ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS LTD LAND OFF LIME AVENUE, OULTON, SUFFOLK (PHASE 1) AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION: RESEARCH ARCHIVE REPORT SHER OUL 037 Authors: Antony R.R. Mustchin (report) Julie Walker (fieldwork, phasing and report) Peter Thompson (background research) Illustrations: Kathren Henry and Thomas Light NGR: TM 518 941 Report No: 5069 District: Waveney Site Code: OUL 037 Approved: Project No: 5758 Signed: Date: 17 March 2016 This report is confidential to the client. Archaeological Solutions Ltd 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. © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Archaeological Solutions is an independent archaeological contractor providing the services which satisfy all archaeological requirements of planning applications, including: Desk-based assessments and environmental impact assessments Historic building recording and appraisals Trial trench evaluations Geophysical surveys Archaeological monitoring and recording Archaeological excavations Post excavation analysis Promotion and outreach Specialist analysis ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS LTD Unit 6, Brunel Business Court, Eastern Way, Bury St Edmunds IP32 7AJ Tel 01284 765210 P I House, Rear of 23 Clifton Road, Shefford, Bedfordshire, SG17 5AF Tel: 01462 850483 e-mail: info@ascontracts.co.uk www.archaeologicalsolutions.co.uk twitter.com/ArchaeologicalS www.facebook.com/ArchaeologicalSolutions 1 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 CONTENTS OASIS SUMMARY SHEET 3 1 INTRODUCTION 4 2 SITE NARRATIVE Overview Background Results 4 4 5 8 3 SPECIALIST FINDS AND ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS The Small Finds The Prehistoric and Roman Pottery The Post-Roman Pottery The Fired Clay, Daub and Ceramic Building Materials The Slag The Struck Flint The Animal Bone The Environmental Samples 46 46 53 55 62 64 67 69 74 4 DISCUSSION 82 5 CONCLUSIONS 94 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 95 BIBLIOGRAPHY 96 APPENDICES 1 CONCORDANCE OF FINDS 2 WRITTEN SCHEME OF INVESTIGATION 3 OASIS DATA COLLECTION FORM PLATES FIGURES 2 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 OASIS SUMMARY SHEET Project details Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk Project name Between February and April 2015 Archaeological Solutions Ltd (AS) conducted an archaeological excavation on land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk. The excavation was commissioned by Persimmons Homes Ltd and was undertaken in advance of the proposed residential development of the site. The excavation was preceded by a geophysical survey and trial trench evaluation, also conducted by AS. As was suggested by the forerunning evaluation, the excavation revealed abundant evidence of activity dating to the late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age and early to middle Anglo-Saxon period. Evidence of Romano-British, middle to late Anglo-Saxon and Saxo-Norman/ medieval occupation/ activity was also encountered. Other periods were more sparsely represented. Of particular significance were a late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age enclosure system, a Romano-British enclosure, hearths and a post-built structure, five Anglo-Saxon sunken-featured buildings and five burn flint pits, also of Anglo-Saxon date. A middle to late Anglo-Saxon enclosure, a post and beam slot structure and a Saxo-Norman/ medieval metal working area were also recorded. Notable small finds comprise eight late Anglo-Saxon/ Viking Age scale weights with embedded silver coins. Project dates (fieldwork) Previous work (Y/N?) P. number Type of project Site status Current land use Planned development Main features (+dates) Significant finds (+dates) Project location County/ District/ Parish HER/ SMR for area Post code (if known) Area of site NGR Height AOD (min/max) Project creators Brief issued by Project supervisor/s (PO) Funded by Full title Authors Report no. Date (of report) February to April 2015 Y Future work 5758 Site code Archaeological Excavation None Agriculture Housing Late Bronze Age/ early Iron age: Romano-British: Early to middle Anglo-Saxon: Middle to late Anglo-Saxon: Saxo-Norman to medieval: Prehistoric: Romano-British: Anglo-Saxon/ Anglo-Saxon/ Viking Age: Saxo-Norman/ medieval Y OUL 037 Enclosure system; pit cluster; clay-lined pits Enclosure, posthole structure; quarry pit; hearths; pit clusters Ditches; SFBs; burnt flint pits Enclosure; posthole and beam slot structure Metalworking area Pottery; struck flint Pottery Blade; pottery Lead coin weights Pottery; slag Suffolk Waveney Suffolk Historic Environment Record c. 35h TM 518 941 c. 10m/ 20m Oulton Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Conservation Team Julie Walker and Antony R.R. Mustchin Persimmon Homes Ltd Land Off Lime Avenue, Oulton, SUFFOLK (Phase 1). An Archaeological Excavation: Research Archive Report Mustchin, A.R.R. and Walker, J. 5069 17 March 2016 3 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 LAND OFF LIME AVENUE, OULTON, SUFFOLK (PHASE 1) AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION: RESEARCH ARCHIVE REPORT 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This report comprises the research archive for the first phase of excavation on land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (centred on NGR TM 518 941; Figs. 1-2) carried out between February and April 2015. The excavation was preceded by a geophysical survey (Egan 2014) and archaeological trial trench evaluation (Orzechowski 2015). This report follows the Archaeological Assessment and Updated Project Design (Walker et al. 2015). 2 SITE NARRATIVE Overview 2.1 Between February and April 2015 Archaeological Solutions Ltd (AS) conducted an archaeological excavation on land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (centred on NGR TM 518 941; Figs. 1-2). The excavation was commissioned by Persimmons Homes Ltd and was required in compliance with a planning condition attached to planning permission for a new residential development. The excavation was preceded by a geophysical survey and trial trench evaluation (also conducted by AS; Egan 2014; Orzechowski 2015). 2.2 The project was conducted in accordance with a brief issued by Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Conservation Team (SCC AS-CT; dated 22/01/2015), and a written scheme of investigation (specification) compiled by AS (dated 23/02/2015) and approved by SCC AS-CT. It conformed to the Institute for Archaeologists’ (2013) Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Excavation and relevant sections of Gurney’s (2003) Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England. 2.3 The principal aim of the excavation – as set out in section 5 of the specification – was to preserve the archaeological evidence contained within the site by record and to attempt a reconstruction of the history and use of the site. Specific research priorities were to: place the activity [within the site] in context with known activity of these dates in the surrounding area; characterise the activity present within the site; identify topographical/ geological/ geographical influences on the layout and development of the activity present within the…site and in the surrounding area; and [to attempt] environmental reconstruction. 4 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2.4 Following the initial assessment of the excavated evidence, including interim specialist statements, these research priorities remained broadly valid. However, based on the preliminary assessment of the environmental assemblage, there is little potential for palaeoenvironmental reconstruction. Phase-specific avenues of investigation were also proposed (see Walker et al. 2015, section 13). Background Site Description 2.5 Oulton is located on the outskirts of Lowestoft, close to Suffolk’s east coast (Fig. 1). The development site comprises an irregular plot of greenfield/ agricultural land immediately north of Lime Avenue on the western edge of Oulton (Fig. 2). Modern housing lies to the south of Lime Avenue, while the eastern edge of the site is delimited by a trackway (Long Fields Path) and additional fields. Further agricultural land lies to the north and west. Topography, Geology and Soils 2.6 The site occupies a gentle, south-facing slope between c. 10m and 20m AOD. The south to north course of the River Waveney passes c. 1.9km to the west. The area’s underlying geology comprises sands of the Crag Group (British Geological Survey 1978), largely overlain (within the site) by sands of the Happisburgh Glacigenic Formation (ibid.). An area of Head – clay, silt, sand and gravel – is present in the eastern area of the site (ibid.). The site’s soils are those of the Wick 3 Association, described as ‘deep well drained coarse loamy often stoneless soils…with…some similar sandy soils’ (Soil Survey of England and Wales 1983, 9). These soils are at risk of water erosion and are suitable for the cultivation of cereals and some horticultural crops (ibid.). 2.7 The excavation encountered a ubiquitous topsoil (L2000) of friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with frequent small stones. In the south-eastern area of the site L2000 overlay a post-medieval or later colluvium (L2009), made up of friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate small stones and charcoal flecks. An unnumbered alluvium, believed to represent a palaeochannel, was sealed by L2000 in the far north of the site. 2.8 The natural geology varied across the site. The most abundant material (L2001) – present across most of the site – comprised a friable, mid yellow orange sand with occasional small stones. L2001 was interspersed with areas of friable, yellow orange sandy gravel with occasional small chalk pebbles (L2002). A small area of chalky clay natural (L2010) was present in the central, northern area of the site, while the easternmost area of the site was underlain by firm, light grey brown sandy silt and clay (L2330). Archaeological and Historical Background 2.9 Little systematic archaeological investigation has previously taken place in the immediate area of the site. Sites and find spots recorded by the Suffolk Historic Environment Record (SHER) number only 16 within a 1km radius (Fig. 2). 5 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Prehistoric 2.10 Prehistoric stone tools found within a 1km radius include a Palaeolithic worked implement (SHER OUL Misc) and a late Neolithic artefact scatter found on Pound Lane to the north-east of the site (SHER LWT 015). A Bronze Age hornblende granulite battle axe was also found to the south, at Lothingland (SHER SUF Misc). Cropmarks of one or more ring ditches have been identified in the parish, between 500m and 1km south/ south-west of the site (SHER OUL 005). An earlier archaeological evaluation on land off Mobbs Way – immediately adjacent to the site’s south-eastern boundary – yielded a small assemblage of prehistoric material including a single sherd of Bronze Age to early Iron Age pottery and two pieces of struck flint (SHER OUL 011; Craven 2010). Romano-British 2.11 The only Roman finds within 1km of the site comprise two bronze coins found by metal detecting (SHER OUL 001). Medieval to post-medieval 2.12 The evaluation at Mobbs Way identified a medieval or post-medieval ditch, while the contemporary finds assemblage from this site suggests an arable use (SHER OUL 011; Craven 2010). St Michael’s Church (SHER OUL 004), located 1km to the south-west of the site is thought to date back to Norman times, although it is not recorded in the Domesday Book. The church was rebuilt between the 14th and 15th centuries, and underwent 19th century restorations (ibid.). The cropmark of a sub-oval enclosure or moat is located over 500m west/ north-west of the site (SHER FTN 013). Medieval and post medieval finds from the area include a 14th century jetton and medieval finger ring found at Oulton Broad village (SHER LWT Misc) and post-medieval tile and other finds from the area of the abovementioned enclosure or moat (SHER FTN 011). A market is recorded at Oulton in 1307 AD (SHER OUL Misc). Project Background Geophysical survey 2.13 A geophysical survey conducted by AS recorded linear anomalies of possible archaeological origin (Egan 2014). In summary: West Field ‘The survey of the western field identified four possible archaeological anomalies; however these could equally be related to modern agricultural activity’. Middle Field ‘The principal recorded anomaly forms a curve or an enclosure which may be of archaeological origin. The enclosure contains four anomalies possibly indicative of infilled, discrete pits. In the same southern area of the field five anomalies may be 6 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 pits of archaeological origin. A linear feature is located in the north-east area of site and is oriented east to west. It may represent a former field boundary and may be of archaeological origin’. East Field ‘A linear ditch runs north-east to south-west across the north-eastern section of the site and may be of archaeological origin. It is close to a second ditch which may also be of archaeological origin’. Conclusions ‘The conducive geology and presence of possible archaeological anomalies suggests that the survey has been successful. The remaining anomalies are of modern origin, relating to agricultural activity and ferrous objects’. Trial trench evaluation 2.14 An archaeological trial trench evaluation was undertaken by AS (Orzechowski 2015). In summary: ‘The earliest features were prehistoric. Five sherds of early Bronze Age pottery were present in Pit F1088 (Trench 105). Three sherds of late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age pottery occurred within Posthole F1033 (Trench 85)’. ‘Sparse struck flint numbering one to three pieces was found in several features (Trenches 52, 67, 82, 114, 117 and 163). Sometimes the struck flint was residual within Saxon features, for example, Pits F1110 and F1114 (Trench 83)’. ‘Five features contained early to middle Saxon (mid 5th to 9th century) pottery: Ditch F1003 (Trench 62), Pit F1069 (Trench 64), Pits F1110 and F1114 (Trench 83), and Pit F1126 (Trench 109); while five features contained Saxo-Norman (10th to 12th century) pottery: Ditch F1041 (Trench 59), Ditch F1043 (Trench 116), Pit F1057 (Trench 84), ?Hearth F1081 (Trench 108), and Ditch F1084 (Trench 105). A possible sunken-featured building (SFB) was recorded in Trench 108. Many of the Saxon features were discrete features (pits), including possible Hearth F1081 (Trench 108). Trenches 64, 83, 84, 108 and 109, which contained the discrete Saxon features were located in close proximity. Pit F1114 and the surface of the ?SFB produced the largest number of pottery sherds (34 and 12 sherds, respectively). CBM, animal bone and a ?rubbing stone were also found within Pit F1114’. ‘[Ditch] F1053 (Trench 163) contained a sherd of medieval (12th to 13th century) pottery’. ‘Undated Ditches F1035 and F1075, respectively located in Trenches 85 and 87, appeared to align with a north to south field boundary depicted on the 1st edition OS map of 1885...Although lacking finds it is possible that both features were 19th century in origin, or possibly earlier. The same boundary was not identified in Trench 86, although subsequent ploughing or some other agency may have resulted 7 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 in the loss of evidence here. Two Ditches in Trench 84 (F1049 and F1051) appeared to run perpendicular to this field boundary...’ Results Phasing 2.15 Based on the analysis of the recovered artefactual assemblage (pottery, struck flint and CBM) and associated stratigraphic evidence, an assessment and refinement of the dating of on-site activity was conducted as part of the project’s post-excavation phase. Seven chronological phases of activity were identified (Table 1; Fig. 4). The majority of features dated to the late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age or early to middle Anglo-Saxon period. Evidence of Romano-British, middle to late Anglo-Saxon and Saxo-Norman/ medieval activity was also encountered. Other periods were only sparsely represented. Phase 1 2 3 4 5 Sub-phase 5.1 5.2 6 7 Period Earlier Prehistoric Late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age Middle to late Iron Age Romano-British Early to middle Anglo-Saxon Middle to late Anglo-Saxon Saxo-Norman/ medieval Post-medieval to early modern/ modern Date Pre-400 BC c. 1300 to 400 BC c. 400 BC to AD 43 AD 43 to 410 5th to 9th century AD 9th to mid 12th century AD 11th to 14th century AD c. AD 1500 to 1900+ Table 1: Chronological Phasing Phase 1: Earlier Prehistoric (pre-400BC) Summary 2.16 Five earlier prehistoric features were identified. These comprised two large boundary ditches (F2117=2757 and F2476=2514) running c. north-west to southeast across the site, and two pits (F2468 and F2542) and a c. north to south aligned ditch (F2470) in the north of the site (Figs. 5, 17 and 19); Pit F2468 cut the fill of Ditch F2470. Neither of the larger ditches contained artefacts and their dating was tentatively based on the stratigraphic relationship between F2117 (=2757) and Phase 2 Ditch F2027 (see below). Of the northernmost features, Pit F2468 yielded mainly prehistoric pot sherds, while Ditch 2470 – the stratigraphically earlier of this intercutting pair – yielded three sherds (12g) of ?prehistoric pottery. The fill of Pit F2542 (L2543) was truncated by Phase 2 Ditch F2027 (Grid Square E5). The Phase 1 ditches 2.17 Parallel Ditches F2117 (=2757) and F2476 (=2514; Table 2) followed a northwest to south-east alignment across the site (Figs. 5, 16-17, 23 and 25). F2117 (=2757) ran between Grid Squares E5 and K1, while F2476 (=2515) ran between Grid Squares D3 and F2; these features were spaced some 45.6m apart. The alignment, profiles and fills the ditches suggest that they were contemporary, while Ditch F2117 (=2757) was stratigraphically earlier than Phase 2 Ditch F2027 (=1128; Enclosure 1; see below). Due to poor preservation and truncation by later features, 8 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 the termini of these ditches were not recorded. The middle section of F2476 (=2515; Grid Square E3) petered out and could not be recorded in plan or section (Fig. 23). 2.18 Ditch F2470 ran c. north to south between Grid Square F6 and the northern excavation edge (Figs. 5, 17 and 19). The fill of this feature was truncated at its southern terminus by Phase 1 Pit F2468 (Table 2). However, the alignment of F2470 was at odds to the other Phase 1 ditches and its relationship to the latter remains uncertain. Feature Fill(s) 2117 =2757 2118=2758 2470 2471 2476 =2514 2477=2515 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, flattish base (c.165.00 x 1.15 x 0.31m) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, flattish base (c. 17.00 x 1.07 x 0.17m) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, flattish base (c. 20.00 x 0.96 x 0.27m) Fill description Comments/ relationships Finds Friable, mid yellowish grey brown silty sand with occasional small and medium sub-rounded stones Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with moderate stones Ditch; cut L2002; cut by F2027, F2068, F2098, F2139, F2504, F2508, F2510 and F2646 Ditch; cut L2001; cut by F2468 - Friable, mid orange brown silty sand Ditch; cut L2001 and L2477; cut by F2478 and F2480 - Pottery (12g); CBM (3) Table 2: The Phase 1 ditches The Phase 1 pits 2.19 Pit F2468 (Table 3) truncated the fill of Gully F2470 at its southern terminus (Grid Square F6; Fig. 17). The positioning of this pit in relation to the earlier feature appeared to be a deliberate placement. The fill of Pit F2468 (L2469) was cut by Phase 3 Pit F2466; it yielded four sherds of prehistoric pottery and a single intrusive early Anglo-Saxon sherd (totalling 19g overall). Despite being devoid of artefacts, the fill of elongated Pit F2542 (L2543) was similar to the Pit F2468 and Ditch F2470 (Tables 2-3). L2543 was also truncated by Phase 2 Ditch F2027 (Grid Square E5) and it is thought that this feature was contemporary with the neighbouring Phase 1 features. Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2468 2469 2542 2543 Irregular/ moderately sloping sides, irregular base (1.87 x 1.85 x 0.28m) Linear/ gently sloping sides, concave base (c. 3.70+ x 0.87 x 0.16m) Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with frequent stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with frequent stones Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2001 and L2471; cut by F2466 Finds Ditch; cut L2002; cut by F2156 - Pottery (19g) Table 3: The Phase 1 pits Phase 2: Late Bronze Age/ Early Iron Age (c. 1300 to 400 BC) Summary 2.20 The earliest, closely dateable phase of activity belongs to the late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age transition. The majority of the Phase 2 features were pits. A single pit cluster (Pit Cluster 1) and a larger, more dispersed feature cluster were identified. Part of a large, rectilinear enclosure (Enclosure 1) was also exposed within the central/ south-eastern area of the site. Seven gullies were observed; two of which 9 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 were intercutting and mirrored the alignment of an adjacent ditch. The remaining Phase 2 gullies were associated with the dispersed feature cluster. 2.21 Dating of the Phase 2 features was primarily based on pottery from their fills (see The Prehistoric and Roman Pottery). The Bronze Age to early Iron Age assemblage is consistent with regional pottery traditions of this period and occurs in two coarse calcined flint-tempered fabrics (ibid.); of particular note is a decorated body sherd from Pit F2349. Enclosure 1 2.22 Phase 2 Ditches F2027 (=1128), F2062, F2066 and F2072 defined the northern and western edges of a rectilinear enclosure boundary (Enclosure 1; Table 4; Fig. 6). Intercutting Gullies F2452 and F2457 ran parallel to the eastern edge of Ditch F2066 (Grid Square E2) and, despite lacking artefactual evidence are thought to have been contemporary to it (see below). Ditch F2111 (Grid Square D4) also appeared to be directly related to Enclosure 1; although the stratigraphic relationship between this feature and Ditch F2066 was obscured by Tree Bole F2086 (Grid Square D4), F2111 appeared to comprise an east to west continuation of the former. It is possible that Ditches F2066 and F2111 delineated the north-eastern corner of an additional Phase 2 enclosure, further evidence of which had been lost. Feature 2027 =1128 Fill(s) 2028 =1129 2062 2063 2066 2067 2072 2073 2111 2112 2452 2453 2457 2458 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 170.00 x 1.50 x 0.53m) Linear/ gently sloping sides, concave base (c.22.00 x 1.24 x 0.20m) Linear/ steep sides, concave base (c. 46.00 x 0.60 x 0.22m) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 10.00 x 0.50 x 0.22m) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, flattish base (c. 11.40 x 0.40 x 0.14m) Linear/ steep sides, concave base (5.50+ x 0.28 x 0.17) Linear/ steep sides, irregular base (5.50+ x 0.14-0.22 x 0.12m) Fill description Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with frequent small and medium sub-rounded stones Friable, dark orange brown silty sand with occasional rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small and medium rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with moderate small and medium sub-rounded and rounded stones Friable, mid orange grey brown silty sand with moderate small rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Comments/ relationships Ditch; cut F2072 F2117; cut by F2025, F2087 and F2137 Ditch; cut L2002; cut by F2025 and F2162 Finds Pottery (20g) Ditch; cut L2002; cut by tree bole (unnumbered) - Gully; cut L2001; cut by F2027 Pottery (13g) Ditch; cut L2001 and L2002; cut by F2115, F2135, and tree bole (unnumbered) Gully; cut L2001 and L2458; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Gully; cut L2001 and L2455; sealed by L2009 - - - Table 4: Enclosure 1 and associated boundaries 2.23 The exposed part of Enclosure 1 spanned the central and south-eastern area of the site and measured approximately 12,877m2 (1.29ha; internally); it would have originally been larger, however. The north-western corner of the Enclosure 1 boundary was cut by Phase 2 Pit F2025 (GS E5; see below). Ditch F2027 (=1128) ran east to west for approximately 27m and was recut along its entire length by F2072. The stratigraphically later ditch followed the same alignment for over 162m and disappeared beneath the eastern excavation edge. Both F2027 (=1128) and F2072 yielded datable finds. North to south aligned Ditch F2062 was c. 28m in length and was assigned to Phase 2 based on its obvious spatial relationship with 10 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 F2027 (=1128) and F2072 (Fig. 6). The profiles and fills of the principal enclosure ditches were also similar. 2.24 The ‘staggered’ western edge of Enclosure 1, formed by Ditches F2062 and F2066 may have represented a short section of trackway running north to south at the boundary of Grid Squares D4 and E4 (Figs. 6 and 16-17). The alignment of this ?trackway was mirrored to the south by Ditch F2066 and intercutting Gullies F2452 and F2457 (Fig. 16). It is possible, therefore, that a narrow trackway ran between Enclosure 1 and the putative enclosure to the west (see above), possibly with a wide access point to Enclosure 1 present between the termini of Ditch F2062 and the gullies to the south (Grid Squares E2-E3; Fig. 16). 2.25 Regional examples of similar enclosures and trackways include those excavated at South Hornchurch, Essex (Guttmann and Last 2000). The latter were part of a more complex archaeological sequence, however, which also included extensive structural and economic evidence (ibid.). Late Bronze Age crop use was interpreted at the Hornchurch site, while ditched trackways associated with the main phases of occupation were thought to be ‘droveways for moving stock through the landscape’ (ibid. 349). A possible late Bronze Age or early Iron Age droveway is also known at Wherstead in the Orwell Valley (SHER WHR 021; after Yates 2007), while a middle Iron Age droveway – close to an area of possible settlement activity – has also been recently excavated at Watton Green, Norfolk (Mustchin and Cussans in preparation). Clustered features Pit Cluster 1 2.26 Pit Cluster 1 (GS F3; Table 5; Figs. 6 and 16) was located in the southern area of the excavation, within the confines of Enclosure 1. This cluster comprised five pits of variable size and depth (F2202, F2567, F2569, F2575 and F2577). All displayed similar profiles and fills, however. The fills of F2567 (L2568) and F2569 (L2570) also contained charcoal inclusions (Plate 1). Only one pit in this cluster (F2569) yielded dateable finds (18 sherds of early Iron Age pottery). The sherds from F2569 are part of a decorated bowl in the post-Deverel-Rimbury tradition, similar to an example from Framlingham (see The Prehistoric and Roman Pottery). The remaining features were dated based on their general similarities and proximity to F2569. 2.27 Feature clustering, particularly during the Iron Age, is common to a large number of regional sites (e.g. Newton and Mustchin 2015; O’Brien forthcoming). A possible late Bronze Age to middle Iron Age field system and a large number of contemporary feature groups (or ‘activity areas’) were excavated on the route of the A505 Baldock Bypass in Hertfordshire (Clarke and Phillips 2009, 35ff). The grouped features in Area 4 of this site included paired postholes, interpreted as ‘simple twopost structures’, possible trackway boundaries and a possible unurned cremation burial (ibid.). Features consistent with the subterranean storage of grain – a characteristic Iron Age practice across lowland Britain (Cunliffe 2010, 411ff, fig. 16.2) – were also present, while many features had been ultimately used for the disposal of refuse, regardless of primary function (Clarke and Phillips 2009, 45-6, fig. 4.10). Early 11 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Iron Age pit groups within possible stock enclosures were also excavated at Little Melton in South Norfolk (Norfolk Historic Environment Record 50209; www.heritage.norfolk.gov.uk/). Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2202 2203 2567 2568 2569 2570 Oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.48 x 0.26 x 0.15m) Oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.48 x 0.27 x 0.12m) Oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.90 x 0.90 x 0.55m) Firm, dark brown grey silty clay with occasional small sub-rounded stone Friable, dark grey black sandy silt with occasional stones Friable, dark brown/ black sandy silt with frequent stones and occasional charcoal flecks Friable, light grey brown sandy silt with frequent stones Friable, dark brown/ black silty sand with occasional stones 2571 2575 2576 2577 2578 Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.20 x 0.16 x 0.06m) Oval/ gently sloping sides, concave base (0.36 x 0.24 x 0.05m) Friable, mid orange brown sandy silt with frequent stones Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Finds Pottery (296g) - Stakehole; cut L2002 sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Table 5: Pit cluster 1 The dispersed feature cluster 2.28 A large, dispersed cluster of 28 features – mostly pits – was present in the north-western area of the excavation (Grid Squares B6-D6; Table 6; Figs. 6 and 12). Three gullies belonging to this group (F2293, F2297 and F2353) were irregular/ linear in plan with similar fills, and were intercut with similarly dated pits (F2241, F2295, F2312 and F2357). Three sets of intercutting pits were also present (F2328, F2338 and F2341; F2370 and F2372; F2398 and F2400). Most of the pits were relatively small; the largest example (Pit F2351) measured 2.2m x 1.4m in plan. 2.29 Two clay-lined pits (F2241 and F2317) were located c. 9.5m apart in the central area of the cluster (Grid Squares B5 and C6). The primary fills of both features contained charcoal, but there was no evidence of in situ burning (Plate 2). This redeposited burnt material may have derived from domestic activity in the near vicinity. Pit F2241 also yielded six sherds of pottery, while F2317 was dated based on its similarity to F2241 and obvious spatial relationship with other Phase 2 features. The remaining pits in this cluster were unremarkable. Several yielded datable pottery (F2056, F2312, F2349, F2362 and F2367) – most probably indicative of small-scale refuse disposal – and the majority contained generally similar fills. Feature Fill(s) 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2056 2057 2241 2244 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Sub-oval/ near vertical sides, irregular base (0.57 x 0.40 x 0.09m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.56 x 0.52 x 0.23m) Sub-oval/ near vertical sides, irregular base (0.98 x 0.88 x 0.34m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (1.10 x 1.10 x 0.17m) Oval/ moderately sloping sides, flattish base (0.82 x 0.64 x 0.18m) Fill description Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate to frequent irregular stones Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with frequent small charcoal flecks and occasional small stones Friable, dark grey brown silty sand and charcoal flecks with moderate small and medium stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small rounded stones and charcoal flecks Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular stones Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Finds - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Animal bone (23g) Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pottery (3:40g); CBM (1g) Pottery (131g); fired clay (313g); Pit; cut L2296; cut by F2297 12 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2243 2242 2293 2294 2295 2296 2297 2298 2299 2300 2312 2313 2317 2318 2325 2326 2327 2328 2329 2338 2339 Linear/ irregular sides, irregular base (c. 4.10 x 0.41 x 0.09m) Irregular/ moderately sloping sides, irregular base (1.05 x 1.04 x 0.18m) Curvilinear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 3.50 x 0.52 x 0.28m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.34 x 0.29 x 0.24m) Sub-oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (1.02 x 0.56 x 0.20m) Sub-rounded/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.62 x 0.59 x 0.11m) Sub-rounded/ steep sides, flattish base (0.47 x 0.42 x 0.17m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.84 x 0.60 x 0.27m) Oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.78 x 0.47 x 0.17m) 2340 2341 2342 2343 2344 2349 2350 2351 2352 2361 2353 2354 2355 2356 2357 2358 2362 2364 Oval/ steep sides, irregular base (1.36 x 0.64 x 0.42m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.44 x 0.42 x 0.19m) Sub-oval/ irregular sides, flattish base (1.50 x 1.06 x 0.21m) Sub-rectangular/ irregular sides, flattish base (2.14 x 1.32 x 0.35m) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 5.00 x 0.25 x 0.14m) Oval, moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.40 x 0.37 x 0.09m) Oval/ gently sloping sides, concave base (0.41 x 0.31 x 0.19m) Oval/ steep sides, Friable, mid yellowish brown sandy silt with moderate large grey clay lumps and occasional small and medium sub-angular and subrounded stones Firm, greenish yellow clay with occasional medium rounded stones and chalk Friable, light grey brown silty sand with occasional small flints burnt flint (167g) Baked clay (42g); burnt flint (294g) - Gully; cut L2001; cut by F2281 and F2306; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2241 - Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with occasional small rounded and sub-rounded stones Gully; cut L2001, F2241 and F2295; cut by F2310, and F2312 - Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded stones Friable, mid orange brown silty sand with occasional small and medium sub-angular and sub-rounded stones Firm, dark grey brown clay silt with moderate small angular burnt flint Firm, mid greenish brown silty clay with occasional small angular stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 CBM (1g) Pit ; cut L2298; cut by F2310; sealed by L2000 Pottery (8g) Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Pit; cut L2342, cut by F2338 CBM (5g) Friable, dark brown/ black silty sand with frequent charcoal and CBM flecks Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with moderate flecks of charcoal flecks and occasional stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks and stones Friable, mid grey silty sand with moderate charcoal flecks and occasional stones Friable, dark grey brown silty sand occasional charcoal and CBM flecks Pit; cut L2329 and L2342; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks and stones Friable, light grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, dark yellowish black silty sand with occasional stones Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Gully; cut L2001 and L2358; sealed by L2000 Pottery (4g) Friable, dark brown/ black silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks and stones Friable dark orange brown silty sand with occasional stones Pit; cut L2001 and L2358; sealed by L2001 Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2353 and F2355; sealed by L2001 Pit; cut L2001; sealed - Friable, mid orange brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular and sub-rounded stones Friable, dark grey/ black silty sand - - Pottery (2g) Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2328, F2338 Pottery (5g) Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Pottery (14g); CBM (7g) CBM (8g) - Pottery (4g); CBM (80g) Pottery ( 13 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 concave base (0.78 x 0.43 x 0.19m) 2363 2367 2368 Oval/ irregular sides, concave base (0.63 x 0.48 x 0.08m) 2369 2370 2371 2372 2373 2376 2377 2398 2399 2400 2401 Sub-oval/ gently sloping sides, flattish base (1.60 x 0.94 x 0.09m) Oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.50 x 0.38 x 0.13m) Sub-rectangular/ moderately sloping sides, concave (0.98 x 0.74 x 0.15m) Irregular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (1.40 x 1.05 x 0.20m) Oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.65 x 0.30 x 0.23m) with occasional stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with frequent stones Friable, dark black brown silty sand with moderate charcoal flecks and occasional stones Friable, mid orange brown silty sand with moderate stones and occasional charcoal flecks Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with moderate stones and occasional chalk Friable, mid brown grey with occasional stones by L2000 5g); slag (8g) - Pit; cut L2369; sealed by L2000 - - Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2372 Pottery (2g) Pit; cut L2371; sealed by L2000 - Friable, dark orange brown silty sand with occasional stones Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with moderate stones Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2400; sealed by L2000 CBM (63g); animal bone (52g) Friable, dark brown clack silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks and stones Pit; cut L2399; sealed by L2000 - Table 6: Dispersed Phase 2 feature cluster Dispersed Phase 2 pits 2.30 Four dispersed Phase 2 pits were identified (Table 7). Of particular significance was a large, sub-oval pit (F2025) at the north-western corner of Enclosure 1 (Grid Square E5; Fig. 6). This pit truncated the fills of enclosure Ditches F2027 (=1128) and F2062 and yielded a single sherd (4g) of late Bronze Age to early Iron Age coarse ware pottery; the long axis of F2025 followed the north to south alignment of Ditch F2062. The apparently deliberate placement of Pit F2025 and its stratigraphic relationships might suggest that it held some particular significance, possibly relating to the abandonment or closure of Enclosure 1. Special deposits, often linked with features or locations of particular, perceived importance are a common Iron Age phenomenon (Cunliffe 2010, 570ff). Although the single sherd of pottery from Pit F2025 is hardly reminiscent of the complex, structured deposition displayed by features at other sites – often including pottery groups, artefact sets, articulated animal remains and/ or human remains (ibid. 570) – the possibility that this feature originally contained archaeologically ‘invisible’ organic deposits such as fleece, cheese or plant matter cannot be discounted. Regional examples of special deposits within Iron Age pits include an amuletic stone pendant from the fill of a storage pit at Ingham Quarry, Suffolk (Newton and Mustchin 2015) and complex group of material including a worked bone bobbin, human foetus and a horse burial within the fills of a ‘ritual pit’ at Duxford in Cambridgeshire (Lyons 2011, 115). 2.31 The remaining Phase 2 pits (F2442, F2444 and F2454; Grid Squares D2 and E2-E3) were devoid of datable material and were dated based on their spatial/ stratigraphic relationships. All lay in close proximity to Phase 2 boundary features; the upper fill of Pit F2454 was truncated by Gully F2452. 14 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2025 2026 2442 2443 Sub-oval/ moderately sloping sides, flattish base (1.50 x 1.50 x 0.50m) Irregular/ irregular sides, flattish base (2.73 x 1.22 x 0.68m) 2444 2445 Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate small stones Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with occasional stones Friable, mid reddish brown sandy silt occasional stones 2454 2455 Sub-circular/ gently sloping sides, concave base (1.51 x 0.88 x 0.17m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.82 x 0.47 x 0.34m) 2456 Friable, mid reddish brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, light grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2001, F2027 and F2062; sealed by L2000 Finds Pottery (4g) Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2452 and F2457 - - Table 7: Dispersed Phase 2 pits Phase 3: Middle to Late Iron Age (c. 400BC to AD 43) Summary 2.32 The middle to late Iron Age at the site was represented by just four dispersed pits, all of which were located in the northern half of the excavation (Fig. 7). This comparative dearth of Phase 3 activity suggests either a large-scale reduction in the scale and intensity of activity at this time, or a major shift in the focus of activity away from the site, possibly to the north. The Phase 3 pits 2.33 The Phase 3 pits (F2040 (Grid Square G6), F2310 (Grid Square C6), F2359 (Grid Square C6) and F2466 (Grid Square F6); Table 8; Figs. 6, 12, 17 and 21) were dissimilar in shape and form, and in the nature of their fills. These features were dated according to the finds they contained, or tentatively, according to their stratigraphic relationships. None was particularly notable. The largest pottery assemblage from any of these features comprises 14 sherds (132g) from Fill L2041 of F2040, while another small group (nine sherds; 129g) is present from Pit F2466 (L2467); Pit F2040 also yielded a single, residual sherd (18g) of late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age date. The Phase 3 pottery occurs in a single fabric, characteristic of middle to late Iron Age manufacture, while its occurrence with burnt flint in Pit F2310 (Table 8) might suggest a date within the earlier part of this range (see The Prehistoric and Roman Pottery). The larger Phase 3 groups both included crossjoining fragments of jars, similar to examples from Burgh in east Suffolk (Martin 1988: fig. 19.20-21). 15 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2010; sealed by L2000 2040 2041 Oval/ near vertical sides, flattish base (0.68 x 0.55 x 0.16m) Firm, mid grey brown silty clay with occasional small subangular and sub-rounded flint 2310 2311 Sub-rectangular/ gently sloping sides, irregular base (2.15 x 0.60 x 0.14m) Friable, very dark grey silty sand with occasional small rounded and sub-rounded stones Pit; cut L2298 and L2313; sealed by L2000 2359 2360 Oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.98 x 0.38 x 0.21m) Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 2466 2467 Sub-oval/ moderately sloping sides, irregular base (1.04 x 0.83 x 0.25m) Friable, dark brown/ black silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks and stones Friable, mind grey brown silty sand with moderate stones Pit; cut L2469; sealed by L2000 Finds Pottery (150g); burnt flint (37g) Pottery (79g); CBM (56g); animal bone (6g) Pottery (24g) Pottery (129g) Table 8: The Phase 3 pits Phase 4: Romano-British (AD 43 to 410) Summary 2.34 Romano-British activity was most concentrated in the western area of the excavation, within and around a ditched, rectilinear enclosure (Enclosure 2; Fig. 8). The main area of Phase 4 activity was located to the south of Enclosure 2 and included a quarry pit, refuse pits and a possible hearth. A rectangular posthole structure (Structure 1) was also present in this part of the site. Two further ?hearths were assigned to this phase, one of which was part of a possible structural ‘complex’ displaying more than one phase of use. Several dispersed Romano-British features were also present. Enclosure 2 2.35 The Romano-British enclosure was located in the far western area of the excavation (Grid Squares A5-B6; Table 9; Figs. 8 and 12). It was delineated by a single L-shaped enclosure ditch (F2281) which measured c. 34.5m west to east and c. 18m north to south. Both ends of this feature continued beyond the edges of the excavation, indicating that the interior of the enclosure extended further to the north and west. The excavated part of Enclosure 2 measured some 657m2 (0.07ha). Three gullies (F2365, F2402 and F2407; Table 10) were present within the enclosure and may have represented internal divisions of space. These features broadly reflected the alignments of the enclosure ditch (Fig. 13) and ranged from c. 2.25m to c. 12.4m in length. Similar divisions of space have been identified at numerous Romano-British sites, including rural settlements at Beck Row, Suffolk (Mustchin 2014a) and Capston Gibbet in Cambridgeshire (Abrams and Ingham 2008, 38-9, fig. 3.2). The excavated field system at the Capston Gibbet site was sub-divided into narrow strips, each no more than 10m wide (ibid.). A single pit (F2481) was also present within Enclosure 4 at Oulton. Despite lacking finds, Pit F2481 cut the fill of Phase 4 Gully F2407 and was tentatively assigned a Romano-British date. 16 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description Comments/ relationships Ditch; cut L2001; L2294; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Finds 2281 =1011 2282 =1012 2365 2366 Linear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 50.00 x 0.82 x 0.29m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (c. 3.50 x 0.84 x 0.25m) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded flint Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional stones and moderate charcoal flecks 2402 2403 2408 Firm, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks and stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with frequent stones Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 2407 Gully; cut L2001 and L2002; cut by F2419 Pottery (32g) 2418 2419 Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (c. 2.00 x 0.46 x 0.15m) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 12.30 x 0.65 x 0.22m) Sub-oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (1.03 x 1.00 x 0.11m) Friable, mid orange brown silty sand with occasional stones Pit; cut L2408; sealed by L2000 - CBM (10g); animal bone (108g) Pottery (151g); CBM (12g); animal bone (11g) Pottery (42g) Table 9: Enclosure 2 and associated features The Phase 4 activity area 2.36 An area of concentrated Romano-British activity was present in the southwestern corner of the excavation, to the south of Enclosure 2 (Figs. 8, 13 and 16). Features in this area included a posthole structure (Structure 1; Grid Squares B3C3), a possible hearth (within the upper profile of Pit F2420; Grid Square B3) and a substantial quarry pit (F2091; Grid Squares C3-C4 and D3-D4). The apparently industrial nature of the latter features might imply a similar function for the neighbouring structure although an agricultural use is equally possible, perhaps linked to Enclosure 1. Two Phase 4 pit clusters, a gully and a tree bole were also present in this part of the site; these are described separately. Additional Phase 4 ?industrial activity was represented by two dispersed hearths. Structure 1 2.37 Structure 1 was represented by 32 postholes located in the south-western area of the excavation, close to Phase 4 Pits F2420, F2427 and Quarry Pit F2091 (GS B3-C3; Table 10; Figs. 8 and 13-14). The postholes formed a sub-rectangular arrangement, aligned east to west and measuring approximately 56m2 (Fig. 14). The eastern part of the structure contained a greater number of postholes, including ‘internal’ features possibly associated with the ‘internal’ partitioning of space (e.g. F2438; Plate 3). The western end of Structure 1 was more loosely defined and may have represented a secondary or other lesser construction. A general lack of feature intercutting meant that no construction phases were identifiable. Possible maintenance/ alteration of the structure’s interior posts was evidenced, however, by an intercutting pair of postholes (F2291 and F2346; Fig. 14). Finds from Structure 1 include trace Roman pottery and three fragments (82g) of possible tegula roof tile from Posthole F2265 (L2266). Sparse animal bone was also present. 2.38 Regional examples of Romano-British posthole structures include four substantial 3rd century buildings excavated at Brandon Road, Thetford, two of which appeared to represent aisled barns (Atkins and Connor 2010, 14-16, fig. 7). The buildings at the Brandon Road site were larger than the Oulton example and appeared to have an agricultural function, principally relating to animal husbandry (ibid. 15-16 and 108). Similar aisled structures have been excavated at Beck Row, 17 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Suffolk (Bales 2004) and, more recently at Woodditton in Cambridgeshire (Mustchin 2015). Buildings at both of these sites were connected to the bulk processing of cereals. A less substantial posthole structure was also excavated a short distance to the south of the Beck Row aisled buildings (Mustchin 2014a). The latter measured approximately 57m2 (closely resembling the Oulton example) and was interpreted as an ancillary agricultural building, possibly serving as a store or fulfilling some function linked to livestock husbandry (ibid. 319). Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2245 2246 2247 2248 Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.35 x 0.34 x 0.14m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.42 x 0.34 x 0.18m) Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small subangular stones 2249 2250 2251 2252 2253 2254 Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.50 x 0.44 x 0.16m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.42 x 0.32 x 0.53m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.40 x 0.38 x 0.16m) 2255 2256 2257 2258 2345 Comments/ relationships Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Finds CBM (8g) Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Pottery (4g); baked clay (3g) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small subangular stones Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with occasional small subangular stones Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 CBM (59g) Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 CBM (147g) Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.35 x 0.33 x 0.18m) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small rounded stones Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.21 x 0.21 x 0.18m) Compact, mid greenish grey sandy clay Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with occasional small rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Pottery (20g); CBM (37g); fired clay (9g) Pottery (2g); CBM (49g); animal bone (24g) - 2259 2260 Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.31 x 0.30 x 0.56m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.15 x 0.15 x 0.35m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.37 x 0.32 x 0.35m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.42 x 0.35 x 0.20m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.19 x 0.16 x 0.20m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.50 x 0.41 x 0.39m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.28 x 0.18 x 0.23m) 2261 2262 2263 2264 2265 2266 2267 2268 2269 2270 2271 2272 2273 2274 Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.47 x 0.32 x 0.18m) 2275 2276 Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.22 x 0.21 x 0.14m) - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 CBM (104g) Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small rounded stones Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 CBM (82g) Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small charcoal flecks Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Pottery (21g) Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Friable, dark brown grey silty sand with occasional small rounded stones and charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Pottery (7g); CBM (7g); baked clay (42g) CBM (37g); animal bone (10g) Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 CBM (94g) 18 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2277 2278 2279 2280 2283 2284 2285 2286 2289 2290 2291 2292 2303 2304 2308 2309 2346 2305 2374 2375 2430 2431 2432 2433 2434 2435 2436 2437 2438 2439 2440 2441 Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.21 x 0.20 x 0.14m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base ( 0.32 x 0.31 x 0.18m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base ( 0.42 x 0.38 x 0.25m Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.16 x 0.14 x 0.09m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.32 x 0.26 x 0.25m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.44 x 0.26+ x 0.25m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.18 x 0.16 x 0.18m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.28 x 0.26 x 0.16m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.30 x 0.10+ x 0.34m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.29 x 0.15 x 0.18m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.35m x 0.30 x 0.11m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, flattish base (0.42 x 0.32 x 0.15m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.34 x 0.31 x 0.10m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.30 x 0.28 x 0.19m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.43 x 0.31 x 0.15m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, flattish base (0.42 x 0.32 x 0.23m) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Pottery (18g) Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional small subrounded stones Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with occasional small rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small rounded stones Friable, very dark grey silty sand with frequent small charcoal flecks Friable, dark grey silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 CBM (200g) Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2001; cut by F2346 CBM (374g) Stakehole; cut L2001; cut by F2301 - Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, dark grey silty sand with frequent small charcoal flecks - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001 and L2292; cut by F2301 Posthole; cut L2274; sealed by L2000 Friable, mid grey brown sand silt with occasional stones Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Firm, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional stones and charcoal flecks Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional stones Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - CBM (89g) Table 10: Structure 1 Pits F2420 and F2427 2.39 Pit F2420 was located in the south-west corner of the site, immediately west of Structure 1 (Grid Square B3; Table 11; Plate 4; Figs. 8 and 13). The lower fills of this pit (L2423, L2424, L2425 and L2426; Fig. 32) contained charcoal inclusions and appeared to comprise redeposited burnt material; the surrounding substrate showed no signs of heating. In contrast, the pit’s uppermost fills (L2421 and F2422) appeared to have been burnt in situ. Fill L2422 comprised a mixture of baked clay and charcoal and was thought to represent the base of a possible Romano-British hearth. This somewhat crude ‘base’ was stratigraphically sealed by L2421, a dark grey brown charcoal-rich sand thought to be related to the use of the hearth. No diagnostic finds were present within the fills of F2420, however, and it was tentatively dated based on its close proximity to Structure 1 (see above). 19 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2.40 The western side of Deposit L2421 (F2420) was truncated by Phase 4 Pit F2427 (Table 11; Plate 4; Figs. 8 and 32). Charcoal inclusions within the fill of this feature (L2428) suggest that it may have had represented a direct continuation of burning activity in this part of the site, although it is unclear whether L2428 was burnt in situ. Pit F2427 also lacked datable material. Feature Fill(s) 2420 2426 (primary) 2425 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Irregular/ steep sides, concave base (2.70 x 2.59 x 0.69m) 2424 2423 2422 2421 (uppermost) 2427 2428 Sub-oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (2.00 x 0.68 x 0.19m) Fill description Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional charcoal flecks Friable, light brown grey sandy silt with moderate charcoal flecks Friable, dark brown/ black sandy silt with frequent charcoal flecks Friable, mid brown grey sandy silt Compact, light orange reddish clay with frequent CMB flecks Firm, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional stones and charcoal flecks Friable, light grey brown silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks and stones Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2002; cut by F2427 Finds Animal bone (293g); slag (172g) - Pit; cut L2021; sealed by L2000 Table 11: Phase 4 Pits F2420 and F2427 Quarry Pit F2091 2.41 Pit F2091 was the largest discreet feature encountered at the site (Grid Squares C3-C4 and D3-D4; Table 12; Figs. 8, 13, 16 and 32). It had steeply sloping sides and a concave base. The complex sequence of nine fills within this feature appeared to represent natural silting, which suggests that F2091 was left ‘open’ following its use and abandonment (Fig. 32). The basal fills yielded Roman pottery (Table 12), while uppermost Fill L2092 contained sparse middle to late Saxon pottery (most probably intrusive in nature). An intrusive Saxon sherd was also recovered from Fill L2104. The upper fills of F2091 were cut by a short section of gully (F2089; see below). Feature Fill(s) 2091 2092 2100 2101 2102 2097 2104 2103 2638 2637 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Sub-circular/ steep sides, flattish base (3.22 x 2.44 x 1.20m) Fill description Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded flint and moderate charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular flint Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular flint Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded stones and charcoal flecks Friable, mid blue/ green grey silty sand with frequent ironstone and charcoal flecks, and occasional small to medium rounded stones Dark-mid brown orange sandy concretion with moderate small sub-angular stones Friable, light blue grey silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded stones Firm, mid grey brown sandy silt Friable, light blue grey, mottled with mid orange silty sand with moderate small sub-angular and subrounded stones Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2089 Finds Pottery (34g); CBM (32g); animal bone (35g) Animal bone (2g) Pottery (76g) Pottery (76g); CBM (12g) Pottery (14g) - Table 12: Phase 4 Quarry Pit F2091 20 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2.42 Regionally, Romano-British quarrying activity is widely attested, ranging from large-scale industries such as the clunch quarries at Reach in Cambridgeshire (Hughes and Hughes 2013, 113) to more modest enterprises such as a 3rd century roadside quarry pit excavated at Scole on the Norfolk/ Suffolk border (Ashwin and Tester 2014, 176). Further modest examples – similar in scale to the evidence from Oulton – include quarrying activity at the former Star and Fleece hotel, Kelvedon (Essex; Fell and Humphrey 2001) and two Roman sand quarry pits encountered during a watching brief at Lexden in Colchester (Colchester Archaeological Trust 2001, 2-3). Sand and gravel extraction has also been reported from Sheepen Hill, Colchester (Niblett 1985). The Oulton quarry pit also occupied natural sand and gravel deposits, indicating the potential targeting of one or both of these aggregates by the local Romano-British occupation. The dispersed Phase 4 ?hearths 2.43 Two dispersed Romano-British ?hearths (F2572 and F2664) were located in the northern and central areas of the site, respectively. F2575 was the more complex feature and appeared to form part of a possible ‘structural’ complex with other nearby features. ?Hearth Structure S2501 2.44 ?Hearth Structure S2501 consisted of ?Hearth F2572 (Plate 5), Pit F2546 and Posthole F2548 (Grid Square H9; Table 13; Figs. 8, 20 and 33). Pit F2546 was the stratigraphically earliest of this group and contained a single fill with fired clay and charcoal inclusions (L2547). This material had not been burnt in situ. Hearth F2572 had been dug into the fill of F2546 and contained three consecutive fills. Primary Fill L2560 comprised dark grey/ black and red silty clay with frequent fired clay and charcoal. This thin layer was sealed by a solid layer of clay (L2559), which was in turn sealed by a high-fired layer of mid red/ orange clay (L2558). The nature of the latter suggests that is may have formed a hearth bottom. No further material (possibly relating to the use of this ?hearth) survived above L2558. Posthole F2548 was located to the south-west of the ?hearth and may have housed an upright post associated with the use of the latter; perhaps a pivot or support of some kind. Finds from S2501 comprise a single sherd (7g) of Roman pottery and a small assemblage (17 fragments; 133g) of daub from Pit F2546 (L2547). Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2546 2547 Sub-oval/ steep sides, flattish base (3.86 x 2.20 x 0.28m) Firm, dark blue brown clayey silt with moderate flecks of charcoal flecks and CBM 2548 2549 2572 2558 Circular/ near vertical sides, concave base (0.42 x 0.40 x 0.28m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.82 x 0.70 x 0.18m) Firm, dark blue brown clayey silt with moderate charcoal flecks and CBM Compact, mid reddish orange clay with occasional chalk flecks Compact, light white green clay with moderate chalk flecks Friable, dark greenish red clayey silt with frequent charcoal flecks and burnt flint 2559 2560 Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2513; sealed by L2000 Finds Pottery (7g); daub (133g) Posthole; cut L2547; sealed by L2000 - ?Hearth; cut L2547; sealed by L2000 - Table 13: ?Hearth Structure S2501 21 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 ?Hearth F2664 2.45 ?Hearth F2664 (Grid Square F5; Table 14; Plate 6; Figs. 8, 17 and 33) was near circular in plan with a wide U-shaped profile and two consecutive fills (L2665 and L2666). Primary Fill L2665 comprised redeposited charcoal-rich silt, while secondary fill L2666 – thought to represent a hearth bottom – comprised a mix of dark red fired clay, unfired clay and charcoal. Like Hearth F2572, no material survived above the ?hearth bottom. This possible hearth was devoid of datable material and was only tentatively assigned to Phase 4 based on its general resemblance to ?Hearth F2572 (see above). Feature Fill(s) 2664 2665 2666 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (1.02 x 0.92 x 0.28m) Fill description Friable, middle grey brown sandy silt with moderate small stones and charcoal flecks Compact, mottled dark red fired clay and white clay with frequent charcoal flecks Comments/ relationships Hearth; cut L2010; sealed by L2000 Finds Animal bone (19) - Table 14: ?Hearth F2664 The Phase 4 Pit Clusters 2.46 Four Romano-British pit clusters were identified, two of which were located relatively close to Structure 1 and the associated activity area. Pit Cluster 2 2.47 Pit Cluster 2 was formed of three large, inter-cutting pits (F2404, F2410 and F2414) close to the western edge of the excavation (Grid Square A4; Table 15; Figs. 8, 13 and 33). A small posthole (F2416) was located immediately to the west and may also have formed part of this group. Of these features, Pit F2404 contained the only notable material; the primary and uppermost fills of this feature (L2405 and L2413) comprised redeposited burnt material, possibly derived from a RomanoBritish ?hearth located some 16m to the south-east (F2572; see above). No other features were present in the immediate vicinity and Pit Cluster 2 was only very tentatively dated based on this possible relationship with the neighbouring ?hearth. Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2404 2405 Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave (1.50 x 0.88 x 0.37m) Firm, dark black silty sand with frequent charcoal flecks 2406 2412 2413 2410 2411 2414 2415 2416 2417 Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (1.70 x 1.16 x 0.31m) Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (2.08 x 1.33 x 0.24m) Circular/ gently sloping sides, concave base (0.46 x 0.22 x 0.06m) Firm, mid yellowish brown with occasional stones Friable, mid brown orange silty sand Friable, mid to dark grey silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand Friable, mid yellowish grey silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2411; cut by F2414 Finds Burnt flint (18g) - Pit cut L2001; cut by F2404 - Pit; cut L2411, L2412 and L2413; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - - Table 15: Pit Cluster 2 22 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Pit Cluster 3 2.48 Pit Cluster 3 comprised four individual pits (F2036, F2038, F2076 and F2078; Grid Square D4; Table 16; Figs. 8, 13 and 33), two of which (F2036 and F2038) were intercutting. These features were located a short distance to the north of Phase 4 Quarry Pit F2091 and may have been associated with the broader area of Romano-British activity (see above). Roman pottery was present in Pits F2036 and F2078 and it is possible that these features were dug for refuse disposal; possibly derived from activity within and/ or around Structure 1, a short distance to the southwest (Fig. 8). Other material from these features is sparse, however. Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2036 2037 Sub-circular/ moderately sloping to steep sides, concave base (1.74 x 1.61 x 0.20m) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small subangular stones and charcoal flecks 2038 2039 2076 2077 2078 2079 Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.49 x 0.32 x 0.25m) Sub-rectangular/ gently sloping sides, flat base (1.16 x 0.62 x 0.06m) Sub-rectangular/ irregular sides, flat base (1.32 x 0.73 x 0.09m) Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with moderate sub angular stones and charcoal flecks. Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with occasional small rounded stones Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with occasional small subrounded stones Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2039; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2036 Finds Pottery (265g); animal bone (93g); struck flint (2g); burnt flint (202g) - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Pottery (40g) Table 16: Pit Cluster 3 Pit Cluster 4 2.49 Pit Cluster 4 comprised four intercutting pits (F2667, F2669, F2671 and F2673) located within the central area of the site (Grid Square F4; Table 17; Figs. 8, 17 and 33). Finds were again sparse from this group, but included a single Roman pot sherd from Fill L2670 of Pit F2669. A small sherd (4g) of early Saxon pottery was also recovered from Fill L2672 of F2671, although is thought to represent intrusive material; F2671 was also the stratigraphically latest pit of this group. Given the relative isolation of this group from other Phase 4 features it is difficult to speculate regarding the source of the recovered pottery. Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2667 2668 Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with moderate stones 2669 2670 2671 2672 Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave (0.53 x 0.35+ x 0.10m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, irregular base (1.12 x 0.74 x 0.18m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.35 x 0.32 x 0.26m) 2673 2674 Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.48 x 0.22 x 0.07m) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with frequent stones and charcoal flecks Compact, dark grey brown silty sand with moderate stones and charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown silty sand moderate stones Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2669 Finds - Pit; cut L2668; cut by F2671 Pottery (9g) Posthole; cut L2670; sealed by L2000 Pottery (4g) Pit; cut L2002; cut by F2669 - Table 17: Pit Cluster 4 23 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 The dispersed Phase 4 pits 2.50 Three additional pits were assigned to the Romano-British period. These included one isolated feature (F2482 (Grid Square E2)) and a tentatively dated pair of pits within the confines of Enclosure 2 (F2463 and F2472 (Grid Square B6); Table 18; Figs. 8, 12 and 33). Although located some distance from the principal Phase 4 activity areas, Pit F2482 yielded a single sherd of Roman pottery. The possible source of this material is difficult to determine, however. Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2482 2483 Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stone 2463 2464 Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (1.28 x 1.12 x 0.23m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.98 x 0.78 x 0.15m) 2465 2472 2473 2474 Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (1.21 x 1.10 x 0.26m) 2475 Friable, mid reddish yellow sandy silt. Friable, dark grey brown silt with frequent charcoal flecks and occasional stones Friable, dark brown sandy silt with moderate charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt Friable, light brown grey sandy silt with occasional angular stones Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Finds Pottery (3g) - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Table 18: Dispersed Phase 4 pits 2.51 Although lacking datable artefacts, Pits F2463 and F2472 (Table 18) were assigned to Phase 4 based on the nature of the environmental assemblage from Pit F2463 (L2465). Carbonised remains from this pit were dominated by wheat grains, predominantly glume wheat with lesser quantities of barley (see The Environmental Samples). A significant proportion of germinated grains (comprising 35% of the wheat component) indicated the deliberate malting of grain, while the high ratio of grains to glume bases indicated the presence of fully cleaned grains (ibid.). Non-cereal taxa present included a number of brome grass seeds which also showed signs of germination, suggesting that they too were present during the malting process. Malt production – resulting in analogous carbonised assemblages – is a commonly encountered practice on Romano-British agricultural sites (ibid.), and the assemblage from Pit F2463 infers the presence of an agricultural kiln in the near vicinity; perhaps within the unexcavated portion of Enclosure 2. Adjacent Pit F2472 lacked similar environmental evidence but was assigned a Romano-British date based on its location in respect to Pit F2463; both features were also similar in plan and contained multiple fills. Phase 5.1: Early to Middle Anglo-Saxon (5th to 9th Century AD) Summary 2.52 The early to middle Anglo-Saxon period was the most intensive phase of past activity at the site and included evidence of land enclosure, industry and habitation. Of particular note were the remains of five sunken-featured buildings (SFBs) and five burnt flint pits. One of these (F2707) was associated with structural remains. 24 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Evidence of enclosure 2.53 Three early to middle Anglo-Saxon gullies (F2019, F2023 and F2029) and a single ditch (F2121=2154) were present in the western area of the site (Grid Squares D5-E5 and D6; Table 19; Figs. 9, 17 and 19). These formed an L-shaped arrangement of possible boundaries and intercut with a number of other Phase 5.1 features. For example, the fill of Ditch F2121 (=2154) was cut by SFB 1. This suggests that any boundary represented may have been relatively short lived. Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2019 2020 Curvilinear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 10.00 x 0.20+ x 0.13m) 2023 2024 2029 2030 Linear/ gently sloping sides, concave base (c. 5.00 x 0.21+ x 0.07m) Linear/ gently sloping sides, concave base (c. 3.50 x 0.55 x 0.17m) 2121 =2154 2122 =2155 Linear/ moderately sloping sides, flat base (c. 20.00 x 0.37 x 0.15m) Friable, light to mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular flint Friable, light grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular stones Friable, light grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular and sub-rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular stones 2695 2696 2697 2698 2740 2741 Linear/ steep sides, concave base (c. 12.20 x 0.64 x 0.23m) Linear/ steep sides, concave base (c. 12.00 x 0.93 x 0.29m) Linear/ steep sides, concave base (c. 20.00 x 0.73 x 0.19m) Comments/ relationships Ditch; cut L2001, L2061, L2081 and L2083; cut by F2021 and F2029 Finds Pottery (21g); CBM (2g) Gully; cut L2022 - Ditch; cut L2001 and F2019; sealed by L2000 - Ditch; cut L2001; cut by F2033 and F2125; sealed by L2000 Pottery (9g); slag (119g); baked clay (1g) - Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate small stones Gully; cut L2002 and L2698; sealed by L2000 Gully; cut L2002; cut by F2695; sealed by L2000 Animal bone (15g) Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate stones Gully; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pottery (52g) Table 19: Phase 5.1 boundaries 2.54 An additional group of contemporary boundaries was present in the southeastern area of the site (Grid Squares I3-I4 and J3-J4; Table 20; Figs. 9, 21 and 23). Ditches F2695 and F2697 formed and L-shaped arrangement of boundaries, while Ditch F2740 mirrored the north to south alignment of F2697 a short distance to the east, and may have delineated a short section of trackway with the latter. These boundaries displayed strong affinities with the positions/ alignments of subsequent, Phase 5.2 boundaries (Enclosure 3; Fig. 9), but was firmly dated to the earlier part of the Anglo-Saxon period. It is possible, however, that Enclosure 3 was earlier in date than much of the pottery evidence suggests (see below), with features delineating its western and northern boundaries simply having been backfilled at a later date. The sunken-featured buildings 2.55 Five SFBs were identified within the excavated area. Three of these formed a loosely clustered group of buildings in the south-east area of the site, while two were more dispersed. Recording of the SFBs followed conventions used in the publications for West Stow (West 1985), Pennylands (Williams 1993), Hartigans (ibid.), and more recently, Dernford Farm (Newton forthcoming) and Snape (Mustchin 2014b): 25 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Key: a: maximum overall length c: mean width b: distance between the gable post centres d: depth below stripped surface 2.56 Summary tables are presented for each SFB, while the individual features forming these structures are tabulated separately. SFB 1 2.57 SFB 1 was located in the northern area of the site, close to contemporary features (Grid Squares D5-E5; Tables 20-21; Plate 7; Figs. 9 and 17-18). Sunken Feature F2033 (measuring 4.32 x 3.16 x 0.31m) cut the fills of Phase 5.1 boundary features (F2023 and F2121=2154). In addition to F2033 the SFB included five postholes (F2127, F2129, F2141, F2150 and F2152). The fill of Posthole F2127 (L2128) was cut by the sunken feature, however, and may not have formed part of the building. Type Dimensions Area Form Orientation GS ?Six-post a. 4.32m b. 4.05m c. 3.00m d. 0.31m 12.96m2 Two postholes located centrally at the eastern and western gable ends (F2150 and F2152). Additional postholes at the north-west and south-west corners (F2129 and F2141); no corresponding postholes at the north-east and south-east corners. One posthole located centrally on the northern side (F2127). East to west D5-E5 Table 20: Summary of SFB 1 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2033 2035 Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, flattish base (4.32 x 3.16 x 0.31m) Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional small to large sub-angular to sub-rounded stones Sub-circular/ gently sloping sides, concave base (0.35 x 0.30 x 0.15m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.35 x 0.20 x 0.26m) Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with occasional small sub-angular flint Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional small to medium subangular to sub-rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional small sub-angular to subrounded stones 2034 2127 2128 2129 2130 2141 2142 2150 2151 2152 2153 Sub-circular/ gently sloping sides, concave base (0.28 x 0.26 x 0.12m) Sub-circular/ near vertical sides, concave base (0.30 x 0.28 x 0.84m) Circular/ vertical sides, concave base (0.24 x 0.21 x 0.45m) Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional small sub-angular stones Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt, with occasional small sub-rounded and sub-angular stones Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional small sub-angular to subrounded stones Comments/ relationships Sunken feature; cut L2128; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2002; cut by F2033 Posthole; cut L2002; cut by F2033; sealed by L2035 Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2035 Posthole; cut L2034; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2002; cut by F2033 Finds Pottery (31g); animal bone (13g); slag (457g) - - - - - Table 21: SFB 1 2.58 Sunken Feature F2033 contained two consecutive fills. Primary Fill L2034 was mostly formed of charcoal; the surrounding substrate displayed no evidence of in situ burning, however. L2034 was devoid of finds, possibly suggesting that it comprised material that had been ‘sifted’ through a suspended wooden floor which overlay F2033 during the building’s use (cf. Tipper 2004, 84). The lack of ‘trampling’ recorded in the base of F2033 lends support to this interpretation. Uppermost Fill L2035 yielded three sherds (27g) of early to middle Saxon pottery, slag (469g) and 26 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 animal bone (13g). A residual late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age pot sherd (4g) was also present. This fill is thought to have resulted from the deliberate backfilling of F2033 following its abandonment. 2.59 The fills of Postholes F2127, F2129 and F2141 were comparable to the uppermost fill of the sunken feature (L2035), suggesting that the posts were removed prior to the building’s abandonment and backfilling. In contrast, L2035 had formed around posts within F2150 and F2152. This suggests either that the posts were left in situ following the abandonment of the SFB, or that their basal elements had rotted and had not been removed for re-use elsewhere. SFB 2 2.60 SFB 2 (Grid Square J3; Tables 22-23; Plate 8) was the easternmost of a loose grouping of such buildings also including SFBs 3 and 4 (Figs. 9, 26 and 27). It was first identified during the trial trench evaluation (Orzechowski 2015) and comprised a sub-circular cut (measuring 4.36 x 4.26 x 0.60m) and three postholes (F2658, F2660 and F2662) truncating the base of the sunken feature. Type Dimensions Area Form Orientation GS ?Two-post a. 4.36m b. 2.10m c. 4.26m d. 0.60m 18.57m2 Two postholes (F2662 and F2688) were located within the base of the sunken feature, set in from its northern and southern edges. A third posthole (F2660) was located close to the feature’s western edge, at the break of slope; no corresponding eastern posthole was present. ? J3 Table 22: Summary of SFB 2 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2633 2634 Sub-circular/ steep sides, flat base. (4.36 x 4.26 x 0.60m) Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with moderate small to medium stones and occasional charcoal flecks 2635 2658 2659 2660 2661 2662 2663 Sub-circular/ near vertical sides, concave base (0.25 x 0.20 x 0.10m) Sub-circular/ near vertical sides, concave base (0.25 x 0.20 x 0.19m) Sub-circular/ near vertical sides, concave base (0.25 x 0.21 x 0.13m) Friable dark grey brown silty sand with moderate small sub-rounded stones and occasional charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with moderate small to medium sub-rounded stones Comments/ relationships Sunken feature; cut L2001; Sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2635 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2635 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2635 Finds SF3 Fe knife blade (20g); Pottery (1436g); CBM (1008); animal bone (48g); burnt flint (140g); burnt pot (3g) Pottery (87g); CBM (279g) - Pottery (24g); CBM (5g) - Table 23: SFB 2 2.61 Like SFB 1, Sunken Feature F2633 contained two consecutive fills. Primary Fill L2635 contained a small amount of cultural material, including nine pot sherds (87g). However, the majority of finds, including 106 pot sherds (1436g) of early to middle Anglo-Saxon date and a ferrous blade (SF3), came from uppermost Fill L2634. It is thought that this finds-rich material resulted from the post-abandonment backfilling of the sunken feature while the scarcity of finds from Fill L2635 may have resulted from its being ‘sifted’ through a suspended wooden floor during the 27 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 building’s use (cf. Tipper 2004, 84). Once again, no evidence of trampling was recorded in the base of the sunken feature. SFB 3 2.62 SFB 3 (Grid Square I3; Tables 24-25; Plate 9; Figs. 9 and 23-24) was located some 25m north-west of SFB 2 and 2m to the north-east of SFB 4. The only surviving element of the structure was Sunken Feature F2754 (measuring 3.36 x 2.14 x 0.52m). This feature contained two fills (L2755 and L2756). Primary Fill L2755 yielded no finds, again suggesting that it had been ‘sifted’ through a suspended wooden floor (cf. Tipper 2004, 84). Unlike SFBs 1 and 2, the uppermost fill of F2754 (L2756) contained few finds. Pottery from this context comprises just 12 sherds (88g). This might indicate that L2756 was not ‘midden’ type material; it may have primarily constituted spoil resulting from the excavation of a new sunken feature. It is possible, based on their very close proximity (Fig. 4), that SFBs 3 and 4 comprised a succession of buildings with one superseding the other. Type Dimensions Area Form Orientation GS ? a. 3.36m b. N/A 7.19m2 ? North-east to south-west I3 c. 2.14m d. 0.52m Table 24: Summary of SFB 3 Feature Fill(s) 2754 2756 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Sub-rectangular/ near vertical sides, flat base (3.36 x 2.14 x 0.52m) 2755 Fill description Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with Frequent burnt clay and charcoal flecks, and moderate small stone Friable, mid grey yellow silty sand with occasional small chalk pebbles and stone Comments/ relationships Sunken feature; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Finds Pottery (88g); animal bone (28g); fired clay (22g) - Table 25: SFB 3 SFB 4 2.63 SFB 4 (Grid Squares H3-I3) comprised Sunken Feature F2750 and Posthole F2752, located close to the centre of its north-eastern gable end (Tables 26-27; Plate 10; Figs. 9 and 23-24). The SFB lay 2m to the south-west of SFB 3. The single fill of F2750 yielded a modest finds assemblage including eight sherds (111g) of early to middle Saxon pottery, five sherds of middle to late Saxon pottery and animal bone (52g). As previously stated, it is possible that SFB 4 was slightly later in date than SFB 3, and replaced the latter following its abandonment (or vice versa). Type Dimensions Area Form Orientation GS ?Two-post a. 4.70m b. N/A c. 3.19 d. 0.34m 14.99m2 One posthole (F2752) located centrally at the north-eastern gable end of the sunken feature. No corresponding posthole to the south-west. North-east to south-west H3 Table 26: Summary of SFB 4 28 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Feature Fill(s) 2750 2751 2752 2753 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Sub-rectangular/ steep sides, concave base (4.70 x 3.24 x 0.34m) Fill description Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate small stones and occasional charcoal flecks Comments/ relationships Sunken feature; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Circular/ vertical sides, flat base (0.30 x 0.30 x 0.49m) Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate small stones Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by F2751 Finds Pottery (275g); CBM (25g); animal bone (52g) - Table 27: SFB 4 SFB 5 2.64 SFB 5 was located in the north-eastern area of the excavation, some 60m north of SFBs 2-4 (Grid Square I6; Tables 28-29; Plate 11; Fig. 9 and 21-22). This building survived as a sub-square sunken feature (F2563; 3.56 x 3.52 x 0.24m), which had been truncated along its north-western edge by a modern wheel rut. Although interpreted as an SFB, this building was distinctly different from the other excavated examples and lacked any dating evidence; its two fills (L2565 and L2556) were devoid of finds. Both fills had formed around in situ posts set within Postholes F2536, F2538 and F2540 – all located within the building’s north-western quadrant. This indicates that the posts were not removed following the abandonment of the building (prior to the backfilling of F2563). Type Dimensions Area Form Orientation GS ? a. 3.56m b. N/A c. 3.52m d. 0.24m 12.52m2 Three postholes (F2536, F2538 and F2540) were located in the north-western quadrant of the sunken feature East to west GS I6 Table 28: Summary of SFB 5 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2563 2565 2536 2566 2537 Friable, light grey brown sandy silt with occasional small stone Friable, light brown yellow silty sand Friable, dark blue black silty sand with frequent charcoal flecks 2538 2539 2540 2541 Sub-square/ near vertical sides, flat base (3.56 x 3.52 x 0.24m) Oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.20+ x 0.50 x 0.38m) Circular/ vertical sides, concave base (0.15+ x 0.20+ x 0.11m) Circular/ steeps sides, concave base (0.26 x 0.20 x 0.14m) Comments/ relationships Sunken feature; cut L2564; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2539; sealed by L2000 Finds - Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with occasional stones Posthole; cut L2566; cut by modern wheel rut - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with moderate charcoal flecks Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Table 29: SFB 5 Phase 5.1 Burnt Flint Pits 2.65 Five Anglo-Saxon burnt flint pits were present across site (Table 30; Figs. 9, 12, 21, 25 and 37). This feature type is well documented on Anglo-Saxon sites across East Anglia – in both domestic and non-domestic contexts – and is often considered as having a cooking function (e.g. Boulter and Walton Rogers 2012). Some examples have been interpreted as having an industrial use (e.g. Garrow et al. 2006). All of the Oulton pits were rectangular in plan with similar, steep-sided profiles. One (F2707) was associated with possible structural remains. Each pit contained at least three fills, including consecutive layers of burnt flint and charcoal. 29 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2331 2337 Rectangular/ steep sides, flattish base (1.54 x 1.10 x 0.47m) Friable, mid pinkish red with occasional stones Friable, black silty sand with frequent charcoal Compact, light grey/ white silty sand with frequent burnt flint Friable, dark brown grey silty sand with moderate stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones and charcoal flecks Friable, black silty sand with frequent charcoal flecks and occasional burnt stones Friable, mid orange brown silty sand with frequent burnt stones Friable, dark grey silty sand with moderate charcoal flecks and burnt stones Friable, mid grey yellow silty sand with occasional stones and charcoal flecks Friable, black sand with frequent charcoal flecks Compact, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate charcoal flecks Friable, mid yellowish grey brown silty sand with moderate small stones and charcoal flecks Friable, dark yellowish grey sand with frequent charcoal flecks and occasional stones Friable, light grey brown sand Compact, black sand with frequent charcoal flecks Friable, mid red pink with occasional small stones Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid red yellowish Friable, dark grey black sand with frequent charcoal flecks Friable, mid brown grey silty sand 2336 2335 2334 2333 2332 2683 2684 Sub-circular/ steep sides, flattish base (1.26 x 1.25 x 0.22m) 2685 2686 2707 2708 Sub-rectangular/ steep sides, flattish base (1.18 x 1.08 x 0.30m) 2709 2710 2717 2718 Rectangular/ steep sides, flattish base (3.60 x 2.60 x 0.80m) 2719 2720 2748 2749 2731 2732 2733 2734 Rectangular/ steep sides, flattish base (1.48 x 1.30 x 0.19m) 2735 Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Finds - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - - Pit; cut L2760; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pottery (83g) - Table 30: Burnt Flint Pits Burnt Flint Pit F2331 2.66 The westernmost burn flint pit (F2331; Grid Square B5; Table 30; Plate 12; Figs. 12 and 37) contained six consecutive fills, including basal fills of charcoal (L2336) and burnt flint (L2335) (Table 30). The surrounding substrate showed signs of heating (oxidation). This feature was devoid of finds. Burnt Flint Pit F2683 2.67 Burnt Flint Pit F2683 (Grid Square G5; Table 30; Plate 13; Fig. 21 and 37) contained three consecutive fills including a basal fill of charcoal (L2684) overlain by a layer of burnt flint (L2685). Uppermost fill L2686 contained additional burnt flint and charcoal, although in lesser amounts. No finds were present. 30 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Burnt Flint Pit F2707 2.68 Burnt Flint Pit F2707 (Grid Square H5; Table 30; Figs. 21 and 37) was of particular interest as it was associated with possible structural remains (Gully F2759 and Posthole F2705; Table 31). The fill of Gully F2759 (L2760) was similar to the uppermost fill of Pit F2707 and it is possible that both were backfilled at the same time. L2760 yielded three sherds (26g) of mid 5th to mid 9th century pottery. It is thought that the gully originally acted as a beam slot that had a structural relationship with the neighbouring posthole. The precise nature of any such relationship remains uncertain, however. Burnt flint pits in close association with Anglo-Saxon buildings have previously been recorded at Eye, Suffolk (Caruth and Goffin 2012) and Redcastle Furze in Norfolk (Andrews 1995). 2.69 F2707 contained three fills, the earliest of which (L2708) comprised natural slumping (L2708). Secondary Fill L2709 was composed of charcoal (burnt in situ), overlain by a mixed layer of burnt flint and silt. This feature was devoid of finds. Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2705 2706 Circular/ steep sides, concave base 2759 2760 Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (1.54 x 0.42 x 0.15m) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with moderate small stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with frequent stones Comments/ relationships Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2002; cut by F2707 Finds - Pottery (11g); animal bone (12) Table 31: Possible structural remains Burnt Flint Pit F2717 2.70 Burnt Flint Pit F2717 (Grid Square K2; Table 30; Plate 14; Figs. 25 and 37) was the best preserved of this feature type at Oulton, and contained a complex series of charcoal and burnt flint fills, overlain by a natural accumulation. Oxidation of the surrounding substrate was again evident. No finds were present. Burnt Flint Pit F2731 2.71 Burnt Flint Pit F2731 was located a short distance to the south-east of SFB 5 (Grid Square I6; Table 30; Plate 15; Figs. 21 and 37). This pit contained four consecutive fills, the earliest of which (L2732) comprised a natural accumulation of silt. This suggests that the feature was left ‘open’ for an indeterminate period prior to its use. The upper profile of L2732 was oxidised as a result of heating. The secondary and tertiary fills comprised layers of charcoal (L2734) and burnt flint (L2735). Phase 5.1 Pit Clusters Summary 2.72 Two pit clusters were assigned to the earliest Anglo-Saxon phase. 31 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Pit Cluster 5 2.73 A cluster of 11 pits was located in the central area of the excavation (Grid Square H5; Table 32; Figs. 9 and 21). This linear arrangement of features included both intercutting and discrete pits, mostly located to the south of the Burnt Flint Pit F2707. Pit F2744 comprised a possible outlier of this group. Four pit fills (L2222, L2613, L2688 and L2745) yielded early to middle Anglo-Saxon pottery. The remaining features were dated based on their spatial/ stratigraphic relationships with the dated features. Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2221 2222 2223 2224 2225 2226 2606 2607 Compact, dark grey brown silty clay with frequent charcoal flecks and moderate medium rounded stones Firm, mid orange brown silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded stones Friable, mid orange brown sandy silt with occasional small sub-rounded stones Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with occasional stones 2608 2609 Circular/ moderately sloping sides, flat base (1.15 x 0.88 x 0.20m) Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.42 x 0.34 x 0.10m) Sub-oval/ moderately sloping sides, flat base (0.86 x 0.75 x 0.16m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, pointed base (0.52 x 0.44 x 0.26m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides (0.40 x 0.08 x 0.10m) 2610 2611 2612 2613 2614 2615 2616 2617 2687 2688 2744 2745 Circular/ gently sloping sides, concave base (1.05 x 0.58 x 0.07m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, pointed/ V-shaped base (0.84 x 0.63 x 0.32m) Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, pointed base (0.78 x 0.57 x 0.30m) Sub oval/ gently sloping sides, concave base (0.86 x 0.33 x 0.18m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.84 x 0.65 x 0.17m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.98 x 0.76 x 0.22m) Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Finds Pottery (630g) Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - - Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Posthole cut L2001; cut by F2610 Pit; cut L2609; cut by F2612 Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Pit; cut L2611; sealed by L2000 Pottery (7g) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid orange brown silty sand with moderate stones Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with frequent small stones Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with moderate stones and occasional charcoal flecks Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pottery (60g); burnt flint (1g) Pottery (102g) Friable, mid to dark grey silty sand - Table 32: Pit Cluster 5 Pit Cluster 6 2.74 A cluster of seven pits was present in the central, western area, some 16.5m north of the excavation edge (Grid Square E3; Table 33; Figs. 9 and 16). Although varying in size, shape (in plan) and profile, the pits forming this cluster contained largely homogenous fills. Pits F2489, F2491 and F2493 were also intercutting. The only datable finds from this cluster comprise 52 sherds (828g) of early to middle Anglo-Saxon pottery from Pit F2164. The comparatively large assemblage from this feature suggests that it may have been purposefully dug for the disposal of domestic rubbish. 32 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2164 2165 Circular/ steep sloping sides, flat base (2.74 x 2.60 x 0.37m) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with moderate small and medium rounded stones Friable, dark grey brown silty sand, with frequent small to medium charcoal fragments Friable, mid orange brown silty sand with moderate small sub-rounded to rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones 2204 2227 2228 Irregular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.92 x 0.48 x 0.24m) 2487 2488 2489 2490 2491 2492 2493 2494 2495 2496 Irregular/ irregular sides, concave base (1.24 x 0.67 x 0.10m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.72 x 0.60 x 0.10m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (1.08 x 0.80 x 0.17m) Circular/ moderately sloping to steep side, concave base (0.68 x 0.56 x 0.19m) Sub-rectangular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.68 x 0.70 x 0.31m) 2497 2498 2499 2512 Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2002; cut by F2148 Finds Pottery (826g); CBM (77g); slag (70g); struck flint (82g) Pottery (2g) Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with frequent stones Friable, mind brown grey silty sand with occasional stones Pit; cut L2496; sealed by 2009 Pit; cut L2002; L2009 - Firm, mid red orange sandy silt with occasional stones Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2495 - Friable, mid blue grey silty sand with occasional stones Friable, dark blue grey silty sand with moderate stones Friable, mid blue grey, silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid yellowish orange silty sand with frequent stones Friable, light grey brown silty sand with moderate stones Pit; cut L2001; L2494 cut by F2489 - - - Table 33: Pit Cluster 6 Dispersed Phase 5.1 Features 2.75 Twenty-four dispersed early to middle Anglo-Saxon features were encountered across the excavation area (Table 34; Fig. 9). While many of these were discrete, some were stratigraphically related to other Phase 5.1 features; e.g. Pit F2125 cut the Fill of Ditch F2121 (=2154), immediately south of SFB 1. Features which lacked datable artefacts were phased based on their stratigraphic and/ or spatial relationships with dated features. Feature Fill(s) 2021 2022 2060 2061 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (1.92 x 1.68 x 0.15m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, flat base (1.70 x 1.10 x 0.24m) 2070 2071 2064 2065 Oval/ steep sides, flat base (0.84 x 0.70 x 0.28m) 2074 2075 2080 2081 Sub-oval/ steep sides, irregular base (0.79 x 0.46 x 0.15m) Sub-circular/ gently sloping Fill description Friable, light grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular to sub-rounded stones Firm, light grey brown silty sand with occasional small to medium sub-rounded flint Firm, dark red brown silty sand Firm, mid grey brown silty sand, with occasional small sub-rounded flint Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional small stones Friable, mid grey ashy silty sand with occasional small charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown silty Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2020; cut by F2023 Pit; cut L2020; sealed by L2001 Finds - - CBM (3g) Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Burnt stone (184g) Pit; cut L2061; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; cut by - 33 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2082 2083 2093 2094 sides, concave base (0.60 x 0.28 x 0.10m) Sub-circular/ gently sloping sides, concave base (0.66 x 0.52 x 0.11m) Sub-oval, moderately sloping sides, concave base (2.40 x 1.72 x 0.47m) 2095 2096 2125 2126 2131 2132 2459 2460 2639 2640 2643 2644 2645 Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 1.30 x c. 1.00 x 0.15m) Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, flattish base (2.60 x 1.90 x 0.19m) sand with occasional small sub-round stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand, with occasional small sub-angular and sub-rounded stones Firm, mid grey brown sandy silt, with occasional small to medium sub-angular stones and charcoal flecks Firm, mid brown yellow sandy silt Firm, dark grey brown sandy silt with occasional small and medium sub-rounded stones and charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with moderate medium sub-rounded flint F2019 Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2019 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 Pottery (344g); CBM 101g); animal bone (6g); slag (82g); struck flint (3g) - Pit; cut L2001, F2151 and F2121; sealed by L2000 - Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular stones Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 Circular/ gently sloping sides, convex base (0.76 x 0.66 x 0.15m) Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, flattish base (1.20 x 0.99 x 0.26m) Friable, dark brown/ black sand with moderate stones Pit; cut L2002; cut by F2287 Pottery (682g); CBM (90g); animal bone (39g); struck flint (75g); worked stone (36g) Pottery (5g); CBM (441g) Friable, dark greyish brown silty sand with moderate stones and occasional charcoal flecks Pit; cut L2002; L2000 Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.54 x 0.50 x 0.38m) Friable, dark brown silt with frequent charcoal flecks Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with moderate charcoal flecks Friable, mid yellowish brown/ black sandy silt with moderate small stones and occasional charcoal flecks Friable, dark grey/ yellowish brown sandy silt with moderate small stones Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with frequent charcoal flecks Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with moderate mall stones and charcoal flecks Friable, black sand with frequent charcoal flecks and occasional small rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown sand with frequent small rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown sand with frequent rounded stones Pit cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Friable, dark reddish brown sandy silt with moderate medium stones Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional sub angular stones Compact, mid brown grey 2679 2680 Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.64 x 0.55 x 0.18m) 2681 2682 2689 2690 2691 2692 2693 2694 Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.78 x 0.58 x 0.18m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.38 x 0.30 x 0.12m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.50 x 0.49 x 0.05m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.32 x 0.31 x 0.30m) 2701 2702 2703 2704 2711 2712 2721 2722 2723 2724 Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.46 x 0.42 x 0.19m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.28 x 0.25+ x 0.19m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (1.48 x 0.66 x 0.30m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.49 x 0.44 x 0.19m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pottery (4g); CBM (113g); animal bone (10g) Pottery (3g); CBM (19g); struck flint (5g) - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pottery (18g) Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2704; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2002; cut by F2701 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; Pottery (98g); 34 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2725 flattish base (3.50 x 2.00 x 0.58m) 2726 2742 2743 2761 2762 Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (1.76 x 1.34 x 0.44m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.73 x 0.64 x 0.25m) sandy silt with moderate stones Firm, dark brown grey sandy silt with occasional small stones and charcoal flecks Compact, mid yellowish brown sandy silt with occasional small stones and charcoal flecks Firm, mid brown grey sandy silt with moderate stones and occasional charcoal flecks Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with occasional stones sealed by L2000 CBM (14g - - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pottery (39g) Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pottery (11g); animal bone (12g) Table 34: Dispersed Phase 5.1 Features Phase 5.2: Middle to Late Anglo-Saxon (9th to mid 12th century AD) Summary 2.76 The middle to late Anglo-Saxon period was principally characterised by a large, rectilinear enclosure in the central area of the excavation (Enclosure 3; Fig. 9). This represented a direct development of the earlier, Phase 5.1 boundaries and was delineated to the north and west by a system of ditched trackways. A cluster of pits was present at the north-western corner of the enclosure, while possible structural remains were recorded along its southern edge. A small number of dispersed pits were also present; one of these contained a set of 11 weights, comprising eight cylindrical pan weights, some of which include embedded coins; and three spherical hanging weights (see The Small Finds). The Phase 5.2 enclosure and trackways 2.77 Enclosure 3 dominated the central area of the Phase 5.2 site and displayed a clear spatial relationship with the earlier Anglo-Saxon boundaries (Fig. 9, 16-17, 21 and 23). This might infer that the features forming Enclosure 3 (Table 35) were earlier in date than suggested by the associated pottery assemblage. If Phase 5.1 ditches F2695 and F2697 are taken to represent the south-eastern extent of the enclosure (Figs. 9 and 23), its internal area is calculable as approximately 3200m2 (0.32ha). However, the earlier backfilling date suggested for these features may indicate that the middle to late Anglo-Saxon enclosure had no eastern boundary, being effectively open along one side. It is also possible that some form of archaeologically ‘invisible’ boundary replaced the earlier ditches in this area (e.g. hedging). 2.78 Enclosure 3 was principally formed of three ditches (F2139 (=2156), F2146, and F2510) delineating its northern, southern and western limits (Figs. 9, 16-17, 21 and 39). Apart from a c. 0.5m wide gap between the termini of Ditches F2139 (=2156) and F2510 (GS E5; Fig. 17), no break in this boundary was evident. The profiles and fills of these ditches were similar and they all yielded modest quantities of pottery. 2.79 Two sections of possible trackway were present to the north and west of Enclosure 3 (Table 35; Figs. 9, 16-17, 19 and 21). The northern section, delineated by Ditches F2042 and F2068 was L-shaped in plan, running east to west along the northern edge of the enclosure before turning sharply to the north and disappearing 35 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 beyond the edge of the excavation. This broad trackway was between 10m and 17m wide along its length. A narrower southern continuation of this trackway ran along the western edge of Enclosure 3, bounded to the west by Ditch F2087 (Figs. 9 and 16-17). This trackway was 2.8m wide in the north, tapering sharply to 0.5m at its southern extent (Grid Square F3). It is possible that the narrowing of the westernmost trackway was designed to control the movement of livestock. Ditch F2087 was devoid of finds. Feature Fill(s) 2042 2043 2068 2069 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c.35.00 x 0.64 x 0.18m) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, flat base (c. 20.00 x 1.10 x 0.30m) 2119 2120 2087 2088 Linear/ gently sloping sides, concave base (c. 40.00 x 0.98 x 0.34m) 2146 2147 Linear/ moderately sloping sides, V-shaped base (c. 17.00 x 0.50 x 0.27m) 2139 =2156 2140 =2157 Linear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c.45.00 x 1.40 x 0.36m) 2145 2510 2511 Linear/ steep sides, concave base (c. 55.00 x 0.28 x 0.24m) Fill description Firm, mid grey brown silty clay with occasional small subangular and sub-rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small subangular flint Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand Friable, dark grey brown silty sand Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate small and medium rounded and subrounded stones Friable, mid yellowish grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded flint Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with occasional small and medium sub-angular and subrounded stones Friable, mid yellowish orange sandy silt with frequent small to medium sub-angular to rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones and charcoal flecks Comments/ relationships Ditch; cut L2010; sealed by L2000 Finds Pottery (43g) Ditch; cut L2001, L2084, L2118; sealed by L2000 Pottery (26g) - Ditch; cut L2001, L2002, L2028, L2047 and L2460; sealed by L2000 - Ditch; cut L2001; cut by F2148 and F2157 - Ditch; cut L2001, L2002, L2117, L2147 and L2543; cut by F2137 Pottery (15g); animal bone (4g) - Ditch; cut L2002, L2118 and L2700; cut by F2675 Pottery (105g); animal bone (105g) Table 35: Phase 5.2 boundaries Pit Cluster 7 2.80 A cluster of eight pits (Grid Squares E5–F5; Table 36; Figs. 9, 17 and 39) was located in the north-western corner of Enclosure 3. This group did not wholly respect the enclosure’s boundary, although their clustering at the 0.5m gap between Ditches F2139 (=2156) and F2510 (see above) is not thought to be coincidental. Pit F2675 cut the fill of Enclosure Ditch F2510 (L2511). None of these features contained finds. 36 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2098 2099 Friable, mid grey brown silty sand 2502 2503 Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.79 x 0.58 x 0.19) Oval/ steep sides, flattish base (0.35 x 0.30 x 0.15m) 2504 2505 Oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.30 x 0.26 x 0.15m) 2506 2507 Oval/ steep sides, flattish base (0.34 x 0.26 x 0.16m) 2508 2509 2550 2551 2675 2676 2677 2678 Sub-oval/ steep sides, irregular base (0.70 x 0.68 x 0.25m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.47 x 0.34 x 0.21m) Sub-oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.28 x 0.24 x 0.10m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave (0.38 x 0.34 x 0.14m) Friable, mid brown/ black silty sand with occasional stones and charcoal flecks Friable, mid brown/ black silty sand with occasional stones and charcoal flecks Friable, mid brown/ black silty sand with occasional stones and charcoal flecks Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with moderate stones Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with occasional stones Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt Friable, mid orange brown silty sand Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2118; sealed by L2000 Finds - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 CBM (8) Posthole; cut L2118; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2118; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2511; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - - Table 36: Pit Cluster 7 Possible structural evidence 2.81 A grouping of two gullies and 21 pits and postholes at the southern edge of Enclosure 3 was thought to represent possible structural remains (Grid Squares G3H3; Table 37; Figs. 9, 23 and 40). During the excavation, Gullies F2594 and F2600 were interpreted as beam slots. These features were spaced approximately 3.8m apart along most of their length and followed parallel, east to west alignments; Gully F2594 was slightly curvilinear in plan (Fig. 23). The alignment of the gullies was mirrored to the north by a linear arrangement of ten pits and postholes (F2516, F2518, F2520, F2522, F2524, F2526, F2528, F2530, F2532 and 2534). Two possible outliers to this group (F2602 and F2604) were also present. Approximately 6m to the north/ north-west of Gully F2600, a second arrangement of seven pits and postholes (F2619, F2621, F2623, F2625, F2627, F2629 and F2631) appeared to follow a roughly similar alignment. Two pits (F2596 and F2598) were also present ‘within’ the area defined by the ?beam slots (Fig. 23). No deposits, potentially representative of floor/ occupation surfaces were present. None of the features forming this possible structure contained finds; the remains were assigned to Phase 5.2, however, based on the alignment of the constituent features in respect to the southern edge of Enclosure 3. 2.82 The form of any structure represented by these features remains unclear. However the uniformity of alignment displayed by the gullies and southernmost pit/ posthole group strongly suggests a planned layout of some description. Posthole structures are common to early Anglo-Saxon sites such as West Stow, Suffolk and Mucking in Essex, and in some cases were replaced by post-in-trench structures (Powlesland 2003, 107); such ‘beamslot’ foundations are rarely encountered in the early Anglo-Saxon period (Lyons 2011, 92). At Mucking, some of the posthole structures are thought to have constituted little more than ‘sheds or partly enclosed shelters (Hamerow 1993, 8). The lack of occupation deposits associated with the Oulton ?structure may suggest such a function in this instance. A similarly ‘sterile’ posthole structure – dating to the early to middle Anglo-Saxon period – was excavated at Chruch Road, Snape (Mustchin 2014b). 37 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2516 2517 2518 2519 2520 2521 Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.33 x 0.22 x 0.08m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, irregular base (0.29 x 0.28 x 0.12m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.28 x 0.25 x 0.11m) 2522 2523 2524 2525 2526 2527 2528 2529 2530 2531 2532 2533 Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, dark brown grey silty sand with occasional stones and CBM flecks Friable mid brown grey silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid brown grey silty sand Friable, dark brown grey silty sand with occasional stones and CBM flecks Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid orange brown silty sand with moderate stones Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.22 x 0.19 x 0.10m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.29 x 0.26 x 0.10m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.34 x 0.30 x 0.09m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.28 x 0.25 x 0.15m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.30 x 0.26 x 0.11m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.24 x 0.24 x 0.14m) 2544 2534 2535 Oval/ steep sides, flattish base (0.22 x 0.19 x 0.10m) 2545 2594 2595 Curvilinear/ moderately sloping to steep sides, concave base (c. 9.00 x 0.47 x 0.14m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.69 x 0.68 x 0.29m) 2596 2597 2598 2599 Sub-oval/ steep sides, flattish base (0.83 x 0.40+ x 0.12m) 2600 2601 2602 2603 2604 2605 2619 2620 2621 2622 2623 2324 2625 2626 2627 2628 2629 2630 2631 2632 Linear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 12.10 x 0.73 x 0.14m) Sub-oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.74 x 0.55 x 0.16m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.40 x 0.37 x 0,10m) Sub oval/ moderately sloping sides, irregular base (0.35 x 0.30 x 0.19m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.36 x 0.33 x 0.25m) Oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.44 x 0.38+ x 0.30m) Oval/ steep sides, uneven base (0.26 x 0.18 x 0.33m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, flattish base (0.24 x 0.20 x 0.20m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.46 x 0.43 x 0.35m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.42 x 0.40 x 0.17m) Comments/ relationships Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Finds - Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - - - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Gully; cut L2002; cut by F2598 - Friable, dark orange brown sandy silt with occasional stones Friable, dark orange brown sandy silt with occasional stones Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with moderate stones Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2595; sealed by L2000 - Gully; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with moderate stones Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with frequent stones Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with moderate stones Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with moderate stones Friable, mid orange brown silty sand with moderate stones Friable, mid greyish brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid brownish grey silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid brownish grey silty sand with frequent stones Friable, mid brownish grey silty sand with frequent stones Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; cut by F2625 Posthole; cut L2624; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Table 37: Possible Phase 5.2 structural features Dispersed Phase 5.2 pits 2.83 Two dispersed pits (F2162 (Grid Square E4) and F2729 (Grid Square I7); Table 38; Figs. 9, 17, 20 and 40) were dated to Phase 5.2. Pit F2729 (L2730) yielded four sherds of 10th to mid 12th century AD pottery. Pit F2162, located some 17m to the west of Enclosure 3 was of particular interest. The single fill of this small 38 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 feature (L2163) contained 11 weights, comprising eight cylindrical pan weights, some of which include embedded coins; and three spherical hanging weights (see The Small Finds). Pan weights including embedded coins are well attested in the literature (e.g. Williams 1999) and are associated with the Anglo-Saxon and Viking periods. Comparative collections are best known from medieval urban centres including Winchester and London (Biddle 1990, 918, fig. 280; Egan 1998, 301-322, fig. 235; see The Small Finds). The small size of Pit F2162 – barely larger than the objects it contained – suggests that it was purposefully dug to contain the weights. Iron fragments from this feature may represent the corroded remains of a set of scales. Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Fill description 2162 2163 Circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.70 x 0.63 x 0.11m) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand, with occasional small subangular to sub-rounded stones 2729 2730 Sub-oval/ steep sides, irregular base (1.19 x 1.04 x 0.17m) Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional charcoal flecks Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2063; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Finds SF1 (coin weights); pottery (4g); Fe (62g); fired clay (84g) Pottery (35g); animal bone (2g); slag (151g) Table 38: Dispersed Phase 5.2 pits Phase 6: Saxo-Norman/ Medieval (11th to 14th century AD) Summary 2.84 Twenty-four features were dated to the Saxo-Norman/ medieval period. The vast majority of these features (23) were associated with a metallurgical waste area located in the north-eastern part of the site (Grid Square H7; Fig. 10). The remaining feature was a discrete pit located in the central, western area of the site. The Phase 6 metallurgical waste area 2.85 A cluster of 23 pits and gullies was located in the north-eastern area of the site (Grid Square H7; Table 39; Plates 16-17; Figs. 10, 20 and 40). All of these features contained single fills and appear to have been associated – at least in part – with the disposal of waste from metallurgical processes (possibly occurring in the near vicinity). Thirteen of the features yielded smelting or undiagnostic slag (totalling 1487g), while one (F2180) contained a single metal fragment (30g); no smelting furnace was present within the excavation area. A circular lock escutcheon plate of uncertain medieval date (see The Small Finds) was present in the fill of Pit F2746 (L2747). Other finds from these features include trace animal bone (3g), a single sherd (19g) of 9th to 12th/ 13th century pottery from Fill L2747 of Pit F2746, and one sherd of 11th to 14th century pottery from Fill L2191 of Pit F2190. As such, this feature cluster was only tentatively dated. 39 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Oval/ vertical sides, concave base (0.20 x 0.12 x 0.10m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, flat base (0.40 x 0.37 x 0.13m) 2170 2171 2172 2173 2174 2175 Circular/ steep sides, flat base (0.19 x 0.19 x 0.11m) 2176 2177 2178 2179 2180 2181 2182 2183 Circular/ vertical sides, concave base (0.15 x 0.15 x 0.25m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.80 x 0.60 x 0.27m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.40 x 0.36 x 0.22m) Sub-oval/ gently sloping sides, irregular base (0.88 x 0.66 x 0.10m) 2184 2185 2186 2187 2188 2189 2190 2191 2192 2193 2194 2195 2196 2197 2198 2199 2200 2201 2205 2206 2207 2208 2209 2210 2211 2212 2213 2214 Sub-circular/ steep sides, irregular base (0.38 x 0.30 x 0.14m) Irregular/ gently sloping sides, irregular base (0.40 x 0.38 x 0.06m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, flat base (0.28 x 0.24 x 0.25m) Curvilinear/ near vertical sides, concave base (c. 2.00 x 0.15 x 0.12m) Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (1.10 x 0.86 x 0.20m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.27 x 0.27 x 0.09m) Sub-circular/ gently sloping sides, concave base (1.86 x 1.70 x 0.17m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base ( 0.22 x 0.20 x 0.08m) Circular/ steep sloping sides, flattish base (0.66 x 0.56 x 0.11m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.32 x 0.20 x 0.08m) Curvilinear/ near vertical sides, concave base (c. 1.70 x 0.16 x 0.05m) Sub-circular/ steep sloping sides, concave base (0.44 x 0.16 x 0.08m) Circular/ near vertical sides, concave base (0.28 x 0.22 x 0.08m) Sub-circular/ steep sloping sides, concave base (0.34 Fill description Compact, dark yellowish grey silty clay Comments/ relationships Posthole; cut L2010; sealed L2000 Finds - Compact, dark yellowish grey silty clay with occasional charcoal flecks Compact, dark grey brown sandy clay with frequent charcoal flecks Posthole; cut L2010; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2010; sealed by L2000 Compact, very dark grey sandy clay with occasional small charcoal flecks Compact, very dark grey sandy clay with occasional small charcoal flecks Firm, dark grey sandy clay with occasional small charcoal flecks Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Animal bone (3g); slag (188g) Slag (50g) Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Slag (105g) Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Metal fragment (30g) Firm, mid brown grey silty clay with occasional small sub-angular to sub-rounded stones and moderate charcoal flecks Firm, mid brown grey silty clay with frequent charcoal flecks and occasional small rounded stones Firm, mid brown grey silty clay with moderate charcoal flecks and occasional small rounded stones Friable, mid orangey brown silty sand with occasional small to medium sub-angular to subrounded stones Firm, mid grey brown clay silt with occasional small sub-angular stones Firm, brown grey silty clay with moderate charcoal flecks and occasional small sub-rounded stones Firm, mid brown grey silty clay Pit; cut L2010; sealed by L2000 Slag (34g) Posthole; cut L2187; sealed by L2000 Slag (258g) Pit; cut L2010; cut by F2184 and F2188 Slag (11g) Posthole; cut L2187; sealed by L2000 - Gully; cut L2010 and L2210; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2010; cut by F2200, F2194 and F2196 Pottery (5g); slag (6g) Posthole; cut L2193; cut by F2196 - Firm, mid brown grey silty clay with occasional charcoal flecks Pit; cut L2193 and L2195; cut by F2198 and F2205 Posthole; cut L2197; sealed by L2000 - Firm, dark grey, silty clay with frequent charcoal flecks and occasional small sub-angular stones Firm, dark grey brown silty sand with moderate charcoal flecks Pit; cut L2193; sealed by L2000 Slag (165g) Posthole; cut L2197; sealed by L2000 Slag (43g) Firm, light grey brown silty clay Gully; cut L2010; cut by F2209 and F2211 - Firm, mid grey brown clay silt with occasional small sub-angular stones Compact, mid grey brown clay silt Posthole; cut L2208; cut by F2190 - Posthole; cut L2208; sealed by L2000 - Firm, mid grey brown silty clay with moderate charcoal flecks and Posthole; cut L2010; sealed by L2000 Slag (63g) Firm, Dark grey silty clay with moderate charcoal flecks Pottery (5g); slag (459g) - 40 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 x 0.29 x 0.09m) 2215 2216 Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.29 x 0.26 x 0.09m) 2746 2747 Sub-oval/ steep sides, flattish base (1.35 x 1.00 x 0.55m) occasional small sub-angular to sub-rounded stone Firm, mid grey brown silty clay with moderate charcoal flecks and occasional small sub-angular stone Firm, light grey brown clayey silt with moderate stone Posthole; cut L2010; sealed by L2000 Slag (59g) Pit; cut L2593; sealed by L2000 SF2 Fe (17g); pottery (19g); slag (307g) Table 39: features forming the Phase 6 metallurgical waste area Pit F2641 2.86 Pit F2641 (Grid Square E4; Table 40; Figs. 10, 17 and 40) was the only isolated feature of Saxo-Norman/ medieval date; it contained three sherds (19g) of 11th to 13th century AD pottery. Pit F2641 was located a considerable distance from other Phase 6 features and its function remains uncertain. Feature Fill(s) 2641 2642 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Sub-rectangular/ steep sides, flattish base (1.06 x 0.68 x 0.28m) Fill description Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with moderate stones and charcoal flecks Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Finds Pottery (19g); CBM (113g) Table 40: Pit F2641 Phase 7: Post-Medieval to Early Modern/ Modern (c. AD 1500-1900+) 2.87 Twenty features were dated to this latest chronological phase (Table 41; Fig. 11). The landscape at this time was defined by two linear boundary alignments represented by Ditches F2143, F2148 and F2396 (Figs. 11, 13, 15-16, 21, 23, 25 and 25). These separated the site into four large, rectilinear fields (based on the exposed evidence), all of which extended beyond the excavated area. This represented an ‘opening up’ of the immediate landscape compared to earlier phases of enclosure (i.e. Phases 4 and 5.2) and parallels a late medieval/ post-medieval pattern of landscape reorganisation noted at a number of other sites (e.g. Wheatcroft Farm, Bradwell (Mustchin et al. in preparation)). The remaining Phase 7 features comprised a mix of linear and discrete features, none of which were particularly notable. A possible fenceline was represented by six postholes, close to the southern edge of the excavation (Grid Squares B2-C2; Figs. 11, 15 and 41). Despite lacking datable material, these features ran parallel to Phase 7 Ditch F2396, some 5m to the north and the modern site boundary, and were dated accordingly. Some other Phase 7 features were tentatively dated based on their spatial or stratigraphic relationships with dated features. 41 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Feature Fill(s) Plan/ profile (dimensions) Sub-oval/ near vertical sides, concave base (1.23 x 0.74 x 0.43m) Sub-oval/ near vertical sides, flat base (1.20 x 0.70 x 0.39m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.64 x 0.52 x 0.06m) Sub-oval/ near vertical sides, flat base (0.61 x 0.42 x 0.04m) Linear/ gently sloping sides, irregular base (c. 2.00 x 0.60 x 0.14m) Linear/ steep sides, concave base (c. 105.00 x 1.03 x 0.48m) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2123 2124 2143 2144 2148 2149 Linear/ moderately sloping sides, flat base (c. 174.00 x 1.40 x 0.30m) 2287 2288 2301 2302 2306 2307 2378 2379 2384 2385 2386 2387 2388 2389 2390 2391 2392 2393 2394 2395 2396 2397 2573 2574 2618 2766 2767 Rectangular/ steep sides, flat base (0.74 x 0.60 x 0.90m) Circular/ steep sides, flat base (0.82 x 0.62 x 0.32m) Oval/ moderately sloping sides, irregular base (4.00+ x 0.92 x 0.17m) Irregular/ steep sides, concave base (0.42 x 0.39 x 0.06m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.18 x 0.18 x 0.11m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.16 x 0.16 x 0.18m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.19 x 0.18 x 0.18m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.18 x 0.18 x 0.09m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.18 x 0.18 x 0.19m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.21 x 0.18 x 0.21m) Linear/ steep sides, concave to flattish base (c. 55.00 x 0.89 x 0.28m) Linear/ gently sloping sides, flattish base (c. 2.00 x 0.40 x 0.19m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (1.12 x 0.97 x 0.42m) Fill description Comments/ relationships Finds Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with frequent medium and occasional small gravel Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional small stones Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional small stones Friable, grey brown sandy silt with occasional small stones Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 CBM (180g) Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Burnt stone (108g) Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular flint Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate small subangular and sub-rounded stones Ditch; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Pottery (5g) Ditch; cut L2010; sealed by L2000 Pottery (439g); glass (65g); slate (25g) Pottery (1g); CBM (495g) - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with moderate small to medium sub-angular to subrounded flint Compact, mid grey brown sandy silt Ditch; cut L2001, L2002, L2147 and L2165; cut by F2573; sealed by L2000 Friable, mid grey brown clay silt with occasional small and medium rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded flints Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Pit; cut L2001 and L2305; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2294; sealed by L2000 Pottery (7g) Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones - Friable, mid orange brown sandy silt Ditch; cut L2001 and L2002; sealed by L2000 and L2009 Gully; cut L2002 and L2149; sealed by L2000 Compact, light grey sandstone Compact, light grey sandstone Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Table 41: Phase 7 features 42 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Undated 2.88 A number of undated and natural features were encountered (Table 42). None of these could be securely dated based on their spatial or stratigraphic relationships with dated features. A small quantity of pottery recovered from two unnumbered tree boles (contexts L2086 and L2429), plus small CBM fragments from four undated features (Table 42) are not thought to have been securely stratified. Feature Fill(s) 2031 2032 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2058 2059 Natural hollow (unnumbered) Tree bole (unnumbered) 2084 2089 2090 2113 2114 2133 2134 2137 2138 2158 2159 2160 2161 2217 2218 2086 Plan/ profile (dimensions) Sub-oval/ steep sides, flat base (1.32 x 0.93 x 0.40m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, flattish base (1.50 x 1.30 x 0.22m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, flat base (0.30 x 0.30 x 0.07m) Circular/ moderately sloping sides, flat base (0.28x 0.28 x 0.11m) Sub-oval/ Steep sloping sides, concave base (0.48 x 0.38 x 0.10m) Sub-rectangular/ vertical sides, irregular base (0.86 x 0.50 x 0.18m) Sub-oval/ gently sloping sides, concave base (1.12 x 0.62 x 0.20m) Sub-oval/ moderately sloping sides, irregular base (1.57 x 0.74 x 0.22m) Irregular/ irregular sides, irregular base (4.20 x 3.60 x 0.31m) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 7.00 x 0.87 x 0.13m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, irregular base (0.31 x 0.17 x 0.04m) Sub-circular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (0.30 x 0.22 x 0.06m) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (c. 2.12 x 0.37 x 0.27m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, flat base (0.68 x 0.42 x 0.06m) Oval/ steep sides, flat base ( 0.23 x 0.18 x 0.22m) Irregular/ irregular sides, irregular base (1.68 x 1.50 Fill description Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate small subangular to sub-rounded stones Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional small subangular stone Friable, mid orange brown sandy silt with occasional small sub-angular stones Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with occasional small sub-angular stones and charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular flint Friable, dark grey silty sand with occasional small rounded flint Friable, dark yellowish brown silty sand with frequent medium rounded stones Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular stones and frequent charcoal flecks Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand Comments/ relationships Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 Finds - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Natural Hollow; cut L2001; cut by F2068 Tree Bole; cut L2002; L2000 - Firm, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded flint Ditch; cut L2001 and L2092; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with moderate small subangular stones Friable, dark brown grey silty sand with occasional small sub-angular stones Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 - Friable, mid brown grey sandy silt with occasional small angular stones Gully; cut L2001, L2028 and L2145; sealed by L2000 - Compact, dark grey brown silty clay with occasional small rounded stones and charcoal flecks Compact, dark yellowish grey silty clay with occasional charcoal flecks Firm, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small to Pit; cut L2010 and L2161; sealed by L2000 - Posthole; cut L2010; cut by F2158 - Pit; cut L2001 and L2010; sealed by - Pottery (25g) 43 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 x 0.74m) 2219 2220 2229 2230 2231 2232 2233 2234 2235 2236 2237 2238 2239 2240 2314 2315 2316 2319 2320 2321 2322 2323 2324 2380 2381 2382 2383 Tree bole (unnumbered) 2409 Tree bole (unnumbered) 2429 2446 2447 2448 2449 2450 2451 2478 2479 Tree bole (unnumbered) 2500 Oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.59 x 0.46 x 0.13m) Circular/ near vertical sides, concave base (0.19 x 0.18 x 0.17m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.44 x 0.42 x 0.13m) Oval/ moderately sloping sides, flat base (0.44 x 0.32 x 0.11m) Oval/ steep sides, irregular base (0.43 x 0.38 x 0.13m) Circular/ vertical sides, concave base (0.24 x 0.22 x 0.22m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.62 x 0.57 x 0.10m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.84 x 0.28 x 0.08m) Circular/ vertical sides, flattish base (0.42 x 0.34 x 0.12m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.64 x 0.54 x 0.20m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.26 x 0.25 x 0.11m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.50 x 0.40 x 0.15m) Irregular/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (1.68 x 1.40 x 0.40m) Irregular/ irregular sides, uneven base (2.74 x 2.03 x 2.24m) Oval/ gently sloping sides, irregular base (0.91 x 0.52 x 0.13m) Irregular/ irregular sides, concave base (0.76 x 0.52 x 0.31m) Circular/ steep, flattish base (0.62 x 0.30 x 0.06m) Linear/ moderately sloping sides, V-shaped base (c. 4.50 x 0.78 x 0.50m) Irregular/ irregular sides, uneven base (1.94 x 1.12 medium sub-angular flint Firm, mid pink red/ grey brown silty clay with moderate small sub-angular flint Compact, mid yellowish brown silty clay with occasional small sub-angular stones Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded stones Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded flint Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded flint Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-rounded flint Friable, dark grey brown silty sand with occasional small sub-angular flint Friable, dark brown grey silty clay with occasional small flint Friable, dark-mid brown grey silty sand with moderate small sub-angular flints Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with occasional charcoal flecks and stones Friable, mid orange brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid orange brown silty sand L2000 CBM (1g) - Pit; cut L2238; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2234; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2336; cut by F2231 - Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2233 and F2237 - Posthole; cut L2236; cut by F2229 - Posthole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 CBM (49g) Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with moderate stones Tree bole; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Firm, mid grey brown silty clayey sand with moderate stones and charcoal flecks and occasional CBM flecks Friable, dark brown/ black sandy silt Tree bole; cut L2001; sealed by L2009 Pottery (4g); CBM (21g) Pit; cut L2002; cut by F2287; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2002, L2451; sealed by L2009 Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2448 - Friable, mid brown grey silty sand with occasional stones Ditch; cut L2001 and L2477; sealed by L2000 - Friable, dark grey brown silty sand Tree bole; cut L2477; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, light grey brown silty sand with occasional stones - - 44 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2552 2553 2556 2557 2561 2562 2579 2580 2581 2582 2583 2584 2585 2586 2587 2588 2589 2590 2591 2592 2646 2647 2648 2649 2650 2651 2652 x 0.10m) Oval/ steep sides, concave base (0m29 x 0.19 x 0.18m) Oval, steep sides, irregular (2.46 x 1.10 x 0.55m) Curvilinear/ steep sides, concave base (c. 6.00 x 1.03 x 0.65m) Oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave base (1.68 x 1.05 x 0.35m) Sub-oval/ moderately sloping sides, concave (1.53 x 0.75 x 0.24m) Irregular-shaped/ gently sloping sides, flattish base (1.64+ x 0.91+ x 0.20m) Circular/ steep sides, flattish base (0.52 x 0.52 x 0.28m) Irregular-shaped/ moderately sloping sides, uneven base (1.96 x 1.18 x 0.30m) Oval/ moderately sloping sides/ concave base (0.92 x 0.62 x 0.22m) Oval/ steep side, irregular (0.56 x 0.51 x 0.24m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.49 x 0.30 x 0.12m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.37 x 0.34 x 0.12m) Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.72 x 0.70 x 0.25m) 2653 2654 2655 2656 2657 2699 2700 2713 2714 2715 2716 2727 2728 2736 2737 2738 2739 Hollow 2765 Sub-oval/ steep sides, flattish base (1.64 x 0.85 x 0.18m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (1.60 x 1.30 x 0.19m) Linear/ steep sides, concave base (c. 0.40 x 0.18 x 0.12m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.34 x 0.25 x 0.09m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.56 x 0.45 x 0.24m) Circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.31 x 0.25 x 0.20m) Sub-oval, steep sides, concave base (1.06 x 0.93 x 0.23m) Sub-circular/ steep sides, concave base (0.90 x 0.47 x 0.45m) - Friable, dark brown/ black sandy silt with occasional stones Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with frequent stones Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid brown/ black sandy silt with frequent stones Ditch; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey yellowish sand with moderate stones Pit; cut L2582; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with frequent stones Pit; cut L2002; cut by F2579 - Friable, mid red brown silty sand with moderate stones Pit; cut L2001; cut by F2887 - Friable, mid red brown silty sand with frequent stones and occasional charcoal flecks Friable, mid orange brown silty sand Posthole; cut L2588; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut by F2585, cut L2584 - Friable, mid brown/ black sandy silt with frequent stones Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid brown/ black silty sand with frequent stones Friable, mid grey brown silty Pit; cut L2001; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2118=L2758; sealed by L2000 Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt with occasional stones Friable, dark grey brown sandy silt with occasional stones and charcoal flecks Friable, dark black/ brown silty sand with frequent charcoal flecks Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional stones Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with moderate stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand occasional stones CBM (16g) - Pit; cut L2002; cut by F2654 - Pit; cut L2653, cut by F2656 - Pit; cut L2655; sealed by L2000 - Friable, mid grey brown sandy silt Gully; cut L2002; cut by F2510 - Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with moderate small stones Friable, mid grey brown silty sand with moderate stones Posthole; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Firm, mid grey brown silty sand with occasional small stones Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with moderate stones Friable, mid yellowish brown silty sand with moderate stones Friable, light grey brown Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Spread; cut L2002; - 45 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 (unnumbered) 2768 2769 Sub-oval/ steep sides, concave base (0.99 x 0.78 x 0.38m) sandy silt with occasional small stones Friable, light grey brown sandy silt cut by F2050 Pit; cut L2002; sealed by L2000 - Table 42: Undated features 3 SPECIALIST FINDS AND ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS The Small Finds Nicholas J. Cooper Carolingian coin identifications by Simon Coupland; conservation and photographs by Graham Morgan Introduction A small but highly significant assemblage of Late Saxon or Viking period (late 9th to early 10th century) finds was recovered from three contexts at the site, the most significant being a group of 11 weights from Pit F2162 (L2163), two of which have Carolingian coins embedded into the upper surface, and two others have Roman coins (Fig. 43). The Weights 1) SF1 F2162 (L2163): Collection of 11 weights comprising eight short cylindrical lead pan weights (left-hand side and centre of Plate 18), four with a coin embedded into the upper surface; and three spherical hanging weights of Viking type, with copper alloy sheaths and iron cores and suspension loops (right-hand side of Plate 19). Each weight is described below from the smallest to the largest by type and preceded by a discussion of each group. Plate 18: Collection of weights recovered from (2163) photographed prior to conservation 46 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Pan weights Disc-shaped pan weights in lead are widely paralleled at medieval urban centres such as Winchester (Biddle 1990, 918, fig. 280) and London (Egan 1998, 301-322, fig. 235), whilst smaller numbers are securely identified as pre-Conquest, associated either with Viking or Late Anglo-Saxon activity (Williams 1999). Amongst those identified as pre-Conquest is a distinctive group with coins or other decorative items embedded in their tops which are often, but not invariably, associated with the Vikings and were perhaps used specifically for the weighing of bullion (Biggs and Withers 2000, 18; Williams 1999, 32). The fact that the pan weights here were found alongside iron hanging weights of Viking type (see below) and that the two Carolingian coins date to the later 9th or early 10th century, further supports the idea of this representing Viking rather than Late Anglo-Saxon activity, although both possibilities presuppose that only the Roman coins were obsolete at the time of use. The fact that all eight pan weights were found together indicates that they might be considered to have formed a set. The difficulties of reconciling their weights with known units of measurement are considered below, but in terms of manufacture, all except one, with convex sides, appears to have been cast by pouring molten lead into a roughly circular mould, and in four cases, coins were embedded into the top surface whilst the lead was still soft. Simon Coupland (pers. comm.) has supplied the following identifications of the Carolingian coins (see catalogue entry (v) and (vii) below) and comments that ‘such coins are often attributed to Charles the Bald (AD 840-877) and are found in numbers in several hoards of the 880s: they remained in circulation until the 10th century, when an identical type was minted between 898 and 923 by Charles the Simple. It is thus impossible, without other evidence, to date the removal of these two specimens from circulation more precisely than to the late 9th or early 10th century’. The re-use of worn, 2nd century Roman coins, already ancient, is not easily explained but the choice of a reverse bearing a cornucopia and possibly scales, in the arms of the seated female figure, may have a symbolic link to trade. The occurrence of coins set into the top of the weights has been reviewed by a number of authors (Archibald 1991; Biggs and Withers 2000, 18-20; Williams 1999). The Rogers collection includes an example with a late Roman coin of Constantine, one with a sceat dating c. 700-725 and another with a Northumbrian styca dating c. 841-50, the last being the most commonly occurring (Biggs and Withers 2000, 18, fig. 1 and Nos. 11 and 12 respectively), as overviewed by Pirie (2000, 25-9) and Kruse (1992, 67-95). Significantly, one example containing a Northumbrian styca dating to the 840s has previously been found near Lowestoft (Williams 1999, 25, No. 10). Later 9th century issues of Wessex and Mercia have also been found on such weights (Biggs and Withers 2000, 18) and a number of examples have been gathered together by Williams (1999, 23-31). Importantly all of the weights so far found incorporate English coinage and the occurrence of Carolingian coins on weights does not appear to be paralleled. The exact significance of this is uncertain as the basic design on the reverses of coins of this period, a central cross surrounded by a legend, continues to be used on weights well into the medieval period (Egan 1998, fig. 233.998 and fig. 235.1011), indicating that whatever authority was imparted by it, continued to be recognised. For example, weights impressed with a recognisable coin die of Edward the Confessor 47 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 are known (Biggs and Withers 2000, 18) and other examples have been recognised by Williams (1999, 19-23), who reached the conclusion that they were likely to be late Saxon in origin rather than Viking and probably influenced the latter’s use of coins in weights. Also from London, the base of a circular balance pan is stamped with a coin-like design with a legend surrounding the representation of a castle (the Abbey at Tours), the legend translated as the ‘weight of denier [penny] Tournois’ (Egan 1998, 324, fig. 240.1039). The weights in the present group vary in diameter and height and their weights are as follows: i) 15.9g and 16.2g; ii) 78.2g; iii) 94.5g; iv) 98.2g; v) 135.1g; vi) 141.5g; vii) 292.5g. Two units thought to have been used during the Viking period are the eyrir (pl. aurar) (ora) or ounce of about 24.4g and the ertog (pl. ertugar) representing one third of an ounce at about 8.1g (Williams 1999, 32). The hanging weights (see below) appear to agree fairly closely with these units whilst two of the pan weights, (iii) and (iv), are close to 100g (the former with a Roman coin embedded) and may indicate their equivalence to a Viking half-mark (comprising four aurar (oras) of about 24g, as represented by an example in the Rogers Collection, found on the north bank of the River Humber (Biggs and Withers 2000, 20, No. 22). The two small pan weights (i) of about 16g could represent two ertuger (two thirds of an ounce). The heavier weights (v)-(vii) (all with coins embedded) may represent multiples of the half-mark or subdivisions thereof; the heaviest at 292.5g being equivalent to three half-marks. The fact the weights do not conform closely to the systems in use during the medieval period, usefully summarized by Egan (1998, table 14), would tend to confirm the contention that the present collection was in use during the Viking period rather than later. i) Two short lead cylinders. The one on the left of each image (Plate 19) has straight sides. Diameter: 15mm, thickness: 8mm, weight 15.9g. The one on the right of each image is cheese-shaped with convex sides. Diameter: 17mm, thickness: 8mm, weight: 16.2g. Both weights would appear to represent approximately half an ounce. Plate 19: Two, small pan weights (i), showing upper (left of each image) and lower (right of each image) surfaces ii) A slightly tapering or conical lead cylinder with a core of black glassy material with a crazed surface (Plate 20). Diameter: 25mm, thickness: 16mm, weight: 78.2g. 48 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Plate 20: Upper (left) and lower (right) surfaces of lead weight (ii) iii) Short cylindrical lead weight with a Roman copper alloy coin, possibly a sestertius, or more likely a dupondius, inset into the top (Plate 21; Fig. 43.1); 31mm in diameter, 11mm thick, weighing 94.5g. The coin is worn and only the reverse is visible. The legend is worn except for the exergue, below the seated figure, which reads [TRP], and refers to the award of Tribunician Power. The representation of the seated female figure holding a cornucopia in the cruck of the left arm, and possibly scales in the outstretched right arm is similar to late 2nd century issues. Plate 21: Upper (left) and lower (right) surfaces of lead weight (iii) with Roman coin inserted iv) Short cylinder lead weight (Plate 22); diameter: 27mm, thickness: 17mm, weight: 98.2g. v) Cylindrical lead weight with a silver coin in very good condition, inserted into the upper surface, with only the reverse visible (Plate 23; Fig. 43.2). Simon Coupland (pers. comm.) identifies it as a denier of the Gratia D-i rex type, minted from 864 onwards, of the Palace mint: +PALATINAMONE: MG 629, Depeyrot 750, cf. MEC 1.884 (MONET). The mint's precise location is uncertain. Diameter: 30mm, thickness: 19mm, weight 135.1g. 49 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Plate 22: Upper (left) and lower (right) surfaces of lead weight (iv) Plate 23: Upper (left) and lower (right) surfaces of weight (v) with Carolingian silver coin inserted vi) Short cylindrical lead weight with an inset copper alloy coin (Plate 24); diameter: 38mm, thickness: 12mm, weight: 141.5g. The coin is illegible but likely to be a later 2nd century sestertius or dupondius. Plate 24: Upper (left) and lower (right) surfaces of lead weight (vi) with illegible Roman coin inserted vii) Large cylindrical lead weight with a coin in very good condition, inserted into the upper surface, with only the reverse visible (Plate 25; Fig. 43.3). (IMG 22079) – 50 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 denier of the same Gratia D-i rex type, of the Laon mint, LVGDVNICLAVATI, MG 794, Depeyrot 482, MEC 1.869. Diameter: 35mm, thickness: 24mm, weight 292.5g. Plate 25: Upper (left) and lower (right) surfaces of lead weight (vii) with Carolingian silver coin inserted Hanging weights Three spherical weights with copper alloy sheaths were present. Each is covered in iron corrosion and, as would be typical of these Viking Age weights, the core appears to be iron rather than lead. Weights of this kind, with copper alloy sheaths are paralleled in later contexts at Winchester (Biddle 1990, 921, fig. 283.3200) and London (Egan 1998, 309, fig. 230.975; dated to Ceramic Phase 6, c. 1150-1200). The latter example bore similar punched decoration on its flat base to (ix) (Plate 27), with three dots centrally, perhaps being the worn remains of a three-armed ‘triskele’ motif. The two larger weights are close to 24g in weight which would equate to one eyrir (ounce) if a Viking system was being used, whilst the smaller weight at 7.7g is close to the value of one ertog (a third of an ounce). viii) Spherical weight with copper alloy sheath (open at both poles), which appears to have an iron core from which an iron suspension loop was presumably fixed (Plate 26). Diameter: 13mm, height: 12mm, weight 7.7g. Plate 26: Upper surface (left) and side (right) of weight (viii) 51 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 ix) Spherical weight with copper alloy sheath and corroded remains of an iron core and suspension loop on the top (Plate 27). The bottom is flattened and is decorated with a ring of punch marks on the circumference and a central threearmed ‘triskele’ motif. Diameter: 18mm, height: 17mm, weight: 23.8g. Plate 27: Side (left) and decorated lower surface (right) of weight (ix) x) Spherical weight with copper alloy sheath (open at both poles), and an iron core from which the base of a suspension loop extends (Plate 28). The surface of the copper sheath is decorated with triangles of punch marks with groups of three ‘grapes’ at each vertice. Diameter: 18mm, height: 18mm, weight: 24.1g. Plate 28: Decorated upper (left) and lower (right) surfaces of weight (x) Lock Plate 2) SF2 F2746 (L2747): Iron circular lock escutcheon plate with central keyholeshaped perforation. Diameter: 35mm. Not closely datable within the medieval period. Knife 3) SF3 F2633 (L2634 (Seg.D)): Complete, small iron whittle-tanged knife of Winchester Type D, with tapering blade, where back and cutting edge taper evenly 52 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 from the junction with the tang (Biddle 1990, 848, fig. 255.2761) of ?mid-13th century date. Total length: 113mm, length of blade: 67mm. Knives of this kind are very difficult to date with any accuracy, and an earlier medieval date is perfectly possible. Concluding Remarks The set of weights, found as single group, and according with Viking units of measure, is a significant discovery. Williams has observed that the majority of discoveries so far have been within the Danelaw or other areas of Viking settlement, with the exception of two from the Isle of Purbeck and one from Cirencester, which may relate to Viking activity in the 870s (Williams 1999, 32). The present discovery, just outside the East Anglian port of Lowestoft, joins a previous discovery of a single weight in 1998, mentioned above, and it is likely that metal-detected finds reported to the Portable Antiquities Scheme will add to the list. The use if Carolingian and Roman coins is highly significant. Williams makes the point that the Vikings may have been influenced by the use of coin dies on late Saxon weights, before they themselves used coinage, and that their increasing familiarity with coinage led to it being perceived as a visual symbol of authority, or of a recognized weight standard, by people who were otherwise illiterate at the time of the early Viking settlement (Williams 1999, 35-6). Was the use of Carolingian issues therefore significant in terms of the original source of the weights, potentially across the North Sea, or the symbolism of the basic design of the reverse, or both? The Prehistoric and Roman Pottery Andrew Peachey Excavations recovered a total of 218 sherds (2019g) of prehistoric and Roman pottery; the bulk of which comprised coarse calcined flint-tempered fabrics that could be assigned a late Bronze Age to early Iron Age date (Table 43), including two bowls that indicate the latter period may be more applicable. The assemblage also included sand-tempered jars with limited burnished decoration of mid-late Iron Age date, and Roman pottery probably dating to the latter half of the 4th century AD. The pottery is generally in a moderately abraded and fragmented condition, but is limited to a sparse distribution, including isolated small groups that contain only rare diagnostic rim or decorated sherds. Pottery Date Late Bronze Age-Early Iron Age Mid-Late Iron Age Late Roman Total Sherd Count 159 28 31 218 Weight (g) 2019 366 777 3162 Table 42: Pottery quantification by period Methodology The pottery was examined at x20 magnification to define fabric categories and quantified by sherd count, weight (g) and R.EVE with all diagnostic features and observations also recorded in accordance with the guidelines of the Prehistoric Ceramics Research Group (PCRG 1995) and Study Group for Roman Pottery (Darling 1994). All data will be entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that forms part of the archive. 53 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Commentary The late Bronze Age to early Iron Age pottery occurs in two coarse calcined flinttempered fabrics (Table 44: F1 and F2) that are consistent with fillers used in the ceramic traditions from the period in the region (Martin 1999a, 74). Small groups of fabric F1 were contained in Ditch F2461 and Pit F2484, and Fabric F2 in Pit F2569, and appear to represent the partial remnants of single vessels in each feature. The remaining fabric F1 and F2 sherds are limited to small, sparsely distributed body sherds that typically occur as 1-5 sherds in pit and posthole features, notably including a decorated body sherd in Pit F2349. Fabric F1 F2 Total Description (hand-made, bonfire-fired) Common moderately to well-sorted calcined flint (generally 1-3mm, occasionally larger) Common moderately-sorted calcined flint (0.5-5mm) Sherd Count 108 51 159 Weight (g) 1264 755 2019 Table 44: Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age pottery fabrics Single vessel types in fabric F1 and F2 could be identified in Ditch F2461 (L2462) and Pit F2569 (L2570) respectively; with both vessels comprising bowls that form part of the post-Deverel-Rimbury (PDR) ceramic tradition of the period. The traits of the bowls are too limited to allow for more detailed stylistic and chronological analysis within PDR groups (Brudenell 2011, 16-20), but comparisons from east Suffolk suggest an origin the early Age is more likely. The bowl in Ditch F2461 has an angular shoulder beneath a plain cordon (base present, rim missing) and is closely comparable to early Iron Age bowls at Little Bealings (Martin 1993, fig. 37.201); while the bowl in Pit F2569 has a slightly flaring rim decorated with finger-tip impressed cabling comparable to an early Iron Age bowl at Framlingham (Martin 1993, fig. 42.2). Furthermore a fabric F1 body sherd from Pit F2349 forms part of the shoulder or girth of a vessel decorated with a single row of finger-top impressions, broadly consistent with PDR decorative styles. While moderately fragmented, both the bowls identified were represented by cross-joining sherds; with that in Ditch F2461 also exhibiting soot or burnt residue on its interior surfaces, potentially consistent with scattered domestic activity in the early Iron Age than more focussed midden/rubbish deposition or burial/ ritual contexts. The mid to late Iron Age pottery appears to have been manufactured in a single handmade fabric, and includes small groups in Pits F2040 and F2466, with further sparse sherds in Pits F2310 and F2359. The fabric tends towards dark grey to black, and has inclusions of common, poorly-sorted quartz (0.1-0.5mm) with occasional flint (shattered and calcined) (<3mm), consistent with manufacturing processes that dominate in the mid to late Iron Age (Martin 1999a, 80), though the consistent (occasional) presence of burnt flint might suggest a date towards the beginning or the middle Iron Age, or possibly just localised expedient use of resources/ technology. Pits F2040 (L2041) and Pit F2466 (L2467) both contain cross-joining fragments of jars with slightly everted plain rims and shouldered bodies, comparable to late Iron Age vessels at Burgh in east Suffolk (Martin 1988, fig. 19.2021). Neither vessel exhibits any evidence of use-wear, although both have burnished rims and necks (excluding the shoulder and lower body), and the same diameter. It remains possible they represent portions of a single vessel although no cross-joins were identified between features. 54 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 The 31 sherds (777g) of Roman pottery are dominated by locally-produced reduced (sandy, grey) coarse wares, but also include sparse regional imports (Table 45) consistent with supply patterns in the late Roman period in East Anglia. The Roman pottery is very sparsely distributed, predominantly in pit features, with a small group of GRS1 and ROB SH in Pit F2036 containing a 4th century AD GRS1 dish and ROB SH jar. This chronology is supported by the presence of a further GRS1 dish in Colluvial Deposit L2009 that dates to the latter half of the 4th century AD; while a small group of non-diagnostic GRS1 and BSW1 body sherds were contained in Pit F2365, Fabric Description (hand-made, bonfire-fired) GRS1 Sandy grey ware. Mid grey with slightly paler core and contrasting grey margins. Inclusions comprise moderately-sorted common quartz (0.1-0.25mm), sparse-common silver mica and occasional flint (<5mm). Romanising/Black-Surfaced grey ware. Dark grey to black surfaces with oxidised margins and core. Inclusions comprise moderately-sorted common quartz (0.1-0.5mm) with sparse red and black iron ore/-rich grains and sparse fine mica. A locally-produced coarse ware. Lower Nene Valley colour-coated ware (Tomber and Dore 1998, 118) BSW1 LNV CC ROB SH Romano-British shell-tempered ware (Tomber and Dore 1998, 212), wheel-made with common, moderately sorted shell (0.5-7mm, occasionally larger). Probably manufactured at Harrold, Bedfordshire (Brown 1994). Total Sherd Count 25 Weight (g) 710 4 50 1 4 1 13 31 777 Table 45: Roman pottery fabrics The GRS1 dish in Pit F2036 has a shallow profile, out-turned sides and two grooves beneath the rim comparable to 4th century AD examples at Burgh Castle, Norfolk (Johnson 1983, fig. 42.164) and Caister-by-Sea (Darling and Gurney 1993, fig. 155.598). Similarly the GRS1 dish from Colluvial Deposit L2009, which has a deep body, tall grooved bead and flange decorated with comb-impressions, also finds parallels at in these two coastal assemblages (Johnson 1983, fig. 42.172; Darling and Gurney 1993, fig. 154.580). However, the development of bead-and-flange rim dishes to incorporate a tall bead and decorated flange is a very late evolution of the more common type that emerges in the late 3rd century AD, occurring only in the latter half of the 4th century AD, if not the latter decades only. Regional imports such as ROB SH and LNV CC are in common circulation in east Suffolk in the 3rd-4th centuries, but become increasingly common as the 4th century AD progresses. The ROB SH jar is consistent with late Roman types also recorded at Burgh Castle (Johnson 1983, fig. 43.216), while the LNV CC in Tree Bole F2429 is limited to a body sherd, possibly from a bowl. The Roman pottery comprises a limited assemblage but is consistent with 4th century AD activity along the east coast of Norfolk and Suffolk, in an area at the south of the Great Estuary, possibly on the southern end of the island or peninsular on which Burgh Castle was located, one of the shore forts that were substantial market consumers of pottery in the period. The Post-Roman Pottery Peter Thompson Introduction Excavations at Oulton produced 451 sherds of pottery weighing 5808g (Table 46). The majority of the sherds (390/4.673kg) are early to early middle Anglo-Saxon in date and account for 86% of the total assemblage. The condition of these sherds can 55 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 be classed in general as abraded but not heavily so, with some that have lighter abrasion. Period Saxon Saxo-Norman Medieval Post-Medieval Late Post-Medieval to modern Total Date Mid 5th-7th Mid 9th-mid 12th 11th-13th Late 16th-18th 19th-20th Sherd No. 390 25 10 1 25 451 Fabric Weight (g) 4673 305 154 26 650 5808 Average sherd weight (g) 11.9 12.2 15.4 26 26 Table 46: Quantification of pottery by period Methodology The sherds were examined under x35 binocular microscope and recorded in accordance with the Post-Roman Pottery Research Group Guidelines (Slowikowski 2001; Table 47). Details including sherd number and weight, fabric type, vessel and rim type, were recorded (where possible) directly into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, which will be deposited with the site archive. All fabric codes comprising letters and numbers, were assigned from the Suffolk post-Roman fabric series, which includes Norfolk, Essex, Cambridgeshire and Midlands fabrics, as well as imported wares. Form terminology is based on the Suffolk post-Roman rim forms and forms in the Medieval Pottery Research Group (MPRG) guidelines (1998), with reference to other published Anglo-Saxon pottery. Ware Early Anglo-Saxon Grass Tempered Ware Grass and Sand Tempered Ware Coarse Quartz Fine Sand Grog and Sand Coarse Shelly Sandstone Gog and Granite Calcareous and Granitic (gold mica) Medium sandy Grog and Calcareous Saxo-Norman Thetford ware Medieval Early Medieval Ware Post-Medieval Glazed Red Earthenware Late Post-Medieval and Modern Transfer Printed Ware Late Post-Medieval red earthenware Factory made white earthenware English Stoneware Modern Porcelain Yellow ware Fabric group Code Sherd Number Fabric Weight (g) ESO1 ES02 ESCQ ESFS ESGS ESCS ESSA ESGG ESCM ESMS ESGC 2.01 2.02 2.03 2.04 2.05 2.09 2.18 2.19 2.21 2.22 2.26 1 130 49 1 46 61 26 1 22 52 1 18 1636 603 6 512 754 72 17 367 590 98 THET 2.50 25 305 EMW 3.10 10 154 GRE 6.12 1 26 TPE LPMRE RFWE ESW PORC YELW 8.00 8.01 8.03 8.20 8.30 8.13 8 2 3 4 6 2 243 12 153 80 104 58 Table 47: Quantification of pottery by ware/ fabric The Early to Middle Anglo-Saxon Pottery Fabrics The fabrics are very mixed often containing two, three or even four groups of inclusions, in varying quantities. Many sherds also contain rare to moderate small voids from leached calcareous inclusions and/ or carbonised organic fragments. The 56 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 fabrics have therefore been divided into groups according to the predominant inclusion (Table 48). Fabric Group 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total Main inclusions Organics Quartz Calcareous Grog Sandstone Granite Sherd Number 131 102 61 48 26 22 390 Fabric Weight (g) 1654 1207 754 619 72 367 4661 Sherd % 33.6 26.2 15.6 12.3 6.7 5.6 Table 48: Fabric groups by main inclusions Group 1 comprising sand and sparse to moderate, and occasionally common, burnt organics or grass tempering, was the largest category comprising one third of the fabric total. However, only one sherd (18g) from Ditch F2019 (L2020 (Seg.B)), contained abundant grass temper only, the remainder containing varying amounts of quartz sand and sometimes other inclusions. The second largest group, Group 2 quartz comprises 26.2% of the sherd total and ranges from fine up to very coarse quartz inclusions. This group includes quartz sand tempering as a sub group which, accounted for 50 sherds (596g) of the early to middle Anglo-Saxon total and 49% of the Group 2 category. Group 3 calcareous wares, makes up 15.6% of the early to middle Anglo-Saxon fabric total. These sherds have distinctive surfaces punctuated by numerous small circular and irregular voids, probably deriving from leached shell naturally occurring in fossiliferous clay. Group 4 (12.3%), contained grog added in varying amounts ranging from sparse to moderate in quantity, in most cases the grog is a distinctive red or orange colour, but is occasionally pale grey or off white. Group 5 sandstone, totalling 6.7% of the fabric total contains sparse to moderate medium polycrystalline quartz clusters present within the matrix. The smallest group, Group 6, contains sub-angular grey and occasionally pink quartz-like inclusions with sparse gold mica on the surfaces, and is of similar description to biotite granite that was present at Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Coalville (Tipper 2009, 202). Table 49 shows the fabric quantities (by sherd percentage) for three other sites in north-east Suffolk: Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Coalville, Church Road, Snape and Hartismere High School, Eye, in comparison to Oulton. Site Fabric Organics Quartz Calcareous Grog Sandstone Granite Other Sherd Total Lime Avenue, Oulton Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Coalville Church Road, Snape Hartismere High School, Eye 33 26.2 15.6 12.3 6.7 5.6 24.6 49.5 8.9 1.6 9.1 6.3 451 6479 41 19.9 6.9 14.3 16.4 1 0.5 231 12.3 46.5 18 6.2 0.7 14.6 1.7 1799 Table 49: Fabrics present (by percentage) on three early Anglo-Saxon sites in north-east Suffolk Forms All of the Anglo-Saxon pottery is handmade. The forms with one or two exceptions, can be characterised as shouldered (Fig. 44.1), straight sided ovoid (Fig. 44.3) and globular or ellipsoid (Fig. 44.7). The presence of only partial profiles makes it difficult in many cases to differentiate between jars and bowls. In only one example could a 57 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 rim be certainly matched to a base, due in part to its decoration (Fig. 44.9). However, the forms in general match those present at Bloodmoor Hill, with the exception of low-bulbous jars and biconical and sub-biconical profiles that appear to be absent at Oulton (Tipper 2009, 208). Out of 37 rims, 23 are simple fairly upright with one flat topped (Fig. 44.12). Six are out-turned, one being slightly thickened, and eight are slightly inturned (Fig. 44.4), one being slightly thickened. Measurable rim diameters range from 8cm to 28cm with 14 out of 18 rims (77.7%) between 8cm and 22cm diameter. A figure of 96% for rims between 10cm and 20cm diameter was obtained from Bloodmoor Hill (Tipper 2009, 217). Out of the 12 bases evident, two are flat, with the remainder being sagging or rounded. The presence of patches of charcoal residue on some sherds indicates a domestic use as cooking pots. At Hartismere High School, Eye there was an additional category of flaring rims making up 18.9% of the rim total, while most of the 89 bases were flat rounded or flat angled with just 18 (20%) rounded or sagging. Additionally there were three pedestal footrings, a form also found at Bloodmoor Hill along with a pedestal base sherd (Anderson 2012a, 78; Tipper 2009, 208). Hartismere High School produced a much wider range of forms including carinated, biconical and sub-biconical vessels, flaring bowls and a lamp or crucible. The commonest vessels included globular and shouldered vessels and hemispherical bowls as at Oulton (Anderson 2012a, 78). Vessels with sloping necks were also fairly common, which may equate with the low bulbous jars from Bloodmoor Hill; a form absent from Oulton Sands. Oulton can also be compared and contrasted with the smaller but more diverse assemblage from Church Road, Snape. The Church Road site yielded baggy shouldered jars and hemispherical and ovoid/ straight sided bowls. There was a single biconical form, a carinated sherd, and, while rims were mainly similar in proportion to Oulton (simple upright 14; everted 4; inturned 3) there were also three thickened or ‘developed’ rims and a flaring rim. The Snape assemblage was dated between the mid 5th and mid 8th centuries, with two sunken-featured buildings (SFBs) providing mid 6th century radiocarbon dates (Mustchin 2014b, 34). The latest demonstrable sherd was one of Ipswich ware, but that was in the post-abandonment backfill of an SFB (Thompson 2014, 76). Decoration and surface treatment Decoration on the Oulton sherds/ vessels is fairly low. Three vessels contain a total of four different stamps. Pit F1114 (L1115) contained the rim and base of a small ovoid bowl with dispersed vertical incised lines down the length of the vessel, with seemingly random negative circle stamps (Briscoe Type A1b) along the vessel length (Briscoe 1981, 4). Part of a slight small boss also survives (Fig. 44.9). Pit F2131 (L2132) contained a body sherd with dispersed floral type motif stamps (Briscoe 1981, Type F7a; Fig. 44.14), and a second sherd with irregular rosette stamps (Briscoe Type A 5a) and a partial segment stamp, both set within an incised chevron (Fig. 44.15). In addition to the incised decoration illustrated above, a body sherd from SFB 2 (L2634 (Seg.B)) contained vertical incised line decoration (Fig. 44.5), and two further sherds from the assemblage contained single or dispersed horizontal incised lines. At Hartismere High School, there were 13 stamps, some duplicated, including rosettes and crosses in circles. Other traits included faceted carinations and bosses (Anderson 2012a, 78-9). At Bloodmoor Hill, which was dated between the early to mid 5th and early 8th centuries, 72 different stamps and 27 58 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 decorated bosses were present. Radiocarbon dating indicated that the stamp decorated pottery belonged to the first half of the 6th century (Tipper 2009, 302-43). Burnishing was also very low at Oulton with just six sherds treated that way, and a further four sherds with ‘polished’ surfaces, but not to the extent of being burnished. It is possible the figure could be a little higher with outer surfaces being heavily abraded on some sherds. This is in contrast with Bloodmoor Hill where 39% of sherds exhibited evidence of burnishing, with a further 28% wiped to the point of having ‘lustrous surfaces’ (Tipper 2009, 216). At Hartismere High School, out of 1172 vessels identified 43 (3.6%) had burnishing and 405 (34%) had smoothed surfaces (Anderson 2012a, 78-9). The main features containing early to middle Saxon pottery Eight features contained a minimum of 15 sherds, whose combined total of 294 sherds makes up 75.3% of the early to middle Saxon total (Table 50). SFBs 2 (F3633), 3 (F2754) and 4 (F2750) contained 160 sherds (1860g) accounting for 41% of the early to middle Saxon total. SFB 2 contained the most pottery (114 sherds (1464g)) with a minimum of 17 vessels represented. SFB 4 also contained a sherd of medieval roof tile which is almost certainly intrusive. Pit F2164 contained 58 sherds (793g), while Pit F2132 contained two stamp decorated sherds. Feature Context Sherd No 114 Fabric Weight (g) 1,464 SFB 2 (F2633) SFB 3 (F2754) SFB 4 (F2750) Pit F2164 L2634, L2635 L2756 Forms 31 86 Minimum of 17 vessels represented including 12 rim and 2 base sherds, and a decorated body sherd (Figs. 44.1-5) Minimum of 5 vessels represented including one rim (Fig. 44.8) L2751 15 256 Minimum of 9 vessels including 6 rim and 2 base sherds (Figs. 44.6-7) 58 793 Minimum of 10 vessels including 5 rims (Figs. 44.16-17) Pit F2131 L2185, L2204 L2132 37 688 Pit F1114 L1115 34 406 Pit F2093 Pit F2744 Pit F2687 L2094 L2745 L2688 19 10 10 339 101 59 Minimum of 13 vessels including 6 rim and 5 base sherds, and 2 stamp decorated sherds (Figs. 44.11-15) Minimum of five vessels including four rims and a base, includes stamp and incised line decorated vessel (Fig. 44.9) Minimum of 5 vessels including 3 rims and a base All one vessel including rim All one vessel including rim Table 50: Features containing ten or more sherds of early to middle Saxon pottery The Later Pottery Thetford Ware There were 25 sherds (305g) of wheel-made Thetford ware present in eight features (Ditches F1041, F1043, F1084, F2042 and Pits F1047, F2091, F2729 and F2746). These include four cooking pot rims, one with a band of rouletting across the shoulder, and a bowl with rouletting across the rim (Figs. 44.18-21). The presence of small patches of sooting indicates that they were used as domestic cooking vessels. The rim forms are all between 12cm and 16cm in diameter, and are similar to examples from Norwich. In particular, a flat base sherd with wire marks underneath is typical of examples from Norwich and suggests a pre-Conquest date (Jennings 1981, 14). The Thetford ware industry probably operated in Norwich between the late 10th and mid 12th centuries (McCarthy and Brooks 1988, 162). 59 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Early Medieval Ware Ten sherds (154g) of early Medieval sandy ware were present in eight features; Pit F1159 (Trial Trench 117; Orzechowski 2015), Postholes F2247, F2671, F2287; Gullies F2190, F2510; Pits F2162 and F2641. Forms comprise two bowl rims, a sagging base, and a flat topped wheel-made rim from Pit F1159 which is probably intrusive. Post-medieval to modern wares Ditch F2068 (L2069) yielded a large abraded brown glazed post-medieval red earthenware bowl rim (26g) with finger decoration below the lip. The remaining 25 sherds (650g) from Ditches F1035, F2143, Pits F2306, F2357 and the topsoil (L2000), are of mid 19th to 20th century date. Discussion The contrasts in certain traits between the abovementioned comparative sites, such as the proportion of burnishing, and perhaps to a lesser degree the forms, suggests that each site had its own characteristics and idiosyncrasies. While the fabrics are always going to be influenced by the composition of the local clays there are certain trends apparent over time. Anderson (2012a, 77) points out that in general, fine, medium and coarse quartz-tempered pottery tend to be the most common fabric groups at sites in East Anglia, although in the later early Anglo-Saxon period these appear to have been replaced to some extent by grass-tempered pottery. Radiocarbon dating of organic residues from the Bloodmoor Hill assemblage showed that the biotite granite pottery from the SFBs was exclusively 6th century, and that there was a positive correlation between granite tempering and decorated sherds within the fills of structures (Tipper 2009, 207-8). At Mucking in Essex, the dominance of grass tempered pottery was a later early Anglo-Saxon development featuring in 6th and particularly 7th century deposits (Hamerow 1993, 31), and this is also thought to be the case for Suffolk (Anderson 2012a, 77). At Bloodmoor Hill organic tempering dates ranged between the early 6th and late 7th centuries (Tipper 2009, 207). The 6th to mid 7th century cemetery at Flixton, Suffolk yielded a small to medium assemblage of 389 sherds containing 70% grass tempering, while shell tempered wares and a relatively high proportion of red grog were also present (Anderson 2012b, 138-40). A decrease in calcareous wares was noted at Mucking after the early 6th century (Hamerow 1993, 31). Conversely, in the Midlands shelly wares appear to increase in the later period and are eventually superseded by Maxey-type wares in the late 7th century (Anderson 2012a, 77). Oulton has a relatively homogenous range of forms which may indicate that the assemblage is of a relatively narrow time span. The lack of carinated or biconical forms or other traits, such as schlickung decoration, present at Hartismere High School are not represented at Oulton, suggesting the site is later than the 5th century (Anderson 2012a, 77; Hamerow 1993, 31 and 42-44). The two Oulton stamp decorated sherds from Pit F2131 (L2132) (Figs. 44.14-15) are in Group 2 quartz (sand) and Group 3 calcareous fabrics respectively, and were associated with a mixed group of fabrics dominated by quartz, calcareous and organic tempered 60 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 fabrics. The stamped vessel from Pit F1114 (L1115) was associated with quartz (sand) tempered sherds only. However, the dating evidence cited above, particularly radiocarbon dates, tentatively suggests that the stamped sherds are most likely to belong to the 6th century. The lack of Middle Saxon Ipswich ware which commenced production c. 720 again might suggest – subject to the small size of the pottery assemblage – that activity on the site had ceased before that date. The presence of Thetford ware and Early Medieval wares shows that further activity took place on the site in the late Anglo-Saxon period probably by the mid 10th century which lasted up to the 12th or possibly 13th centuries. List of Illustrations Fabric group in brackets [ ] Fig. 44.1: Fig. 44.2: Fig. 44.3: Fig. 44.4: Fig. 44.5: Fig. 44.6: Fig. 44.7: Fig. 44.8: Fig. 44.9: Fig. 44.10: Fig. 44.11: Fig. 44.12: Fig. 44.13: Fig. 44.14: Fig. 44.15: Fig. 44.16: Fig. 44.17: Fig. 44.18: Fig. 44.19: Fig. 44.20: Fig. 44.21: SFB F2633 (L2634) shouldered vessel dark brown outer surface, dark grey inner surface [2] SFB F2633 (2634 (Seg.B)) ovoid jar with pale orange outer surface mottled with dark grey patches, and dark grey inner surface [4] SFB F2633 (L2634 (Seg.B)) straight sided cooking pot, pale orange brown surfaces with dark grey mottling and small patches of charcoal residue [4] SFB F2633 (2634 (Seg.B)) ovoid or barrel shaped jar with dark grey surfaces mottled with pale orange patches. Outer surface polished [1] SFB F2633 (2634 (Seg.B)) dark grey body sherd with incised line decoration [4] SFB F2750 (L2751) upright rim to shouldered vessel mid brown with oxidised margins [4] SFB F2750 (L2751 (Seg.C)) inturned simple rim to globular or ellipsoid bowl, dark grey surfaces with patchy orange mottling [1] SFB F2754 (L2756 (Seg.D)) hemispherical bowl rim with black outer surface and dark grey inner surface [6] Pit F1114 (L1115) slightly inturned rim to ovoid bowl with flat base, pale brown surfaces. Incised horizontal line below rim and dispersed vertical lines with a slight boss. Random circular stamp decoration between the panels of A1b negative circles [2] Pit F2093 (L2094) ovoid vessel with outurned rim, pale brown outer surface mottled with orange patches and dark grey inner surface [1] Pit F2131 (L2132) globular jar [1] Pit F2131 (L2132) globular or shouldered jar with upright flat topped rim. Orange brown pitted surfaces [3] Pit F2131 (L2132) inturned rim to globular or ellipsoid bowl, pale orange brown outer surface with charcoal patches, mottled pale orange brown and dark grey inner surface [1] Pit F2131 (L2132) F7a type ‘floral’ motif stamp [3] Pit F2131 (L2132) A5a irregular Rosette stamp, possible segmented line, and incised lines [2] Pit F2164 (L2165) ovoid cooking pot with dark brown outer surface with adhering, and dark grey inner surface [6] Pit F2164 (L2165) small ovoid bowl pale orange outer surface, dark brown inner surface [1] Ditch F1043 (L1044) Thetford ware jar upper profile, dark grey surfaces with rouletted band across the shoulder Pit F2091 (L2092 (Seg.A)) Thetford ware cooking pot rim, dark grey mottled with pale orange patches, with patches of charcoal residue Pit F2042 (L2043) Thetford ware bowl rim with faint rouletting on rim Pit F2729 (L2730) Thetford ware dark grey cooking pot rim 61 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 The Fired Clay, Daub and Ceramic Building Materials Andrew Peachey Excavations recovered a total of 233 fragments (6493g) of fired clay, daub and ceramic building materials (CBM) in a very highly fragmented and abraded condition (Table 51). The bulk of the fired clay and daub appears to be of probable Saxon date or deposition, but may represent re-deposited or recycled Roman kiln furniture. The fired clay includes possible pre-fabricated objects, notably bars and slabs/ bricks, but the highly friable preservation of these objects has limited their analysis. Occasional, very small fragments of Roman CBM were also present, while medieval (early 14th century) estuarine silt bricks were recovered from the backfill of Saxon features. Fired Clay/ Daub/ CBM type Roman Tile (?Tegula) Saxon Baked Clay Bar Baked Clay Brick/ Plate/ Pedestal Miscellaneous Baked Clay Daub Medieval Brick Post-Medieval Brick Peg Tile Total F W 11 222 11 18 68 85 129 960 650 941 3 211 26 11 233 3161 219 6493 Table 51: Quantification of Fired Clay, Daub and CBM by frequency (F) and weight (W, in grams) Methodology The fired clay, daub and CBM were quantified by fragment count and weight, with fabrics examined at x20 magnification and any extant dimensions/ technological traits measured or characterised. All data were entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that will be deposited as part of the archive. The Roman CBM Roman CBM is limited to small fragments of flat tile (average weight 20.7g), probably tegula roof tile, but no flanged or diagnostic fragments are present. The fabric of the tile is typical of Roman CBM in the region: orange-red with inclusions of common quartz (0.1-0.5mm), sparse red and cream clay pellets (0.5-3mm) and sparse fine mica. The tile was sparsely distributed in SFB 2 (F2633), Gully F2697 (Seg.C), Posthole F2265, Pits F2056, F2091, F2093 and F2365; with no evidence that it was directly associated with a Roman structure, nor subject to any form of re-cycling or curation in subsequent periods. The Fired Clay The fired or baked clay occurs in a single friable fabric that has pale-mid orange surfaces fading to a mottled orange to dark grey core, and tempered with chopped organic material, burnt out but seemingly grass and chaff (typically 0.5-7mm, occasionally larger). The bulk of the small fragments could not be categorised, but two object types could be partially defined. The former comprised a bar with a sub62 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 rectangular section and rounded edges (profile: c. 30 x 20mm). Only small sections of these bars were contained in Pits F2314 and F2357, but these appear uniform along their limited straight length rather than tapering. Thus, the bars are superficially similar to kiln bars known to be used in Roman kilns, but are smaller and lack the tapering length; thus may have been deployed in a similar setting, though there is no evidence of burning. The second object type appears to comprise slabs, bricks or plates with a thickness of c. 40mm and rough surfaces, but no other extant dimensions/characteristics; contained in Anglo-Saxon SFB 2 (F2633 (Seg.B)), Pits F2131, F2301, F2310 and F2459. These appear to represent prefabricated objects, again superficially similar to Roman kiln furniture and pedestals, such as those identified at West Stow (West 1990: figs. 63-5), however the examples at West Stow are larger and none were identified as re-used in the adjacent Anglo-Saxon settlement (although Roman pottery was curated). The objects in this assemblage do not exhibit any evidence for burning, exposure to heat or other use, and it remains possible these were either re-deposited from nearby Roman industry, salvaged and re-cycled from Roman debris to act as prefabricated components in Anglo-Saxon structures, or a deliberate Anglo-Saxon product for an un-defined purpose. The Daub A significant proportion of the assemblage comprised daub, which accounts for a total of 85 fragments (941g), but the highly friable nature of the material severely restricts its potential to be informative. The daub comprises sun-dried clay tempered with common rounded chalk (generally <5mm, occasionally to 10mm), resulting in a mottled pale orange to mid brown colour. This type of daub has been recorded across Suffolk on Iron Age to medieval sites, due to the suitability of the local boulder clays for its production. In this assemblage fragments are associated with prehistoric, Roman and Anglo-Saxon features, but are only present in quantities over 100g in Roman Pit F2546, undated Postholes F2251, f2259 and F2283; while AngloSaxon features tend to contain only ‘crumbs’. The daub fragments do not preserve any surfaces, although a single fragment in undated Posthole F2342 does preserve a 20mm wide impression of a rod that probably formed part of a wattle panel. The Medieval CBM A total of three fragments (211g) of medieval brick were contained in Anglo-Saxon SFB 2 (F2633 (Seg.C)) and Pit F2164. The brick is comprised of distinctive Flemishtype estuarine silt bricks, which have fabrics containing abundant small shells and casts (Ryan 1996, 94). Flemish-type bricks were probably imported in the early 14th century, or possibly from the mid/ late 13th century, and are especially common around the wash and east coast due to their trade being facilitated by Hanseatic merchants and ports (Drury 1981, 127). Although of distinctive fabric, the brick fragments in the assemblage are heavily abraded and do not preserve any extant dimensions or other diagnostic characteristics. Post-Medieval CBM The assemblage includes a total of 38 fragments (3395g) of post-medieval CBM, in a rubble-like condition and of varying date within the period. The bulk appear to 63 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 comprise 17th to early 18th century bricks in a sandy orange-red fabric, with dimensions if c. ? x 110 x 45mm and a slightly rough to smooth base. Relatively large fragments of this type of brick were limited to Ditch F2148 (Segs. A and G) with the remaining fragments identified by fabric and the presence of small comparable edges only. Also present in Ditch F2140, as well as Pit F2011 were 18th to 19th century red bricks, suggesting the post-medieval CBM may be associated with field enclosures and associated soil improvement (by the addition of rubble). Sparse fragments of post-medieval peg tile were also recovered from Topsoil L2000 and were probably redistributed by ploughing and related agricultural processes. The Slag Andrew A.S. Newton Introduction A total of 143 (3347g) pieces of slag, originating from 26 contexts, was recovered during archaeological excavation at Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk. The slag was identified on morphological grounds by visual examination. Visual examination of metalworking residues allows them to be categorised according to morphology, colour, density, and vesicularity. It should be noted, however, that not all slags are diagnostic of a particular metalworking process or part of that process. Slags are also particularly susceptible to morphological and composition alteration by secondary corrosion products. Reference was made to the National Slag Reference Collection (Dungworth et al. 2009) where appropriate and to the relevant subject-specific (Bayley et al. 2008) and regional research frameworks (Medlycott 2011). Results L2000: 3 fragments, 4g. Red brown, very fragile. Uniform dull surface. Slightly magnetic. Possibly very small fragments of very degraded slag or perhaps small pieces of iron-rich geology. F2033, L2035: 1 fragment, 459g. Dark red brown to light orange brown. Some black or grey patches of vitrification. Very dense. Few browken surfaces but where these are present very small (less than 1mm diam air pockets are visible). Is plano-convex in form and displays several of the other characteristics of a smithing hearth bottom (Crew 1996) but is only faintly magnetic. Therefore, this is possibly a PCB but otherwise may simply be classifiable only as undiagnostic Fe slag. F2093, L2094: 1 fragment, 86g. Dark grey with purple red tinges. Smooth, matte surfaces. Very dense, broken surfaces reveal no internal porosity. No response to magnet. Globular/ rippled morphology identify this as a fragment of tap slag clearly broken from a larger fragment after cooling in antiquity. F2154, L2155:1 fragment, 119g. Orange brown to black in colour. Broken surfaces reveal moderate interior vesicularity/ porosity; despite this material is quite dense. Upper surface might be described as an intact cooling surface but beyond this diagnostic morphological traits are lacking. Slight response to magnet. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2164, L2165: 2 fragments, 75g. Mid brown to black. Sharply rippled/ mammilated surface may represent an intact cooling surface. Some vitrification. Very similar to the material from L2216 (see below) but lacking the charcoal impressions. Possibly a slag prill, or part thereof, from the interior of the smelting furnace (Crew 1995). 64 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 F2215, L2216: 1 fragment, 61g. Orange red to very dark brown. Dull surfaces. Dense with little indication of internal air pockets. Upper surface sharply rippled or globular, representing an intact cooling surface. Lower surface displays impressions of charcoal. These characteristics indicate that this fragment is likely to represent a slag prill from the interior of the smelting furnace (Crew 1995). F2170, L2171: 4 fragments, 97g. Uniform mid grey. Dull finish. Moderate internal porosity; air pockets of varying size. No response to magnet. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2174, L2175: 11 fragments, 287g. Four fragments bright red brown to very dark red brown (near black), Rough dull finish. Varying from dense to pumice-like. Moderately to strongly magnetic. Five fragments mid red brown to dark grey with occasional very light grey patches. Smooth, rippled surfaces, mostly dull but with some eburnation. Not particularly dense and with indications of large (greater than c. 10mm in some cases) air pockets. No response to magnet. Two fragments mid grey in colour. Dull but smooth surfaces with occasional vitrified patches. Globular, mammilated form. Intact cooling surfaces. No response to magnet. Possible fragments of tap slag. All of the material from this context would appear to derive from ironworking but morphological characteristics are insufficient to determine from which phase of the process they derive, although smelting is perhaps more likely than smithing. F2176, L2177: 3 fragments, 51g. Black to dark brown. Some vitrified patches. Small (1mm diam or less) moderate to occasional air pockets. Non-magnetic. Morphology would suggest that these are four very small fragments of tap slag or small slag flows from the interior of the smelting furnace (Crew 1995). F2178, L2179: 5 fragments, 9g. Two fragments, light grey to black with rough, dull surfaces. Some very small patches of vitrification. Pumice-like with numerous interior air pockets suggesting a very frothy material when molten. Small pieces of burnt flint are impressed into the surfaces. No response to magnet. Three fragments, mid orange to dark orange brown. Dull, rough, powdery finish. Strongly magnetic. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2178, L2179: 2 fragments, 71g (from sampling residues). Mid to very dark grey with some greywhite patches and occasional red-brown staining. Dull finish, contorted shape, moderate air pockets (<2mm), moderate piece of crystalline stone embedded in one fragment. Possible tap slag or internal flow of slag from the interior of the furnace. F2182, L2183: 8 fragments, 34g. Black to dark orange brown in colour. Light, vesicular fragments, mostly globular in form. Powdery dull finishes. Some strongly magnetic, others display no response to magnet. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2184, L2185: 19 fragments, 258g. Colour varies from bright orange to black. Material is mostly pumice-like but there is some variation in density. Vesicularity is quite high, in keeping with its pumice-like qualities. Material is amorphous in form. Some pieces show small patches of vitrification. Much of the material comprises baked ceramics indicating the slag has incorporated part of the furnace lining. No response to magnet. Fe slag clearly originating from the interior of the furnace (or possibly the smithing hearth, but this is probably less likely). F2186, L2187: 1 fragment, 12g. Very dark brown with occasional orange brown patches. Dense with little indication of interior air pockets. Very slightly magnetic. Vaguely globular, suggesting that it may represent a very small piece broken from a flow of tap slag but otherwise only classifiable as undiagnostic Fe slag. F2190A, L2191A: 1 fragment, 6g. Dark brown to black with orange brown patches. Rough, dull finish. Moderately light with some vesicularity. Globular in form and clearly broken from a larger piece. Possibly part of a slag run from the interior of the smelting furnace. 65 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 F2192, L2193: 24 fragments, 418g. One fragment is mid orange brown with a dull powdery exterior. Dense and strongly magnetic. Quite possibly a heavily corroded piece of iron. Three fragments are light and pumice-like ranging from pale beige to dark grey in colour. A large proportion of each of these fragments appears to comprise baked ceramic material and one has a piece of flint embedded in it. These would appear to represent fragments of furnace lining. The remaining 20 fragments are dark orange brown to black in colour. They vary in density but would all appear to derive from the same source. Intact cooling surfaces, displaying the globular or rope-like characteristics of tap slag are present and it would appear that this material represents pieces of a broken-up accumulation of tap slag. F2192B, L2193B: 7 fragments, 39g. One fragment is mid orange brown with a dull powdery exterior. Dense and strongly magnetic. Possibly a heavily corroded piece of iron. 6 fragments are light and vesicular ranging in colour from light grey to black with frequent surface vitrification. Low response to magnet. Possibly fuel ash slag but perhaps more accurately classified as undiagnostic Fe slag. F2200, L2201: 11 fragments, 170g. Three fragments bright to dark orange brown. Broken surfaces reveal black, quite dense interior. Strongly magnetic. Four fragments grey to very dark brown pumice-like material with ceramic material adhering to it and fragments of burnt flint embedded. Four fragment black to dark red brown with some glittery areas. Dense with little indication of air pockets. Some sharp rippling may represent intact cooling surfaces. Possible fuel impressions and the presence of burnt flint embedded in two of the pieces might indicate that these are pieces broken from slag prills from within the smelting furnace. F2205, L2206: 5 fragments, 48g. Dark grey to grey brown in colour. Dull powdery surfaces. Some intact cooling surfaces but insufficient to identify it as tap slag. No response to magnet. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2213, L2214: 3 fragments, 67g. Two fragments black to dark orange brown with light grey patches. Pumice-like in character, no response to magnet very similar to the material from L2179. One fragment black to mid orange brown. Small and dense with no clear indication of internal porosity. Very strongly magnetic. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2362, L2364: 1 fragment, 8g. Dark grey to dark brown. Dull, powdery surfaces. Moderately dense but with numerous small air pockets (<1mm). Slightly magnetic. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2506, L2507: 5 fragments, 9g. Dark red brown to black in colour. Very small fragments. Hard yet brittle. Rough dull finish. Moderate air pockets (c. 1mm diam). Very slight response to magnet. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2506, L2507: 3 fragments, 8g (from sampling residues). Black. Very hard material. Rough dull finish. Numerous air pockets (up to 7mm diam.). No response to magnet. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2536, L2537: 3 fragments, 150g. Two fragments purple grey to very dark grey amorphous globular/mammilated material. Material is pumice-like in character with numerous small air pockets. There is evidence of vitrification on some exterior surfaces and, indeed, on the interior walls of some of the air pockets visible at the broken surfaces. Slight response to magnet. One fragment dark orange brown to black in colour. Very dense and with strong response to magnet. This is either a very Fe-rich piece of slag or, as is more likely, a heavily corroded piece of iron. F2536, L2537: 3 fragments, 169g (from sampling residues). This material is all very similar in appearance with rough dull surfaces, colour varying from dark brown to mid red brown, and a rough 66 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 globular morphology. However, magnet response and density varies widely from fragment to fragment. Frequent charcoal impressions, and fragments of charcoal impressed into the material, are present. These fragments would appear to comprise conglomerations of slag, fuel and ceramic furnace lining with the largest and most dense fragment also incorporating fragments of iron. F2538, L2539: 2 fragments, 9g. I fragment, mid grey with smooth surfaces. Broken surfaces reveal large interior air pockets. No response to magnet. Morphology indicates that this is a very small run or drip of tap slag. One fragment dark grey to orange brown in colour. Rough surfaces. No response to magnet. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2540, L2541: 7 fragments, 113g. Mid grey to dark red brown in colour. Dull powdery surfaces. Limited evidence of interior porosity. Amorphous with limited diagnostic traits. Fe slag. F2540, L2541: 4 fragments, 57g (from sampling residues). Black to mid grey. Some vitrification but mostly dull surfaces. Pumice-like in consistency. Intact but contorted cooling surface. Undiagnostic Fe slag. F2729, L2730: 1 fragment, 149g. Very dark grey to mid red-brown in colour. Rough, dull finish. Dense and with limited indication of air pockets. Small fragments of stone (poss quartz-like material) adhere to what would appear to be the upper surface. Moderate response to the magnet. Seemingly broken from a larger piece and displaying no diagnostic morphological characteristics. Undiagnostic Fe slag, however, the stone fragments on the upper surface could represent flux, which might indicate that this is a piece of slag broken from a larger smithing hearth cake. F2746, L2747: 2 fragments, 304g. Mid grey brown to dark grey brown. Rough, dull finish. Dense but with moderate air pockets (up to c. 3mm diam.) Both fragments are broadly plano-convex in form but it appears unlikely that they represent smithing hearth cakes; this form may simply result from the location they were sitting in when they cooled. Slight response to magnet. Undiagnostic Fe slag. Discussion Although over 3kg of slag was recovered during archaeological work at Lime Avenue, Oulton this is insufficient to suggest that metalworking was being carried out at this site and, furthermore, none of this material appears to have been recovered from a primary metal working context. It does, however, suggest that metalworking was being conducted somewhere in the surrounding area. It appears that all of this material is derived from ironworking, rather than the working of any other kind of metal. The presence of possible smithing hearth cakes/ planoconvex smithing hearth bottoms in the assemblage indicates that refining of blooms was being carried out alongside iron smelting, which is better represented in the assemblage. The presence of tap slag is consistent with the Anglo-Saxon date assigned to some contexts from which slag was recovered. The Struck Flint Andrew Peachey Excavations recovered a total of 19 pieces (115g) in an un-patinated condition (Table 52). The assemblage appears to represent the blade-based technology of the earlier Neolithic period, including a platform rejuvenation flake from a blade core 67 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 that was rotated to create a new platform, blades and a side scraper, and a small group of debitage removed from a single core. Struck Flint Type Platform rejuvenation flake Blade Scraper Debitage (blade-like) Total F 1 2 1 15 19 W 22 12 10 71 115 Table 52: Quantification of struck flint implements and debitage by frequency (F) and weight (W, in grams) Methodology and Terminology The flint was quantified by fragment count and weight (g), with all data entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that will be deposited as part of the archive. Flake type (see ‘Dorsal cortex,’ below) or implement type, patination, colour and condition were also recorded as part of this data set, along with free-text comments. The term ‘cortex’ refers to the natural weathered exterior surface of a piece of flint, and the term ‘patination’ to the colouration of a flaked surface exposed by human or natural agency. Dorsal cortex is categorised after Andrefsky (2005, 104 and 115) with ‘primary flake’ referring to those with cortex covering 100% of the dorsal face; ‘secondary flake’ with 50-99%; ‘tertiary’ with 1-49% and ‘un-corticated’ to those with no dorsal cortex. A ‘blade’ is defined as an elongated flake whose length is at least twice as great as it’s breadth, often exhibiting parallel dorsal flake scars (a feature that can assist in the identification of broken blades that, by definition, have an indeterminate length/ breadth ratio). Terms used to describe implement and core types follow the system adopted by Healy (1988, 48-9). Raw Material The raw flint in the assemblage is typically mid to dark grey in colour the limited cortex present ranging between thin brown-grey to white and chalky; suggesting a source in local secondary or tertiary gravels derived from local chalk deposits. However the platform rejuvenation flake contained in Pit F2164 is near black with a particularly chalky cortex; characteristics of the primary chalk-derived flint typical of the Breckland, and suggesting that the group of associated mid-dark grey debitage flakes with a white chalky cortex in the same feature may have been imported from the same source. Distribution and Technology The struck flint appears to occur primarily as residual material in Anglo-Saxon pits, with a notable group of 12 pieces (82g) contained in Pit F2164. The group includes a platform rejuvenation flake indicative of earlier Neolithic core maintenance and blade production, but is more notable for a blade and ten debitage flakes that appear to have been removed from a single core, indicative of an earlier Neolithc knapper working in the immediate vicinity. The platform rejuvenation flake in Pit F2164 is the only direct evidence for core technology in the assemblage, and represents a blade core that had been rotated to 68 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 exploit two platforms perpendicular to one another, before the flake was removed presumable to create a new platform on a cube-like core. The platform rejuvenation flake was removed with a hard-hammer and is of comparable length to the blades in Pit F2164 and Topsoil L2000, which in contrast were removed with soft-hammer, indirect percussion. The only other implement in the assemblage comprises a side scraper from Topsoil L2000, which is technologically indistinct, but probably contemporary with the bulk of the assemblage. The debitage flakes in the assemblage exhibit minor variability but remain consistent with blade production in the earlier Neolithic. The ten flakes in Pit F2164 are slightly bigger than the blades and rejuvenation flake, with the shades, variation and profile of the mid grey interior and extant cortex clearly indicative of a shared core source, though no cross-joining flakes could be identified. The remaining debitage flakes are significantly smaller, and include in Pits F2036 and F2043 small flakes probably resultant from platform trimming, maintenance or preparation; while equally small blade-like flakes in Pits F2093 and F2484 may represent mis-hit removals, unintended results or small flakes continually removed as a core was continually shaped/ prepared. The Animal Bone Dr Julia E.M. Cussans Introduction A small and poorly preserved assemblage of animal bones and teeth was recovered and is analysed below. The majority of material came from Roman and Anglo-Saxon contexts with little prehistoric or medieval material present. The taxa represented and taphonomic issues encountered are discussed. Method The entire animal bone assemblage was scanned one context or context segment at a time and the results recorded on a bone scan pro-forma. The pro-forma took into account observations on bone condition including general preservation, colour, abrasion, fresh breaks and gnawing. Preservation was rated on a five point scale of very poor (bone highly fragmented and friable, surface highly abraded, little identifiable bone), poor (bone fragmented, surfaced fairly abraded, some identifiable material), ok (some fragmentation and surface abrasion, but bone generally identifiable), good (bones may be fragmented but have little surface abrasion, identification is not impaired) and excellent (bones in near perfect (as buried) condition). The presence of abraded bones, fresh breakages and gnawing was rated on a semi-quantitative scale of none/ few/ some/ many. Bone identifications were made using the in house reference collection and with the aid of reference manuals (e.g. Cohen and Serjeantson 1996; Hillson 1992; Pales and Garcia 1981 a and b; Pales and Lambert 1971 a and b; Schmid 1972). Mammal bones were quantified by species where possible or where this was not possible by size category, where large indicates cattle or horse sized, medium is sheep/ goat, pig or large dog sized and small mammal is cat or hare sized. The presence of bird, fish and other small fauna could also be noted. For the identified mammal species the particular elements present were noted, as was the presence of butchery, ageable mandibles and teeth, unfused epiphyses, measurable bones and those displaying pathologies. The presence of such features was noted in a semi-quantitative manner, as above. 69 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Further to this, notes were made on any particular points of interest. Once recorded animal bone data were entered into an MS Excel spreadsheet along with context descriptions, feature group and phase to assist with data processing and analysis. Tooth eruption and wear was recorded following Grant (1982) and age stages assigned following Payne (1973) for sheep/ goat and Halstead (1985) for cattle; no ageable pig or horse teeth were present. Epiphysial fusion of long bones was assigned to age stages (Early, Intermediate, Late) following O’Connor (1989). Results Taphonomy As previously noted (Cussans 2015) the bones from this assemblage are generally in a poor state of preservation. The most notable feature of this is that the vast majority of identifiable elements are teeth or tooth fragments, with very few postcranial elements being intact enough to be identified to specific taxa; long bone fragments for example are however present in the large and medium mammal assemblages, indicating their presence in the buried assemblage. Teeth (particularly tooth enamel) have a much higher mineral content and much lower organic content than bones (Lyman 1994, 79) and hence survive much better in conditions of poor organic preservation. Bone preservation ratings, which were made on a context by context basis, are shown by phase in Chart 1. No contexts were rated as having good or excellent preservation and only five were rated as ok. The remainder were fairly evenly split between poor and very poor preservation. 7 6 No. of contexts 5 4 Very poor poor 3 ok 2 1 0 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase (2) (2) (11) 5.1 (13) Phase 5.2 (4) Phase 6 (1) Chart 1: Bone preservation ratings of contexts by phase Chart 2 shows the occurrence of fresh breakages and indicates that these were particularly common, especially in the larger assemblages. The occurrence of fresh (post excavation) breakages is an indicator of the friability and preservation state of the bone, likely indicating a significant loss of organic content. Chart 3 shows that abraded bones were also fairly common, indicating a significant loss of bone surface across the assemblage, which has consequences for the recognition of other bone surface modifications such as butchery marks and pathological lesions. 70 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 7 6 No. of contexts 5 none 4 few some 3 many 2 1 0 Phase 2 (2) Phase 3 (2) Phase 4 (11) Phase 5.1 Phase 5.2 (13) (4) Phase 6 (1) Chart 2: Bone fragmentation rating of contexts by phase 7 No. of contexts 6 5 none 4 few 3 some many 2 1 0 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase (2) (2) (11) 5.1 (13) Phase 5.2 (4) Phase 6 (1) Chart 3: Bone abrasion rating of contexts by phase Species present and quantification Despite the preservation issues described above a small proportion of the assemblage was identifiable to specific taxa (Table 53). In order of abundance cattle, sheep/ goat, horse and pig were all identified. These identified elements only accounted for 13% of the assemblage by number of identified specimens (NISP). The vast majority of the assemblage was made up of bones that could only be designated as large mammal; a small proportion was designated as medium mammal. Not all taxa are present in all phases; in fact the only phase where they are all present is Phase 5.1. Phases 3 and 6 had no identifiable taxa, only bones designated as large mammal and Phase 2 had only a single identifiable cattle element. It seems most likely that the absence of some of the taxa from some of the phases is most likely a product of the poor preservation and resultant small sample size and hence one cannot draw too much inference from the relative representation of different taxa across the phases. The bones present in each of the phases will be described in detail below. 71 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Phase Taxa 2 Cattle 1 3 Sheep/ goat 4 5.1 5.2 11 14 1 27 3 1 1 5 Pig 1 Horse 1 1 72 1 Large Mammal Total Total 1 4 8 109 15 9 2 5 8 138 98 6 Medium mammal 6 2 1 195 1 256 26 Table 53: Quantification of animal remains from Oulton by taxa and phase Description by Phase Phase 2 Phase 2 comprised a total of five bones, one of which was a fragment of cattle pelvis with the remainder only being identifiable as large mammal, two of which were thought to be mandible fragments, the others were not identified to body part. These bones all derived from pits in the Phase 2 dispersed feature cluster (Sections 2.2930; Table 6). No butchery or pathology was observed and no ageable elements were present. Phase 3 The Phase 3 assemblage was entirely derived from Pit F2310 and made up of large mammal tooth fragments. These were highly fragmented and could not be further identified. Phase 4 Phase 4 has the largest bone assemblage of all the phases but only 14 identifiable fragments. Cattle and sheep/ goat are the only identified taxa. Sheep/ goat are represented by three teeth, all of which are upper permanent premolars and all in wear, indicating the presence of adult animals. All of these derived from Posthole F2273 associated with Structure 1. This is the only bone containing context found in association with this structure and it is likely that all of the teeth belong to a single animal. Other bone fragments from this context are all recorded as medium mammal and are a mix of skull and long bone fragments. Cattle bones derive from four different features and are a mix of teeth and long bones. There are eleven cattle bones/ teeth in total, eight of which come from L2421 (Pit F2420). These include a fused proximal radius and an unfused distal radius (epiphysis and fragment of diaphysis); these radius fragments may have come from the same bone but could not be joined. An unfused proximal tibia was also present as well as a mandible fragment with no teeth intact, a second or third permanent premolar, two upper molars and an upper permanent premolar, all of which were in wear. Both the distal radius and proximal tibia are late fusing elements (O’Connor 1989), whereas proximal radius is an early fusing element; these bones and teeth may well represent an animal/ animals that have reached approximately full size but are not yet skeletally mature and hence possibly represent prime meat aged animals. Other cattle remains from Phase 4 were a fused proximal radius, a 72 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 mandible fragment and a molar fragment (in wear); these bones fit well with the group from L2421. The rest of the Phase 4 assemblage was made up of bone fragments recorded as large mammal; these were largely long bone fragments. Phase 5.1 Phase 5.1 yielded the second largest collection of bones/ bone fragments and the largest number of identifiable bones/ teeth as well as the greatest number of identified taxa. Cattle are again dominant but sheep/ goat, pig and horse are also represented. The identified assemblage is overwhelmingly dominated by teeth and tooth fragments. The only partial exception to this is a fragment of sheep/ goat mandible from L1115 (Pit F1114). This mandible had three teeth intact: a fragment of the M1, the M2 and the M3, all of which were in wear. The M3 was worn to Grant’s (1982) wear stage g and the M2 to stage h. This indicates an animal at Payne’s (1973) age stage H with a suggested age of 6-8 years. The only pig element present was an upper deciduous 4th premolar (dp4) which had very slight wear on the tips of the cusps indicating a fairly young animal. Horse is represented by a permanent upper 2nd premolar (P2) which is in wear but not complete enough for age assessment. Cattle were represented solely by teeth and tooth fragments; none of these could be assigned to wear stages or age groups. In the main bone fragments assigned as large or medium mammal were noted as long bone fragments indicating that post-cranial elements were also present. The Phase 5.1 bones came from two feature types, sunken-featured buildings (SFBs) and dispersed pits (Section 2.76; Table 34) group. Bones/ teeth were found in SFBs 1, 2, 3 and 4 but not SFB 5. SFB 2 had the largest bone assemblage but other than this no distinct patterning could be detected, largely due to the small size of the assemblage. Phase 5.2 The assemblage from Phase 5.2 is small but contains a reasonable spread of taxa. Cattle, sheep/ goat and horse are all represented by a single element each. Cattle is represented by a lower M3, with a Grant’s (1982) wear stage of g, indicating an animal of Halstead’s (1985) age stage G (adult). Sheep/ goat were represented by a metatarsal shaft fragment with no age or butchery data. The only horse bone was a fragment of proximal tibia which was fused; this being a late fusing bone indicates the presence of an adult animal. Very few bones were identified as large or medium mammal and these were a large mammal mandible fragment and some medium mammal long bone fragments. Phase 6 A single large mammal long bone fragment was recovered from Phase 6 Posthole F2174 in association with the metallurgical waste area (Section 2.86; Table 39). No butchery marks or other modifications were observed. 73 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Summary and Discussion Overall the assemblage is poorly preserved and likely does not accurately represent the original buried assemblage. The more porous bones of younger animals and those species more prone to decay, for example pigs (Bond 1995) are likely to be under represented. Roman period (Phase 4) remains include cattle and sheep/ goat. The limited age data available indicate the presence of adult sheep/ goat and young adult (prime meat) cattle. The lack of pigs and horses from the Roman period assemblage is likely a product of the poor preservation and small sample size as both species are common at Roman site in East Anglia (e.g. Curl and Cussans 2014, Cussans and Philips in press). It is also likely that a selection of other taxa such as dog, deer and chicken were present at the site (ibid.) but are not represented in the available bone assemblage. Anglo-Saxon (Phase 5) animal bones included cattle, sheep/ goat, horse and pig. Adult cattle, sheep/ goat and horse were identified and the presence of relatively young pig was noted. Pigs in particular are likely under represented as they are noted as a key element of the Anglo-Saxon economy (Crabtree 2014). Hagen (2006, 116) however suggests that in Anglo-Saxon times pigs were often consumed as salt pork and that at the point of consumption this product produces no bones, which may at some sites account for the lack of pig remains and may be a contributing factor here. However as mentioned above pig bones may also be under represented due to their greater tendency to decay. Several other common Anglo-Saxon taxa such as domestic fowl and goose (e.g. Holmes 2014; Mustchin et al. in preparation) may also have originally been present. The Environmental Samples Dr John R. Summers Introduction During excavations at land north of Sands Lane, Oulton, 154 bulk soil samples for environmental archaeological assessment and analysis were taken and processed. Sampled deposits from all phases of occupation on the site are represented, from the late Bronze Age, through to the post-medieval period. This report combines information from the assessment of the bulk sample light fractions with the full analysis of a small number of richer samples from Phase 4 and 6 deposits. In addition, charcoal remains from five burnt flint pits of Anglo-Saxon date (Phase 5.1) were analysed and the results are presented below. The significance of the identified remains to the interpretation of activities undertaken at the site during its long period of use is discussed in relation to relevant archaeological and archaeobotanical research in the region. Methods Samples were processed at the Archaeological Solutions Ltd facilities in Bury St Edmunds using standard flotation methods. The light fractions were washed onto a mesh of 500μm (microns), while the heavy fractions were sieved to 1mm. The dried light fractions were sorted under a low power stereomicroscope (x10-x30 magnification). Botanical and molluscan remains were identified and recorded using 74 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 reference literature (Cappers et al. 2006; Jacomet 2006; Kerney and Cameron 1979; Kerney 1999) and a reference collection of modern seeds. Potential contaminants, such as modern roots, seeds and invertebrate fauna were also recorded in order to gain an insight into possible disturbance of the deposits. Charcoal remains were fractured on three planes (transverse, tangential and radial) for microscopic analysis. Transverse sections were characterised using a low-power stereomicroscope (x10-x30 magnification) and the microscopic features in the tangential and radial planes were examined using a metallurgical microscope with magnification up to x400. Identifications were made using reference literature (Schweingruber 1978; Schoch et al. 2004). Identifiable charcoal fragments over 2mm were recorded by fragment count and by weight (to the nearest 0.001g). Results The assessment data from the bulk sample light fractions are presented in the assessment report (Summers 2015a, Appendix 1). Table 54 presents the distribution of samples by phase and Table 55 displays the raw data from the fully quantified Phase 4 and 6 samples. Phase Phase 1: Earlier Prehistoric (pre-400 BC) Phase 2: Late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age (c. 1300-400 BC) Phase 3 - Middle to late Iron Age (c. 400 BC-AD 43) Phase 4 - Romano-British (AD 43-410) Phase 5.1 - Early to middle Anglo-Saxon (5th to 9th century AD) Phase 5.2 - Middle to late Anglo-Saxon (9th to mid 12th century AD) Phase 6 - Saxo-Norman/ medieval (11th to 14th/ 15th century AD) Phase 7 - Post-medieval to early modern/ modern (c. AD 1500 to 1900+) Undated Total Number of samples 2 21 2 51 51 13 7 2 5 154 Volume (litres) 20 210 20 600 670 130 70 20 50 1790 Table 54: Distribution of samples by phase Phase 1: Earlier Prehistoric (pre-400 BC) Two samples were recovered from Phase 1 deposits, which contained only a small number of charcoal fragments. Phase 2: Late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age (c. 1300-400 BC) From Phase 2 deposits, there were 21 bulk samples. Nine of these samples contained identifiable carbonised plant macrofossils in the form of cereal remains (42.86%; Chart 4). Cereals were present in the form of hulled barley (Hordeum sp.), wheat, including free-threshing type wheat (T. aestivum/ turgidum type), oats (Avena sp.) and rye (Secale cereale). Wheat and barley were recorded in less than 10% of samples and the other crops in less than 5% of samples. Rye and free-threshing type wheat are not typical late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age crops and may either represent weed contaminants of other crops or intrusive remains from later periods of activity on the site. The same could also be true for oat, which only had a limited presence in the Phase 2 samples. Non-cereal taxa included knotweed (Persicaria sp.) and brome grass (Bromus sp.), which are common arable weeds, most likely associated with cereals in the deposits. 75 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Phase 3: Middle to late Iron Age (c. 400 BC-AD 43) Only two samples were present from Phase 3, containing a single indeterminate cereal grain and a modest concentration of charcoal. Phase 4: Romano-British (AD 43-410) The Romano-British period showed an increase in the intensity of activity at the site. Fifty one samples were taken and processed from Phase 4 deposits and carbonised cereal remains were recorded in 31 of these (60.78%). Hulled barley (Hordeum sp.), glume wheat (T. dicoccum/ spelta), free-threshing type wheat (T. aestivum/ turgidum sp.), rye (Secale cereale) and oats (Avena sp.) were all recorded. Barley was most ubiquitous, being recorded in 29.41% of samples, closely followed by rye in 27.45% of samples. Wheat was third most ubiquitous (19.61%), followed by oat (17.65%). The site lies in an area of free-draining, slightly acidic soils, which would not have been well suited to traditional wheat cultivation. There are areas of heavier soil to the north, although they are not particularly fertile (Soilscapes 2015). Barley, oats and rye have a greater tolerance for drought and do not require such high soil fertility as wheat. Chart 4: Ubiquity values for the main crop taxa arranged by phase. Phases 1, 3 and 6 omitted due to insufficient sample size (<10) 76 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Non-cereal taxa included goosefoot (Chenopodium sp.), corn cockle (Agrostemma githago), dock (Rumex sp.), wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum), bedstraw (Galium sp.), stinking chamomile (Anthemis cotula), vetch/ wild pea (Vicia/ Lathyrus sp.) and brome grass (Bromus sp.). All of these are common arable weeds. The presence of stinking chamomile, which prefers heavier soils, may indicate the cultivation of clayey soils north of the site, whilst wild radish is more indicative of sandy or freedraining soils. Rich samples were recovered from L2284, L2290, L2292, L2465 and L2547 (Table 55). The samples from L2284, L2290, L2292 and L2547 were all comparable, with barley, oats or rye dominating the cereal remains. Chaff elements were rare and non-cereal taxa included a small range of typical arable weed taxa. The density of remains was relatively low in these deposits, ranging between 1.5 and 4.6 items per litre. This is likely to represent the deposition of carbonised plant remains from mixed sources, most likely including routine crop processing and food preparation activities. A much richer sample was recovered from L2465 (F2463), which produced 64.3 items per litre. The dominant class of material was cereal grains (58.32%). Wheat grains dominated (57.27%), the majoriy of which could be identified were found to be glume wheat (T. dicoccum/ spelta). Barley was the only other cereal present and made up the remaining 42.73% of the identifiable cereal grain in the sample. A number of the wheat grains showed signs of germination (Plate 29), making up 35% of the wheat in the deposit. This is sufficient to indicate deliberate malting (cf. van der Veen 1989). Plate 29: Photograph of a sub-sample of germinated glume wheat (T. dicoccum/ spelta) grains from L2465 (scale = 1mm) A small number of chaff elements were present, including spelt wheat (T. spelta) glume bases and indeterminate glume wheat spikelet forks. A calculation of the ratio of glume wheat grains to glume bases gave a result of 20.98:1, far in excess of the 77 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 1:1 expected for unprocessed spikelets. This indicates that the wheat in the deposit was predominantly of clean grain following de-husking. Non-cereal taxa were dominated by large seeded taxa, such as vetch/ wild pea (Vicia/ Lathyrus sp.) and indeterminate medium legumes (Fabaceae), large grasses, such as chess type (Bromus secalinus type), soft brome type (Bromus hordeaceus type) and other indeterminate large grasses (Poaceae), and corncockle (Agrostemma githago). These large seeded taxa commonly remain with the crop after processing and may well have been a tolerated component of the cereal crop, particularly legumes and large grasses (cf. Campbell 2000, 48-50). Numerous goosefoot seeds were also present, which are small dense seeds, although these may have been present as larger seed heads that broke down during carbonisation. A number of the Bromus seeds also showed signs of germination, which suggests they were present in the crop during malting. It is most likely that the material in L2465 was the carbonised remains of deliberate malting activity, focussed primarily on spelt wheat. The product of this process may have been carbonised during malt drying. This not only implies malting activity on the site during the Roman period but also the likely presence of a drying kiln in the vicinity. A range of wood types were recorded in the Phase 4 charcoal assemblage, including oak (Quercus sp.) and probable gorse (cf. Ulex sp.). Phase 5.1: Early to Middle Anglo-Saxon (5th to 9th Century AD) Phase 5.1 represents the most intensive period of post-Roman activity at the site, with 51 samples collected. Sampled deposits included the fills of five sunkenfeatured buildings (SFBs) and five burnt flint pits. Overall, the representation of carbonised plant macrofossils was poor, with only low concentrations of material recovered. Cereal remains were present in 43.14% of the samples (Chart 4), which suggests fairly common usage of cereals but, coupled with low concentrations, indicates that there was no bulk processing or storage carried out at the site. Most of the cereal remains could not be identified. Wheat, including free-threshing type wheat (T. aestivum/ turgidum type), was present in 5.88% of samples, barley (Horderum sp.), including hulled grains, was present in 7.84% of samples, and oat (Avena sp.) and rye (Secale cereale) were each present in 1.96% of samples. Pulses (Fabaceae) were also recorded, although only in two sample (3.92%). The small range of non-cereal taxa included goosefoot (Chenopodium sp.), black bindweed (Fallopia convolvulus), dock (Rumex sp.) and brome grass (Bromus sp.). Sunken-featured buildings The fills of the SFBs fitted the overall pattern of sparse carbonised plant macrofossils. Such low densities most likely represent scattered background debris on the site which became incorporated into the feature fills. It seems unlikely that the use or processing of cereals was strongly associated with any of the five sampled SFBs on the site. 78 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Burnt flint pits The fills of the five burnt flint pits contained few carbonised plant macrofossils but were largely rich in charcoal. Charcoal remains were identified from all five pits (Table 56), predominantly from primary fills unless the assessment found the primary fills to contain lower concentrations of charcoal (i.e. L2708 of F2707 and L2732 of F2731). Particularly rich was L2748 (F2717) which contained 1.358kg of charcoal >2mm in just 10 litres of sediment. Oak (Quercus sp.) was the most abundant taxon in all five pits. In most instances, weak ring curvature and the presence of tyloses in the vessels indicated heartwood and the burning of mature oak timber. Occasional pieces of round wood probably represent smaller branches from the felled trees. Hazel (Corylus sp.) was recorded in four of the samples (L2684, L2709, L2734 and L2735). In L2684 and L2709 it constituted only a very minor contribution. In L2734 hazel was more prominent, although remains of oak still dominated. It is likely that in this instance, a mixed fuel source of oak and hazel was burned. The material from L2735 contained only hazel but the density of charcoal fragments was very low and it is not likely that it represents the remains of in situ burning within the pit. The use of oak fuel in burnt flint pits is not uncommon. For example, a burnt flint pit at Snape, Suffolk, contained large volumes of oak charcoal, accompanied by hazel (Summers 2014). Another burnt flint pit from Snape was more varied, as were those from Flixton (Boulter and Rogers 2012, 94). Recent assessment of material from similar features at a site near Stowmarket also indicates more varied fuel wood selection (Summers 2015b). The overwhelming dominance of oak in the Oulton examples may simply be a reflection of local woodland availability as those from other sites indicate a less rigid selection of fuel resources. Phase 5.2: Middle to Late Anglo-Saxon (9th to mid 12th Century AD) In the thirteen samples from Phase 5.2, carbonised macrofossils were again rather sparse. Cereals were recorded in 30.77% of the samples, which included a small number of wheat (Triticum sp.) and oat (Avena sp.) remains. A single knotweed (Persicaria sp.) seed was recorded in L2730. Charcoal, including oak (Quercus sp.) and probable gorse (cf. Ulex sp.), was quite common. This indicates the deposition of fuel debris with few associated remains from the use and processing of cereals. Phase 6: Saxo-Norman/ Medieval (11th to 14th/ 15th Century AD) Seven samples were assessed from Phase 6, only two of which contained carbonised plant macrofossils. Sample 113 of L2642 contained a single indeterminate cereal grain but Sample 146 of L2747 was richer. This deposit contained grains of hulled barley (Hordeum sp.), oat (Avena sp.) and rye (Secale cereale), along with a small range of non-cereal taxa (Table 55). The range of cultivars is similar to preceding periods, with barley, oats and rye apparently dominating the economy. Unfortunately the results from a single sample make it difficult to determine how representative of Phase 6 deposits these data are. Charcoal, particularly oak (Quercus sp.), was well represented in the Phase 6 samples. 79 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Phase 7: Post-Medieval to Early Modern/ Modern (c. AD 1500-1900+) Only two samples were assessed from Phase 7. The material from L2379 was richer, containing hulled barley (Hordeum sp.), wheat (Triticum sp.) and pea/ bean (Fabaceae). A small range of non-cereal taxa was also present, including corn cockle (Agrostemma githago), legumes (Fabaceae) and brome grass (Bromus sp.). Although the evidence is quite limited, the presence of wheat is in contrast to Phase 6 and may represent an element of economic change. However, the significance of this is difficult to determine within a broad post-medieval period. Undated Only five samples were present from undated deposits, the majority of which were poor in carbonised plant macrofossils. Sample 8 of L2059 contained a higher concentration of remains, predominantly in the form of grains from hulled barley (Hordeum sp.), glume wheat (T. dicoccum/ spelta) and oat (Avena sp.). A small number of legume seeds (Fabaceae) probably derived from the arable weed community. Sample 6 from L2049 was rich in oak (Quercus sp.) charcoal. Conclusions Analysis of the bulk samples from Oulton has demonstrated the use of cereals at the site from the late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age through to the post-medieval period. Over this time there was variation in the intensity of arable production and processing associated with the site, which was most pronounced during the Romano-British period (Phase 4). The elevated number of rich samples in Phase 4 indicates that cereals were being dealt with in larger volumes than in the preceding phases. The rich deposit from L2465 included a significant proportion of germinated glume wheat and indicates malt production in the vicinity. Such a deposit may have been carbonised during drying and may indicate the presence of a cereal or malt drying kiln on or near the site. Malt production was common on Romano-British agricultural sites (e.g. Fryer 2003; Summers 2015c; 2015d), probably representing a trade commodity in some instances (e.g. van der Veen and O’Connor 1998, 134). It is difficult to determine the scale of the practice at the present site based on the evidence of a single sample and malting may have been undertaken for consumption by a single household. Cereal production and processing appears to have been less significant during the Anglo-Saxon period. Remains of cereals were present in less than half of deposits and only in low densities. This is consistent with background debris, most likely originating from low level cereal use on the site. Following Phase 5.1, activity on the site was less intensive and this is reflected in the archaeobotanical assemblage. Activities associated with the Phase 5.1 burnt flint pits remain enigmatic. However, there appears to have been a careful selection of predominantly mature oak timber for the purpose. Similar features elsewhere show a range of fuel wood types (e.g. Boulter and Rogers 2012, 94; Summers 2014; 2015b) and consistently contain few diagnostic remains relating to function, other than charcoal and burnt flint. 80 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Phase Sample number Context number Feature number Volume (litres) 4 54 2284 2283 20 58 2290 2289 10 59 2292 2291 10 92 2465 2463 10 106 2547 2546 20 6 146 2747 2746 10 Cereal grains: Cereal NFI (Cereal NFI - tail grain) (Cereal NFI - germinated grain) Hordeum sp. - Barley Hordeum sp. - Hulled barley (Hordeum vulgare - twisted grain) Triticum sp. - Wheat (Triticum sp. - tail grain) (Triticum sp. - germinated grain) Triticum dicoccum/spelta - Emmer/spelt wheat (Triticum dicoccum/spelta - germinated grain) Triticum aestivum/ turgidum type - Free-threshing type wheat Avena sp. - Oat cf. Secale cereale - Rye Secale cereale - Rye Cereal indet. detached embryos Cereal indet. sprout 9 (1) 7 4 2 2 - 28 3 3 1 2 4 - 21 3 2 1 1 2 1 5 - 148 (2) 64 33 (5) 87 (1) (24) 42 (22) 1 2 9 18 2 3 2 - 8 3 11 3 - Cereal chaff: Triticum spelta - Spelt wheat glume base Triticum dicoccum/spelta - Emmer/spelt wheat glume base Triticum dicoccum/spelta - Emmer/spelt wheat spikelet fork Cereal/large grass rachis 1 - - 2 2 3 - - - Wild taxa: Chenopodium sp. L. - Goosefoot Atriplex sp. L. - Oraches Chenopodiaceae - Goosefoot family Stellaria media L. - Common chickweed Agrostemma githago L. - Corncockle Caryophyllaceae indet. - Pink family Persicaria sp. Mill. - Knotweed Fallopia convolvulus (L.) A.Love - Black-bindweed Rumex sp. L. - Dock Polygonaceae indet. - Knotweed family Raphanus raphanistrum L. - Wild radish Vicia/Lathyrus sp. L. - Vetch/wild pea Fabaceae indet. - Pea family (medium) Anthemis cotula L. - Stinking chamomile Asteraceae indet. - Daisy family Luzula sp. DC. - Wood-rush Bromus hordeaceus type L. - Soft-brome (Bromus hordeaceus germinated) Bromus secalinus type L. - Rye brome/ chess Bromus sp. L. - Brome grass (Bromus sp. Germinated) Poaceae indet. - Grass (large) 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 64 1 3 1 3 5 8 1 1 15 37 1 1 18 (13) 9 52 (5) 30 2 1 1 1 2 - 1 1 2 1 1 1 Charcoal: Charcoal >2mm X XX XX XXX X XXX Other carbonised: Arrhenatherum elatius var. bulbosum - Onion couch tuber - - - - - 1 Table 55: Raw data from the fully quantified bulk samples; Key: X = present; XX = common; XXX = abundant 81 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 145 153 2734 2735 2748 2707 2731 2731 2717 Burnt Flint Pit Burnt Flint Pit Burnt Flint Pit Burnt Flint Pit Burnt Flint Pit 10 10 10 10 10 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 Total weight (g) 144 2709 2683 Indet./unidentified WEIGHT (g) 138 2684 WEIGHT (g) 130 Diffuse porous COUNT Phase 5.1 WEIGHT (g) Volume (litres) 20 Corylus COUNT Feature type Burnt Flint Pit WEIGHT (g) Feature 2331 COUNT Context 2336 Fraction Sample number 71 Quercus >5mm 100 106 - - - - 11 117 2-5mm 100 2.42 - - - - 14 16.42 Total 200 108.42 - - - - 25 133.42 >5mm 44 3.672 - - - - 0.149 3.821 2-5mm 59 1.077 1 0.009 - - 3.051 4.137 Total 103 4.749 1 0.009 - - 3.2 7.958 >5mm 5 1.515 - - 1 0.017 0.044 1.576 2-5mm 10 0.173 3 0.05 2 0.021 1.315 1.559 Total 15 1.688 3 0.05 3 0.038 1.359 3.135 >5mm 63 23.15 13 1.82 - - 0.172 25.142 2-5mm 67 1.241 33 0.496 - - 3.02 4.757 Total 130 24.391 46 2.316 - - 3.192 29.899 >5mm - - 2 0.098 - - - 0.098 2-5mm - - 17 0.278 - - 0.169 0.447 Total - - 19 0.376 - - 0.169 0.545 >5mm 100 158.427 - - - - 813 971.427 2-5mm 100 3.289 - - - - 384 387.289 Total 200 161.716 - - - - 1197 1358.716 Table 56: Charcoal data from the investigation of the five burnt flint pit features 4 DISCUSSION Summary 4.1 The excavation at Lime Avenue, Oulton revealed human activity spanning the prehistoric to modern era, with a particular emphasis on features and finds of AngloSaxon date. Although the earliest encountered features – representing little more than occasional/ transient use of the site – were not closely datable, the earliest recovered finds comprised sparsely distributed lithic blades of Neolithic character. These complement a previously documented late Neolithic artefact scatter found on neighbouring Pound Lane (SHER LWT 015), and build on the findings of the preceding trial trench evaluation (Peachey in Orzechowski 2015). In contrast, the first closely datable phase, dating to the late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age, witnessed an increased intensity of activity at the site, including the remains of a substantial ditched enclosure and areas of pit digging. However, subsequent mid to late Iron Age features were again few in number and suggest a shift in the focus of activity away from the site at this time. 4.2 The Romano-British period witnessed a re-intensification of on-site activity, and included a second ditched enclosure and a defined area of activity. The latter included the earliest encountered structural evidence, comprising a sub-rectangular arrangement of postholes in the south-west area of the excavation. This was interpreted as a post-built building of possible agricultural use; the animal bone and environmental evidence from this phase suggests a mixed agricultural economy. ?Hearths and a substantial quarry pit were also identified. 82 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 4.3 The Anglo-Saxon period was the principal period of past activity at the site, and the only one to include evidence of possible domestic structures. The early to middle Anglo-Saxon period (Phase 5.1) included the remains of five sunken-featured buildings, two of which were clustered together and may have represented a chronological sequence of occupation activity. Also belonging to Phase 5.1 were 5 burnt flint pits, a characteristic Anglo-Saxon feature type occurring on both domestic and non-domestic sites across the region. A ditched enclosure and trackways were also identified, along with evidence of a post-built structure dating between the middle and later Anglo-Saxon periods. Like preceding Phase 4, the animal bone and environmental evidence suggested a mixed agricultural economy. 4.4. Post-Anglo-Saxon evidence was again sparse. The Saxo-Norman/ medieval period was defined by a metallurgical waste area, comprising some 23 features, while the post-medieval to early modern/ modern site appeared to comprise open agricultural fields divided by substantial linear ditches, akin to the current land use. 4.5 The following discussion will focus mainly on the pre-modern phases of activity at the site, with particular emphasis on the Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon periods. The Site within its Landscape 4.6 The site occupies a gentle, south-facing slope overlooking Oulton Broad, some 1.1km distant. The River Waveney passes approximately 1.9km to the west, beyond which are the Burgh Marshes – one of a chain of similar marshland habitats flanking the Waveney between Beccles, some 10km to the south-west of the current site and Yarmouth, c. 10km to the north-east (www.suffolklandscape.org.uk). The Waveney is a navigable watercourse and would have provided an important historical (and earlier) trade and communications link, originally reaching the sea via the valley of Oulton Broad and Lake Lothing (Lucy et al. 2009, 1 and 3). From the late prehistoric era to the early Anglo-Saxon period in England, the light, fertile soils of river valleys were the chief focus of clearance, settlement and cultivation, with the rivers themselves forming major arteries for communication and commerce (Mudd 2002, 3; Williamson 2010, 146, 152). The broad spread of local habitats and associated resources – including the site’s free-draining soils (Soil Association of England and Wales 1983, 9) – would have been important factors influencing past settlement. 4.7 The earliest evidence from the current site comprises flint blades of Neolithic character. At this time the coastal plain of north-east Suffolk appears to have been characterised by a lack of permanent settlement, with finds overwhelmingly comprising scatters of pottery and lithics (e.g. Martin 1999b, 37). Across the border into Norfolk, coastal settlement during the Neolithic has been postulated as comprising transient occupation of ‘specialised or seasonally-occupied [sites] in a diverse settlement and economic regime’ (Ashwin 1996, 47). A focus of settlement activity on river valley slopes, within easy reach of water is also a characteristic of the Neolithic in Suffolk (Good and Plouviez 2007, 36; Martin 1999, 37); a pattern reflected by the location of the current site. 83 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 4.8 The local Bronze Age landscape appears more intensively occupied, with a minor concentration of barrows and ring-ditches, plus finds of metalwork noted in this part of Suffolk (Martin 1999c, 39). Monumental evidence from the immediate area includes undated ring-ditches (SHER OUL 005), possibly of Bronze Age date, while similar sites within a 2km radius include a probable Bronze Age barrow (SHER FTN 013) and similar earthworks/ cropmarks at Flixton. Complementary evidence is also forthcoming from neighbouring Norfolk, with an intensification of settlement activity – particularly reflected by finds of material culture – pointing towards ‘an extensive and industrious farming community’ (Yates 2007; after Lawson and Wymer 1993, 30). A small, unenclosed late Bronze Age farmstead including roundhouses and four-post granary type structures has been excavated at Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville (Heard 2013); some 4.2km to the south of Oulton. The Bloodmoor Hill site occupies a similar geology and elevation to the current site, on a plateau partly defined by the Waveney Valley (ibid. 6). 4.9 Iron Age settlement evidence is comparatively scarce in north-east Suffolk, with the densest concentration of sites occupying the free-draining soils of the northwest and south-east, while settlement of the county’s central clay lands is also evident (Martin 1999d, 40-1). Easy access to water was once again determining factor influencing settlement location at this time (ibid. 40). Despite this general trend, Iron Age evidence from Oulton includes finds of pottery from Mobbs Way (SHER OUL 011; Craven 2010). 4.10 Previously recorded Romano-British and early to middle Anglo-Saxon settlement activity is scarce from the immediate area. Although minor RomanoBritish settlements are present in the far north-east of Suffolk (Plouviez 1999, 43), the only previously documented finds within the immediate area of the site are two coins, respectively dated AD 98-117 and AD 293-6 (SHER OUL 001). Although subsequent early to middle Anglo-Saxon settlement was again most prolific in the north-west and south-east of the county, sites in the surrounding area include the significant early Anglo-Saxon settlement and cemetery at Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville (Lucy et al. 2009). The topographical and geological setting of the Bloodmoor Hill settlement is similar to that of the current site, with both occupying slightly elevated positions on sandy soils overlooking the floodplain of the River Waveney (ibid. 1). Occupation at Bloodmoor Hill – dating between the 6th and early 8th centuries – was characterised by a large number of SFBs with fewer post-built structures, hearth/ oven bases, middens and pits (ibid.). The predominance of SFBs is usual for sandy/ gravelly sites where post-built structures or ‘halls’ tend to be scarcer (Tipper 2004, 24). The current site makes a useful addition to the known corpus of early Anglo-Saxon Settlement in this part of Suffolk, as well as providing good evidence for continuity of settlement activity into the later Anglo-Saxon period and beyond. 4.11 The post-Anglo-Saxon era is poorly represented in the immediate vicinity, with only a small number of finds and sites recorded (see Section 2.12). Although the parish church of St Michael (SHER OUL 004) is thought to have Norman origins, it is not recorded in the Domesday Book, nor is Oulton itself. The closest documented settlement was at Flixton, c. 1.4km to the north, comprising 65 households, two lord’s plough teams and ten men’s plough teams (http://opendomesday.org/). The population of this large rural settlement was mostly made up of smallholders and free 84 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 men, while the pastoral economy was dominated by sheep husbandry (ibid.). The overwhelmingly agricultural nature of the surrounding landscape appears to have persisted well into the modern era. The first edition Ordnance Survey map (dated 1885) displays the current site as occupying open agricultural fields, with little encroachment of modern Oulton until the early 20th century. A market was first recorded in Oulton in the early 14th century (SHER OUL Misc). The Pre-Roman Evidence 4.12 The earliest evidence from the site comprises dispersed flint blades of Neolithic character. Overall, this early struck flint assemblage attests to little more than transient (possibly seasonal) activity within the surrounding area, with no associated ‘activity area(s)’ being identified. This pattern fits well within the current understanding of Neolithic activity along the eastern coastline of Suffolk/ Norfolk (cf. Ashwin 1996, 47), and may be linked to the occasional exploitation of resources within the coastal plain and local wetland habitats. Certainly, the current site provides good access to a number of different habitats, while the River Waveney would have provided a useful transport corridor and access to the coast. 4.13 The majority of encountered prehistoric features were dated to Phase 2 (Late Bronze Age/ Early Iron Age (c. 1300 to 400 BC)). The Phase 1 (earlier prehistoric) features may have formed part of the same occupation landscape, although most were only tentatively dated and no firm conclusions can be drawn. The substantial Phase 1 boundary ditches could have formed part of a more extensive system of local landscape divisions – mostly represented by undated cropmarks and earthworks (e.g. SHERs FTN 010 and LWT 286; cf. Good and Plouviez 2007, 37) – with subsequent Enclosure 1 and its associated ?trackway (Fig. 6) representing a continuity of enclosure activity within the site, albeit on a greatly altered alignment. Regionally, Bronze Age and Iron Age enclosures/ trackways are relatively well represented, with earlier examples including Late Bronze Age enclosures and trackways at South Hornchurch, Essex (Guttmann and Last 2000). This settlement site also produced good evidence of cereal exploitation (ibid.). Although defensive Iron Age enclosures are absent from this part of East Anglia (Cunliffe 2010, 198), enclosed sites – thought to reflect a broader shift towards settlement nucleation – have been identified (Bradley 1984, 139). Type sites include the multi-ditched enclosure complex at Fisons Way, Thetford (Gregory 1991) the complexity of which far exceeds the current evidence. Late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age enclosures associated with possible ring ditch structures ware also excavated at Beck Row in north-west Suffolk (Bales 2004, 62). This fen-edge area, like the current site, is well placed for the exploitation of a number of geological zones and different habitats (cf. Mustchin 2014a), thus making it attractive to settlers. Although the current site lacks evidence of prehistoric structures, it is tempting to see the Phase 2 site as representing part of a broader agricultural landscape associated with a nearby occupation site(s). The Phase 2 economic evidence suggests a mixed agricultural economy, possibly with an emphasis on cereal cultivation, while the associated pottery assemblage – consistent with regional late Bronze Age/ early Iron Age traditions – suggests local domestic activity. 4.14 Phase 3 (middle to late Iron Age) evidence was scarce – comprising just four dispersed features – and suggests either a large-scale reduction in the scale and 85 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 intensity of activity at this time, or a shift in the focus of activity away from the site. This dearth of activity is not unusual for the area, however. Recorded Iron Age sites and findspots are few from this part of the Suffolk coast and are generally of limited significance (Good and Plouviez 2007, 37), although it is probable that many of the area’s undated cropmark enclosures/ fields are either Iron Age or Romano-British in date (ibid.). The Romano-British Period 4.15 The Romano-British site included part of a single enclosure boundary (Enclosure 2) and a focussed area of activity – including possible industrial evidence – a short distance to the south (Fig. 8). A number of dispersed features were also encountered. The Romano-British Enclosure 4.16 Although only the south-eastern corner of Enclosure 2 was excavated, it may well have formed part of a more extensively enclosed Romano-British landscape; numerous undated cropmark enclosures of possible Roman date have been recorded along this part of the Suffolk coast (cf. Cook and Plouviez 2007, 37), and this local pattern of enclosure, if genuine, fits well with the general picture of ‘…extensively and continuously bounded [Romano-British] landscapes’ which pervade across southern and central England (Taylor 2007, 113). However, it is equally possible that Enclosure 1 was an isolated entity or part of a more limited system of land division. 4.17 Fulford (1982) proposes a number of reasons for Romano-British land enclosure, including agriculture/ horticulture and livestock containment (after Wallis 2011, 74). Excavated evidence from East Anglia also attests to domestic and industrial functions, as well as mixed uses (e.g. Atkinson and Preston 2015, 44-5; Lally et al. forthcoming; Mustchin and Peachey forthcoming). The evidence from Oulton suggests a predominantly agricultural economy, however, based on cereal cultivation/ processing and animal husbandry (see below). Although some possible industrial evidence was also encountered at the site, it was not directly associated with the enclosure. It is proposed, therefore, that Enclosure 1 fulfilled a primarily agricultural role, possibly as a livestock corral or a crop processing area. Similar agricultural fields/ enclosures have been excavated at numerous regional sites including Cedars Park, Stowmarket (Nicholson and Woolhouse forthcoming). Structure 1 4.18 Structure 1 was represented by 32 postholes forming a roughly rectangular arrangement (approximately 56m2) with some evidence of possible ‘interior’ subdivision of space (Plate 3; Fig. 14). Although the limited finds assemblage from this structure included three fragments (82g) of possible tegula roof tile, it is not suggested that the structure incorporated a significant CBM component. In addition, no floor or other internal ‘occupation’ deposits survived to suggest function. Despite being located within an area of ?industrial activity, the validity of the latter remains uncertain (see below), and Structure 1 may have held an agricultural or storage role linked to the Romano-British enclosure (see above). 86 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 4.19 Although examples of rural Romano-British posthole structures are common across East Anglia, many are larger than the Oulton structure and often represent substantial aisled barns with specialised functions, e.g. the storage and malting of grain (Bales 2004; Mustchin 2015). The majority of Romano-British dwellings were also timber-built, with earth-fast construction being the most widely employed building technique (Perring 2002, 83-4). However, although structure 1 at Oulton is clearly of earth-fast construction, the site does not appear to have been a domestic settlement per se, although the recovered pottery assemblage suggests that a settlement of some description existed in the near vicinity. One close parallel to the Oulton structure was excavated at Beck Row. The building in this instance was similar in size and plan to Structure 1 at Oulton, and also lacked internal deposits, suggesting that it may have represented a simple, ancillary building (Mustchin 2014a). Other, similar structures include a rudimentary Romano-British barn of timber construction at Milton, Cambridgeshire (Reynolds 1994, 12). Other evidence 4.20 The remaining Romano-British evidence included four modest pit clusters, a quarry pit and three possible hearths. One ?hearth, the quarry pit and two pit clusters were located close to Structure 1 and were initially interpreted as forming a focussed area of possible industrial activity. However, only the ?hearth – set within the upper part of Pit F2420 – yielded obviously industrial material (172g of slag), although not in significant quantities. As such, the function of this ?hearth remains uncertain. The function(s) of the remaining Phase 4 ?hearths is equally ambiguous; both were devoid of outwardly industrial material; it is possible that they represented simply bonfires, perhaps used for the burning of waste. Elsewhere, hearths have been found on a number of site types including villas (e.g. Gurney 1986, 8 and 45) and industrial sites, being linked to activities such as ore roasting (Chirikure and Paynter 2002). 4.21 Quarry Pit F2091 has good regional parallels, including modest sand quarries at Lexden in Colchester (Colchester Archaeological Trust 2001, 2-3). Similar extraction activity has been reported from Sheepen Hill, Colchester (Niblett 1985). The natural substrate encountered at Oulton – comprising sand and gravel deposits – suggests that the small-scale extraction of one of both of these aggregates was occurring at the site. Sand had a number of uses in the Roman world, including an architectural role in the manufacture of mortar and concrete (Humphrey et al. 1998, 229-30) and a secondary application in the metallurgical industries (e.g. Sim and Ridge 2002), while one obvious use of gravel was for the metalling of roads (Humphrey et al. 1998, 180). 4.22 The Romano-British pit clusters are thought to have functioned – at least in part – for the disposal of rubbish, either domestic or otherwise. Many of these pits lacked finds, however, and no firm conclusions can be drawn. Although some pits were devoid of finds, it is possible that they originally contained organic material that did not survive in the burial environment. It is thought that the clusters in the vicinity of Structure 1 were directly related to its use. 87 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 The Romano-British Economy 4.23 Romano-British features yielded the greatest quantity of animal bone from any phase, although the majority of fragments could not be identified to species. The identifiable assemblage – numbering just 14 fragments – was exclusively cattle or sheep/ goat, however, and included evidence for the presence of adult animals (see The Animal Bone). Most of the remaining fragments were identified as large mammal, denoting cattle/ horse sized animals. Despite difficulties in identifying the animal bone, the size of the assemblage clearly denotes the importance of animal husbandry to the local Romano-British population. 4.24 Recovered plant remains also indicate an increased intensity of arable production/ processing at this time with a clear dominance of barley grains, while rye being the second most abundant taxa (see The Environmental Samples). Both species are well suited to cultivation on the area’s sandy soils, while the presence of germinated grains (from Pit F2463) suggests malting activity and, by extension, the presence of a drying kiln in the near vicinity. Evidence of Romano-British malting activity is relatively abundant from the region, and includes the large-scale Maltings site at Beck Row, Suffolk (Bales 2004), and a more recently excavated agricultural kiln at Woodditton in Cambridgeshire (Mustchin 2015). It has been suggested that malted grain may have been an important Romano-British trade commodity (e.g. van der Veen and O’Connor 1998, 134). However, the scale of production at the current site is difficult to assess based on the limited evidence (see The Environmental Samples). 4.25 The site’s mixed agricultural economy is typical of the Romano-British period across East Anglia, with animal husbandry and arable production recorded at sites including the former Smoke House Inn, Beck Row (Suffolk; Mustchin 2014a), Childerley Gate, to the west of Cambridge (Abrams and Ingham 2008) and two farmsteads near Kempston in Bedfordshire (Luke and Preece 2011). The RomanoBritish economy at Childerley Gate was dominated by cattle husbandry – possibly akin to the current site – with secondary evidence for horse breeding along with some level of crop husbandry (ibid. 61 and 63). Good access to water is essential for effective animal husbandry. Dairy cows, for example have a total water content of between 56 and 81 per cent of their body weight and require regular access to large quantities of water in order to maximise milk production (Murphy 1992). Although the location of the current site would have met this requirement, the local soils are not ideal for grazing (Soil Survey of England and Wales 1983, 9). However, it is possible that the local pastoral economy involved some level transhumance, perhaps between the site and nearby soils of the Newport 4 Association. These soils support lowland heath (ibid. 10) which is a traditionally important economic resource supplying fuel wood, animal bedding and grazing land (English Nature 2005). Similar Romano-British transhumance between heathland pastures and other areas has been suggested elsewhere (e.g. Caruth 2003 and Craven 2005). The Anglo-Saxon Settlement 4.26 The Anglo-Saxon period (Phase 5) was represented by two sub-phases of activity, collectively spanning the 5th to mid 12th centuries AD. The earlier part of this period included the only firm evidence of domestic occupation, comprising five 88 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 sunken-featured buildings, five burnt flint pits and a small number of pit clusters. The pit clusters yielded a modest artefact assemblage, thought to represent general refuse disposal, and will not be discussed further. Evidence of enclosure was identified throughout the Anglo-Saxon period, but was more clearly defined in the latter part of Phase 5, suggesting a possible change in the use of the site at this time. Possible structural remains and a small number of dispersed pits were also identified within the middle to later Anglo-Saxon phase. One of the pits yielded a find of particular interest, a collection of 11 weights, two of which have Carolingian coins (x2) or Roman coins (x2) embedded in their upper surfaces. The early to middle Anglo-Saxon pottery assemblage is in a mixed selection of fabrics (numbering six in all), in predominantly handmade forms with only low incidences of decoration. The later assemblage comprises Thetford ware of 10th to 12th century date, including one sherd of probable pre-Conquest date. Settlement location 4.27 The location of the Phase 5 site on light, easily worked soils is typical of the Anglo-Saxon period in Suffolk (West 1999, 44). In contrast, the county’s central ‘claylands’ are devoid of early settlement evidence, with the exploitation of these heavier soils only beginning around AD 650-850 (Wade 1999, 46; West 1999, 44). 4.28 The site occupies an elevation between c. 10m and 20m AOD, overlooking the valley of Oulton Broad. At one time this valley linked the River Waveney to the sea, while the river’s current route passes approximately 1.9km to the west. Such an elevated position is typical of Early Anglo-Saxon settlements across the region, with the deliberate positioning of structures on high ground having been noted at a number of sites including Brandon Road, Thetford (Norfolk) (Atkins and Connor 2010, 21), Duxford, Cambridgeshire (Lyons 2011, 91ff) and Snape, Suffolk (Mustchin 2014b). These sites all overlook river valleys; the Duxford settlement sits above the crossing point of the Icknield Way – an important communications route in the middle Anglo-Saxon period (Baker and Brookes 2013, 280) – over the River Granta (Roberts et al. 2011, 124), while the Brandon Road and Snape sites overlook the rivers Little Ouse and Alde, respectively (Atkins and Connor 2010, 2, fig. 1; Mustchin 2014b, fig. 1). From the late prehistoric to the early Anglo-Saxon period in England, the light, fertile soils of river valleys were the chief focus of clearance, settlement and cultivation, with the rivers themselves forming major arteries for communication and commerce (Mudd 2002, 3; Williamson 2010, 146, 152). As such, the juxtaposition the current site and the original route of the Waveney might have been an important factor in determining the placement of the Anglo-Saxon settlement. The inhabitants of the latter would have been well placed to exploit the resources of the Waveney Valley and surrounding wetlands as well as monitor any approaching river traffic. Settlement form 4.29 The early to middle Anglo-Saxon period settlement comprised five SFBs, three of which formed a loosely clustered group of buildings. Five burnt flint pits, a small number of pit clusters and a few other Phase 5.1 features were also present. The latter included ditched boundaries which may have represented an early development of a later Anglo-Saxon enclosure (see below). Although SFBs are often found in combination with earth-fast structures (e.g. West Stow; West 1971), 89 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 none were present in this case. However, a predominance of SFBs is usual for sandy/ gravelly sites where post-built structures/ ‘halls’ tend to be scarcer (Tipper 2004, 24). SFBs are also broadly indicative of an early settlement date as this structural form is seen to decline during the middle Anglo-Saxon period and is absent at a number of 7th to 9th century settlements (ibid. 11-12). 4.30 Sunken-featured buildings (SFBs) or Grubenhäuser are the most commonly encountered form of Anglo-Saxon structure on archaeological sites and are ubiquitous throughout southern Britain (Hamerow 2011, 146; West 1971, 4). Other East Anglian examples are known from sites including Brandon Road, Thetford (Atkins and Connor 2010), Harston Mill, Harston (O’Brien forthcoming), Dernford Farm, Sawston (Newton forthcoming), the Old Bell, Marham (Newton 2013) and Hartismere High School, Eye (Caruth and Goffin 2012). Although the function of these sub-square structures is still widely debated, a study by Tipper (2004, 64-5) defines their average measurements as 3 x 4m in plan by 0.30-0.50m deep, which is similar to some of the Oulton examples (Chart 5). Hamerow (1993, 11) has noted, however, that later, 7th century SFBs can be much larger in size (after Hamerow 2011, 146), possibly suggesting a late date for SFB 2 at Oulton. However, Sunken Feature F2633 contained the largest group of early to middle Anglo-Saxon pottery from the site, thus firmly placing its use and backfilling within Phase 5.1. Chart 5: Oulton SFB sizes and depths compared with Tipper’s (2004) average dimensions. A median depth of 0.40m has been used based on Tipper’s stated range of 0.30-0.50m 4.31 Although broadly contemporary, the SFBs at Oulton may have represented a temporal succession of buildings (at least in part). It is possible that SFBs 3 and 4, located c. 2m apart represented a short ‘sequence’ of structures with one building replacing the other. However, none of the SFBs yield a concentration of carbonised plant remains deemed suitable for radiocarbon dating, and the structural sequence remains unknown as a result. 90 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 The Sunken-Featured Buildings Structural typologies 4.32 SFB typologies have previously been described by von Guyan (1952) and Ahrens (1966). Three of the Oulton SFBs displayed evidence of structural postholes midway along their short sides (Figs. 18, 24 and 27). These would most likely have housed upright, gable-end timbers in turn supporting a horizontal ridge pole which formed the apex of the roof. This structural format was defined by Ahrens (1966) as a Giebelpfostenhaus or gable-post house (after Tipper 2004, 68). In addition, SFB 1 at Oulton had postholes at two of its corners which may have held further uprights, perhaps tied into horizontal, gable-end crossbeams. Two-post SFBs (defined by von Guyan (1952)), of which SFBs 2 and 4 at Oulton may have been examples, are common, whilst six-post examples, with post settings similar to SFB 1, are largely confined to south-east England and East Anglia (Tipper 2004, 69; after West 1985, 121). Both forms were represented at the Anglo-Saxon village of West Stow (West 1971; 1985) and Spong Hill (Rickett 1995). Evidence for suspended wooden floors 4.33 A lack of trampling recorded in the base of the Oulton SFBs suggests that all may have originally included suspended wooden floors. The absence of trampling is notable given the sandy nature of the underlying geology and suggests that bases of the sunken features did not themselves constitute floor levels. In at least three cases, this lack of trampling was accompanied by a dearth of finds from the primary fills; a limited quantity of cultural material was recovered from the primary fill of SFB 2 and the single Fill of SFB 4. It is thought that the ‘sifting’ of material through floorboards had resulted in this dearth of artefacts. In contrast, the upper fills contained numerous finds. A similar distribution was observed in SFB 5 at Dernford where the original presence of a suspended wooden floor was also attested by micromorphological analysis (Newton forthcoming). This pattern is by no means universal however (see Tipper 2004, 103ff). Trampled material and a hearth present in SFB 2037 at Marham, for example, suggests that the base of the sunken feature had itself formed the primary floor surface (Newton 2013, 335-6). Depositional models 4.34 Tipper (2004, 107, 153, 184) suggests that, once derelict, most SFBs were subject to rapid backfilling with redeposited material from surface ‘middens’. As such, the majority of finds from SFBs have no direct bearing on their primary use (ibid. 160); the same may be true for finds from Oulton. The stratigraphic evidence from the site also largely conforms to this pattern of backfilling, with finds-rich material sealing cleaner, primary deposits (thought to represent occupation deposits; see above). The Burnt Flint Pits 4.35 The Phase 5 burnt flint pits each contained clearly defined fills yielding large quantities of burnt flint and charcoal (dominated by oak). Fill L2732 of Pit F2731 also yielded 83g of residual late Bronze Age to early Iron Age pottery. Despite the spot 91 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 date from this feature, comparable pits containing non-Anglo-Saxon finds are well documented. These include seven pits containing residual Roman material at Kilverstone, Norfolk (Lucy 2006, 184-6, fig. 5.16, plate XXI). An Anglo-Saxon burnt flint pit containing Roman pottery was also excavated at Church Road, Snape (Mustchin 2014b). The Kilverstone pifts were separated from contemporary structures and were thought to function as part of a periodic industrial process of uncertain character (Lucy 2006). Seventeen analogous pits excavated at Hartismere High School, Eye (Suffolk) were found scattered across a 4.67ha area, with some respecting the position of contemporary SFBs (Caruth and Goffin 2012, 45-6). Similar features, also in close association with structural remains, were found at Redcastle Furze (Andrews 1995) and were interpreted as having a cooking function (after Lucy 2006, 184, 186). A domestic role seems unlikely, however, due to the low thermal tolerances of flint; it can explode when rapidly heated and cooled (Sieveking and Clayton 2011, 284). 4.36 Seven similar pits containing burnt flints, tentatively associated with ritual feasting, were identified at Snape Anglo-Saxon Cemetery (Filmer-Sankey and Pestell 2001; Williams 2008, 248). These pits were of particular interest as the flint they contained is atypical of the site’s geology and could not have been collected locally (Pestell 2001, 259). The Snape Cemetery pits were analogous to another ‘cooking’ pit recorded at Flixton (Boulter and Walton Rogers 2012, 94-5, fig. 6.3). Despite containing late Iron Age/ early Roman pottery, radiocarbon dating of the Flixton pit confirmed its association with the adjacent Anglo-Saxon site (ibid.). Evidence of Enclosure 4.37 A large, rectangular enclosure was dated to the middle to late Anglo-Saxon period, but appeared to constitute a development of boundary alignments belonging to the earlier part of Phase 5. The enclosure was bounded to the north and west by contemporary sections of ditched trackway, the northernmost of which continued beyond the edge of the excavation in the same direction. The southernmost section of trackway, to the west of the enclosure, narrowed towards the south and may have been laid out purposefully to control the movement of livestock. Although small, the Phase 5.2 animal bone assemblage includes a good spread of taxa with cattle, sheep/ goat and horse all represented (see The Animal Bone). However, the few fragments recovered cannot be used to infer the relative economic importance of these species to the Anglo-Saxon population. Plant remains were also sparse from the latter part of Phase 5. As such, it is difficult to determine the function(s) of the Anglo-Saxon enclosure, although an agricultural use seems most likely. An economy based on sedentary farming, subsidised by hunting, is typical of the period in East Anglia (e.g. Crabtree 1985, 85ff; Higbee 2009; Powell and Clark 2002, 101ff). Possible Structural Evidence 4.38 A group of 21 pits and two possible beam slots at the southern edge of the Anglo-Saxon enclosure may have represented structural remains. These features were devoid of finds, however, and were only tentatively dated. Evidence of ‘internal’ deposits – possibly relating to the use(s) of this ?structure – were also absent. This dearth of evidence, although possibly taphonomic in nature, might suggest that any structure represented was ancillary in nature, perhaps having a 92 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 storage function. Alternatively, the remains may have represented a livestock pen or similar agricultural structure, thus accounting for the dearth of cultural material. 4.39 Anglo-Saxon examples of earth-fast and beamslot structures are well documented; Addyman (1972, 283, fig. 5) provides a useful overview of ‘post-built huts’. ‘Beamslot’ foundations are rarely encountered on early Anglo-Saxon sites, however (Lyons 2011, 92), thus supporting a middle to late Anglo-Saxon date for the Oulton ?structure. The Anglo-Saxon Economy 4.40 It is difficult to infer much regarding the nature of the Anglo-Saxon economy at Oulton. Plant remains from Phase 5.1 are only representative of low level cereal use, while the animal bone assemblage is small, albeit the second largest recovered. Despite its size, the faunal remains include the greatest diversity of identified taxa, dominated by cattle; sheep/ goat, pig and horse are also present. Animal and plant remains are also scarce from middle to late Anglo-Saxon deposits. Nonetheless, as previously mentioned, a sedentary farming economy is typical for the period in East Anglia and it is not unreasonable to suggest that this was also the case at Oulton. The Weights 4.41 Dispersed Phase 5.2 Pit F2162 yielded a highly significant collection eight cylindrical pan weights and three spherical hanging weights (see The Small Finds). Four of the pan weights have embedded coins in their upper surfaces (x2 Roman and x2 Carolingian; ibid.). These finds are considered to have been in use during the Viking Age, with several comparative collections known (ibid.). The occurrence of Carolingian coinage – possibly deriving from Viking incursions into Frankia – is of particular significance and is not paralleled elsewhere (ibid.). These coins might suggest a continental origin for the weights themselves. 4.42 The system of measurement in use may well be Viking. The two larger hanging weights are close to 24g each, equating to one eyrir (1 ounce), while the smallest weight is equivalent to one ertog (one third of an ounce) (ibid.). None of the weights conforms to medieval systems of measurement. 4.43 Although the character of the weights appears relatively clear, the context of their discovery can add little to their overall interpretation. Pit F2162 was small and contained just a single fill (L2163), perhaps indicating that it had been dig specifically to receive the weights. Other finds from L2163 include a single sherd (4g) of Early Medieval sandy ware and a corroded piece of iron (62g); the latter may have been the remains of a set of scales. Beyond the Danelaw, similar groups of weights are known from the Isle of Purbeck and Cirencester; the latter perhaps relating to late 9th century activity (ibid.). This date would fall well within the early part of Phase 5.2 at Oulton. The Post-Anglo-Saxon Evidence 4.44 Post-Anglo-Saxon activity was relatively scarce within the excavated area. Twenty-four Saxo-Norman/ medieval (Phase 6) features were present, 23 of which 93 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 formed an informally distributed cluster in the northern area of the site (Fig. 10). Thirteen of the clustered features yielded smelting or undiagnostic slag (totalling 1487g), while one (F2180) contained a single metal fragment (30g). Although no smelting furnace was present within the confines of the site, the recovered slag assemblage indicated the probable occurrence of metallurgical industry somewhere in the near vicinity. Similar evidence of medieval iron working was excavated at Nowhere House, Thornington (SHER TNG 026), while a medieval (15th to 16th) lead working site and other remains have been reported from the Angel Site in Halesworth; both sites are located close to the Suffolk coast, within 24km of Oulton. Diagnostic pottery from the Phase 6 features was scarce, however, and the majority were only tentatively dated. 4.45 The post-medieval to early modern/ modern (Phase 7) site appeared wholly agricultural in nature, defined by two substantial, linear boundary alignments. This ‘opening up’ of the landscape (compared to earlier phases of enclosure) is reminiscent of similar reorganisation elsewhere, e.g. Wheatcroft Farm, Bradwell (Mustchin et al. in preparation) and reflects the current land use. The remaining Phase 7 features comprised a mix of linear and discrete features and a possible fenceline. None yielded finds of note. The agricultural nature of the site at this time is reflected by the cartographic evidence, with no encroachment of modern Oulton until the early 20th century 5 CONCLUSIONS 5.1 The encountered Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon archaeology at Oulton adds significantly to our understanding of these periods in this part of Suffolk. Both are relatively poorly represented in the north-eastern area of the county, although the recently published Anglo-Saxon settlement and cemetery at Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville conforms to patterns of settlement elsewhere, being confined to light, easily worked soils. Economic evidence from both periods at Oulton suggests the practice of mixed agriculture, although only low levels of cereal use are represented in Phase 5 and the animal bone assemblage is relatively poor across all phases. Some evidence of malting activity is represented in the Romano-British period – in keeping with evidence from across East Anglia – although the scale of this industry is uncertain. 5.2 The early to middle Anglo-Saxon site contained the only evidence of domestic occupation within the excavated area, including five sunken-featured buildings and five burnt flint pits. Although few, the Phase 5.1 structures are notable, being the only domestic buildings of this period known from the immediate area. Good comparisons in terms of building form, configuration and settlement layout are known from other regional sites, however. The topographical and geographical setting of the early to middle Anglo-Saxon settlement is also mirrored elsewhere. The study of AngloSaxon settlement and social organisation has been identified as a regional research priority (Medlycott 2011, 56) and the current site makes a valuable contribution to this field. 5.3 The Anglo-Saxon burnt flint pits are more difficult to interpret. Although regional comparisons are relatively numerous, there is no firm consensus regarding 94 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 the use/ purpose of this feature type. Interpretations range from cooking pits to industrial features. In this instance, however, it is thought unlikely that they held a domestic/ cooking function, owing to the propensity of flint to explode when heated or cooled rapidly. 5.4 One find of particular significance from the site is the collection of 11 weights from Phase 5.2 Pit F2162. Pan weights in this group include two with embedded Roman coins in their upper surfaces and two with Carolingian coins. The latter are particularly notable as they are not paralleled elsewhere and suggest a possible European origin for the weights. Alternatively the coins may have derived from Viking incursions into Frankia. The system of measurement in use appears to be Viking and the collection as a whole has parallels with other groups both within and beyond the boundaries of the Danelaw. One group from Cirencester may relate to activity in the latter part of the 9th century, well within the early part of Phase 5.2 at Oulton. However, the context of the Oulton weights adds little to their overall interpretation; the site at this time was dominated by a large agricultural enclosure and trackways, with only tentative structural evidence and no domestic buildings. 5.5 The Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon phases were indirectly preceded by prehistoric activity, with the earliest material from the site comprising sparsely distributed struck flint of Neolithic character. The earliest sedentary activity at the site spanned the late Bronze Age to early Iron Age (Phase 2) and was characteristic of regional settlements of this period, largely comprising enclosure boundaries – thought to be agricultural in nature – and clustered refuse pits. The Phase 2 economy is difficult to interpret, however, as only trace animal bone was present and much of the environmental assemblage consists of taxa that are not typical of the period. Later in the Iron Age, the focus of activity appears to have shifted away from the site, with very few features of middle to late Iron Age date encountered. The post-Anglo-Saxon phases were only poorly represented, with a possible metallurgical waste area being dated to the Saxo-Norman/ medieval period, while the character of the post-medieval and later landscape was agricultural; in character with the current land use. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Archaeological Solutions Ltd (AS) is grateful to Persimmon Homes Ltd and Oldman Homes Ltd for funding the project and for their assistance. AS is also pleased to acknowledge the input and advice of Matthew Brudenell (formerly of Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Conservation Team). Nicholas J. Cooper would like to thank Simon Coupland for identifying the Carolingian coins, as well as Martin Allen, Yolanda Courtney, Jo Story and Paul Withers for their help in researching the weights (SF1). 95 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 BIBLIOGRAPHY Abrams, J. and Ingham, D., 2008 Farming on the Edge: archaeological evidence from the clay uplands west of Cambridge. East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 123 (Bedford, Albion Archaeology) Addyman, P.V., 1972 ‘The Anglo-Saxon House: a new review’, Anglo-Saxon England 1, 273-307 Ahrens, C., 1966 ‘Vorgeschichte des Kriesen Pinneberg und der Insel Helgoland – Die Vor- und frühgeschichtliche Denkmäler und Funde in Schleswig-Holstein, VII’, in Kersten, K. (ed.) Veröffentlichungen des Landesamtes für Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Schleswig, 205, (Neumunster, Wachholtz, GFR) Anderson, S., 2012a ‘Post-Roman Pottery’, in Caruth, J. and Goffin, R. (eds.), Land South of Hartismere High School, Eye, Suffolk, EYE 083: Post-Excavation Assessment Report, Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Report No. 2012/067 (Bury St Edmunds), 7482 Anderson, A., 2012b ‘Pottery’, in Boulter, S. and Walton Rogers, P. (eds.), Circles and Cemeteries: Excavations at Flixton. Volume 1, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 147 (Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk County Council), 138-42 Andrefsky, W., 2005 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis (2nd edition, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press) Andrews, P., 1995 Excavations at Redcastle Furze, Thetford, 1988-9, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 72 (Dereham, Norfolk Museums Service) Archibald, M.M., 1991 ‘Anglo-Saxon and Norman lead objects with official coin types’, in Vince, A.G. (ed.), Aspects of Saxon and Norman London 2: Finds and Environmental Evidence, London and Middlesex Archaeological Society Special Paper No. 12, 326-46 Ashwin, T., 1996 ‘Neolithic and Bronze Age Norfolk’, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 62, 41-62 Ashwin, T. and Tester, A., 2014 A Romano-British Settlement in the Waveney Valley: excavations at Scole, 1993-4, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 152 (Dereham/ Bury St Edmunds, Norfolk Historic Environment Service/ Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service) 96 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Atkins, R. and Connor, A., 2010 Farmers and Ironsmiths: prehistoric, Roman and Anglo-Saxon settlement beside Brandon Road, Thetford, Norfolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 134 (Cambridge, Oxford Archaeology East) Atkinson, M. and Preston, S., 2015 Heybridge, a Late Iron Age and Roman Settlement: Excavations at Elms Farm 19935, Volume 1, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 154 (Colchester, Essex County Council, Historic Environment) Baker, J. and Brookes, S., 2013 Beyond the Burghal Hidage: Anglo-Saxon Civil Defence in the Viking Age (Leiden, Koninklijke Brill NV) Bales, E., 2004 A Roman Maltings at Beck Row, Mildenhall, Suffolk, East Anglian Archaeology Occasional Paper No. 20 (Ipswich, Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service) Bayley, J., Crossley, D. and Ponting, M., 2008 Metals and Metalworking: a research framework for archaeolometallurgy (London, The Historical Metallurgical Society/ English Heritage) Biddle, M., 1990 Object and Economy in Medieval Winchester, Winchester Studies 7(ii) (Oxford, Oxford University Press) Biggs, N. and Withers, P., 2000 Lead Weights: The David Rogers Collection (Llanfyllin, Galata Publications) Blinkhorn, P., 2012 The Ipswich ware project: Ceramics, trade and society in Middle Saxon England, Medieval Pottery Research Group Occasional Paper No. 7 Bond, J.M., 1995 ‘Animal Bone from Early Saxon Sunken-Featured Buildings and Pits’, in Rickett, R., The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Spong Hill, North Elmham, Part VII: the Iron Age, Roman and Early Saxon Settlement, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 73 (Dereham, Norfolk Museums Service), 142-46 Boulter, S. and Walton Rogers, P., 2012 Circles and Cemeteries: Excavations at Flixton. Volume 1, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 147 (Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk County Council) Bradley, R.J., 1984 The Social Foundations of Prehistoric Britain (Harlow, Longman Group) Briscoe, D., 1981 ‘Anglo-Saxon Pot Stamps’, in Brown, D., Campbell, J. and Chadwick Hawkes, S. (eds.), Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History, British Archaeological Reports (British Series) 92 (Oxford, Archaeopress), 1-35 97 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 British Geological Survey (BGS), 1978 Legend for the 1:625,000 Geological map of the United Kingdom (solid geology): London (BGS, Mansfield) Brown, A., 1994 ‘A Romano-British Shell-Gritted Pottery and Tile Manufacturing Site at Harrold, Bedfordshire’, Bedfordshire Archaeology 21, 19-107 Brudenell, M., 2011 ‘Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Pottery in Norfolk: a review’, in Davies, J. (ed.), The Iron Age in Northern East Anglia: New Work in the Land of the Iceni, British Archaeological Reports (British Series) 549 (Oxford, Archaeopress), 11-24 Campbell, G., 2000 ‘Plant utilization: the evidence from charred plant remains’, in Cunliffe, B., The Danebury Environs Programme: The Prehistory of a Wessex Landscape. Volume 1: Introduction, English Heritage and Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph No. 48 (Oxford, Institute of Archaeology), 45-59 Cappers, R.T.J., Bekker R.M. and Jans, J.E.A., 2006 Digital Seed Atlas of the Netherlands. Groningen Archaeological Studies Volume 4 (Eelde, Barkhuis Publishing) Caruth, J., 2003 Child Development Centre, RAF Lakenheath, ERL 089. Archaeological Service Report No. 2003/100 Suffolk County Council Caruth, J. and Goffin, R., 2012 Land South of Hartismere High School, Eye, Suffolk, EYE 083: Post-Excavation Assessment Report, Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Report No. 2012/067 (Bury St Edmunds) Chirikure, S. and Paynter, S., 2002 A Metallurgical Investigation of Metalworking Remains from Snettisham, Norfolk, Centre for Archaeology Report No. 50/2002 (English Heritage) Clarke, C. and Phillips, M., 2009 ‘Area 4’, in Phillips, M., Duncan, H. and Mallows, C., Four Millennia of Human History Along the A505 Baldock Bypass, Hertfordshire, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 128 (Bedford, Albion Archaeology) Cohen, A. and Serjeantson D., 1996 A Manual for the Identification of Bird Bones from Archaeological Sites (2nd edition, London, Archetype Publications Ltd) Colchester Archaeological Trust, 2001 An archaeological watching brief on one section of an Anglian Water main Spring Lane, Lexden, Colchester, April-September 2001, Colchester Archaeological Trust Report No. 160 (Colchester) 98 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Crabtree, P., 1985 ‘The Faunal Remains’, in West, S. West Stow: the Anglo-Saxon village, Suffolk, 8596, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 24 (Ipswich, Suffolk County Council Planning Department) Crabtree, P.J., 2014 ‘Animal husbandry and farming in East Anglia from the 5th to the 10th centuries CE’, Quaternary International 346, 102-8 Craven, J.A., 2005 New Access Control, Gate 2, RAF Lakenheath, ERL 120. Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Report No. 2005/27 Craven, J.A., 2010 Land off of Mobbs Way, Oulton OUL 011: archaeological evaluation report, Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Report No. 2010/146 Crew, P., 1995 Bloomery Iron Smelting Slags and other residues, Historical Metallurgy Society, Archaeology Data Sheet No. 5 Cunliffe, B., 2010 Iron Age Communities in Britain: an account of England, Scotland and Wales from the seventh century BC until the Roman Conquest (fourth edition, London, Routledge) Curl, J. and Cussans, J.E.M., 2014 ‘The Animal Bone’, in Mustchin, A.R.R., Former Smoke House Inn, Beck Row, Mildenhall, Suffolk. Research Archive Report, Volume I – Report, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 4514 (Bury St Edmunds), 243-76 Cussans, J.E.M., 2015 ‘The Animal Bone’, in Walker, J. and Mustchin, A.R.R., An Archaeological Excavation on Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk: Archaeological Assessment and Updated Project Design, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 5002 (Bury St Edmunds), 56-8 Cussans, J.E.M. and Philips, C., in press ‘Animal Bone’, in Nicholson, K. and Woolhouse, T., A Late Iron Age and RomanoBritish Farmstead at Cedars Park, Stowmarket, Suffolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report Darling, M., 1994 Guidelines for the Archiving of Roman Pottery, Study Group for Roman Pottery Darling, M. and Gurney, D., 1993 Caister-on-Sea: Excavations by Charles Green 1951-55, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 60 (Dereham, Field Archaeology Division, Norfolk Museums Service) 99 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Drury, P., 1981 ‘The production of brick and tile in medieval England’, in Crossley, D. (ed.), Medieval Industry, Council for British Archaeology Research Report No. 40, 126-39 Dungworth, D. with Blakelock, E. and Nicholas, M., 2009 National Slag Collection (Ironbridge Gorge Museums Trust/ Historical Metallurgy Society) Egan, G., 1998 The Medieval Household: Daily Living c.1150-c.1450 (London, Museum of London) Egan, S., 2014 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk. A Geophysical Survey, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 4687 (Bury St Edmunds) English Nature, 1995 Grazing Management of Lowland Heaths (Peterborough, English Nature) Fell, D. and Humphrey, R., 2001 ‘The Excavation of an Iron Age and Roman Site at the Former Star and Fleece Hotel, Kelvedon’, Essex Archaeology and History 32, 102-32 Filmer-Sankey, W. and Pestell, T., 2001 Snape Anglo-Saxon Cemetery: excavations and surveys 1824-1992, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 95 (Ipswich, Suffolk County Council Planning Department) Fryer, V., 2003 ‘Charred plant macrofossils and other remains’, in Hinman, M., A Late Iron Age Farmstead and Romano-British Site at Haddon, Peterborough, British Archaeological Reports (British Series) 358 (Oxford, Archaeopress), 133-5 Fulford, M.G., 1982 ‘Town and country in Roman Britain: a parasitical relationship?’, in Miles, D., The Romano-British Countryside: studies in rural settlement, British Archaeological Reports (British Series) 107 (Oxford) Garrow, D., Lucy, S. and Gibson, D., 2006 Excavations at Kilverstone, Norfolk: An Episodic Landscape History, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 113 (Cambridge, Cambridge Archaeological Unit) Good, C. and Plouviez, J., 2007 The Archaeology of the Suffolk Coast (Ipswich, Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service) Grant, A., 1982 ‘The use of toothwear as a guide to the age of domestic ungulates’, in Wilson, B., Grigson, C. and Payne, S. (eds.), Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites, British Archaeological Reports (British Series) 109 (Oxford, Archaeopress), 91-108 100 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Gregory, T., 1991 Excavations in Thetford, 1980-1982 Fisons Way, Volume 1, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 54 (Norwich, Norfolk Museums Service) Gurney, D., 1986 Settlement, Religion and Industry on the Roman Fen-Edge, Norfolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 31 (Dereham, Norfolk Archaeological Unit/ Norfolk Museums Service) Gurney, D., 2003 Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England, East Anglian Archaeology Occasional Paper No. 14 (Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers, East of England Region) Guttmann, E.B.A. and Last, J., 2000 ‘A Late Bronze Age Landscape at South Hornchurch, Essex’, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 66, 319-59 Hagen, A., 2006 Anglo-Saxon Food and Drink (Ely, Anglo-Saxon Books) Halstead, P., 1985 ‘A study of mandibular teeth from Romano-British contexts at Maxey’, in Pryor, F., French, C., Crowther, D., Gurney, D., Simpson, G. and Taylor, M. (eds.), The Fenland Project: Archaeology and Environment in the Lower Welland Valley, Volume 1, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 27 (The Fenland Project Committee), 21924 Hamerow, H., 1993 Excavations at Mucking, Volume 2: The Anglo-Saxon Settlement (London, English Heritage/ British Museum Press) Hamerow, H., 2011 ‘Anglo-Saxon Timber Buildings and their Social Context’, in Hamerow, H., Hinton, D.A. and Crawford, S. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Anglo-Saxon Archaeology (Oxford, Oxford University Press), 128-55 Healy, F., 1988 The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Spong Hill, North Elmham, Part VI: Occupation during the Seventh to Second Millennium BC, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 39 (Derham, Norfolk Archaeological Unit, Norfolk Museums Service) Heard, K., 2013 Late Bronze Age Settlement at Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk; CAC 042, Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Report No. 2012/183 (Bury St Edmunds) 101 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Higbee, L., 2009 ‘Mammal and bird bone’, in Lucy, S., Tipper, J. and Dickens, A., The Anglo-Saxon Settlement and Cemetery at Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk 279-304, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 131 (Cambridge, Cambridge Archaeological Unit) Hillson, S., 1992 Mammal Bones and Teeth: an introductory guide to methods of identification (London, Institute of Archaeology) Holmes, M., 2014 Animals in Saxon and Scandinavian England: backbones of economy and society (Leiden, Sidestone Press) Hughes, T.M. and Hughes, M.C., 2013 Cambridgeshire (Paperback Edition, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press) Humphrey, J.W., Oleson, J.P. and Sherwood, A.N., 1998 Greek and Roman Technology: a sourcebook (London, Routledge) Institute for Archaeologists (IfA), 2013 Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Excavation (Reading, IfA) Jacomet, S., 2006 Identification of Cereal Remains from Archaeological Sites (2nd edition, Basel University, Laboratory of Palinology and Palaeoecology) Jennings, S., 1981 Eighteen Centuries of Pottery from Norwich, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 13 (Norwich, The Norwich Survey/ Norfolk Museums Service) Johnson, S., 1983 Burgh Castle, Excavations by Charles Green 1958-61, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 20 (Dereham, Norfolk Archaeological Unit, Norfolk Museums Service) Kerney, M.P., 1999 Atlas of the Land and Freshwater Molluscs of Britain and Ireland (Colchester, Harley Books) Kerney, M.P. and Cameron, R.A.D., 1979 A Field Guide to Land Snails of Britain and North-West Europe (London, Collins) Kruse, S.E., 1992 ‘Late Saxon balances and weights from England’, Medieval Archaeology 36, 67-95 Lally, M., Nicholson, K., Peachey, A., O’Brien, L., Newton, A.A.S. and Mustchin, A.R.R., forthcoming A Romano-British Industrial Site at East Winch, Norfolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report (Bury St Edmunds, Archaeological Solutions Ltd) 102 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Lawson, A. and Wymer, J., 1993 ‘The Bronze Age’, in Wade-Martins, P. (ed.), An Historical Atlas of Norfolk (Norwich, Norfolk Museums Service), 30-1 Lucy, S., 2006 ‘The Early Anglo-Saxon Settlement and Cemetery’, in Garrow, D., Lucy, S. and Gibson, D. (eds.), Excavations at Kilverstone, Norfolk: An Episodic Landscape History, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 113 (Cambridge, Cambridge Archaeological Unit), 170-201 Lucy, S., Tipper, J. and Dickens, A., 2009 The Anglo-Saxon Settlement and Cemetery at Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 131 (Cambridge, Cambridge Archaeological Unit) Luke, M. and Preece, T., 2011 Farm and Forge: Late Iron Age/Romano-British Farmsteads at Marsh Leys, Kempston, Bedfordshire, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 138 (Bedford, Albion Archaeology) Lyman, R.L., 1994 Vertebrate Taphonomy, Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press) Lyons, A., 2011 Life and Afterlife at Duxford, Cambridgeshire: archaeology and history in a chalkland community, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 141 (Bar Hill, Oxford Archaeology East) Martin, E., 1988 ‘Other Pottery’, in Martin, E., Burgh: the Iron Age and Roman enclosure, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 40 (Ipswich, Suffolk County Planning Department), 34-63 Martin, E., 1993 Settlements on Hill-tops: seven prehistoric sites in Suffolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 65 (Ipswich, Suffolk County Planning Department) Martin, E., 1999a ‘Suffolk in the Iron Age’, in Davies, J. and Williamson, T. (eds.), Land of the Iceni: The Iron Age in Northern East Anglia, Studies in East Anglian History 4 (Norwich, Centre of East Anglian Studies), 45-99 Martin, E., 1999b ‘The Neolithic’, in Dymond, D. and Martin, E. (eds.), An Historical Atlas of Suffolk (revised and enlarged edition, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk County Council/ Suffolk Institute of Archaeology and History), 36-7 103 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Martin, E., 1999c ‘The Bronze Age’, in Dymond, D. and Martin, E. (eds.), An Historical Atlas of Suffolk (revised and enlarged edition, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk County Council/ Suffolk Institute of Archaeology and History), 38-9 Martin, E., 1999d ‘The Iron Age, in Dymond, D. and Martin, E. (eds.), An Historical Atlas of Suffolk (revised and enlarged edition, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk County Council/ Suffolk Institute of Archaeology and History), 40-1 McCarthy, R. and Brooks, C., 1988 Medieval Pottery in Britain AD 800 to 1600 (Leicester, Leicester University Press) Medieval Pottery Research Group (MPRG), 1998 A Guide to the Classification of Medieval Ceramic Forms, MPRG Occasional Paper No. 1 Medlycott, M. (ed.), 2011 Research and Archaeology revisited: a revised framework for the East of England, East Anglian Archaeology Occasional Paper No. 24 (ALGAO East of England Region) Mortimer, R., 2000 ‘Village Development and Ceramic Sequence: the middle to late Saxon village at Lordship Lane, Cottenham, Cambridgeshire’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society 89, 5-34 Mudd, A., 2002 Excavations at Melford Meadows, Brettenham, 1994: the Romano-British and early Saxon occupations, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 99 (Oxford, Oxford Archaeology) Murphy, M.R., 1992 ‘Water Metabolism of Dairy Cattle’, Journal of Dairy Science 75(1), 326-33 Mustchin, A.R.R., 2014a Former Smoke House Inn, Beck Row, Mildenhall, Suffolk. Research Archive Report, Volumes 1 and 2, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 4514 (Bury St Edmunds) Mustchin, A.R.R., 2014b An Archaeological Excavation on Land North of Blyth Houses, Church Road, Snape, Suffolk. Archive Report, Archaeological Solutions Lt Report No. 4471 (Bury St Edmunds) Mustchin, A.R.R., 2015 Darley Endurance Facilities, Woodditton, Cambridgeshire. An Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation and Excavation: Research Archive Report, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 4943 (Bury St Edmunds) 104 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Mustchin, A.R.R. and Cussans, J.E.M., in preparation A Middle Iron Age Droveway at Watton Green, Norfolk Mustchin, A.R.R. and Peachey, A., forthcoming ‘An Early Romano-British Double Flue Pottery Kiln at Church Road, Snape, Suffolk’, Journal of Roman Pottery Studies Mustchin, A.R.R., Bull, K., Cussans, J.E.M., Summers, J.R. and Thompson, P., in preparation A Saxo Norman to Post-Medieval Landscape at Wheatcroft Farm, Bradwell, Norfolk Newton, A.A.S., 2013 ‘Saxon and Medieval Settlement at The Old Bell, Marham’, Norfolk Archaeology XLVI, 331-56 Newton, A.A.N., forthcoming ‘Prehistoric and Anglo-Saxon Activity at Dernford Farm, Sawston, Cambridgeshire’, East Anglian Archaeology Report Newton, A.A.S. and Mustchin A.R.R., 2015 ‘Archaeological Excavations at Ingham Quarry, Fornham St Genevieve, Suffolk’, Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology and History 43(3), 337-69 Niblett, R., 1985 Sheepen: an early Roman industrial site at Camulodunum, Council for British Archaeology Research Report No. 57 (London) Nicholson, K. and Woolhouse, T., forthcoming A late Iron Age and Romano-British farmstead at Cedars Park, Stowmarket, Suffolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report (Bury St Edmunds, Archaeological Solutions Ltd) O’Brien, L., forthcoming Bronze Age Barrow, Iron Age Settlement and Burials, and Early Anglo-Saxon Settlement at Harston Mill, Cambridgeshire, East Anglian Archaeology Report (Bury St Edmunds, Archaeological Solutions Ltd) O’Connor, T.P., 1989 Bones from Anglo-Scandinavian Levels at 16-22 Copppergate, Archaeology of York Series 15/3 (London, Council for British Archaeology/ York Archaeological Trust) Orzechowski, K., 2015 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk. Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 4743 (Bury St Edmunds) Pales, L. and Garcia, M.A., 1981a Atlas Ostéologique pour servir à l’identification des Mammifères du Quaternaire: II.Tête – Rachis Ceintures Scapulaire et Pelviene Membres. Herbivores, Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (Paris, CNRS) 105 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Pales, L. and Garcia, M.A., 1981b Atlas Ostéologique pour servir à l’identification des Mammifères du Quaternaire: II.Tête – Rachis Ceintures Scapulaire et Pelviene Membres. Carnivores, Homme, Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (Paris, CNRS) Pales, L. and Lambert, C., 1971a Atlas Ostéologique pour servir à l’identification des Mammifères du Quaternaire: I. Les membres. Carnivores, Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (Paris, CNRS) Pales, L. and Lambert, C., 1971b Atlas Ostéologique pour servir à l’identification des Mammifères du Quaternaire: I. Les membres. Herbivores, Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (Paris, CNRS) Payne, S., 1973 ‘Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: the mandibles from Aşvan Kale’, Anatolian Studies 23, 281-305 Peachey, A., 2015 ‘The Flint’, in Orzechowski, K., Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk. Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 4743 (Bury St Edmunds), Appendix 2 Perring, D., 2002 The Roman House in Britain (London, Routledge) Pestell, T., 2001 ‘Burnt Stone Features’, in Filmer-Sankey, W. and Pestell, T. Snape Anglo-Saxon Cemetery: excavations and surveys 1824-1992, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 95 (Ipswich, Suffolk County Council Planning Department), 259-61 Pirie, E.J.E., 2000 Thrymsas, Sceattas and Stycas of Northumbria: an Inventory of Finds recorded to 1997 (Llanfyllin, Galata Publications) Plouviez, J., 1999 ‘The Roman Period’, in Dymond, D. and Martin, E. (eds.), An Historical Atlas of Suffolk (revised and enlarged edition, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk County Council/ Suffolk Institute of Archaeology and History), 42-3 Powell, A. and Clark, K.M., 2002 ‘Animal Bones’, in Mudd, A. Excavations at Melford Meadows, Brettenham, 1994: the Romano-British and early Saxon occupations, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 99 (Oxford, Oxford Archaeology), 101-8 Powlesland, D., 2003 ‘Early Anglo-Saxon Settlements, Structures, Form and Layout’, in Hines, J. (ed.), Anglo-Saxons from the Migration Period to the Eighth Century: an ethnographic perspective (Woodbridge, The Boydell Press) 106 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Prehistoric Ceramics Research Group (PCRG), 1995 The Study of Later Prehistoric Pottery: general policies for analysis and publication, PCRG Occasional Paper No. 1-2 Reynolds, T., 1994 Iron Age/Romano-British Settlement at Milton: an archaeological rescue project, Cambridgeshire County Council Report No. 104 Rickett, R., 1995 The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Spong Hill, North Elmham, Part VII: the Iron Age, Roman and early Saxon Settlement, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 73 (Dereham, Field Archaeology Division, Norfolk Museums Service) Roberts, J., Spoerry, P. and Lyons, A., 2011 ‘Anglo-Saxon’, in Lyons, A. (ed.) Life and Afterlife at Duxford, Cambridgeshire: archaeology and history in a chalkland community, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 141 (Cambridge, Oxford Archaeology East), 123-6 Ryan, P., 1996 Brick in Essex: from the Roman Conquest to the Reformation (Colchester, Privately Published) Schmid, E., 1972 Atlas of Animal Bones for Prehistorians, Archaeologists, and Quaternary Geologists (London, Elsevier Publishing) Schweingruber, F.H., 1978 Microscopic Wood Anatomy: Structural Variability of Stems and Twigs in Recent and Subfossil Woods from Central Europe (Birmensdorf, Swiss Federal Institute of Forestry Research) Sieveking, G. de G. and Clayton, C.J., 2011 ‘Frost Shatter and the Properties of Frozen Flint’, in Sieveking, G. de G. and Hart, M. B. (eds.), The Scientific Study of Flint and Chert (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press), 283-90, Sim, D. and Ridge, I., 2002 Iron for Eagles: the iron industry of Roman Britain (Stroud, Tempus) Slowikowski, A., Nenk, B. and Pearce, J., 2001 Minimum Standards for the Processing, Recording, Analysis and Publication of PostRoman Ceramics, Medieval Pottery Research Group Occasional Paper 2 Soil Survey of England and Wales, 1983 Legend for the 1:250,000 Soil Map of England and Wales (Harpenden, Soil Survey of England and Wales) 107 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Summers, J.R., 2014 ‘The Charcoal’, in Mustchin. A.R.R., An Archaeological Excavation on Land North of Blyth Houses, Church Road, Snape, Suffolk. Archive Report, Archaeological Solutions Lt Report No. 4471 (Bury St Edmunds) Summers, J.R., 2015a The Environmental Samples’, in Walker, J. and Mustchin, A.R.R., An Archaeological Excavation on Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk: Archaeological Assessment and Updated Project Design, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 5002 (Bury St Edmunds) Summers, J.R., 2015b The Environmental Samples’, in Bull, K. and Mustchin, A.R.R., Phase 1, Chilton Leys, Stowmarket, Suffolk: Archaeological Assessment and Updated Project Design, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 4962 (Bury St Edmunds) Summers, J.R., 2015c Carbonised Plant Macrofossils’, in Newton, A.A.S., Land North East of Fordham Road, Soham, Cambridgeshire; Research Archive Report, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 4816 (Bury St Edmunds) Summers, J.R., 2015d ‘The Carbonised Plant Remains’, in Mustchin, A.R.R., Darley Endurance Facilities, Woodditton, Cambridgeshire. An Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation and Excavation: Research Archive Report, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 4943 (Bury St Edmunds) Taylor, J., 2007 An Atlas of Roman Rural Settlement in England, Council for British Archaeology Research Report No. 151 Thompson, P., 2014 ‘The Anglo-Saxon Pottery’, in Mustchin A.R.R., An Archaeological Excavation on Land North of Blyth Houses, Church Road, Snape, Suffolk. Archive Report, Archaeological Solutions Lt Report No. 4471 (Bury St Edmunds) Tipper, J., 2004 The ‘Grubenhaus’ in Anglo-Saxon England: an analysis and interpretation of the evidence from a most distinctive building type (Yedingham, English Heritage/ The Landscape Research Centre) Tipper, J., 2009 ‘Pottery’, in Lucy, S., Tipper, J. and Dickens, A. (eds.), The Anglo-Saxon Settlement and Cemetery at Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Coalville, Suffolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 131 (Cambridge, Cambridge Archaeological Unit), 202-43 Tomber, R. and Dore, J., 1998 The National Roman Fabric Reference Collection (London, Museum of London) 108 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 van der Veen, M., 1989 ‘Charred grain assemblages from Archaeological Journal 146, 302-19 Roman-period corn driers in Britain’, van der Veen, M. and O’Connor, T.P., 1998 ‘The expansion of agricultural production in late Iron Age and Roman Britain’, in Bayley, J. (ed.), Science in Archaeology: An Agenda for the Future (London, English Heritage), 127-44 von Guyan, W.U., 1952 ‘Einige Karten zur Verbreitung des Grubenhases in Mitteleuropa im ersten nachchristlichen Jahrtausend und einige Hinweise auf des archäologische Problem der völkerwanderungszeitlichen Hausformen der Schweiz’, Jahrbuch der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Urgeschichte 42, 174-97 Wade, K., 1999 ‘The Later Anglo-Saxon Period’, in Dymond, D. and Martin, E. (eds.), An Historical Atlas of Suffolk (revised and enlarged edition, Ipswich, Suffolk County Council/ Suffolk Institute of Archaeology and History), 46-7 Walker, J., Mustchin, A.R.R. and Thompson, P., 2015 An archaeological Excavation on land Off Lime Avenue, Oulton, SUFFOLK (Phase 1). Archaeological Assessment and Updated Project Design, Archaeological Solutions Ltd Report No. 5002 (Bury St Edmunds) Wallis, H., 2011 Romano-British and Saxon Occupation at Billingford, Central Norfolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 135 (Norwich, Norfolk Archaeological Unit/ Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service) West, S.E., 1971 ‘The Anglo-Saxon village of West Stow: an interim report of the excavations 1965-8’, Medieval Archaeology 13, 1-20 West, S., 1990 West Stow: the Prehistoric and Romano-British Occupations, East Anglian Archaeology Report No. 48 (Ipswich, Suffolk County Planning Department) West, S., 1999 ‘The Early Anglo-Saxon Period’, in Dymond, D. and Martin, E. (eds.), An Historical Atlas of Suffolk (revised and enlarged edition, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk County Council/ Suffolk Institute of Archaeology and History), 44-5 Williams, G., 1999 ‘Anglo-Saxon and Viking coin weights’, British Numismatics Journal 69.4, 19-36 Williamson, T., 2010 ‘The Environmental Contexts of Anglo-Saxon Settlement’, in Higham, N.J. and Ryan, M.J. (eds.), The Landscape Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England (Woodbridge, The Boydell Press), 133-56 109 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Yates, D.T., 2007 Land, Power and Prestige: Bronze Age field systems in southern England (Oxford, Oxbow) Web-based Resources Norfolk Heritage Explorer http://www.heritage.norfolk.gov.uk/ (consulted 22/02/2016) Schoch, W., Heller, I., Schweingruber, F.H. and Kienast, F., 2004 Wood Anatomy of Central European Species, www.woodanatomy.ch (consulted 29/10/2015) Soilscapes, 2015 National Soil Resource Institute, Cranfield University, https://www.landis.org.uk/soilscapes/ (consulted 29/10/2015) 110 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) APPENDIX 1 CONCORDANCE OF FINDS Trial Trench Evaluation Feature Context 1003 Segment Trench Description Spot Date (Pottery) Pottery CBM (g) Animal Bone (g) 1004 62 Ditch fill Mid 5th-9th C (1) 4g 1005 1006 62 Pit fill 1013 1014 67 Posthole fill 1023 1024 82 Ditch fill 1033 1034 85 Posthole fill EIA (3) 96g 1035 1036 85 Ditch fill Modern (3) 157g 1039 1040 52 Ditch fill 1041 1042 59 Ditch fill 10th-12th C (2) 6g 1043 1044 116 Ditch fill 10th-12th C (7) 67g 1045 1046 163 Ditch fill 1047 1048 84 Pit fill 10th-12th C (3) 95g 1053 1054 163 Ditch fill 12th-13th C (1) 23g 1055 1056 114 Pit fill 1067 1068 64 Pit fill 1069 1070 64 Pit fill Mid 5th-9th C (1) 6g 58 1081 1071 108 Hearth fill 10th-12th C (1) 17g 497 1084 1085 105 Ditch fill 10th-12th C (1) 14g 1088 1089 105 Pit fill EBA (5) 13g 1106 1107 83 Ditch fill 1110 1111 83 Pit fill Mid 5th-9th C (1) 18g 1114 1115 83 Pit fill Mid 5th-7th C (34) 434g 1120 1121 113 Ditch fill 16 1122 1123 113 Ditch fill 7 1126 1127 109 Pit fill 1139 109 Pit fill 1 1147 1148 110 Gully fill 231 1159 1160 117 Pit fill Other 1 Struck flint (2) - 8g Struck flint (1) - 13g 184 Struck flint (3) - 17g 13 Struck flint (1) - 15g 4 Cu. Alloy (2) - 1g Struck flint (2) - 11g Struck flint (2) - 4g 554 Struck flint (2) - 77g 20 41 Struck flint (1) - 5g 284 60 ?Rubbing Stone - 38g Struck flint (2) 63g Mid 5th-9th C (2) 30g Struck flint (1) - 35g Struck flint (2) - 19g © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 - - 108 Possible SFB Saxon (one med sherd) (12) 99g 1221 1223 B (1) 2g 28 (3) 52g 52 Glass (30 - 20g Excavation Feature Context Segment 2000 Description Spot Date (Pottery Only) Pottery (Quantity) Pottery (g) CBM (g) Topsoil modern 7 89 219 Animal Bone (g) Other Material Other (Quantity) Other (g) Glass 2 48 Struck flint 2 17 Fe 3 239 Burnt stone 2 108 Slag 2005 2006 Pit fill 2009 Colluvium 2011 2012 Pit fill 23 Late Roman 1 77 180 2016 2019 2020 B Ditch fill mid 5th to mid 9th 1 3 6th-7th 1 19 Pit fill prehistoric 1 4 Ditch fill D F 2025 2026 2027 2028 2033 2 prehistoric 1 3 C prehistoric 2 12 D prehstoric? 2 2 E prehistoric 1 3 F prehistoric 2 13 prehistoric 1 4 2035 2 Lower Fill of SFB 5 C Slag 457 8 mid 5th-mid 9th 3 27 2036 2037 D Pit fill Roman 7 265 2040 2041 Pit fill mid to late Iron Age 15 150 2042 2043 Ditch fill mid 9th-mid 12th 5 43 2056 2057 Pit fill prehistori 3 40 93 Struck flint 1 2 Burnt flint 202 Burnt flint 37 1 112 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2064 2065 Pit fill 2068 2069 Ditch fill 2060 2071 2072 2073 2078 2079 2086 2091 2092 B Burnt stone 17th-18th 1 26 Gully fill prehistoric 2 13 Pit fill Roman 1 40 Tree bowl fill prehistoric 2 25 Pit fill mid 9th-12th 5 34 Pit fill 32 B 2094 28 7 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 19 344 101 6 Slag Struck flint 2091 2097 A Pit fill Roman 1 28 2091 2100 A Pit fill 2091 2102 A Pit fill Roman 3 76 2091 2104 A 2105 2106 Pit fill mid 9th-mid 12th 1 14 Posthole fill Iron Age 5 85 2115 2116 Pit fill LBA-IA 1 6 2123 2124 Ditch fill 19th-20th 2 5 2131 2132 Pit fill mid 5th-7th 38 682 2136 B Ditch fill prehistoric 3 4 2143 2144 A Ditch fill 19th-20th 16 439 2149 Ditch fill 2149 2154 2155 A 2157 2162 2163 B 90 2165 4 Fired clay 11 Struck flint 1 75 Worked stone 2 36 Glass 1 65 Roof slate 1 25 3 Ditch fill mid 5th-mid 9th 1 1 Ditch fill prehistoric 1 8 495 Slag 119 mid 5th-mid 9th 2 1 Baked clay 1 Ditch fill LBA-IA 1 15 Pit fill mid 7th-mid 12th? 1 4 Fe crusted weights 62 SF1 (weights) 869 4 B 2164 39 Burnt flint 700 B 2156 3 12 598 G 2148 82 1 2 2135 2148 184 3 A 2093 1 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 51 826 77 Fired clay 84 Slag 70 113 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Struck flint prehistoric 1 12 82 2168 2169 Posthole fill 2 2174 2175 Posthole fill 2176 2177 Pit fill 2178 2179 Pit fill 2180 2181 Pit fill Metal 2182 2183 Pit fill Slag 34 2184 2185 Posthole fill Slag 258 2186 2187 2190 2191 2192 2193 3 188 Slag 50 105 Pit fill A Slag 1 30 Slag 11 Gully fill 11th-14th 1 5 Slag 6 Pit fill Roman? 1 7 Slag 420 Slag 39 Slag 165 A 2200 2201 Pit fill 2164 2204 Pit fill 2205 2206 Posthole fill 2213 2214 Posthole fill Slag 63 2215 2216 Posthole fill Slag 56 2217 2218 Pit fill 2217 2219 Pit fill 2221 2222 Pit fill 2241 2243 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 1 2 43 1 mid 5th-mid 9th 6 30 Baked Clay Burnt flint 2241 2244 Pit fill prehistoric 6 131 2245 2246 Posthole fill 2247 2248 Posthole fill 2249 2250 Posthole fill 2251 2252 Posthole fill 2253 2254 Posthole fill Roman 2 20 37 2255 2256 Posthole fill Roman? 1 2 49 2259 2260 Posthole fill 104 2265 2266 Posthole fill 82 2269 2270 Posthole fill LBA-Iron Age 2 21 2271 2272 Posthole fill LIA - Roman 1 7 42 8 294 Fired clay 313 Burnt flint 167 Baked Clay 3 Fired clay 9 Baked Clay 42 8 12th-15th 2 4 59 147 7 24 114 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2273 2274 Posthole fill 37 2275 2276 Posthole fill 94 2277 2278 Posthole fill LBA-IA 1 18 2274 2280 Posthole fill mid 5th-mid 9th? 1 3 2281 2282 Ditch fill 10 2283 2284 Posthole fill 200 2287 2288 A 10 106 2 Posthole fill late medieval/early post-medieval 1 5 F Fired clay 2291 2292 2293 2294 Posthole fill 2295 2296 Pit fill 2299 2300 Posthole fill 2301 2305 Pit fill 2306 2307 Pit fill modern 2 7 2310 2311 Pit fill prehistoric 1 79 A 374 Gully fill 1 168 A A 2312 2313 2314 2316 Pit fill 2317 2318 Pit fill 2328 2329 Pit fill 2338 2340 Pit fill prehistoric 1 2 2341 2342 Pit fill prehistoric 1 5 2347 2348 Ditch fill 2349 2350 Pit fill LBA to Iron Age 1 14 2351 2352 2353 2354 Gully fill Pit fill prehistoric 4 mid 5th-mid 9th? 2 4 2357 2358 Pit fill late 18th-mid 20th 1 4 2362 2364 Pit fill prehistoric 1 5 2365 2366 mid 5th-mid 9th (all but one sherd Roman) 9 151 A 7 39 6 49 5 SF2 (metal) 1 17 7 8 Pit fill B 17 8 Pit fill A 64 80 Slag 12 2359 2360 Pit fill mid to late Iron Age 2 24 2367 2368 Pit fill prehistoric 3 6 2370 2371 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th? 1 2 8 11 <1 115 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 2374 2375 Pit fill 89 ? 2398 Cut of Pit 63 2402 2403 2404 2405 2407 2408 A Pit fill Roman 1 42 prehistoric 1 16 mid 5th-mid 9th 5 16 52 Pit fill B Gully fill C Burnt flint D 13 2418 2419 Pit fill 2420 2421 Pit fill 2429 Tree bowl fill 2342 2433 Posthole fill ?clinker 2459 2460 Pit fill 2461 2462 2466 2467 2468 2469 2470 2471 2480 2481 2482 2484 2502 2503 2510 2511 2536 2537 Pit fill 2540 2541 Posthole fill 2546 2547 Pit fill Roman 1 7 2554 2555 Posthole fill LBA-IA 13 210 2501 2560 ?Hearth fill 2567 2568 Posthole fill 2569 2570 Pit fill 2612 2613 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 1 7 2633 2634 Fill of SFB mid 5th-mid 9th 30 547 293 Roman 1 4 mid 5th-mid 9th 1 5 Ditch fill LBA-EIA 17 471 Pit fill mid to late Iron Age 9 129 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th (but mainly prehistoric sherds) 5 19 Ditch fill prehistoric? 3 12 Pit fill prehistoric 1 10 2483 Pit fill Roman 1 3 2485 Pit fill prehistoric 48 442 6th-12th 2 105 B Gully fill Slag 172 21 67 Posthole fill D 18 441 3 Struck flint 2 6 8 105 13 Slag 152 Slag 113 133 Metal 7 11 13 18 296 482 9 SF3 ( Fe blade) 2 20 8 3 Burnt flint Burnt clay A mid 5th-mid 9th 35 272 10 B mid 5th-mid 9th 20 397 222 140 39 116 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 C mid 5th-mid 9th 21 220 Fill of SFB mid 5th-mid 9th 3 39 mid 5th-mid 9th 6 48 279 2640 Pit fill Mid 5th-mid 9th 1 4 113 2641 2642 Pit fill 11th-13th 3 19 113 2643 2645 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 1 3 2646 2647 Pit fill 2660 2661 Posthole fill 2664 2665 ?Hearth fill 2669 2670 2671 2633 2635 2639 C 294 10 4 Struck flint 1 5 16 mid 5th-mid 9th 1 24 Pit fill Roman? 1 9 2672 Posthole fill mid 5th-mid 9th 1 4 Baked Clay 20 2687 2688 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 10 60 Burnt flint 1 2689 2690 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 3 18 2697 2698 2723 2724 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 9 98 2729 2730 Pit fill mid 9th-mid 12th 4 35 Slag 151 2731 2732 Pit fill LBA-IA 8 83 2740 2741 Ditch fill mid 5th-mid 9th 2 52 2742 2743 Pit fill 6 39 2744 2745 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 10 102 2746 2747 Pit fill mid 9th-12th/13th 1 19 Slag 307 2750 2751 Fill of SFB mid 5th-mid 9th 3 37 prehistoric 2 54 C A 2754 2756 19 Gully fill A 5 15 14 2 25 B mid 5th-mid 9th 5 74 31 C 12th-16th 5 110 21 mid 5th-mid 9th 9 31 4 mid 5th-mid 9th 3 57 24 A Upper fill of SFB D 2759 2760 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 3 26 2761 2762 Pit fill mid 5th-mid 9th 2 11 U/S U/S Unstratified 1 14 Fired clay 22 Clay 48 12 28 117 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) APPENDIX 2 WRITTEN SCHEME OF INVESTIGATION LAND OFF LIME AVENUE, OULTON, SUFFOLK WRITTEN SCHEME OF INVESTIGATION FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION rd 23 January 2015 © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 LAND OFF LIME AVENUE, OULTON, SUFFOLK ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION SPECIFICATION FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This Written Scheme of Investigation has been prepared in response to a brief issued by Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Conservation Team (SCC AS-CT) (Matthew Brudenell, dated 22nd January 2015). It provides for a programme of archaeological excavation on land at Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (NGR TM 518 941). The investigation is required to be undertaken to comply with a planning condition attached to planning permission for the construction of a new residential development. The requirement follows a trial trench evaluation of the site (Orzechowski & Thompson 2015). 2 COMPLIANCE 2.1 The terms and conditions contained in the SCC AS-CT brief have been read, understood and are accepted. The project will adhere also to the Code of Conduct of the Institute for Archaeologists. The investigation will adhere to the IfA’s Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Excavation (revised 2008); the SCC AS-CT document Requirements for Archaeological Excavation 2012 Ver 1.1 and Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England (Gurney 2003). 3 SITE DESCRIPTION NATURE OF THE DEVELOPMENT & ARCHAEOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS 3.1 The site lies in an area of archaeological potential on the northern side of Lime Avenue, Oulton. It is largely greenfield/agricultural, and extends to some 35.ha. 3.2 The underlying geology is Crag Group - Sand (British Geological Survey website). The drift geology is Happisburgh Glacigenic Formation – Sand across the majority of the surveyed area, with an area of Head – Clay, Silt, Sand and Gravel in the east (British Geological Survey website). 3.3 It is proposed to construct new residential development on the site. 3.4 There has been little in the way of previous investigation in the area to characterise its archaeological potential, but it is a large greenfield site in a topographic location favourable to early activity, overlooking the River Lothing to the south and the Oulton Marshes to the north. A small area of land adjacent to Mobbs Way has been subject to an archaeological evaluation in 2010 (HER OUL 11), revealing evidence of prehistoric and medieval occupation. 3.5 This is an area that has undergone very little systematic archaeological field investigation and there are just 16 HER points within an approximate 1km radius of the site. Prehistoric stone tools have been found in the area between 500m and 1km of the site including a Palaeolithic worked implement (OUL Misc), a Neolithic 119 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 polished axe head, a late Neolithic flint artifact scatter including an adze and barbedand-tanged arrowhead from Pound Lane to the north-east (LWT 015), and a Bronze Age hornblende granulite battleaxe from Lothingland to the south (SUF Misc). Cropmarks of at least one, and possibly three ring ditches, have been identified in Oulton parish between 500m and 1km south/south-west of the site (OUL 005). The only Roman finds are two bronze coins found during metal detecting (OUL 001). 3.6 There is only one HER point recorded within 500m of the site where an archaeological evaluation was carried out on 1.7ha of arable land off Mobbs Way between approximately 200 and 500m east of the site (OUL 011). A small assemblage of prehistoric material was recovered and two undated ditches and three possible pits were identified. A medieval or post-medieval ditch was also recorded, and the isolated post-medieval finds recovered indicated that the area had probably remained as open arable land since the medieval period. 3.7 St Michael’s Church located 1km to the south-west is thought to date back to Norman times although it is not mentioned in the Domesday Survey. It was rebuilt in the 14th and 15th centuries and was restored in the 19th (OUL 004). A market is recorded at Oulton in the year 1307 (Oulton Misc). Oulton Broad is the most southerly of the manmade Norfolk Broads. A 14th century jetton and medieval finger ring were found in a garden at Oulton Broad village (LWT Misc). The cropmark of a sub-oval enclosure or moat is located over 500m west/north-west of the site (FTN 013). Post-medieval tile and other finds were made within the area of the enclosure/moat (FTN 011). 3.8 A geophysical survey recorded linear anomalies of possible archaeological origin (Egan 2014). In summary: West Field The survey of the western field identified four possible archaeological anomalies; however these could equally be related to modern agricultural activity. Middle Field The principal recorded anomaly forms a curve or an enclosure which may be of archaeological origin. The enclosure contains four anomalies possibly indicative of in filled discrete pits. In the same southern area of the field five anomalies may be pits of archaeological origin. A linear feature is located in the north east area of site and is oriented east-west. It may represent a former field boundary and may be of archaeological origin. East Field A linear ditch runs NE/SW across the north-eastern section of the site and may be of archaeological origin. It is close to a second ditch which may also be of archaeological origin. 120 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 The conducive geology and presence of possible archaeological anomalies suggests that the survey has been successful. The remaining anomalies are of modern origin, relating to agricultural activity and ferrous objects. 3.9 An archaeological evaluation of the first phases of the site was carried out by AS (Orzechowski & Thompson 2015). In summary: The dating of features is tentative due to the occurrence of small quantities of pottery and other finds. Seventy eight features were recorded. The majority of features were linears (ditches, ditch terminals and gullies). Discrete features (pits) were common and structural remains (post and stake holes) were also recorded. A possible sunken featured building was recorded in Trench 108. The earliest features were prehistoric. Early Bronze Age pottery was present in Pit F1088 (Trench 105), and Late Bronze Age / Early Iron Age pottery occurred within Post Hole F1033 (Trench 85). Sparse struck flint numbering 1 – 3 pieces were found in several features (Trenches 52, 67, 82, 114, 117 and 163). Five features contained Early – Middle Saxon (mid 5th – 9th century) pottery, and five features contained Saxo-Norman (10th – 12th century) pottery. A possible sunken featured building (SFB) was recorded in Trench 108. Many of the Saxon features were discrete features (pits) as opposed to linears, and they included a possible hearth (F1081 Trench 108) and a sunken featured building (SFB, Trench 108). Trenches 64, 83 – 84 and 108 - 109 which contained the discrete Saxon features were located in close proximity. Pit F1114, and from the surface of the SFB, produced the largest number of sherds (34 and 12 sherds respectively). CBM, animal bone and a ?rubbing stone were also found within Pit F1114. The Saxon features were recorded in the southern sector of the site and were located within the semi-circular `enclosure’ identified during the geophysical survey. F1053 (Trench 163) contained a sherd of medieval (12th – 13th century) pottery. 4 REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION STRATEGY COMPRISING EXCAVATION 4.1 All stages of the excavation will be carried out in accordance with the procedures and guidance contained within Management of Archaeological Projects 2, English Heritage (1991) and MoRPHE (2006). 5 MITIGATION STRATEGY DETAILS 5.1 Aims and Objectives 5.1.1 The primary objective is to preserve the archaeological evidence contained within the site by record and to attempt a reconstruction of the history and use of the site. 121 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 5.2 Research Priorities 5.2.1 Principally: • • • • 6 Place the activity in context with the known activity of these dates in the surrounding area Characterise the activity present within the site Identify topographical/geological/geographical influences on the layout and development of the activity present within the current site and in the surrounding area. Environmental reconstruction PROGRAMME OF WORKS Archaeological Excavation 6.1 The brief requires: Controlled strip, map and excavation of part of the Phase development area (Area A on the attached plan - extending to c.3.2ha) 6.2 The strip will be carried out under archaeological supervision. 6.3 Details of proposed work are presented below. 6.4 All of the above stages and operations will be carried out in accordance with MAP2 (EH 1991), MORPHE and the IFA Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Watching Briefs and Excavations (revised 2008), as well as the documents listed in Section 2 (above). A Method Statement for dealing with archaeological remains, if present, is presented below (Appendix B). 7 EXCAVATION METHODOLOGY 7.1 As set out in the brief. A Method Statement is presented (Appendix A). 7.2 The research design and details of proposed work amplify the methodology. 8 SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS 8.1 As set out in the brief. 8.2 The SCC AS attaches considerable importance to the public archaeology associated with the work. AS also has a commitment to educational work, and will arrange for outreach as required as part of the project. If practical, an Open Day will be arranged. Visits to local schools and a parish-based presentation of the archaeological remains may also be undertaken. 122 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 8.3 A programme of environmental sampling will be undertaken according to guidelines of the document Environmental Archaeology; A guide to the theory and practice of methods, from sampling and recovery to post-excavation, Centre for Archaeology Guidelines, English Heritage, 2011. The results of the project will be made known to the English Heritage Regional Advisor in Archaeological Science. A method statement for sampling and scientific analysis is presented (Appendix A). 9 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 9.1 STAFF 9.1.1 Archaeological Team As to be set out in the brief. Details, including the name, qualifications and experience of the site director and all other key project personnel are provided (as required) (Appendix B). Senior Project Manager Project Manager Project Officer Claire Halpin MIfA Jon Murray MIfA TBC All have extensive experience of the archaeology of the local area. All senior AS Field Staff have experience of the use of metal detectors during excavation projects. AS is recognised as an Investor in People, a Registered Organisation of the Institute of Field Archaeologists and is certified to BSI ISO: 9001 & 14001. 9.2 RESEARCH DESIGN 9.2.1 The previous archaeological evaluation of the site has revealed features of prehistoric and Saxon date. 9.2.2 The research priorities for the region are set out in Glazebrook (1997) and Brown & Glazebrook (2000) and updated by Medlycott and Brown (2008) and Medlycott (2011). The key issues for the Neolithic and Bronze Age (as set out by Brown & Murphy in Brown & Glazebrook 2000, 9-13) centre on the theme of the development of farming and the attendant development and integration of monuments, fields and settlements. Medlycott & Brown (2008) and Medlycott (2011, 13) suggest that future research on the Neolithic should include synthetic and regional studies for the region; an examination of the Mesolithic/Neolithic transition through radiocarbon dates; the establishment of a chronology for Neolithic ringditches; improved understanding of the chronological development of pottery; the excavation and study of cropmark complexes; greater understanding of burial practices; a study of the inter-relationships of settlements; greater use of scientific methods of dating and modelling of the environmental conditions during this period; targeted programmes of sedimentological, palynological and macrofossil analyses of 123 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 sediment sequences in valley bottoms, lakes or the intertidal zone; and the human impact on the natural landscape during this period. The nature of Neolithic burial in the region and the pattern of burial practice, including the relationship between settlement sites and burial, require further research. Settlement sites themselves also form part of an important research subject as there is a requirement to identify if a consensus exists on the subject of non-permanent settlement in the Neolithic (Medlycott 2011, 13). Further work on understanding the effects of plough damage on Neolithic sites is considered to be an important research subject for the region (Medlycott 2011, 13). 9.2.3 Inter-relationships between settlements and greater understanding of patterns of burial practice are important areas of research for the Bronze Age (Medlycott & Brown 2008). Medlycott (2011, 21) identifies artefact studies as of particular importance for the study of the Bronze Age in the region; the typological identification of later Bronze Age pottery linked to close radiocarbon dating, the further study of Bronze Age flintworking and the significance of hoarding and other depositional practices are all identified as being key research subjects. Artefact studies can contribute to the refinement of chronologies for the period and to an assessment of the reasons behind the marked divide in research results between the northern and southern parts of the region, which are identified by Medlycott (2011, 21) as important research areas. Like the Neolithic, sedimentological, palynological and macrofossil analyses of sediment sequences are considered to be important areas of research as are the effects of colluviation and the possibility that colluvial deposits mask some significant sites (Medlycott 2011, 21). 9.2.4 Research topics for the Iron Age set out by Bryant (in Brown & Glazebrook 2000, 14-18) include further research into chronologies, precise dating and ceramic assemblages, further research into the development of the agrarian economy (particularly with regard to field systems), research into settlement chronology and dynamics, research into processes of economic and social change during the late Iron Age and Romano-British transition (particularly with regard to the development of Aylesford/Swarling and Roman culture, and also regional differences and tribal polities in the late Iron Age and further research into oppida and ritual sites), further analysis of development of social organisation and settlement form/function in the early and middle Iron Age, further research into artefact production and distribution and the Bronze Age/Iron Age transition. Medlycott & Brown (2008) and Medlycott (2011, 29-32) build on these themes, paying particular attention to chronological and spatial development and variation and adding subjects as the Bronze Age/Iron Age transition and manufacturing and industry. 9.2.5 Research topics for the Iron Age set out by Bryant (in Brown & Glazebrook 2000, 14-18) include further research into chronologies, precise dating and ceramic assemblages, further research into the development of the agrarian economy (particularly with regard to field systems), research into settlement chronology and dynamics, research into processes of economic and social change during the late Iron Age and Romano-British transition (particularly with regard to the development of Aylesford/Swarling and Roman culture, and also regional differences and tribal polities in the late Iron Age and further research into oppida and ritual sites), further analysis of development of social organisation and settlement form/function in the early and middle Iron Age, further research into artefact production and distribution 124 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 and the Bronze Age/Iron Age transition. Medlycott & Brown (2008) and Medlycott (2011, 29-32) build on these themes, paying particular attention to chronological and spatial development and variation and adding subjects as the Bronze Age/Iron Age transition and manufacturing and industry. 9.2.6 Medlycott (2011, 47) identifies regional variation and tribal distinctions as underlying themes for research in the Roman period. Research topics for the Roman period previously set out by Going & Plouviez (in Brown & Glazebrook 2000, 19-22) include analysis of early and late Roman military developments, further analysis of large and small towns, evidence of food consumption and production, further research into agricultural production, landscape research (in particular further evidence for potential woodland succession/regression and issues of relict landscapes, as well as further research into the road network and bridging points), further research into rural settlements and coastal issues. Medlycott (2011, 47-48) states that these research areas remain valid and presents updated consideration of them. To these themes Medlycott & Brown (2008) and Medlycott (2011, 47-48) add rural settlements and landscapes, the process of Romanisation in the region, the evidence for the Imperial Fen Estate, and the Roman/Saxon transition. 9.2.7 Wade (in Brown & Glazebrook 2000, 23-26) identifies research topics for the rural landscape in the Saxon and medieval periods. These include examination of population during this period (distribution and density, as well as physical structure), settlement (characterisation of form and function, creation and testing of settlement diversity models), specialisation and surplus agricultural production, assessment of craft production, detailed study of changes in land use and the impact of colonists (such as Saxons, Danes and Normans) as well as the impact of the major institutions such as the Church. 9.2.8 Medlycott (2011, 57) states that he study of the Anglo-Saxon period still requires further cooperation between historians and archaeologists. Important research issues for this period comprise: the Roman/Anglo-Saxon transitional period; settlement distribution, which suffers from problems associated with the identification of Saxon settlement sites; population modelling and demographics, which has the potential to be advanced by modern scientific methods; differences within the region in terms of settlement type and economic practice and subjects related to this such as links with the continent, trading practices and cultural influences; rural landscapes and settlements, including detailed study of the changes and developments in such settlements over time and the influence of Saxon landscape organisation and settlements on these issues in the medieval period; towns and their relationships with their hinterland; infrastructure, including river management, the identification of ports and harbours and the role of existing infrastructure in shaping the Saxon period landscape; the economy, based on palaeoenvironmental studies; ritual and religion; the effect of the Danish occupation; and artefact studies (Medlycott 2011, 57-59). 9.2.9 The issues identified by Ayers (in Brown & Glazebrook, 2000) and Wade (in Brown & Glazebrook, 2000) remain valid research subjects (Medlycott 2011, 70) for the medieval period. The study of landscapes is dominated by issues such as water management and land reclamation for large parts of the region, the economic development of the landscape and the region’s potential to reveal information regarding field systems, enclosures, roads and trackways. Linked to the study of the 125 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 landscape are research issues such as the built environment and infrastructure; the main communication routes through the region need to be identified and synthesis needs to be carried out regarding the significance, economic and social importance of historic buildings in the region (Medlycott 2011, 70-71). Also considered to be important research subjects for the medieval period are rural settlements, towns, industry and the production and processing of food and demographic studies (Medlycott 2011, 70-71). References Egan, S., 2014. Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk. A Geophysical Survey. AS Report No. 4687 Medlycott, M. (ed.) 2011, Research and Archaeology revisited: a revised framework for the East of England, ALGAO East of England Region, East Anglian Archaeology Occasional Papers 24 Orzechowski, K & Thompson, P, 2015, Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk; Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation, AS Report 4743 10 DETAILS OF PROPOSED WORK 10.1 Areas of Excavation The brief requires formal archaeological excavation of the area shown on the attached plan. The excavation will address the research priorities listed above 10.2 Excavation Methodology Methodology for the excavation is contained in Appendix A. It is understood that the excavation should comprise the following stages: • • • • Mechanical stripping of topsoil and overburden within the defined area Cleaning/base planning of archaeological features Review with SCCAS. This will be an ongoing part of management of the project at regular intervals. Monitoring visits will include all phases of the excavation and will be essential at key points e.g. decisions to vary requirements in the brief or this WSI, any proposal for supplementary machine stripping of layers or features, before any area is treated as completed and backfilled or otherwise degraded. Full excavation and recording of the archaeological deposits as specified in the brief and Appendix A. The above will be carried out according the requirements of the document Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment. The MoRPHE Project Managers Guide (English Heritage 2006). 126 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 10.4 Arrangements for Access Access is to be arranged by the client. 10.5 Security Throughout all site works care will be taken to maintain all existing security arrangements and to minimise disruption to landowners and local residents. 10.6 Reinstatement No provision has been made for reinstatement of the excavation areas, not even backfilling. 10.7 TIMETABLE FOR THE PROPOSED WORK 10.7.1 As required Excavation Duration c. 6-8 weeks Composition of the excavation team: Project Officer, 9 Archaeological Excavators (to be deployed as necessary after the site has been stripped and planned). 10.8 10.8.1 10.9 DETAILS OF ALL SPECIALISTS Details of all specialists are presented (Appendix B) as required. METHOD OF RECORDING 10.9.1 Details of the method of recording are presented (Appendix A) as required. 10.10 LEVELS AND GRADES OF ALL KEY PROJECT STAFF 10.10.1 The levels and grades of all key project staff are presented (Appendix B) as required. AS is a recognised Investor in People. 10.11 POST-EXCAVATION ANALYSIS & PUBLICATION 10.11.1 This specification includes provision for the post-excavation assessment, analysis and final publication of the project results, to the requirements and timescales set out in the SCC AS brief, and to be agreed with SCC AS following the results of the excavation and assessment. An interim report will be prepared immediately on conclusion of the site works, followed by a Post-Excavation Assessment. This will follow the guidelines and format outlined in MAP2 (English Heritage 1991) and MoRPHE (English Heritage 2006). It is understood that SCC 127 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 AS-CT require the post-excavation work for this part of the site (including the 2014 evaluation results) to be treated separately from the subsequent phases of development. 10.11.2 Publication of the project results will be made in the appropriate county journal or the relevant national period-specific journal, depending on the results of the project. 11 CONSTRAINTS 11.1 All constraints will be identified prior to the start of works. 12 HUMAN REMAINS 12.1 As set out in the brief and also Appendix A. 13 RISK ASSESSMENT & INSURANCES 13.1 A risk assessment will be prepared prior to the commencement of the field work . 13.2 AS is a member of FAME, formerly the Standing Conference of Archaeological Unit Managers (SCAUM) and operates under the ‘Health & Safety in Field Archaeology Manual’. 13.3 AS is a member of the Council for British Archaeology and is insured under their policy for members. 14 ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE LONG DEPOSITION OF ALL ARTEFACTS TERM STORAGE AND 14.1 As set out in the brief and Method Statement (Appendix A). Any necessary conservation of items will be carried out by the specialists listed in Appendix B. Longterm storage and deposition of all artefacts will be at the SCC County Store and in accordance with Deposition of Archaeological Archives in Suffolk. 15 PROJECT ARCHIVE 15.1 The SCC County Store, Suffolk, will be the depository for the resulting project archive. The deposition of the archive will be agreed prior to the commencement of the fieldwork. A unique reference number will be obtained. 128 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 16 MONITORING 16.1 As set out in the brief 17 CHANGES TO THE SPECIFICATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SCCAS 17.1 As set out in the brief 18 OASIS REPORTING 18.1 The results of the project will be communicated to the OASIS project. 129 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 APPENDIX A METHOD STATEMENT The archaeological excavations will be conducted in accordance with the project brief, and the code and guidelines of the Institute for Archaeologists. 1 Topsoil Stripping 1.1 A mechanical excavator with a 1.8-2 m wide toothless bucket will be used to remove the topsoil. The machine will be powerful enough for a clean job of work and be able to mound spoil neatly, at a safe distance from the trench edges. 1.3 Removal of overburden will be controlled, under the full-time supervision of an experienced archaeologist. 2 Grid and Bench Marks 2.1 Following the stripping the temporary bench marks (with corrected levels) and an accurate site grid (pegs at 5-10 m intervals) will be surveyed. 3 Site Location Plan 3.1 On conclusion of the site stripping, a `site location plan', based on the current Ordnance Survey 1:1250 map and indicating site north, will be prepared. This will be supplemented by an `area plan' at 1:200 (or 1:100) which will show the location of the area(s) investigated in relationship to the development area, OS grid and site grid. The location of the OS bench marks used and site TBMs will also be indicated. 4 Manual Cleaning & Base Planning of Archaeological Features 4.1 As set out in the brief. 4.2 Ahead of any excavation a complete site plan will be composed. The principal purpose will be to quantify the composition of the site from the outset in order to agree a detailed excavation strategy. 5 Archaeological Excavation The archaeological features will be excavated according to the requirements of the SCCAS brief Archaeological Excavation Strategy Negative features will be half-sectioned and box sections may be excavated through more homogeneous layers as appropriate. These may provide a window into any underlying deposits present on the site. 130 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Where archaeological features are encountered at a ‘high’ level; e.g. cutting earlier horizons, they will be base planned, cleaned, hand excavated and recorded prior to excavation proceeding to the underlying archaeological horizons. 100% excavation will be undertaken of: • structural features; (including post holes unless clearly not part of a recognisable structure) • surviving internal floors; e.g. within ring gullies, or buildings, will be fully exposed, carefully cleaned, planned (at 1:50 or 1:20) and photographed, prior to being hand excavated to reveal possible underlying features. Where appropriate these surfaces will be excavated in a grid of 1m2 test pits, in 5cm spits in order to assess artefact density and distribution. • positive features obscuring earlier features; will be cleaned, photographed and planned (at 1:50 or 1:20) prior to being excavated stratigraphically and in phase. Component deposits or structural elements will be recorded on proforma recording (Context) sheets and in section if appropriate prior to 100% excavation. • hearths; will be hand cleaned and planned, hand excavation of 50% of the feature will be carried out stratigraphically and in phase in order for a profile to be drawn and a full assessment the component deposits be made. Additional environmental and specialist sampling will be carried out on specialist advice, prior to 100% hand excavation of the feature. • graves or animal burials; each grave cut will be cleaned, fully defined and planned. The grave fill(s) will be hand excavated in phase and any skeletal remains carefully cleaned and exposed; environmental bulk samples will be taken from the grave fill(s) and abdominal cavity (for stomach contents, kidney stones etc) as appropriate. The exposed skeletal remains will be recorded using pro forma recording (Skeleton) sheets photographed and planned at 1:20 or 1:10 dependant on size and complexity. Small finds such as grave goods, shroud pins or coffin fittings will be will be three dimensionally recorded. • industrial features; (pottery kilns, furnaces etc) will be excavated stratigraphically and in phase. Sections will be recorded through the length of each feature (large features such as a limekiln may be quadranted) incorporating any surviving flue or stoke hole allowing a full assessment the component deposits be made and any industrial waste, or structural components (e.g. kiln furniture, tuyeres) to be identified. These features will photographed and planned at 1:20. All industrial features will be sampled for appropriate scientific analysis (e.g. archaeometallurgical, artefactual and environmental analysis). The document Archaeomaetallurgy (English Heritage Centre for Archaeology Guidelines 2001) will be used to give guidance to the project. Advice on archaeomagnetic dating will be obtained from the relevant specialists (e.g. Dr Cathy Batt, University of Bradford) as necessary. 131 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 • wells; will be hand excavated stratigraphically and in phase. The backfills of the well shaft will be ‘half-sectioned’ to a maximum depth of 1.2m. The deposits revealed will be recorded using pro-forma recording (Context) sheets, photographed and drawn at 1:10 or 1:20 as appropriate, any lining or structure will be cleaned and recorded prior to 100% excavation and investigation of any possible construction cut. Excavation will only continue beyond a depth of 1.2m once the area of excavation has been made safe either by ‘stepping’ or shoring. Specialist advice (such as Maisie Taylor) will be sought if a preserved wooden lining or water-logged remains are encountered. 50% excavation will be undertaken of: discrete features, pits, post and stake holes (the latter which are clearly not part of a structure). Pits with a suggestion of ‘placed’ deposits or which contain significant artefactual/ecofactual assemblages will be 100% excavated as required 10% excavation will be undertaken of: simple linear features not directly associated with core settlement, with more detailed investigation of intersections/terminals/re-cuts/specialised deposits etc A minimum of 25% excavation will be undertaken of linear features associated with settlement in hand excavated slots up to 2m in length. Building remains Building remains may be encountered. These structures are likely to comprise stake holes, post holes, beam slots, gullies and, more rarely masonry foundations or low masonry walls. Associated features may be represented e.g. stone, tile floors, cobbled yard surfaces and hearths. These features will be fully excavated in plan/phase. Where encountered the structural remains of early buildings will be hand cleaned to reveal their full extent and then planned at 1:50 or 1:20 as appropriate. The internal areas will be stratigraphically excavated and recorded by quadrants where appropriate to establish the sequence of post-use deposition and abandonment and to identify any in situ occupation or floor surfaces. Any surviving walls or foundations of structures will be cleaned and recorded using pro forma recording (Masonry) sheets. Elevations will be drawn of external and internal wall faces as appropriate. Sections will be excavated and recorded through the fabric of the walls in order to fully understand their construction. Samples of worked stone, early tile and any bonding or render material will be taken for specialist analysis. 132 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Waterlogged Deposits/Remains Should deposits such as the above be encountered, provision has been made for controlled hand excavation and sampling. Appropriate specialists will be on hand to advise as necessary. All industrial features will be sampled for appropriate scientific analysis (eg archaeometallurgical, artefactual and environmental analysis). The document Archaeomaetallurgy (English Heritage Centre for Archaeology Guidelines 2001) will be used to give guidance to the project. Sieving Strategy Dry-sieving of onsite deposits will be carried out to enhance finds recovery. 6 Written Record 6.1 All archaeological deposits and artefacts encountered during the course of the excavation will be fully recorded on the appropriate context, finds and sample forms. 6.2 The site will be recorded using AS's excavation manual which is directly comparable to those used by other professional archaeological organisations, including English Heritage's own Central Archaeological Service. Information contained on the site record forms will be entered into a database programme to enable computerised manipulation of the data. The data entry will be undertaken in tandem with the fieldwork. 7 Photographic Record 7.1 An adequate photographic record of the investigations will be made. It will include black and white prints and colour transparencies (on 35mm) illustrating in both detail and general context the principal features and finds discovered. It will also include ‘working and promotional shots’ to illustrate more generally the nature of the archaeological operations. The black and white negatives and contacts will be filed, and the colour transparencies will be mounted using appropriate cases. All photographs will be listed and indexed. 8 Drawn Record 8.1 A record of the full extent, in plan, of all archaeological deposits encountered will be drawn on A1 permatrace. The plans will be related to the site, or OS, grid and be drawn at a scale of 1:50. Where appropriate, e.g. recording an inhumation, additional plans at 1:10 will be produced. The sections of all archaeological contexts will be drawn at a scale of 1:10 or, where appropriate, 1:20. The OD height of all principal strata and features will be calculated and indicated on the appropriate plans and sections. 133 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 9 Recovery of Finds GENERAL The principal aim is to ensure that adequate provision is made for the recovery of finds from all archaeological deposits. The Small Finds, e.g. complete pots or metalwork, from all excavations will be 3Dimensionally recorded. A metal detector will be used to enhance finds recovery. The metal detector survey will be conducted on conclusion of the topsoil stripping, and thereafter during the course of the excavation. The spoil tips will also be surveyed. Regular metal detector surveys of the excavation area and spoil tips will reduce the loss of finds to unscrupulous users of metal detectors (treasure hunters). All nonarchaeological staff working on the site should be informed that the use of metal detectors is forbidden. WORKED FLINT When flint knapping debris is encountered large-scale bulk samples will be taken for sieving. POTTERY It is important that the excavators are aware of the importance of pottery studies and therefore the recovery of good ceramic assemblages. A Roman ceramic specialist will visit during the excavations as required, to provide on-site advice. The pottery assemblages are likely to provide important evidence to be able to date the structural history and development of the site. The most important assemblages will come from ‘sealed’ deposits which are representative of the nature of the occupation at various dates, and indicate a range of pottery types and forms available at different periods. ‘Primary’ deposits are those which contain sherds contemporary with the soil fill and in simple terms this often means large sherds with unabraded edges. The sherds have usually been deposited shortly after being broken and have remained undisturbed. Such sherds are more reliable in indicating a more precise date at which the feature was ‘in use’. Conversely, ‘secondary’ deposits are those which often have small, heavily abraded sherds lacking obvious conjoins. The sherds are derived from earlier deposits. The pottery specialist is likely to seek important or key groups which will be studied in detail. If several sherds from a single pot are found, the other half of the feature will be dug to obtain conjoins and a more complete pottery profile. 134 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 METALWORKING The excavation team will be made fully aware of the potential presence of any early metalworking evidence. It is envisaged that where there is evidence for industrial activity, large technological residues will be collected by hand. Separate smaller samples will be collected for micro-slags, as detailed in the EH/HMS Archaeometallurgy in Archaeological Projects, Centre for Archaeology Guidelines 2001. Appropriate specialists (e.g. Jane Cowgill/Oxford University Research Laboratory for Archaeology) will be invited to visit the site if significant deposits (e.g. slag) are encountered. The requirements of the Treasure Act 1996 (with subsequent amendments) will be adhered to, in the event of significant items of metalwork being recovered. HUMAN BONE If human remains are encountered, AS will obtain an exhumation licence for human remains from the Ministry of Justice. Post-excavation analysis will follow the guidelines outlined in the English Heritage document Human Bones from Archaeological Sites, Guidelines for producing assessment documents and analytical reports, Centre for Archaeology Guidelines 2002. ANIMAL BONE Animal bone is one of the principal indicators of diet. As with pottery the excavators will be alert to the distinction of primary and secondary deposits. It will also be important that the bone assemblages are derived from dateable contexts. SAMPLING Provision will be made for the sampling of appropriate materials for specialist and/or scientific analysis (e.g. radiocarbon dating, environmental analysis). The location of samples will be 3-dimensionally recorded and they will also be shown on an appropriate plan. AS has its own environmental sampling equipment (including a pump and transformer) and, if practical, provision will be made to process the soil samples during the fieldwork stage of the project. The programme of environmental sampling will adhere to the guidelines, in particular, it will accord with Model clauses on Archaeological Science for Briefs and Specifications (EH Advisors for Archaeological Science from all 9 regions), December 2000 and the document Environmental Archaeology; a guide to the theory and practice of methods, from sampling and recovery to post-excavation, English Heritage, Centre for Archaeology Guidelines 2011. If waterlogged remains are found advice on sampling will be obtained on site from Dr Rob Scaife. Dr Rob Scaife and AS will seek advice from the EH Regional Scientific Advisor if significant environmental remains are found. 135 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 The study of environmental archaeology seeks to understand the local and nearlocal environment of the site in relation to phases of human activity and as such is an important and integral part of any archaeological study. The evaluation report notes the potential of deposits within the site for the preservation of charred plant remains. Environmental remains, both faunal and botanical, along with pedological and sedimentological analyses may be used to understand the environment and the impact of human activity. There may be a potential for the recovery of a range of environmental remains (ecofacts) from which data pertaining to past environments, land use and agricultural economy should be forthcoming. To realise the potential of the environmental material encountered, a range of specialists from different disciplines is likely to be required. The ultimate goal will be the production of an interdisciplinary environmental study which can be of value to an understanding of, and integrated with, the archaeology. Organic remains may allow study of the contemporary landscape (Romano-British occupation/industrial/agricultural impact and land use) and also changes after the abandonment of the site. The nature of the environmental evidence Aspects of sampling and analysis may be divided into four broad categories; faunal remains, botanical remains, soils/sediments and radiocarbon dating measurements. a) Faunal remains: molluscs and insects. These comprise bones of macro and microfauna, birds, a.i) Bones: The study of the animal bone remains, in particular domestic mammals, domestic birds and marine fish will enhance understanding of the development of the settlement in terms of the local economy and also its wider influence through trade. The study of the small animal bones will provide insight into the immediate habitat of any settlement. The areas of study covered may include all of the domestic mammal and bird species, wild and harvested mammal, birds, marine and fresh water fish in addition to the small mammals, non-harvest birds, reptiles and amphibia. Domestic mammalian stock, domestic birds and harvest fish The domestic animal bone will provide insight into the different phases of development of any occupation and how the population dealt with the everyday aspect of managing and utilising all aspects of the animal resource. Small animal bones Archaeological excavation has a wide role in understanding humans’ effect on the countryside, the modifications to which have in turn affected and continue to affect 136 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 their own existence. Small animals provide information about changing habitats and thereby about human impact on the local environment. a.ii) Molluscs: Freshwater and terrestrial molluscs may be present in ditch and pit contexts which are encountered. Sampling and examination of molluscan assemblages if found will provide information on the local site environment including environment of deposition. a.iii) Insects: If suitable waterlogged contexts (pit, pond and ditch fills) are encountered (which can potentially be expected to be encountered on the project), sampling and assessment will be carried out in conjunction with the analysis of waterlogged plant remains (primarily seeds) and molluscs. Insect data may provide information on local site environment (cleanliness etc.) as well as proxies for climate and vegetation communities. b) Botanical remains: Sampling for seeds, wood, pollen and seeds are the essential elements which will be considered. The former are most likely to be charred but possibly also waterlogged should any wells/ponds be encountered. b.i) Pollen analysis: Sampling and analysis of the primary fills and any stabilisation horizons in ditch and pit contexts which may provide information on the immediate vegetation environment including aspects of agriculture, food and subsistence. These data will be integrated with seed analysis. b.ii) Seeds: It is anticipated that evidence of cultivated crops, crop processing debris and associated weed floras will be present in ditches and pits. If waterlogged features/sediments are encountered (for example, wells/ponds) these will be sampled in relation to other environmental elements where appropriate (particularly pollen, molluscs and possibly insects). c) Soils and Sediments: Characterisation of the range of sediments, soils and the archaeological deposits are regarded as crucial to and an integral part of all other aspects of environmental sampling. This is to afford primary information on the nature and possible origins of the material sampled. It is anticipated that a range of 'on-site' descriptions will be made and subsequent detailed description and analysis of the principal monolith and bulk samples obtained for other aspects of the environmental investigation. Where considered necessary, laboratory analyses such as loss on ignition and particle size may also be undertaken. A geoarchaeologist will be invited to visit the site as necessary to advise on sampling. d) Radiocarbon dating: Archaeological/artifactual dating may be possible for most of the contexts examined, but radiocarbon dating should not be ruled out Sampling strategies Provision will be made by the environmental co-ordinator that suitable material for analysis will be obtained. Samples will be obtained which as far as possible will meet the requirements of the assessment and any subsequent analysis. 137 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 a) Soil and Sediments: Samples taken will be examined in detail in the laboratory. An overall assessment of potential will be carried out. Analysis of particle size and loss on ignition, if required would be undertaken as part of full analysis if assessment demonstrates that such studies would be of value. b) Pollen Analysis: Contexts which require sampling may include stabilisation horizons and the primary fills of the pits and ditches, and possibly organic well/pond fills. It is anticipated that in some cases this will be carried out in conjunction with sampling for other environmental elements, such as plant macrofossils, where these are also felt to be of potential. c) Plant Macrofossils: Principal contexts will be sampled directly from the excavation for seeds and associated plant remains. It is anticipated that primarily charred remains will be recovered, although provision for any waterlogged sequences will also be made (see below). Sampling for the former will, where possible (that is, avoiding contamination) comprise samples of an average of 40-60 litres which will be floated in the AS facilities for extraction of charred plant remains. Both the flot and residues will be kept for assessment of potential and stored for any subsequent detailed analysis. The residues will also be examined for artifactual remains and also for any faunal remains present (cf. molluscs). Where pit, ditch, well or pond sediments are found to contain waterlogged sediments, principal contexts will be sampled for seeds and insect remains. Standard 5 litre+ samples will be taken which may be sub-sampled in the laboratory for seed remains if the material is found to be especially rich. The full sample will provide sufficient material for insect assessment and analysis. Where wood is found, representative material will be sampled during the excavation and stored wet/moist to facilitate later identification. d) Bones: Predicting exactly how much of what will be yielded by the excavation is clearly very difficult prior to excavation and it is proposed that in order to efficiently target animal bone recovery there should be a system of direct feedback from the archaeozoologist to the site staff during the excavation, allowing fine tuning of the excavation strategy to concentrate on the recovery of animal bones from features which have the highest potential. This will also allow the faunal remains to materially add to the interpretation as the excavation proceeds. Liaison with other environmental specialists will need to take place in order to produce a complete interdisciplinary study during this phase of activity. In addition, this feedback will aid effective targeting of the post-excavation analysis. e) Insects: If contexts having potential for insect preservation are found, samples will be taken in conjunction with waterlogged plant macrofossils. Samples of 5 litres will suffice for analysis and will be sampled adjacent to waterlogged seed samples and pollen; or where insufficient context material is available provision will be made for exchange of material between specialists. f) Molluscs: Terrestrial and freshwater molluscs. Samples will be taken from a column from suitable ditches. Pits may be sampled, based on the advice of the Environmental Consultant and / or English Heritage Regional Advisor. Provision will also be made for molluscs obtained from other sampling aspects (seeds) to be examined and/or kept for future requirements. 138 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 g) Archiving: Environmental remains obtained should be stored in conditions appropriate for analysis in the short to medium term, that is giving the ability for full analysis at a later date without any degradation of samples being analysed. The results will be maintained as an archive at AS and supplied to the EH regional coordinator as requested. Waterlogged Deposits/Remains Should waterlogged deposits (such as wells/deep ditches) be encountered, provision has been made for controlled hand excavation and sampling. Dr Rob Scaife will visit to advise of sampling as required, and AS will take monolith samples as necessary for the recovery of palaeoenvironmental information and dating evidence. Scientific/Absolute Dating • Samples will be obtained for potential scientific/absolute dating as appropriate (eg Carbon-14). This will allow ‘rangefinder’ dates for key strategic units at assessment stage as necessary, with provision for further dating for full analysis, by agreement with SCC AS-CT) FINDS PROCESSING The Project Manager (and Project Officer) will have overall responsibility for the finds and will liaise with AS's own finds personnel and the relevant specialists. A person with particular responsibility for finds on site will be appointed for the excavation. The person will ensure that the finds are properly labelled and packaged on site for transportation to AS’s field base. The finds processing will take place in tandem with the excavations and will be under the supervision of AS’s Finds Officer. The finds processing will entail first aid conservation, cleaning (if appropriate), marking (if appropriate), categorising, bagging, labelling, boxing and basic cataloguing (the compilation of a Small Finds Catalogue and quantification of bulk finds), i.e., such that the finds are ready to be made available to the specialists. The Finds Officer, having been advised by the Project Officer and relevant specialists, will select material for conservation. AS’s Finds Officer, in conjunction with the Project Officer, will arrange for the specialists to view the finds for the purpose of report writing. 139 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 APPENDIX B ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS: PROFILES OF KEY STAFF & SPECIALISTS DIRECTOR Claire Halpin BA MIfA Qualifications: Archaeology & History BA Hons (1974-77). Oxford University Dept for External Studies In-Service Course (1979-1980). Member of Institute of Archaeologists since 1985: IFA Council member (1989-1993) Experience: Claire has 25 years’ experience in field archaeology, working with the Oxford Archaeological Unit and English Heritage's Central Excavation Unit (now the Centre for Archaeology). She has directed several major excavations (e.g. Barrow Hills, Oxfordshire, and Irthlingborough Barrow Cemetery, Northants), and is the author of many excavation reports e.g. St Ebbe's, Oxford: Oxoniensia 49 (1984) and 54 (1989). Claire moved into the senior management of field archaeological projects with Hertfordshire Archaeological Trust (HAT) in 1990, and she was appointed Manager of HAT in 1996. From the mid 90s HAT has enlarged its staff complement and extended its range of skills. In July 2003 HAT was wound up and Archaeological Solutions was formed. The latter maintains the same staff complement and services as before. AS undertakes the full range of archaeological services nationwide. DIRECTOR Tom McDonald MIfA Qualifications: Member of the IfA Experience: Tom has twenty years’ experience in field archaeology, working for the NorthEastern Archaeological Unit (1984-1985), Buckinghamshire County Museum (1985), English Heritage (Stanwick Roman villa (1985-87) and Irthlingborough barrow excavations, Northamptonshire (1987)), and the Museum of London on the Royal Mint excavations (19867)., and as a Senior Archaeologist with the latter (1987-Dec 1990). Tom joined HAT at the start of 1991, directing several major multi-period excavations, including excavations in advance of the A41 Kings Langley and Berkhamsted bypasses, the A414 Cole Green bypass, and a substantial residential development at Thorley, Bishop’s Stortford. He is the author of many excavation reports, exhibitions etc. Tom is AS’s Health and Safety Officer and is responsible for site management, IT and CAD. He specialises in prehistoric and urban archaeology, and is a Lithics Specialist. OFFICE MANAGER Rose Flowers Experience: Rose has a very wide range of book-keeping skills developed over many years of employment with a range of companies, principally Rosier Distribution Ltd, Harlow (now part of Securicor) where she managed eight accounts staff. She has a good working knowledge of both accounting software and Microsoft Office. OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR Sarah Powell Experience: Sarah is an experienced and efficient administrative assistant with more than ten years’ experience of working in a variety of office environments. She is IT literate and proficient in the use of Microsoft Word, particularly Microsoft Excel. She has completed NVQ 2 & 3 in Administration and Office Skills. She recently attended and completed a course in Microsoft Excel – Advanced Level. 140 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 SENIOR PROJECTS MANAGER Jon Murray BA MIfA Qualifications: History with Landscape Archaeology BA Hons (1985-1988). Experience: Jon has been employed by HAT (now AS) continually since 1989, attaining the position of Senior Projects Manager. Jon has conducted numerous archaeological investigations in a variety of situations, dealing with remains from all periods, throughout London and the South East, East Anglia, the South and Midlands. He is fluent in the execution of (and now projectmanaes) desk-based assessments/EIAs, historic building surveys (for instance the recording of the Royal Gunpowder Mills at Waltham Abbey prior to its rebirth as a visitor facility), earthwork and landscape surveys, all types of evaluations/excavations (urban and rural) and environmental archaeological investigation (working closely with Dr Rob Scaife), preparing many hundreds of archaeological reports dating back to 1992. Jon has also prepared numerous publications; in particular the nationally-important Saxon site at Gamlingay, Cambridgeshire (Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology & History). Other projects published include Dean’s Yard, Westminster (Medieval Archaeology), Brackley (Northamptonshire Archaeology), and a medieval cemetery in Haverhill he excavated in 1997 (Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology). Jon is a member of the senior management team, principally preparing specifications/tenders, co-ordinating and managing the field teams. He also has extensive experience in preparing and supporting applications for Scheduled Monument Consent/Listed Building Consent PROJECT OFFICER Zbigniew Pozorski MA Qualifications: University of Wroclaw, Poland, Archaeology (1995-2000, MA 2003) Experience: Zbigniew has archaeological experience dating from 1995 when as a student he joined an academic group of excavators. He was involved in numerous archaeological projects throughout the Lower Silesia region in southwest Poland and a number of projects in old town of Wroclaw. During his university years he specialized in medieval urban archaeology. He had his own research project working on an early/high medieval stronghold in Pietrzykow. He was a member of a University team which located and Excavated an unknown high medieval castle in Wierzbna, Poland. Zbigniew has worked for archaeological contractors in Poland on several projects as a supervisor where he gained experience in all types of evaluations and excavations in urban and rural areas. Recently he worked in Ireland where he completed two large long-term projects for Headland Archaeology Ltd. He joined AS in January 2008 as a Project Officer. Zbigniew is qualified in the Construction Skills Certification Scheme (CSCS) and is a qualified in First Aid at Work (St Johns Ambulance). SUPERVISOR Gareth Barlow MSc Qualifications: University of Sheffield, MSc Environmental Archaeology & Palaeoeconomy (2002-2003) King Alfred’s College, Winchester, Archaeology BA (Hons) (1999-2002) Experience: Gareth worked on a number of excavations in Cambridgeshire before pursuing his degree studies, and worked on many archaeological projects across the UK during his university days. Gareth joined AS in 2003 and has worked on numerous archaeological projects throughout the South East and East Anglia with AS. Gareth was promoted to Supervisor in the Summer 2007. Gareth is qualified in the Construction Skills Certification Scheme (CSCS) and is a qualified in First Aid at Work (St Johns Ambulance). 141 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 SUPERVISOR Kamil Orzechowski BA, MA Experience: Kamil Orzechowski joined AS in 2012, as an experienced field archaeologist after spending five years in various commercial archaeology units working on large-scale construction projects including railways and pipelines. Before becoming a field archaeologist, Kamil graduated from the Institute of Ethnology and Cultural Anthropology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland. Kamil is qualified in the Construction Skills Certification Scheme (CSCS). SUPERVISOR James Earley Experience: James’ site experience dates from 2002 – 2006 when he was a Project Assistant with Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service. From Suffolk he was an Archaeological Officer with Thames Valley Archaeological Service (2006 – 2013), and more recently the University of Leicester Archaeological Service. James has over 10 years’ field experience on both urban and rural sites. He has supervised staff, supervised topsoil and subsoil stripping for evaluations and excavations, and has surveyed sites using both GPS and Total Station. SUPERVISOR Julie Walker BSc MA PIfA Qualifications: Queens University Belfast: BSc Archaeology (2007-2010) University of Southampton: MA Osteoarchaeology (2010-2011) Experience: Julie is a member of the Institute for Archaeologists (PIfA grade) and the British Association for Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology. Professionally, Julie has worked for organisations including Albion Archaeology (2014) and Oxford Archaeology East (2014). Julie has a thorough knowledge and experience of archaeological fieldwork and post-excavation practice. Julie’s personal research interests include congenital and developmental defects in the Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon periods and she has made several conference presentations on this subject. SUPERVISOR Matthew Baker BA MA Qualifications: Cardiff University: BA Archaeology (2008-2011) Cardiff University: MA Archaeology (2012-2013) Experience: Since concluding his higher education, Matthew has worked for a number of archaeological projects and organisations including GeoArch (Cardiff), the Damerham Archaeology Project and Cambridge University. He has a gained a varied experience of archaeological fieldwork and post-excavation practice including geophysical survey/ interpretation and isotopic analysis. SUPERVISOR Kerrie Bull BSc Qualifications: University of Reading: BSc Archaeology (2008-2011) Experience: During her undergraduate degree at the University of Reading Kerrie worked on the Lyminge Archaeological Project (2008), the Silchester ‘Town Life’ Project (2009) and the Ecology of Crusading Research Programme (2011). Through her academic and professional career, Kerrie has gained good experience of archaeological fieldwork and post-excavation techniques. 142 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 SUPERVISOR Thomas Muir BA MSc Qualifications: University of Edinburgh: BA Archaeology (2007-2011) University of Edinburgh: MSc Mediterranean Archaeology (2011-2012) Experience: Thomas is an affiliate member of the Institute for Archaeologists. Throughout his higher education, Thomas volunteered on research excavations at sites including Port Sec Sud, Bourges (France; 2008), the Hill of Barra (the Hillforts of Strathdon Project; 2010) and Prastio Mesorotsos, Cyprus (2010-2012). In 2013 Thomas returned to Prastio Mesorotsos – a research project run by the Cyprus American Archaeological Institute – in a supervisory capacity. Professionally, Thomas has worked for CFA Archaeology (2013) and thereafter AS Ltd. Through his academic and professional career, Thomas has gained a broad working knowledge of archaeological fieldwork and post-excavation techniques including environmental sampling, on-site recording and digital archiving. SUPERVISOR Vincent Monahan BA Qualifications: University College Dublin: BA Archaeology (2007-2012) Experience: Professionally, Vincent has worked for various archaeological groups and projects including the Stonehenge Riverside Project (Site Assistant/ Supervisor; 2008), University College Dublin Archaeological Society (Auditor; 2009-2010) and the Castanheiro do Vento Research Project (Site Assistant/ Supervisor; 2009-2010 (seasonal)). Vincent has gained good experience of archaeological fieldwork including excavation, various sampling techniques and on-site recording. He also gained experience of museum-grade curatorial practice during his undergraduate degree. PROJECT OFFICER (DESK-BASED ASSESSMENTS) Kate Higgs MA (Oxon) Qualifications: University of Oxford, St Hilda’s College Archaeology & Anthropology MA (Oxon) (2001-2004) Experience: Kate has archaeological experience dating from 1999, having taken part in clearance, surveying and recording of stone circles in the Penwith area of Cornwall. During the same period, she also assisted in compiling a database of archaeological and anthropological artefacts from Papua New Guinea, which were held in Scottish museums. Kate has varied archaeological experience from her years at Oxford University, including participating in excavations at a Roman amphitheatre and an early church at Marcham/ Frilford in Oxfordshire, with the Bamburgh Castle Research Project in Northumberland, which also entailed the excavation of human remains at a Saxon cemetery, and also excavating, recording and drawing a Neolithic chambered tomb at Prissé, France. Kate has also worked in the environmental laboratory at the Museum of Natural History in Oxford, and as a finds processor for Oxford’s Institute of Archaeology. Since joining AS in November 2004, Kate has researched and authored a variety of reports, concentrating on desk-based assessments in advance of archaeological work and historic building recording. ASSISTANT PROJECTS MANAGER (POST-EXCAVATION) Andrew Newton MPhil PIFA Qualifications: University of Bradford, MPhil (2002-04) University of Bradford, BSc (Hons) Archaeology (1998-2002) University of Bradford, Dip Professional Archaeological Studies (2002) Experience: Andrew has carried out geophysical surveys for GeoQuest Associates on sites throughout the UK and has worked as a site assistant with BUFAU. During 2001 he worked as a researcher for the Yorkshire Dales Hunter-Gatherer Research Project, a University of Bradford and Michigan State University joint research programme, and has 143 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 carried out voluntary work with the curatorial staff at Beamish Museum in County Durham. Andrew is a member of the Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle-upon-Tyne and a Practitioner Member of the Institute for Archaeologists. Since joining AS in early Summer 2005, as a Project Officer writing desk-based assessments, Andrew has gained considerable experience in post-excavation work. His principal role with AS is conducting post-excavation research and authoring site reports for publication. Significant postexcavation projects Andrew has been responsible for include the Ingham Quarry Extension, Fornham St. Genevieve, Suffolk – a site with large Iron Age pit clusters arranged around a possible wetland area; the late Bronze Age to early Iron Age enclosure and early Saxon cremation cemetery at the Chalet Site, Heybridge, Essex; and, Church Street, St Neots, Cambridgeshire, an excavation which identified the continuation of the Saxon settlement previously investigated by Peter Addyman in the 1960s. Andrew also writes and co-ordinates EnvironmentalImpact Assessments and has worked on a variety of such projects across southern and eastern England. In addition to his research responsibilities Andrew undertakes outreach and publicity work and carries out some fieldwork. PROJECT OFFICER (POST-EXCAVATION) Antony Mustchin BSc MSc DipPAS Qualifications: University of Bradford BSc (Hons) Bioarchaeology (1999-2003) University of Bradford MSc Biological Archaeology (2004-2005) University of Bradford Diploma in Professional Archaeological Studies (2003) Experience: Antony has over 14 years’ experience in field archaeology, gained during his higher education and in the professional sector. Commercially in the UK, Antony has worked for Archaeology South East (2003), York Archaeological Trust (2004) and Special Archaeological Services (2003). He has also undertaken a six-month professional placement as Assistant SMR Officer/ Development Control Officer with Kent County Council (20012002). Antony’s academic interests have led to his gaining considerable research excavation experience across the North Atlantic region. He has worked for projects and organisations including the Old Scatness & Jarlshof Environs Project, Shetland (2000-2003), the Viking Unst Project, Shetland (2006-2007), the Heart of the Atlantic Project Føroys Fornminnissavn, Faroe Islands (2006-2008) and City University New York/ National Museum of Denmark/ Greenland National Museum and Archives, Greenland (2006 & 2010). Shortly before Joining Archaeological Solutions in November 2011, Antony spent three years working for the Independent Commission for the Location of Victims Remains, assisting in the search for and forensic recovery of ‘the remains of victims of paramilitary violence (“The Disappeared”) who were murdered and buried in secret arising from the conflict in Northern Ireland’. Antony has a broad experience of fieldwork and post-excavation practice including specialist (archaeofauna), teaching, supervisory and directing-level posts. POTTERY, LITHICS AND CBM RESEARCHER Andrew Peachey BA MIfA Qualifications: University of Reading BA Hons, Archaeology and History (1998-2001) Experience: Andrew joined AS (formerly HAT) in 2002 as a pottery researcher, and rapidly expanded into researching CBM and lithics. Andrew specialises in prehistoric and Roman pottery and has worked on numerous substantial assemblages, principally from across East Anglia but also from southern England. Recent projects have included a Neolithic site at Coxford, Norfolk, an early Bronze Age domestic site at Shropham, Norfolk, late Bronze Age material from Panshanger, Hertfordshire, middle Iron Age pit clusters at Ingham, Suffolk and an Iron Age and early Roman riverside site at Dernford, Cambridgshire. Andrew has worked on important Roman kiln assemblages, including a Nar Valley ware production site at East Winch Norfolk, a face-pot producing kiln at Hadham, Hertfordshire and is currently researching early Roman Horningsea ware kilns at Waterbeach, Cambridgeshire. Andrew is an enthusiastic member of the Study Group for Roman Pottery, and also undertakes pottery 144 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 and lithics analysis as an ‘external’ specialist for a range of archaeological units and local societies in the south of England. POTTERY RESEARCHER Peter Thompson MA Qualifications: University of Bristol BA (Hons), Archaeology (1995-1998) University of Bristol MA; Landscape Archaeology (1998-1999) Experience: As a student, Peter participated in a number of projects, including the excavation of a Cistercian monastery cemetery in Gascony and surveying an Iron Age promontory hillfort in Somerset. Peter has two years excavation experience with the Bath Archaeological Trust and Bristol and Region Archaeological Services which includes working on a medieval manor house and a post-medieval glass furnace site of national importance. Peter joined HAT (now AS) in 2002 to specialise in Iron Age, Saxon and medieval pottery research and has also produced desk-based assessments. Pottery reports include an early Iron pit assemblage and three complete Early Anglo-Saxon accessory vessels from a cemetery in Dartford, Kent. PROJECT OFFICER (OSTEOARCHAEOLOGY) Dr Julia Cussans Qualifications: University of Bradford, PhD (2002-2010) University of Bradford, BSc (Hons) Bioarchaeology (1997-2001) University of Bradford, Dip. Professional Archaeological Studies (2001) Experience: Julia has over 14 years of archaeozoological experience. Whilst undertaking her part time PhD she also worked as a specialist on a variety of projects in northern Britain including Old Scatness (Shetland), Broxmouth Iron Age Hillfort and Binchester Roman Fort. Additionally Julia has extensive field experience and has held lead roles in excavations in Shetland and the Faroe Islands including, Old Scatness, a large multi-period settlement centred on an Iron Age Broch; the Viking Unst Project, an examination of Viking and Norse houses on Britain’s most northerly isle; the Laggan Tormore Pipeline (Firths Voe), a Neolithic house site in Shetland; the Heart of the Atlantic Project, an examination of Viking settlement in the Faroes and Við Kirkjugarð, an early Viking site on Sanday, Faroe Islands. Early on in her career Julia also excavated at Sedgeford, Norfolk as part of SHARP and in Pompeii, Italy as part of the Anglo-American Project in Pompeii. Since joining AS in October 2011 Julia has worked on animal bone assemblages from Beck Row, a Roman agricultural site at Mildenhall, Suffolk and Sawtry, an Iron Age, fen edge site in Cambridgeshire. Julia is a full and active member of the International Council for Archaeozoology, the Professional Zooarchaeology Group and the Association for Environmental Archaeology. ENVIRONMENTAL ARCHAEOLOGIST Dr John Summers Qualifications: 2006-2010: PhD “The Architecture of Food” (University of Bradford) 2005-2006: MSc Biological Archaeology (University of Bradford) 2001-2005: BSc Hons. Bioarchaeology (University of Bradford) Experience: John is an archaeobotanist with a primary specialism in the analysis of carbonised plant macrofossils and charcoal. Prior to joining Archaeological Solutions, John worked primarily in Atlantic Scotland. His research interests involve using archaeobotanical data in combination with other archaeological and palaeoeconomic information to address cultural and economic research questions. John has made contributions to a number of large research projects in Atlantic Scotland, including the Old Scatness and Jarlshof Environs Project (University of Bradford), the Viking Unst Project (University of Bradford) and publication work for Bornais Mound 1 and Mound 2 (Cardiff University). He has also worked with plant remains from Thruxton Roman Villa, Hampshire, as part of the Danebury Roman 145 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 Environs Project (Oxford University/ English Heritage). John’s role at AS is to analyse and report on assemblages of plant macro-remains from environmental samples and provide support and advice regarding environmental sampling regimes and sample processing. John is a member of the Association for Environmental Archaeology. SENIOR GRAPHICS OFFICER Kathren Henry Experience: Kathren has over twenty-five years’ experience in archaeology, working as a planning supervisor on sites from prehistoric to late medieval date, including urban sites in London and rural sites in France/ Italy, working for the Greater Manchester Archaeological Unit, Passmore Edwards Museum, DGLA and Central Excavation Unit of English Heritage (at Stanwick and Irthlingborough, Northamptonshire). She has worked with AS (formerly HAT) since 1992, becoming Senior Graphics Officer. Kathren is AS’s principal photographer, specializing in historic building survey, and she manages AS’s photographic equipment and dark room. She is in charge of AS’s Graphics Department, managing computerised artwork and report production. Kathren is also the principal historic building surveyor/illustrator, producing on-site and off-site plans, elevations and sections. HISTORIC BUILDING RECORDING Tansy Collins BSc Qualifications: University of Sheffield, Archaeological Sciences BSc (Hons) (1999-2002) Experience: Tansy’s archaeological experience has been gained on diverse sites throughout England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Tansy joined AS in 2004 where she developed skills in graphics, backed by her grasp of archaeological interpretation and on-site experience, to produce hand drawn illustrations of pottery, and digital illustrations using a variety of packages such as AutoCAD, Corel Draw and Adobe Illustrator. She joined the historic buildings team in 2005 in order to carry out both drawn and photographic surveys of historic buildings before combining these skills with authoring historic building reports in 2006. Since then Tansy has authored numerous such reports for a wide range of building types; from vernacular to domestic architecture, both timber-framed and brick built with date ranges varying from the medieval period to the 20th century. These projects include a number of regionally and nationally significant buildings, for example a previously unrecognised medieval aisled barn belonging to a small group of nationally important agricultural buildings, one of the earliest surviving domestic timber framed houses in Hertfordshire, and a Cambridgeshire house retaining formerly hidden 17th century decorative paint schemes. Larger projects include The King Edward VII Sanatorium in Sussex, RAF Bentley Priory in London as well as the Grade I Listed Balls Park mansion in Hertfordshire. FINDS AND ARCHIVE ASSISTANT Adam Leigh Experience: Adam joined AS in January 2012. In his time with the company he has helped process hundreds of finds from a variety of sites going on to concord them. Adam has helped prepare a large number of sites for deposition with museums making sure that the finds are prepared in strict accordance with the guidelines and requirements laid out by the receiving museum. ASSISTANT ARCHIVES OFFICER Karen Cleary Experience: Karen started her administrative career as Youth Training Administrator for a training company (TSMA Ltd) in 1993, where she provided administrative support for NVQ Assessors’ of trainees and apprentices on the youth training scheme and in work 146 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 placements they'd helped set up. Amongst her administrative duties she was principally in charge of preparing the Training Credits Claims and sending off for government funding. She gained NVQ's Level’s 2 and 3 in Administration whilst working in this role. Karen started out with AS as Office Assistant in February 2009 and within a few months was promoted to Archives Assistant. Principally her role involves the preparation of Archaeological archives for long term deposition with museums. She has developed a good understanding of the preparation process and follows each individual museum's guidelines closely. She has a good working knowledge of Microsoft Office and is competent with FileZilla- Digital File Transfer software and Fastsum-Checksum Creation software. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS: PRINCIPAL SPECIALISTS GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS AIR PHOTOGRAPHIC ASSESSMENTS PHOTOGRAPHIC SURVEYS PREHISTORIC POTTERY ROMAN POTTERY SAXON & MEDIEVAL POTTERY POST-MEDIEVAL POTTERY FLINT GLASS COINS METALWORK & LEATHER SLAG ANIMAL BONE HUMAN BONE: ENVIRONMENTAL CO-ORDINATOR POLLEN AND SEEDS: CHARCOAL/WOOD SOIL MICROMORPHOLOGY CARBON-14 DATING: CONSERVATION Sam Egan Dr John Summers Air Photo Services Ms K Henry Mr A Peachey Mr A Peachey Mr P Thompson Mr P Thompson Mr A Peachey H Cool British Museum, Dept of Coins & Medals Ms Q Mould, Ms N Crummy Ms J Cowgill Dr J Cussans Ms S Anderson Dr R Scaife Dr R Scaife Dr J Summers Dr R MacPhail, Dr C French English Heritage Ancient Monuments Laboratory (for advice). University of Leicester 147 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) © Archaeological Solutions Ltd 2016 APPENDIX 3 OASIS DATA COLLECTION FORM 148 Land off Lime Avenue, Oulton, Suffolk (Phase 1) PLATES 1: section through Phase 2 Pit F2569, looking south 2: Section through Phase 2 clay-lined Pit F2241, looking west 3: Eastern end of Structure 1 (post-excavation), looking north 4: Section through Phase 4 Pits F2420 (left) and F2427 (right), looking south 5: section through Phase 4 ?Hearth F2572, looking south 6: Section through Phase 4 ?Hearth F2664, looking south 7: SFB 1, looking east 8: SFB 2, looking west 9: SFB 3, looking north 10: SFB 4 (Quadrant C), looking north-west 11: SFB 5, looking north-west 12: Section through Phase 5.1 Burnt Flint Pit F2331, looking north 13: Section through Phase 5.1 Burnt Flint Pit F2683, looking north 14: Section through Phase 5.1 Burnt Flint Pit F2717, looking north 15: Section through Phase 5.1 Burnt Flint Pit F2731, looking north 16: Section through Phase 6 Postholes F2184 (left), F2188 (right) and Pit F2186 (centre), looking north-east 17: Section through Phase 6 Pit F2178, looking west 0 10km Lowestoft Bungay Beccles N Southwold Halesworth SITE Reproduced from the 1999 Ordnance Survey 1:25000 map with the permission of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Ó Crown copyright Archaeological Solutions Ltd Licence number 100036680 Archaeological Solutions Ltd Fig. 1 Site location plan Scale 1:25,000 at A4 Oulton (P5758) 1 2 3 0 3cm Archaeological Solutions Ltd Fig. 43 Lead weights Scale 1:1 at A4 Oulton, Lowestoft, Suffolk (P5758) 1 3 2 6 4 5 8 10 7 9 12 11 15 13 14 17 16 21 19 20 18 0 15cm Archaeological Solutions Ltd Fig. 44 Pottery illustrations Scale 1:4 at A4