Middle Bronze Age occupation at Cripple Street, Maidstone, Kent · 2017. 4. 25. · Site code: CSM 14/108 Area of site: 11250 sq m Summary of results: The archaeological excavation

Middle Bronze Age occupation at

Cripple Street, Maidstone, Kent

An Archaeological Excavation

for Millwood Designer Homes Ltd

by David Sanchez

Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd

Site Code CSM 14/108

March 2017

i Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd, 47–49 De Beauvoir Road, Reading RG1 5NR

Tel. (0118) 926 0552; Fax (0118) 926 0553; email [email protected]; website: www.tvas.co.uk

Summary

Site name: Land at Cripple Street, Maidstone, Kent

Grid reference: TQ 7605 5360

Site activity: Archaeological Excavation

Date and duration of project: 18th July - 11th August 2016

Project manager: Steve Ford

Site supervisor: David Sanchez

Site code: CSM 14/108

Area of site: 11250 sq m

Summary of results: The archaeological excavation has revealed a modest volume of

archaeological features representing Middle Bronze Age occupation on the site. The

chronology was supported by 3 radiocarbon dates of 2064-1880, 1516-1418 and 1501-1392

cal BC. The most distinctive features were two small clusters of pits but also included a

dispersed spread of postholes and a length of ditch. Tentatively, one semicircular arrangement

of postholes represents a roundhouse of broadly similar date. The fieldwork also revealed a

modest number of Post-medieval/modern date features.

Location and reference of archive: The archive is presently held at Thames Valley

Archaeological Services, Reading and will be deposited at Maidstone Museum in due course.

This report may be copied for bona fide research or planning purposes without the explicit permission of the

copyright holder. All TVAS unpublished fieldwork reports are available on our website:

www.tvas.co.uk/reports/reports.asp.

Report edited/checked by: Steve Ford 13.03.17

Steve Preston 13.03.17

mailto:[email protected];

1

Middle Bronze Age Occupation at Cripple Street, Maidstone, Kent

An Archaeological Excavation

by David Sanchez

Report 14/108c

Introduction

This report documents the results of an archaeological excavation carried out at Land at Cripple Street (TQ 7605

5360) (Fig. 1). The work was commissioned Mr Pete Bland of Millwood Designer Homes Ltd, Bordyke End

East Street, Tonbridge Kent TN9 1HA

Planning permission (14/503167/FUL) has been gained from Maidstone Borough Council to develop the

site for residential housing. The consent is subject to a planning condition (11) relating to archaeology. This is in

accordance with the Department for Communities and Local Government’s National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF 2012) and the Borough’s policies on archaeology. Initial trial trenching of the site (Socha-

Paszkiewicz and Weale 2015) revealed deposits of Bronze Age and Iron Age date on the southern part of the site

and as a result of this an excavation of the site targeting the known deposits and the area to be affected by the

development was required.

The field investigation was carried out to a specification approved by Ms Wendy Rogers, Senior

Archaeological Officer of Heritage Conservation of Kent County Council. The fieldwork was undertaken by

David Sanchez, David Platt, Graham Hull, Cosmo Bacon, Rebecca Constable, Ellen McManus, Jim Webster and

Virginia Fuentes, between 18th July and 11th August and the site code is CSM14/108.

The archive is presently held at Thames Valley Archaeological Services, Reading and will be deposited at

Maidstone Museum in due course.

Location, topography and geology

The site is located to the north of Cripple Street, approximately 2km south of Maidstone (Fig. 1). The proposed

site for development is approximately 2.1ha in which two areas of 9900sq m and 1350sq m were to be

investigated during the archaeological excavation. The site itself consisted of a relatively flat parcel of farmland

at 1.6km to the west of river Medway, although there is a gentle slope down towards the north-west, a terrace

however does occupy the north-west corner of the site where there is a drop of 2.5m from the eastern top of the

terrace to the western base. This land is bounded to the north by a public footpath and to the south by Cripple

Street with residential houses to the west and east. The height above Ordnance Datum rises from about 60m in

2

the north-west corner of the site to approximately 65m in the south-east corner. According to the British

Geological Survey (BGS 1976) the underlying geology consists of Hythe Beds (Inter-bedded sandstone,

limestone and calcareous sand) and the geology observed on site consisted of red brown silty clay with bedded

sandstones.

Archaeological background

Prehistoric remains, other than Palaelithic handaxes from the environs of the site recorded in the county Historic

Environment Record are uncommon with just a few stray finds of Neolithic flintwork. In later times Subsequent

periods are not much better represented though a probable Roman cremation cemetery was recorded in the first

half of the 19th century about 100m north-west of the development site, and inhumation burials of similar date

were found slightly further a field at Tovil. Stray finds of Roman material make up much of the rest of the

archaeological record for the environs. Slightly further afield, to the north, a Saxon cemetery and a medieval kiln

site are known.

The whole development site had been evaluated prior to the archaeological excavation, an exercise which

revealed small areas containing cut features of Bronze Age and Iron Age date to the south and with post-

medieval and modern features spread more widely (Socha-Paszkiewicz and Weale 2015).

Objectives and methodology

The purpose of the excavation was to excavate and record all archaeological deposits and features within the

areas affecter by the proposed development, to produce relative and absolute dating and phasing for deposits and

features recorded on the site, to establish the character of these deposits in attempt to define functional areas on

the site such as industrial, domestic, etc., and to produce information of the economy and local environment and

compare and contrast this with the results of other excavations in the region.

Specific research objectives of the project were to answer the following questions:

What is the nature of the earlier prehistoric activity on the site and what is its date and extent?

What is the date and nature of the Bonze Age on the site?

Are any structural remains on the site representing occupation and if so are they enclosed or

unenclosed? How do they relate temporally and spatially to any land division features?

What use was made of floral and faunal resources and can these be identified and assessed form a

program of environmental sampling?

3

What is the paleoenvironmental setting of the various episodes of activity on the site?

The excavation project comprised overburden stripping of two areas of 9900sq m (Area A) and 1350sq m

(Area B). A contingency of a total of 1000sq m of extra stripping was included in the proposal but after

consultation with the Senior Archaeological Officer of Kent County Council this was not required. These areas

were stripped of topsoil and subsoil using a 360º type machine fitted with a toothless ditching bucket under

constant archaeological supervision. Discrete features such as pits and postholes were fully excavated following

half-sectioning and recording. Linear features such as ditches and gullies as field boundaries were sampled at a

minimum of 10% in 1m wide slots and all termini and intersections were to be examined. Any deposits relating

to funerary/ritual activities such as burials and cremations deposits and domestic/industrial activities such as

walls, postholes floors, middens, walls, hearths, ring gullies, etc. were to be fully excavated.

The recording system adopted during the investigation was as detailed in the TVAS manual (7th edition

2011). Description of individual deposits and features were recorded on pro-forma context recording sheets and

plan and sections were drawn at scales of 1:100 and 1:10 respectively.

Sieving took place to enhance the recovery of small bones and artefacts as advised by our faunal remains

specialist. 31 deposits were sampled and wet-sieved using a 2mm mesh and charred plant remains were

recovered using floatation and a 0.25mm sieve.

Results

Area A

Area A was 9900sq m in extent and it was stripped of topsoil and subsoil sometimes to depth of 0.85m to expose

the archaeologically relevant horizon. The stratigraphy observed typically consisted of 0.25m of topsoil and

0.20m of subsoil, with the land slopping down to the NW where the thickness of the subsoil was up to 0.60m.

The natural geology consisted of red/yellow brown silty clay with bedded stone. The excavation of Area A

revealed a moderate volume of archaeological deposits comprising small and medium sized pits, postholes and a

single linear feature (Fig. 2). The features are thought to belong to two principal periods- Middle Bronze Age

and Post-medieval modern.

Ditch 1000 (Fig. 2, 3 and 4, Pl. 2)

The only linear feature observed during the excavation of Area A comprises a 34m long ditch aligned E-W in the

south part of the site. Both ends of the ditch terminated in the excavation area. The ditch had a depth between

0.55m and 0.70m and a width ranging between 1m and 1.45m. Five slots were dug showing it had a variable

profile from V-shaped with a flat base to U-shaped. It contained a single deposit of mid grey brown silty clay

4

with small and medium size sandstone inclusions. A flint scraper, 24 sherds of prehistoric pottery and 2

fragments of bone were recovered. A single sherd of pottery recovered from this feature during the evaluation

was tentatively considered to be of Iron Age date but which might be of earlier date or be intrusive.

Two radiocarbon dates obtained from charcoal samples from either terminal of the ditch gave two dates of

2064-1880 Cal BC (UBA32994) and 1501-1392 Cal BC (UBA32996). The second date would be in keeping

with the Middle Bronze Age chronology suggested by the pottery from this feature and elsewhere on the site.

The first date is somewhat earlier than expected and is considered to be from residual material in this context,

providing only a terminus post quem date which is better defined by the other date and pottery. However, in the

context of the site in general, unless the tree it was obtained from was exceedingly old when burnt, this points to

an earlier Bronze Age component of activity on the site.

Pits

A total of 22 features were recorded as pits, excluding those of post-medieval date. as detailed in table 1 Twelve

are dated by pottery to the Middle Bronze Age. Several of the pits formed two distinct clusters (A and B), with

others occurring in pairs (eg 102-103) or were isolated (eg 122). As always there is an overlap in shapes and size

range between features considered to be small pits and those considered to be large postholes.

Pit Cluster A (Figs. 3 and 4, Pl. 3 and 4)

This cluster of prehistoric pits was located in the SW corner of the stripped area comprising 5 pits (2, 3, 4, 111,

113). They were of circular shape with diameters ranging between 0.75m and 1.8m and depths between 0.40m

and 0.60m (Fig. 4). They were filled with mid grey brown silty clay deposits with frequent small and medium

size sandstones. All five pits contained pottery pits 3 and 113 containing 52 and 42 sherds respectively. Four

struck flints and burnt flint were recovered from the fill of pit 111. Charred plant remains were few with pit 111

producing a little identifiable charcoal as willow and oak. Four fragment of bone came from pit 111 and one

fragment from 113. Pits 2,3,4 and 111 produced 10 struck flints between them. There are no other types of

feature near to this cluster though it does lies close to the edge of the excavation ith the possibilityof further

features beyond.

5

Pit cluster B (Figs. 3 and 5, Pl. 5)

A second cluster of 9 pits (130, 133-5, 137-9 and 148-9) was located towards the northern end of the site.

Several of the pits were intecutting. They were circular and oval in plan between 0.80m and 1.75m across and

with a depth between 0.22m and 0.74m. The intercutting nature of some of these pits suggests a longer period of

activity in this area compared to cluster A. Six of the nine pits contained pottery and it is only pit 130 that is not

well dated. Charred plant remains were few but with a little willow and oak charcoal and four indeterminate

cereal grains recovered. One of these grains from pit 133 has returned a radiocarbon date of 1516-1418 BC

(UBA, 32995). A flake, and a serrated flake and spall of flint were recovered from the fills of pits 133 and 139

respectively and 8 fragments of bone from pits 148 and 149.

Other pits

The remaining 10 pits were spread across the site without any obvious patterning. Pits 102 and 103 formed a pair

or even a small group with 109 whereas pits 122 and 147 were in relative isolation. Only one of these pits (121)

produced Bronze Age pottery as dating evidence with another (9) containing a flint flake.

Table 1 Summary of pits (excluding post-medieval)

Cut Fill (s) Diameter (m() or

length/breadth

Depth (m) Profile Comment

2 53 0.9 0.26 Steep sided, flat based 1 MBA sherd; Flint flake; 1 fragment fired clay

3 54-7 1.78 0.4 Deep bowl-shaped 52 MBA sherds; Flint flake; 2 fragments animal bone

4 58 2.15 0.68 Irregular sided, flat based 2 MBA sherds; 3 flint flakes and acore fragment; 2

fragments animal bone

9 66 1.5/0.98 0.16 Shallow-bowl shaped Flint flake

14 72 0.46/0.4 0.08 Shallow bowl-shaped

23 83 0.3 0.2 Shallow-bowl shaped




111 159 1.1 0.39 Steep sided, flat based 6 MBA sherds; 3 flint flakes and a spall; 42.5g burnt flint

113 162 1.7 0.6 Steep sided, flat based 42 MBA sherds

121 171,253 0.7 0.5 Deep bowl-shaped 1 MBA sherd


123 173 0.8 0.14 Shallow bowl-shaped 6g Burnt flint

130 180 1.0 0.22 Shallow bowl-shaped

131 181 0.95 0.24 Shallow bowl-shaped

133 183 0.85 0.37 Steep sided, flat based 1 MBA sherd; Flint flake; C14 date 1516-1418 cal BC.

134 184 0.8/0.45 0.3 Deep bowl-shaped 1 MBA sherd;

135 185 1.75 0.23 Shallow bowl-shaped 1 MBA sherd;


138 189 0.2 0.32 Steep sided, flat based Posthole?

139 190 1.15/1.0 0.37 Steep sided, concave based 7 MBA sherds; Serrated flake and spall; 93g burnt flint

147 198 0.55 0.11 Steep sided, flat based

148 199,250 1.7/1.4 0.74 Deep bowl-shaped 8 MBA sherds

149 251 1.5/1.0 0.68 Deep bowl-shaped 3 MBA sherds; 22g burnt flint

6

Postholes and Structure 2000.

A total of 22 features were recorded as postholes but only one which contained dating evidence (struck flint).

Some 17 of these features were considered to be structural and are summarised below.

Structure 2000 (Figs. 3 and 6)

Six features, (117-120,129,125), mostly postholes though 125 would be better described as a pit, were uncovered

in the north west corner of the site forming a semi circular plan This had a project diameter of 7.2m though two

features were slightly off-line and the circuit is far from complete to the south west casting doubt as to its

validity. The postholes to the north east were spaced at c. 1.5-2m apart with diameters between 0.22m and 0.45

and depths between 0.05 and 0.14m. They had typical fills of greyish brown silty clay with very occasional small

size sandstone inclusions. No finds were recovered from any of the eneither of their fills,

Three post structures?

One arrangement of three postholes (142, 143, 144) was uncovered in the central west part of Area A. and

formed a slightly bent line 2.5m long. The three features had diameters of between 0.22m and 0.24m and depths

of between 0.12m and 0.24m. Their fills consisted of mid grey brown silty clay with occasional sandstone

inclusions and only a little of burnt flint from posthole 144 was recovered.

A second arrangement of three postholes (12, 13, 20) was uncovered in the northern part of Area A and

formed a line 2.5m long. These three features had diameters of between 0.3m and 0.32m and depths of between

0.11m and 0.19m. Their fills consisted of grey brown silty clay with occasional sandstone inclusions. A flint

scraper was recovered from posthole 12.

Posthole pairs (Figs. 3 and 6)

Four pairs of postholes were revealed in locations away from other features to suggest that their paired

associations were valid (140-141, 145-146, 126-127, 128-129). Their dimensions were similar to other postholes

uncovered during the excavation as were their fills. The posts were spaced between 0.9m and 3m apart. The only

find recovered from any of these features was a flint flake from posthole 126. It is assumed that such postholes

are simple structures such as drying racks.

7

Post-medieval and modern (Fig. 7)

Area A

Some 13 post medieval features and two land drains were recorded for Area A. Several of these were

investigated to confirm that they were of modern date and found to contain modern tile and brick fragments,

'china' pottery sherds and modern metalwork.

Land drain.

During the field evaluation a slot in a field drain (6) was dug at the west end of trench 3, recovering a 16th

century (or later ) sherd of pottery. The drain consisted of a linear cut containing two backfills (60 and 61)

covering the actual drain constructed of pitched stones in a triangular form with a hollow or void between the

stones. During the excavation this slot was extended by two metres recovered from fill 60, two sherds of 'china'

pottery, to confirm that it was of modern date.

Area B

Area B was 1350sq m in extent. The stratigraphy observed consisted of 0.25m of topsoil and 0.15m of subsoil

overlying red/yellow brown silty clay with bedded stone natural geology. No deposits of archaeological interest

were observed. Three pits and a linear feature were investigated and found to contain modern items such as

ceramic drains, plastic or 'china'.

Finds

Prehistoric pottery by Richard Tabor

The combined later prehistoric pottery assemblage from the evaluation and excavation comprised a total of 159

sherds weighing 1655g. The weights, fabrics and vessel parts of all sherds were recorded. The assemblage

appeared to derive from three phases of occupation, earlier Middle Bronze Age, Middle to Late Bronze Age and

later Iron Age. The boundaries between the first two phases are poorly defined but the later phase has a

distinctive range of fabrics, albeit including only one diagnostic feature sherd.

The sherds were allocated to fabric groups based on the material, size and sorting of the principal

inclusions. Vessel forms were grouped also by characteristic profiles, where reconstruction was possible, or by

rim or other diagnostic features, including surface treatments in accordance with guidelines for the recording and

analysis of prehistoric pottery (PCRG 2010).

8

A valuable assessment of Kent’s Middle Bronze Age to Middle Iron Age pottery has recently been

presented (McNee 2012). Her thesis presents an ambitious chronologically arranged vessel morphology and a

fabric series founded on detailed petrological analysis. Reference is made to McNee’s system of classification

within which five ceramic phases cover an approximate time span of 1500BC to 400BC (McNee 2012, 55). Her

research included material from the nearby site at Westborough School, Maidstone (Rayner 2005).

Fabrics

The fabrics have been divided into two Bronze Age groups, one comprising grog mixtures and the other with

inclusions of flint or metamorphic rock. The dating of the Bronze Age material is supported by association with

sherds carrying diagnostic traits of variable significance and there is significant co-occurrence of the fabric

groups in single features (Tables 1 and 2 Appendix 2). A single rim sherd supports the speculative later Iron Age

dating of quartz or sand with flint mixtures in the evaluation report (Table 3 Appendix 2; Tabor 2016a).

Bronze Age: grog mixtures

GF1 (medium) Soft grey fabric with red brown exterior and grey interior surfaces including moderate

rounded grog (<3mm), and sparse burnt flint (<2mm).

GF2 (coarse) Moderately hard grey fabric with red brown exterior and grey interior surfaces including

moderate rounded grog (<3mm), and moderately well-sorted sparse to moderate burnt flint (<4mm).

GF3 (coarse) Moderately hard grey fabric with red brown exterior and grey interior surfaces including

moderate rounded, flint inclusive grog (<5mm), and poorly-sorted sparse to moderate burnt flint (<5mm).

GQ1 (medium) Moderately hard grey fabric with buff exterior and grey interior surfaces including moderate

rounded grog (<4mm), moderate subangular quartzitic rock (<3mm) and rarely burnt flint (<3mm).

fG1 (medium) Soft grey fabric with buff brown exterior and grey interior surfaces including moderate grog

(<3mm), and rare burnt flint (<1.5mm).

fG2 (fine) Moderately soft grey micaceous fabric with grey surfaces including common fine (<1mm) to

medium (<2mm) sub-rounded grog and rare burnt flint (<2mm).

fGS1 (medium) Moderately soft grey fabric with buff red exterior and grey interior surfaces including

common quartz sand (<0.25mm), sparse grog (2mm), and rare to sparse poorly-sorted, angular burnt flint

(<1mm).

Bronze Age: flint

mF1 (coarse) Moderately hard dark grey sparsely micaceous fabric with buff to yellowish brown exterior and

grey to dark grey interior surfaces including moderate angular burnt flint (<3mm).

F1 (coarse) Moderately hard dark grey to black fabric with red brown exterior with pink outer margin,

reddish brown exterior and dark grey to black interior surfaces including common angular burnt flint

(<3mm). Hackly fracture.

F2 (fine/medium) Moderately hard, well-fired, dark grey fabric with buff orange exterior and dark grey

interior surfaces including abundant well-sorted angular burnt flint (<1mm).

F3 (medium) Moderately hard grey fabric with reddish brown surfaces including abundant well-sorted fine

(<0.5mm) to sparsely medium (<1.5mm) angular burnt flint.

9

Bronze Age: metamorphic

Met1 (coarse) Moderately hard grey fabric with grey surfaces including common poorly sorted metamorphic

(? Quartzite) crushed rock (<4mm).

Met2 (coarse) Moderately hard grey fabric with buff brown exterior and grey interior surfaces including

common fine (<1mm) and sparse coarse (<5mm) metamorphic (? Quartzite) crushed rock and rare to sparse

iron-rich clay pellets (<3mm).

Later Iron Age: flint and sand

FS1 (medium) Moderately hard grey to red fabric with red brown exterior and red brown or grey interior

surfaces including abundant quartz sand (<0.25mm) sparse to moderate, moderately well-sorted, angular flint

(2mm) and sparse brown iron oxides (<2mm).

fS2 (medium) Moderately hard grey to red fabric with red brown exterior and red brown or grey interior surfaces

including abundant quartz sand (<0.25mm) rare angular flint (3mm) and rare brown iron oxides (<2mm).

fMS1 (medium) Moderately hard grey fabric with red brown surfaces including abundant sand (<0.25mm)

moderate clear mica (<0.1mm) and rare to sparse angular flint (1mm).

mfeS1 (medium) Moderately hard orange micaceous sandy fabric with orange surfaces including sparse brown

iron oxides (<2mm).

Later Iron Age: quartz and flint mixtures

FQ1 (coarse) Moderately hard grey fabric with grey surfaces including abundant quartz sand (<0.25mm) and

moderate to common, poorly-sorted, angular flint (<5mm).

FQ2 (medium) Moderately hard grey fabric with buff orange surfaces including abundant quartz sand

(<0.25mm) and sparse to moderate, poorly-sorted, angular burnt flint (<2mm) and rare reddish brown iron

oxides (<3mm).

fgQ1 (medium) Moderately hard grey fabric with buff orange exterior and grey interior surfaces including

abundant fine to medium quartz (1mm), sparse to moderate amounts of moderately well-sorted rounded grog

(<3mm), sparse angular burnt flint (<3mm) and rare red brown round iron oxides (<1.5mm).

fQSt1 (medium) Hard grey fabric with grey to buff orange exterior and grey surfaces including abundant fine

sub-rounded quartz (<0.25mm), sparse poorly sorted subangular crumbly sandstone (<5mm) and rare to

sparse angular burnt flint (<1.5mm) and rarely red brown round iron oxides (<0.5mm).

fefGQ1 (medium) Moderately soft grey fabric with buff red exterior and grey interior surfaces including

common quartz sand (<0.5mm), moderate iron rich pebbles (<1mm), sparse iron-rich clay or grog pellets

(2mm), and rare to sparse poorly-sorted, angular burnt flint (<2mm).

Undated: Flint with voids

VF1 (medium) Moderately soft dark grey vesicular fabric with buff brown exterior dark grey to black

interior surfaces including sparse fine (<1mm) to rare medium (<2mm) angular burnt flint. Commom voids

(<4mm) from sub-angular to plate-like striations probably due to dissolution of shell.

In the neighbouring areas of Sussex and the Thames Valley there is a fairly well established fabric sequence in

which grog mixtures of the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age give way to flint during the Middle Bronze Age

before sandy fabrics become increasingly prevalent during the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age (Seager

Thomas 2008; Leivers et al. 2010; Needham 1996). Flint inclusions dominated the nearby, broadly

10

contemporary, assemblage from West Borough School, Maidstone (Rayner 2005, 47-8) but carbon dating

suggests that mixtures of grog with flint persisted at least into the later Middle and Late Bronze Age in some

areas of Kent, including Maidstone (McNee 2012, table 5.3; Tabor 2016b, 9). It is noteworthy, also, that grog

was re-introduced during the Late Iron Age at Westborough School (Rayner 2005, 49) so that only limited

inferences should be drawn concerning the Bronze Age sequence based on the fabrics alone. At Westborough

School it was suggested that an absence of fabrics including both sand and flint might indicate a pre-1000 BC

date (Rayner 2005, 47-8) but elsewhere in Kent similar mixtures feature in fine vessels of the Middle Bronze

Age and remain in use throughout the Iron Age, raising the possibility that the sandy fabrics listed below may

include sherds of Bronze Age date (McNee 2012, table 5.3). A quartzitic sherd from pit [4] from a thicker-walled

vessel may predate the sherds in F1. Like the sherd from the same context grog is a dominant inclusion which

might support an earlier date.

Vessel forms, decoration and surface treatment

Middle to Late Bronze Age

The excavation phase has increased the range of rim forms recovered from the site to include one with fingertip

impressions on top of an expanded rim above a fingertip impressed cordon on a high shoulder and an everted rim

from a high shouldered tripartite jar, both from pit 113. Five more examples of incurved rims from ovoid jars

have been added to those from pit 3. In the evaluation report it was suggested that the sherds from pit 3 might all

derive from a single vessel (Tabor 2016a, 10). Subsequently, other significant sherds from the same pit have

been identified, giving a minimum of three but, more probably, four vessels. The well-fired, hard fabric of a

single flattened incurved rim, 8, is very similar to that of substantial base fragments, 9, distributed over two

contexts within the pit. Presumably a single vessel, it differs from the other ovoid forms in lacking rustication of

the exterior surface. Other decoration includes a row of very light fingertip impressions, 7, on either the wall of a

straight-sided bucket form vessel or the shoulder of a weakly shouldered biconical jar, and two sherds, 12 and

13, with sharply tooled linear incisions from pits 148 and 139 which are likely to derive from a single vessel.

The sherds are too small for the confident identification of a design but the use of differing angles on 13 implies

that it may have been geometrical. Part of a single perforation formed prior to firing, 11, is likely to be

decorative and probably from a horizontal row. A scar on a sherd from pit 3 (not illustrated) is probably the only

remaining trace of an applied lug or knob. Carbonised residues were noted on several sherds in fabric F1,

including those from pit 3 with fingertip impressions and the possible lug scar.

11

Ovoid jars occur throughout the Bronze Age in southern Britain with either simple rounded rims, as in the

present case, or flattened rims. Such vessels are a late, Post Deverel-Rimbury component of the near pan-Bronze

Age cemetery at Kimpton where the rims of that phase were generally simple tapering or rounded and

sporadically-used decorative motives included single rows of fingertip impressions made directly on the wall or

shoulder and imperforate lugs (Ellison 1981, 179-83). Examples from Ramsgate in east Kent include

impressions made directly on the shoulders of bucket and weakly biconical vessels and a slightly wavy row of

fingertip impressions arcing over imperforate lugs on an ovoid jar with a flattened, fingertip impressed rim

(Moody et al. 2010, 160; figs. 3 and 4, 5, 6 and 11). An emphatically Middle Bronze Age date range at 95%

probability of 1520BC to 1310BC from human bone associated with one of the vessels defies the given

periodisation of the assemblage as ‘later Bronze Age’ (Moody et al. 2010, 157-62). Ovoid jars with incurved,

simple rims, classified as J3, were amongst the most widespread during the Middle to Late Bronze Age in Kent

but are generally absent from Early Iron Age assemblages (McNee 2012, 65, 270; tables 3.7 and 4.13).

The fingertip impressions, cordon and form of the biconical vessel are very similar to a small vessel from

Alfriston, Sussex dated to the earlier Middle Bronze Age but also to a medium sized high shouldered jar from

the Late Bronze Age phase of the cemetery at Kimpton, Hampshire (Seager Thomas 2008, fig. 4, 2; Ellison

1981, 185, fig. 22, G6). The later date is supported by an everted rim from the same context which probably

derives from a high shouldered tripartite jar characteristic of the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age (McNee

2012, 297ff; Seager Thomas 2008, fig. 10). The use of incised linear decoration occurs in Kent on Early and

Middle Iron Age vessels but also rarely on Deverel-Rimbury forms. Reconstruction of a small, weakly ovoid or

biconical vessel from Dartford shows a vertical strip of incised linear decoration combining vertical lines and

chevrons enclosing horizontal triangles. Two radiocarbon assays from the associated context gave middle and

third quarter 2nd millennium dates (Couldrey 2003, 55-9). Well-represented in a small assemblage from nearby

Stanley Farm, single rows of pre-firing perforations, usually just below the rim, occur sparsely in Kent’s Middle

Bronze Age pottery but are absent by the transition to the Early Iron Age (Tabor 2016b, 10; McNee 2012, 183).

Later Iron Age

As noted above there is a distinct group of sandy and quartzitic fabrics which is likely to be of later Iron Age

date. The only feature sherd was a rim, probably from a high shouldered, rounded jar of the type classified as

type JC2.3 at Danebury, where its currency was estimated to lie within the span 350BC to 50BC (Brown 2000,

86-7).

12

Summary

The persistence of Deverel-Rimbury traits into the late 2nd millennium and even the early 1st millennium in

Kent renders the dating of Bronze Age pottery from the county problematic. Two Middle Bronze Age carbon

dates would fit perfectly well with the assemblage but for the presence of early 1st millennium rim on pit 113.

The lack of heavily expanded rim forms also points to a later date, although this might reflect the nature of

activity on the site rather the timing of its occupation. The single diagnostic Iron Age sherd supports dating

based on the fabrics making up the very small assemblage of the period recovered during the evaluation.

Struck Flint by Steve Ford

A small collection of 20 struck flints were recovered from the site including the evaluation finds. Thirteen of

these were flakes including a narrow flake, though the latter does not appear to reflect deliberate manufacture

indicative of a Mesolithic date. The remaining pieces comprise two core fragments 2 spall (pieces less than

20x20mm), 2 scrapers and a serrated flake. The flints are not closely datable, but are likely to be of Neolithic or

Bronze Age date.

Burnt Flint by David Sanchez

A modest amount of burnt flint was recovered during the excavation with a total weight of 164g. The burnt flint

pieces recovered were very fragmented and found in small amounts from the fills of 5 different features, all of

them of certain or likely prehistoric date.

Animal Bone by Lizzi Lewins

A small assemblage of animal bone (15 fragments), weighing a total of 57g was recovered during the course of

the investigation. The bone was highly fragmented with a high degree of surface abrasion and erosion. Much of

the recovered bone was unidentifiable due to its condition and fragmentary nature. Pit 148 contained a long bone

shaft fragment that had been sliced from a medium-sized mammal and Pit 149 also contained a fragment of long

bone shaft from a medium-sized mammal.

13

Charred plant remains by Rosalind McKenna

A programme of soil sampling was implemented during the excavation to recover small artefacts and charred

plant remains. Thirty-eight samples were taken and were floated and sieved using a 0.25mm mesh. Details of

methodology are in the site archive. The full species list appears in Appendix 7.

Charred plant macrofossils were present in just three of the samples, in the form of single, poorly-preserved

indeterminate cereal grains in each: nothing of further interpretative value can be gained.

Charcoal fragments were present in all of the samples but again the preservation was poor. The total range

of identifiable taxa comprises oak (Quercus) and willow/poplar (Salix / Populus). A local environment with an

oak dominant woodland is indicated from the charcoal of the site. As seen in Appendix 7 Table 2, oak has the

highest number of identified charcoal fragments within the samples, although willow/poplar was recorded in

smaller numbers in more samples. It is possible that these were the preferred fuel woods obtained from a local

environment containing a broader choice of species. It is probable that these small assemblages of charcoal

reflect the intentional deposition or accumulation of domestic waste. However, as the samples are so small in

size nothing of great interpretative value can be gained.

Radiocarbon dating

Three samples (two of wood and one of cereal) were submitted to the Chrono radiocarbon dating laboratory at

the Queen’s University of Belfast. The results were calibrated using Calib rev 7.0 with data from INTCAL 13

(Reimer et al. 2013) and are detailed in Appendix 8. All results are quoted at 2-sigma (95.4% probability).

Conclusion

The excavation undertaken on this parcel of land at Cripple Street has revealed a modest density of

archaeological deposits, most of them located in the largest area investigated (Area A). The majority of features

revealed are certainly or probably of Middle Bronze Age date but with some late Post-medieval and modern also

noted.

Middle Bronze Age

The Middle Bronze Age occupation mainly takes the form of two clusters of pits along with a linear feature.

Less securely dated to this period is a possible post-built round house and other post-built structures. The

chronology of the site is supported by three radiocarbon dates. A sample of cereal from pit 133, belonging to the

14

northern cluster of features (B), has returned a radiocarbon date of 1516–1418 cal BC. The linear feature

produced two radiocarbon dates obtained from charcoal samples from either terminal of the ditch of 2064–1880

cal BC and 1501–1392 cal BC. The latter date is broadly contemporary with that from pit cluster B, and together

these are taken to place the bulk of the certain and probable Middle Bronze Age features within this period. The

former date is earlier than expected and is considered to be residual in this context even if an allowance is made

for a date returned from the burning of mature wood. Yet it must point to some form of activity on the site in the

Early Bronze Age. Some of the Middle Bronze Age pottery has fabrics including grog tempering which might

indicate an earlier Bronze Age origin, and pit 121, for example, contained just a single sherd in such a fabric. A

serrated flint flake from pit 139 is also a tool type of earlier Bronze Age (or earlier) date. However, the

significance of these observations is at best tentative. The strongest evidence for the site, namely the modest

density of features, the pottery types and two radiocarbon dates are thought to indicate a relatively short

chronology and suggest that use of the site as a whole lies within the Middle Bronze Age.

There are relatively few sites within the region with which to compare our site and the prehistoric

archaeology of the Weald across Kent, Surrey and Sussex is particularly poorly understood. Middle Bronze Age

occupation sites comprising more than isolated pits are generally rare and it is considered that much settlement at

this time is comparable to earlier Bronze Age and Neolithic settlement, which left few below-ground traces.

Recent fieldwork has tended to reveal sites of Later Bronze Age date (e.g., Coles et al. 2003). In the east of Kent

several sites have been investigated but all them seem to be placed within a Later Bronze Age timeframe. At

Netherhale Farm, Thanet (Macpherson-Grant 1992), Highstead, Chislet and Mill Hill, Deal (Macpherson-Grant

1991) a series of enclosures or field boundaries of Late Bronze Age date were excavated. In west Kent two

settlements have been identified, which again seem to be dated within the Late Bronze Age. At Hayes Common

a small mixed farming settlement was revealed (Philp 1973; Drewett et al. 1988), and at Coldharbour Road,

Gravesend, two parallel ditches associated with smaller ditches and gullies seem to represent a driveway with

attached settlement (Mudd 1994). A more recent excavation in the Weald at Burgess Hill revealed an unenclosed

occupation site comprising a round house defined partly by a ring gully and partly by postholes, dating to the

Middle Bronze Age (Wallis 2016).

Middle Bronze Age occupation sites which are unenclosed and represented by small clusters of features

with or without recognizable houses are a recurrent site type in other regions areas such as the Middle Thames

Valley or Sussex coastal plain (Taylor et al. 2014, fig 68). At Wexham, Slough, Middle Bronze Age occupation

was represented by three clusters of pits and postholes (Ford 2012) whereas at Springfield Quarry, Beaconsfield,

15

the site included a post-built roundhouse (Lewis 2012). Fieldwork at Cippenham, Slough revealed loose clusters

of pits, postholes and cremation burials but without roundhouses or other structural features (Ford 2003). The

site at Cripple Street therefore appears to be fairly typical for the wider period, albeit less so for this region.

POST-MEDIEVAL/MODERN

The last phase documented during the archaeological excavation comprised pits of various sizes mostly located

on Area A, along with other features such as land drains.

References BGS, 1976, British Geological Survey, 1:50,000, Sheet 288, Solid and Drift Edition, Keyworth

Brown, L, 2000, ‘The later prehistoric pottery’, in B Cunliffe, The Danebury Environs Programme, the

Prehistory of a Wessex landscape, volume 1: Introduction, Oxford, 80–124

Coles, S, Pine, J and Preston, S, 2003, ‘Bronze Age and Saxon landscapes on the Isle of Sheppey: Excavations at

Shrubsoles Hill, Brambledown, 1999–2001’, in S Coles, S Hammond, J Pine, S Preston, S and A Taylor,

Bronze Age, Roman and Saxon sites on Shrubsoles Hill, Sheppey and at Wises Lane, Borden, Kent, TVAS

Monograph 4, Reading, 2–55

Couldrey, P, 2003, ‘Prehistoric Pottery’, in P Hutchings, ‘Ritual and Riverside Settlement: a multi-period site at

Princes Road, Dartford’, Archaeologia Cantiana, 123, 55–60

Cunliffe, B, 2000, The Danebury Environs Programme, the Prehistory of a Wessex landscape, volume 1:

Introduction, Oxford

Dacre, M and Ellison, A, 1981, ‘A Bronze Age Cemetery at Kimpton, Hampshire’, Proc Prehist Soc 47, 147–

203

Drewett, P, Rudling, D and Gardiner, M, 1988, The South-East to AD 1000, Harlow

Ellison, A, 1981, ‘The Middle Bronze Age pottery (Deverel-Rimbury and Post Deverel-Rimbury)’, in M Dacre

and A Ellison, ‘A Bronze Age Cemetery at Kimpton, Hampshire’, Proc Prehist Soc 47, 1Leivers73–85

Ford, S, 2003, ‘The Old Way Lane site: excavation of an early/middle Bronze Age ring ditch, late Bronze Age

occupation, Roman enclosures and Neolithic and Bronze Age deposits’ in S Ford, R Entwistle and K Taylor,

Excavations at Cippenham, Slough, 1995–7, TVAS Monogr 3, Reading, 95–145

Ford, S, 2012, ‘Middle Bronze Age occupation and enclosure and Roman occupation at All Souls Farm Quarry,

Wexham, Buckinghamshire’, in S Preston (ed), Settlement and Landscape Archaeology in the Middle

Thames Valley: Slough and Environs, TVAS Monogr 14, Reading, 87–182

Gardiner, M, 1990, ‘The Archaeology of the Weald – A survey and a review’, Sussex Archaeol Collect 128, 33–

54

Hasted, E, 1798, The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent : Volume IV, London

Holden, S, 2005, ‘Phased summary and assessment document of an archaeological excavation of land at West

borough School, Maidstone, Kent’, London

Hutchings, P, 2003, ‘Ritual and Riverside Settlement: a multi-period site at Princes Road, Dartford’,

ArchaeolCantiana 123, 41–79

KCC, 2004, Kent Historic Towns Survey: Maidstone; Archaeological Assessment Document, Kent County

Council, Maidstone

Leivers, M, Every, R and Mepham, L, 2010, ‘Prehistoric Pottery (section 1)’, in Lewis et al 2010

Lewis, J, Leivers, M, Brown, L, Smith, A, Cramp, K, Mepham, L and Philpotts, C, 2010, Landscape Evolution in the

Middle Thames Valley: Heathrow Terminal 5 excavations: vol 2, Framework Archaeology Monogr 3, Oxford

Lewis, J, 2012, ‘Bronze Age occupation and later Bronze Age field boundaries at Springfield Quarry,

Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire’, in S Preston (ed) Settlement and Landscape Archaeology in the Middle

Thames Valley: Slough and Environs, TVAS Monogr 14, Reading, 183–94

Macpherson-Grant, N, 1991, 'A Re-appraisal of Prehistoric Pottery from Canterbury', Canterbury's Archaeology,

(1991) 38-47

Macpherson-Grant, N, 1992, A Review of Late Bronze Age Pottery from East Kent', Canterbury's Archaeology,

(1992) 55-63

Margary, I D, 1955, Roman Roads in Britain, London

McNee, B, 2012, The Potters’ Legacy: Production, Use and Deposition of pottery in Kent, from the middle

Bronze Age to the early Iron Age, unpubl PhD thesis, Univ Southampton (accessed: 2nd March 2016)

16

Mills, A D, 1993, Dictionary of English Place-Names, Oxford

Moody, G, MacPherson-Grant, N and Anderson, T, 2010, ‘Later Bronze Age cremation at West Cliff,

Ramsgate’, Archaeologia Cantiana, 130, 147-72

Mudd, A, 1994, 'The excavation of a Later Bronze Age site at Coldharbour Road, Gravesend', Archaeologia

Cantiana, 114, 363–410

Needham, S, 1996, ‘The Late Bronze Age pottery: style, fabric and finish’, in S Needham and T Spence, Refuse

and Disposal at Area 16 East, Runnymede, London, 106-64

Needham, S and Spence, T, 1996, Refuse and Disposal at Area 16 East, Runnymede, London

NPPF 2012, National Planning Policy Framework, Dept Communities and Local Govt, London

PCRG, 2010, The Study of Prehistoric Pottery: General policies and guidelines for analysis and publication,

Prehistoric Ceramics Research Group, occas pap 1 & 2, 3rd edition

Philp, B, 1973, Excavations in West Kent 1960-1970, Kent Archaeol Rescue Unit, Dover

Rayner, L, 2005, ‘Appendix 3: Assessment of the prehistoric and Roman pottery’, in S Holden, ‘Phased

summary and assessment document of an archaeological excavation of land at Westborough School,

Maidstone, Kent’, London, 46–51

Reimer P J, Bard E, Bayliss A, Beck J W, Blackwell P G, Bronk Ramsey C, Buck C E, Cheng H, Edwards R L,

Friedrich M, Grootes P M, Guilderson T P, Haflidason H, Hajdas I, Hatté, C, Heaton T J, Hogg A G, Hughen

K A, Kaiser K F, Kromer B, Manning S W, Niu M, Reimer R W, Richards D A, Scott E M, Southon J R,

Turney C S M, van der Plicht J, 2013, ‘IntCal13 and MARINE13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0-50000

years cal BP’, Radiocarbon 55(4), 1869–1887

Seager Thomas, M, 2008, ‘From potsherds, to people: Sussex prehistoric pottery: Collared Urns to Post Deverel-

Rimbury, c. 2000-500 BC’, Sussex Archaeol Collect 146, 19–51

Schweingruber, F H, 1978 Microscopic wood anatomy, Birmensdorf

Socha-Paszkiewicz, A and Weale, A, 2016, ‘Land at Cripple Street, Maidstone, Kent: an Archaeological

Evaluation’, TVAS South West unpubl rep, 14/108b, Taunton

Stace, C, 1997, New Flora of the British Isles, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Tabor, R, 2016a, ‘The Prehistoric Pottery’ in A Socha-Paszkiewicz and A Weale, ‘Land at Cripple Street,

Maidstone, Kent: an Archaeological Evaluation’, TVAS South West unpubl rep, 14/108b, Taunton, 9–11

Tabor, R, 2016b, ‘Prehistoric Pottery’, in A Socha-Paszkiewicz, ‘Land at Stanley Farm, Marden, Maidstone,

Kent; an archaeological evaluation’, TVAS unpubl rep 13/118b, Reading, 8-11

Taylor, A, Weale, A and Ford S, 2014, Bronze Age, Iron Age and Roman Landscapes of the Coastal Plain, and a

Late Iron Age Warrior Burial at North Bersted, Bognor Regis, West Sussex, TVAS Monogr 19, Reading

Wallis, S, 2014, ‘Land at Cripple Street, Maidstone, Kent: an Archaeological Desk Based assessment’, TVAS

South unpubl rep, 14/108, Brighton

Wallis, S, 2016, Middle/Later Bronze Age occupation at Manor Road, Burgess Hill, West Sussex, TVAS Occas

Pap 9, Reading

17

APPENDIX 1: Catalogue of features.

Cut Group Fill (s) Type Date Dating evidence

1 1000 52 Ditch Middle/Late Bronze Age Pottery

2 53 Pit Middle/Late Bronze Age Pottery

3 54-7 Pit Middle/Late Bronze Age Pottery


5 59 Pit Post-medieval/Modern Pottery

6 60-61 Drain Post-medieval/Modern Pottery

7 Pit Pit Post-medieval/Modern Pottery

8 64-5 Pit Post-medieval/Modern Pottery

9 66 Pit Prehistoric? flint

10 67 Spread Post-medieval/Modern Pottery


12 70 Posthole Prehistoric? flint

13 71 Posthole

14 72 Pit




18 81 Posthole

19 84 Pit Middle/Late Bronze Age Same as 111

20 85 Posthole

21 77 Hollow/pond? Post-medieval/Modern?

22 79, 82 Hollow/natural? Post-medieval/Modern?

23 83 Pit



102 152 Pit

103 153 Pit

104 154 Tree hole Undated

105 1000 155 Ditch slot Middle Bronze Age Pottery

106 156 Posthole


108 1000 158 Ditch terminus Middle Bronze Age Pottery, C14 date 1501-1392 cal BC

109 252 Pit

110 1000 160 Ditch slot Pottery

111 159 Pit Middle Bronze Age Pottery

112 1000 161 Ditch terminus Early/Middle Bronze Age Pottery, C14 date 2064-1880 cal BC

113 162 Pit Middle Bronze Age Pottery

114 1000 163 Ditch slot Middle Bronze Age Pottery

115 164,166 Pit Post-medieval/Modern Brick/tile

116 165 Pit Post-medieval/Modern Brick/tile

117 2000 167 Posthole

118 2000 118 Posthole

119 2000 169 Posthole

120 2000 120 Posthole

121 171,253 Pit Middle Bronze Age Pottery

122 172 Pit

123 173 Pit

124 2000 174 Posthole

125 175 Posthole Prehistoric? Flint

126 176 Posthole

127 177 Posthole

128 178 Posthole

129 179 Posthole

130 180 Pit

131 181 Pit Post-medieval/Modern Stratigraphy cuts 1`32

132 182 Pit Post-medieval/Modern Pottery, glass

133 183 Pit Middle Bronze Age Pottery, C14 date 1516-1418 cal BC. Cuts 133

134 184 Pit Middle/Late Bronze Age Pottery; Cut by 133


136 186,187 Pit Post-medieval/Modern Brick/tile

137 188 Pit Middle/Late Bronze Age or earlier Stratigraphy ,Cut 138 Cut by 139

138 189 Pit Middle/Late Bronze Age or earlier Stratigraphy, Cut by 137

139 190 Pit Middle/Late Bronze Age Pottery , Cut 138

18

Cut Group Fill (s) Type Date Dating evidence

140 191 Posthole Undated







147 198 Pit Undated

148 199,250 Pit Middle/Late Bronze Age Pottery. Cut 149

149 251 Pit Middle/Late Bronze Age Pottery. Cut by 148

200 Pit Post-medieval/Modern Pottery






19

APPENDIX 2: Catalogue of prehistoric pottery.

Table 1. Bronze Age sherds and weights of fabrics including grog by cut

GF1 GF2 GF3 QG1 fG1 fG2 fGS1

Cut No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g)

1 1 2

4 1 3 1 7

111 3 6

113 5 9

121 1 5

133 6 29

135 1 1

139 2 9 3 18 1 1

148 3 4

Tot 6 18 7 34 6 22 1 7 6 11 1 1 1 1

Table 2. Bronze Age sherds and weights of fabrics lacking grog by cut

mF1 F1 F2 F3 Met1 Met2 fMS1 mfeS1

Cut No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g)

1 1 0.5 1 2

2 1 3

3 27 202 25 731

105 2 6

111 1 4 1 3

112 2 26

113 34 442 2 4 1 9

133 1 4

139 1 8

148 4 19 1 7

149 2 4 1 5

Tot 34 442 30 209.5 10 53 28 746 1 4 3 20 1 2 1 3

Table 3. Iron Age sherds and weights of fabrics by cut

FQ1 FQ2 fgQ1 fQSt1 fefGQ1 FS1 fS2 fMS1 mfeS1 VF1

Cut No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g) No Wt (g)

1 1 5 1 2

105 4 4 2 13

108 1 0.5

110 1 1 2 14 1 22 1 6 3 3 1 4

111 1 3

114 1 6 1 1 1 0.5 1 1

134 1 0.5

1 1 4 20.5 2 23 1 6 1 0.5 10 12.5 2 13 1 2 1 3 1 1

20

APPENDIX 3: Catalogue of struck flint

Trench Cut Fill Type

21 U/S Flake

2 53 Flake

3 154 s82 Flake

4 58 3 Flakes; core fragment

6 60 Core fragment

9 66 Narrow flake

12 70 Scraper

110 160 Scraper

111 159 2 Flakes

111 159 (s80) Flake; Spall

125 175 Flake

126 176 Flake (very fresh)

133 183 Flake

139 190 Serrated flake ; Spall

21

APPENDIX 4: Catalogue of burnt flint

Cut Fill Sample Weight (g)

111 159 54 0.5

111 159 42

123 173 6

139 190 93

144 195 74 0.5

149 251 22

TOTAL 164

22

APPENDIX 5: Catalogue of clay tobacco pipes

Cut Fill No Bowls No Stems Wt (g)

5 59 0 1 0.5

8 64 0 2 3

121 171 0 1 2

23

APPENDIX 6: Animal Bone Inventory

Cut Deposit Sample Type No. Frags. Wt (g) Medium Mammal Unid. Notes

105 155 - 2 9.5 2

111 159 80 4 4 4

113 162 - 1 3.5 1

148 199 - 2 6 1 1 Sliced

149 251? - 6 34 1 5

Total 15 57

24

APPENDIX 7: Paleoenvironmental.

Table 1: Plant Macrofossils - Complete list of taxa. Taxonomy and nomenclature follow Stace (1997).

Sample 69 77 78

Feature 133 148 149

Context 183 199 201

Feature Type Pit Pit Pit

Indeterminate Cereal 2 1 1

Table 2: Charcoal - Complete list of taxa. Taxonomy and nomenclature follow Schweingruber (1978). Numbers are identified charcoal fragment for each sample.

Sample 52 57 59 61 63 68 69 70 71 76 78 79 80 81

Feature 105 117 119 121 124 130 133 139 141 146 149 140 111 146

Context 155 167 169 171 174 180 183 190 192 197 201 191 159 197

Feature Type Ditch Post hole Post hole Pit Post hole Pit Pit Pit Post hole Post hole Pit Post hole Pit Posthole

No frags. 6 21 18 26 100+ 50+ 17 26 50+ 700+ 18 19 30 8

Max. size (mm) 7 5 5 8 12 15 7 8 9 19 6 7 14 22

Salix / Populus Willow / Poplar 2 2 4 3 2 10 8 1

Quercus Oak 3 16 100 4 3 4 5

Indeterminate Indeterminate 4 19 14 23 84 47 15 16 42 14 16 25 3

25

APPENDIX 8: Radiocarbon dates

Lab ID Feature Material Radiocarbon Age (BP) Calibrated date BC Area under curve at 2-sigma

UBA32994 Ditch 1000 (112, 161) charcoal 3613 + 44 2134-2078

2064-1880 1836-1834

10%

89.9% 0.1%

UBA32995 Pit 133 (183) cereal 3199 + 28 1516-1418 100%

UBA32996 Ditch 1000 (108, 158) charcoal 3162 + 30 1501-1392 1334-1325

98.4% 1.6%

Documents

Middle Bronze Age occupation at Cripple Street, Maidstone, Kent · 2017. 4. 25. · Site code: CSM 14/108 Area of site: 11250 sq m Summary of results: The archaeological excavation