Evaluates deposits during groundworks in Fishbourne, indicating limited archaeological remains.
The archaeological monitoring and recording took place during the machine excavation of a foundation trench Records were maintained in accordance with CA Technical Manual 1: Fieldwork Recording Manual. Deposits were assessed for their palaeoenvironmental potential in accordance with CA Technical Manual 2: The Taking and Processing of Environmental and Other Samples from Archaeological Sites. No deposits were identified that required sampling. Artefacts were processed in accordance with CA Technical Manual 3: Treatment of Finds Immediately after Excavation. CA will make arrangements with Fishbourne Roman Palace for the deposition of the site archive (accession number: 2024.2). The archive will be prepared and deposited in accordance with: " Guidelines for essential archive tasks and the preparation of archives (CA 2024); " Standard and guidance for the creation, compilation, transfer and deposition of archaeological archives (CIfA 2014; updated October 2020); and " Standard and Guide to Best Practice for Archaeological Archiving in Europe: EAC Guidelines 1 (Europae Archaeologia Consilium 2019). In July 2025, Cotswold Archaeology carried out archaeological monitoring and recording during groundworks associated with the construction of a replacement wall at Salt Mill House, Mill Lane, Fishbourne, Chichester, West Sussex. The monitored trench contained post-medieval/modern made ground deposits to a depth in excess of 0.84m below present ground level. No archaeological features were present other than a single post-medieval/modern pit. No features, artefacts or deposits associated with the adjacent Fishbourne Roman Site were exposed by the monitored groundworks. This indicates either that no associated remains extended into the monitored area, or that any remains were removed by post-medieval/modern ground disturbance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Craig Jones (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: