SURVEY RESULTS

2006 / 17 Banton Meadow, Hadstock


1. Survey Area

1.1 Approximately 2.5ha were surveyed using a Bartington Grad 601-2 fluxgate gradiometer. Readings were logged at 0.25m intervals along traverses 1m apart. The location of the survey area is shown in Figure 1 at a scale of 1:1000.

1.2 The survey grid was set out by GSB Prospection Ltd, and tied in to existing hard detail and the previous GSB survey grid using tapes and an EDM system.


2. Data Processing and Display

2.1 The magnetic data have been pre-processed by removing baseline shifts due to zig-zag data collection. Where appropriate, traverses have been corrected for minor misalignments; these are due to variations in walking speed, which are usually a result of ground conditions or topography. Unless stated in the report it should be assumed that no filtering has been undertaken on the datasets collected in this project. In some greyscale images the data may have been interpolated, which reduces pixelation in the visualisation.

2.2 The results are displayed as a summary greyscale image and interpretation at a scale of 1:1000 (Figures 2 and 3). The accompanying archive CD contains greyscale images, XY traces and interpretations at a scale of 1:500. These display formats, and the interpretation categories used, are discussed in the Technical Information section at the end of the text.

2.3 The survey area has been sub-divided into three areas (A, B and C) for ease of display in the archive section. However, it is referred to as a whole in the text.

2.4 Letters in parentheses refer to specific anomalies highlighted in the text.


3. General Considerations - Complicating factors

3.1 Conditions for surveying were generally good, the field having been set-aside under stubble for several years, though the land sloped significantly in places. Elsewhere, there were localised patches of boggy ground, though these did not have any substantial impact upon the data quality.

3.2 Several large and numerous small ferrous responses are apparent within the data. These are presumed to be the result of modern debris on or near the surface and are not regarded as archaeologically significant.







4. Results of Detailed Survey

The original magnetic survey in Banton Meadow was re-surveyed to ensure complete coverage of the whole of the area of interest. This included extending the survey to the eastern edge of the field.

4.1 The agreement between the original survey and the re-survey is reasonable, but there are some minor changes. In part this is due to the excavations that have occurred in the period between the visits and also due to the slight change in traverse orientation that was a consequence of the new baseline.

4.2 The ditch (A) identified during the first phase of this work has been found to extend across the width of the field. Given the proven antiquity of this feature it is something of a surprise that it appears to join with the present field corner to the south-west. This may suggest a continuity of land divisions from the Roman period to date. It is noteworthy that additional ditch anomalies (B) and (C) have been identified south of (A) and these are evidently former field divisions.

4.3 It is apparent that the strength of the response associated with ditch (A) decreases away from the northern corner of the field, i.e. away from the original survey area. This decrease in signal with respect to distance from a settlement has been noted on many occasions and has been termed the ‘habitation’ effect (Gaffney and Gater 2003). This occurs as rubbish, including debris from fires, is more likely to be incorporated into ditches within, or near, areas of settlement than those at greater distance.

4.4 Given the variation in the strength of ditch (A) it can be concluded that the most likely place for settlement is near the northern corner of the present field. It is clear that a great number of anomalies are found at this point. A general area of increased magnetic response has been identified and this largely correlates with a noteworthy topographic platform at this point. While there are individual anomalies of archaeological potential within this zone, the impression is that ploughing may have played an important role in the destruction of some of the features.

4.5 Within the presumed settlement area there are subtle differences either side of ditch (A). To the north there are fewer coherent responses, although there is the presumed ditch (D), which was noted in the first phase of the survey; (D) shadows ditch (A) along its length. (D) is significantly more curved than straight. In the area to the south of ditch (A) there is evidence for discrete anomalies and potential lengths of ditch. It is not clear if the latter indicates the core of potential settlement or, given the likelihood for plough damage, simply the area with best preservation of possible remains. The slightly broader anomalies at (E) may be due to the topographic change, although they may indicate ploughed out lengths of ditch.

4.6 Regarding the western part of the survey, this area was divided by large ditches that have been subsequently filled in within living memory. It has been suggested that these ditches are likely to be found at either end of the western ‘arm’. There is evidently a former ditch that has been filled with ferrous or fired material at (F) and this would have divided the present field into two. At the far end of this area is a much weaker response (G), which is consistent with a soil filled ditch. It is assumed that (F) and (G) are the two ditches that were extant within living memory, although they have since been filled with different material. This part of the field was particularly wet and only a few trends have been identified between (F) and (G). Perhaps of more interest is the apparent enclosed area either side of (F), which is defined by the possible ditches (H) and (I) and associated trends. Within this zone, surface finds have been made from the late Roman / early Saxon periods (H. McIlwrick, pers.comm.).

4.7 Perhaps the most obvious anomaly within the whole of the magnetic data set is (J), which appears to represent a former field boundary. The form of the response is significantly different from the other boundaries / ditches, and that is likely to reflect the fill material. It is possible that this anomaly is the result of a drain or similar feature. A few trends appear to be associated with (J) and two broad anomalies (K) and (L) are nearby. These two anomalies are likely to be large soil filled pits or similar features, and they may be the product of the soil marks noted from the surface. However, they appear to be isolated and no additional interpretation can be suggested. It is noted, however, that (K) is similar to anomaly (M) which lies on the edge of the presumed settlement and also may be a soil filled pit.

4.8 Elsewhere in the southern part of the survey there are few anomalies of credible archaeological potential. Particularly along the western boundary there are many small ferrous type responses; it is believed that this distribution is likely to be a result of cleaning the adjacent drain. The large negative shadow (N) is a result of the nearby electricity pole and supports.




5. Conclusions


5.1 The magnetic survey suggests that the ditch identified during the first phase of work, and subsequently proved to be Roman in date, extends across the width of the field. It appears to join with the current field boundary which implies a continuity of field division. At the northern end of the field, nearest to Church Field and on a topographic platform, the ditch signal is strongest. Within this zone there are many pits or small ditch type responses and it is suggested that this is a likely area for former habitation, although preservation levels may not be high.

5.2 Two likely contenders for the in-filled ditches at the western end of the survey have been highlighted. There are few anomalies of interest between these two presumed ditches, so the significance of the features remains unclear.

5.3 Three larger soil filled responses have been identified, although they appear to be isolated and therefore little can be definitely said about their origins. However, they may be a result of the soil marks noted on photographs.




Project Co-ordinator: Dr. C.F. Gaffney
Project Assistants: C. Stephens, B. Urmston and E. Wood


Date of Survey: 8th March 2006 – 9th March 2006
Date of Report: 4th April 2006


References:

Gaffney, C & Gater, J 2003
Revealing the Buried Past: Geophysics for Archaeologists. Tempus

GSB 2005
Geophysical Survey at Hadstock, Essex. Unpublished Report No. 2005/63.

SSEW 1983
Soils of England and Wales. Sheet 4, Eastern England. Soil Survey of England and Wales.



SITE SUMMARY SHEET

2006 / 17 Banton Meadow, Hadstock


NGR: TL 559 446


Location, topography and geology

The village of Hadstock lies on the Essex/Cambridge border approximately 6km north of Saffron Walden and 16km southeast of Cambridge. A gradiometer survey was carried out over part of an arable field, known as Banton Meadow, to the south of the village church; the field is set-aside, while the topography undulates markedly. The soils are of the Hanslope association (411d), comprising calcareous clayey soils formed from a parent of chalky till (SSEW 1983).

Archaeology#

The village of Hadstock has a cruciform late Saxon church, which is uncharacteristically large for the size of the parish which it serves. During 2005 a geophysical survey was undertaken within a paddock to the east of Hadstock Church, and an extension to the south covering a small part of the adjacent arable field (GSB 2005). The magnetic survey within the latter found many anomalies with archaeological potential, particularly a well defined ditch and other linear anomalies. A small excavation during October 2005 revealed a large quantity of Roman pottery in association with the postulated ditch; additional archaeological finds, both ceramic and metallic have been found on the surface of the field. The majority come from the northern half of the field and date from the Roman period or later (H. McIlwrick, pers.comm.).

Aims of Survey

The present survey was undertaken over the northern and western part of Banton Meadow, effectively covering the high ground adjacent to the present village. The aims of the work were threefold:
1. to extend the previous survey in an effort to place the results from the earlier work into context.
2. to investigate the western part of the field where ditches have been reported by village members.
3. to extend the survey south and west to the present boundary to establish evidence for soil marks that have been identified in this region.
This work forms part of the ongoing investigation into the village by The Hadstock Society.


Summary of Results *

The magnetic survey has established that the ditch identified during the first phase of geophysical work runs the whole width of the present field. At the northern end, which is near the church, there are suggestions of settlement type responses. However, they are highly fragmented and that may be the result of ploughing. Two candidates have been found for the in-filled ditches in the western part of the field, although few anomalies of archaeological interest are apparent in the area between them. Three broad responses have been found that may be linked to the soil marks, but there is no evidence that they are definitively associated with any of the anomalies with archaeological potential.



# Information provided by The Hadstock Society.

* It is essential that this summary is read in conjunction with the detailed results of the survey.



List of Figures

Figure 1 Summary Location 1:1000
Figure 2 Summary Greyscale 1:1000
Figure 3 Summary Interpretation 1:1000
Figure 4 Area A Greyscale 1:500
Figure 5 Area A XY Trace 1:500
Figure 6 Area A Interpretation 1:500
Figure 7 Area B Greyscale 1:500
Figure 8 Area B XY Trace 1:500
Figure 9 Area B Interpretation 1:500
Figure 10 Area C Greyscale 1:500
Figure 11 Area C XY Trace 1:500
Figure 12 Area C Interpretation 1:500