Other sites situated in the vicinity of Barrow A
|
Other sites situated in the vicinity of Barrow A |
|
The round barrow which is the subject of this proposal is located in a prominent position on the crest of Baily’s Hill, Crowlink, East Sussex. The National Monument Record Number for the monument is TV 59 NW 16. Baily’s Hill is situated approximately 1.75 km south-west of East Dean village, towards the south-east corner of the South Downs. The area of interest lies under light downland pasture between the 60 and 65m. O.D. contour lines. The sub-surface geology is undivided Upper and Middle Chalk.
The remains under investigation comprise a bowl barrow (Barrow A) with a surviving east-west diameter of approximately 15.5m and a north-south measurement of 13.5m. The existing mound is located approximately 7.5in from the cliff edge. The maximum height of Barrow A has been recorded as 0.5m. However, a depression has been noted in the centre of the mound. It is possible that this subsidence represents previous disturbance of the archaeological deposits. A deflation surface created by both human and wind erosion has also started to encroach upon the barrow.
Numerous archaeological excavations have been undertaken on the Sussex Downland. This work has demonstrated that the chalk geology presents good conditions for the longer-term survival of a wide range of inorganic and organic prehistoric materials. Any in-situ deposits and features associated with Barrow A should therefore be found in a state of preservation favourable for comprehensive post-excavation analysis.
Currently, the barrow can best be interpreted as a ceremonial / ritual mound dating to the period c. 2500 to 1500 B.C. It should be noted that
at least twenty-eight of the excavated Sussex mounds contained Saxon burials, mostly in primary contexts (Drewett, Rudling and Gardiner 1988: 79).
Two Saxon barrows were investigated at New Barn Down in 1933 (Curwen 1934: 157). Several examples of Romano-British round barrows have also been recorded in the south-east of England. These monuments are ‘usually large, circular, steep and conical’ (Grinsell 1984: 29). Any interpretation of Barrow A regarding its period of construction and monument class, must of course await the results of excavation.
In April 1985, the Field Archaeology Unit of University College, London undertook an archaeological survey along the rapidly eroding cliff edge between Seaford Head and Beachy Head (Holgate 1986: 243-44). The objective of this project was to assess the threat posed by coastal erosion to prehistoric sites. Barrow A on Baily's Hill was located approximately 10m away from the cliff edge at the time of the survey. The average annual cliff fall along this section of coastline is estimated to be 0.5m. It was for this reason that Holgate asserted that Barrow A was ‘likely to be destroyed in the next five to ten years’ (Holgate 1986: 243).
In 1996 Dr Andrew Woodcock, the County Archaeologist for East Sussex, informed the Field Archaeology Unit that Barrow A was now only 8m from the cliff edge. The monument is in imininent danger of coastal erosion and possible destruction. In the absence of feasible measures to ensure in-situ preservation of the remains, Dr Woodcock concluded that Barrow A should be subject to detailed excavation and recording.
The barrow is situated within a 700 acre (283 hectare) block of downland owned by the National Trust. Consequently, Dr Woodcock contacted this organisation, plus English Heritage, with regard to funding a programme of archaeological fieldwork at the site. It was agreed in principle that the cost of the project would be shared equally between the National Trust, English Heritage and East Sussex County Council and a research design drawn up accordingly.
It is proposed that, on the completion of the fieldwork, the barrow will be reinstated as a rough mound, similar in size and shape to its pre-excavation form. Any extra contouring of the spoil may incur additional costs.
There are no official records of any intrusive archaeological investigations having been conducted on Barrow A, although as noted above, it is possible that the mound has been disturbed or robbed. During his 1985 coastal erosion survey, Holgate collected twenty-nine humanly-struck flints from the deflation surface encroaching upon Barrow A. These late Neolithic or early Bronze Age artefacts comprised twenty-seven flakes, a single core and a piercer. It is possible that this assemblage represents ‘domestic activity before the barrow was constructed’ (Holgate 1986: 244).
Many of the round barrows located on the Sussex Downs have been dug into in the past, although few accounts of these early examinations have survived.
A report in Volume 5 of the Sussex Archaeological Collections records the ‘opening’ of a barrow a few yards from the cliff edge on Baily's Hill (Figg 1852). This ‘tumulus’ was approximately thirty-three feet in diameter and two feet high. Two crouched inhumations were found in the upper barrow deposits, while a cremation, apparently cut into the chalk below the mound, was also discovered. A preliminary investigation of the barrow by J.T. Auckland ‘a few days previously’ had revealed evidence of another cremation. No artefacts were recovered from the excavations. However, the evidence as recorded does enable an Early Bronze Age date to be assigned to the barrow. The precise location of Figg’s excavation is unclear. Even so, the reported position of the barrow in the 19th century suggests that this monument has now been destroyed by coastal erosion.
In 1813, an inverted cinerary um was removed from a mound situated within the Belle Tout larger entrenchment (Giddy 1814: 338). This Bronze Age round barrow was approximately thirty-six feet in diameter but has now fallen over the edge of the cliff (Grinsell 1931: 67).
Three barrows located on the top of Beachy Head were opened by Sir John Evans in 1869. The only significant archaeological artefacts or deposits recovered from the investigation of these mounds, were two sherds of pottery and a fragment of perforated Kimmeridge shale (Turner 1870:191). All three barrows have subsequently been ploughed-out.
In 1976 two circular parchmarks indicative of Early Bronze Age round barrows were discovered to the south-west of Cornish Farm on Bullock Down. The surrounding ditch of the westernmost barrow was sampled by Lawrence Stevens in 1977 as part of the Bullock Down survey (Drewett and Stevens 1977: 21). No evidence of a surviving burial mound was recorded. The easternmost parchmark was the subject of a programme of total excavation in 1990 (Drewett 1992: 235-38). This work revealed a chalk cut ditch which encircled an off-centre burial pit. The pit was found to contain the crouched skeletal remains of a female in her late 30s or early 40s. No grave goods were recovered from the investigation of this inhumation.
The East Sussex County Council Sites and Monuments Record has records of numerous later prehistoric field monuments and findspots in the vicinity of Barrow A. Some of these sites were discovered during the Bullock Down landscape project, undertaken between 1976 and 1980 by the Sussex Archaeological Field Unit based at the Institute of Archaeology (Drewett 1982). The objective of this project, a five year multi-period Downland survey, was to examine landuse through time. Settlement sites were identified and then related to associated landscape features such as fields, boundaries and ceremonial and ritual monuments. Excavations were conducted on sites of most periods. The work demonstrated that the South Downs ‘should be considered as marginal land rather than a focus of human activity’ (Drewett 1982: 208). Certainly, the picture that emerged was one of intermittent activity with low population density.
The Sites and Monuments Record held by East Sussex County Council was examined by the Field Archaeology Unit on the 29th January 1998 and monuments with possible associations to Barrow A were noted. For the purpose of this section of the document, it has been assumed that Barrow A dates to the Early Bronze Age (c. 2500 to 1500 B.C.). No Romano-British or Saxon burial mounds have been recorded in the vicinity of the proposed excavation. The entry for TV59 NW 16 comprises Barrow A, Figg’s 1852 investigation and a third mound located approximately 80m north-east of Barrow A.
Numerous ceremonial / ritual mounds were constructed in south-east England during the period c. 2500 to 1500 B.C. Indeed, the total number of Early Bronze Age round barrows recorded in this region is probably over 2000. However, ‘very few of these sites have adequate dating, evidence and even fewer have been totally excavated’ (Drewett, Rudling and Gardiner 1988: 79). The majority of previous barrow investigations have also failed to examine the immediate environs of the monuments.
The current archaeological data-base has obvious limitations. However, it is clear that some of the earthworks referred to as round barrows did not in fact contain burials. It would therefore appear that some mounds were constructed and utilised for purposes other than human interment. Conversely, many of the round barrows located in the south-east, have produced cremations, inhumations and, occasionally, rich grave goods.
There are a number of areas of research regarding ceremonial/ritual mounds which can be addressed through the total excavation of Barrow A. The project is intended to undertake the following:
The specific aims of the fieldwork outlined above can be related to a number of broader research objectives. The total excavation of Barrow A, allied to subsequent comprehensive analysis, will enhance our understanding of the round barrow in south-east England.
The proposed survey and excavation will be confined to an area of 40m square around the barrow mound.
Initially, a resistivity survey will be conducted across the site. Readings will be taken at 0.5m intervals within 4 x 20m x 20in grids. This exercise should confirm the presence or absence of any encircling barrow ditches. It may also locate cut features external to the central monument. An accurate contour plan of the extant earthwork will be produced at a scale of 1:20 prior to excavation. The resistivity and contour surveys will be undertaken by permanent staff employed by the Field Archaeology Unit.
The area of investigation will be subject to a metal detector survey before the commencement of excavation. The position of any signals will be plotted on to the contour plan of the barrow and tagged on the ground. In this way important metal deposits such as Romano-British coins will not be lost during the de-turfing process.
The barrow will be subject to total excavation by hand, using the standard quadrant method (e.g. Ashbee 1960: 184-93). The fieldwork programme has been designed to ascertain the nature, date, condition character and extent of the mound, associated features and deposits. The excavation will comprise the investigation and complete removal of the mound and any buried land surface/cultural horizon. All located deposits and features, such as grave cuts, pits and ditches, will be excavated and recorded in-toto. The project will also aim to retrieve palaeoenvironmental data from suitable contexts.
The barrow will be divided into quadrants separated by 1m wide baulks. These baulks will provide full diametric sections across the mound and any associated buried soils and ditches. All deposits and features such as secondary or intrusive burials located within the body of the mound will be recorded and excavated in stratigraphic relationship to the primary barrow structure. Investigation will continue in each quadrant until a clean surface of the natural bedrock is exposed across the site. All features found to dissect the chalk will then be subject to a programme of total excavation and record.
Should a ditch be located, this will be recorded utilising the sections provided by the diametric baulks and subsequently excavated in full. The stratigraphic position of artefact concentrations, features and deposits will also be recorded. It should be noted that the cross baulks win be removed once they have been documented and sampled for palaeoenviromental remains.
Cut features such as non-burial pits and post-holes will initially be half-sectioned and recorded. Sections will be located to best interpret the relative chronology of intersecting features and any changes in context morphology. On completion of context recording, section drawing and palaeoenvironmental sampling, the remaining deposits within each feature will be removed.
All grave cuts, skeletal remains and cremation deposits will be recorded and excavated in accordance with guidelines drawn up by the Institute of Field Archaeologists (e.g. McKinley and Roberts 1993). Human remains and any associated grave goods will be documented comprehensively before lifting. All inhumations will be recorded on specific skeleton record sheets. The fills of any located grave cuts will be dry sieved through a 4mm mesh to increase the retrieval of small artefacts and bones.
The chalk subsoil is expected to present good conditions for the recovery of faunal and molluscan remains, although pollen and plant macrofossils may only be found in a poor state of preservation. All palaeoenvironmental samples will be subject to post-excavation assessment, in order to establish their potential for full analysis. Samples will be recovered and processed using standard techniques. Cremation deposits will be subject to 100% sampling.
Deposition of animal remains may have been part of ceremonies associated with the barrow. There is a good possibility that structured deposition of animal bones as well as of human bones took place. Evidence of human activity beneath the barrow, which includes animal remains deriving from food or other activity will be important as such evidence is rare for Sussex. Any animal skeleton or part skeleton which can be dated, even if it is a later intrusion, has potential interest. The bones of small vertebrates which are contemporary with the old ground surface can provide palaeoenvironmental evidence, provided they can be demonstrated to be contemporary with the original activity and not intrusive. The bedrock is suitable for the survival of faunal remains, but where deposits are shallow, water percolation and rootlet action may have destroyed bones. All surviving animal bone fragments will be recovered from the whole excavated area. Fragments of the same bone, especially of the same jaw and associated bones will be bagged together. The location of animal bones from the ditch and from other contexts of potential ritual interest will be plotted with the same precision as human bones. The complete fill of pits and cut features in the old ground surface will be sieved to 4mm mesh. The sampling which is undertaken for molluscs and charred plant remains will be adequate to recover small vertebrate remains.
Any human skeletal remains discovered during the excavation will be assessed regarding their suitability for D.N.A. analysis. This work will be undertaken by Mark Spigelman of the Institute of Archaeology, University College London, as an integral part of a current research programme. This excavation offers an opportunity to gather fresh skeletal material in a clean manner, making it available in an uncontaminated form for research into ancient biomolecules.
DNA in particular can be used to establish a number of facets of ancient society, notably
Human:
Animal:
Advice will be taken regarding the possibility of obtaining radiocarbon dates from material recovered during the excavation.
Ashbee, P. 1960 The Bronze Age round barrow in Britain Phoenix House Ltd.
Beckinsall, S.G. 1967 The excavation of Money Mound Sussex Archaeological Collections 105:13-30.
Bradley, R. 1982 Belle Tout - revision and reassessment In: P. Drewett The archaeology of Bullock Down, Eastbourne, East Sussex: the development of a landscape. Sussex Archaeological Society Monograph 1
Curwen, E.C. 1934 A Late Bronze Age farm and a Neolithic pit-dwelling on New Barn Down, Clapham, nr Worthing Sussex Archaeological Collections 75: 136-170.
Drewett, P. 1982 The archaeology of Bullock Down, Eastbourne, East Sussex: the development of a landscape Sussex Archaeological Society Monograph 1
Drewett, P. 1992 The excavation of a Bronze Age round barrow (Site 15), Cornish Farm, Eastbourne Sussex Archaeological Collections 130: 235-38.
Drewett, P. and Stevens, L. 1977 The preliminary excavation of a Medieval farmstead at Kiln Combe, Bullock Down, East Sussex In: P. Drewett (ed.), Rescue Archaeology in Sussex, 1976 Institute of Archaeology Bulletin No. 14.
Drewett, P., Rudling, D. and Gardiner, M. 1988 A Regional History of England. The south-east to AD 1000. Longman.
English Heritage 1991 The management of archaeological projects. London: HBMC. 2nd edn.
Figg, W. 1852 On the opening of a barrow at Crowlink, in Friston Sussex Archaeological Collections 5: 207-12.
Giddy, D. 1814 Report on the opening of a round barrow at Belle Tout Archaeologia 17: 338-9.
Greatorex, C. 1997 The excavation of a Bronze Age round barrow at Crowlink, East Sussex: Method Statement, Unpublished Archaeology South-East Report No. 696.
Grinsell, L.V. 1931 Sussex in the Bronze Age Sussex Archaeological Collections 72, 3 0-68.
Grinsell L.V. 1984 Barrows in England and Wales. Shire Publications.
Holgate, R. 1986 Prehistoric sites threatened by coastal erosion between Seaford Head and Beachy Head, East Sussex Sussex Archaeological Collection 124: 243-44.
McKinley, J. 1997 Bronze Age ‘barrows’ and funerary rites and rituals of cremation Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 63: 129-45.
McKinley, J. and Roberts, C. 1993 Excavation and post-excavation treatment of cremated and inhumed human remains Institute of Field Archaeologists Technical Paper Number 13.
Turner, E. 1870 Miscellanies Sussex Archaeological Collections 22: 185-200.
| Top of Document |
Arch Division Homepage |
List of Summaries |