Land at Church Farm, Aylesbury Road, Thame, Oxfordshire

wide trenches were excavated across the site targeted on anomalies detected by the magnetometer survey. Trenches 1 and 2 were to measure 25m in length; Trench 2 was extended to 28.5m. Trenches 3 and 4 were to be 30m in length but were extended to 40m and 38.5m respectively. They were excavated by a 5-tonne excavator with a ditching bucket, to the top of the archaeology or the natural, whichever occurred first. The resultant surfaces were cleaned by hand, where necessary, prior to limited hand excavation of any identified archaeological features. Standard John Moore Heritage Services techniques were employed throughout, involving the completion of a written record for each deposit encountered, with scale plans and sections drawings compiled where appropriate. A photographic record was produced. The field evaluation confirmed much of the geophysical survey work carried out by Oxford Archaeotechnics at the site. Trench 1 was not examined with geophysical methods. Trenches 2, 3 and 4 were, however. The results from Trenches 2 and 4 were extremely positive; and, although the results from Trench 3 were negative, and Trench 4 did not reveal all the anomalies picked up by the geophysical survey, this may be a consequence of the size of the original anomalies in a field of this size, or equally that they were natural anomalies - differences in the natural were observed during the evaluation. Trench 4 evidenced the undated but possibly Bronze Age ring-ditch 45m in diameter; the barrow of which having been removed. The barrow, which in its location on a headland overlooking the Thame valley is appropriately placed on a break on the upslope, and which would only serve to intensify the impression it would have made. The size is comparable with the largest ring ditches found at Barrow Hills, Abingdon (Barclay 156-7). The ring-ditch is located on northwest facing spur overlooking the Thame valley. It is possible that the feature 4/10 observed toward the centre of the ring-ditch may represent the original inhumation place, although no positive evidence was recovered for such a conclusion. It is also a possibility that the ditch 2/11 may represent a second ring ditch on the eastern part of the site. However, if this were so, the projected size of such a ring ditch would be in the region of 58m, which is somewhat larger than usual. As such it is unlikely to be a ring ditch, but rather probably represents an enclosure ditch. The linear feature (4/07), which registered as a weak anomaly on the geophysical survey may well be part of such a system of enclosures. This feature was seen within the ring ditch on the western side of the site. It is an undated, though probably prehistoric, ditch aligned northwest-southeast which was recorded by the geophysical survey and subsequently identified during the evaluation. Pottery was recovered from the surface during machining, but it was not excavated, as, despite cleaning, it was not easily visible, within the narrow confines of the trench. This possible enclosure ditch was not seen during the geophysical survey to extend north of the ring ditch. To the east Trenches 1 and 2 evidenced remains of a number of possible enclosures; the strongest dated sequence was obtained from Trench 2. The ditches - which are largely a secular part of the landscape - are in close proximity to the earlier barrow. A north/south aligned ditch 2/09 containing early to middle Iron Age pottery was located in the middle of the trench. A single potsherd dates this ditch; it is therefore possible that this is residual material. However, c. 11m to the west the feature 2/13 also evidenced middle Iron Age pottery, and the Roman date for the feature is based on only a few sherds dating, which might be intrusive. Moreover this feature yielded a relatively large quantity of animal bone.