Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 20 – uploaded by Lisa Fisher

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13 EEN In general there were not many finds, the majority were post medieval, with a typical profile of Victorian and modern debris in the topsoil making up the majority of finds on the site. The medieval finds proved to be crucial in giving a date for either the slag spread in trench 1, or the re-deposition of the slag, which would make it earlier than medieval. These sherds have been analysed below. In addition to the medieval pottery in trench 1 were two very badly degraded sherds found within the fill of the smithing hearth in trench 3. These were the only finds from within the features in this trench and as they come from a sealed deposit of burnt material these are fairly reliable for dating the activity by association. As such, it is highly likely that they are Later Iron Age or Romano British (Luke Barber pers.comm). One medieval green glazed sherd came from the soil samples in context (103) after the pottery had been analysed and so is not included in the report below. This sherd was fairy degraded and matched the fabric, thickness and glaze of the Earlswood kiln in Surrey with another likely date of C13th

Figure 20 Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13 EEN In general there were not many finds, the majority were post medieval, with a typical profile of Victorian and modern debris in the topsoil making up the majority of finds on the site. The medieval finds proved to be crucial in giving a date for either the slag spread in trench 1, or the re-deposition of the slag, which would make it earlier than medieval. These sherds have been analysed below. In addition to the medieval pottery in trench 1 were two very badly degraded sherds found within the fill of the smithing hearth in trench 3. These were the only finds from within the features in this trench and as they come from a sealed deposit of burnt material these are fairly reliable for dating the activity by association. As such, it is highly likely that they are Later Iron Age or Romano British (Luke Barber pers.comm). One medieval green glazed sherd came from the soil samples in context (103) after the pottery had been analysed and so is not included in the report below. This sherd was fairy degraded and matched the fabric, thickness and glaze of the Earlswood kiln in Surrey with another likely date of C13th

Related Figures (43)

BN8 4AX
BN8 4AX
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
This trench contained a moderate amount of archaeology in the southern end of the trench below contexts (100) and (101), with a single ‘shadow’ of a feature in the north end of the trench (plate 1) which was photographed only as it had no substance to it once a slot was excavated to ascertain it’s nature. An officer from the Archaeology Section at East Sussex County Council visited that day and was happy that this feature should only be recorded by photographs due to its ephemeral nature. The only thing that set this ‘feature’ apart from the surrounding soil was a slight difference in colour with a slight edge which ran down part of the trench before becoming so vague it was no longer visible. Consequently it was not given a separate context or recorded more fully as it was so unclear, was becoming waterlogged and the slot across revealed very little information. Plate.1 The ephemeral shadow of a feature in trench 1 (scales 1m)
This trench contained a moderate amount of archaeology in the southern end of the trench below contexts (100) and (101), with a single ‘shadow’ of a feature in the north end of the trench (plate 1) which was photographed only as it had no substance to it once a slot was excavated to ascertain it’s nature. An officer from the Archaeology Section at East Sussex County Council visited that day and was happy that this feature should only be recorded by photographs due to its ephemeral nature. The only thing that set this ‘feature’ apart from the surrounding soil was a slight difference in colour with a slight edge which ran down part of the trench before becoming so vague it was no longer visible. Consequently it was not given a separate context or recorded more fully as it was so unclear, was becoming waterlogged and the slot across revealed very little information. Plate.1 The ephemeral shadow of a feature in trench 1 (scales 1m)
some of which was tap slag. This would indicate iron production within the vicinity o might possibly have been brought in from elsewhere to use as a metalled surface However, as the weather was so bad on this first day of machining the trench was filling up with water within ten minutes and so it was decided to call off the excavatior and wait for the field to dry out. Excavation commenced two months later, durinc which time the archaeology survived well. This feature was described as a genera spread of silty clay with a high slag content mixed in with it and it did not appear tc have an associated cut. However, it was difficult to ascribe any other details, apar from the fact that it was a deposit. The linear nature of the ‘edge’ proved to be one that shifted and was ephemeral. A slot was excavated across this spread and | proved to be only 80mm deep and approx. 400mm wide. It was not hard enough t be deemed a metalled surface and at best can be described simply as a spread o slag which might have been raked out of a furnace. However, there were no obviou: large quantities of charcoal within it, so a bagged soil sample was taken to ascertair if any hammerscale or small charcoal was contained within. See section on samplinc below. The rest of the slag was collected as a bulk sample.
some of which was tap slag. This would indicate iron production within the vicinity o might possibly have been brought in from elsewhere to use as a metalled surface However, as the weather was so bad on this first day of machining the trench was filling up with water within ten minutes and so it was decided to call off the excavatior and wait for the field to dry out. Excavation commenced two months later, durinc which time the archaeology survived well. This feature was described as a genera spread of silty clay with a high slag content mixed in with it and it did not appear tc have an associated cut. However, it was difficult to ascribe any other details, apar from the fact that it was a deposit. The linear nature of the ‘edge’ proved to be one that shifted and was ephemeral. A slot was excavated across this spread and | proved to be only 80mm deep and approx. 400mm wide. It was not hard enough t be deemed a metalled surface and at best can be described simply as a spread o slag which might have been raked out of a furnace. However, there were no obviou: large quantities of charcoal within it, so a bagged soil sample was taken to ascertair if any hammerscale or small charcoal was contained within. See section on samplinc below. The rest of the slag was collected as a bulk sample.
Plate 3. Trench 1 being excavated showing top of (102) (scales 2m) Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Plate 3. Trench 1 being excavated showing top of (102) (scales 2m) Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Plate 4. Slag deposit (103) scales 50cm and 30cm
Plate 4. Slag deposit (103) scales 50cm and 30cm
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Plate 6. Trench 2 being excavated and immediately filling up with water
Plate 6. Trench 2 being excavated and immediately filling up with water
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13 7.11. Trench 3 (Fig.5)
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13 7.11. Trench 3 (Fig.5)
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13 Plate 8. Slag spread (302) in trench 3 (Fig. 5) very ephemeral on day 1 (scales 50cm)
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13 Plate 8. Slag spread (302) in trench 3 (Fig. 5) very ephemeral on day 1 (scales 50cm)
Plate 9. Trench 3 after excavation and clean up showing linear features and spreads of slag. Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Plate 9. Trench 3 after excavation and clean up showing linear features and spreads of slag. Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13 Plate 10. Excavation of slots across the field drains (scales 1m)
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13 Plate 10. Excavation of slots across the field drains (scales 1m)
Plate 12. Looking north across trench 3 showing excavated slots (scales 1m) Plate 11. SE sector of excavated spread of slag (302) scales 1m and 20cm.
Plate 12. Looking north across trench 3 showing excavated slots (scales 1m) Plate 11. SE sector of excavated spread of slag (302) scales 1m and 20cm.
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Plate 13. South facing section 2 of [309] (scales 20cm)
Plate 13. South facing section 2 of [309] (scales 20cm)
Plate 14. West facing section 9 through [809] (scales 20cm and 50cm)
Plate 14. West facing section 9 through [809] (scales 20cm and 50cm)
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Plate 16.Feature [503] looking north after being sectioned (scales 50cm)
Plate 16.Feature [503] looking north after being sectioned (scales 50cm)
Plate 18. Looking down at east facing section of [503] scales 20cm Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Plate 18. Looking down at east facing section of [503] scales 20cm Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Plate 20.Green glazed high medieval pottery sherd from Surrey Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Plate 20.Green glazed high medieval pottery sherd from Surrey Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Plate 22.The jug base in-situ
Plate 22.The jug base in-situ
Plate 23.Run slag, showing extruded lumps from (310)
Plate 23.Run slag, showing extruded lumps from (310)
Whole earth and bagged slag samples were taken on site as follows: Sampling Methodology. A series of bagged samples were taken from key contexts and subjected to processing. Some of the samples consisted of bagged, hand picked Slag and others were whole earth samples. Two hearth type features [309] and [503] had their corresponding fills (310), (801) (504) and (505) 100% sampled (Table 10). All samples were initially wet sieved through a coarse sieve to remove any large pieces of slag material for analysis, the residues were retained and the remaining fraction was wet sieved in buckets of water through >1mm Endecott sieves. The residues were sorted by eye with larger lumps of slag removed and were left to dry in trays. A high strength magnet was then passed over the residues to remove the magnetic hammerscale and pieces of slightly magnetic slag. The remaining fractions contained some elements of charcoal from some samples and mostly small stones. Any residues that had charcoal in them were then soaked in buckets of water overnight and stirred slightly to remove any trapped pieces of charcoal therein. The flotelements were then poured into >1mm Endecott sieves and _left to dry on trays. The following day, they were fractionated through 5mm, 2mm and 1mm sieves. All charcoal samples >1mm were examined under a x10 binocular microscope to look for any charred plant remains but no surviving seed or molluscs were evident. The larger pieces >4mm and the sieved flots >2mm (as requested by the specialist for species identification) were sent off to a specialist to assess the potential for a
Whole earth and bagged slag samples were taken on site as follows: Sampling Methodology. A series of bagged samples were taken from key contexts and subjected to processing. Some of the samples consisted of bagged, hand picked Slag and others were whole earth samples. Two hearth type features [309] and [503] had their corresponding fills (310), (801) (504) and (505) 100% sampled (Table 10). All samples were initially wet sieved through a coarse sieve to remove any large pieces of slag material for analysis, the residues were retained and the remaining fraction was wet sieved in buckets of water through >1mm Endecott sieves. The residues were sorted by eye with larger lumps of slag removed and were left to dry in trays. A high strength magnet was then passed over the residues to remove the magnetic hammerscale and pieces of slightly magnetic slag. The remaining fractions contained some elements of charcoal from some samples and mostly small stones. Any residues that had charcoal in them were then soaked in buckets of water overnight and stirred slightly to remove any trapped pieces of charcoal therein. The flotelements were then poured into >1mm Endecott sieves and _left to dry on trays. The following day, they were fractionated through 5mm, 2mm and 1mm sieves. All charcoal samples >1mm were examined under a x10 binocular microscope to look for any charred plant remains but no surviving seed or molluscs were evident. The larger pieces >4mm and the sieved flots >2mm (as requested by the specialist for species identification) were sent off to a specialist to assess the potential for a
This map ts reproduced from Ordnance Survey maternal with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. 100019601. 2008.
This map ts reproduced from Ordnance Survey maternal with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. 100019601. 2008.
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Evaluation report for a proposed burial site at Summersales, Crowborough, East Sussex. ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICES LEWES. Project No. ASL.21/13
Related topics:
Roman Iron ProductionMedieval Iron ProductionWealden Iron Industry
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved