KAS Newsletter, Issue 109, Summer 2018

St Mary’s Church Lees Court Estate Dartford Heath Ranscombe A rare survival in High Halden Preparing for a major excavation An ovate palaeolithic handaxe Examining re-fitting at this important site THE OLDEST AND LARGEST SOCIETY DEVOTED TO THE HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ANCIENT COUNTY OF KENT № 109 Summer 2018 06 09 27 LOST AVENUE OF COBHAM HALL 10 02 | Kent Archaeological Society President Dr Gerald Cramp Vice Presidents Mr L.M. Clinch Mr R.F. Legear Hon. General Secretary Clive Drew secretary@kentarchaeology.org.uk Hon. Treasurer Barrie Beeching treasurer@kentarchaeology.org.uk Hon. Membership Secretary Mrs Shiela Broomfield membership@kentarchaeology.org.uk Hon. Editor Terry G. Lawson honeditor@kentarchaeology.org.uk Hon. Curator Dr Elizabeth Blanning Elizabeth.Blanning@kentarchaeology.org.uk Hon. Librarian Ruiha Smalley librarian@kentarchaeology.org.uk Press Dr Simon Elliott Simon.Elliott@kentarchaeology.org.uk Safeguarding David Brooks david.brooks@kentarchaeology.org.uk Newsletter Richard Taylor 87 Darnley Road, Gravesend, Kent DA11 0SQ Richard.Taylor@kentarchaeology.org.uk A warm welcome to the Summer 2018 Newsletter. You will notice that this issue of the newsletter has a fresh new look, and that is down to our new designers, Paul and Katie Murdoch. It was felt the Newsletter would benefit from this new approach, reflecting the many exciting changes the Society itself is undertaking. That said, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Redboat Design for the excellent work and their role in developing the Newsletter. We welcome a new feature, The Finds Corner, in which the PAS Finds Liaison Officer, Walter Jo Ahmet, discusses recent finds from the county. You will also notice that the Letters to the Editor section has had an impact on the design of this new issue, and I’m pleased the membership is not afraid to say what they want to see from their Newsletter. WELCOME FROM THE EDITOR The Lees Court Estate Project is gathering pace with exciting fieldwork elements available to all from September 2018; do go to the website page http://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/leescourt- project-register-interest/ and register your interest for the various planned events. I continue to encourage members to write articles and help inform the broader historical and archaeological community of what is taking place in our heritage-rich and diverse county. It remains a privilege to edit the Newsletter, and I hope you enjoy reading this issue. Best wishes Richard Taylor The editor wishes to draw attention to the fact that neither he nor the KAS Council are answerable for opinions which contributors may express in their signed articles; each author is alone responsible for the contents and substance of their work. Front cover image courtesy of Dean Barkley Summer 2018 | 03 CONTENTS FEATURES St Mary’s Church, High Halden – A Rare Survival Lees Court Estate Update A Small Ovate Palaeolithic Handaxe West Park, Cobham Geophysical Survey M.A.A.G. East Farleigh Roman Site Update Oh, Doctor Beeching! A Critical Time for the NPPF? Ranscombe Re-fitting SHAL Excavation at Stutfall Fort Geophysics Equipment Update 06 09 10 16 18 21 24 27 30 32 № 109 Summer 2018 6 mi. 10 km 18 10 16 27 09 06 30 President’s Column Books The Finds Corner Notices Membership Matters Letters to the Editor An Interview With... Pauline Roland REGULAR 04 04 05 15 20 20 26 04 | Kent Archaeological Society In 2014 Peter Stutchbury and Ian Coulson started the process to incorporate the Society. This is now coming to fruition with the Society becoming an operational Charitable Incorporated Organisation (CIO) on the first of January 2019. On Saturday 19 May 2018, two annual general meetings were convened in Canterbury. The first held elections for officers and Council members to serve until 31 December 2018 and the second to elect officers and Council members to serve with the newly-established CIO from 1 January 2019. After the close of the first meeting, our former president, Paul Oldham, gave an entertaining talk on the history of the Society since its formation in 1857. Paul joined the Society in 1960 and became a Council member in 1971. He served on many committees and was President of this Society from 1998 until 2005. He assisted with the formation of the Maidstone Area Archaeological Group in 1969 and like many others involved in Archaeology during the 1960s, he assisted Brian Philp with the formation of the Kent Archaeological Research Groups’ Council which later became the Council for Kentish Archaeology (CKA). The Society held a successful study day in Rochester Cathedral on Saturday 14 April. Lectures were given by Graham Keevil, the Cathedral Archaeologist, describing the findings in the Crypt, and Jacob Scott talked about the graffiti found in the nave and the crypt. The Lees Court Estate project is now in full swing. So far there are three elements to note: firstly, a mound at Holly Grove is thought to be the remains of a Bronze Age barrow; secondly, metal detectorists uncovered four Bronze Age hoards in the adjacent field in Sept 2017, and lastly, an evaluation excavation carried out at Stringmans Field in May this year confirmed the presence of a substantial ring ditch of Mid-Neolithic date. Further excavations of the surrounding area are planned for September to fit in with the LCE agricultural diary. Members are invited to help with the project by contacting the designated LCE website address at: http://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/leescourt- project-register-interest/ This summer, excavations will continue in Cobham Village, at the Roman Villa in Otford and the medieval site in Bredhurst. Unfortunately, work at the Roman Villa site at East Farleigh has ceased, but an article detailing excavations since 2016 can be found in this issue. Finally, I should like to thank all those members who are doing sterling work on behalf of the Society. Clive Drew and Barrie Beeching have both worked hard behind the scenes, Chris Blair-Myers is progressing the development of the new website while Chris Broomfield is maintaining the existing one. Ruiha Smalley (assisted by Peter Titley and others) continue to update the library catalogue, and Elizabeth Blanning is doing the same with the Society’s collection of artefacts. Finally, I must thank Shiela Broomfield for all her membership work including ensuring that the Society complies with GDPR. Keep up the good work! Gerald Cramp, President PRESIDENT’S COLUMN Searching for Ebony This book, the first to be devoted to the history of a village and parish, tells the story of the early inhabitants… the desecration by man and destruction by nature of their first church… the one they built to replace it… and why, hundreds of years later, it had to be moved, stone-by-stone, down the hill to Reading Street. To obtain a copy, post a cheque for £13.50 to: Kent Archaeological Society c/o 2 Salts Avenue Loose Maidstone Kent ME15 0AY A ‘Short’ Story This book is written by the great, great niece of Horace Eustace and Oswald Short and gives a notion of the ancestry, lives and works of these pioneering Balloon and Aeronautical Engineers and Manufacturer. To obtain a copy: Order by email (£12.50 + p&p) to: info@shortbrothersaviationpioneers.co.uk Pick up a copy for £12.50 at: Eastchurch Aviation Museum, Stanford Hill, ME12 4BF, or Muswell Manor, Shellbeach Road, Leysdown, Isle of Sheppey, M12 4RJ. BOOKS Countdown to the KAS CIO Summer 2018 | 05 Iron Age archaeology in Kent can often appear, on the surface, to be quite enigmatic despite the hard to miss Hillforts at Bigbury and Oldbury. While Iron Age farmsteads, enclosures and associated features are frequently spotted on excavations around the county, the metal artefacts of the period are less frequent. There is, however, one exception to this: late Iron Age coinage. Our first object (fig 1) is one such coin, a secondary series cast bronze unit or Flatline Potin. These coins come into circulation c.125 BC, evolving from the primary phase of potins (c.175–c. 140 BC). These coins were produced by the Cantii tribe (who give their name to our county) based on designs from the Gallo-Greek city of Massalia, modern-day Marseille in southern France. They display the helmeted head of the Greek god Apollo on the obverse and the butting Bull of Massalia under the cities initials on the reverse. Fig 1, recorded on the PAS database as KENTFFCC96, the design on these flatlines examples has become very abstract. This coin fits David Holman’s (2016) type B2/2-1a type and dates c.115/110 – 105/100 BC. While potins may not be the most well-known of objects, our next find (fig 2) fits with a group of objects so iconic they even inspired the PAS logo, the Keystone Garnet Kentish Disc brooches. These fantastic objects combine the early Anglo- Saxon fashion for inlaid garnets and early Germanic animal art or zoomorphic decoration of style I. These brooches emerge during a period when all the surrounding influences of the newly emerging Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, continental Frankish powers and the fading memory of Rome combine to a produce a uniquely Kentish style. This style would ultimately go onto THE FINDS CORNER influence those who produced the fantastic objects that make up the Staffordshire Hoard and Sutton Hoo Mound 1 assemblages. This brooch is gilt silver and was found in the vicinity of other high status early Anglo-Saxon objects. They likely represent a heavily disturbed high-status woman’s grave and were reported as a treasure case at KENT-0AF0AE. What makes this brooch so interesting is that while mostly fitting Richard Avent’s class 2.4 (1975, 27) it has an outer group of three radial garnets usually only seen on later classes. This brooch was likely produced c.AD 550–575, with the garnets probably coming from Sri Lanka via the Byzantine Empire. Our last object (fig 3) doesn’t belong to a group objects produced first time in Kent or an object symbolising the growing prosperity of the county but is deeply linked to Kent and in many ways the most personal of the three. It is a Medieval bronze flat circular seal matrix, a type we’d usually date generally to c.AD 1200–1350. Used to impress into wax to certify a document often the names on them are lost to time. This one, however, is different. This matrix (KENT- 3C5592) bears the name of ‘+S’RADULFI•DE•SANDWICO•’, although written backwards so it would appear the correct way around when used. It also bears a coat of arms which can often help identify the owner. In this case, however, the arms proved (initially) to be a little tricky, and it was thanks to some excellent research by the finder that the owner was identified as a Mr Ralph of Sandwich, a former Lord Mayor of London, which meant we were able to narrow the date range for the coat of arms to AD 1260–1308. Not only this but it was discovered that the matrix was found only a short distance from Ralph’s estate and the town of Sandwich itself. The matrix now resides in the Guildhall Museum in Sandwich. In the first of a new series, the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) Kent Finds Liaison Officer (Jo Ahmet) discusses objects found in Kent. The Finds Liaison Officer can be contacted at: FLO@kent.gov.uk If you wish to keep up with some of the recent discoveries in Kent, keep an eye on the Archaeology in Kent Facebook page or find us at Kent_Finds on Twitter. Acknowledgements All images courtesy of the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) and Kent County Council (KCC) Top Fig 1 Middle Fig 2 Bottom Fig 3 06 | Kent Archaeological Society St Mary’s Church, High Halden is a Grade 1 listed church courtesy of its unique narthex or tower lobby. The felling date of the main timbers for the tower lobby has a dendro-chronology date between 1470–1490, meaning the tower was likely constructed around the beginning of the 16th century. In around 1900, Rev. Livett surveyed the church, and his findings were published in Archaeologia Cantiana (26, 295–315). The quoins (or corner-stones) he found in the west wall of the church prove that this was the original south-west corner of the nave. The Early-English south wall and lancet window in the chancel date from the construction of the south aisle and lengthening of the chancel in the 13th century. The original church is much earlier, and Livett was able to date it to the early 12th century, a time when Norman architectural style was used in church construction. However, there is no sign of this Norman architectural style in St Mary’s; the survival of its many original features over 900 years prove it to be the work of a skilled Master-mason. ST MARY’S CHURCH HIGH HALDEN A RARE SURVIVAL By Mary Adams Summer 2018 | 07 Opposite top Fig 1: Rev. Livett’s plan drawing of High Halden Church, Kent (1903). Top left Fig 2: Quoins recorded by Rev. Livett. Top right Fig 3: SW corner of the church and the small 15th-century porch. Bottom Fig 4: The North chapel – no striking division between porticus and extension except for table-stone H.M. and Joan Taylor, writing in Anglo-Saxon Architecture (Vol. 1 p. 2) say: ‘it is reasonable to believe that some surviving buildings in the styles – of the later Anglo-Saxon periods were erected by Anglo- Saxon workmen in the manner to which they were accustomed but after the Norman Conquest’. Today, the south aisle has been extended to form the South – or Lady – Chapel which opens into the chancel; the narthex was built onto the west wall, but the size and shape of the nave and chancel remain as they were after the 13th-century extension. Undoubtedly this, with the increased weight of the roofs, contributed to the collapse of the original chancel arch which was replaced in the 14th century by the great arch which now dominates the east wall of the nave. New, lower-pitched roofs were built at the same time. To connect with the new aisle, the nave arches were probably cut out of the original south wall by stonemasons using techniques which avoided disturbing the surrounding stonework. The resulting arcade was replaced by a fine 15thcentury one which still supports the upper part of the rubble wall. The west wall is exceptionally high and narrow and its stonework reminiscent of Saxon churches near Winchester. The wall rises over a large entrance arch which was unlikely to have been built until it was protected from the elements by the narthex. Reused timbers used in the construction of the narthex suggest that there was probably a much smaller porch attached to the west wall before the tower construction. The north wall remains, constructed of rubble set in mortar with patches of white plaster on the outer side. It stands 20 feet high above ground level and is some 2 feet 9 inches thick, a typically Saxon measurement (Anglo- Saxon Architecture Vol.1 p. 12). The undisturbed stonework shows that there never was a doorway, but a 14th-century window probably replaces an earlier version. At the east end of the wall there was a porticus enlarged in the 15th century to form the North Chapel. 08 | Kent Archaeological Society Top row Figs 5 & 6: Plinths at the bottom NW corner of the north chapel and the junction of the two table-stones where the porticus wall met the 14th century one & table-stone on top of the plinth showing where porticus ended and 14th-century chapel began. Middle Fig 7: This is the hole with wire and glass. The other (no picture) just a piece of stone in the hole. There seem to be signs of stone chiselling around the rim. References Rev Livett G. M. F.S.A., 1904. The Architectural History of High Halden Church, Kent. Archaeologia Cantiana 26, 295–315. Taylor, H. M. & Taylor, J., 2011. Anglo-Saxon Architecture Vols 1 & 3. Cambridge University Press. Today a 15th-century arch leads into this chapel, but traces of bolster (vertical) stone-dressing suggest that it was preceded by a 13thcentury one replacing the porticus doorway. The chapel has a plinth running along its west wall, and the change in the table-stone on top of it shows where the porticus ended and the extension began. Over the centuries every window and arch has been altered, and only the lancet window in the chancel has survived untouched. However, there are two small round windows or vent holes, made by cutting circular holes in square blocks of sandstone, which are set high in the west wall. These alone merit further investigation. The ground plan of the original church is virtually unchanged since the 13th century. It reveals a long, narrow nave with a western entrance and the replacement chancel arch leading to what was, formerly, a small squarish chancel. The uninterrupted north wall has a porticus at the east end, but the conversion of the south wall to an arcade means that it is impossible to know the original features of this wall. The Taylors, writing about the style of small Saxon churches, say: ‘the majority of chancels are roughly square in plan whereas the naves tend to be longer in proportion to their width than usual after the Conquest.’ Talking about specific plans, they mention: ‘the small, early Kentish type of church with side chapels or porticus opening from the eastern part of the nave’. (Anglo- Saxon Architecture Vol. 1 p. 13). They also define this plan as the only one ‘that does not appear in Norman practice’. (Anglo-Saxon Architecture Vol. 111 Ch.15 p. 763) This specifically Kentish plan appears to match the existing ground plan of High Halden church except for the symmetrical north and south walls. This symmetry was probably true of St Mary’s but cannot be proven since the south wall has gone. Nevertheless, the survival of so much original fabric means that it is impossible to deny the overall impression that the church was designed and built by Anglo-Saxon masons. It is a fantastic survival in this region of the Weald and surely demands both recognition and protection. Summer 2018 | 09 Upcoming fieldwork In September 2018 the Society will be conducting a major excavation, under the supervision of Keith Parfitt ably assisted by Richard Taylor. Following on from the discovery and rescue of three bronze age hoards in Woods Court Field, Lees Court Estate, a significant excavation will take place in the areas in which the hoards where found. The aim is to gain better knowledge as to why and how these hoards came to be in this particular location? There is a possibility that there might be more hoards in this area. We also want to try and understand the relationship between the hoards and the burial site that is about 500 meters to the west of Woods Court Field. All Society members are most welcome to come along and take part. The site will be open to you from Wednesday 5th September 2018; we will be on site seven days a week from 9 o’clock onwards. We look forward to your participation in our Society’s exciting and important project. News & future work in 2019 An evaluation excavation was conducted by the Society at Stringmans Field in May 2018 to look at a possible ring ditch that appears on both aerial images and geophysical survey data. The excavation revealed a probable prehistoric monument structure approximately 25 metres in diameter surrounded by a large, deep ditch. Evaluation slots cut into the ditch fill revealed stratified pottery and lithic material, the earliest of which dates from the Mid Neolithic. The Society plans to return to this intriguing structure next year armed with additional geophysical survey data to help determine its function in the wider landscape. More details regarding participation will appear in future issues of the Newsletter. LEES COURT ESTATE UPDATE Sky’s the Limit with the Society’s Quadcopter Drone The Society can reach for the skies with its newly acquired professional video and photography drone – the Phantom 4 Pro version 2 from the world’s leading drone manufacturer, DJI. It was purchased in May 2018, and it has already been put to use on the recent Ring Ditch excavation on Lees Court Estate. For the Society’s needs this drone is perfect because: Top left Fig 1: Phantom 4 Pro photography drone. Above Fig 2: Drone image of evaluation excavation at Stringmans Field. • It has a 1-inch sensor which is much larger than most fixed-lens drones, allowing it to take higher quality images with more detail and sharpness. • The Society needs to take videos that will not be obsolete as technology improves. Currently, most households (72%) use HD television and the next generation is 4K television. This drone can take 4K video at 60 frames per second. In other words, it is future-proofed. • The Society’s digs are often in large open fields where wind causes problems for drones. This drone is larger than any other fixed-lens drone means it is also the most stable. • It has a flight time of 30 minutes, a range is 4.3 miles and it can return to base automatically using GPS at a push of a button. By Anthony Mak 10 | Kent Archaeological Society The Palaeolithic finds from the Dartford Heath deposits include a series of small ovate frequently twisted handaxes that includes some of the smallest handaxes found in Britain. Recently a small pointed ovate handaxe from these deposits was lent by the finder to facilitate further research. It was found in 1991 at a depth of 0.6m at the bottom of the hole that was being dug for a fence post in North Road, Dartford, Kent just above the start of the slope from Dartford Heath to the modern Thames floodplain (TQ 5201 7408; OD 31m). The handaxe measures 107.8 mm in length, 85.7 mm in maximum breadth, is 24.7 mm thick and weighs 230.5 gm. It is unrolled and is very finely worked with a circumferential cutting edge with working of the butt and tip ends and a slightly twisted profile and has a blue-white patina on one face and a blue-grey patina and 10% thin worn cortex on the other, both faces being overlain with an orange staining. The British Geological Survey maps the geological deposits at the find site for this handaxe, as part of the Boyn Hill /Orsett Heath formation. The Dartford Heath deposits consist of a thick sequence of interglacial predominantly fluviatile loam, sand and gravel units and have been exposed at Bowman’s Lodge Pit which is about 50 metres south of the find site for this handaxe, at Wansunt Pit which adjoins Bowman’s Lodge to the southwest and at Pearson’s Pit which is further to the south-east (fig 2). A SMALL OVATE PALAEOLITHIC HANDAXE Below top Fig 1: The small pointed ovate handaxe found in North Road, Dartford, Kent in 1991. Both faces and a profile view. Below bottom Fig 2: North West Dartford Heath showing North Road, the Bowman’s Lodge find site (stippled) and Wantsunt Pit. Based on Peter Tester’s sketch map in Archaeologia Cantiana 63. FROM THE DARTFORD HEATH DEPOSITS By Frank Beresford Summer 2018 | 11 The sequence of the Dartford Heath deposits at Wansunt Pit (see figs 3, 4 & 5) is shown in Table 1. The dating of the Dartford Heath deposits in which this handaxe was found and their correlation with other deposits in the Lower and Middle Thames region has been the focus of an interesting debate since the late nineteenth century. Some researchers propose two separate formations abutting each other within the Dartford Heath deposits, the higher of them, the Wansunt Loam correlating with the post-Anglian Boyn Hill/ Orsett Heath formation and the lower, the Dartford Heath Gravels, correlating with the upstream late-Anglian Black Park Terrace on account of their high altitude (Hinton and Kennard 1905,84; Zeuner 1959,154; Gibbard 1994,19; White et al. 1995,117). Others propose that the thick deposits at Dartford Heath represent a single formation, fully equivalent to the Boyn Hill/ Orsett Heath Formation that is prevalent as an east-west series of terrace patches in this part of northern Kent. Bridgland suggests that the Dartford Heath deposits represent an unusually high feather edge deposit of this formation that was laid down by the ancient Thames in the post- Anglian interglacial period between c. 450,000 and 350,000 BP. Layer Description Name Thickness 5 Unstratified Loamy Gravel ?colluvium? ? 4 Stratified Silts and Clays The Wansunt Loam 0–3m 3 Dark Clay 2 Loamy Gravel, planar bedded The Dartford Heath Gravels 4m 1 Sandy Gravel, cross-bedded Up to 11m Above Fig 3: The Wansunt Loams in Wansunt Pit in 1913 being removed from above the Dartford Heath Gravels (used with permission). Left Fig 4: Wansunt Loam Section 1, as re-opened in 2015 (photo by Peter Allen). For comparison, the section drawing from the 1995 QRA guide showing the approximate positions of the 2015 steps (used with permission). Table 1: The stratification of the Dartford Heath deposits at Wansunt Pit (After Bridgland 1994, 187). 12 | Kent Archaeological Society This would suggest that the majority of the sequence dates from the interglacial OIS 11, although the localised presence of late Anglian deposits cannot be ruled out (Leach 1913, Wenban- Smith and Bridgland 2001, 252). In either proposal, it is evident that the artefacts from the Dartford Heath Deposits represent some of the earliest known palaeolithic material from Kent dating to an early part of the period between 450,000 and 350,000 BP. It is possible that some palaeolithic artefacts found in the higher reaches of the south bank tributaries of the Thames in this area such as the Ravensbourne, the Cray, the Darent and the Medway which are all the remnants of longer pre-Anglian rivers could be older but no artefact bearing deposits have been securely dated in these upper valleys which are now frequently dry or almost dry but which previously contained much larger Pleistocene water courses (Beresford 2018, 38). The implication is that the Dartford Heath deposits are a direct upstream continuation of the sediments at Barnfield Pit Swanscombe and other sites such as Dierden’s Pit and Rickson’s Pit in the Swanscombe area as shown in fig. 6. Dartford Heath is about 5 miles upstream from Swanscombe. (Chandler & Leach 1912,104; Smith & Dewey 1914, 199; Bridgland 1994,191; Bridgland et al. 2014, 151). In 2001, a section at Swan Valley Community School, Swanscombe, Kent was identified as equivalent to the Swanscombe Upper Loam. It extended upwards to 39 m OD, a height which would link it to the latter part of OIS 11. The Wansunt Loam at Dartford Heath has a similar vertical range and has comparable sediments. Correlation of the Wansunt Loam with the latter part of OIS 11 would place the main body of the Dartford Heath Gravel either in the Anglian (OIS 12) or earlier in OIS 11. It could thus be seen both as the earliest fluvial deposit to have been recognised in the Lower Thames and potentially equivalent to the Black Park Gravel of the Middle Thames, and yet part of the Boyn Hill/Orsett Heath Formation However, the teeth of an interglacial elephant (Palaeoloxodon antiquus) were reported from the base of the Dartford Heath Gravel in 1913. Above Fig 5: Some closer views of Wansunt Section 1 as reopened in 2015. Step One (top); Step two (middle); Base (bottom). Photos by Peter Allen. Below Fig 6: Idealised terrace staircase sequences of the Lower Thames showing summarised Palaeolithic archaeology. The Wansunt Loam and the Dartford Heath Gravel are mapped top left (© David Bridgland 2018). Summer 2018 | 13 Below left Fig 7: Chandler and Leach’s 1913 report photo of some of their collection of small pointed ovate handaxes from Wansunt Pit with three of the illustrated artefacts now in the British Museum. (used with permission) Below top right Fig 8: A similar small pointed ovate handaxe found in Bowman’s Lodge Pit. Both faces and a profile view. Below bottom right Fig 9: A small pointed ovate handaxe with twisted profile and tranchet removal at the tip found in the loam at Bowman’s Lodge Pit. Both faces and a profile view. The location and depth at which the North Road handaxe was found would suggest an original relationship with the Wansunt Loam. R. H. Chandler and A. L. Leach (1911, 107) were the first to describe Palaeolithic artefacts from Wansunt Pit which were found mainly in the Wansunt Loam with a few from the upper part of the Dartford Gravel. The known assemblage from Wansunt comprises 43 handaxes, largely in mint condition, together with 53 flakes and a core. Most of the hand axes are small pointed ovate or cordate forms with a mean length of only 90 mm. All are intensively worked, 75% having a circumferential cutting edge with equal working of the butt and tip ends. Twisted profiles are common, with 8 fully twisted pieces. This is one of the assemblages that led White (1998) to conclude that British assemblages with high proportions of twisted (ovate) hand axes all belong to the terminal Hoxnian (MIS 11) or to the transition into the subsequent (MIS 10) cold stage (cf. Bridgland & White, 2014). Chandler and Leach noted these handaxes in their 1911 report with a photo. This is shown in fig 7 with some of the illustrated examples which are now in the British Museum. Nearby, at Bowmans Lodge Pit, Peter Tester found Palaeolithic Artefacts derived from the surface of the gravel, beneath an overlying brick earth that he interpreted as a continuation of the Wansunt Loam (Tester 1951, 1975). The bifacial component of the assemblage included 18 complete and finished pointed ovate or cordate handaxes with a mean length of 86 mm. All except one are twisted in profile and with a circumferential cutting edge with equal working of the butt and tip ends similar to the North Road example. An example, now in the British Museum, is shown in fig 8. The large collection of Palaeolithic material from Peter Tester’s collection that was recently transferred to the Shorne Wood Archaeology Group includes about 100 pieces from Bowman’s Lodge (Beresford, 2017). There are 15 pieces, including implements, which were found in uncertain contexts while the rest are flakes from the base of the loam that are similar to much of the assemblage now in the British Museum. They include seven further pointed ovate or cordate handaxes, four with a twisted profile with a mean length of 84 mm, and one of these, marked loam, is shown in fig 9. 14 | Kent Archaeological Society References Beresford F.R., 2017, Palaeolithic Material from Kent collected by Peter Tester, Kent Archaeological Society Newsletter 107, 4–7. Beresford F.R., 2018. A re-examination of the late nineteenth-century Palaeolithic finds in the Upper Ravensbourne Area, Bromley, Kent. Archaeologia Cantiana 139, 17–45. Bridgland, D.R. 1994. Quaternary of the Thames. Chapman & Hall, London. Bridgland, D.R., 2014. Wansunt Pit, Dartford Heath (TQ 598743). In Bridgland D.R. et al 2014, 152–157. Bridgland D.R., Allen P., and White T. S. (ed’s) 2014. The Quaternary of the Lower Thames and Eastern Essex: Field Guide:. Quaternary Research Association, Durham Chandler, R.A. & Leach, A.L. 1912. On the Dartford Heath Gravel and on a Palaeolithic implement factory. Proceedings of the Geologists Association 23, 102–111 Gibbard, P.L. 1994. Pleistocene History of the Lower Thames Valley. Cambridge: University Press. Similar small pointed ovate handaxes also formed part of the palaeolithic assemblage found at Pearson’s Pit in the south-east of Dartford Heath (Newton 1930, 42). There are 27 in the British Museum, 20 with a twisted or slightly twisted profile and with a mean length of 92mm. One is shown in fig. 10. The small ovate pointed handaxe with a circumferential cutting edge and a twisted profile is a distinctive element of all the Dartford Heath palaeolithic assemblages. It has been proposed that the knapping technique that produces these characteristics is based on working each quadrant of the axe in turn through a series of inversions and rotations (White 1998, 99). The North Road hand axe is a particularly fine addition to this range of examples. The 1995 fieldwork at Wansunt Pit demonstrated the survival of undisturbed Pleistocene deposits around the edge of the eastern extension of Wansunt Pit that extended under housing to the north (White et al. 1995, 124; Wenban- Smith et al. 2003, 6). Only further field work would establish whether this handaxe is also indicative of the potential in this northern area. Acknowledgements I would like to thank the owner of the handaxe for lending it for this study – it has now been returned. I would also like to thank David Bridgland and Peter Allen for their help with this paper. David Bridgland provided fig. 3 and prepared a new version of fig. 6 for this paper and Peter Allen provided the photos for figs 4 and 5. Figs 1 and 2 courtesy of Medway Archives. Figs 3 and 7 are by permission of the Geologist’s Association. Fig. 4 (diagram) is by permission of the Quaternary Research Association. Figs 7, 8 & 10 are by courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. Hinton, M.A.C. & Kennard, A.S. 1905. The relative ages of the stone implements of the Lower Thames Valley. Proceedings of the Geologists Association 19, 76–100. Leach, A.L. 1913. On buried channels in the Dartford Heath Gravel. Proceedings of the Geologists Association 24, 337–44 Newton, W. M. 1930. A Remarkable Gravel Pit. Man 30, 41–44 Smith, R.A. & Dewey, H. 1914. The high terrace of the Thames: report on excavations made on behalf of the British Museum and H.M. Geological Survey in 1913. Archaeologia 65: 187–212. Tester P.J., 1950; Palaeolithic Flint Implements from the Bowman’s Lodge gravel pit, Dartford Heath. Archaeologia Cantiana 63, 122–134 Tester P.J., 1975; Further Consideration of the Bowman’s Lodge Industry. Archaeologia Cantiana 91, 29–39 Wenban-Smith F.F, White M.J., Allen P, Bridgland D.R., and Bates M.R., 2003. Refitting Palaeolithic Artefacts from Wansunt Pit, Lithics 24, 3–12. White, M., Bridgland, D.R., Ashton, N.M., McNabb, J. and Berger M.A. 1995. Wansunt Pit, Dartford Heath (TQ 513737). In D.R. Bridgland, P. Allen and B.A. Haggart (ed’s) The Quaternary of the Lower Reaches of the Thames: Field Guide: 117–128. Quaternary Research Association, Durham. White, M.J. (1998). Twisted ovate bifaces in the British Lower Palaeolithic: some observations and implications. In (Ashton, N., Healey, F. & Pettit, P., eds). Stone Age Archaeology: Essays in Honour of John Wymer, Oxbow Monograph 102, Lithic Studies Occasional Paper 6. Oxbow Press, Oxford. 98–104. Wenban-Smith F.F, Bridgland D.R, 2001 Palaeolithic Archaeology at the Swan Valley Community School, Swanscombe, Kent. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 67, 2001, 219–259. Zeuner, F.E. 1959. The Pleistocene Period: its climate, chronology and faunal successions. London, Hutchinson & Co. Left Fig 10: A small pointed ovate handaxe from Pearson’s Pit. Both faces and a profile view. Summer 2018 | 15 The Kent Archaeological Society Place-Names Committee Saturday, 17 November 2018, from 9.30 for 10.00–4.30 The Michael Berry Lecture Theatre, Old Sessions House, Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury CT1 1PL The Kent Place-Names Committee in conjunction with the Centre for Kent History and Heritage announces details of its biennial day conference for 2018. The confirmed speaker list is: Dr Paul Cullen (English Place-Name Society), “Tavern names of Kent”; Dr Barrie Cook (The British Museum), “Names, trades and places on the tokens of 17th Century Kent”; Dr Sheila Sweetinburgh (Canterbury Christ Church University), “Pigs, pannage and place-names in medieval Kent”; Dr Eleanor Rye (University of Nottingham), “Place-names and travel in early medieval Kent”; Dr Paul Cullen, “Some tricky Kent surnames”. Tickets £15 available from Canterbury Christ Church University at: https://www.canterbury. ac.uk/arts-and-humanities/ events/events-list.aspx Or by phoning 01227 782994 or emailing: artsandculture@canterbury.ac.uk If in doubt, contact Anita Thompson (Hon. Sec., Kent Place-Names Committee) on 01580 891222. Every Object Tells A Story (if you know how to read it) – Using artefacts to explore life in Kent from the Bronze Age to AD1100 Saturday, 24 November 2018 Rutherford College, University of Kent, Canterbury This autumn’s KAS Fieldwork Committee conference is themed around Finds. It aims to explore the meaning of artefacts and the stories they tell in a way that is interesting and accessible to a wide audience, with talks focussing principally on material from Kent. Speakers have been asked to discuss the potential of artefacts for understanding society, rather than imparting detailed information on typologies, etc. The KAS holds a large collection of artefacts, including significant assemblages from the Anglo-Saxon cemeteries at Bifrons, Lyminge and Sarre, while the Lees Court Estate, under current investigation by the KAS, has produced several Bronze Age hoards. The Stowting ‘hoard’ (a partial Anglo-Saxon grave assemblage) has also recently been acquired by the Society. The conference will thus give the opportunity to discover more about objects in the Society’s longstanding collection as well as tying in with current fieldwork. Confirmed speakers include Keith Parfitt (Bronze Age hoards, including Lees Court); David Holman (Iron Age and Roman coin assemblages); Rose Broadley (Roman and Anglo-Saxon glass); Andrew Richardson (Anglo-Saxon grave assemblages); Dana Goodburn- Brown (a conservator’s eye view). South East Industrial Archaeology Conference To be held in April 2019 In 2019 the Kent Archaeology Society will be hosting the SERIAC Conference. Each year a different county in the south east is responsible for the organisation of the conference and next year’s will be organised by the KAS. The Society’s Industrial Archaeology Committee is in the process of putting together the programme for the conference which will be in April. We would like to reach out to a wider group from the KAS. membership, hence this appeal for more support. If you have an interest in any aspect of Industrial Archaeology or would like to assist in the planning and running of the conference or would be prepared to make a presentation please get in touch with Mike Clinch. We are looking at all aspects of Industrial Archaeology from pre-history to yesterday. For further details, please contact Mike Clinch: Mike.clinch@kentarchaeology.org.uk Or by phoning 02083048359 Orpington & District Archaeological Society (ODAS) Saturday 15th and Sunday 16th September 2018, 2–4.30pm (last entry) Visitors to the Open Weekend can follow a self-guided trail around the moated manor site, see ODAS’ excavations, and explore the foundations of the Tudor kitchens and Great Hall to see how they would have been used when the house was owned by the Walsingham family. It’s also possible to see World War II defences and a restored shepherd’s hut. Admission is free and there are refreshments, a bookstall and an exhibition about the history of Scadbury. Access is from the public footpath around the estate. The entrance to the site is where the footpath passes the moated site. The nearest access from the road is along the footpath at 14 St Paul’s Wood Hill; turn left along the circular footpath, five mins walk. From Old Perry Street car park, the entrance is around 30 mins walk along the footpath. There is limited parking at the site for elderly/disabled visitors only, via the access drive from Perry Street. For more information about ODAS and Scadbury see www.odas.org.uk NOTICES 16 | Kent Archaeological Society The survey of West Park involved marking out some 200 grids, 30-metre square each, in preparation for the survey (Pythagoras was a great help!). The survey results revealed the avenue running diagonally from Halfpence Lane towards the brick kiln ponds (that have been dug since the avenue went out of use), on a direct line to Cobham Hall thus confirming the 1718 estate map and further details shown on the 1719 ‘Brogley’ map. This survey was made possible by the determination of Cobham Landscape Detectives in all weathers. Their continuing efforts are hugely appreciated. The Cobham Landscape Detectives are looking forward to making more discoveries across Cobham village this summer. We will be hunting for Cobham’s lost medieval manors. Throughout the second half of July we will be on site conducting surveys and digging test pits. To get involved do contact Andrew at andrew.mayfield@kent.gov. uk or 07920 548006 and keep an eye on www.facebook.com/ archaeologyinkent and www. shornewoodsarchaeology.co.uk Throughout March and April 2018, the Shorne Woods Archaeological Group conducted a geophysical survey of 135,000m² of West Park, Cobham. The survey used both magnetometry and resistivity techniques. West Park was formerly part of the Cobham Hall estate but is now owned by Gravesham Borough Council. The council kindly gave the project permission to survey the Park. Currently used as pastureland, West Park is located to the west of Cobham Hall. The Hall itself is an outstandingly beautiful red brick mansion dating from 1584, demonstrating a combination of Elizabethan, Jacobean, Carolean and 18th Century styles. Before the work, research was undertaken at Medway Archives to interrogate various estate maps which might indicate the location of former features within the survey area. A key target which emerged from this research was locating the ‘lost’ avenue, leading from Cobham Hall to Shepherds Gate at the north-west corner of West Park. The 1718 ‘Russell’ map shows five avenues radiating out from Cobham Hall. They are not shown clearly on the 1641 map by Thomas Norton, so we can surmise that the main avenues were installed sometime between these two dates. One led to Brewers Gate, north of the Hall; one north-west to Shepherds Gate (the entrance of which was on Halfpence Lane); one to the bowls green, due west of the Hall; one south-west to the junction of Lodge Lane and Halfpence Lane and one due south to Lodge Lane. Shepherds Gate Avenue was approximately 600 metres in length and was the only avenue that crossed what is now West Park. The southwestern ‘Lime’ avenue is the only survivor, now planted with Lime trees and still owned by the Hall. The avenues are still shown on the 1758 ‘Sloane’ map, except that the Shepherds Gate avenue terminates at the boundary of the paddock in West Park, rather than continuing to Halfpence Lane as shown on the 1718 map. WEST PARK, COBHAM GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY Cobham Hall’s lost avenue rediscovered By Trevor Bent Summer 2018 | 17 Top left Fig 1: 1718 Russell Map (courtesy of Medway Archives) Middle left Fig 2: The southwestern ‘Lime’ avenue today, looking northeast (courtesy of Medway Archives) Middle right Fig 3: 1758 Sloane map Bottom Figs 4 & 5: The magnetometer survey results (courtesy of KCC) Main Aerial view of lush green West Park look northeast. West Park is bounded by the surviving avenue to the right and Ashenbank Woods to the left. Cobham Hall can be seen, surrounded by trees toward the centre. Photo courtesy of Dean Barkley 18 | Kent Archaeological Society M.A.A.G. EAST FARLEIGH ROMAN SITE UPDATE The site has been challenging in many ways, not least because much of the archaeology is deep; the clay soil tends to bake hard in the sun, and the trees take up what moisture is left. Interpreting the archaeology has also been difficult, with many phases evident, from the first century AD through to the end of the fourth. Recent interest in the site follows an antiquarian reference from 1838 referring to a ‘Roman Villa’, accompanied by a partial, rudimentary plan. To date, we have been unable to locate the building found in 1838. We have, however, found six other previously unknown buildings, none of which appear to be a ‘Villa’. That is not to say that there may not be a villa nearby or associated with what we have found so far, but what we do know is that we have yet to find the full extent of the site. For those not familiar, the site sits on a relatively flat natural promontory on the southern side of the Medway, overlooking the river about eighty-five meters away, and this proximity to the river is a factor in its original siting. During the 2016 digging season, two exploratory trenches were opened in the northeastern corner of the site adjacent to the trackway running down to the river (see fig 1). The trench uncovered a narrow, yet well-made wall footing, running roughly north/south. This leads us on to discover a small building (building 6), approximately 5m x 5m, sitting astride another more substantial wall, oriented south-west/ north-east. Though we have no confirmed date for construction, this new building probably underwent several phases of use indicated by signs of alterations and repairs in different mortar types (figs 2 & 3). The north side of the building has not survived well but we can speculate that the ground surface on the southern side had built up with hillwash, so when the structure was demolished, a portion of the southern side survived intact. The central wall appears to have been built as part of the building from the outset. There are two chambers on either side of this central wall each with large openings. There was no evidence of being able to get from one chamber to the other through the central dividing wall, although there is a narrow channel through the wall that appears to have been for drainage. In the eastern chamber, there are what seem to be stone seats built into the alcove. The floor in both chambers is metalled, comprising small stones rammed into the earth. The eastern chamber contains evidence of repair and resurfacing, while the western chamber is heavily disturbed. There is also remains of an external metalled surface leading to the two entrances. However, the make-up of each was different; more broken tile used in the western track than its eastern counterpart. There is also a distinct gulley marking the edge of the track to the west. The central wall was removed at some point, making the internal space into one chamber. It is not clear whether the wall external to the building was removed at the same time, leaving the building free-standing, but the small ‘seats’ remained and can be seen to survive at a different level to both the outer walls and the removed central wall. We know that the central wall was removed separately to the rest of the building because there is a ‘niche’, a small rectangular inset in the internal side of the southern wall made with a different reddish-orange mortar. There is also a small narrow wall abutting the northwestern corner of the building, which must have been constructed when the building was standing as it would have been unnecessary had the other larger central wall still been in situ. During our final excavation days of 2017, we were able to trace the central wall 5.5m to the north of the building and 7.5m to the south. No additional returns to this wall were evident, though the other nearby trenches where the wall was absent suggest that we are not far away from confirming the shape of the western extent of this complex. It is possible that the building was initially constructed as an entrance to the enclosure to the east. However, there are no signs of wheel ruts or extensive wear in the stones of the central wall that remained at ground level. It has also been suggested that the building was a shrine, and given the other buildings on the site, this seems plausible. However, the building was used for different purposes late in its life prior to demolition around 275 AD. There is a long shallow feature running roughly east/west that cuts through the floor and what remained of the central wall and terminating in the largest of several pits in the centre of the building. It is hard to discern its function as there is no sign of burning so that it may have been some sort of water sluice, perhaps for cleaning. Many of you will be aware that Maidstone Area Archaeological Group (M.A.A.G.) has been excavating a Roman site in East Farleigh since 2005, and update articles have appeared in this newsletter from time to time. By Stephen Clifton Summer 2018 | 19 Above left Fig 1 Bottom left Fig 2 Top right Fig 3 Bottom right Fig 4: A fragment of Roman glass found at East Farleigh At the end of a long and exciting year in 2017, the ownership of the site changed, and it remains unclear whether M.A.A.G. will get chance to continue its work at East Farleigh. This is, therefore, an opportunity to pull together the 12 years of material and concentrate on compiling and publishing a full excavation report. To see how we get on and for more details of the site go to the MAAG website: www.maag.btck.co.uk 20 | Kent Archaeological Society LETTERS TO THE EDITOR I am very pleased to welcome the following who have joined the KAS since the previous newsletter. Many apologies if I have omitted anyone! MEMBERSHIP MATTERS Dear Editor, My concern is something that has struck me before – particularly in the Spring 2018 edition. I feel it would be useful to include (either on the front cover or inside on page 2) an outline map of the county showing the approximate locations of sites featured in that newsletter. The only map in the Spring 2018 newsletter is the one showing the ancient coastline of East Kent and the Wantsum Channel. This should have made the article comprehensible. But it doesn’t. Near the end of page 7, the writer explains that in Roman times “to the East of Ebbsfleet peninsula was the sea”. In the last column on page 8, he is suggesting that Caesar landed at Pegwell Bay. If the modern location of Pegwell Bay had been shown on the map, it would have helped. The fact that Rose Hill is being excavated by a Sittingbourne group serves to provide a general sense of what part of Kent it is in. But its location in Bredhurst Joint Members As you are well aware the new GDPR data protection regulations are now in place. I have had a very good response, but quite a few of you have not yet returned your completed forms to me. These forms were included in the paperwork for the AGM so you may have inadvertently thrown them out! If this is the case, please get in touch with me, and I can then send you a new set. Perhaps your forms are lying around somewhere waiting for attention (along with many others from other organisations I suspect!). In any case, I would appreciate you returning these to me soon. Of course, you will still receive all publications and paperwork associated with your membership of KAS, but the forms have also proved to be a good way of making sure that my membership database is correct. A former long-time member of KAS has left us a nearly complete set of Archaeologia Cantiana, and this is looking for a home. If you are interested or know of someone who might be, please get in touch with me at my email address below. I have them at home so it would be useful if they could be collected from me. Remember that without you as members KAS could not exist!! Shiela Broomfield Membership Secretary membership@kentarchaeology.org.uk is not mentioned until paragraph 5. Probably, everyone knows where Rochester is! But so many archaeological sites are in obscure locations. The article on Ebony is another case in point. The article about Ranscombe assumes that a previous article is fresh in the reader’s mind. There is no sign at all of where the writer is talking about until the middle of page 4 of the article. The first needs to be designed by the editor, but the second type should be provided by the writer with an article that needs it. Anyway. I have had my moan. A picture can be more informative than lots of words – and the newsletter has lots of pictures. But a map can be more useful than hints and inferences. Keep up the good work! Best wishes Marylin Stevenson Individual Members Mrs P Armitage Hartley Mr Fred Birkbeck Chartham Mrs J Copping Greenhithe Dr E Eastlake Newbury, Berkshire Mr J Howe Canterbury Mr C Hutchinson Walmer Mr D Jennings Ramsgate Mr C Smith Didcot, Oxfordshire Mrs J Bubb Hoo St. Werburgh, Rochester Mr P & Mrs S Ripley Dartford Summer 2018 | 21 Recent postings on the KAS website (†) include 500 epitaphs on gravestones & memorial plaques in four Maidstone churches and burial grounds – All Saints’ Church; Maidstone Baptist Church, Brewer Street; Holy Trinity Church, and Union Street Methodist Church. Among those remembered are ancestors of one of Britain’s most controversial captains of industry – Dr Richard Beeching. This account examines the impact on Kent’s transport history of the 1963 Beeching Report The Reshaping of British Railways, and is illustrated with photographs supplied by Dr Robert Cockcroft, KAS Hon. Assistant General Secretary, a keen railway enthusiast who has collected many photographs of railway buildings. The ‘Beeching cuts’ were memorably lamented by Michael Flanders and Donald Swann in their song “We Won’t be Meeting Again on the Slow Train” (‘No churns, no porter, no cat on a seat‘), but Kent escaped lightly since most of its unprofitable routes had already closed. Among these were the Elham Valley Railway from Canterbury to Folkestone, the Sheppey Light Railway from Leysdown to Queenborough, the Hythe & Sandgate Railway, the Canterbury & Whitstable Railway and, two years before Beeching published his report, the Kent & East Sussex Railway and Southern Railways’ lines from Paddock Wood to Hawkhurst & from Dunton Green, near Sevenoaks, to Westerham. All this meant that Kent’s post-war railway infrastructure was mostly intact in the Sixties, but when they realized Beeching was proposing to close thousands of miles of tracks and stations nationwide, passengers across the county became increasingly concerned about the future of their services. BEECHING! As it turned out, only two areas of Kent were affected by Beeching’s recommendations. In the west, the last trains on the 20-mile cross-country route from Tunbridge Wells through the middle of rural Sussex to East Grinstead and Three Bridges ran on 1 January 1967, 101 years after the service opened, but the section of the line from Tunbridge Wells Central to Tunbridge Wells West and Groombridge, on the county border, was reprieved, surviving until July 1985. In 1997 the track between Tunbridge Wells West and Groombridge reopened as the Spa Valley Railway, now a favourite heritage line. Above Tunbridge Wells West in 1988, three years after closure and nine years before becoming the headquarters of the heritage Spa Valley Railway. ©Dr Robert Cockcroft. †h ttp://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/ Research/Libr/MIs/MIslist.htm By Paul Tritton OH, DOCTOR 22 | Kent Archaeological Society In south-east Kent, Beeching recommended closing the railway from Ashford to Ham Street, Appledore, Rye and Hastings. It was reprieved in 1967 because of the difficulty of providing adequate replacement buses but services on its branch line from Appledore, opened to Brookland Halt and Lydd Town in 1881 and extended in 1884 to New Romney (with, from 1937, intermediate stations at Lydd on-Sea Halt [for Dungeness] and Greatstone-on-Sea), ended in 1967. A spur from a junction between Lydd and Greatstone-on- Sea was retained, to carry flasks of nuclear waste on the first stage of their 400-mile rail journey from Dungeness Power Station to the Sellafield reprocessing plant in Cumbria. The main line survives today as Southern Railways’ Marshlink service, from Ashford International to Hastings, but has yet to realise its full potential; it is the only line in Kent still operated solely by diesel locomotives and, since 1979, has had only a single track between Appledore and Rye. With electrification and restoration to two tracks, High Speed 1 trains from Hastings could run across the marsh to Ashford and on to London St Pancras International. Appledore, Kent’s most southerly mainline station and one of its most remote, would then be about 45 minutes from London. Whilst all of Kent’s main lines survived Beeching, several intermediate stations along their routes were closed (usually first to passengers, then to freight), among them Grove Ferry & Upstreet (1966), between Sturry and Minster; Gravesend West (1968); and, between Ashford and Dover, Smeeth (where goods facilities were withdrawn in 1964, ten years after passengers services ceased), Folkestone East (1965), and Folkestone Warren Halt (1971). Paradoxically, while Beeching was considering which stations in Kent should close, he paid an official visit to one that had just been rebuilt – Folkestone Central. Richard Beeching’s family roots were in Sheerness and Maidstone. His great-grandfather, William, was a master cordwainer and shoemaker in the county town; both he and his brother were staunch Wesleyan Methodists and officers of Union Street Methodist Church, Maidstone, where they were preachers for 50 years. A plaque in the church commemorates their faithful service. Richard’s grandfather, Josiah, was editor and proprietor of the Kent Times and Chronicle, published in Maidstone every Tuesday and Saturday. He and his wife Eliza (née Gascoigne) had seven children, two of whom, Hubert and Cecil, worked as cub reporters on his newspaper and steadily worked their way up to senior positions in the local press. After completing his training, Richard’s father Hubert worked for the Maidstone and Kentish Journal and the Kent County Standard in Tonbridge; the Croydon Advertiser; and afterwards was appointed acting editor and chief reporter of the Sheerness Guardian. During his 11 years in Sheerness Hubert married Annie Twigg, a local schoolmistress, and covered many WW1 incidents, including the arrest of a naval spy he spotted boarding a train at Sheerness station; Zeppelin air raids, and the Battle of the Falkland Islands, based on a log of the action given to him by a warrant officer from one of the cruisers involved. In 1916 Hubert and Annie and their four sons – Geoffrey, three-yearold Richard, Kenneth and Ivan – moved to 100 King Edward Road, Maidstone; Hubert was returning to his father’s home town to become chief reporter on the South Eastern Gazette, where for the next 20 years he covered major news in the area, including the construction of the Boxley Hill water reservoir, descending the gigantic wells from which more than 15 million gallons a day would be extracted. He completed his career as a sub-editor on the Kent Messenger from 1937 until 1945 and died in 1956, aged 78. Left Lydd Town Station, closed in 1967, pictured 50 years later, in December 2017, showing tracks retained for nuclear waste trains. ©Dr Robert Cockcroft. Opposite top left & right Appledore Station in 1988, 21 years after being reprieved. Above right: Ham Street Station, also reprieved in 1967, pictured in December 2017 during completion of its new footbridge and lift towers. ©Dr Robert Cockcroft Opposite bottom Gravesend West in March 1959, with an E1 class locomotive ready to depart and sundry enthusiasts on the platform. ©Bluebell Railway Museum Archive Summer 2018 | 23 Cecil Beeching, who was a year older than Hubert, also had a distinguished newspaper career. In 1904, while working at the Kent Times and Chronicle and South Eastern Advertiser, he married Madeline Bunter. A few years later he and his brotherin- law, G P Bunter, acquired the Maidstone and Kentish Journal. Cecil and Madeline lived in Maidstone at ‘Holyoake,’ St Luke’s Road and later at ‘Orchard House’, Boughton Lane. In 1912 the Journal amalgamated with the South Eastern Gazette and for the next 27 years Cecil was business manager for both publications, retiring in 1939. He died in 1959 at the age of 82. Hubert and Cecil each completed more than 50 years in journalism. When they entered the profession in the 1890s, five newspapers circulated in Maidstone. From All Saints to Maidstone Grammar Soon after the Beechings moved to Maidstone, Richard reached school age and became a pupil at All Saints’ Church of England Primary School in College Road (as did his brothers), a few minutes’ walk from his home. From All Saints the Beeching boys won scholarships to Maidstone Grammar School, where during his next eight years there, Richard distinguished himself academically and in school life as a prefect, rugby player, PT instructor and member of the Combined Cadet Force. He obtained a ‘First’ in physics and later a PhD at the Royal College of Science (as did his brother Geoffrey) and in 1936 embarked on a career that first took him to HM Fuel Research Station in Greenwich and then to Mond Nickel Company. From there, now aged 30, he was seconded to the wartime Ministry of Supply to work on anti-aircraft armaments at the government research centre at Fort Halstead, near Sevenoaks, where he became Deputy Chief Engineer, reporting to Sir Frank Smith, previously Chief Engineer at Imperial Chemical Industries. After the war, Smith returned to ICI and invited Beeching to be his personal technical assistant. The 1950s and 1960s were the company’s ‘glory years’. New technologies and innovative products were developed and Beeching soon became a senior executive and eventually a director of ICI Fibres Division and ICI (Canada) Ltd and Chairman of ICI Metals Division. In 1957 he joined the main board as Technical Director. In 1959 Beeching became a member of an advisory board set up by Ernest Marples, Harold Macmillan’s Minister of Transport, to suggest how to deal with the dire finances of Britain’s nationalised transport services, run by the virtually insolvent and soon to be abolished British Transport Commission. Beeching advocated drastic pruning of the rail network, an argument that led Marples to appoint him as the first chairman of the British Railways Board with effect from 1 June 1961, on an annual salary of £24,000 (nearly £500,000 in today’s money). This matched his ICI earnings, was more than the prime minister’s salary and almost three times that of any other head of a nationalised industry in the 1960s. His report was published in March 1963. Ernest Marples and, after the 1964 General Election, Labour transport minister Tom Fraser and (from December 1965), Barbara Castle, were responsible for implementing Beeching’s recommendations, some of which were rejected in favour of social reasons for keeping unprofitable lines open. 24 | Kent Archaeological Society A CRITICAL TIME FOR THE NPPF? The Society has a long-held tenet that we will not get involved in matters political or controversial. That said there are occasions when, as a Society, we might have to transcend that tenet and I am wondering if that time is approaching us. In the July / August edition of the CBA’s British Archaeology, Mike Heyworth, CBA Director, writes a critical article on the proposed changes to the Planning laws and how they will affect archaeology (page 63). The article is reproduced in full opposite, with kind permission of the CBA. I have often felt that potential conflict between, on the one hand, the current need for increased housing capacity and, on the other, By Clive Drew the requirements of the current National Planning Policy Framework, will result in the lessening of heritage safeguards, no matter which political party is in power. This would now seem to be the case with the possible loosening of the hard fought for requirements for archaeological investigations before construction. Additionally, changes are being looked at regarding archaeology and agriculture as part of our withdrawal from the EU Common Agricultural Policy. The CBA is asking for our help and support in this matter. I think that we must ensure that our past is recorded, understood and then left for subsequent generations. Once construction has started, then archaeology will be lost. Therefore, I think it is important The death of rural England In the 1960s ‘Beeching Must Go’ became a slogan of trade unionists and railway users alike; he was even accused of causing ‘the death of rural England’. In the 1990s (thirty years after his dreadful deeds!) he inspired David Croft and Richard Spendlove’s BBC television sitcom ‘Oh, Doctor Beeching!’ Having recommended axing about a third of the rail network – 6,000 miles of track, 2,363 stations and tens of thousands of jobs – Beeching returned to ICI as Deputy Chairman and in the 1970s became Chairman of the Redland building materials group and Furness Withy, the shipbuilding company. On accepting a life peerage in 1965 he adopted the title ‘Lord Beeching of East Grinstead,’ after the town where he lived. Its railway station was soon to lose, on his say-so, its services into Kent and West Sussex. Beeching retained his links with Maidstone Grammar School and in 1969 became president of its ‘old boys’ association, the Old Maidstonian Society. Beeching died on 23 March 1985 at the age of 71, leaving a widow, Ella. There were no children. Top left Dr. Beeching Top right The Beeching family memorial in Union Street Methodist Church, Maidstone Bottom left Advertisement for Kent newspapers from Kelly’s Directory 1890 Bottom right Dr. Beeching (left) pictured with past-president of Old Maidstonian Society R. R. (Bob) Rylands Summer 2018 | 25 that the Society engages with this matter being careful to draw a deft line between our advocacy and constructive criticism, without hindering the government’s needs to look after the people. As a reputable county-wide society, I feel we are ideally placed to liaise with our members and affiliated societies, but also, I think we should reach out to those archaeological and historical communities within the county with whom we are not in regular contact. We should seek the views of all; we should, in turn, convey these views to the CBA to help them with their nationwide campaign. MIKE HEYWORTH SAYS CAMPAIGNING TO PROMOTE ARCHAEOLOGY IS CRITICAL FOR ITS FUTURE In recent weeks, the Council for British Archaeology (CBA) has been working with colleagues in other key national archaeological bodies to explain to the government why archaeology matters. Of particular concern in England has been the review of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which appears to downgrade archaeology by moving key policies to footnotes or a glossary. It also proposes that historic environment records should be known as “resources”, not “services” – for no clear reason – apparently downplaying the critical role of expert staff who maintain and interpret databases for public benefit. Most of our archaeological sites are protected through the planning system. Any changes to the NPPF, on top of other recent changes which introduce permission in principle for developers and limit precommencement conditions, are a cause for concern. Another government department has been seeking views about farming policy – particularly important as we anticipate withdrawing from the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. A new Agriculture Act is expected, and we hope archaeology will feature in the bill. Our rural archaeological heritage is particularly vulnerable to changes in farming, and needs careful stewardship. Landowners and farmers are well placed to protect archaeological sites from plough damage, animal erosion, treasure hunting and so on. It is important funding remains available to support these “public goods”. National champion Without such protections and policies for archaeology, sites will be damaged or destroyed. There will be no opportunity for archaeologists to investigate, record and research, and to pass on the results to a public which has huge interest and enthusiasm for stories about our past. If developments are not monitored by local authority expert staff, who can specify planning conditions to protect and record significant archaeology, evidence will be lost forever: there is only one chance. If environmental stewardship funding drops, farmers may have no choice but to bring land back into cultivation and destroy fragile archaeological remains. Discoveries and research which regularly feature in this magazine would not have happened without these planning and farming policies. They safeguard archaeological remains. Our work to persuade ministers and officials that archaeology matters is fundamental to why the CBA exists. It builds on the reasons why the CBA was established nearly 75 years ago by archaeology societies across the UK who wanted a national champion. Support for our campaigning and advocacy work comes only from our members. Just as we need to stand up and make your voices heard even more loudly, our resources have diminished. We may not be able to continue to speak out on issues that matter to us all. That is why we have launched a fundraising campaign to ask our members to support our work. Please give generously as we strive to ensure that we can continue to promote archaeology for all. Mike Heyworth Director of the Council for British Archaeology In most cases, archaeological works are currently programmed to be undertaken at an early stage of a construction project. From a developer’s perspective, there is an economic benefit to having archaeological work conducted at the start of a project, and if things are done properly then this should inform the development and help to make it more attractive and deliver an enhanced public benefit. If we do nothing and changes to the National Planning Policy Framework are implemented that lessen or remove the need for archaeological investigations before construction, then we stand correctly dammed. That is the dilemma! I would very much appreciate your views as to how we, as a Society, should approach this important matter. I welcome your opinions at: secretary@kentarchaeology.org Or send your comments to the Newsletter Editor: newsletter@kentarchaeology.org.uk 26 | Kent Archaeological Society AN INTERVIEW WITH… Pauline is an experienced fieldwork archaeologist who has volunteered on excavations throughout Kent for a number of years. I began by asking Pauline to tell us a bit more about her background: PR: I started my career about forty years ago as an Occupational Therapist, became a social worker and ended up as South East England’s Area Manager for the National Autistic Society. Very different to my current lifestyle. RT: What got you interested in archaeology? PR: I always have, from a child, been interested in history and particular ancient civilisations and early man. I have over the years pursued some qualifications through the Open University and other distance learning institutions. So it seemed natural on retirement to seek opportunities to be more involved in my local history. RT: How and why did you become an archaeological volunteer? PR: Happy chance started my involvement in archaeology. While walking in Shorne Country Park, I came upon Roger (Cockett) who was doing some advanced preparation for the Randall Manor dig. He put me in touch with Andrew (Mayfield), and I was hooked! RT: What excavations have you been involved with? PR: Wow, when I try to count I realise so many, over 30 different sites, from palaeolithic Twydall, Mesolithic Ranscombe and Shorne, Lyminge, East Wear, Otford, Ebbsfleet and Worth, Randall, Cobham village and Rose Hill to name but a few, as well as some rescue archaeology. RT: How has your archaeological skill set evolved; can you give any examples? PR: Obviously over the years the range of sites has enabled me to learn many new skills not just in excavation but also helping with magnetometry, finds identification processing and conservation, section drawing and planning, field walking, ground truthing LiDAR and helping to create exhibitions and displays and so much more. Now you have asked I am surprised with the breadth of opportunity I have had to develop my skills. RT: What are the best and worst things about being an archaeological volunteer? PR: The best is probably exploring the history of Kent with likeminded people …the camaraderie. The worst, hoping the “body holds out” after a heavy day digging. RT: Given your excavation experience, have you been aware of a distinction between yourself as a “volunteer” and “professional” archaeologists when on site over the years? PR: Generally no – though some site directors vary in their attitude to volunteers. RT: How long have you been a member of the KAS? PR: Just two years. RT: How do you view the KAS… are its aims compatible with that of an archaeological volunteer? PR: It’s hard to say… I feel it could do more to support local archaeology groups with their projects, possibly financially, equipment loan, insurance, training opportunities, etc. Perhaps helping to inform the membership and broader community of current excavations and schemes and how to get involved. An annual symposium or conference to enable groups to meet and share the year’s activities with others in the county would be invaluable. RT: Any message for the KAS Leadership Team? PR: Perhaps the society needs to concentrate not just on the current membership but how we encourage new young members and their families to become involved, see the benefits of participating in understanding their history, and so help protect and value its future. Pauline Roland ARCHAEOLOGICAL VOLUNTEER Summer 2018 | 27 Lithic refitting has been used in archaeological research since the end of the 19th Century, and more recently it has become a standard research method (Schurmans 2007:7). The process of refitting pieces from a production sequence can illuminate the different stages of flint tool production or the various stages of the châine opératoire. In recent years attempts at automating re-fitting (Evans et al). have been undertaken on Boxgrove artefacts using modern technology. However, Ranscombe – unlike at Boxgrove – has a larger assemblage available, making an automated approach difficult with the available technology. Being retired, the author undertook re-fitting studies of the Ranscombe assemblage by the traditional method. The re-fitting started back in early 2012 with the Shorne Woods Country Park Archaeological volunteers assisting with the digging of test pits. An excavator from one test pit found two similar flints a few centimetres apart, at the same depth, commenting that they looked as if they may re-fit. Some days later the author, having processed the flints, recalled this comment, located the flints in questions and re-fitting was achieved. By David May In this third and final article, the author explains how the feature that must make Ranscombe an important site is its sheer quantity of re-fitting. Fig 1: The first re-fitting group Fig 2: Example of aligning fossils Fig 3: Pair with aligning cortex At this time, more than 2,500 flints had been recovered from the Ranscombe site. Out of curiosity, the author looked through the assemblage and quickly found two more re-fitting flints. It soon became an addiction and one that continues to this day. At the time of writing, more than 3,000 hours over six years have culminated in 151 groups of re-fits comprising of 404 items or 2.9% of the assemblage recovered. The lateral separation of pieces going into re-fitting groups was a maximum of 2.5 metres, and some 80% of items were from a depth of between 35cm and 60cm below the ground surface. The methodology for finding re-fits is simple. Good lighting is essential but avoid a mixture of colour temperatures (i.e. fluorescent, incandescent or LED). Cool white LED lighting provides the optimum. Commence laying out much of the debitage in a suitable large area. The flints are pre-sorted by arranging in groups based upon physical characteristics (e.g. body colour, colour patches, texture or fossil inclusions). Finally, a time consuming, physically relaxing but mentally stimulating process of comparison of apparently similar flints. As possible re-fits were found, the pieces in question are checked for key features: After that, platforms are examined for similarity and proper alignment allowing for bulb scars. If doubts exist, the items in question are put aside and re-examined at a later date. RANSCOMBE RE-FITTING • a good mechanical fit with no light visible between the pieces; • ensure flint body colouration or patina is similar; • any fossils or other marks identical in both pieces and appearing to align when the flints are combined. 28 | Kent Archaeological Society Fig 4: Two similar groups of two Fig 5: Three groups of similar flint Fig 6: Poor quality material group of three Fig 7: Small re-fitting group Item type Quantity Primary flakes with edge retouch 2 Secondary flakes with edge retouch 4 Tertiary flakes with edge retouch 1 Hammerstone 1 Axe thinning and sharpening flakes 4 Cores 2 Core tablets 2 Axe/adze preform 1 Group size (no of flints) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 20 Quantity of groups 112 20 8 0 3 2 2 1 1 1 When a re-fitting group is found, it is allocated and marked with the group serial number prefixed by the letters CJ. A photograph is then taken of the re-fitting pieces. These are then joined by an adhesive of a 50% solution of ethyl-methacrylate copolymer (Paraloid B72) in acetone with added fumed silica. At times it was found that support between re-fitting pieces was required, in which case hot melt glue was used. Such an example is the group of 20 shown in fig 14. The selection of adhesive type was to allow the re-fit group to be dis-assembled should the need ever arise. Any identifications of the disassembled pieces could be made from the earlier photographs. Table 1: Re-fitting groups Table 2: Items in groups with secondary working Sometimes, flakes would be found that would fit onto an existing group. Very occasionally, existing groups were compared with the re-fitting of existing groups, into a larger group. In this situation, the lower group number reference was retained and appropriate re-numbering as required. With all scenarios, further photography was required for future reference (table 1). Re-fitting groups are not solely formed of flakes. Table 2 lists items of interest and items with secondary working found re-fitting groups: In some instances, it was found that several groups were of similar appearance with a high probability of being from the same nodule but would not re-fit. In another case shown (fig 5) groups of 8 (top), 7 (middle) and 6 (lower) were of almost identical material. These three groups are formed from poor flint material but considered possible debitage from axe manufacture. From the evidence collected it is surprising, that knapping of poor flint material is a common occurrence, as can be seen with fig 6. Re-fitting should not be thought of as applicable to large flints, or those over 5cm in size (fig 7). Summer 2018 | 29 Fig 8: Illustrating the variety of flint at Ranscombe Fig 9: Illustrating the variety of flint at Ranscombe Fig 10: Group of 11 Fig 12: Group of 10 Fig 14: Group of 20 However, finding these smaller groups is less easy to refit, and so they often have higher group numbers. It is understood that these items are debitage from a core tool such as an axe. Fig 13 is unusual in that the flake indicated by the lower arrow (not attached to a group of three) is probably an axe thinning flake which if turned over would re-fit making this a group of 4 pieces. Arrows indicating re-fitting area. And finally, the piece de résistance (fig 14). Note the core at lower left and the flake in the middle with the number has secondary edge retouch. With three exceptions the refitting groups were from an area of 3 metres by 12 metres. One exception was from an area of Mesolithic and Neolithic activity approximately 250 metres away from where a hammerstone with a refitting flake was found. Fig 13: Re-fitting flake Fig 11: Group of 6 with broken and abandoned preform all found within a 1 metre by 1.5 metre area 30 | Kent Archaeological Society The weekend of 5–6 May 2018 saw members of the Studying History and Archaeology of Lympne, or SHAL group excavate a small trench at Stutfall Fort, Lympne, Kent. The fort is believed to have been constructed c.270 AD and the assumed coastline during Roman times would have allowed it to protect a natural harbour in an area now part of Romney Marsh. The remains of the fort were investigated by Charles Roach Smith in 1850 and more recently by Barry Cunliffe from 1976–78. In both cases, they discovered evidence from excavations to suggest that there was earlier occupation with military connotations, most notably Classis Britannica. Roach Smith found an altar – later dated to c.135 AD and dedicated to Neptune by Aufidius Pantera – reused in the foundations of the main east gate of the later fort, along with tiles stamped CL BR. Cunliffe also found an uninscribed altar in his re-excavation of the main east gate and describes the quantity of early Romano-British pottery found as “significant”. Geophysical work carried out at the fort in 2015-16 produced evidence suggesting a previously unknown structure close to the main east gate. It seemed reasonable to investigate this possible structure for additional evidence of a second century AD occupation – Historic England and the landowner agreed. The objective was set for excavation – establish if the geophysical evidence was indeed a structure, and if it was a source of, or contemporary with, the Classis Britannica material discovered by Roach Smith and Cunliffe, thereby strengthening the case for an earlier phase of the fort’s Roman past. Historic England granted site director, Malcolm Davies, license to excavate a 5-metre x 1-metre trench in an east-west direction, centred at 611855 134213 that aimed at uncovering the probable western wall of the structure and areas both inside and outside of its theorized projection. On 5 May members of SHAL began de-turfing the area (fig 1) and carefully divided the trench into ten equal compartments. Over the next two days, members of the SHAL, accompanied by members of the Shorne Woods Archaeological Group, carefully excavated the trench revealing some unexpected archaeology (see fig 2). By late afternoon of day 1, ragstone of various shapes and sizes began to emerge through a context of light brown silty and sandy clay (context numbers 002 & 003). Within these contexts, a mixture of post-medieval finds (pottery, bone, coal and clay pipe) mixed with a small amount of probable Roman finds (tegula fragments, pottery and a hobnail) were found. Towards the west of the trench, a substantial ragstone block (context no. 005) also began to emerge (fig 3). Top Fig 1: De-turfing on Day 1 Right top Fig 2: Careful excavation of the trench in small areas Right middle Fig 3: Careful revealing of structure 005 on Day 1 Right bottom Fig 4: West end of trench looking north and showing structure 005 and (possible) cut 006, at the end of Day 2 EXCAVATION AT STUTFALL FORT SHALStudying History & Archaeology in Lympne By Malcolm Davies and Richard Taylor July 2018 | 31 By Day 2, the trench continued to expose what we interpreted to be the geophysical anomaly; 005 was undoubtedly a large ragstone block that was (or had been) part of a structure. However, the purported interior (east of 005) appeared as highly abraded, often crushed ragstone rubble in a light brown sandy clay matrix, reminiscent of a demolition spread. The exterior, however (west of 005), was represented by a cleaner matrix of light brown sandy clay with very little rubble content. Indeed, the material to the east soon bottomed out onto the natural Weald Clay approximately 0.5m below the ground surface (fig 4). To further support the argument of a purpose-built structure, there was the slightest hint of a foundation cut into the natural 004 to position 005. Given the small physical snapshot available, this scenario is reminiscent of a structure that had either a) collapsed in on itself or, b) purposely demolished towards its centre. In summary, while excavating within the parameters of Historic England’s instructions, the excavation did not reveal any evidence of earlier Roman occupation, but it did suggest the presence of a building of an unconfirmed date. The rubble to the east of 005 could be interpreted as in-situ building demolition, and it has undoubtedly been trampled and compacted, but no secure dating evidence for a demolition event could be found. A small test hole (0.15 x 0.15m, under Historic England supervision) was cut through the rubble, but no evidence of a floor surface was visible. The presence of Roman material stratified with (mostly) Victorian artefacts and compacted ragstone rubble (figs 5 & 6) around a large ragstone block or wall suggests considerable disturbance, which is hardly surprising at a site known for its soft soils, geological movement, nearby springs and the documented presence of livestock for over 150 years. Alternatively, the excavation trench may have been sited over a camp or discard area associated with Roach Smith’s excavation of 1850. Given the proximity to the main east gate, this scenario could Bottom left Fig 5: Trench looking east at end of Day 2 Top Fig 6: Plan of excavation Right middle Fig 7: Selection of Victorian finds from contexts 001, 002 and 003: pottery; coal; clay pipe; bone and iron nails Right bottom Fig 8: Selection of Roman finds from contexts 001, 002 and 003: Tegula fragment; tufa fragment; 3rd Century AD abraded pot fragment and a hobnail explain the geophysical results, along with the compaction of the ragstone and the quantity of Victoriana mixed with a small amount of (presumably discarded) Roman finds (see figs 7 & 8). In either case, the excavation revealed no additional evidence of Classis Britannica at Stutfall Fort. Nevertheless, the SHAL Group gained first-hand experience of excavation and recording techniques, and their sights are now firmly set on researching the wider Roman landscape around Lympne. Acknowledgements Images of excavation courtesy of Simon Read. Many thanks to Historic England and Richard Taylor for all permit and land permissions. A Bartington magnetometer and a Leica GS18 T smart antenna are now available to further enhance fieldwork and post-excavation capacity throughout the county. The Bartington Magnetometer measures variations in the Earth’s magnetic field to detect magnetic anomalies in the ground. Archaeologists and geophysicists often use a magnetometer due to its ability to cover large areas of ground and locate features such as ditches, trackways, pits or areas that have been exposed to a prolonged heat source, for instance, hearths or kilns. The Leica GS18T captures and models positional satellite data and is capable of compiling accurate plans of archaeological sites on the ground to an accuracy of 1-2mm on its handset. These image files can be downloaded to a PC or laptop for inclusion in publications or postexcavation reports. The GS18T has an in-built tilt compensation mechanism, so the user no longer needs to watch and level the bubble. The Bartington magnetometer and GD18T are both available for supervised use (subject to availability) at excavation sites to all affiliate societies and Society members. For further details please email your enquiry to: geophysics@kentarchaeology.org.uk Top Fig 1: Bartington magnetometer Middle left Fig 2: Example showing magnetometer results of a ring ditch at Lees Court Estate Middle right Fig 3: Example showing Leica data as plan of excavations of Otford Roman villa, courtesy of DROP Bottom Fig4: GS18T unit GEOPHYSICS EQUIPMENT UPDATE The Kent Archaeological Society has recently made two important purchases to increase its capacity to help provide geophysics support for the membership. If undelivered, please return to S. Broomfield, 8 Woodview Crescent, Hildenborough, Tonbridge, Kent TN11 9HD