Watching brief documents below-ground disturbance in Lochmaben, revealing modern ground compositions.
Any archaeologically significant features within all areas of below-ground disturbance identified during the Watching Brief were hand-drawn at a scale of 1:20 and sections at a scale of 1:10. Any impacted historic structural fabric was recorded at a scale of 1:20 or 1:50 as appropriate. All plans and sections include the Ordnance Datum (OD) height of principal features and were tied to the Ordnance Survey National Grid. All archaeological features were recorded using Rocket Heritage & Archaeology Ltd pro-forma sheets. Sections were recorded at appropriate scales with digital photographs taken of all relevant features and deposits. The monitoring, recording, post-excavation analysis and publication of any exposed archaeological deposits and features was recorded in line with the advice in NPF4 (2023), HEPS (2019) and PAN2/2011. Registers were kept of all photographs, levels, plans, sections, finds and samples taken in the field. If required a stratigraphic matrix was produced for the site, where appropriate. From the trench that was excavated and monitored under archaeological supervision no archaeological features were present or recorded. It assumed that the composition and material recorded in context (001) is suggestive of a modern made ground associated with the recent use of the proposed development site. Context (002) is suggested to represent a former topsoil associated with a garden or Rig area. Both the 25-inch 1st edition ordnance survey Dumfriesshire, XLII.15 (Lochmaben) (1857) (not shown) and the 25-inch 2nd edition ordnance Survey Dumfriesshire XLII.15 (1899) (not shown) depict the proposed development as open and suggestive of a former garden. The final deposit; (003) would most likely represent the natural geology. From the Watching Brief it was not possible to record if there had been any pre-existing structures at the site prior to the modern construction as the building(s) and foundations had been demolished and removed prior to the watching brief being carried out. As such it cannot be fully concluded that any evidence for pre-existing structures or features were present within the area of the proposed development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Evelyn Eros (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: