See report Results of investigations in central-west Essex have indicated activity dating back to the Mesolithic, with evidence for agriculture being present since the Bronze Age (RPS 2021). Cartographic evidence has determined the site to have been agricultural and undeveloped since at least the 1800s, and this is supported by the LiDAR plot which yielded minimal variation to suggest evidence for archaeological remains on the site (ibid.). Records from the Essex HER indicated the presence of possible field systems in the surrounding areas, as well as excavations 800m north-west of the site revealing rectilinear ditches dating back to the Late Iron Age into the Early Roman period (ibid.). The village of Felsted lies immediately to the south, which has a strong medieval and post-medieval character. 10.1.2 The trial trench evaluation broadly corroborated these findings, with evidence from the Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age, the Late Iron Age to early Roman and the post-medieval periods being recovered from the site. Features were scattered and generally shallow, which may be why the features were not detected by the LiDAR scan. The features, which were concentrated on the higher ground in the eastern part of the field, consisted of a ditch system dating to the Late Iron Age/Early Roman period, with residual evidence for Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age activity in the far south-east corner of the site, in Trenches 34 and 35. 10.1.3 There was a small quantity of undated pits and ditches that did not conform to any particular pattern of activity. Many such features yielded no finds and were located away from the main concentration of activity (such as the small pit 124 in Trench 1). 10.1.4 The finds assemblage recovered by the evaluation was small, given the number of trenches excavated. An assessment of soil samples taken from four features revealed that the site had been affected by post-depositional disturbance and noted the potential for the recovery of preserved carbonised plant material in sealed contexts; the samples also noted a high frequency of wood charcoal from pyre debris associated with a human cremation in sample . 10.2 Prehistoric (Pre-AD43) 10.2.1 Prehistoric evidence was limited to the south-east corner of the site and was residual in nature. In Trench 35, a small pit contained a single struck flint dateable to the Mesolithic to Early Neolithic periods (10,000-4000BC), and a small piece of burnt flint that although not dateable in its own right, can be deduced as also being of prehistoric date. 10.2.2 The pit was in the same trench as a series of intercutting ditches and pits dating to the 1st century AD that yielded residual prehistoric material. The flints found in ditches 112 and 120 were dated to approximately the Middle Bronze Age through to the Late Iron Age and residual pottery from pit 116, which cut into ditch 112, dated to the Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age. Ditch 120 yielded multi-period pottery evidence with sherds dating from the Late Bronze Age through to early Roman periods. The location of these ditches in Trench 35, running parallel to the road immediately outside the southern perimeter of the site (Station Road) and their shallow profile, suggests a possible previous usage as a trackway, possibly one located near to settlement activity. 10.2.3 One other sherd of Late Bronze Age to Early Iron age pottery was found in ditch 153 in Trench 24. A small quantity of Late Iron Age to possibly early Roman fired clay was identified in ditch 110 of Trench 22, which also yielded Late Iron Age pottery. 10.2.4 Ditch 184 yielded no dating evidence, but its stratigraphic location, being cut by Roman ditch 173, offers a terminus ante quem prior to this.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Kerry Broughton
Constructing Excellence
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Kerry Broughton (Sat,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0ff38cd674f7c03778c480 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.5284/1142056
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: