Randomized trial examines archaeological deposits in Cirencester, indicating previous Roman activity.
In 2023 three 1m x 1m evaluation pits were excavated by hand across the projected site of the Roman rampart. The footprints of all three pits were scanned using a CAT prior to breaking ground, and no cables were detected. Access to the footprint of evaluation pit 1, to the front of the property, was easily obtained by the lifting of concrete patio slabs. To the rear of the property, difficulties in excavation arose in pits 2 and 3 where multiple pours of solid concrete covered the excavation area below the patio. These required the use of a breaker, which was hired and operated by a supervisor on site. Once the concrete and patio slabs were removed, there were multiple layers of construction backfill and made ground present in all three evaluation pits. These were removed to reach the top of the archaeological horizon, where excavations ceased and the deposits were cleaned and recorded. A modern drainage service pipe was also revealed within pit two and was excavated down to the concrete bedding of the pipe. Subsequently, an initial excavation of two test pits took place without archaeological monitoring prior to a site visit undertaken on the 29th October 2024. These test pits were dug to determine the existing footing depths. The excavations within Test Pit 1 impacted an archaeological deposit containing Roman material. For the construction of the new porch, the old porch had been removed along with the underlying patio slabs and concrete prior to works starting. From the top of the patio slabs this measured down to a depth of 200mm. The overlying deposit at 200mm was still a modern sub base that most likely been laid down when the original porch had built. The foundation trench for the new porch were then had excavated down, under archaeological monitoring another 100mm. The total depth of the foundation trench was 300mm. After trowelling the excavated trench it was clear the foundations were still within made ground and no Roman deposits or artefactual remains were encountered. Three archaeological evaluation pits were excavated to the front and rear of 8 Corinium Gate during the first stage of works in 2023. The Roman horizon (01/07), (02/09) and (03/07) was seen in all evaluation pits, with the Roman rampart being reached at depths between 0.17m and 0.43m in pits 2 and 3. The Roman horizon in evaluation pit 1 appears to be an occupational deposit related to general use of the rampart. The deposit had a slightly siltier composition than the horizon reached in pits 2 and 3, as well as being darker in colour. The stone inclusions within deposit (01/07) seem more substantial in their placement than those seen in pits 2 and 3. Whilst they may not be structural in usage, the limestone inclusions appear to be moderately sorted, potentially comprising a trodden in upper surface to the possible ascensus. The possible ascensus was observed during an archaeological investigation at 10 Corinium Gate to the immediate north of the property, recorded as a limestone surface, though this was more substantial than the limestone inclusions recorded in evaluation pit 1. Furthermore, the Roman horizon in evaluation pit 1 yielded finds to be expected from an occupation deposit. Material evidence from the surface of the deposit, such as oyster shell, indicate general Roman occupational activity that may relate to later deposition and phases connected to the rampart. The Roman rampart (02/09) and (03/07), was reached in evaluation pits 2 and 3, where it was distinguished from deposit (01/07) for being a cleaner clay deposit, more yellow in colour, with less evidence that would be expected from an occupation deposit. The rampart was truncated by a service trench in evaluation pit 2, most likely contemporary with the construction of the property. This pipe cut into the rampart deposit at a depth greater than 0.17m, where the rampart deposit could also be seen as extending beyond 0.17m.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Burke et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: