The evaluation trench was 2m long by 1m wide and was excavated targeting the area of the proposed extension. Overlying pavers were initially removed, followed by the excavation of the trench by hand. Deposits and material was carefully inspected during the excavation. Around 0.8m to 1m of overlying modern deposits were stratified above the highest archaeological horizon. This was carefully cleaned by hand and recorded. The majority of the trench was occupied by a Roman wall running north-east-southwest, but further excavation in a small area on the northern side of a Roman wall was undertaken, as much as possible, to understand the vertical stratigraphy. Subsequently, the former rear extension had already been demolished and removed. The subsequent ground reduction back was done by a 360� excavator with a toothless bucket. Due to the constraints of the size of the skip the area was excavated in sections to help with spoil management. The area in the southeast corner of the extension was excavated first and monitored by an archaeologist. The overall depth of the reduced area was 370mm, due to this continuous monitoring was ceased as the cut was being maintained above the known archaeological horizon of 800mm below ground level. Regular photographic updates were maintained during the excavation with a final visit by an archaeologist during the final stage of reduction. The archaeological evaluation has demonstrated that significant remains associated with the Roman villa exist at the site of 1 Roman Villas Box. More specifically the remains discovered in this phase of work established the existence of room 18 of the villa in the immediate vicinity of the current property. Whilst associated occupation and activity deposits seem to have been truncated by antiquarian investigations and the construction of the later properties in 1881, the structural remains of the villa exist in a state of particularly good preservation. Previous antiquarian work had brought to light the remains of the villa in the south-east of the complex, with work specifically focusing on the baths, comprising rooms 30 to 35, immediately south of this. However, only few references had been made of the existence of room 18, and the layout of much of the room and wall alignments were conjectural. Much the same could be said for room 17 which adjoined the western side of room 18. An article by R, Mann in 1887, within a few years of the construction of the properties on the site, indicated that "the ground had been levelled, and a house built upon it, - a result much to be regretted. Thus are such priceless relics lost" (Mann, 1887). This suggested that much of the area had been truncated by the construction of the houses and little survived in the immediate vicinity of the property. However, this work has indicated that the he highest archaeological horizon exists at a depth of 0.8 to 1m below ground level, demonstrating that the ground was built up at the time of the construction in 1881, rather than truncated and thus preserving the archaeology at this location of the site. Furthermore, to the north of where the evaluation trench was located, the garden, which was not originally part of the property, steps down ca.0.8m below the level of the top of the trench, and relates to the previous ground level before the construction of the current house. Deposit (1/05) covered the archaeological horizon, and indicates that the remains were uncovered at the time of the house's construction, but not recorded, and subsequently covered with this fine gravel deposit, potentially to preserve the remains in situ. Whilst preserving much of the structural remains, this activity has largely removed any potential in situ occupation deposits and finds associated with this portion of the villa.
Guaggenti et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: