Canal Way Ilminster Somerset Archaeological Evaluation Report

Home , Taunton Stop Line, Wiveliscombe

Canal Way

Ilminster

Somerset

Archaeological Evaluation Report

White Young Green for

CA Project: 4476 CA Report: 13517

September 2013

Canal Way Ilminster Somerset

Archaeological Evaluation Report

CA Project: 4476 CA Report: 13517

prepared by Steven Sheldon, Project Officer

date 16 September 2013

checked by Richard Greatorex, Principal Fieldwork Manager

date

approved by

signed

date

issue 01

This report is confidential to the client. Cotswold Archaeology accepts no responsibility or liability to any third party to whom this report, or any part of it, is made known. Any such party relies upon this report entirely at their own risk. No part of this report may be reproduced by any means without permission.

Cirencester Milton Keynes Andover Building 11 Unit 4 Office 49 Kemble Enterprise Park Cromwell Business Centre Basepoint Business Centre Kemble, Cirencester Howard Way, Newport Pagnell Caxton Close, Andover Gloucestershire, GL7 6BQ MK16 9QS Hampshire, SP10 3FG t. 01285 771022 t. 01908 218320 t. 01264 326549 f. 01285 771033 e. [email protected]

Canal Way Ilminster Somerset

Archaeological Evaluation Report CONTENTS

SUMMARY ...... 4

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 6

The site ...... 6 Archaeological background ...... 7 Archaeological objectives ...... 11 Methodology ...... 11

2. RESULTS (FIGS 2-4) ...... 12

The finds ...... 14

3. DISCUSSION ...... 16

4. CA PROJECT TEAM ...... 17

5. REFERENCES ...... 18

APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS ...... 20 APPENDIX B: THE FINDS ...... 22 APPENDIX C: OASIS REPORT FORM ...... 23

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1 Site location plan (1:25,000) Fig. 2 Trench location plan, showing archaeological features (1:1000) Fig. 3 Trenches 3 and 7; sections and photographs

Canal Way Ilminster Somerset

Archaeological Evaluation Report

SUMMARY

Project Name: Canal Way Location: Ilminster, Somerset NGR: ST 3513 1450 Type: Evaluation Date: 12-16 August 2013 Location of Archive: To be deposited with Somerset County Museum Accession Number: TTNCM74/2013 Site Code: CWI 13

An archaeological evaluation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology in August 2013 at Canal Way, Ilminster, Somerset. Ten trenches were excavated.

A pit/posthole containing quantities of Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age Beaker pottery was identified in Trench 3. A further undated pit/posthole was also identified within the trench and may be broadly contemporary. Although these features are suggestive of settlement activity, no other contemporary features were identified during the evaluation making further interpretation impossible.

Further probable prehistoric activity was identified in Trench 7 where a single worked flint flake of prehistoric date was recovered from the fill of a curving ditch gully. The function of this feature remains unclear although it may represent the remains of a ring-ditch or roundhouse drip gully. A further, undated but slightly curving ditch/gully was also identified in the trench and may be broadly contemporary

Roman activity was confined to the south-western half of Trench 7 where pottery of Late Roman date was recovered from a ditch and a pit/ditch terminal. The exact function of these features is unclear at present although they are suggestive of settlement activity. A further

undated ditch/gully also identified in the trench may be broadly contemporary with this Roman activity.

Undated ditches were identified in Trenches 5, 6 and at the north-eastern end of Trench 7. The exact nature of these features remains unclear although they are likely to relate to land management, drainage or division.

Canal Way Ilminster Somerset

Archaeological Evaluation Report

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 In August 2013 Cotswold Archaeology (CA) carried out an archaeological evaluation for White Young Green acting on behalf of ersimmon Homes (South West) Ltd. at Canal Way, Ilminster, Somerset (centred on NGR: ST 3513 1450; Fig. 1). The evaluation was undertaken to accompany a planning application to South Somerset Council for residential development and forms part of a broader evaluation of the archaeological potential of the site, which has also included a Heritage Desk-Based Assessment (WYG 2013).

1.2 The evaluation was carried out in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) produced by CA (2013) and approved by Steven Membury, Senior Historic Environment Officer, Somerset County Council (SCC) the archaeological advisor to South Somerset Council. The fieldwork also followed the Standard and guidance for archaeological field evaluation (IfA 2009), the Heritage Service Archaeological Handbook (Somerset County Council 2011), the Management of Archaeological Projects (English Heritage 1991) and the Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment (MORPHE): Project Manager’s Guide (English Heritage 2006). It was monitored by Steve Membury, which included a site visit on 14 August 2013.

The site 1.3 The proposed development area is situated to the west of the small town of Ilminster, Somerset and comprises a c. 2ha area of land lying at approximately 35m above Ordnance Datum (AOD). It is bounded to the north by light industrial units fronting on to Canal Way, to the west by a dismantled railway and agricultural land, to the south by Coldharbour Farm, and to the east by further agricultural land and areas of residential development. The Site is currently under pasture.

1.4 The underlying solid geology of the proposed development site is on the boundary of the Belemnite Marl Member of the Calcareous Mudstone Formation and the Dyrham

Formation of Mudstone and Sandstone of the Pliesbachian Age. It is also at the boundary of Holocene alluvial clays, silts and sands to the north and colluvium to the south (BGS 2013). The natural substrate, comprising mottled yellow grey with occasional gravel patches or mid orange yellow clay with frequent bands of gravel, was identified in all of the excavated trenches.

Archaeological background 1.5 The archaeological potential of the site has been assessed within a Heritage Desk- Based Assessment (WYG 2013) the details of which are summarised below. The Somerset Historic Environment Record holds details for 26 recorded heritage assets within a c. 500m radius study area centred on the site (WYG 2013).

Prehistoric (up to 43AD) 1.6 Palaeolithic activity in the region is not well characterised due to the paucity of data. Typically, ‘sites’ are recognised from lithic scatters, often found within river gravels and terraces (of which the highest density is from the east of the region (Hosfield et al. 2007, 30)). Cave sites associated with Palaeolithic activity are found throughout the south west region, particularly in south Devon and central Somerset (Hosfield et al. 2007, 37) and a number of such cave dwellings have been recorded in Cheddar Gorge to the east. Mesolithic activity is typically associated with upland zones and lowland wetland areas (Hosfield et al. 2007, 40).

1.7 The environment is better understood, in part due to the work of several specialists who contributed to the Somerset Levels Project: 1974-1989 (cf. Caseldine 1984 cited in Hosfield et al. 2007, 43). Throughout the region a diverse range of prehistoric sites survive, dating from the Neolithic onwards. From within the peat deposits of the Somerset Levels, timber trackways and artefacts have been recovered, as well as providing extensive environmental data (Pollard and Healy 2007, 75). Within the region, areas of continued activity (albeit seasonal) have been recorded from the Mesolithic through to the Early Bronze Age, both from lithic assemblages and in the continued use of cave sites (Pollard and Healy 2007, 76- 77).

1.8 Whilst Later Bronze Age settlement in the region is characterised by roundhouses, settlement evidence from within Somerset is largely gathered from material culture (pottery and lithics), rather than structures (Fitzpatrick 2007, 118). Settlement in the

Iron Age focused, for the most part, on agriculture. ‘Village-like’ settlements, such as Little Yeovilton, as well as hill forts were evenly distributed through the region.

1.9 Whilst the hill forts have been the focus of much research over a number of years, the non hill fort settlements are less well characterised with the exception of the ‘Lake Villages’ at Meare and Glastonbury in Somerset which were the subject of excavation. These villages represent near contemporary settlement, and have revealed evidence for specialised craftsmanship and trade (Fitzpatrick 2007, 133).

1.10 A field evaluation was undertaken on land immediately to the west of the proposed development at Hort Bridge, Ilminster in 2009. This involved the machine excavation of 30 trenches, each 30m in length. The evaluation established that archaeological features comprising pits, gullies and ditches were present across the majority of the adjacent site. Late Bronze Age occupation was attested by spreads of burnt flint deposits, perhaps indicative of activities associated with burnt mounds and ditches enclosing post holes consistent with at least one roundhouse and a number of four-post structures (28315).

Roman/Romano British (43 AD to c.450 AD) 1.11 That there was extensive Roman activity and influence within the region is long attested. Within Somerset, the Iron Age tribal areas of the Durotriges in the south, Dobunni in the north, and Dumnonii in the west were all occupied during the 1st century AD. As part of a programme of conquest and subsequent process of Romanisation, the major Roman road, later known as the ‘Fosse Way’ was constructed through the county at this time. Several forts have been recorded in Somerset, with one at Wiveliscombe, to the south-west of the study area (Ordnance Survey 1994). With the exception of militarised zones and larger civitas capitals, settlement forms remained relatively unchanged until the 2nd century with streets and ‘roadside settlements’.

1.12 Somerset saw a marked expansion in villas in the 3rd-4th century (Holbrook 2007, 151). Some of these villas have been shown to continue in use into the sub-Roman period of the 5th century. Villa sites have been the main focus of research in the region, with new sites identified and investigated at Dinnington, south Somerset and Yarford, north of Taunton (Holbrook 2007, 152). Natural resources within Somerset that were locally exploited included iron to the west, salt to the north-east of the study area, stone to the south and lead from the Mendips in the north of the county

(Ordnance Survey 2004; Holbrook 2007, 154-157). The Hort Bridge evaluation identified Romano-British activity close to the site on its west side, in addition to the Bronze Age presence noted above (28315).

Early Medieval (450 AD to 1066 AD) 1.13 The nature of the transition from Romano-British culture to the later Anglo-Saxon in the region is not wholly understood. Theories of ‘system collapse’ for the Roman period and subsequent Anglo-Saxon conquest have been challenged; thoughts of a continuation of Romano-British settlement beyond 410AD and the incursion of peoples from northern Europe seen more in terms of migration events during the 5th-6th centuries provide contrasting theories (Webster 2007, 170-171). Indeed, evidence from a number of villa sites, including Langport, suggest that Romano- British culture definitely continued into the 5th century in Somerset. The latter part of the early medieval period (9th century) witnessed a resurgence in both urban areas and nucleated rural settlements (Webster 2007, 171).

1.14 Ilminster itself has early medieval origins. The name of the town is Old English in origin, meaning “the minster church on the island in the river” (Mills, 2011, 255). A minster was an Anglo-Saxon phenomenon whereby a “mother church” cared for a number of other, smaller “daughters”. This minster church was founded by King Ine (AD 689-728) who granted Ilminster to Mulcheney Abbey (Somerset County Council 2013). There are no recorded early-medieval remains recorded on the site.

Medieval Period (1066 AD - 1540 AD) 1.15 The archaeological evidence for the medieval period largely survives within pockets of the landscape which are used less intensively today, and also sealed beneath modern towns and farmsteads (Rippon and Croft 2007, 195). Overviews of medieval Somerset are provided by Aston and Burrow (1982 cited in Rippon and Croft 2007, 195) and Aston (1988 cited in Rippon and Croft 2007, 195). The origins of the social structure is rooted in the early medieval period with improvements made to these existing patterns and perhaps a spread into more marginal zones throughout the high medieval period (Rippon and Croft 2007, 195).

1.16 The 13th century saw the enclosure of earlier field systems and later in the period, rural nucleated settlements in areas including west Somerset contracted and split into two or more single farmsteads (Rippon and Croft 2007, 197). Medieval Ilminster was concentrated around the minster church, High Street and Silver Street. During

the middle ages the church saw the expansion and modernisation of the minster, including the erection of a tower. The town was also granted a charter for a weekly market. There was also an annual fair (Somerset County Council 2013).

1.17 By the later Middle Ages, Ilminster was, like other towns in Somerset, enriched by the profits of the wool trade, while the effective control of the town by Mulcheney Abbey and Wells Cathedral saw a period of good governance and powerful patronage. The presence of major land-owners and their power to reconfigure the landscape is evident in the Donyatt Deer Park that abuts the southern boundary of the site. These sites provided recreation and were a source of food for the Crown, gentry and senior clergy.

Post-Medieval Period (c.1540AD to 1750AD), Industrial (1750 to 1900AD) and Modern (1900AD to present) 1.18 Much of the wider region remained largely unchanged from the medieval period through the post-medieval period. The area remained agricultural in nature with continuation of farmsteads and villages established in the medieval period. The greatest changes to the landscape occurred as a result of the Parliamentary enclosures of land and changing agricultural techniques, including the extensive drainage and enclosure of the moors – low-lying, wet ground in the Axe valley; Somerset moors being similar to fen or mire elsewhere in England.

1.19 Early industrial agricultural improvement from the 18th and 19th centuries is manifest within the study area. However, there are also records of the post-medieval survival of the Donyatt Deer Park from the mid-18th century (Gathercole 2003, 12) showing that 18th century landscape change could be as much about prestige and pleasure as about agricultural improvement. Improvements in transport links also had a significant impact on the landscape through the post-medieval and early modern periods. These included the Turnpike roads, such as that of the Ilminster Trust, which crosses the study area, and the canals, such as the now partly in-filled Chard Canal, which passed the site to the East and which went through the town and was serviced at Canal Wharf.

1.20 The most dramatic change in rural areas, epitomising the Industrial Age, was the arrival of the railway. Here, the western boundary of the development site is formed by the remains of the now dismantled railway. The canal and railway appear to have been instrumental in reversing the fortunes of Ilminster, which saw population

growth and commercial expansion after years of stagnation during which the town suffered hard times, including devastating fires in 1491 and 1661 (Gathercole 2003, 4). During the English Civil War the town’s bridges were the focus of military engagement in the run-up to the Battle of Langport in 1645 (Barratt 2005, 116–118). 1.21 During the Second World War, Ilminster was defended against a possible German invasion via the south-west peninsula and formed part of the Taunton Stop Line, one of the major linear defences in England. The defences included concrete pillboxes, including two to the south of Station Road and earthworks such as those identified at Coldharbour Farm. The presence of in-filled earthworks of this date cannot be ruled out.

Archaeological objectives 1.22 The objectives of the evaluation are to establish the character, quality, date and extent of any archaeological remains or deposits surviving within the site. This information will assist South Somerset Council in making an informed judgement on the significance of the archaeological resource, and the likely impact upon it of the proposed development. Specific attention will be paid to assess whether any archaeological remains that might survive might be similar in nature and date to those identified on a neighbouring site where Bronze Age and Romano-British remains were recovered.

Methodology 1.23 The fieldwork comprised the excavation of 10 trenches, originally proposed to measure 50m in length and 1.8m in width, in the locations shown on the attached plan (Fig. 2). The overall distribution and length of the trenches was amended on site from the layout agreed in the WSI (CA 2013) to enable the avoidance of trees, hedgerows and a path used by members of the public located along the western edge of the site. The revised trench layout was approved by Steve Membury. Trenches were set out on OS National Grid (NGR) co-ordinates using Leica GPS and surveyed in accordance with CA Technical Manual 4 Survey Manual (2012).

1.24 All trenches were excavated by mechanical excavator equipped with a toothless grading bucket. All machine excavation was undertaken under constant archaeological supervision to the top of the first significant archaeological horizon or the natural substrate, whichever was encountered first. Where archaeological deposits were encountered they were excavated by hand in accordance with CA Technical Manual 1: Fieldwork Recording Manual (2007).

1.25 Deposits were assessed for their palaeoenvironmental potential in accordance with CA Technical Manual 2: The Taking and Processing of Environmental and Other Samples from Archaeological Sites (2003). No deposits were identified that required sampling. All artefacts recovered were processed in accordance with Technical Manual 3 Treatment of Finds Immediately after Excavation (1995).

1.26 The archive and artefacts from the evaluation are currently held by CA at their offices in Kemble. Subject to the agreement of the legal landowner the artefacts will be deposited with Somerset County Museum under accession number TTNCM 74/2013, along with the site archive. A summary of information from this project, set out within Appendix C, will be entered onto the OASIS online database of archaeological projects in Britain.

2. RESULTS (FIGS 2-4)

2.1 This section provides an overview of the evaluation results; detailed summaries of the recorded contexts and finds are to be found in Appendices A and B respectively.

2.2 All identified archaeological features cut the natural substrate, except where modern features cut through the overlying subsoil. No features or deposits of archaeological significance were identified within Trenches 4, 8, 9 and 10.

2.3 In Trenches 2-10 a number of field drains were noted. These field drains contained distinctive mixed fills, often including large pieces of re-deposited natural grey yellow and grey clay, and where tested, ceramic drain pipes were normally encountered at depths of 0.5m or more below the level of the natural substrate.

General Stratigraphy 2.4 The natural geological substrate within excavated Trenches 5-10 comprised mottled yellow grey clay with occasional gravel patches. In Trenches 1-4 the natural geological substrate comprised mid orange yellow clay with frequent bands of gravel. These deposits were overlain by between 0.17m and 0.5m of subsoil which was itself overlain by topsoil measuring between 0.12m and 0.36m in thickness.

Trench 1 (Fig. 2) 2.5 Wide north-west/south-east aligned feature 104 was identified towards the centre of the trench. It had a shallow ‘U’-shaped profile and was filled by sterile clay silt

deposit 103, which appeared to have formed as part of a process of natural silting. The wide, shallow nature of this feature along with the sterile nature of its fill suggests that it represents an in-filled combe or natural hollow.

Trench 2 (Fig. 2) 2.6 Undated, shallow linear feature 203 was identified towards the south-eastern end of the trench. During excavation this feature was found to be highly irregular in both plan and profile and it exhibited evidence of root disturbance at both its sides and base. It was therefore interpreted as the remains of a former grubbed-out hedge.

Trench 3 (Figs 2 & 3) 2.7 Small, oval pit/posthole 303 was identified towards the south-eastern end of the trench. It had a shallow bowl-shaped profile and contained a single fill, 304, from which twenty-eight sherds of Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age Beaker pottery and a fragment of burnt flint were recovered.

2.8 Located to the north-west was small, shallow pit/posthole 305. It contained a single undated fill, 306.

Trench 5 (Fig. 2) 2.9 Wide, shallow ditch 503 was partially exposed towards the south-eastern end of the trench. It cut both the subsoil and the natural geological substrate and contained a two undated fills, 504 and 505, both of which appeared to have derived from a process of silting.

Trench 6 (Fig. 2) 2.10 North-west/south-east aligned ditch, 604, was located towards the south-eastern end of the trench. It cut both the subsoil and the natural geological substrate and contained a single undated fill, 603.

2.11 East-west aligned ditch 606 was located to the north-west of ditch 604. It cut both the subsoil and the natural geological substrate and contained a single undated fill, 603.

Trench 7 (Figs 2 & 4) 2.12 Narrow, shallow ditch/gully 720 was located in the south-western corner of the trench. It was aligned north-south, had an open ‘U’-shaped profile and contained a single undated fill, 721.

2.13 To the north-west narrow, shallow ditch/gully 718 was identified. It was slightly curving in plan, had a shallow open profile and contained a single fill, 719, from which a worked flint flake of prehistoric date and a fragment of animal bone were recovered. Immediately to the north-west pit/ditch terminal 703 was partially revealed. It contained two fills, 704 and 705. Four sherds of Roman pottery of late 2nd to 4th-century AD date, a copper alloy coin of probable 4th-century AD date and three fragments of animal bone were recovered from the latest of these fills, 704.

2.14 Shallow, narrow ditch 706 was revealed towards the centre of the trench. It was aligned east-west, had a shallow flat-based profile and contained two fills, 707 and 713. Seven sherds of pottery of dating from the mid 3rd to the 4th-century AD and nine iron hobnails of Roman date were recovered from the latest of these fills, 707. A probable north-south return of this ditch was recorded in the trench. However, this could not be investigated as it had been significantly truncated by a later stone-lined land drain.

2.15 Slightly curving ditch/gully 714 was identified towards the centre of the trench. It was aligned north-west/south-east, had an open ‘U’-shaped profile and contained a single undated fill, 715.

2.16 Shallow, irregular feature 722 was identified in the north-eastern half of the trench. It contained a single sterile fill, 723, which was similar in character to the overlying subsoil and was therefore interpreted as a natural hollow in-filled by silting.

2.17 North-east/south-west aligned ditch 708 was located towards the north-eastern end of the trench. It cut both the subsoil and the natural geological substrate and contained a single undated fill, 709.

The finds

2.18 Finds recovered from the evaluation included pottery, iron and copper alloy objects, worked flint and burnt flint (Appendix B).

Pottery Prehistoric 2.19 Twenty-eight sherds of fragmentary Beaker pottery were recovered from deposit 304 (the single fill of pit/posthole 303). All were body-sherds which were too fragmentary

to allow the profile of the vessel(s) to be determined. Characteristically for Beaker pottery, the fabric is a fine, grog-tempered type with dark orange surfaces and a dark grey core. Eight of the recovered sherds featured scored external decoration in the form of horizontal lines. The remainder is undecorated, a feature of some Beaker coarse ware, and commonly characteristic of a non-funerary/domestic group. Scored/incised decoration is known from Beaker fine wares, though it would seem to be less common than either corded or comb-impressed decoration. The style of decoration and presence of Beaker coarse ware suggest dating in the late third or early second millennium BC (Gibson & Woods 1997, 97-99).

Roman 2.20 A total of six sherds of Black-burnished ware were recovered during the evaluation. Two sherds were recovered from deposit 704 (the upper fill of pit/ditch terminal 703), three sherds were recovered from deposit 707 (the upper fill of ditch 706) and a further sherd was unstratified. This assemblage included two rim-sherds from conical flanged bowls from ditch fill 707. Black-burnished ware was produced at centres around Poole, Dorset and elsewhere in the south-west, and in this region occurred throughout the Roman period. The conical flanged bowls are known to be produced from the mid-3rd to 4th centuries (Seager Smith and Davies 1993, 235).

2.21 Further Roman pottery including two sherds of grey ware, two sherds in a black- firing, sand-tempered fabric and two sherds in a coarse, reduced fabric were also recovered from deposit 704 (the upper fill of pit/ditch terminal fill 703) and deposit 707 (the upper fill of ditch 706). These fabrics are not closely dateable.

Metal objects 2.22 One copper alloy coin was recovered from deposit 704 (the upper fill of pit/ditch terminal fill 703). It is highly corroded and illegible, but is almost certainly a 4th- century AD nummus.

2.23 Nine iron hobnails of Roman date were recovered from deposit 707 (the upper fill of ditch 706).

Flint 2.24 One worked flint flake was recovered from deposit 719 (the single fill of ditch/gully 718) and one piece of burnt, unworked flint was recovered from deposit 304 (the

single fill of pit/posthole 303. The flake cannot be more precisely dated than to the prehistoric period.

Animal bone 2.25 A total of four fragments of animal bone were recovered from deposits 704 (the upper fill of pit/ditch terminal 703) and 719 (the single fill of ditch/gully 718). The bone was highly fragmented and in a poor state of preservation. The only species that could be identified with any confidence was cattle, a common occurrence in assemblages of later prehistoric or Roman date. No significant interpretative data was observed.

3. DISCUSSION

3.1 The evaluation has identified a number of archaeological features within the proposed development area. These features were confined to Trenches 3, 5, 6, and 7.

Prehistoric 3.2 Pit/posthole 303, identified in Trench 3, contained quantities of Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age Beaker pottery and it is possible that undated pit/posthole 305, also identified in Trench 3, is broadly contemporary. Although these features are suggestive of settlement activity, no further demonstrably contemporary features were identified during the evaluation making further interpretation impossible at present.

3.3 Later Bronze Age activity, indicative of settlement, was identified during an earlier archaeological evaluation immediately to the west of the proposed development area (see Archaeological Background above) and it is possible that the Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age features identified during the current evaluation represent an earlier phase of this settlement activity.

3.4 A single worked flint flake, only broadly dateable to the prehistoric period, was recovered from curving ditch/gully 718 (identified in Trench 7). The function of this feature remains unclear due to the limited view afforded by evaluation trenching, although it is conceivable that it may represent part of a ring-ditch or circular roundhouse drip gully. However, the absence of any definitively associated

postholes, pits, hearths etc. in close proximity to this ditch/gully makes clear identification of settlement remains problematic. A further, undated and slightly curving ditch/gully, 714, was also identified within Trench 7 and may be broadly contemporary due to the similarity in its form and fill characteristics to ditch/gully 718.

Roman 3.5 Roman activity was confined to the south-western half of Trench 7 where pottery of Late Roman date was recovered from pit/ditch terminal 703 and ditch 706. The exact function of these features is unclear at present, although they are suggestive of settlement activity due to the recovery of fragments of domesticated animal bone from pit/ditch terminal 703 and iron hobnails from ditch 706. It is possible that undated ditch gully 720, also identified in Trench 7, is broadly contemporary due to the similarities of its fill with those observed in pit/ditch terminal 703 and ditch 706.

3.6 Roman activity was identified during an earlier archaeological evaluation immediately to the west of the proposed development area (see Archaeological Background above) and it is possible that the Roman features identified during the current evaluation represent a continuation of this activity.

Undated 3.7 Undated ditches were identified in Trenches 5, 6 and at the north-eastern end of Trench 7. The exact function of these features remains unclear although they are likely to relate to land management, drainage or division. None of the ditches identified in these trenches correlate closely to field boundaries depicted by available historic mapping, although a relatively recent date for these features can be postulated due to the fact that they all demonstrably cut through the subsoil.

4. CA PROJECT TEAM

Fieldwork was undertaken by Steven Sheldon, assisted by Andrew Loader, Sarah Foster and Noel Boothroyd. The report was written by Steven Sheldon. The illustrations were prepared by Jon Bennett. The archive has been compiled by Steven Sheldon, and prepared for deposition by James Johnson. The project was managed for CA by Richard Greatorex.

5. REFERENCES

BGS (British Geological Survey) 2011 Geology of Britain Viewer http://maps.bgs.ac.uk/geology viewer_google/googleviewer.html Accessed 20 August 2013

Barratt, J. 2005 The Civil War in the South West, Barnsley, Pen & Sword Military

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2013 Canal Way, Ilminster, Somerset: Written Scheme of Investigation for an Archaeological Evaluation

Fitzpatrick A., 2007 Later Bronze Age and Iron Age. In Webster, C. (ed.) The Archaeology of South West England. South West Archaeological Research Framework, Taunton, Somerset County Council

Gathercole, C. 2003 Somerset Extensive Urban Survey – Ilminster Assessment

Gibson, A. and Woods, A. 1997. Prehistoric Pottery for the Archaeologist. London. Leicester University Press.

Holbrook, N., 2007 Roman. In Webster, C. (ed.) The Archaeology of South West England. South-West Archaeological Research Framework, Taunton, Somerset County Council

Hosfield, R. T., Brown, A. G., Basell, L. and Hounsell, S. 2005 The Palaeolithic Rivers of South-West Britain: Assessment Report and Updated Project Design. Unpublished English Heritage Interim Phase I Project Report (Project No. 3847)

Mills, A.D. 2003 Oxford Dictionary of British Place Names, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Pollard, J. and Healy, F. 2007 Neolithic and Early Bronze Age. In Webster, C. The Archaeology of South West England. South West Archaeological Research Framework, Taunton, Somerset County Council.

Rippon, S. and Croft, B. 2007 Post-Conquest Medieval. In Webster, C. The Archaeology of South-West England. South-West Archaeological Research Framework, Taunton, Somerset County Council.

Seager Smith, R. and Davies, S. M. 1993. ‘Roman Pottery’, in Woodward et al 1993, 202- 214.

Somerset County Council (2013) http://www.heritageoftheile.org.uk/welcome/ilminster/ (accessed18/3/13) WYG Planning and Environment 2013 Canal Way, Ilminster, Somerset Proposed Residential Development: Archaeology and Heritage Desk-Based Assessment.

Webster C (2007) The Archaeology of South West England. South West Archaeological ResearchFramework, Taunton, Somerset County Council

Woodward, P. J., Davies, S. M. and Graham, A. H. 1993. Excavations at The Old Methodist Chapel and Greyhound Yard, Dorchester, 1981-4. Dorset Natural History and Archaeology Society Monograph Series: Number 12. Dorchester.

APPENDIX A: CONTEXT DESCRIPTIONS

Trench Context Type Fill of Context Description L (m) W Depth Spot- No. No. interpretation (m) /thick date ness (m) 1 100 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silt clay >25 >1.8 0.2 1 101 Layer Subsoil Mid-light yellow grey silt clay with >25 >1.8 0.5 frequent rounded pebble inclusions 1 102 Layer Natural Mid orange yellow clay with >25 >1.8 >0.25 subst frequent gravel bands rate 1 103 Fill 104 Fill Sterile mid grey brown clay silt >1.8 9.8 0.48 1 104 Cut Infilled NW/SE aligned combe/natural >1.8 9.8 0.48 combe/natural hollow hollow 2 200 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silt clay >50 >1.8 0.2 2 201 Layer Subsoil Mid-light yellow grey silt clay with >50 >1.8 0.17 frequent rounded pebble inclusions 2 202 Layer Natural Mid orange yellow clay with >50 >1.8 >0.23 substrate frequent gravel bands 2 203 Cut Former hedge Shallow irregular, root disturbed >1.8 1.45 0.1 feature. Remains of former hedge 2 204 Fill 203 Fill Sterile mid grey brown clay silt >1.8 1.45 0.1 3 300 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silt clay >41 >1.8 0.12 3 301 Layer Subsoil Mid-light yellow grey silt clay with >41 >1.8 0.18 frequent rounded pebble inclusions 3 302 Layer Natural Mid orange yellow clay with >41 >1.8 >0.17 substrate frequent gravel bands 3 303 Cut Pit/posthole Small pit/posthole 0.56 0.47 0.15 3 304 Fill 303 Fill Mid grey brown clay silt with 0.56 0.47 0.15 occasional rounded pebble inclusions 3 305 Cut Pit/posthole Small pit/posthole 0.4 0.4 0.04 3 306 Fill 305 Fill Mid grey brown clay silt with 0.4 0.4 0.04 occasional rounded pebble inclusions 4 400 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silt clay >50 >1.8 0.27 4 401 Layer Subsoil Mid-light yellow grey silt clay with >50 >1.8 0.2 frequent rounded pebble inclusions 4 402 Layer Natural Mid orange yellow clay with >50 >1.8 >0.1 substrate frequent gravel bands 5 500 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silt clay >50 >1.8 0.22 5 501 Layer Subsoil Mid-light yellow grey silt clay with >50 >1.8 0.2 frequent rounded pebble inclusions 5 502 Layer Natural Mottled yellow grey clay with >50 >1.8 >0.15 substrate occasional gravel patches 5 503 Cut Ditch NE/SW aligned ditch >1.8 1.33 0.35 5 504 Fill 503 Fill 1st fill of ditch 503, mid grey yellow >1.8 0.8 0.1 clay silt 5 505 Fill 503 Fill 2nd fill of ditch 503, mid orange >1.8 1.33 0.26 grey silt clay 6 600 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silt clay >50 >1.8 0.15 6 601 Layer Subsoil Mid-light yellow grey silt clay with >50 >1.8 0.17 frequent rounded pebble inclusions 6 602 Layer Natural Mottled yellow grey clay with >50 >1.8 >0.13 substrate occasional gravel patches 6 603 Fill 604 Fill Single fill of ditch 604, mid brown >1.6 2.27 0.24 yellow silt clay 6 604 Cut Ditch NE/SW aligned ditch >1.6 2.27 0.24 6 605 Fill 606 Fill Single fill of ditch 606, mid brown >2 1.2 0.2 yellow silt clay 6 606 Cut Ditch E/W aligned ditch >2 1.2 0.2 7 700 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silt clay >50 >1.8 0.32 7 701 Layer Subsoil Mid-light yellow grey silt clay with >50 >1.8 0.35 frequent rounded pebble inclusions 7 702 Layer Natural Mottled yellow grey clay with >50 >1.8 >0.17 substrate occasional gravel patches

7 703 Cut Pit/ditch terminal Shallow pit/ditch terminal >0.7 0.52 0.16 7 704 Fill 703 Fill 2nd fill of pit/ditch terminal 703, mid >0.7 0.52 0.1 grey brown silt clay 7 705 Fill 703 Fill 1st fill of pit/ditch terminal 703, 0.44 0.45 0.08 yellow grey clay silt 7 706 Cut Ditch E/W aligned ditch >1.8 0.78 0.24 7 707 Fill 706 Fill 2nd fill of ditch 706, mid orange >1.8 0.78 0.15 brown clay silt 7 708 Cut Ditch NE/SW aligned ditch >2.2 1.56 0.49 7 709 Fill 708 Fill Single fill of ditch 708, dark grey >2.2 1.56 0.49 brown silt clay 7 710 Cut Field drain Cut for ceramic field drain >2 0.4 0.15 7 711 Fill 710 Fill Fill of 710, ceramic field drain >2 0.4 0.15 7 712 Fill 710 Fill Fill of 710, ceramic field drain >2 0.3 0.15 7 713 Fill 706 Fill 1st fill of ditch706, light orange grey >1.8 0.5 0.08 clay silt 7 714 Cut Ditch/gully NW/SE aligned ditch/gully >1.8 0.38 0.13 7 715 Fill 714 Fill Single fill of ditch/gully 714, mid >1.8 0.38 0.13 brown grey clay silt 7 716 Cut Ditch/gully E-W aligned ditch/gully >2 0.23 0.06 7 717 Fill 716 Fill Single fill of ditch/gully 716, mid >2 0.23 0.06 brown grey clay silt 7 718 Cut Ditch/gully E/W aligned ditch/gully >1.8 0.67 0.1 7 719 Fill 718 Fill Single fill of ditch/gully 718, mid >1.8 0.67 0.1 brown grey clay silt 7 720 Cut Ditch/gully N/S aligned ditch/gully >1 0.35 0.08 7 721 Fill 721 Fill Single fill of ditch/gully 720, mid >1 0.35 0.08 brown grey clay silt 7 722 Cut Infilled natural Irregular infilled natural hollow >1.8 3.7 0.15 hollow 7 723 Fill 722 Fill Sterile mid grey brown clay silt >1.8 3.7 0.15 8 800 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silt clay >50 >1.8 0.24 8 801 Layer Subsoil Mid-light yellow grey silt clay with >50 >1.8 0.22 frequent rounded pebble inclusions 8 802 Layer Natural Mottled yellow grey clay with >50 >1.8 >0.2 substrate occasional gravel patches 9 900 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silt clay >50 >1.8 0.15 9 901 Layer Subsoil Mid-light yellow grey silt clay with >50 >1.8 0.2 frequent rounded pebble inclusions 9 902 Layer Natural Mottled yellow grey clay with >50 >1.8 >0.1 substrate occasional gravel patches 10 1000 Layer Topsoil Mid grey brown silt clay >50 >1.8 0.36 10 1001 Layer Subsoil Mid-light yellow grey silt clay with >50 >1.8 0.18 frequent rounded pebble inclusions 10 1002 Layer Natural Mottled yellow grey clay with >50 >1.8 >0.3 substrate occasional gravel patches

APPENDIX B: THE FINDS

Context Description Count Weight(g) Spot-date Unstratified Roman pottery: Black-burnished ware 1 14 C2-C4 304 Prehistoric pottery: Beaker 28 43 EBA Burnt flint 1 0 704 Roman pottery: Black-burnished ware 2 22 LC2-C4 Roman pottery: black sand-tempered fabric 1 Roman pottery: grey ware 1 Roman coin: nummus 1 1 Animal bone: sheep-size 3 6 707 Roman pottery: Black-burnished ware 3 81 MC3-C4 Roman pottery: black sand-tempered fabric 1 Roman pottery: fine grey ware 1 Roman pottery: coarse reduced fabric 2 Iron: hobnails 9 14 719 Worked flint: flake 1 0 Prehistoric Animal bone: cattle 1 1 721 Charcoal 1 0 -

APPENDIX C: OASIS REPORT FORM

PROJECT DETAILS

Project Name Canal Way, Ilminster, Somerset Short description An archaeological evaluation was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology in August 2013 at Canal Way, Ilminster, Somerset. Ten trenches were excavated.

Further probable prehistoric activity was identified in Trench 7 where a single worked flint flake of prehistoric date was recovered from the fill of a curving ditch gully. The function of this feature remains unclear although it may represent the remains of a ring- ditch or roundhouse drip gully. A further, undated but slightly curving ditch/gully was also identified in the trench and may be broadly contemporary

Undated ditches were identified in Trenches 5, 6 and at the north- eastern end of Trench 7. The exact nature of these features remains unclear although they are likely to relate to land management, drainage or division.

Project dates 12-16 August 2013 Project type Field evaluation Previous work DBA WYG 2013 Future work Unknown PROJECT LOCATION Site Location Canal Way, Ilminster, Somerset Study area (M2/ha) 2ha Site co-ordinates (8 Fig Grid Reference) ST 3513 1450

PROJECT CREATORS Name of organisation Cotswold Archaeology Project Design (WSI) originator Cotswold Archaeology Project Manager Richard Greatorex Project Supervisor Steven Sheldon MONUMENT TYPE None SIGNIFICANT FINDS None PROJECT ARCHIVES Intended final location of archive Content (museum/Accession no.) Physical Somerset County Museum/ TTNCM Pottery, animal bone, 74/2013 metal, flint Paper Somerset County Museum/ TTNCM Context sheets, trench 74/2013 recording forms, section drawings, registered artefact register, photographic registers Digital Somerset County Museum/ TTNCM Digital photos, survey

74/2013 data BIBLIOGRAPHY

CA (Cotswold Archaeology) 2013 Canal Way, Ilminster, Somerset: Archaeological Evaluation. CA typescript report 13517

24 site

N Cirencester 01285 771022 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE Canal Way, Ilminster, Somerset

Somerset FIGURE TITLE Site location plan

0 1km

FIGURE NO. Reproduced from the 1997 Ordnance Survey Explorer map with PROJECT NO. 4476 DATE 21-08-2013 the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller DRAWN BY JB REVISION 00 of Her Majesty's Stationery Office c Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109 APPROVED BY PJM SCALE@A4 1:25,000 1

Trench 3, section AA Trench 3, section BB

SW NE SW NE 35m 34.8m 306 AOD AOD pit/posthole 304 305

pit/posthole 303

Trench 3, pit/posthole 303, looking north-west (scale 0.3m)

Trench 7, section CC Trench 7, section EE Trench 7, section DD Trench 7, section FF

EWSNNS 33.5m 33.2m 707 33.5m AOD AOD topsoil 700 704 AOD ditch 719 NE SW 705 713 pit/ditch 706 33.5m terminal gully AOD 703 718 subsoil 701

715 ditch/gully 714

01m

Cirencester 01285 771022 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE Canal Way, Ilminster, Somerset

FIGURE TITLE Trench 7, ditch/gully 718, looking north-west (scale 0.3m) Trench 7, ditch 706, looking west (scale 0.3m) Trenches 3 and 7; sections and photographs

PROJECT NO. 4476 DATE 21-08-2013 FIGURE NO. DRAWN BY JB REVISION 00 APPROVED BY PJM SCALE@A3 1:20 3