|
Faversham Society Archaeological Research Group
|
|
Understanding Ospringe
Report for Keyhole
K54
|
|
46 Water Lane, Ospringe, Faversham, Kent
|
|
Grid Reference: TR 00256 60769
|
|
1.
Introduction |
|
Number 46 is on the west side of Water Lane and the
house was constructed in 1965. It is adjacent to Fern
Lodge, a listed building officially dated to the 18th
Century1 but possibly partly earlier2.
Maps of 18653 show two outbuildings on the
plot, one probably remaining as the current garage of
number 46. A map of 19074 depicts a path
leading to these buildings from Water Lane.
|
|
 |
 |
|
Fig
1a: OS 1st edition 1865 |
Fig
1b: OS Special Edition 1907 |
|
2. Location of pit |
|
The
pit was the same distance from the road (the last route
of the stream) as previous pits where evidence of
prehistoric activity was found during this project5.
It was 1.5 x 1 metre in size and the long axis spanned
the line of local prehistoric activity. The final
position was chosen to avoid the lost outbuilding. |
|
3. The procedures |
|
A
plot 1 x 1.5 metres was pegged out and delineated with
string. The position of the pit was recorded by
measuring to mapped corners of the house. Turf was
removed carefully, rolled and stored in plastic bags.
The pit was hand excavated using single contexts, each
of which was recorded. The keyhole was excavated to a
maximum safety depth of 1.2metres. All excavated soil
was sieved meticulously and the spoil heap scanned using
a metal detector. Finds were retained from each context
and any features revealed carefully recorded. Finally
the spoil was replaced, tamped down, watered and the
turf replaced.
|
|
4. The findings |
|
The
top layer of this pit, extending to a depth of 12cm,
contained a mix of inclusions, including pottery, glass,
animal bone, shell and coal [1] The pottery was mainly
late post-medieval and undated redware, although some
pieces of medieval (date span AD 1066-1539) were found.
The context below this, which spread across the whole
pit, contained a similar range of inclusions, but with
more flint and chalk [2]. A Bronze Age worked flint was
retrieved from this layer, as were numerous stressed
flints (pot boilers).
The third layer contained much less late post-medieval
pottery, and more medieval sherds were present [3].
Below this, and confined to the western end of the pit,
was an 8cm thick, firm, even layer of small pebbles and
shingle [4]. This contained pottery of a similar age
distribution to the layer above.
Below and level with this 4th layer was silty clay,
which extended to a depth of 65cm [5]. This fifth
context contained a large collection of pottery, of
which the vast majority (97%) was medieval, including
some early medieval sherds (date span AD1050-1225). This
included a particularly large section of a rim of a
North Kent shelly ware pot6. Most of the
shell recorded in the pit was in this layer, along with
a significant amount of animal bone. Most of the worked
flints found were also from this context, presumably
residual. These were dated to the Bronze Age, with one
tentatively identified as a Mesolithic rod.
In the eastern end of the pit, within the layer
described above, a distinctive flint feature was
revealed [7]. The flints were not obviously shaped and
not mortared together. They were arranged in approximate
layers forming a line running north/south through the
pit with the feature curving eastwards before it reached
the southern pit wall. Some chalk and oyster shell were
present between flints. This feature was not dismantled
and finds were limited to a few sherds of medieval
pottery and even fewer pieces of iron and bone. Set
within the flint feature was a round pit [8]. Careful
excavation of this using small tools yielded pot sherds,
the majority of which were early medieval.
Excavation continued, with layer [5] being removed, but
retaining the flints in the eastern third of the pit.
The layer below 5 consisted of large, unworked flints
with gravel [6]. A coarse, paste like substance of
variable colour was noted between many of the flints. In
places, the flints were tightly impacted and in section
on the pit’s western wall flints were arranged in a
regular pattern with 2 oyster shells between. The only
find from this context was a single piece of pottery
with sharp, non-abraded edges, tentatively dated to the
Roman period. A scale plan was drawn of the arrangement
of the flints.
A small area in the south west of the pit was excavated
further, avoiding and hence retaining the majority of
the aligned flints described above. A surface of yellow
brown, gritty gravel was revealed, containing rounded
and sub-rounded pebbles and flints [10]. This was
interpreted as being the natural geology, possibly the
stream-bed, and excavation ceased.
|
|
The flint layer |
 |
|
Fig 2: West end of K54 excavated down to expose the
flint layer. Note the 'racking' of the flints in the
western baulk.
|
|
 |
|
Section drawing of the
western baulk. Scale 1: 10
|
 |
|
Fig 3: Flint layer [07]
at the eastern end of the pit, with 'round pit' [10] on
the left. All of the material excavated from the ins and
outs of this feature was the same as in [5], the
medieval midden scatter layer.
|
|
5. Interpretation |
The top 30cm of this pit,
representing the first two layers, contained garden soil
that had been churned, as shown by the wide range of
dates for the material found. [4] probably represents a
path or yard surface and almost certainly relates to the
buildings known to have been on the site previously.
The presence of such high levels of medieval pottery
together with shell and animal bone in layer [5]
suggests that this may be medieval midden scatter
(resulting from the practice of spreading material from
rubbish pits over cultivated land to enrich the
soil)(Fig 5). Finds of medieval pottery in Ospringe
throughout this FSARG project have been generally lower
than would have been expected if the village had been an
important settlement during this time. The finds in this
pit, however, along with those of K63/63T suggest that
some intensive activity did occur. The presence of early
medieval pottery, especially the rim of North Kent
shelly ware, is particularly interesting as this dates
from before the accepted building date of the Hospital
of St Mary Ospringe in 1234.
Expert comment was required on the nature of the flint
deposits in this pit and it has been suggested that the
patterns are a result of periglacial frost action,
causing a frost heave, with the oyster shell and Roman
pottery sherd being intrusive7. Thus although
the pit spanned the ‘prehistoric contour’ in Ospringe,
no specifically prehistoric context was found. The
presence, however, of prehistoric flints throughout the
pit shows evidence of local activity and subsequent
churning of deposits (Fig 4).
|
|
 |
|
Fig 4: Bronze Age
scraper from context [2]
|
|
 |
|
Fig 5: Medieval 'midden
scatter' pottery from context [5]
|
|
6. Final comments
|
|
This was an intriguing pit
to dig, with clearly stratified layers overlying a flint
complex that looked too patterned to be natural. The
overlapping rectangular flints at the west end of the
pit looked suspiciously like a flint cobbled surface of
some kind, such was the regularity: the specialists'
interpretation does, however, seem more likely although
less interesting for us archaeologists. |
|
7. Acknowledgements |
|
Many thanks to all
involved in excavating and interpreting this pit.
Editor's note: K54 was
in Lesley's own garden, along with our finds processing
base, and we would all like to thank the Shea family
enormously for their hospitality and tolerance, as well
as this excellent report by Lesley.
Lesley Shea
December 2009
|

1http://lbonline.english-heritage.org.uk/SearchForm.aspx
2Householder
pers. comm.
3OS
1865 (1904 reprint) Sheet XXXIV Scale 1:2500
4OS
1907 Sheet XXXIV Scale 1:2500
5www.community-archaeology.org.uk/projects/UnderstandingOspringe/K52rep.htm
www.community-archaeology.org.uk/projects/UnderstandingOspringe/k44rep.htm
www.community-archaeology.org.uk/projects/UnderstandingOspringe/K59rep.htm
6John
Cotter 2000 'Medieval shelly wares in Kent; some recent
research' CAT Annual Report 1999-2000 Part 3 pp 56-60
7Geoff
Hallewell (flint specialist) and Peter Golding
(geologist) pers.comm.
|
|
 |
|