INTRODUCTION

Location and history

Langley is situated about 13km south-southeast of , , within the modern of . It lies on the northern edge of a short but broad valley, which runs northeastwards from the end of the Caer Caradoc/Lawley outcrop to open out into the upper Severn Valley. Langley is now little more than a placename, the remaining structures consisting of a post-medieval chapel, a 19th century farmhouse (Langley Hall) and its outbuildings, and a gatehouse (Fig. 1).

Langley Gatehouse is the only surviving structure of a moated medieval manor, Langley Hall, although the earthworks of former fishponds and water management systems are also still visible to the east and south of the present farm and farmyard. The gatehouse is a Grade II* listed building, though for many years it has been in a condition of some decay. The gatehouse is currently being restored by the Landmark Trust and converted for use as holiday-let accommodation.

Langley is first mentioned in the Domesday Survey of 1086 (Thorne, 1986), when it was held by Thored from Roger de Montgomery, Earl of Shrewsbury. Before the conquest, Langley had been held by a freeman, Swein. Langley was a smallish settlement, valued at 5s, with « hide paying tax, four slaves, and land for one plough.

By the early 13th century, the manor was held by a William Burnel. In 1266 the manor, together with most of the estates once held by William, was acquired by , Bishop of Bath and Wells, Chancellor of , and a close friend of Edward I. Robert granted the manor of Langley to his relative, Richard, responsible for the building of Langley Place and a nearby chapel of ease. The Burnell family held Langley until 1377, when it passed by marriage to Roger Lee. The Lees, another powerful Shropshire family, held Langley until after the Civil War, when it again passed by marriage to Edward Smythe from County Durham. By the end of the 17th century the Smythes had abandoned Langley Hall as their residence in favour of , and Langley became a tenanted farmhouse until its demolition in the late 19th century (Morriss 1992).

The gatehouse survived the demolition of the rest of the hall complex, although it appears to have been given over to agricultural usage. By the 1970s the gatehouse was in a state of dereliction, supported by scaffolding, a condition in which it remained until its restoration in 1992 by the Landmark Trust.

A more detailed account of the documented history of the manor can be found in the introduction to the recent structural survey of the gatehouse by the City of Hereford Archaeology Unit (Morriss, 1992).

Previous Work In recent years, Langley Gatehouse has been the subject of a number of structural surveys and small scale trial excavations.

In 1968, the building was examined by the Shrewsbury Old Houses Research Group (Moran, 1970). An archaeological building recording exercise conducted by Birmingham University Field Archaeology Unit in 1987 on behalf of the Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission included the archaeological excavation of a number of trial trenches in the vicinity of the gatehouse (Ferris, 1987). Both these surveys concluded that the structure of the gatehouse contained evidence for a number of separate phases of construction. The Birmingham University trial excavations also revealed the presence of a former road surface through the gate passage, and yard surfaces on either side of the building.

In 1991, the archaeological excavation of porosity test holes was undertaken on behalf of the Landmark Trust by the Archaeology Unit of the Leisure Services Department of Shropshire County Council (Hannaford, 1991). This work confirmed the presence of archaeologically significant deposits within the area of the farmyard to the east of the gatehouse. 2. AIMS OF THE EXCAVATIONS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDING

To accompany the renovation work on the gatehouse, the Landmark Trust commissioned a photographic survey of the building, to be carried out before the start of the repair work, and a structural survey and analytical assessment to be undertaken during the repairs. This work was carried out in 1992 by the City of Hereford Archaeology Unit (Morriss, 1992).

Because of the survival of potentially significant archaeological deposits within the area around the gatehouse, demonstrated by the Birmingham University evaluation (Ferris, 1987) and the excavation of test pits (Hannaford, 1991), the Landmark Trust commissioned the Archaeology Unit of the Leisure Services Department, Shropshire County Council, to undertake the archaeological excavation and supervision of groundworks associated with the renovation of the gatehouse.

In the first instance, the renovation work would involve disturbance to the ground surface both within and in the immediate environs of the gatehouse. These works were to be carried out under archaeological supervision, with the aim of recording all archaeological levels and deposits relating to the use of the gatehouse prior to its abandonment. It was hoped that this work would contribute to an understanding of the sequence of the development of the structure.

Additionally, a number of service trenches were to be cut to the north, south, and east of the gatehouse. These trenches were to be excavated and recorded under archaeological conditions, with the aim of recovering information relating to the internal occupation, development, and use of the moated manorial site. 3. THE EXCAVATIONS

Inside the north cell of the gatehouse (Fig. 2, Area B), the renovation work required that the surface of the floor be lowered by about 0.45m, and that a service trench be cut across the floor from west to east to a depth of about 0.8m below the original ground surface. A watching brief accompanied these excavations.

The area to the east of the gatehouse was crossed by a number of service trenches, all 0.5m wide and ranging in depth from 0.5 to 0.9m deep (Fig. 2, Trenches C, D, F, K, and L). The installation of a new septic tank and soakaway system required the excavation of further similar sized trenches in the southern and eastern parts of the farmyard (Trenches E, G, H, I and J). A further trench 0.5m wide by 0.45m deep ran south from the southern end of the gatehouse and around the southern edge of the farmhouse garden (Trench M).

Whilst the excavation of relatively narrow trenches limited the recovery of dateable artefacts, in all the areas examined a sequence of archaeological features and deposits were revealed, which have been grouped into three main phases (medieval, post-medieval, and modern).

Phase 1: Medieval (Fig. 3)

The curtain wall, gate passage, and moat

Within the area of the north cell of the gatehouse, the natural subsoil lay at depth of 0.5m below the internal ground level and was seen to consist of a light reddish brown sandy clay. The internal footings of the west wall of this northern cell of the gatehouse were cut into this natural subsoil. The footings, however, appeared to be of no great substance in comparison to the size of the wall they supported, consisting of a single course of sandstone blocks 0.3m deep and between 0.25m to 1.0m long. No finds associated with this wall were recovered, and its assignment to this phase is based on the recent structural analyses of the gatehouse (Ferris, 1987 and Morriss, 1992). The lower courses of this west wall of the gatehouse have been interpreted by previous commentators as the remains of the curtain wall around the moated manorial site (Morriss, op.cit.).

Two walls ran in an easterly direction from the gateway in the curtain wall, forming a flanked gate passage originally 9m long (the present gate passage is 6m in length) running into the former courtyard area. The foundations of the southern of these two walls were exposed in a service pit cut into the northeast corner of the south cell of the gatehouse. They were seen to consist of a single course of large sandstone blocks 0.4m in height with a rough rebate along the top edge, and they rested directly upon the reddish brown sandy subsoil.

The service trenches cut across the east face of the gatehouse revealed the foundation remains of the eastern ends of both the passage walls where they continued beyond their present buttressed ends. Both sets of foundations were constructed of grey sandstone, bonded in brown sandy mortar. The southern wall was 1.16m wide (and no longer had a rebate cut along its top edge), the northern was slightly narrower at 0.95m width (above ground, both walls are of about the same thickness, the southern wall being 0.9m wide, the northern 0.95m wide). These foundation courses survived at a depth of as little as 0.26m below the ground surface, and the base of each wall lay at a depth of 0.7m (about the same level as the base of the internal footings of the curtain wall).

The earliest made roadway through the gate passage was constructed of fragments of yellowish brown sandstone in a matrix of compact crushed sandstone and sand of the same colour, laid over a layer of reddish brown clay and an underlying layer of grey clay. These layers and the road surface all had a pronounced camber to either side. The roadway continued into the courtyard beyond the end of the gate passage, though how far was not determined by these excavations.

At a distance of about 18m to the north of the gate passage, the cutting of a service trench (Fig. 2; D) revealed a large ditch running on a west/east alignment. The ditch was seen to be 6m wide, although its depth was not determined as only the upper 0.4m of its fills were exposed by the cutting of the trench. The northern edge of the ditch was cut into the natural red boulder clay, which lay at a depth of about 0.3m below the ground surface. (The boulder clay was seen to continue undisturbed at this level into the field beyond the road on the north side of the present farm.) This ditch probably represented the northern arm of the moat around the manor

Along the inner edge of the ditch was what appeared to be the foundation course of a sandstone wall, lying at a depth of 0.6m below the ground surface. These foundations consisted of large sandstone blocks, about 1m by 0.8m by 0.8m in size (the cutting of the trench necessitated the eventual removal of one of these blocks). These foundations may have supported the northern return of the curtain wall. Behind the wall was a deposit of greenish brown sandy clay, containing large fragments of sandstone and pieces of Harnage slate rooftile, extending south to the northern edge of the roadway into the courtyard.

Along the southwestern edge of the site, a further shallow service trench (Fig. 2, M) was cut through the present farm gardens and revealed the foundation remains of a substantial wall 1.1m in width, constructed of grey sandstone bonded in clay. This wall ran on a west/east alignment some 4.5m to the south of the gatehouse, probably linking the curtain wall with the manor house complex.

Further to the south, in the same service trench, was a dump of 17th to 19th century domestic rubbish filling what appeared to be a cut or hollow just beyond the line of the southern boundary of the present farm garden. A linear depression is still visible running east from this point up towards the former pond to the east of the site. It is possible that this may mark the position of the southern arm of the moat. However, the service trench was of insufficient depth to determine this point.

The courtyard

A cobble yard surface 5.6m wide from north to south was laid over the clay deposits to the north of the roadway into the courtyard. Although this yard did not appear to extend as far north as the wall on the inner edge of the moat, this may be the result of more recent ground disturbance in this area.

South of the roadway, a series of features of medieval date were revealed (Plate 1). The earliest of these features was a U-shaped ditch (Fig. 4, 1213) 1.7m wide by 0.7m deep cut on a north/south alignment into the natural clay (1236/7), which here was of an orange brown colour. No finds were recovered from the fills (1218, 1230-3) of this ditch, nor from the fill (1221) of a shallow oval scoop (1222) which cut its eastern edge. However, the layers sealing the ditch (1209, 1212, and 1234) produced pottery of 12th-13th century date.

These deposits were sealed in turn by a stone and cobble yard surface (1208), whose matrix also produced similar pottery. A fragment of a quern (Fig. 8b) was reused in this cobble yard surface. This yard extended eastwards from the line of the western edge of the ditch for some 9.7m, where it was cut by a large 19th century quarry pit.

Roughly in the centre of this stone and cobble yard was a well (Fig. 5, 1199, and Plate 2), about 1.5m in diameter, whose lining was constructed of sandstone fragments bonded in a yellowish brown clay. The upper courses of the well had been robbed out in the 19th century, leaving a large circular cut which had also removed the yard surface around the well. The well was excavated to a depth of 1.2m below the ground surface and its backfill to this depth was entirely of later 19th century date.

The manor house

At the southeastern corner of the site, service trenches (Fig. 2; E, I, and J) cut for the installation of a soakaway system revealed the east, north and west foundation walls of a rectangular structure (Fig. 6, 1240, 1242, 1254 and 1255). The tops of these walls lay immediately beneath the topsoil at a depth of 0.25m - 0.35m below the ground surface. The eastern foundation wall (1240) was the most substantial, being 1.7m in width, with four uneven courses surviving. The remaining walls were of about 1.4m width.

The western face of the western wall (1254) of the structure had also been damaged by the 19th century quarry pit (1252). However, the foundations were seen to survive to a depth of 0.7m, about the same as those of the east wall. At the southernmost visible extent of the west wall, a series of vertically pitched sandstone blocks (1281) were seen in section, and gave the appearance of forming a rafted platform foundation supporting an external feature. A layer of yellowish clay (1241, 1256) butted against the internal edges of these walls, and may have been the remains of a formation layer for a floor surface.

After the topsoil and 19th century disturbance had been removed from this area, it was decided to relocate the soakaway system so as to leave these foundations intact. They were cleaned and recorded at this level, and then re- covered with topsoil. Phase 2: c1600 to c1875 (Fig. 7)

The gatehouse

The lowering of the ground floor level within the north cell of the gatehouse made it possible to establish a sequence for the construction of this part of the building. This cell of the gatehouse was built against the angle created by the curtain wall north of the gateway and the northern gate passage wall. The construction of the gatehouse probably involved the shortening of the gate passage walls to their present configuration.

As a first stage in the construction of the gatehouse, the ground level appears to have been reduced and levelled, removing any earlier deposits behind the curtain wall in this area down to the level of the natural subsoil. A plinth course of sandstone blocks supporting the sole plate of the east wall of the north cell of the building was then built directly over the natural sandy clay subsoil. A longer, thinner block at the southern end of this wall was probably the threshold, and holes in the timber framing of the wall here suggested the former location of the doorway. The timber framing of the wall here was built up against the edge of the north wall of the gate passage. The north wall of this room was of similar construction. (The foundations of the sandstone chimney incorporated in the north wall were not exposed by these works.)

A layer 0.1m deep of compacted greenish grey sand and sandstone fragments was then deposited within the room, butting against the footings of the walls, and may have represented the bedding for the original floor. Directly upon this green sand layer rested three sandstone blocks which probably formed piers supporting the timber framing of an internal partition, whose former existence is indicated by the existence of joint holes in the surviving timbers of the ceiling.

At the southeast corner of the gatehouse, the sandstone foundations of the northeast corner of a building were revealed. These foundations were of greenish grey sandstone bonded in a buff mortar. They were 0.38m wide at the bottom of their exposed depth, stepping in internally to a width of 0.28m. A brick wall had then been built around the outer edges of these foundations. Against the eastern wall, the brick wall was three courses wide, and against the northern wall, was of two courses width. The brick walls presumably represented reinforcing or even re-facing of the original structure. This structure would have extended south from the gatehouse towards the main complex of manor house buildings. The western end of the wall was cut by the foundation cut for the sandstone plinth course of the east blocking wall of the south cell of the gatehouse.

In recent times the area had obviously been used as part of the garden, and the soil above and on both sides of these foundation walls to a depth of 0.48m below the present ground surface consisted of a homogeneous dark grey loam. The internal area enclosed by these walls had also been heavily disturbed, and consisted of the same dark grey garden soil. No westward return of these walls were seen in Trench M, so it is presumed that they butted against the earlier east/west sandstone wall recorded in this trench or some structure at the western end of the manor complex.

In the 19th century, the roadway through the gatehouse into the courtyard was re-surfaced with cobbles, with kerbs of larger cobbles on either side. These cobble surfaces are probably the same as those encountered during the Birmingham University evaluation (Ferris, op.cit.). South of the roadway, a layer of crushed mortar and brick fragments had been laid over the garden soil in the angle between the roadway and the gatehouse, perhaps representing hardcore for a lean-to or other insubstantial structure since removed, perhaps just providing an area of hard standing.

The courtyard

At some stage during the post-medieval period the curtain wall around the northwestern edge of the site was demolished. The lower of the fills of the moat encountered in the excavation trench contained large fragments of greyish green sandstone which may have been derived from the curtain wall. A dump of fragments of Harnage slate roof tile then covered the remaining foundation course of the curtain wall and slumped into the inner edge of the moat. The moat was finally allowed to silt up, its upper fill consisting of a brown silty clay.

Built over the upper fill of the moat just inside its outer edge was a single course of flat sandstone fragments, probably representing the foundations of an insubstantial wall, perhaps a simple boundary wall marking the northern edge of the yard (such a wall is shown in the foreground of the Rev Williams' 1789 view of the hall).

A layer of soil up to 0.20m thick had accumulated over the remains of the curtain wall and the moat fills, before this in turn was partially sealed by a cobbled yard, extending back from the inner edge of the moat for 5.5m towards the roadway through the gatehouse; a further 3m width of this cobbled surface ran up to the northern edge of the roadway. The area between the two sections of this yard surface had presumably been worn away or removed in later years. This surface may not, however, have covered the entire northern part of the courtyard, as no trace of this surface was seen in the test pit excavated here in 1991 (Hannaford, 1991; Pit C), nor was there any trace of it on the north side of the foundations of the east wing of the hall (although the deposits here did show signs of truncation by recent landscaping).

A gulley 3.6m wide was seen cut into the natural sand and boulder clay about 6m to the north of the east wing of the hall. The gulley was on a south west/northeast alignment, and became deeper towards the former pond beyond the eastern edge of the site. The gulley was filled with a very dark grey sandy silt, containing 18th/19th century pottery and brick rubble.

The manor house Along the internal face of the east wall of the east wing of the manor complex was a pit (Fig. 6; 1243) up to 0.6m deep by 2.9m wide. The natural subsoil here consisted of a very soft, damp sand, and the pit may have been the result of natural subsidence - indeed the southern half of the pit was filled by the yellow clay floor formation and underlying sand layers which had simply slumped into the pit. The rest of the hole had been infilled with loosely dumped sandstone rubble, amongst which were a few fragments of early to mid 19th century pottery and brick fragments. Phase 3: Modern (mid 19th c - present)

The gatehouse

Inside the north cell of the gatehouse, the remains of the post-medieval floor layers were covered by a brick floor. The brick floor was bedded in reddish sand on a hardcore of rubble and greenish grey sand. These floor deposits covered the sandstone piers supporting the internal partition, which must have been removed at this time. Incorporated into this floor was a brick pier, probably intended to support a piece of agricultural equipment, adjacent to the hearth in the north wall.

It is likely that the cobble floor inside the south cell of the gatehouse dates to this period. These cobbles were laid over a layer of lime 0.14m thick, perhaps the remains of a deposit of agricultural or building material stored in this room.

At the northern end of the gatehouse (Fig. 2; area A) was a rough surface consisting of bricks, cobbles and pebbles, and fragments of harnage roof slate. This surface ended on a line with the eastern wall of the gatehouse, and the edge here was pierced by a number of postholes, some still with the remains of timber posts in situ. Presumably, this surface represented the floor of a lean-to or outbuilding butting against the north wall of the gatehouse and since removed.

The courtyard

In the centre of the courtyard area, the ground had been cut by a massive pit at least 15m in diameter, backfilled with material of late 19th century and modern date. This pit seems to coincide with a pocket of naturally occurring sand and peagrit within the otherwise generally clay subsoil, and may possibly be the remains of a sand quarry, excavated after the demolition of the manor house. The initial infilling of this pit contained large quantities of demolition rubble, presumably from the hall, with post-medieval and 19th century pottery. Included within this material were a number of medieval floor tiles; some of these were plain, but among the decorated examples one pattern predominated (Fig. 8c). The pit was probably finally infilled as part of the general site clearance and levelling that accompanied the erection of a number of barns on the site in the latter half of the present century. These barns have now been removed for re-erection elsewhere on the farm. 4. DISCUSSION

The moated platform

The earliest occupation on the site evidenced during these excavations predated the 12th/13th century, and was represented by the northwest/southeast ditch seen at the southern edge of the courtyard. No dateable artefacts were recovered from the fills of this feature, but it was sealed by occupation layers containing 12th/13th century pottery. In fact, this area, the southern part of the courtyard, was the only part of the site from which any quantity of stratified medieval pottery was recovered. However, the amount of pottery recovered from this relatively small area suggests that there was an established settlement on this site by this period. The pottery forms represented include jugs, tripod pitchers, cooking pots and skillets, a typical domestic assemblage of 12th-13th century date; a sample of the pottery from these contexts is illustrated here (Fig. 8a).

The stone-lined well in the courtyard may also date to this period, although its stratigraphic relationship to the medieval layers here had been removed by the 19th century robbing of the upper courses its lining. The Rev Williams' watercolour of the hall depicts a small structure in the courtyard in front of the main range of hall buildings corresponding in position to the location of the well. Morriss has suggested that this structure may represent some sort of shelter for the wellhead (Morriss, op.cit.)

The northern arm of the moat was located some 18m to the north of the gate passage, and the probable remains of the curtain wall were seen here to run behind the inner edge of the moat. Dating evidence for these features, however, was lacking. The lower fills of the moat were not affected by the cutting of the service trench through the northwestern part of the site, and thus were not sampled. Moreover, the narrow section cut through the upper fills of the moat produced only two sherds of medieval pottery, and these may well have been residual. A post-medieval date is most likely for the disuse of the northern arm of moat and the demolition of the curtain wall along its inside edge; their remains were sealed by a sequence of cobble and pebble yards of post-medieval to modern dates.

The evidence for the existence of a southern arm of the moat is admittedly tenuous, and it may be that the former fishponds suggested by the earthworks to the east and south of the modern farmstead delineated the eastern and southern limits of the manorial site.

Whichever, the platform thus enclosed would have been of about 0.3ha (0.8 acres) in area, the manor house occupying the southeastern portion of the enclosure, with a courtyard on the northwest side and the gateway providing access from the southwest.

The manor house

The rectangular sandstone structure uncovered in the eastern part of site probably represents the remains of the eastern wing of the former manor house. This structure is likely to have formed the solar wing of the medieval hall (Morriss, op.cit.), whose main range would have occupied the southern edge of the platform. The external feature suggested by the vertically pitched footings (above, p9, 1281) would thus have formed the foundations of the oriel window situated in the angle between this east wing and the main range of the hall buildings, as depicted in the Rev. Williams' watercolour of the hall.

It is at least possible that the subsidence noted inside the east wall of the excavated structure may have been a contributory factor to the abandonment of this part of the building in the 19th century.

The foundations of this eastern wing of the hall were the only remains of the former manor house which were encountered during the course of these excavations. However, further remains of the hall buildings may survive in the garden to the south - the present farmer has mentioned that he has come across buried walls here when digging over his vegetable plot (Mr I Faulkner, pers. comm.).

The gatehouse

The excavated evidence directly relating to the gatehouse itself is less informative. The excavations suggest that the earliest parts of the structure are the west wall (originally the curtain wall) and the walls of the gate passage. These latter were later truncated, probably at the time of the construction of the gatehouse, the truncated ends finishing in the present stepped buttresses. The gatehouse was then built utilising the angles of the curtain wall and the gate passage walls. No evidence was seen for any structure predating the existing building, and the only information that was gleaned from the excavations regarding the internal layout of the gatehouse was the existence of an original internal partition within the ground floor of its northern cell, and its removal in the 19th century when this room was fitted out for agricultural purposes.

The post-medieval structure seen at the south east corner of the gatehouse may be the remains of the southern crosswing depicted on the Rev Williams' view of the gatehouse, and suggested by the structural survey (Morriss, op.cit.). The original post-medieval stone foundations were later reinforced with an outer skin of 18th century type bricks. However, any stratified deposits that might have been associated with these foundations have been removed by more recent gardening activities. All that can be said is that they predated the thin-brick blocking wall on the east side of the south cell of the gatehouse. 5. CONCLUSION

The conclusions drawn from these investigations may appear tentative, and in many instances the dating evidence recovered was minimal. This unfortunately is a reflection of the nature of the work: the excavation of narrow trenches inevitably produces a very limited view of the structure of a site. Moreover, the excavation trenches in this instance were not located primarily in order to provide answers to archaeological questions, but were laid out according to the requirements of the building contractors, and only then excavated and recorded on an archaeological basis.

What these excavations have demonstrated, however, is the survival of archaeologically significant features and deposits belonging to the occupation of the site of Langley Hall from the early medieval period onwards. These features and deposits survive despite more recent quarrying and landscaping on the site, and include the foundation remains of part of the hall building itself, and associated occupation deposits within the area of its courtyard. The northern limit of the medieval courtyard was marked by the foundation remains of the curtain wall (whose western stretch still stands incorporated within the west elevation of the gatehouse) and beyond that a moat. Whether this moat extended around the western and southern parts of the site must remain a matter for future research.

Additionally, the excavations have provided limited supporting evidence for the structural sequence suggested by the latest survey and interpretation of the gatehouse (Morriss, op.cit.), and for the presence of its suspected former southern cross-wing.

It is envisaged that an integrated synopsis of the documented history of the site, the results of the recent structural survey of the gatehouse, and of these excavations will appear at a later date in an appropriate period or regional journal.

H R HANNAFORD November 1992 6. REFERENCES

Ferris, I, 1987: "Langley Gatehouse, Shropshire: A structural survey", BUFAU

Hannaford, H R, 1991: "Archaeological excavation and recording of porosity test holes at Langley Gatehouse, Langley, Shropshire", Shropshire Leisure Services

Moran, M, 1970: "Langley Gatehouse", Shropshire Newsletter, No.38, 1-5

Morriss, R K, 1992: "Langley Gatehouse, Langley, Shropshire: An interim report", Hereford Archaeology Series 143

Thorne, F and C, (eds), 1986: "Domesday Book, Shropshire", Phillimore

7. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The writer would like to thank Will Fletcher, Doug Murphy, and Ken Westwood for their assistance on site during the course of the excavations, also the staff of Treasures Ltd and the farmers, Mr and Mrs Faulkner, for their forbearance and cooperation. Thanks are due also to John Bucknell, of the Landmark Trust, and to Andrew Thomas, architect, for their interest and support.

The illustrations for this report were produced by Heather Bird, and the report was edited by M D Watson. CONTENTS

Page No.

1 INTRODUCTION 1

2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 4

3 THE EXCAVATIONS 5

4 DISCUSSION 17

5 CONCLUSION 21

6 REFERENCES 23

7 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 23

APPENDIX I - THE FINDS 24

APPENDIX II - THE ARCHIVE 26

ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1: Location map

Fig. 2: Trench location plan

Fig. 3: Phase 1: medieval features

Fig. 4: Trench E: medieval features in southern part of courtyard

Fig. 5: Trench E: well

Fig. 6: Trenches E, I, and J: foundations of east wing of hall

Fig. 7: Phase 2: post-medieval features

Fig. 8: Finds illustrations

Plate 1: Medieval ditch and cobble yard in southern part of courtyard

Plate 2: Medieval well in courtyard Archaeological Excavations at

LANGLEY GATEHOUSE, LANGLEY,

SHROPSHIRE by

H R Hannaford

A Report for

The Landmark Trust

THE ARCHAEOLOGY UNIT, LEISURE SERVICES DEPARTMENT,

SHROPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL Report No. 22

November 1992 APPENDIX 1

THE FINDS

(i) The Pottery (Fig. 8a)

The medieval pottery recovered from the excavations ranged in date from the late 11th/12th to the 16th centuries, and a total of 31 distinct fabric types were represented. Cooking pots, pitchers, and jugs in a variety of fabrics predominated, but other domestic types were also represented. The selection illustrated here is a small sample from the 12th/13th century deposits in the southern part of the medieval courtyard.

Cooking pots

L1 - A rough, hard, grey fabric with moderate grit inclusions up to 2mm. Internal rim diameter 28cm L5 - A rough, hard, grey fabric with sparse grit and grog inclusions up to 2mm. An infolded rim with an internal diameter of 34cm. L8 - A rough, hard, grey fabric with sparse grit inclusions up to 2mm. Rim infolded, with an internal diameter of 18cms

Other forms

L2 - Pitchers in a harsh, hard, orange fabric with common grit inclusions up to 0.5mm. The exterior surface is purplish in colour, and both internal and external surfaces have a patchy green glaze.

Two types of pitchers are represented: (i) with an internal rim diameter of 18cm (L2) and (ii) with an internal rim diameter of 16cm (L6) and a rope handle (L3).

L7 - A tripod pitcher in a rough, hard, orange fabric with a grey core, with rare grit inclusions over 2mm. The external surface has a patchy, green glaze. Base diameter 21cm. L4 - Skillet handle in a similar fabric to L2, ie a harsh, hard, orange fabric with common medium inclusions. The exterior surface is purplish in colour and unglazed.

(ii) Metal objects

A total of 44 iron objects were recovered, of which 26 were nails. 4 copper alloy objects, including a snuff box, were also found, all from post-medieval contexts.

(iii) Brick and tile

Amongst the brick and tile, 43 fragments (weighing a total of 10.6kg) of decorated medieval floor tile were recovered, mainly from post-medieval contexts. One pattern predominated (Fig. 8c) although at least two patterns were discernible. One fragment of a medieval glazed roof ridge tile was found within the 19th century backfill of the well.

(iv) Stone objects

Three fragments of Harnage roof slate were kept, as was a fragment of quern (Fig. 8b), re-used within the medieval cobble surface 1208. APPENDIX II

THE ARCHIVE

The archive, including the finds, has been retained by the Leisure Services Department, Shropshire County Council, and will be deposited at its museum store at Atcham, near Shrewsbury.

Primary records

Contexts :163 Drawings : 39 Photographs: Black and white: 173 frames (9 films: negatives and contact prints) 3 prints (7" x 5") Colour slide : 244 slides (10 films) Samples : 2

Materials recovered

Pottery: post-medieval : 329 sherds medieval : 83 sherds Brick and tile : 12.1kg Glass : 5.4kg Iron : 41 objects Copper alloy : 4 objects Animal bone : 1.6kg Stone : 4 objects Plaster : 2.3kg Clay tobacco pipe : 6 fragments