Quarrendon Fieldwalk Society
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Buckinghamshire Archaeological Quarrendon fieldwalk Society FIELDWALK AND FINDS ANALYSIS / April 2017 FIELDWALKING by members of the BAS Active Archaeology Group led by Mike Farley. FINDS ANALYSIS AND REPORT: MIKE Farley and Barbara Hurman Report number BAS/2017-02 BUCKINGHAMSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY'S ACTIVE ARCHAEOLOGY GROUP Report of a fieldwalk by Buckinghamshire Archaeological Society's Active Archaeology Group at Quarrendon, Buckinghamshire on 2/4/2017 Michael Farley with assistance from Barbara Hurman February 2018 Buckinghamshire Archaeological Society 1 Report of a fieldwalk by Buckinghamshire Archaeological Society's Active Archaeology Group at Quarrendon, Buckinghamshire on 2/4/2017 Michael Farley, with assistance from Barbara Hurman 1. Introduction to Quarrendon The former village site of Quarrendon includes two separate areas of village earthworks - thought to be largely of medieval date - the remains of a chapel, a moated site and substantial garden earthworks of the Tudor period. The site is described in Everson (2001) which includes a plan of the earthworks. A watching brief in 1993 when an area of trackway was illegally stripped west of the principal stream that divides the site, recovered over 600 medieval sherds suggesting the presence of a building(s) here, and also two sherds of Saxo- Norman date. Indications of Romano-British activity had previously been reported nearby. All of the visible remains are scheduled as an ancient monument and are now owned by the Buckinghamshire Conservation Trust. Air photographs indicate that one peripheral ploughed feature may not be included in the scheduled area. There are now known to be significant manorial records (court rolls and rent rolls) in the Dillon manuscripts at Oxfordshire Record office which have been catalogued post-Everson's 2001 publication and a project to study these is underway. Fig. 1. Quarrendon looking north. The arable field can be seen centre right 2 2. The fieldwalk All of the scheduled area is under grass, but a large field immediately adjacent to the scheduled area on the south (SP 8029 1569: Fig. 1) was under arable, providing an opportunity to check whether medieval occupation extended in this direction prior to the field being put down to grass. The field lies at 72m OD, a metre lower than the floodplain height to the south. The British Geological Survey (BGS 1994) maps the location as on the junction of alluvium and Kimmeridge Clay, with a glaciofluvial deposit forming the rising ground on which the principal earthworks of the former village are sited to the north-east. The latter, at c.82m OD are probably a first terrace deposit of the River Thame (BGS 1995, 112). Following discussion with the Trust and Eliza Alqassar of the County Archaeological Service, an area of 30m grid squares was laid out in advance of the walk, the squares being lettered N-S and numbered W-E (Fig.2). On the day forty-one complete or part squares were walked with about seven people operating in each square for roughly fifteen minutes. Several weeks previously the area had been ploughed but not harrowed and despite a secondary grass coverage of about 10%, search conditions were reasonable, although very uneven. Walkers were asked to collect all man-made items unless obviously of very recent date, also any worked stone. In addition items of geological note were collected. Fig. 2. Quarrendon fieldwalk grid. 3 3. Post-collection procedure Prior to washing all of the tile that had been collected was checked, counted and weighed and entered on a spreadsheet (Appendix 3). With few exceptions noted below, all was roof tile. Fabric was not individually recorded but a brief scan noted that the majority of tiles contained small (sandy) silica inclusions. Apart from a small sample of tiles from individual squares which were retained for future fabric analysis or because of particular interest, once recorded all of the remaining tile pieces was discarded. Subsequent to washing most of the nineteenth-century and later ceramic was also discarded. This was predominantly domestic earthenware (clear glazed, firing brown) and sherds of 'industrial period' ceramic. 4. Assessment and summary of finds The finds were initially entered on recording sheets and the information was later transferred to a spreadsheet (Appendix 3.NB, Z1 was unallocated). Six categories of pottery were itemised also metal, slag, bone, worked flint, other stone, glass and miscellaneous finds. Features of particular interest relating to any one item were recorded in the notes section on the spreadsheet. For example 3(1) indicates that there were three items in that category and see Note 1 for additional information. Pottery: Surprisingly few sherds (140) that were earlier than the post-medieval period were found, the average being 3.4 sherds per 30m square. Those that were present (apart from sherds of post- medieval date) were generally small and only a few were featured in any way (i.e. possessed rims, decoration etc.). A difficulty with dating arose from the fact that sherds gritted with flint were frequent. Around Aylesbury and in the Chiltern this fabric is common throughout prehistory but also occurs in in some medieval pottery. (i) Prehistoric worked flint and pottery For convenience, three pieces of struck flints are included in this section (Fig.3): 1. B5: with some probable re-touch on the ventral face at the bulbar) end suggesting utilisation as a scraper. On good black flint. 2. C2: snapped flake/blade. 3. Z1: snapped flake/blade None of these are datable. The only probable tool (B5) is a type with a long life but could be Neolithic. 4 Fig 3. Quarrendon worked flints Four large handmade flint-gritted sherd and three others (Fig.4) are almost certainly prehistoric in date and it is possible that a proportion of the smaller sherds noted above may also be prehistoric. A total of eighteen is suggested but this may be an underestimate. Of the four large sherds, one is decorated with an applied thumbed strip, apparently below a simple rounded upright rim. This form of decoration is common on middle Bronze Age 'Deverel-Rimbury' pottery (Gibson 1997, 142-5). The large versions of such vessels are often used to contain cremated human bone, for example in Buckinghamshire at Stoke Poges [Fig.5) but similar pottery also occurs on settlement sites, e.g. locally at Walton (Dalwood 1989, Fig.8). Some of the small, thinner, featureless flint-gritted sherds on grounds of thickness might also be prehistoric but most are included in the accompanying spreadsheet under the medieval or undated column (see comment above). 5 6 (ii) Romano-British Eighteen sherds of Romano-British coarse ware were present, including one certain and two probable rims. It is possible that some other sherds which had solution cavities (see below) could also be of this date. Everson (2001, 21) had previously noted sherd(s) of samian ware during fieldwork, downstream from the bridge which joins the two main areas of the site. (iii) Saxon-Late Saxon No sherds typical of the tenth-century locally (St Neots-type ware), were recorded nor any early-mid Saxon sherds. (iv) Mediaeval There is lack of certainty about the number of medieval sherds present (see above) but tentatively one hundred and five are dated to this period. Apart from difficulties over flint- gritted sherds, fabrics were commonly sandy; others had cavities indicating the former presence of a soluble inclusion such as limestone or chalk. In a very few cases rim-form determined that these sherds of various fabric were medieval, none conclusively earlier that the late eleventh century or later than the early fourteenth. There were a very few Brill- Boarstall jug sherds (typically later thirteenth-fourteenth century) a common find around Aylesbury, and their absence here might indicate that the other sherds largely pre-date the main period of production at Brill-Boarstall (the later thirteenth to late fourteenth centuries).The distribution of probable medieval sherds is shown in Figure 4. (v) Post-Medieval A large number of 'brown-glazed' domestic earthenware (generally of eighteenth-nineteenth century date) were discarded a few identifiable sixteenth-eighteenth century sherds ere retained. Tile and brick: Some 2012 pieces of tile were collected weighing over 54 kilos (moving them off the field was no mean feat ...). As previously noted the bulk of this was roof tile and following sampling was discarded after recording on the accompanying spreadsheet (Appendix 4). It was notable that only 55 had pegholes (or parts of them), that is one peghole fragment to 37 pieces of tile. A calcareous fabric with patchy green glaze provisionally dated to the twelfth century in Aylesbury (Farley 1974, 443) was not present. Undatable brick fragments were also discarded apart from one piece with a curved surface, perhaps from a coping. One curved parallel-sided piece of tile with eroded surfaces, might be either from field drain or be from a Romano-British imbrex. Other finds: Metal recovered was all iron and included horseshoe fragments and a hasp. A small piece of smithing slag was recorded. It should be noted here that in 1997 the field was searched by Tom Clark, a local metal detectorist, whose finds were recorded at the County Museum (HER 6273). There is a little 7 doubt as to whether these all came from the fieldwalked area or nearby. It is reported that the finds included: • Part of a 14c stirrup • 13-14c coins • A copper allot crotal bell • A tinned buckle • Copper alloy fittings • A ?jetton in base,metal • A finger ring ??silver • Six Roman coins (certainly from this field) • A piece of a copper-alloy bowl. • A quantity of lead shot (?pistol) (found close to the east bank of the garden earthworks) and other shot in the same field further to the east Some of this material is now in the County Museum some was sketched or photographed (record in HER).