Land Off Salisbury Street, Amesbury, Wiltshire

Wessex Archaeology
Land off Salisbury Street,

Amesbury, Wiltshire
Post-excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design
Ref: 60033.01 February 2007

Land off Salisbury Street
Amesbury, Wilts
Post-excavation Assessment
And
Updated Project Design
Prepared on behalf of
The Co-operative Group
PO Box 53
New Century House
Manchester
M60 4ES
by
Wessex Archaeology
Portway House
Old Sarum Park
Salisbury
SP4 6EB
Report reference: 60033.01
February 2007
© Wessex Archaeology Limited 2007 all rights reserved

Wessex Archaeology Limited is a Registered Charity No. 287786
Land off Salisbury Street, Amesbury, Wilts Post-excavation Assessment and
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Amesbury, Wilts
And
Contents
Summary ......................................................................................................................... iii

Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... iv
1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Project Background ....................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Site Location, Description and Geology .................................................................. 1
1.3 Archaeological Background ........................................................................................ 2
2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES............................................................................................... 3
3 EXCAVATION METHODOLOGY .................................................................................. 3
4 RESULTS .......................................................................................................................... 4
4.1 General .............................................................................................................................. 4
4.2 Roman ............................................................................................................................... 4
4.3 Late Saxon / Early Medieval features (Fig. 2) .......................................................... 4
4.4 Medieval features (Fig. 2) ............................................................................................. 5
4.5 Post-medieval features (Fig. 2) ................................................................................... 5
4.6 Modern features (Fig. 2) ............................................................................................... 6
4.7 Undated features ............................................................................................................ 6
5 THE FINDS ....................................................................................................................... 7
5.2 Pottery ............................................................................................................................... 7
5.3 Ceramic Building Material ............................................................................................ 9
5.4 Worked and Burnt Flint................................................................................................. 9
5.5 Stone ................................................................................................................................. 9
5.6 Metalwork ....................................................................................................................... 10
5.7 Other Finds .................................................................................................................... 10
5.8 Animal Bone .................................................................................................................. 10
6 PALAEO-ENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE................................................................. 13
6.1 Aims ................................................................................................................................. 13
6.2 Palaeo-environmental summary .............................................................................. 13
6.3 Introduction and environmental samples taken .................................................. 13
6.4 Assessment Results; methods and data ............................................................... 13
6.5 Charred Plant Remains and Charcoals .................................................................. 13
6.6 Charred plant remains ................................................................................................ 13
6.7 Charcoal ......................................................................................................................... 15
6.8 Land and fresh/brackish water molluscs ............................................................... 15
6.9 Small animal bones ..................................................................................................... 15
7 POTENTIAL, RESEARCH AIMS AND METHOD STATEMENT ........................... 17
7.1 Archaeological potential ............................................................................................ 17
7.2 Updated research aims and objectives .................................................................. 18
7.3 Method statements and recommendations for further work ............................ 19
7.4 Finds ................................................................................................................................ 19
7.5 Charred plant remains ................................................................................................ 20
7.6 Charcoal ......................................................................................................................... 20
7.7 Land Snails and fresh/brackish water molluscs .................................................. 20
8 PUBLICATION PROPOSAL, RESOURCES, AND TASKLIST ............................ 21
8.1 Publication proposal ................................................................................................... 21
8.2 Resources ...................................................................................................................... 21
8.3 Tasklist............................................................................................................................ 22
9 STORAGE AND CURATION ....................................................................................... 23
10 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 25
11 APPENDIX ...................................................................................................................... 27
11.1 List of Archaeological Features ............................................................................... 27
i
_____________________________________________________________________
Wessex Archaeology 60033.01 February 2007
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
List of Figures
Cover The site, looking north
Figure 1 Location and trench layout
Figure 2 Features in trenches 4 and 5
Figure 3 Features in relation to the Flitcroft Map of 1726 AD
List of Plates
Plate 1 Northern boundary wall of Redworth House overlying Saxon
ditch 519. Looking east.
List of Tables
Table 1 Summary of fieldwork events
Table 2 Finds totals by material type
Table 3 Quantification of Late Saxon and medieval pottery by ware
type
Table 4 Taphonomic characteristics of the assemblage
Table 5 Species percentages
Table 6 Assessment of the charred plant remains and charcoal
Table 7 The project team
Table 8 Tasklist
ii
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Amesbury, Wilts
Summary
In July 2005 Wessex Archaeology undertook an excavation on behalf of the Co-

operative Group on land near the centre of Amesbury, prior to redevelopment as a
supermarket. A Watching Brief during the early part of the construction work took
place in April 2006.
The excavation revealed several features of probable late Saxon date, including a
number of aligned ditches (property boundaries), a dog burial within a pit and other
smaller pits. Some of these features can be correlated with recorded documentary
evidence. Medieval features include an east to west aligned ditch just to the north of
the present day northern boundary wall of the former Redworth House, other ditches
and some intercutting pits. In addition several other ditches and some quarry pits can
be assigned to the post-medieval and modern periods.
A small amount of evidence for earlier activity includes worked flint, and a few
residual Roman and early/middle Saxon sherds.
The report assesses the potential of the fieldwork results for further analysis and
publication. It highlights a series of updated research aims for the project and
outlines a proposed programme of work to complete a publication report and archive
for the project.
iii
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Amesbury, Wilts
Acknowledgements
The fieldwork was commissioned by Emily Watts of the Co-operative Group.

Acknowledgements are due to Helena Cave-Penny of Wiltshire County Council and
Peter Goodhugh for provision of a print of the Flitcroft Map of AD1726.
The fieldwork was carried out by David Godden, Steve Beech, Jane Roberts, Andy
Sole and Ken Lyden. The finds and environmental evidence was assessed by
Lorraine Mepham and Chris Stevens. The illustrations were prepared by Linda
Coleman. This report was compiled by David Godden and Alistair Barclay.
The project was managed on behalf of Wessex Archaeology by Paul McCulloch,

Paul White and Alistair Barclay.
iv
_____________________________________________________________________
Land off Salisbury Street, Amesbury, Wilts Post-excavation Assessment
and Updated Project Design
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
And Updated Project Design

Amesbury, Wilts
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Background

1.1.1 In July 2005 Wessex Archaeology undertook an excavation and watching
brief on behalf of the Co-operative Group at land off Salisbury Street,
Amesbury, Wilts prior to redevelopment as a supermarket (NGR 415500
141350) (Fig. 1).
1.1.2 Following on from an evaluation Wiltshire County Council recommended that

an archaeological excavation would be necessary as part of a mitigation
strategy. In 2005 a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) was prepared by
Wessex Archaeology and approved by Helena Cave-Penny acting on behalf
of Wiltshire County Council. Fieldwork events are listed in Table 1.
Table 1: Summary of fieldwork events

Fieldwork Date Contractor WA ref
event
Evaluation 1996 Wessex Archaeology 42612
Evaluation May 2005 Wessex Archaeology
Excavation July 2005 Wessex Archaeology
Watching April 2006 Wessex Archaeology
Brief
1.2 Site Location, Description and Geology

1.2.1 The town of Amesbury lies within the valley of the meandering River Avon
and is built on the river gravels that form a promontory around which the
river curves on the western side.
1.2.2 The site (Fig. 1) was located to the south-east of Amesbury High Street
within a sub-circular area of land bounded by Flower Lane on the west and
south sides and Salisbury Street to the north. The area of redevelopment
was irregular in shape, approximately 100 m by 50 m, bounded by Flower
Lane to the south, Salisbury Road to the east, the northern boundary wall of
the now demolished Redworth House to the north, and buildings to the west.
It had a 15 m wide corridor in the north-west corner reaching through to
Salisbury Street. The development is to include approximately 40 m more
land to the north of the aforementioned boundary wall of Redworth House.
1.2.3 Two areas were opened up for archaeological investigations (Fig. 1). The
largest, Trench 4, was a rectangle 40 m by 10 m in the north-west of the
development. The other, Trench 5, was a rectangle 10 m by 2 m in the
south-west corner of the development. This was a total area of
approximately 0.05 hectares.
1
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.2.4 The development area was very gently sloping. The ground level varied
between 69-70 m above ordnance datum (aOD).
1.2.5 At the time of the excavation the site was rather overgrown with the concrete
oversights of several demolished buildings visible on the ground.
1.2.6 The natural ground encountered on site was of several types of sandy river
gravel.
1.3 Archaeological Background

1.3.1 Within the historic core of Amesbury little evidence of prehistoric activity has
been found. A Palaeolithic hand-axe was discovered near the High Street in
1938.
1.3.2 In 1996 a small archaeological evaluation consisting of two trenches was

carried out by Wessex Archaeology (WA 1996) nearby (Fig. 1). The two
trenches were located c. 30 m east of excavation Trench 4. In the northern
Trench 1 two ditches were revealed at the base of the archaeological
sequence. One (104) was aligned north-west to south-east and the other
(109) north-east to south-west. No finds were recovered from them but they
were both probably Saxon. Another feature (215) was revealed at the south
end of Trench 2 at the base of the archaeological sequence. Only the north
edge of the feature was revealed so as to leave its shape and character
unresolved. It did, however, contain a large sherd of Saxon pottery.
1.3.3 There has been no evidence found for Roman activity within the historic core
of the town.
1.3.4 Although Amesbury is known to have developed into a sizeable settlement

by the 10th century, there is little archaeological evidence for the Saxon
period. There have been isolated small finds recovered. A very large north to
south aligned ditch possibly dating to the Saxon period was found on land to
the rear of the Antrobus Arms, Church Street (Hulka and Valentin 1999).
1.3.5 The only extant building from the medieval period is the parish church. The
prosperity of the town in this period was largely dependent on the visitors
and trade generated by the priory on the western side of town. A market
place is known to have existed in Amesbury since at least the 13th century
and was bounded by the High Street to the north-west and by Salisbury
Street to the north-east. The other extents of the market are conjectural. Pits
and pottery were found to the rear of the Antrobus Arms, Church Street
(Hulka and Valentin 1999).
1.3.6 Wessex Archaeology had carried out an evaluation consisting of three test
trenches on the same site in May 2005 (see Table 1). This showed Saxon
activity in the north-west corner of the site and this was where the
excavation that is the subject of this report was focussed.
2
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
2.1.1 The aims and objectives for the excavation were set out in the Written
Scheme of Investigation.
2.1.2 The excavation was to establish the presence or absence, location, extent,
date, character and condition of any archaeological remains within the areas
of the development that were investigated.
2.1.3 Of special interest was the discovery of Saxon pottery, rare in Amesbury, in
the test trenching phase undertaken by Wessex Archaeology in 1996.
Features from this period were carefully sought in all subsequent phases of
fieldwork (see Table 1).
3 EXCAVATION METHODOLOGY
3.1.1 The outlines of the two trenches were marked out and the areas checked for
services using the Cable Avoidance Tool.
3.1.2 Approximately 0.6 m of overburden was stripped using a 360º tracked

machine under constant archaeological supervision. It was transported to
the south of the site by dumper and stockpiled. The stockpiled material was
inspected for finds.
3.1.3 The exposed ground was examined for archaeological features. All pre-
modern features were excavated by hand and recorded on Wessex
Archaeology pro forma sheets. A monochrome and colour 35 mm film
photographic record was kept. Selected digital photographs were also made.
3.1.4 Samples were taken from selected features to provide possible palaeo-
environmental information.
3.1.5 A digital survey was made that included the outlines of the two trenches, the
outlines of the archaeological features and investigative slots made into the
features. Several boundary lines around the development were also
recorded in order to tie the survey in with maps of the area.
3.1.6 The deeper features were backfilled for safety reasons at the end of the
investigation.
3.1.7 The excavation took place between the 18th of July and the 4th of August
2005.
3.1.8 A subsequent Watching Brief took place in April 2006.
3
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4 RESULTS
4.1 General
4.1.1 There were three types of natural ground encountered on the site. The most
common was 402, a mid orangey brown silty sand and sub-angular flint mix.
Pale orangey yellow silt 423 and pale grey silty sand and sub-angular flint
mix 424 were only found at the north end of Trench 4.
4.2 Roman
4.2.1 Four pieces of Roman pot were recovered, one from the late Saxon/early
medieval ditch 507 in the southern Trench 5 and three pieces from the late
Saxon/early medieval pit 518. They were all residual.
4.3 Late Saxon / Early Medieval features (Fig. 2)

The large pit
4.3.1 A large, probably circular pit 518 was found underlying Saxon ditch 523. It
was 2.5 m diameter and 2 m deep with steep-sloping sides and a concave
base. A dog was buried on the base of the pit. The dog skeleton was not
recovered due to safety considerations. The relationship between the pit and
ditch 523 could not be seen as this had been destroyed by recut 511 that
produced a shallower pit centred on and integral with, this ditch. Common
sense would suggest that pit 518 would have predated ditch 523 if it was to
avoid collecting runoff from the ditch from where they would have touched. It
could, however, have been dug as a large sump to collect water from the
ditch.
The ditches
4.3.2 There were five late Saxon/early medieval ditches revealed. The most
northerly pair, 522 and 523 were aligned north-west to south-east. The
largest, 523, was 1.3 m wide and 0.85 m deep. It was integral with recut pit
511 and extended further south-east until it terminated in shallow pit 604
later recut as 607. This south-easterly end seems to have been respecting
the east to west boundary line marked by ditch 519.
4.3.3 Ditch 522 lay approximately 5 m north-east of ditch 523 and was 0.6 m wide
and 0.35 m deep. Its north-western end was obscured by post-medieval pit
482.
4.3.4 The large east to west aligned ditch 519 at the south end of Trench 4 had
late Saxon/early medieval pot in its lowest fill and may have been originally
cut in this period. It was 2.1 m wide and 1.1 m deep with steep-sloping
convex sides and a narrow flattish base. The asymmetrical fills in the ditch
suggested that a bank had existed on its northern side. The sharp profile
and bank suggest it may have had a defensive purpose as well as to mark a
boundary. The upper fills in the ditch contained post-medieval material
showing how long it had been maintained. Above the unfilled ditch its line
was marked to the present day by the northern boundary wall 448 of
Redworth House (Pl. 1) made of chalk and mortar and carrying a small rain-
shedding roof. In places this had been repaired with modern breeze blocks.
4
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4.3.5 The two ditches in Trench 5, 503 and 507, had either been flat and shallow
or had been heavily truncated. Ditch 503 was 0.8 m wide, 0.15 m deep and
was filled with material, 502, that formed a 0.1 m deep extensive layer
underneath the subsoil in this part of the site. The ditch was aligned east to
west.
4.3.6 The other ditch, 507, was situated at the southern end of Trench 5 and was
of similar dimensions and level to ditch 503. Its fill, 506, also appeared to be
part of a general layer lying under the subsoil. Ditch 507 was aligned north
north-east to south south-west.
The pits and postholes

4.3.7 Two shallow pits, 426 and 428 in Trench 4 were dated to the late Saxon/
early medieval period.
4.3.8 There were two pits, 484 and 495, revealed at the south end of Trench 4. If
ditch 519 had been constructed with a bank on its northern side the placing
of 484 suggests that it predated the ditch.
4.3.9 Postholes 487 and 477 were a similar size and shape. They were at a
similar offset and may have respected contemporary ditch 523.
4.3.10 Posthole 405 to the north of Trench 4 may also have dated to this period. All
the postholes of this period were dated only on the recovery of one small
piece of pot in each.
4.4 Medieval features (Fig. 2)

4.4.1 Two ditches and a group of intercutting pits could be dated to this period.
4.4.2 At the southern end of Trench 4 a ditch, 462, was revealed. It was aligned
east to west and lay 2 m to the north of and parallel to earlier ditch 519. Its
position suggests it could have run along the north side of a possible bank
associated with ditch 519. It had a noticeably rectangular-shaped eastern
terminus.
4.4.3 The other ditch of this period, 489, was noted near the north of Trench 4. It
was aligned north-west to south-east like earlier ditches 522 and 523 but
was less substantial with only a 2 m length surviving between post-medieval
truncation by 425. It may have been a third parallel late Saxon ditch (along
with 522 and 523) that was still in use in the medieval period.
4.4.4 A group of intercutting pits 524 was revealed on the western boundary of
Trench 4. The group comprised pits 497, 540, 542 and 544 which covered
an area of 2.5 m by 2.5 m although the western extent of the group was not
revealed. The pits were 0.5 m deep on average. The edges of pit 497
reflected the general north-west to south-east alignment of the property lines
in this area.
4.5 Post-medieval features (Fig. 2)

4.5.1 Pits 520, 526, 403 and 410 probably lay in a line just to the north of the
north-eastern boundary of the property marked as “82” on the Flitcroft map
(Fig. 3).
5
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4.5.2 Pit 533 dated to the post-medieval period. It was sited just to the north of the
medieval pit group 524 and extended beyond the edge of the excavation.
4.6 Modern features (Fig. 2)

4.6.1 The largest modern feature, 425, had a plan of an irregular cross shape. It
was 7 m in diameter and over 1.3 m deep although not bottomed. It may
have been a robbed out building or small scale quarrying at the south-
eastern end of the property marked “84” on the AD1726 map of Henry
Flitcroft (Fig. 3). Only the southern part of extensive cut 417 was revealed. It
also lay within “84”. The shallow ditch 419 marked the curving boundary
shown on this map.
4.6.2 At the extreme north of the site part of a modern pit 536 was revealed.
4.6.3 Modern pit 616 was revealed to the east of the main excavation area during
the Watching Brief.
4.6.4 A group of five sub-square postholes 546 at the south of Trench 4 took its
east to west alignment from the property boundary originally marked by ditch
519 which lay 2.5 m to the south. The group comprised 465, 475, 491, 492
and 493.
4.7 Undated features

4.7.1 Kidney-shaped feature 499 was probably a tree-throw hole. It was undated
although certainly pre-modern.
6
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
5 THE FINDS
5.1.1 The site has produced a finds assemblage of moderate size, amongst which
animal bone and pottery are the best represented categories in terms of
quantity. The primary interest here lies in the fact that this is the first
assemblage of any size of late Saxon/early medieval date (10th-12th century
AD) excavated from the town.
5.1.2 Table 2 provides a summary quantification of all finds by material type and
context. All finds data, including those from evaluation, excavation and
watching brief on the site, are held on the project database (Access).
Table 2: Finds totals by material type (number / weight in grammes)

Material Evaluation Excavation W/Brief TOTAL
Pottery 21/284 464/7141 26/493 511/7918
Romano-British - 4/59 - 4/59
Early / Middle Saxon - 2/18 - 2/18
Late Saxon / Medieval 20/284 403/5097 12/111 435/5492
Post-Medieval - 55/1967 15/382 70/2349
Ceramic Building Mat. - 30/2282 7/270 37/2552
Fired Clay - 11/145 3/48 14/193
Clay Pipe - 9/27 4/6 13/33
Stone 9/44 13/3017 - 22/3061
Flint - 31/991 - 31/991
Burnt Flint - 6/254 - 6/254
Glass - 11/402 2/7 13/409
Slag - 5/577 - 5/577
Metalwork (no. objects) 4 46 - 50
Copper Alloy - 1 - 1
Iron 4 44 - 48
Lead - 1 - 1
Animal Bone 162/1576 1191/9059 57/461 1410/11,096
Shell - 10/94 - 10/94
5.2 Pottery
5.2.1 Pottery provides the primary dating evidence for the site, and largely
consists of material of late Saxon/early medieval date (10th to 12th centuries),
with a few residual Romano-British sherds, and a small amount of post-
medieval material.
5.2.2 The whole assemblage has been quantified within each context by ware
type. The presence of rims and other diagnostic sherds has been noted, and
spot dates recorded on a context by context basis.
Romano-British
5.2.3 Romano-British sherds came from two features – one coarse greyware from
ditch 507 and three sherds of Oxfordshire colour coated fineware from pit
518, in both cases residual in later contexts.
Early/Middle Saxon
5.2.4 Two sherds of organic-tempered ware are dated as early to middle Saxon
(5th to 8th centuries). Both are small, abraded body sherds, and both
occurred residually in later contexts (ditches 489 and 503).
7
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Late Saxon and Medieval

5.2.5 The late Saxon and medieval assemblage contains a number of different
ware types, most of which are identifiable at least to source area, and which
reveal a number of geographically distinct sources of supply to the town.
Totals by type are given in Table 3.
Table 3: Quantification of late Saxon and medieval pot by ware type
Ware No. sherds Weight (g)

Calcareous ware 254 3320
Cheddar-type ware 1 30
Flint-tempered ware 24 362
Kennet Valley wares 16 95
Laverstock-type coarseware 17 115
Laverstock-type fineware 4 55
Michelmersh-type ware 80 1065
Other fineware 1 37
Other sandy wares 32 381
West Wilts ware 6 32
TOTAL 435 5492
5.2.6 Most of these wares fall within a broad date range of 10th to 12th centuries.
Most common are calcareous wares, which appear here exclusively in jar
forms, with simple, everted rims. Oolitic inclusions within some of these
wares suggest an origin in the north of the county, although no production
centres of this date are known. Similar calcareous wares, in similar jar
forms, have been found at Trowbridge, Wilton and Market Lavington
(Mepham 1993; Andrews et al. 2000; Mepham 2006).
5.2.7 Alongside the calcareous wares are sherds of wheelthrown, reduced sandy
wares of Michelmersh-type, in jar forms, comparable to products of a
recently excavated kiln in that village (Mepham and Brown forthcoming).
One example of curvilinear tooling was observed, as recorded on jars from
Wilton (Andrews et al. 2000), and one example of a body sherd with multiple
open-circle stamps, not so far paralleled elsewhere. Sherds of similar sandy
wares in the same contexts, but of a slightly different texture, with oxidised
surfaces (recorded here as ‘other sandy wares’), may also be Michelmersh-
type products; they include body sherds with applied, stamped strips in the
same manner as some of the Michelmersh-type spouted pitchers (Addyman
et al. 1972).
5.2.8 In the same contexts are a small number of sherds containing patinated flint
inclusions; only one vessel form is present, a jar with everted, simple rim.
Again, similar fabric types are known from Trowbridge, Market Lavington
and Wilton. A single sherd of a glazed, decorated tripod pitcher in
Laverstock-type coarseware was recorded, from pit 520. These pitchers
have been previously recorded as ‘South East Wiltshire pitchers’ (e.g. Vince
1981), but the similarity of fabric type with the products of the 13th century
Laverstock kilns suggests an earlier production centre in this area.
5.2.9 The largest groups of 10th-12th century pottery came from ditch 523 (103
sherds), pit 518 (85 sherds) and its recut 511 (143 sherds).
5.2.10 Other wares occur in much smaller quantities, and some have a slightly later
date range (or at least a currency extending later than the 12th century).
Other flint-tempered and calcareous-/flint-tempered wares potentially fall
8
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
within two ceramic traditions, from the Kennet Valley and from west
Wiltshire. Wares of ‘Kennet Valley’ type have a wide distribution across west
Berkshire and north-east Wiltshire, and have a lengthy currency, from at
least the 11th century through to the 13th century; one possible source is in
the Savernake Forest, where the place-name Crockerstrope is recorded
(Vince 1997, 65). ‘West Wiltshire’ wares have a distribution centres on
Warminster and were probably products of the medieval Crockerton
industry; they have a similarly lengthy currency through the medieval period
(Smith 1997). ‘West Wiltshire’ wares are generally micaceous, and have
been distinguished on that basis here, although the distinction between
these and the ‘Kennet Valley’ wares is not always clear.
5.2.11 Laverstock-type wares are also present in small quantities; as well as the
tripod pitcher already noted, there are coarseware jar forms of 12th/13th
century type, some scratchmarked, and a few 13th century glazed and
decorated finewares (ditch 463, pit 497 and pit recut 511). One other glazed
fineware, probably also of 13th century date, is of unknown source (pit 497).
Post-Medieval
5.2.12 The remainder of the assemblage (71 sherds) is post-medieval, and
comprises sherds of coarse earthenwares (redwares, and Verwood-type
earthenware from east Dorset), tinglazed earthenware, English stoneware,
creamware and modern refined whitewares. A large proportion of the post-
medieval assemblage came from cut 425.
5.3 Ceramic Building Material

5.3.1 Most of the ceramic building material consists of fragments of medieval flat
roof tile, in characteristic coarse, poorly wedged, pale-firing fabrics. One
post-medieval unglazed floor tile and two post-medieval brick fragments
came from cut 425.
5.4 Worked and Burnt Flint

5.4.1 The worked flint assemblage consists of 31 pieces, all hard hammer struck,
with a potential date range of Early Neolithic to Late Bronze Age. Raw
materials consist almost entirely of locally-derived pale grey to brown gravel
flint; condition ranges from fresh to edge-damaged; some have a light grey
patina.
5.4.2 The majority of the assemblage comprises flakes and broken flakes which
are not chronologically distinctive. There are two possible Late Bronze Age
cores – large, crude, and irregular - although both may simply be dressed
nodules; retouched pieces are limited to a pair of notched flakes.
5.4.3 A few pieces of burnt, unworked flint were also recovered, of unknown date
and origin.
5.5 Stone
5.5.1 The stone includes one whetstone (pit 536) and ten lava quern fragments
(one from ditch 416 and nine from evaluation trench 2). The rest of the stone
shows no obvious signs of working but could represent building materials –
two pieces of micaceous sandstone, and two of shelly limestone, could
9
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
derive from roof tiles. Other pieces are of limestone, in various shapes and
sizes.
5.6 Metalwork
5.6.1 Metalwork includes objects of copper alloy, iron and lead. Only one copper
alloy object was recovered – a small, rectangular buckle of post-medieval
date (subsoil 401). The iron objects are all heavily corroded, and some
remain unidentified at this stage. Most appear to represent nails and other
structural items, but there are at least three knives (one from ditch 416, two
from pit recut 511), one possible awl (pit 518) and one rectangular buckle
(pit 482). The single lead object is a small, tapering strip of unknown function
(pit 526).
5.7 Other Finds

5.7.1 Other finds recovered from the site comprise small quantities of post-
medieval clay pipe stems, undiagnostic fired clay, post-medieval glass
bottle/jar, ironworking slag, and oyster shell.
5.8 Animal Bone

5.8.1 Although the whole animal bone assemblage from all stages of fieldwork has
been scanned, quantifications in Tables 3-4 include only the bone from the
excavation. Conjoining fragments that were demonstrably from the same
bone were counted as one bone in order to minimise distortion, and
therefore specimen counts (NISP) given here may differ from the absolute
raw fragment counts in Table 2 (above). There may also be some
discrepancies when bone is fragile may fragment further after initial
quantification. No fragments were recorded as ‘medium mammal’ or ‘large
mammal’; these were instead consigned to the unidentified category. No
attempt was made to identify ribs or vertebrae (except the atlas and axis) to
species, although large numbers of these bones were noted where they
occurred.
Table 4: Taphonomic characteristics of the assemblage; proportions of

bones as a percentage of NISP rather than raw counts
Gnawed Loose Unidentified Butchery Burnt Measure Age Total
teeth (NISP)
Late Sax/
Early Med 6 8 64 14 3 6 15 936
Med 9 0 59 18 0 5 23 22
Post-med 8 0 72 20 0 0 28 25
Undated 0 33 67 44 11 0 0 9
Total 6 8 64 14 3 6 15 992
5.8.2 The bones originated mainly from features of late Saxon/early medieval
date, some of which contained earlier Romano-British pottery, and with few
from later periods (Table 4). The largest quantities of bone originated from
pits 511 and 518, and ditch 523, from more than one fill in each of these
features.
5.8.3 Approximately 95% of the 992 bones were in good condition, with 49 in
excellent condition (mainly from the post-medieval period) and only four in
poor condition (from a single post-medieval cut and one fill in a late Saxon/
10
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
early medieval pit). Correspondingly, the proportion of teeth lost from the jaw
by erosion or fragmentation was low in the post-medieval assemblage,
although the proportion of unidentified bone was high in this period, perhaps
partially due to scavenger activity destroying the bone, and butchery
fragmenting the bones into less easily identifiable pieces (also reflected in
the absence of any post-medieval bones complete enough to be measured).
5.8.4 Gnawing was present throughout and will have affected the assemblage to
an extent, although at a relatively low level. Loose teeth are particularly well-
represented in the undated contexts, and this portion of the assemblage also
contains no measureable or ageable bone, perhaps a result of fragmentation
from reworking or the methods of butchery or deposition. The late Saxon/
early medieval assemblage contained a relatively high proportion of loose
teeth, but these were often in the same context as the jaw from which they
had been lost, and fragmentation probably occurred post-depositionally.
5.8.5 Approximately a third of bones could be identified, and the species

proportions varied by phase, from a late Saxon/early medieval
predominance of sheep/goat (sheep but no goats positively identified) to a
majority of cattle in the later periods of occupation (Table 5). The proportion
of pigs is relatively high, especially in the late Saxon/early medieval period,
and this is also the period where a variety of other species are represented,
probably due to the larger size of the assemblage. Fish, however, were only
observed in the medieval assemblage, and one cat jaw was recovered from
a Post-medieval pit that contained early medieval ceramic.
Table 5: Species percentages (as proportion of identified bones)

Horse Cattle Sheep/ Pig Dog Deer Cat Bird Fish Total
Goat identified
(NISP)
Late Sax/ 2 16 53 24 2 1 0 3 0 336
Early Med
Med 0 44 11 22 0 0 0 0 22 9
Post-med 0 43 29 14 0 0 14 0 0 7
Undated 0 33 33 33 0 0 0 0 0 3
Total 2 17 51 24 2 1 0 3 1 355
5.8.6 The number of ageable bones is relatively high, partially due to the large
number of sheep/goat mandibles, and includes foetal individuals. Several
bones could be sexed, 55 measured, and ten with pathological modifications
can facilitate interpretation of animal treatment and health.
5.8.7 Butchery marks were seen on a large number of bones, mainly consisting of
helical fractures from marrow extraction, chops to portion the carcass and a
few cuts from filleting and disarticulation. Some ribs showed splintering
consistent with snapping of fresh bone during consumption. A small but
significant number of bones had been burnt, and the position and extent of
scorching on some could be used to indicate cooking activity. An odd texture
and appearance, similar to that documented as ‘ivoried’ but more
translucent, almost marbled, was observed on 51 bones from late
Saxon/early medieval pits and ditches. This effect has been noted on many
sites and linked to cooking, although other interpretations have been
suggested, and it is interesting that it is so prevalent on the late Saxon/early
medieval bones here.
11
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
5.8.8 Several deposits contained a large proportion of bones from the head and
feet which may be butchery waste, and several deposits of articulated lower
limbs indicate direct, rapid deposition (perhaps also primary butchery waste)
into some features.
5.8.9 Three worked fragments were recovered from two late Saxon/early medieval
ditch segments; object 36 is a polished piece with rounded flattened ends,
one roe deer-sized radius had been worked into a wedge shape and a piece
of long bone had been fashioned into a rod.
12
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6 PALAEO-ENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE
6.1 Aims
6.1.1 The assessment of samples taken from the evaluation, excavation and a
final watching brief were undertaken to; demonstrate the presence, range
and diversity of remains present and assess their potential to aid with
understanding the activities and economy associated with the archaeological
evidence and isolate samples, where appropriate, for further analysis and
reporting.
6.2 Palaeo-environmental summary

6.2.1 The samples were consistently rich in charred cereal grains, mainly barley
and free-threshing wheat, but also produced evidence for the cultivation of
peas and broad beans probably reflecting dense and intensive occupation
during this period in the vicinity of the site. There were few remains of chaff
or weeds. The samples showed little variation between them.
6.3 Introduction and environmental samples taken

6.3.1 Six bulk samples were taken during the evaluation, eight from the
assessment phase and one during the final watching brief. All of the
samples all came from probable late Saxon to early medieval/Saxon-
Norman features, including eight ditches, three came from pits, and a further
from a possible beam slot. The samples were processed for the recovery
and assessment of charred plant remains and charcoals.
6.4 Assessment Results; methods and data
6.5 Charred Plant Remains and Charcoals

6.5.1 Bulk samples were processed by standard flotation methods; the flot
retained on a 0.5 mm mesh, residues fractionated into 5.6 mm, 2 mm and 1
mm fractions and dried. The coarse fractions (>5.6 mm) were sorted,
weighed and discarded. Flots were scanned under a x10 – x40 stereo-
binocular microscope and the presence of charred remains quantified (Table
6) in order to present data to record the preservation and nature of the
charred plant and charcoal remains and assess their potential to address the
project and subsidiary aims. Preliminary identifications of dominant or
important taxa are noted below, following the nomenclature of Stace (1997).
6.5.2 The flots were generally large and rich in charred remains that was
reasonably well preserved. Many of the samples contained high numbers of
both large and fine roots that may be indicative of stratigraphic movement,
reworking or the degree of contamination by later intrusive elements.
6.6 Charred plant remains

6.6.1 The samples were all broadly similar with little variation between them. This
is especially true of the ditch samples. All the samples contained ample
evidence for cereal remains, predominately free-threshing wheat (Triticum
aestivum) and hulled barley (Hordeum vulgare sl). Remains of rye (Secale
13
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
cereale) were also present, particularly in ditches 503 and 407, with grains in
pit (608). Chaff remains were rare and consisted predominately of
occasional rachis of rye and free-threshing wheat. In the latter case a single
well-preserved fragment could be identified as a hexaploid e.g. bread-wheat
(Triticum aestivum) or club-wheat (Tritium compactum). Many grains of oats
(Avena sp.), were also present in the samples. These were generally large
and possibly represent the cultivated oat (Avena sativa), rather than the wild
oat (Avena fatua). No floret bases which allow such distinction were seen
during the assessment, however, it is notable that no awn fragments that are
more indicative of the wild species were recovered.
6.6.2 Other crop remains included occasional seeds of broad bean (Vicia faba) or
pea (Pisum sativum), and with respect to wild food resources shells of
hazelnut (Corylus avellana).
6.6.3 Weed seeds were generally poorly represented in the samples, they
included mainly large seeded species that are commonly recorded as grain
contaminants, in particular vetches/wild pea (Vicia/ Lathyrus sp.), but also
corn gromwell (Lithospermum arvense), cleavers (Galium aparine),
persicaria (Persicaria maculosa/lapathifolia) knotgrass (Polygonum
aviculare) and knotted hedge parsley (Torilis sp.). Smaller occasional seeds
of species such as stinking mayweed (Anthemis cotula), meadow grass
(Poa sp.) and orache (Atriplex sp.) were also recovered.
6.6.4 A very small amount of mineralised material was present within a few
samples. Such remains had become mineralised through the presence of
calcium phosphate, and so may indicate the presence of cess, or may relate
to the presence of rotting fish. Little of this material was identified with the
exception of seeds of knotted hedge parsley (Torilis sp.) from ditch 115 and
pit (608). Pit (608) also produced probable mineralised seeds of elder
(Sambucus nigra) and corn gromwell (Lithospermum arvense).
6.6.5 The finds are all in keeping with the late Saxon to early medieval date (Greig
1991). The presence of stinking mayweed is several of the samples can be
taken as an indicator of the cultivation of clay soils. The species becomes
increasingly prevalent throughout the Saxon period, assumingly associated
with the introduction of heavy and mouldboard ploughs that facilitated the
cultivation of previously less manageable heavy clays (Stevens 2004).
6.6.6 The similarity of the samples raises the possibility that they may relate to a
single burning event that has become dispersed throughout the features.
However, more probably they indicate the storage and handling of cereals
on a large basis. That the samples contained a mixture of crops,
predominately of cereal grains with little chaff or weed seeds probably
indicate the burning of cereal grains that arrived and were stored on the
settlement as almost clean grain. The burning may come from waste from
processing the grain in bulk or the cleaning of stores.
6.6.7 In comparison to the earlier Saxon settlement at Countess Roundabout

(Wessex Archaeology 2003) it is notable how much richer these samples
are reflecting a denser and more intensive period of occupation in the
region. The predominant crops remain however the same, mainly wheat and
barley, although neither pea nor broad bean was recovered from the earlier
Saxon settlement.
14
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6.7 Charcoal
6.7.1 Charcoal was noted from the flots of the bulk samples and is recorded in
Table 6. While charcoal was present in all the samples it was generally
poorly represented compared to grain that frequently made up the greater
proportion of the flots. It was well represented in ditches 110, 106 and 115
and also in pit 518.
6.8 Land and fresh/brackish water molluscs

6.8.1 During processing of bulk soil samples for the recovery of charred remains,
a small number of snails were noted, and recorded (Table 6), in the flots.
These were almost always of open country species such as Vallonia spp.
and Helicella itala, although a single shell of Cochlicopa spp. and also of
probable Trichia sp. were also noted.
6.9 Small animal bones

6.9.1 During the processing of bulk soil samples for the recovery of charred plant
remains and charcoals, a small number of fish bones were noted, and
recorded (Table 6), These were predominately eel (Anguinus anguinus)
vertebrae, although occasionally other fish vertebrae and in one case a
single otic bullae (ear bones indicative of fish heads) was noted. There were
also several small fish bones within pit (608) of a type similar to herring.
Table 6. Assessment of the charred plant remains and charcoal

Flot Residue
Feature Context Sample size flot size Grain Chaff charred Notes Char’l Other Charcoal analysis
type/no litres ml %root other 4/2 mm >5.6mm
Pits
20
pit 428 429 4 20 100 A* - B wheat, barley legumes 1/1ml moll-t -
Rumex (C)
15
Pit 518 514 5 20 175 A* - B wheat, barley pea bean 5/5ml min – -
Vicia Galium Atriplex (C)
Poa, Anthemis
60
515 6 8 250 A* C B wheat barley oats 6/4ml - - P
Bromus Lit arv rachis
T-aes (hex)
80
Pit 608 100 20 250 A** C B Vicia faba x2, pea x2- 10 moll-t P C
3, barley, f-t wheat, (C)
rye+ oats, Galium, fish –
Vicia. Anthemis, (A)
Odontites. Bromus, eel-(C)
Torilis Rumex cf. smb –(C)
Agrostemma cone min- (B)
indet
Min Torilis, Lit arv.
Sambucus
Ditches
10
Ditch 107 1 16 125 A** C A barley, f-t wheat, oats, 10/8ml moll-t - P
110 Vicia, poppy head (C)
hazelnut, Vicia faba,
Gal ap, Torilis, Lit arv
30
108 2 10 160 A** C A Vicia? faba. Pisum? 5/10ml eel (C) -
20
109 3 10 60 A - A as above poss. more f-t 0.5/2 ml - -
wheat
30
Ditch 106 105 4 10 125 A* C Bh f-t wheat, oats 10/10 moll-t -
Vicia/cleavers ml (C)
persicaria rye rachis
15
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
50
Ditch 115 114 5 10 100 A* - C oats, f-t wheat barley 10/10 fish eel -
p. aviculare ml (B)
moll-t
(B)
min (C)
2
503 502 1 10 60 A* C B(h) +++f-t wheat, +barley 1/6 ml smb-(B) - P
hazelnut, pea/lentil x1 moll-t
rye rachis, f-t rachis (C)
Anthemis Galium
Avena
40
407 409 2 20 160 A* C B (h) Rye& f-t wheat 1/1ml moll-t -
+rachises barley oats (C)
Vicia Anthemis
20
507 506 3 20 150 A* - C(h) oats Bromus, f-t 2/2ml fish-eel -
wheat. Vicia/ Lathyrus (B)
Lit arv Anthemis smb (C)
moll-t
(B)
min - (C)
10
416 414 7 20 100 A* B B f-t wheat barley oats 2 /5 ml moll-t -
Vicia faba oats Galium (C)
Poa
30
432 435 8 9 175 A* - B(h) wheat barley oats 0.2/0.2 - -
hazelnut Bromus ml
Beam Slot
40
116 117 6 10 60 A* - B 1x f-threshing wheat. 0.5/8 ml moll-t -
vetches (C)
eel (C)
KEY: A** = exceptional, A* = 30+ items, A = ≥10 items, B = 9 - 5 items, C = < 5 items, (h) = hazelnuts, smb =
small mammal bones; Moll-t = terrestrial molluscs Moll-f = freshwater molluscs; Analysis: C = charcoal, P =
plant, M = molluscs. NOTE: 1flot is total, but flot in superscript = % of rooty material.
6.9.2
16
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7 POTENTIAL, RESEARCH AIMS AND METHOD STATEMENT
7.1 Archaeological potential

7.1.1 Until now little had been discovered of Saxon Amesbury apart from part of a
probable early Saxon cemetery found 300 m north of the site during
demolition work at the junction of London and Countess Roads in 1835
(Chandler and Goodhugh 1989, 6). In addition, a large north to south aligned
ditch, whose upper fills contained Saxon and medieval pottery, was revealed
and partially excavated on land 100 m west of the site behind the Antrobus
Arms, Church Street (Hulka and Valentin 1999). The limits of Saxon
Amesbury are not known. Features found during this excavation show that
the site was within the area of Saxon Amesbury, although the limits of the
settlement have never been established.
7.1.2 A Saxon feature and two probable Saxon ditches found 30 m east of Trench
4 by Wessex Archaeology in 1996 (Fig. 3) show that the settlement
extended in this direction. One of the ditches (109) found in 1996 was
aligned south-west to north-east and could have taken its alignment as a
perpendicular from a curving street frontage further to the north-east, which
is preserved to the present day in the outline of the present bus station and
is mirrored by the properties beyond the north-west corner of the site. This
arrangement of property boundaries would have been masked by their
amalgamation some time before the AD1726 Flitcroft Map was drawn (Fig.
3). The curving northern boundary of the block of land now bounded by
Flower Lane to the south and Salisbury Street to the north therefore could
date to at least the late Saxon period.
7.1.3 Narrower strips of land between two boundary ditches (522 and 523)
suggest that smaller properties in the late Saxon period had become
amalgamated into larger properties by the post-medieval period (as shown
on the Flitcroft map of 1726) if not before (Fig. 3). The general orientation of
the strips, taken perpendicularly from the street frontage, is however
preserved. If the roots of this street frontage can be traced back to Saxon
times it follows that this was also the probable eastern extent of the
medieval market place. That Trench 4 was not in the market place may be
confirmed by the rarity of medieval finds recovered from the site.
7.1.4 The property boundary of the former Redworth House marked by the late
Saxon/early medieval ditch 519 and also the present day wall 448 has been
a feature in the landscape for around a thousand years (Fig. 3). It appeared
to have had a bank on its northern side making it a more substantial barrier
than the other two early ditches 522 and 523, which showed no traces of
surviving banks. It may have marked the northern edge of a medieval road
leading from the south-east corner of the medieval market place and
continuing further east as Salisbury Road. However, no trace of road
construction was found in the earlier evaluation Test Trench 1 that extended
approximately 5 m further south than the later Trench 4 or Test Trench 3
that ran close to the possible course of the road.
7.1.5 The large late Saxon/early medieval pit 518 was not exactly on the line of
ditch 523 unlike the pit recut 511 that was centred on it. This may suggest
that original pit 518 predated the ditch. The dog that had been buried at the
17
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
base of the pit may have been an offering. It was not recovered due to
safety considerations.
7.1.6 Trench 5 showed that late Saxon/early medieval activity continued south of
the large ditch 519.
7.1.7 The medieval activity on the site all respected the alignments and
boundaries of the earlier features.
7.1.8 The large Post-medieval or modern feature 425 is situated within the south-
east end of the property marked “84” on the Flitcroft Map of 1726 (Fig. 3). Its
cross-shaped outline and depth suggest it is the result of quarrying for the
natural sandy gravel rather than marking the position of a robbed-out
building.
7.2 Updated research aims and objectives
What is the evidence for pre-Saxon activity?

7.2.1 The excavations produced a few residual sherds of Romano-British pottery
and a small assemblage of worked flint of mixed date (Neolithic to late
Bronze Age).
What is the evidence for early-mid Saxon activity?

7.2.2 Two residual sherds of organic-tempered pottery of early-mid Saxon date
provide slight evidence for earlier domestic occupation. The 1996 evaluation
recovered no pottery from this period.
What is the evidence for late Saxon/early medieval settlement?

7.2.3 Features found in the 1996 evaluation and the excavation can be related to
probable property boundaries of this date. This suggestion is supported by
the recovery of domestic occupation debris (eg quantities of late Saxon
pottery).
Evidence for trade in the late Saxon/early medieval period

7.2.4 Assessment of the ceramics (see Mepham Section 5, above) indicates that
the settlement at Amesbury was being supplied by several different sources
within the county before the 12th century. After this date pottery from both
the Kennet valley and west Wiltshire was being brought to Amesbury. Other
finds include lava quern fragments, some of which could be of pre-late
Saxon date and possible building stone fragments.
Evidence for activities

7.2.5 Although most of the material was recovered as rubbish from ditch and pit
fills, it does none the less provide an insight into the range of material being
used. As well as the range of domestic pottery mentioned above, various
tools of ironwork, including a possible awl, and three knife blades, worked
bone (polished bone object, a wedge worked from a roe deer radius and a
rod), a whetstone and structural material – iron nails, possible stone building
material and tile were recovered. All of this material is fairly typical.
7.2.6 Assessment of the animal bone indicates that several deposits are made up
of either butchery waste (some primary) and others are the remains from
cooking and/or roasting meat. Most of the bone comes from cattle, pig and
18
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
sheep/goat, although a small number of horse, dog and bird bone was also
recovered. Some fish bone, predominantly eel was noted.
7.2.7 Assessment of the charred plant remains indicates that the assemblage is
typical of the late Saxon/early medieval period (see Section 6, above) and
includes wheat, oats, beans and some hazelnut fragments. Weed seeds
were present but less well represented. There is the potential to reveal
information on the range of crops grown as well as, to a limited extent, the
nature of cultivation.
7.2.8 It was noted that some of the material was mineralised, which could be an
indicator of cess or rotting fish (note fish bone above).
What is the evidence for medieval and post-medieval development of the

known settlement?
7.2.9 Medieval features (ditches and pits) tended to respect the alignment of
earlier features. There was some evidence that properties had become
amalgamated in the post-medieval period.
7.3 Method statements and recommendations for further work

Historical background and research
7.3.1 A short account of the historical background will form part of the report and
discussion so that the excavation results can be placed in their known
historical context.
7.4 Finds
Introduction
7.4.1 Of the total finds assemblage, only pottery and animal bone warrant further
detailed analysis. Any comment on other finds categories will utilise data
already recorded as part of the assessment phase.
Pottery
7.4.2 All pottery will be subjected to detailed analysis, involving identification of
fabric and form, following the standard Wessex Archaeology recording
system for pottery (Morris 1994) and nationally recommended nomenclature
for post-Roman vessel forms (MPRG 1998). The pottery will be briefly
described and discussed within its local and regional context, with reference
to potential sources, chronology and any functional implications. A small
selection of vessels will be illustrated as a representative type series
(maximum ten vessels).
Animal Bone
7.4.3 Further work should focus on the late Saxon/early medieval assemblage,
and a full record should be made of the species, elements and
characteristics of each fragment, to include butchery, measurements, etc.
Analysis should then be carried out to investigate taphonomic processes,
carcass manipulation and methods of animal husbandry. The results should
then be compared to other similarly dated sites and feature types to
19
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
determine the nature of occupation and infer aspects of the status and
function of this site.
7.5 Charred plant remains

7.5.1 The charred remains have the potential to reveal information about the types
of crops cultivated at the settlement and from the limited number of weed
seeds a small amount of information on the nature of cultivation at the
settlement. The potential in part depends on the likelihood of whether the
samples are likely to come from a single event or multiple events. Analysis
of multiple samples may possibly be able to shed some light on this
possibility. Well dated assemblages of Saxon charred plant remains are
relatively rare in Wiltshire and southern England as a whole. These remains
may help aid in defining the rural versus ‘urban’ nature of this activity.
7.6 Charcoal
7.6.1 The charcoal has some potential to indicate the utilisation and management
of woodland resources and their use as fuel. Given that such material may
come from a single event and is not associated with any specific activity,
e.g. drying cereals, metal working etc. such potential is limited.
7.7 Land Snails and fresh/brackish water molluscs

7.7.1 The land snails have no further potential.
20
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
8 PUBLICATION PROPOSAL, RESOURCES, AND TASKLIST
8.1 Publication proposal

A short report will be produced for the Wiltshire Archaeological Magazine.
Evidence for late Saxon and early Medieval occupation near Salisbury Street,
Amesbury
By David Godden and John Chandler
With Lorraine Mepham, Alistair Barclay, Chris Stevens

Introduction
Historical context
Archaeological investigations
Finds
Pottery by Lorraine Mepham
Misc finds by Lorraine Mepham
Environmental
Animal bone by Jessica Grimm
Charred plant remains by Chris Stevens
Discussion
Bibliography
8.2 Resources
8.2.1 The project team is listed in Table 7 and their required tasks to undertake
the proposed programme of analysis and publication is given in Table 8
below.
Table 7: the project team

Staff Company Role
A Barclay WA PX manager
D Godden WA Project Officer- analysis
and report
J Chandler Freelance Documentary research
L Mepham WA Finds management &
analysis
M Allen WA Environmental
management
WCC WCC Conservation
J Grimm WA Animal bone specialist
C Stevens WA Palaeobotanist
J Gardiner WA Reports manager & editor
C Butterworth WA Archive supervisor
21
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
8.3 Tasklist
Table 8: Task list for analysis and publication

Task
No Analysis Task description Grade Staff Days
1 Management General management PM A Barclay 2
2 Finds management FM L Mepham 0.5
3 Environ management EM M Allen 0.25
Stratigraphic
4 Site narrative PO D Godden 0.5
5 Documentary research & historical
background Ext J Chandler 2
6 Figures for publication DO Illustrator 3
Finds
7 Conservation Ext WCC -
8 Pottery FM L Mepham 3
9 Misc finds PO L Mepham 0.5
10 Animal bone PO J Grimm 2
11 Finds illustration DO Illustrator 2
Environ
12 Analysis CPR SPO C Stevens 2.5
13 Edit specialist reports EM M Allen 0.25
Report
14 Assemble report, intro, background,
captions, bibliography D Godden 0.5
15 D Godden
Write discussion J Chandler 1
16 Edit report A Barclay 0.5
17 Review report J Gardiner 0.5
18 Editors corrections All 1
19 Journal submission J Gardiner
Archive
20 Archive preparation PO C Butterworth 0.5
21 Microfilm jobsheets and checking PO C Butterworth 0.5
22 Microfilm paper records Marathon 1
23 Archive deposition PO C Butterworth 0.5
22
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
9 STORAGE AND CURATION
Museum
9.1.1 It is recommended that the project archive resulting from the excavation be
deposited with the Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum, Salisbury. The
Museum has agreed in principle to accept the project archive on completion
of the project. Deposition of the finds with the Museum will only be carried
out with the full agreement of the landowner.
Conservation
9.1.2 No immediate conservation requirements were noted in the field. Finds
which have been identified as of unstable condition and therefore potentially
in need of further conservation treatment comprise the metal objects.
9.1.3 Metal objects have been X-radiographed as part of the assessment phase,
as a basic record and also to aid identification. On the basis of the X-rays,
the range of objects present and their provenance on the Site, two objects
(knife, possible punch) have been selected for further conservation
treatment, involving investigative cleaning and stabilisation.
Storage
9.1.4 The finds are currently stored in perforated polythene bags in 7 cardboard or
airtight plastic boxes, ordered by material type, following nationally
recommended guidelines (Walker 1990).
Discard Policy
9.1.5 Wessex Archaeology follows the guidelines set out in Selection, Retention
and Dispersal (Society of Museum Archaeologists 1993), which allows for
the discard of selected artefact and ecofact categories which are not
considered to warrant any future analysis. In this instance, any discard could
target the burnt, unworked flint, and the undiagnostic fired clay. The
discarding of any artefacts will be carried out only with the complete
agreement of the Museum.
9.1.6 The discard of environmental remains and samples follows the guidelines
laid out in Wessex Archaeology’s ‘Archive and Dispersal Policy for
Environmental Remains and Samples’. The archive policy conforms to
nationally recommended guidelines (SMA 1993; 1995; English Heritage
2002) and is available upon request.
Archive
9.1.7 The complete site archive, which will include paper records, photographic
records, graphics, artefacts and ecofacts, will be prepared following the
standard conditions for the acceptance of excavated archaeological material
by the Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum, and in general following
nationally recommended guidelines (SMA 1995).
Copyright
9.1.8 The full copyright of the written/illustrative archive relating to the Site will be
retained by Wessex Archaeology Ltd under the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988 with all rights reserved. The recipient museum, however,
will be granted an exclusive licence for the use of the archive for educational
purposes, including academic research, providing that such use shall be
23
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
non-profitmaking, and conforms with the Copyright and Related Rights

regulations 2003.
Security Copy
9.1.9 In line with current best practice, on completion of the project a security copy
of the paper records will be prepared, in the form of microfilm. The master
jackets and one diazo copy of the microfilm will be submitted to the National
Archaeological Record (English Heritage), a second diazo copy will be
deposited with the paper records, and a third diazo copy will be retained by
Wessex Archaeology.
24
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
10 REFERENCES
Addyman, P.V., Hopkins, B.G. and Norton, G.T., 1972, ‘A Saxo-Norman pottery kiln
producing stamped wares at Michelmersh, Hants’, Medieval Archaeol. 16,
127-30
Andrews, P., Mepham, L. and Seager Smith, R., 2000, ‘Excavations in Wilton, 1995-
6: St John’s Hospital and South Street’, Wiltshire Archaeol. Natur. Hist. Mag.
93, 181-204
Chandler, J. and Goodhugh, P., 1989, ‘Amesbury: history and description of a south
Wiltshire town (2nd edition), The Amesbury Society
English Heritage, 2002, Environmental Archaeology; a guide to theory and practice of

methods, from sampling and recovery to post-excavation, Swindon: Centre
for Archaeology Guidelines
Greig J., 1991 The British Isles, in W. van Zeist, K. Wasylikowa, K-E. Behre (eds)
Progress in Old World Palaeoethnobotany, Rotterdam, 229-334
Hulka, S. and Valentin, J. 1999, ‘The proposed development of land at 15 Church

Street (rear of Antrobus Arms Hotel), Amesbury, Wiltshire’, AC Archaeology,
unpublished report
Mcmahon, P., 2004, ‘Amesbury’ in ‘The Archaeology of Wiltshire’s Towns’ Wiltshire

County Archaeological Service
Mepham, L., 1993, ‘Pottery’; ‘Ceramic objects’; ‘Ceramic building material, daub and
fired clay’ in Graham, A.H. and Davies, S.M., Excavations in Trowbridge,
Wiltshire 1977 and 1986-1988, Wessex Archaeol. Rep. 2, Salisbury, 101-114;
114-6; 116-7
Mepham, L., 2006, ‘Pottery’ in Williams, P. and Newman, R., Market Lavington,
Wiltshire, an Anglo-Saxon Cemetery and Settlement, Wessex Archaeol Rep.
19, 88-105
Mepham, L. and Brown, L, forthcoming, ‘The Broughton to Timsbury Pipeline, part 1:

A Late Saxon pottery kiln and the production centre at Michelmersh,
Hampshire’, Proc. Hampshire Field Club Archaeol. Soc.
Morris, E.L., 1994, The Analysis of Pottery, Salisbury: Wessex Archaeology

Guideline 4
SMA 1993, Selection, Retention and Dispersal of Archaeological Collections, Society

of Museum Archaeologists
SMA 1995, Towards an Accessible Archaeological Archive, Society of Museum

Archaeologists
Smith, R.W., 1997, Excavations at Emwell Street, Warminster: the Early Economy
and Environment of a Wiltshire Market Town, Wessex Archaeology
25
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stace, C., 1997. New flora of the British Isles. 2nd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
Stevens, C. with Robinson M. 2004 Production and consumption: Plant cultivation,

81-82, In Hey, G. (ed.) Yarnton: Saxon and Medieval Settlement and
Landscape. Thames Valley Landscape Monograph. Oxford: Oxford
Archaeology
Vince, A.G., 1981, ‘The medieval pottery industry in southern England: 10th to 13th
centuries’ in Howard, H. and Morris, E. (eds.), Production and Distribution: a
Ceramic Viewpoint, Brit. Archaeol. Rep. S120, 309-22
Vince, A.G., 1997, ‘Excavations at Nos. 143-5 Bartholomew Street, 1979’ in Vince,
A.G., Lobb, S.J., Richards, J.C. and Mepham, L., Excavations in Newbury
1979-1990, Wessex Archaeol. Rep. 13, Salisbury, 7-85
Walker, K., 1990, Guidelines for the Preparation of Excavation Archives for Long-
Term Storage, UKIC Archaeology Section
Wessex Archaeology, 1995, Stonehenge Visitors Centre, Wiltshire, SVC - Countess

Roundabout. Archaeological Evaluation, unpub. client report, ref. 38477
Wessex Archaeology, 1996, Land Off Salisbury Street, Amesbury, Wiltshire.

Archaeological Evaluation, unpub. client report, ref. 42612
Wessex Archaeology, 2003, Stonehenge Visitor Centre, Countess East, Amesbury,

Wiltshire. Archaeological evaluation, unpub. client report, ref. 53324.01
26
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
11 APPENDIX
11.1 List of Archaeological Features

Note: Features from Watching Brief 60032 marked *
Group Cut Fills Description
- 401 Subsoil covering most of the site. Mid grey silt containing common sub-angular
flints. Average 0.5m deep. Removed by machine.
- 402 Natural ground. The most common of three geological deposits. Mid orangey
brown silty sand and sub-angular flint mix.
403 404 Post-med pit. Irregular oval. 0.95x0.80x0.15m deep with steep-sloping concave
sides and a flattish base.
405 406 Saxo-Norman posthole. Sub-circular. 0.30m diameter and 0.15m deep with
moderate-sloping concave sides and a concave base.
410 411 Undated posthole. Sub-rectangular. 0.52x0.40x0.03m deep with a flattish base.
412 413 Undated pit. Sub-circular. 1.0m diameter and 0.07m deep with shallow-sloping
sides and a flattish base.
417 418 19th cent cut. Irregular. Only partly exposed and excavated at the N of the site.
3+x1x0.2m+ deep with variably sloping sides.
419 420 19th cent trench. S end uncertain and may finish as pit 526, N end not exposed.
9m+ long. 0.6m wide and 0.15m deep with moderate-sloping concave sides and
a concave base. Skirts around the east side of and is probably contemporary
with cut 425. S end numbered as 528.
421 422 19th cent ditch. Aligned N-S. 1.5m long. S end uncertain. 0.20m wide and 0.15m
deep with steep-sloping concave sides and a concave base.
- 423 Natural ground. Pale orangey yellow silt.
- 424 Natural ground. Pale grey silty sand and sub-angular flint mix.
425 467, 468, 19th cent cut. Irregular cross shape. Aligned N-S and E-W. 7x7x1.3m+ deep with
469, 470, vertical sides. W side not exposed and full depth not excavated. The arms of the
471, 472, cross were 1.6 to 3.0m wide.
473, 474
426 427 Saxo-Norman pit. Sub-circular. 0.60m diameter and 0.10m deep with moderate-
sloping sides and a flattish base.
428 429 Saxo-Norman pit. Probably two contemporary intercutting pits. The irregular
shape included a sub-circular part, 0.5m diameter and 0.10m deep with
moderate-sloping sides and a flat base at the N. This was joined to an oval pit
2.1x1.5x0.2m deep to the S. The oval pit had moderate-sloping sides and a
concave base.
440 441 Undated cut. Only seen in section. 0.6m wide and 0.20m deep with moderate-
sloping sides a concave base.
- 442 Post-med layer. Only seen in section. Covers Saxon ditch 519.Very dark greyish
brown silty clay. 0.25m deep.
- 443 / 444 Modern layer. Only seen in section. Mid brown silty clay. 0.30m deep. A greenish
tinge suggests the presence of cess.
445 446, 447, 19th cent? construction cut. Only seen in section. Cut for the construction of the
448, 449, E-W aligned boundary wall (448) that is still extant. At least 1.5m wide and 0.2m
450 deep with shallow-sloping sides and a flattish base.
- 448 19th cent? boundary wall. Aligned E-W and still extant although partially replaced
with 20th cent breeze block. 0.40m wide and 2m tall. Made from lime mortar and
chalk rubble with occasional fractured flints. Perhaps categorised as “Clunch”.
451 452, 453, 20th cent pit. Only seen in section. Ca. 1.6m wide and 0.5m deep with shallow-
454, 455 sloping sides and a concave base.
456 457, 458 20th cent robber trench. Only seen in section. At least 1.2m wide and 0.5m deep
with steep-sloping sides and a flat base. Contained flint rubble (457) in a corner,
probably a remnant of the original fill. Just N and possibly parallel to wall 448.
462 430 431 Medieval ditch. Aligned E-W. 9m+ long, W end not exposed. 0.50m wide and
463 464 0.22m deep with moderate-sloping sides and a concave base. Its E terminus
was noticeably rectangular.
477 478 Saxo-Norman posthole. Sub-rectangular. 0.90x0.52x0.20m deep with moderate-
482 483 Post-med pit. Sub-circular. 2.70m diameter and 0.25m deep with moderate-
484 485, 486 Saxo-Norman pit. Sub-circular. 1.7m diameter and 0.50m deep with moderate-
sloping sides and a concave base.
487 488 Saxo-Norman posthole. Sub-rectangular. 0.80x0.40x0.20m deep with steep-
sloping sides and a concave base.
489 490 Medieval ditch. Aligned NW-SE. 2m+ long, both ends truncated. 0.45m wide and
0.25m deep with moderate-sloping somewhat irregular sides and a concave
base.
495 496 Saxo-Norman pit. Sub-oval. 0.70x0.50x0.17m deep with moderate-sloping sides
27
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
and a flattish base.

497 498 Medieval pit. Sub-rectangular. 2.1x1.2x0.45m deep with steep-sloping sides and
a flat base.
499 508 Treethrow. Undated but lack of finds suggest possibly prehistoric. Kidney-
shaped. 1.8x1.0x0.10m deep with shallow-sloping sides and an uneven base.
- 501 / 505 Subsoil in the trench 5 area. Mid grey silt containing common flints and chalk
fragments. Average 0.5m deep. Removed by machine.
503 502 Saxo-Norman ditch. Aligned E-W. 2m+ long, neither end exposed. 0.80m wide
and 0.15m deep with moderate-sloping sides and flattish base.
- 504 Natural ground in Trench 5 area. Same as 402.
507 506 Saxo-Norman ditch. Aligned NNE-SSW. 3m+ long, neither end exposed. 0.70m
wide and 0.25m deep with moderate-sloping sides and a concave base.
511 509, 510 Recut of Saxo-Norman pit 518. Circular with a diameter of 2m and a depth of
1.3m with steep-sloping sides and a concave base. Integral with ditch 523.
518 514, 515, Saxo-Norman pit. Circular with a diameter of 2.5m and a depth of 2.0m with
516, 517 steep-sloping sides and a concave base. A dog was buried at the base of the pit.
Later recut as 511 which was more centred on the line of ditch 523.
519 432 433, 434, Saxo-Norman ditch. Aligned E-W. 10m+ long, neither end exposed. 2.1m wide
435, 436, and 1.1m deep with steep-sloping convex sides and a narrow flattish base. The
437, 438, line of the ditch underlies the present day boundary marked by wall 448. The
439 ditch must end or narrow just to the E as Saxo-Norman ditch 523 would
encroach on it.
520 521 19th century pit. Sub-circular. 1.6m average diameter. Moderate-sloping irregular
sides and a flat base.
522 407 408, 409 Saxo-Norman ditch. Aligned NW-SE. 14m+ long, NW end cut by pit 482 and SE
479 480, 481 end not exposed. 0.6m wide and 0.35m deep with moderate-sloping, V-shaped
profile.
523 416 414, 415 Saxo-Norman ditch. Aligned NW-SE but with a slight bend to the S. 15m+ long.
513 512 NW end not exposed. The ditch passes through contemporary pit 518 and
terminates in pit 607 to the SE. 1.3m wide and 0.85m deep with a moderate-
600* 601 sloping upper part and a narrow deeper toe.
602* 603 SE end may respect a boundary line marked by ditch 519 that still existed as
614* 615 448, the N boundary wall of Redworth House.
620* 621, 622,
623
524 497 498 Medieval group of intercutting pits. Approximately 2.5x2.5x0.5m deep with
=538 =539 moderate-sloping sides and a flattish base. W extent not revealed.
540 541
542 543
544 545
526 529 Modern pit. Sub-oval. 2.3x1.4x0.15m deep with moderate-sloping sides and a
flattish base. Sited at the S end of ditch 419 with which it may be contemporary
and joined.
527 530 Modern pit. Sub-oval. 0.9x0.7x0.5m deep with steep-sloping sides and a flat
base. Apparently cut within the outline of pit 526.
528 531 S end of ditch 419.
533 532 Post-medieval pit. Only E side exposed and not bottomed. 1.4x0.7+x0.5+m deep
with moderate-sloping sides.
534 535 Undated posthole. Sub-circular. 0.47m diameter and 0.20m deep with moderate-
sloping sides and a flat base.
536 537 Modern pit. Only S side exposed. Unexcavated other than to recover finds.
1.3x0.9m+.
546 465 466 Line of 5 modern postholes. Aligned E-W. Average posthole sub-square,
475 475 0.4x0.4x0.20m deep with steep-sloping sides and a flat base.
491 -
492 -
493 494
604* 605, 606 Saxo-Norman pit. Probably sub-rectangular but truncated by 607. 1.2x0.9x0.20m
deep. Very steep sloping sides and a flattish base. Forms the original SE
terminal of ditch 523. Recut as pit 607.
607* 608, 609, Saxo-Norman pit. Sub-rectangular. 1.5x0.9x0.30m deep. Moderate-sloping sides
610, 613 and a flattish base. Recut of pit 604. Forms the SE terminal of ditch 523.
616* 617, 618, Modern pit. Irregular. 3.0x1.8x0.6m deep. Very steep-sloping sides and a flat
619 base. (Two slots into the pit were given separate cut and fill numbers).
624* 625, 626,
627, 628,
629, 630,
631
28
_____________________________________________________________________
142000
The Site
141000
414000
415000
416000
417000
418000
Salisb OSBM
ury Str
eet
141400
BB
BB BB
The Site
69.19
oad
Salisbury R
69.07
69.07
68.97
Trench 4
Trench 5
141300
Flowe
415400
415500
r Lane
Reproduced from the 2002 Ordnance Survey 1:25 000 Explorer® map with the permission of the controller of Her
Excavation area Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown copyright, Wessex Archaeology, Portway House, Old Sarum Park, Salisbury, Wiltshire. SP4 6EB.
Archaeology Licence Number: 100028190.
Digital data reproduced from client survey
This material is for client report only © Wessex Archaeology. No unauthorised reproduction.
Date: 13/12/06 Revision Number: 0
Scale: 1:25 000 & 1:1000 @ A4 Illustrator: LJC

Wessex
Archaeology Path: Y:\PROJECTS\60033\Drawing Office\Report Figures\Excav\06-12-13\60033exc.dwg
Location and trench layout Figure 1

Section 3
Excavation area
Saxon Section 1
Medieval 417
Post-medieval/modern 489 419
536 NE SW
Undated 69.150m OD
425 421 409

520 408
533 407
542 540
544 526
524
405
497
403
482 410
Section 2
NE SW
523 522 69.200m OD
414
Section 1
412
487 415
Section 2
426
416
428
Pit 518 from north-west

518 (see detail right)
The Site 477
492
Section 3 Section 3
462 491 465 624
546
141350 519 475 499 Section 3
493
600 NW SE NE SW
Section 4
495 69.210m OD
607
Trench 4
604 Observed during watching brief 509
484 534
512
513
510 511
514
516
515
518
518
Trench 5
Pit 518
503 Section 4
SW 401 450 NE
461
465 448
454 449
507 453 447
446 458 460
451
452 443 444 459
431 69.010m OD
442 457
438 441 456
439 445 430
437 436
Group 462
435
434
433
141300 432
0 10 20m 0 1 2m
415450
South-east facing section through groups 519 and 462 Group 519
Scale: 1:400 & 1:50 @ A4 Illustrator: LJC

Wessex Digital data reproduced from client survey
This material is for client report only © Wessex Archaeology. No unauthorised reproduction.
Features in trenches 4 and 5 Figure 2

The Site
2006 excavation
2006 evaluation
1996 evaluation This material is for client report only © Wessex Archaeology. No unauthorised reproduction.
Saxon features
Scale: 1:25 000 & 1:1000 @ A4 Illustrator: LJC

Wessex
Features in relation to the Flitcroft Map of 1726 AD Figure 3

Plate 1: Northern property boundary of the former Redworth House looking east. Modern breeze
block wall sitting on the foundations of a post-medieval chalk and mortar wall. This overlies and
aligns with a ditch of Saxon origin.
Wessex Date: 21/02/07 Illustrator: LJC

Archaeology Path: Y:\PROJECTS\60033\Drawing Office\Report Figures\Excav\06_12_13\A4_plates.cdr
Plate 1
WESSEX ARCHAEOLOGY LIMITED.
Head Office: Portway House, Old Sarum Park, Salisbury, Wiltshire SP4 6EB.
Tel: 01722 326867 Fax: 01722 337562 info@wessexarch.co.uk www.wessexarch.co.uk
London Office: Unit 701, The Chandlery, 50 Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 7QY.
Tel: 020 7953 7494 Fax: 020 7953 7499 london-info@wessexarch.co.uk www.wessexarch.co.uk
Registered Charity No. 287786. A company with limited liability registered in England No. 1712772.

Land Off Salisbury Street, Amesbury, Wiltshire

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Land Off Salisbury Street, Amesbury, Wiltshire

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Land Off Salisbury Street, Amesbury, Wiltshire

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wessex Archaeology

Land off Salisbury Street,

Post-excavation Assessment and Updated Project Design

Ref: 60033.01 February 2007

Report reference: 60033.01

© Wessex Archaeology Limited 2007 all rights reserved

Land off Salisbury Street

Summary ......................................................................................................................... iii

Land off Salisbury Street

In July 2005 Wessex Archaeology undertook an excavation on behalf of the Co-

Land off Salisbury Street

The fieldwork was commissioned by Emily Watts of the Co-operative Group.

The project was managed on behalf of Wessex Archaeology by Paul McCulloch,

Land off Salisbury Street

1.1 Project Background

1.1.2 Following on from an evaluation Wiltshire County Council recommended that

Table 1: Summary of fieldwork events

1.2 Site Location, Description and Geology

1.3 Archaeological Background

1.3.2 In 1996 a small archaeological evaluation consisting of two trenches was

1.3.4 Although Amesbury is known to have developed into a sizeable settlement

2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

3.1.2 Approximately 0.6 m of overburden was stripped using a 360º tracked

3.1.8 A subsequent Watching Brief took place in April 2006.

4.3 Late Saxon / Early Medieval features (Fig. 2)

The pits and postholes

4.4 Medieval features (Fig. 2)

4.5 Post-medieval features (Fig. 2)

4.6 Modern features (Fig. 2)

4.7 Undated features

Table 2: Finds totals by material type (number / weight in grammes)

Late Saxon and Medieval

Table 3: Quantification of late Saxon and medieval pot by ware type

Ware No. sherds Weight (g)

5.3 Ceramic Building Material

5.4 Worked and Burnt Flint

5.7 Other Finds

5.8 Animal Bone

Table 4: Taphonomic characteristics of the assemblage; proportions of

5.8.5 Approximately a third of bones could be identified, and the species

Table 5: Species percentages (as proportion of identified bones)

6.2 Palaeo-environmental summary

6.3 Introduction and environmental samples taken

6.4 Assessment Results; methods and data

6.5 Charred Plant Remains and Charcoals

6.6 Charred plant remains

6.6.7 In comparison to the earlier Saxon settlement at Countess Roundabout

6.8 Land and fresh/brackish water molluscs

6.9 Small animal bones

Table 6. Assessment of the charred plant remains and charcoal

7 POTENTIAL, RESEARCH AIMS AND METHOD STATEMENT

7.1 Archaeological potential

7.2 Updated research aims and objectives

What is the evidence for pre-Saxon activity?

What is the evidence for early-mid Saxon activity?

What is the evidence for late Saxon/early medieval settlement?

Evidence for trade in the late Saxon/early medieval period

Evidence for activities

What is the evidence for medieval and post-medieval development of the

7.3 Method statements and recommendations for further work