bitton watching brief report

An Archaeological Investigation at

St. Mary’s Parish Church,

Bitton,

South Gloucestershire

BMC 10

Carried out for: St. Mary’s Church PCC and

Benjamin & Beauchamp Ltd.

by

C. & N. Hollinrake Ltd.,

Consultant Archaeologists,

12, Bove Town,

Glastonbury,

Somerset BA6 8JE Telephone: 01458 833332

Report Number 458

An Archaeological Investigation at

St. Mary’s Parish Church, Bitton

Table of Contents

para.......... Contents ..........................................................page Summary ........................................................... 1

1.0............. Introduction....................................................... 1

2.0............. Topography and Geology.................................. 2

3.0............. Archaeological Background.............................. 4

3.1......... Archaeological finds ......................................... 4

3.2......... The Curchyard................................................... 5

3.3......... The Church........................................................ 5

4.0............. The Archaeological Watching Brief ................. 10

4.2......... Trench A ........................................................... 11

4.3......... Trench G ........................................................... 12

4.4......... Bay 2 ................................................................. 14

4.5......... Bay 22 ............................................................... 15

4.6......... Bay 24 ............................................................... 16

5.0............. Discussion ......................................................... 18

Acknowledgements ........................................... 21

Bibliography...................................................... 21

Appendix: Finds List......................................... 22

Figures number .... Description..........................................................................page 1................ The church and historic settlement of Bitton .......................2

2................ Bitton, 1st edition O.S. map, 1886........................................4

3................ St. Mary’s, Bitton, with neighbouring buildings ................6

4................ The eastern end of the church with new features.................10

5................ Trench A looking west .........................................................11

6................ Trench B at junction with Trench A ....................................12

7................ Trench B north end ..............................................................12

8................ The drystone wall in Trench B.............................................13

9................ Trench B in Bay 24 ..............................................................13

10.............. Plan of Bay 2........................................................................14

11.............. Photograph of foundations Bay 2.........................................14

12.............. Plan of Bay 22......................................................................15

13.............. Photograph of Buttress 22/23...............................................15

14.............. Photograph of Buttress 22/23...............................................15

15.............. Plan of Bay 24......................................................................16

16.............. Photograph of Figure 15 ......................................................16

17.............. Photograph of Bay 24 ..........................................................16

18.............. Photograph of Bay 24 and new drain...................................17

An Archaeological Investigation

at

St. Mary’s parish church, Bitton, Gloucestershire and

Summary

A watching brief on new stormwater drains has allowed a glimpse of the

archaeological deposits associated with the foundations of the chancel and a short

drain trench to the north. Despite the limited nature of the ground disturbance,

foundations of several earlier walls were recorded and two features were observed in

the churchyard, demonstrating the survival of finds even in the heavily dug cemetery.

Finds included a Romano-British hypocaust flue tile fragment and glazed medieval

roof tiles.

1.0 Introduction

1.1 In November 2009, benjamin + beauchamp architects commissioned C. and N.

Hollinrake Ltd to prepare an archaeological and historical background study of St.

Mary’s church and its immediate surroundings to better inform the Bath and Wells

Diocesan Advisory Council in dealing with the maintenance of the south boundary

wall of the churchyard (C. and N. Hollinrake, report no. 438). Background

information in this paper is taken from that earlier report.

1.2 In 2010 the chancel required repair and maintenance and C. and N. Hollinrake

were asked to provide archaeological monitoring for the groundworks element of the

project, especially for the storm water drains for the new downpipes that were

installed around the eastern end of the chancel.

1.3 The work to the chancel was undertaken by Ben and Paul Hastings of

Wellington Masonry. The groundworks were monitored and reccorded by Charles

and Nancy Hollinrake on the 4th

and 5th

October and the 4th

November 2010.

1.4 Methods of recording were appropriate for an augmented watching brief.

Archaeological features and deposits, when encountered, were recorded in plan and

by elevation, when accessible, at a scale of 1:20, and by colour digital photography.

Finds were collected and their locations were recorded in a field book. The finds

were cleaned, identified and bagged by context before being listed.

Bitton Church Archaeological Watching Brief

BMC10

2

2.0 Topography and Geology

This paragraph was taken from the earlier desk-top survey.

Figure 1. The church and historic settlement of Bitton . O.S. map 1964.

2.1 The small village of Bitton lies approximately 10 kilometres SE of the centre

of Bristol, about 2 kilometres SE of the SE edge of the greater Bristol area at

Willsbridge and approximately 8kilometres to the NW of Bath. Keynsham lies

around 2 kilometres to the SW and Saltford is around 2 kilometres to the south, the

latter two towns being situated south of the River Avon, which flows from east to

west through its floodplain forming the south boundary of Bitton parish.

2.2 Bitton is said to take its name from the River Boyd that flows from the north

through Golden Valley and then skirts the western side of the village before joining

the Avon. This river was formerly used to power mills.

The village straddles the main road from Bath to Bristol, notorious in the 18th

century as the home of the Cock Road gang of highwaymen (Dunning p. 44). The

older, southern half of the village, which includes the church, lies to the south of the

main A431 road which is the successor to a Roman road, once known as the Via Julia.


BMC10

3

2.3 The village stands on ground sloping gently towards the south and the river.

The north end of the village, just north of the road, stands at around 25m above mean

Ordnance Datum (aOD) and the church stands at around 17m aOD. The village lies

within a landscape of gentle hills, with Bitton Hill, immediately to the north, rising to

around 85m aOD and the hills beyond Upton Cheyney, just NE of the village, rising

to around 100m aOD.

‘…It is beautifully varied with easy elevations, and some bolder rising grounds, which

form a very agreeable landscape, as seen from several points of view. The soil is rich

and fertile, consisting chiefly of loam, intermixed with different proportions of sand,

and in some parts a little clay. The greater part is meadows and pasture, both in

common fields and inclosure.’ (Rudder’s County History, 1779 quoted in Ellacombe,

p.2.)

2.4 The church stands at the south end of the village, within and at the extreme

southern edge of a very large churchyard. Immediately south of the church is a

private house, ‘The Grange’ (SMR 5703), along with two smaller houses, ‘Granchen’

(SMR 12539), to the west and ‘The Dower House’ (SMR 12540) to the east. Much of

the south end of the village was formerly church property and ‘The Grange’, a private

house immediately south of the church, was formerly the Rectory. Immediately NW

of the churchyard is Church Farm (SMR 5702) and immediately NE are the Old

Vicarage (SMR 12531) and the Hall, both formerly church properties. The rectorial

tithe barn (SMR 13244) stands immediately west of Church Road, SW of the church.

An extensive area of meadowland lies south of the church complex and south of

Church Road, between Church Road and the River Avon.

2.5 Geology

River Terrace gravels lie below the south end of the village with bands of

Cretaceous and Jurassic siltstone and sandstone below the northern part of the village

with bands of Jurassic limestone to the NE and Permo-Triassic red mudstones to the

NW. (Soils of England and Wales).


BMC10

4

Figure 2. Bitton 1st edition O.S. map , 1886.

3.0 Archaeological Background

This paragraph is taken from the earlier desk-top study.

3.1 Archaeological finds

In 1986 a scatter of Romano-British pottery and a quern-stone fragment were

discovered at ST 68606955, in Mickle Mead to the west of the church, during topsoil

stripping for a gas pipeline. (Rawles 1988).

The South Gloucestershire Heritage Environment Records (HER),

incorporating the South Gloucestershire Sites and Monuments Record (SGSMR)

provide the majority of the archaeological references relating to Bitton, with a second,

major source being Ellacombe’s historical writings (Ellacombe 1867, 1881).

The archaeological record demonstrates abundant Roman finds, including

coins, in Bitton, but the focal point for the Roman material is not known. The largest

concentration and the greatest variety of Roman finds have been recovered from St.

Mary’s churchyard.


BMC10

5

3.2 The Churchyard

Ellacombe reported finding Roman tesserae in the churchyard with ‘an

abundance of cinerary ware and burnt earth’ (p5). He also reported a hoard of Roman

coins in a ‘small earthenware vessel’.

emperor date

bronze coins

Valentinian I 364AD

Gratian (x4) 367

Valentinian II (x2) 383

Eugenius 392

silver coins

Constantius 306

Arcadius 395

Tetricius n.d

In 1850, when a new doorway was pierced into the tower stairwell from the

outside, bricks were found in the masonry of the west wall of the nave; the masonry

was interpreted as Norman and the bricks as Roman (Ellacombe 1881 pp.4-5; SMR

1247; Figure 7).

3.3 The Church

St. Mary’s, Bitton, displays several examples of pre-Norman Conquest work,

often referred to as ‘Anglo-Saxon’ (SMR 1247). During his time as the vicar of

Bitton, the Rev. Ellacombe attempted to describe the various building phases of the

church, following the written sources and the evidence he collected from the fabric of

the building. His work has more recently been corroborated by Taylor and Taylor.

The locations of the various features they describe have been added to Figure

4 in an effort to determine the relationship between the standing buildings and the

various descriptions of buried masonry. The observations fall within three main

periods: pre-Norman Conquest/ Anglo-Saxon, Norman/ Romanesque and medieval/

Gothic.

1) pre-Norman Conquest / Anglo-Saxon church

a Chancel Arch

The semi-circular arch constructed of plain voussoires resting on plain jambs

of long-and-short work; was revealed in the 19th

century when an ornamented plaster


BMC10

6

of Paris surface treatment dating from the 1760s was removed (Ellacombe 1881 p.5).

This arch was destroyed in 1843 and replaced with the present mock-Norman arch of

1846, although a few traces of the original may still be seen (Taylor and Taylor 1965

p. 74; SMR 1247).

Above the arch, visible from the nave, can be seen the remains of a pre-

Conquest Rood which was probably larger than life size (Taylor and Taylor 1965 p.

74; SMR 1247).

towerC14th

St. Catherine’s chapel1299

chancelC14th

b

ccg

i jk

gh

f

f

a

de

Figure 3. St. Mary’s, Bitton, with neighbouring buildings as they appeared on the

tithe map.


BMC10

7

b nave

The north wall of the nave is largely original while the south wall is a later

rebuild on the original Saxon plinth (Taylor and Taylor 1965 p. 74). At 95ft, the nave

is an exceptional length for an Anglo-Saxon church (ibid. p. 73), but b marks the

place some 100 feet from the west side of the chancel arch where an entrance step was

found at a depth of 6 inches when the pavement of the floor was raised (Ellacombe

1878 p. 6), suggesting that the pre-Conquest nave was even longer than the present

one. The walls were significantly higher than present: over 27 feet above the floor,

judging from the Rood (a; mentioned above), which is still in situ (Taylor and Taylor

1965 p. 74).

The great size, alone, is testament to the importance of this church and the

presence of a major piece of sculpture supports that interpretation of high status.

c Outside of the tower, in line with the south wall of the church, foundations of

two, flat buttresses were seen, suggesting that the length of the nave was truncated

when the western tower was built (Ellacombe 1881 p. 7). Ellacombe described these

buttresses as Norman, but without further description they might be equally

interpreted as pre-Conquest.

The upper parts of the north wall of the nave contain traces of round-headed

windows which may be either pre-Conquest or late-Norman inserts (Taylor and

Taylor 1965 p. 76; SMR 1247).

d Transepts / Porticus

Near the east end of the north wall are ‘large stones of an archway of much

earlier date than the Norman Conquest, and near the ground is a block of masonry

which the least tutored observer would see is of the same character as that in the little

church of St. Lawrence at Bradford-on-Avon.’ (Ellacombe, quoting a report of the

Somerset Archaeological Society visit in 1876, p. 74). Ellacombe speculated that this

arch may have opened into a side tower which existed before the west tower was

built.

e Outside of this spot, in 1842, foundations were seen extending 4 feet beyond

the present nave wall. The masonry was described as having ashlar faces, badly

burnt. At the same time, quantities of decorated floor tiles, some bearing the arms of


BMC10

8

De Vivon and Berkley, were recovered, along with Roman flue tiles (Ellacombe 1881

p. 8-9).

f The arch seen by Ellacombe has been re-interpreted as the northern arch of an

Anglo-Saxon porticus (side chapel), illustrating the existence of former porticus on

both sides of the eastern end of the nave (Taylor and Taylor 1965 p. 74; SMR 1247).

The foundations of the south transept, containing the graves of the de Button (or

Bitton) family, formerly extended some 12 feet into the garden of the Parsonage

(Ellacombe 1865 p.8). The location of the southern porticus is marked by masonry

scars on the outer nave wall; the northern porticus has been sketched in on Figure 7 to

match, for illustrative purposes only, although porticus were usually of different

proportions. The footings of the southern porticus are clearly visible extending into

the garden of ‘The Grange’

2) Norman church

The Norman church was comprised of

• a long, single-aisled church of great height; a row of small windows was high

up on the nave walls; the nave walls had been lowered and a Norman corbel

table laid;

• g: northern, southern, and, probably, western, rich doorways, inserted into the

Saxon nave walls (Taylor and Taylor p. 74); they are not placed

symmetrically;

• f: either:

o north and south transepts, or

o a south transept and northern tower in the location of pre-Conquest

porticus.

Nothing remains of the Norman chancel (Ellacombe 1881 p.10).

3) 13th Century church

f The effigy of Robert de Button was discovered in 1826 just outside the south

side of the church, in what was probably the mortuary chapel of the Buttons

(Ellacombe in Nichols p.197).


BMC10

9

h Written sources attest to the dedication in 1299 of the chapel of St. Catherine,

constructed on the north side of the church by Thomas de Button, Bishop of Exeter, to

serve as a chantry chapel for his parents’ graves (Ellacombe p.11; SMR 1247).

4) 14th Century church

Both the chancel and the buttressed western tower have been dated to the 14th

century (Taylor and Taylor p.73; SMR 1247). The floor was raised by 6 inches when

the tower was built (Ellacombe 1881 p.10).

5) The Vestry was built in the 1830s

As part of the recent works to the church, the architect Marcus Chantry has

numbered the bays defined by the external buttresses of the church. These bay

numbers have been applied to this report.


BMC10

10

4.0 The Archaeological Watching Brief

Figure 4. The eastern end of the church with the new features added.

4.1 Trenches A and B, north of the chancel, were designed as linear soakaways.

The trenches now contain perforated drainage pipes which connect to new connection

chambers installed in Bays 22 and 24. These collect storm and rain water from the

roof through new down pipes.

Both trenches were cut using a mini-digger.

Trench B deepened to the north.


BMC10

11

4.2 Trench A

Trench A, c39cm deep x c36cm wide, was dug from the location of the new

connection chamber in Bay 22 in an eastward direction adjacent to the north wall of

the chancel. The following profile or stratigraphy was recorded:

depth description interpretation

up to c10cm dark loamy topsoil garden soil

more than

39cm

loamy clay with lenses of yellowish stone

dust and occasional mortar flecks, with

fragments of unworked local yellow freestone

up to c8cm across.

made ground

Figure 5. Trench A from the junction with Trench B looking west towards Bay 22.

50cm vertical scales in side trench. 1m horizontal scale.

Close to the junction of Trench A with Trench B, marked X on Figure 4, at a

depth of c20-25cm, a fragment of Romano-British hypocaust tile was recovered,

along with some prehistoric flint. No pottery was found, but fragments of glazed

ceramic drain pipes and small fragments of modern window glass identified this as a

modern deposit, probably dating to the rebuilding of the vestry in the 19th

century.


BMC10

12

Figure 6. Trench B, looking north.

Trench A, bottom left.

The path lies below the spoil heap.

Figure 7. Trench B terminated when a

burial vault was encountered.

4.3 Trench B

Trench B ran to the north from the new connection chamber in Bay 24

following the path into the churchyard; the trench was c36cm wide and c40cms deep.

At about 50cm north of the junction with Trench A, the base of the trench was

dug to the lower depth of c75cm. The soil it was dug through appeared to be a mid-

brown grave earth with few finds, but the trench was too narrow for detailed

description of the lower deposits.

The break of slope, marked by hachures in Figure 4, ended with a small

spread (c80cm wide N-S) of dark grey-brown, homogenous, silty clay with a few

charcoal flecks. This deposit appeared to be the fill of a small ditch crossing the

trench in an east-west direction, but, again, the trench was too narrow to permit

further excavation.


BMC10

13

Figure 8. The drystone wall seen in Trench B.

50cm vertical and 20cm horizontal scales

Further north, c1.3m along the trench, the remains of a dry-stone wall, much

disturbed by grave digging, crossed the trench in an east-west direction. The top of the

wall was c40cm below the surface, and the base of the wall lay at c60cm below the

surface; its width was c30cm at its widest.

The wall was constructed of unworked, yellow limestone rubble of all sizes up

to c12cm across. From this wall, south to the church, small chips of yellow limestone

were commonly encountered. These appeared to form concentrations in places

although no particular pattern could be discerned.

Pennant Sandstone fragments, probably all roof tile fragments, one with a nail

or peg hole, were recovered throughout the trench, becoming increasingly scarce to

the north. The distribution followed no discernable pattern, nor were any more

Romano-British finds encountered.

Figure 9. Trench B linked into the pipe from the downpipe in Bay 24.

Junction with Trench A, leading to the right of photo.

1m and 50cm scales.


BMC10

14

4.4 Bay 2

Bay 2

rebated

0 1

1 2 3 4 5 6ft

2m

N

earlier wall

buttress

rebate

{

{

W E

Figure 10. Plan of Bay 2.

Figure 11. The foundations of Buttress

2/3 looking west showing the stone

with the rebate and the chancel

foundations cutting the foundations

below the buttress. 50cm scales.

A small trench (c15cm deep x c20cm wide) was dug along the south face of

the south wall and along the east face of the western buttress of Bay 2, on the south

side of the chancel, revealing dark earth with rubble. Cleaning the base of the trench

revealed that Buttress 2/3 (between Bay 2 and Bay 3) rests upon on an earlier wall.

The chancel wall cuts through this earlier structure, leaving a gap of 2 to 3cm between

them. Two of the stones have rebates cut into them and are presumably re-used.


BMC10

15

4.5 Bay 22

Bay 22

Bay 23

scaffoldingsupport

mor tar

0 1

1 2 3 4 5 6ft

2m

N

Figure 12. Plan of foundations below Buttress

22/23.

Figure 13. North end of buttress.

Looking NE.

Figure 14. Buttress 22/23 looking

east. 50cm horizontal scale,

1m vertical scale.

The north-west buttress of the vestry (between Bay 22 and Bay 23) rests upon

a wall foundation which appears to have a different orientation, and which extends for

an unknown distance beyond the buttress to the east. This foundation consisted of 2

courses of roughly squared yellow limestone blocks; the upper course was 9-12cm

thick and up to 25cm wide and rested upon on a lower course of similar stones but

only 5-10cm thick. It was bonded with yellow lime mortar. The foundation was

surrounded by yellow sandy clay with abundant yellow mortar flecks and many small

pieces of unworked yellow limestone up to 8cm across, which might be the backfill of

a robber trench as there appeared to be a straight edge to the deposit slightly east of

the buttress. When cleaned, this deposit produced 3 or 4 sherds of green-glazed

pottery, but it was impossible to be sure whether they came from the sandy clay or

from the soil above.

This earlier foundation was cut by the foundations of the vestry wall, which

were flush with the plinth.


BMC10

16

4.6 Bay 24

N

Bay 24

0 1

1 2 3 4 5 6ft

2m

Figure 15. Plan of Bay 24.

Section of foundation for chancel

wall in insert (left).

Figure 16. Birds eye view of

figure 15; north to top of photo.

50cm scales.

Figure 17. Looking south to new

connection chamber. 1m and 50cm

horizontal scales. 20cm vertical

scale. Older footing below buttress.


BMC10

17

Figure 18. Bay 24 foundations and new connection chamber; looking south.

Older footing stones exposed below the buttress.

50cm and 1m scales depict the orientation of the older footing.

This buttress (between Bay 1 and Bay 24) also rests upon older foundations

with a different orientation. In this case, the foundation survives to the height of two

courses of large blocks extending up to c. 0.30m (1 foot) to the west. Several of the

stones were burnt a deep pink and traces of cream mortar were seen. Another short

stretch of masonry below the chancel wall was parallel to that wall and much deeper,

consisting of at least five courses of much smaller stones. The two types of mortar

were not keyed in, a slim block of yellow freestone filling the gap between the two.

The buttress was not always flush to the surface of the older footing and not

always bonded to it. The photograph in figure 17 (above) shows a gap between the

top of the older footing and the base of the present buttress (seen behind the small,

vertical, 20cm scale).


BMC10

18

5.0 DISCUSSION

5.1 The data presented in this report was been collected under conditions which

were far from ideal for archaeological purposes: the trenches were too narrow to allow

for investigation of the features encountered and finds were not recovered in

association with the features. Allowing for these and similar caveats, a surprising

number of observations were made in these small trenches and it is possible to draw a

few broad conclusions without fear that they are unfounded. The safest policy would

be to begin with the known and to work from that to the unknown.

5.2 The chancel is often the oldest part of the church. The chancel at St. Mary’s

church has been dated to the 14th

century (Taylor and Taylor 1965 p.73)), but the

Anglo-Saxon chancel arch (Taylor and Taylor 1965 p.74) argues that at least some of

the chancel foundations belong to the pre-Conquest period. It is possible that the

chancel was extended during the 14th

century (the slight change of wall thickness

from the western half of the chancel to the eastern might indicate an eastern

extension), so it possible to state with reasonable confidence that the chancel

foundations date to the 14th

century, if not earlier.

5.3 The chancel foundations were seen in both Bay 2 and Bay 24 to be nearly

flush with the wall plinth. In both bays, the foundations for the buttresses were

noticeably different from those of the chancel. In Bay 2 the chancel foundations

appeared to cut through the buttress foundations (Figures 11 and 12), suggesting that

the present buttress is built upon an earlier foundation.

Only a small section of the chancel foundation was visible in Bay 24, but it

was clearly of a different character to the buttress foundation, which extended far

beyond the buttress to the north and to the west and lay on a very different orientation

(Figures 16 – 19). The coursing of the buttress matches that of the chancel, showing

that they are of the same date, suggesting, again, that the buttress foundations are of

an earlier phase.

5.4 Buttress 22/23 was constructed considerably later than the chancel: the date

above the eastern doorway of the vestry is 1826. The foundations of the vestry itself

were not seen and it is entirely possible that this element of the church was built on


BMC10

19

similar foundations to those seen under the buttress (Figures 13 – 15). The mortary

deposit around the foundations do, however, appear to be a robber trench, so it would

appear that the 19th

century buttress laps over an earlier wall foundation.

5.5 It was noted that the NW buttress of Bay 24 stands above a distinctly different

footing and that the buttress was not bonded to that footing; there is a gap between the

two which can be seen on the photographs in figures 18 and 19.

Furthermore, the footing extends far to the west of the present buttress and

also to the north with these extensions at an obviously different orientation.

56 It should come as no surprise to see earlier walls beneath St. Mary’s, since the

small triangle of roads around the churchyard (Figure 2) has been intensively

occupied from at least the Roman period (para. 2.2, 3.1 and 3.2 above). The Romano-

British hypocaust fragment found in Trench A joins the tesserae reported by

Ellacombe and the plentiful coins to paint a picture of high status buildings with

underfloor heating beneath mosaic pavement at the end of the Roman administration

in Britain. Romano-British sites were often re-used for Anglo-Saxon church sites , as

demonstrated at several major early churches in the area, e.g. Wells Cathedral

(Rodwell 2005) and Glastonbury (Hollinrake 2008 p. 70; Morris, 1997 p. 30-45).

As is typical for churches, few datable finds were recovered. Pottery dating

from the 13th

to the 19th

centuries only served to inform us of what we already know:

the presence of a medieval church being maintained into the modern period. The

range of medieval building materials, however, derive from a roof of green-glazed

tiles with brown-yellow glazed accents.

The combed flue tile is diagnostic of the Roman system of interior heating

known as hypocaust. Fireplaces stoked from outside provided heat for the under-floor

cavities, which was drawn through the walls via these flues before emerging through

the roof. The combing is intended to act as a key for a plaster render. The high-status

building for which this flue was intended could well have been roofed with the

Pennant sandstone tiles, although these stone tiles could have also been used in the

church or associated buildings. There is also a great likelihood that the stone roof

tiles could have been taken from the Roman buildings and used on the church.

Finds were marked with the site code BMC10 and context. The

churchwardens will be negotiating with the staff of Bristol City Museum, where other


BMC10

20

finds from the churchyard are deposited, to use these and other finds for a small

museum display in the church.

5.7 Continuity of occupation over this long period may well have fostered the

retention of major boundary and property lines, so it is possible that the principal

building aligments occur and re-occur throughout the Roman, Saxon and medieval

periods. The ditch and wall seen in Trench B could, therefore, be of any date; their

proximity suggests that they could represent a long-standing boundary although their

contemporaneity cannot be demonstrated at present. It should be noted that these

features have survived despite intensive grave digging over many centuries,

suggesting that other important features could survive within the graveyard in this

outstandingly important and interesting site.

Nancy Hollinrake

28th

March 2011


BMC10

21

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The watching brief was commissioned by Marcus Chantry, who generously donated

his photographs of the southern side of the boundary wall. Ann and Bob Willis, the

churchwardens, were very helpful in escorting us around the church and churchyard.

Thanks are due to Ben and Paul Hastings of Wellington Masonry for all their help and

support for our work. Val Stevens washed and marked the finds and Arthur

Hollinrake compiled the finds list. Nancy Hollinrake drew the illustrations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Dunning, Robert, 1992, Somerset and Avon, Stroud.

Ellacombe, Rev. H.T., 1867, ‘Some account of the manor of Button or Bitton, Co.

Gloucestershire, in Nichols.

Ellacombe, Rev. H.T., 1881, History of the parish of Bitton, Exeter.

Hollinrake C and Hollinrake N, 2009, An Archaeological and Historical Desk-top

Survey of St. Mar’s Parish Church, Bitton, South Gloucestershire, BMC 09,

unpubl. client report no. 438 for St. Mary’s Church PCC and Bath and Wells

Diocesan Advisory Council.

Hollinrake, N. 2008, Glastonbury from the Romans to the Saxons: a critical review of

the evidence from the Roman period to the tenth century, unpulb MA

dissertation, University of Wales, Cardiff.

Morris, Richard, 1997. Churches in the Landscape, London.

Rawes, B. (ed.) Archaeological Review No 12, 1987, Transactions of the Bristol and

Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 1988, Vol. 106, 219-224

Rodwell, Warwick, 2001, Wells Cathedral: Excavations and Structural Studies, 1978

– 93, English Heritage Archaeological Report 21, London.

Taylor and Taylor Taylor, H.M. and Taylor, J., 1965, Anglo-Saxon Architecture, Vol

1. Cambridge University Press.


BMC10

22

Appendix: Finds List

{______ pottery____________________} {_building materials _} context

no fabric & weight surface date no description

miscellaneous

Trench A - Centre / East - U/S 1 large Pennant

sandstone roof

tile fragment with

peg hole, grey,

micaceous. 681g

1 small Pennant

sandstone

fragment, purple.

42g

1 yellow limestone

slab fragment,

?Bath stone,

patch of cream

mortar, c.22mm.

157g

1 ceramic pipe,

'male end', grey

fabric, patchy

brown glaze

inside, mottled

brown glaze out,

c.45-50mm

internal diameter.

802g. C18-19th

1 large ceramic

pipe fragment,

'male end', grey

fabric, small

black grit temper,

smooth shiny

brown glaze out,

c.50mm internal

diameter. 704g.

C17-18th

1 ceramic pipe

fragment, orange-

brown fabric,

grey core, grit,

quartz & fine

calcite temper,

grey-brown glaze

outside. 145g.

C18-19th

7 flat ceramic tiles,

oxidised fabric,

sandy orange

surfaces. c.15mm

thick. retained =

485g, 274g,

206g, 177g +

discarded = 229g,

152g, 52g


BMC10

23



miscellaneous

Trench A - U/S 1 large ?Bath stone

fragment,

?possible carved

surface. 884g

Trench B - 1.4m - U/S 4 Pennant

sandstone frags.

1 x sooty

surfaces -

retained = 626g +

3 x discarded =

495g, 435g, 28g

1 smooth, pale

limestone pebble.

12g


sandstone

fragment, purple.

discarded. 442g

3 Pennant

sandstone

fragments, grey.

discarded. 171g,

111g, 90g

1 small yellow

limestone

fragment.

discarded. 55g


sandstone

fragment, grey.

discarded. 140g

1 Pennant

sandstone

fragment, purple.

discarded. 382g


sandstone

fragment, grey-

brown. discarded.

105g

1 Pennant

sandstone

fragment, purple,

prominent mica.

discarded. 40g


BMC10

24


n

o

fabric & weight surface date no description

miscellaneous

Trench

B - West

End -

U/S

1 glazed ware, pale

reduced, sandy.

13g

mottled green

glaze outside

with applied

horizontal

thumbed strip

and brown

glaze, pale

creamy sandy

surface inside

13-

15th

1 ceramic tile

fragment, grey

fabric, small

black grit temper,

hard, mottled

green glaze

above, pale

cream surface

below. 17g. C13-

15th

1 glazed ware, grey,

small black grit

temper, white

margin out. 9g

mottled khaki

glaze outside,

orange inner

surface with

deep rilling lines

13-

15th

Trench

B - U/S

1 small sherd,

oxidised sandy,

some grog temper,

abraded. 1g

trace of green

glaze surface

13-

15th

1 ceramic ridge tile

fragment, dark

grey fabric, black

grit temper up to

3mm with rare

grog, pale

oxidised sandy

inner surface,

outer surface

pulled to a rough

point, white strip

below patchy

green & clear

glaze, stabbed.

72g. C13-15th

2 x cortical FLINT

lumps, dark grey to

black. 8g, 7g

1 porcelain sherd.

4g

blue decoration 19-

20th

1 x small tarmac

lump. discarded. 21g

1 large box-flue tile

fragment, 6 x

toothed combed

key-ins, oxidised

fabric with rare

calcite, grit &

grog temper.

416g. C1st-4th

1 ceramic roof tile

fragment.

discarded. 14g.

C19-20th

1 Pennant

sandstone

fragment, grey,

micaceous.

discarded. 112g

2 small roof slate

fragments. grey,

discarded. 15g.

9g


BMC10

25


n

o

fabric & weight surface date no description

miscellaneous

1 ceramic tile,

oxidised fabric,

patchy clear

glaze on surface.

14g. C17-18th?

1 limestone rubble

fragment coated

with pale cream

lime mortar.

212g

3 Lias stone

fragments,

discarded. 32g,

19g, 8g

2 small white lime

mortar fragments.

3g, 1g

1 window glass

sherd, pale green.

2g. ?medieval

Bay 2 2 joining, base &

body sherds,

oxidised sandy,

partly reduced on

the base. 96g, 32g

abraded inner

surface with

traces of brown

glaze, sooty

patches inside &

out, spots of dull

green glaze on

the base

?14-

16th

1 x long Fe nail,

square with flat

hammered top. 47g.

n.d

Bay 22 1 ceramic ridge tile

fragment, dark

grey fabric, black

grit temper,

rough, buff inner

surface, oxidised

upper surface

with stabbed

decoration,

patchy green

glaze. 228g.

C13-15th

3 x Fe nails.

discarded. 59g, 38g,

31g

1 large Pennant

sandstone roof

tile with peg

hole, purple.

1514g

1 Pennant

sandstone

fragment, purple,

sooty. 505g

1 Pennant

sandstone

fragment, grey,

discarded. 290g


BMC10

26



miscellaneous

1 small yellow

limestone

fragment, ?traces

of carving. 140g

1 large yellow

limestone

fragment. 622g

1 dense, smooth

pale limestone.

39g

1 small ceramic

floor tile

fragment, red-

orange fabric,

brown-yellow

glaze above. 21g.

C13-15th

Bay 24 1 rim frag, pale

oxidised, grey

core, frequent

quartz temper.

probably ?North

Devon ware. 33g

inner surface

missing

?16-

18th

1 Pennant roof tile

fragment, grey,

discarded. 270g

1 ceramic tile

fragment, orange

fabric, 1 x

smooth surface.

52g. n.d

U / S Spoil - Pipe Trench 18th Nov 2010 2 joining ceramic

ridge tile

fragments,

oxidised sandy

fabric, patchy

yellow-green

glaze above.

122g.

?C14-16th

bitton watching brief report

Documents