Geophysical survey identifies potential archaeological features including enclosures and agricultural remnants.
This geophysical survey was completed using a Bartington Grad601 system. Readings were recorded at a resolution of 0.01 nT and data collected with a traverse interval of 1 m and a sample interval of between 0.16 - 0.25 m. Data was collected by traversing the survey area in 4 m (Bartington Grad601-2) increments using a hand-pushed non-magnetic cart system to achieve the best possible results The survey was undertaken in May 2025 and produced good data throughout. The results confirmed the presence of a number of anomalies of a probable archaeological and possible archaeological origin. A large, rectilinear enclosure has been identified within several internal anomalies that are likely to indicate sub-dividing features. In addition, several possible pits are noted in the vicinity, which could indicate localised extraction or probable refuse pits. One anomaly corresponding to a former boundary feature recorded on historical Ordnance Survey maps (1888-1913) is noted. A second anomaly in the north of the Site is parallel to this, and while interpreted as possible archaeology, it is likely to be contemporary to the former boundary. Evidence of historical agricultural activity has also been identified that could tentatively indicate ridge and furrow cultivation. More isolated anomalies including an uncertain trend are noted, although it is unclear whether these may plausibly represent archaeological features or modern features such as land drains, several of which are noted throughout the remaining survey area as weakly dipolar linear anomalies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
James Howe (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: