Milton Keynes Archaeology Unit Carried Our the Most Intensive Archaeological Investigation Yet Undertaken of Part of the East Midlands Countryside

THE MJ[Ll'O N KJE '1{NJE S PROJJE C 1'

R. J. ZEEPVAT

Between 1971 and 1991, the Milton Keynes Archaeology Unit carried our the most intensive archaeological investigation yet undertaken of part of the East Midlands countryside. This paper summarises the arch.aeo!Ggicallandscapes that can be constructed ji·om the results of this work, and assesses the methods employed to obtain them.

Introduction Milton Keynes is underlain by beds of Oxford The new city of Milton Keynes covers an area Clay, which outcrop extensively on the west of some ninety square kilometres, straddling side of the Ouzel floodplain, which forms the the narrowest part of north Buckinghamshire, east side of the city. Much of this central area is with the counties of Bedfordshire and North• covered by glacial deposits of Boulder Clay, amptonshire to the south-east and north res• whilst both glacial and alluvial deposits of pectively (Fig. 1). Part of the reasoning behind gravel are found in the Ouse and Ouzel valleys. the choice of this location can be seen in its Rocky outcrops are mainly confined to areas situation on the principal natural 'corridor' bordering the O use valley. Soils in the area are linking the south-east to the Midlands and heavy, though lighter soils are found in areas of north, a route followed by all the major forms gravel subsoil, and drainage is generally poor of surface transport, ancient and modern. even in the riv·er valleys, which were prone to flooding until recent years. Until the designation of Milton Keynes, the area was devoted almost entirely to agri• Despite its situation on a major communica• culture. Settlement consisted mainly of small tions corridor, th_e Milton Keynes area re• villages, isolated farms, and the market towns mained largely ignored by antiquaries and of Bletchley, Stony Stratford, and Newport archaeologists until the 1950s, with the growth of Pagnell. The more recent establishment of two local archaeological societies. A large Wolverton , and the large-scale expansion of amount of fieldwork, as well as several small Bletchley, provided a more modern industri• excavations, were undertaken by these groups alised environment, the former being a in the area, particularly after the designation of nineteenth-century railway creation, and the Milton Keynes in I 967. The result was a total latter a post-war development, sponsored in change in the historical map of the area, part by the Greater London Council. showing that the Ouse valley and its hinterland had been densely settled since at least the In geological terms, the area forms a part of Roman period. the Oxford Clay vale of the cast Midlands, bounded to the south-east by the Lower As a result of this work, and campaigning by Greensand escarpment (Fig. 2). The under• the societies, the Milton Keynes Development lying geological sequence is represented by Corporation appointed two full-time arc• mudstones and limestones of the Upper Lias, haeologists in 197l to carry out excavation of outcropping on the edges of the floodplain of sites in the new city area in advance of de• the river Ouse, which forms the north bound• velopment. From this grew the Milton Keynes ary of the city. Moving southwards, much of Archaeology Unit, which has been funded the high ground forming the central part of principally by the Development Corporation,

49 Milton Keyn es designated area boundary

0 1 2 km. F Ig ..1 Milton Keynes; location--- map. 50 MILTON KEYNES Os(nrd dl}' Surface geology & clraimge

C(mll,r,o,h , 0 I Hl~::~istlrth hm1 to ~ ll' ~~ d ;:y ~ . [~ tuJu».~ ,qrli:!!l.. --- lh. l l fl~ l Ll•ly 1~''" (g; dll)' Fig. 2. Milton Keynes; geology and drainage.

51 with only small contributions from the De• have produced suitable samples of environ• partment of the Environment and the Man• mental material to allow detailed reconstruc• power Services Commission. tion of the palaeoenvironment for periods prior to the Iron Age. Since its inception, the Unit's brief has been to undertake excavation of sites threatened by Palaeolithic occupation is represented only development within the Milton Keynes de• by five hand-axes, no 'in situ' occupation sites signated area, taking as a starting point sites having been discovered. Gravel pits in the identified by fieldwork carried out by local Ouse and Ouzel valleys have proved difficult to societies, as well as to advise on the retention monitor constantly. In contrast, Mesolithic and and management of selected sites. Over the Neolithic flintwork and artefacts have been years, this approach has been modified with found throughout the city, mainly sealed in the discovery of additional sites by fieldwork riverine deposits in the Ouzel and Laughton during the course of development, or, more Brook valleys, though the discovery of a recently, by local metal detectorists, working tranchet axe at Pennyland, 2 km. from the in co-operation with the Unit. However, the Ouzel on heavy clayland suggests that tree• emphasis always has been on examining at felling may have been under way in the least a representative selection of types of sites Mesolithic period on what is assumed to have of all periods throughout the city area, in order been a heavily wooded area. Only three occu• to obtain a comprehensive picture of changes pation sites, all late Neolithic in date, have so m land use and settlement pattern since the far been identified and excavated, at Stacey end of the last Glacial period. This approach Bushes, Heelands, and Secklow. has met with varying degrees of success, largely depending on the archaeological period con• The Stacey Bushes site (Green and Sofranoff cerned. The Unit's involvement with fieldwork 1985) was located on a Cornbrash limestone ceased in 1991, prior to the winding-up of the area to the west of Laughton Brook, sur• Development Corporation, and Unit staff are rounded by intractable clays. It consisted of engaged presently on completing post• a group of pits and other features containing excavation work before the Unit itself is closed occupation debris, including Grimston style down in 1994. and Grooved Ware pottery. Environmental evidence from the site suggests that the area This article was prepared following a confer• was wooded, but that substantial clearance had ence on landscape archaeology projects, held taken place around the site. At Heelands, a in Leicester in 1989. Its aim was to describe the group of pits similar to those at Stacey Bushes aims of and methods employed on the Milton were found on a south-facing slope on the Keynes project, and to assess their success or Boulder Clay plateau which covers the central failure. With the completion of fieluwork by part of Milton Keynes. Also on the plateau, the Unit in the new city area, this paper has about one kilometre to the south-east, a single been amended to include a more detailed look Neolithic pit was located beneath a Saxon at the results of the Unit's work over the last mound at Seck low. twenty years, and the picture it presents of the changing landscape of this part of the county All the evidence from these and other con• since the Palaeolithic era. temporary finds in the city suggests extensive dearance, even ot the heavier wooded clay Prehistoric areas, by the late Neolithic period. It is unfor• Turning first to the hunter/gatherer cultures, tunate that with the pdncipal direction of tbe it is evident that the area of Milton Keynes is Unit's programmes being dictated by the pre - too small and its geology and topography insuf• smes of development it has not been p . sible ficiently diverse to allow any meaningful to organise or fund tbe type of intensive field• observations to be made from the results of the work and sampling programme necessary to Unit's work (Fig. 3) . Furthermore, few sites identify sites of this period. Both Stacey

52 M ~lT()[\~ KEY~~E S PALAEOLITHIC~>BRONZE ACE

~ _/

0 Q PALAEOLITHIC FINDSPOTS 6 FLINT SCATTERS (Neolithic/Mesolithic) (;1ft OCCUPATION SITES (Neolithic) / Q RING DITCHES it: BRONZE HOARDS @ OCCUPATION SITES (Bronze Age)

Fig. 3. Milton Keynes; Prehistoric sites (Palaeolithic to Bronze Age).

Bushes and Heelands were brought to light Green's excavations of 'ring ditches' in the during construction work, which invariably Ouse and Ouzel valleys, which provided the imposes severe restrictions on any arch• basis for his pioneering study relating burial, aeological investigation. territories, and population (Green 1974). Green's hypothesis of an essentially pastoral Turning to the Bronze Age, much of the economy in this period, with ranch-like estates available evidence has come from Stephen or units covering the Ouse and Ouzel valleys,

53 requires further confirmation from excavation to the north-west, situated on a gravel spur and fieldwork. overlooking the Ouzel valley, cultivation of the surrounding clay soils was clearly taking place. In recent years, an increasing number of Wavendon Gate, the largest site so far ex• Bronze Age artefacts have been reported to amined, was located on a 'head' deposit over• the Unit by local detectorists. However, it has looking a tributary of the Ouzel, while Ban• proved difficult to locate settlements, a prob• croft and Furzton were both on the west side of lem which is not limited to Milton Keynes the Lough ton Brook valley, the latter on very alone. There is one exception to this, the intracable clay soils. At Furzton in particular massive late Bronze Age roundhouse, dis• the evidence points to a cattle-based economy, covered beneath an Iron Age settlement at perhaps seasonal in nature, with few traces of Bancroft. This structure, 18.5 m. in diameter, the introduction of new cereal crops or deeper with three concentric rings of posts, remains a ploughing methods. It seems in general that unique find for the area, and was associated the central clay plateau was not settled until with an equally rare type of pottery, for which the late Iron Age. Bancroft is so far the only the only parallels have come from excavations site that has produced evidence of continuity at Hartigan's gravel pit, near Milton Keynes with both the Bronze Age and the Roman village, and from a field scatter at Weston period. Underwood, to the north of the city. Because of the emph:1sis pl:1cecl on incli• Iron Age vidual sites, little attention has been given to In contrast, evidence for Iron Age occupa• locating and identifying pre-Roman field tion in Milton Keynes provides the most systems in the area. This omission has to a complete example of prehistoric settlement dis• small extent been rectified in recent years by tribution in the city (Fig. 4). As with earlier the discovery of a pattern of Iron Age and periods, this is still riverine, but with some early Roman field boundary ditches beneath notable exceptions. Five major settlements the medieval settlement at Westbury-by• have been excavated; Hartigans, Pennyland Shenley (Ivens et al, forthcoming). (Williams, forthcoming), Furzton (Williams and Hart, forthcoming), Bancroft (Zeepvat Environmental evidence recovered from the and Williams, forthcoming), and Wavendon five major sites mentioned above suggests that Gate (Williams et al., forthcoming), while sev• by the late Iron Age much of the city area had eral smaller sites have been partially ex• been cleared of woodland, although a variety cavated, for example Walton and Kiln Farm, of trees remained in the landscape, presumably and a number of others have been identified in copses that were managed to provide the during watching briefs on construction sites. types and sizes of timber needed for construc• Fieldwork for both Iron Age and Roman tion and fuel. The overall picture is of open periods has been particularly thorough, prob• grassland, on which mixed farming was ably because sites of these periods are easy to practised, though it is difficult to assess the identify, and there is good evidence for the relative importance of cereal cultivation as Iron Age-Roman transitional period. opposed to stock rearing.

Of the major excavations of this period, the Roman Hartigans site (Wiliams, op.cit.) on the east side Much of our knowledge of the distribution of of the Ouzel valley is the only example situated Roman sites in Milton Keynes has come from on a gravel terrace. Occupation evi• the pioneering work of local archaeological dence related only to the early to middle Iron societies prior to the start of the new city. The Age, though evidence from evaluation work results of the Unit's work on sites of this period carried out in 1989 on fields to the north sug• up to 1982 and detailed discussions of the evi• gests that a shift of settlement took place in the dence from Milton Keynes and the surround• late Iron Age. At Pennyland, three kilometres ing area have been published (Mynard 1987;

54 MILTC)N KEYNES AGE SITES

••

•0 A * COINAGE

r .H March 1980

Fig. 4. Milton Keynes; Iron Age sites.

Zeepvat 1991), and whilst work has been under• Roman period cannot be discerned readily in taken more recently on major sites at Bancroft the archaeological record in Milton Keynes. A and Wavendon Gate, the results do not appear few sites, such as Furzton, appear to have been to suggest any great changes are necessary to deserted in the mid first century AD, but our understanding of. the period (Fig. 5). others, including Westbury-by-Shenley, Caldecotte and Wavendon Gate remained in The transition from the late Iron Age to the use beyond the Conquest, while at Bancroft 55 MILTON KEYNES ROMAN SITES & FINDSPOTS

•106 •235 ~..

./ ,. ,'

•72 "-1 !.gs i I r ··' \

,Aicheater

• FINDSPOT 0 FORT - ROAD • TOWN • POTTERY KILN ""' VILLA * CEMETERY !'> POSSIBLE VILLA ~ MAUSOLEUM NATIVE-TYPE SETTLEMENT -, e J

Fig. 5. Milton Keynes; Roman sites.

the Iron Age farmstead metamorphosed, albeit economy during the Roman penod was the with a slight shift in location (c. 300m.), into a establishment of towns, which provided a focal Roman villa. Similar shifts in position, but not point for the community in the surrounding in character, have also been noted at Hartigans area, as a social and administrative centre, as and Wavendon Gate. well as a market for local produce. The local cenire for ihe Miilon l'l..eynes area was One major change to the landscape and the Magiovinium, a small town covering some 7.5 56 hectares, close to the Watling Street crossing of animals kept, followed by sheep (and goats), the Ouzel, south-east of Fenny Stratford. As pigs, horses and domesticated fowl. In cereal with many other Roman towns, Magiovinium cultivation spclt wheat predominated, while was established close to the local tribal centre, free threshing and emmcr wheats and barley next to a fort dating from the Conquest were also grown, the latter being a Roman (Woodfield 1977), and served both the local introduction. Vegetables too made their debut area and travellers on Watling Street. Little is at this time, including cabbage, carrot, celery known of the town's history, and the site is a and coriander, parsnips, summer savory and scheduled ancient monument, but extensive turnips. In favourable areas fruit trees were suburbs have been excavated to the south-east grown, including apple, pear, plum and dam• along Watling Street (Neal 1987). son, cherry, mulberry, chestnut and walnut.

The other noticeable change to the land• Given the lack of raw materials and fuel scape fo\lowing the Conquest was the construc• supplies, it comes as no surprise that few traces tion of a comprehensive major road network, of Roman industrial activity have come to light initially for military and administrative in Milton Keynes. The major industrial activity purposes. One of these major routes, Watling in the area was the production of pottery and Street (the modern AS) crosses Milton Keynes tile. Pottery kilns have been excavated at on a north-west to south-east alignment. Other Caldecotte and Wavendon Gate, while pottery known Roman routes of a lesser nature in the production on a much larger scale was carried area include the Fenny Stratford• out at Emberton, Warrington, Harrold, Thornborough road (B4034) and a road Bromham and Bozeat in the Ouse valley, and leading northwards from Magiovinium to the at Great Houghton on the Nene, taking Roman town at Irchester, Northants. In addi• advantage of the easily obtainable clays in the tion there must have been a network of track• river valleys. A detailed study of the Roman ways serving the many villas and farmsteads in pottery from sites excavated by the Unit has the area. One such was excavated at Bancroft, been published (Marney 1989). probably linking the villa with Watling Street. The only other industrial activity of which The pattern of rural settlement during the traces have been found in the area is Roman period is of a mixed agrarian economy, metalworking. Evidence of smithing was re• exploiting the available resources by means of covered from Magioviniwn, probably catering a variety of different-sized units. These varied for travellers on Watling Street as well as local from small farmsteads of 'native' type, such as demand . From the villa establishments at Woughton and Wood Corner, through small Bancroft and Stanton Low, on the Ouse farms with Roman-style buildings, such as (Woodfield 1989), sufficient quantities of slag Wymbush , to small but substantial 'villa' estab• and scrap iron, and in the latter case an anvil , lishments, as excavated at Bancroft and were recovered to suggest a permanent smithy. Stantonbury .It is ' interesting to note that sites The discovery at Caldecottc of a hearth and of the latter category did not reach the same crucibles suggested the existence of a bronze• standards of wealth as villas in the Chilterns, to working industry, probably producing a variety the south, or in Northamptonshirc, to the of toilet instruments (Zeepvat et a!, north of the Ouse. This probably reflects the forthcoming). lack of growth of Magiovinium, which re• mained a small town, albeit with linear suburbs It is possible for the first time in this period extending to the south-east along Watling to make some assessment of the population in Street, throughout the Roman period. the Milton Keynes area. Using the generally accepted estimates based on heads per square From the available environmental evidence kilometre (Jones 1979) and settlement size and it can be seen that agriculture in the area was density (Taylor 1975), the rural Roman popu• mixed. Cattle or oxen were the most common lation of the area now occupied by Milton 57 Keynes would have been between 900 and meeting mound at Secklow showed only that 1350, with a further 750--1500 people living in the mound was post-Roman in date (Adkins Magiovinium. and Petchey 1984). During recent excavations at Westbury-by-Shenley, two Saxon wells, a From the mid fourth century onwards, the flax-retting pit and a number of Saxon burials picture of occupation becomes less easy to in• were located at the west end of the medieval terpret. At Wymbush and Wood Corner, village. The most recent discovery, during human activity ceases on site by about 360; a roadworks in south-west corner of the city, has similar trend has been noted in other sites in been a Saxon cemetery alongside the Buck• the upper Ouse valley. However, there is good ingham Road. The presence of Saxon fea• evidence at Bancroft and Magiovinium for con• tures at Bancroft, Wavendon Gate, and tinued occupation into the fifth century. Some Caldecotte suggests that continuity of occupa• attempt has been made to seek possible corre• tion into the Saxon period is perhaps more lations between Saxon/medieval land bound• widespread than previously thought. In recent aries and the possible boundaries of Roman years, increasing finds of Saxon metalwork, 'estates', after the manner of similar studies in amounting to perhaps 95% of the Unit's col• other areas, notably Northamptonshire (Bon• lection, have been reported to the Unit by local ney, 1979; Brown and Taylor, 1978). The re• detectorists. One major problem which has yet sults of this are also discussed in Zeepvat to be resolved is the 'middle Saxon shuffle', the (1987). transition from early to late Saxon occupation, a problem not limited to the Milton Keynes Saxon area (Taylor 1982). In the Saxon period, the lack of known sites in the area relative to those in the Iron Age and The earliest Saxon settlers in the Milton Roman periods may be partly because many Keynes area would have doubtless found a Saxon settlements developed into villages highly organised and well-managed agrarian which have survived up to the present day (Fig. landscape. However, it is evident from place• 6). There has been little opportunity for work names of Saxon origin such as Shenley (Bright in this area, as in the development of Milton clearing) and Bletchley (Bleacc's clearing) that Keynes a conscious effort has been made to at least some of the area reverted to woodland preserve all the village settlements contained in or scrubland after the end ot the Roman period its boundaries, though the discovery of middle/ (Gelling, forthcoming). Mixed farming con• late Saxon pottery beneath Great Linford tinued to be practised, but on a subsistence church (Mynard and Zeepvat 1992) seems to level, in contrast to the Roman period. point in this direction. However, in some cases there is evidence to suggest that surviving vil• Medieval lages in the area developed in the late Saxon The medieval period in Milton Keynes is period (ie tenth to eleventh century), and that richly represented archaeologically, with de• early to middle Saxon settlements were in serted villages at Old Wolverton, Caldecotte, slightly different locations. Examples of this Tattenhoe and Westbury-by-Shenley, many vil• have been noted at Milton Keynes village and lage earthworks suggesting a shift or shrinkage Wolverton, the earlier settlements being at of extant settlement, three motte-and-bailey Hartigans and Wolverton Turn respectively. castles, and a number of fishponds and moated sites. Most of these sites are scheduled ancient Only two Saxon settlements have so far been monuments, and are being preserved as open excavated; the extensive early to middle Saxon space in the new city. There are also two site at Pennyland, with its two post-built halls, medieval planned towns, at Fenny and Stony eleven sunken-featured buildings, timber-lined Stratford, and one principal religious house, well, and three unusual four-post structures; Bradwell Priory (Fig. 7). and the smaller settlement at Hartigan's gravel pit. Excavation of a possible Saxon hundred All of the earthwork sites in the city have

58 M ILTC)N KEYNES SAXON SITES

0 kms

• CEMETERY ~ • SETTLEMENTS

A> POTTERY *: COINAGE * METALWORK &:> HUNDRED MEETIN

T H , M a r ch 198 9

Fig. 6. Milton Keynes; Saxon sites. been surveyed in detail by the Unit, and a carry out major excavations on two villages , comprehensive picture of the medieval field Great Linford and Westbury-by-Shenley systems, as represented by surviving ridge and (Ivens et al , forthcoming), with smaller scale furrow in the city has been built up, using both 'sampling' of other village sites as they came up field survey and aerial photography. Because for development, as at Walton, Willen, of the intention to preserve many of the city's Woughton and an important manor site at medieval sites, the Unit's strategy has been to Bradwell (Mynard, forthcoming). Limited ex-

59 MILTON KEYNES MEDIEVAL LANDSCAPE

0 km

VILLAGE """ MOTTE + CHURCH a MANOR 0 MOAT PARISH BOUNDARY MILL * TOWNSHIP BOUNDARY 0 FISHPOND (Bietchley parish) *: PRIORY @ WOODLAND

Fig. 7. Milton Keynes; the medieval landscape. cavation has also taken place at Bradwell Excavations at Great Linford, on Priory (Mynard 1974, Croft 1982, 1983). earthworks to the south and east of the present Additionally, excavation has been undertaken village, have concentrated on eleven crofts, as a condition of scheduled monument consent those to the east being late tenth century in for development at Tattenhoe (Ivens, op. cit.) date, while those to the south, around the vil• and Caldecotte (Zeepvat et al, op. cit.). lage green, represented late twelfth-century 60 expansion onto ridge and furrow. The sites of a came late to this part of Buckingliamshire; the medieval post-mill (Zeepvat 19gO) and manor earliest was in Great Linford in 16:i8, the latest house have also been examined, and limited in Bow Brickhill in 1"/90. excavation was carried out in the church during renovation work. Excavations at Westbury-by• Methods Shenley have produced mainly thirteenth to Having looked briefly at the results of the fourteenth-century occupation evidence, with Unit's work over the last twenty years, it is some traces of middle to late Saxon, Roman evident that there arc many lessons to be learnt and iron Age material. from the success or failure of the methods and strategies employed. First and foremost, it In addition to field survey and excavation of must be remembered that archaeology in medieval sites, the Unit has undertaken Milton Keynes is, and bas always been, historical research into the available documen• developer-funded, and that the Corporation's tary sources for all of the eighteen parishes prime directive has been to excavate sites in within the city. In many cases it has been pos• advance of development. With the pace of de• sible to relate early documentary and cartog• velopment that has existed since the mid raphic evidence to the results of excavation and 1970's, this bas meant that most of the Unit's fieldwork (Croft and Mynard forthcoming), financial and labour resources have been di• particularly with ref renee l Great Linford, rected towards the excavation of threatened which has recently een published. As a result, sites. As a result, many non-excavation our knowledge of the development of the vil• activities, such as intensive fleldwork and sur• lage, and of changes in land use in the parish, is vey, have had to be funded out of other pro• more comprehensive than would be the case if jects, or financed by outside agencies, such as only one of these sources of information were the Manpower Services Commission, which used. can limit the scope of the work. The inevitable problem of post-excavation backlogs has also Environmental sampling has not, as a rule, built up, and is only now being resolved. been carried out on medieval sites in Milton Despite these limitations, the Unit has Keynes. As can be seen in Fig. 7, the medieval attempted to examine as broad a spectrum of landscape was largely open farmland, with five sites of different periods and types as possible well-defined areas of woodland; Linford wood, in the city, and in this aspect has proved quite Riekley wood (Bletchley parish), Oakhill and successful. One advantage of the continued Shenlcy woods (Shenley Church End) and emphasis on excavation is that it has allowed Howe Park wood (Shenley Brook End), all the Unit to excavate some small sites, particu• located on clay soils. The ridge and furrow larly of Iron Age and Roman date, that would surveys show that nearly all the available land otherwise have escaped detailed examination. in the city was at one time under cultivation, but documentary and cartographic evidence With hindsight, it c·ould be argued that the indicates that areas were increasingly given main clement lacking in the Unit's strategy has over to grazing. For example, the southern been a concerted programme of fieldwalking part of Great Linford parish, shown as "Great and other non-destructive types of survey, Linford Common, called Lay Field" on the particularly in the early years, to build on and 1641 estate map of the parish (Mynard and complete the work begun by the local societies, Zeepvat 1992, fig. 5) was found to be almost and to give a better basis for planning future entirely covered by ridge and furrow (ibid., fig. excavation. Whilst there is much truth in this, 4). This change in land use was probably an such arguments in the 'rescue ·-oriented l970's early, small-scale example of the process of met with little favour from any of the funding enclosure which by the eighteenth century had bodies. However, some fieldwork has been changed the landscape in the area to the form done, albeit sporadically, resulting in the addi• which survived until the building of Milton tion of many new sites to the city's arch• Keynes. Large-scale enclmure by agreement aeological record. Much of this has been

61 systematic fieldwalking, generally on the basis giving a density of one site per 122 hectares. of ten m tre transect , followed up by geophy• However, on the basis of discoveries in the sical surv y and/or machine trial trenching. developed part of the city, a minimum of Survey by geophysical and aerial techniques thirty-three sites should exist. Therefore, nine• have both proved of limited u e, because f the teen more sites should be awaiting discovery in diversity of local subsoils. Even fieldwalking this area; ten Prehistoric, nine Roman, and no has its limitations, as experience at Pennyland more Saxon. No account is taken of medieval and Wavendon Gate has shown. These sites, sites in these figures, as these are all earthwork unnoticed during fieldwalking, were sealed by sites, or arc recorded in historical sources. unusually deep topsoil, and came to light during construction work, which imposed limi• Since these figures were calculated, at the tations of time on their excavation. Only selec• time this article was originally prepared, it has tive trial trenching of 'negative' areas shown up not been possible to revise the figures, as the by fieldwalking would have pinpointed them undeveloped areas mentioned are now under sooner. development. However, it is worth noting that Many of the sites discovered in Milton new Roman sites have been found at Westbury Keynes since the Unit was formed have Farm (Shenley Brook End) and Monkston appeared during construction projects in• Park, Saxon sites at Westbury-by-Shenley, volving large-scale earth-moving, such as the Tattenhoe, and Tattenhoe Park, in the south• west corner of the city, and a medieval tile kiln construction of the city's balancing lakes, and the large rental housing estates built in the at Shenley Wood. Contrary to the above pre• 1970's. With the change to smaller privately• dictions only one prehistoric site has been sponsored housing and industrial estates, it has located, at Westbury-by-Shenley, but this is become increasingly difficult to monitor sites probably because no fieldwork is being carried and to assess the results. This problem also out in the city area. However, prehistoric could have been avoided by more intensive metal objects have been reported as a result of metal detecting. The Roman and Saxon sites fieldwalking. mentioned above have all been discovered Perhaps it would be useful at this point to either in the course of excavations, or by look at some statistics relating to the arch• detectorists. aeological work undertaken in Milton Keynes, and to its future direction. In 1989, about 1637 Conclusion hectares (18%) of the total area of the city Finally, how successful has the Milton (about 9000 hectares) remained undeveloped Keynes project been in terms of landscape arch• on the east and west flanks. Prior to 1971, fifty aeology? Firstly, the limitations imposed by sites of prehistoric to Saxon date were known in the Unit's developer· funded and development• the city, a density of one site per 180 hectares. led situation un efforts to undertake a study of By 1982, this number had risen to 104 in the this kind cannot be too strongly stressed. Also, developed part of the city - one site per forty• the small size of the area available for sampling nine hectares -· with a total number of sites for has made an in-depth examination of all pre• the whole city of 136. The developed land at historic landscapes except that of the Iron Age this point totalled 5130 hectares- 57% of the impractical. However, it has been possible to city. Of the 104 sites, forty-one (39%) were construct a comprehensive and useful model of prehistoric, fifty ( 48%) were Roman, and thir• the Roman landscape, and the same will prob• teen (13%) were Saxon. ln 19S9 the situation ably be true of the medieval period when the on the east and west flanks was as follows: evidence has been fully analyzed. The Saxon 1637 hectares, containing: period, like the prehistoric, is problematical, Prehistoric 3 sites though mainly through lack of evidence and Roman 7 sites continuing uncertainties in the dating of middle Saxon 4 sites Saxon pottery. With hindsight, greater emp• TOTAL 14 sites hasis could have been placed on systematic 62 fieldwork, followed up as necessary by evalua• transferred to a new museum m Milton tion before embarking on major excavations. Keynes. However, the results of the Unit's work sug• gest that the 'opportunist' approach taken has, ACKNOWLEDGEMF.NTS in fact, been quite successful. Above all, I would like to thank all the staff, past and present, of Milton Keynes Arc• The results of the Unit's work are being haeology Unit, without whose work this article published in monograph series under the au• would not have been possible. Thanks arc also spices of Buekinghamshire Archaeological due to the various funding bodies who have Society, whilst some smaller sites will be sub• supported the project. For their help in the mitted to Records. Responsibility for the finds preparation of this paper I would like to thank and archive material from Milton Keynes has Bob Williams, for supplying much of the in• been handed over to the County Museum, and formation and for commenting on the text, and it is hoped that the collection will one day be Tora Hylton, for drawing Figs 4 and 6.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Adkins, R. A. and Petchey, M.R., 1984. 'Secklow Hundred Mynard, D.C. and Zeepvat, R . .T., 1992. Great Linford, mound and other meeting mounds in England', Buckinghamshire Archaeol. Soc. Monog. Ser. 3 Archaeol. J. 141 , 243-51. (Aylesbury). Bonney, D.J., 1979. 'Early boundaries and estates in South• Neal, D.S., 1987. 'Excavations at Magiovinium, Bucking• ern Britain' in Sawyer, P.H., Medieval settlement, hamshire, 1978-80', Rec Buckinglwmshire 29 , 72-82, (Oxford). 1-124. Brown, R.M. and Taylor, C. C., 1978. 'Settlement and land Taylor, C. C., 1975. 'Roman settlement in the Nene Valley: use in Northamptonshire', in Cunliffe, B. and Row• the impact of recent archaeology', in Fowler, P.J. ley , R.T. (eds). Lowland Iron Age communities in Recent work in rural archaeology, 107 (Bath). Europe, Brit. Archaeol. Rep. S48, 77-89 (Oxford). Taylor, C. C., 1982. 'The nature of Romano-British settle• Croft, R.A., 1982. 'Bradwell Abbey', CBA 9 Newsletter 9, ment studies- what are the boundaries?', in Miles, 65- 69. D. (ed.). The Romano-British countryside: studies Croft, R. A., 1983. 'Bradwell Abbey excavations 1982', in rural selllement and economy, Brit. Archaeol. South Midlands Archaeology 13, 57-62. Rep. 103.1 , 1-16 (Oxford). Croft, R.A. and Mynard, D.C. (forthcoming), The Williams, R.J. , forthcoming. Penny/and and Hartigans, changing landscape of Milton Keynes, Buckingham• Buckinghamshire Archaeol. Soc. Monog. Ser. 4 shire Archaeol. Soc. Monog. Ser. 5 (Aylesbury). (Aylesbury). Gelling, M., forthcoming. The place-names of Milton Williams, R .J. and Hart, P.J. , forthcoming. 'Furzton', Rec. Keynes' in C roft and Mynard. Buckinghamshire. Green, H.S., 1974. 'Early Bronze Age Burial, Territory Williams, R.J., Hart, P.J. and Williams, A.LI., forth• and Population', Archaeo/. J. 131, 75-140. coming. Wavendon Gate, Buckinghamshire Arc• Green, H.S. and Sofranoff, S., 1985. 'A Neolithic settle• haen!. Soc. Monog. Ser. 10 (Aylesbury). ment at Stacey Bushes, Milton Keynes' , Rec. Woodfield C., 1977. 'A Roman military site at Buckinghamshire 27, 10-37. Magiovinium?', Rec. Buckinghamshire 20.3, Ivens, R.J. , Busby, P. and Shepherd, N.J. , forthcoming. 384-99. Westbury-by-Shenley and Taltenhoe, Buckingham• Woodfield , C, 1989. 'A Roman site at Stanton Low, on the shire Archaeol. Soc. Monog. Ser. 8 (Aylesbury). Great Ouse, Buckinghamshire', !lrchaeol. J. 146. Jones, M.E., 11.)79. 'Climate, nutrition and disease: a 135-278. hypothesis of Romano-British population', in Zeepvat, R.J. ,1980. 'Post mills and archaeology', Current Casey, J. (eel.), 1979. The end of Roman Britain, Archaeol. 71 , 375- 77. Brit. Archaeol. Rep. 71. 231-51 (Oxford). Zeepvat, R.J. , 1987. 'Romano-British settleme nt in the Marney, P. T., 191:!9. Roman and Belgic pottery from exca• upper Ouse and Ouzel valleys' , in My nard 1987, 6-18 vations in Milton Keynes, 1972-82. Buckingham• Zcepvat, R.J., 1991. Roman Milton Keynes, Milton shire Archaeol. Soc. Monog. Ser. 2 (Aylesbury). Keynes Archaeology Unit (Milton Keynes). Mynard, D. C., 1974. 'Exca11ations at Bradwell Priory 1968- Zeepvat, R .J., Roberts, J.C. and King, N .A., forth• 1973 ', Milton Keynes}. Archaeol. Hist. 3, Jl-66. coming. Caldecotte, Buckinghamshire Archaeol. Mynard. D.C. (ed.), 1987. Roman Milton Keynes, Buc• Soc. Monog. Ser. 9 (Aylesbury). kinghamshire Archaeol. Soc. Monog. Ser. 1 Zcepvat, R.J. and Williams, R ..T., forthcoming. Bancroft, (Aylesbury). Buckinghamshire Archaeol. Soc. Monog. Ser. 7 Mynard, D.C., forthcoming. Medieval11illage excavations (Aylesbury). in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire Archaeol. Soc. Monog. Ser. 6 (Aylesbury).