I ,I ARCHAEOLOGICAL ii SERVICE I

;1 Archaeological Evaluation, at the Proposed 'Inter Tidal Habitat', I Trimley Marshes. · Rpt. No. 99/2

I for Harwich Haven Authority I I Tristan Carter I I with contributions from

I Sue Anderson I Anthony M. Breen

I Field Projects Team Archaeological Service Environment & Transport Dept. I SuffolkCounty Council I January 1999 Suffolk County Council ,11 P. J. Thompson Msc CEng FICE, County Director of Environment & Transport St Edmund House, County Hall, Ipswich Suffolk IP4 ILZ \I ' Tel. (01473) 583000 ,1 ·I

I I Archaeological Evaluation at the Proposed 'Inter Tidal Habitat', Trimley Marshes. I Report No. 99/2 I for Harwich Haven Authority I lSUMMARY 1-2 I 2 INTRODUCTION AND TOPOGRAPHY 3 3BACKGROUND 4 I 4 AIMS OF THE EVALUATION 5

I DESKTOP ASSESSMENT 6-9 I 5 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 6-7 5.1 Description 6 I 5.2 Methodology 6 5.3 Results 6-7 I 6 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY 8-9 6.1 Description 8 I 6.2 Methodology 8 6.3 Results 8 I 6.4 Interpretation 8-9

I FIELDWORK 10-19 7 FIELDWALKING 10-15 I 7.1 Description 10 7.2 Methodology 10 I 7 .3 General Results 10-11 I 7 .4 Results by Field 11-13 7.5 TYN 072 13 I 7.6 TYN 073 13-14 7. 7 General Interpretations 14-15 I I I ii

I 8 GRID-SAMPLING 16-17 8.1 Description 16 I 8.2 Methodology 16 8.3 Results 16-17 I 8.4 Interpretation 17 9 'SHOVEL-TEST' PITTING 18-19 I 9.1 Description 18 9.2 Methodology 18 I 9.3 Results 18 I 9.4 Interpretation 18-19 I SPECIALIST REPORTS 20-29 10 THE FINDS (S. Anderson, SCCAS) 20-22 I 11 DOCUMENTARY SEARCH OF THE INTER-TIDAL 23-29 HABITAT, TRIMLEY MARSHES (A. Breen). I 12 CONCLUSION 30 I 13 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK 31-32 13.1 The Sea-Wall 31 I 13.2 Fields 1-4 31 I 13.3 TYN 073 31-32 I BIBLIOGRAPHY 33

APPENDICES I Appendix I Brief and specification for an archaeological evaluation: Inter-Tidal I Habitat, Trimley Marshes (R. Carr, SCCAS). Appendix II Selection of sites from the SMR for Trimley St Martin in the vicinity I of the proposed 'inter-tidal' habitat. Appendix Ill Trimley Marshes fieldwalking: The finds (S. Anderson, SCCAS). I Appendix IV Description ofthe 'shovel-test' pits. Appendix V List and findspot of small-finds from Field 5. I I I 111 I FIGURES I Figure 1 Location map, showing area walked, field numbers and sites from the SMR .I Figure 2 Location of field walking lines, transects and area of grid-sampling Figure 3 Location of 'shovel-test' pits I Figure 4 Distribution of small-finds across Field 5 Figure 5 Finds from Trimley Marshes fieldwalking, by number and weight I Figure 6 Finds from Trimley Marshes fieldwalking, by field Figure 7 Distribution ofbumt flint within Field 1 I Figure 8 Distribution of tile within Field 1 I Figure 9 Distribution of worked flint within Field 1 Figure 10 Distribution ofbumt flint within Field 2 I Figure 11 Distribution ofbaked-clay within Field 2 Figure 12 Distribution of worked-flint within Field 2 I Figure 13 1968 OS map ofTrimley Marshes showing original form ofField 2 I 6 Figure 14 Distribution of shell within Field 2 I Figure 15 Distribution ofbumt flint within Field 3 Figure 16 Distribution of tile within Field 3 I Figure 17 Distribution of shell within Field 3 Figure 18 Distribution ofbumt flint within Field 4 I Figure 19 Distribution of tile within Field 4 Figure 20 Distribution of shell within Field 4 I Figure 21 Distribution ofbumt flint within Field 5 Figure 22 Distribution of worked flint within Field 5 I Figure 23 Distribution of tile within Field 5 I Figure 24 Distribution of slag within Field 5 Figure 25 Distribution of burnt flint within Field 6 I Figure 26 Distribution of tile within Field 6 Figure 27 Distribution of worked flint within Field 6 I Figure 28 Plan of red soil spread within TYN 073 Figure 29 Distribution ofbaked clay within TYN 073 I I I iv

I Figure 30 Distribution ofbumt flint within TYN 073 Figure 31 Distribution of tile within TYN 073 I Figure 32 Distribution of slag within TYN 073 I Figure 33 Distribution of worked flint within TYN 073 TABLES I Table 1 Percentage of each field's transects producing finds Table 2 Transects producing finds in Field 1 I Table 3 Transects producing finds in Field 2 Table 4 Transects producing finds in Field 3 I Table 5 Transects producing finds in Field 4 I Table 6 Transects producing finds in Field 5 Table 7 Transects producing finds in Field 6 I Table 8 Transects producing finds in Field 7

I MAPS FROM DOCUMENTARY SOURCES la 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey Map Sheet Number 83.SE 1886 I lb 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey Map Sheet Number 83.SE 1948 2a 1: 10,560 Ordnance Survey Map Sheet Number 83 .NE 1904 I 2b 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey Map Sheet Number 83.NE 1928 3 P461/260 Tithe Map Trimley St Martin 1839 I 4 P461/261 Tithe Map Trimley St Mary 1839 5 150/1/316 Enclosure Map Trimley St Martin & St Mary 1806 I 6 HA119/435 A Plan of the Parishes ofTwo Trimlies (Isaac Johnson) 1784

I DOCUMENTS I Document 1a-c Marsh Reeve's Book 1726 Document2 Book of Customs, Walton cum Trimley c.1560 I I I I I

I Archaeological Evaluation at the Proposed 'Inter Tidal Habitat', Trimley Marshes.

I 1SUMMARY 1.1 There has been a proposal to create an 'inter-tidal habitat' on land beside the Orwell estuary at Trimley Marshes, in the parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk I (Figure 1).

1.2 Those proposing the development requested a brief and specification for an I archaeological evaluation of the area, as part of an overall assessment of the project's potential impact upon the natural and human environment.

I 1.3 The brief and specification was drawn up by Suffolk County Council's Archaeological Service (SCCAS) Conservation Team, in August 1998 (Appendix 1). I The brief documented the area's numerous archaeological sites (known from excavation, aerial photography and chance finds), and detailed the likely two-phase I nature of the evaluation. 1.4 The archaeological evaluation's first phase comprised two elements, a desktop assessment and fieldwork. The former constituted a detailed appraisal of the area's I settlement history and archaeological potential, through reference to the County Sites and Monuments Record (SMR), cartographic and documentary sources, place-name evidence and air photographs (Appendix 11; Section 11; Palmer 1998). Field I evaluation primarily took the form of a fieldwalking survey and systematic surface collection (Figure 2; Appendix Ill). Upon the basis of this work's results, selected areas were more intensively analysed through gridded sampling and a metal detector I survey. Soil-type and depth of top-soil was assessed by hand-excavating a number of I 'shovel-test' pits (Figure 3; Appendix IV). 1.5 The fieldwalking results indicate archaeological activity within the proposed development area, in particular what appears to be a salt-working site of Late Iron I Age or Early Roman date (TYN 073). Whilst a similar site had already been identified nearby (TYN 018), this was a new discovery (Figure 1; Appendix 11). Very little was recovered from those fields which abutted the current sea-defences, however, this is I probably a reflection of their relatively modem land-surfaces. Indeed, given the quantity of finds collected from the slightly higher land of the surrounding fields, it is suggested that archaeological material may well be masked in this area by a I combination of colluviation, recent human activity (bulldozing and ditch-cutting) and river-flood deposits (Appendix IV). ·

I 1.6 As a result of these findings it is firstly recommended that site TYN 073 undergoes further evaluation through trenching, with the possibility of full-excavation if necessary. Secondly, it is desirable that those fields directly affected by the I proposed development should be examined by 2% trenching,_with_ an allowance for extra trenching should the need arise. Finally, it is suggested that the sea-wall should I be investigated and recorded archaeologically when it is dismantled. I I I 2

I 1. 7 The work was commissioned by the Harwich Haven Authority on land owned by Trinity College, Cambridge as part of the mitigation strategy associated with the current dredging of the River Orwell (planning application - C/98/1192). It was I carried out by the SCCAS Field Project's Team in November 1998, who gratefully acknowledges the help and information provided by the tenant farmer of the land, Mr. I N. Smith of Longford House. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3

I 2 INTRODUCTION AND TOPOGRAPHY 2.1 There has been a proposal to create an 'inter-tidal habitat' on land beside the Orwell estuary at Trimley Marshes, in the parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk, I centred on TM. 2562 3655.

2.2 The land lies due east of the Orwell estuary, bounded by Sleighton Hill to the I north, the New Fleet and the parish boundary between Trimley St Martin and St Mary to the south, with Thorpe Common, Trimley Lower Street and Salter's Wood slightly inland to the east (Figure 1). Three of the fields (1, 4 and 7) directly abut the current I sea-defence wall, whereas the northernmost field (Field 5) is bounded on its west by a public footpath, beyond which lies a sandy-cliff and the river beyond. In turn, Field 5 is part separated from the field to the south (Field 1) by a copse planted in 1980 as a I result of the Port ofFelixstowe Act (N. Smith pers. comm.). I 2.3 The fields are divided from the sea-defence wall and one another by a series of drainage ditches of varying widths and depths, with a few narrow causeways allowing interconnection. When viewed in late November most ditches contained water plus a I range of flora and fauna.

2.4 Fields 1, 4 and 7 are low-lying and flat, with dark, heavy clayey-loam soils, I largely due to the land once having been marsh. In contrast, Fields 2, 3, 5 and 6 were comprised of a more medium-brown, less clayey and sandier loam of finer texture (Appendix IV). As one moves north-eastwards the gradient slightly increases, being I most notable in Field 5, particularly in reference to its relationship with Field 1, its north-eastern corner forming the lower slopes of Sleighton Hill (Figure 1). The study I area lies between 9m OD at its highest point and 2m OD at its lowest point. 2.5 Fields 2 and 6 are essentially one and the same field, but were separated during I fieldwalking along the western line of the overhead electrical lines and the pylons which bore them. Field 2 fell within the area of proposed development and had been cultivated, whereas Field 6lay outside this boundary and remained unploughed with a I cover of stubble and grass.

2.6 According to the November 1966 OS map (Plan TM 2436 & Plan TM 2536), I Field 2 I 6 had once been a group of 4 smaller pieces of land divided by banks of earth and drainage ditches. The larger field was created in the late 1960's, when the banks were levelled and top-soil was brought in from elsewhere to infill the ditches. I Similarly, Field 4 had previously been two pieces of land, becoming one in 1968 when the ditches were filled (N. Smith pers. comm.). I I I I I I 4

I 3BACKGROUND 3.1 In August 1998 a brief and specification was carried out by Suffolk County Council's Archaeological Service (SCCAS) Conservation Team. The report assessed I the proposed development's likely impact upon the area's archaeology, through_ reference to those sites already documented, through excavation, aerial photography I and chance finds (Appendix 1). 3.2 Three sites were already known from the fieldwalking area, two of which are located within the area which would be directly affected by the proposed development I (Figure 1). Both of these 'sites' consisted of individual stray finds, TYN 004 a Bronze Age circular flint scraper from Field 4 and TYN 007, a large sherd of Middle I Saxon pottery on the shoreline due west of Field 7 (Appendix 11). 3.3 Over 70 sites are currently recorded with the SMR for the parish of Trimley St. I Martin, including a number situated just beyond the area of the proposed 'inter-tidal habitat' (Figure 1; Appendix 11). The latter include another piece of Bronze Age worked flint (TYN 002), a small group of Late Iron Age sherds (TYN 003), a Roman I brooch (TYN 022), scatters of Middle-Late Saxon and Medieval sherds (TYN 005, 006), plus an area of red soil and fragments of burnt clay briquetage, likely traces of a salt-working (TYN 018). Of currently unknown date, is a large complex of cropmarks I denoting field systems and ring-ditches situated to the north I north-east of the fieldwalked area (TYN 005, 014, 015), spread across Sleighton Hill towards Thorpe I Common (Palmer 1998). 3.4 From documentary records it seems likely that the settlement pattern within the area was largely established before the eleventh century. The date of the enclosure of I the Marshes by the sea-wall is unknown, the defence's earliest reference being 1740, though it is not inconceivable that the wall was erected sometime in the sixteenth century (Section 11). Salt-working is attested a little to the east of the evaluation area I through a number of place names, including Old Salt Works, Salter's Marsh and Salter's Wood (Section 11). The regular cleaning of drainage ditches has probably I resulted in the accumulation of soil and its contents along the channels' edges. 3.5 Aerial photography provides clear evidence of archaeological features in the area, I albeit none within the fields affected by the proposed development (Palmer 1998). Field 5 does, however, contain a ring-ditch or traces of a possible Bronze Age burial (TYN 0 15) and further to the north-east, the area between Sleighton Hill and Thorpe I Common is covered with a variety of rectilinear, circular and linear ditches (TYN 014), likely remains of prehistoric and Roman activity (see below). Inland of the development area, due east of Field 7, a new set of enclosures were recorded between I Alston Hall and Painter's Wood (Palmer 1998: 5, Figures 1, 4). I I I I I 5

I 4 AIMS OF THE EVALUATION 4.1 The brief and specification for an archaeological evaluation of the proposed 'inter­ tidal habitat' at Trimley Marshes recommended that the evaluation should comprise I two major elements, a desk-top assessment and primary fieldwork (Appendix I).

4.2 The desk-top assessment was to constitute a detailed appraisal of the area's I settlement history and archaeological potential, through reference to the County Sites and Monuments Record, cartographic and documentary sources, place-name evidence I and air photographs. 4.3 The fieldwork was to comprise two sections, a fieldwalking survey with systematic surface collection and the excavation of a limited number of 'shovel-test' I pits. The aim of the former was to define the location and extent of any structures, earthworks or concentration of finds which could indicate the existence of known and I I or previously unrecorded archaeological activity in the area. The 'shovel-test' pits were to be dug in order to ascertain the nature and depth of top-soil across the fields I threatened by the proposed development. 4.4 If the fieldwalking exercise resulted in the positive identification of an archaeological site, there was an option for a supplementary intensive analysis of up I to 5% of the landscape in order to better characterise the site, spatially, temporally and functionally. This would primarily involve the use of gridded collection of material I culture, plus a metal detector survey. 4.5 The results of the fieldwalking and I or the more intensive modes of analysis, would then be employed to produce a final report upon the area of proposed I development, including, if necessary, recommendations for future archaeological I fieldwork. I I I I I I I I I 6

I DESKTOP ASSESSMENT

5 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE I 5.1 Description 5 .1.1 Documentary and cartographic research upon the land affected by the proposed development and its immediate hinterland, was undertaken by Anthony M. Breen in I November 1998 (Section 11).

5.2 Methodology I 5.2.1 The research was primarily undertaken at the Suffolk Record Office, Ipswich and the Public Research Office, London, drawing upon a range of documentary and cartographic sources. These included Ordnance Survey maps, tithe maps, Acts of I Parliament, manorial records and the Commission of Sewers in regard to the history I of land drainage. 5.2.2 Whilst only limited reference has been made to the area under consideration, a number of conclusions can be drawn about the medieval and post-medieval history of I the Trimley Marshes through allusion to data from neighbouring parishes.

5.3 Results I 5.3.1 Since at least the eighteenth century Trimley Marsh has been connected with the owner and occupier of Grimston Hall, one of a number of small manors scattered amongst the parishes between Ipswich and Felixstowe. Many of these manors have I their origin in pre-conquest (1 066) settlements and development.

5.3.2 The southern limit of Trimley Marshes, demarcated by the New Fleet (the I marshes' main drain) and the parish boundary between Trimley St. Martin and Trimley St. Mary dates from 1362. The fact that it curves around the park boundary of I Grimston Hall suggests that the park had been created before this date absorbing the site of the church of St. John's Alston (the parish consolidated with Trimley in 1362). Indeed, it can be argued that the settlement pattern of the Coneis Hundred (within I which the Trimley Marshes lie) appears to have been established before the eleventh century.

I 5.3.3 Settlements in Trimley tend to be located at the head of streams leading to various leaches I fleets, suggesting that they were formally accessible to the sea. Conceivably silting in the early medieval period left these settlements isolated from I the sea, an isolation subsequently compounded by the construction of the sea­ defences.

I 5.3.4 The exact date of the sea-wall's construction, and by extension, the Marshes' enclosure, is not recorded, the earliest reference to the sea-defences being 1740. However, given that a statute to govern the protection of low-lying areas from flood I was passed in 1532, it is not inconceivable that the wall was constructed in the I sixteenth century. 5.3.5 Marsh management not only centred upon the sea-wall but also the regular I maintenance and cleaning of the drainage ditches, which may well have removed all I I 7

I dateable evidence for these channels. By extension this will have resulted in the re­ deposition of this soil and its contents along these features' edges.

I 5.3.6 The region has produced various references to salvage rights, such as a sixteenth century Book of Customs for the Manor of Walton and Trimley. Jettisoned material, wrecks and their contents would be valued and the proceeds divided between the I finder and the lord of whichever manor represented the lands nearest to where the craft floundered. Whilst the bulk of this material is likely to have been removed, it is I not unfeasible that some of the finds may have remained upon these lands. 5.3.7 Whilst there is no documentary or cartographic evidence for either salt-works or oyster beds within the area under consideration, it is quite conceivable that they I existed. This conclusion is partly based upon place-name evidence, with a Salt House Field on the Tithe Map for Trimley St. Mary south of Grimston Hall, plus an Old Salt I Works and Salter's Wood shown on this field on the Ordnance Survey maps (Section 11; Map 2a). A 1784 map refers to a nearby Salter's Marsh and the mud-flats and beach alongside Sleighton Hill and the fieldwalking survey's Fields 5 and 1 are also I referred to as 'saltings' on the OS map. Similarly, it is conceivable that oyster beds originally lay within the assessment area, a nineteenth century example being I recorded to the south in Trimley St. Mary. I I I I I I I I I I I I 8

I 6 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY 6.1 Description 6.1.1 Aerial photographs of Trimley Marshes area were examined in November 1998 I (an area of some 200 hectares centred upon TM1636), in order to identify and accurately map archaeological features (Palmer 1998).

I 6.2 Methodology 6.2.1 The study involved exammmg existing aerial photographs of the Trimley Marshes area (no new pictures were commissioned), drawing upon a range of sources. I These included the Cambridge University Collection of Aerial Photographs, the National Library of Air Photographs and Suffolk County Council (ibid: Appendix).

I 6.2.2 For the specific methodology see the accompanying report (Palmer 1998).

I 6.3 Results 6.3.1 No archaeological features were recognised within the area of the proposed I development. 6.3.2 A number of features were, however, recognised in the surrounding area. Two of these were located in Field 5, a ring-ditch of c. 25m diameter first recorded in 1977 I (TYN 015), plus a short length oflinear ditch (Palmer 1998: 4, Figures 1-2).

6.3.3 The greatest number of features lay beyond those fields investigated by I fieldwalking, with a major concentration across Sleighton Hill towards Thorpe Common (Palmer 1998: 4-5, Figures 1, 3, Areas C-D), comprising a series of enclosures and linear ditches which had also been first noted in 1977 (TYN 014). A I new group of features was recorded to the east of Field 7, between Alston Hall and I Painter's Wood, including another set of enclosures (Palmer 1998: 5, Figures 1, 4). 6.4 Interpretation 6.4.1 The absence of features in the area of proposed development (Fields 1-4) was I not commented upon. However, much of this land (in particular Fields 1 and 4) was originally marsh and is still much damper than the surrounding soils. This constant ground-water presence means that crop-marks are far less likely to develop, dependant I as they are upon sub-surface archaeological features creating areas I lines of differential access to water, thus enhancing or restricting the growth of a crop within that field. This, however, may represent only one explanation as to why I archaeological features were not visible within this area (see below).

6.4.2 From contextual evidence (scale, finds recorded in the SMR and comparisons I with other sites), the ring-ditch situated in Field 5 has been interpreted as a likely Bronze Age burial site (Palmer 1998: 4).

I 6.4.3 The mass of cropmarks-constituting TYN 014 to the north of the fieldwalked area (Palmer 1998: Figure 3, Area C-D), is considered to reflect rural settlement and I agricultural activity, with rectilinear and circular enclosures, droves and linear ditches which appear to form field-like structures. A circular ditch in Area D is thought to be I the remains of a Bronze Age burial akin to that recorded in Field 5. Some of the I I 9

I features due east of Field 7 (ibid: Area E) are thought to be natural (periglacial), however, many are likely to be archaeological upon the basis of their shapes and associations. Whilst none of the aforementioned features have been positively dated, a I prehistoric or Roman date is considered most likely. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10

I FIELDWORK 7 FIELDWALKING I 7.1 Description 7 .1.1 The field walking took place between 16th November - 1st December 1998.

I 7.1.2 The area was divided into 7 fields, ofwhich 1-4 represent the land which will be directly affected by the proposed development (Figure 1). In total an area of 46 I hectares were surveyed. 7 .1.3 Visibility was generally very good, aided by even light and a lack of shadow. Fields 1, 4 and 7 were ploughed and weathered, whilst 2, 3 and 5 were sown with the I crop just through. Field 6 was unploughed and covered in stubble, thus providing very poor visibility.

I 7.2 Methodology 7.2.1 Each field was walked in lines (denoted by capital letters) set 20m apart, which I were subdivided into transects of 50m length (denoted by Roman numerals). The layout of the lines was usually influenced by the direction of the plough furrows, or tramlines where the fields had been sown (Figure 2). Some 77 lines and 421 transects I were walked, with each field numbered separately, rather than sequentially.

7.2.2 Finds were collected by transect within each line (Appendix Ill), with material I culture collected along the line and to a distance of c.1.5m either side. All finds were kept, except for obviously modem tile and pot, of which only a representative sample was retained. Any 'special finds' (e.g. pottery, retouched flint or metalwork) noted I outside of the lines were bagged separately and their findspot marked on the map; such finds were only located in Field 5 (Figure 4; Appendix IV).

I 7.3 General Results I 7.3.1 Ofthe 439 transects walked, 189 produced some form of material culture (43%). 7.3 .2 The finds were processed, quantified, described and dated by Sue Anderson (SCCAS), with some supplementary analysis of the worked flint by E. Martin I (SCCAS) and the author. The following discussion of the material culture draws upon and summarises Anderson's work which is presented ih full as section 10.

I 7.3.3 The aforementioned 189 transects generated 1390 finds (Figure 5), of which the major classes of object were burnt flint (number=843, 61 %) and tile (n=200, 14%), followed by worked flint (n=128, 9%), baked clay (n=75, 5%), slag (n=68, 5%), shell I (n=53, 4%) and pot (n=23, 2%). By weight, the greatest amount of finds were burnt flint (11,076g, 59%), followed by tile (3,287g, 18%), slag (1,945g, 10%), worked flint I (1,228g, 7%), baked clay (549g, 3%), shell (293g, 2%) and pot (245g, 1%). 7.3 .4 Field 5 was the most productive in terms of number of transects containing finds (48 I 50, 96%), followed by Fields 3, 1, 6, 2 and 4 (Tables 1-8). Field 7 was the least I productive with no finds whatsoever. In regards to the number of finds per field, Field I 5 generated the greatest quantity (n=902), followed by 2, 6, 3, 4 and 1 (n=222, 136, I I 11

I 75, 29 and 26 respectively). In terms of weight, they are ranked as following: Field 5 (5080g), followed by 6, 2, 3, 1 and 4 (1871g, 1160g, 899g, 257g and 208g I respectively). 7.3.5 The survey produced two notable concentrations of finds, whose quantity and nature led them to being denoted as new sites within the Sites and Monuments I Record, TYN 072 and TYN 073. The former was located in Field 5, the latt~r in Field 2, i.e. within the area of the proposed development, and thus received a secondary I study in the form of intensive gridded sampling (see below). 7.4 Results by Field 7.4.1 Field 1 I 7.4.1a Field 1 only produced 26 finds (Figure 6; Section 10; Appendix Ill), the vast majority being burnt flint (n=24), with no major concentrations noted (Figure 7). The I other finds comprised four pieces of peg-tile and a single flint flake (Figures 8-9). Small spreads of modem tile were noted in A(iii) and F(iii-iv).

I 7.4.2 Field 2 7.4.2a Field 2 generated the second largest quantity of finds (n=222), the majority collected from Lines A-D, Transects ii-iii (Figures 6 & 10-11; Section 10; Appendix I Ill). This concentration of baked clay and burnt flint is considered a site and has been added to the SMR as TYN 073; it receives further discussion below in section 7.6.

I 7.4.2b In addition, Field 2 produced two sherds of Roman pottery (a greyware jar rim of 2nd-4th century date and a redware flagon neck) from its southern boundary G(ix). A low density of burnt flint extended across most of the transects, however, only three I flint flakes were found beyond the area defined as TYN 073 (Figure 12). All ceramic building material not associated with TYN 073 is probably of post-medieval date.

I 7.4.2c A well demarcated swathe of modem tile, brick and small lumps of concrete and mortar could be traced diagonally across the field's centre, from E(iv)-A(v). This I spread is the result of a bank and drainage ditch being levelled and infilled in 1968 (marked on the 1966 OS map; Figure 13), a quantity of top soil containing modem building debris having been brought in to complete the process (N. Smith pers. I comm.).

7.4.2d Thirteen oyster shells were recovered, all coming from a strip bordering the I drainage ditch which forms the field's southern boundary (Figure 14).

7.4.3 Field 3 I 7.4.3a The second smallest field surveyed produced 75 finds, with no major concentration worthy of denoting a site (Figure 6; Section 10; Appendix Ill). A small quantity of burnt flint was collected (Figure 15) along with 5 flint flakes, plus I 17 pieces of fired clay, of which 4 piecescwere likely briquetage, the remainder, all from transect G(v), possibly daub. Of the 10 pieces of ceramic building material one I may be Roman, however, the remainder were of medieval and post-medieval date (Figure 16). I I I 12

I 7.4.3b Only four pottery sherds were recovered, one handmade of Late Iron Age, or Early Saxon date, plus a piece of Roman greyware and two fragments of late medieval I German stoneware. 7 .4.3c The largest group of finds from Field 3 were 25 shells, including 17 oysters and 5 cockles. They were concentrated along the field's edges alongside the drainage I ditches (Figure 16), including opposite where the shell was recovered in Field 2.

7 .4.4 Field 4 I 7 .4.4a Despite its size, Field 4 had the lowest relative quantity of transects producing finds and the second lowest number overall (n=29; Figure 6; Section 10; Appendix Ill). A small amount of burnt flint was recovered, albeit scattered across the field I (Figure 18); no worked flint was found. Only a single piece of pottery was collected, dating to the early Postmedieval period. The 8 pieces of ceramic building material I included one possible Roman example and some post-medieval tiles (Figure 19). A small quantity of metal and clinker was found, all probably modem.

I 7.4.4b Whilst only 8 pieces of shell were recovered, they once more, tended to derive from transects close to drainage ditches (Figure 20).

I 7.4.5 Field 5 7.4.5a Field 5 produced the greatest concentration and largest quantity of finds (Figure 6; Section 10; Appendix Ill). A mass of burnt flint located in the field's I north-west corner was considered to represent a site, and has been added to the SMR as TYN 072 and is discussed further below.

I 7.4.5b Burnt and worked flint was recovered from virtually every transect, with 1095 pieces of the former and 154 of the latter (Figures 21-22). Two concentrations of I worked flint could be noted, one forming part of TYN 072, the second in the lower, south-east corner of the field. The field produced a number of modified and chronologically diagnostic pieces, including a small bifacially flaked axe, 6 scrapers, I plus a number of blades and core-fragments (Figure 4; Appendix V). The axe blade had been prepared by a 'tranchet' blow, a feature typical ofMesolithic axe production, though some have argued that this manufacturing trait continues into the Neolithic I (Gardiner 1987: 59). However, the recovery of an end-scraper upon a prismatic blade, provides further evidence that the worked flint of Field 5 has a Mesolithic component (cf. Wymer 1976: 9, fig. 3,1). From published comparanda one can assign much of the I remaining diagnostic material to a Late Neolithic date, with some possible Early Bronze Age debitage (cf. Martin 1976: 53-56, fig. 27, 1993: 16, fig. 11).

I 7.4.5c Notable quantities of ceramic building material were collected (Figure 23), the majority being post-medieval, though a few possible Roman pieces were also identified. The pottery component was also primarily late in date, including glazed red I earthenware, though a sherd of Early Medieval Ware was recognised and an abraded I medieval base. I I I 13

I 7.4.5d The other material culture comprised a large sample of slag derived from iron smithing, often associated with burnt coal waste (Figure 24), plus a small quantity of I shell and a clay pipe stem. 7 .4.6 Field 6 7.4.6a In spite of the fact that stubble and grass ensured very poor visibility in most of I the transects walked in Field 6, it still produced the third highest number of finds (n=136), though no major concentrations were noted (Figure 6; Section 10; I Appendix Ill). 7.4.6b The three major components of material culture recovered from Field 6 were burnt flint (n=65), tile (n=39) and worked flint (n=l7), each of which had a relatively I even distribution (Figures 25-27). The tile appeared to be predominantly post­ medieval, or modem, though two possible Roman pieces were identified. One sherd I of Thetford Ware (Late Saxon) and a piece of glazed red earthemware were also found. As in Field 2, slag generally pertained to iron smithing waste. Only one shell I was collected. 7.4. 7 Field 7 I 7.4.7a The largest field surveyed produced no finds whatsoever. 7.5 TYN072 7.5.la TYN 072 (located at TM 25553714) comprised a dense concentration of burnt I flint located in the north-western corner of Field 5, specifically within Lines B-C, Transects ii-iii, with a 'halo' of finds extending over Lines A-D, Transects ii-iv I (Figure 21; Section 10; Appendix Ill). 7.5 .1 b This area also included higher than average quantities of worked flint, mainly I undiagnostic cortical and non-cortical flakes but also some blades and a single core­ fragment (Figures 4 & 21; Appendix V). I 7.5.lc TYN 072 also produced 8 sherds of pottery, one possibly prehistoric, one Roman and the remainder post-medieval. Large quantities of slag and burnt coal waste also came from the area. Other finds i11cluded shell, a piece of lead waste, an I iron fragment, a piece of blue glass and a clay-pipe stem (Section 10).

7.5.1d No earthworks, or differences in soil could be viewed in association with the I concentration of finds.

7.5.1e As the site lay outside of the area proposed for development (Figures 1-2), no I secondary analysis was undertaken.

7. 6 TYN073 I 7 .6.1 a TYN 073 (located at TM -25663677) constituted a concentration of -baked clay and burnt flint overlaying a distinctive red soil towards the north-western part of Field I 2. The greatest density of finds was located within Lines C-D, Transects ii-iii, a 'halo' of material culture extending across Lines A-D, Transects ii-iii (Figures 10-11; I Section 10; Appendix Ill). I I 14 I 7.6.1b No earthworks were viewed in association with the site, however, the greatest concentration of baked clay overlay a sandy-reddish soil, which was quite distinct in I colour from the rest of the field (Appendix IV). This spread of red soil was quite clearly demarcated, whereby it was possible to make a surface plan of its extent I (Figure 28). 7 .6.1 c As the site lay within the area proposed for development (Figures 1-2), it was decided that a secondary level of analysis was necessary, namely an intensive survey I and collection of material culture within a series of 20m2 grids (see below).

7.7 General Interpretations I 7.7.1 The earliest evidence for human activity in the Trimley Marshes may date to the Mesolithic, the bifacially worked flint axe of 'tranchet' type from Field 5 being the I most diagnostic find of this period (cf. Pitts 1980: 22-25; Wymer 1989). This field also produced a number of pieces of worked flint (Figure 4), specifically the large round scrapers, which should be assigned a Late Neolithic, or possibly Early Bronze I Age date (cf. Martin 1976: 53-56, fig. 27, 1 & 7, 1993: 16, fig. 11, 14). This information supplements and expands existing data (Appendix 11), as individual finds of Final Neolithic and Bronze Age date had already been recovered in the area, with a I barbed and tanged flint arrowhead from just north of Alston Hall (TYN 002) and a circular flint scraper from Field 4 (TYN 004).

I 7.7.2 It is most probable that some of the aforementioned worked flint is to be associated with the ring-ditch in Field 5 (TYN 015), a possible Bronze Age burial. The material may also further strengthen the case that a component of the extensive I linear and enclosed features recorded by aerial photography across Sleighton Hill, are I of prehistoric date. 7. 7.3 At present there is no positive dating for TYN 072, the mass of burnt flint discovered in the north-western corner of Field 5. Amongst this material came both I worked flint of the types just mentioned (Figure 4), plus quantities of post-medieval tile, pottery and slag associated with iron smithing. A prehistoric date is certainly the more likely, however, interpreting the site remains problematic. The most likely I explanation is that the burnt flint was a product of cooking activity related to nearby settlement (Martin 1988), though others have suggested their relationship to more exotic practices, such as hot-water bathing and saunas (Barfield and Hodder 1987). A I further consideration is that the burnt flint was generated during episodes of cremation as part of Bronze Age burial practices, though this tends not to generate such large I quantities of the material. 7.7.4 The low density of burnt flint across the remaining fields is more difficult to read. Some no doubt represents the 'background noise' of activities similar to those I described above, however, with the discovery ofTYN 073 in Field 2, one has to-factor I in the possibility of much later industrial activity. 7.7.5 From well-published comparanda, the concentration of baked clay, burnt flint I and red-soil which constitutes TYN 073 can be interpreted as traces of a salt-working. I I 15

I Indeed, some of the briquetage fragments had deposits of vitrified salt adhering to it. Here salt would have been extracted through boiling sea-water in vessels over built hearths (Fawn et a/ 1990), with charcoal to fuel the fire, the heat generated leaving I some of the naturally occurring flint fire reddened, whilst other pebbles were deliberately heated to be employed as pot-boilers (Section 10; Appendix Ill). A date of Late Iron Age or Early Roman is proposed for the site, upon the basis of the pottery I recovered and the date of comparable installations elsewhere in East Anglia (cf. Fawn et a/1990; Baker 1975; Gurney 1982).

I 7.7.6 Pieces of Roman tile and pottery of a wide date range have been recovered in very small numbers from Fields 2-6 (Section 10; Appendix Ill), providing no positive indication of settlement, or other concentrations of activity. It is conceivable I that this scatter of material could be the result of ancient manuring. In turn, it is highly unlikely that the saltern existed in isolation, however, and it should be noted that I another salt-works, conceivably contemporary, has been recorded within a kilometre ofTYN 073, to the south-:east at TYN 018 (Appendix 11).

I 7. 7. 7 A very small amount of Sax on and medieval material was collected by the survey, as indeed it has been from a number of other locations close by (TYN 005, 006, 007, 021; Appendix 11). Little, however, can be said about this period's finds, I except that it likely represents· 'background noise' to settlement within the parish.

7.7.8 The post-medieval finds represented the third largest component of material I culture after that ofthe Late Neolithic- Early Bronze Age and Late Iron Age- Roman periods. Much is ceramic building material present in each of the fields in low density scatters. The finds are probably related to nearby settlement, though the majority may I be in secondary context, having been dumped with top-soil in the various processes of I maintaining and remodelling the fields in this area. 7.7.9 Field 5 did, however, provide a concentration of post-medieval tile and slag (Figures 23-24). The latter is considered to be a waste product of iron smithing and it I is not inconceivable that some form of tile-roofed wooden structure, or shelter was erected in association.

I 7.7.10 Concentrations of oyster shell along the edges of the drainage ditches lends weight to the suggestion that there were oyster beds in the area (Figures 14, 17 and 20). The shells are likely to have been dug up from below in the cutting and cleaning I of these channels, thus explaining their distribution. I I I I I· I 16

I 8 GRID-SAMPLING 8.1 Description I 8.1.1 The grid-sampling took place on the 24th November 1998. 8.1.2 Ten 20m2 squares were laid over the part of Field 2 which had produced the I concentration of baked clay and burnt flint defined as new site TYN 073. 8.1.3 As with the rest of Field 2, the area of the gridded samples had been sown, with I the crop only just through, providing very good visibility with even light. 8.1.4 Within these grid-squares, four new lines were walked for sampling purposes, I comprising 40 new transects in total (Appendix Ill). 8.2 Methodology 8.2.1 The ten grid-squares were established employing the original fieldwalking lines, I covering a large part of what had originally been denoted Field 2, Lines A-D, I Transects ii-iii (Figure 2). 8.2.2 Four transects were walked within each grid-square, at 4, 8, 12 and 16 metres to the right of the original fieldwalking lines. All material culture encountered, up to 1.5 I metres either side, was collected. I 8.2.3 The area was also subjected to a metal detector survey. 8.2.4 Two of the evaluation's 32 'shovel-test' pits were sunk into the area ofTYN 073 I (Figure 3), namely test-pits 13 and 14 (Appendix IV). 8.3 Results 8.3.1 All but one of the 40 transects produced finds, the exception being Grid 4, I Transect B, +4m (Table 9). I 8.3.2 On a grid-by-grid basis, the highest concentration of finds was recovered from Grid 1, with 546 finds, weighing 1900g. In terms of weight, the next most productive I grids were 4 (1876g), 3 (1230g), and 2 (1090g). 8.3:3 The finds from the gridded sample comprised two major elements, baked clay (n=1186, 78%) and burnt flint (n=251, 17%). Whilst overlapping, these finds' had I slightly different distributions, with Grid 4, Transect B, + 16m producing the greatest amount of baked clay (94 pieces weighing 998g), and Grid 2, Transect B, + 16m I generating 28 pieces of burnt flint, weighing 252g (Figures 29-30). 8.3.4 All the baked clay was briquetage, i.e. crudely fired structural debris, in this instance related to salt-production (Fawn et al 1990: 10). Some of the tile was I probably also related to the salt-works, as a number of pieces,- along with 'Some ofthe I burnt flint and slag, had deposits of vitrified salt adhering to their surfaces. I I I 17

I 8.3.5 The next largest category of finds was tile (n=28, 2%), worked flint (n=26, 2%) and slag (n=16, 1%; Figures 31-33). Eight pieces of pot and two pieces of shell were I also recovered. 8.3.6 The pottery comprised two pieces of handmade-flint tempered pottery, plus three sherds of Late Iron Age or Early Roman date, along with one medieval and two I post-medieval pieces. Several post-medieval tiles were also recovered.

8.3.7 The metal detector survey over the area of the grid-samples failed to locate any I ferrous, or non-ferrous finds. Two possible iron objects were, however, collected within the gridded sampling.

I 8.3.8 Test-pit 13 produced a single piece of burnt flint and test-pit 14 produced two I pieces ofbaked clay (Appendix IV).

I 8.4 Interpretation 8.4.1 The concentration of surface finds which defines TYN 073 is considered to be an indication of a salt-working. It has produced distinctive briquetage and a number of I finds upon which vitrified salt is adhering.

8.4.2 The salt-work is considered most likely to be of Late Iron Age or Early Roman I date, in part due to the associated pottery but also from comparison with excavated examples from nearby regions such as Essex (Fawn et al1990: 37-39).

I 8.4.3 The site may not have operated in isolation as another salt-works (TYN 018) has been recognised less than a kilometre to the south-east near Cuttings Grove I (Appendix II). I I I I I I I I I 18

I 9 'SHOVEL-TEST' PITTING 9.1 Description I 9.1.1 The 'shovel-test' pitting took place on the 30th November- 1st December 1998. - 9.1.2 'Shovel-test' pits were only excavated within the four fields affected by the I proposed development (Fields 1-4). 9.2 Methodology 9.1 The 'shovel-test' pits were excavated by hand, in order to establish soil-type and I depth to subsoil. A maximum of 35 were allowed, i.e. the equivalent of c.250m centres (Figure 3).

I 9.2 No test-pit exceeded 400mm in depth, nor were they dug below MHWL, or on flood defences, or within those fields not affected by the proposed development I (Fields 5-7). 9.3. A 'shovel-test' design was prepared prior to the pits' excavation, partly on the I basis of the fieldwalking results. Thus it was decided to sink two pits into the area of TYN 073, with the remainder a largely random sample of the remaining fields, with a tendency to establish tests upon an E-W axis, in order to investigate any changes in I soil depth and deposition as one moved inland from the estuary (Appendix IV).

9.4 All finds recovered from the resultant spoil were kept and marked according to I findspot (Appendix Ill).

9.3 Results I 9.3.1 Thirty-two 'shovel-test' pits were dug, six in Field 1, ten in Field 2, four in Field I 3 and twelve in Field 4, i.e. the bigger the field the greater the number of pits. 9.3.2 The pits indicated that Fields 1 and 4, i.e. those abutting the sea-defence wall, were comprised of heavy, dark clay-based soils, which had been recently ploughed, I hence the regular straw component. In contrast, the top-soil from the more inland fields (Fields 2 and 3) was a medium-brown, less clayey loam of finer texture I (Appendix IV). 9.3.3 No difference in depth of top soil could be discerned, with an average depth of I 38cm in both Fields 1 and 4 (from 18 samples), and Fields 2 and 3 (14 samples). 9.3.4 Only two pits produced finds, both located within the area ofTYN 073. A single piece of burnt flint came from test-pit 13 and a two pieces of baked clay from test-pit I 14 (Figure 3; Appendix Ill).

9.4 Interpretation I 9.4.1 From reference to the results of the 'shovel-test' pitting and a consideration of topography and consultation with the current tenant farmer, it seems that the lower I fields abutting the sea-wall (1, 4 and 7) represent a much more altered and modem land-surface than is encountered a little further inland and upland (Fields 2, 3, 5 and I 6). The darker, heavy, clay-based soils of Fields 1, 4 and 7 are likely the product of I I 19

I long-term natural and human modification, including a limited degree of colluviation, a far greater amount of alluviation (as for example deposited by the great floods of 1953 which led to the drowning of cattle on far higher ground [N. Smith pers I comm.]), plus !~e removal and redeposition of soils by bulldozers in the 1960's during a period of ditch-filling to enlarge some of the fields (N. Smith pers comm.).

I 9.4.2 These conclusions are very important when one comes to interpreting the significance of archaeological material, or lack thereof, upon the land closest to the I sea-defences. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20

I 10 Trimley Marshes Fieldwalking: the finds (Sue Anderson). Introduction I Table 1 presents the quantities of finds collected from each of the six fields which produced artefacts, and the two identified sites. Note that the site figures have been subtracted from the relevant fields (2 and 5). Detailed quantifications of finds are I available in Appendix Ill.

Field/ Pottery Fired clay CBM Burnt flint Worked flint Slag Shell I site No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. 1 0 0 0 0 4 30 21 223 4 0 0 0 0 2 2 14 10 78 29 652 33 319 3 24 0 0 13 73 I 3 4 24 17 119 10 207 15 314 5 19 2 43 22 173 4 1 2 5 5 8 105 7 82 0 0 0 0 8 14 5 6 141 0 0 78 1225 154 2122 68 841 23 727 7 24 I 6 2 7 5 54 39 550 65 836 17 83 7 338 3 TYN072 8 57 0 0 28 482 464 6468 29 210 35 834 2 6 TYN073 8 41 1226 6070 32 318 336 2478 31 190 17 100 2 2 I Totals 31 286 1263 6326 228 3569 1095 12842 154 1371 84 2042 55 295 I • Quantities of major find types from the fields and identified sites. Other finds include fragments of burnt coal (field 5 and TYN072), clay pipe stems (fields 3, 5 and TYN072), one piece of glass (TYN072), and a few pieces of I metalwork (lead, iron and copper alloy).

Field 1 I Very few finds were collected in Field 1. Four pieces of peg tile of late and post medieval date were collected in lines A and E. One flint flake was found in A(iii), and 21 pieces of burnt flint were scattered across lines B, C, E and F. No sites were I identified.

Field 2 I Finds from the non-site areas of Field 2 included pottery, fired clay, tile, worked and burnt flint and shell. Two sherds of Roman pottery (a greyware jar rim of 2nd-4th I century date and a redware flagon neck) were found in G(ix). Small amounts of fired clay briquetage were recovered from lines A, C, D and E. All ceramic buidling material (CBM) from the non-site areas of this field was probably of post-medieval I date and included peg tile and brick. Burnt flint was common in small quantities across most of the field, but only three flint flakes were recovered. Thirteen oyster I shells were found, but there were no particular concentrations. Field 3 Four small sherds of pottery were collected from this site, including two fragments of I German stoneware (A(ii) and B(i)), one piece of Roman greyware (A(ii)) and one handmade Late Iron Age or Early Saxon sherd (D(iv)). Four of the seventeen sherds of fired clay were probably briquetage but the other pieces, all from G(v), may have I been daub. Ten fragments of CBM were collected, of which seven were probably I post-medieval, three medieval (B(ii)) and one possibly Roman (B(iii)). Burnt flint I I 21

I was less common on this field, and there were five flint flakes. Two fragments were identified as slag but may be natural concretions. Shell was clustered in the G-K areas, and included five cockles and 17 oysters. One clay pipe stem was found I (D(ii)).

Field 4 I Field 4 was similar to Field 1 in producing very few finds. Only one small abraded sherd of pottery, a piece of English stoneware (17th century) was found. Five very small pieces of fired clay were probably daub. The fragments of CBM were generally I undiagnostic but included a possible Roman imbrex and post-medieval tiles. A small quantity of burnt flint was widely scattered and no worked flint was found. Of the eight shells, one was a cockle, two were whelks and the remainder were oyster. Other I fragments included a copper alloy rim with screw thread, possibly from an early mortar shell, a large fragment of an unidentified modem iron object, and several I pieces of burnt coal clinker. Field 5 I This field produced the largest concentration of finds, as well as site TYN072 which is discussed below. Six sherds of pottery consisted largely of glazed red earthenware, but there was also one piece of Early Medieval Ware (D(v)) and a heavily abraded I medieval ?coarseware base (H(iii)). Most of the identifiable fragments of CBM were of post-medieval date, but a few pieces were identified as possibly Roman in F(ii), F(v), H(vi) and l(v). Burnt flint was the most common find from the field, with small I quantities scattered across most lines. Most of the worked flint consisted of flakes, although there were some small blades, a few cores, four scrapers, a retouched core and a small axe. Fragments of slag were largely derived from iron smithing and were I often associated with burnt coal waste. A small amount of shell included one cockle I and four oysters. One clay pipe stem was found. Field 6 This field also produced a relatively small group of finds. The two sherds of pottery I included one piece of Thetford Ware (D(ii)), and a fragment of Glazed Red Earthenware (E(ii)). Five fragments of possible briqetage were found. Tile, where identifiable, was again largely post-medieval or modem, with possible Roman pieces I from I(v) and J(iii). Burnt flint was scattered over most of the area; the largest group being at H(iii). Most of the 17 worked flints were simple flakes. Slag was generally I iron smithing waste, and there was a single cockle shell. TYN072 This site is identified as a burnt flint concentration in Field 5. Eight sherds of pottery I were mainly of post-medieval date and included glazed and unglazed redwares, and tin glazed earthenware. One sherd of possible prehistoric pottery was found (B(ii)), and there was a highly abraded ?Roman greyware sherd and a possible crucible I fragment in C(ii). All tile-from this site was late-or post-medieval in date. The burnt flint scatter appears to have been concentrated particularly arounf A(ii), C(ii-iii) and I D(ii). Worked flints, including a scraper, were also common, although most were undiagnostic flakes. Large quantities of slag and burnt coal waste were also I receovered from the area, although presumably these are not related to the burnt flint. I I 22

I Other finds included two oyster shells, a piece of lead waste, an iron fragment, a piece of blue glass vessel, and a clay pipe stem. This site appears to be the most dense concentration of post-medieval as well as prehistoric finds. The possibility that it may I have been deposited by plough action rather than representing true concentrations of activity should be considered.

I TYN073 This site is characterised by a·concentration ofbriquetage and burnt flint. In this case, although the burnt flint does include potboilers, much of it is merely fire reddened. I Although there clearly is a large deposit of burnt flint, the total weight is only about a third of the amount collected from TYN072, despite the extra collection from grid sampling at TYN073. I A small group of pottery was collected from the site, all during grid sampling. These were two pieces of handmade flint tempered pottery (grid 1 C+4; grid 4 B+8), a I Late Iron Age or Early Roman rim (grid 1 C+8) and two body sherds (grid 2 B+4 and B+ 16), one medieval coarseware sherd (grid 8 A+2) and two post-medieval glazed red earthenwares (grid 8 A+4 and A+8). All baked clay was briquetage, and some of the I tile was probably also related to salt production since both this and fragments of stone/slag collected from the area had deposits of vitrified salt on the surfaces. However, there were also several post-medieval tile fragments in the area. I Most of the worked flint consisted of flakes and there were no particular concentrations. Some of the slag from the site was clearly related to the salt-making process, rather than being ironworking slag, although this was also present and may I be post-medieval. Other finds included one whelk and one cockle shell and two possible iron objects.

I Discussion In general, the assemblage from these fields suggests little past human activity in the fields directly adjacent to the river (Fields 1, 4 and 7), whilst those fields further I inland produced more artefacts in greater concentrations (particularly Fields 2 and 5). The artefactual evidence suggests activity in the prehistoric, late Iron Age/Early I Roman and post-medieval periods. The large overall number of flint and burnt flint ·artefacts is good evidence for occupation in the earliest period, perhaps related to the nearby ring ditch site (TYN015). The presence of a concentration and wider I scattering of briquetage suggests industrial use of the saltings in the ?early Roman period, and there is further evidence for this to the south at TYN018. Evidence for post-medieval activity is largely confined to a few sherds of pottery (several of which I may belong to a single vessel), some roof tile, a scatter of ironworking slag in association with burnt coal, and several small finds. This may suggest deposition of smithing waste in the area of TYN072, although the clinker could be the remains of I ash discarded from the fireboxes of traction engines. I Sue Anderson (SCCAS December 1998). I I I I 23

I 11 Documentary Search of the Inter-Tidal Habitat, Trimley Marshes (Antho~y M. Breen).

I Introduction The documentary search was carried out at the Suffolk Record Office in Ipswich to examine all the readily available cartographic and documentary sources that would I contribute to the archaeological examination of the site. It was also necessary to examine documents at the Public Record Office in relation to Commission of Sewers responsible for land drainage. The pattern of land ownership in this area has resulted I in a limited range of sources that are specific to the site and this report therefore incorporates material produced by the Commissioners of Sewers for the neighbouring parishes of Felixstowe, Walton and Falkenham. The systems of management and I manorial custom described in these papers parallel that of Trimley Marsh and the dates of this cognate material is directly relevant to the archaeological investigation of I the site. The settlement pattern of this part of the Colneis Hundred was established before the eleventh century.

I Maps The area of this assessment is shown on the 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey maps sheets numbers 83.SE and 89.NE and copies have been made for this report of 1886 and the I 1948 editions of 83.SE and 1904 and 1928 editions of 83.NE. None of the maps show any significant change within the assessment area between the various editions of the maps. There is a sheepfold shown on 83.SE in 1886. The modem map does show that I some of the minor water courses have been filled in and part of the site is now crossed by electrical cables supported on pylons. The area is bounded by Sleighton Hill to the north and by the sea wall to the west, to the east and slightly inland are Thorpe I Common, Alston Cottage at Trimley Lower Street, Grimston Hall and Salter's Wood with its Old Salt Work in the adjoining field. The southern edge of the area rests on I the New Fleet and the parish boundary between Trimley St Martin and St Mary. This boundary curves around the edge of some fields west of Grimston Hall, but it will be shown that the boundary is of a late Medieval date. The principal feature of this area is I the New Fleet which is the main drain for this part of the marsh. The word "Fleet" is from Old English Fleot meaning "an estuary, an inlet, an arm of the sea" or from the I Old Norse Fliot "a stretch of river, a reach". 1 The two parishes of Trimley St Martin and Trimley St Mary were surveyed by the Tithe Commission in 1839 and maps produced have been photocopied for this report. I The map ofTrimley St Martin (ref. P461/260) is damaged, where it has been possible to match the field names from the apportionment (ref. FDA260/1A/1a) with the numbered fields the names have been added to the photocopy. All the area was owned I by the Duke of Hamilton who then owned 2,060 acres of the parish whose total acreage was 2,138 acres. The area was occupied by William Last, who is listed as occupying Grimston Hall? The field names are not of particular interest except for I "New Layd Pasture" and other fields which are described as meadow or ley-to the east­ I ofthe New Feet suggesting attempts to turn marsh into meadow land or pasture. There 1 A.N. Smith "English Place-Name Elements" English Place-Name Society, 1956. I 2 R. White "Directory of Suffolk" 1844. I I 24

I were no arable fields in this area apart from "the Seven Acre Marsh and Plantation Field" to the east of the fleet, again suggesting land reclamation. Once again there are a few minor changes in the line of some ditches, Sluice Marsh was later sub divided. I The Map of Trimley St Mary (P4611261) has been copied to show those fields 79-81 within the assessment area all ofwhich contain the element "Park". Again the land was owned by the Duke of Hamilton and occupied by William Last. The site of I Thurston Marsh and Salt House Marsh are of interest.

The two parishes were enclosed by Act of Parliament in 1806. The Map (ref. I 150/11316) has been traced in part for this report. Only those field names relevant to the description of the parish boundary were entered on ~the original map. Almost the entire area was owned by George Nassau, only those fields to the north are described I as owned as owned by a Mr. Firmin. Those field names that do appear on the map are consistent with the field names on the Tithe Maps. The area of the marsh was not I effected by the enclosure. in 1784 Isaac Johnson produced "A Plan of the Parishes of Felixstowe, Walton, I Trimlies St Martin and St Mary and Part of the Parishes of Falkenham, Kirton and Levington in Suffolk lying within the Lordship of the Hon. George Nassau Esq. Drawn from the Actual Survey of John Kirby made in the years 17 40 & 17 41" (ref. I HA 119/435). The maps are in a manuscript volume and were designed to show the areas of land owned by copyholders of the various manors, they therefore omitted a great deal of detail for land held in hand or leased. The map shows the sea wall as do I all the later maps and the Fleet is shown as a wide area of water corresponding to the marsh area shown on the Ordnance Survey Maps. It should be noted that the Old Fleet on later maps is called "Gun Bush Fleet" on this map. The park boundary of Grimston I Hall seems to be embanked and some of the adjoining fields are shown as occupied by Marsh House Farm, a building that stood on the edge of Alston Common. The date of I the survey that the sea wall was already built in 17 40 enclosing the marsh. Kirby worked on his survey using an earlier survey of 1613 by Aaron Rathbone (ref. HB8/1/201). Rathbone's survey does not describe this area, but briefly mentions the I owner of Grimston Hall who also held land of the Manor of Walton in Trimley "Sir Roberte Barker payeth the rente ... but acknowledgeth not the lande ", that is, he would not assist the surveyor to show where the lands were in Trimley. Rathbone and Kirby I both had difficulties in accurately plotting some of the copyhold lands.

There is an undated map of the foreshore (ref. HA49/E2/211) which shows the site of I the Martello Towers and is therefore early nineteenth century. There is also a , perambulation of the Trimley parishes by Kirby in 1740 (ref. HB9 517 D5) which I only shows the parish boundary without any further details. Land Ownership and Manorial Records The map evidence shows that Trimley Marsh has been since at least the eighteenth I century connected with the-owner-and occupier of Grimston Hall. Grimston Hall-was one of a number of small manors scattered amongst the parishes between Ipswich and I Felixstowe I Walton such as Blofield Hall, Candlet Farm, Searsons, Alston etc. Many I I I 25

I of these manors have their origin in pre conquest settlements. 3 The site of some of these holdings have not been identified such as Thurstanestuna. This place name can also be found in the Domesday Book in the parish of Hawkedon and later became I Thurston End. Thurston Marsh listed in the Tithe Apportionment for Trimley St Mary may mark some of the land associated with this settlement. The descent of the Manor of Grimston is described by Copinger.4 It was owned by the Cavendish Family from I the fourteenth century. In 1601, the manor passed to John Barker and then in 1766 to George Nassau. Nassau died in 1823 when the manor passed to his half brother the Earl of Rochford. At the beginning of this century it was owned by the Pretyman I family who deposited their archives with East Suffolk Council in 1937, by which time the lands had passed to Trinity College, Cambridge. During the Second World War, their tenant was James Arthur Stennett who had farmed the 433 acres of Grimston I Hall. There is nothing remaining of the original manorial building though a large pond is believed to be part of some improvements to the park carried out in the sixteenth I century. The park is also believed to have been the site of St John's Church Alston, a former parish consolidated with Trimley in 1362. There are no records at Ipswich which record the transfers of ownership nor any lease or tenancy agreements between I the owners and their tenants. It is likely that the manor had ceased to be a principal residence by the start ofthe eighteenth century. The one document, a valuation of the estates of Sir William Barker in Trimley St Martin and elsewhere (ref. HA35 61/1) I which might have given details of the land around the manor including Trimley Marsh is considered too fragile to be produced for research. In the absence of such documents in Ipswich, there is the possibility of obtaining such information from I documents known as Inquisitiones PostMortem Quod Damnum (I.P.M.). These were prepared by the crown esceator on the death of a lord of the manor to assess the value of the holdings. There are I.P.M.'s for 1292, 1331, 1517 and 1554 held at the Public I Record Office at Kew, which have not been examined for this report some of which include extents. The extent of the park and the date at which it was created combined I with possibility of details of the marshlands would be of great interest. The park boundary does match the parish boundary created after 1362. I The manorial records for Grimston Hall available in Ipswich date only from 1606 and do not include any survey or extent. The court rolls seem to indicate that the copyhold lands were inland scattered around Thorpe Green, Alston and Trimley Street. There is I a contemporary copy of legal papers for a case heard at Chancery in 1539 concerning rights over Trimley Common. One of the witnesses Harry Sparman of Trimley St Martin, then aged 80 stated "That Aleston is a towne by itselfe and longithe to the I churche of St. John's but how farre the same towne doth extende· he knowethe not... " (ref. HA119 50/3/52).

I Commission of Sewers The western boundary of the marsh is marked by a sea wall and the date at which this was put in place is of interest to the archaeological investigation of the site as the wall I provides an effective barrier to the use of any inlet as a means of access from-the

I 3 N. Scarfe "Domesday Settlement and Churches: The Example of Colneis Hundred", An Historical Atlas of Suffolk ed. D. Dymond and E. Martin, Suffolk C. C. 1989. I 4 W.A. Copinger "The Manors of Suffolk" Vol. Ill London, 1909. I I 26

I Orwell to the inland settlements. The map evidence places the construction of the wall at a date before 1740, but there are no other documents that can offer an earlier date.

I The protection oflow lying areas from flood was governed by a statute passed in 1532 (23 Hen. VIII c.5) which replaced an earlier Act of 1427 (6 Hen. VI c.5).5 The Act created the Commission of Sewers with wide ranging powers to repair sea-walls, to I remove obstructions to water courses, to enact local bye laws, to raise rates for repairs and to reacquisition materials and labourers to carry out the required work. The only local commission created during the reign of Henry VIII was for the whole of Suffolk I (PRO C66 664 m.6d) and is dated 7th December 1534. The enrolled Letters Patent uses the same phrases as the original Act and the commissioners were charged "to survey the said walls, streames, ditches, bankes, gutteres, sewers, gates, calcies, I bridges, trenches, gaylies, mildames, jludgates, pondes, lockes, hebbying weires and other impediments ... ". The Act and Letters Patent both mention the example of I Romney Marsh in Kent. Further letters were issued through the Petty Bag Office appointing new commissioners for Suffolk (see C226 17 dated 15th April 1678 and C226 18 dated 20th January 1679). In 1609 another Act was passed specifically for I the parishes in Suffolk and Norfolk lying along the River Waveney due to damage to the sea wall at Yarmouth and Happisborough. There were regular applications from Suffolk for fiats to renew commissions, such as one dated 14th February 1710 (C 191 I 1 f.1 08) and separate commissions for Alderton, Bawdsey and Hollesley 1704 and the Liberty of St. Edmunds 1727. Storms that again damaged the sea wall at Yarmouth in 1698 and the destruction of the lighthouse at Winterton in 1714 resulted in renewed I applications from the Waveney district. The Commissions for the Colneis Hundred are however always in very general terms.

I At Ipswich there is a single example of a Letter Patent issued for the repair of the sea wall at Trimley Marsh (ref. HB 8/4/24) dated 1824. As the area of marsh behind this I wall was owned by one person there was no need for the various rate books and other documents which do exist for the marshes between Felixstowe and Falkenham on the I North side of the Colneis Peninsula. The records for the marshes of Felixstowe and Falkenham are extensive beginning with a Commission of 1557 (ref. HA 119 50/3/53). This document does mention the I earlier work probably carried out after 1534. It also mentions Sir William Cavendish the owner of Grimston Hall. The Commissioners appointed two Marsh Reeves to oversee the regular remedial work required and to collect the rate from the various I landowners. There is a Marsh Reeves Book dated 1708-1784 (ref. HA 49/E4/1 ), which begins with an eighteenth century copy of the rate list for 1563. The nature of the works required were probably mirrored by similar work at Trimley Marsh and I maintenance was carried out each year. The accounts for a single year, 1726, have been copied for this report (Document 1) as a good example of the type of work and materials used. The use of piles, planking and chalk seem to be self explanatory, but I the use of heath and ling is uncertain,-possibly binding for the chalk- It should be I noted that the annual scoring and cleaning of ditches may well have removed all 5 R. Gosling "The Statutes at Large containing all the Publick Acts of Parliament... " Vols I & 11, I London 173 5. I I 27

I dateable evidence for these channels. The book also contains an example of a local bye passed in 1737 "It frequently happens that many idle and disorderly persons employed on fishing boats and others residing near the coast do unlawfully and I maliciously cut off draw up or burn and destroy the piles which are drove into the marsh, or sea walls and banks whereby the chalks and other materials used for I securing the said walls and banks fall away... ". It is reasonable to suggest that Trimley Marsh was managed in a similar fashion. All the legislation emphasises the need to maintain the sea walls and not to allow them to I be cut or fall into disrepair.

Wrecks I At Ipswich there is a sixteenth century Book of Customs for the Manor of Walton and Trimley (ref. HA 119 50/3/51; Document 2). This manor had the right to salvage I "Wrakes of Sea". The book quotes examples of wrecks in 1386 (10 Ric II), 1455 (34 Hen. VI) and 1456 (35 Hen. VI). It also notes fines for those who took soil or dug in the marsh without permission. The wrecks include material jettisoned from boats. The I goods were valued and the proceeds divided between the lord of the Manor and the finder. As such wind falls were of value to both parties it is not unreasonable to I suggest the bulk of such materials were removed. This book also contains a full list of the laws governing the Falkenham and Felixstowe Marshes dated to the reign of Philip and Mary 1555-58. Copies from this I document are included in the report.

Salt Works and Oyster Beds I There is no documentary or cartographic evidence for either salt works or oyster beds within the assessment area. This does not necessarily mean that such works do not I exist. There is a Salt House Field on the Tithe Map for Trimley St. Mary south of Grimston Hall and an Old Salt works is shown on this field in the Ordnance Survey maps. The Oyster beds at Trimley St Mary were probably built by the Orwell Oyster I Company during the last century, earlier beds may well exist in the assessment area.

Conclusion I The lack of documents relating specifically to this area does make it a little difficult to offer a detailed succession of events, however a possible history can be offered by I referring to the cognate material. The marsh land was sealed behind a sea wall by 1740 and possibly at a much earlier date of the middle of the sixteenth century. The work required by the operation of the I Commission of Sewers would remove most, if not all of the dateable material from the assessment area. The sea wall itself though regularly repaired may contain materials used in its original construction and careful recording of sections of the wall I during its removal should he considered. Materials and sites that could only have been I created when there was access to the sea must pre-date the construction of the wall. The manorial customary laws over the right to salvage wrecks may have insured that I all such material whether wrecked, jettisoned or abandoned were removed. It is still I I 28

I possible that such materials may be found within the marsh area and possible that they are of a pre-medieval date.

I _The parish boundary between the two parishes of Trimley St Martin and Trimley St Mary only dates from 1362 when the former parish of St John's Alston was consolidated with Trimley. The fact that this boundary curves around the park I boundary of Grimston Hall suggests that the park had been created before this date absorbing the site of the church. The Boundary of Alston probably included all this I area, though by at least 14 70 the former boundary had been forgotten. The sites of settlements in Trimley at the head of streams leading to various reaches I fleets may suggest that they were formally accessible from the sea. It may be the case I that the accumulation of silt in the early medieval period left these settlements isolated I from the sea. Archival References I Suffolk Record Office, Ipswich Maps la 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey Map Sheet Number 83.SE 1886 I lb 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey Map Sheet Number 83.SE 1948 2a 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey Map Sheet Number 83.NE 1904 I 2b 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey Map Sheet Number 83 .NE 1928 3 P4611260 Tithe Map Trimley St Martin 1839 I 4 P461/261 Tithe Map Trimley St Mary 1839 5 150/1/316 Enclosure Map Trimley St Martin & St Mary 1806

I 6 HA119/435 A Plan of the Parishes of Two Trimlies (Isaac Johnson) 1784

I 7 HB9 517 D5 Line ofPerambulation (J. Kirby) 1740 Commission of Sewers I HB 8/4/25 Return of Rates Felixstowe and Falkenham Marsh 1826-1896 HB 8/4/24 Letter Patent Trimley Marsh 1824 HA49/E4/1 Accounts of the Marsh Reeve Felixstowe 1708-1784 I and Falkenham Marsh HA119/50/3/53 Commission & Return at to the Marshes 1557

I Manorial Records Walton cum Trimley

I HB 8/1/201 Survey Aaron Rathbone 1613 I HA119/50/3/51 Book of Customs c.1560 Grimston Hall I I I 29

I HB 8/11222 Court Book 1663-1728 HA119 50/3/118 Court Roll 1639-1659 I HA119 50/3/117 Court Roll 1606-1612 Chancery Proceedings I HA119 50/3/52 Deposition of Witnesses 1539 Public Record Office, Kew I Letters Patent C66/664 Patent Roll 26 Hen. VIII membrane 6 dorso 1534

I Petty Bag Office I c 226 18 Renewal of Commissioners Suffolk 1679 c 226 17 Renewal of Commissioners Suffolk 1678 I c 1911 f.1 08 Fiat Colneis 1710 c 191 2 f. 70 Liberty of St Edmunds 1727

I Anthony M Breen, November 1998 I I I I I I I I I I I I 30

I 12 CONCLUSION 12.1 The lack of finds from Fields 1, 4 and 7 (i.e. those which abut the sea-wall), does not necessarily indicate an absence of past human activity upon this land. It seems I quite apparent that the land-surface surveyed is a relatively modem one, the product of long-term natural and human modification, whereby any ancient activity within the I area will have been masked by the heavy, clay-rich soils. 12.2 These heavy, dark, clay-rich soils appear to overlay the archaeologically rich lighter, more loamy I sandy soils which rise inland and to the north of the Marshes I (Fields 2 I 6, and 5 in particular). It would thus seem wise to assume that archaeological material exists within the area of Fields 1, 4 and 7, albeit covered by the marshy deposits. Furthermore, due to the proximity to the river, there is a potential I for waterlogged, organic deposits within this area, some of which may pertain to the use of the estuary, be that for transport, or the exploitation of its contents, such as fish I and salt. 12.3 The inland fields (2, 3, 5 and 6) produced a range of archaeological material I indicating human activity upon this land during the Mesolithic, later Neolithic - Bronze Age, Late Iron Age or Early Roman and post-medieval periods. Some of the earlier material may in part relate to the ring-ditches I burials in the area (TYN 015 in I Field 5 for example), and conceivably strengthens the case that some of the linear features and enclosures spread across Sleighton Hill (TYN 014) are prehistoric. A dense concentration of burnt flint in the north-western corner of Field 5 (denoted TYN I 072) did not coincide with any previously recorded features and could represent the remains of burning from hearths related to settlement.

I 12.4 Small amounts of Roman pottery and tile have been identified in Fields 2-6, finds which may partly relate to contemporary industrial activity in the area, specifically the production of salt. A mass of baked clay and burnt flint from the I north-west part of Field 2 (denoted TYN 073), appears to be the traces of a salt­ working, with associated pottery of Late Iron Age or Early Roman date. A further I sal tern is recorded within a kilometre to the south-east (TYN 0 18). 12.5 Quantities of post-medieval pottery and tile were recovered from Fields 1-6, the I highest density from Field 5, which also produced quantities of slag and burnt coal, indicating iron smithing in the vicinity.

I 12.6 The recovery of shell along a number of the drainage ditches' edges, may indicate the presence of oyster-beds in the area.

I 12.7 Small quantities of modem material, including brick, tile, mortar, concrete, slag and clinker, indicate more recent episodes of human activity above and beyond farming the land, specifically field enlargement through the infilling of drainage I ditches during the late 1960's (Field 2 I 6), -the recutting of channels, and the planting I of trees in 1980 (Field 1). I I I 31

I 13 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK As a result of the desk-top assessment and fieldwork the following recommendations for further archaeological work are made. However, please note the disclaimer at the I end of this report.

13.1 The Sea-Wall I 13.1.1 Whilst the recent fieldwork did not focus upon the sea-wall per se, it is recommended that in the course of it being dismantled it should be archaeologically I investigated and recorded. 13.1.2 The map evidence indicates that the sea-defences were built sometime before 1740 (Section 11), though the exact date of construction remains unknown. Given that I a statute to govern the protection of low-lying areas from flood was passed in 1532, it I is not inconceivable that the Trimley Marsh sea-wall has a sixteenth century origin. 13.1.3 It is thus desirable that the wall's foundation, subsequent repairs and I remodelling be aated archaeologically. 13 .1.4 Furthermore, erecting the sea-defences sealed the marsh-land and blocked direct access to the estuary for those settlements which lay behind it. Investigating the I wall will thus provide important information upon land management and the nature of human activity in the area of Trimley Marshes, as well as providing an insight into I early Postmedieval engineering. 13.2 Fields 1-4 13.2.1 Whilst Fields 1 and 4 produced little archaeological material, it has been I argued above that this may be due to the greatly modified nature of the land surface I studied, rather than indicating a true lack of ancient activity in the area. 13.2.2 Fields 2 and 3 produced a great deal of archaeological material, the former in particular, indicating human activity in the area during the prehistoric, Late Iron Age I I Early Roman and post-medieval periods. One major concentration of finds in the north-west of Field 2 (denoted TYN 073) appears to be the remains of a salt-working I installation; separate recommendations for future work on this site are detailed below. 13.2.2 It is recommended that Fields 1-4 are investigated through 2% trenching where extensive ground disturbance is planned, with an allowance for extra trenching should I the need arise. It is suggested that the trenches should be spaced at regular intervals, a number of which should be orientated roughly east-west in order to examine the nature of soil deposition as one moves inland and up-slope from the edge of the I estuary. I 13.3 TYN 073 ~_13.3.1 Site TYN 073 produced a~mass of finds indicatingthe presence of some form of industrial activity in antiquity (probably salt-panning), most likely during the Late I Iron-Age or Early Roman period. I I I 32

I 13.3.2 It is recommended that a further evaluation of the site through trenching is undertaken prior to the creation of the 'inter-tidal habitat', with a remit for full-scale excavation if the site is an area which will be affected by proposed groundworks for I this project.

13.3 .2 Such an investigation is necessary to elucidate the exact nature of the industrial I activity, its date and the extent of the site. It should also provide the first real insight into the county's salt-workings, a subject which has received little study in comparison to the work undertaken elsewhere in East Anglia (cf. Fawn et al 1990; I Baker 1975; Gurney 1982). I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 33

I BIBLIOGRAPHY Baker, F.T. (1982), 'Saltmaking sites on the Lincolnshire coast before the Romans', in I K.W. de Brisay and K.A. Evans (eds), Salt. The Study of an Ancient Industry. Colchester Archaeological Group Publication.

I Barfield, L. and Hodder, M. (1987), 'Burnt mounds as saunas, and the prehistory of bathing',AntiquityVol. 61: 370-79.

I Fawn, A.J., Evans, K.A., McMaster, I. and Davies, G.M.R. (1990), The Red Hills of Essex: Salt-Making in Antiquity. Colchester Archaeological Group, Witley Press, I Hunstanton. Gardiner, J. (1987), 'Tales of the unexpected: Approaches to the assessment and I interpretation of museum flint collections', in A. G. Brown and M.R. Edmonds (eds ), Lithic Analysis and Later British Prehistory. British Archaeological Report 162, I Oxford: 49-66. Gurney, D. (1982), 'Salt-production in the Roman Fenland', Britannia 13.

I Martin, E.A. (1976), 'The excavation of a tumulus at Barrow Bottom, Risby, 1975', East Anglian Archaeology No. 3, Suffolk County Council: 43-62.

I Martin, E.A. (1976), Settlements on Hill-Tops: Seven Prehistoric Sites in Suffolk. East Anglian Archaeology No. 65, Suffolk County Planning Department.

I Martin, E.A. (1988), 'Swales Fen, Suffolk: a Bronze Age cooking pit?', Antiquity Vol. I 65: 358-59. Palmer, R. (1998), Inter-Tidal Habitat, Trimley Marshes, Area TM1636, Suffolk: Aerial Photographic Assessment. Air Photo Services, Report No: 1998/23, November I 1998. I Pitts, M. (1980), Later Stone Implements. Shire Archaeology, Vol. 14, Aylesbury. Wymer, J. (1976), 'A long blade industry from Sproughton', East Anglian I Archaeology No. 3, Suffolk County Council: 1-10. Wymer, J. (1989), 'Late glacial and Mesolithic hunters', in D. Dymond and E.A. Martin ( eds ), An Historical Atlas of Suffolk. Suffolk County Council Planning I Department and the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology and History, Bury St. Edmunds I (Second Edition): 26-27. - I I I I Appendix 1 I SUFFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICE- CONSERVATION TEAM Brief and Specification for an Archaeological Evaluation

I INTER-TIDAL HABITAT, TRIMLEY MARSHES

I 1. Background

1.1 There is a proposal to create an 'inter-tidal habitat' on land beside the Orwell estuary. I The applicant has requested this brief and specification. It is understood that a planning application is imminent.

I 1.2 The Planning Authority will be advised that any consent should be conditional upon an agreed programme of work taking place before development begins (PPG 16, I paragraph 30 condition). An archaeological evaluation of the application area will be required as the first part of such a programme of archaeological work; decisions on I the need for, and scope of, any further work will be based upon the evaluation. 1.3 The evaluation (Figure 1) is primarily low lying arable land, marsh and inter-tidal zone on the east bank of the Orwell estuary. The scope and form of engineering works I which will take place to create the habitats are not yet decided. The consequent effects on water level and natural erosion are not yet decided. The area has not been the subject of systematic archaeological survey but there are a number of known I archaeological sites resulting from chance finds, and aerial photographs (Figure 2).

TYN004 Circular scraper, stray find, ?Bronze Age. I TYN005 Pottery scatter on shore, Saxon to Medieval. TYN007 Pottery scatter on shore, Saxon. I TYN 014 Cropmark complex, field system, ring ditch, rectilinear enclosure, ?Bronze Age/Iron Age. TYN 015 Cropmark ring ditch, ?Bronze Age. I TYN 018 Saltworking site, briquetage, ?Roman. The presence of prehistoric occupation showing as cropmarks on the present margin of I the marshland is significant as we know that land levels have fallen since the Bronze Age; the potential for well preserved archaeological deposits below the marsh soils is high. The saltworking site, which would probably have been on the inter-tidal zone I and is now c.500m inland tends to confirm this potential. The extensive scatter of early pottery on the present inter-tidal zone is unexplained, but could relate either to I beached shipping or erosion from up-stream deposits. I I I I Appendix 1 2 I 1.4 Evaluation is likely to be undertaken in two phases. The first stage of desktop study I. plus fieldwalking is covered by this document. Any further evaluation involving trial trenching will be defined following the first phase and when further detailed I development proposals are available.

1.5 All arrangements for the field evaluation of the site, the timing of the work, and access I to the site, are to be negotiated with the commissioning body.

1.6 The submission of a Project Design based upon this brief and accompanying outline I specification is an essential requirement. Selection of an approved archaeological contractor should not take place until the Project Design has been approved by this I office. I 2. Brief for Archaeological Evaluation 2.1 Establish whether any archaeological sites exist in the area, with particular regard to I any which are of sufficient importance to require preservation in situ. 2.2 Identify the date, approximate form and purpose of any archaeological sites within the I application area. 2.3 Evaluate the likely impact of past land uses and the possibility of masking I colluvial/alluvial deposits. 2.4 Establish whether waterlogged organic deposits are likely to be present in the proposal I area. 2.5 Provide sufficient information to construct a preliminary archaeological conservation I strategy, dealing with preservation, the recording of archaeological deposits, working practices, timetables, orders of cost and scope for further evaluation.

I 3. Specification A: Desk-Based Assessment

3.1 Consult the County Sites and Monuments Record, both the computerised record and I any backup files. I I I I I I Appendix 1 3 I 3.2 Examine all the readily available cartographic sources (e.g. those available in the I County Record Office). Record any evidence for archaeological sites (e.g. buildings, settlements, field names) and history of previous land uses. Where possible I . photocopies or tracing should be included in the report. 3.3 Assess the potential for documentary research that would contribute to the I archaeological investigation of the site. 3.4 Provide a transcription and analysis of archaeological features from all available air photographs held by Suffolk County Council Environment and Transport Department, I its SMR, and the RCHME, at a scale of 1:2500. I 4 Specification B: Field Evaluation 4.1 Examine the area for earthworks eg. banks, ponds, ditches. If present these are to be I recorded in plan at 1:2500, with appropriate sections. A record should be made of the topographic setting of the site (e.g. slope, plateau etc ). I 4.2 Assess the artefact content of the topsoil by systematic surface collection. Artefacts of all types and periods will be collected with a recording system that will allow the location and extent of concentrations to be accurately defined. Finds of particular I significance should be individually plotted. The collection strategy will be based on a line walking system with transects at 20m intervals.

I 4.3 Provision should be made for the collection strategy to be more detailed over 5% of the area, with a 20m grid as the basic collection and recording area.

I 4.4 Assess the non-ferrous metal artefacts content of the topsoil by systematic metal detector survey. All artefacts (excluding aluminium) will be collected using a recording system that will allow the locations and extents of concentrations to be I accurately defined. A detection strategy will be based upon fieldwalking results, I allowance should be made for 5% of the total area to be detected. 4.5 Hand excavate 'shovel-test' pits to establish soil type and depth to subsoil. No test pit should exceed 400mm in depth. Allow for a maximum of 35 pits (i.e. the equivalent I of c.250m centres). No test pit need be dug below MHWL or on flood defences. A 'shovel-test' design should be prepared and approved by Archaeological Service I Conservation Team before field work begins. 5. General Management

I 5.1 .~ A timetable for all stages ofthe project must be agreed before the first stage of work commences, including monitoring by the Conservation Team of SCC Archaeological I Service. I I I Appendix 1 4

I 5.2 The composition of the project staff must be detailed and agreed (this is to include any I subcontractors). 5.3 A general Health' and Safety Policy mu-st be provided, with- d-etailed risk assessment I and management strategy for this particular site. 5.4 No initial survey to detect public utility or other services has taken place. The I responsibility for this rests with the archaeological contractor. 5.5 The Institute of Field Archaeologists' Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Desk-based Assessments and for Field Evaluations should be used for additional I guidance in the execution of the project and in drawing up the report. I 6. Report Requirements 6.1 An archive of all records and finds must be prepared consistent with the principle of I Management of Archaeological Projects, English Heritage 1991 (particularly Appendix 3.1 and Appendix 4.1). I 6.2 The data recording methods and conventions used must be consistent with, and approved by, the County Sites and Monuments Record.

I 6.3 The objective account of the archaeological evidence must be clearly distinguished from its archaeological interpretation. The conclusion should include a statement of I the archaeological potential of the site. 6.4 An opinion as to the necessity for further evaluation and its scope should be given. A second phase will not be embarked upon until the primary fieldwork results are I assessed and the need for further work is established. A second phase cannot be I developed in detail at this stage. 6.5 Finds should be appropriately conserved and stored in accordance with UK Institute of Conservators Guidelines. The finds, as an indissoluble part of the site archive, should I be deposited with the County SMR if the landowner can be persuaded to agree to this. If this is not possible for all or any part of the finds archive, then provision must be I made for additional recording (e.g. photography, illustration, analysis) as appropriate. 6.6 The site archive is to be deposited with the County SMR within three months of the I completion of work. It will then become publicly accessible. 6.7 Where positive conclusions are drawn from a project (whether it be evaluation or excavation) a summary report, in the established format, suitable for inclusion in the I annual 'Archaeology in Suffolk' section of the Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute for I Archaeology, should be prepared and included in the project report. I I I Appendix 1 5

I 6.8 County SMR sheets should be competed, as per the county SMR manual, for all sites I where archaeological finds and/or features are located. I Specification by: RCarr Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Conservation Team I Environment and Transport Department Shire Hall Bury St Edmunds I Suffolk IP33 2AR Tel: 01284 352441

I Date: 19 August 1998 Reference: trim08.doc I This brief and specification remains valid for 12 months from the above date. If work is not carried out in full within that time this document will lapse; the I authority should be notified and a revised brief and specification may be issued. I

The results of this evaluation, if they are to be used as part of a planning I application, will be need to be considered by the Conservation Team of the Archaeological Service of Suffolk County Council, who have the responsibility I for advising the appropriate Planning Authority. I I I I I I I I I - Appendix 11 - I

I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 001 Record Number 08084

I N.G.R TM 264- 368- A PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. TM23NE22 I FORM stray find PERIOD Preh ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD / I quem stone LAND CLASS ON SITE cultivated land 4 LAND CLASS AROUND cultivated land 4 I AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY LANDOWNER Stennett C A, Alston Hall Farm.

I REPORTED 1960 Gooding M OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY I DESCRIPTION Saddle quem. Upper stone, sarsen (?). Grid reference vague, marked on SAU record map at TM 263 368. Found on Alston Hall Farm or Grimston Farm (S2).

I SOURCES (checked) (S1) IPSMG, card 960-46, 1960 (S2) OS, card TM23NE22 I REFERENCES (unchecked) (R1) Archaeol in Suff 1960, PSIA, 28, 1960, 295 MATERIAL HELD LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I IPSMG 960-46

PRIMARY SMR DATE:- BY: SEW -. REVISED: BY: I INPUT: 19880229 BY: SR UPDATE: BY: FORM TYPE s I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 002 I Record Number 08085 N.G.R TM 2625 3695 A PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal I MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. TM23NE18 FORM stray find PERIOD BA

ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD I arrowhead barbed and tanged flint -EBA

LAND CLASS ON SITE cultivated land 4 I LAND CLASS AROUND cultivated land 4 AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres I SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY I I

I REPORTED 1968 Newberry Mr OTIIER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION I Barbed and tanged arrowhead "found circa 1962, when making an irrigation pond. Retained by finder (S1)(S2).

I SOURCES (checked) (S1) OS, card TM23NE18 (S2) IPSMG, card Trimley St Martin I REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I Smith G, Gestings''Farm, Trimley. PRIMARY SMR DATE:- BY: SEW REVISED: BY: I INPUT: 19880229 BY: SR UPDATE: BY: FORMTYPE s

I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 003 Record Number 08086 I N.G.R TM 2628 3667 A PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. TM23NE20 SITE NAME Alston Hall I FORM excavation PERIOD IA

ARTIFACTTYPE/MATERIAL/ SPECIFIC PERIOD I pottery fired clay LIA

AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres I SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY REPORTED 1956 Chick Air Commodore J S EXCAVATED 1956 Chick Air Commodore J S I OTIIER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION 1956: Trial trench No. 1: Nine sherds of buff-brown undecorated pottery of I Late Iron Age (non-Belgic)(S1) found 200 yards SW of Alston Hall (S2)(S3), at depth of 3 feet. Grid reference TM 264 365 given in (S1)(S3) which is dueS of Alston Hall. I This same map reference has been revised (at unknown date) on IPSMG card to TM 2628 3667 (S2). I SOURCES (checked) (S1) Archaeol in Suff, 27, 1956, (2),117 (S2) IPSMG, card 956-146, notes, plans, correspondence & manuscript (S3) OS, card TM23NE20 I REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I IPSMG 956-146

PRIMARY SMR DATE:------BY: SEW REVISED: 19910900 BY: CP I 19970402 CP I I

I INPUT: 19880229 BY: SR UPDATE: 19970425 BY: SR FORMTYPE s I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 004 I Record Number 08087 N.G.R TM 255- 367- A PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal I MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. TM23NE19 SITE NAME Trimley Marshes FORM stray fing PERIOD BA

I ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD worked flint flint I AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY

REPORTED 1968 . Newberry Mr I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION I Circular scraper of black flint found on Trimley Marshes in 1968 (S2)(R1). Grid reference given as TM 256 368 in (S2)(R1) but revised (at unknown date) on IPSMG card to TM 255 367 approximately (S1).

I SOURCES (checked) (S1) IPSMG, card 968-73, 1968 (S2) OS, card TM23NE19 I REFERENCES (unchecked) (R1)PSIA,31, 1968,199 MATERIAL HELD LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I IPSMG 968-73

PRIMARY SMR DATE:- BY: SEW · REVISED: BY: I INPUT: 19880229 BY: SR UPDATE: BY: FORM TYPE s I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 005 I Record Number 08088 N.G.R TM 256- 373- - PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal I MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. TM23NE14 SITE NAME Sleighton Hill; Trimley Shore FORM finds scatter PERIOD Sax

I ARTIFACT TYPE /MATERIAL/SPECIFIC PERIOD pottery fired clay pottery thetford fired clay LSax I pottery ipswich fired clay M Sax

LAND CLASS ON SITE coastland 2 inter-tidal I AREA hectares HEIGHT OD 0 metres I I

I SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY

REPORTED 19600100 Mann R (Felixstowe Archaeological Movement) I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY DESCRIPTION Large number of pottery sherds found on the shore (S1)(S2), mainly Med & PMed I but including(?) "A sherd of (buff) Anglo Saxon, coarse ware ·decorated with pendant triangles" and "Two (black) coarse ware pot rims of the 8th century". Area on SMR map enlarged to include mud flats after (S6). Details I in (S4)(S5). 198112: fieldwork by John Newman located 6 sherds Thetford ware (probably not Ipswich type)($3). I See also Med & PMed. SOURCES (checked) (S1) OS, card TM23NE14 I (S2) IPSMG, card Trimley St Martin (S3) SAU, Newman J, site report, TYN 005, June 1985 (S4) Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (Journal), 1, January 1960 (SS) Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (Journal), 2, July 1960, 18 I (S6) Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (Journal), 5, November 1961, 11-14 REFERENCES (unchecked) (RI) PSIA, 28, 1960, (3), 296 I MATERIAL HELD Parish file: (S3) LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (1961) I SAU

OTHER PERIODS 08089 15679 I PRIMARY SMR DATE:------BY: SEW REVISED: 19900425 BY: CP 19950502 CP I INPUT: 19880229 BY: SR UPDATE: 19960930 BY: SR FORM TYPE 1

------. . I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 005 Record Number 08089 I N.G.R TM 256- 373- - PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. TM23NE14 SITE NAME Sleigh ton Hill I FORM finds scatter PERIOD Med

ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD I pottery fired clay pottery fired clay C13

AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres I SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY

REPORTED 19600000 Mann R I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION I Scatter of Med pottery and late C13 French ware (seen by G Dunning) ? St I I

I Onge. Flint 'surface' uncovered on shore. I98112: further Med sherd found during fieldwork by John Newman (S4). I See also Sax & PMed. SOURCES (checked) (SI) OS, card TM23NEI4 I (S2) IPSMG, card 965-26, I965 (S3) PSIA, 28, 1960, (3), 296 (S4) SAU, Newman J, site report, TYN 005, June I985 I REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD Parish file: (S4) LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I IPSMG 965-26 (French pottery) Retained by finder I OTIIER PERIODS 08088 I5679 PRIMARY SMR DATE:------BY: SEW REVISED:------BY: JP I9900425 CP I INPUT: 19880229 BY: SR UPDATE: I9960930 BY: SR FORM TYPE s I SUFFOLK COUN1Y SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 005 Record Number I5679

I N.G.R TM 253- 374- C PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. I SITE NAME Trimley Shore; "Sleighton Hill" FORM finds scatter PERIOD PMed I ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD pottery fired clay clay pipe fired clay

I LAND CLASS ON SITE coastal 2 inter-tidal AREA hectares HEIGHT OD 0 metres I SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY REPORTED I9600IOO Felixstowe Archaeol Movement OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

I DESCRIPTION "Here at low tide on the shingle banks about twenty five yards out, clay pipes, stems and a variety of pottery fragments have been found, dating from all periods as far back as the twelfth century and possibly even the Roman period" (SI). Suggested (S3) that scatter represents material washed downstream by tidal waters. List of pottery in (S3). For details of some of the clay tobacco pipes see (S4). ·

SOURCES (checked) I (SI) Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (Journal), I, January I960 (S2) Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (Journal), 2, July I960, I8 (S3) Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (Journal), 5, November I96I, ll-I4 I (S4) Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (Journal), 3, December I960, 20-23 I I

I REFERENCES (unchecked) MA1ERIAL HELD LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (1961) OTIIER PERIODS 08088 08089 PRIMARY SMR DA1E: 19950502 BY: CP REVISED: 19960927 BY: CP I INPUT: 19950511 BY: SR UPDA1E: 19960930 BY: SR FORM TYPE s I SUFFOLK COUNTY SI1ES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 006 I Record Number 08090 N.G.R TM 269- 363- - PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal I MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. FORM finds scatter PERIOD Med

ARTIFACT TYPE I MA1ERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD I pottery fired clay

LAND CLASS ON SI1E cultivated land 4 I LAND CLASS AROUND cultivated land 4 AREA hectares HEIGHT OD 15 metres I SI1E MANAGEMENT HISTORY REPORTED 19601200 Mann R (Felixstowe Archaeological Movement) OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

I DESCRIPTION Medieval potsherds (S 1). Findspot cited as TM 268 363 in (S2). I SOURCES (checked) (S1) IPSMG, card Trimley St Martin (S2) Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (Journal), 3, December 1960, 26 REFERENCES (unchecked) ' I MA1ERIAL HELD LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (1960) PRIMARY SMR DA1E: ------BY: SEW REVISED: 19950505 BY: CP I INPUT: 19880229 BY: SR UPDA1E: 19950714 BY: SR FORM TYPE s

I SUFFOLK COUNTY SI1ES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 007 Record Number 08092

N.G.R TM 254- 363- A I PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. TM23NE21 I FORM stray find PERIOD Sax ARTIFACT TYPE I MA1ERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD I pottery ipswich fired clay M Sax I I

I AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY

REPORTED . Warren P J, 193 Main Road, Kesgrave. OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HIST6RY-- - .

DESCRIPTION Large sherd of Ipswich ware found on shore about high tide mark by P J Warren (SI).

I SOURCES (checked) (Sl) IPSMG, card 962-20, 1962 (S2) OS, card TM~3NE21 REFERENCES (unchecked) I MATERIAL HELD LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I IPSMG 962-20 PRIMARY SMR DATE:- BY: SEW REVISED: BY: I INPUT: 19880301 BY: SR UPDATE: BY: FORMTYPE s

I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 008 Record Number 08093 I N.G.R TM 2688 3658 C PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. SITE NAME Grimston Hall; Trimley Park I FORM roofed building earthwork PERIOD Med documentary evidence I SITE TYPE I SPECIFIC PERIOD building moat bank road I pond park I ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SITE STATUS LB Grade 11 SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY I. LANDOWNER Smith N D, Grimston Hall.

REPORTED 19570000 Chick Air Commodore J S I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION Grimston Hall. Remnants of moat to E, bank in small wood to S - probably I connected. Occupied. APs show roads toW at TM 268 364 (Sl)(Rl). Domesday Will of Grimestuna (S2) and site of the manor of Grimston (S3). Seat of the Cavendish family from mid C 14 to the end of C 16. Thomas I Cavendish, the last of the family, was the second English circumnavigaor of the world, 1586-8 (S3-S5). He died at sea 1592 and the estate acquired by John Barker oflpswich, created a Baronet in 1621. Grimston was the seat of I the Barkers until the death of Sir Jeremy Barker, 3rd Bt in 1665. His I I

I brother moved to Ipswich and family later moved to Chantry, Sproughton, though still owned Grimston. George Nassau who inherited Grimston from the Barkers 'for some time resided here'; he died in 1823 (S6). I Present house listed Grade ll and described as early C18 with possibly an earlier core, timber-framed. Described by DE Davy as 'a good modern Farm House' in 1829 (S7). Pond by house may be part of a moat or merely a pond - Copinger described ponds 'which fall in a regular series down the valley' I (S3). Presumably the bank in the wood is the dam of a pond. Two ilexes, said to have been planted by Thomas Cavendish are mentioned in 1764 (S4). By 1829 only one seems to have been left, and that was partly I dead (S3)(S7). Park of Grimston Hall mentioned 1764, presumbably on the Alston side (S4). Davy mentions the view from Park Hill 'once part of the Park' (S7). Grimston Hall & Park mapped by Emanuel Bowen in 1753 (S8). I Reference in 1673 to' Sir John Barker of Trimpley-Park' (S9).

SOURCES (checked) I (S1) IPSMG, card Trimley St Martin (S2) Rumble A (ed), Domesday Book, Suffolk, 1986,2.20 & 7.99 (S3) Copinger W, Manors of Suffolk, III, 1909, 96f (S4) Canning R (ed), John K.irby's Suffolk Traveller, 2nd ed, 1764, 83 I (SS) Dyke G, Thomas Cavendish ofTrimley St Martin, pamphlet n.d. but 1988 (S6) Page A, A supplement to the Suffolk Traveller, 1844, 69-70 (S7) Blatchly J (ed), DE Davy, Journal ofExcusions through the County of I Suffolk, 1823-1844, 1982 (S8) Bowen E, 'An Accurate Map of the County of Suffolk', 1753 (S9) Blome R, Britannia, 1673, 427 I REFERENCES (unchecked) (R1) Chick Air Commodore J S, APs MATERIAL HELD I LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS PRIMARY SMR DATE:------BY: SEW REVISED: 19910920 BY: EM 19951107 EM I INPUT: 19880301 BY: SR UPDATE: 19960529 BY: SR FORM TYPE I I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 014 I Record Number 08099 N.G.R TM 2600 3740 C PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. I FORM cropmark PERIOD Un

SITE TYPE I SPECIFIC PERIOD field system I ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD

LAND CLASS ON SITE cultivated land 4 AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres I SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY

REPORTED 19770707 SAU I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION I Complex field system including a number of overlapping ditch boundaries. I I.

I Also two rectilinear 'fields' with S boundaries missing, and E of these two large 'L' shaped field boundaries (Sl)(S2). I .SOURCES (checked) (S1) SAU, AP AFZ 05 (S2) CUCAP, AP BNL 52,53,54, 1974 REFERENCES (unchecked) I MATERIAL HELD APs: SAU AFZ 05; CUCAP BNL 52,53,54 LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS

PRIMARY SMR DATE:------BY: SEW REVISED: 19870320 BY: JMC 19970730 CP INPUT: 1988030( BY: SR UPDATE: 19970807 BY: SR FORM TYPE s

SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 015 Record Number 08100

I N.G.R TM 2559 3704 - PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. I FORM cropmark PERIOD Un

SITE TYPE I SPECIFIC PERIOD ring ditch I ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD LAND CLASS ON SITE cultivated land 4 AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY

REPORTED 19770721 SAU OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION Ring ditch circa 25m diameter (S1).

SOURCES (checked) (S1) SAU, AP AGK 015 I (S2) Essex CC, Strachan D, AP, CPI961l5n, June 1996 REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD AP: SAU AGK 015 I LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS

PRIMARY SMR DATE:------BY: EM REVISED: 19870320 BY: JMC I 19970730 CP INPUT: 19880301 BY: SR UPDATE: 19970807 BY: SR FORM TYPE s I

SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 018 I Record Number 08103

N.G.R TM 2596 3604 - I PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal I I

I MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. SITE NAME Trimley Marshes FORM finds scatter PERIOD Un

I SITE TYPE I SPECIFIC PERIOD salt working site burnt area ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD briquetage fired clay

AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY LANDOWNER Trinity College

REPORTED 1979 SAU OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION ? Salt extraction site. Area of red soil with burnt clay 'briquetage' fragments. See also TYY 001, 004, 006, 014, 015.

I SOURCES (checked) REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD I Parish file: LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS SAU

PRIMARY SMR DATE:- BY: JP REVISED: BY: INPUT: 19880301 BY: SR UPDATE: BY: FORMTYPE s

I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 021 Record Number 08106

N.G.R TM 265- 369- A PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. SITE NAME Church of John the Baptist, Alston (Rectory)(site of) I FORM documentary evidence PERIOD Med SITE TYPE I SPECIFIC PERIOD churchyard church I human skeleton ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD I AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY DESCRIPTION Church of John the Baptist, Alston (Rectory)(site of). I 'No remains of this church are anywhere to be found; but from a great number of human bones and skulls that were dug up at putting down the Posts of a Cartlodge, at the West-end of Alteston Street, about the year 1720, it is I probable it might stand there over against the Park of Grimston Hall' (S 1). I I

I Alteston Rectory consolidated to Trimley St Martin in 1362. 'Bones are often ploughed up on the Alston Hall Farm' (S2). Domesday Book, 'Lands of Roger Bigot - Alteinestuna - a church with 5 acres' I (S3). Listed in the Norwich Taxation of 1254, but only the parish of Alstanstone is mentioned in the Taxatio Ecclesiastica (circa 1291), not mentioned in the V alor Ecclesiasticus of Henry VIII. Apparently the church survived I physically until at least 1460 (S4). 'Old Chapel now down' marked on Hodskinson's Map of Suffolk, 1783.

I SOURCES (checked) (S1) Kirby J, Suffolk Traveller, 1764, 87 (S2) Barker HR, East Suffolk Illustrated, 1908-9, 479 (S3) VCH Suffolk: 1, 478 (S4) Scarfe N in Dymond D & Martin E (eds), Historical Atlas of Suffolk, 1988,42 REFERENCES (unchecked) (R1) PSIA, 19, 1926, (2), 206 MATERIAL HELD I LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS PRIMARY SMR DATE: 1981---- BY: EM REVISED: 19910920 BY: EM I INPUT: 19880301 BY: SR UPDATE: 19910924 BY: SR FORM TYPE 1

I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 022 Record Number 08107

N.G.R TM 262- 370- - I. PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. SITE NAME Alston Hall I FORM finds scatter PERIOD Rom ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD brooch bow colchester derivative 'bronze I brooch bow bronze brooch bow crossbow bronze C4 I AREA hectares HEIGHT OD 15 metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY

REPORTED 198307 Grayston A (IMDC) per SAU Ipswich I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION I 1983: Brooch, incomplete, Colchester derivative type, bronze. Found with metal detector. 1985: Three further brooch fragments, one unknown, one Colchester derivative, one separate arm from crossbow brooch - see (S3). I See also Sax & Med.

SOURCES (checked) I (S1) Archaeol in Suff, 1984, PSIA, 36, 1985, (1), 46 (S2) SAU, Photographs, ASZ 22, 23 (S3) Oliver (A ?)(IMDC) per SAU, Ipswich, finds ID sheet, December 1985, I sketches & drawing I

I REFERENCES (unchecked) MA1ERIAL HELD Parish file: (S3) Photographs: ASZ 22, 23 LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS Grayston A, IMDC Oliver (A?)

OTHER PERIODS 08108 12402 PRIMARY SMR DA1E: 1984---- BY: JP REVISED: 19910524 BY: CP I INPUT: 19880301 BY: SR UPDA1E: 19910529 BY: SR FORM TYPE s I SUFFOLK COUNTY SI1ES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 022 I Record Number 08108 N.G.R TM 262- 370- - PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal I' MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. SI1E NAME Alston Hall FORM stray find PERIOD Sax

I ARTIFACT TYPE /MA1ERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD pin bronze M Sax

AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SI1E MANAGEMENT HISTORY

REPOR1ED 198307 Seager M per SAU Ipswich OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION I Pin, faceted head, bronze, with ring and dot decoration. Found with metal detector (Rl). See also Rom & Med.

I SOURCES (checked) REFERENCES (unchecked) (R1) Archaeol in Suff, 1984, PSIA, 36, 1985, (1), 46 I MA1ERIAL HELD Parish file: LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I Seager M, 44 Suffolk Road, Ipswich. OTHER PERI0DS 08107 12402 PRIMARY SMR DA1E: 1984---- BY: JP REVISED: 19910524 BY: CP I INPUT: 19880301 BY: SR UPDA1E: 19910529 BY: SR FORM TYPE s I SUFFOLK COUNTY SI1ES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 022 Record Number 12402

N.G.R TM 262~ 370- - PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. I I

.I SITE NAME Alston Hall FORM finds scatter PERIOD Med I ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD buckle bronze belt fitting bronze

I AREA hectares HEIGHT OD 15 metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY I REPORTED 19851200 Oliver (A?)(IMDC) per SAU (Ipswich) OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION I Scatter of Med metalwork including 3 buckles and one ?belt fitting (S 1). Also Rom & Sax.

I SOURCES (checked) (S1) Oliver (A?) per SAU, finds ID sheet, December 1985, sketches REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD I Parish file: (S1) LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I Oliver (A?) OTHER PERIODS 08107 08108 PRIMARY SMR DATE: 19910524 BY: CP REVISED: BY: INPUT: 19910528 BY: SR UPDATE: BY: FORMTYPE s

SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 047 I Record Number 11189 N.G.R ~ 2556 3742 - PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. ~ 23 NE OS No. I SITE NAME Sleighton Hill FORM stray find PERIOD BA I ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD ring-money · gold LBA axe ~oore ~A

AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres TOPOGRAPHY estuary side ASPECT W facing SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY LANDOWNER Trinity College, Cambridge.

REPORTED 19890000 Wombwell C per IPSMG I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY DESCRIPTION Penannular gold ring of the type termed 'ring-money' and dated to the LBA I (S1). This example is solid gold with dark bands, giving a striped appearance. Found with a metal detector (S2). For a similar, but unbanded piece, see Mildenhall Mise (CRN 00459). A further banded example is known I from Hockwold-cum-Wilton, Norfolk. No other examples of banded ring-money I I

I are known from East Anglia. A fragment blade end of a bronze axe, probably an EBA flat axe, found at 1M I 256 374 by metal detecting (S3). SOURCES (checked) (SI) Taylor J J,Bronze Age Goldwork of the British Isles, I980, 64-65- (S2) Wombwell C, per IPSMG, I989 I (S3) Charity I, IMDC, I99I REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD I Photographs: Parish file: finds report sheet, drawing LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS Wombwell C, 264High Road, Trimley St Martin (sale to I IPSMG under negotiation).

PRIMARY SMR DATE: I99003I5 BY: EM REVISED: I9900323 BY: CP I ~ I99IIIOO JP INPUT: I99003I9 BY: SR UPDATE: I9911I25 BY: SR FORM TYPE s I

SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 048 I Record Number 11I90

N.G.R TM 267- 365- - PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal I MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. SITE NAME Grimston Hall FORM stray find PERIOD lA

ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD I coin LIA AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY

.I REPORTED I9890000 Wombwell C per IPSMG OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY I DESCRIPTION Coin, Trinovantian issue ofDubnovellaunus (SI).

SOURCES (checked) I (Sl) Wombwell C, per IPSMG, I989 REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD I Parish file: finds report sheet LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS W ombwell C, 264, High Road, Trimley St Martin.

I PRIMARY SMR DATE:l99003I5 BY: EM REVISED: I990I211 BY: CJB INPUT: I9900319 BY: SR UPDATE: 19901212 BY: SR FORM TYPE s I

I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYN 050 I Record Number 12403

N.G.R TM 269- 366- - PARISH Trimley St Martin DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal I MAP No. Th1"23 NE OS No. SITE NAME Grimston Hall I FORM finds scatter PERIOD Med ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD I pottery fired clay C 13 C 14 LAND CLASS ON SITE cultivated land4 AREA hectares HEIGHT OD 15 metres I SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY REPORTED 19841000 Blow J per SAU (Ipswich) I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY DESCRIPTION 1984: 215gms of C131C14 pottery including 6 rims found by J Blow at TM 269 366 (S1). NE ofMed Grimston Hall site and N of ?further scatter of pottery, I TYN006.

SOURCES (checked) I (S1) Blow J per SAU, Ipswich, finds ID record, October 1984 REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD Parish file: (S1) LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS Blow J

OTHER SITES 08090 08093 PRIMARY SMRDATE: 19910524 BY: CP REVISED: BY: I INPUT: 19910528 BY: SR UPDATE: BY: FORM TYPE s

------. . I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYY 004 Record Number 08129 I N.G.R TM 267- 358- - PARISH Trimley St Mary DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. SITE NAME The Old Salt Works I FORM excavation PERIOD PMed

SITE TYPE I SPECIFIC PERIOD salt working site I ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD pottery fired clay C13

AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres I SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY LANDOWNER Smith N D, Grimston Hall, Trimley St Martin (1991).

I REPORTED 19601200 Mann R (Felixstowe Archaeological Movement) SURVEYED OS EXCAV A 1ED 19600000 Mann R (Felixstowe Archaeological Movement) I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY I I I DESCRIPTION "Old Salt Works", S of "Salter's Wood" on OS map (Sl); and shown as a roughly I rectangular ditched earthwork. One fragment C13 pottery from trial excavation by R Mann, 1960(?). Said to be no pottery finds in (S2)(S3)­ probably PMed.

I SOURCES (checked) (Sl) OS, 1:25000 map, LXXXIX.3, 1926 (S2) Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (Journal), 2, July 1960 I (S3) Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (Journal), 3, December 1960, 25-6 REFERENCES (unchecked) (R1) PSW281196p1296 (R2) JFAM/111961 I MA1ERIAL HELD LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I Felixstowe Archaeological Movement (1960) PRIMARY SMR DA1E: ------BY: SEW REVISED: 19910920 BY: EM 19970326 CP I INPUT: 19880302 BY: SR UPDATE: 19970425 BY: SR FORM TYPE s I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYY 006 I Record Number 08131 N.G.R 1M 265- 359- - PARISH Trimley St Mary DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. 1M 23 NE OS No. I FORM finds scatter PERIOD PMed

SITE TYPE I SPECIFIC PERIOD brick kiln I tile kiln salt working site ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD I pottery fired clay' . . C16 C17 LAND CLASS ON SITE cultivated land 4 LAND CLASS AROUND cultivated land 4 I AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY

REPORTED 1960 Mann R I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION I ? Brick and tile kiln. C16-C17 pottery sherds. Retained by finder. This may actually be a salt-working site as there are several in the area I (see TYY 004 & TYN 018). SOURCES (checked) REFERENCES (unchecked) I MATERIAL HELD LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I OTHER SITES 08129 08103 I I

I PRIMARY SMR DATE:------BY: SEW REVISED: 19910920 BY: EM INPUT: 19880302 BY: SR UPDATE: 19910925 BY: SR FORM TYPE s I

SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYY 018 I Record Number 12399

N.G.R TM 268- 359- - I PARISH Trimley St Mary DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. FORM finds scatter PERIOD Med

I ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL I SPECIFIC PERIOD pottery fired clay C13 C14 I AREA hectares HEIGHT OD metres SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY

REPORTED 19841000 Blow J per SAU (Ipswich) I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY

DESCRIPTION I 1984: 705gms ofC131C14 pottery, including 6 rims and 3 glazed sherds including 1 possible Ipswich Fore Street sherd (S 1)

SOURCES (checked) I (S1) Blow J, per SAU, Ipswich, finds ID record, October 1984 REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD I Parish file: (S1) LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS I Blow J PRIMARY SMR DATE: 19910524 BY: CP REVISED: BY: I INPUT: 19910528 BY: SR UPDATE: BY: FORM TYPE s

I SUFFOLK COUNTY SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORD Parish Number TYY 022 Record Number 17497

N.G.R TM 276- 360- C I PARISH Trimley StMary DISTRICT Suffolk Coastal MAP No. TM 23 NE OS No. SITE NAME Painters Wood, Salters Wood I FORM documentary evidence earthwork PERIOD Un SITE TYPE I SPECIFIC PERIOD ancient woodland earthwork I ARTIFACT TYPE I MATERIAL/ SPECIFIC PERIOD

AREA 4 hectares HEIGHT OD 15 metres I SITE MANAGEMENT HISTORY I OTHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY I I

I DESCRIPTION Ancient woodland as defined in (S1). For details of history and earthworks see (S1), the Suffolk Wildlife Trust, English Nature and the County Council I Countryside section (Peter Holborn and Geoff Sinclair) and various Oliver Rackham works including (S2).

I. SOURCES (checked) (S1) Nature Conservancy Council, Suffolk Inventory of Ancient Woodland (provisional), June 1992, maps (S2) Rackham 0, "Medieval Woods", An Historical Atlas of Suffolk, 1988,50-1 I REFERENCES (unchecked) MATERIAL HELD LOCATION OF ARTIFACTS

I PRIMARY SMR DATE: 19951207 BY: AMB REVISED: BY: INPUT: 19970527 BY: SR UPDATE: BY: FORM TYPE I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5

Hud

C) 0 "'~.. /\ 0:. \ . \ \ \ ~·6 \ \ .. \ 00 \ . \ \ \ I

,,,I -- -;.,.- -~: 11" I - - -'- - - .. ------I - - TYN 073 - Grid Sampling

GRID LINE FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. C+4 Yes 1 2 87 373 9 61 1 1 2 2 C+8 Yes 1 4 142 667 25 68 4 18 2 12 C+12 Yes 181 118 6 32 2 4 2 C+16 Yes 79 515 2 14 9 2 8+4 Yes <1 16 63 2 7 11 56 3 22 2 8+8 Yes 15 73 5 42 2 20 2 8+12 Yes 28 114 2 70 20 144 2 6 23 2 8+16 Yes 7 26 162 28 252 2 17 2 11 3 C+4 Yes 107 557 8 1 burnt stone with salt deposit (11g) 3 C+8 Yes 85 334 2 2 3 C+12 Yes 65 198 10 1 burnt stone with salt deposit ( 12g) 3 C+16 Yes 24 65 2 24 2 29 4 8+4 4 8+8 Yes 4 28 173 3 16 4 8+12 Y~s 51 621 1 44 4 8+16 Y!3S 94 998 3 20 5 0+4 Yes 9 31 5 0+8 Yes 2 4 5 0+12 Yes <1 <1 5 0+16 Yes 1 1 6 A+4 Yes 1 <1 3 27 10 6 A+8 Yes 2 9 2 4 4 23 13 ?Fe obj. (10g) 6 A+12 Yes 1 1 4 29 7 91 6 A+16 Yes 2 13 3 27 3 68 7 C+4 Yes 20 48 20 111 2 8 7 C+8 Yes 12 50 20 132 7 C+12 Yes 3 8 5 76 7 C+16 Yes 2 9 8 A+4 Yes 2 20 3 3 9 7 45 1 8 A+8 Yes 4 2 11 2 35 4 41 18 12 8 A+12 Yes 2 11 2 39 7 41 8 A+16 Yes 5 9 3 6 21 9 8+4 Yes 21 159 6 32 9 8+8 Yes 35 129 8 32 9 8+12 Yes 22 69 8 54 8 9 9 8+16 Yes 8 9 2 11 30 10 A+4 Yes 2 2 10 A+8 Yes 4 35 6 58 10 A+12 Yes 4 43 10 A+16 Yes 2 23 10 4 45 3 16 ?Fe obj. (3g) Test pit 13 10 Test pit 14 2 115 Total 8 41 1188 5777 28 282 252 1766 26 143 16 97 2 2

Appendix Ill ------~------

Trimley - Field 1

FIELD LINE TRANSECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. I Wt. A iii Yes 1 1 4 A iv Yes 11 A V Yes 40 B Yes 9 B iii Yes 1 15 B iv Yes 5 52 B V Yes 6 c iii Yes 3 31 c iv Yes c V Yes 0 0 ii 0 iii 0 iv 0 V E Yes 2 18 14 1 E ii Yes 3 1 E iii 1 E iv Yes 2 24 1 E V ~ F F ii F iii Yes 2 20 F iv Yes 7 Total 0 0 0 0 4 30 21 223 1 4 0 0 0 0

Appendix Ill ------.. ------1-I - - Trimley • Field 2

FIELD LINE TRAN-SECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. 2 A Yes 2 5 2 A ii Yes 11 99 14 2 A iii 2 A iv Yes 2 54 2 A V Yes 10 2 A vi 2 A vii Yes 1 3 2 A viii Yes 14 4 37 4 2 A ix 2 B Yes :3 .. ·· .) • ' i::iiir iv, 2 B V Yes 7 162 10 2 B vi 2 B vii 2 B viii 2 B ix Yes 4 Yes 9 ·1.lf . .t<<=F: ·78, '2~rs i·:±;299. Y~s •1:_ 42 c V Yes 273 2 c vi Yes 4 2 c vii 2 c viii Yes 8 6 2 c ix Yes 2 7 2 D Yes 4

<-f'lt~k;:: <-~~0~v;;.:~·~iv\~1:i~:~~~J 2 0 6 2 D V Yes 5 123 2 D vi Yes 2 2 D vii 2 D viii Yes 9 2 D ix Yes 3 20 2 E iii Yes 13 <1 2 E iv Yes 2 32 2 E V 2 E vi 2 E vii Appendix Ill ------Trimley - Field 2

FIELD LINE TRANSECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. 2 E viii 2 E ix Yes 2 4 2 F iv Yes 2 F V 2 F vi 2 F vii Yes 2 62 2 F viii 2 F ix 2 G vi 2 G vii 2 G viii 2 G ix Yes 2 14 3 26 2 H vi 2 H vii 2 H viii 2 H ix Yes 10 2 I vii 2 viii 2 ix 2 J vii 2 J viii Yes 2 8 2 Total 2 14 48 371 33 688 117 1031 8 71 1 3 13 73

Total TYN073 (shaded} 0 0 38 293 4 36 84 712 5 47 3 0 0 Total non-site 2 14 10 78 29 652 33 319 3 24 0 0 13 73

Appendix Ill - - -~------

Trimley - Field 3

FIELD LINE TRANSECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. 3 A Yes 1 22 3 A ii Yes 2 12 6 10 3 A iii Yes 2 30 3 A iv Yes 1 10 3 B Yes 7 2 58 3 B ii Yes 3 69 2 9 3 B iii Yes 27 4 3 B iv Yes 15 2 9 3 c 3 c iii Yes 94 17 3 c iv Yes 4 4 93 26 3 D Yes 1 Clay pipe stem (1g) 3 D iii Yes 15 3 D iv Yes 5 8 3 3 E 3 E iii Yes 24 3 E iv Yes 2 3 F 3 F iii Yes 3 F iv Yes 3 F V 3 G ii Yes 3 3 G iii Yes 4 3 G iv 3. G V Yes 11 77 6 3 20 3 H iii Yes 3 6 102 3 H iv Yes 21 3 H V 3 I iii Yes 12 3 I iv 3 I V Yes 3 12 3 J iii 3 J iv 3 J V Yes 5 2 25 7 3 K iv Yes 3 9 3 K V Yes 10 3 4 Total 4 24 17 119 10 207 15 314 5 19 2 43 22 173

Appendix Ill ------

Trimley - Field 4

FIELD LINE TRANSECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. 4 A ii 4 A iii Yes 1 33 4 B ii Yes 1 42 4 B iii Yes 1 1 4 B iv Yes 2 10 4 c ii 4 c iii 4 c iv 4 c V Yes 1 3 4 c vi 4 D ii 4 D iii 4 D iv Yes 1 6 4 D V 4 E ii 4 E iii 4 E iv 4 E V 4 E vi 4 F i 4 Fi ii 4 F iii 4 F iv 4 F V ' 4 F vi 4 G i 4 G ii Yes 2 5 4 G iii 4 G iv 4 G V 4 G vi Yes 1 17 4 H i 4 H ii 4 H iii 4 H iv Yes 1 4 4 H V 4 H vi 4 I ii Yes 1 1 4 I iii 4 I iv 4 I V - 4 I vi 4 J ii Yes 1 2 4 J iii 4 J iv 4 J V 4 J vi 4 K ii 4 K iii I 4 K iv 4 K V

Appendix Ill ------

Trimley- Field 4

FIELD LINE TRANSECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. wt. No. wt. No. wt. No. wt. No. wt. No. wt. No. wt. 4 K vi 4 L ii 4 L iii 4 L iv 4 L V 4 L vi 4 M ii 4 M iii 4 M iv 4 M V 4 M vi Yes 1 5 4 N ii 4 N iii 4 N iv 4 N V Yes 1 1 4 N vi Yes 5 5 2 1 1 Ae frag (3g), 15 bum! coal (97g) 4 0 ii 4 0 iii 4 0 iv 4 0 V 4 0 vi Yes 4 burnt coal (241 g) ! 4 p i Yes 1 1 4 p ii 4 p iii 4 p iv 4 p V 4 p vi Yes 1 burnt coal (2g) 4 Q i Yes 1 20 4 Q ii Yes 1 2 1 33 4 Q iii Yes 1 1 4 Q iv 4 Q V 4 Q vi 4 R i 4 R ii 4 R iii 4 R iv 4 R V 4 R vi 4 s i 4 s ii 4 s iii 4 s iv 4 s V 4 s vi 4 T i 4 T ii 4 T iii 4 T iv Yes 1 1 4 T V 4 T vi

Appendix Ill ------

Trimley - Field 4

FIELD LINE TRANSECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. 4 u i Yes 1 14 4 u ii 4 u iii 4 u iv 4 u V 4 u vi 4 V i 4 V ii 4 V iii 4 V iv 4 V V Yes 1 Fe frag. (123g) 4 V vi 4 w i 4 w ii 4 w iii 4 w iv 4 w V 4 w vi 4 X i 4 X ii 4 X iii 4 X iv 4 X V 4 X vi 4 y i 4 y ii 4 y iii 4 y iv 4 y V 4 y vi 4 z i 4 z ii 4 z iii 4 z iv 4 z V 4 z vi 4 a ii 4 a iii 4 a iv 4 a V 4 a vi 4 b iv 4 b V Total 1 2 5 5 8 105 7 82 0 0 0 0 8 14

Appendix Ill ------

Trimley Field 5

FIELD LINE TRANSECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. A Yes 1 8 2 42 A J! Yes A Ui Y!ils ~~(f:' ~~~. i Yes 10 2 'p• Yes '<~;-'.':~~3';~''},' '"" 2~"~•"">;' ,"~' ' 1' :' 0 2" . 3~;d; '28 J;&r;~;,;;, .z~:·~i: 5 .1.: '0~;k~c1.!1 V Yes <1 Yes 14 89 ~?(4~··· 116 i :n:~~lir~t qg.al (32gr: ;~;,, .· s:f•:;" , ·. >i:Yes · 31 •f:\e (16g), ?6 E:lli'"[J! ~{llj(1.80g).~tpurn~ tt~'· :-:~> §l\;>riE) (48g), 11:JJ!:J.8 gl~s~ fr119 (5g) Yes 40 7 Burnt Coal (30g) Yes 3 Yes Yes .···· f4·ves '·1 BumtCoal (2g) r .· . . ·~·.r Siti:vJs. ·:1AliYPipe stem(1g),1'burn\ £9~liL(~gl; ..• ·... : Yes 3 1 2 5 D V Yes 8 75 3 32 6 100 5 43 5 D vi Yes 4 50 2 18 2 26 17 2 8 5 E Yes 1 7 1 11 2 burnt coal (12g) 5 E ii Yes 2 16 10 134 85 1 burnt coal (4g) 5 E iii Yes 23 9 106 3 2 1 1 2 burnt coal (11g) 5 E iv Yes 2 13 9 97 2 11 3 25 4 burnt coal (11g) 5 E V Yes 1 24 3 20 2 16 2 16 5 E vi Yes 2 46 2 44 122 5 F Yes 2 123 1 3 5 F Yes 10 1 31 13 362 4 98 2 10 2 burnt coal (2g) 5 F iii Yes 2 45 8 119 1 5 2 5 2 burnt coal (5g) 5 F iv Yes 65 3 67 15 2 8 5 F V Yes 5 74 2 12 7 4 5 F vi Yes 4 55 5 G Yes 3 28 5 G Yes 8 6 126 4 103 2 32 1 burnt coal (6g) 5 G iii Yes 2 28 4 153 4 27 5 G iv Yes 6 5 22 12 2 441 1 clay pipe stem (5g) 5 G V Yes 2 67 4 11 5 G vi Yes 1 14 4 5 H Yes 52 1 3 5 H Yes 23 4 19 3 26 7 5 H iii Yes 21 2 18 2 36 3 21 5 H iv Yes 2 14 2 8 8 94 11 5 H V Yes 2 47 3 55 2 35 5 H vi Yes 4 57 5 I i 5 Yes 16 5 iii

Appendix Ill ------

Trimley Field 5

FIELD LINE TRANSECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. wt. No. wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. 5 iv Yes 1 18 8 116 5 46 5 V Yes 2 12 8 78 6 54 3 5 vi Yes 2 26 Total 14 198 0 0 106 1707 618 8590 97 1051 58 1561 9 30

Total TYN072 (shaded) 8 57 0 0 28 482 464 6468 29 210 35 834 2 6 Total non-site 6 141 0 0 78 1225 154 2122 68 841 23 727 7 24

Appendix Ill ------

Trimley - Field 6

FIELD LINE TRANSECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. 6 A Yes 1 32 6 A Yes 34 6 A iii Yes 2 6 A iv Yes 2 11 6 A V 6 A vi Yes 14 6 A vii Yes 3 113 6 B Yes 13 6 B ii Yes 30 2 29 10 6 B iii Yes 38 2 8 6 B iv Yes 17 24 3 22 6 B V 6 B vi 6 B vii Yes 5 36 8 79 6 c 6 c ii Yes 5 2 15 13 6 c iii Yes 2 13 1 6 6 c iv Yes 16 5 6 c V Yes 7 1 6 c vi 6 c vii 6 D 6 D ii Yes 4 6 6 D iii 6 D iv Yes 25 6 D V 6 D vi Yes 22 6 E 6 E ii Yes 3 2 54 3 18 6 E iii Yes 2 10 2 12 2 11 6 E iv Yes 2 2 36 6 E V Yes 3 19 1 7 6 E vi Yes 36 3 2 25 2 8 6 F 6 F ii 6 F iii 6 F iv Yes 6 6 F V 6 F vi 6 G 6 G ii Yes 3 2 56

Appendix Ill --- ;------

Trimley- Field 6

FIELD LINE TRANSECT FINDS POT BAKED CLAY TILE BURNT FLINT WORKED FLINT SLAG SHELL OTHER No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. No. Wt. 6 G iii Yes 1 8 1 9 6 G iv Yes 8 6 G V Yes 6 6 G vi Yes 8 6 H i 6 H ii 6 H iii Yes 17 196 4 6 H iv 6 H V Yes 12 6 I 6 I ii 6 I iii Yes 25 35 26 3 6 I iv 6 I V Yes 32 6 J Yes 1 39 6 J ii Yes 2 28 2 6 J iii Yes <1 3 54 14 4 297 6 J iv Yes 4 6 K 6 K ii Yes 3 23 2 23 2 6 K iii Yes 4 37 6 K iv 6 L i Yes 2 15 6 L ii 6 L iii 6 L iv Total 2 7 5 54 39 550 65 836 17 83 7 338 1 3

Appendix Ill I

I - Appendix IV -

I Description of the 'Shovel-Test' Pits I 4 grey-brown clayey loam, with straw c.40cm I 2 4 grey-brown clayey loam, with straw c.40cm 3 4 grey-brown clayey loam, with straw c.40cm 4 4 grey-brown clayey loam, with straw c.30cm I 5 4 grey-brown clayey loam, with straw c.35cm 6 4 peaty black soil over grey-brown clayey loam >40cm I 7 4 grey-brown clayey loam, with straw c.35cm 8 4 grey-brown clayey loam, with straw c.40cm I 9 4 grey-brown clayey loam, with straw c.40cm 10 4 brown clayey loam, with straw c.30cm 11 4 brown clayey loam, with straw c.35cm I 12 4 brown clayey loam, with straw c.40cm 13 2 fme reddish lighter clayey-loam >40cm Yes I 14 2 fme reddish lighter clayey-loam >40cm Yes 15 2 medium-brown lighter loamey-clay c.40cm 16 2 medium-brown lighter loamey-clay c.40cm I 17 2 medium-brown lighter loamey-clay c.35cm 18 2 medium-brown lighter loamey-clay c.35cm I 19 2 peat over medium-brown lighter loamey-clay >40cm 20 2 medium-brown lighter loamey-clay c.40cm 21 3 medium-brown lighter loamey-clay c.30cm I 22 3 medium-brown lighter loamey-clay c.35cm 23 3 medium-brown lighter loamey-clay c.40cm I 24 3 medium-brown lighter loamey-clay >40cm 25 heavy black clayey-loam c.40m I 26 heavy black clayey-loam, with straw >40cm 27 heavy black clayey-loam, with straw c.40cm 28 heavy black clayey-loam, with straw c.35cm I 29 medium-brown loamey-clay c.40cm 30 medium-brown loamey-clay c.40cm I 31 2 medium-brown lighter loamey-clay c.35cm 32 2 with straw c.40cm I I I - Appendix V -

List and Findspot of Small-Finds from Field 5

I Flint 1 - scraper, Line E, Transect ii, 40m down, 4m to right Flint 2- retouched piece, Line E, Transect v, 16m down 11 Flint 3- axe, Line G, Transect ii, 13m down, lm to right Flint 4- scraper, LineD, Transect v, 30m down 11 Flint 5 - scraper, Line C, Transect ii, 1Om down, 1Om to right Flint 6 - scraper, Line H, Transect iv, 35m down 11 Flint 7- scraper, Line I, Transect v, 40m down, lm to left -I Flint 8 - retouched blade-core fragment, Line I, Transect ii, 15m down, lm to left Flint 9- blade-like flake, Line F, Transect ii, 12m down, 8m to right t Metal1 - object, Line B, Transect iv, 30m down I Pot 1 - prehistoric flint-tempered sherd, Line B, Transect ii, 40m down I I r I I I I I I I I I I I T MARTIN CP

\ I \ M ' \ \ \ d..O I \ I .:·::: \l}:. I :~ l;:: :l::. : I

I Managed retreat

...... • . • . 0 • . • . • . . • . • ...... ' I ...... ·.·.·. ·.· . . ;:: ~ ~ ~~~:~~~:~~~ ~~~= p :::::::- : :::: :::: I n... :::::::: :::-::: ;: .; :~: ~;~ ; ~ :;:~:~~~~ ·.·.·...... I ;o < \\f I ~.., 0.., I ~ · ~ I ~ : : ! : H~: I I I :~H/~X

I· Reproduced from Ordnance Survey mapping with the pennlaalon of the C<>ntroller of HMSO (e)Crown ~ eopyrighL Unauthorised reproduction lntringea Crown copyright and may lead to proMCUtlon. S J 1 10000 I· Suffolk County Coundl199ll Uc:ence No. L.A076M4 Ca e : ' 0 / 0

~oo

0 (, <) f 0 • 0 o o () .

I 200m I I· I I I I I

I \ \ \ iv jjj -· jj . \ \ I \ \ ·1 \ \ < Ora on \ I \ ;. \ I

I '.\ Cutting5f ··. / -· ; Grove C 1 • . I . • . I . . I

Figure 2: Location of fieldwalking lines, I \ transects and area of grid-sampling - ,, - ·I ... l \ I :;, I :. .. - CJ '· ~ ­ - ' -, . I J : IJ I ..., ' \\ · ~ I ~ . Q / ' \ /0 .. \ ~Oct J I

)" I I I I • I 14 • • 13 0 10 11 12 .., \ \ I • "' • • :J \ \

I 15 • 9 8 7 I • • • 18 • 19 I \ •22 \ \ \ \ I 3 4 5 23 ~ • • • • \ \ \ \ I Dr:111' \ 1 2 I • • I I Figure 3: Location of 'shovel-test' pits

.' 1~--~~~------~ I I Sleighton J-Iill I I 0 40m I I I I I I ' I I - / I I I,/ I I I I I I

.· ·-·. I ,_ ,·-.. ~I I \

I Figure 4: Distribution of small-finds across Field 5 I I I I Trimley Marshes- Finds 0 Shell • Pot 2% • Slag 4% I 5% 0 Baked aay I 5% Ill n=843 0 \1\/orked Flint 9% • n=200 I on=128 an=75

• n~B I on=53 • n=23 • Tile 61% I 14% I I I Trimley Marshes- Finds by Weight • Pot 0 Shell 1% 2% I • Slag 10% l!l Baked aay I 3%

1!11 11076g 0 \1\/orked Flint I 7% . 3287g 0 1228g o549g I . 1945g 1!!1 Burnt Aint 0293g 59% I . 245g 18% I I I Figure 5: Finds from Trimley Marshes fieldwalking, by number and weight. I I I

Field 1 -Finds Field 21'lnds

I 0 Sh-'1 • Ftt 0-­.,. ... '" I

••"21 • n=-t 11 9Jmt Ant I on=1 52% I I ....Field 3 ·Finds .Field... 4 -Finds I 5% 3% I I I oBoloodDoy 23% I Field 5 • Finds Field 6 • Finds

OSheil .... OShel • AX . s.....g 1% ,.. 1% ,,. I c Baked... Qay

wated Fill 13..

• ,,..lie I I

I Figure 6: Finds from Trimley Marshes fieldwalking, by field I I I I

I Field 1 I A B c D E F I 1 I I 11 I I 111 I I I IV I I V I

I Figure 7: Distribution of burnt flint within Field 1

I 1-25g 26-SOg 51-lOOg

I 101-200g 201-SOOg I I I I

I Field 1 A B c D E F I

I 1 I

I 11 I

I 111 I I lV I I V I I I Figure 8: Distribution of tile within Field 1 I 1-25g 26-50g 51-lOOg I I I I I

I Field 1 A B c D E F I I I

I 11 I I 111 I I lV I I V I I I Figure 9: Distribution of worked flint within Field 1 I 1 piece 2 pieces 3 pieces I I I I I

I Field 2 J I H G F E D c B A I I I I I I I I I I I I I ix

I Figure 10: Distribution ofburnt flint within Field 2

I 1-25g 26-SOg 51-lOOg

I 101-200g 201-SOOg I I I

I Field 2 J I H G F E D c B A I I

I 11 I I I

I V I I Vl

I Vll

I vm I I ix

I Figure 11: Distribution of baked clay within Field 2

I 1-25g 26-50g 51-lOOg

I 101-200g 201-500g I I I

I Field 2 J I H G F E D c B A I I

I 11 I iii I I IV

I V I I vi I vii I Vlll I I ix

I Figure 12: Distribution of worked flint within Field 2

I 1-10 pieces 11-20 pieces 21-30 pieces I I I --- ·-··------.. ---~-

>vember 1966 The West h~lf of this sheet is Plan TM 2436 I --- 1961 The East half of this sheet is Plan TM 2536 PLAN TM 2436 & PLAN TM 2536 70 80 90 96 Chains ~ "' ~ 254 258 259 3E3E3E3E3 E3 E3 E3 E3 E3 E3 I 237000 ~ 7600 ·;;; 14·34 0 ~­ I ~

I 369

0086 I I 2·12 ~--' I 368 I 0071 b 2·36 ~ 367 ~ :;.:, I 1::> g I I I Afud l

--l I s: 00<9 365 lli 3·90 (J) I \ \ \ \ I ·-- ... -----,·----· 364 -I \ ______\ ___ Q__ ------1:..:.;;~i..:_-- \ ----7138 ' -~__;_2:. ~ I \ t>,~ '"<:

363 "''-l 0002 ;,:: I 2·76 :.. :;.:, ::j ~ <) ~- I ""

362

7418 I 11·98 I I Figure 13: 1968 OS map of Trimley Marshes showing original form of Field 2 /6 I I

I Field 2 J I H G F E D c B A I I

I 11 I 111 I I IV

I V I I VI I vii I I I

I Figure 14: Distribution of shell within Field 2

I 1-2 pieces 3-5 pieces 6-10 pieces I I I I

I Field 3 K J I H G F E D c B A I I I I I I I I V I

I Figure 15: Distribution ofbumt flint within Field 3

I 1-25g 26-50g 51-lOOg

I 101-200g 201-500g I I I I I I I

I Field 3 K J I H G F E D C B A I I I I I I I I V I

I Figure 16: Distribution of tile within Field 3

I 1-25g 26-50g 51-lOOg

I 101-200g 201-500g I I I I I I I I Field 3 I K J I H G F E D c B A I 1 I

I 11 I I 111

I lV I I V I Figure 17: Distribution of shell within Field 3 I I 1-2 pieces 3-5 pieces 6-10 pieces I I I I I I ------

IAIB CID E I FIGIHI I J IKILIMINIO p IQ RI s TIU v lwlxlvlz a I b

I

[]] 11

111

'' IV I <.· ~: lE 1.·····.::::•······: I+ V '· I •• •• VI

F

Figure 18: Distribution ofbumt flint within Field 4

l-25g 26-50g 51-lOOg ------

: 1

·~: " 11 ~ ~,. ···tj\·':······:: D 111 lV

V

Vl

Figure 19: Distribution of tile within Field 4

l-25g 26-SOg 51-lOOg ------

AIB clnl E F IGIHI I 1 IK LIMINiol P IQ RI s ITiul v lwlxi Y zl a I b I

I

lW

' [ 'n:ml•::;i:'~· ; ; ~~~

... 111

IV ) ••••••

.. .,.i.:

V

VI

.... ,...

Figure 20: Distribution of shell within Field 4

1-2 pieces 3-5 pieces 6-10 pieces I

I Field 5 I H G F E D c B A I

I 1 I ii I

I iii I I IV I I

I Vl I I Figure 21: Distribution ofbumt flint within Field 5 I 1-25g 26-50g 51-lOOg I 101-200g 201-500g 501-1000g

I 1001 -1500g 1501-2000g I I I I

I Field 5 I H G F E D c B A I I I I I I I I I I I I Figure 22: Distribution of worked flint within Field 5 I 1-2 pieces 3-5 pieces 6-10 pieces I 11-15 pieces I I I I I

I Field 5 I H G F E D c B A I I I I I I I I I I I I Figure 23: Distribution of tile within Field 5 I 1-25g 26-50g 51-lOOg I 101-150g I I I I I

I Field 5 I H G F E D c B A I

I 1 I 11 I

I iii I I I V I

I Vl I I Figure 24: Distribution of slag within Field 5 I 1-25g 26-50g 51-lOOg 101-150g 151-200g 201-300g I 301-400g 401-500g I I I I I

I Field 6 L K J I H G F E D c B A I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I

I Figure 25: Distribution ofbumt flint within Field 6

I l-25g 26-50g 51-lOOg I 101-200g 201-500g I I I I

I Field 6 L K J I H G F E D C B A I I I I I I I I I I I I

I Figure 26: Distribution of tile within Field 6

I 1-25g 26-SOg 51-lOOg I b-~- 101-200g 201-SOOg I I I I

I Field 6 L K J I H G F E D c B A I I 1

K ' ,, I I'+ 11 :: I <

i ... I 111

lik s I ' ''ii~ """'' I &fs I'' ? ? "' ,( I ' V IF I " f ?

'i l,. I Vl I ,,;; I Vll

I Figure 27: Distribution of worked flint within Field 6

I 1-2 pieces 3-5 pieces 6-10 pieces I I I I I I I I

I D c 8 +------+------+ I I 1 2 I ·- t5 -~-----+ ~ c I as t=

I 3 4 I I ------+ I 0 16m I I

I Figure 28: Plan of red soil spread within TYN 073 I I I I I

I TYN 073

I D c B A I +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 I I 8 I I 6 I I

I 10 I

I Figure 29: Distribution ofbaked clay within TYN 073

I 1-lOOg 101 -200g 201-300g I 301-400g 401-SOOg 501-600g I 601-700g 701-800g 801 -900g I 901-1000g I I I I

I TYN 073 D c B A I +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 I I I I I s I I I I I Figure 30: Distribution of burnt flint within TYN 073 I 1-20g 21-40g 41-60g I 61-80g 81-lOOg 101-200g I 201-300g I I I I I

I TYN 073 D c B A I +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 I

I 7 9 I I I 5 2 I I 4 10 I I I Figure 31: Distribution of tile within TYN 073 I 1-lOg 11-20g 21-30g I 31-40g 41-50g 51-60g I 61-70g I I I I I I TYN073 D c B A I +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 I ,I I I I 5 I I I I I Figure 32: Distribution of slag within TYN 073 I 1-lOg 11-20g 21-30g I I I 'I I I I

I TYN 073 D c B A I +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 +16 +12 +8 +4 I I I I I s I I I I I Figure 33: Distribution of worked flint within TYN 073 I 1 piece 2 pieces 3 pieces I 4 pieces I I I I I I I +Hi[ Field Lines Transects K 'tn,Transects WitH F-mds I 1 6 24 15 63% 2 10 62 36 58% I 3 11 36 27 65% 4 22 146 23 16% I 5 9 50 48 96% 6 12 67 40 60% 7 7 60 0 0% I ' ,, ,,,;;' iF'M """' [% ):i''''~ Total 439 189 *

I Table 1: Percentage of each field's transects producing finds. I

I Field 1 I 1 0 Yes 0

11 0 Yes 0

I 111 Yes Yes Yes 0 0 Yes

IV Yes Yes Yes 0 Yes Yes

I V Yes Yes Yes 0 0 I Table 2: Transects producing finds in Field 1 I I I I I I I I

I Field 2 if; A :Ki* ···"@ B c 1~~ lW D E""' F 0 IX B ,~. I ~ pl J"' ''' I I Yes Yes Yes Yes ------11 Yes Yes Yes Yes ------... .I 111 0 Yes Yes Yes Yes - - --- IV Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes - -- - I V Yes Yes Yes Yes 0 0 - --- VI 0 0 Yes Yes 0 0 0 0 - - V11 Yes 0 0 0 0 Yes 0 0 0 0 ... V111 Yes 0 Yes Yes 0 0 0 0 0 Yes IX 0 Yes Yes Yes Yes 0 Yes Yes 0 -

Table 3: Transects producing finds in Field 2 I I .I Field 3

Yes Yes I 11 Yes Yes 0 Yes 0 0 Yes 111 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 0 I IV Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 0 Yes 0 0 Yes I V 0 Yes 0 Yes Yes Yes Table 4: Transects producing finds in Field 3 I I I

I I ------

Field 4

b

11 0 Yes 0 0 0 0 Yes 0 Yes Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 iii Yes Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 iv Yes 0 Yes 0 0 0 Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

V Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes 0 0 0 0 0 vi 0 0 0 0 Yes 0 0 0 0 0 Yes Yes Yes Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 5: Transects producing finds in Field 4 I

I Field 5 A B c D E F G H I I I Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 0 11 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes .. . I 111 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 0 IV Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes I V Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes VI Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

I Table 6: Transects producing finds in Field 5

I Field 6

A B c D l;r }1' ' G 1 ,~ H ,:n l J ,K L" l! "' E < I I Yes Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes 0 Yes 11 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 0 Yes 0 0 Yes Yes 0 ... I 111 Yes Yes Yes 0 Yes 0 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 0 IV Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 0 0 Yes 0 0 I V 0 0 Yes 0 Yes 0 Yes Yes Yes - - - VI Yes 0 0 Yes Yes 0 Yes --- - - I V11 Yes Yes 0 ------I Table 7: Transects producing finds in Field 6 I Field 7 L fu ,·§: &il! cw N' ,;~j ~~~~ I'*' , F ns ?::**'' 1;l ' Q *' D ey~! E "~' o@ G I I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... I 111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... I V111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I IX - -- 0 0 0 0 Table 8: Transects producing finds in Field 7 I I -~-~--·- ~ I ... south .,' r· \ KTRTON LXXX Ill I ~Oit.I'IJ 0 1"111' I I

'I> I u.t.n•o• I I I I

LXXXIIL~.'Y.,. I I I ·-Colltnw; Pm'nt ·I I I I Crane'•

,,.,...... ,. . ,. .. SltcihtJ' HanAu '·# ·: Lo11 er Reach ! Tr'/.mt~J' Alar#!Jlllt 7'RIMLEY sr M.ARY LXXXIX.N.E. .~ SHOTLEY I I St::a.Ut_Stz lru:hu l4 OTUJ Sl4luJ~ .vu~ or 880FUJt to OJU lnoh.--10:60 • Jo-Jo -- .1opd 518oF~t Price l.r. I 1Hik

Plwtowu:ogrophd. trom .a£. P/4n4 and Pu.IJU..Iwl

I Map 1 a: Ordnance Survey Map Sheet No. 83 .SE ( 1886) I I HALL I I

., .. I LXXXIII.S.W. \.__ _

!· ... I .. I \~ ~oUimer Point '\\ . ..- ·~ ..,;_ ~ \ :' \ \ I .:,.B(}(ltHard. \ Mud ··""".:.~ \ =·.' \ I \ .,,t..T.S. 59 I I I ' ' '36o"·'mS. ~=~~==~::=::::::::::==:======~=~======s._.======::::=::~=' <:-- ~,;:. SAotl'.¥ Lowur Re Ill~ 1..01'11 1 17 ( Tr,,.lty Mt~rtiHI 0' t 16 N ... Jltlrt.lts N SeW. _Si.z.!,.,.., I J::o,. :_/ :..n ~ Suf"tfeyed in 1879.80. le¥ellin1 f

I Map 1 b: Ordnance Survey~ Map I Sheet No. 83.SE (1948) I I ··-::~· SECOND EDITION, 1904. TRIMf:li)" ~' A/111N 1'11. SUl'POLlL (EAS1') SOU1'/I EASTJo:RN on li'OIJ/Jli/IJDGE /. I LON.I 17 E. 1•1s' LXXXI!I.G.E: I I I

"'-~._ ...... ,.;.t.;, c..':.'\ LAT. 51 ..,8 ' \".';:tJ.,... p', ·a-,.0 I -~··."? -~~ --~ ·~":"

~ <>; I~~ I >0" I

0· ! I OltWELL llAVEN

::;, "' ------"'g / I "'~ / ~ .... ::1 RIVE11 c " -- ' I·· ------' ' ~- XXI. N. W. ' /,mu/in!l ' ' ---'-----·--·--- ·------·----- ·---·------·-·A--- ___ .~~tl.f-~g ___ ------~------' I 11 A H ll 0 u 11 I I Map 2a: Ordnance Survey Map Sheet No. 83.NE (1904) I I __ , =-""", .. r~-~"--'""'"'~'"-'"....__.._..=-~ ~~.__...,_,...,._"""'=....,;·.,;.·"'tro:;;-;;o··"''"'='' ------~·---- EDITION Tli!Mf:EJ.' 81'. JolA111'1N PH. SUFF()l,K EAST SUFFOLK LON. I 17 E. LXXXIII

Q~~ SA_~•t I ·;.; .. ;., I I I

I ·•·"' ·:--··

<">'~ I ·~:.,.;..., ?': ..,.,,A~ c.".':'\ \·-~... 1'j. 0 I ·;: .. ~ -~~ ··" -~~ I SUFF. LXXXIX. N. W. ··.F

I .v "d ·- ·--~ · .. ·-!; '_;'>'"··.' '. ·'· ...... ·'· ·...... I .,

.. ~·

I ·1. Blnody Point

I I I

I OH. WELL HAVEN I ·-- ... ___ _ .c • ' "' ' I LAT,51 0 51 ' --- ·---._ ' ' I ESSEX .,XXI. S.W. LON. I .17 ' £. r"•e R·jj,llt. s-rtd i" 11119-8(1 •• -· n,!fi.ml ;., 19!U.2L .•... U~lli"9 lltlliml i~t 190R. IIAHWICII 11 A Rm.r..... 8wrtey~ in 1811-. ....• RntUtd in .. .. 1922.

I Map 2b: Ordnance Survey Map Sheet No. 83.NE (1928) I

·---~-----·.,----~~~~---~-"""7: c<:.:..;, .,. ---~.-.---0---:T"'. ·::-: I -~-- ;;.;. -~;:-~ .. ;;, ... - ;.:t... --i_... ..-...;;,.,.:·-}.- ···. ·•' 1.. I. I I I';· Slayton Marsh I 16-1-28 I

·, -:· ... ·;·.· The 16 acres 16-3-1 I

I ;Collins I··· . :13-2-24 I Sluice Marsh I 29-3-2 I. I FurthecM~ I . 22-1-30 I I

I Map 3: Tithe Map I Trimley St Martin ( 1839) I

I I

\ I Park 22 acres 1

25-2-32 I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I Map-4: Tithe Map I Trimley St Mary ( 1839) . I I I I I I I . Map 5: Enclosure M I Tnmley s . ap I I t Martin & St M ary (1806) I I ' ' I ' \ I " ... _ .... I 't-'"'- I I I I I I. I I : Sian, -. -:. ·. ··---~~- I I I I I I I I : Grimston Hall Park I I

rJ). I ~....., rJ).

I \ \_~ \< I \~ I I

I Map 6: APiano~_theParsishes of Two Trimlies I (after lsaac Johnson 1784) I I -~· ...... , .':~·:::" .....:~ I. I.

I . r I I I I ,_. I ~ I a•·t& I 1(///.' I I I I I I I I I I Document 1: Marsh Reeve's Book (1726) I I I

I $)-.,;J ,{f_Niffl't11 1 MlltiJJr' I I f1./'f:t 11J I 111 c~ tl 111 1111 Ill~ lt~·JitY .J)o

I-! i I(.) , './ft'l IJt{,~u I '/ill~ c1fj\>1uyFI· JJ h nh". ",,,.

I of, I I I I I I I I I I I I I L. I I

I Document 2b: Book of Customs I Walton cum Trimley (c.1560} I i • \ \ . ,. . (. ,_ :· -\~ \

- ..... ~ I ~ -- :.. I I ! ... I (7) I Document 2c: Book of Customs I Walton cum Trimley (c.1560) I