Client Name: RPS and Hartford Homes Document Title: Peel Road, Braddan, Isle of Man Document Type: Written Scheme of Investigation for an Archaeological Strip, Map and
Record Grid Reference: SC 36846 77120 Planning Reference: Site Code: Invoice Code:
OA Document File Location: X:\Paul\Projects\Braddan_Excavation\WSI OA Graphics File Location: X:\Paul\Projects\Braddan_Excavation\WSI\WSI_Figs
Issue No: V. 2 Date: 16 August 2024 Prepared by: Helen Evans (Senior Project Manager) Checked by: Paul Dunn (Senior Project Manager) Edited by: Paul Dunn (Senior Project Manager) Approved for Issue by: Alan Lupton (Operations Manager) Signature:
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared for the titled project or named part thereof and should not be relied upon or used for any other project without an independent check being carried out as to its suitability and prior written authority of Oxford Archaeology being obtained. Oxford Archaeology accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequences of this document being used for a purpose other than the purposes for which it was commissioned. Any person/party using or relying on the document for such other purposes agrees and will by such use or reliance be taken to confirm their agreement to indemnify Oxford Archaeology for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Oxford Archaeology accepts no responsibility or liability for this document to any party other than the person/party by whom it was commissioned.
An archaeological site plan showing evaluation trenches and features like Bronze Age settlements overlaid on a map.
Peel Road, Braddan, Isle of Man
Written Scheme of Investiga tion fora nArcha eologica l Strip, Ma p a nd Record
CentredonSC 36846 77120
Contents
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4
3.2 SPECIFIC AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................................................................................10
4 PROJECT SPECIFIC EXCAVATION AND RECORDING METHODOLOGY............................... 12
4.1 SCOPE OF WORKS.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 12
4.3 SITE SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12
5 PROJECT SPECIFIC REPORTING AND ARCHIVE METHODOLOGY ........................................16
6 HEALTH AND SAFETY .................................................................................................................................. 17
6.1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES...................................................................................................................................................................... 17
6.2 METHOD STATEMENT AND RISK ASSESSMENT........................................................................................................................................ 17
6.3 MONITORING OF WORKS................................................................................................................................................................................. 17
7 BIBLIOGRAPHY...............................................................................................................................................18 OA STANDARD FIELDWORK METHODOLOGY APPENDICES............................................................19
APPENDIX A GENERAL EXCAVATION AND RECORDING METHODOLOGY .......................19
APPENDIX B GEOMATICS AND SURVEY............................................................................................. 21
APPENDIX C ENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE ..................................................................................... 23
APPENDIX D ARTEFACTUAL EVIDENCE............................................................................................. 25
APPENDIX E HUMAN REMAINS............................................................................................................. 27
APPENDIX F REPORTING.......................................................................................................................... 30
1.1.1 Oxford Archaeology (OA) has been commissioned by RPS, on behalf of Hartford Homes, to undertake an archaeological strip, map and record excavation of the site of a proposed housing development, following evaluation trenching undertaken in June 2021 (OA 2021a and b).
1.1.2 The work is being undertaken as a condition of Planning Permission. Although Manx National Heritage (MNH) has not set a brief for the work, discussions with RPS have established the scope of work required; this document outlines how OA will implement those requirements.
1.1.3 All work will be undertaken in accordance with the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists Code of Conduct and relevant Standard and Universal Guidance, and local and national planning policies, including:
• Historic England’s Management of research projects in the historic environment, or MoRPHE (2015), with specific reference to the tenets of MoRPHE’s Project Planning Note 3: archaeological excavation;
• the second edition of English Heritage’s (now Historic England’s) Management of archaeological projects, or MAP2 (English Heritage 1991);
• the European Associate of Archaeologist’s (EAA’s) Principles of conduct for archaeologists involved in contract archaeological works (EAA 1998);
• the CIfA’s Code of conduct (2022); Standard for archaeological excavation (2023a); Universal guidance for archaeological excavation (2023b); Standard and guidance for the collection, documentation, conservation and research of archaeological materials (2020a); and Standard and guidance for the creation, preparation, transfer and deposition of archaeological archives (2020b).
• the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016).
1.2 Location, topography and geology
1.2.1 The site lies to the north of Douglas and south-east of the village of Braddon (Fig 1). It is centred on NGR SC 36846 77120, with the Peel Road to the east, Ballafletcher Road to the north, Tromode Road to the east and Quarter Bridge Road to the south. A cemetery borders it on the north and strips of woodland enclose it on the west, south and east. The River Dhoo flows north/south to the west of the site boundary, and the River Glass, flows in a sinuous north/south course to the east and south. In low-lying ground in the middle of the site is an elongated pond fed by the River Glass. South-west of the pond and additional to the main area of the site, the proposed development includes two attenuation tanks and a services corridor on the River Glass’ floodplain (Figs 1 and 3).
1.2.2 The area of proposed development consists of pasture fields (Fig 1). The topography varies considerably, although the southern half is dominated by
a broad ridge stretching from north-east to south-west across the extents of the site, the south-eastern edge of which is a steep wooded scarp overlooking the floodplain of the River Glass. This ridge slopes down more gently to the east, west and north. To the north an area of very damp and wet ground probably marks the site of a former watercourse or body of water, beyond which the land rises again, reaching a high point close to Ballafletcher Farm and Ballafletcher road. Old Kirk Braddon lies 160m to the west.
1.2.3 The sedimentary geology of the area is mapped as Lonan Formation: mudstone, siltstone and sandstone (British Geological Society; BGS 2024). These sedimentary rocks are marine in origin. They formed in deep seas, and are detrital, comprising coarse- to fine-grained slurries of debris from the continental shelf flowing into a deep-sea environment, forming distinctively graded beds. The superficial geology is Shellag formation sand and gravel (ibid). These sedimentary deposits are glacigenic in origin. They are detrital, created by the action of ice and meltwater, they can form a wide range of deposits and geomorphologies associated with glacial and inter-glacial periods during the Quaternary.
2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND POTENTIAL
2.1 Archaeological and historical background
2.1.1 The archaeological and historical background of the site has been described in detail in the desk-based assessment (RPS 2018) and will not be reproduced here in full. In summary, there are no Ancient Monuments or Registered Buildings within the site itself, although there is one Ancient Monument and several Registered Buildings within the 1km study area. There are three known heritage assets recorded within the site – an undated low mound of uncertain function and two findspots – of a Bronze Age collared urn and razor found during quarrying (probably the remains of a burial) and the findspot of an undiagnostic worked flint.
2.1.2 A low mound lies on the edge of the wooded scarp in the south-western corner of the site, and was first recorded on the 1st Edition Ordnance Survey map published in 1879, when it was labelled as a ‘fort’. This mound has been variously interpreted as a motte, a Viking burial mound or the foundations for a post-medieval summer house, but given the recovery of worked flints and a prehistoric burial from elsewhere within the site, it could equally represent the remains of a prehistoric burial mound. The remains of this mound lie in an area of heavy undergrowth, and will not be affected by the proposed development. Its form is hard to discern on the ground, and it appears to have been affected by an episode of modern quarrying and dumping.
2.1.3 In order to determine the potential for buried archaeological remains on the site, a magnetometer survey was undertaken of the main area of the site (Magnitude Surveys 2018). Several anomalies were identified, some of which were considered to be archaeological in origin (Fig 2). The anomalies which were of archaeological interest were mostly concentrated towards the high ground in the south-west of the site. Further anomalies from across the site
area were deemed to form archaeological patterns, such as enclosures or possible field systems. In addition, several other features were interpreted as large-scale ditch-like anomalies, distinct rectilinear and sub-rectilinear enclosures, a large D-shaped enclosure and two alignments of circular and penannular features. The features attributed to archaeological activity have been interpreted as possible field systems, enclosures, and potential kilns or ring ditches (Fig 2). Based on the magnetometer survey results and the nature of some of the anomalies within the field systems and enclosures, the evidence suggested that there was clear potential for previously unknown archaeological remains to exist within the site.
2.1.4 Based on the results of the desk-based assessment and the geophysical survey it was considered that the site had moderate potential to contain remains of prehistoric and Early Medieval/medieval date. These were likely to be of local or regional (low or moderate) significance. The close proximity of the eighteenth-century Old Kirk Braddan, c 160m west of the site, enhances the potential for the survival of later remains at the site. The graveyard contains a collection of Early Medieval crosses, which might suggest some potential for activity of this date.
2.1.5 In June 2021, Oxford Archaeology North (OA North) was commissioned by RPS, on behalf of Hartford Homes, to undertake an evaluation of the site of the proposed development (OA 2021a and b). The programme of works comprised trial trenching along with a preliminary programme of palaeoenvironmental assessment and radiocarbon dating. The evaluation trenching (Fig 2) comprised excavation of 24 trenches (19 no. 2m x 50m trenches; 2 no. 10m x 10m; 2 no. 15m x 15m and 1 no. 20m x 20m trenches), positioned to investigate the anomalies identified in the geophysical survey (Magnitude Surveys 2018) and characterise their archaeological significance. In this respect Trench 19 (10m x 10m) and Trench 20 (15m x 15m) were extended by 14m x 2m and 8m x 2m respectively to investigate geophysical anomalies lying beyond their original limits.
2.1.6 The evaluation trenching (OA 2021b) confirmed the results of the geophysical survey and established that there are areas of former settlement activity, possible industrial activity and extensive field systems within the site. In conjunction with the results of the palaeoenvironmental and finds analysis along with radiocarbon dating this work suggests that these remains are predominantly Bronze Age in date, although some evidence for Early Medieval activity was identified.
2.1.7 Trenches 10 and 12 in the west of the site identified a Bronze Age settlement, the extents of which are suggested by the geophysical survey (Fig 2). It comprised at least three, but probably more, roundhouses with stone-built foundations situated within potential walled and/or ditched compounds. In addition, the presence of pits and postholes suggest further structures which may also relate to domestic occupation or associated craft industry/animal husbandry. The results of the geophysical survey, when compared alongside the features revealed in the evaluation trenches, indicated that the probable domestic occupation is discrete to the eastern side of Area 1. Moreover, it is likely that settlement continued further to the east, defined by the pits and postholes recorded in Trench 12, although the
radiocarbon date returned from a feature in that area suggested that this could relate to Early Bronze Age settlement. Therefore, settlement is likely to be more extensive than the area defined by the geophysical features and potentially initiated in the Early Bronze Age.
2.1.8 The area of domestic activity identified in Trenches 10 and 12 lay to the northeast of a further area of Bronze Age activity, perhaps more industrial in nature, recorded in Trench 17 (Fig 2). This comprised potential stone-walled enclosures surrounding hearths/ovens, probable post-built structures, and earth-fast ceramic and, possible, organic containers. The geophysical survey indicated that this industrial complex was linear in nature, and most likely focussed on five discrete areas of furnaces, hearths or ovens.
2.1.9 These domestic and industrial/agricultural complexes lay within a wider system of probable boundary features forming large enclosures in the western area of the site (Fig 2). Trenches 13 and 22 confirmed the presence of smaller sub-rectilinear and sub-circular enclosures, potentially accessed by trackways, which appeared to be nested within the wider boundary system. The layout of the linear features and enclosures implies livestock management; however, the presence of postholes and pits recorded in the smaller enclosures indicated the presence of structures which could have related to domestic and/or small-scale industrial activity.
2.1.10 A possible Late Upper Palaeolithic long blade, made on flint imported to Man, was recovered, as a likely residual find, from a Bronze Age or later ditch in Trench 20 in the south-west area of the site. If this is indeed Palaeolithic in date, it represents some of the earliest evidence for humans on Man, dating to a time before it was an island.
2.1.11 In Trenches 7 and 23, two linear boundaries associated with a scatter of pits and postholes and a D-shaped enclosure were recorded (Fig 2). A radiocarbon date from a pit in Trench 7 returned an Early Medieval date, suggesting that there may be Early Medieval activity in this area.
2.1.12 A series of parallel linear features relating to probable medieval or later ridge and furrow agriculture was identified in Trenches 14 and 15 in the southern and south-eastern area of the site (Fig 2). This has the potential to extend further across the site.
2.1.13 Further enclosures laid out in a more regular rectilinear pattern were revealed in Trenches 3, 4, 14, 15 and 16 in the southern and south-eastern areas of the site (Fig 2). While this probable field system remains undated and could be potentially associated with the Bronze Age management of the landscape, its regularity indicates it could be of a possible later date. To the east, undated archaeological features comprising possible stakehole structures and linear ditches were identified in Trench 6.
2.2 Significance and Potential 2.2.1 In most cases where the 2021 evaluation trenches were placed over or
adjacent to geophysical anomalies the results confirmed their archaeological character. However, in some instances the archaeological features differed in form and function to the proffered geophysical interpretation. Furthermore, archaeological features were also recorded in areas apparently devoid of
geophysical anomalies, although it should be noted those were only small discrete features, which rarely show up well on geophysical surveys. Nonetheless, the results of the evaluation have confirmed the extensive distribution of archaeological features and deposits across the site area.
2.2.2 The Bronze Age remains are significant given their potential extent and composition. They compare favourably with the recently excavated site at Ronaldsway Airport, which is believed to be part of a wider village complex dating to the Middle to Late Bronze Age, although both Early Bronze Age and later Iron Age occupation was also recorded (Neely 1940; Gregory and Brown forthcoming). The recent airport excavation comprised several roundhouse structures, often containing central hearths, and produced a large artefact assemblage, which was partly derived from extensive middens. Some of the structures were also associated with metal working and animal husbandry.
2.2.3 The structures at Braddan have the potential to be of a similar form and function, albeit with additional possible specialist activity located nearby the settlement, defined by the hearths/ovens and associated structural features. In addition, the potential for Bronze Age burials within the site area is also of a distinct possibility, given the presence of a possible burial mound in the south-west corner of the site and the recovery of a collared urn and bronze razor believed to have derived from a burial (RPS 2018). Both the artefact and ecofact assemblages at Braddan were small which was a consequence of the sample excavation methodology. Therefore, there is potential for the survival of greater concentrations of material from which a fuller understanding of the landscape setting of the site and the range of activities associated with Bronze Age occupation can be documented.
2.2.4 In a local context, apart from the finds of the collared urn and the razor in the site along with sporadic finds of metalwork and burnt mounds, potentially dating to the period, from the general area nothing is currently known about the Bronze Age settlement pattern around Douglas. Therefore, the remains at Braddan are potentially important for understanding the development of the Bronze Age landscape, on a local and regional scale.
2.2.5 A pit and a charred cereal assemblage from a ditch in the northern part of the site are suggestive of activity during the Early Medieval period. Currently the settlement pattern for the period is poorly understood and there is a lack of good dating evidence and excavated sites. Therefore, the features within the development area could be significant for understanding the chronology and development of the wider Early Medieval landscape.
2.2.6 If the potential long blade is indeed Palaeolithic in date, especially if there are other contemporary finds or features at the site, then this would be of national significance for Man. Indeed, it would be some of evidence of the earliest evidence for humans on Man and date to a time before it was an island.
3.1.1 The general aims of the project are to determine the nature, form and extent of the archaeological resource within those areas identified as having significant potential during evaluation trenching:
• to undertake a programme of managed excavation of the significant elements of the archaeological resource to recover artefactual, palaeo-environmental and structural evidence;
• to undertake evaluation trenching in the area of the proposed attenuation tanks/service corridor;
• to undertake a programme of analysis of archaeological materials recovered followed by the dissemination of the findings of the works.
3.1.2 It is proposed that three areas of the site (totalling approx. 3ha; Fig 3) be subject to archaeological strip map and record excavation, as well as four 50m by 1.8m evaluation trenches in an area of proposed attenuation works to the south of the original site. Area 1 takes in evaluation Trench 23 (potential Early Medieval D-shaped enclosure); Area 2 takes in evaluation Trenches 8, 10, 12, 17, 18, 19, 24 (potential Bronze Age settlement with surrounding industrial features) and Area 3 takes in evaluation Trenches 13 and 22 (potential Early/Middle Bronze Age enclosure ditches, pits, postholes and hearths).
3.1.3 The four proposed evaluation trenches on the River Glass floodplain were not included in the previous archaeological evaluation nor subject to geophysical survey. These comprise two 50m by 1.8m evaluation trenches along the line of the proposed services corridor and one each diagonally across the proposed attenuation tanks (Fig 3). The desk-based assessment records the site of a post-medieval water mill, south of the main area of the site (CGMS 2018; MNH 2198), associated with the pond to the south-east: the OS 6-inch map of 1896 marks a tail race which is clearly identifiable on satellite imagery and appears to pass through the area of the proposed SW attenuation tank (Fig 3). In addition to the former tail race, satellite imagery suggests the presence of several paleochannels crossing the floodplain, which may indicate the potential for archaeological remains, including prehistoric occupation.
3.2 Specific aims and objectives3.2.1 The specific aims and objectives of the project are:
i. to determine or confirm the general nature of any remains present;
ii. to determine the chronological sequence of prehistoric, Early Medieval and other periods of occupation, industrial activity and landuse;
iii. to further examine features identified by the geophysical survey and areas of less substantial archaeology identified in areas where geophysical survey identified no features;
iv. to examine the potentially Early Medieval D-shaped enclosure (Area 1);
v. to examine the probable Bronze Age roundhouses with stone-built foundations situated within potential walled and/or ditched compounds, and pits and postholes which may relate to domestic occupation or associated craft industry/animal husbandry (Area 2);
vi. to examine the probable Bronze Age linear industrial complex comprising potential stone walled enclosures surrounding discrete areas of furnaces, hearths or ovens, and post-built structures (Area 2);
vii. to examine the area of potential Early/Middle Bronze Age ring features/enclosure ditches, pits, postholes and hearths (Area 3);
viii. to examine post-holes and ditches/gullies linked with structures and enclosure to determine whether they are a product of a coherent build, sequential build and whether they have been cleaned or re-cut suggesting reworking and re-use;
ix. to determine or confirm the approximate date or date range of any remains, by means of artefactual or other evidence;
x. to recover palaeo-environmental evidence to clarify the nature and function of activities undertaken within individual structures and areas to enable a patterning of activity by area and time;
xi. to recover flint (worked and debitage) to provide an insight into prehistoric activity on the site;
xii. to recover any bone (human/animal) to maiximise the potential for any analysis;
xiii. to recover a sufficient pottery assemblage to enable the characterisation of the main forms of vessel present on-site;
xiv. to consider the impact of earlier land division on the patterning of later settlement and enclosure;
xv. to consider the evidence for the process of abandonment of settlement especially any indication of causal factors;
xvi. to explore the relationship of prehistoric settlement activity to micro topography.
4 Project Specific Excavation And Recording Methodology
4.1 Scope of works
4.1.1 The proposed excavation areas, Areas 1 -3 (Fig 3) have been agreed in discussion between the client and the Curator – Field Archaeology/Inspector of Ancient Monuments for MNH. As such, the archaeological works will comprise the stripping of the areas and then the investigation of any archaeological remains identified.
4.1.2 The areas will be stripped of topsoil and subsoil under direct archaeological supervision, by a suitably experienced and qualified archaeologist, with one archaeologist responsible for monitoring each excavator. Once the topsoil and subsoil have been removed any archaeological remains exposed will be rapidly surveyed and a plan of the remains produced, the plan will be provided to the client and MNH, a number of features will also be hand cleaned, excavated and recorded at this stage to give an indication of the duration of the mitigation works, by sample excavation. The sample excavation strategy will be undertaken following the agreed percentages. If more significant archaeological remains are identified than has been assumed, a revised excavation strategy will be formulated in discussion with the client and MNH.
4.1.3 The four proposed evaluation trenches (Fig 3) will be 1.8m wide (ie, the width of a standard ditching bucket on an 8- 13-ton 360 mechanical excavator) and 50m long. The trenches will be excavated by mechanical excavator fitted with a toothless ditching bucket, under direct supervision of a suitably experienced and qualified archaeologist. Mechanical excavation will cease at the level of the natural undisturbed substrate or archaeology, whichever is encountered first.
4.1.4 During the course of the works, the Curator for MNH will be afforded the opportunity to view and sign off the areas of the site and the evaluation trenches.
4.2 Programme
4.2.1 It is anticipated that the fieldwork will take approximately nine weeks to complete, by a team consisting of a Project Officer, Becky Wegiel, directing up to 13 Project Archaeologists, under the management of Paul Dunn, Senior Project Manager. All fieldwork undertaken by OA North is overseen by the Operations Manager, Alan Lupton MCIfA.
4.3 Site specific methodology
4.3.1 A summary of OA’s general approach to excavation and recording can be found in Appendix A. Standard methodologies for Geomatics and Survey, Environmental evidence, Artefactual evidence and Burials can also be found below (Appendices B, C, D and E respectively).
4.3.2 Strip and map: the topsoil and subsoil will be removed from the area of the site in a logical manner by a suitably-sized mechanical excavator fitted with a toothless ditching bucket, under direct archaeological supervision, by a suitably-experienced and qualified archaeologist, with one archaeologist
responsible for monitoring each excavator. The excavator will progress the excavation in even spits of up to 0.1m to the natural geology or significant archaeological remains, whichever occurs first. The plant movements will be restricted to running on the topsoil until signed off by the Curator for MNH (ie there is to be no running on the stripped surface until signed off by the Curator for MNH).
4.3.3 Once the areas have been stripped, the archaeologists will inspect and survey the stripped surface, cleaning where necessary, to map all the visible potentially significant archaeological remains. The archaeological remains encountered will be assessed by cleaning and hand excavating a sample of them to assist in determining their significance.
4.3.4 The mapping of the archaeological remains will be undertaken by a realtime kinematic (RTK) global navigation satellite system (GNSS), Leica GS07, tied into the Ordnance Survey grid and Ordnance Datum. The raw survey data will be exported as Shape files for incorporation into a GIS. The survey data can then be uploaded to OA’s bespoke Mapboard, an online GIS viewer, which will allow regular updates on the progress of the stripping and also areas which have been signed off.
4.3.5 Sample excavation: the excavation sampling strategy will be confirmed in discussion with the client and Curator for MNH. The appropriate levels of sampling of any archaeological features to be destroyed by the development are:
• all funerary contexts will be fully excavated and all relationships recorded;
• intersections of potentially significant ditches and gullies will have all relationships defined, investigated and recorded through 100% excavation (all terminals will be excavated). Some 5% by length of linear features will be excavated to determine their character over the exposed course, achieved via a sequence of slots;
• sufficient artefact assemblages will be recovered (where possible) to assist in dating the stratigraphic sequence and for obtaining ample ceramic and lithic groups for comparison with other sites;
• a minimum of 50%, by volume, of all post-holes will be excavated;
• a minimum of 50%, by volume, of all pits will be excavated;
• for other types of feature, such as working hollows, the basic requirement will be that all relationships are ascertained. Further investigation will be a matter of on-site judgement, but will seek to establish as a minimum their extent, date and function;
• small prehistoric kilns or ovens will be 100% excavated, although initially excavated in quadrants. If more significant remains are encountered, a different methodology would be required;
• for layers, an on-site decision will be made as to the limits of their excavation. The factors governing the judgement will include the possibility that they mask earlier remains, the need to understand function and depositional processes and the necessity to recover
sufficient artefacts to date the deposit and to meet the project aims; and
• for features that are interpreted as being elements of significant coherent structures and/or have an industrial function, MNH may require 100% excavation.
4.3.6 Where feature groups are to be partially excavated within this sampling strategy, the characteristics of the identified features will be used to inform selection. Features with visible finds will preferentially be targeted. Metal detectors will be used within this context to inform sampling.
4.3.7 The presumption is that all excavation works detailed above will be undertaken by hand. However, in limited circumstances excavation plant may be used to assist the excavation methodology, in particular where:
• deep archaeological strata can only be safely investigated by stepping or battering a localised trench; and
• where sterile/natural layers and/or extensive layers that have been sampled are encountered that mask archaeologically significant strata.
4.3.8 The use of excavation plant within the excavation areas after the initial strip and map phase will be confirmed and agreed with MNH, prior to use.
4.3.9 Evaluation trenches: the trenches will be accurately surveyed in and the locations photographed. Following scanning the trenches for cables etc or impediments, the overburden (topsoil and subsoil) will be removed and stored separately in spits, no greater than 0.20m, by a mechanical excavator using a toothless ditching bucket. Close archaeological supervision will be maintained at all times. Mechanical excavation will cease at the level of the natural undisturbed substrate or archaeology, whichever is encountered first.
4.3.10 If no archaeology is present, the blank trench will be recorded on a trench sheet (including the depths, thicknesses and descriptions of the generic deposits recorded by the trench sections) and photographed. If archaeological remains are encountered, these will be cleaned and excavated by hand, any finds and, if appropriate, samples for palaeoenvironmental materials will be collected. An accurately located textual, graphic and photographic record will be produced.
4.3.11 This work will be undertaken to the satisfaction of Manx National Heritage (MNH)m who will be given the opportunity to visit the site and inspect the trenches. If particularly sensitive archaeological remains are encountered, including funerary deposits and human remains, discussions will be held with RPS and MNH to agree the most appropriate strategy and action.
4.3.12 On the completion of recording, the trench will be backfilled with the arisings, in the approximate order that they were excavated. No further reinstatement will take place beyond tracking over the trenches with the machine to compact the deposits.
4.3.13 Recording: All information identified the course of the site works will be recorded stratigraphically, on pro-forma context sheets, using a system
adapted from that used by the Centre for Archaeological Service of English Heritage, and will be accompanied with sufficient pictorial records (plans, sections and digital photographs) to identify and illustrate individual features. The site archive will include plans and sections at appropriate scales (plans 1:20 and sections 1:10), and a Harris matrix will be compiled during the fieldwork. Primary records will be available for inspection at all times.
4.3.14 A full and detailed photographic record of individual contexts will be maintained and general views from standard viewpoints of the overall site at all stages of the excavation will be generated. Photography will be undertaken using high-resolution digital cameras, and all frames will include a visible, graduated metric scale. The images will be taken in JPEG and RAW formats. All archaeological features and deposits will be drawn in plan, and, as necessary, in section and/or elevation, on pro-forma permatrace sheets and at an appropriate scale (1:50, 1:20, and 1:10).
4.3.15 Artefacts identified during the works will be recovered and their stratigraphic position accurately recorded, as will any palaeo-environmental samples that might be taken from appropriate deposits. Any resultant spoil will also be systematically examined during the course of the operation.
4.3.16 Finds policy: finds recovery and sampling programme will be in accordance with best practice (following current CIfA guidelines) and subject to expert advice in order to minimise deterioration. Finds will be recorded and reported on by appropriately qualified staff.
4.3.17 Treasure: any gold and silver artefacts recovered during the course of the works will be reported to MNH as promptly as possible (compliant with Isle of Man Government Circular 66/72). Such items must be removed to a safe place (on island), and should it not be possible to remove the find, appropriate safeguarding to the agreement of MNH will be put in place until it has been removed.
4.3.18 Environmental policy: the strategy for palaeoenvironmental and other specialist sampling will be developed on site, in consultation with appropriate specialists, as necessary. The environmental sampling strategy will therefore evolve from discussion between those specialists and the field team and will be in accordance with current best practice. In broad terms, however, the sampling strategy will be aimed at recovering palaeobotanical, palaeozoological and pedological evidence, from appropriately stratified contexts, should any such features be identified during the course of the excavation.
4.3.19 Human remains: in the event that human remains are discovered, all works on those features will be halted and MNH notified. The IoM constabulary will be informed of the exposure by MNH where relevant. Excavation works will only recommence once those parties are content. Where the Burials Act 1986 applies, a licence will be sought for exhumation under Section 22 of the Act.
5 Project Specific Reporting And Archive Methodology
5.1 Programme
5.1.1 The level of reporting will depend upon the archaeological significance of the results. If only locally important archaeological remains are discovered, then only an archive report will be produced. If remains of regional or national importance are revealed, then an English Heritage MAP2 style postexcavation assessment report will be compiled and will define the resource implications for completing the post excavation programme. This will form the basis and methodological approach with which to address a more comprehensive level of analysis and an appropriate level of subsequent publication, should it be required. The decision as to which reporting strategy to be followed will be made in conjunction with MNH.
5.1.2 A copy of the report in Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) format will be provided to the client for their review and comment, once satisfied the report will be forwarded to MNH. Paper copies can also be provided on request.
5.2 Content
5.2.1 The content of this report will be as defined in Appendix F.
5.3 Specialist input
5.3.1 OA has a large pool of internal specialists, as well as a network of external specialists with whom OA have well established working relationships. A general list of these specialists is presented in Appendix G; in the event that additional input should be required, an updated list of specialists can be supplied.
5.4 Archive
5.4.1 The site archive will be deposited with MNH following completion of the project.
5.4.2 A summary of OA's general approach to documentary archiving can be found in Appendix H.
6.1.1 The Senior Project Manager, Paul Dunn, has responsibility for ensuring that safe systems of work are adhered to on site. Elements of this responsibility will be delegated to the Project Officer, Becky Wegiel, who implements these on a day-to-day basis. Paul Dunn and Becky Wegiel are supported by OA’s Health, Safety and Environment Advisor, Fraser Brown, based in the Lancaster office.
6.1.2 The Director with responsibility for Health and Safety at OA is Dan Poore Tech IOSH (Chief Operating Officer).
6.2 Method statement and risk assessment
6.2.1 A summary of OA's general approach to health and safety can be found in Appendix I. A risk assessment has also been undertaken and approved and will be kept on site, along with OA's standard Health and Safety file, which will contain all relevant health and safety documentation.
6.2.2 The Health and Safety file will be available to view at any time.
6.3 Monitoring of works
6.3.1 At least two weeks notice of the commencement of the works will be given to Andy Johnson, Curator – Field Archaeology/Inspector of Ancient Monuments for MNH.
6.3.2 The Curator for MNH will have free access to the site (subject to Health and Safety considerations) and all records to ensure the works are being carried out in accordance with this WSI and all other relevant standards.
Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), 2019 Code of Conduct, Reading
CIfA, 2020a Standard and guidance for an archaeological excavation, Reading
CIfA, 2020b Standard and guidance for the creation, preparation, transfer and deposition of archaeological archives, Reading
English Heritage, 1991 Management of archaeological projects, 2nd edn, London
European Association of Archaeologists (EAA), 1998 Principles of conduct for archaeologists involved in contract archaeological work, Goteborg
Historic England (HE), 2015a Management of research projects in the historic environment (re-issue), London HE, 2015b Digital image capture and file storage: guidelines for best practice, London Gregory, R A, and Brown, F, forthcoming Pioneers, settlers, villagers and
warriors: excavations at Ronaldsway Airport, Isle of Man, Lancaster Imprints Isle of Man Government, 2016 The Island Development Plan: The Isle of Man strategic plan 2016
Magnitude Surveys, 2018 Geophysical survey report of land at Braddan, Douglas, Isle of Man, unpublished report
Neely, G J H, 1940 Excavations at Ronaldsway, Isle of Man, Antiquaries Journal 20 (1), 71-86 Oxford Archaeology (OA) North, 2021a Written Scheme of Investigation for an evaluation at Peel Road, Braddan, Isle of Man, Unpubl doc Oxford Archaeology (OA) North 2021b Peel Road, Braddan, Isle of Man, Archaeological Evaluation Report, unpublished report
The following methods and terms will apply, where appropriate, to all OA fieldwork unless varied by the accompanying detailed Written Scheme of Investigation.
Copies of all OA internal standards and guidelines referred to below are available on request.
APPENDIX A GENERAL EXCAVATION AND RECORDING METHODOLOGY A.1 Standard methodology – summary
Mecha nica l exca va tion
A.1.1 An appropriate mechanical excavator will be used for machine excavation. This will normally be a JCB or 360° tracked excavator with a 1.5 m to 2 m wide toothless ditching bucket. For work with restricted access or working room a mini excavator may be used.
A.1.2 All mechanical excavation will be undertaken under direct archaeological supervision.
A.1.3 All undifferentiated topsoil or overburden of recent origin will be removed down to the first significant archaeological horizon, in successive, level spits.
A.1.4 Following mechanical excavation, all areas that require examination or recording will be cleaned using appropriate hand tools.
A.1.5 Spoil heaps will be monitored in order to recover artefacts to assist in the analysis of the spatial distribution of artefacts. Modern artefacts will be noted but not retained.
A.1.6 After recording, evaluation trenches and test pits will usually be backfilled with excavated material in reverse order of excavation, and compacted as far as is practicable with the mechanical excavator. Area excavations will not normally be backfilled. Ha nd exca va tion
A.1.7 All investigation of archaeological levels will usually be by hand, with cleaning, examination and recording both in plan and section.
A.1.8 Within significant archaeological levels the minimum number and proportion of features required to meet the aims of the excavation will be hand excavated. Pits and postholes will usually be subject to a 50% sample by volume. Linear features will be sectioned as appropriate. More complex features such as those associated with funerary activity will usually be subject to 100% hand excavation.
A.1.9 In the case of evaluations, it is not necessarily the intention that all trial trenches will be fully excavated to natural stratigraphy, but the depth of archaeological deposits across the site will be assessed. The stratigraphy of a representative sample of the evaluation trenches will be recorded even where no archaeological deposits have been identified. Any excavation, both by machine and by hand, will be undertaken with a view to avoiding
damage to any archaeological features or deposits, which appear to be worthy of preservation in situ.
Recording
A.1.10 Written descriptions will be recorded on proforma sheets comprising factual data and interpretative elements.
A.1.11 Where stratified deposits are encountered a Harris matrix will be compiled during the course of the excavation.
A.1.12 Plans will normally be drawn at 1:100, but on urban or deeply stratified sites a scale of 1:50 or 1:20 will be used. Detailed plans will be at an appropriate scale. Burials will be drawn at scale 1:10 or recorded using geo-referenced digital photography.
A.1.13 The site grid will be accurately tied into the National Grid and located on the 1:2500 or 1:1250 map of the area.
A.1.14 A register of plans will be kept.
A.1.15 Long sections of showing layers will be drawn at 1:50. Sections of features or short lengths of trenches will be drawn at 1:20.
A.1.16 A register of sections will be kept.
A.1.17 Generally, all sections will be tied in to Ordnance Datum.
A.1.18 A full photographic record, illustrating in both detail and general context the principal features and finds discovered will be maintained. The photographic record will also include working shots to illustrate more generally the nature of the archaeological work.
A.1.19 Photographs will be recorded on OA Photographic Record Sheets. A.2 Relevant industry standards and guidelines
A.2.1 The Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) Standard and Universal guidance notes relevant to fieldwork are:
• Standard for archaeological field evaluation, 2023
• Standard for archaeological excavation, 2023
• Standard for archaeological monitoring and recording, 2023
• Universal guidance for archaeological field evaluation, 2023
• Universal guidance for excavation, 2023
• Universal guidance for archaeological monitoring and recording, 2023
A.2.2 These will be adhered to at all times.
A.3 Relevant OA manual and other supporting documentation
A.3.1 All fieldwork will be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the OA Field Manual (ed. D Wilkinson 1992), and the revised OA fieldwork manual (publication forthcoming).
A.3.2 Further guidance is provided to all excavators in the form of the OA 'Fieldwork Crib Sheets - a companion guide to the Fieldwork Manual'. These have been issued ahead of formal publication of the revised Fieldwork Manual.
APPENDIX B GEOMATICS AND SURVEY
B.1 Standard methodology - summary
B.1.1 The aim of OA methodology is to provide comprehensive survey cover of all investigation areas. Additionally, it is designed to provide coverage for any areas, beyond the original scope of the project, which arise as a result of further work. It provides digital plans of all required elements of the project and locates them within an overall grid.
B.1.2 It also maintains all necessary survey data and ensures that the relevant information is copied into the primary record, in order to ensure the integrity of the project archive. Furthermore, it ensures that all core data is securely stored and backed up. It establishes accurate project reference systems utilising a series of control stations and permanent base lines.
B.1.3 The survey will be conducted using a combination of GPS/GNSS (Global Positioning System/Global Navigation Satellite System), hand-measured elements, Total Station Theodolite (TST) survey utilising Reflectorless Electronic Distance Measurement (REDM), or photogrammetry where appropriate.
B.1.4 Before the main work commences, a network of control stations will be laid out encompassing the area as necessary. Control stations will be tied in to known points or existing features using rigorous metric observation. The control network will be set in using a TST to complete a traverse or using techniques as appropriate to ensure sufficient accuracy. A GNSS, or other appropriate method, will be used to orientate the control network to National Grid or other recognised coordinate system.
B.1.5 Control stations will be checked by closed traverse and/or GNSS, as appropriate. The accuracy of these control stations will be accessed on a regular basis and re-established accordingly. Control stations will be recorded on Survey Control Station sheets.
B.1.6 Each control station will be marked with a PGM (Permanent Ground Marker). Witness diagrams will include the full 3-D co-ordinates generated, a sketch diagram and measurements to at least three fixed details, written description of the mark and a photograph of the control point in its environs.
B.1.7 Prior to entry into the field all equipment will be checked, and all pre-survey information will be uploaded onto survey equipment as appropriate. Prior to conducting the survey, the site will be reconnoitred for locations for a viable control network and check the line of sight and any possible hindrance to survey. Daily record sheets will be kept recording daily tasks and conditions as appropriate.
B.1.8 All spatial data will be periodically downloaded uploaded and backed up to our central servers via ftp. It will be cleaned, validated and inspected.
B.1.9 All survey data will be documented on daily survey record sheets as necessary. Information entered on these sheets includes key set up information (Instrument height etc.) as well as daily variables and errors/comments. All survey data will be digitally recorded in a raw format and translated during the download process this shall allow for any errors to be cross referenced with the daily survey record and corrected accordingly.
B.1.10 A summary of survey work will be produced as needed to access development and highlight problems. Technical support for the survey equipment and download software shall be available at all times. In those instances, where sites are remotely operated, all digital data will be backed up regularly via ftp to Oxford on a regular basis.
B.1.11 A site plan will initially be created by a rapid survey of relevant archaeological features by mapping their extent using a combination of TST and GNSS. This will form the basis for deciding excavation strategy and will be updated as the excavation clarifies the extent of, and relationships between, archaeological features.
B.1.12 Areas of complex stratigraphy will be hand drawn or recorded by photogrammetry as appropriate. Where hand drawn, at least two Drawing Points (DPs) will be set in as a baseline and measurements taken off this by tape and offset. The hand drawn plans will be referenced to the digitally captured pre-site plan by measuring in the DPs with a TST or GNSS. These hand drawn elements will then be scanned in, geo-referenced using the DPs as reference points and digitised following OA's digitising protocols. For further details on hand planning procedure please refer to the fieldwork guidelines.
B.1.13 Photogrammetry may also be used to record standing structures or burials. This will be carried out in line with Standard OA procedures for photogrammetry.
B.1.14 Survey data recorded in the field will be downloaded using appropriate downloading software, and saved as an AutoCAD Map DWG file, or an ESRI Shapefile. These files will be regularly updated and backed up with originals being stored on an OA server in Oxford.
B.1.15 All drawings will be composed of closed polygons, polylines or points in accordance with the requirements of GIS construction and OA Geomatics protocols. Once created, additional GIS/CAD work will normally be carried out at the local OA central office or at on-site remote locations when appropriate. Support for all GIS/CAD work will be available from OA’s Oxford Office during normal office hours. The aim of the GIS/CAD work is to produce workable draft plans, which can be produced as stand-alone products, or can be readily converted to GIS format. Any hand-drawn plans will be scanned and digitised on site in the first instance. Subsequent plans will be added to the main drawing as it develops.
B.1.16 All plan scans will be numbered according to their plan site number. Digital plans will be given a standard new plan number taken out from the site plan index.
B.1.17 Information (metadata) on all other digital files will be created and stored as appropriate. At the end of the survey all data recorded will be made available for archiving purposes.
B.2 Relevant industry standards and guidelines
B.2.1 Historic England, 2017 Understanding the Archaeology of Landscapes A
Guide to Good Recording Practice
B.2.2 Historic England, 2015 Metric Survey Specifications for Cultural Heritage (3rd edn)
B.2.3 Historic England, 2016 Understanding Historic Buildings: A Guide to Good Recording Practice
B.2.4 Historic England, 2017 Photogrammetric Applications for Cultural Heritage: Guidance for Good Practice
B.3 Relevant OA manual and other supporting documentation
B.3.1 OA South Metric Survey, Data Capture and Download Procedures
B.3.2 OA South Digitising Protocols
B.3.3 OA South GIS Protocols
B.3.4 These will be superseded by the OA South Geomatics Manual (in progress).
APPENDIX C ENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE C.1 Standard methodology – summary
C.1.1 Different environmental and geoarchaeological sampling strategies may be employed according to established research targets and the perceived importance of the strata under investigation. Where possible an environmental specialist(s) will visit the site to advise on sampling strategies. Sampling methods will follow guidelines produced by Historic England and Oxford Archaeology. A register of samples will be kept. Specialists will be consulted where non-standard sampling is required (e.g. TL, OSL or archaeomagnetic dating) and if appropriate will be invited to visit the site and take the samples.
C.1.2 Geoarchaeological sampling methods are site specific, and methodologies will be designed in consultation with the geoarchaeological manager on a site by site basis.
C.1.3 Bulk soil samples, where possible of 40 litres or 100% of a deposit if less is available, will be taken from potentially datable features and layers for flotation for charred plant remains and for the recovery of small bones and artefacts. Larger soil samples (up to 100L) may be taken for the complete recovery of animal bones, marine shell and small artefacts from appropriate contexts. Smaller bulk samples (general biological samples) of 10-20 litres will be taken from any waterlogged deposits present for the recovery of macroscopic plant remains and insects. Series of incremental 2L samples may be taken through buried soils and deep feature fills for the recovery of snails and/or waterlogged plant remains, depending on the nature of the
stratigraphy and of the soils and sediments. Columns will be taken from buried soils, peats and waterlogged feature fills for pollen and/or phytoliths, diatoms, ostracods and foraminifera if appropriate. Soil samples will be taken for soil investigations (particle size, organic matter, bulk chemistry, soil micromorphology etc.) and possibly for metallurgical analysis in consultation with the appropriate specialists.
C.1.4 Bulk samples from dry deposits will be processed by standard water flotation using a modified Siraf-style machine and meshes of 0.25mm (flot) and 0.5 or 1mm depending on sediment type and like modes of preservation (residue). Heavy residues will be wet sieved, air dried and sorted. Samples taken exclusively for the recovery of bones, marine shell or artefacts will be wet sieved to 2mm. Waterlogged samples (1L sub-sample) and snail samples (2L) will be processed by hand flotation with flots and residues collected to 0.25mm (waterlogged plants) and 0.5mm (snails) respectively; these flots and residues will be sorted by the specialist. Samples specifically taken for insects, pollen, other microflora and microfauna, metallurgy and soil analysis will be submitted as whole earth to the appropriate specialists or processed following their instructions.
C.2 Relevant industry standards and guidelines
C.2.1 Historic England, 2010 Waterlogged Wood: Guidelines on the recording, sampling, conservation and curation of waterlogged wood.
C.2.2 Historic England, 2018 Waterlogged Organic Artefacts: Guidelines on their Recovery, Analysis and Conservation.
C.2.3 Historic England, 2011 Environmental Archaeology. A guide to the theory and practice of methods, from sampling and recovery to post excavation, (2nd ed)
C.2.4 Historic England, 1998 Dendrochronology: Guidelines on Producing and Interpreting Dendrochronological Dates (revision due 2021).
C.2.5 University of Bradford, 2019 Archaeomagnetism: Magnetic Moments in the Past https://www.brad.ac.uk/archaeomagnetism/
C.2.6 Historic England, 2008 Luminescence Dating. Guidelines on Using Luminescence Dating in Archaeology (revision due 2020).
C.2.7 Historic England, 2008 Guidelines for the Curation of Waterlogged Macroscopic Plant and Invertebrate Remains (currently being revised).
C.2.8 Historic England, 2015 Archaeometallurgy. Guidelines for Best Practice.
C.2.9 Historic England, 2015 Geoarchaeology. Using Earth Sciences to Understand the Archaeological Record.
C.2.10 Historic England, 2017 Organic Residue Analysis and Archaeology.
C.2.11 Baker, P and Worley, F, 2019 Animal Bones and Archaeology: Recovery to archive. Historic England, London
C.2.12 Bayliss, A and Marshall, P, 2022 Radiocarbon Dating and Chronological Modelling: Guidelines and Best Practices, Historic England, London
C.3 Relevant OA manual and other supporting documentation C.3.1 Oxford Archaeology 2017. Environmental Sampling Guidelines, 4th ed.
APPENDIX D ARTEFACTUAL EVIDENCE D.1 Standard methodology - summary
D.1.1 Before a site begins arrangements concerning the finds will be discussed with the Finds Team Leader. Information will be provided by the project manager about the nature of the site, the expected size and make-up of the finds assemblage and any site specific finds retrieval strategies. On-site requirements will be discussed and a conservator appointed who can be called on to make site visits if required. Special requirements regarding particular categories of material will be raised at this early stage for instance the likelihood of recovering assemblages of waterlogged material, large timbers, quantities of structural stone or ceramic building material. Specialists may be required to visit sites to discuss retrieval strategies.
D.1.2 The project manager will supply the Finds Team Leader with contact details of the landowner of the site so that consent to deposit any finds resulting from the investigation can be sought.
D.1.3 The on-site retrieval, lifting and short term packaging of bulk and small finds will follow the detailed guidelines set out in the OA Finds Manual (sections 2 and 3), First Aid for Finds and the UKIC conservation guidelines No.2.
D.1.4 All finds recovered from site will be transported to an OA regional office for processing; local sites will return finds at the end of each day, away based sites at the end of each week. Special arrangements can be discussed for certain sites with the Team Leader before the start of a project. Larger long running sites may in some instances set up on-site processing units to deal with the material from a particular site.
D.1.5 All finds qualifying as Treasure will be removed to a safe place and reported to the local Coroner according to the procedures relating to the Treasure Act
(1996), and the Treasure (Designation) Order 2002. Where removal cannot be effected on the same working day as the discovery, suitable security measures will be taken to protect the finds from theft.
D.1.6 Each box of finds will be accompanied by a finds context checklist itemising the finds within each box. The number of bags of finds from each context and individual small find from each context will be recorded. A member of the processing team will check the list when it arrives in the department. There are separate forms for finds recovered from fieldwalking.
D.1.7 The processing programme is reviewed on a weekly basis and priorities are worked out after discussions with the Fieldwork Team Leader and the Postexcavation Team Leader. Project managers will keep the Finds Team Leader informed of any pressing deadlines that they are aware of. All finds from evaluations are dealt with as a matter of priority.
D.1.8 All bulk finds are washed (where appropriate), marked, bagged and boxed by the processing team according to the guidelines set out in section 4 and 5 of the OA Finds Manual, First-aid for finds and the UKIC guidelines No.2. They
must also take into account the requirements of the receiving museum. Primary data recording count and weight of fragments by material from each context is recorded on the site database.
D.1.9 Unstable and sensitive objects are recorded onto the database and then packaged and stored in controlled environments according to their individual requirements. The advice of a conservator will be sought for sensitive objects in need of urgent conservation. All metalwork will be xrayed prior to assessment (and to meet the requirements of most receiving museums).
D.1.10 Finds recovered from the environmental sample processing will be incorporated into the main assemblage and added to the database.
D.1.11 On completion of the processing and data entry a finds file for each archaeological investigation will be produced, a summary of which is available for the project manager. The assemblage is allocated an OA number for storage purposes. Bulk finds are stored on a roller racking system, metals in a secure controlled storage and organic finds are refrigerated where possible.
D.1.12 The movement of finds in and out of the storage areas is strictly monitored and recorded. Carbon copy transit forms exist to record this information. Finds will not be removed from storage without the prior knowledge of the Finds Team Leader.
D.1.13 Finds information summarised in the finds compendium is used to assess the finds requirements for the post excavation stages of the project. The Team Leader holds a list of all specialists used by OA (see below) both internal and external.
D.1.14 On completion of the post excavation stage of the project the team prepares the finds assemblage for deposition with the receiving museum. Discussions will be held with the museum, the excavator and the Finds Team Leader to finalise any selection, retention or discard policy. Most museums issue strict guidelines for the preparation of archives for deposition with their individual labelling, packaging and recording requirements.
D.2 Relevant industry standards and guidelines
D.2.1 CIfA, 2014 (updated 2020) Standard and guidance for the collection, documentation, conservation and research of archaeological materials
D.2.2 Society of Museum Archaeologists, 1993 Selection, retention and dispersal of Archaeological Collections. Download available via http://www.socmusarch.org.uk/publica.htm)
D.2.3 UKIC, 1983 Packaging and Storage of Freshly-Excavated Artefacts from Archaeological Sites. Conservation Guidelines No.2. Archaeology Section, United Kingdom Institute for Conservation.
D.2.4 UKIC, 1988 Excavated Artefacts and Conservation: UK sites Revised Edition. Conservation Guidelines No.1. Archaeology Section, United Kingdom Institute for Conservation.
D.2.5 Watkinson, D E & Neal, V, 1998 First Aid for Finds (3rd edition). RESCUE & UKIC
D.3 Relevant OA manual and other supporting documentation
D.3.1 Allen, L, and Cropper, C (internal publication only) Oxford Archaeology Finds
Manual.
APPENDIX E HUMAN REMAINS
E.1 Standard methodology - summary
E.1.1 Human remains will not be excavated without a relevant licence/faculty and, where applicable (for example, a post medieval cemetery), a risk assessment from the local environmental officer.
E.1.2 All human remains will be treated with due care and regard to the sensitivities involved, and will be screened from the public throughout the course of the works.
E.1.3 Excavation will be undertaken in accordance with CIfA (Roberts and McKinley 1993), Historic England (2018), the Advisory Panel on the Archaeology of Burials in England (APABE, 2015, 2017) and British Association of Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology Code of Practice (2019) and Code of Ethics (2019). For crypts and post-medieval burials, the recommendations set out by the CIfA (Cox 2001) and by the Association of Diocesan and Cathedral Archaeologists and APABE (2010) are also relevant.
E.1.4 In accordance with recommendations set out in the Historic England and Church of England (2005) and updated by the Advisory Panel on the Archaeology of Burials in England (2017), skeletons will not be excavated beyond the limits of the trench, unless they are deemed osteologically or archaeologically important.
E.1.5 Where any soft tissue survives and/or materials (for example, inner coffins, mattresses and other paddings) soaked in body liquor, no excavation or handling of the remains will take place until an appropriate risk assessment has been undertaken. Relevant protocols (i.e. Cox 2001) for their excavation, recording and removal will be adhered to.
E.1.6 OA does not excavate or remove modern burials (those less than 100 years old) and does not remove or open sealed lead coffins. Appropriate PPE (e.g. chemical suit, latex gloves) will be worn by all staff when working with lead coffins.
E.1.7 Graves and their contents will be hand excavated in plan. Each component (for example, skeleton, grave cut, coffin (or remains of), grave fill) will be assigned a unique context number from a running sequence. A group number will also be assigned to all of these, and small finds numbers to features such as coffin nails, hobnails and other grave goods (as appropriate).
E.1.8 Soil samples will be normally taken during the excavation of inhumations, usually from the region of the skull, chest, right hand, left hand, abdomen and pelvis, right foot and left foot. Infants (circa. less than 5 years) will
normally be recovered as bulk samples. Soil samples will also be taken from graves that appear to contain no human bone.
E.1.9 Burials (including the skeleton, cremation, coffin fittings, coffin, urn, grave goods / other) will be recorded by photographic and written record using specialised pro forma context sheets, although these records may only include schematic representations of the location and position of the skeletons, depending on the nature and circumstances of the burial.
E.1.10 Where digital imaging is used it will be done in accordance with the British Association of Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology Recommendations on the Ethical Issues Surrounding 2D and 3D Digital Images of Human Remains (2019).
E.1.11 Where necessary, hand drawn plans (usually at 1:10, sometimes 1:5) will be made, especially of contexts where required details cannot be adequately seen using photography (for example, urned cremations; undisturbed hob nails).
E.1.12 Levels will be taken. For inhumations this will be on the skull, pelvis and feet as a minimum.
E.1.13 Human remains that are exhumed will be bagged and labelled according to skeletal region and carefully packed into suitable containers (for example, acid free cardboard boxes) and transported to a suitable storage location. Any associated coffins and coffin fittings will be contained with the human remains wherever possible.
E.1.14 Unurned cremations will not usually be half sectioned, but excavated in spits and/or quadrants (i.e. large deposits or spreads), or recovered as a bulk sample.
E.1.15 Wherever possible, urned cremations will be carefully bandaged, recovered whole and will be excavated in spits in the laboratory, as per the recommendations of McKinley (2004, 2017).
E.1.16 Unless deemed osteologically or archaeologically important disarticuled bone / charnel will be collected and reserved for re-burial if immediate reinternment as close to its original position is not practicable. In some instances, a rapid scan of this material may be undertaken by a qualified osteologist, if deemed relevant.
E.1.17 If undisturbed, pyre sites will normally be excavated in quadrants, at the very least in 0.5 m blocks of 0.5 m spits.
E.1.18 Pyre debris dumps will be half sectioned or quadranted and will be subject to 100% sampling.
E.1.19 Wooden and lead coffins and any associated fittings, including fixing nails will be recorded on a pro forma coffin recording sheet. All surviving coffin fittings will be recorded by reference to Reeve and Adams (1993) and the unpublished master catalogue that is being compiled by OA. Where individual types cannot be paralleled, they will be drawn and/ or photographed and assigned a style number. Biographical details obtained from legible departum plate inscriptions will be recorded and further documentary research will be made.
E.1.20 Funerary structures, such as brick shaft graves and/or vaults will be recorded by photogrammetry or hand-drawn at a scale of 1:10 or 1:20, as appropriate. Location, dimensions and method of construction will be noted, and the structure added to the overall trench plan.
E.1.21 Memorials, including headstones, revealed within the areas of development will be recorded irrespective of whether they are believed to be in situ.
E.1.22 Where required, memorials will be accorded an individual context number and will also be included as part of the grave group, if the association with a burial is clear.
E.1.23 Memorials will be recorded on pro-forma context sheets, based on and following the guidelines set out by Mytum (2002), and will include details of:
• Shape
• Dimensions
• Type of stone used
• Condition, completeness and fragmentation of stones, no longer in original positions
• Iconography (an illustration may best describe these features)
• Inscription (verbatum record of inscription; font of the lettering)
• Stylistic type
E.2 Relevant industry standards and guidelines
E.2.1 Advisory Panel on the Archaeology of Burials in England, 2013 Science and the Dead. A guideline for the destructive sampling of archaeological human remains for scientific analysis. English Heritage Publishing.
E.2.2 Advisory Panel on the Archaeology of Burials in England, 2017 Guidance for Best Practice for the Treatment of Human Remains Excavated from Christian Burial Grounds in England
E.2.3 Advisory Panel on the Archaeology of Burials in England, 2015 Large Burial Grounds. Guidance on sampling in archaeological fieldwork projects
E.2.4 Association of Diocesan and Cathedral Archaeologists and APABE, 2010 Archaeology and Burial Vaults. A guidance note for churches. Guidance Note 2
E.2.5 British Association of Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology. 2019a Code of Practice (http://www.babao.org.uk/index/ethics-and-standards)
E.2.6 British Association of Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology. 2019b Code of Ethics (http://www.babao.org.uk/index/ethics-and-standards)
E.2.7 British Association of Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology, 2019c Recommendations on the Ethical Issues Surrounding 2D and 3D Digital Images of Human Remains (http://www.babao.org.uk/index/ethics-andstandards)
E.2.8 Cox, M, 2001 Crypt archaeology. An approach. CIfA Paper No. 3
E.2.9 English Heritage, 2002 Human Bones from Archaeological Sites. Guidelines for producing assessment documents and analytical reports
E.2.10 Historic England, 2018 The Role of the Human Osteologist in an Archaeological Fieldwork Project. Swindon, Historic England
E.2.11 McKinley, J, and Roberts, C, 1993 Excavation and post-excavation treatment of cremated and inhumed human remains, CIfA Technical Paper No. 13
E.2.12 McKinley, J, 2004 Compiling a skeletal inventory: cremated human bone. In Brickley, M, and McKinley, J (eds) Guidelines to the Standards for Recording Human Remains, CIfA Technical Paper No. 7. 9-13
E.2.13 McKinley, J, 2017 Compiling a skeletal inventory: cremated human bone. In Mitchell P, and Brickley, M (eds) Updated Guidelines to the Standards for Recording Human Remains, CIfA 14-19
E.2.14 Mitchell P, and Brickley, M (eds) Updated Guidelines to the Standards for Recording Human Remains, CIfA 2017
F.1.2 For Excavations, a Post-Excavation Assessment and Project Design will generally be prepared, as prescribed by Historic England Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment (MoRPHE) 2015, Section 2.3. This will include a Project Description containing:
• A summary description and background of the project.
• A summary of the quantities and assessment of potential for analysis of the information recovered for each category of site, finds, dating and environmental data. Detailed assessment reports will be contained within appendices.
• An explicit statement of the scope of the project design and how the project relates to any other projects or work preceding, concurrent with or following on from it.
• A statement of the research aims of the fieldwork and an illustrated summary of results to date indicating to what extent the aims were fulfilled.
• A list of the project aims as revised in the light of the results of fieldwork and the current post-excavation assessment process.
F.1.3 A section on Resources and Programming will also be produced, containing:
• A list of the personnel involved indicating their qualifications for the tasks undertaken, along with an explanation of how the project team will communicate, both internally and externally.
• A list of the methods which will be used to achieve the revised research aims.
• A list of all the tasks involved in using the stated methods to achieve the aims and produce a report and research archive in the stated format, indicating the personnel and time in days involved in each task. Allowance should be made for general project-related tasks such as monitoring, management and project meetings, editorial and revision time.
• A cascade or Gantt chart indicating tasks in the sequence and relationships required to complete the project. Due allowance will be made for leave and public holidays. Time will also be allowed for the report to be read by a named academic referee as agreed with the County Archaeological Officer, and by the County Archaeological Officer.
• A report synopsis indicating publisher and report format, broken down into chapters, section headings and subheadings, with approximate word lengths and numbers and titles of illustrations per chapter. The structure of the report synopsis should explicitly reflect the research aims of the project.
F.1.4 The Project Design will be submitted to the County Archaeological Officer or equivalent for agreement.
F.1.5 Under certain circumstances (e.g. with very small mitigations), and as agreed with the County Archaeological Officer or equivalent, a formal Assessment
and Project Design may not be required and either the project will continue straight to full analysis, or a simple Project Proposal (MoRPHE 2015 Section 2.1) will be produced prior to full analysis. This proposal may include:
• A summary of the background to the project
• Research aims and objectives
• Methods statement outlining how the aims and objectives will be achieved
• An outline of the stages, products and tasks
• Proposed project team
• Estimated overall timetable and budget if appropriate.
F.1.6 Once the post-excavation Project Design or Project Proposal has been accepted, the County Archaeological Officer or their appointed deputy will monitor the progress of the post-excavation project at agreed points. Any significant variation in the project design will be agreed with the County Archaeological Officer.
F.1.7 The results of the project will be published in an appropriate archaeological journal or monograph. The appropriate level of publication will be dependent on the significance of the fieldwork results and will be agreed with the County Archaeological Officer. An OASIS (Online Access to the Index of Archaeological Investigations) form will be completed for each project as per Historic England guidelines.
F.2 Relevant industry standards and guidelines
F.2.1 Oxford Archaeology (OA) adheres to the national standards in postexcavation procedure as outlined in Historic England’s Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment (MoRPHE; HE 2015). Furthermore, all post-excavation projects take into account the appropriate regional research frameworks as well as national research agendas such as the Framework for Historic Environment Activities & Programmes in Historic England (SHAPE; EH 2008).
APPENDIX G LIST OF SPECIALISTS REGULARLY USED BY OA
G.1.1 Below are two tables, one containing 'in-house' OA specialists, and the other containing a list of external specialists who are regularly used by OA.
Internal archaeological specialists used by OA
Specialist
Specialism
Qualifications
John Cotter
Medieval and Post Medieval pottery, Clay Pipe and CBM
APPENDIX H DOCUMENTARY ARCHIVING H.1 Standard methodology – summary
H.1.1 The documentary archive constitutes all the written, drawn, photographic and digital records relating to the set-up, fieldwork and post-excavation phases of the project. This documentary archive, together with the artefactual and environmental ecofact archive collectively forms the record of the site. The report is part of the documentary archive, and the archive must provide the evidence that supports the conclusions of the report, but the archive may also include data which exceeds the limitations of research parameters set down for the report and which could be of significant value to future researchers.
H.1.2 At the outset of the project OA Archive manager will contact the relevant local receiving museum or archive repository to notify them of the imminent start of a new fieldwork project in their collecting area. Relevant local archiving guidelines will be observed and site codes, which integrate with the receiving repository, will be agreed for labelling of archives and finds.
H.1.3 Where there is currently no receiving museum for the project archive, although responsibility for the archive ultimately lies with the client, OA will hold the archive on their behalf for a period of up to 3 years after completion of the report, after which time (in the event that a suitable depository has not been secured) provision for further storage of the archive will be made in agreement with Oxford Archaeology, the client and the relevant planning archaeologist.
H.1.4 During the course of the project the Archive team will assist the Project Manager in the management of the archive including the cataloguing and development technique suitable for photographic archive requirements.
H.1.5 The hard copy site archive will be security copied by scanning to PdFA and a copy of this will be housed on the OA Archive Server. A full digital copy of the archive, including scanned hard copy and born digital data, will be deposited with and made publicly available on-line through the ADS. A further copy will be maintained on the OA server and if requested a copy on disk will also be sent to the receiving museum with the hard copy. This will act as a safeguard against the accidental loss and the long-term degeneration of paper records and photographs.
H.1.6 Born digital data will only be printed to hard copy for the receiving museum where practical. Archive elements that need maintaining in digital form will be sent to ADS in accordance with Arches Standard and ADS guidelines. A copy will be sent to the receiving museum by CD and back-up copies will be stored on the OA digital network. In most cases a digital copy of the report will be included in the OASIS project library hosted by ADS.
H.1.7 Prior to deposition the Archive team will contact the museum regarding the size and content of the archive and discuss any retention and dispersal policies which may be applicable in line with local and SMA Guidelines ' Selection, Retention & Dispersal of Archaeological Collections' 1993.
H.1.8 The site archive will then be deposited with the relevant receiving museum or repository at the earliest opportunity unless further archaeological work on the site is expected. The documentary archive will include correspondence detailing landowner consent to deposit the artefacts and any copyright licences in accordance with the receiving museum guidelines. Deposition charges will be required from the client as part of the project costs, but the level of the fee is set by the receiving body and may be subject to change during the lifespan of the project. Changes to archiving charges beyond OA’s control will be passed across to the client.
H.1.9 Oxford Archaeology will retain full copyright of any commissioned reports, tender documents, or other project documents, under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 with all rights reserved; excepting that it will provide the receiving repository or museum for the archive with a full licence for use to the client in all matters directly relating to the project as described in the Written Scheme of Investigation, and in line with the relevant receiving body guidelines.
H.1.10 OA will advise the receiving repository or museum for the archive of 3rd party materials supplied in the course of projects which are not OA's copyright.
H.1.11 OA undertakes to respect all requirements for confidentiality about the client's proposals provided that these are clearly stated. It is expected that such conditions shall not unreasonably impede the satisfactory performance of the services required. Archaeological findings and conclusions can be kept confidential for a limited period but will be made publicly available in line with the above procedure either after a specified time period agreed with the client at the outset of the project, or where no such period is agreed, after a reasonable period of time. It is expected that clients respect OA's general ethical obligations not to suppress significant archaeological data for an unreasonable period.
H.2.1 At the end of the project the site archive will be ordered, catalogued, labelled and conserved and stored according to the following national guidelines:
H.2.2 EAC, 2014 A Standard and Guide to Best Practice for Archaeological Archiving in Europe (EAC Guidelines 1)
H.2.3 CIfA, 2014 (Updated 2020) Standard and Guidance for the Creation, Compilation, Transfer and Deposition of Archaeological Archives
H.2.4 Brown, D, 2011 Archaeological Archives A Guide to Best Practice in Creation, Compilation, Transfer and Curation. AAF
H.2.5 UKIC, 1990 Guidelines for the preparation of excavation archives for longterm storage
H.2.6 SMA, 2020 Standards and Guidance in the Care of Archaeological Collections
H.2.7 Local museum guidelines such as Museum of London Guidelines: (http://www.museumoflondonarchaeology.org.uk/English/ArchiveResearch/ DeposResource) will be adopted where appropriate to the archive collecting area.
H.2.8 The site archive will be prepared to at least the minimum acceptable standard defined in Management of Archaeological Projects 2, Historic England 1991.
H.3 Relevant OA manual and other supporting documentation
H.3.1 The OA Archives Policy. APPENDIX I HEALTH AND SAFETY
I.1 Standard Methodology - summary
I.1.1 All work will be undertaken in accordance with the current OA Health and Safety Policy, the OA Site Safety Procedures Manual, a site-specific Risk Assessment and, if required, Safety Plan or Method Statement. Copies of the site-specific documents will be submitted to the client or their representative for approvals prior to mobilisation, and all relevant H and S documentation will be available on site at all times. The Health and Safety documentation will be read in conjunction with the project WSI.
I.1.2 Where a project falls under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations (2015), all work will be carried out in accordance with the Principal Contractor's Construction Phase Plan (CPP).
I.2 Relevant industry standards and guidelines
I.2.1 All work will be carried out according to the requirements of all relevant legislation and guidance, including, but not exclusively:
I.2.2 The Health and Safety at Work Act (1974).
I.2.3 Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations (1999).
