Series: Suffolk Archaeology unpublished report series

Suffolk Archaeology
 ADS Digital Resource

Primary Contact: Rob Brooks email
Associated OrganisationSuffolk Archaeology
Series Publication Type:
Publisher:
Year of Publication (Start): 2015
Year of Publication (End): 2105
Records per page:
Previous   Page 1 of 7   Next
Filter results by issue title, e.g. 'roman military station'
Filter:
Issue Title Sort Order Up Arrow Access Type Publication
Type
  Author / Editor   Abstract Publication
Year Sort Order Both Arrows
S Picard
During an archaeological monitoring two large pits dated to the late 12th to 14th centuries were revealed by the groundwork associated with the demolition of an existing single storey extension and the construction of a replacement two storey extension at 1 Crawley Cottages, Blyburgate, Beccles.
2015
M Sommers
trenched evaluation - no features or artifacts of any period identified
2015
J A Craven
A program of archaeological monitoring of construction groundworks, for two new blocks of flats on land to the rear of 16 High Street, Mildenhall, Suffolk, was carried out following an archaeological trial trench evaluation which had identified archaeological deposits relating to four phases of past activity from the medieval, post-medieval and modern periods. The monitoring of footing trenches and a small remedial soil strip generally proved inconclusive due to the nature of the trenches and ground conditions. While evidence of post-medieval or later pitting/quarrying was broadly identified several features seen in the evaluation were missed and it was difficult to clearly identify with any certainty a difference between general modern disturbance and potential cut features of an earlier date. Apart from one piece of worked masonry dating to the 14th/15th century, which may have originated form the nearby church and was recovered from a grubbed out footing trench along the historic plot boundary and position of a former post-medieval structure, no further dating evidence relating to the medieval occupation of the site was identified.
2017
M Green
An archaeological evaluation by trial trenching was carried out by Suffolk Archaeology behind No. 19 Toyse Lane, Burwell in Cambridgeshire. The evaluation assessed 5% of a small parcel of land covering 0.24ha for archaeological evidence. The works consisted of four trenches, three aligned north-east to south west (Trenches 1, 3 and 4), and one aligned north-west to south-east (Trench 2), measuring 70m in total length. The evaluation of the site has shown that a topsoil and post-medieval subsoil lie across the site, sealing the natural geology and two undated pits at a depth of c.0.5m. The subsoil seen in Trenches 1 and 2 produced the only dating evidence, a small quantity of medieval and post-medieval pottery and CBM, which is thought to have been deposited thought to be spread by agricultural processes such as manuring. The presence of the two pits demonstrates that archaeological evidence does survive in the development area but it is very sparse and the lack of dating evidence and low density of features does not indicate the presence of any sizable or significant phase of past activity.
2015
L Everett
Two trenches were excavated to the rear of The Old Rectory, prior to residential construction.
2015
L Everett
Three evaluation trenches were excavated in advance of plans to develop the site
2016
L Everett
An archaeological evaluation was carried out on the 10th July and 11th July 2017 as a condition on a planning application relating to a proposed housing development. The evaluation consisted of five 20m by 1.6m trenches. In each trench, agricultural activity was evident to at least the depth of any subsoil layer, between 0.3m and 0.4m deep. Features below this were likely to have been truncated by deep ploughing and drainage work, with the possibility that shallower features could have been lost completely. A number of linear features and a single pit were identified. None of the features produced secure dating evidence, although a fragment of probable Roman building material provided an earliest possible date for one of a large ditch identified in two of the trenches.
2017
L Everett
A single evaluation trench excavated in advance of a proposed new heritage facility building. The majority of the area had been subject to significant modern disturbance.
2017
L Everett
Monitoring of two 0.5m x 0.5m test holes to the rear of Gainsborough's House to investigate the depth of foundations. No pre modern deposits were observed in either test pit.
2017
L Everett
Trial trench evaluation in advance of new development.
2017
S Picard
Two visits were made to 23 Trinity Street, Bungay, on the 14th and 15th of November to monitor the groundworks associated with the construction a new house within the garden of the property. Topsoil and any other overburden was removed from the footprint of the proposed new building, an area measuring c.220m2, to expose the natural stratum below. Tree disturbance was evident over the stripped area and a single cut feature was identified, possibly representing terracing or landscaping of the garden. A small assemblage of both stratified and unstratified pottery was recovered but no environmental samples were collected.
2016
M Green
A small archaeological strip map and sample was carried out prior to the construction of two houses on land between 63 and 66 Cannon Street, in Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk The site had previously been evaluated by Suffolk Archaeology CIC with two evaluation trenches finding well preserved Medieval and post-medieval ditches, pits and postholes. The strip map and sample area was located between Trench 1 and Trench 2 where the densest archaeology was identified. A small number of well-preserved features were found including two Medieval postholes, two Medieval or post-medieval ditches along with three post-medieval square cut trenches and gullies and a Tree throw containing Neolithic struck flint.
2015
R Brooks
Two evaluation trenches were excavated on land between 63 and 66 Cannon Street, Bury St Edmunds, in Suffolk. Medieval contexts, including a pit, a pit/posthole and a layer were recorded, with a post-medieval trench, ditch, drain and a pit, as well as an undated pit and a posthole. The features were all well preserved, with only limited levels of modern construction having occurred across the site previously.
2015
S Boulter
The results from the excavation of a single evaluation trench revealed that the archaeological levels were well preserved at a depth of c.1.00m. The recorded deposits included a pit of later Saxon date, a ditch possibly of similar date, a series of post-medieval p[its and a number of later post-medieval post-holes.
2016
R Brooks
An area immediately to the rear of 88 Guildhall Street, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, was excavated, with further trenching monitored. The excavation uncovered chalk quarry pits, postholes and wells of medieval and post-medieval date beginning in the 12th century, as well as post-medieval mortar deposits, culverts and drains, suggestive of structures. However, there had been significant terracing of the site from post-medieval landscaping, as well as the construction of a modern small extension. Despite this, well-preserved deposits, including delicate remains such as fish bone, were preserved in places. Finds from the site included pottery, animal bone, ceramic building material (CBM), shell and fired clay of medieval and post-medieval date. There was also post-medieval tobacco pipe, mortar, bottle and window glass, and a small range of medieval and post-medieval small finds. Environmental samples produced evidence of crop processing, malting and smithing. Unusually large quantities of non-magnetic clinker/slag were recovered, indicating some sort of industrial activity nearby.
2015
R Brooks
Archaeological monitoring was carried out at RAF Lakenheath, in Suffolk. The works were located on the southern edge of the runway. The area had previously been concrete hardstanding and this was being replaced and upgraded. No features or finds were recorded in the works, despite the site's proximity to Caudle Head and areas of Roman and Saxon occupation. The whole area appeared to have been heavily truncated by the laying of the original concrete and its subbase.
2016
T P Schofield
In March 2017 Suffolk Archaeology Community Interest Company (SACIC) undertook reconnaissance earth resistance meter survey followed by detailed earth resistance meter survey in the gardens of Abbey Farm and Moatfield, Hoxne, Suffolk, which both lie within the former boundary of the Benedictine Hoxne Priory, a Scheduled Monument. The geophysical surveys successfully recorded the location of anomalies indicative of building structures related to the Priory and former wings of the 16th century farmhouse, as well as pits and ditches of possible archaeological derivation.
2017
C Douglas
An archaeological evaluation, consisting of the excavation of three trenches, was carried out at the Albany Road car park, Lowestoft, Suffolk, in advance of development of the site. A single post-medieval field boundary ditch was identified in Trench 1. No other archaeological features or deposits were encountered. There was some disturbance from modern service pipes and overlying made ground layers, however for the most part the geological horizon appeared to remain intact, and the absence of archaeological deposits suggests a general lack of activity on the site before the post-medieval period.
2017
R Brooks
One evaluation trench was excavated in an area of tarmac playground prior to its redevelopment into two new classrooms at All Saints CEVCP School, Lawshall, in Suffolk. No archaeological features or finds were recorded. Despite truncation of the upper levels of the soil profile (that had occurred during the laying of the old playground), the geological levels were well preserved. There was no indication that the adjacent graveyard associated with All Saints Church had ever encroached onto the school grounds.
2015
C Douglas
Eight archaeological evaluation trenches were excavated on land to the rear of 10 Turnpike Lane, Red Bridge, Suffolk in advance of redevelopment of the site. No archaeological features or deposits were identified during the investigation.
2017
 
Previous   Page 1 of 7   Next