APPENDIX 14.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL DESK BASED ASSESSMENT

ANDOVER BUSINESS PARK Andover

County of

Archaeological desk–based assessment June 2007

Archaeology Service ANDOVER BUSINESS PARK Andover

County of Hampshire

Archaeological desk–based assessment

National Grid Reference: 433000 145700

Project Manager Stewart Hoad Reviewed by Jon Chandler Author Helen Dawson Graphics Carlos Lemos

Museum of Service © Museum of London 2007 Mortimer Wheeler House, 46 Eagle Wharf Road, London N1 7ED tel 020 7410 2200 fax 020 7410 2201 email [email protected] web www.molas.org.uk Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

Contents

1 Introduction 2 1.1 Origin and scope of the report 2 1.2 Site status 2 1.3 Aims and objectives 2

2 Methodology and sources consulted 4

3 Legislative and planning framework 6 3.1 National planning policy guidance 6 3.2 Regional guidance: 6 3.3 Local Planning Policy 7

4 Archaeological and historical background 9 4.1 Site location, topography and geology 9 4.2 Overview of past archaeological investigations 10 4.3 Chronological summary 11

5 Archaeological potential 20 5.1 Factors affecting archaeological survival 20 5.2 Archaeological potential 20

6 Impact of proposals 22 6.1 Proposals 22 6.2 Implications 22

7 Conclusions and recommendations 24

8 Acknowledgements 25

9 Gazetteer of known archaeological sites and finds 26

10 Bibliography 29 10.1 Published and documentary sources 29 10.2 Other Sources 30 10.3 Cartographic sources 30

i P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

Figures

Cover: Photograph of RAF Andover (1917-1918) seen from the south-east

Fig 1 Site location

Fig 2 The Study area: archaeological features map

Fig 3 The Site: archaeological features map

Fig 4 Location of previous evaluation trenches (source: WA 2000b)

Fig 5 Interpretation of Geophysical Anomalies (source: WA 2000a)

Fig 6 Fieldwalking showing flint densities (TVAS 2002b)

Fig 7 Fieldwalking survey showing distribution of flint types (TVAS 2002b)

Fig 8 Fieldwalking survey showing distribution of ceramic types (TVAS 2002b)

Fig 9 Composite Tithe map from (1842), (1838), (1837), and (1842)

Fig 10 Ordnance Survey 1st edition 25” map of 1872/3 (not to scale)

Fig 11 Ordnance Survey 2nd edition 25” map of 1897(not to scale)

Fig 12 RAF Andover Plan (1933) (RAF Museum, Hendon, A.M. Dg.890/33)

Fig 13 RAF Andover Plan (1943) (RAF Museum, Hendon, A.M. Dg.520/43)

Fig 14 Ordnance Survey revised edition 1:2500 map of 1977(not to scale)

Fig 15 Proposed Site Layout (RPS Burks Green 14961/A1/161 Rev. - 22/05/06)

Note: site outlines may appear differently on some figures owing to distortions in historic maps. North is approximate on early maps.

ii P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

Executive Summary Rosemound Development Ltd has commissioned the Museum of London Archaeology Service to carry out an archaeological desk-based assessment of proposed development at a site located within the former Andover Airfield, west of Andover in Hampshire. The Site has been designated for development in the Borough Council Local Plan, subject to investigation of its archaeological potential. The current development proposal consists of the construction of a business park comprising of three main units, each consisting of a warehouse, office blocks on two floors, and a gatehouse. A hotel/conference building, warehousing and a three-storey office block are also planned. Extensive landscaping is proposed prior to building construction. The Site has a high potential for archaeological remains dated to the prehistoric period. A number of features, including five ring ditches possibly corresponding to Bronze Age round barrows, have been identified within the Site from aerial photographs. In addition, there is potential for previously unrecorded features, given the Site’s location in relation to nearby waterway resources. The Site has a high potential to contain Roman remains given its close proximity to a Roman Road. Linear features recorded by a geophysical survey at the site immediately to the south have been interpreted as a possible Roman military camp; although excavations have so far failed to locate this, its remains may extend into the Site. The Site has high potential to contain remains dated to the medieval period when it lay in a rural area at the periphery of four neighbouring parishes: these include an extant parliamentary boundary bank identified during the Site walkover and historic parish boundaries. The Site has high potential for the post-medieval period, and specifically to contain remains associated with the WWI Andover Airfield, which is considered one of the best examples in Hampshire and is of historical importance. The proposals will impact on the archaeological resources identified and described in this report and on any previously unrecorded archaeological deposits. The main impact is likely to arise from ground levelling to correct the undulating topography of the Site. Stripping the topsoil/subsoil down to the chalk would remove any archaeological deposits to the depth of ground deduction. In addition, foundations would remove any deeper archaeological features cut into the chalk that had not already been removed by soil stripping (e.g. wells, pits, ditches). In light of the high archaeological potential of the Site, it is likely that the local authority would request further investigation in order to clarify the possible archaeological impact upon known and possible (previously unrecorded) remains. The precise details of any such work would need to be agreed with the relevant Planning Archaeologist. It is suggested that the most appropriate further investigation strategy is likely to entail a non-intrusive geophysical survey of the Site in the first instance, followed by an archaeological field evaluation. This could be targeted at areas with known or suspected archaeological features (blanket trenching of a representative sample) and those areas highlighted by the geophysical survey as worthy of further investigation. This could be combined with a strategy of “strip, map and record” in areas to be stripped of topsoil. The information would enable the planning authority to make informed decisions regarding appropriate mitigation (if required).

1 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

1 Introduction

1.1 Origin and scope of the report 1.1.1 Rosemound Development Ltd has commissioned the Museum of London Archaeology Service (MoLAS) to carry out an archaeological desk-based assessment of proposed development at a site located within the former Andover Airfield (National Grid Reference 433000 145700: Fig 1). The Site is located west of Andover in Hampshire and just south of the A303. It is composed of two areas referred to as the Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas in the Planning Application. These areas occupy the eastern and western parts of the Site respectively. The Site has been designated as an option site for development in the Test Valley Borough Council Local Plan (TVBC), subject to investigation of its archaeological potential. 1.1.2 The development proposal consists of the construction of a business park comprising of three main units, each consisting of a warehouse, office blocks on two floors, and a gatehouse. In addition, a Hotel/conference building is planned in the eastern corner of the Site (Phase 1 Area), while to the north-western corner (Phase 2 area), warehousing and a three-storey office block are planned. Extensive landscaping is proposed prior to building construction. 1.1.3 This desk-based assessment forms an initial stage of archaeological investigation of the area of proposed development (hereafter also referred to as the ‘Site’) and may be required at a future date in relation to the planning process in order that the local authority can formulate appropriate responses in the light of any identified archaeological resource. 1.1.4 The desk-based assessment has been carried out in accordance with the standards specified by the Institute of Field Archaeologists (IFA 2001) and the Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers. Under the ‘Copyright, Designs and Patents Act’ 1988 MoLAS retains the copyright to this document. 1.1.5 Note: within the limitations imposed by dealing with historical material and maps, the information in this document is, to the best knowledge of the author and MoLAS, correct at the time of writing. Further archaeological investigation, more information about the nature of the present buildings, and/or more detailed proposals for redevelopment may require changes to all or parts of the document.

1.2 Site status 1.2.1 The Site does not contain any nationally or locally designated (protected) archaeological sites, such as Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings or Registered Parks and Gardens. The Site does not fall within a Conservation area but is discussed in the Andover Development Areas Study (Historic Environment and Archaeology), which, together with previous investigation at the Site and its immediate vicinity (TVAS 2002a, 2002b; WA 1999a, 1999b, 2000), indicates that the Site has a high archaeological potential.

1.3 Aims and objectives 1.3.1 The aim of the assessment is to:

2 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

• Describe the survival and extent of known or potential archaeological features that may be affected by the proposals; • Assess the likely impacts arising from the proposals; • Provide recommendations to further quantify the nature of the archaeological resources or mitigation aimed at reducing or removing completely any adverse impacts.

3 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

2 Methodology and sources consulted 2.1.1 For the purposes of this report the documentary and cartographic sources, including results from any archaeological investigations in the close proximity of the area of proposed development and a study area around it were examined in order to determine the likely nature, extent, preservation and significance of any archaeological remains that may be present within the Site. 2.1.2 In order to set the Site into its full archaeological and historical context, information was collected on the known archaeology within a 1000m-radius study area around the area of proposed development, as held by the primary repositories of archaeological information for the county. These comprise the National Monument Record (NMR), Hampshire County Council (HCC) Archaeology and Historic Building Record (AHBR), and the Test Valley Borough Council Andover Development Area Study. The AHBR includes information from past investigations, local knowledge, find spots, and documentary and cartographic sources. The NMR, managed by , comprises a similar dataset, which occasionally holds additional information. 2.1.3 In addition, the following sources were consulted: • British Geological Survey (BGS) - geology map sheet 283 • Hampshire County Council Environment Department Archive – Reports on previous archaeological work done on the Site and its environs • Rosemound Ltd - Site topographical survey (Greenhatch Group, November 2005); Details of proposals plans (RPS Burks Green - May 2007); Site Investigation Report (Geotechnical Developments Ltd October 2006) • Hampshire Record Office, - historic maps, Ordnance Survey maps, and published histories • RAF Museum, Hendon – historic airfield plans • Internet - web-published material including Local Plan 2.1.4 Paul Heslop, Infrastructure Project Manager of Rosemound Ltd, was consulted on existing data on the Site and on the proposal plans. 2.1.5 The assessment included a site visit carried out on the 15th of November 2006, in order to determine the topography of the Site and existing land use, and to provide further information on areas of possible past ground disturbance and general archaeological potential. The whole Site was accessible and inspected with the exception of the site of the Rifle Range, which was fenced off. Observations made on the site visit have been incorporated into this report. 2.1.6 The degree to which archaeological deposits actually survive on the Site will depend on previous land use, so an assessment is made of the destructive effect of the previous and present activity and/or buildings, from the study of available plan information, ground investigation reports, or similar. 2.1.7 Fig 2 and Fig 3 show the location of known archaeological sites and finds within the study area and Site respectively. Identified features within the Site have been allocated a unique assessment reference number (DBA 1a, 1b, etc), and so have sites

4 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007 within the study area (DBA 2, 3, etc). These are listed in a gazetteer at the back of this report and are referred to in the text. A full bibliography and list of sources consulted may be found in section 10.

5 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

3 Legislative and planning framework

3.1 National planning policy guidance

Archaeology 3.1.1 Planning Policy Guidance Note 16: Archaeology and Planning (PPG16) sets out the Secretary of State’s policy on archaeological remains, and provides many recommendations subsequently integrated into local development plans. The key points in PPG16 can be summarised as follows: Archaeological remains should be seen as a finite and non-renewable resource, and in many cases highly fragile and vulnerable to damage and destruction. Appropriate management is therefore essential to ensure that they survive in good condition. In particular, care must be taken to ensure that archaeological remains are not needlessly or thoughtlessly destroyed. They can contain irreplaceable information about our past and the potential for an increase in future knowledge. They are part of our sense of national identity and are valuable both for their own sake and for their role in education, leisure and tourism. Where nationally important archaeological remains, whether scheduled or not, and their settings, are affected by a proposed development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation. If physical preservation in situ is not feasible, an archaeological excavation for the purposes of ‘preservation by record’ may be an acceptable alternative. From an archaeological point of view, this should be regarded as a second-best option. Agreements should also provide for the subsequent publication of the results of any excavation programme. The key to informed and reasonable planning decisions is for consideration to be given early, before formal planning applications are made, to the question of whether archaeological remains are known to exist on a site where development is planned and the implications for the development proposal. Planning authorities, when they propose to allow development which is damaging to archaeological remains, must ensure that the developer has satisfactorily provided for excavation and recording, either through voluntary agreement with the archaeologists or, in the absence of agreement, by imposing an appropriate condition on the planning permission.

3.2 Regional guidance: 3.2.1 The Hampshire County Structure Plan, adopted by Hampshire County Council, City Council and City Council in February 2000, sets out the planning strategy up to 2011. The over–arching strategies and policies for the whole of the County also include statements relating to archaeology: Policy E14 : ‘Where nationally important archaeological sites and monuments, whether scheduled or not, and their settings are affected by a proposed development, there will be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation in situ. The need for the preservation of unscheduled sites of more local importance will be considered on merit. Where preservation is not possible then, before planning permission is granted, it should be demonstrated that appropriate arrangements have been made for a programme of excavation and recording prior to development taking place.’ 346. The value, variety and vulnerability of sites and monuments justify the preservation of those most important to the archaeology, history and character of Hampshire.

6 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

347. Archaeological sites and monuments and their settings are a finite and non-renewable resource. Care must be taken to ensure that they are not needlessly or thoughtlessly destroyed. Although at present a number of archaeological sites and monuments are protected by national legislation, the majority rely on the Structure Plan, local plans and the development control process for their continued protection and management as reflected in PPG 16. 348. When considering proposals for development, the local planning authorities will ensure the availability of accurate information on the condition and significance of archaeological sites affected by development proposals. Such information is essential for the decision-making process on planning and land-use issues and for monitoring the effectiveness of the planning process in protecting archaeological sites. 349. The authorities will promote, where practicable, the appropriate management and enhancement of important archaeological sites and monuments and where resources permit, assist owners to maintain them in good condition and to adopt sympathetic land management regimes. Policy E15 : ‘Development which is likely to have an adverse impact on landscapes included in English Heritage's Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest and the County Council's Register of Parks and Gardens will not be permitted unless the local planning authorities are satisfied that the need for the development outweighs that impact.’ 352. In addition to historic parks and gardens and battlefield sites, there is the wider historic landscape, the conservation of which is equally important and which deserves to be protected from development. Local planning authorities should take account of these historic components of the landscape in their local plans and development control work.

3.3 Local Planning Policy 3.3.1 The Test Valley Borough Council's first borough-wide Local Plan was adopted in 1996. The review plan was prepared by Test Valley Borough Council together with Hampshire County Council as Highway Authority in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and formally adopted by the Council on 2nd June 2006. The policy adheres to the principles of national planning guidance PPG16 (see above). The document sets out the local authority’s policies in relation to archaeology, set out below: ENV 11: ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE In order to protect the cultural and historic heritage of the Borough, development which would adversely affect features, buildings and areas which are of national and local historic importance or of archaeological interest (whether or not a Scheduled Ancient Monument) will not be permitted. If preservation in situ is not possible or feasible, archaeological investigation and recording leading to the interpretation of local culture and history will be required as an acceptable alternative. 4.5.4. The Council will secure provision for archaeological investigation and recording, either through the application of archaeological planning conditions, a planning agreement or similar arrangements. Where necessary a project brief will be prepared by the Council to guide developers and their consultants in planning the necessary archaeological works. 4.5.5. Where there is evidence that archaeological remains may exist and whose extent and importance are unknown, the Council will require developers to arrange for an archaeological field evaluation to be carried out before the planning application can be determined, to allow an informed planning decision to be made (Regulation 4: Town & Country Planning (Applications) Regulations 1988). 4.5.6. The Council will seek mitigation strategies to assess the impact of development proposals, by securing suitable project designs for programmes of archaeological work. This may also require measures to minimise physical destruction such as the application of 7 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

suitable foundation design conditions, or modification of the development to minimise physical destruction. Where this is not possible or feasible then the Council will not allow development to take place, until satisfactory provision has been made for a programme of archaeological investigation and recording prior to the commencement of the development. 4.5.7. It is recommended that prospective developers of sites or historic buildings should hold early discussions with the Council's Heritage Officer concerning the possible archaeological implications of their proposed development. It will be a requirement that any specification or project design for archaeological work, (prepared to meet planning requirements), will be submitted to the Council for written approval before any works commence. 4.5.8. The Council will encourage projects, which enhance and interpret historic buildings, monuments and sites of archaeological interest and importance and their settings. The interpretation and environmental improvement of archaeological sites will ensure their continued contribution to the area's local heritage and their role as important educational, recreational and tourism resources. Scheduled Ancient Monuments 4.5.9. A Scheduled Ancient Monument (see Appendix 6) requires the consent of the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport before any works are carried out which affect the monument. The need for Scheduled Monument Consent does not remove the need for planning consent where development is proposed. Even if Scheduled Monument Consent is forthcoming, for instance, where the monument is already badly damaged, the development proposal may be unacceptable on planning grounds. The Council recognises the requirement under Article 10 of the General Permitted Development Order 1995, to consult English Heritage on development proposals likely to affect the site or setting of a Scheduled Ancient Monument. 4.5.10. When the presence of archaeological remains only becomes apparent once development has commenced, the Secretary of State has the power to schedule the remains and in that event Scheduled Monument Consent would be required before development could continue. If justified, the Council or the Secretary of State is empowered to revoke planning permission, in which case there is legal provision for compensation. 3.3.2 Thirty-six Conservation Areas and Areas of Archaeological Importance have been designated in the Borough. The Site does not fall within a Conservation area but is discussed in the Andover Development Areas Study (Historic Environment and Archaeology).

8 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

4 Archaeological and historical background

4.1 Site location, topography and geology 4.1.1 The Site is located west of Andover in Hampshire, on a plot of land occupied by the former Andover Airfield (NGR 433000 145700: Fig 1). The Site is bounded by the A303 to the north, by the Defence Logistics Organisation (DLO) site to the south- east, by Red Post Lane to the south, and by fields to the west. 4.1.2 The Site is located in Hampshire on the boundary between four historic parishes: Monxton, Abbotts Ann (south-east and south-west of the Site respectively), Penton Mewsey, and Weyhill and Appleshaw (north-east and north-west parts of the Site respectively). 4.1.3 The Site occupies an area of gently undulating downland, occupied by open farmland (but no crop this year and covered in scrub and weeds). The Wessex downland rises to a height of c 100m to the south of Andover and slopes downwards to 60m Ordnance Datum (OD) in the valley bottoms. The Site topographical survey (Greenhatch Group, Draw. No. 9564_Nov05; Rev. 2, dated 17-09-06) shows that the level for the Site varies from 81m OD at the southern end to 77m OD in the middle, where a shallow valley runs in a north-south direction, and then rises to 85.8m OD at the northern end. 4.1.4 The nearest main watercourse is the River Anton, which rises just to the north of the town of Andover, and passes c 2.5km east of the Site, flowing in a southerly direction before joining the . Pillhill Brook joins the River Anton from the south-west near the villages of Abbotts Ann and Monxton ( c 1.5km south of the Site). Water meadows and flood plains lie to the south and north of Andover near the Site. 4.1.5 The Site lies on upper chalk, overlying shallow well-drained calcareous silty brown soils known as Andover 1 (BGS sheet no. 283). An archaeological evaluation by Wessex Archaeology along the northern part of the DLO site (immediately south of the Site) revealed between 0.12m and 0.33m of mid dark brown or yellowish brown clay silt topsoil with occasional sub-angular flints and chalk flecks on top of 0.12- 0.30m of mid yellow brown clay silt (WA 1999a, 10). Untruncated natural chalk was found at depths varying between 0.45m (trench 5) and 0.29m (trench 17) below ground level ( c 80m OD). 4.1.6 A geotechnical investigation was recently carried out at the Site for engineering (non-archaeological) purposes. This comprised five cable percussion boreholes and 15 trial pits excavated in 2005; and 24 trial pits, 29 boreholes, and 36 Static Cone penetration tests excavated in 2006 (Geotechnical Developments 2006). 4.1.7 The exploratory holes indicated a thin layer of topsoil overlying the ‘White Chalk Subgroup’, comprising an upper structureless white silty sandy chalk over structured chalk with occasional gravel and cobbles of flint (Geotechnical Developments 2006, 2). The tests revealed a limited amount of topsoil spread evenly across the Site, between 0.20m and 0.50m below ground level (bgl) (and at no greater depth in the central north-south valley feature, where no alluvial/colluvial deposits were noted). Made ground was encountered in a limited number of exploratory holes (unspecified location) to a maximum depth of 0.30m bgl. The made ground included “firm brown slightly sandy, slightly gravely clay. The gravel consisting of flint, chalk, quartz, 9 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

brick and occasionally mudstone and charcoal’ ( ibid. ). Although it is described as ‘modern’, the made ground may in fact contain archaeological deposits. Weathered Upper Chalk was encountered under the topsoil/made ground to depths between 0.30m and 1.40m bgl (Geotechnical Developments 2006, 16).

4.2 Overview of past archaeological investigations 4.2.1 The Site and study area have been subject to various investigations and as a result there is good understanding about the Site’s archaeological potential, which is deemed high. An assessment of aerial photographs (2000) commissioned by TVBC from Chris Cox Aerial Photographic Services Ltd identified 35 archaeological sites in the area surrounding Andover. They mostly included ring ditches representing ploughed-out Bronze Age round barrows, often occurring in clusters and indicating considerable funerary use of this landscape. In addition, the survey identified Iron Age and Roman field systems, as well as post-medieval agricultural features (source: TVBC Andover Development Area Study). 4.2.2 Within the Site, the aerial photography survey identified a group of five ring ditches (the ploughed-out remains of round barrows), two of which appear conjoined, in the north-western end of the Site ( DBA 1a); two ring ditches ( DBA 1b) in the central area of the Site; a linear ditch ( DBA 1c) just west of the cluster of five ring ditches; and an isolated ring ditch in the extreme north-east corner of the Site (DBA 1i). These features were plotted digitally and are shown on Fig 3. 4.2.3 In 1999 and 2000, two field evaluations, a watching brief, a geophysical survey, and environmental sampling were carried out by Wessex Archaeology in the area of the Andover Airbase, immediately south of the Site (also known as the DLO site). Eighteen trenches were excavated out of the 24 originally planned (part of the land had not been cleared of ammunition or lay close to live underground electricity services) (Fig 4). A total of ten archaeological features (prehistoric and modern), some previously undetected from the aerial photographs, were recorded in seven trenches, mainly in the east of the site: seven ditches, a gully, a trackway and a quarry pit (WA 1999a, 10). The southern and western part of the DLO site had been heavily truncated by the buildings associated with the RAF Andover Airfield, but open areas and the area of the runway to the north had higher archaeological potential (WA 1999a, 11, 15). The WA Archaeology investigations concluded that the north and eastern parts of the DLO site (which lie closest to the Site and include part of it) have the highest potential for archaeological features. 4.2.4 In February 2000, a Stratascan geophysical survey (WA 2000a), using a FM36 Fluxgate Gradiometer with a typical depth penetration of 0.5m to 1.0m, was carried out at the DLO site ( DBA 2 ), immediately south of the Site, as well as over an area to the north-east, corresponding to the north-easternmost corner of the Site (Phase 1 Area) (see Fig 5). The geophysical survey showed several anomalies, possible archaeological features ( DBA 2 ), including a possible enclosure stretching into the Site, some of which were investigated during subsequent field evaluation. 4.2.5 In April 2002, TVAS carried out a fieldwalking survey on the majority of the Site with the exception of the south-western and north-eastern corners, in advance of proposed development. Three fieldwalkers surveyed the Site recording any finds along north-south lines spaced at 10m-intervals, and collecting pre-19th century artefacts within 1m-radius search areas every 10m (c 10% sample). At the time, the Site was covered with cereal plants of moderate growth and had 80% ground

10 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

visibility (Figs 6-8). The survey recorded an extensive spread (2013 pieces recovered) of struck flint of prehistoric date, possibly indicative of intensive or lengthy occupation (TVAS 2002b, 3) (Fig 6-7). Prehistoric, Roman, medieval and post-medieval pottery (Fig 8) was recovered, but no clear concentrations were noted (163 sherds collected in total). The majority was Roman (later 3rd or 4th century) and post-medieval (TVAS 2002b, 5). 4.2.6 TVAS (2002b, 7) point out that the lithic scatters identified at the Site does not meet the six significance criteria for national importance set by English Heritage (EH 2000), given that: 1) the scatters do not have clearly defined boundaries; 2) the material has low potential for use-wear analysis owing to its being edge-damaged, patinated and corticated; 3) there is no clear evidence that the flints derive from buried deposits; 4) there is evidence for plough disturbance; 5) its composition is very homogenous; 6) and finally the dating is very broad. They conclude that recording the scatters would form the most appropriate mitigation strategy. 4.2.7 The Site was included in the Andover Development Areas, Historic Environment and Archaeology Part 1, carried out by W S Atkins Heritage on behalf of Test Valley Borough Council. This document, which takes into account the Hampshire Historic Landscape Assessment (1999), evaluates twelve option sites allocated for development, including the Site, against environmental and heritage criteria. The investigation of these option sites has shown that “archaeological features and deposits survive for various periods, but that no sites of national significance have been located. None of the archaeological sites or remains located so far can be assigned a value of national significance or importance” (ADA, 24). 4.2.8 TVAS and WA have both produced archaeological desk-based assessments for parts of the Site and for the area immediately to the south (DLO site). TVAS (2002a, 8) concluded that the Site lies in ‘an area of high archaeological potential with several sites already known or suspected to be present’. WA (1999a, 14) noted that the DLO site, immediately south of the Site, ‘contains moderate to high archaeological potential, particularly for archaeological remains dated to the prehistoric period’. 4.2.9 The results of these investigations, along with other known sites and finds within the study area, are discussed by period, below.

4.3 Chronological summary 4.3.1 The following abbreviations apply to the text: DLO = Defence Logistics Organisation EN, MN, LN = Early, Middle, Late Neolithic EBA, MBA, LBA = Early, Middle, Late Bronze Age EIA, MIA, LIA = Early, Middle, Late Iron Age TVBC = Test Valley Borough Council TVAS = Thames Valley Archaeological Services WA = Wessex Archaeology

Palaeolithic Period (c 500,000–40,000 BC) 4.3.2 There are no known finds dated to the Palaeolithic period in the Site and study area . The Lower and Middle Palaeolithic saw alternating warm and cold phases and

11 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

intermittent perhaps seasonal occupation. During the Upper Palaeolithic ( c 40,000– 10,000 BC), after the last glacial maximum, and in particular after around 13,000 BC, further climate warming took place and the environment changed from being a treeless steppe–tundra to one of birch and pine woodland. It is probably at this time that this part of saw continuous occupation. Subsequent erosion has removed many of the land–surfaces on which Palaeolithic people lived and hunted and consequently, most Palaeolithic finds are typically residual (located outside the context in which it was originally deposited), and often discovered during gravel extraction.

Mesolithic Period (c 10,000–4,000 BC) 4.3.3 There are no known sites dated to the Mesolithic period in the Site and study area. The TVAS fieldwalking survey across the Site collected some possibly Mesolithic pieces of struck flint (these were mainly waste flints and therefore not easily dateable tools) (TVAS 2002b, 3). In addition, some stray Mesolithic finds were retrieved in 1974 from the excavation of a ring ditch in Portway West, c 340m north of the Site ( DBA 35 ). The Mesolithic hunter-gather communities of the postglacial period inhabited a still largely wooded environment. River valleys, such as the Anton valley and its tributaries, would have been especially favoured locations, providing a predictable source of food (from hunting and fishing) and water, as well as a means of transport and communication. Evidence of human activity for this period is largely characterised by finds of flint tools and waste rather than structural remains. Mesolithic hand axes are known from and from the high ridges west of Andover (source: TVBC Andover Development Area Study).

Neolithic Period (c 4000–2000 BC) 4.3.4 Finds dated to the Neolithic are known from the Site and a Neolithic site is known from the study area. The Neolithic is traditionally seen as the time when hunter gathering gave way to farming and settled communities, and forest clearance occurred for the cultivation of crops and the construction of communal monuments. Pollen records indicate that forest clearance occurred over large areas of the British Isles during this period. Survey-surface collection by TVAS in 2002 at the Site (DBA 1j) recorded an extensive spread of Late Neolithic struck flint (as well as later material) taken as indicative of intensive or lengthy occupation (but no obvious concentration). In the study area, Late Neolithic Grooved Ware and some Beaker sherds were retrieved during the excavation of a barrow ( DBA 17), c 420m north- east of the Site. Generally, settlement sites dated to this period are scarce in the Hampshire landscape, while burial sites are better represented. Impressive Neolithic burial mounds are known in the chalk regions of Hampshire, such as the Nutbane long barrow ( c 3500 BC) near Weyhill, north-west of the Site (Hughes 1984, 5; PSSC 1991).

Bronze Age (c 2,000–600 BC) 4.3.5 Several Bronze Age sites are known from the Site and study area . The Bronze Age is characterised by technological change, with copper and then bronze eventually replacing flint and stone as the main material for everyday tools. It is traditionally seen as a period of increasing social complexity and organised landscapes, possibly brought on by increasing population and pressure on available resources. The earliest known fields in Hampshire are referred to as “Celtic” fields and are thought 12 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

to date to the Bronze Age. They are known from aerial photographs and are nearly always straight-sided, generally square or rectangular, measuring c 0.1-0.4 ha in area, and defined by banks or lynchets, acting as field boundaries (Hughes 1984, 6, PSSC 1991). Another feature of chalkland Hampshire of possible Bronze Age date is the linear or “ranch” field boundary, usually consisting of a single ditch and a bank of three to six metres across ( ibid .). Most of these features have been levelled by ploughing and are only visible from the air as cropmarks. 4.3.6 Bronze Age round barrows occur in significant numbers in the Andover area. The term barrow is derived from Old English, or earlier, beorg or beorge , meaning a mound of earth used as a burial (as opposed to “cairns”, which are mounds of stones). Generally the barrows occupy higher ground, while settlements are concentrated in lower areas. They usually occur in groups of 5-6, each erected for a single burial (both inhumation and cremation burials, with or without urns). The earliest and smallest tend to contain coffined inhumation burials, often with a beaker pot, and sometimes with a bronze dagger or perforated stone battleaxe. Larger barrows tend to cover cremations (Ashbee 1998). 4.3.7 A large cemetery complex of 15 barrows is located at Penton Mewsey north of the Site and just outside the study area. The Andover barrows have been interpreted as forming “a continuation of the Wessex downland and Plain Bronze Age burial landscapes” and “a developed landscape with land holdings and woodland management regime in places, supporting a sizeable population and increasingly organised society” (TVBC Andover Development Study, p. 14). Round barrows are generally found on high ground, often on false ridges, for maximum visibility from below and at a distance, possibly serving as territorial markers (Ashbee 1998). Round barrows on chalk-lands would have been white and striking features in the landscape, usually clustering on henge monuments. Satellite burials are also known to cluster around the barrows (Ashbee 1998). Excavation has shown their ditches were usually vertically-sided, suggesting that the barrows were originally drum-like structures revetted with chalk blocks (Ashbee 1998). 4.3.8 Bronze Age sites in the study area include: an Early Bronze Age to Late Bronze Age ring ditch, 38m in diameter, and another curvilinear feature, possibly another ring ditch, were located c 120m north of the site, at , Penton Mewsey (DBA 3); a curvilinear feature, possibly a Bronze Age ring ditch ( DBA 4), was located south-east of the two features just mentioned. Excavations of a Bronze Age round barrow, c 400m north of the site ( DBA 12) were carried out in 1974; a possible EBA to LIA rectangular enclosure is visible on air photographs ( DBA 23), c 100m of the site. Bronze Age occupation is probable at Joule Road, c 200m north of the Site ( DBA 24). A Bronze Age ring ditch was identified from air photographs c 380m north-west of the Site. Bronze Age ditches have been identified c 520m north of the Site ( DBA 26). Further prehistoric activity (undated) was recorded at the Portway Industrial Estate, c 230m north-east of the Site. 4.3.9 The Site contains a number of EBA to LBA features that have been identified from positive cropmarks seen on aerial photographs (Cox and Elsworth 2000). They are (see Fig 3): a group of five ring ditches, two of which appear conjoined, in the north- western end of the Site (DBA 1a); two ring ditches ( DBA 1b) in the central area of the Site; a linear ditch ( DBA 1c) just west of the cluster of five barrows; and an isolated ring ditch in the extreme north-east corner of the Site (DBA 1i). Ring ditches are the remains of ploughed-out barrows. 4.3.10 Of the group of five ring ditches/barrows occupying the north-western end of the 13 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

Site (DBA 1a) - corresponding to an area of lower vegetation observed during the recent Site walkover - one, known as “Mark Lane ” and marked Tumulus on the Ordnance Survey maps up to 1912, was removed in 1917 following the construction of the Andover Airfield. It is, however, possible that cut features (ring ditches, and possibly burials) still survive. 4.3.11 According to Williams-Freeman (1918, 354-357), the Mark Lane Tumulus was: “situated about 200 yards [= c 180m] south of the main Andover and Ludgershall road, and just the west of the road leading from Foxcotte to Abbotts Ann, known as Mark Lane. This road has been destroyed by the Military Authorities where it passes over the aerodrome. It formed the boundary between the parishes of Abbotts Ann and Penton Mewsey. The Barrow is shown by the Ordnance Survey, and was situated in the Manor of Penton”. 4.3.12 He adds that the Mark Lane Tumulus “formed a very perfect circle, about 110 feet [=33.6m] in diameter…its vertical height was only 5 feet” [= c 1.50m], having been reduced by ploughing. There was no sign of a ditch, but this may have been filled up by the ploughing of the tumulus. The soil of the field is described as “a rich brown loam” covering the chalk to the depth of 1 foot or 18 inches” [c 0.30m] (Williams- Freeman (1918, 355). “On removing the grass, the soil covering the whole barrow was seen to be the same as that of the adjoining field, with the exception of a band of broken, chalky soil, from 5 to 6 feet wide [= c 1.5-1.8m], which formed a ring about 60 feet in diameter [= c 18m], extending completely round the slope, except for a distance of about 25 feet [= c 7.5m] on the north- west sector. This probably marked the outer edge of the true extent of the barrow, before the spread of it had extended its dimensions. The deficiency on the north-west side may probably mark a spot where some former excavators have dug into it”. 4.3.13 The barrow was excavated in 1917 by military engineers, in the absence of an archaeologist. It contained a primary cremation in a 15cm scoop in the chalk beneath the centre of the barrow, with a MBA bronze knife dagger, closely resembling examples found in . Possible secondary burials were represented by the fragments of two earthenware vessels, one unadorned, the other including the adorned rim of a cinerary urn, “found not far below the surface”, c 6.1m from the barrow's centre and at about the same distance from each other (it is not clear whether these finds were part of the primary burial and were displaced by tomb- robbing or animal burrowing). Other finds included part of a beaker and fragments of iron pyrite (Williams-Freeman 1918, 356). 4.3.14 In 1999, Wessex Archaeology carried out a field evaluation (DBA 2 ) at the former RAF Airbase site (DLO site), immediately south of the Site (WA 1999a). The finds from the WA 1999 evaluation (Fig 4) included worked and burnt flint, pottery and animal bone, almost all of prehistoric date ( DBA 2 ). Worked flint, recovered in small quantities from five trenches (Tr.3,6,7,8,15), was the most frequent find, mainly consisting of waste flakes utilising locally available chalk flint, rather than tools or retouched pieces. They were broadly dated to the Bronze Age. Prehistoric pottery included EBA Collared Urn ware and LBA post-Deverel-Rimbury ware (WA 1999a, 12). In addition, environmental sampling from a range of archaeological features recovered charred plant remains (grain, chaff, and weed seed fragments), charcoals, molluscs and small mammal bone. The scarcity of these remains (especially of charcoal) was taken to indicate that this area lay away from the main focus of domestic settlement, a possibility reinforced by the findings of open country snail species ( ibid. ). 4.3.15 In December 1999, two further trenches were opened in the area of a ring ditch located from aerial photographs in the north-eastern corner of the DLO site, which 14 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

also corresponds to the north-easternmost corner of the Site. The ring ditch however failed to materialise, and neither archaeological features nor evidence for truncation were found (WA 1999b). 4.3.16 The geophysical survey (WA 2000a) located a number of cut features spread across the site (cut features are identified from their humic fills, which are richer in iron oxides than the chalky subsoil). The features included undated drainage ditches, and clusters of potentially archaeological features (possible pits), especially in the north and western parts of the site. In the easternmost area (corresponding to the easternmost corner of the Site), the survey recorded the aforementioned ring ditch (initially identified from aerial photographs) or possibly an enclosure, as suggested by a possible break/entrance on the west side of the ditch (Wessex 2000a), as well as linear ditches and pits, all potentially of archaeological significance. 4.3.17 In general, linear features noted by the geophysical survey were observed in the trial trenches. In addition, ten test pits were excavated in the southern part of the DLO site. Of these, only one (test pit 29), on the far southern edge of the site, produced three parallel ditches (two of which prehistoric), and an undated gully (Fig 4). 4.3.18 Retouched scrapers noted during the fieldwalking survey (TVAS 2002) were taken as indicative of possible LBA date, and probably contemporary with the ring ditch cemetery and other ring ditches on the Site (TVAS 2002b, 4, 6). The average density of finds for the Site was 258 flints per hectare reaching 500-750/ha in some areas. TVAS (2002b, 4) point out that these are much lower that the densities recorded on the Environs Project (5000/ha) (Richards 1990), or elsewhere in Andover (e.g. Thruxton Airport, 832/ha with peaks of 1720/ha) (WA 1997). They take this evidence as indicative that the area was used for occupation, farming, and procurement of raw materials, but with a lower intensity of utilisation when compared to the sites mentioned above (ibid. ). Prehistoric pottery was well distributed across the Site and may reflect the presence of sub-soil archaeological features. Conversely, it may have been brought to the Site as the result of manuring and consequently spread out by ploughing.

Iron Age (c 600 BC–AD 43) 4.3.19 There is widespread evidence of Iron Age occupation at the Site and in the study area . During the Iron Age, the climate deteriorated with colder weather and more rainfall. The period is characterised by expanding population, necessitating the utilisation of previously marginal or difficult land, reflected in the intensification of agricultural practices. The Iron Age in lowland Britain saw the emergence of , generally believed to have been linked to the possession and utilisation of land within tribal territories. Iron Age hillforts constitute the most recurrent and distinctive prehistoric feature in Hampshire (Cunliffe 1984). The Harrow Way (DBA 9), c 400m north of the Site, and other trackways identified from aerial photos may have originated in the Iron Age or even earlier in the Bronze Age. Late Iron Age activity is recorded around Andover at Farm, at the crossing between the , a north to south route from Marlborough to Winchester, and the Portway ( DBA 10 ), an east to west route from to . “It is almost a truism to say that each new housing estate in or Andover for that matter will lie on top of an Iron Age farm and attendant field system” (PSSC 1991, ii). 4.3.20 Iron Age features (EIA/MIA) were recorded in Trenches 3 and 6 of the WA

15 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

evaluation (Fig 4) at the DLO site. Ditch 303 in Trench 3 was north to south aligned and probably represents a boundary or enclosure ditch (WA 1999a, 10). The orientation is such that the ditch may continue into the Site. Prehistoric pottery found in trenches 3 and 6 included a non-diagnostic EIA/MIA ware (WA 1999a, 12). 4.3.21 Trench 22 contained a north to south aligned 3.5m-wide metalled trackway (2205), overlying a clayey silt foundation. The trackway, known as Mark Lane, is first shown on the 1st edition OS map (1872/3) as crossing the Site and was observed during the recent Site walkover in the shape of a 180m-long raised bank ( DBA 1f ).

Undated Features 4.3.22 Undated, possibly prehistoric, features in the study area also included the following: four ditches (DBA 2 ) and a gully at the DLO site, south of the Site; earthworks remains of a hollow-way (also identified as cropmark) ( DBA 6 ), c 540m west of the Site; a linear feature ( DBA 8 ), probably part of a linear ditch system that converged on the Iron Age Portway enclosure, 120m north-west of the Site; and a ditch at a former garage in Penton Corner ( DBA 16 ), c 100m north of the Site.

Roman period (AD 43–410) 4.3.23 There is evidence dated to the Roman period at the Site and study area . The Site lies at some distance from the two main Roman towns in Hampshire, Silchester (Calleva ) and Winchester ( Venta ). Rural settlement was centred around small towns, such as and , while elsewhere villa or farmstead sites dotted the landscape (Hughes 1984, 9). 4.3.24 Two converge around Andover at East Anton Farm, where a Roman settlement is conjectured on the basis of evidence for late Iron Age and Roman activity (Spaul 1999). The routes are the Icknield Way, which was aligned north to south from Marlborough to Winchester, and the Portway ( DBA 10 ), an east- west route from Silchester to Old Sarum, passing c 200m south-east of the Site and then following the Site boundary for a 180m-stretch along its extreme north-western corner. 4.3.25 A geophysical survey at the DLO site ( DBA 2 ), immediately south of the Site, recorded an anomaly consisting of rectilinear features, possibly alternating ditches and embankments, which, given their proximity to the Roman road, were initially interpreted as a Roman camp (WA 2000a). In view of its small size, this feature may have been a temporary marching camp (Breeze 1994, 9-12). However, when targeted with an evaluation trench (Trench 33), the Roman camp failed to materialise and it was then concluded that the anomaly was geological (WA 2000b, 11). 4.3.26 Roman pottery found by fieldwalking may indicate manuring on the Site, though TVAS submit that “one or more Roman occupation sites must be present nearby if not actually on the site” (2002b, 6). 4.3.27 Earthwork remains of an undated shallow, linear ditch ( DBA 7), c 200 m west of the Site, were found to contain a single plough-abraded Romano-British ware sherd. Romano-British sherds were also retrieved from a linear ditch excavated in 1989, c 240m north-east of the Site ( DBA 20). Excavations in 1974, c 400m north of the Site (DBA 12), also revealed Roman pottery.

16 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

Medieval period (AD410–1485) 4.3.28 There is limited evidence for medieval activity at the Site. The TVAS fieldwalking survey collected eleven possible medieval pottery sherds from the Site. They were too small and abraded to be identified more confidently, and point to a ploughsoil use of the land and to manuring (TVAS 2002b, 5). Following the withdrawal of the Roman army from England in the early 5th century AD the whole country fell into an extended period of socio-economic decline. Very few sites are known in Hampshire between the 5th and 7th centuries AD. The few that are known (e.g. Charlton, Foxcotte, and Old Down Farm) had small sunken-floored huts and occasionally large rectangular timber buildings or halls (Hughes 1984, 11; ADA, 16). 4.3.29 In the study area, a ring ditch 22m in diameter, seen on an air photograph and excavated in 1974 in Portway West, c 360m north-east of the Site, contained a large amount of Saxon pottery ( DBA 35 ); five probable Saxon or medieval graves aligned west-east with their heads to the west were excavated at Harroway Farm ( DBA 11), c 520m north of the Site. Excavations in 1974, c 400m north of the Site ( DBA 12), revealed an Early Medieval round barrow. Early Saxon burials are often associated with Bronze Age round barrows (Welch 1992). In 1981, an early medieval cemetery (DBA 13) was excavated at the Portway West Industrial Estate, c 400m north of the Site. In 1982, seventeen Anglo-Saxon (6th-7th century) burials ( DBA 18), of which one was within a ring ditch ( DBA 19 ), were excavated in Portway West, c 250m north of the Site. 4.3.30 Around the 9th and 10th century, the local parochial system began to replace the earlier Saxon Minster system, with formal areas of land centred on nucleated settlement served by a parish church. In Hampshire, late Saxon charters hint at the existence of open fields with a system of estates based on strip cultivation, which reduced the forest cover by an estimated 50% (Hughes 1984, 12). Forest clearance resulted in the formation of several irregular-shaped fields. The early name of the Anton River (Andeferas) is of Saxon origin and gave the name to the town of Andover, for which there are 10th century historical accounts referring to it as a Royal manor (Munby 1982; VCH iv, 345). 4.3.31 The Site straddles the peripheries of four historic parishes: Weyhill (north-west of the Site), Penton Mewsey (north-east part), Abbotts Ann (south-west) and Monxton (south-east). The small nucleated villages of Abbotts Ann, Monxton, Penton Mewsey, surround the main settlement at Andover, and are all located along the route of the River Anton and its tributaries. The Site lies c 0.5km east of Weyhill, 1.8km north-west of Monxton, 1km south of Penton Mewsey, 1.5km north of Abbott’s Ann, and c 3.5km east of the centre of Andover. 4.3.32 The parish boundaries across the Site did not follow any distinctive topographic features and were probably marked artificially by banks and other boundary markers. An extant bank ( DBA 1f), noted during the Site walkover, may correspond to the boundary between Weyhill and Penton Mewsey. 4.3.33 The earliest available historic record refers to the manor of Abbots Ann: Edward the Elder granted 15 hides of land at Anna to Winchester Abbey in AD 901 (a hide was the area of arable land which could be cultivated in one day by a plough and a team of oxen) (VCH iv, 345). Monastic foundations were sometimes endowed with large agricultural estates, comprising several manors farmed by the monasteries (“demesne” farming) (Hughes 1984, 14). Andover was a Royal Estate in the late

17 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

Saxon period. The other manors are first mentioned in Domesday Book (1086), though it is possible that they all originated in the early medieval period (Munby 1982; Spaul 1977, 2004).

Post-medieval period (AD1485–present) 4.3.34 There is limited evidence for post-medieval activity at the Site . 15th- and 16th- century Hampshire was predominantly agricultural, with most settlements along rivers. The majority of the land was still administered by abbots and bishops, but increasingly leased to tenant farmers (Hughes 1984, 20). It was at this time that the majority of the land in the study area was enclosed as common fields dwindled and increasingly strips within them were enclosed with hedged enclosures, often leading to disputes (Hughes 1984, 21, 23). The TVAS fieldwalking survey collected 39 post- medieval sherds, with no clear concentrations, suggesting these are residual finds from manuring (Fig 8). They included glazed red earthenwares, slip decorated ware, English and German stoneware and basalt ware (TVAS 2002b, 5). 4.3.35 Taylor’s map of 1759 and Milne’s map of 1791 are not very detailed (not reproduced) but both show the Site as fields crossed by paths, corresponding to present-day Monxton Road, Red Post Lane, and Weyhill Road. By the end of the 18th century, enclosure had left few common fields in Hampshire. There were 95 enclosures by private Acts between 1709 and 1842, and areas immediately south of the Site were enclosed in 1807 (part of Monxton parish) and 1818 (part of Weyhill and Appleshaw parish). 4.3.36 The HCC Historic Landscape Characterisation shows the Site as “Prairie” fields (19th century enclosure with extensive boundary loss), which is consistent with the information gained from the parish Tithe maps (Fig 9). The Tithe map of Abbott’s Ann (1842) shows the south-west part of Site occupied by arable fields (No 344, “The Out Down”, and No 345, “Starve Acre”) owned by Lord Berwick and occupied by a George Marshman. The Monxton Tithe map (1839) shows the southern part of the Site as arable fields known as “Great Cowdown”, occupied by James Soper, who held the land in “copyhold under the Provost and fellows of Kings College Cambridge” (copyhold tenure was tenure of land according to the custom of the manor). The Penton Mewsey Tithe map (1837) shows the northern part of the Site as arable fields known as “Great Harroway” and occupied by Susannah Batt (No 279) and owned by the Reverend Honourable Henry Pierrepont, who also owned nearby fields. Field 282 “The Harroway” was owned by William Hutchins who held it in copyhold under the Reverend Pierrepont. The Tithe map of Andover (1850) shows the eastern part of the Site as an arable field known as “the Hundred Acres” and owned by the Reverend Thomas Gale. 4.3.37 The Ordnance Survey (OS) 1st edition 6” and 25” maps (1872/3) (Fig 10) show the Site as an area straddling four fields divided north-south by Mark Lane (which also marks the Parliamentary boundary between the parishes) ( DBA 1f ), and bounded by what appears to be Red Post Lane to the south. A Tumulus is marked in the north- central part of the Site, while a large pit referred to as “Old Chalk Pit” appears (possibly corresponding to DBA 1g ). The Portway Roman road is marked along the south of (outside) the Site. The OS 2nd edition 25” map (1897) (Fig 11) and the 3rd edition 25” map (1912) (not reproduced) show no change at the Site, and limited change in the surrounding area in terms of new housing. A notable change is seen on 2nd edition map (1897), which shows the Midland and Southwestern Junction and the London and South western Railways passing south of the Site. 18 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

4.3.38 In 1918, a grass airfield, RAF Andover, was opened by the Royal Flying Corps on the Site ( DBA 5 ). RAF Andover was one of only two Schools of Navigation and Bomb Dropping for newly qualified pilots and navigators. It was later renamed Air Pilotage School. A plan of the airbase, dated 1933 (Fig 12), shows the airbase buildings in the area immediately to the south of (outside) the Site (DLO site). The Rifle Range buildings (DBA 1k ) are marked on south-west corner of the Site, within its boundary. They included three buildings (no longer extant): the machine gun range, the machine gun test butt, and the W&B Area HQ Store (“works and buildings”). Two small storage areas ( DBA 1l), one marked pyrotechnic store the other explosives store, lie just north-west of the rifle range, and an incinerator (DBA 1m ) is located in the far western corner of the site, just by the old chalk pit (possibly being back-filled with the waste). 4.3.39 From the end of WWI until 1937, Andover became the headquarters for a number of reorganised and renamed RAF Area and Group Commands, including many operational bomber squadrons. The airfield changed from Bomber to Fighter Command in 1939. 4.3.40 During WWII, the airfield was attacked twice by the Luftwaffe during the Battle of Britain and a number of buildings were destroyed or badly damaged. On the 13th August 1940, approximately 12 high explosive bombs were dropped onto the Station Headquarters and officer's quarters (part of the DLO site), which were extensively damaged. One aircraft on the station was also damaged. Two people were killed and one injured. The following day, RAF Andover was attacked again. About 15 high explosive bombs were dropped destroying a transmitting set in the centre of a group of radio masts, and killing a civilian radio operator. German records make it clear that RAF Andover was the intended target, as the Luftwaffe thought wrongly that it was an operational bomber station (Ferguson 1977; Wood and Dempster 1969). 4.3.41 A subsequent plan of the airfield, dated 1943 (Fig 13), shows the Site marked “landing ground” and skirted by concrete strips and platforms for the aircraft. The machine gun range buildings are still visible, but the explosives and pyrotechnic stores and the incinerator have gone. The chalk pit is no longer marked either, having presumably been completely back-filled. 4.3.42 RAF Andover was the first British military unit to be equipped with helicopters in 1945. The Helicopter Training School was also the first European helicopter flying- training school. Between 1948 and 1976 the grass airfield was not greatly used, although the RAF Staff College was housed at Andover until 1969. The last flying unit was disbanded in 1976 and RAF Andover finally closed in 1977. Although mostly cultivated, it is the “best preserved airfield in Hampshire” (source: HCC AHBR). A historic building survey was carried out on buildings at Andover Airfield by Wessex Archaeology (2000). 4.3.43 The OS 1961 edition 1:2500 map (not reproduced) shows the Site marked Andover Airfield. Although already built, the military structures are not shown for security reasons. The area of the Tumulus is marked “site of”, as it is no longer in existence (see above). The OS 1977 edition 1:2500 map (Fig 14) (by this time the airbase had ceased to operate) shows the Rifle Range in the south-west of the Site, and the airbase buildings and runways to the south of (outside) the Site. Concrete strips and platforms follow the south-western boundary of the Site and continue into the fields to the north, beyond the Site boundary. The Site is shown consistently on these maps as a grass field.

19 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

5 Archaeological potential

5.1 Factors affecting archaeological survival

Natural geology 5.1.1 The Site lies on upper chalk, overlying shallow well-drained calcareous silty brown soils known as Andover 1 (BGS sheet no. 283).

Past impacts 5.1.2 Historic maps and documents indicate low level past impacts on the Site: they include possible chalk quarrying in the south-west of the Site, and localised disturbance associated with RAF Andover. These include the Rifle Range buildings, storage areas and incinerator, the concrete strips and part of a circular platform located along the western edge of the Site. A further possible impact is bombing during WWII, although there are no records of bombs hitting the airfield itself, only the buildings in the DLO site. Ploughing would have caused disturbance to upper archaeological strata (typically to a depth of c 0.30m, slightly deeper for certain crops such as potato), but left cut features intact.

Likely depth/thickness of archaeological remains 5.1.3 Previous investigations at the DLO site, immediately south of the Site, recorded archaeological features cut into the chalk at depths of c 0.30-0.40m below ground level (c 80m OD). Natural chalk was found at depths varying between 0.45m (tr. 5) and 0.29m (tr. 17) below ground level. Archaeological remains are therefore expected immediately beneath the topsoil.

5.2 Archaeological potential 5.2.1 The area of proposed development lies close to predictable resources of the River Anton and its tributaries, making it an attractive location for human occupation in all periods. The nature of possible archaeological survival at the Site is summarised here, taking into account the levels of natural geology and the level and nature of later disturbance and truncation discussed above. 5.2.2 The Site has a high potential to contain archaeological remains dated to the prehistoric period . The Site appears to contain a number of EBA to LBA features identified from positive cropmarks seen on aerial photographs (Cox and Elsworth 2000): a group of five round barrows, two of which appear conjoined, in the north- western end of the Site; two ring ditches in the central area of the Site; an isolated ring ditch in the extreme north-east corner of the Site; and a linear ditch just west of the cluster of five barrows. 5.2.3 The Site has a high potential to contain archaeological remains dated to the Roman period . The Site lay in a rural area at some distance from the main Roman centres in Hampshire. However, an east-west route from Silchester to Old Sarum, passed c 200m south-east of the Site and then following the Site boundary for a 180m-stretch along its extreme north-western corner. Given their proximity to the Roman road,

20 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

alternating ditches and embankments, located towards the south-western corner of the Site have been interpreted as a Roman camp, though they were not identified during excavation (WA 2000a). 5.2.4 The Site has high potential to contain remains dated to the medieval period , when it lay in a rural area at the periphery of four neighbouring parishes: these include an extant parliamentary boundary bank identified during the Site walkover and historic parish boundaries. 5.2.5 The Site has high potential for the post-medieval period , and specifically to contain remains associated with the WWI Andover Airfield, which is considered one of the best examples in Hampshire and is of historical importance.

21 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

6 Impact of proposals

6.1 Proposals 6.1.1 The development proposal (Fig 15) consists of the construction of a business park comprising of three main units, each consisting of a warehouse, office blocks on two floors, and a gatehouse. In addition, a Hotel/conference building is planned in the eastern corner of the Site (Phase 1 Area), while to the north-western corner (Phase 2 area), warehousing and a three-storey office block are planned. None of the buildings will have basements (RPS Burks Green 14961/A1/161 Rev. - 22/05/06). No engineering drawings or further details on construction were available at the time of writing as the proposals are yet to be finalised. However, it is anticipated that the Site will undergo stripping and extensive earthworks entailing cutting and filling to create level areas. Standard foundations will be used (Paul Heslop, pers. comm. 13/11/06), except possibly in areas of deeper made ground, such as the former backfilled chalk pit in the south-western corner of the Site, and in areas subject to higher loads, where consideration is given to piled foundations (Geotechnical Developments 2006, 20).

6.2 Implications 6.2.1 The proposed development will impact on the archaeological resources identified and described above and on any previously unrecorded archaeological deposits. The main impact is likely to arise from the “cut and fill” groundworks proposed, i.e. preliminary topsoil stripping and subsequent ground levelling across the Site in order to remedy its sloping topography. 6.2.2 Archaeological deposits would potentially be located immediately beneath the topsoil. Removal of topsoil is an archaeological impact as it exposes any archaeology that may be present immediately beneath the topsoil, which is then damaged by subsequent movement of vehicles and plant involved in construction activities (i.e. through rutting and compaction). In addition, it is possible that topsoil removal without archaeological supervision may result in overstripping, which would have a direct impact upon archaeological deposits located beneath the topsoil, or understripping, where archaeological features are concealed beneath a thin layer of topsoil but are then exposed and unprotected from subsequent construction activities. Any archaeological remains that survived topsoil stripping (“cutting”) would become buried (“filling”), whilst they would be entirely removed from areas of cutting and subsequent landscaping. 6.2.3 Standard building foundations, such as ground beams, floor slabs and raft foundations, would entail the removal of deeper archaeological features (e.g. wells, pits, ditches) cut into the chalk that had not already been removed by soil stripping and landscaping. It is possible that the bases of deep cut archaeological features such as pits, ditches, wells and building foundations would remain intact beneath the impact level, but their context could be lost. Archaeological features would be removed from within the footprint of each construction, to the maximum depth of the construction (usually 1-1.5m below ground level). Piled foundations would remove any archaeological deposits within the pile cap and the footprint of each pile, therefore the impact would depend on pile size and density.

22 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

6.2.4 There will be an additional impact to any surviving archaeological remains from groundworks for drains, lighting and other services, and other temporary works, ground clearance and levelling. These works would partially or completely remove any surviving archaeological remains that had not been removed by preliminary groundworks.

23 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

7 Conclusions and recommendations 7.1.1 The Site does not contain any nationally or locally designated (protected) archaeological sites, such as Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings or Registered Parks and Gardens. It does not lie within a Conservation Area. However, previous investigation at the Site and its immediate vicinity indicate that the Site has a high archaeological potential. 7.1.2 The Site has a high potential for archaeological remains dated to the prehistoric period. A number of features, including five possible Bronze Age ring ditches, have been identified from aerial photographs at the Site. In addition, there is potential for previously unrecorded features, given the location of the Site close to waterway resources. The Site has high potential to contain Roman remains given its proximity to a Roman Road. Linear features recorded by a geophysical survey at the site immediately to the south have been interpreted as a possible Roman military camp, though excavations have so far failed to locate this. The Site has high potential to contain remains dated to the medieval period, when it lay in a rural area at the periphery of four neighbouring parishes: these include an extant parliamentary boundary bank identified during the Site walkover and historic parish boundaries. The Site has high potential for the post-medieval period, and specifically to contain remains associated with the WWI Andover Airfield, which is considered one of the best examples in Hampshire and is of historical importance. 7.1.3 It is proposed to build a business park comprising of three main units, each consisting of a warehouse, office blocks on two floors, and a gatehouse. In addition, a hotel/conference building is planned in the eastern corner of the Site, while to the north-western corner warehousing and a three-storey office block are planned (RPS Burks Green 14961/A1/161 Rev. - 22/05/06). No engineering drawings or further details on construction were available at the time of writing. 7.1.4 These proposals will impact on the archaeological resources identified and described above and on any previously unrecorded archaeological deposits. Given the undulating topography of the Site, the main impact is likely to arise from any ground levelling performed there. Removing the topsoil/subsoil down to the chalk would remove any archaeological deposits to the depth of ground stripping. In addition, foundations would remove any deeper archaeological features cut into the chalk that had not already been removed by the soil stripping (e.g. wells, pits, ditches). 7.1.5 In light of the high archaeological potential of the Site, it is likely that the local authority would request further investigation in order to clarify the possible archaeological impact upon known and possible (previously unrecorded) remains. The precise details of any such work would need to be agreed with the relevant Planning Archaeologist. It is suggested that the most appropriate further investigation strategy is likely to entail a non-intrusive geophysical survey of the Site in the first instance, followed by an archaeological field evaluation. This could be targeted at areas with known or suspected archaeological features (blanket trenching of a representative sample) and those areas highlighted by the geophysical survey as worthy of further investigation. This could be combined with a strategy of “strip, map and record” in areas to be stripped of topsoil. The information would enable the planning authority to make informed decisions regarding appropriate mitigation (if required).

24 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

8 Acknowledgements 8.1.1 MoLAS would like to thank Rosemound Ltd for commissioning this report and in particular Paul Heslop, Infrastructure Project Manager, for his assistance in providing information regarding the Site and proposal plans. MoLAS would also like to thank Frank Green and Andy Russell, Heritage Officers for Test Valley Borough Council.

25 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

9 Gazetteer of known archaeological sites and finds 9.1.1 The table below represents a gazetteer of known archaeological sites and finds within the 1000m-radius study area around the Site. The gazetteer should be read in conjunction with Fig 2 and 3. Abbreviations: AHBR Hampshire County Council Archaeology and Historic Buildings Record Andover and District Excavations Committee TVAC Test Valley Archaeological Committee TVAS Test Valley Archaeological Services TVAT Test Valley Archaeological Trust WA Wessex Archaeology

DBA Description Site code/ No. AHBR No. 1a RAF Andover. A group of five Early Bronze Age to Late Bronze Age round NMR barrows, identified from aerial photography, two of which appear conjoined. SU34NW14 One of these, marked “tumulus” on OS maps, was standing above ground 228095 (albeit reduced by ploughing to 1.52m high) in 1917, when it was destroyed AHBR following the construction of the Andover Airfield. It was 33.6m in diameter Barrow 32142 and contained a primary cremation in a 15cm scoop in the chalk beneath it with Barrow 32143 a bronze knife dagger of MBA date. Possible secondary burials were Barrow 32144 represented by 2 earthenware vessels found 6.1m from the barrow's centre. Barrow 32145 Tumulus 16955 1b RAF Andover. Two ring ditches seen as positive cropmarks on aerial AHBR 55322 photographs. 1c RAF Andover. A linear ditch seen as a cropmark on aerial photographs. Its AHBR 55323 association with the ring ditches is unclear. 1d RAF Andover. Bronze Age ring ditch seen as a positive cropmark on aerial AHBR 55324 photographs. 1e Round barrow located by air photography (25m in diameter). SU34NW25 228140 AHBR 32148 1f Historic Parish boundary – raised bank noted during site walkover probably No number corresponds to Mark Lane. 1g Possible archaeological feature (‘old chalk pit’ noted on 1st edition OS map?) No number marked by thicker and higher vegetation cover 1h Cut features, possibly archaeological, identified by geophysical survey No number 1i Ringed ditch – possible barrow/henge, identified by geophysical survey (note No number that this may correspond to 1d) 1j RAF Andover. Fieldwalking carried out by TVAS between 10-18 April 2002 AHBR 54239 over 78 ha revealed Late Bronze Age, Iron Age, Roman, medieval and post- medieval pottery. An extensive spread of struck flint of late Neolithic and Bronze Age date with higher density areas probably indicative of intensive or lengthy occupation. A single cluster of burnt flint was observed. 1k RAF Andover Rifle Range, located in south-west corner of the Site, within its No number boundary. It included three buildings: the machine gun range, the machine gun test butt, and the W&B Area HQ Store (“works and buildings”). First noted on 1933 plan. No longer extant. 1l RAF Andover Stores. Two small storage areas, one marked pyrotechnic store No number the other explosives store, just north-west of the rifle range. Noted on 1933 plan, not in 1943 plan. 1m RAF Andover Incinerator. Located in the far western corner of the Site, by the No number old chalk pit (possibly being back-filled with the waste). 2 RAF Andover, north site. WA (1999) desktop assessment and field evaluation SU34NW64 excavation (2000) of seven trenches on the north side of Andover military 1385780 airfield found a BA ditch, two EIA or MIA ditches and a quarry pit, four 1327413

26 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

undated ditches and a gully, and a modern trackway. In addition, WA carried AHBR 41161 out a building survey and recorded prehistoric features on the east of the airfield. A Stratascan geophysical survey recorded anomalies interpreted as a ring ditch or henge; however, an anomaly interpreted as a multi-ditched rectilinear enclosure failed to materialise when tested with a trial trench. 3 Early Bronze Age to Late Bronze Age ring ditch, 38m in diameter. SU34NW26 228141 AHBR 32146 4 Curvilinear feature, possible Bronze Age ring ditch, located SE of a large ring AHBR 32147 ditch (AHBR 32146). 5 RAF Andover. Military airfield, opened in 1916 and closed in 1980. Best SU34NW58 preserved WWI airfield in Hampshire. Staff College built in 1383306 1920. Grass landing area (1300x930 yards), seven Trussed type hangars; AHBR 30064 and a brick-built 2-point machine gun range (shelter) (all WWI). Also: five Blister and four GS hangars; four large “frying pan”-shaped hard standings and 21 temporary hard standings (all WWII). A historic building survey was carried out by Paul Francis for WA between 1999 and 2000. Since redeveloped and now known as the Defence Logistics Organisation or DLO site. 6 Earthworks remains of an undated hollow-way with discontinuous surface of SU34NW41 sub-angular flint cobbling, levelled by ploughing, also identified as cropmark. 621236 Paired ruts suggest use of vehicles. C 2.5m wide, with a flanking ditch 0.35m to AHBR 30009 the east, between ploughed hedge banks, and following the boundary between Penton Mewsey and Weyhill parishes. Excavated in 1991. 7 Earthwork remains of an undated shallow, linear ditch, found to contain a single SU34NW42 plough-abraded Romano-British ware sherd. 621239 AHBR 30010 8 Undated linear feature containing no finds excavated by WA in advance of SU34NW48 building. Probably part of a linear ditch system that converged on the 621334 Iron Age Portway enclosure 450m to the north. Excavated in 1992. AHBR 30030 9 The Harroway – Bronze Age trackway comprised mainly of hollow ways and Linear 44, traced from Folkestone to Ilchester via Salisbury Plain. This section starts at 1065639 and ends at Wyelye. 10 - Roman road (RR 4b) from Old Sarum to Silchester. No longer Linear 182 visible. 914813 AHBR 21206 11 Harroway Farm – TVAT (1987) excavation of five out of six probably Saxon or SU34NW60 Medieval graves aligned west-east with the heads to the west. 1385775 651654 AHBR 30071 12 Portway West – Excavation 1974 by S. Power, revealed a BA round barrow, 627103 Roman pottery and an Early Medieval round barrow. 13 Portway West, industrial estate, TVAC excavation (1981) of an early medieval 627106 cemetery. 14 Midland and South Western Junction Railway. Dismantled railway from Linear 208 Andoversford to Andover via Cirencester opened in 1883 and closed in 1961. 971169 15 Salisbury and Basingstoke Branch Railway. Branch line between Oakley Linear 81 Junction on the Southampton and London main line, and Milford (south of 1358849 Salisbury) – opened in 1857. 16 Evaluation in 2002 of six trenches by WA at former garage in Penton Corner, 1409512 Andover, revealed an undated ditch. AHBR 54242 17 Round barrow located by air photography (22m in diameter). Excavation by SU34NW31 ADEC in 1974 produced Neolithic Grooved Ware and EBA to LBA pottery NMR 228107 (Beaker sherds) AHBR 16911 AHBR 16913 18 17 Anglo-Saxon (6th-7th century) burials from Portway West, Andover, AHBR 16914 excavated in 1982. One was within a ring ditch. 19 Ring ditch enclosing a female Saxon inhumation excavated in 1982 (see above) AHBR 16916 20 Linear ditch observed during topsoil stripping and trenching prior to AHBR 30040 development and found to contain Romano-British sherds. An east-west curvilinear ditch was also noted from air photographs. 27 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

21 Two undated prehistoric worked flints and a “pot boiler’ recovered during AHBR30060 removal of topsoil for construction of factory site in 1982. AHBR 30061 22 No features of archaeological interest were observed during the groundworks AHBR 30066 for the preparation of a large car park (1992). 23 Possible Early Bronze Age to Late Iron Age rectangular enclosure visible on air AHBR 32149 photos. 24 During a watching brief in 1999, ditches, pits and post holes and pottery, AHBR 41163 fragments of animal bone and a single flint scraper were recorded that suggested Bronze Age occupation in this area. 25 Bronze Age ring ditch identified from air photo survey AHBR 55291 26 Two systems of sinuous ditches cross at a possible focus of settlement possibly AHBR 55293 later than the Bronze Age ring ditches (Early Iron Age to Late Iron Age). Identified from aerial photographs. Pits are also visible. 27 Plot 57, Portway West Industrial Estate, Andover. An archaeological evaluation AHBR 57086 located and excavated a linear ditch 2m wide and running for 44m across the site, and two small pits containing charcoal and charred hazel nut shells suggesting prehistoric human activity. A subsequent watching brief did not expose further features. 28 Cropmark of round barrow east of Penton Corner, between Andover airfield and AHBR 32165 Penton Mewsey, possible Bronze Age ring ditch. 29 55 West Portway, Andover. No features of archaeological interest were AHBR 30032 observed during topsoil stripping and the excavation of foundation trenches (1990). 30 53-54 West Portway Industrial Estate, Andover. No archaeological features AHBR 30038 were observed during machine trenching for building foundations. Topsoil stripping over an area of 0.8 hectares also failed to uncover any features of archaeological interest (1988). 31 Linear cropmarks, north of Aurris House and Harrow Way No number 32 Linear cropmarks, north of Whittle Road, Portway Industrial Estate No number 33 Several linear and curved cropmarks, between Hopkinson Way and Macadam No number Way, Portway Industrial Estate 34 Cropmark of round barrow west of Hopkinson Way, Portway Industrial Estate No number 35 Ring ditch 22m in diameter seen on air photograph, excavated in 1974 in SU34NW16 Portway West, and found to contain large amount of Saxon pottery and stray 228146 Mesolithic finds. AHBR32150 36 Several linear and curved cropmarks, south of Red Post Junction, Little Park No number

28 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

10 Bibliography

10.1 Published and documentary sources Ashbee, P. 1998 Barrows, cairns and a few impostors. British Archaeology Issue no 32, (March), http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba32/ba32toc.html (consulted on 16/11/06) ACAO, 1993 Association of County Archaeological Officers, Model briefs and specifications for archaeological assessments and field evaluations , Bedford ADA, Andover Development Areas, Historic Environment and Archaeology . http://www.testvalley.gov.uk/PDF/PLANMDAarchpart1.pdf (accessed November 2006). BADLG, 1986 British Archaeologists and Developers Liaison Group, Code of practice , London Breeze, D.J. 1994. Roman Forts in Britain. Shire Archaeology, Buckinghamshire. Bungay, Stephen, The Most Dangerous Enemy: a history of the Battle of Britain, (Aurum Press, 2000) Cunliffe, B. 1993. Wessex to AD 1000 . Longman Ferguson, A.P. 1977. Airfield histories: Royal Air Force Station Andover. In Aviation News , June 1977 Wood, D. and Dempster, D. 1969. The Narrow Margin: The Battle of Britain and the rise of air power 1930-1940 . Arrow Books. Cunliffe, B.W. 1984 Danebury: an Iron Age in Hampshire . CBA Research Report No. 52 (2 vols) DoE, 1990 Department of the Environment, Archaeology and planning: a consultative document , Planning Policy Guidance Note 16, London Dreweatt Neate, 2002 Andover Business Park . Environmental Impact Assessment Chapter. English Heritage, 2000 Managing lithic scatters, archaeological guidance for planning authorities and developers, London Geotechnical Developments Ltd 2006 Report on Site Investigation at Andover Airfield Business Park, Andover, Hampshire . Report No. P4160/R13, Date 31 Oct 06; Draft Issue 1 Hughes, M. 1984 Man and the Landscape. Hampshire’s Countryside Heritage . HCC. IFA, 2001 Institute of Field Archaeologists, By-laws, standards and policy statements of the Institute of Field Archaeologists, standard and guidance: desk-based assessment , rev, Reading Munby, J. 1982 Domesday Book, Hampshire . Phillimore, Winchester. PSSC, 1991 Hampshire and the Isle of Wight . Prehistoric Society Summer Conference. RCHM (E), 1979 Long Barrows in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. RCHM (E), 1984 Danebury. An aerial photographic interpretation of its environs. Richards, J.C. 1990 The Stonehenge Environs Project , Historic Buildings Monuments Commission (England) Rep 16, London Shennan, S. and Schadla-Hall, T. (eds) 1981 The archaeology of Hampshire. Hampshire Field Club. Monograph 1. Spaul, J. 1977 Andover, an historical portrait . Andover Local Archives Committee. Spaul, J. 1999 Where is Levcomagus? Hampshire Field Club and Archaeological Society Newsletter 31 (Spring) 6-7. Spaul, J. 2004 Andover 950-1974 . Aluric Press. TVAS, 2002a. Andover Business Park, Red Post Lane, Andover, Hampshire. Archaeological Desk-based Assessment . Thames Valley Archaeological Services (Ford, S.)

29 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk-based assessment  MoLAS 2007

TVAS, 2002b. Andover Business Park (Andover Field), Red Post Lane, Andover, Hampshire: an archaeological fieldwalking survey. Thames Valley Archaeological Services (Ford, S) TVAT, 1999. Land at Joule Road, Portway Industrial Estate, Andover. Report on an archaeological watching brief. Test Valley Archaeological Trust (September 1999) Test Valley Borough Council Local Plan (1996) and Review Plan (2006) VCH, 1912. Victoria History of the Counties of England. A and the Isle of Wight , vol. iv. WA, 1997. Land at Thruxton Aerodrome, Andover, Hampshire . Wessex Archaeology WA, 1999. Headquarters Quartermaster General, North Site, Andover (RAF Andover): historic building survey/Report No 47088b . Wessex Archaeology (Francis, P) WA, 1999a. Quartermaster General, North Site, Andover (RAF Andover):Desk Based Assessment and Field Evaluation . Wessex Archaeology (October 1999). WA, 1999b. Headquarters Quartermaster General, North Site, Andover (RAF Andover): archaeological field evaluation report. Wessex Archaeology (December 1999) WA, 2000a. Headquarters Quartermaster General, North Site, Andover (RAF Andover): A report on a geophysical survey (Stratascan). Wessex Archaeology (February 2000) WA, 2000b. Headquarters Quartermaster General, North Site, Andover (RAF Andover): Archaeological Field Evaluation Report. Wessex Archaeology (May 2000) WA, 2002. Former Garage, Penton Corner, Andover, Hampshire. Report on Archaeological Evaluation . Wessex Archaeology (March 2002) Welch, C. 1992 Anglo-Saxon England . Batsford. English Heritage. Williams-Freeman, J.P. 1918 'Note on the opening of a Round Barrow near Weyhill'. Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club and Archaeological Society 8, 354-356.

10.2 Other Sources Hampshire County Council Archaeology and Historic Buildings Record Internet – web-published sources Hampshire Record Office, Winchester

10.3 Cartographic sources Enclosure Maps of Monxton (1807) and Weyhill and Appleshaw (1818) RAF Museum (Hendon): RAF Andover Airfield plans 1933 (830/33) and 1943 (A.M. Dg.520/43) Tithe Maps of Abbotts Ann (1842), Monxton (1838), Penton Mewsey (1837), Weyhill and Appleshaw (1842) Ordnance Survey 1st edition 25” map (1872/3) Ordnance Survey 2nd edition 25” map (1897) Ordnance Survey 3rd edition 25” map (1912) Ordnance Survey 1:2500 map (1961) Ordnance Survey 1:2500 map (1977) British Geological Survey map sheet 283

Engineering/Architects drawings RPS Burks Green Framework Plan (RPS Burks Green 14961/A1/161 Rev. - 22/05/06) Greenhatch Group Site Topographical Survey (existing) (Draw. No. 9564_Nov05; Rev. 2, dated 17-09-06)

30 P:\HAMP\1021\na\Field\DBA_22-06-07.doc

Archaeological desk–based assessment ©MoLAS 2007

N N

Andover

Winchester

Southampton

Portsmouth Cowes

0 40km County of Hampshire the site 432000/147000

Andover

The Site

434000/145000

This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown copyright 2007. All rights reserved. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to 0 1km prosecution or civil proceedings. Corporation of London 100023243 2007. Fig 1 Site location

1 R:\Project\hamp\hamp1021\dba\fig01 11 N 31 26

9 25 33 12,13 34 17 35 28 18,19 16 32 6 3 4 7 23 21

24 29 20 30

27 8

The Site

see fig 3 A

9 (DBA 1a–1m)

r

c

h

a e

2 o

l

o

g i

5 c a

10 l

d

e

s k

R

- b : \ KEY a P

14 s

r e

o d j sites

e

a

c 22 s t

\ s

h findspots e

a s

m

s m p cropmarks

\ e

h n a m

Roman road t

© p

1 M

0 possible Bronze age trackway

2 o

1 L \ d railway 0 500m A

b 15 S

a

\ 2 f 1000m radius study area This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance

i 0

g 36 Survey on behalf of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown copyright 2007. 0

0 All rights reserved. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to 7 2 prosecution or civil proceedings. Corporation of London 100023243 2007.

Fig 2 The Study area: archaeological features map KEY N

earthworks 1e

archaeological cropmark (digitally plotted)

archaeological cropmark (not plotted) 1c archaeological features identified by geophysical survey 1a possible archaeological feature identified during site walkover

RAF Andover features

parish boundary 1d area included in fieldwalking survey 1f area included in geophysical survey 1h

1i 1b A

9

r

c

h

a

e

o

l

o

g

i

c

a

l

d

e

s k

R

- b :

\ a

P s

r e

o d j

e

a

c 1l s t

\ s

h e

a 1g s

m

s m p

\ e

h 1m n a

m

t

© p

1 M 0 2

1k o

1 L \ d 0 250m A

b S

a

\ 2 f This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance

i 0

g Survey on behalf of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown copyright 2007. 0

0 All rights reserved. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to 7 3 prosecution or civil proceedings. Corporation of London 100023243 2007.

Fig 3 The site: archaeological features map N

Tr.3 Tr.2

Tr.1 Tr.7 Tr.6

Tr.10 Tr.8 Tr.13 5 Tr.12 Tr. Geophysical anomaly Tr.4 Tr.17 Tr.33 Tr.15 9 Tr.20 Tr.16 Tr.9 A TP29 r

TP23 c h

TP31 a

TP26 TP25 e

Tr.21 Tr.19 TP32 TP24 o

l

o

g i

TP27 c

a l

TP28

d

e s

Tr.22 TP30 k

R

- b : \ Tr.18 a

P s

r e

o d j

e

a

c s t

\ s

h e

a s

m

s m p

\ e

h n a

m

t

© p

1 M 0 2 KEY o

1 L \

d A b

evaluation trench S

a

\ 2 f

i 0

g test pit (not to scale) 0 0

0 250m 7 4

Fig 4 Location of 1999 and 2000 evaluation trenches at adjacent "DLO site" (WA 2000b)

500m N

9

A

r

c

h

a

e

o

l

o

g

i

c

a

l

d

e

s k

R

- b :

\ a

P s

r e

o d j

e

a

c s t

\ s

h e

a s

m

s m p

\ e

h n a KEY

m

t

© p

1 cut features, possibly archaeological M

0 The Site

2 o 1 remains of earthworks L \

d A

b S a

modern agricultural ditches

\ 2 f

i 0

g Area of 0 0 modern disturbance 0 125m 7 5 geophysical survey

Fig 5 Interpretation of geophysical anomalies (WA 2000a) N

9

A

r

c

h

a

e

o

l

o

g

i

c

a

l

d

e

s k

R

- b :

\ a

P s

r e

o d j

e

a

c s t

\ s

h e

a KEY s

m

s m p

\ e

h flint density per hectare n a

m

t

©

p 1 to 10

1 M 0 2

10 to 30 o

1 L \

d A

b 30 to 50 S

a

\ 2 f

i 0

g 50 to 75 0 0

0 250m 7 6

Fig 6 Fieldwalking survey showing flint densities (TVAS 2002b) N

9

A

r

c

h

a e

KEY o

l

o g

blades i

c

a l

spalls

d

e s

cores types 5 – 10 k

R

- b :

\ a

P core fragments and bashed lumps s

r e

o d j e

burnt flint cluster a

c s t

\ s

h e

a RETOUCHED FLINTS s

m

s m p

\ scrapers e

h n a

m t

hammerstone © p

1 M 0

2 flaked axe o

1 L \

d A

b hollow scraper / notched flakes S

a

\ 2 f i retouched flake 0

g 0 0

0 250m 7 7

Fig 7 Fieldwalking survey showing distribution of flint types (TVAS 2002b) N

9

A

r

c

h

a

e

o

l

o

g

i

c

a

l

d

e

s k

R

- b :

\ a

P s

r e

o d j

e

a

c s t

\ s h

KEY e

a s

m

s m p Late Bronze Age

\ e

h n a

m t

Prehistoric © p

1 M 0 Roman

2 o

1 L \ d Medieval A

b S

a

\ 2 f i

Post-medieval 0

g 0 0

0 250m 7 8

Fig 8 Fieldwalking survey showing distribution of ceramic types (TVAS 2002b) Archaeological desk–based assessment ©MoLAS 2007

N

The Site

Fig 9 Composite Tithe map from Abbott’s Ann (1842), Monxton (1838), Penton Mewsey (1837), Weyhill and Appleshaw (1842)

N

The Site

Fig 10 Ordnance Survey 1st edition 25" map (1872/3) (not to scale)

17 R:\Project\hamp\hamp1021\dba\fig09&10 Archaeological desk–based assessment ©MoLAS 2007

N

The Site

Fig 11 Ordnance Survey 2nd edition 25" map (1897) (not to scale)

17 R:\Project\hamp\hamp1021\dba\fig11 N

9

A

r

c

h

a

e

o l

The Site o

g

i

c

a

l

d

e

s k

R

- b :

\ a

P s

r e

o d j

e

a

c s t

\ s

h e

a s

m

s m p

\ e

h n a

m

t

© p

1 M 0

2 o

1 L \

d A

b S

a

\ 2 f

i 0

g 0 1

0 125m 7 2

Fig 12 RAF Andover Plan (1933) (RAF Museum, Hendon, A.M. Dg.890/33) N

9 A

The Site r

c

h

a

e

o

l

o

g

i

c

a

l

d

e

s k

R

- b :

\ a

P s

r e

o d j

e

a

c s t

\ s

h e

a s

m

s m p

\ e

h n a

m

t

© p

1 M 0

2 o

1 L \

d A

b S

a

\ 2 f

i 0

g 0 1

0 250m 7

3

Fig 13 RAF Andover Plan (1943) (RAF Museum, Hendon, A.M. Dg.520/43) Archaeological desk–based assessment ©MoLAS 2007

N

The Site

Fig 14 Ordnance Survey revised edition 1:2500 map of 1977 (not to scale)

17 R:\Project\hamp\hamp1021\dba\fig14 Archaeological desk-based assessment ©MoLAS 2006 m 0 0 4 0 . – 22/05/06) N Fig 15 Proposed site layout (RPS Burks Green 14961/A1/121 Rev

9 R:\Project\hamp\hamp1021\dba\fig15