Settlement Patterns in Hertfordshire: A review of the typology and function of enclosures in the Iron Age and Roman landscape 9780860548355, 9781407318769

Citation preview

Settlement Patterns

in Hertfordshire

A review of the typology and function of enclosures in the Iron Age and Roman landscape

J. R. Hunn

BAR British Series 249 1996

Published in 2019 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR British Series 249 Settlement Patterns in Hertfordshire © J. R. Hunn and the Publisher 1996 The author’s moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher. ISBN 9780860548355 paperback ISBN 9781407318769 e-book DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9780860548355 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library This book is available at www.barpublishing.com BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Tempvs Reparatvm in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 1996. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2019.

BAR

PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

E MAIL P HONE F AX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

Settlement Patterns In Hertfordshire: a review of the typology and function of enclosures in the Iron Age & Roman landscape. Contents Acknowledgements List of Figures 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

Location of Hertfordshire in relation to southern and eastern England Location of enclosure sites mentioned in the gazetteer Cropmark and earthwork enclosure plans (SMR 0003 - 1437) Cropmark and earthwork enclosure plans (SMR 1446 - 2215) Cropmark and earthwork enclosure plans (SMR 2322 - 2491) Cropmark and earthwork enclosure plans (SMR 2502 - 4195) Cropmark and earthwork enclosure plans (SMR 4472 - 6009) Cropmark and earthwork enclosure plans (SMR 6124 - 6819) (Al-2, Bl-B4, Il , Pl) Late Iron Age enclosures in the St Albans area Enclosures, boundaries and topography of the Verulamium oppidum Excavated sections across the late Iron Age dykes of the oppidum Topography and settlement in the Stevenage area Hypothetical territories in the Stevenage area using 1biessen polygons Notional territories in the Stevenage area The Boxfield Farm enclosure plan Market centres in the Stevenage area in the Roman period Hollard ' s Farm, Codicote enclosure plan Ditch sections across the Hollard' s Farm enclosure Plan of Prae Wood earth works Earthwork profiles in Prae Wood Earthwork profiles in Prae Wood Earthwork profiles in Prae Wood Earthwork profiles in Prae Wood Plan ofGorhambury Dykes Earthwork profiles across the Gorhambury dykes Earthwork profiles across the Gorhambury dykes

1

3 5 13 14 15 16 17 18 33 36 37 51 54 55 61 78 85 86 96 97 98 99 100 104 105 106

List of Tables 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Classification of enclosure types Range of enclosure sizes in Hertfordshire Dating evidence from enclosure sites in Hertfordshire and the Chilterns Incidence of parallel ditches Comparative ditch dimensions Sites in order of the quantity of cubic metres excavated List of cremations at the Boxfield Farm enclosure Comparative dimensions of com driers/malting kilns Time-span of site evidence for Boxfield Fann enclosure Comparative list of structures found on the site and functions Comparative list of personal adornments from a selection of Romano-British sites

7 7 8 8 10 10 67 71 75 76 81

Introduction

4

The area and topography

4

Hertfordshire enclosure sites (gazetteer)

6

St Albans area

31

Stevenagearea

50

Appendix I

The Boxfield Farm site

57

AppendixII

The Codicote enclosure

83

Appendix ID

The Prae Wood enclosure (after Wheeler & Wheeler 1936)

87

Appendix IV

Earthwork profiles in Prae Wood

91

Appendix V

Earthwork profiles across the Gorhambury dykes

Bibliography

101

107

Acknowledgements I owe a long standing debt of gratitude to Angus Wainwright (now a National Trust archaeologist) for his loyal and patient assistance to me some twenty years ago during the survey of Prae Wood. I would also like to thank Chris Saunders and Ros Niblett of Verulamium Muse~ Mike Morris of the Hertfordshire Archaeological Trust (now Chester City Archaeologist) and the staff of the Archaeology Section of the Planning and EnvironmentDepartment (Hertfordshire County Council) for their advice and assistance over the years.

2

0

100km

Fig. I Hertfordshire in relation to southern and eastern England

3

Introduction

The Chilterns (regions 1 and 2 of Hertfordshire) also bestride the counties of Oxfordshire , Buckinghamshire and Bedfordshire. They are composed of chalk which have been overlain by a variety of weathered sediments (mostly clay-with-flints) . The chalk is exposed on the north west facing escarpment which constitutes the most dramatic element of the regions topography . Beyond the escarpment, the clay capped plateau extends , dipping gently south eastwards. The Chilterns extend from the Goring Gap by the Thames north eastwards to the Hitchin Gap . That is, a distance of 46 miles (75 km) with an average width of approximately 10 miles (16 lan) . They have one of the highest densities of woodland in England (over 20% in the western Chilterns) . The area is bisected by a series of rivers (Wye , Miss , Bulbourne , Gade , Ver and Lea) flowing on a predominantly north-west south-east axis (Coppock 1953 , 1983)

This volume brings together a variety of studies concerned with settlement patterns and enclosures in the county of Hertfordshire in the late Iron Age and Roman periods. Originally , it was intended to include a larger area of the Chilterns and was to be unrestricted in temporal terms . However , several elements have contrived to thwart this objective . The first problem was that many of the crop mark sites had not been dated and many more were either incomplete or too indistinct in terms of their plan . The second problem concerned the presentation of the results of the Asbridge survey undertaken by Angus Wainwright on behalf of the National Trust. Due to other commitments this sw-vey, of what is a relict landscape mostly preserved within woodland, must await publication at some future date . Nevertheless , some aspects of this work are illustrated in this volume . It is hoped that these studies can be used as a stepping stone to further work in the county and more generally , within a wider geographical setting such as the Chilterns .

The study areas vary in the degree to which they have been surveyed and studied . That of Asbridge (17.95 sq. Ian) has been the most intensively studied but , apart from the enclosures, is not reported in this volume . The St Alban ' s area (126.2 sq. Ian) has been studied with varying degrees of intensity , but has been , nonetheless, unevenly treated. A similar situation applies to the Stevenage area (100 sq. km) where only one woodland survey was carried out (by the RCHM for England). Most of the evidence has been compiled from the SMR, Stevenage museum, recent excavations and aerial photographs. The methods used in the various studies will be described in the appropriate section .

The Area (Fig 1) The county (Hertfordshire) is one of the smaller shire units in England and covers an area of 1614 sq. kilometres (623 sq. miles) . It is located immediately to the north of Greater London (Middlesex) and , in addition , abuts the counties of Buckinghamshire , Bedfordshire , Cambridgeshire and Essex . Almost all the rivers with the exception of those on the extreme northern side of the county belong to the catchment area of the River Thames . The soils of the county are composed of a variety of sediments that were formed in the Cretaceous period. These have since been eroded and weathered over the course of time, and in particular in the Pleistocene when the effects of glaciation had a dramatic impact on the topography and drainage pattern of the area. As the result of sediment variation and differential erosion the county can be divided into six soil regions . On the west and north west side of the county the soils are chalk and clay with flints (regions 1 and 2); on the eastern side Boulder clay (region 3) ; the central area to the south west comprises the Lea and Colne gravels (regions 4 and 5) ; and the southern edge of the county is dominated by London clay (region 6) . In 1982, 20% of the county was classified as urban or industrial ; 64% was farmed (80% of which was arable , the remainder being improved grassland) ; 7% was wooded and 5% was classified as retaining seminatural habitats (Sawford 1990, 9).

4

~

"' '° ,.._C0

••

·-

◄ ■ l!l

• +,o 0 0

...,

. ...... ~

.... .... ':::

.::~~ .,,.,,

. N

co

-; ..,

;

■

•

.... .., .... ..,

. ~..,

~

"' "' CD

•

'° • ..., ,.,

-

.....'° OI

..., .... .... 0

v'I

..,

~

N

;;;

z ~

.... •• 0

~

N

co

..,

OI

•

+ 00

Fig 2 Location of enclosure sites mentionedin the gazetteer (see p.30 for key to symbols used) 5

!:::~

.

I

OI

-NNO

-

• I• •

were far wider and deeper than those of Boxfield Farm.

A Gazetteer of sites in Hertfordshire

Introduction Morphology This gazetteer will consider a selection of probable Iron Age and Roman enclosures within the county, the majority of which survive only in crop mark form. There have been discussions of enclosure sites such as Prae Wood (Wheeler and Wheeler 1936; Hunn 1980), Foxholes (Partridge 1989), Gorham.bury (Neal et al 1990), Welwyn I (Rook 1968b), Welwyn II (Arnold 1952-54) and those in the St Albans area (Hunn 1994a and 1994b) , but excluding those around St Albans there has been little attempt to analyse, on a comparative basis , their size and morphology.

Of the 102 enclosure plans that have been examined in this study over half (54%) show a preference for a regular lay out. Some 19% have an irregular long/short quadrilateral lay out while the remaining 27% are made up of a variety of irregular, curvilinear, rectilinear, D-shaped, polygonal and hybrid types. The classification follows that of the Royal Commission for Historic Monuments (Whimster 1989). See Figs 3 - 8. In terms of its morphology the enclosure at Box:field Farm site is unlike any other of the crop marks in the sample being considered. Its configuration reinforces the suspicion that the enclosure was a result of an eastern addition. This was never demonstrated archaeologically but the interpretation would at le~t account for its curious shape and perhaps its greater size. Its· western and presumably earlier side enclosed an area of 0.45 ha (1.1 acres). Both its predominantly square shape and size would make it comparable to the enclosure at Codicote (Bollard's Farm, SMR 2388) which has been partly examined by Letchworth Museum (Burleigh et al 1990), (see Appendix II).

Fig 2 shows some 94 enclosure sites that have been selected for the quality of their crop mark evidence. In addition, some sites have been included because they have had some archaeological investigation . The majority of the plans are relatively unambiguous and all except three sites have been plotted. The exceptions are the multi enclosure sites of Ashwell III and Baldock. These two sites (Ashwell III and Baldock) were either too indistinct or impossible to plot adequately. The remaining 102 plans at 92 different locations are all crop marks with the exception of Foxholes , Wymondley II, Gorham.bury III, Codicote, W el'W)'nII, the royal burial enclosure at St Albans and the surviving earthworks of Gatesbury (Braughing), Prae Wood (Enclosure A), Little Gaddesden and Ivinghoe (on Herts/Bucks boundary). It must be stressed that the list is not exhaustive and the distribution pattern is probably as much to do with the influence of different soils, different rates of plough erosion and the intensity of aerial reconnaissance as with the real density of the sites.

The internal sub-divisions of the Boxfield farm enclosure, with the exception of a north - south ditch, were composed of shallow ditches, palisade slots and fence alignments. Only three internal boundaries were apparent on the aerial photograph at Box.field Farm and such sites as Bladder Wood (Sandridge II, SMR 6124) with its four divisions may have been similarly sub-divided. The enclosure at Foxholes (SMR 2131) near Hertford was only divided by a ditch (Partridge 1989), in contrast to Gorham.bury (SMR 0504) where there were at least eight fenced sub-divisions (Neal et al 1990). However, the enclosure at Gorhambury has a more regularly planned appearance than the somewhat haphazard arrangement at Boxfield Farm.

Of the above_sites only Gorham.bury, Foxholes, the royal burial enclosure at St Albans and Boxfield Farm can be described as having had any kind of extensive archaeological examination . The Boxfield Farm enclosure is classified as an irregular single ditched hybrid (see Appendix I). Its dimensions (1.86 ha) places it towards the top of the enclosure size range. Only five other enclosures have been identified as being larger and two of those could probably be discounted (Redbourn II and Hatfield) on the grounds that they may include adjoining fields rather than be simply occupation sites. The closest in terms of size are those of Ashwell I. l , Ashwell I.2 and Wymondley II. It is noteworthy that the Boxfield Farm enclosure was larger than that of a high status site such as Gorhambury III (1.38 ha). However, the enclosing ditches, not to mention the front dyke, at Gorhambury 6

Table 1 Classification of enclosure types (all sizes). ENCLOSURE TYPE Regular single ditched long quadrilateral enclosure Regular single ditched short quadrilateral enclosure Regular single ditched sub-divided enclosure Double ditched long quadrilateral enclosure Conjoined single ditched quadrilateral enclosure Incomplete regular single ditched long quadrilateral enclosure Irre~ar single ditched long quadrilateral enclosure Irregular single ditched short quadrilateral enclosure Irregular,curvilinear,rectilinear,D-shape-.

~

VI

Ol

C) V

_,J

>-. -0

I-

-0

C,

0 0

~

>-.

0

3:

C

M U)

C,

~

"

z

I

N

0

" 0

I

0

Lf)

N

0

C,

0

0

L..

_,J

CL

I-

0

-

0

M

N

_,J

IC,

.:t:.

>-.

C)

~