LEISTON SUBSTATION 132kv CABLE ROUTE, SIZEWELL

LEISTON LCS 150

Post-Excavation Assessment Report

SCCAS Report No. 2012/016

Client: South East Electricity Substation Alliance

Authors: Anthony Breen, David Gill and Richenda Goffin

December 2014

LEISTON SUBSTATION 132kv CABLE ROUTE, SIZEWELL

LEISTON LCS 150

Post-Excavation Assessment Report

SCCAS Report No. 2012/016

Authors: Anthony M. Breen, David Gill and Richenda Goffin

Contributions By: Sue Anderson, Tom Cousins, Julie Curl, Richard Darrah, Val Fryer,

Dr Ben Gearey, Dr Tom Hill, Ian Riddler, Dr David Smith and Ian Tyers

Illustrator: Beata Wieczorek-Oleksy

Editor: Richenda Goffin

Report Date: December 2014

HER Information

Report Number: 2012/016

Site Name: Leiston Substation 132kv cable route, Sizewell

Planning Application No: C/06/2191/FUL

Date of Fieldwork: 20th May – 26th June 2008

Grid Reference: TM 4719 6316 – TM 4693 6272

Client/Funding Body: South East Electricity Substation Alliance

Client Reference: -

Curatorial Officer: Jess Tipper

Project Officer: Rob Atfield

Oasis Reference: suffolkc1-119095

Site Code: LCS 150

Digital report submitted to Archaeological Data Service:

http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/library/greylit

Disclaimer

Any opinions expressed in this report about the need for further archaeological work are those of the Field

Projects Team alone. Ultimately the need for further work will be determined by the Local Planning

Authority and its Archaeological Advisors when a planning application is registered. Suffolk County

Council’s archaeological contracting services cannot accept responsibility for inconvenience caused to

the clients should the Planning Authority take a different view to that expressed in the report.

Contents

Summary

Drawing Conventions

1. Introduction 1 

1.1  Project background 1 

1.2  Sequence of archaeological work 1 

1.3  Original project aims 5 

2  Geological, topographic and archaeological background 5 

2.1  Geology, topography and recent land use 5 

2.2  Archaeology and historical background 6 

2.3  Scope of the project 9 

3  Results of the fieldwork 10 

3.1  Methodology 10 

3.2  Excavation summary 11 

3.2.1  Overview 11 

3.2.2  Phasing 14 

3.3 Site description by chronological phase 17 

3.3.1 Phase 1  Prehistoric 17 

3.3.2 Phase 2  Pre-Conquest-10-11th century 18 

3.3.3 Phase 3  11th-12th century to Phase 4 18 

3.3.4 Phase 4   12th-13th century 21 

3.3.5 Phase 5  mid-13th century 23 

3.3.6 Phase 6  late13th-14th century 34 

3.3.7 Phase 7  post 14th century 44 

4  Quantification and assessment 47 

4.1  Post-excavation review 47 

Factual data 47 

4.2  Quantification and assessment of the bulk finds archive 48 

4.2.1  Introduction 48 

4.2.2  Pottery 49 

4.2.3  Ceramic building material 52 

4.2.4  Fired clay 53 

4.2.5  Clay tobacco pipe 54 

4.2.6  Worked flint 54 

4.2.7  Burnt flint 55 

4.2.8  Stone (unworked) 55 

4.2.9  Quernstone 55 

4.2.10  Iron nails 55 

4.3  Quantification and assessment of the small finds archive 55 

4.3.1  Introduction 55 

4.3.2  Factual data 56 

4.3.3  Finds associated with the boat 57 

4.4  Quantification and assessment of the environmental evidence 59 

4.4.1  Re-used boat timbers 59 

4.4.2  Wood technology 59 

4.4.3  Dendrochronology 61 

4.4.4  Animal bone 61 

4.4.5  Shell 67 

4.4.6  Charcoal 67 

4.4.7  Charred plant macrofossils and other remains 68 

4.5  Quantification and assessment of the documentary records 71 

4.5.1  Introduction 71 

4.5.2  Research 72 

4.5.3  The progress of the research 73 

5  Significance of the site data and potential for analysis 76 

5.1  The significance of the site record 76 

5.2 The boat timbers 79 

5.3  The potential and significance of the finds data 80 

5.3.1  Pottery 80 

5.3.2  CBM 81 

5.3.3  Fired clay 82 

5.3.4  Clay tobacco pipe 82 

5.3.5  Worked flint 82 

5.3.6  Burnt flint 82 

5.3.7  Slag 82 

5.3.8  Quernstone 82 

5.3.9  Stone 83 

5.3.10  Iron nails 83 

5.3.11  Small finds 83 

5.3.12  The organic finds from the boat timbers reused in the well 85 

5.4  The potential and significance of the environmental evidence 86 

5.4.1 Wood technology 86 

5.4.2  Animal bone 87 

5.4.3  Fishbone 88 

5.4.4  Charred plant macrofossils and other remains 88 

5.4.5  Soil micromorphology 89 

6  Updated Project Design 89 

6.1  Revised research aims 89 

6.2  Updated project design 90 

7  Preliminary publication synopsis 91 

7.1  Suggested layout 91 

9  Acknowledgements 92 

10  Bibliography 93 

List of Figures

Figure 1. Site location 2 

Figure 2. Excavation areas LCS 148 and LCS150 plotted over the LIDAR data 4 

Figure 3. Historic maps 8 

Figure 4. Site plan showing all cut features 15 

Figure 5. Phase 3 and Phase 4 features 19 

Figure 6. Phase 5 features 25 

Figure 7. Detail plan of Phase 5 building 1092 28 

Figure 8. Phase 6 features 37 

Figure 9. Phase 6 Building, ovens and cisterns detailed plan 42 

Figure 10. Phase 7 features 45 

List of Tables

Table 1. List of physical records 47 

Table 2. List of digital records 48 

Table 3. Finds quantities. 48 

Table 4. Pottery quantification by fabric 49 

Table 5. Pottery quantification by feature type 51 

Table 6. Pottery in structural groups 52 

Table 7. CBM by fabric and form 52 

Table 8. Quantities of fired clay by fabric 54 

Table 9. Quantification of the faunal assemblage by context type 62 

Table 10. Quantification of species by context type 64 

Table 11. Small finds by category and material 84 

Table 12. Summary of tasks for analysis and publication 95 

Table 12a. Summary of boat specific tasks for analysis and publication 96 

List of Plates

Plate 1. General view of the eastern end of the site 12 

Plate 2. General view showing the line of the palaeo- channel 12 

Plate 3. Phase 5 ‘posthole’ building 1092 27 

Plate 4. Timber wall plate from pit 1503 27 

Plate 5. Fragment of oven floor 1311 27 

Plate 6. Well 1365 containing a suite of pottery vessels 33 

Plate 7. Pit 1025 contained a coarseware jug 33 

Plate 8. Water tank 1219 40 

Plate 9. Bottom of water tank 1730 40 

Plate 10. Side of water tank 1219 made from a section of boat hull 40 

List of Appendices

Appendix 1.  Brief and specification

Appendix 2.  Context List

Appendix 3.  Harris matrix

Appendix 4.  Documentary evidence

Appendix 5.  Bulk finds catalogue

Appendix 6.  Pottery catalogue by context

Appendix 7.  CBM catalogue by context

Appendix 8.  Fired clay catalogue by context

Appendix 9.  Small finds catalogue

Appendix 10.  Leiston boat timbers report

Appendix 11.  Dendrochronology report

Appendix 12.  Animal bone by context

Appendix 13.  Charred plant macrofossils and other remains

Appendix 14.  Paleo-environmental assessment

Appendix 15.  OASIS summary report

Summary

A program of archaeological fieldwork, culminating in an open area excavation of

3,700sqm, was completed in advance of laying underground 132kv cables between the

site of the substation for the Greater Gabbard Windfarm and the Sizewell Power

Station. The cable route passed through part of medieval Sizewell, the once burgeoning

market town that flourished under the benefaction of Leiston Abbey until the 14th

century. Time and tide has since seen Sizewell reduced to a fishing hamlet; a decline

that was the result ultimately of a coastal squeeze, caused by erosion and subsequent

(and repeated) inundations by the sea. Resignation of the settlement’s diminishing

status was first signalled by the relocation of the abbey convent to its present inland

spot at Leiston in 1361, which was followed, within thirty years, by the re-siting of the

market. Despite this, fishing remained vibrant, due in part to the addition of Dutch

expertise, and Sizewell’s population was still comparable in size to Leiston in the early

16th century, but in the face of a relentless sea, numbers waned rapidly through the

16th and 17th centuries. The archaeological excavations offered an opportunity to

chronicle a part of Sizewell’s past and through this study inform our understanding of

the changing shape of our towns.

The spread of the archaeological features recorded during the excavation seems to

represent the pinnacle of the settlement’s westerly expansion, which peaked at or soon

after the turn of the 14th century, and attested to a period of ‘industrial’ activity centred

on a freshwater marsh. The site produced evidence of workshop-type buildings, ovens

and an assortment of timber-lined wells and sunken water-tanks together with a large

assemblage of finds to help characterise the site as a place of work and a place where

cereals crops were being processed. The cut-off in the archaeological record occurs

during the first half of the 14th century; this is abrupt and coincides closely with what is

historically the start of Sizewell’s decline.

The excavation data has the potential to shed light upon the type of occupation that

occurred here and a site sequence can be reconstructed. The finds assemblages reflect

the settlement’s location on the beach hinterland and include fishing equipment (hooks,

weights, boat nails and possible net fragments) along with the bones of both freshwater

and marine species of fish. Of particular pertinence to this coastal milieu was the

discovery of sections of planking from a small inshore boat of between 6-9m long. The

planks were riveted together and caulked with sheep’s wool and its construction

seemed to follow a British (rather than a Scandinavian) tradition. Some of the boat

fragments are worthy of museum display and retain enough details to enable the boat to

be reconstructed (virtually). The boat’s timbers (if not the entire vessel) were sourced

from Ireland and were from trees felled sometime between AD1241 and AD1266; this is

compatible with few examples of early 13th century boat remains found along the east

coast which suggest that Ireland was the source of oak boards before the development

of the timber trade with Hanseatic League in Northern Europe.

Beyond the beach, the presence of boar, deer, and rabbit suggested the population

successfully exploited the natural hinterland or derived direct benefits from the

infrastructure of the abbey of Leiston. The plant macrofossil record, although not

plentiful, showed that heathers and bracken, probably gathered from the nearby

commons, were being used as fuels within ovens and corn driers on the site and hemp,

was being processed. The pottery assemblage is particularly important as it produced a

number of complete or near-complete vessels dating to 13th/14th-century; most notably

jugs but also some jars and bowls, which will form a basis of a type series for this part of

Suffolk. In addition the preservation of a number of examples of medieval joinery,

including barrel staves, a building wall plate and well-linings offer an opportunity for the

study of wood-working technology.

In addition to the archaeological evidence, there is an unusually complete set of

medieval land records for the manor of Sizewell which indicate that the land to the east

of the town was divided into a high proportion of small copyholds. The records include

the area sampled by the excavations and date back to the period it was occupied. The

properties and tenancies described within these records have the potential to be

precisely located geographically and, together with close dating gained from timber and

organic remains recovered from the site, show that there is a high potential to relate the

written records to the archaeological one, greatly enhancing the academic value of both.

In summary the site, together with the neighbouring excavations(LCS148), has provided

a relatively large sample across several medieval plots which have a high potential to

contribute to the knowledge of the town’s early layout, character, development history

and subsequent decline. The study of the development of medieval towns is a key

research topic, contributing to a better understanding of the region’s historic landscape;

as such the excavation findings are of regional significance and merit academic

publication. It is therefore suggested that the results of this and the adjacent site, LCS

148 are published together in the East Anglian Archaeology (EAA) monograph series. A

full preliminary publication synopsis is included with the report.

1

1. Introduction

1.1 Project background

A program of archaeological work, consisting of paleo-environmental investigation,

evaluation by trial trench and ultimately an open area excavation was undertaken in

advance of laying the underground 132kv cables which were to connect the proposed

substation for the Greater Gabbard Windfarm to the Sizewell Power Station and thence

the national grid. The cable route lay within an area of ‘high potential archaeological

interest’ and the archaeological work was a condition of the planning consent (on

application C/06/2191/FUL), in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance 16.

This document contains an assessment of the potential for analysis and publication of

the archaeological fieldwork results. It summarises the field and post-excavation work

already carried out and details the additional work needed to publish the excavation

results. This is required in order to bring the project to a conclusion in line with the

discharge conditions on the planning consent. The assessment is consistent with the

requirements of the English Heritage guidelines as set out in The Management of

Research Projects in the Historic Environment (English Heritage2006).

The field work was undertaken between May and June 2008 by SCCAS Field Team.

The project sponsor for all of the work to date is South East Electricity Substation

Alliance, a partnership between National Grid and construction companies AREVA,

Skanska and Mott MacDonald, which has funded all stages of the fieldwork to date and

this assessment.

1.2 Sequence of archaeological work

The proposed cables were to be laid along the route using a combination of Horizontal

Directional Drilling (HDD) and, wherever possible, conventional open trenches. Where

trenched, the cables were to be laid in four parallel channels; each 0.6m wide, 1.4m

deep and spaced at 3m intervals. The cable trenches were to be excavated within a

working corridor 20m wide which was to be stripped of the topsoil exposing potential

archaeological deposits to considerable damage. Thus the heritage appraisal of the site

was concentrated on the areas of the proposed open excavation namely along the

south edge of Pill-box field and the ‘launch pits’ of the HDD near Suffolk Coastal District

Council’s car park alongside the beach.

ETL

ETL

646700

646900

646800

647000

647100

647200

647300

647400

647500

647600

263100

263000

262900

262800

262700

262500

262400

262300

262200

TM

BBN

0 200m

Sizewell

Gap

LCS 117

LCS 073

LCS 114

LCS 112

LCS 049

LCS 050

LCS 056

LCS 052

LCS 051

LCS 053

LCS 054

LCS 057

LCS 148 Site

5m

5m

5m

10m

10 m

10m

10m

B

0 2 km

A

A

Norfolk

SUFFOLK

Essex

0 25 km

© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2012

Figure 1. Location of site and Historic Environment Record entries as mentioned in the text (green)

2

3

An initial desk-based assessment of the area, commissioned as part of the Greater

Gabbard wind farm project, (Maritime Archaeology Ltd 2006) identified it as one of high

archaeological potential. Suffolk Coastal District Council (SCDC) demanded further field

evaluation to test this potential, with the aim of assessing the extent and quality of the

possible archaeological resource and its vulnerability to the impact of the development.

To this end a staged program of archaeological work, consisting of the monitoring of

engineering test pits along the full 1km cable route followed by a targeted palaeo-

enviromental assessment by auger survey and an archaeological evaluation by trial

trenching was recommended. A series of Briefs and Specifications was drawn up by Dr.

Jess Tipper, the Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Conservation Team

(SCCASCT) officer advising the planning authority, detailing how each aspect work was

to be done.

The field surveys and evaluation identified a sequence of ditches, pits and postholes

across the south end of Pill Box field indicative of a settlement site. The features

produced closely dateable medieval pottery from a variety of local manufacturing sites,

including Hollesley-type wares, suggesting an occupation of the settlement starting in

the 12th and ending at the start of the 14th centuries. Oyster shell, animal and fish

bones were also found and the remnants of clay surface, damaged by modern

ploughing, indicated that part of the earlier ground surface was likely to remain intact

(Atfield and Gill 2008). The palaeo-environmental surveys found organic-rich deposits

symptomatic of a backwater lagoonal floodplain. The deposits contained an abundance

of well-humified peats, characteristic of a wet environment which indicated a high

potential for well-preserved plant and animal macro-fossils (Hill, Gearey and Smith,

Appendix 14). The evaluation trench within the area of the ‘launch pit’ near the beach-

side car park and the monitoring of the engineering test-holes established that the

archaeological potential on the cable route beyond Pill-Box field was low.

No deposits were identified of sufficient importance to warrant preservation in-situ, but

preservation by excavation and record was stipulated by SCDC to mitigate for the loss

of the archaeological remains within the development. A further brief was prepared by

Dr. Tipper which outlined an area of excavation totalling 3680sqm (Appendix 1).

The open-area excavation confirmed that the features were evidence of settlement and

part of the once burgeoning town of Sizewell that developed around the landing place

N

LCS

148

and

150

exca

vatio

n ar

eas

Size

wel

l Gap

road

Floo

d Zo

ne

Figu

re 2

. Ex

cava

tion

area

s plo

tted

agai

nst t

he L

IDA

R ©

and

floo

d zo

ne d

ata.

The

Siz

ewel

l Gap

road

is a

rela

tivel

y re

cent

add

ition

, the

med

ieva

l rou

te

betw

een

Leis

ton

and

Size

wel

l ski

rted

the

edge

of t

he c

omm

on a

nd is

show

n in

red;

the

orgi

nal b

ridge

acr

oss t

he b

rook

that

is n

ow S

izew

ell W

ents

is m

arke

d w

ith th

e re

d st

ar ju

st to

the

east

of t

he si

te; t

he b

ridge

was

shor

t-liv

ed a

nd re

loca

ted

furth

er to

the

north

in th

e la

ter m

edie

val p

erio

d.

Plan

Sca

le 1

:10,

000

0

5

00m

5

and market under the administration of Leiston Abbey. The settlement spread was

further recorded in the adjacent field to the west as part of the same overall project

(Greater Gabbard Wind Farm Onshore Works excavations (LCS148) funded by

GGOWL (Gill 2013).

1.3 Original project aims

The broad aims of the project to assessment stage were to:

provide a record of all archaeological deposits which would otherwise be

damaged or removed along the cable route.

assess the significance of the archaeological data and its potential for

reconstruction of the site’s history and land use, with particular reference to the

date of its establishment, subsequent development and end.

assess the site’s character and status and place it in the context of the local

historical landscape.

provide data for the study and characterisation of the local palaeo-enviroment.

The academic objective centred upon understanding the nature of medieval

settlements; their layouts and their relationship with the landscape and the sea,

establishing the nature of the wet environment, dating when the lagoon was flooded and

the settlement’s relationship with this very particular setting. These themes were

considered pertinent at the beginning of the project based on the limited understanding

of the site at the evaluation stage. More specific and updated objectives, determined

after the review of the excavations findings, are presented at the end of the report in

Section 6.

2 Geological, topographic and archaeological background

2.1 Geology, topography and recent land use

The site lies in the parish of Leiston, 2.8km west of the centre of Leiston town (Fig. 1)

and in an area of open farmland. The site is situated within the Suffolk Coast and

Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty on the North Sea coastline and the mean

high tide mark is c.350m to the east. The parish incorporates the remnants of the

medieval hamlet of Sizewell which has been largely lost to coastal erosion that occurred

most dynamically during the 16th century.

6

The geology of the area is of deep, well drained, sandy soils overlying glaciofluvial drift.

The site is one of level ground at a height of c.4m AOD. Ground levels rise to the south,

west and north-west, placing the site in a shallow valley, currently an area of low-lying

waterlogged farmland that leads to the coastline and the Sizewell Belts which is a

designated S.S.S.I. The sites of the Sizewell A and B nuclear power stations lie 400m to

the north on an area of relatively high ground overlooking the coastline.

2.2 Archaeology and historical background Based on documentary research by A.M. Breen

The site lies within an extensive, multi-period archaeological landscape recorded in the

Suffolk Historic Environment Record (HER). This has been previously highlighted in a

desk top survey of the Sizewell Belts S.S.S.I. (Newman and Ridgard 1995), a desktop

assessment and field survey of the proposed Sizewell C area (Richmond 1994) which

includes the current site, and in a desk based assessment for the neighbouring site to

the west, LCS 148 (Maritime Archaeology Ltd, 2006).

In summary the HER records evidence of prehistoric, Roman and medieval activity in

the nearby area (Fig. 1). Possible Bronze Age ring ditches and other earthworks (LCS

052, LCS 053, LCS 055, and LCS 057) have been identified within 350m to the north-

west and west. A Roman finds scatter is recorded 200m to the north-west (LCS 051)

whilst medieval finds have been collected from areas 200m to the north (LCS 0049),

300m to the west (LCS 054) and 300m to the north (LCS 073). In addition various

undated crop marks have been recorded on the surrounding agricultural land (LCS 050

and LCS 056). A post-medieval boundary bank is recorded 400m to the north-east (LCS

114). In the wider vicinity there are numerous sites relating to the World War I and II

defences of the Suffolk coastline (e.g. LCS 112, a WWII command post trench and pill

box).

The site also lies in close proximity to known areas of medieval settlement. The village

of Leiston existed at least as far back as the Anglo-Saxon period and is recorded in the

Domesday Book as ‘Leistuna’. The manor and Soke of Leiston was granted to Leiston

Abbey at its foundation in 1182 by Raulf de Glanville; the Soke of Leiston was a

territorial unit, which probably pre-dated the Norman Conquest and that included the

whole of the parish of Theberton and parts of Aldringham cum Thorpe and Knodshill.

The original Abbey convent was located near Minsmere, 3.4km to the north (LCS 002)

7

before moving to its present site 3km to the north-west in 1363 and part of the current

development area (site LCS148) is within the Abbot’s own demesne lands. Minsmere

Haven, once the mouth of the Minsmere River was a shelter for boats and the chapel at

the original abbey’s Minsmere site was dedicated to St Nicolas, the patron saint of

sailors, reflecting the local population’s strong association with the sea.

By the 13th century a medieval settlement also existed at Sizewell; this settlement

rivalled Leiston in size and was granted a market in 1237. Following on from the

relocation of the Abbey, the market was also removed from Sizewell to Leiston in 1391

because it had ‘ceased to be of any value’ and the manor had become impoverished

through ‘misfortunes’. These misfortunes are likely to have included loss of land through

inundations from the sea and records attest to the disappearance of at least sixty acres

and, in a separate occasion during the 1340’s, 300 houses were sunk. Fishing however

remained vibrant, in part due to the addition of Dutch expertise, and in the early 16th

century the settlement was still of a comparable size to Leiston as indicated by numbers

of taxpayers. The decline of Sizewell through the 16th and 17th centuries appears to

have been at times a rapid process largely caused by flooding and coastal erosion

(Breen 2013).

The focus of the medieval geography of the immediate area was different from that of

today; the Sizewell Gap Road was an insignificant drift way, a short ‘cul de sac’ which

only became the road linking Sizewell and Leiston in 1806. Prior to this the route

between the settlements ran north from Leiston and followed the south side of Leiston

Common before dropping south (diagonally across Pill box field) to a bridge that

crossed a watercourse (now part of Sizewell Belts) immediately north-west of the

excavation (Fig. 2). Early on the bridge was replaced by one positioned slightly further

to the north; this change is likely to have occurred in the medieval period as both

bridges are named after tenants who are known to have lived in the 14th century (Breen

2013).

The site west of Sandy Lane (LCS148) formed part of Leiston Warren and part of the

Abbot’s own demense lands which following the Dissolution became Crown Land,

whereas the area to the east of the lane (LCS150) had become separated from the

Abbot’s demesne prior to the Dissolution and become manorial copyhold which was

subsequently sold on to a number of copyholders.

a) Hodskinson Map of Suffolk 1783 ‘Sizewell Gap’ appears as an annotation on the

map just to the right of the site which is outlined in

red and the junction between the Gap road and

Sandy Lane is shown just as they appear today.

Sandy Lane provided access to Leiston Wet and

Dry Commons and as a route was clearly more

important than it is today. Leiston Commons were

enclosed in 1824-5

b) Tithe map for the parish of Leiston–cum-

Sizewell1841

The site lies in the corner of Field 254 which at

the time was Crown Land and not listed in the

tithe apportionment, but is named as Sizewell

Vent on maps of 1777 and 1806. Field 271 was

recorded as ‘Pit Field’ and was part of an

unnamed farm of 180 acres, one of several

holdings in the ownership of Francis Hayle (IRO

ref FDA164/A1/1b)

c) First Edition Ordnance Survey 1882 This suggests that entire area of the

excavations were open fields. Broom

Covert, is shown as a smaller area and

does not include that area of trees that

covered the north end of field 202 that

were sampled in the evaluation. Butchered

rabbit bones (once a luxury foodstuff and

indicator of high status) were found in

some of the medieval contexts and it is

interesting to note the proximity of the area

designated ‘The Warren’ to the site

Figure 3. Historic Maps

8

9

Hodskinson’s map of Suffolk published in 1783 (Fig. 3a), depicts ‘Sizewell Gap’ and the

Gap Road to the junction with Sandy Lane just as they are today, while to the north of

the site the extent of the Wet and Dry Common are shown; Sandy Lane provided

access to the commons and was clearly more important than it is today.

When the tithe map was drawn in 1841, the site (LCS 150) was recorded as ‘271- Pit

Field’ and was part of an unnamed 180 acre farm owned by Francis Hayle. (Fig. 3b).

The adjacent site (LCS 148) was exempt from tithes as Crown Land and was not listed

on the apportionment, but is named as Sizewell Vent on maps of 1777.

During the modern period the site appears to have been open farmland and is shown as

such by the First Edition Ordnance Survey of 1882 (Fig. 3c).

2.3 Scope of the project

During the medieval period, Sizewell was a much larger and more influential market

town and trading gateway than it is today. The site lies on what was, in the Middle Ages,

the western edge of the town close to the earliest known bridging point of ‘Chapel

Brook’, the access into the town. Together with the neighbouring fieldwork (LCS 148),

the excavated areas exposed a relatively large sample (8200sqm) of the settlement

area; this ranged across several medieval plots that exhibited evidence of a range of

crop processing, semi-industrial and fishing-related activities on the margin of the town.

The archaeological features were well dated by finds, demonstrating a relatively short

occupation of the site that peaked at the advent of the 14th century. The period of

demise, identified as a drop in archaeological evidence on the site, coincides with the

date of the removal of Sizewell’s market to Leiston, the relocation of the Abbey convent

inland and a time of encroachment by the sea. Alongside the archaeological evidence

there is an unusually complete set of medieval land records for the manor of Leiston-

cum-Sizewell which cover the area sampled by the excavations. The properties and

tenancies described within these records have the potential to be precisely located

geographically and, together with close dating gained from timber and organic remains

recovered from the site, show that there is a high potential to relate the written records

to the archaeological one, greatly enhancing the academic value of both.

The research agenda for East Anglia (Medleycott 2011) recognises several areas of

study which aim to improve understanding of the formation of our medieval urban

10

centres, including changes in their internal layouts, housing densities, and their role as

centres of supply and demand. At Sizewell an almost complete cycle of change,

accelerated by the effects of the sea, has occurred which has reduced a medieval

market-town’s physical and commercial prospects to small fishing hamlet that we see

today. The aim of this report is to summarise the results of the archaeological fieldwork

against this framework and assess the potential of the site’s findings to address these

study topics.

3 Results of the fieldwork

3.1 Methodology

An area of 3680sqm was stripped by a mechanical excavator fitted with a toothless

ditching bucket, under the supervision of an archaeologist, which removed the

ploughsoil to the top of the archaeological levels. Unstratified finds were collected

during the machining and recorded under context number 1000 during the excavation.

Sites and spoil heaps were thoroughly surveyed by an experienced metal-detectorist

both during the machining and subsequent hand-excavation of features. A temporary

cessation in the stripping was caused by the discovery of live ordnance, an incendiary

device dropped by the Luftwaffe during WWII. The ordnance was removed and the site

assessed by BAC TEC International Ltd, a specialist bomb disposal company, who

maintained a presence on site for the remainder of the soil strip.

Archaeological features were normally clearly visible. Areas were cleaned and all

features were then investigated by hand excavation; generally 50% of pits and

postholes, 10% of ditches and 100% of features that could be interpreted as structural

or of other specific interest. Additional sections were also placed where required to

investigate stratigraphic relationships. Sixty-three samples, consisting of environmental

bulk soil samples and preserved timbers, were collected from selected contexts for

further analysis.

Both evaluation and excavation were recorded using a single context continuous

numbering system; numbers 5000-5036 related to the evaluation, 1000-1728 to the

excavation and small finds were allocated a specific block of numbers, 2001-2037. The

trenches, excavation areas and features were planned with an RTK GPS and Total

Station Theodolite. Individual hand drawn feature plans were recorded at a scale of 1:20

11

or 1:50 onto A1 permatrace sheets. Feature sections and profiles were recorded at a

scale of 1:20 onto A1 permatrace sheets. Digital colour and black and white print

photographs were taken of all stages of the fieldwork, and are included in the digital and

physical site archives.

The majority of site data has been input onto separate MS Access databases. Bulk finds

have been washed, marked and quantified, with the resultant data also being entered

onto databases.

The site archives are kept in the main store of Suffolk County Council Archaeological

Service at Bury St Edmunds under HER No. LCS 150.

3.2 Excavation summary

3.2.1 Overview

The site lay in an arable field and archaeological deposits or the natural geology were

visible following removal of the ploughsoil. The excavation area was situated on the

southern margins of a low-lying palaeo-channel that ran east –west. It was sampled by

trial trench in the adjacent site (LCS148) and palaeo-environmental survey as part of

the evaluation of LCS150. Radiocarbon and environmental samples from the deeper

parts of the channel indicate that this was once a water course which became silted

facilitating the slow accumulation of peat from the mid-late Bronze Age (cal date1130-

930 BC). The uppermost peat dates to the Middle Saxon period but there is a clear and

sharp interface between the organic layers and the silt-sands that seal it suggesting that

it may have been truncated and buried by ploughing in the medieval period. Whilst the

palaeo-channel had become completely infilled by the time of the occupation of the site

it still existed as a discernible hollow and prone to flooding, as occurred during the

excavation (Pl.2).

One hundred and nine cut features were recorded across the entire area of the

excavation with particular concentrations over the eastern half and, less so, the west

end (Fig. 4). Although during the medieval period the Gap Road did not exist as the link

between Leiston and Sizewell it is interesting to note the features occur where the site is

closest to the road edge; at the eastern end, the putative Phase 5 building lies within

17m of the road whereas at the west end the site is no closer than 20m from Sandy

12

Plate 1. General view of the eastern end of the site looking south showing a pattern of ditches and features

Plate 2. General view of the east end of the site looking west which shows the line of the low-lying palaeo-channel following summer rain

13

Lane. Features were most sparse at the centre of the site where the natural ground

level was at its highest and there is a strong likelihood that the features from this area

have been a casualty of truncation through modern ploughing and it was noted that the

remaining ditch runs were shallow and incomplete. Where best preserved (at the east

end of the site) the archaeological deposits had been partly protected by soil build–up,

the result of plough movements, and discrete areas of patchy clay, indicating the former

medieval floor/ground level and the remains of surface-built ovens, which were recorded

0.5m below the existing surface. A limited vertical stratigraphy existed in these areas

which were left upstanding during the mechanical soil strip and hand-excavated within

soil blocks; over the vast majority of the site however the archaeology could only be

identified as cut features once the surface of the natural sand had been exposed. The

low-lying situation, at the margin of a linear hollow at the tail of the Sizewell Belts

wetlands, meant that the site was waterlogged within 300-400 mm of the excavation

surface and flooded across the lowest-lying parts of the site. With the exception of those

features excavated specifically to access water, all of the cut features were shallow

stopping at or just within the existing groundwater level. This suggested that the height

of the water table at the time of the excavation was similar or slightly above that of the

medieval period. Where features breached the water table, preservation of organic

material was good and this together with the concentrations of mineralised iron within

the natural sand was indicative of the site being historically waterlogged.

The archaeological features were the result of occupation between the 11th and 14th

centuries. The early medieval phase consisted of a series of a sequence of narrow

ditches running down to the edge of the palaeo-channel. The early ditches were well-

dated by pottery to the 11th-12th century although other feature-types relating to this

initial occupation were sparse. None of the building evidence which was encountered on

the adjacent site (LCS148) for this period was recorded here. This apparent low

intensity of occupation was reflected in the pottery totals and more than twice as much

early medieval pottery was collected from the LCS148 site than from here; the early

medieval pottery accounted for only 2.6% of the total LCS150 assemblage – a ratio that

was lower than that of the adjacent site.

From around the end of the 12th century, a more intense occupation phase occured;

initially with pit-digging on the (marginally) higher ground on the south edge of the

excavation, but during the 13th century the activity developed on the lower lying area

14

and included two posthole buildings, clay-built ovens, a timber-lined well and similarly-

lined large cisterns or steeping tanks; a second less concentrated and defined group of

occupation features also occurred near to the corner of Sandy Lane. The main group of

features suggested semi-industrial activity exploiting the freshwater resource and was

confined to a narrow section of the site spanning c.30m. The extent of the intense

feature spread was narrow and it is thought that these features lay entirely within a

single property; the area covered by the spread of features was similar to the plot widths

observed at LCS148 site (Gill 2013) although here not enclosed within a bounded area.

For this high medieval period, the pottery quantities were greater than the adjacent site

and the variety of vessel types broader. The pottery assemblage included caches of

complete or near complete vessels, mainly jugs, which had been discarded into two of

the wells when they were abandoned. Amongst the other finds the animal bone

assemblage despite being small shows a rich diversity of species, including fish and sea

birds reflecting the coastal position; there were good organic remains and most

significantly jointed planking from the hull of a 13th century boat, which had been re-

used to create the well–linings, and a wall plate from a modest building of similar date.

There are no features and very few finds that postdate the mid-14th century indicating a

probable total abandonment of the site by this time.

3.2.2 Phasing

Approximately 56% of the cut features could be dated by pottery and or small finds, all

of which were attributed to a relatively short-lived period of occupation of the site

between the 12th to 14th centuries. The wet environment and unstable nature of

waterlogged sand meant that the open features existed fleetingly and this transience

was apparent in the multiple re-cutting of some of the ditches and short date range of

some of the pottery assemblages. Short stratigraphic sequences within local feature

groups allowed the evidence of this high medieval activity to be sub-divided further;

particularly in the low-lying areas in the centre of the site where a very limited vertical

stratigraphy existed. Using a combination of pottery dating and stratigraphic and spatial

relationships it was possible to assign 82% of the features to one of the seven

chronological phases listed below.

N

palaeo-channel

© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2014

Figure 4. Overall plan showing all features

15

Plan Scale 1:120

0 20m

17

The site appears to have been open farmland since the 14th century and its only known

land use history is one of continuous cultivation. Modern ploughing has resulted in the

damage and removal of the upper levels of archaeological deposits. Other factors

however, such as animal disturbance, buried services or drainage trenches, were

limited meaning that the majority of features were well preserved and provide secure

contexts for the material dating evidence recovered.

The occupation is clearly contemporary with the activity on the LCS148 site and the

phase numbering is common to both sites. A site matrix has been prepared (Appendix

3) and the site is described by phase in the next section.

� Phase 1: Prehistoric

� Phase 2: Pre-Conquest 10-11th century

� Phase 3: Early medieval 11th–12th century

� Phase 4: Medieval 12th–13th century

� Phase 5: Medieval mid-13th century

� Phase 6: Medieval late 13th-14th century

� Phase7: Post 14th century

3.3 Site description by chronological phase

3.3.1 Phase 1 Prehistoric

The environmental assessment (Hill, Geary and Smith, Appendix 14) suggested that the

dynamics of water in the palaeo-channel slowed, probably due to shifts in local drainage

patterns, to a lower energy depositional force sometime in the later Bronze-Age (1130-

930 Cal yrs BC; SUERC- 19651) which allowed the development of peats along this

former water course. Radiocarbon dating shows a continued accumulation of peat

throughout the following 1500 years and the preliminary assessment of pollen grains,

beetles and diatoms preserved within the peat profile indicates that the palaeo-channel

continued to exist as a shallow body of fresh water and throughout this time was

surrounded by grazing meadows.

The earliest evidence of human activity on the site comprised fifteen struck flint flakes;

the flint working was poor quality and therefore likely to be of an Iron Age date, and all

were recovered as residual material in later contexts.

18

3.3.2 Phase 2 pre-Conquest-10-11th century

The organic accumulation within the palaeo-channel stopped just after AD440-630

(SUERC 19649) and the shift from organic to inorganic silts/clays at the termination of

the pollen record suggests increased fluvial influence during the early medieval period

which led to increased erosion of material onto the site and it is suggested that this

could signal agricultural activity destabilising the soil or it may be linked to factors such

as climate and sea-level change.

The earliest pottery was 10th-11th century Thetford-type ware; the pottery was collected

from two contexts which also produced later medieval material. Six sherds (five of which

came from one context, 1265) were recovered from this site to consolidate the twelve

recovered from LCS148 and attest to an Anglo-Saxon presence in the vicinity, but there

were no features assigned to either of these phases.

3.3.3 Phase 3 11th-12th century to Phase 4

The earliest features on the site, as determined by either stratigraphic relationship or

pottery spot date, are shown in pale blue in Figure 5 together with the slightly later

Phase 4 features in green and undated features in grey. The plan shows a low density

of small, shallow ditches running either at approximate right-angles towards the edge of

the palaeo-channel or skirting the edge of the palaeo-channel just above the wet

ground. None of the ditches were more than 250mm deep and all were filled with pale,

leeched, grey silts mottled with iron panning indicative of past waterlogging. Some of

the ditches appeared to be paired (1473 with 1372 and 1468 with 1669) suggesting

track or drift ways; the pattern of ditches at the west end of the site bears some

resemblance to the layout of the existing Sandy and opposing Home Farm lanes, both

of which are historic routes whilst the trackway implied by ditches 1372 and 1399 is

orientated towards the putative site of the earlier crossing of the Sizewell Belts. All of

the features were either ditches or other boundary markers and there was no evidence

of pits, buildings or other occupation-type features.

The suggested trackways were 6m and 11m wide; the ditches of the narrower one

funnelled out at the junction with the east-west track suggesting that the two were

linked. The ditches which defined the tracks were shallow and the recorded lengths

represent only the truncated bottom of surviving segments and there was no evidence

of the track surface itself. Although not continuous the shallow cuts 1399 (identified as

1354

1033

1559

1201

1669

1468

13721399

1473

1279

1150

group 1446

1409

palaeo-channel

1377

1018

pit group 1387

1016

1255

1338

Plan Scale 1:120

0 20m

© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2014

N

Figure 5. Overall site plan highlighting the Phase 3 (pale blue) and phase 4 (green) features. Undated features are shown in black and subsequent phases in pale grey.

19

21

5025 in the evaluation), 1454 and 1473 were all considered to be variations of the same

ditch and paired with 1372. No individual ditch section produced more than three sherds

of pottery, mostly early medieval and medieval coarsewares but the combined

assemblage from all of the ditches assigned to this phase tended towards the early end

of the date range for the pottery implying that the ditches were open during the 12th

century. Ditch 1468 produced eight large pieces of fired clay that were similar in

appearance to triangular loomweights of Iron Age or early Roman date, but may be

pieces of some other rectilinear object, such as a kiln bar.

The E-W track way ditches terminated where they fed into a contemporary north-south

aligned ditch 1377. Ditch 1377 was paralleled by ditches 1016 and 1279, which were

also the earliest features in their respective sequences, and together formed the

boundaries of an enclosed area. Within this area and aligned with its boundaries was a

fence, in the form of an alignment of postholes (Group 1446) which ran down to the

edge of the palaeo-channel which continued and extended along a line of a narrow slot

1150. The postholes produced very little in the way of finds but none dated later than

11th-12th century.

3.3.4 Phase 4 12th-13th century

Features that were assigned to Phase 4 (Fig. 5) all produced pottery that was spot-

dated to the 12th-14th century and was generally later than that recovered from Phase

3. The features were however the earliest within their respective stratigraphic

sequences and therefore it is likely that the pottery dates from the beginning of this date

range and Phase 4 denotes the start of the high medieval period of occupation.

At the western end of the main site the occupation evidence comprised two north-south

aligned ditches 1338 and 1354. The ditches were 15m apart and shared the same

alignment as the Phase 4 ditches on the eastern side of the adjacent site. The south

end of the ditch 1338 terminated within a baulk that crossed the site; this was also

similar to the end-point of the LCS148 ditches suggesting that they were laid out in

common. Each ditch produced only a single sherd of pottery, ditch 1354 was cut by

crossing ditch 1352 whilst 1338 was cut by 1335 and 1344.

22

Pit Group 1387

At the eastern end of the site restricted to the slightly higher/drier ground close to the

south edge of the site were a group of pits (Group 1387). None of the pits were greater

than 0.5m deep and many were less suggesting that the high ground water,

experienced during the excavation, was similar to conditions in the medieval period. The

group consisted of pits 1007, 1009, 1011, 1013, 1033, 1036, 1058, 1101, 1232, 1269,

1289 and 1572. The fills were all sterile–looking, pale leeched out sands, and did not

contain the hearth and oven debris that was prevalent in the later phased features. The

pits produced some pottery, mainly coarsewares, but in general the pottery quantities

were low with no more than four sherds coming from any one pit. The exception to this

was pit 1033 which had been used for the disposal of rubbish, deposited in a single fill,

and over seventy sherds pottery along with food waste in the form of animal bone and

shell were recovered from it. A minimum of thirty-six vessels were represented by the

pottery fragments produced largely (86% of them) in the same micaceous fabric and

spot-dated to the 12th-14th century. Pit 1033 was cut by Phase 5 pit 1062.

North of the pits a small cluster of postholes (Group 1201), part of an unknown

structure, were also assigned to this phase. The postholes were sealed by pale silts and

sealed and/or cut by later features associated with Phase 5 and Phase 6 ovens but

were otherwise undated. The group was associated with a sinuous linear hollow 1307,

not a cut feature but possibly an eroded one from the posthole structures use, that was

filled with a similar silt. The posthole group was located centrally between a pair of

narrow, gently diverging ditches 1255 and 1559 and because of this they have been

phased together; the ditches combined produced three sherds of pottery post-dating the

start of the 12th century.

Well 1018

To the east of the postholes was a possible well 1018. It was a broad, shallow circular

pit 2.0m in diameter which had become silted up with pale washed sands; the upper fill,

1019, was stained heavily with mineralised iron. The pit was cut into the water table and

the lower fill 1020 was running sand which contained several fragments of preserved

timber. The wood pieces were the remains of a collapsed lining from the south side of

the well and consisted of two plank fragments, each approximately 1m long, and three

round wood stakes (Group 1223, pieces1451-1453 and 1456-1457). The timber

remains suggested a simple structure; square in plan and built without apparent

23

carpentry jointing, whereby the planks, laid horizontally were retained behind upright

stakes that had been were driven into the natural sand at the base of the pit. The well

was no more than 1m deep and the top of the wood was 320mm below the soil strip

level (top of the natural). The timber remains are the bottom planks of one side and the

absence of further timbers suggests that the remainder of the lining structure was

retrieved when the well silted up or collapsed.

The plank fragments were reused, they had been salvaged and cut down from a

previous structure but retained some woodworking technology from their past use.

Plank 1451 had a peg-hole but top and bottom edges were missing and Plank 1452 was

shaped, possibly a 'prow piece' (a brace/seat/holdfast from a small boat –Robert

Simper, local maritime historian pers comm) that was fastened with dome-headed pegs.

On specialist advice piece 1451 was recorded and discarded, 1452 has been retained

for analysis.

The well pit was cut by the Phase 6 ditch 1183 and cut the Phase 3 ditch 1016; the find

was a residual sherd of early medieval shelly ware pottery.

3.3.5 Phase 5 mid-13th century

The most developed phase of occupation occurred during the second half of the 13th

century (Phase 5) through to the first half of the 14th century (Phase 6). During this

period there appears to have been a progression in the spread of feature-digging

northwards towards the line of the palaeo-channel and the erection of a building close to

the channel edge (Fig. 6). The spread of features towards the channel may indicate that

the ground was drier, as a result of a drop in the ground water level, and the two ditches

1106 and 1374, which run away from the building, are likely to have been originally

excavated to maintain it so.

The most significant development in Phase 5 was the construction of a small timber

building (1092) within the plot in the eastern half of the site and the increase in activity

which was reflected in the increased number of finds and occupation debris, in the form

of more organic fills as well as the occurrence of charcoal and burnt clay, which made

up the pit fills close to the building. The presence of charcoal was ubiquitous across all

features in Phase 5; to the extent that it appeared that the features (including the

building postholes and the ditches) all shared a common fill, which prompted thoughts

24

that there had been a fire or major burning/clearance event. The charcoal-filled features

pre-dated the evidence of oven-building that subsequently occurred in Phase 6.

At the western end of the site there were fewer features and evidence of activity was

less common; the features counted amongst their number an incoherent spread of small

postholes and east-west ditch, 1352. Finds quantities were generally low, the exception

to this was a wood-lined well 1365 which produced a cache of buried pottery vessels;

the single largest assemblage of pottery from the whole site.

Building 1092

Evidence for building 1092 survived as an almost complete footprint; it covered an area

of 9.5m x 5.6m and was orientated SW-NE, parallel to the line of the Gap Road. The

building’s superstructure was composed of seventeen postholes which made up the

perimeter walls and included a possible further seven extraneous postholes within its

footprint (Fig. 7 and Pl. 3). The north and east walls were made up of four and three

posts respectively; the post being widely-spaced at regular 2m intervals. In contrast the

south wall is made up of an array of closely-spaced smaller posts; there were two

distinct fill types and possibly two structures, or a repair phase, are represented in this

particular wall. The earlier postholes included much burnt material (1076, 1099 and

1131) and the supposed later ones (1127, 1180, 1289, 1293, 1297, 1299, 1301, 1303,

1459, 1479 and 1538) were packed with yellow clay; this was similar to the vestiges of

clay that made up the surface to the south of building and extended, in traces, over the

building’s floor area. The clay infilling of the postholes was in the form of a solid block,

rather than packing around/securing a post, suggesting that these were foundation

pads. The position of the ‘twin postholes’ on the south wall are not paired with, or

opposed to, postholes in the north wall. All of the postholes were c.300mm across; the

floor height was indicated by the level of the subsequent Phase 6 hearths which

suggested that the postholes were 300mm deep. Any evidence of the building’s west

wall had been lost, removed by a later ditch which also removed one of the north wall

postholes. A 2m long fragment of a wall plate jointed to accept roof-rafters (Pl. 4), was

recovered from a nearby pit and was conceivably part of the building (see pit 1503).

Outside the line of the building’s walls, but near the southeast corner was a waterlogged

pit 1591 which contained a large piece of preserved timber, 1593. This lay flat across

the base creating a floor to the pit and possibly acted as a post pad or a foot; a load-

1374

1712

1515

1503

palaeo-channel

1103

1106

1092

1365

1248

1352

© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2014

N

Plan Scale 1:120

0 20m

Figure 6. Overall site plan highlighting Phase 5 features (in blue);subsequent phases are shown in pale grey and unphased features in black.

25

27

Plate 3. Phase 5 ‘posthole’ building 1092 looking east with an earlier ditch in the foreground. The divisions on the scales are 0.5m.

Plate 4. (left) Part of a wall plate from pit 1503, mortised for roof rafter along its top face; an extremely rare survivor of vernacular joinery from a humble building of the c.13th century, Plate 5. (right) Fragment of oven floor, 1311, pierced with closely-spaced stake holes; photographed looking west, the scale divisions are 0.5m.

1374

1503

1103

1092

1131

1131

1099

107611

27

1180 12

89

12971299

1299

1301

1303

1459

147

915

38

1293

1591

1171

1023

1103

1581

1106

1380

1220

© C

row

n C

opyr

ight

. A

ll rig

hts r

eser

ved.

Suf

folk

Cou

nty

Cou

ncil

Lice

nce

No.

100

0233

95 2

014

N

Plan

Sca

le 1

:75

05m

2m

28

Figu

re 7

. Pla

n of

Pha

se 5

Bui

ldin

g 10

92 a

nd a

ssoc

iate

d fe

atur

es.

29

spreader to prevent sinking into the soft wet sands. This was the only one of the

pits/postholes which included or required this apparent reinforcement of its base.

Pit group 1445

A succession of pits was located close to the building and was thought to be directly

related to the building’s occupancy or use; five pits in all have been assigned to this

group of which four are closely spaced together alongside (c.2m from the south of)

building 1092. The pits were phased together on basis of their stratigraphic relationships

supported by their pottery spot-date.

Unlike the sterile-looking, silt-filled pits which have been assigned to the earlier phases

in this area, the Group 1445 pits (1023, 1103, 1171, 1220 and 1581) were all filled with

occupation debris. Charcoal and burnt clay/daub was common in each and all produced

a mixed finds assemblages (pottery, animal bone, shell and burnt clay) in which the

pottery post-dated the late 12th century. The pits were all shallow sided and cut into the

natural sand without the timber lining or structure seen in some of the more specialised

features, and their function was thought to be simply for the disposal of domestic

rubbish. In Phase 6 there were several ovens in this area with associated pits in which

there was oven debris; the clay and charcoal fill of the Phase 5 pits looked similar to

that of the later pits suggesting that they too were derived from ovens, however, no

such hearths were identified within the area during Phase 5 (the pits within group 1445

were separated stratigraphically from the Phase 6 ovens beneath a patchy surface of

clay (1105)). Two of the pits within group 1445, pits 1103 and 1220, cut Phase 4

features.

The pits varied in size from c.0.9m across (pits 1023 and 1103) to a large elongated pit

1171 which was 4m x 2m across; all of the pits however were 0.5m deep or less and it

seem likely that pit-digging beyond this depth was restricted by the level of the ground

water. The feature depths were recorded from the top of the subsoil but originally the

pits were cut from a ground surface higher up; this is dramatically illustrated by pit 1023

in which a coarseware jug(1025), laid on its side on the base of the pit, had been sliced

off along its mid-line where the pit had been truncated by post-medieval ploughing.

Pit 1503 and associated ditch 1374

A large waterlogged pit, 1503, was located 17m west of building 1092. The pit was very

broad (4.0m wide x 9.0m long) and 0.7m deep so that it was cut below the current

30

(summer 2008) water table. The pit was connected to contemporary ditches 1374, 1380

and 1399 that fed into the pit and the ditches extended eastward to terminate within 7m

of the building. The line of ditch 1374 was extended by a shallow linear depression 1145

within the building which may have been a continuation of the ditch. The primary fills of

the ditches, the pit and depression were all similar and consisted of charcoal with burnt

clay which appeared to be a common single deposit. Within pit 1503 this burning layer

was numbered 1585 and was up to 0.45m deep and therefore represented a large

amount of material. There was no indication of in-situ burning and the charcoal seems

to have been a dumped deposit. Over the charcoal the top of the ditches and pit were

infilled by a contrasting pale silt, an alluvial or waterlogged deposit impregnated with

iron staining.

Forty–five sherds of medieval pottery were collected from the pit 1503 in total; these

were mainly medieval coarsewares but the presence of Hollesley-type and Hollesley

glazed wares indicate a late 13th century date. The most significant find was a fragment

of a building wall-plate; a component of a building’s timber-frame recognisable from

angled mortises on the outer edge of its top face which would have housed the rafters

of a pitched roof. The joints were 0.45m apart and the wall plate fragment was 2m long

(the timber’s end had rotted off so the true length is unknown); it was made from a wood

susceptible to insect attack rather than oak; this use of an ‘inferior’ timber is indicative of

lower status vernacular from the early years of the medieval period and it is therefore a

very rare survivor. There was no mortising on the underside of the wall plate for wall

studs suggesting it was perhaps part of an open-sided shed. In the pit the timber lay on

the bottom, angled across the entrance to the adjacent ditches and it was speculated

that may have acted as a dam or a sluice, although there was no other structural

evidence to support this.

The ditches extending from pit 1503 produced similar pottery assemblages to that of the

pit, but in much-reduced quantities. The ditches, 1374 and 1380, were sealed by the

Phase 6 oven (1310) and cut by clay-filled postholes 1434 1472; pit 1503 was cut by pit

1430 which produced no finds.

Ditch 1106

Ditch 1106 ran eastward from the edge of building 1092. It was aligned NE to SW,

approximately parallel with the Gap Road, and set back 18m from the current road

31

edge. The west terminal of the ditch turned southward close to the building to leave a

2m interval between it and the building’s NE corner post. The ditch was 2m wide with a

square cut sides, a flat base and was no more than 0.6m deep. It was sectioned in two

places close to the building and the soil profile was similar in both sections; the lower

fills (1107 and 1167) were made up of dark grey/black silt and sand (waterlogged) and

produced similar distinct bone assemblages (made up of only cat and fish bones (cod) –

a cameo of a domestic drama?), wood fragments and some heat-altered flint.

The upper fill (1168 and 1108) was a mid-brown silt which included burnt and unburnt

clay lumps, heat-altered flint, charcoal flecks, oyster and other shells. The pottery

collected from the ditch was predominately from the upper fills (forty-six sherds as

opposed eight from the lower fill); the upper fills producing Hollesley-type wares from

late 13th century whereas the lower fills tended to be earlier greywares.

Ditch 1106 cut the Phase 3 ditch (1016) and was in turn cut by ditches from Phase 6

(1183) and Phase 7 (1441); part of the later Phase 6 ditch network (ditch 1003)

paralleled the line of ditch 1106.

Well 1248

Ten metres to the north of ditch 1106 was an isolated pit 1248. The pit was broad and

shallow (1.7m x 0.24m deep) and excavated into the pale leeched out sands within the

margins of the palaeo-channel. The pit fill was brown sand with iron pan staining which

was waterlogged and unstable at the time of the excavation. The pit was probably

created to access ground water, but it was no more than a simple hole without a lining

or structure and it produced only ten pottery sherds which were dated to the late 13th

century; no animal bone was found.

Western area

Evidence of occupation in the western end of the site was sparser and made up of a low

density of dispersed pits and postholes, a well and part of a ditch system numbered

1352. The south edge of the palaeo-channel encroached onto the northern end of the

site here and was identified as an area of leeched white and heavily mineralised sand.

Two soil changes were identified in the natural subsoil within the depression that was

the palaeo-channel and these were in effect ‘tidemarks’ attesting to fluctuations in the

water level. The E-W ditch 1352, and later the Phase 6 ditch 1335, lay near and

paralleled these expressions of the channel edge and apart from well (1365), the

32

channel was devoid of cut features from the later phases. Only a 0.35m depth of ditch

1352 survived; it was filled with pale grey sand and produced only two sherd of pottery

from context 1357. The pottery date was early medieval (11th-13th century) but is likely

to be residual as the ditch cut and post-dated Phase 4 ditches 1338 and 1354.

Well 1365

Timber-lined well 1365 had been created by sinking the sides of a redundant wooden

cask (1662) into the low-lying ground on the margins of the palaeo-channel. It was

constructed in waterlogged ground so that the sides and the fill of the features became

running sand when opened, which made it challenging to excavate and record. The

feature was particularly significant in that it included a cache of whole and near whole

pottery vessels.

The well was 1.02m deep from the excavation (subsoil) surface at which point it was

1.35m in diameter; this width however included the well’s construction pit and the lined

well shaft itself was only 0.7m across. The lining was first encountered at 0.5m below

the surface; at this depth the barrel was set tight against the natural sand and the funnel

shape of the cut of the feature above this point suggested that the cask had been

worked into the waterlogged ground, to half its depth, from the bottom of a more bowl

shaped pit; the well builders presumably having to contend with the same liquid sand as

the archaeologists below this level.

A 300mm depth/height of the barrel/cask lining survived pressed into the bottom and

consisted of thirteen vertical staves (all of the barrel’s component pieces are individually

numbered 1634-1673). The structure seems to have been placed into the well as a

complete cask (minus the lid and bottom) as the fragmentary remains of the wooden

hoop (1646 and 1647) was recorded, pegged around the outside of the staves. An inner

hoop (1640 and 1649) was also recorded, located 180mm up from the bottom of the

staves, which was presumably an adaptation for the well rather than an original feature

of the barrel. The barrel was approximately circular, but flattened on the SW side where

the well sides had begun to cave in; it was 0.68m across and the staves were 150mm

thick. Six staves were selected by wood technologist Richard Darrah to be assessed for

dendrochronological dating but were not suitable for reliable analysis (Appendix 11).

33

Plate 6. Well 1365 containing a demonstrably contemporary suite of pottery vessels; the forms represented are jars, jugs, bowls and a cistern. The fabrics are mainly 12th-14th century coarsewares but the deposition of the group can be more narrowly dated to the L13th-14th by the presence of a Hollesley-type jug.

Plate 7. Pit 1025 contained a coarseware jug that had been sliced off along its mid-line by subsequent post-medieval ploughing; a dramatic illustration of the depth of truncation.

34

Although only the bottom half of the well lining survived, the pattern of infilling indicated

that the timber had originally extended to the full height of the excavated hole. This was

apparent in both the excavation cross-section which showed the fill which had been

within the barrel (context nos 1364 and 1367) as distinctly column of dark soil; the

vertical-sides extended up from the surviving lining and manifested as a dark circle in

plan on the surface. Outside the line of the barrel sides the construction pit had been

backfilled with pale sand (1366); presumably this was spoil from the original excavation

of the hole, re-packed behind the barrel once it had been set in place.

The fills inside the lining were waterlogged and rich in organic material; bulk samples

(S136, 137 and 138) were taken and have been processed. The survival of the plant

macrofossils were good but the findings were unremarkable and probably reflected the

surrounding environment rather than a particular well use.

The pottery was a primary discard deposit, which accounted for c.40% by weight of the

total recovered from the entire site, including several distinct broken pottery vessels and

five complete or near complete examples. The pottery was deposited in a layer midway

down the well shaft, demonstrating that the well had already silted up by half its depth

before the pottery was dumped and occurred above the surviving timber lining at a point

where the well shaft was dry. The pots were planned and photographed in situ and each

vessel given a context number (1609-1626) to locate them on the drawing; they

occurred only in the north half of the well, packed together against the NE side and

apart from pot 1626 which lay beneath, were arranged in a layer one pot deep.

Deposited all together the pottery is a demonstrably contemporary suite of vessels and

the forms represented are jars, jugs, bowls and a cistern. The fabrics are mainly

coarsewares that normally can only be dated broadly to 12th-14th century but in this

case the deposition of the group can be more narrowly dated to the L13th-14th by the

presence of a Hollesley-type coarseware jug. The construction pit backfill (1366) and

the basal layer (1651) which relate directly to the foundation of the well, produced only

two sherds of medieval coarseware.

3.3.6 Phase 6 late13th-14th century

The greatest level of activity, measured in the number of features, occurred around the

turn of the 14th century (Fig. 8). The Phase 5 building 1092 was probably demolished

and replaced by a group of at least three external ovens (Group 1035). These are

35

thought to have co-existed with a twinned pair of sunken, cistern-like structures (1219

and 1730), made from re-used boat timbers, and a small out-building constructed

around earth-fast post (1117); features which together suggest an ‘industrial’ working

yard. The features within this group extended across an area of c.30m immediately west

of ditch 1183, but it is not immediately clear if the buildings, ovens and wells were

contained with a bounded plot or not, but the extent of the feature concentration largely

mirrors that of the previous phase.

The oven and cistern structures seemed to exist in conjunction with a spread or surface

of unfired yellow clay and were located on the clay’s north and western edge; the clay in

effect formed a promontory extending out into the marginal wet environment and the

ovens and cisterns accessed via trampled track-way 1041. The ditches which surround

the features were shallow and showed signs of being waterlogged and are probably in

effect dykes or drains managing the water around the working-area rather than

demarcating a boundary. The clay did not exist as a coherent solid surface but rather

survived as a slumped deposit, capping off the pits and features of the previous phase;

as a coherent layer it was best seen in section on the south edge of the site. The

presence of a large angled post (1044) on the eastern side of the clay and recorded in

section on the edge of the excavation, suggests that the clay and the sand track-way

1041 were retained within a possible post revetment.

At the western end of the site the features are less intelligible and consist of a low

density of pits and postholes and part of a ditch system (ditch 1335) which paralleled

the edge of the palaeo-channel. The postholes and pits from this area were assigned to

this phase because they either contained at least one sherd of pottery that post-dated

the first half of the 13th century, or were the latest features within their immediate

stratigraphic sequence. Beyond this it is difficult to identify associated features but post

holes and pits (1679, 1681, 1687, 1698, and 1707) have been grouped together under

the number 1447 based on their shared alignment and even spacing. The arrangement

of ditches 1704 and 1465 suggests part of an enclosure with an entrance at the corner;

ditch 1465 is on the projected line of ditch 1106 of the east end of the site suggesting a

possible association between the two.

36

Oven Group 1035

The remains of three large ovens, 1141, 1310, and 1442 were recorded within a 10m

space, the ovens aligned with and were located on and followed approximately the edge

of the wet palaeo-channel (Fig. 9). The ovens would have been constructed on top of

the medieval ground surface, over the then topsoil, and the structure of their firing

chambers would have been wholly above ground. As such the remains existed relatively

high in the soil profile and normally would be vulnerable to subsequent plough damage.

Their part survival here was due to the low-lying nature of this part of the site; had they

been elsewhere they would no longer exist. The remains suggested two oven forms and

these are described by type below.

Ovens 1141 and 1310

Oven 1141 was built directly over a short ditch (1145) from Phase 3 and had slumped

into the ditch; giving the appearance that it followed the ditch’s contours. An oblong

construction pit numbered 1221, 1m x 0.45m, was cut into the top of the ditch fill and

filled with a thick deposit of clay, 1222. This was pierced by a series of small stakeholes,

1139 which presumably once secured the timber-formwork on which the oven’s

superstructure was built. Sixteen stake-holes were recorded in all, located on the edges

of the clay. The holes were 45-50mm in diameter and all but two pierced the full depth

of the clay 40-60mm deep. In plan the pattern of holes enclosed an incomplete

rectangle c.0.80m x 1.0m. The clay at the centre of the oven, 1129, was vitrified and a

dark maroon/black colour and overlying this was a variety of clay deposits deriving from

the collapse/demolition of the oven’s dome that were recorded in sections 1057 and

1140. Consisting of charcoal rich sands and scattered pieces of clay these deposits

held a range of medieval material and lay in a broad spread either infilling the oven itself

(1130, 1428, 1429) or lying above it (1081, 1083, 1105, 1580, 1587) and extending

southwards.

Lying c.8m to the west, 1310 was an overall number issued to the remains of a second

clay-built oven. The oven structure, 1623, was very similar to 1035 although only the

oven floor, which appeared as a surface of partially heat reddened clay, survived. The

area of the clay measured c.2.2m by 1m but this was merely a fragment of what was

likely to have been a much larger structure (Pl. 5). Oven 1623 was built over the infilled

terminus of ditch 1374 and lay above a basal layer of mixed sands, 1625. A series of

sixteen small stake-holes, 1311, were cut through the oven base. The holes were

palaeo-channel

ovens 1035

10411335

1465

1704

group 1447 building 1117

1141

1533

14611601

1604

1726

1142

15311183

1730

1219

© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2014

N

Plan Scale 1:120

0 20m

Figure 8. Overall site plan highlighting the Phase 6 features (red) and clay surface in yellow. The Phase 7 features are shown in pale grey and unphased in black.

37

39

between 35-50mm across up to 100mm deep and filled with brown silty sand with

charcoal; they were closely spaced and located within the burnt/reddened are of the

clay and but did not fall into a discernible pattern.

Oven 1442

Phase 7 ditch, 1441 sliced through the centre of oven 1442 destroying it almost

completely leaving only vestigial remains to be recorded in the ditch’s sides (section

1057). Oven 1441 post-dated oven 1141 which was constructed 1.5m to the east and

cut the spread of clay layers associated with the earlier ovens use.

Oven 1442 was a type thought to be for drying or the malting of grain and took the form

of a pit, 1.3m and about 0.6m deep; this is a different kind of oven from those described

above (ovens 1141 and 1310). The pit had tapering-sided which were lined all around

with clay to create walls 100-150mm thick, the clay (layers 1078 and 1080) was burnt

red to the full height and the depth of burning was in places through to the full thickness

of the clay. The later ditch cut though the centre of the oven ‘chamber’ removing the

floor of the oven pit and any evidence of its firing. The oven was located at the west end

of the Phase 5 building 1092 on its centre-line but this appears to be coincidental and

the two are not thought to be related.

Water-pits/cisterns: pits 1133 and 1172

To the south of the ovens and west of the clay spread lay two large irregular pits, 1172

and 1133, each about 3m across. These were construction pits or enabling works which

allowed two, square, timber box-like structures to be set into the underlying waterlogged

sands to create sunken water tanks or cisterns (Pls. 8 and 9). The two tanks (numbered

1219 and 1730 respectively) were c.1.5m square; the surviving timber remains were

first encountered at 240mm below the excavation surface and the tank in total would

have been about 1-1.2m deep. The tank’s sides were assembled from recycled sections

of a boat hull, cut to length and held in place against an internal frame. The frame was

post and rail type; the post made from stout square-sectioned timber, the rails (in 1219)

from bent-wood ‘branches’ ( in 1730 the wood was more processed). The posts were

mortised and the horizontal rails tennoned, with a simple ‘single-faced shoulder’, and

pegged into place and the whole structure exhibited a measure of woodworking skill.

The frame structure (at least) had been prefabricated and lowered into the construction

pit complete; the squared-off post bases rest on the floor of the excavations. The planks

were positioned behind the frame, shoring up the sides of the excavated hole, and were

40

Plate 8 Water tank 1219 (pit 1172), assembled from recycled section of boat, during excavation looking north. The horizontal scale is 2m long

Plate 9. Bottom of water tank 1730 showing the planks and internal frame, this is the bottom of the structure which simple rested on the floor of the well pit

Plate 10. Side of water tank 1219 made from a section of boat hull. The shaped planks were fastened together along their long edge with iron roves, the joints caulked with twisted sheeps wools.

Plate 9. Base of water tank 1730 viewed from the SW. The frame was prefabricated outside the excavation for the well before it was lowered in to simply rest on the floor of the construction pit. 1m scale

Plate 8. Water tank 1219 (pit 1172), which was created from the hull of a boat, during excavation. The photograph is taken looking north and the horizontal scale is 2m long

Plate 10. One side of water tank 1219 made from a section of boat hull. The carefully-shaped planks were fastened together along their long edge with iron rivets and the joints caulked with twisted sheep’s wool.

41

simply held in place by what would have been the pressure of the collapsing, running

sands. The boat planks retained their original hull fastenings and were still joined

together on their long edges by closely spaced iron roves (rivets); so were, in effect,

ready-made sides from cut sections of a small vessel (Pl.10). The pressure of the

collapsing sides had caused the planks to bow markedly and to counteract this

additional stakes had been driven in against the internal face to brace them further; this

remedial work implied that an attempt was made to maintain or prolong the use of the

tanks. Dislodged planks, collapsed from the upper parts of the structures were

recovered from within the tank and loose roves, located by metal-detecting, collected

and plotted, but generally the tanks were in excellent states of preservation, presumably

the result of having spent their entire life immersed in wet sand.

The closing fill of the pit 1172, deposited once the tanks became unsustainable or

redundant produced one hundred and thirty-four sherds of pottery which included a high

proportion of Hollesley-type coarsewares which dated the assemblage to the turn of the

14th century, but two sherds of Dutch-type red-ware were also recovered which are

later (15th-17th century). Part of a turned wooden bowl (SF 2037) was also recovered

from the backfill.

The timbers were catalogued individually - (structure 1291 with numbers 1450, 1487-

1496, 1549-1558 and structure 1730 with numbers 1731-69, 1780 and 1789-90) on site

under the guidance of a wood technology specialist and those with the greatest

potential for dating were selected for dendrochronological analysis; a total of nineteen

planks from the two tanks were submitted, of which fourteen were suitable for dating.

The analysis concluded that the planks from the two tanks were contemporaneous and

therefore likely to be from the same vessel; the suggested felling date was between

AD1241 and AD1266 and the timber was sourced from Ireland (see dendro-

chronological report Appendix 11).

Some of the boat planks remained joined together when they were set into the ground,

fastened by iron roves and the joints ‘caulked’ with cords of twisted wool to water-proof

them. As the planks have remained joined in their boat hull configuration they have an

enhanced potential for further analysis, to provide information on the techniques of

construction, materials and boat-architecture. The timbers were examined by specialist

wood technologists and maritime archaeologists, whose initial assessment was that

oven

s 103

5

1041

bui

ldin

g 11

17

1533

1142

1531

1183

1310

1141

1442

s105

7

s114

0

1133

1172

1730

1219

1178

1253

1284

1324 13

26

1153

1174

1118

1200

1062 11

87

1044

1027

1021

1525

1434

1472

1164

1121

1150

1199

1274

1106

1271

Plan

Sca

le 1

:75

05m

2m

© C

row

n C

opyr

ight

. A

ll rig

hts r

eser

ved.

Suf

folk

Cou

nty

Cou

ncil

Lice

nce

No.

100

0233

95 2

014

N

42

Figu

re 9

. D

etai

l pla

n of

mai

n P

hase

6 fe

atur

e (r

ed) i

n th

e ce

ntre

of t

he s

ite. C

lay

fille

d fe

atur

es a

nd s

urfa

ces

show

n in

yel

low

.

43

they are part of a small coastal vessel, with a flat bottom and a ‘hard chine’ (a steep

angle between the sides and the bottom). Prior to finding itself in these reduced

circumstances the boat had done long-service at sea and showed many signs of re-

planking and repair; the specialist’s reports are included the finds chapter of this report.

Building 1117

Building 1117 was located against the south edge of the site (Fig. 9). The planned

structure was orientated SW-NE and measured 5.4m x 2.6m but it is possible that this

was only a fragment of a larger building that extended beyond the limits of the

excavation. The floor plan which was rectangular and comprised nine postholes was

divided into two unequal ‘cells’ by a slot 1150, which ran across its width so that the

western cell measured 2.2m and the eastern one 1.8m long. The corner postholes at

the east end contained sand fills, but the slot and the all of the posthole (pads) in the

western end were filled with a yellow clay and a clay deposit, 1136, spread across the

footprint of the whole building, which formed either a floor or was derived from the

collapse or demolition of the wall structure. The clay was in turn sealed by a layer of

sands, 1135, which held medieval pottery which had a mid-14th century date. Clay-filled

postholes 1199 and 1324 lay outside the line of the main building footprint but were

thought to be an associated ancillary structure; posthole 1199 was short-lived and

replaced by post 1200.

The building was located and aligned on the edge of the Phase 7 enclosure ditch 1055,

but the ditch just cuts posthole 1153 and the building and the ditch were too close to be

considered contemporary. Beneath the building were a group of earlier postholes and

slots, features reminiscent of the component parts of building 1117, suggesting that this

may have been the second or replacement structure on this particular site.

Phase 6 rubbish pits

Rubbish pits 1027, 1062 and 1187 to the east of building 1117 were assigned to this

phase along with pit 1525 which was located c.15m north of the building within the low-

lying area of the palaeo-channel. All of these pits produced reasonably large quantities

of finds (both animal bone and pottery) compared with the earlier phase pits which were

devoid of debris, included charcoal and burnt clay in the make-up of their fills and were

the latest in their stratigraphic sequence. The pottery assemblages from all of the pits

included Hollesley-type coarse and glazed wares which dated them to the late13th–mid

14th century and adjacent pits 1062 and 1127 both produced Scarborough Ware. And

44

the bones from at least four salmon were collected from pit 1062. The pits were about

1m across, shallow (0.60m or less) and flat bottomed.

Pit 1187 cut through clay layer 1192, a fragment of part of the extensive surface 1441

and was overlain by a series of buried soil layers, 1191-1196 which were recorded in

the site edge above the pit.

3.3.7 Phase 7 post 14th century

The occupation of the site, as a functioning workspace, appears to have stopped during

the early part of the 14th century and only sixteen sherds of late and post-medieval

pottery were recovered from the site (compared to 2700 high medieval sherds).

The Phase 7 features consist of a small, square enclosure surrounded by a boundary

ditch, 1441 (Fig.10). The ditch was 1.5m wide and 0.5m deep and demarcated a small

parcel of land on three of its sides whilst the fourth was bounded by the Gap Road,

although this was not tested by excavation as it was beyond the limit of the site. The

enclosure does not appear to contain any contemporary cut features and functioned

simply as a small agricultural plot, either an area of pasture or market garden. This

small field extended c.20m back from the road and was 20m wide, which as an imperial

linear measurement equates to exactly one survey chain (or four rods) and implies that

the enclosure was a precisely laid out allotment of land (it is one tenth of an acre).

Extending at right-angles eastwards from the east side of the enclosure was a narrow

ditch 1318 and on the side of this was a shallow hollow 1282.

Pottery from these features was dated to the late13th-14th century, but the main

enclosure ditch cut through the densest area of archaeology from the previous phase

and all of the pottery is almost certainly residual material derived from the earlier

occupation. The ditch post-dates the 14th century but beyond this it is undated; it is not

shown on any of the mapping of the area which begins in the 19th century. Soil samples

collected from the ditch produced cereal grain from spring barley and oats but quantities

of plant macrofossils were low.

To the west of the enclosure, shallow ditch 1461 and feature/hollow 1601 and 1604

have also been assigned to Phase 7. Ditch 1461 cut across Phase 6 ditches and

features 1601 and 1604 produced a sherd of stoneware pottery.

palaeo-channel

1141

1533

14611601

1604

1726

1142

1531

N

Plan Scale 1:120

0 20m

© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2014

Figure 10. Overall site plan showing the Phase 7 features in brown.

45

47

4 Quantification and assessment

4.1 Post-excavation review

This is an assessment of the completed fieldwork, of the state and quality of the site

archives, of the post-excavation work carried out to date and of the further analysis

required to take the extensive evidence from the project through to publication.

Factual data

Physical records

Physical records, such as context sheets and drawings, are the primary data collected

on site. Paper records have been sorted and are kept in the site archive at SCCAS.

Site Type Number Detail

LCS 150 evaluation

Context sheets 37 5000-5036

Section/plan sheets A2 2

LCS 150 excavation

Context sheets 780 1000-1768, 1780-1790

Soil sample sheets 63 0100-0162

Small finds 37 2001-2037

Section/plan sheets A2 9

Timber illustrations (acetate sheets) 6 Timbers 1450, 1491, 1497, 1551, 1556, 1557

Timber illustrations (permatrace sheets)

12

Black and white photos SCCAS film codes: FYO 1-36, FYR 1-13, FYU 4-36, FZC 1-36, GCG 36, GCH 1-15

Table 1. List of physical records

Digital records

Site records have been partially input into Microsoft Access 2003 tables. Digital

photographs have largely been catalogued using SCCAS film codes and are stored

accordingly. Original GPS and TST plan data from the evaluation and excavation

fieldwork are stored in relevant folders. From this data a series of mapinfo tables have

been created but require further editing. Individual hand drawn site and feature plans

and sections have not been digitised.

48

Site Type Number Detail

LCS 150 evaluation

Context list 1 To be inputted

Trench list 1 To be inputted

Finds list 1 To be inputted

Mapinfo tables 2 \\SVR-ETD077\Data\Arc\ALL_site\Leiston\LCS 150\Evaluation\maps

Digital photographs (uncatalogued)

22 \\SVR-ETD077\Data\Arc\ALL_site\Leiston\LCS 150\Photos\Evaluation photos LCS 150

LCS 150 excavation

Context list 1 \\SVR-ETD077\Data\Arc\ALL_site\Leiston\LCS 150\LCS 150.mdb (not completed)

Finds lists To be inputted

Soil sample and timbers list

1 \\SVR-ETD077\Data\Arc\ALL_site\Leiston\LCS 150

Small finds list 1 \\SVR-ETD077\Data\Arc\ALL_site\Leiston\LCS 150\LCS 150.mdb

Mapinfo tables: 11 \\SVR-ETD077\Data\Arc\ALL_site\Leiston\LCS 150\Maps

Contour survey (mapinfo tables)

5 \\SVR-ETD077\Data\Arc\ALL_site\Leiston\LCS 150\maps\contour survey

Digital photographs (catalogued)

466 SCCAS Film codes: GBC 1-104, GBD 1-104, GBE 1-104, GBF 1-104, GBG 1-50

Digital photographs (uncatalogued)

301 \\SVR-ETD077\Data\Arc\ALL_site\Leiston\LCS 150\Photos\Excavation photos LCS 150

Table 2. List of digital records

4.2 Quantification and assessment of the bulk finds archive

Richenda Goffin

4.2.1 Introduction

Table 3 shows the quantities of finds collected during the excavation. A full

quantification by context is included as Appendix 5.

Find type No. Wt/gPottery 2877 49696 CBM 34 6273 Fired clay 365 3201 Stone 26 2212 Clay pipe 5 19 Lava quern 122 3943 Worked flint 15 3550 Burnt flint/stone 70 1366 Slag 3 92 Iron nails 33 244 Animal bone - 4953 Shell 657 - Charcoal 29 -

Table 3. Finds quantities

49

4.2.2 Pottery

Sue Anderson

Introduction

A total of 2877 sherds of pottery weighing 49,696g was collected from 193 contexts.

Table 4 shows the quantification by fabric; a summary catalogue by context is included

as Appendix 6.

Description Fabric Code No Wt/g MNV Eve

Thetford-type ware THET 2.50 6 74 3 Early medieval' sandwich wares EMSW 2.58 8 322 6 0.32Early medieval ware EMW 3.10 87 610 75 0.57Early medieval ware gritty EMWG 3.11 6 42 5 Yarmouth-type ware YAR 3.17 4 21 3 Early medieval sparse shelly ware EMWSS 3.19 24 111 24 0.03Early medieval gritty with shell EMWSG 3.191 17 213 10 0.10Pingsdorf Ware PING 7.24 1 8 1 153 1401 127 1.02

Medieval coarseware MCW 3.20 1085 15417 596 6.95Medieval coarseware gritty MCWG 3.21 5 66 5 Medieval coarseware micaceous MCWM 3.24 1095 23636 404 9.11Hollesley-type coarseware HOLL 3.42 376 7018 330 3.18Flemish Blue-Grey Ware FLBG 7.23 2 11 2 Unprovenanced glazed UPG 4.00 16 180 7 Grimston-type ware GRIM 4.10 6 26 2 Rouen-type ware ROU 7.34 1 8 1 Hedingham Ware HFW1 4.23 5 40 3 Ipswich Glazed Ware IPSG 4.31 3 23 1 Hollesley Glazed Ware HOLG 4.32 94 1311 49 0.10Scarborough Ware SCAR 4.40 17 317 16 Yorkshire glazed wares YORK 4.43 1 3 1 2706 48056 1417 19.34

Late medieval and transitional LMT 5.10 4 104 4 Midland Purple MIDP 5.21 1 6 1 Raeran/Aachen Stoneware GSW3 7.13 1 20 1 0.20Dutch-type redwares DUTR 7.21 2 36 1 Glazed red earthenware GRE 6.12 3 28 3 0.05Cologne/Frechen Stoneware GSW4 7.14 2 15 2 Refined white earthenwares REFW 8.03 3 8 3 16 217 15 0.25

Unidentified UNID 0.001 1 10 1 Unidentified ?import UIMP 7.00 1 12 1 2 22 2

Totals 2877 49696 1561 20.61

Table 4. Pottery quantification by fabric

Methodology

Quantification was carried out using sherd count, weight and estimated vessel

equivalent (eve). The minimum number of vessels (MNV) within each context was also

recorded, but cross-fitting was not attempted unless particularly distinctive vessels were

observed in more than one context. A full quantification by fabric, context and feature is

available in archive. All fabric codes were assigned from the author’s post-Roman fabric

series, which includes East Anglian and Midlands fabrics, as well as imported wares.

50

Form terminology for medieval pottery is based on MPRG (1998). Recording uses a

system of letters for fabric codes together with number codes for ease of sorting in

database format. The results were input directly onto an Access database.

Pottery by period

Early to high medieval

Only six sherds of Late Saxon pottery were present, including a wide strap handle in

Thetford-type ware and two jars with everted rims in EMSW.

A small proportion of this assemblage comprised early medieval pottery of later 11th to

13th-century date. Just over half of the early medieval assemblage was in sandy fabrics

(EMW, EMWG, PING), with around a third containing moderate to common shell

inclusions (YAR, EMWSS, EMWSG). In the high medieval phase, sandy wares

dominated (MCW, MCWG, MCWM, HOLL, FLBG), with no shelly wares occurring in this

group. The MCWM fabric was introduced with this group when it became clear that a

high proportion of the group contained moderate to abundant mica, and that certain

forms seemed to be present in those fabrics only. This impression will require further

work to confirm, but there is also a tentative suggestion that the fabric may occur later in

the sequence than some of the other fabrics in this assemblage. Only a few micaceous

wares were noted at the neighbouring site, LCS 148, and these were not separated out.

Of the early medieval wares, only seven rims were present, of which six were jars and

one was possibly a spouted pitcher. The range of forms present in the high medieval

group comprised jars, bowls, handled bowls, jugs, spouted pitchers, cisterns and a

lamp. This is a much broader range than was present at LCS 148. Rim forms were

varied, although the majority seemed to be developed types of 13th/14th-century and

possibly later date. This assemblage is particularly important in producing a number of

complete or near-complete vessels, most notably jugs but also some jars and bowls,

which will require illustration as a basis of a type series for this part of Suffolk.

Like LCS 148, glazed wares were not common in this group, in this case making up

5.6% of the high medieval group (based on MNV). This is a very small proportion of the

medieval group as a whole, but is nevertheless higher than the proportion at LCS 148.

Hollesley-type wares formed the greatest proportion of the group, and there were

several sherds of ‘UPG’ which appeared similar to the local medieval coarsewares,

51

suggesting a local origin for those too. Other glazed wares included local and regional

wares from Suffolk, Norfolk and Essex, and there were several sherds from Yorkshire,

most notably the commonly exported Scarborough Ware.

Imports of this period comprised a single sherd of white Pingsdorf ware, a possible

fragment of Rouen Ware (athough this was burnt and could be a London Ware copy),

and two sherds of Flemish blue-grey ‘Paffrath’ ware.

Late and post-medieval

Few sherds of late and post-medieval date were recovered, and only two vessel forms

were identifiable. These were a Raeren stoneware mug and a GRE dish. Two

fragments of a Dutch redware handle may be from a small cauldron or skillet, and both

body sherds in Frechen stoneware were probably from bottles.

Three small refined factory-made whiteware sherds were present, including a ?saucer

rim and two body sherds with blue transfer-printed decoration.

Unidentified

A redware sherd with all-over white slip externally was most likely to be of high medieval

date, although all other pottery from the context (1575) was of 11th-century date and it

may be an import of the period. A pinkish sherd with white clay lens inclusions, from

1109, was possibly an early or high medieval import.

Pottery by context

No plans of the site were available at the time of writing. A summary of the pottery by

context is provided in Appendix 6. Table 5 provides quantification by feature type.

Feature type No Wt/g MNVpit 700 6376 463oven 125 1380 54post-hole 55 405 36well 538 19884 142linear feature 64 1069 45 ditch 449 4840 355gully 2 7 2layer 59 754 42spread 34 296 25soil profile 1 18 1 finds 676 12339 292not allocated 174 2328 104

Table 5. Pottery quantification by feature type

52

The majority of the assemblage was recovered from pits, wells, ditches or as

unstratified finds, with smaller quantities being derived from layers/spreads, post-holes

and linear features. A number of features have been grouped and the quantities of

pottery from these are listed in Table 6.

Group Description No Wt/g MNV 1035 Oven 133 1548 60 1092 Post-hole group 12 113 11 1035/1092 Mixed 40 661 26 1117 Post-hole group 89 606 59 1172 Well/water pit 134 1573 89 1310 Oven 1 6 1 1365 Barrel-lined well 404 18311 53 1387 Pit group 304 3516 132

Table 6. Pottery in structural groups

Large quantities of pottery were recovered from wells 1172 and 1365, including some of

the most complete vessels in the assemblage.

4.2.3 Ceramic building material

Sue Anderson

Thirty-four fragments of CBM weighing 6273g were collected from sixteen contexts. The

assemblage was quantified (count and weight) by fabric and form. Fabrics were

identified on the basis of macroscopic appearance and main inclusions. The width,

length and thickness of bricks and floor tiles were measured, but roof tile thicknesses

were only measured when another dimension was available.

Table 7 shows the quantification by fabric and form, and a full catalogue by context is

included as Appendix 6.

Fabric code RBT RT EB LB DP UNestuarine clays est 1fine sandy with clay pellets fscp 3 1fine sandy with ferrous inclusions fsfe 1 medium sandy ms 2 1medium sandy with chalk msc 1medium sandy with clay pellets mscp 1 2 medium sandy with flint msf 6 medium sandy with ferrous inclusions msfe 2 medium sandy with grog msg 5 2medium sandy with grog and Fe msgfe 1 medium sandy with voids msv 1 medium sandy poorly mixed clays msx 1 white-firing medium sandy wms 1

Table 7. CBM by fabric and form

53

Three fragments of ?Roman tile (RBT) were identified. One piece from pit fill 1063 was

overfired or burnt and could be later brick. A fragment 17mm thick from pit fill 1510 was

possibly an imbrex, although it may be a medieval roof tile. The only certain piece was a

fragment from ditch fill 1184 which measured 29mm thick and had a reduced core.

One fragment of medieval roof tile (RT) was collected from 1169, and there was a large

piece of early brick (EB: 13th-15th c.) from 1026, measuring 112 x 51mm.

Late brick (LB) was the most common CBM on this site, but most pieces were abraded.

Thicknesses of six fragments varied from 50mm to 62+mm, and three widths could be

measured (105-125mm). These sizes suggest that bricks with a range of dates were

present. Those measuring 50-54mm thick were generally partly reduced or even vitrified

and may be ‘Tudor’ bricks (15th/16th c.), whilst the thicker pieces and fully oxidised

fragments were probably later (17th-19th c.). A few pieces could be Roman tile, but loss

of surfaces made identification difficult. The white-firing example was abraded and could

be floor tile.

One piece of field drainpipe (DP) was an unstratified find (1002).

The four unidentified fragments (UN) were all small and were likely to be pieces of

either Roman tile or late brick.

4.2.4 Fired clay

Sue Anderson

A total of 365 fragments of fired clay weighing 3201g was collected from sixty four

contexts. The fired clay was quantified by context, fabric and type, using fragment count

and weight in grams. The presence and form of surface fragments and impressions

were recorded. Data was input into an MS Access database and a summary catalogue

by context is appended to this report.

Over a third of the assemblage (by count) was abraded, the softer fabrics being the

most affected as would be expected. Forty-two contexts contained fired clay with an

average fragment weight of 10g or less.

54

Eight very broad fabric types were identified; brief descriptions and quantities are shown

in Table 8. The assemblage was dominated by medium sandy chalk-tempered fabrics.

Voids were present due to the leaching of calcareous and/or organic materials. Other

inclusions were present as background scatters, particularly coarse quartz sand, mica

and flint.

Fabric Code No Wt/g Fine sandy with chalk fsc 5 26 Fine sandy with with clay pellets fscp 41 710 Fine sandy with organic material fso 17 115 Medium sandy ms 12 35 Medium sandy with chalk msc 241 1905 Medium sandy with chalk and organic msco 26 143 Medium sandy with with coarse quartz mscq 9 229 Medium sandy with voids msv 14 38

Table 8. Quantities of fired clay by fabric

Functional types were recorded where possible, but most of this assemblage falls into

the ‘uncertain’ category. Roughly smoothed, convex pieces of surface were most likely

to be pieces of oven dome (two such fragments came from oven context 1083), and

some flat pieces may have been used to line the floors of ovens or hearths (e.g. 1121,

1173, 1510). Eight large pieces from ditch fill 1485 were similar in appearance to

triangular loomweights of Iron Age or early Roman date, but may be pieces of some

other rectilinear object, such as a kiln bar. No fragments with wattle impressions were

identified and it is unlikely that any of this assemblage represents daub walling.

The majority of fragments in this assemblage came from pits and ditches, in particular

contexts in group 1387. The total quantities recovered from other features such as

ovens, post-holes, a well and layers were all below 20 pieces per context type.

4.2.5 Clay tobacco pipe

Five fragments of ceramic tobacco pipe were collected from five contexts. All are pieces

of pipe stem and cannot be closely dated. One small stem fragment in 1336 has an

undiagnostic decoration.

4.2.6 Worked flint

A small quantity of poor quality worked flint was collected (15 frags @ 3550g). All the

flint is likely to be redeposited and is residual. Two large flint nodules showed

indications that they had been used for flint knapping.

55

4.2.7 Burnt flint

Fragments of burnt flint were recorded in small quantities from 27 contexts.

4.2.8 Stone (unworked)

Twenty-six fragments of stone (2212g) were collected from the site. Several different

petrological types are present, ranging from flint, to oolitic limestone in 1585, quartzite,

an abraded fragment of shelly limestone, possibly from Purbeck (1188), a fragment of

schist and two fragments of probable clunch.

4.2.9 Quernstone

A total of 122 fragments of lavastone weighing 3943g was recovered from the

excavation. The stone is a dark grey vesicular lavastone which is likely to be imported

from the Mayen area of the Eiffel hills region of Germany, in the Rhineland region.

Overall the material is fragmentary but reasonably well preserved, and it has been

relatively unaffected by water saturation. Many pieces are undiagnostic, but some

fragments still have one or more of their original surfaces. There are no measureable

diameters to determine whether the stones were part of hand-turned querns or part of

larger stones such as mill stones. There was no evidence of mortar or other signs

indicative of re-use.

4.2.10 Iron nails

Thirty-three nails were recorded as bulk finds, but it is possible that they may relate to

boat building and be clench nails.

4.3 Quantification and assessment of the small finds archive

Ian Riddler

4.3.1 Introduction

Sixty-three small finds were considered for this assessment. Most of them are

medieval, although there are also seven post-medieval objects. The latter include a

complete copper alloy thimble of 17th to 18th century date, as well as a lock

escutcheon, a button and several other items of late post-medieval date. The medieval

finds are discussed below by functional category.

56

4.3.2 Factual data

Methodology

The objects have been examined and identified to material and type as far as possible,

using typologies from Dover, London and Norwich, which are referenced in the

bibliography. Iron objects form the majority of the assemblage and they have been

viewed with the aid of X-radiographs. The original small finds database has been used

as the basis for the assessment and has been checked against the objects themselves,

with all revisions duly noted.

Objects and materials

The objects are summarised by functional category and material in Table 01. Dress

accessories are well represented and include belt mounts, buckles and strap-ends, as

well as a strap clasp plate. Most of the items are of 14th century date, although an oval

buckle with a composite plate (2024) is slightly later and mid-14th to early 15th century

in date. Only one of the objects is stratified. Household items include a copper alloy

casket key of a common 13th to 14th century type (Ward Perkins 1940, fig 43.3-4), a

late medieval cast copper alloy suspension ring and a Norwegian mica schist hone of

light grey colour (Mitchell et al 1984, 173). Schist hones were imported into England

from the late 9th century onwards and they continued in use until the late medieval

period. They are well represented at both Kings Lynn and Norwich (Clarke and Carter

1977, 317-20; Margeson 1993, 197-202). A fragmentary granitic beach cobble (2036)

can be identified as a ‘smoother’, an object possibly used in sharpening implements but

equally suitable in smoothing fabrics or leather (Clark and Gaunt 2000, 209). A

fragmentary iron ferrule (2030) may have formed the terminal of a wooden staff and is

similar to examples from Steyning and Thetford (Rogerson and Dallas 1984, 97;

Gardiner 1993, 45-7).

Two fragmentary iron knives form the only personal possessions, whilst crafts are

represented by a piece of lead melt and a rectangular section of lead alloy sheet metal

with cutting marks on one side, as well as several fragments of copper alloy sheet metal

waste. Three complete fish hooks and several fragments, all of the medium size within

the medieval range (Riddler 2009, 100-101), represent the only fishing equipment to

come from the site. All of them are unstratified. Aside from the dress accessories, the

finds assemblage is dominated by structural ironwork, consisting both of nails and

57

clench nails. Some of the nails have bent shafts, whilst the clench nails have internal

lengths between 29 and 35mm and have straight shafts with perpendicular roves. A

few of the clench nails are stratified, but the majority are not.

Two unstratified coins were recovered from the excavation, one copper alloy and a

second one made in silver.

A small collection of post-medieval objects includes a complete thimble of mid 17th to

18th century date, and a group of late post-medieval items, all of which are unstratified.

Two additional small finds were recovered through the environmental processing of the

environmental samples. These are a delicate copper alloy pin from 0321 and an iron

clench nail from 1511.

4.3.3 Finds associated with the boat

Richenda Goffin

Wooden artefacts

Six fragments of a medieval fine-grained wooden shallow bowl or platter with a wide

recessed rim were recovered (SF 2037). The pieces which form roughly 20% of the

complete vessel, were found in a gap 1553 between the boat planks 1491 and the

frame 1494 which were re-used in the well 1172.

An initial comment on the vessel has been provided by wood specialist Robin Wood,

having been sent a digital image. It is probably an ash or alder dish or platter which may

have quite a large diameter of over 10 inches. Similar bowls have been found in a group

of eighteen turned wooden table vessels recovered from the fill of a pit from St Mary

Spital, London (Egan, 1997). The size of the platter is unusual (Robin Wood,

pers.comm).

Wooden bowl fragments are not commonly recovered from excavations in Britain as

they rarely survive. Where found, they can be associated with religious foundations,

perhaps because this is where they tend to survive in any quantity. Another large group

was found from the site of Leicester Friary (Clay 1981). A slightly smaller group found in

58

a 14th century pit on the site of a hospital for lepers and plague victims came from

Hanover, Germany (Dunning 1937).

A small wooden peg (SF 2034) associated with the boat plank 1450 in the well 1172

was identified. Other pegs may be part of the adaptation of the planking to line the well.

Textiles

Fifteen samples of textile taken from in between the wooden planking of the clinker-built

boat hull were extracted for analysis. This is likely to be caulking material in the form of

twisted animal fibres making up caulking rolls, felts placed in scarf joints during

construction and/or textile rags and tufts of fibre stuffed into repairs (Penelope Walton

Rogers, pers. comm). Penelope Rogers has provided an initial comment on an image

sent to her of the caulking that it looks like a single-strand S-twist caulking roll which is

typical of British boats (not Scandanavian).

These caulking samples are listed below:

0124 textile, context 1219, wooden plank 1556

0125 textile, context 1219, wooden plank 1556

0126 textile, context 1219, wooden plank 1557

0127 textile, context 1219, wooden plank 1557

0128 textile, context 1219, wooden plank 1551

0129 textile, context 1219, wooden plank 1450

0130 textile, context 1219, wooden plank 1557

0131 textile, context 1219, wooden plank 1491

0132 textile context 1219, wooden plank 1497 re-used in well

0133 textile, context 1491,

0143 textile, context 1219, wooden plank 1594

0163, textile, context 1450

0181, textile, context 1763 (sent to Ian Tyers)

0191, textile (?felt), context 1767 (sent to Ian Tyers)

0192, textile, context 1762 (sent to Ian Tyers)

59

4.4 Quantification and assessment of the environmental evidence

4.4.1 Re-used boat timbers

The boat fragments were also examined by a team of specialist marine archaeologists

from Bournemouth University; a report was prepared by Tom Cousins which is has

been reproduced in full as Appendix 10.

4.4.2 Wood technology

Introduction

The near permanent waterlogged nature of deposits below c.1m in depth has ensured

that excellent timber preservation was possible. Eighty-nine pieces of wood were

recorded either on individual timber data sheets (71) or on a cask table (19). The data

has been entered into an excel spreadsheet recording dimensions, wood species, tool

marks, joints, reuse, function, dating and patterns of growth where relevant. Of the

wood twenty-six pieces of oak were considered suitable for dendrochronological dating

and sent to Dr. Ian Tyers for analysis.

Most of the wooden items were recovered from wells/water tanks; both from the

structure of the well linings themselves and wooden artefacts recovered from the

backfills. The most important of these features were two sunken box-like water tanks

whose sides were constructed from the hull of a small boat. Other significant examples

of woodworking technology included a wall plate from a medieval building, a cask and a

large buried oak off cut that may have served as either an extremely large post pad or

the solid basis for a mortar or anvil.

Features containing wood

1219 –a water tank, with a post and rail frame and oak boarded sides made from recycledboat planks. Context 1553, fill of water tank 1219, which produced a turned wooden dish(SF 2037)

1223- a pit or well revetted with an assortment of four cleft oak stakes, a possible boatplank (1451) and a fragment of a possible boat seat with a series of dome-headedpegs(1452).

1365 – a timber-lined well containing twelve part staves and several sections of a peggedhoop, part of coopered cask (1662), reused to form the well shaft.

1503 – a large pit or pond which produced part of a wall plate (1504) mortised to houserafters and a halved log 1585.

60

1591-a pit with a halved and flattened oak post plate (1593) set across its base

1730-a water tank, paired with tank 1219 with a post and rail frame and oak boarded sidesmade from recycled boat planks.

Timber sources

The wood preserved on the Sizewell site can be divided into four distinct groups:

Imported Irish oak- used planking for the boat hull.

Oak of unknown provenance- used for the staves from a cask

Contemporary local timber, freshly felled, fast-grown coppiced or hedgerow

wood-used in the frames of the water tanks.

Reused local wood/abandoned local wood –used in the turned vessel

The timber from water tanks 1219 and 1730

The dendrochronological analysis indicates that the wood for the hull planks re-used in

each of the two water tanks came from a single area in Ireland and had contemporary

felling dates; this would imply strongly that they were all part of the same vessel. Initial

comparisons between the two groups of timbers however suggest distinctions in the nail

intervals, the peg hole spacings for the frames and in the plank widths and thicknesses.

Evidence also hinted at the boat used for 1219 had been re-framed whilst there is less

evidence for this on the timbers from 1730.

The evidence that Ireland was the source of much planking is particularly interesting as

it fits with a cluster of other examples of east coast boat remains from before the middle

of the 13th century which suggest that Ireland was the source of oak boards before the

timber trade with Hanseatic League in Northern Europe developed in the late 13th

century.

The native timber used in constructing the internal frames of the water tanks consists of

short sections of small trees used as corner posts with branch wood or reused ash

poles for braces. The frame is of a post and rail construction jointed with mortise and

tenons; the drilled ends of the mortise holes were left in the round and this represents a

‘peasant’ vernacular joint that is not part of the suite of joints used in complex medieval

carpentry post AD1150.

61

Wall plate 1504

The 2m length of timber recovered from pit 1502 is a fragment of a wall plate, which

would have topped the wall of a building at eaves height. The upper face of the wall

plate is mortised for a couple of rafter joints and is made from a wood susceptible to

insect attack rather than oak; this use of an ‘inferior’ timber is indicative of lower status

vernacular from the early years of the medieval period and it is therefore a very rare

survivor.

Discussion

The wall plate and the water tank frame offer a rare insight into the types of joints you

would expect to see in vernacular buildings in the 13th century; these are likely to be

distinct from the more expensive mainly oak-built high status buildings occupied by

people of the yeoman class and above, which are the only type of building which endure

today. It is important to record these structures sufficiently well to understand this

‘peasant’ level of building. Although mediaeval wells survive those that are published

are usually high status cask or timber framed wells.

4.4.3 Dendrochronology

Twenty-six samples were selected by the wood specialist as being suitable for tree-ring

dating and sent to Dr. Ian Tyers for analysis. The samples comprised seven from the

‘Boat 1’ lining of well 1172, eleven from the ‘Boat 2’ lining of well 1730, one timber each

from the two associated well frames, and six barrel staves from well 1365. Of these

seven of the selected boat timbers and the well frames contained enough rings for

reliable analysis whilst one plank from ‘Boat 2’ and all six of the barrel staves did not.

Fourteen of the suitable samples were found to cross-match. The composite sequence

constructed from these was successfully dated, indicating these timbers date from the

mid-13th century and these planks were derived from Ireland.

Dr. Tyers report has been reproduced in full as Appendix 11

4.4.4 Animal bone

Julie Curl

Introduction

Almost five kilograms of faunal remains were recovered from seventy-three contexts.

Despite being quite a small assemblage, it is very rich in terms of species, with remains

62

of the main domestic species, probable boar, small mammals, fish and a range of birds

including Kittiwake and Crane.

Methodology

The assessment was carried out following a modified version of guidelines by English

Heritage (Davis, 1992). All of the bone was examined to determine range of species

and elements present. A note was also made of butchering and any indications of

skinning, hornworking and other modifications. When possible a record was made of

ages and any other relevant information, such as pathologies. Counts and weights were

noted for each context. All information was recorded directly into Excel for quantification

and assessment. A basic catalogue is included in the written report and the full

assessment database is available in the digital archive.

The assemblage – provenance and preservation

A total of 4.953kg of faunal remains, consisting of 833 elements, was recovered from

the excavation. Bone was produced from seventy-three contexts, the majority of a

medieval date. Just under 40% of the remains were retrieved from pit fills, just over 26%

was yielded from ditch deposits, the remaining bone was found in a variety of linear,

gully, post-hole, oven and well fills, with some remains from general finds numbers.

Table 9 shows quantification in weights and counts by context type.

Table 9. Quantification (weights and counts) of the faunal assemblage by context type

A distal tibia from a pony-sized equid was produced from 1173 which is in a much

poorer state than the rest of the bone in the same fill, suggesting residual material.

Similar was noted in 1585 where some of the bone showed a contrasting darker colour

that suggested material originally from rich, organic, probably waterlogged soils.

Context type Total weight (Kg) Total Qty for context type Ditch 1.313 197Finds 0.494 63Gully 0.002 1Linear feature 0.382 21 Oven 0.348 24Pit fill 1.927 476 Pit? 0.05 4Posthole 0.118 15Spread 0.095 9Well/pit 0.162 20Unspecified 0.062 2Assemblage total 4.953 833

63

Gnawing was noted on the proximal and distal ends of a sheep/goat metapodials from

1002. A Cormorant coracoid from 1526 showed some gnawing from a cat or small dog.

General butchering

Much of the assemblage had been butchered with chops from dismemberment of the

carcasses and the finer cuts from removal of the meat. Fine cuts were seen on proximal

metapodials which show skilled skinning. Fewer butchering marks were seen on bird

bones and went present were just faint knife cuts. Birds often require only minimal

preparation and are frequently cooked whole; where cooked meat is easily pulled from

the bone, leaving little evidence of butchering. It is interesting that butchering is more

often seen on larger birds like Crane which are have quite tough meat, requiring more

cutting to remove the meat.

The fish, as with the birds, show little butchering for the same reasons.

It is interesting to note the butchered juvenile/neonatal equid metacarpal; while this

animal may not have been used for human consumption, it may have provided meat

and marrowbone for dogs.

Species range and modifications and other observations

This relatively small assemblage produced a minimum of twenty species from large and

small mammals, birds and fish. Quantification of these species is shown in Table 10

overleaf.

64

Species

dit

ch

fin

ds

gu

lly

linea

r

ove

n

pit

fill

pit

?

po

sth

ole

spre

ad

wel

l/p

it

un

spec

ifie

d

Gra

nd

To

tal

Bird 1 1

Bird - Cormorant 2 2

Bird - Crane 1 1

Bird - Crow/Rook 1 1

Bird - Fowl 2 1 1 4

Bird - Goose 1 1

Bird - Kittiwake 2 2

Bird - Mallard 1 2 3

Bird - No ID 1 9 2 12

Bird - Teal 4 4

Cattle 15 2 6 1 25 1 3 1 54

Dog/wolf 3 3

Equid 2 1 1 4

Feline 11 2 13

Fishbone Inc. Haddock, Salmon Cod.

11 292 7 2 312

Mammal 133 29 1 12 19 113 3 2 8 13 3 336

Pig 1 3 1 4 5 2 1 17

Polecat/Ferret 2 2

Rabbit 3 3

Rodent - WV/BR 1 1

Sheep/goat 13 27 1 15 1 1 58

Small Mammal 1 1

Totals: 197 63 1 22 24 476 4 15 9 20 4 835

Table 10. Quantification of species by context type

The main domestic mammals

Sheep/goat (most, if not all were sheep, no goat was positively identified) were

marginally the most frequently identified species, with cattle a close second and pig

remains only slightly more common than cats. The frequency of the sheep/goat

probably reflects the keeping of sheep for wool in the medieval period to meet the

needs of the wool trade.

Elements from several individual sheep/goat were found in 1002, with both adult and

juvenile remains and a range of body parts, from horncore and foot bones to good

quality meat-bearing bones. Certainly all parts of the sheep/goat were being used, they

would have also provided other by-products such as lanolin and dung for manure.

65

Possible hornworking was noted from the ditch fill 1111 where a skull fragment showed

the horncores had been removed at the base.

Cattle were almost equal to the ovicaprids, although this number affected by the number

of bones belonging to one calf skeleton. One mature cattle mandible was found in 1268

which showed gum disease from the heavy wear on the teeth; this older animal may

have been a breeding or traction animal. Bones from a very young juvenile cow was

produced from 1728, which appear to be an incomplete burial. Many parts of the animal

were present with most limbs, some foot bones, fragments of a few ribs, upper jaw and

mandibles. It is possible that this was from a natural death of a calf, which would be

avoided for meat use due to the threat of disease transmission.

Porcine elements were seen in eight contexts, all of which were juvenile or sub-adult

bones and many of these had been butchered. One large tusk was produced from the

oven fill 1083, the size of which suggests Wild Boar; these animals would have still

been resident in the area until around the 16th century. It is possible that at least some

of the porcine remains are from wild hunted animals.

Single bones or teeth from equid were produced from four contexts, the most interesting

being the juvenile/neonatal metapodial from 1000 which had been chopped. This young

equid may not have been butchered for human consumption, but could have been used

for providing meat and marrowbone for dogs.

Dog, cat and small mammal

Several bones of felines were recovered from pit and ditch fills. A small adult cat

humerus was produced from 1109 and another sub-adult feline humerus was produced

from 1134. A very young kitten mandible was produced from 1169, a fragment of

another small kitten mandible was produced from the pit fill 1034. Bones from a

strongly-built, stocky cat were found in the ditch fill 1061, the robustness of which

suggests a male. This seems quite a range of cats for a small assemblage, with

numerous young animals. No butchering was seen on any of the bones, so this lack of

butchering does not suggest that these animals were skinned, which was sometimes

seen in the medieval period (Luff & Garcia, 1995). It is possible that these animals may

have been culled as population control or may be natural deaths from accidents or

disease. The faunal assemblage from Cinema City in Norwich (Curl, 2006) produced

66

several medieval cats which had not been butchered, the range suggesting possible

culling of ferals or natural deaths.

Only one fill produced canid remains. Two bones of a small to medium-sized dog were

seen in the ditch fill 1108.

Two bones of a Polecat/ferret were retrieved from the varied assemblage in 1134; this

animal may have been used for hunting rabbit or possibly for fur. Polecat or Ferret has

been found at several other sites including from a medieval deposit at Preston St Mary

(Curl, 2004) and from a late medieval fill at St Annes Wharf in Norwich (Curl, 2004),

both of which showed skinning evidence.

Two ditch fills (1061 and 1111) produced bones of rabbit, one of which had been

butchered. By the medieval period these animals would have been readily available for

wealthier people to eat and possibly available in the wild.

A single tibia from a rat was produced from the medieval pit fill 1034, it is possible that

this is a bone from a Water Vole, but, given the context, more likely to be remains of a

scavenging rat.

Bird bone

A range of bird bone was recovered, with several species (eight) for the size of the

assemblage. Four species of bird were noted in the pit fill 1137 which comprised of

bones of Kittiwake, Crane, Mallard and Cormorant, all coastal or wetland birds. Another

Cormorant was found in the pit fill 1526. Other birds in the assemblage were fowl,

goose, Mallard, Teal and Crow/Rook.

Crane was resident in East Anglia until the 16th century and tends to occur in higher

status assemblages and from ecclesiastical sites. These birds were expensive items to

buy and tended to be used for an elaborate centrepiece in banquets in a similar fashion

to swans and peacocks. Other medieval sites that have produced this bird include

ecclesiastical waste from Bawsey (Curl, 2009) and Cathedral Close in Norwich (Curl,

2009), crane was also identified from Ayscoughee Hall in Lincolnshire (Curl, 2008).

Cormorants and Kittiwakes are quite rare on inland archaeological sites, although more

frequent closer to the coast. Kittiwakes are restricted to coastal waters, in East Anglia

67

they tend to only be passage migrants or occasionally large groups are summer visitors,

while Cormorants are also common on inland waters all year round. Kittiwakes and their

eggs were regularly eaten until recent times and their skins and feathers were once

used for hats (Cocker & Mabey, 2005). One Cormorant was found in a 14th to 15th

century fill at the Millennium Library excavation in Norwich (Curl, 2006). The presence

of seabirds at Leiston, with its close proximity to the coast, may be a chance catches

that were included for meat or a bird caught for meat, perhaps with the use of falcons.

There are several coastal archaeological sites, in northern England and Ireland in

particular, where a large range of seabirds were recovered, including Kittiwake and

Cormorant (Yalden & Albarella, 2009).

Goose and fowl would have probably been kept on site for a supply of eggs, feathers

and ultimately meat. Mallard and Teal would have been readily available for meat on

even the smallest bodies of water in the area. The corvid (Crow or Rook) is likely to

have been a local resident and scavenger.

Fish

Fish bones were retrieved from fifteen contexts, with the majority of the fish yielded from

one context. The pit fill 1063 produced 277 fish bones, all of a ?salmon species, with a

minimum of four individual fish present. The remaining contexts produced further

Salmon, Haddock and Cod. All of these species are marine fish (with salmon also found

in freshwater) and are likely to be locally caught.

4.4.5 Shell

A total of 657 shells were collected from the site. The majority of the shells are oyster,

but mussels, cockles and oysters were found in the upper fill 1134 of pit 1133 which is

close to the tank lined with the boat timbers and which contains pottery dating to the

13th-14th centuries. Terrestrial shells were identified in some number in deposit 1110

(the upper fill of ditch 1055).

4.4.6 Charcoal

Twenty-five fragments of charcoal were recovered through bulk finds recovery with

further charcoal present in many of the environmental samples.

68

4.4.7 Charred plant macrofossils and other remains

Val Fryer

Introduction and method statement

Bulk samples from twenty-three contexts were submitted for assessment. The samples

were processed by manual water flotation/washover and the flots were collected in a

300 micron mesh sieve. Although de-watered macrofossils were noted within four of the

assemblages, all were robust and well preserved and, therefore, the flots were slowly

air-dried prior to sorting. The flots were scanned under a binocular microscope at

magnifications up to x 16 and the plant macrofossils and other remains noted are listed

in Appendix 13 tables 1–3. Nomenclature within the tables follows Stace (1997). Both

charred and de-watered plant remains were recorded, with the latter being denoted

within the tables by a lower case ‘w’ suffix. Other abbreviations used in the tables are

explained at the end of the text section. Modern roots and seeds were also recorded.

The non-floating residues were collected in a 1mm mesh sieve and sorted when dry. All

artefacts/ecofacts were retained for further specialist analysis.

Results

Cereal grains/chaff and seeds of common weeds were present at a low density within

all but three of the assemblages studied. Preservation of the charred remains was

moderately good, although some grains were puffed and distorted, probably as a result

of combustion at very high temperatures. The de-watered remains were mostly robust,

although some distortion had occurred, probably as a result of the compaction of the

deposits.

Oat (Avena sp.), barley (Hordeum sp.), rye (Secale cereale) and wheat (Triticum sp.)

grains were recorded, mostly as single specimens within an assemblage. Chaff was

extremely scarce, although both rye and bread wheat (T. aestivum/compactum) type

rachis nodes were noted. Two rounded legume (Fabaceae) seeds of possible pea

(Pisum sativum) type were present within the assemblages from Samples 0116 (pit

1513) and 0144 (ditch 1473).

Although small legume seeds were recorded within ten assemblages, other weed seeds

were scarce, with the highest density occurring within the de-watered samples.

69

Common segetal taxa included corn cockle (Agrostemma githago), fat hen

(Chenopodium album), brome (Bromus sp.), goosegrass (Galium aparine), persicaria

(Persicaria maculosa/lapathifolia), knotgrass (Polygonum aviculare) and wild radish

(Raphanus raphanistrum). Hemp (Cannabis sativa) fruits were noted within the

assemblages from samples 0123 (pit 159) and 0136 (well 1365) and a single specimen

of cotton thistle (Onopordum acanthium), also from pit 1591, represents a further early

record of this plant within eastern England. Hazel (Corylus avellana) nutshell fragments

were noted within three assemblages along with a single bramble (Rubus sect.

Glandulosus) ‘pip’ and an elderberry (Sambucus nigra) seed.

Charcoal fragments were present throughout, although rarely at a high density. Charred

root/stem fragments, including pieces of heather (Ericaceae) stem were also recorded

within most assemblages. Other plant macrofossils, including bracken (Pteridium

aquilinum) pinnule fragments, were generally scarce, although the assemblages from

samples 0123 and 0138 (well 1365) did contain moderate to high densities of de-

watered root/stem fragments.

The fragments of black porous and tarry material were all probable residues of the

combustion of organic remains at very high temperatures. Other materials included

fragments of bone (a proportion of which were burnt/calcined), small pellets of burnt or

fired clay, fish bones and small pieces of coal. A single small fragment of charred fibre

or textile was recorded within the assemblage from Sample 0123 (see also further

fragments from site LCS 148, Fryer 2011).

Discussion

For the purposes of this discussion, the samples have been divided by context type. At

the time of writing, it is unknown whether there are any spatial relationships between the

sampled features.

Pit and posthole fills (Appendix 13 table 1)

Of the seven pit fills, only one (sample 0123) contains a significant assemblage of plant

macrofossils, and even here, the density of material recovered is very low. The

remaining assemblages contain occasional cereal grains, chaff elements or weed

seeds, but at an insufficient density to be indicative of any specific activity; conversely, it

would appear most likely that the assemblages are partly or wholly derived from small

quantities of scattered refuse of unknown origin. Sample 0123 contains a moderate

70

density of de-watered plant remains, and assuming that these are contemporary with

the pit fill and not later contaminants, it would appear that the assemblage may be a

mixed deposit incorporating cereal processing/storage detritus, hearth waste and

midden material. Similar pit assemblages were also noted at the adjacent LCS 148 site

(see Fryer ibid).

The two posthole assemblages are very insubstantial, although both contain occasional

cereal grains and charcoal fragments. It would appear most likely that both are derived

from materials which were accidentally incorporated within the post-hole fills.

Ditch fills (Appendix 13 table 2)

Although cereal grains/chaff, seeds and charcoal fragments are present within all eight

of the ditch assemblages, the density of material recorded is generally very low and, as

with the post-hole assemblages (see above), it would appear most likely that the

remains are entirely derived from materials which gradually accumulated within the ditch

fills. However, it may be of note that burnt bone fragments and pellets of burnt or fired

clay, which may be indicative of either midden waste or hearth refuse, are present

within most of the ditch assemblages.

Wells 1172 and 1365 (Appendix 13 table 3)

Although Sample 0138 produced a very large flot (c. 1.2 litres in volume), it is almost

entirely composed of comminuted root/stem fragments, including some pieces of

heather stem. Whether this material is derived from the flora surrounding the well, or

from materials dumped within the feature after it ceased to be used, is currently

unknown. The remaining three assemblages are extremely sparse, containing little

other than occasional grains and seeds, all of which are probably derived from wind

dispersed detritus.

Oven 1623 (Appendix 13 table 3)

The two assemblages from oven 1623 (Samples 0134 and 0135) are extremely small,

containing little other than occasional charcoal fragments. As with the ovens at site LCS

148 (Fryer ibid.), it would appear most likely that this feature was kept clear of detritus to

prevent accidental fires.

71

4.5 Quantification and assessment of the documentary records

Antony M Breen

4.5.1 Introduction

In May 2008 a report was prepared ‘to assess the potential for researching the history of

the site back to the medieval period’. It was noted that ‘the research has been

hampered by the poor quality of the surviving manuscript maps’. The assessment report

has since been slightly amended to show that when the property was sold in 1845

(Appendix 4) the historic property descriptions that had been in use from at least 1611

onwards were then reconciled to the contemporary landscape and a plan prepared to

show the positions of the copyhold lands in relation to the remaining parts of Sizewell

Farm that were held as either freehold or leasehold. Unfortunately there is no copy of

this map amongst the records held at the Suffolk Record Office in Ipswich. It is possible

that the plan was attached to the property deeds and these deeds may have remained

with the present owners of the site or their representatives. Sizewell Farm was

consolidated into a single landholding in the period 1708–11.

In order to prepare a scheme of research for the site at Leiston, it has been necessary

to prepare a list of the surviving records and to obtain further information relating to their

physical condition. A further assessment of the potential of the sources held at

Cambridge has been made through visiting Cambridge University Library and

examining key documents.

In his 1995 desk top survey ‘Sizewell Belts SSSI’, Dr. John Ridgard drew attention to

the ‘division and very poor condition of many of the Leiston manor court rolls and

Sizewell “heathwardmote" rolls (in effect wreck-rolls)’. The estate and manorial records

are divided between the two collections held at the Suffolk Record Office in Ipswich,

(those deposited in 1975 HD 371 and in 1991 HD 1032) with further records in the

Vanneck-Ardeckne Papers at Cambridge University Library (CUL Vanneck). The

records relating to Leiston and Sizewell held at the National Archives in Kew are also of

great importance. Through combining these sources it is highly likely that it will be

possible to recreate a full picture of the community at Sizewell, formerly part of the

possessions of Leiston Abbey, at the time of the dissolution of the abbey in 1536. This

would then provide a strong basis for further research leading back to the early 14th

72

century. Amongst the records held in Cambridge there is a complete account of

Sizewell in the 15th century. This document can be used to overcome gaps in the

medieval record sequence. It is entirely possible to recreate a full description of Sizewell

in the 14th century and to identify the names of all the boat owners and determine

where they were living.

Gaps in the sequence of the post-medieval records were noted during the research for

the assessment report. Cambridge University hold the records for these periods and the

record sequence from 1546 through to 1845 is complete.

Louise Clarke, the archivist at the Suffolk Record Office in Ipswich, has prepared a list

of the court rolls in HD1032 and has commented on their condition, also Mr Peter

Meadows of the Department of Manuscripts & University Archives at Cambridge

University Library has prepared a list of the records in the Vanneck-Ardeckne

Collection, which is now owned by the University and all the records in this collection

are deemed to be available for research. The rolls in the Vanneck are indexed with the

regnal years of the monarch and not specific calendar dates. A combined listing is given

in Appendix 4.

4.5.2 Research

The tenure of the land, whether leasehold, freehold or copyhold will determine the

progress of the research. An unusually large portion of Sizewell Farm was held as

copyhold and these lands are described in full in the manorial records. Other parts of

the farm would have been described in the property deeds or leases to the tenancy and

these are not amongst the records at the Suffolk Record Office in Ipswich.

There are two research options:

1. If a copy of the 1845 plan of Sizewell Farm can be discovered and areas of copyhold

either forming part or the whole of this site can be identified and separated from other

areas of the farm the history of the site can be traced through the manorial records only.

2. In the absence of the 1845 plan the history of this site can still be traced through a

wider study of the medieval community of Sizewell. It should be emphasised here that

even though some records (listed in Appendix 4) are not available for research other

records could be used in their place.

73

A full study of the medieval community would be an important outcome in its own right.

Dr Ridgard in his 1995 report has indicated the importance of Sizewell in the 13th and

14th centuries. The progress of the decline of this community to being little more that a

single farm at the start of 18th century is described and can be dated from the surviving

records. The study would cover the entire area of Sizewell including those parts now

lost to the sea, including not only the area of this development but also all adjoining

areas.

4.5.3 The progress of the research

If the 1845 plan is not available, lands forming Sizewell Farm can be determined

through obtaining a copy of the Leiston Tithe map held at the National Archives in Kew

(ref. IR 30/33/270). The entire area of Sizewell as opposed to other parts of the parish

of Leiston can be determined and defined through using all the surviving manuscript

maps.

Apart from those held at the Suffolk Record Office in Ipswich, other maps and plans for

the Vanneck Estate in Leiston are available at Cambridge University Library (Vanneck-

Arcedeckne Papers Box 55/1). The outlines of the principal landholdings and areas of

former common can be marked on a modern edition of the Ordnance Survey map

leaving a distinct and geographically defined area that is Sizewell. The maps also offer

information as to the tenure of the adjoining areas.

The assessment report examined post-medieval records held at the Suffolk Record

Office relating to the copyhold lands. The records at Cambridge University Library

covering gaps in the record sequence have not been examined. Once these additional

sources have been examined, the history of the site in relation to the copyhold estate

would have been completed back to 1546. At that point other records held at the

National Archives should be considered.

The National Archives

For the period from the dissolution of Leiston Abbey in 1536 until the various parcels of

its former possessions were granted out, the lands and its revenues were the property

of the Crown. These were administrated through the court of Augmentation. The

surviving records for this court include surveys of various monastic estates suppressed

in 1536 and then specific accounts for Leiston Abbey covering the full period from 1536

74

to 1546 (ref. SC6/3408, 3427-3421 and LR8/418). There is a separate rental for Leiston

in 1539–40 (ref. SC11/983). Various headings and marginal glosses in these records

can be used to identify the properties in Sizewell.

There is a survey of the lands of the manor of Leiston dated 1574–75 (ref. E178/2149).

The possessions of the Crown in 1585 are described in a separate account (ref.

SC6/Eliz1/2122). There are notes as to the demesne lands from the same period (ref.

SC12/1/1 m 10 & SC12/1/3 m 10) and an inquisition as to the manor dated 1599 (ref.

E179/7095).

The Suffolk Record Office in Ipswich holds a copy of the Parliamentary Surveys of the

crown estates made in 1650 after the execution of Charles I (ref. HD1538/83). Leiston

Warren is mentioned in a survey and described as 846 acres 2 roods 14 perches

‘between the common of Thorp in part and the lands of Mr Shipman in part towards the

east’. William Shipman was a prominent copyholder in Sizewell. The entire warren had

been leased to Henry, earl of Holland in June 1638.

Amongst the records of the Court of Requests, there is a case concerning the ‘rights of

the tenants of Leiston, Sizewell and Thorpe by Sizewell 1492–1547’ (ref. REQ 2/2/178).

Of particular relevance to this site amongst the records of the court of Chancery there is

the case of 'Robert Pykebone of Dunwich v Thomas Wente, abbot of Leiston:

Messuages and land held of the defendant’s manor Sizewell from the tenancy of which

the complaint has been ejected 1504-1515’ (ref. C1/345/59). The land in question was

part of Sizewell Farm.

These records offer a complete description of Sizewell in the 16th century and can be

used to identify all the other parts of Sizewell Farm that were not held in copyhold

tenure.

Manorial Court Rolls

These are listed in full in Appendix 4. Amongst those held at the Suffolk Record Office

HD 1032/6 Court Roll 13 Jun 1486 – 14 Sep 1508 and HD 1032/8 Court Roll 23 May

1509 – 30 Aug 1546 are both fragile and ‘cannot be produced for use’. Another HD

1032/7 the Court Roll 12 Mar 1510 – 12 Mar 1521 has undergone conservation and can

75

be produced. All the earlier rolls held at Ipswich are not currently available for research,

however there is an alternative document held at Cambridge that can be used in place

of the court rolls. All the surviving medieval court rolls held at Cambridge are available

for research.

In Box 17 there is a 15th-century account of the Several Manors of Leiston Abbey. The

account is written on paper and bound with a parchment cover that is slightly decayed.

Though the binding is not strong, the document can be used if handled with care. The

entries for Leiston begin on folio XXXXI and those for Syswell on folio LIIII, these

continue to folio LXIIII. There are approximately about 160 pieces of land described for

Sizewell. The survey includes details of some 26 messuages or dwellings and a further

21 cottages each described under the then owners with a succession of the names of

later tenants entered into the margin against each entry. The lands are described in full

with numerous references to various roads and pathways, field names and other

topographic features.

There is also a 14th-century extent of the lands of Leiston Abbey lands at Ipswich (ref.

HD 371/5).

Wreck Rolls

Though these rolls were not considered in the initial assessment, the discovery of a

boat during the archaeological investigation of the site dictates that these documents

should be considered during the research for the final report.

The manor had jurisdiction over wrecks and convened a court to determine the

distribution of the proceeds from this source. The spelling of the name of this court

varies; in Cambridge it is indexed as ‘Hethelwaymot’, in Ipswich as 'Hethewarmoot' and

in Dr Ridgard’s article as 'Heathwardmote'. The court met annually on the feast of St

Nicholas (6th Dec). The boat owners formed the court’s jury, their numbers rising from

8–10 in the earliest rolls to some 20 individuals in the later rolls.

The records and their condition are described in Appendix 4.

76

Other Records

There are a number of accounts for the possessions of Leiston Abbey. Some of these

may contain references to Sizewell and their potential for furthering this research has

not been fully examined.

5 Significance of the site data and potential for analysis

5.1 The significance of the site record

The promise of the excavation at the start of the project lay in its potential to discover

something of the former Sizewell, the once thriving population centre which declined

and all but disappeared toward the end of the medieval period. The understanding of

the development and morphology of our urban spaces is highlighted as an objective set

out in the Regional Research Aims and the site, together with its sister excavations on

the east side of Sandy Lane (LCS 148), covered a total area of 8200sqm which has

provided a significant study sample of a medieval settlement; covering an area in which

small land parcels held by individual copyholders sit cheek-by-jowl with the Abbot of

Leiston monastery’s own demesne lands. The site archive (which must be integrated

with the LCS148 data) includes records of buildings, (agri-)industrial structures and land

divisions and together with the large artefact assemblage, the environmental material

and the ancient land records provide a valuable data-set which can contribute towards

characterising the type of occupation, the study of settlement layout, property ownership

and use of space. The focus of Sizewell would have been the coastal landing-place and

market place (the sites of both, now long-vanished into the sea) but the excavation has

provided an indication of its spread inland which was hitherto unknown; whether this

spread inland is an expression of an expansion of the settlement, a relocation/retreat

from the sea or the result of other factors is seen as an important research question

towards understanding the morphology of the town.

A settlement of Leiston is recorded in Domesday and the discovery of probable late

Anglo-Saxon buildings and Thetford-ware pottery on the LCS 148 site demonstrate that

at least a small pre-Conquest settlement existed here too by the start of the 10th-11th

century. Evidence from the palaeo-channel indicates a cessation of peat growth

sometime after the Middle Saxon period and this implied change in the wetland

environment may be a clue as to why permanent settlement along the channel edge

became possible, or more attractive, from this time; the number of wells and cistern-

77

type features show that the easy proximity of ground water was certainly something to

be exploited. The pattern of archaeological evidence would indicates a general low level

of occupation activity on the margin of the settlement which flourished momentarily in a

period sometime between the mid-13th and the early years of the 14th century before

apparently disappearing altogether; an abandonment date that is not only mirrored by

historic events such as the migration of the market from Sizewell and the relocation

inland of the Abbey convent but with a period of social and economic crisis in English

history brought on by successive agricultural failures at the start of the 14th century,

culminating mid-century with the arrival of the Black Death. What were factors that

encouraged (and quashed) this late flourish of development/activity in Sizewell just

before its disappearance and can the archaeological record offer an insight? The

archaeology is (in places) well-stratified and includes sealed features and deposits

which enables the site sequence to be reconstructed. The sequence can be dated by

pottery and RC analysis, made possible by waterlogged well-preserved organic material

suggesting a high potential for determining the earliest date of activity on site, before

any documentary records appear, and at the other end of the timescale for informing on

the eventual decline of the settlement.

After the initial 10th-11th century settlement, the domestic occupation on the site

became more ephemeral; there is no evidence of houses as such and the buildings that

occur in the high medieval period are thought to be more akin to workplaces. Domestic

features like the wells exist and the detritus of domestic life is apparent amongst the

finds assemblage, developing an understanding of the nature of the occupation that was

occurring here (whether it be part of an ‘industrial suburb) and the deposition process of

the domestic debris is seen as important in understanding the settlement’s geography.

The further analysis of the finds assemblage will aid the characterisation of the

occupation/activities that occurred here and as well as in building a picture of life of the

inhabitants of medieval Sizewell. The initial observation of the faunal remains

assemblage suggest that ‘Sizewellians’ enjoyed a varied diet; the marine fish are likely

to have been a staple with the settlement being so close to the coast, but does the

presence of boar, deer, rabbit and freshwater fish bone simply reflect the successful

exploitation of the natural hinterland or were they benefitting directly from the

infrastructure of the abbey of Leiston? The plant macrofossil record is not plentiful for

this site, but environmental samples show that heathers and bracken, probably

78

gathered from the nearby commons, were being used as fuels within the ovens on the

site and hemp (cannabis sativa L.), was being processed. Hemp was used to make

rope and canvas along with flax ‘throughout the 6th-14th centuries’ (Walton Rogers 14).

One of the processes in the preparation of the fibres was ‘retting’ in which the stems of

the hemp plant were soaked for several weeks in wet pits, ditches or ponds (Walton

Rogers 18) and the easy proximity of the ground water would have made the site

eminently suitable for this work. This was a foul activity and the Abbey (as the principal

landlords) issued a decree outlawing the retting of hemp; the needs for such a

prohibition must be seen as a direct response to the fact that the practise must have

been going on.

The ceramic assemblage is substantial and includes several complete or near complete

vessels. As such it makes an important addition to the overall picture of the types of

pottery which were in use within an ordinary (albeit) coastal community in Suffolk and

the dating offered by the ceramics will provide useful physical evidence to consider

along with the chronologies within documentary history of the site. Although completely

dominated by locally produced medieval coarseware, some glazed wares are present

but not many, and there is a higher proportion of glazed wares from this site than at the

neighbouring site of the Greater Gabbard Windfarm (LCS 148). Perhaps surprisingly for

a market town non-local pottery was not more common and the assemblage consist

mainly of regional wares such as those produced at Hedingham; some sherds of

Scarborough ware however, do reflect Sizewell’s connection with its sister ports along

the east coast; places which were linked by a common goal, their pursuit of the vast

herring shoals that migrated from north to south along the east coast. There is no

evidence of highly decorated tablewares or specialist vessels which might be expected

if the site was closely connected to an ecclesiastical foundation. The preservation of the

wooden vessel is unusual, as the survival of these ephemeral utilitarian artefacts is a

rare occurrence. Neither the ceramics nor the small finds suggest that the inhabitants of

the settlement were consumers of expensive or luxurious goods but they may have

been servicing another community which were. The ordinary nature of the material from

the site is perhaps an indication of the lack of prestige and the status of the settlement

‘quarter’ represented here.

Determining what the impact was on the settlement of the abbey’s relocation inland is

an important research topic. How long and in what form did the settlement continue

79

after this event? The culmination of the most intense period represented in the

archaeological record just about coincides with the retreat of the abbey whilst the start

of the land records for the site, the survey of 1467, gives us a picture of the land

ownership a century later. Closely dating the end of the occupation through the study of

the supporting finds and environmental evidence and attempting to plot the holdings

described in land survey against the site plan is seen as important to better understand

how the settlement fared in the face of this upheaval.

Alongside the archaeological evidence there is an unusually complete set of medieval

land records for the manor of Leiston-cum-Sizewell which cover the area sampled by

the excavations at a time when the occupation was coming to an end. The records

include details of tenement sizes and owners names and have the potential to be

precisely located geographically; linking the written records to the archaeological one

would greatly enhance the academic value of both.

5.2 The boat timbers Fishing obviously made up an important part of the subsistence of medieval Sizewell’s

population and that of the Suffolk coastal area in general, but the potential for study of

this topic has been limited as it leaves almost no material evidence. At Sizewell the

Abbey administered its rights to all goods washed up along the coast through a court

known as Hethewarmoot; the court also dealt with fishing contracts and recorded the

fishing season. The court appointed a bailiff from both Sizewell and Thorpe and the jury

was made up of every ship's master who was operating from the beaches of the two

settlements. Remarkably the court’s records for the years between 1378 and 1481,

which are known as the ‘wreck rolls’, are held in the Ipswich Record Office and offer a

rare glimpse into this significant aspect of the settlement’s life.

On site the waterlogged conditions have ensured the survival of organic material which

in other circumstances would have rotted away. Most notable amongst this are the

remains of a small coastal vessel dating to the mid-13th century. There are repeated

references in the wreck rolls to batella, which describe small boats less than 20ft long

that could be dragged up onto the beach. The boat fragments recovered from the site

retain enough details which will enable the boat to be reconstructed (virtually) and they

may have the potential to flesh out our knowledge of the batella as a boat classification

and contribute to the study of boat design and construction technology; it can be

demonstrated that the boat timbers (possibly even the boat itself) were sourced from

80

Ireland and the method of the producing the caulking between the planks follows a

British (rather than a Scandinavian) tradition. The plank’s origins illustrate these trade

links and raises questions about indigenous boat-building and the regionalism of boat

design. The provenance of the timber for the Sizewell boat exemplifies the vigorous

trade in timber from southern Ireland that prevailed in the 13th century, prior to being

superseded by links with Hanseatic League in Northern Europe, and this fits in with the

other examples of the few surviving remains of east coast boats from before the middle

of the 13th century.

Fishing at Sizewell was largely seasonal; the main types of fish sought by east coast

fishermen were pelagic, those which returned in large shoals each year to established

spawning grounds. The most important of these were herring which arrived off the

Suffolk coast between September and December (Bailey 1990) and sprats. The site

archive, in addition to the boat parts, includes fishing hooks, weights, fragments of nets

as well as fish bones from both marine and freshwater species and this offers offer the

opportunity to study how the settlement equipped them to take advantage of this

harvest.

The region’s historic relationship with the sea is obviously a defining characteristic of the

identity of this part of Suffolk; boat remains of this period are extremely rare and as an

illustration of the early boat-builder’s technique the surviving fragments are of display

quality.

5.3 The potential and significance of the finds data

5.3.1 Pottery

Sue Anderson

This assemblage is one of several recently excavated rural medieval groups in Suffolk.

Such a large assemblage, particularly in conjunction with the adjacent site assemblage

from LCS148, has very high potential to further our knowledge of medieval pottery of

this period in the region.

If it is possible to produce a narrow phasing structure for the site, or if a Harris matrix is

available, it will be of value to study the distribution of the main medieval wares and

81

their association with earlier and later fabrics in relation to their stratigraphic positions.

This may enable a tightening of date ranges for the forms and/or fabrics which will be of

value for the study of future Suffolk assemblages.

Comparison of the assemblage with groups recently excavated at Cedar’s Field,

Stowmarket (Anderson forthcoming), and with unpublished groups from Hoxne

(Anderson 2009a), Ipswich (Anderson 2009b) and surrounding rural sites (e.g.

Anderson 2009c) will help to place the group in context. The large group from the

adjacent site at Leiston (LCS148) will also be of value for comparison; these groups will

be analysed at the same time.

Spatial distribution of the pottery will almost certainly be of value in determining the

growth and decline of areas within the site, and use of pottery associated with the

structures and oven complexes. The large group from well 1365 is of particular value,

due to the number of near-complete vessels collected from it. This provides a good

group of contemporary vessels which were presumably deposited during the backfilling

of the feature, and these will require their own section in the publication report.

In summary, the potential of this assemblage is to provide evidence for dating and

phasing of the site; pottery use, consumption and possibly manufacture; trade links both

within and outside East Anglia; and the status of the occupants. In addition the

assemblage provides a useful corpus of pottery for a broader study of medieval pottery

from Suffolk.

The assemblage has been recorded in full and no further cataloguing is required. The

pottery needs to be put into context with relation to site phasing and spatial distribution,

and a more detailed publication report produced.

5.3.2 CBM

Sue Anderson

The CBM assemblage is small and provides little information about structures on the

site. Much of it post-dates the medieval activity. The assemblage has been recorded in

full and no further work is required, apart from the addition of two fragments of CBM

82

originally classified as stone from context 1602. A summary of this report should be

included in the publication report.

5.3.3 Fired clay

Sue Anderson

The assemblage has the potential to provide information on the use of clay to line and

cover the oven and hearth structures identified on the site.

The material is fully recorded and no further cataloguing is required. The assemblage

needs to be placed in context with reference to site phasing and spatial distribution, and

a report suitable for publication should be prepared. The potential for selected

fragments to be absolutely dated should be explored.

5.3.4 Clay tobacco pipe

Only a few stem fragments were recovered and no further work is required.

5.3.5 Worked flint

A brief catalogue is required for the archive and any non-worked material should be

discarded. The spatial distribution of this material should be briefly commented on,

including its association with the burnt flint.

5.3.6 Burnt flint

The flint should be checked and the distribution examined to see if it can be related to

industrial activities going on during the medieval period.

5.3.7 Slag

There is such a small quantity of slag that no further work on this material is

recommended. There is no evidence in the environmental samples for hammerscale

and it seems that no metal working was occurring on or near the site.

5.3.8 Quernstone

The assemblage of lava stone quern fragments should be catalogued and the spatial

distribution of this material investigated. The possibility that some of it may have been

re-used for consolidation of surfaces and packing around structural elements should be

considered.

83

5.3.9 Stone

The stone should be briefly catalogued. Two fragments of possible clunch should be

examined by the specialist writing up the fired clay and the information added to their

report.

An abraded fragment of Norwegian schist from 1414 may be a sharpening stone and

should be included amongst the small finds assemblage.

5.3.10 Iron nails

Roves or Clench nails should be extracted from the bulk finds, catalogued and x-rayed.

They should be included in any report on the nails associated with boat building, and

discussed with the comparable material from LCS 148.

5.3.11 Small finds

Ian Riddler

The small finds provide a small assemblage of medieval date, centred on the 14th

century. As noted above, the majority of them are unstratified. Most can be identified to

type and dated, sometimes within broad date ranges, with the dress accessories

providing the best dating evidence. Their typological dating can be compared with the

evidence from the ceramics. As unstratified finds, they do not help with the detailed

phasing of the site, unfortunately.

The dress accessories survive in good condition. Some are complete, whilst others

survive as fragments, but all can be identified to type. Late medieval dress accessories

are known largely from several Norwich excavations, with small assemblages from

Castle Acre and Castle Rising, and relatively few published assemblages from Suffolk

(Margeson 1993, 4-40; Huddle 2007, 191-202; Goodall 1982; Williams 1997, 87). The

small assemblage from this site can be usefully compared with both rural and urban

groups from East Anglia, some of which are also from coastal sites, in order to assess

whether there is any variability between sites of different type and standing. The small

size of the assemblage would not allow any detailed analyses to be carried out, but

there is the potential to set it within a broader East Anglian context.

84

Category Material Object Quantity

Dress accessories Copper Alloy Belt Mount 2 Copper Alloy Buckle 3Copper Alloy Buckle Plate 1 Copper Alloy Strap Clasp Plate 1 Copper Alloy Strap-End 2

Household Copper Alloy Key 1Copper Alloy Suspension Ring 1 Iron Binding 1Stone Hone 1Stone Smoother 1Iron Ferrule 1Wood Bowl 1

Personal possessions Iron Knife 2 Crafts Lead Alloy Melt 1

Lead Alloy Sheet Waste 1 Copper Alloy Sheet Waste 4

Fishing equipment Iron Fish Hook 5 Structural fittings Iron Clench Nail 14

Iron Clench Nail Rove 2 Iron Nail 8Copper Alloy Nail 1Iron Staple 1Lead Alloy Sheet 1Wood Peg 1

Trade Copper alloy Coin 1Silver Coin 1

Post-medieval objects Copper Alloy Button 1 Copper Alloy Thimble 1Copper Alloy Lock Escutcheon 1 Copper Alloy Mount 2Copper Alloy Wiring 1Copper Alloy Needle 1

Table 11. Small finds by category and material

The household items are typical finds of the period and all of them can, once again, be

identified to type. The mica schist hone is the only imported item from the assemblage;

hones of this stone type were widely distributed across East Anglia during the medieval

period. The particular character of the site is seen with the five fish hooks, three of

which are complete, and with the clench nails, which can perhaps be related to the re-

use of boat timbers on site, although they form a class of structural ironwork that was

also used on buildings and carts from the 7th century onwards (Riddler 2006, 309-11;

Ottaway 1992, 615-8). Half of the clench nails are complete and they can be measured

and compared with the evidence from the timbers themselves.

In summary, the small finds assemblage consists largely of a series of late medieval

objects that fall into two distinct groups. On the one hand the dress accessories (items

of no particular status) are useful for dating purposes and provide a glimpse of late

medieval fashions in a Suffolk coastal community. On the other hand the fish hooks and

clench nails are characteristic of a maritime community. As a whole, the finds resemble

the contemporary if slightly larger assemblage from New Romney, where clinker-built

vessels were also broken up for re-use (Draper and Meddens 2009). The small finds

85

can shed some light on the activities of this coastal community and their significance is

increased by the lack of contemporary sites from Suffolk that have reached publication.

The following recommendations for further work are suggested:

1 The medieval small finds should be catalogued and discussed by functional

category. The schist fragment found in the bulk stone should be examined and given a

small find number and catalogue entry if necessary. The two additional metal small finds

recovered through the environmental processing should also be catalogued and

included in any discussion.

2 A comparison can be made between the range and types of dress accessory

from LCS 150, seen against other rural, urban and fortified sites of East Anglia, to see

whether any regional distinctions can be established.

3 The clench nails should be measured for their internal lengths and angles, and

compared with sequences from Dover, New Romney and elsewhere. Bulk nails should

be examined and catalogued if they are clench nails.

4 A discussion text can then be written, and aligned with the results from the

environmental and ceramics studies.

5. Selected small finds have been recommended for illustration, and the pencil

illustrations should be checked by the specialist before they are inked in.

It is suggested that selected small finds should also be photographed which will provide

the opportunity to include some artefact images in the narrative of the report as well as

the specialist reports.

5.3.12 The organic finds from the boat timbers reused in the well

Species identification will be required for the fine-grained wood from which the bowl (SF

2037) is made. In addition it should be conserved and freeze dried, and should be

illustrated or photographed.

The identification of the species of wood should be established. The bowl may show

evidence for heating, burning or some internal residues. Wear patterns in the form of

86

deep knife scoring from the cutting of food may be visible. In addition there could be

some identification marks made on it, to suggest a particular owner or user of the vessel

(Egan 204). The shape and proportions of the vessel should be discussed in relation to

how it could have been used at the table.

Several wooden pegs used in the planks which make up the boat require species

identification and recording.

Identification of the textile caulking material is required, which should increase our

understanding of how clinker-built boat planks were sealed to make them more

watertight in the medieval period in this area of Suffolk. If it is animal hair then the

species will require identification. There may also be some kind of additional material

added for water proofing such as tar. The information can be compared to the

construction of other boats of a similar date in England and beyond.

It is recommended that the following items should be described and photographed, and

that species identification should be undertaken.

0142 wood from well lining structure 1219

0155 Pegs from timber plank 1557 x 2

1753 Wooden peg (sent to Ian Tyers)

5.4 The potential and significance of the environmental evidence

5.4.1 Wood technology

Richard Darrah

The wall plate and the water tank frame offer a rare insight into the types of joints used

in vernacular buildings in the 13th century; these are likely to be distinct from the more

expensive mainly oak-built high status buildings occupied by people of the yeoman

class and above, which are the only type of building which endure today. It is important

to record these structures sufficiently well to understand this ‘peasant’ level of

constructional craftsmanship. The frame joints of the two water tanks frames need

describing and illustrating; the wall plate 1504 requires species analysis and drawing.

The freshly cut wood which was used for water-tank frame should be subject to

radiocarbon analysis to date the joinery.

87

Clinker-built boats have been built in Northern Europe from the 6th to the 20th century.

It is becoming clear that there was an English boat tradition of the east coast during the

Anglo-Saxon period which was separate from and identifiably different from the

continental traditions. Despite the Irish oak the provenance of the square-shanked nails

suggest an English craft. If we are to understand these distinctions and demonstrate

when they evolved in the later medieval period we need to know more about east coast

boats. It is likely that boat pieces represent a relatively small boat (6 to 9m long) which

had a flattish bottom and a hard chine (a steep angle between the bottom of the hull and

the sides). If this is the case then the boat fragments from Sizewell represent the

earliest example of this form of a boat in the eastern England. As well as boat building

technology the boat planks exemplify the trade in timber from southern Ireland that

prevailed in the 13th century.

The boat remains will require a full analytical report; planks 1731, 1732, 1734, 1744,

1752, 1753, 1754, 1755, 1757,1758, 1761, 1762a, 1763, 1767, and 1768 need to be

drawn in detail, recording the spacing of nails and peg holes, plank thicknesses and

angles between the plane of joining planks . The various pegs require species

identification and the caulking material analysis by a textile specialist. The joined planks

(context 1553) need to be preserved as a reference example for this type of boat on the

East Anglian coast. The joining techniques exhibited on the planks, the types of nail

roves used, the use of tarred wool, scarf joints, and wooden pegs to hold the timbers to

the frames, are all details that can be appreciated by the layman. The planks would

make an excellent museum display; especially if used alongside a reconstructed section

of a boat and the timbers should be made available to the Time and Tide Museum in

Great Yarmouth (or a similar institution) .

5.4.2 Animal bone

Julie Curl

This is a relatively small and yet very rich assemblage. While it is dominated by the

primary and secondary butchering and food waste from the main domestic animals,

there is plentiful evidence here for the diet being enriched by meat from hunting,

including boar, birds, rabbit and fishes.

The variety in this assemblage would suggest higher status food waste or possibly

ecclesiastical food waste. Certainly ecclesiastical sites would have evidence of fasting

88

days and the consumption of fish. In the medieval period the fasting day diets were also

enriched with other foods classed as ‘fish’, which extended to virtually any species

associated with water (including wetland birds, cetaceans, mammals and even pre-natal

rabbits from the womb) could be consumed as ‘fish’.

An overview of both this site and the faunal assemblage at LCS148 (Curl, 2009) would

be worthwhile, taking into account stratigraphic and historical information and other

finds recovered. If further excavation is carried out at this site it would be worthwhile

sampling and sieving (using BS or SRS methods) suitable pit fills or other bone-rich

deposits to retrieve the maximum bird and fish bone and including this assemblage in

any analysis, otherwise, no further work is needed on this particular assemblage.

5.4.3 Fishbone

A small quantity of poorly preserved fishbone was identified amongst the faunal

remains, with some additional material present amongst the plant macrofossil

assemblage. The overall conclusion of the specialist is as follows:

Further identification of the fishbone in this assemblage would be difficult due to the

fragmentary nature of these more fragile bones and any information gained would add

little more to the report. However it is important to find out whether these remains are

likely to be the remnants of fish processing or solely fish consumption, and for this

reason it is suggested that we send this material off for further analysis.

5.4.4 Charred plant macrofossils and other remains

Val Fryer

The plant macrofossil assemblages are, with only one possible exception, extremely

sparse, and it would appear most likely that all contain high densities of scattered or

wind-dispersed refuse. A similar picture of the somewhat random deposition of ‘mess’

was also noted at the adjacent site (LCS 148), although in the latter instance at least

some general conclusions about the origin of the material could be reached. One point

of possible note with the current site is the occurrence of hemp seeds. Although these

could simply be relicts of the general site flora, it is, perhaps, of note that hemp

processing was a particularly malodorous activity, which was frequently undertaken in

areas well removed from domestic settlement, as at the current site.

89

As none of the assemblages contain a sufficient density of material for quantification

(i.e. 100+ specimens) no further analysis is recommended. However, it is suggested

that a note about the general findings is appended to the recommended report for site

LCS 148, to be included along with any publication of data from the sites.

5.4.5 Soil micromorphology

The soil micromorphology assessment will include evaluation of the pollen cores for

their suitability for pollen and microstratigraphic study with full pollen counts from those

found to be suitable. A soil chemistry and magnetic susceptibility study will also be

undertaken, alongside the manufacture and analysis of two thin sections. This will then

be compiled into a single integrated report for addition to the final site report.

6 Updated Project Design

6.1 Revised research aims

The following revised research aims have been formulated based on the assessment of

the site data and its potential to contribute to the wider regional research agenda.

The immediate research questions which the excavation has the potential to answer

are:

How far did the settlement spread inland at its peak at the start of the 14th century?

When was the settlement first established here and when did the occupation come

to an end?

What were the environmental conditions at the time of the establishment of the

settlement? How much did the palaeo-channel influence the type of activities that

occurred here? How were the commons being used and the and the coastal

hinterland being exploited?

What industrial/agricultural processes were being undertaken on the site and can

this characterise the nature of the occupation on this part of the settlement? Does it

suggest specialisation or zoning within the settlement.

What were the circumstances of the apparent increase in activity at the end of the

13th century and its decline in the 14th century? Did the settlement change after the

relocation of the Abbey convent?

90

Is the coastal location of the site reflected in the finds assemblage; in diet and

trading connections?

To improve the understanding of high-medieval pottery groups

What types of boats were being launched from Sizewell beach? What did they look

like and how were they made? How is the medieval fishing industry represented in

the material evidence?

Can the land holdings described in the 1467 survey be mapped against the current

landscape? How much can the archaeological evidence support/relate to

documentary material?

These site specific research questions feed into the regional research priorities for the

medieval period identified in the Regional Research Agenda (Medlycott 2011).

Particular research topics that this work has the potential to address relate to:

The morphology of towns, the development of specific urban forms- the coastal

market town – layout, patterns of land holdings, ownership and town and gown,

the relationship with the church.

Use of space (zoning of activity) impact of the environment on shaping town

development, use of coastal marshes and the coastal squeeze.

The agricultural economy, food production and the use of commons.

The medieval fishing industry.

The integration of documentary and archaeological records.

The collation and synthesis of published and unpublished excavations.

6.2 Updated project design

In order to address the revised research questions and complete the analysis and

prepare for archive deposition the following studies will need to be completed.

Integrate the LC148 and LCS150 site archive (including all finds catalogues) and

phasing.

Update databases.

Temporal and spatial analysis is required of the pottery.

Analysis to refine the pottery and small find dating to aid the accurate dating of

the site sequence.

91

Synthetic discussions of the small find, environmental and ceramics studies.

Analysis of pollen cores and beetle analysis from the palaeo-channel, complete a

soil chemistry and magnetic susceptibility study.

Analysis of the boat timbers/caulking materials and the reconstruction of the

boat. Dendro and species identification to be undertaken for extraneous wood

fragments currently in store. Integrate the recording of the clench nails in the sf

record with the boat archive. Conservation of the boat planks.

Attempt to fit the ‘word map’ detailed in the 1467 land survey with the landscape.

Production of a synthetic discussion and publication text.

Produce finds and site illustrations/finds photography.

7 Preliminary publication synopsis

The dissemination of any significant archaeological data, through academic publication,

is a requirement of the brief (Appendix 1) and will need to be completed in order fully to

mitigate for the loss of the physical archaeological deposits through the development.

The following is a suggested layout for a publication report in the East Anglian

Archaeology (EAA) monograph series. A full preliminary publication synopsis will be

submitted to the EAA Editorial Committee for approval by April 2015.

7.1 Suggested layout

Chapter 1. Introduction

I. Topography and setting

II. Surrounding sites

III. Background to the project

IV. The excavations

V. Historical analysis

Chapter 2. Phasing and Dating

I. Introduction

II. Radiocarbon dating

III Summary of site phasing

Chapter 3. Prehistoric, Roman and Saxon

Activity

I. Phase 1: Prehistory

II. Phase 2.1: Roman evidence

III. Phase 2.2: Saxon evidence

Chapter 4. The Medieval Phases

I. Introduction

II. Phase 3 – 11th–12th century

III. Phase 4 – 12th–13th century

IV. Phase 5 – 14th century

Chapter 5. The Medieval Finds

I. Introduction

II. Household objects

III. Building and structural materials

IV. Dress accessories and textiles

V. Personal possessions

VI. Crafts

VII. Fishing equipment

VIII. Boat building technology

IX. Trade

92

Chapter 6. Environment and Economy

I. Introduction

II. Animal bone

III. Fish bone

IV. Plant macrofossils and other

remains

V. Pollen

VI. Soil micromorphology

Chapter 7. Discussion

I. Site morphology

II. The buildings

III. The people and daily life

IV. The coastal economy: fishing

manufacture and trade

V. The end of the settlement

Bibliography

Index

The fieldwork was carried out by a number of archaeological staff, (Duncan Allen,

Robert Atfield, Beth Barham, Andrew Beverton, Rob Brooks, Phil Camps, Linzi Everett,

Michelle Fieder, Tony Fisher, Fiona Gamble, David Gill, Jonathan Van Jennians, Steve

Manthorpe, Simon Picard, John Sims, Holly Stacey and Anna West) all from Suffolk

County Council Archaeological Service, Field Team.

The project was managed by David Gill who also provided advice during the production

of the report. The fieldwork was directed by Robert Atfield. The report was written and

compiled by David Gill, Simon Cass and John Craven.

The post-excavation was managed by Richenda Goffin. Finds and sample processing

was carried out by Jonathan Van Jennians and Anna West. The production of digital

site plans and sections was carried out by Gemma Adams and the specialist finds

report by Richenda Goffin. Other specialist identification and advice was provided by

Sue Anderson, Julie Curl, Val Fryer and Ian Riddler, with the documentary assessment

undertaken by Anthony Breen. The report was edited by Richenda Goffin.

9 Acknowledgements

93

10 Bibliography

Anderson, S., 2009a, Cross Street, Hoxne (HXN044): the pottery. Archive report for NAUA.

Anderson, S., 2009b, Thurleston School, Ipswich (IPS 504): post-Roman pottery assessment. Archive report for SCCAS.

Anderson, S., 2009c, ‘Pottery’, in Loudham Lane, Pettistree (PTR025): ceramic finds. Archive report for SCCAS.

Anderson, S., forthcoming, ‘The pottery’, in Woolhouse, T, Medieval Activity on the Suffolk Clay at Stowmarket, E. Anglian Archaeol.

Atfield, R., Leiston Substation 132kv Cable Route. SCCAS Report No. 2007/190.

Atfield, R., 2008, Greater Gabbard Wind farm Onshore Works, Sizewell Wents, Leiston, Suffolk. An interim summary of the archaeological evaluation. SCCAS unpublished report.

Atfield, R., 2008b, ‘Medieval boat timbers from Sizewell’ in Saxon: the newsletter of the Sutton Hoo Society. No.48/2008.

Atfield, R., & Gill, D., Leiston Substation 132kV Cable Route LCS 150. SCCAS Report No. 2008/115.

Bailey, M. 1990, Coastal Fishing off South East Suffolk in the Century after the Black Death Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology and History Vol XXXVII Part 2 1990

Breen, A., 2013, Documentary report in Gill,D. Assessment report on Gabbard Wind Farm Onshore Works excavations, Sizewell Wents, Leiston LCS 148 SCCAS report No. 2012/007

Clark, E. A. and Gaunt, G. D., 2000, Stone Objects, in P. A. Stamper and R. A. Croft, The South Manor Area. Wharram. A Study of Settlement on the Yorkshire Wolds

VIII, York University Archaeological Publications 10, York, 101-110

Clarke, H. and Carter, A., 1977, Excavations in Kings Lynn 1963-1970, Society for Medieval Archaeology Monograph Series 7, London

Cocker, M. and Mabey, R. 2005. Birds Britannica. Chatto & Windus

Curl, J. 2004. The Faunal Remains from PSM 007, Preston St Mary, Suffolk. NAU Specialist Report for Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service.

Curl, J. 2004. The Faunal Remains from St Annes Wharf, Norwich. Norfolk Archaeological Unit Specialist Report.

Curl, J. 2006. The Faunal Remains Analysis from Cinema City, Norwich. Norfolk Archaeological Unit Specialist Report.

Curl, J. 2008. The Faunal Remains from BAU1618, Ayscoughee Hall, Lincolnshire. NAU Archaeology Specialist Report.

Curl, J. 2009. The Faunal Remains from Church Farm, Bawsey St James, King’s Lynn, Norfolk. Specialist Report for the Time Team.

Curl, J. 2009. The Faunal Remains from BAU2203, IT Trench Watching Brief at Cathedral Close, Norwich, Norfolk. Archive report for NAU Archaeology.

94

Curl, J. 2009. The Faunal Remains from LCS148, Leiston, Suffolk. Assessment for Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service.

Davis, S. 1992. A rapid method for recording information about mammal bones from archaeological sites. English Heritage AML report 71/92

Draper, G. and Meddens, F., 2009, The Sea and the Marsh. The Medieval Cinque Port of New Romney, PCA Monograph 10, London

Dunning, G. C., 1937, A 14th century well at the Bank of England, Antiq. J. 17, 414-18.

Egan, G., 1997, ‘The Non-ceramic finds’ in Thomas, C., Sloane B., and C Phillpotts, Excavations at the priory and hospital of St Mary Spital, London, Medieval Monasteries Series, MoLAS Monograph 1

Gardiner, M., 1993, The Excavation of a Late Anglo-Saxon Settlement at Market Field, Steyning, 1988-9, Sussex Archaeol. Collect. 131, 21-67

Gill,D.J., 2013, Gabbard Wind Farm Onshore Works excavations, Sizewell Wents, Leiston LCS 148, Archaeological Assessment Report SCCAS report No. 2012/007

English Heritage, 2008, Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment

Goodall, A., 1982, Objects of Copper Alloy, in J. G. Coad and A. D. F. Streeten, Excavations at Castle Acre Castle, Norfolk, 1972-77: Country House and Castle of the Norman Earls of Surrey, Archaeological Journal 139, 235-9

Huddle, J., 2007, Dress and Personal Possessions, in P. A. Emery, Norwich Greyfriars: Pre-Conquest Town and Medieval Friary, East Anglian Archaeology 120,

Gressenhall, 191-202

Hill, T., Gearey B., and Smith, D., 2008, Sizewell, Suffolk: A Palaeoenvironmental Assessment of Deposits Encountered Along the Proposed Leiston Substation 132kV Cable Route

Hillson, S. 1996. Teeth. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press.

Hilson, S. 1992. Mammal bones and teeth. The Institute of Archaeology, University College, London.

Luff, R.M & Moreno Garcia, M.1995. Killing Cats In The Medieval Period. An Unusual Episode In The History Of Cambridge, England. Archaeofauna 4 (1995): 93 –

114.

Lucas, G., 1998, A medieval fishery on Whittlesea Mere, Cambridgeshire, in Medieval Archaeology, Vol XLII, pages 19-44

Maritime Archaeology Ltd, 2006, Greater Gabbard Windfarm, Sizewell Wents – Archaeological Assessment Technical report. Report no. 1759.

Margeson, S., 1993, Norwich Households. Medieval and Post-Medieval Finds from Norwich Survey Excavations 1971-78, East Anglian Archaeology 58,

Gressenhall.

Medlycott, M., 2011, Research and Archaeology Revisited: a revised framework for the East of England, EAA Occasional Paper 24, ALGAO

Mitchell, J. G., Askvik, H. and Resi, H. G., 1984, Potassium-Argon Ages of Schist Honestones from the Viking Age Sites at Kaupang (Norway), Aggersborg

95

(Denmark), Hedeby (West Germany) and Wolin (Poland), and their Archaeological Implications, Journal of Archaeological Science 11, 171-6

MPRG, 1998, A Guide to the Classification of Medieval Ceramic Forms. Medieval Pottery Research Group Occasional Paper 1.

Newman, J and Ridgard, J. M., 1995, Sizewell Belts S.S.S.I. – Desktop survey. SCCAS unpublished report.

Ottaway, P., 1992, Anglo-Scandinavian Ironwork from Coppergate, The Archaeology of York. The Small Finds 17/6, York

Richmond, A., 1994, Sizewell C, PWR Power Station evaluation report. SCCAS Report No. 94/31.

Riddler, I. D., 2006, The Coins, Small Finds and Building Materials, in K. Parfitt, B. Corke and J. Cotter, Townwall Street, Dover. Excavations 1996, The Archaeology of Canterbury, New Series 3, Canterbury, 255-318

Riddler, I. D., 2009, Fishing Implements and Medieval Fishing Practices in East Kent, in G. Draper and F. Meddens, The Sea and the Marsh. The Medieval Cinque Port of New Romney, PCA Monograph 10, London, 100-4

Rogerson, A., and Dallas, C., 1984, Excavations in Thetford, 1948-59 and 1973-80, East Anglian Archaeology 22, Gressenhall

Stace, C., 1997, New Flora of the British Isles. 2nd edit. Cambridge University Press

Tyers, l., 2009, Appendix 11 of Tree-ring spot dates from archaeological samples: Pillbox Field, Sizewell, Suffolk (sitecode LCS150)

Ward-Perkins, J. B., 1940, Medieval Catalogue, London Museum Catalogues 7, London

Walton Rogers, P., 2007, Cloth and clothing in Early Anglo-Saxon England, CBA Research report 145, CBA

Williams, V., 1997, The Small Finds, in B. Morley and D. Gurney, Castle Rising Castle, Norfolk, East Anglian Archaeology 81, Gressenhall, 87-101

Yalden, D.W. and Albarella, U. 2009. The History of British Birds. Oxford.

Archaeological services Field Projects Team

Delivering a full range of archaeological services

Desk-based assessments and advice

Site investigation

Outreach and educational resources

Historic Building Recording

Environmental processing

Finds analysis and photography

Graphics design and illustration

Contact:

Rhodri Gardner

Tel: 01473 581743 Fax: 01473 288221

rhodri.gardner@suffolk.gov.uk

www.suffolk.gov.uk/Environment/Archaeology/