Randomized trial investigates archaeological features in a development area, indicating significant findings at higher elevations.
The development area is defined by the different stages of extraction, designated as Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, Phase 4, Phase 5A and Phase 5B. Within these phases, five area excavations have been planned for where concentrations of known archaeological remains had been identified by evaluation trenches. A strip, map and sample exercise (SMS) was conducted during groundworks over the rest of the quarry site. This interim report presents the results of the SMS in Phase 1. The Excavation Area E had already been investigated and the results presented in a previous report (John Moore Heritage Services 2022). Phase 1 is an area of about 8.3 hectares located at the easternmost third of the development area. In Phase 1, layers of topsoil and subsoil were stripped to the archaeological horizon under the supervision of a qualified archaeologist. Any archaeological features encountered were excavated and recorded by hand. Standard John Moore Heritage Services techniques were employed throughout, with the completion of a written record for each of the 952 contexts encountered, including the creation of scaled plans and section drawings, the collection of spatial data with a GPS unit, and the production of a photographic record. Site progress was discussed with Berkshire Archaeology following the appropriate sampling and recording of archaeological features in each area, which were subsequently signed off and handed back to quarry staff for development. The work proceeded as follows. The northernmost SMS Area 1.1 was between Phase 5B and the eastern site boundary. The area of about 11m NE to SW by 320m NW to SE was stripped to the archaeological horizon for the creation of a drainage ditch around the perimeter of the site. A bund of about 15m width was created on the southern edge of this stripped portion, made of the removed topsoil. The area beneath the bund was later stripped to the archaeological horizon as well. After the area of the drainage ditch had been investigated and signed off, the further 30m wide band of SMS Area 1.2 immediately to the south was then stripped. The few archaeological features revealed were investigated and recorded. The next strip of SMS Area 1.3 was the westernmost stretch between the previously explored areas in the north and the southern limit of site, an area measuring about 50m NW to SE by 250m NE to SW. Following this, the 30m wide area of SMS Area 1.4 along the northernmost remaining area was stripped and investigated, then the southernmost SMS Area 1.5 of the site up to the edge of Excavation Area E. The remaining trapezoidal area in the centre, SMS Area 1.6, was the final area to be stripped and recorded. The natural geology encountered across the site was an orange clay with flint and gravel inclusions, overlain by an orangish brown sandy clay subsoil, and then covered by a dark brown silty clay topsoil. Archaeological features were observed across the entire Phase 1 area, dating from prehistory to the post-medieval or modern period. While there were features found throughout the SMS Area, there was greater frequency across the southern half, namely in SMS Area 1.5 and SMS Area 1.6. This spatial predominance follows the results of the excavation in Area E. The preservation is likely due to elevation, and pre-excavation elevations extracted from LIDAR data indicate that the land along this band was higher than the rest of the floodplain. The greater frequency of preserved archaeological features at higher elevations within a floodplain is likely due to environmental conditions and land use patterns that affected preservation. A similar pattern was observed nearby at the Eton Rowing Lake, located on the other bank of the River Thames to the north of site.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
B Braun (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: