eye church excavation report final - amazon web...

View of the exposed brick-lined graves

ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION AND MONITORING REPORT SCCAS REPORT No. 2009/211

Church of St. Peter and St. Paul, Eye EYE 045

S. Boulter with contributions from M. Sommers and R. Goffin © September 2009 www.suffolkcc.gov.uk/e-and-t/archaeology Lucy Robinson, County Director of Environment and Transport Endeavour House, Russel Road, Ipswich, IP1 2BX.

i

HER Information Planning Application No: N/A; Faculty No. DR12127 Date of Fieldwork: June 2009 Grid Reference: TM 1489 7380 Funding Body: Eye Parochial Church Council Curatorial Officer: Robert Carr Project Officer: Stuart Boulter Oasis Reference: suffolkc1-63682

Digital report submitted to Archaeological Data Service: http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/library/greylit

ii

Contents Page

HER information i Table of contents ii Summary v 1. Introduction 1

1.1 General background & site location 1

1.2 Geology and topography 2

1.3 Archaeological and historical background 2

2. Methodology 2

2.1 Excavation 2

2.2 Post-excavation 3

3. Results 3

3.1 Excavation 3

3.2 Monitoring of groundworks (Mark Sommers & Stuart Boulter) 16

4. The finds evidence (Richenda Goffin) 20

4.1 Introduction 20

4.2 Pottery 20

4.3 Ceramic building material 20

5. Discussion 21

6. Conclusions 26

7. Archive deposition 27

8. Contributors and acknowledgements 27 9. Bibliography 28

iii

List of Figures Page Fig. 1. Site location 1

Fig. 2. 1:50 scale pre-excavation plan 4

Fig. 3. 1:50 scale plan 5

Fig. 4. Location of monitored trench, scale 1:500 16

Fig. 5. Brickwork 0003, scale 1:50 18

Fig. 6. East face of man-hole 0004, scale 1:50 19

List of Tables Table 1 Finds quantities 20

List of Plates Cover View of the exposed brick-lined graves

Plate 1. Ledger stone 0008 6

Plate 2. Tiled floor panel 0013 7





Plate 7. Dwarf walls 0020 9

Plate 8. Overview of the brick-lined graves 9

Plate 9. Footings 0035 & 0036 10

Plate 10. Footing 0033 & wall stub 0034 10

Plate 11. Brick-lined grave 0024 11

Plate 12. Coffin in brick-lined grave 0024 11


Plate 14. Lead coffin in brick-lined grave 0025 11





Plate 19. Brick structure 0032 13




iv

List of Plates cont. Page Plate 23. Coffin in brick-lined grave 0029 14

Plate 24. Wall monument 0039 15

Plate 25. Wall monument 0040 15

Plate 26. Brickwork 0003 18

Plate 27. East face of man-hole 0004 19

Plate 28. Junction between the sacristy & chancel aisle/chapel 22

Plate 29. Sacristy west wall, stepped fabric 23

Plate 30. Blocked window openings in chancel aisle/chapel east wall 23

List of Appendices Appendix I. Brief and specification 29

Appendix II. EYE 045; Context list & descriptions 35

v

Summary

Eye, Church of St. Peter and St. Paul (TM 1489 7380; EYE 045) A programme of works at the church of

St. Peter and St. Paul, Eye, involved a significant reduction in the floor level of the north chancel

aisle/chapel and the insertion of services in a trench excavated through the churchyard to the north of the

church. Removal of the 19th/20th century organ platform and soil (representing the fill of earthcut graves)

under the wooden choir room floor, revealed six brick-lined graves, all of probable 18th or early 19th

century date. As reduction of these structures down to the proposed development formation level would

have required significant additional resources, a revised level was imposed which left the grave tops

intact. Other features recorded included the footing and wall stub for the east wall of the nave north aisle,

that would have been dismantled when the north chancel aisle/chapel was added, and the junction

between the chancel chapel footing and that of the north nave wall.

Monitoring of the service trench revealed evidence of burial in the churchyard in the form of

disarticulate human bone and at least three intact burials, along with a wall stub thought to represent an

earlier phase of the churchyard wall and another piece of brickwork associated with the stepped entrance

to the sacristy.

(Stuart Boulter for Suffolk County Council & Eye Parochial Church Council; SCCAS Rpt. No. 2009/211)

1

Site

0 125 250

metres © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council Licence No. 100023395 2009

Fig. 1 Site Location

1. Introduction 1.1 General background & site location The church of St. Peter and St. Paul in Eye is located on the eastern edge of

the town in a position that places it external to, but immediately adjacent to the

line of the outer bailey of Eye Castle (TM 1489 7380)(Fig. 1).

In 2007, Faculty Consent was granted for development of an area of the

church then occupied by the organ and choir room, equating to the last two

bays at the eastern end of the of the north aisle (Fig. 4). The Diocesan

Archaeologist (Robert Carr) visited the site in order to assess the

archaeological implications of the development and subsequently prepared a

Brief and Specification document (Appendix I) that detailed the extent of the

archaeological mitigation works required if the development was to proceed.

Subsequently, Suffolk County Council’s Archaeological Service Field Projects

Team were commissioned by the project architect (OWL Architects) to

undertake the programme of archaeological works, the field work for which

was undertaken in the June of 2009.

2

1.2 Geology and topography The site lies at approximately 30mOD and overlooks the water meadows that

flank the River Dove which passes some 150m to the south east of the

church. The underlying drift geology at this juncture comprises sand and

gravel, a localised deposit at the junction between the chalky till to the west

and alluvium associated with the River Dove to the south-east.

1.3 Archaeological and historical background The town of Eye is essentially dominated by the medieval castle, the layout of

which is reflected in the modern street pattern. The motte of the castle stands

at its eastern end, less than 100m from the west end of the church. The

church itself is large, mostly in the perpendicular style and dating mainly to the

14th and 15th centuries. No previous formal archaeological work has been

undertaken within the church or its associated churchyard, but it clearly had

the potential to provide evidence for the best part of a millennium of burials

and earlier phases of the church building.

2. Methodology

2.1 Excavation The dismantling of the old organ, by members of the parish, and the removal

of the choir room floor and fitted cupboards, by the contractors, was

undertaken prior to commencement of the programme of archaeological work.

The inscriptions on the existing floor monuments were transcribed in advance

of their removal into the main body of the church. These and the two wall

monuments were also photographed.

All excavation was carried out by hand with the spoil placed in skips for

removal off site. Disarticulate human bone was retained for subsequent

reburial on the site.

A full photographic record was made, both colour digital and monochrome

prints, throughout the project. Site plans were drawn in pencil at a scale of

1:50 on A3 plastic drafting film sheets.

3

All excavation work undertaken by the contractors external to the church

building was monitored by archaeologists. Disturbed human bone was

collected for reburial.

Contexts were allocated numbers within a ‘unique continuous number system’

under the Historic Environment Record (HER) code EYE 045 and recorded on

‘pro forma’ sheets.

Levels were taken using a Dumpy Level and were related back to the

proposed formation level of the development, effectively that of the extant

north aisle floor.

2.1 Post-excavation Context details were input onto Microsoft Access database (Appendix II).

Photographs were allocated unique number and letter codes and have been

added to Suffolk County Council’s Archaeological Service Photographic

Archive held in St. Edmund House, Ipswich.

Drawn site plans and sections were digitised and have been included in this

report as Figures 2, 3, 5 and 6.

Finds were processed, marked and identified by the SCCAS Finds Team.

3. Results 3.1 Excavation Prior to its removal, the old organ had rested on a solid floor surface which

stepped up by c.0.20m from the level of the nave north aisle. The step itself

was formed by two separate pieces of limestone (0019) (Fig. 2). The wooden

floor in the choir room had been at a similarly high level accessed through a

doorway against the north wall of the church with a stone step (0017). The

removal of the organ and choir room floor left the existing floor and, in the

case of the choir room, the underlying superstructure exposed and available

for recording. Figure 2 is a plan made at this juncture.

4

10 2

metres

Concrete f loor

Dw arf w all

Tiled f loor

Stone step

Key

Ledger Stone

0020

0021

0020 0022

0012

0011

00230009

0010

0017

0014 00150016

0023

0019

00080013 0018

Fig. 2 1:50 scale pre-excavation plan

5

10 2

metres

0029

0024

0025

0026

0035

0038

0037

0011

00270032

0030

0036

0035

0034

0028

0031

0033

Fig. 3 1:50 scale plan

6

Plate 1 Ledger stone 0008

At the western end of the development area there were four sections of floor

(0013, 0014, 0015 & 0016) which were at a similar level to that of the north

aisle. An additional area was formed by ledger stone 0008 which continued

under step 0019. Plate 1 shows ledger stone 0008 with a transcription of its

inscription alongside. The stone itself was a hard dark grey limestone.

IN MEMORY OF JOHN WYTHE ESQUIRE

WHO DIED JULY 8TH 1816 AGED 66 YEARS

ALSO OF MARGATETTA MARIA WYTHE

HIS WIFE WHO DIED MAY 18TH 1798

AGED 48 YEARS ALSO OF

HANNAH THEIR DAUGHTER WHO DIED

OCTOBER 10 1802 AGED 16 YEARS

AND ALSO OF ANNA MARIA THE INFANT DAUGHTER OF

JOHN WYTHE GENT AND ANN HIS WIFE

WHO DIED DECEMBER 3RD 1819

The four sections of floor at the same level as ledger stone 0008 included two

decorative tiled panels (0013 & 0015). Panel 0013 was approximately 1m

square (Plate 2) with a geometric pattern formed from triangular, square and

rectangular tiles of four different colours. The second panel (0015) measured

1.90m by 3.90m and was not quite rectangular in shape (Plate 3). Its

southern edge had been set square to ledger stone 0008 which, itself, was

not quite square with the room. The tile rows were laid slightly offset to their

neighbours in order to twist the panel very slightly to better fit the available

space. However, this still left a wider gap at the western end of the northern

edge of the panel than at the eastern end. The majority of the tiles were

square (6 inch) with some triangular and rectangular pieces used to form the

geometric pattern. Four different colours were used.

7

Plate 2 Tiled floor panel 0013 Plate 3 Tiled floor panel 0015

Plate 4 Tiled floor panel 0012

The third area of floor comprised plain c.0.30m square grey coloured

pamments that continued on into the north aisle to the west, while the fourth

area of floor (0016) was made of hard grey concrete (Fig. 2).

The raised organ platform comprised

a patterned tile area (0012) which

had clearly been disrupted at some

time as it exhibited an uneven

broken edge at its junction with an

area of hard cementitious patching

(0023), the latter appearing to be

associated with two ledger stones

(0009 & 0010) which had been used

to form the edge of the step down into the chancel and coincided with a gap in

the wooden screen (0011) to accommodate the front of the organ. Tile panel

0012 (Plate 4) also exhibited a geometric design formed from square and

rectangular tiles in three different colours.

The two ledger stones incorporated into the organ platform floor (0009 &

0010) are shown on Plates 5 and 6 respectively along with their transcribed

inscriptions. Both were a similar dark grey limestone to 0008. The smaller of

the two stones, 0010 was partially obscured by wooden screen 0011 and the

full inscription was only obtained after its removal. Evidence that these stones

were not in their original position included the fact that 0010 was set with its

inscription orientated east west rather than north south. Both stones were

carefully removed, although 0010 broke into two pieces along the line of a

visible crack, possibly the result of the weight of screen 0011.

8



IN MEMORY OF JOSEPH BROWNE GENTn

WHO DIED 16th SEPTbr 1759 AGED 75 YEARS

ALFO OF ELIZTH HIS WIFE WHO DIED 25th JUNE 1733

AGED 46 YEARS

AND OF JOSEPH THEIR SON WHO DIED 9 th DECbr1759

AGED 48 YEARS

IN MEMORY OF THOMAS DENNEY GENTn

WHO DIED 8th NOVbr 1768 AGED 58 YEARS

HIC IACET JOHANNES BLOME FILIVS JOHANNIS ET

ELIZABETHÆ VXORIS EIVS QVI PARVULVS OBYT VLTIMO

DIE OCTOBTIS ANNO DOM MDCLXXX1

† TALIUM EST REGNUM

CÆLORUM

Which translates as

Here lies Johannes Blome Son of Johannis and

Elizibetha his wife Who died an infant on the last

Day of October 1681

† Such is the kingdom

of heaven

Removal of the wooden floor of the choir room had revealed a series of dwarf

walls (collectively numbered 0020) which had provided a level and stable

surface on which the joists for the overlying floor were set (Fig. 2 & Plate 7).

Between these walls there was bare earth. The bricks were usually

9

Plate 7 Dwarf walls 0020

Plate 8 Overview of the brick-lined graves

unmortared and comprised a mixture of types, including flettons, and many

appeared to have been reused. Two other brick settings, 0021 and 0022

were thought to be associated with 0020.

After the details of the various floor

surfaces and dwarf walls were

recorded in plan (Fig. 2), the whole

development area was lowered.

Initially, the intention was to remove

c.0.60m of material down to the

proposed formation level.

However, when the tops of six

brick-lined graves (0024-0029)

were revealed at high level (Fig. 3 & Plate 8), the decision was made to

reduce the depth of the excavation to 0.30m below the level of the north aisle

floor in order to expose the graves and asses the problems that they would

cause.

The soil exposed between the brick-

lined graves comprised

homogenous light brown silty sand

(0038) with common inclusions of

disarticulated human bone. At no

point was undisturbed natural

subsoil encountered and 0038 was

interpreted as undifferentiated grave

fill. Discrete grave cuts were limited

to 0030, cut into footing 0036, and 0031, cut into footing 0033 (Fig. 3). The

disarticulate human bone was collected together and was later reburied in one

of the external service trenches.

Three phases of footing (0033, 0035 & 0036) were revealed during the

excavations (Fig. 3). Footing 0035 was seen at the base of the north and east

wall. Protruding from the base of the wall for up to 0.40m, its irregular edge

was almost certainly the result of it being cut by graves. The base of the wall

10

Plate 9 Footings 0035 & 0036 Plate 10 Footing 0033 & wall stub 0034

immediately above the footing exhibited a somewhat irregular face that

protruded slightly for the basal 0.40 metres. Footing 0035 comprised

alternate layers of gravel and sandy clay.

Footing 0036 was recorded along the southern edge of the excavation area

below the arcade piers and continuing to span the gap forming the eastern

arcade arch. This was different in character to 0035, comprising alternate

layers of lime mortar and sandy clay. There was a clear, well defined junction

with footing 0035 (Plate 9).

The third identified footing (0033) was orientated from north to south at the

western end of the excavation area and was clearly overlain by 0035 at its

northern end. Only the upper surface of 0033 was exposed, consisting of

hard sandy gravel. Footing 0033 was accompanied by a small stub of

surviving flint and lime mortar wall (0034) (Plate 10).

Details of the six brick-lined graves (0024-0029) are presented below. Each

was investigated by removing bricks at one end to asses at what level/height

within the grave that human remains occurred. After the decision was made

to leave them intact, they were resealed by the contractors.

Brick-lined grave 0024 was located in the north-east corner of the excavation

area (Fig. 3). The structure comprised a rectangular brick-built chamber

capped with a c.0.81m wide, c.1.99m long and c.0.17m thick slab of cream

coloured limestone (Plate 11) the surface of which was 0.15 metres below the

level of the extant north aisle floor. Six bricks immediately to the west (0037)

11

Plate 11 Brick-lined grave 0024 Plate 12 Coffin in brick-lined grave 0024

Plate 13 Brick-lined grave 0025 Plate 14 Lead coffin in brick-lined grave 0025

were simply set in the soil and were not structurally related to 0024. The

removal of a brick at the western end of the structure revealed a wooden

coffin right up to the top of the internal cavity (Plate 12).

Brick-lined grave 0025 was located immediately to the south of 0024 (Fig. 3).

The exposed brick top formed a flattened arch with the whole structure

measuring c.0.85m in width and c.2.20m in length (Plate 13). The highest

point of the structure was 0.15m below the level of the extant north aisle floor.

The bricks were hard frogless reds.

12


A brick was removed from the eastern end revealing that the internal face of

the tomb had been whitewashed. A single lead coffin lay at its base (Plate 14)

with raised, applied lettering reading.

CHARLES CUNNINGHAM DIED FEB19TH

1788 AGED 78 YEARS

One of the two wall monuments (Plate 24) overlooking the excavation area

was dedicated to the sole occupant of Tomb 0025.

Brick-lined grave 0026 was located immediately south of tomb 0025 (Fig. 3).

The brick top was arched and had been built with a shape that imitates that of

a single-break coffin with its widest point approximately one third of the way

down from the west end (Plate 15). The structure was 1.85m long and a

maximum of 0.75m wide. The bricks used in its construction were hard

frogless whites. An apron/skirt of mainly on-edge brick pieces (frogless reds)

surrounding the whole structure may have been used to help support a ledger

stone when this area of the church had a solid floor. The highest point of the

structure was only 0.04m below the level of the extant north aisle floor.

Removal of a brick from its western end revealed a wooden coffin at the top of

its internal void (Plate 16).

13


Plate 19 Brick structure 0032

Brick-lined grave 0027 was located towards the south-west corner of the

excavation area (Fig. 3). This was a double width vault measuring c.1.25m

wide and c.2.50m in length (Plate 17). A curving section of brickwork

immediately to the west (0032) appeared to be associated, possibly to

facilitate access (Plate 19). The arched roof was constructed using hard red

unfrogged bricks. The highest point of the vault was 0.18m below the extant

floor level in the north aisle. Removal of a brick at the western end revealed

wooden coffins extending to the very top of the internal void (Plate 18).

Brick-lined grave 0028 was

located immediately to the

north of 0027 (Fig. 3). The

arched brick top was

constructed from hard red

frogless bricks, some of

which were broken pieces

(Plate 20). The structure

measured c.2.00m in length

with a maximum width of

c.0.70m, approximately

halfway along its length, reducing to c.0.60m at each end, with its highest

point at 0.18m below the extant floor level in the north aisle. The removal of a

loose brick forming the top of the arch revealed the lid of a wooden coffin

within 0.40m from the top of the structure (Plate 21).

14



Brick-lined grave 0029 was located on the north side of the excavation area

immediately west of 0024 (Fig. 3). The arched brick top was constructed from

hard red frogless bricks. The structure was c.2.20m long with a maximum

width of c.0.75m at a point approximately two thirds of the way down its length

measured from the east and reducing to c.0.50 metres at each end (Plate 22).

The highest point of the structure was at only 0.07m below the level of the

extant north aisle floor. The removal of a brick at the eastern end revealed a

coffin at the very top of the internal void (Plate 23). Coffin furniture was

clearly visible, a thin pressed decorative metal plate could be seen along with

copper alloy rivets which would not only have produced a decorative pattern,

but would also have helped fix the cloth (velvet) covering to the wooden coffin.

15

Plate 24 Wall monument 0039 Plate 25 Wall monument 0040

Horizontal wooden slats on top of the coffin were probably collapsed elements

of formers used to support the brickwork during the construction of the arch.

Two wall monuments located on the internal face of the north aisle wall were

recorded as they were due to be moved as part of the programme of works.

The first (0039), located between the first and second windows from the

eastern end of the aisle (Plate 24) was subsequently identified as the

occupant of brick-lined grave 0025, while the second (0040) was almost

certainly a more recent relative, probably his son, with the same name (Plate

25), and was located between the second and third windows from the eastern

end of the aisle. A grave associated with the more recent monument was not

positively identified. However, it is possible, from the obvious high standing of

the family, that both the second Charles Cunningham and his daughter, also

commemorated on the monument, are among the occupants of the six

recorded brick-lined graves.

Inscription on wall monument 0039:

Near this Place Are deposited

The Remains of CHARLES CUNNINGHAM

GENT Who died 19th Feb.

1788 Aged 78 Years

16

100 5metres

0041

Area of Excav ation

0042

0004

0006

0005

0002

0003

Fig. 4 Location of monitored trench, scale 1:500

Inscription on wall monument 0040:

VINCIT MALUM BONO

IN MEMORY OF REAR ADMIRAL SIR CHARLES CUNNINGHAM K. G. H. WHO DEPARTED THIS LIFE FEBRY 11TH 1834 IN THE 79TH YEAR OF HIS AGE.

COMMANDER OF THE CLYDE AT THE MUTINY OF THE NORE, HIS ADDRESS IN FIRST DETACHING HIS SHIP FROM THE DISAFFECTED FLEET,

MAINLY CONTRIBUTED TO DISSOLVE THAT DANGEROUS CONFEDERACY; AFTER A LONG AND BRILLIANT PROFFESSIONAL CAREER,

MARKED BY REPEATED ACTS OF SIMILAR ENERGY GALLANTRY AND DEVOTEDNESS.

HE WAS APPOINTED IN 1803 COMMISSIONER OF THE VICTUALLING BOARD, IN 1806, TO THE SAME OFFICE AT THE NAVY BOARD, AND SUBSEQUENTLY,

RESIDENT COMMISSIONER AT DEPTFORD AND WOOLWICH, AND FINALLY AT CHATHAM.

THE DUTIES OF THESE IMPORTANT OFFICES HE DISCHARGED AT ONCE, MOST HONOURABLY TO HIMSELF,

AND ADVANTAGEOUSLY TO HIS COUNTRY. ALSO IN MEMORY OF CHARLOTTE, DAUGHTER OF THE ABOVE,

WHO DIES MAY 15TH 1833, IN THE 33RD YEAR OF HER AGE.

3.2 Monitoring of groundworks (Mark Sommers & Stuart Boulter) Monitoring of the external service trenches was undertaken both concurrently

with the internal excavation works and subsequently as a series of dedicated

site visits.

17

The trenches were excavated along the north side of the church, past the

west end and across the churchyard to connect the new works with an

existing sewer in the centre of Church Road (Fig. 4). This work was

archaeologically monitored in order to record and recover any archaeological

features, deposits or artefacts that may have been revealed. It was also

undertaken to collect any human bone that may be exposed with the aim of

reburial once the project was completed.

The work was carried out in four separate stages, each of which was allocated

a context number under which finds were retained. They were undertaken in

the following order (Fig. 4):

I) (0041) a length of trench along the north side of the church,

II) (0002) a short stretch of trench across the churchyard west of the

church and continuing into the road,

III) (0004) the site of man-hole outside the west entrance of the church,

IV) (0006) a length of trench to connect the first trench excavated with

man-hole 0004.

The trenches and the man-hole were mechanically excavated using a mini-

digger fitted with a narrow, c.0.50m wide, toothed bucket with the spoil being

placed alongside the trench or adjacent the churchyard wall on Church Street.

The trenches were initially excavated at one end to their maximum depth and

then extended along their proposed routes.

The churchyard area to the west of the church was generally flat although it

fell away slightly towards Church Street and it was noted that the level of

Church Street was significantly lower than the adjacent churchyard. On the

north side of the church, the ground fell away to both the west and east from a

high point approximately halfway along the building.

In addition to the gravel path make-up, the trenches were cut through typical

mixed ‘graveyard’ soil, generally in two layers. The upper layer comprised a

light yellow-brown sand and silt which overlay a darker, mid-grey brown sand

18

Fig. 5 Brickwork 0003, scale 1:50 Plate 26 Brickwork 0003

and silt which in turn overlay a yellow sand and gravel interpreted as the

natural subsoil. While individual grave cuts were not easily discerned,

numerous fragments of disarticulated human bone were present throughout

the first two layers, all of which was collected for reburial, although the greater

majority was recovered from the upper layer. At least three in-situ graves

were encountered during the course of the work, one in trench section 0002,

at a depth of c.1.00m, and two in the man-hole excavation (0004), both at a

depth of 0.55m (Fig. 6). It was not possible to archaeologically excavate

these, although all bone was collected and grouped for subsequent reburial

back in the excavated trenches.

Other than the human remains, only three separate archaeological

phenomenon of any note were encountered, these comprised a block of

brickwork (0003), a deposit of clay (0005) and a second area of brickwork

(0042) (Fig. 4).

Block of brickwork 0003 (Plate 26) comprised soft red brick cemented with a

pale yellow lime mortar (Fig. 5). It projected from the south side of the trench

for a distance of 0.50m and was located 0.78m east of the churchyard wall, to

which it appeared parallel. The eastern face was vertical whilst the west face

sloped back towards the east. It measured 1.10m in height and was 0.70m

wide at the base, reducing to 0.60m wide at the top. It was sitting on a

concrete foundation just over 0.70m wide, 0.20m thick and was flush with the

19

Fig. 6 East face of man-hole 0004 Plate 27 East face of man-hole 0004

northern face. This foundation was presumably poured in-situ into a trench,

the base of which cut approximately 0.18m into the natural subsoil. All

exposed faces of the brickwork were relatively rough suggesting it would have

been intended to remain buried. All faces appeared to be undamaged

indicating that it had not been previously truncated. In order to install the

drainage pipe it was necessary to cut the brickwork back until it was flush with

the edge of the trench. This was achieved using a hydraulic breaker fitted to

the end of the machine arm.

The deposit of clay 0005 was noted towards the east end of trench section

0002, across the entire width of the excavation for the man-hole (0004) and

extended along trench section 0006 for about 4.00m (Fig. 4). It was up to

1.20m thick and appeared to be filling a large gently sloping sided depression.

The two graves noted in the man-hole excavation were cut into this deposit

(Fig. 6).

Brickwork 0042 was located immediately to the east of the existing steps to

the external doorway to the sacristy (Fig. 4). Comprising frogless red bricks

set in a hard white lime mortar these were thought to represent the base for

an earlier phase of stepped entrance to the sacristy. This was left in-situ with

the trench moved over to accommodate the services on a slightly different

alignment.

20

4. The finds evidence (Richenda Goffin)

4.1 Introduction Finds were collected from three contexts given to spoil deposits from the

excavation of a series of drainage trenches (0002 & 0006) and a single find

(0007) retained from the reduced level strip within the north aisle/chapel of the

chancel, as shown in the table below.

Context Pottery CBM Spotdate No. Wt/g No. Wt/g 0002 2 14 10th-11th C 0006 3 66 1 569 L12th-14th C 0007 1 414 Medieval Total 5 80 2 983

Table 1 Finds quantities 4.2 Pottery Five fragments of pottery were recovered (0.080kg). A fragment of Thetford-

type ware (10th-11th C) and a wheelthrown greyware body sherd, which may

also be the same fabric rather than being a medieval coarseware, were found

in 0002. A sherd of Thetford-type ware, a fragment of Early medieval ware

(11th-12th century) and the rod handle of a Grimston-type jug dating to the

L12th-14th century were collected from 0006.

4.3 Ceramic building material The substantial remains of a Roman tegula was present in 0006. It is made in

a hard medium sandy fabric with few inclusions. Although slightly abraded, the

remains of a signature mark is still visible and one side of the cutaway is

intact. There is slight evidence of re-use with areas of cream mortar present

on the broken edge of the tile.

A medieval floortile 0007 was recovered from undifferentiated grave fill 0038

within the church (W111mm, H 29mm). It has a pink-orange fabric with buff

streaks and is covered with a dark green glaze. There is some glaze on the

broken edge which suggests that the tile was cracked during manufacture,

allowing glaze into its interior prior to firing. The tile is Flemish and dates to

the medieval period (Drury 1993, 166).

21

5. Discussion

In order to provide a meaningful interpretation of the archaeology recorded

during the programme of work, it is first necessary to provide at least some

general context based on the overall history and development of the church

building.

The standing church is generally recognised as dating predominantly to the

14th and 15th centuries (Pevsner and Radcliffe 1974, 207; Mortlock 1990, 85)

with various major restoration works in the late 19th century. The only earlier

work recognisable in the building today being the south doorway which dates

to the 13th century and was probably re-used from an earlier structure

(Pevsner and Radcliffe 1974, 207; Mortlock 1990, 85). However, this general

statement of dating obscures a complex series of minor phases of alteration

and addition within the overall timeframe. Where, in a project such as this, a

discrete area of the building is studied in detail, the distinction between these

smaller phases becomes crucial to the overall interpretation.

On the north side of the church, both the five bay nave arcade and two bay

chancel arcade are thought to date to the first half of the 14th century,

although evidence such as the minor stylistic differences between the nave

and chancel arches and the abrupt change in character of the external

parapet at the juncture between nave and chancel are immediately suggestive

of two discrete constructional phases. Further positive evidence for this was

recorded during the excavation in the form of the footing and vestiges of a flint

and mortar wall that would have formed the eastern end of the north aisle

prior to the addition of the chancel aisle/chapel. In addition, a continuous

footing was recorded spanning the easternmost chancel arch which would

originally have supported the solid north wall of the chancel.

Given that the essentially similar windows in both the north aisle and chancel

aisle/chapel are 15th century insertions, along with the addition of a strip of

fabric at the top of the aisle wall and the clerestory above, then the insertion of

the chancel arcade and construction of the associated chapel must belong to

22

Plate 28 Junction between the sacristy

& chancel aisle/chapel

a separate building phase during the 14th century, but post-dating the addition

of the north aisle.

The relationship between the chancel

aisle/chapel and the sacristy to the east

is also problematic. While clearly of

different builds, the evidence for which

includes the markedly different

character exhibited by the external

facing of their wall fabrics (Plate 28), the

actual physical relationship between the

two was hard to discern. The eastern

external wall face of the north chancel

aisle/chapel had been relatively recently

re-pointed with mortar obscuring the

joint itself.

The architectural character of the sacristy is not obviously diagnostic. The

wall facing comprises predominantly of unknapped flint pebbles that were well

coursed and extremely closely spaced (Plate 28). This fabric was not seen

elsewhere at the church, suggesting that it was not contemporary with or

directly related to any of the other building additions, and it was clearly post-

dated by the fabric associated with the east end of the nave that was rebuilt,

or at least remodelled, during the second half of the 19th century. The

windows are essentially perpendicular, but square-headed, while the simple

doorway was not easily datable, but has mouldings that were extremely clean

and crisp. The battlemented parapet is decorated with flushwork panels with

shields. While the character of the sacristy is not overly diagnostic, the fact

that it was completely different to all of the 14th and 15th century work

suggests that it did not fall within the sequence of phases that started with the

addition of a north aisle in the first half of the 14th century and ended with the

insertion of the windows and clerestory in the 15th century. Given that on

stylistic grounds it is unlikely to predate these phases, the evidence tends to

favour the sacristy post-dating the chancel aisle/nave.

23

Plate 29 Sacristy west wall, stepped fabric

Plate 30 Blocked window openings in chancel aisle/chapel east wall

A study of the internal

wall structure at the

junction of the chancel

aisle/chapel with the

sacristy provided only

further ambiguity. The

groundplan of the

sacristy and chancel

aisle/chapel shows

that the dividing wall

between the two is

c.0.20m thinner on its eastern face than where it continues as the chancel

aisle/chapel wall to the north (Fig. 2). While this could be considered as

evidence to suggest that the sacristy wall was present when the chancel

aisle/chapel was constructed, it was also noted that high up on the dividing

wall, the fabric stepped out by c.0.20m (Plate. 29). If continued down as a

vertical face, this wall would be of comparable thickness to that of the chancel

aisle/chapel to the north. It does then seem possible that the lower portion of

this wall has been reduced in thickness.

At the top of the internal face of the chancel aisle/chapel wall the vestiges of

two window openings were present (Plate 30). Externally, above the level of

the sacristy roof, these were seen to be blocked with bricks of a similar type to

those forming the

parapet of the chancel

aisle/chapel, the latter

probably a

replacement of an

earlier parapet. There

was no visible

evidence in the wall

plaster (cracks etc.) for

a larger window,

comparable to that at

the eastern end of the

24

south chancel aisle/chapel, although this does not preclude its presence. The

windows could represent a replacement of a larger window occluded by the

construction of the later sacristy to the east or, in the alternative scenario,

were contemporary with the construction of the chancel aisle/chapel,

necessitated at this juncture due to the presence of the existing sacristy to the

east.

However, maybe the most compelling evidence for the relationship between

the chancel aisle/chapel and the sacristy was recorded in the excavation itself.

The footing exposed at the base of the chancel aisle/chapel internal wall face

appeared to run continuously from its junction with the north aisle wall, around

the north-east corner and on to its southern end where it abutted the earlier

footing for the chancel north wall (Fig. 3). This suggests that the north east

walls of the chancel aisle/chapel are all one build with the sacristy added on at

a later date.

Overall, the evidence may still be considered to be inconclusive, but on

balance seems to suggest that the sacristy was a later addition built against

already existing structures: the chancel to the south and the chancel

aisle/chapel to west.

Prior to the addition of the chancel aisle/chapel in the 14th century, the area

that it now occupies would have been part of the churchyard and subject to

the repeated insertion of burials. After the construction of the aisle/chapel, the

enclosed area would have become even more sought after as a favoured

location for burial. During the excavation, a quantity of disarticulate human

bone was recovered from the general lowering of the ground level. This

material would have been derived from the disturbance of earlier burials by

the excavation of later graves. At no point during the excavation down to a

depth of c.0.30m was naturally occurring subsoil encountered and with the

exception of two discrete earth-cut graves, visible because they cut into the

markedly different fill of wall footings, all of the material removed was

considered to be undifferentiated grave fill. A fragment of green glazed

medieval tile recovered from the fill may provide a hint of the character for an

25

earlier floor somewhere in the church. Tiles such as this were often alternated

with similar sized, yellow glazed tiles to form a chequerboard pattern.

The latest burials were clearly the six brick-lined graves. The brick-lined shaft

was the most popular form of intramural burial from the later 17th century and

all of the 18th century (Litten 2002, 221). During the early 19th century

increasing concern regarding the public health led to the almost total

cessation of intramural burial as a result of the burial acts of the early 1850’s.

Litten states that brick-lined shafts were ‘a superior version of the family

grave, patronized by the professional classes’ (Litten 2002, 211) and when

our six graves are considered in this way, along with their desirable location

within the chancel chapel, it is likely that their occupants were of some local

consequence.

Only one of the six brick-lined graves revealed during the excavation provided

any firm dating evidence, in the form of a lead coffin with applied lettering

naming the occupant as Charles Cunningham who died in 1788, and was also

commemorated on an adjacent wall monument. However, while all of the

brick-lined graves exhibited variations in character, all are consistent with the

accepted currency of these structures (late 17th- early 19th century).

Interestingly, the wall monument to Sir Charles Cunningham, a respected

career navy man who died in 1834, also commemorates his daughter who

died only one year earlier in 1833. At this time, intramural burial was still a

relatively common practice, particularly if coffins were being added to the

already established ‘family’ shafts. It is then possible that Charlotte

Cunningham and her father are both occupants of the brick-built graves.

However, if we presume that the earlier Charles Cunningham was a relative of

the later, possibly his father, it is intriguing that only the one coffin, that of

Charles himself, was present in that shaft. There was clearly room for another

three coffins, and given that in order to secure a shaft at this location a

considerable sum of money would have been required. It is strange that more

use was not made of the structure, unless the increasing concerns about

public health, which ultimately led to the burial acts of the 1850’s, were

already influencing burial practices in the church at Eye with the later

26

Cunningham’s electing to be buried elsewhere, with only a wall monument

placed inside the church itself.

It is likely that the brick-lined shafts would originally have been marked in the

floor surface by inscribed ledger stones, since removed, probably when the

organ platform and its associated organ was inserted in the north chancel

chapel and the wooden floors and partition walls and cupboards of the choir

room constructed in the late 19th or early 20th century. The organ was rebuilt

in 1979 (Jones and Salmon 1980) and it is seems likely that at this time it was

decided to replace the worn floor in front of the organ, where it steps down

into the chancel, with two available ledger stones. These were clearly not in

their original position over discrete graves and had been set in hard

cementitious mortar in an area of floor where the 19th/20th century tiling had

been disrupted. While there is no direct evidence for this, it is possible that

the three ledger stones recorded during the excavation were amongst those

that would originally have been associated with the six brick-lined graves.

Archaeological deposits recorded during the monitoring work associated with

the excavation of the external service trenches were limited to disarticulated

human bone, c.three intact burials and two pieces of structural brickwork.

One piece of brickwork was probably associated with an earlier phase of the

churchyard wall and the other to the entrance into the sacristy.

6. Conclusion

The programme of archaeological works undertaken at the Church of St.

Peter and St. Paul, Eye, was designed both to accommodate the recording of

archaeology that would be damaged by the proposed development and also

to function as an evaluation, where the results could be used to inform

decisions regarding the minimisation of the archaeological impact of the

construction work.

The presence of the six brick-lined graves clearly had implications to the

formation level of the new floor. While it would have been possible to lower

the graves and cap them at a lower level, the formal recording of the high

27

level coffins in the shafts would have added a significant cost to the project.

In addition, in sections 2.3 and 3.4 of the Brief and Specification there was

emphasis on the preservation in situ of burials where possible. As a result,

after consultation with the all of the interested parties, a revised design was

agreed, which raised the level of the finished floor with a ramped entrance up

from the nave north aisle.

Although nothing entirely unexpected was revealed during the excavations,

some of the observations provided evidence which add to the known facts

regarding the sequential construction of the various elements of the standing

buildings. While still open to debate, the favoured interpretation regarding the

constructional phases on the north side of the church involves the addition of

the nave north aisle followed by the chancel aisle/chapel, both in the 14th

century, followed by the addition of nave and chancel clerestory and insertion

of perpendicular windows in the aisles, both in the 15th century with the

sacristy added later, possibly in the 16th century.

Due to the relatively small scale of the project in archaeological terms and the

limited findings and conclusions, no further work is recommended on the data

recorded, other than the retention of the site archive in the county HER and

submission of this report to form part of the OASIS online record.

7. Archive deposition

Paper and photographic archive: SCCAS Ipswich

Finds and environmental archive: SCCAS Bury St Edmunds

8. List of contributors and acknowledgements

All project staff were members of Suffolk County Council Archaeological

Service Field Team.

The project was directed and managed by Stuart Boulter.

28

Fieldwork was carried out by a number of archaeological staff (excavation by

Stuart Boulter & Roy Damant; monitoring by Stuart Boulter, Mark Sommers &

Duncan Stirk).

The post-excavation finds work was managed by Richenda Goffin.

Finds processing was carried out by Jonathan Van Jenniens and the

specialist report prepared by Richenda Goffin. The site plans and overall

report was prepared by Stuart Boulter with contributions by Mark Sommers.

The report was checked by Robert Carr.

9. Bibliography

Drury, P., 1993, ‘Ceramic Building Materials’, in Margeson, S., Norwich Households. East Anglian Archaeology 58, Norwich Survey.

Jones, D. and Salmon, J., 1980, Eye Church, Jarrold Colour Publications, Norwich

Litten, J., 2002, The English Way of Death, the Common funeral since 1450, Robert Hale, London

Mortlock, D. P., 1990, The Popular Guide to Suffolk Churches, No. 2 Central Suffolk, Acorn Editions

Pevsner, N., 2nd edition Revised by Radcliffe, E., 1974, The Buildings of England, Suffolk, Penguin

29

S U F F O L K C O U N T Y C O U N C I L A R C H A E O L O G I C A L S E R V I C E - C O N S E R V A T I O N T E A M

Appendix I Brief and Specification for an Archaeological Excavation

NORTH AISLE, SS PETER & PAUL, EYE

Although this document is fundamental to the work of the specialist archaeological contractor the developer should be aware that certain of its requirements are likely to impinge upon the working practices of a general building contractor and may have financial implications, for example see paragraphs 2.1, 2.3, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 & 4.9. The commissioning body may also have Health & Safety and other responsibilities, see e.g. paragraph 1.7.

1. Background 1.1 Faculty Consent has been granted for development in the area currently occupied by the organ

and the choir room in the north end of the north aisle. The proposal involves reducing levels by c 600mm below present floor, creating a load bearing slab and provision of services connecting to new pipe-work out side the church. The Chancellor has applied a condition to the consent requiring a programme of archaeological work.

1.2 The development area has been assessed (Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service,

letter to the DAC 4/10/2007), this letter adequately describes the potential of the site. 1.3 In order to comply with the condition the parish has requested a brief and specification for the

archaeological recording of archaeological deposits which will be affected by development. 1.4 There is a presumption that all archaeological work specified for the whole area will be

undertaken by the same body, whether the fieldwork takes place in phases or not. There is similarly a presumption that further analysis and post-excavation work to final report stage will be carried through by the excavating body. Any variation from this principle would require a justification which would show benefit to the archaeological process.

1.5 Detailed standards, information and advice to supplement this brief are to be found in

“Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England” Occasional Papers 14, East Anglian Archaeology, 2003.

1.6 All arrangements for field excavation of the site, the timing of the work, and access to the site,

are to be negotiated with the commissioning body. 1.7 The responsibility for identifying any restraints on field-work rests with the commissioning

body and its archaeological contractor. The existence and content of the archaeological brief does not over-ride such restraints or imply that the target area is freely available.

2. Brief for Archaeological Project 2.1 In the areas defined for floor lowering, archaeological excavation, as specified in Section 3, is

to be carried out prior to development. The precise location of the area is relative to the architectural and engineering design.

2.2 The excavation objective will be to provide a record of all archaeological deposits which

would otherwise be damaged or removed by development, including services permitted by the consent. The academic objective will centre upon the high potential for this site to produce evidence for earlier structural remains from the church site and burial deposits.

2.3 There is to be a presumption that burials and medieval structural remains will be preserved in

situ wherever possible. Excavation methodology must acknowledge this by not removing such evidence without consent from the DAC archaeologist.

30

2.4 In addition to the formal archaeological excavation there will be a programme of systematic

archaeological monitoring of selected development works which involve alteration to the medieval church fabric and service trenches in the churchyard. This work is specified in Section 4.

2.6 This project will be carried through in a manner broadly consistent with English Heritage's

Management of Archaeological Projects, 1991 (MAP2). Excavation is to be followed by the preparation of a full archive, and an assessment of potential for analysis and publication. Analysis and final report preparation will follow assessment and will be the subject of a further brief and updated project design.

2.7 In accordance with the standards and guidance produced by the Institute of Field

Archaeologists this brief should not be considered sufficient to enable the total execution of the project. A Project Design or Written Scheme of Investigation (PD/WSI) based upon this brief and the accompanying outline specification of minimum requirements, is an essential requirement. This must be submitted by the developers, or their agent, to the Conservation Team of the Archaeological Service of Suffolk County Council (Shire Hall, Bury St Edmunds IP33 2AR; telephone/fax: 01284 352443) for approval. The work must not commence until this office has approved both the archaeological contractor as suitable to undertake the work, and the PD/WSI as satisfactory. The PD/WSI will provide the basis for measurable standards and will be used to establish whether the requirements of the faculty condition will be adequately met. An important aspect of the PD/WSI will be an assessment of the project in relation to the Regional Research Framework (East Anglian Archaeology Occasional Papers 3, 1997, 'Research and Archaeology: A Framework for the Eastern Counties, 1. resource assessment'. Occasional Pap. 8, 2000, 'Research and Archaeology: A Framework for the Eastern Counties, 2. research agenda and strategy').

2.8 The developer or his archaeologist will give the Conservation Team of Suffolk County

Council's Archaeological Service (SCCAS) five working days notice of the commencement of ground works on the site, in order that the work of the archaeological contractor may be monitored. The method and form of development will also be monitored to ensure that it conforms to previously agreed locations and techniques upon which this brief is based.

3. Specification for the Archaeological Excavation

The excavation methodology will form part of the Project Design and is to be agreed in detail before the project commences; defined minimum criteria in this outline are to be met or exceeded. Paragraphs 3.1 to 3.4 outline the necessary sequence.

3.1 The existing floor and ledger slabs set into it to be recorded to archaeological standards

when the organ and the raised wooden floor are removed. 3.2 The floor surface and its sub-base to be removed (it may be acceptable for this to done

in part or whole by a general contractor under archaeological supervision, a decision on this must await the appointment of both the main and archaeological contractors). The ledger slabs, if they seal vaults, should not be removed until the archaeological context of the vaults is understood.

3.3 Subsequent excavation to the full depth required by the engineering design to be

carried out by archaeologist. 3.4 Vaults and burials to be opened by an archaeologist and mitigation to be agreed with

the DAC archaeologist and the architect/engineer (a strong archaeological preference for preservation of burials in situ rather than exhumation will apply).

3.5 Fully excavate and record all features that are, or could be interpreted as, structural. 3.6 All features must be sufficiently examined to establish, where possible, their date and

function. Where features, other than those identified as earth cut grave fills, extend below the formation level of the new floor limited further excavation below the formation level to establish structural form, context and identification must be considered necessary but should be agreed with the DAC archaeologist and the architect/engineer.

31

3.7 Collect and prepare environmental samples (by sieving or flotation as appropriate). The

Project Design must provide details of the sampling strategies for retrieving artefacts, biological remains (for palaeoenvironmental and palaeoeconomic investigations), and samples of sediments and/or soils (for micromorphological and other pedological/sedimentological analyses. Advice on the appropriateness of the proposed strategies will be sought from J Heathcote, English Heritage Regional Adviser for Archaeological Science (East of England). A guide to sampling archaeological deposits (Murphy and Wiltshire 1994) is available from the Conservation Team of SCCAS.

3.8 A finds recovery policy is to be agreed before the project commences. It should be addressed

by the Project Design. Use of a metal detector will form an essential part of finds recovery. Sieving of occupation levels will be expected.

3.9 All finds will be collected and processed. No discard policy will be considered until the

whole body of finds has been evaluated. 3.10 All ceramic, bone and stone artefacts to be cleaned and processed concurrently with the

excavation to allow immediate evaluation and input into decision making. 3.11 Metal artefacts must be stored and managed on site in accordance with UK Institute of

Conservators Guidelines and evaluated for significant dating and cultural implications before despatch to a conservation laboratory within 4 weeks of excavation.

3.12 Human remains are to be treated at all stages with care and respect, and are to be dealt with in

accordance with the law. “Guidance for best practice for treatment of human remains excavated from Christian burial grounds in England” English Heritage and the Church of England 2005 provides advice and defines a level of practice which should be followed. Remains must be recorded in situ and if required subsequently lifted, packed and marked to standards compatible with those described in the Institute of Field Archaeologists' Technical Paper 13: Excavation and post-excavation treatment of Cremated and Inhumed Human Remains, by McKinley & Roberts. Proposals for the final disposition of remains following study and analysis will be required in the Project Design.

3.13 Plans of the archaeological features on the site should normally be drawn at 1:20 or 1:50,

depending on the complexity of the data to be recorded. Sections should be drawn at 1:10 or 1:20 again depending on the complexity to be recorded. Any variations from this must be agreed with the Conservation Team.

3.14 A photographic record of the work is to be made, consisting of both monochrome photographs

on film base and colour transparencies, which may be captured digitally. 3.15 Excavation record keeping is to be consistent with the requirements Suffolk County Council's

Sites and Monuments Record and compatible with its archive. Methods must be agreed with the Conservation Team of SCCAS.

4. Brief for Archaeological Monitoring

This is to include groundwork for services outside the church, penetrations of the medieval fabric for the services and fixings into the medieval wall interior will all require some archaeological supervision and record keeping.

4.1 To provide a record of archaeological deposits which are not to be archaeologically excavated

prior to development but which will be damaged or removed by any development [including services] permitted by the current consent.

4.2 To carry out the monitoring work the developer will appoint an archaeologist (the observing

archaeologist) who must be approved by the Conservation Team of SCCAS. 4.3 The developer or his archaeologist will give the Conservation Team of SCCAS 48-hours

notice of the commencement of site works.

32

4.4 A contingency allowance must be made to cover archaeological costs incurred in monitoring the development works. The size of the contingency should be estimated by the approved archaeological observer, on the basis of the work specified below and the contractor's timetable and working practices.

4.5 The developer shall afford access at all reasonable times to both Conservation Team of

SCCAS and an ‘observing archaeologist’ to allow archaeological observation of building and engineering operations which disturb the ground.

4.6 Opportunity must be given to the ‘observing archaeologist’ to hand excavate any discrete

archaeological features, which appear during earth moving operations, retrieve finds and make measured records as necessary.

4.7 All archaeological features must be planned at a minimum scale of 1:50 on a plan showing the

proposed layout of the development. 4.8 The data recording methods and conventions used must be consistent with, and approved by,

the County Sites and Monument Record. 4.9 The precise monitoring works required cannot be specified until detailed development plans

are formulated. Working practices are to be defined in the Project Design. For the purposes of providing an indication of the scale of work and quotations for this work it is suggested that for this entire application area a minimum of attendances on site will be:

3 attendances of one day each

Working practices to achieve these aims are to be defined in the Project Design 4.10 The results of this monitoring must be recorded in a manner consistent with the main

excavated areas and incorporated into the archive record. 5. General Management 5.1 A timetable for all stages of the project must be agreed before the first stage of work

commences. 5.2 Monitoring of the archaeological work will be undertaken by the Conservation Team of

SCCAS. Where projects require more than a total of two man-days on site monitoring and two man-days post-excavation monitoring, a contribution may be requested to assist with the expenses of carrying out the monitoring (currently expected to be in the region of £150 per day, but to be agreed at the time that the project takes place), it would be helpful if provision could be made for this in all costings. [A decision on the monitoring required will be made by the Conservation Team on submission of the accepted Project Design.]

5.3 The composition of the project staff must be detailed and agreed (this is to include any

subcontractors). For the site director and other staff likely to have a major responsibility for the post-excavation processing of this site there must be a statement of their responsibilities for post-excavation work on other archaeological sites.

5.4 A general Health and Safety Policy must be provided, with detailed risk assessment and

management strategy for this particular site. 5.5 The Project Design must include proposed security measures to protect the site and both

excavated and unexcavated finds from vandalism and theft. 5.6 Developers should be aware of the possibility of human burials being found. If this eventuality

occurs they must comply with the provisions of Section 25 of the Burial Act 1857; and the .archaeologist should be informed by ‘Guidance for best practice for treatment of human remains excavated from Christian burial grounds in England’ (English Heritage & the Church of England 2005).

33

5.7 The Institute of Field Archaeologists’ Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Desk-based Assessments and for Field Evaluations should be used for additional guidance in the execution of the project and in drawing up the report.

6. Archive Requirements 6.1 Within four weeks of the end of field-work a timetable for post-excavation work must be

produced. Following this a written statement of progress on post -excavation work whether archive, assessment, analysis or final report writing will be required at three monthly intervals.

6.2 An archive of all records and finds is to be prepared consistent with the principle of English

Heritage's Management of Archaeological Projects, 1991 (MAP2), particularly Appendix 3. However, the detail of the archive is to be fuller than that implied in MAP2 Appendix 3.2.1. The archive is to be sufficiently detailed to allow comprehension and further interpretation of the site should the project not proceed to detailed analysis and final report preparation. It must be adequate to perform the function of a final archive for lodgement in the County SMR or museum.

6.3 A clear statement of the form, intended content, and standards of the archive is to be submitted

for approval as an essential requirement of the Project Design (see 2.5). 6.4 The site archive quoted at MAP2 Appendix 3, must satisfy the standard set by the “Guideline

for the preparation of site archives and assessments of all finds other than fired clay vessels” of the Roman Finds Group and the Finds Research Group AD700-1700 (1993).

6.5 Pottery should be recorded and archived to a standard comparable with 6.3 above, i.e. The

Study of Later Prehistoric Pottery: General Policies and Guidelines for Analysis and Publication, Prehistoric Ceramics Research Group Occasional Paper 1 (1991, rev 1997), the Guidelines for the archiving of Roman Pottery, Study Group for Roman Pottery (ed. M G Darling 1994) and the Minimum Standards for the Processing, Recording, Analysis and Publication of Post-Roman Ceramics, Medieval Pottery Research Group Occasional Paper 2 (2001).

6.6 All coins must be identified and listed as a minimum archive requirement. 6.7 The data recording methods and conventions used must be consistent with, and approved by,

the County Sites and Monuments Record. All record drawings of excavated evidence are to be presented in drawn up form, with overall site plans. All records must be on an archivally stable and suitable base.

6.8 A complete copy of the site record archive must be deposited with the County Sites and

Monuments Record within 12 months of the completion of fieldwork. It will then become publicly accessible.

6.9 Finds must be appropriately conserved and stored in accordance with UK Institute

Conservators Guidelines. 6.10 Every effort must be made to get the agreement of the landowner/developer to the deposition

of the finds with the County SMR or a museum in Suffolk which satisfies Museum and Galleries Commission requirements, as an indissoluble part of the full site archive. If this is not achievable for all or parts of the finds archive then provision must be made for additional recording (e.g. photography, illustration, analysis) as appropriate. If the County SMR is the repository for finds there will be a charge made for storage, and it is presumed that this will also be true for storage of the archive in a museum.

6.11 Where positive conclusions are drawn from a project, a summary report in the established

format, suitable for inclusion in the annual ‘Archaeology in Suffolk’ section of the Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute for Archaeology journal, must be prepared and included in the project report, or submitted to the Conservation Team by the end of the calendar year in which the evaluation work takes place, whichever is the sooner.

34

7. Report Requirements 7.1 A report on the fieldwork and archive must be provided consistent with the principle of

MAP2, particularly Appendix 4. The report must be integrated with the archive. 7.2 The objective account of the archaeological evidence must be clearly distinguished from its

archaeological interpretation. 7.3 An important element of the report will be a description of the methodology. 7.4 Reports on specific areas of specialist study must include sufficient detail to permit

assessment of potential for analysis, including tabulation of data by context, and must include non-technical summaries.

7.5 The report will give an opinion as to the potential and necessity for further analysis of the

excavation data beyond the archive stage, and the suggested requirement for publication; it will refer to the Regional Research Framework (see above, 2.5). Further analysis will not be embarked upon until the primary fieldwork results are assessed and the need for further work is established. Analysis and publication can be neither developed in detail or costed in detail until this brief and specification is satisfied, however, the developer should be aware that there may be a responsibility to provide a publication of the results of the programme of work.

7.6 The assessment report must be presented within six months of the completion of fieldwork

unless other arrangements are negotiated with the project sponsor and the Conservation Team of SCCAS

7.7 At the start of work (immediately before fieldwork commences) an OASIS online record

http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/project/oasis/ must be initiated and key fields completed on Details, Location and Creators forms.

7.8 All parts of the OASIS online form must be completed for submission to the SMR. This

should include an uploaded .pdf version of the entire report (a paper copy should also be included with the archive).

Specification by:RDCarr Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Conservation Team Environment and Transport Department Shire Hall Bury St Edmunds Suffolk IP33 2AR Tel: 01284 352441 Date: 18 April 2007 Reference: Eye church Naisle Spec Ex.doc This brief and specification remains valid for 12 months from the above date. If work is not carried out in full within that time this document will lapse; the authority should be notified and a revised brief and specification may be issued.

If the work defined by this brief forms a part of a programme of archaeological work required by a Faculty Condition, the results must be considered by the Conservation Team of the Archaeological Service of Suffolk County Council, who have the responsibility for advising the appropriate Authority.

SITE OPNO CONTEXT IDENTIFIER DESCRIPTION CUTS OVER CUTBY UNDER MODIDATE

Appendix II EYE 045: Context List and Descriptions

EYE 045 0001 0001 U/S Overall No. allocated to unstratified finds from all works

-

EYE 045 0002 0002 Trench Number allocated to service trench between junction with churchyard wall and man-hole 0004

-

EYE 045 0003 0002 Brickwork Brickwork stub seen immediately east of churchyard wall in trench 0002

18th-19th century

EYE 045 0004 0004 Trench Overall number allocated to excavated man-hole in churchyard

-

EYE 045 0005 0004 Layer Layer of stiff light yellow clay seen in a depression-like feature spanning the eastern end of 0002 all of 0004 and on into 0006, up to 1m thick. Has two in-situ burials cutting it within 0004.

-

EYE 045 0006 0006 Trench Overall number allocated for stretch of trench running between man-hole 0004 and western end of 0042

-

EYE 045 0007 0038 Finds Floor tile fragment found while reducing the level of the undifferentiated grave fill inside chancel north aisle/chapel

med

EYE 045 0008 0008 Ledger Stone Ledger stone (John Wythe & family), at N. aisle floor level, not in original position

0019 L.18th century

EYE 045 0009 0009 Ledger Stone Ledger stone (Joseph Browne etc.). Used to form facing/step where old organ fronted into chancel

18th century

EYE 045 0010 0009 Ledger Stone Small ledger stone (Elizabeta…? MDCLXXXI). Adjacent to 0009, part of step where organ fronted into chancel

0011 16th century

26 August 2009 Page 1 of 4



EYE 045 0011 0011 Wooden screen Wooden screen separating old organ chamber and choir room from chancel. Continuous in one arcade arch, the other has opening for organ front. Also screen between nave aisle and chancel aisle/chapel

20th century

EYE 045 0012 0012 Tiled floor Decorative tiled floor panel (6 inch tiles), disrupted for insertion of ledger stone step 0009 & 0010 and associated hard cement floor 0023. Runs up to stone step 0019.

19th/20th century

EYE 045 0013 0013 Tiled floor Discrete decorative tiled floor panel (6 inch tiles) abutted by 0014, 0015, 0008 & 0019

19th/20th century

EYE 045 0014 0014 Tiled floor Tiled floor, continuation of N. aisle (12 inch pamments), abutted by 0013, 0008 & 0015

19th/20th century

EYE 045 0015 0015 Tiled floor Discrete decorative tiled floor panel (6 inch tiles), slightly off square abutted by 0014, 0013, 0008, 0016 & 0020

19th/20th century

EYE 045 0016 0016 Floor layer Small 2.5 x 2.5 m area of floor comprising hard cementitious mortar at base of step 0017 marking entrance to choir room.

19th/20th century

EYE 045 0017 0017 Stone step Limestone step at the entrance to the choir room

19th/20th century

EYE 045 0018 0018 Stone step N-S orientated limestone step defining the edge of the organ platform

19th/20th century

EYE 045 0019 0019 Stone step E-W limestone step defining the edge of the organ platform

19th/20th century

EYE 045 0020 0020 Dwarf walls Overall number allocated to a series of earth-set brick walls on which the joists for the wooden floor in the choir room were lain

19th/20th century




EYE 045 0021 0021 Bricks Small area of earth-set bricks either related to 0020 or underlying tomb 0024

19th/20th century

EYE 045 0022 0022 Bricks Small area of earth-set bricks either related to 0020 or underlying tombs 0024 & 0025

19th/20th century

EYE 045 0023 0023 Floor layer Irregular area of hard cementitious patching on organ platform, contemporary with insertion of 0009 & 0010

0012 20th century

EYE 045 0024 0024 Brick-lined grave Brick-lined grave in north-east corner of excavated area, had thick limestone lid, coffin wood seen right up to top of internal void

18th/19th century

EYE 045 0025 0025 Brick-lined grave Vaulted brick-lined grave S. of 0024. Contains one lead coffin, that of Charles Cunningham died 19th Feb 1788 aged 78 years old

18th/19th century

EYE 045 0026 0026 Brick-lined grave Vaulted brick-lined grave S. of 0025, shaped to imitate a single break coffin, has brick skirt, possibly to help support a ledger stone.

18th/19th century

EYE 045 0027 0027 Brick-lined grave Vaulted double width brick-lined grave in south-west corner of excavation area, associated with 0032 to W.

18th/19th century

EYE 045 0028 0028 Brick-lined grave Vaulted brick-lined grave N. of 0027 18th/19th century

EYE 045 0029 0029 Brick-lined grave Vaulted brick-lined grave immediately west of 0024

18th/19th century

EYE 045 0030 0030 Grave cut Grave cutting footing 0036, only S. side discernable

0036 med/p-med

EYE 045 0031 0031 Grave cut Grave cutting footing 0033, only W. end discernable

0033 med/p-med




EYE 045 0032 0027 Brickwork Brick-lined chamber at W. end of 0027, possibly to facilitate entrance to 0027 and/or support footing of adjacent pier

18th/19th century

EYE 045 0033 0033 Footing Hard gravel surface representing the top of a N-S orientated footing for E. end of original N. aisle

0031 0035 14th century

EYE 045 0034 0034 Wall stub Vestiges of original north aisle E. wall 0033 14th century

EYE 045 0035 0035 Footing Layered footing of N. and E. wall of extended aisle

0033 14th century

EYE 045 0036 0036 Footing Layered footing of original N. wall of chancel

0030 13th century?

EYE 045 0037 0024 Bricks Earth-set bricks, one course deep seen at west end of 0024, possibly associated. Frogless reds

18th/19th century

EYE 045 0038 0001 Layer Undifferentiated grave fill seen throughout excavation area, effectively unstratified. Comprises relatively loose homogenous light brown silty sand.

-

EYE 045 0039 0039 Wall monument Wall monument to Charles Cunningham, died 1788, aged 78

L.18th century

EYE 045 0040 0040 Wall monument Wall monument to Charles Cunningham, died 1854, aged 78 + his daughter Charlotte who died aged 32 in 1833

M.19th century

EYE 045 0041 0001 Trench Monitored trench north of north aisle. No finds retained, human bone reburied. No obvious intact inhumations, but difficult to tell.

-

EYE 045 0042 0042 Brickwork Redbrick wall stub N. of N. aisle, Function unknown, possibly base of earlier steps.

18th/19th century


eye church excavation report final - amazon web...

Documents