The excavation was carried out by a professional archaeologist. All deposits were inspected in order to identify any archaeological remains of interest, in particular those of medieval or earlier in date. These were cleaned by hand, examined and recorded. Recording of the excavation included the position and depths of the deposits exposed, by drawing (both in section and plan where applicable) and photograph. Prior to backfilling spoil heaps were inspected for any datable or significant archaeological artefacts. All identifiable deposits were given unique individual four digit context numbers e.g. 0001, 0002 etc. Context numbers started at 0001. All saved artefacts were to be given individual three letter finds codes e.g. AAA, AAB. Disarticulated human remains found in the confines of the work were to be recorded appropriately and left on site for reburial. Advice from Dr Chris Brooke, Archaeological Advisor to the Diocese of Southwell & Nottingham would be sought if articulated remains were present. The excavation of Area 01 revealed a basic stratigraphy of three deposits comprising topsoil 0001, deposit 0002 and natural substrata 0004. The topsoil 0001, which extended to a depth of 0.16m, consisted of a weak very dark brown silty clay loam. Beneath 0001 was deposit 0002, which was up to 0.44m thick and comprised firm brown sandy clay with smallquantities of skerry and disarticulated human remains. The layer was probably formed either when the chancel was built or during later renovation work during the 19th century. Firm strong brown sandy clay natural substrata was encountered below 0002 and 0003. Orientated west to east and extending along the full length of Area 01 was 0003, either a former wall or foundation. It was built of well-dressed angular pieces of skerry of up to four courses, with a single fragmentary piece of tile present, bonded with firm strong brown sandy clay. It was overlaid by the chancel wall and the modern brick foundations for the low cast iron railings of the private burial plot. Of particular note the feature is on a slightly different alignment to the chancel wall. The difference in alignment between the stonework 0003 and the chancel wall suggests that rather than being the foundation for the present chancel it is associated with an earlier structure. As the masonry has a broadly Romanesque appearance and underlies the late 13th century chancel wall it seems likely that 0003 relates the Norman chancel, the north wall of which, if not the entire chancel, was replaced, and not repaired, by the legacy of �5 left in the will of Mr John Clarell in 1295.
M Hurford (Mon,) studied this question.