereals are processed on certain sites, while a scatter of domestic waste is usually present on occupation sites of different types. More information is needed to examine the distribution of remains and for evidence of domestic and other activities on the site.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 69 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology 12.5 Recommendations If further excavations are carried out in the area it is recommended that sampling is continued to recover charred plant remains to add to the evidence from the distribution of remains on the site, and for comparison with other sites. Sparse results from some features cannot be taken to indicate that all features in the area are similar, even occasional burials produce results from charred or mineralized plant remains. Care should be taken to minimize contamination of samples. Samples of more than one part are recommended (usually 30 litres), so that more material can be processed from productive samples to produce enough remains for analysis (over 50 items of plant remains). A range of samples to represent the types of datable features with the potential to contain charred plant remains, or other remains, should be taken.
12.6 Bibliography Greig J., 1991 The British Isles in W. van Zeist, K. Wasylikowa and K. Behre eds. Progress in Old World Palaeoethnobotany. Rotterdam: Balkema. p299-334.
Monckton, A., 2004 Investigating past environments, farming and food in Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland: the evidence for plant and animal remains p154- 171 in P. Bowman and P. Liddle ‘Leicestershire Landscapes’ LMAFG Monograph No.1, 2004.
Stace, C., 1991 New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge University Press.
Veen, van der M., 1992 Crop Husbandry Regimes, Sheffield Archaeological Monographs 3, J. R. Collis Publications, University of Sheffield 1992.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 70 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology Table E1: Remains from flots
Samp Cont Area, Samp Flot Ch Gr Cf Se Se Comments. No. No. Type Vol. Vol. c Ch Ch Ch un Plant remains. Litres Mls 1 1907 AZ5 3 12 ++ - - - - Charcoal small frags only and 2 Crem frags ?ironstone. 2 1915 AZ5 2.5 50 + - - - - Charcoal v. small frags, Crem concretions or indet charred material only. 3 1717 AZ5 3 15 ++ - 1 - - Charcoal small frags, some Crem modern straw, a rachis of bread wheat ?modern. 4 1919 AZ5 3 12 ++ - - - - Charcoal slivers, a couple of Crem concreted lumps? 5 1505 AZ5 9 7 - - - - ++ Modern straw, uncharred seeds of goosefoots. 6 1713 AZ5 9 5 Fl - 4 1 - Rachis fragments part charred, a charred seed of cleavers. Modern straw. 7 1924 AZ5 8 5 - - - - 3 Modern straw and uncharred seeds. 14 1406 AZ4 8.5 7 Fl - - - ++ Uncharred seeds of goosefoots and persicaria, some modern straw. 12 116 AZ2 8 4 Fl 2 1 - 2 Indet cereals, two uncharred duckweed seeds. 15 213 AZ2 8 50 + 2 3 - - Wheat glumes including spelt, cereal grains. Some modern straw and leaf frags. 8 713 AZ3 8 2 Fl - - - - Modern straw and roots only. 9 704 AZ3 8.5 6 + 5 - 5 3 Glume wheat grains, a barley grain, charred seeds of clover type, large grass and goosefoots. A seed of duckweed uncharred. Some modern straw. 10 611 AZ3 9 10 - - - - 1 An uncharred campion seed, a wood frag, leaf frags, some modern straw. 11 906 AZ3 8.5 15 Fl 1 - - + A grain of bread wheat type, some modern straw. 13 802 AZ3 9 7 Fl - 1 1 3 A wheat glume, a buttercup seed charred. Some modern straw.
Key: Gr = cereal grain, Cf = chaff, Se = seed, Ch = charred, un = uncharred, Chc = charcoal, fl = flecks, frags = fragments, + = present, ++ = moderate amount, +++ = abundant.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 71 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
13. APPENDIX 5 – HUMAN BONE REPORT By Harriet Jacklin (ULAS)
13.1 Introduction The following report details the results of the assessment and analysis of four bone samples taken from what was thought to be possible cremation burials.
13.2 Methodology The cremated remains were assessed with regard to whether they were human or animal and as to whether any of the bone fragments could be individually identified. The weight of each sample, the fragment size, and oxidisation level was also assessed with reference to McKinley (1994), McKinley (2000a), McKinley (2000b), and McKinley and Bond (2001).
Sample Weight Colour (%) Additional Notes (g) 1 (1907), [1905] 59g White 98%, white- Identifiable fragments of human cranial material and grey 2% fragments of a radius/and or ulna. Cranial sutures un- fused suggesting a young individual, whilst arm bones are of adult size indicating an adolescent to young adult. The fragment size varies with the majority of fragments being over 10mm. The small amount of cremated material and the fact only larger fragments were present indicates that rather than an actual cremation burial, sample 1 represents secondary deposition of hand-picked cremated bone. The colour of the bone suggests that full oxidization temperature was reached. (600+ degrees) See Fig 1. 2 (1915), [1914] 9g White 98%, white- No identifiable fragments. All fragments sized 0<2mm. grey 2% Could be either human or animal. 3 (1917), [1916] <1g White 98%, white- No identifiable fragments. Could be either human or grey 2% animal. 4 (1919), [1918] <1g White 98%, white- No identifiable fragments. Could be either human or grey 2% animal.
Figure 1: Sample 1
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 72 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology 13.3 Results Sample 1 is the only sample with identifiable human remains, possibly representing an adolescent/young adult. The small amount of cremated material from Sample 1, alongside the fact only larger fragments were present, indicates that rather than an actual cremation burial, Sample 1 represents secondary deposition of hand-picked cremated bone. Samples 2, 3 and 4 cannot be identified as either human or animal, and given the small amount of material it suggests that these samples do not represent primary cremation deposits.
13.4 Recommendations No further work is deemed necessary on these remains.
13.5 References McKinley, J.L., 1994 ‘Bone Fragment Size in British Cremation Burials and its Implications for Pyre Technology and Ritual’, Journal of Archaeological Science 21.3, 339-42
McKinley, J.L., 2000a ‘Putting Cremated Bone into Context’, in S. Roskams (Ed) Interpreting Stratigraphy; Site Evaluation, Recording Procedures and Stratigraphic Analysis, BAR (International Series). Oxford: Archaeopress No. 910, 135-140
McKinley, J.L., 2000b ‘The analysis of cremated bone’, In M. Cox and S. Mays (Eds.) Human Osteology. Greenwich Medical Media: London, 403-421
McKinley, J.L. and Bond, J. M., 2001 ‘Cremated Bone’, In D.R. Brothwell and A.M. Pollard (Eds) Handbook of Archaeological Sciences, Wiley: Chichester, 281-292
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire 73 Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Milton 218000 Keynes
BUCKINGHAM
Aylesbury Development Area (DA) High Wycombe
217000
Berryfields 80ha East
216000 AYLESBURY 1 km
1 km
479000 480000 481000
Figure 1: Site location and Development Area Base map reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, by Albion Archaeology, Central Bedfordshire Council. OS Licence No. 100017358(LA). © Crown Copyright.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation
Albion Archaeology
HER6299
Key
Former field boundary (pre-1848)
Medieval ridge and furrow
Former boundary shown on (www.flashearth.com 14-01-2010) Extant track-way
Extant field boundary
Extant stream
Possible ditch or pit
Headland/natural features
Figure 2: DA showing selected cropmarks (Albion Archaeology 2009a).
0 200m
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation
Albion Archaeology
a b Key Natural stream Inferred pre-medieval boundary Pre-medieval boundary Inferred medieval field boundary Medieval headland Medieval ridge and furrow
3a: DA showing possible pre-medieval boundaries inferred from analysis of cropmark, 3b: DA showing medieval ridge and furrow and inferred boundaries based on alignment geophysical survey and trial trenching data. changes and gaps within ridge and furrow cropmarks.
Figure 3: Development of field-systems (pre-medieval and medieval)
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation
Albion Archaeology
Key
Natural stream
Pre-medieval boundary Inferred medieval field boundary
Irregular pre-parliamentary enclosure Extant track-way of probable post-medieval origin a b Extant boundaries of probable post-medieval origin
Modern ditch
4a: DA showing likely irregular pre-parliamentary, remnant pre-medieval and remnant 4b: DA showing extant boundaries, remnant pre-medieval, remnant medieval and remnant medieval boundaries. post-medieval boundaries.
Figure 4: Development of field-systems (post-medieval and modern)
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation
Albion Archaeology
89.9m
No. of Finds
H
R
m
2
2 .
1
87.5m
Po n d
n i
a
r
D
Iss ues
1 . 2
2 m
R
H
n i a r D
Pond
C
o
C
o
n
s
t
&
W
a
r
d
B
d PREVIOUSLY y SURVEYED
in r a D k rac T
Pumping Station
(disus ed)
FB
PASTURE
Dr ain
1 .2 2 m
R H
Track
k ac Tr
in a r D
Tr a ck
Pon d
FB
St Peter's Chapel Tr a ck (remains of) Fish P onds
Tr ack 500 m
W ater
Medieval Village (site of)
Dr a in Moat
Earthworks
Figure 5: All findspots identified by fieldwalking survey Base map reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, by Albion Archaeology, Central Bedfordshire Council. OS Licence No. 100017358(LA). © Crown Copyright.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
+16 a b Yellow, orange, and
8 red colouration indicates higher iron 1 content in the soil. This indicates the HER6299 likely presence of past human activity. 2 Blue shows lower 4 iron content.
3 0
No. of finds Late Bronze Age/early Iron Age pot Late Iron Age/early Roman Pot Roman Pot
0 250m
6a: Results of magnetic susceptibility overlain with prehistoric and Roman 6b: Results of magnetic susceptibility overlain with results of detailed artefact locations (recorded during fieldwalking). There is a strong correlation magnetometry. Sub-surface remains identified by this detailed technique between magnetic anomalies and artefact locations. correlate with both surface artefact scatters (A) and anomalies identified during the magnetic susceptibility survey.
Figure 6: Magnetic susceptibility overlaid with late Bronze Age to Roman findspots
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation
Albion Archaeology
+16 a b
Yellow, orange, and red colouration indicates higher iron content in the soil. This indicates the likely presence of past human activity.
Blue shows lower iron content.
0
0 250m
Medieval pot No. of pieces
7a: Results of magnetic susceptibility overlain with locations of medieval pottery (recorded 7b: Results of magnetic susceptibility overlain with locations of medieval and post-medieval during fieldwalking). There is no correlation between magnetic anomalies and artefact ceramic building material (recorded during fieldwalking). There is no correlation between locations. magnetic anomalies and artefact locations.
Figure 7: Magnetic susceptibility overlaid with medieval and post-medieval findspots
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation
Albion Archaeology
HIGH (POTENTIAL)
AZ1 PIPELINES MODERATE AZ8 LOW
0 200m
AZ8 1:5000 21700 AZ2
AZ4
AZ3 AZ5
AZ6
AZ8 AZ7
AZ8 Figure 8: Locations of Archaeological Zones (AZ) Base map reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, by Albion Archaeology, Central Bedfordshire Council. OS Licence No. 100017358(LA). © Crown Copyright.
48000
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation
Albion Archaeology
89.9m
Areas selected for detailed survey
H
R
m
2
2 .
1 Areas not producing significant sub- surface remains
87.5m 1
Pond
n
i
a
r
D
Is s ues
1 . 2
2 m
R
H
n i a r D
2 Pond
C
o
C
o
n
s
t
&
W
a
r d
B
d 3 y
n ai r D k rac T
Pumping Station
(di sus e d)
FB
Dr ain 5
1 .2 2 m
R 4 H
Track
c k r a T
in a r D
Tr a ck
Po nd
FB
St Peter's C hapel Tr ac k (remains of) Fish P onds Tr ac k 500 m
W a ter
Medieval Village (site of)
in a r D Moat
E arthworks
Figure 9: Magnetic susceptibility showing areas selected for detailed magnetometry Base map reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, by Albion Archaeology, Central Bedfordshire Council. OS Licence No. 100017358(LA). © Crown Copyright.
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Key
Phase 1 trenches
Phase 2 trenches
Pipelines
Cut feature; possible archaeology
Linear feature; possible archaeology
Linear feature; agricultural
Linear feature; possible land drain
Possible pit
Ferrous object
Disturbance associated with service or field
Magnetic debris
0 200m
Figure 10: Trial trench plan overlaid onto detailed magnetometry results
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
AZ2 Tr 2 HER6299 Tr 1 Tr 4
Tr 3 Trial trench
Archaeological features Projected line of linear feature Tr 6 Drain Tr 5 Archaeological Zones (AZ) Tr 13 Tr 14 Geophysical survey limits Tr 7 AZ5 Geophysical anomalies: possible archaeology Tr 12 Tr 17 Geophysical anomalies: modern disturbance AZ4 Tr 15 Geophysical anomalies: furrows Tr 8 AZ3
Tr 11 Tr 10 Tr 9
Tr 16 Tr 19 Tr 18
Drain
216500
Tr 20 Figure 11: All features plan overlaid onto detailed magnetometry results Base map reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the Drain Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, by Albion Archaeology, Central 100 m Bedfordshire Council. OS Licence No. 100017358(LA). © Crown Copyright. 480000
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
[120]
Tr 1 Tr 2
[124] Tr 3 [122] Section 2 [108]/[112] [112] [105] [110] [102] 20 m Ditches [105]-[112] looking south-west. Ditch [114] looking south-east. Scale 1m [207] [205][202] Scales 1m and 40cm [126] [216] [220] [214] [224] [211] [130] [128] [226] [230] [232] [218] [222] [236] [238] Section 3 [242] [118] (213) Tr 2 Tr 1 [228]
[234] [240] [244] [250] [246] [209]
[248] [132] 20 m
[252] [254]
Section 1 Trench 1 Looking north 100
117 Archaeological feature [114] 84.17m OD 101 Archaeological feature; excavated segment SSW NNE 116 Section 1 Tree root disturbance Archaeological feature 50cm 115 Tree root disturbance; excavated segment [134] Stones [114] Geophysical anomalies Layer [136] 84.95m OD 84.71m OD 109 119 104 111 107 NNW NE [118] SW SSE 103 [110] [108] [102] 106 Section 3 Figure 12: Trench 1 Section 2 [105]
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
[120]
Tr 1 Tr 2
[124] Tr 3 [122] Ditches [202]-[207] looking north. Scale 1m [108]/[112] [112] [105] [110] [102] Section 1 20 m Tr 2 Ditch/track [211] looking south. Scale 1m [207][205][202]
[126] [216] Section 2 [220] [214] [224] [211] [130] [128] [226] [230] [232] [218] [222] [236] [238] [242] [118] (213)
Tr 1 Section 3 [228]
[234] [240] Section 4 [244] [250] [246] [209]
[248] [132] 20 m
[252] [254]
84.80m OD 206 84.65m OD 208 204 NW SE [207] [205] 203 SE 215 NW
[202] [214] Trench 2 looking east Archaeological feature Section 1 Section 2 Archaeological feature [114] Tree root disturbance
Archaeological feature; excavated segment Stones
84.61m OD Tree root disturbance 84.59m OD [136] [134] 213 N 210 S SE NW Tree root disturbance; excavated segment 212 [209] [211] Section 3 Geophysical anomalies 50cm Section 4
Figure 13: Trench 2
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
83.03m OD NW SE 307 300 Layer 83.03m OD [306] 309 Section 2 Archaeological feature [308] 50cm Tr 1 Tr 2 Section 1
83.07m OD
SE Tr 3 NW
303 83.17m OD
SE 305 NW [304] Section 4 [302] Section 3
Tr 3
[310] Ditch [302] looking north. Scale 1m Section 1 [308] [306] Trench 3 looking north-west. Scale 1m [312] [318]
[314] [320] Archaeological feature Section 2 [316] Archaeological feature; excavated segment
Furrow [324] [302] Furrow; excavated feature [326] [328] Tree root disturbance Section 4 [330] Tree root disturbance; excavated segment Section 3 Geophysical anomalies 20 m [304]
Figure 14: Trench 3
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Tr 4 Section 1
[409]
[405] [407]
Archaeological feature [411] Archaeological feature; excavated segment Palaeo-channel [405] looking south-west. Scale 1m Palaeo-channel Palaeo-channel; excavated segment Geophysical anomalies 20 m
86.42m
W E 402
403
404 Section 1 50cm Trench 4 looking north-west 405
Figure 15: Trench 4
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Archaeological feature
Archaeological feature; excavated segment
Modern disturbance Geophysical survey anomalies
[511] Tr 5 [514]
[518]
Section 1 [507] [516] 5 m Section 1
500 Trench 5 looking east
501 81.47m OD
512 502 [514] E 504 W 508 503 506 509 505 510 [511] [507] Section 1
81.47m OD 512 Layer [514] 513 SW NE Archaeological feature 515 [516] 50cm
Section 2 Ditches [507], [511], [514] and posthole [518] looking north. Scale 1m
Figure 16: Trench 5
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Archaeological feature Tr 6 Archaeological feature; excavated segment
Modern Section 1 Furrow [615]
[619] Geophysical survey anomalies [617] 20 m [625] [604]
[621] [623] [629] Section 2 [602]
[631] [627] Section 3 [608] [610] [606]
[633] Pits [602],[604], looking north-east, 84.40m OD [635] 616 Scale 1m. S N [615] [637] Section 1 Section 4
[612]
[641]
[639]
600 600
84.61m OD [719] 601 601 605 [721] NW [604] SW SE NW SE NE [723] Section 2
[712]
84.73m OD 609 607 NW 611 [608] [606] SE [725] [610] [716] Section 3
84.54m OD 614 [727] NW 613 SE [612] [729] Section 4 [707]
Layer Tr 7 Archaeological feature 50cm
[702]
[731]
[733]
[710]
Trench 6 looking north-east
Ditches [606]-[610], looking north-east, Scale 1m. Figure 17: Trench 6
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Tr 6 Archaeological feature
Archaeological feature; excavated segment
Modern
[615] Furrow [619] Geophysical anomalies [617] 20 m [625] [604]
[621] [623] [629] [602]
[631] [627] [608] [610] [606] Trench 7 looking south-west
Scale 1m [633] Ditch [707] looking south-west. [635] Scale 1m
[637]
Layer [612] Archaeological feature [641]
[639] 50cm
[719] 700 NE SW 84.32m OD [721]
701 [723] 715 Section 1
714 [712]
Section 1 713 [712] 701 [725] [716] Section 2 84.13m OD E 718 W
717 [716]
Section 2 [727]
[729] 83.98m OD [707] SW Section 3 NE 709
[707] 708 Tr 7 Section 3 [702]
Section 4
83.80m OD [731] NE 706 SW 705
704 703 [733] [702] Section 4
[710] Section 5 711 83.46m OD Ditch [702] looking south-west. [710] Scale 1m Section 5
Figure 18: Trench 7
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Section 2 Section 1 Tr 8
[812] [806] [804] [810] [808]
82.93m OD 802 82.98m OD E 805 SW W [806] NE 803 Section 2 [804] Layer Section 1 Archaeological feature Ditch [804] Looking north. Scale 1m 50cm
82.84m OD 901 W E 82.00m OD 906 901 909 N 902 S [908] 905 Trench 8. Looking west. Scale 1m 903 [904] Section 4
Section 3
20 m
Archaeological feature Ditch [908] Looking east. Pre-excavation. Scale 1m Archaeological feature; excavated segment
Furrow Geophysical anomalies Ditch [904] Looking north. Scale 1m [920] Section 4 [918] Tr 9 [908] [904] [912] [910] Trench 9. Looking east. Scale 1m
[914] Figure 19: Trenches 8-9 Section 3
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Archaeological feature
Archaeological feature; excavated segment [1012] Furrow Furrow; excavated segment [1009] Tr 11 Modern [1009] Geophysical survey anomalies
Tree root disturbance [1012] Section 2 Tree root disturbance; excavated segment Section 1 [1106] [1005]
[1011] Tr 10 [1012] Trench 11 looking south-east. Scale 1m
[1012]
Ditches [1005], [1011] looking north-west. Scale 1m
20 m
Trench 10 looking north-east. Scale 1m [1104]
80.74m OD
SW 1004 1008 79.86m OD NE N
1007 S 1103 [1106] [1011] 1003 Section 2 1006 Archaeological feature [1005] 50cm Section 1
Figure 20: Trenches10-11
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
79.29m OD NW 1202 SE Tr 12 [1203] 50cm
Section 1
[1205]
Ditch [1203] looking north-east. Scale 1m
[1203]
Section 1
Archaeological feature Archaeological feature; excavated segment Geophysical anomalies
20 m
Trench 12 looking north-west. Scale 1m
Figure 21: Trench 12
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Tr 13 81.38m OD 1402 N S [1302] [1403] Section 1 Tr 14 1404 [1304] 82.56m OD NE [1306] [1404] 1406 SW [1409]
[1407] Section 2 [1306] [1411] 50cm Archaeological feature Section 2 [1405] [1306] [1407]
[1306]
[1413]
[1306] [1415]
Trench 13 looking south-east. Scale 1m
Section 1
Trench 14 looking north Scale 1m [1403]
[1419] Ditch [1407] and gully [1405] looking east Archaeological feature Scale 1m [1417] Archaeological feature; excavated segment Furrow Modern Geophysical survey anomalies 20 m Ditch [1403] looking east. Scale 1m Figure 22: Trenches 13-14
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Tr 15 Archaeological feature
Archaeological feature; excavated segment Furrow Geophysical survey anomalies
20 m
Section 1 [1503]
Section 2
83.86m OD
SE 1504 1505 NW [1510] [1506] [1503] [1602]
Layer Section 1 [1613] Archaeological feature
50cm
[1604]
83.78m OD
1500 NW SE 1509 1511 [1510] [1607] 1508
1512 [1506] 1507 [1615]
Section 2
Tr 16
[1617]
Ditch [1503] Looking north-east. Scale 1m [1611]
[1609]
Trench 15 looking south-east. Scale 1m
Figure 23: Trench 15
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Tr 15 Archaeological feature
Archaeological feature; excavated segment Furrow Geophysical survey anomalies
20 m
[1503] Trench 16 looking north-east. Scale 1m
83.00m OD
NE 1603 SW [1602] Section 1 [1510] [1506]
[1602] Section 1
[1613]
83.08m OD
NE SW 1600 [1604]
Section 2 1605 1601 1606
[1607]
[1604]
Section 2 [1615] Section 3 Layer Archaeological feature
82.16m OD Furrow Tr 16 1608 NW SE 50cm 1607 [1617] Section 3
80.68m OD 1612 NE 1610 [1611] [1611] SW
Section 4 [1609]
[1609]
Section 4
Ditch [1604] looking west. Scale 1m
Figure 24: Trench 16
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Archaeological feature
Archaeological feature; excavated segment Layer Layer Archaeological feature Geophysical survey anomalies 50cm 20 m
1709 83.03m OD
Section 3 S N 1711 Section 2 [1707] [1705] [1710] [1703] Section 1 [1712]
[1726] Ditches [1703]-[1707] looking north-west. Section 1 Scale 1m 83.28m OD
[1724] NE SW 1713 [1710]
[1722]
[1712] [1720] Section 2
[1718] 1700
17011700 [1716] 83.48m OD 1702 1708 1704 1706 1701 [1714] [1705] 83.48m OD SE NW 1702 1708 [1703]1704 1706 [1705] [1707] SE NW [1703] Section 3 [1707]
Trench 17 looking south-west. Figure 25: Trench 17 Ditch [1712] looking north-west. Scale 1m Scale 1m
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Tr 18
[1804]
[1802]
Section 1
[1806]
Archaeological feature Archaeological feature; excavated segment [1804] Furrow Geophysical survey anomalies
20 m
Trench 18 looking south-east. 76.83m OD Scale 1m
1800 NW SE
1801 1803
[1802] Layer Archaeological feature Section 1
50cm
Figure 26: Trench 18
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Archaeological feature [1910] Archaeological feature; excavated segment Section 4 Furrow [1908] Stake-holes
Geophysics anomalies [1912]
20 m 76.49m OD
NE
Tr 19 SW 1924
Profile 1 Section 1 Profile 4 [1905] [1923] [1918] Profile 2 Section 2 76.71m OD 76.95m OD [1914] 1922 SW SW 1902 NE NE [1916] 1904 1921 [1920] [1920] [1925] [1903] Stake-holes, looking south-east. Profile 3 Section 3 Scale 1m [1910] Section 2 50cm
[1903] 77.93m OD Section 3
NE SW 1900
1901 1902 1902 Section 1 1909 Layer [1908] [1923] Archaeological feature Section 4 [1929] Furrow
[1910] 76.99m OD 77.03m OD 77.03m OD 76.99m OD NE SW NE NE SW [1918] [1927] SW [1916] [1905] [1914] Profile 4 Profile 3 Profile 1 Profile 2
Figure 27: Trench 19 Trench 19 looking north-east. Scale 1m
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation Albion Archaeology
Tr 20
[2003]
[2005]
Archaeological feature Modern Geophysical anomalies 20 m
Trench 20 looking north-west. Scale 1m
Figure 28: Trench 20
Quarrendon Fields, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Field Evaluation