SURVEY RESULTS

2003 / 74 Whitestaunton, Somerset

1.	Survey Areas

1.1  	Using both magnetic and earth resistance techniques, approximately 1ha was surveyed over various ground conditions.  The survey areas were situated both within the grounds of the manor house and in the surrounding fields.  The locations can be seen in Figure 1 at a scale of 1:2500.

1.2. 	The survey grid was set out by GSB Prospection and tied in to the Ordnance Survey grid by Dr Henry Chapman using a Trimble GPS system.

2.	Display

2.1 	Figures 2 and 3 are summary greyscale images of the magnetic data and associated interpretation diagrams, while Figures 4 and 5 show summary greyscales and interpretations for the resistance data.

2.2 	Figures 6 to 12 show the magnetic and resistance data and interpretations at a scale of 1:500 (magnetic) and 1:625 (resistance).

2.3	Letters and numbers in parentheses (for magnetic and resistance anomalies respectively) in the text refer to anomalies highlighted on the interpretation diagrams.  Interpretations used are explained in the technical information section of the report.

3.	General Considerations - Complicating factors

3.1 	The ground conditions within all survey areas were generally good, although Area 5 was fairly steep and quite overgrown in places.  The survey areas within the garden (1, 2 and 3) were all on very short grass and all but Area 2 were level. Areas 4 and 5 in fields around the Manor House were covered by short pasture and were gently sloping.

3.2 	During the time of the survey, weather conditions were good although the ground was very dry in places, causing problems in achieving good contact with the resistance rig.  This may have introduced some erroneous spikes into the data and will have resulted in a reduction in any electrical resistance contrast between features that might be present and the surrounding soil.

4.	Results of Detailed Survey

Area 1

Magnetic Survey

4.1	The data in this area are extremely noisy and it is likely that this is a consequence of the levelling of the area to make a flat lawn.  The area of magnetic disturbance (A) appears to correspond with a slight slope at the edge of the main lawn and as such it is thought that this is the result of the landscaping of the garden.  The orientation of (A) is similar to several high resistance anomalies visible in the earth resistance data (see paragraph 4.4).

4.2	A very strong ferrous anomaly (B) seen in the centre of the plot corresponds with a small metal post protruding through the lawn.

4.3	Trends visible throughout the data seem likely to be related to landscaping activities due to their relatively ferrous nature, although it is possible that they correspond to the locations of garden features no longer visible on the surface.

Earth Resistance Survey

4.4	Within this area there are several high resistance anomalies (1) which appear to have some archaeological potential.  Since they are orientated parallel and perpendicular to the house it is thought that these may be the remnants of formal garden features, likely to be Victorian or earlier.  As stated previously, it seems likely that these anomalies can be related to anomaly (A) in the magnetic data.

4.5	The associated low resistance anomalies (2) are probably predominately natural in origin but may represent areas of increased waterlogging due to the impedance of drainage due to the presence of underlying walls or other garden features.

Area 2

Earth Resistance Survey

4.6	The western third of this area is located on a raised platform that lies above the other two lawns that form Area 2. It is probable that anomaly (3) is related to terracing or other similar activity. The high resistance anomaly (4) coincides with the edge of the platform and the top of a steep slope. As such it is possible that this anomaly has a natural origin or may have been the location of a garden wall.

The high resistance anomalies (5) together with low resistance anomalies (6) are thought to represent the location of former garden features.  This is thought likely due to the presence of a set of ornamental steps on a similar orientation leading down to the pond.  If this interpretation is correct then it is likely that the trends in the eastern area have a similar explanation.  However, since the lawn has been obviously landscaped, these high resistance anomalies may simply be areas in which the underlying bedrock is much closer to the surface than elsewhere.

4.7	Excavation of anomaly (7), which correlated with a visible parch mark, indicated that this was the location of a garden wall likely to be no older than Victorian in date.

4.8	The high resistance anomalies (8 and 9) are also thought to be natural as they seem to relate to the location of a steep slope.  The soil cover in this area is very shallow and again the bedrock is likely to be close to the surface.  Excavation of anomaly (8) indicated that the high resistance response was indeed due to the presence of near-surface bedrock.  The trends in this area may relate to activities pre-dating the croquet lawn / tennis court (see 4.9)

4.9	The irregular shape and form of anomalies (10) and their relationship with low resistance anomalies (11) suggest that these are associated with landscaping.  It is known that this area has been levelled off to create a croquet lawn / tennis court in the past and it is likely that this has resulted in variations in moisture content of the soil.
4.10	It is thought that the high resistance anomalies (12) are modern in origin.  Since they are next to a gravel path, it is more than likely this has slightly changed course over the years.  

Area 3

Earth Resistance Survey

4.11	Very few responses of interest are visible within this area. Areas of high resistance (13) are likely to relate to the revetting of the area for the construction of an adjacent water channel, while anomalies (14) lie at the very edge of a landscaped wooded slope.

Area 4

Magnetic Survey

4.12	Much of this area is magnetically disturbed and is dominated by ferrous responses.  The large ferrous anomaly running north to south through the middle of the data is associated with a metal pipe, while the anomalies to the north east of the survey to relate to an adjacent fence line.  A similar interpretation can be given for the ferrous anomaly in the south east corner of the data.  

4.13	Areas of increased magnetic response are potentially relate to garden features known to have been present in this area at one time. The western most of these anomalies (C) also coincides with an extant earthwork bank.  Although no definite anomalies are present, these enhanced areas seem to correlate with high resistance areas within the earth resistance data (15) which are thought to be associated with garden features.

4.14	The pit-like anomalies (D) are thought to be related to the construction of the garden as they appear to form an alignment approximately parallel with the trends visible on the magnetic data and high resistance anomaly (15) (see paragraph 4.15). However, the interpretation of similar responses at (E) is more perplexing. They may all be associated with past quarrying and ground disturbance (Bob Croft, pers comm.).

Earth Resistance Survey

4.16	The clearest responses of potential interest comprise several high resistance linear anomalies (15) which are associated with former garden boundaries known to have been present in this area before it reverted back to agricultural use (S Ainsworth pers comm.).  There are also a few trends which appear to follow the same alignment and suggest a formal garden arrangement. A lower garden terrace is visible at (16).

4.16	The remaining variations in background resistance are all thought to be natural in origin. However, when the high resistance response (17) was first surveyed it was thought that these anomalies could represent the location of the Roman Villa. Expansion of the survey area revealed that a geological explanation was far more likely and this interpretation was confirmed by excavation. Bedrock was found to be only a few centimetres below the grass.

Area 5

Magnetic Survey

4.17	This area is dominated by ferrous responses which are due to the presence of two pipes within the field and the ground disturbance associated with them.  Other trends visible in the data are also ferrous in nature and are likely to be associated with past quarrying activity (Bob Croft, pers comm.).

Area 6

Magnetic Survey

4.17	Within this area, there are a few anomalies that are of archaeological potential, however none are of a strength or nature that would be expected from a villa building.  Some of the earthworks and undulations within the field correspond with anomalies, but it is unclear whether these are of archaeological interest and a modern explanation cannot be ruled out.

5.	Conclusions

5.1	The geophysical survey work failed to find any evidence for a villa building or complex in any of the areas investigated. This proved consistent with the analysis of the landscape and limited trial trenching. 

5.2	The majority of anomalies detected were associated with either garden features connected with the Manor House or natural responses due to the close proximity of the bedrock to the ground surface.

Project Co-ordinator:	J Gater and M Saunders
Project Assistants:	J Adcock, C Stephens and E Wood

Date of Survey:		23rd September 2003		
Date of Report:		20th January 2004 

References:
SSEW 1983.	Soils of England and Wales. Sheet 5, South West England. Soil Survey of England 		and Wales.

SITE SUMMARY SHEET

2003 / 74, Whitestaunton, Somerset

NGR: ST 281 105		

Location, topography and geology 

Whitestaunton lies approximately 10 miles south of Taunton and 5 miles north west of Chard in Somerset.  The geophysical survey was undertaken in and around the Manor House at Whitestaunton, both within the garden and grounds of the house and the surrounding fields. Immediately around the house, the land is level, most probably as a result of landscaping to create the gardens.  However, to the west, the land slopes steeply upwards into the adjacent field, while the other fields investigated, to the north and east of the house, also have slopes. The soils in this area belong to the Charity 1 series (571l), usually flinty silty drift and often overlying clayey subsoils (SSEW 1983). Within the garden itself, it seems likely that the soil matrix has been altered by the gardening and landscaping activities which have taken place.  The underlying geology is also known to be very close to the surface in this area, with bedrock visibly forming the foundations of a wall close to the Manor House.

Archaeology

A scheduled Roman structure, possibly a villa, exists within the grounds of Whitestaunton Manor though its interpretation has been questioned: the remains may simply be a bath house.  Extensive formal gardens were constructed around the house in Elizabethan times, both within the area now kept as lawn and in areas which have reverted back to agricultural use.

Aims of Survey

It was hoped that geophysical survey, especially in the form of earth resistance work, would identify the location of the villa building associated with the bath-house structure and identify further evidence for the presence of Roman activity within the area.  It was also hoped that any garden features present would be identified and mapped.  The survey formed part of a wider assessment undertaken by Time Team for Channel 4.

Summary of Results *

Within the area of the garden, little was identified other than features that are likely to relate to landscaping and the formal gardens which are now no longer visible. There are no geophysical responses that could readily be interpreted as a villa building, though the results are complicated by the presence of very near surface geology.

In the field to the west of the house, the anomalies again seem to relate to the presence of formal gardens, although it is possible that more than one phase of activity may be discernible. Geological complications again hinder any interpretation.

The results from the other two areas investigated, to the north and east of the house, show little of interest, with ferrous interference a problem in the latter.  Some potentially archaeological anomalies are visible in the area to the north but these have little coherent form and are not typical of those associated with a villa.

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

List of Figures

Figure 1		Location diagram							1:2500
Figure 2		Summary diagram, magnetic data					1:2000
Figure 3		Summary interpretation, magnetic data				1:2000
Figure 4 	Summary diagram, earth resistance data				1:1000
Figure 5		Summary interpretation, earth resistance data			1:1000
Figure 6		Magnetic Data – Areas 1, 4, 5 & 6: XY Trace Plots			1:500
Figure 7		Magnetic Data – Areas 1, 4, 5 & 6: Interpretation			1:500
Figure 8		Resistance Data – Areas 1-4: Greyscale Diagrams			1:625
Figure 9		Resistance Data – Areas 1-4: Interpretation				1:625