KAS Magazine, Issue 119, Winter 2022

Update on the Society Fordwich Medway Trosley From the Chairman of the Board of Trustees A 600,000 year old Lower Palaeolithic site History Showcase 2022 A Roman Villa revealed DISCOVERING KENT’S HERITAGE BRINGING THE PAST TO THE PRESENT FOR EVERYONE № 119 WINTER 2022 04 26 48 40 KAS ACQUIRES THE OZENGELL COLLECTION 02 | Kent Archaeological Society CHAIR OF BOARD OF TRUSTEES Professor Kerry Brown kerry.brown@kentarchaeology.org MANAGEMENT TEAM General Manager: Clive Drewclive.drew@kentarchaeology.org.uk Deputy General Manager and Magazine Editor: Richard Taylor richard.taylor@kentarchaeology.org.uk Communications and Brand Manager: Nicky Hammond nicky.hammond@kentarchaeology.org.uk Finance Manager: Brie Thomasbrie.thomas@kentarchaeology.org.uk MANAGEMENT GROUP Curator: Elizabeth Blanningelizabeth.blanning@kentarchaeology.org.uk Social Media: Celia Boughtoncelia.boughton@kentarchaeology.org.uk Webmaster: Laura Freemanlaura.freeman@kentarchaeology.org.uk Education and Outreach: Peter Joyce peter.joyce@kentarchaeology.org.uk Arch Cant Editor: Terry Lawsonterry.lawson@kentarchaeology.org.uk Librarian: Ruiha Smalleyruiha.smalley@kentarchaeology.org.uk Membership, Safeguarding and Volunteer Coordinator: Ann Watsonann.watson@kentarchaeology.org.uk WELCOME FROM THE EDITOR Welcome to the Winter 2022 Magazine. Following a busy summer, we have a bumper winter issue packed with abundant and intriguing material and discussion. It seems like the entire membership was involved in fieldwork, surveying, or research during the summer, and that can’t be bad. While editing the many articles in this issue, the theme that continually jumped out at me was the invaluable efforts of the many volunteers that took part and made the projects so successful. On a personal level, it was equally rewarding for me to help train and instruct many of these volunteers in fieldwork techniques, recording practices and survey methods. Following a successful AGM, several significant changes to the Society are highlighted in this issue; in particular, I would ask you to read Prof. Kerry Brown’s piece on the reconstitution and the future direction of the Society. Front cover image of the Ozengell Collection courtesy of Roseberys London Auctioneers 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. I continue to encourage as many members as possible to think about writing articles and help inform the broader historical and archaeological community of what is taking place in our heritage-rich and diverse county. Please continue to forward articles or notices to richard.taylor@kentarchaeology.org.uk Enjoy this issue; Merry Christmas and a happy and healthy New Year to all readers. Best wishes, Richard Winter 2022 | 03 CONTENTS FEATURES Reconstitution of the Board of Trustees The Affair at Rolvenden Medieval Animals James Gilbert of Lydd: The Dickens Connection The Tudor Gravesend Blockhouse Restabilised Ozengell Collection Purchase Kent Defence Research Group Visit to Dover The Story of a Canal for Sandwich Harbour Hollingbourne Zero Station A Roman Roof Tile from Hartlip Villa The 600 000-year-old Lower Palaeolithic Site at the West Gravel Pit, Fordwich, Kent The Hooden Horse: A Kentish Christmas Custom Medway History Showcase 2022 Something at the end of the Garden Roman Settlement at Shepway Cross, Lympne Roman Villa Revealed near Trosley Introducing the Society’s Outreach & Engagement Officer – Pete Joyce What’s On: 2023 Diary of Society events 05 07 08 09 12 16 18 20 23 24 26 37 40 42 45 48 54 56 № 119 WINTER 2022 6 mi. 10 km 42 48 09 07 26 20 23 40 24 12 45 18 Message from the Chair of the Board of Trustees Notices REGULAR 04 55 04 | Kent Archaeological Society At the Annual General Meeting on the 16th September, in Canterbury, those present (along with those who had voted by Proxy) overwhelmingly supported the changes for the Society governance, which I wrote to members about some weeks before. Instead of 22 Trustees, the KAS now has 12. Those with administrative or management functions no longer sit as trustees but work together as an executive team. This means there is greater clarity between the part of the Society that has to think about medium to longer-term strategy and the part that sets out how to implement this. It is good that this work is now finally sorted out. I want to thank Clive Drew, Richard Chaplin, Richard Taylor and all the others involved in this often time-consuming process. We had much legal advice to ensure we were doing the best thing for the KAS’s long term prospects and putting it in a position where it can continue fulfilling its important work. Now that we have achieved this, our priority for the coming year is to make sure we do everything to fulfil our public benefit function. Serendipitously, almost as soon as the AGM was over, the opportunity arose to make a bid for a unique collection of artefacts excavated from Kent and closely linked to the KAS work. The successful purchase of the Ozengell Collection means that we now have a well-documented, important and diverse assemblage of seventh and eighth-century artefacts – several thousand, in fact. Some of these will be described elsewhere in this newsletter. This gives us a magnificent opportunity for our members and the wider public to learn about and, through this collection, one of the most important but elusive periods of our post-Roman history. We hope that parts of this collection will be available to display at locations around the county, and an exhibition we plan for next May at Maidstone Museum. Maidstone Museum has been the home to our library and many of our holdings from the middle of the 19th century. Some of KAS material is on display, and we have been involved in discussions about the new archaeological gallery being planned at the museum. We hope that the exhibition in 2023 will showcase KAS excavation findings from the Leas Court Estate, our acquisition of the Elham Valley Cross, and some of the Ozengell collection material. Through our new engagement officer Peter Joyce, we have become far more active in social media and events. Michael Wood, the historian well-known for his television work over the last four decades, will come to speak to us on 1st December. There are details about this event in the Magazine. We are also aiming to host Ken Dark, whose recent paper on the MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Kerry BrownSt Pancras Church in Canterbury argues that this was indeed the original building constructed by St Augustine during his mission to Britain in the 6th and 7th centuries. We are aiming to hold that event in Canterbury. This is in addition to online events and excavations such as the recent one at Trottiscliffe. I was also privileged to represent the Society at two events held since Spring this year. The first, a dinner arranged by the Council for the Protection of Rural England, was in Allington Castle and presided over by both their and our patron, Sir Robert Worcester. This event offered a chance to understand what other heritage focussed groups in the county were doing and make better connections with some of them. However, going into the castle was an interesting experience for personal reasons. I remember going there on a school visit in the mid-1970s when the Carmelite Friars owned it. It was good to see how well looked after the castle, and its surrounding gardens were. The second event was a study day arranged by Dr Sheila Sweetingburgh in August at the Lossenham Priory site on the border between Kent and East Sussex. As usual, this was packed with interesting speakers and presentations and plotted the fascinating story of how this substantial but largely forgotten establishment had been refound and is now better understood. We have many other plans for the coming year, and we are grateful for the continuing support from our members. It is a great time to be interested in the history and archaeology of Kent and a great time to be involved with KAS work. I look forward to seeing you at some of our events in the weeks and months ahead. Best wishes, Kerry BrownChair of the Board of Trustees Winter 2022 | 05 Following this year’s AGM, Council has been replaced by a Board of Trustees. The outcome is that a Board of Trustees has now replaced the former positions of Society President, Vice-Presidents and Honorary positions, reduced from twenty-two to twelve, and led by the Chair of the Board of Trustees, Professor Kerry Brown. RECONSTITUTION OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Trustees have been allocated an area of responsibility within the Society’s sphere of activities and responsibilities – where vacancies exist, a current Trustee will undertake those responsibilities until the vacancy has been filled. If you would like to apply to become a Trustee, please write to the Chair of the Board of Trustees at kerry.brown@kentarchaeology.org.uk Board of Trustees Name Role Email address 1 Kerry Brown Chair of the Board of Trustees kerry.brown@kentarchaeology.org.uk 2 Chris Blair-Myers Archaeology Projects and County Pottery Reference Collection chris.blair-myers@kentarchaeology.org.uk 3 Lloyd Bosworth Communications and Brand lloyd.bosworth@kentarchaeology.org.uk 4 Richard Chaplin Governance and Constitution richard.chaplin@kentarchaeology.org.uk 5 Stephen Clifton Committees and Special Interest Groups stephen.clifton@kentarchaeology.org.uk 6 Michael Curtis Diversity and Community michael.curtis@kentarchaeology.org.uk 7 Liz Dixon Fund Raising liz.dixon@kentarchaeology.org.uk 8 Kate Kersey History and Allen Grove Fund kate.kersey@kentarchaeology.org.uk 9 Ed Knight Communication and Membership ed.knight@kentarchaeology.org.uk 10 Elizabeth Roberts Education and Outreach elizabeth.roberts@kentarchaeology.org.uk 11 Vacant Environmental Issues 12 Vacant Health, Safety & Welfare 06 | Kent Archaeological Society THE AFFAIR AT ROLVENDEN John Wesley first preached in Rolvenden more than 250 years ago. At that time, the Layne Farmhouse at Rolvenden Layne, now known as Wesley House, was used for Methodist services, but by law, only five people were allowed to meet in addition to members of the household. Across the road stood the little chapel built by the Bible Christians. In 1971 Mrs Gladys Jenner, for over forty years the Organist, Treasurer, Caretaker, Cleaner, and Sunday-School Teacher at the Bible Christian chapel, gave an account of ‘THE AFFAIR AT ROLVENDEN’ mentioning earlier research by Mr Edmund Austen of Brede. This ‘Affair’ took place at Wesley House. According to Mr Austen, ‘On the evening of March 13th 1760, the service was conducted by John Morley, one of Wesley’s travelling preachers stationed in the Sussex circuit. Sixteen Methodists met for religious worship for, as one said, ‘We think it more profitable after the labour of the day than to be at an ale house or spending our time in idle amusements.’ We know from the court case which followed that among the worshippers were Thomas and Jane Osborne; Philip Norris, yeoman; Thomas Reeve the elder, shoemaker; Thomas Reeve the younger, shoemaker; Henry Bigg, thatcher; Joseph Bigg and John Bigg, labourers; George Pike, servant; Betty Vine, spinster; Mary and Elizabeth Bigg, spinsters; Hannah Young, spinster; Ambrose and Hannah Buckland, all of these belonging to Rolvenden except the Bucklands, who came from Benenden. Thomas Witherden, a neighbouring farmer, reported the meeting to the magistrate, Mr Robert Moneypenny By Gillian Metcalfe AboveFig 1: Wesley House, courtesy of Jackie Kingof Maytham Hall, and he issued a summons against ‘the vagrant itinerant Methodist preacher, and his congregation’. Two days later, they were charged with ‘being PERSONS above the age of 16 and there being more than five persons in the house (besides those of the household) of the said Thomas Osborne then assembled together, under the pretence of the exercise of Religion in other manner than according to the Liturgy and practice of the Church of England against the Form of the Statute.’Two witnesses appeared for the prosecution, Thomas Apps, yeoman of Rolvenden, and his servant, Thomas Buss. In reply to the charge, John Morley said ‘that he was not a Protestant Dissenter, but a member of the Church of England, and that he belonged to the Methodist Society in London, members of the Church of England in connection with the Rev. Mr Wesley. That his intent and meaning was to instruct his brethren in a godly, pious manner according to the scripture. That he exhorted Winter 2022 | 07 them to go to Church and not to keep from thence, and he prays for his Majesty King George III.’ He further said that he followed no occupation or business other than a travelling preacher and that he had no settled habitation or goods, or chattels, which might be seized for the payment of a fine. All the defendants were convicted: John Morley was fined £20, Thomas Osborne £20, and the remaining fourteen 5/- each, the maximum fines in each case. Morley, having neither money nor goods, his fine was levied on Philip Norris and Thomas Reeve Jnr. £10 each. Osborne, Norris and Reeve refused to pay the fines, and their goods to the value of that fine were seized fourteen days later. They appealed to the quarter sessions at Maidstone a month later. They applied for an adjournment through their counsel until the next session to prepare their case. This was refused, and they declined to enter their defence. So the Judge with the Jury confirmed the fines and ordered the payment of £8 costs. The Methodists being informed that the proceedings were not according to the law applied to the King’s Bench for the convictions to be set aside. Accordingly on June 3rd 1760, the case was argued, and the court quashed the convictions, not only the proceedings of the sessions but also the convictions before the magistrates. John Wesley referred to the ‘Rolvenden Affair’ in a sermon some years afterwards. He declared that the Rolvenden Methodists, ever since then, had been permitted to worship God according to their conscience. The case aroused great interest throughout the country and was the subject of much comment in newspapers and periodicals. John Wesley, writing to his brother a few days after the case on June 23rd, says, ‘It is of more consequence than our people seem to apprehend. If we do not exert ourselves, it must drive us to that bad dilemma, leave preaching, or leave the Church of England. We have reason to thank God it is not come to this. Perhaps it never may.’ The Bible Christians had always been part of the Methodist movement whilst disagreeing with some of their policies. One area of disagreement was that women preachers, in particular, were barred by the Methodists from preaching but found a welcome with the Bible Christians founded in Cornwall in 1815. One of the earliest preachers in the chapel was the Rev. Lillie Edwards. She was well known and popular, never seen without her black button boots as she lifted her long skirts and mounted the steps to give a spirited sermon. From 1918 the Methodists allowed women preachers, and in 1929 took over the chapel at Rolvenden Layne as the number of Bible Christian followers fell. In 1971 the chapel closed and was sold and demolished. The six occupants of graves were re-interred in the churchyard of St. Mary the Virgin at Rolvenden. A new house now stands on the site. Many people have never heard of ‘The Affair at Rolvenden’, which aroused so much controversy at the time, and only a few remember the little Bible Christian chapel, gone forever. However, Wesley House still stands opposite the site where the chapel once stood, their two histories intertwined. It remains an impressive former farmhouse with a great story to tell. Acknowledgements The author wishes to express her gratitude to Mrs Gladys Jenner of Rolvenden Layne, Mr Edmund Austen of Brede and Jakie King of Rolvenden Layne for their input into this article. AboveFig 2: Maytham Hall, courtesy of Jackie King 08 | Kent Archaeological Society The Medieval Animals Heritage is a Heritage Lottery Heritage Fund project focusing on the rich diversity of East Kent Medieval Animals Heritage (MAH) that spans nearly a thousand years. Real and imaginary animals had their stories told in medieval books, paintings, and sculptures. They helped to inspire and express people’s sense of wonder in the natural world. The heritage project is linked to the life and legacy of Saint Anselm, a theologian and Archbishop of Canterbury from 1093 until 1109. St Anselm oversaw a spiritual and intellectual renaissance in East Kent. Less well-known is Anselm’s emphasis on creation and the natural world. Medieval animals have been linked to St Francis, but this project brings the much more ancient bestiary tradition to the fore and shows how these books of beasts were used by St Anselm and his kinsman Honorius in East Kent to connect spirituality to people’s emotions in what became an important local and international heritage. St Anselm and other medieval writers in medieval East Kent sought to engage everyone’s feelings by making animals the bearers of emotional meanings. We will reimagine their creativity, help children better understand their emotions, and support everyone’s wellbeing by enthusing about our fantastic local heritage. The Medieval Animals Heritage Project is looking for volunteers who would kindly visit their local medieval churches for us and photograph medieval representations of animals - usually found in stained glass, tiles, pew ends and misericords, and stone MEDIEVAL ANIMALS PROJECT By Diane Heathcarvings. We are asking for a photograph to be sent to Dr Diane Heath, the project lead (diane.heath@canterbury.a.uk) of the item(s) found and, if possible, one of the exterior of the Church too, that we can put up on the project website, with the photographer duly credited, and a note of the name of the Church and its location, e.g. St Clement’s, Sandwich. We hope to build up an archive of sources that can be used by researchers and also by our special needs families in a simple ‘I Spy’ format. As the project focuses on wellbeing, green heritage, and sustainability, we hope volunteers might car-share with others on these short trips out, walk, cycle, or take public transport where feasible. Find out more at https://www.medievalanimals.org/ Above and leftAnimal images from St Clement’s Church in Sandwich Winter 2022 | 09 JAMES GILBERT OF LYDD THE DICKENS CONNECTION By Stephen Duxbury Among the vast amount of academic research that has been performed in connection with the life and works of Charles Dickens, the name of James Gilbert is very rarely mentioned, and the details of his life history and his connections with Dickens are almost non-existent. This article intends to highlight Gilbert’s links with Dickens and his other achievements, all of which may surprise, or at least be of interest to, the residents of Lydd, Romney Marsh and Kent generally. James Gilbert, an ancestral relative of mine, was born in Lydd, Kent, in 1806, the son of James Gilbert senior and Sarah Strowd Finn. James Gilbert senior, was born in 1776 and christened at All Saints Church, and Sarah Strowd Finn was born 31st January 1779. James Gilbert senior married Sarah Strowd Finn on 17th July 1801 at St. Mary the Virgin, Dover, Kent, at which time James was said to be a grazier. They and their family lived at Tourney Hall, Lydd, on the southwest end of High Street, opposite the modern-day army camp. At the 1851 Census of Lydd, James Gilbert senior is described as ‘Stationer and Annuitant of landed property’. He died in 1857 and is buried at All Saints church. His wife, Sarah Strowd Finn Lydd, died in 1861 and is also buried at All Saints in a grave next to her husband’s, with a headstone stating that her children, including James, had erected it. Probate records state that she was resident at Tourney Farm, Lydd, and died there. James Gilbert married Mary Grafton Grattan in 1833 at St. Botolph without Aldersgate, London. James was a publisher and bookseller. Mary was one of the daughters of Edward Alport Grafton Grattan (‘Edward Grattan’, my 3xgreat-grandfather) and sister to my 2xgreat-grandmother, Martha Matilda. At the 1841 Census, James and Mary lived with their family at Devonshire Grove, Peckham. Mary’s mother (and sister, Martha Matilda) lived with them. James and Mary Gilbert eventually had eight children. Gilbert’s place of business was 51 Paternoster Row, and later No. 49, in the shadow of St. Paul’s Cathedral, London. Paternoster Row was well-known for its concentration of booksellers and publishers. He was in partnership with his father-in-law, Edward Grattan, and the business was known as Grattan and Gilbert. His publishing speciality was maps and atlases, notably, in 1840, Gilbert’s Modern Atlas of the Earth. In 1837, Grattan published thirty-two additional illustrations to Charles Dickens’s Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club (The Pickwick Papers). Dickens, born 1812, was becoming popular. The Pickwick Papers was published monthly by Chapman and Hall in 1836-37, and his popularity led to publishers trying to jump on the bandwagon. The thirty-two Pickwick Papers illustrations published by Grattan were drawn by Thomas Onwhyn and were sometimes bound into early editions of The Pickwick Papers as extras. In 1839 Grattan and Gilbert published forty additional Onwhyn illustrations to Dickens’s The Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby. Onwhyn used the pseudonyms’ Sam Weller’ and ‘Peter Palette’. James Gilbert also published GWM Reynolds’s Master Timothy’s Bookcase, a pastiche of Dickens’s publication, Master Humphrey’s Clock. Dickens might have had Master Timothy’s Bookcase in mind whilst writing to his friend, John Forster, when considering whether or not to sue an unspecified party or parties for breach of copyright. Dickens’s commented to Forster: ‘that it is better to suffer a RightFig 1: The World Familiarly but Philisophically Described, A Companion to Gilbert’s Map of the World, 1840 10 | Kent Archaeological Society greater wrong than to have recourse to the much greater wrong of the law.’ He had little faith in the law, as was apparent in some of his works. A notification alerting booksellers and the public of the imminent publication of Nicholas Nickleby included a PROCLAMATION which in part threatened what would happen to anyone who pirated his book: ‘we will hang them on gibbets so lofty and enduring, that their remains shall be a monument of our just vengeance to all succeeding ages.’ This tongue-in-cheek threat, which seems to have reflected Dickens’s serious concerns on the subject, was aimed at all literary pirates, including Grattan and Gilbert. Dickens’s Proclamation went on to give notice ‘TO THE POTENTATES OF PATERNOSTER-ROW’ (i.e. booksellers, again presumably including Grattan and Gilbert) of the details of each monthly issue of Nicholas Nickleby was to be issued and where and how they should collect their copies. The PROCLAMATION did not deter Grattan and Gilbert from publishing the extra Nicholas Nickleby illustrations. In 1842, Grattan and Gilbert appear to have run into financial difficulties, unconnected with Dickens, and were committed to The Fleet debtors’ prison in London, but were able to redeem themselves. There is some irony in their committal to The Fleet since Mr Pickwick, the subject of Grattan’s additional illustrations, was himself committed to the same debtors’ prison in Dickens’s novel, The Pickwick Papers. In 1847 James Gilbert was again subject to bankruptcy proceedings but again was able to secure his release. Gilbert’s next contact with Dickens was in May 1849 when he wrote to Dickens complaining that Bradbury and Evans, Dickens’s new publisher, was charging 8s 9d per dozen for the shilling numbers of David Copperfield, as opposed to the 8s 6d previously charged by publisher Chapman and Hall. Dickens sent the letter to Bradbury and Evans. In his covering letter, he admonished the publisher for causing offence, commenting: ‘I am very sorry that we cannot get on, without calling for such letters as the enclosed. What does it mean? Is it not ill-advised, and very ill-advised, to give any semblance of colour to such complaints? They used never to be made, and how is it that they begin now?’ The criticism stung Bradbury and Evans, and a seemingly indignant Mr Evans responded: ‘I am very sorry that anyone should have induced you to write as you have done to me – because I am sure that in all cases we have acted so as best to promote your interests.’ He further commented that James Gilbert was ‘a man of no character or Estimation whatever – perfectly powerless to affect the sale of your works and whose sole disappointment is that he loses the advantage he never ought to have had.’ In a conciliatory letter to Mr Evans, Dickens replied, ‘ I am sorry you took the complaints ….. so much to heart’. James Gilbert became Secretary of the Newsvendors’ Benevolent and Provident Institution. In this capacity, he wrote to Dickens in 1849, inviting him to attend and speak at the Institution’s tenth anniversary dinner. Dickens accepted and duly attended the dinner on 21st November 1849 at the Albion Tavern, Aldersgate Street, London. At the dinner, Dickens proposed to the health of Queen Victoria, Prince Albert and the royal family. He praised the work of newsvendors, and he praised the Institution. He commented, with tongue-in-cheek humour, that he was indebted to them for bringing him the news ‘that the City of London was Top, leftFig 2: Nicholas Nickleby frontpiece, Thomas Onwhyn, published by Grattan & Gilbert Top, rightFig 3: Mr Squeers from Nicholas Nickleby, published by Grattan & Gilbert BottomFig 4: The Wonders of the World in Nature and Art, published by Grattan & Gilbert, c.1842 Winter 2022 | 11 the best watered, the best drained and the most wholesome city in the world’, an oblique reference to the then-current cholera epidemic in London and implied criticism of London’s aldermen who had made these claims for the city. Dickens said that Newsvendors had also brought him the surprising news that the same aldermen who had claimed this for London’ were not locked up in the incurable cellars of Bethlehem Hospital’ (a mental institution). Dickens also commented on reaction to his recently expressed distaste for public executions. Those opposed to Dickens’s opinions had branded him as bloodthirsty, characterising him as one who made ghoulish visits to public executions, whereas any such visits that Dickens made were in connection with his campaign to ban them. He did not necessarily disagree with capital punishment but strongly objected to the debauched spectacle of public executions. Dickens became President of the Newsvendors’ Institution in 1854 until he died in 1870. After the dinner, which James Gilbert presumably attended (and may even have met Dickens), Gilbert wrote a thank you letter to Dickens, taking the opportunity to raise once again the question of book pricing, this time relating to the Cheap Edition of David Copperfield. Dickens replied that he had no intention of reducing his price, especially since his books contained three times the material in an ‘ordinary novel.’ Gilbert also published educational books in the Gilbert & Ince’s Outlines series, of which hundreds of thousands were printed and issued to Victorian schools and scholars, so Gilbert played a role in the field of education. At the 1871 Census, James Gilbert was recorded as residing at 51 Hill Street, Camberwell, London, and was said to be an author, aged 66, born in Lydd, Kent. He died in Camberwell in 1874, aged 69. Acknowledgements: The Pilgrim Edition – The Letters of Charles Dickens, Vol. 5, editors Graham Storey, K. J. Fielding, Oxford University Press; Keith Fielding, The Speeches of Charles Dickens, Oxford at the Clarendon Press, 1960. Dickens and the North, published by Grayswood Press and available from grayswood.press@tiscali.co.uk Top, leftFig 5: The Book of Fun, or Laugh and Learn, for Girls and Boys, published by Grattan & Gilbert, c.1842 Top, rightFig 6: Outlines of French history, published by Grattan & Gilbert, c.1842 BottomFig 7: Dickens and the North, published by Grayswood Press and available for purchase at grayswood.press@tiscali.co.uk 12 | Kent Archaeological Society THE TUDOR GRAVESEND BLOCKHOUSE RESTABILISED By Victor Smith Thanks to Gravesham Borough Council, crucial re-stabilisation of the nationally important remains of the Tudor Gravesend Blockhouse (1539/40) was completed in July 2022. Hopefully, this will ensure the excellent condition and continued public visibility of this Scheduled Ancient Monument for years to come. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The fenced western half of this semi-circular structure is exposed at the side of Royal Pier Road in front of Gravesend’s riverside Clarendon Royal Hotel. It is the only blockhouse remaining to view from a network of five which, through the crossfire of their guns, guarded the river approaches to London against a hostile fleet. Moreover, the Thames was a route for a large part of England’s international trade and was, therefore, a vital national asset. The river could also be used as a base for English naval forces. Politically, the blockhouse was, in a sense and however modestly, an icon of a geopolitical rift in the 1530s, characterised by a state of tension between Henry VIII and much of Europe. Indeed, in 1538 an invasion was feared. This resulted in the inception of an ambitious English programme of TopFig 1: Looking south at the complete restabilisation of Gravesend Blockhouse in July 2022 BottomFig 2: Coloured reconstruction drawing of the Gravesend Blockhouse by Chris Forsey Winter 2022 | 13 defence construction at sea and on land, of which the Gravesend Blockhouse was a part. Its design took forward new Continental approaches to defences for mounting gunpowder artillery. Bespoke artillery fortifications had emerged in Renaissance Italy from the 15th century, and designs evolved. In general, though, the form of the new English works probably reflected current north European practice, but with some similarities to earlier Italian examples. The designs adopted by the defence planners in England were portrayed, for example, by the ideas in an earlier treatise by Albrecht Durer (1527). These embraced the use of enclosed gun casemates, often in rounded bastions, as demonstrated in the remains at Gravesend. Such a built form is familiar from the survival of Deal and Walmer Castles, as well as elsewhere at other coastal locations in Britain. Henry VIII is thought to have contributed to design. Built on the riverbank’s edge, the blockhouse was a robust D-shaped brick tower or bastion. It was arranged with guns to fire onto the Thames from the inside through gun ports on two levels and from an embrasured roof. Additionally, there were guns in external ground-level positions on either flank. The guns, originally twenty-one in total, differed in their types and calibres, whether muzzle or breech-loading and cast in iron or ‘brasse’, as described in the original armament listing. With the addition of a ‘bumbard’, presumably a larger calibre weapon, they varied between 3 and 9 pounders, with a theoretical range of up to a mile. They could cover the river in a crossfire with the Tilbury blockhouse on the north shore, just 800 m. away, and secure a vital ferry crossing between Kent and Essex. In addition to the guns, there were drawn bows, pikes and bills for local protection. The permanent garrison was a commander, a porter, ten soldiers, and gunners, to be reinforced according to need during a war period. The original armament of guns was hardly mighty, and more powerful guns were introduced later, particularly in the external gun positions. The blockhouse was a deterrent during the Spanish Armada crisis of 1588 and the Dutch Raid on the Thames and Medway in 1667. In the rear of the blockhouse, during 1665, quarters were added for the Duke of York when he was Lord High Admiral (subsequently crowned King James II). This building later became the residence of successive Ordnance Storekeepers. Sometime, perhaps before the end of the 17th century or not long after, the blockhouse was converted into a gunpowder depot magazine, but the external gun positions were retained and rebuilt in several phases. A Left, topFig 3: Albrecht Durer’s drawing of an artillery bastion from his treatise of 1527, copied by Victor Smith Left, bottomFig 4: Typical Tudor guns mounted in the Thames blockhouses, by Victor Smithmajor remodelling occurred in 1780 when its eastern gun lines were almost connected with New Tavern Fort, built in the same year. By the 1830s, the blockhouse was judged to be militarily redundant, and, in stages, its grounds were sold off. The blockhouse itself was sold separately. In 1844, with the assistance of the use of explosives, it was demolished down to just below ground level, with the external gun positions having already been levelled. A small extension of the land followed this into the river to provide a leisure space for the clientele of the Clarendon Hotel (not yet called ‘Royal’), into which the storekeeper’s quarters had been converted. THE REMAINS Archaeological excavation in 1975-6 by the Thameside Archaeological Group, with modest subsequent investigation, revealed what can be 14 | Kent Archaeological Society seen today. There was a fascinating array of discoveries, including masons’ marks, carved masonry and mouldings, ceramics, roundshot and cross-bow bolts, implying the presence of that type of weapon and the earlier-mentioned drawn bows. Tantalisingly, the eastern half of the blockhouse is hidden under the Clarendon Royal Hotel’s riverside car park. Other parts are just to the rear under Royal Pier Road. Remains of stables and a small detached magazine may still exist at the rear of the site. As a display of lower courses of walls, the blockhouse is reminiscent of other displayed archaeological sites across the country of various types and periods, whether of stone, brick or both. Such exposures have been retained where this has been judged to be to the heritage and educational public benefit. The blockhouse, with its interpretation panel on the path alongside its fence, is emphatically in this category. The wide and lower stone-faced walls date from the original building of the blockhouse and reveal the lines of infilled gun-ports, with iron rings on either side. The internal walls were, perhaps, to support lower parts of the gunpowder magazine from the original conversion of the building or later adaptations. STABILISATION The heritage value of continuous remains exposure was recognised, and, with the generous funding of the then owner, Berni Inns, the structure was stabilised in 1980, its setting being landscaped. Unfortunately, successor owners allowed the walls to fall into neglect, and 19 years ago, with the support of English Heritage, the exposed remains passed into the ownership of Gravesham Borough Council. At the same time, and after preparatory volunteer effort by Thames Defence Heritage and with funds secured for the purpose from English Heritage and the council, the building was restabilised and its immediate setting re-landscaped. Over time, exposed walls can be affected by the following: • The dislodging of fabric by the effects of frost • Invasive growth allowed to erupt from the structure • The effects of rain and surface water penetration • Vandalism and anti-social behaviour of intruders • Poor stabilisation • Differential temperature between the host structure and repairs • Falling out of pointing Some of this had become apparent enough to justify a reference to the council from the author, Peter Torode and the Gravesham Heritage Forum. Remedial work began, ably carried out by Universal Stone of Wickford, Essex, a company with experience in this type of project. As this progressed, imperfections in previous stabilisation became apparent, particularly the inappropriate use of sand and cement instead of lime. The opportunity has been taken to undertake a comprehensive Top, leftFig 5: Early stage of restabilisation works Top, rightFig 6: Looking northeast at a more advanced stage of restabilisation works Winter 2022 | 15 programme of works to more certainly future-proof the remains. The author’s report to the council of 14th April 2022 commended for the future a regime of documented condition monitoring and attentive spraying of any invasive growth to head off future problems before they become serious. Global warming should help by reducing the incidence of the disruptive effects of frosts. The author has also suggested the renewal of the now rather tired-looking information panel and, when energy costs have returned to an affordable level, the re-establishment of monument lighting to return the blockhouse to being an enhanced visual asset at night. As well as this, re-positioning some temporary structures outside the council ground north of the fenced enclosure might help to re-establish a relationship of the blockhouse with the river. Most importantly, Gravesham Borough Council has digitally presented the blockhouse as it originally looked through the exciting ‘In Gravesham Footsteps’ initiative. This is a family-friendly augmented reality trail designed to uncover the secrets of Gravesend’s past. The history of Gravesend can be explored by using a smartphone to see some of the town’s historic buildings and heritage sites, such as the blockhouse, which transforms dramatically before your eyes. For more information about this important asset, which locations are covered and how to experience the trail, visit www.ingraveshamfootsteps.co.uk/map FUTURE POSSIBILITIES Earlier excavation revealed what appeared to be large dislodged sections of the front wall. This may suggest that some or much of the debris from the demolition of the blockhouse in 1844 were deposited in front of the building as part of the extension of ground into the river. There might be further brickwork displaying form and shape, stonework such as mouldings and edgings, and artefacts already found internally. The presence of structural material might be tested through geophysics, such as Ground Penetrating Radar. There are also possibilities for archaeologically examining the western gun line, the subject of an earlier preliminary investigation. A comprehensive history of the blockhouse and the Clarendon Royal Hotel may be found in Victor T.C. Smith and Eric R. Green, The Gravesend Blockhouse, Thames Defence Heritage, 2000. Priced at £2.50, this is available from (a) ‘Visit Gravesend’, Gravesend Borough Market, High Street, Gravesend DA11 OAZ (postal sales enquiries telephone 01474 337600/email info@visitgravesend.co.uk) or (b) New Tavern Fort and the Milton Chantry Heritage Centre, Milton Place, Gravesend during opening hours (postal sales enquiries 01474 363998/email sandrasoder@yahoo.co.uk). Top, leftFig 7: Complete restabilisation looking north Top, rightFig 8: Complete restabilisation looking southwest BottomFig 9: The Gravesend Blockhouse, by Victor Smith and published by Thames Deence Heritage 16 | Kent Archaeological Society OZENGELL COLLECTION PURCHASE The Kent Archaeological Society is delighted to announce its recent acquisition of the Ozengell Collection, a nationally important assemblage of Anglo-Saxon grave goods of jewellery, glass, pottery, metalwork and weaponry. Dr Andrew Richardson, director of Isle Heritage CIC and an expert on Anglo-Saxon cemeteries in Kent, said, “this important collection of finds come from nearly 200 graves excavated between 1977 to 1981 at Ozengell, near Ramsgate. This cemetery dates primarily to the sixth and seventh centuries AD when Kent was one of the wealthiest kingdoms in the British Isles, able to draw on extensive international networks that brought exotic goods and materials from across Europe and as far as the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. The finds in the collection reflect this rich heritage, with high-quality jewellery manufactured in east Kent found alongside imported goods from Europe, Africa and southern Asia.” The site at Ozengell was first identified as a burial ground of the early Anglo-Saxon period in 1845 when a railway cutting was dug through the site, close to the Lord of the Manor public house. Perhaps 50-80 burials were disturbed then, with little proper recording, though a range of finds found their way into museum collections. The overall cemetery is believed to number several hundred burials, and it is perhaps one of the largest and most important such sites to have been excavated in Kent. Unfortunately, to date, no thorough assessment of the finds or records of the site has been possible. Kerry Brown said, “By securing ownership of this important collection and the associated site records, the Society has ensured the preservation of the archives of one of Thanet’s, and Kent’s, most important archaeological sites. Future generations will be able to see and study this collection, enabling further publication and interpretation of this important cemetery. By their actions, the officers of the KAS have secured a vital piece of Kent’s past.” Dr Elizabeth Blanning, Curator for the Society, added, “we wish to extend our thanks to the vendor for agreeing to the sale, and Alice Bailey of Roseberys auction house for her help in ensuring the collection was sold to an institution”. The Society has one of the country’s most significant collections of Anglo-Saxon material, providing a fitting home for the Ozengell Collection, ensuring that this important assemblage is kept together, properly conserved and made available for study to realise its potential. [Images reproduced with the kind permission of Roseberys London] AboveFig 1: Anglo Saxon Glass Vessels Winter 2022 | 17 TopFig 2: Anglo Saxon Pottery and Bronze Age Accessory Vessels BottomFig 3: Selection of Anglo Saxon Jewellery and Accessories 18 | Kent Archaeological Society KENT DEFENCE RESEARCH GROUP VISIT TO DOVER By Clive Holden (Chair, KDRG) A damp September morning saw us gathering at the National Trust’s White Cliffs site at Dover to tour their Fan Bay and Wanstone Second World War gun battery sites. Both sites are subjects of the NT’s three-year ‘Wanstone Rediscovered’ project, funded with a substantial grant from the National Lottery Heritage Fund and donations and support from local businesses. The project officially started on 1 July 2022 and is being delivered by existing and new volunteers who will be recruited locally. Although primarily arranged for KDRG and KAS members, the visit was also opened up to the volunteers and trustees from the Slough Fort Preservation Trust. All made for an enthusiastic and keenly interested group that met up in the light showers of rain. Having monitored the Met Office forecasts for the day, I proclaimed confidently to the group, ‘Don’t worry guys – this is as bad as it’s going to get’ as we set off over the fields to the Fan Bay site for guided tours of the deep battery shelter. By the time we arrived, the rainfall had got steadily harder, and we were glad to be descending the 125 steps down to the shelter. Fan Bay Battery was constructed in 1940-41 and comprised three 6-inch guns. The deep shelter was excavated twenty-three metres below the clifftops by the Royal Engineers to provide protected accommodation for the battery personnel. The guided tour also took us out of the shelters to view the two concrete sound mirrors set into the cliff face, one dating from 1917 and the other from the 1920s. The sound mirrors were an early form of aircraft detection which worked by picking up the sounds of aircraft engines as they approached across the Channel. The advent of radar in the 1930s made them obsolete. The shelter tour at an end, we ascended the steep stairs to find the rain now coming down in proverbial ‘sheets’. Hence, we were a very sodden group by the time we made it back to Wanstone for a look around the site of one of the 15-inch gun emplacements and its associated buildings. AboveFig 1: Descending into the Fan Bay Battery deep shelter Winter 2022 | 19 The battery was constructed in 1941-42, and, as with Fan Bay Battery, the guns were removed in the 1950s, and the emplacements were buried in the 1970s. The main work of the ‘Wanstone Rediscovered’ project for this year has been the excavation of No.1 gun emplacement (wartime nickname ‘Jane’). The excavation of the No.2 gun emplacement (wartime nickname ‘Clem’) is planned for 2024. We took cover from the continuing torrential rain in the gun’s crew shelter, and when it eased off, we inspected the recently excavated gun emplacement and one of its magazines. Our final tour of the day was of the adjacent Swingate heavy anti-aircraft gun battery (designated ‘D2’). Comprising four 3.7-inch guns, the battery was operational from 1938 to the mid-1950s. The gun emplacements, gun store, magazines and the Battery Command Post survive, as do the remains of a few other buildings. Despite the awful weather, the whole group enjoyed the day immensely, and the KDRG intends to organize similar visits to other defence-related sites around the county in the future. Finally, on behalf of the KDRG and the visiting group, I would like to express my sincere thanks to Jon Barker, NT Project Manager for ‘Wanstone Rediscovered’ for facilitating the visit, and we wish him and his team every success with the ongoing work on this fascinating and worthwhile project. For more information on the activities of the Kent Defence Research Group can be found at: https://kentarchaeology.org.uk/about-us/committees/kent-historic-defences https://www.facebook.com/KentDefenceResearchGroup/ AboveFig 2: Examining one of the sound mirrors at Fan Bay BelowFig 3: The group inspecting No.1 Gun Emplacement at Wanstone Battery 20 | Kent Archaeological Society THE STORY OF A CANAL FOR SANDWICH HARBOUR By Jenny Wall Since as early as the 7th century, Sandwich became one of the most important ports connecting southern England to mainland Europe. During medieval times the town saw great prosperity as a safe deep anchorage for merchant shipping. Indeed, successive monarchs valued Sandwich not only because of its geographical location but also the people, seafarers who were reliable and hard working in support of shipping and the valuable communications artery with Europe. Today Sandwich is one of the best preserved walled medieval towns in England, one of the original Cinque ports, which now lies two miles inland. By 1500 large vessels could no longer safely navigate the river as far as Sandwich and the town slowly declined as a coastal port. The last large ship passing through the Wantsum channel (now mostly the river Stour) is recorded as being in 1672. However, long before this date, several attempts had been made to create “cuts” or canals to provide better water flow to maintain the depth of Sandwich harbour for big ships. The reasons why Sandwich and, indeed, Richborough silted up are complex. The map above shows how the coast looked 2000 years ago, illustrating how much the coastline has changed. TopFig 1: A drawing of the East Kent coastline 2000 years ago showing Sandwich, from the Journal of the Trust for Thanet ArchaeologyBottomFig 2: Spit formation & Longshore Drift / Coastal & geography map Winter 2022 | 21 The unique currents of the English Channel and the so-called longshore drift (Fig 2) create a northern migration of thousands of tons of shingle and sand, which we continue to observe today. These deposits build up gradually into sand and shingle “spits”, which slow the flow of water and allow deposits of sand and shingle to settle. A human contribution to this process of “siltation” has been going on for millennia; from the extraction of materials from the ground, e.g. The Romans extracting clay, to the dredging, draining, the creation of dikes, sluices, tracks for animals to the building of sea walls and harbours collectively have all contributed to our changing coastline through time. Concern grew; Sandwich harbour or haven was in decline as it became smaller and shallower. In 1551 Henry V111 passed a Land Drainage Act funded through local taxation, prompting further attempts to try and save the harbour at Sandwich. Left, topFig 3: Tudor canal scheme Sandwich Kent c.1548, British Library Notes catalogued as Cotton Augustus I.i.f.54]Left, bottomFig 4: OS map showing where the remains of the Rogers Canal is marked Old Haven The first attempt to build a “cut” or canal to increase flow to the Stour and harbour came in 1479 with the diverting of the river via Lydden Bridge and the building of a sluice today known as Vigo sluice. During this time, several sea walls were also built to reclaim salt marshes for agriculture by draining the land, keeping fresh water in or channelling seawater more efficiently. Many different surveys and plans were also drawn to dredge the river, search for springs, reroute the Stour and build canals or cuts. In 1548 a military engineer named John Rogers devised a plan to build a canal from Sandwich near the all-important wharves to the sea on both sides of the town. The map below shows the proposed route of the canal. In 1551 the building of the Rogers canal commenced from south of Sandwich to the sea near the 22 | Kent Archaeological Society TopFig 5: Walking along inside the canal towards the sea – Photo Jenny Wall BottomFig 6: Walking alongside the canal filled with trees – Photo Jenny Wall Sandwich Estate. Sadly, the plan ran into financial problems, and only a short stretch was ever built. On modern maps, what remains of this section of the canal is referred to as the “Old Haven” (Figs 4-6). From Tudor times onwards, several detailed plans were drawn to build a canal or divert the meanders of the Stour to manage the continued silting up of Sandwich harbour. Finally, the 18th-century competition with Ramsgate as a more suitable and cost-effective alternative was first muted, culminating in the Ramsgate Pier Bill of 1755. The Roger’s canal was the only one of several very detailed schemes for preserving the Sandwich Haven, which today it is still possible to walk along if you know where to look. To the author’s knowledge, only two other canals were ever built in Kent. The first is the 1799 seven-mile canal called Thames and Medway Canal, also known as the Gravesend to Rochester canal. The canal was designed to provide a shortcut for military and commercial vessels from Deptford and Woolwich Dockyards on the Thames to Chatham Dockyard on the Medway. In 1830 a long tunnel through the canal was divided into two. The railway line saw use well into the 20th century, and stretches of the canal are being restored as a leisure waterway. The second is the well-known Royal Military Canal which runs for 28 miles (45 km) between Seabrook near Folkestone and Cliff End near Hastings. This canal, with its distinctive zig-zag design every 500 yards to permit a line of site for gun emplacements, was constructed as a defence against the possible invasion by Napoleon during the Napoleonic Wars ( 1803-1815). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank Andre Molenkamp for his help finding the Rogers Canal site. REFERENCES British Library Notes catalogued as Cotton Augustus I.i.f.54 http://www.thanetarch.co.uk/journal/?p=1315 www.pinterest.com Winter 2022 | 23 In June of this year, an important surviving word War 2 site was scheduled by Historic England after a successful application made by the KDRG (Entry list number 1479310). The Hollingbourne Zero station was once part of a network of secret underground radio stations that would come into operation in the advent of a German Invasion of Britain. The network was initially developed in Kent and Sussex and then expanded to cover most of the coastal regions of Britain. These radio stations received messages from several outstations. In the case of Hollingbourne, there are 13 known locations. The network was part of the elaborate plans in 1940/41 to counter the impact of a German invasion of Britain. The zero stations known as the “Special Duties Section” (Warwicker 2002) were separate while part of the same overall plans that included the more widely known stay-behind sabotage teams, the “Home Guard Auxiliary’s” (Lampe 1968). Kent being at the forefront of the likely planned invasion route, was at the centre of the initial plans to prepare for the stay-behind force and intelligence gathering to aid British counter-attacks. The radio network was developed to quickly pass intelligence gathered from locally recruited civilian spies, who would take note of German military formations supply dumps and activities and pass them on via a series of note drop-off points to local radio transmitting stations known as outstations throughout the eastern area of Kent. The HOLLINGBOURNE ZERO STATION A SCHEDULING SUCCESS FOR THE KENT DEFENCE RESEARCH GROUP (KDRG) By Keith Gulvin, Vice Chair KDRG TopFig 1: Main chamber of the Hollingbourne Zero station showing doorway to the third room with the escape tunnel. (Clive Holden) BottomFig 2: Kent Defence Research Group members removing rubbish via the main access shaft in February 2022. (Clive Holden)Hollingbourne station then passed intelligence gathered from the outstations to operational military headquarters, which was initially located at Canterbury in the case of Hollingbourne. The personnel who operated the radio station at Hollingbourne where female members of the Auxiliary Territorial Service, based in nearby West Leas Farm, their accommodation and training base. However, which was sited in a small wood on the North Downs above Hollingbourne 24 | Kent Archaeological Society A ROMAN ROOF TILE FROM HARTLIP VILLA By Trevor Bent & Dave Ambrose Hartlip Roman villa site was initially excavated in 1845 by Charles Roach Smith and again in 1848. The location of the villa building remained unknown for many years after the excavations. However, recent research and small-scale fieldwork led by local archaeologist Dave Ambrose, supported by the Shorne Woods Archaeology Group (SWAG), re-located the villa; see The Re-Discovery of Hartlip Roman Villa article on the site by Gerald Cramp in KAS Magazine 116, pp22-25. SWAG’s evaluation fieldwork trenching revealed Roman structural remains and were successfully georeferenced to Roach Smith’s 19th-century plans, establishing its location using the KAS GNSS surveying equipment. Approximately fifty metres south of the established villa remains, a flat-bottomed V shape ditch was identified, about one metre in depth. Two small trial trenches revealed roof tile fragments and several pieces of pottery, animal bone and iron nails. These items were in the upper layers of the ditch fill, and nothing was found in the lower layers. AboveFig 1: Excavation of ditch showing roof tile fragments village on Ringlestone Road. In the event of an invasion, they would have moved permanently into the underground bunker. The bunker was constructed by excavating a deep hole, creating a concrete base, then placing corrugated iron sheets like a military Nissen hut or Anderson Shelter to create the rooms, then backfilled and hidden from view. The Layout of the Hollingbourne Zero Statin consists of an entrance chamber accessed via a hidden trapdoor and a vertical ladder now missing. This small room was designed to resemble a hidden arms cache like those used by the sabotage units. A hidden catch behind a shelf unit gave access to the main chamber, which would have contained the radio transmission and receiving equipment, codebooks and other signals equipment, also the domestic arrangements. Behind the second chamber is another room which contains the chemical toilet and access to an escape tunnel some 6 metres in length, which came up nearby in the same wooded area. Unlike the Home Guard Auxiliary’s operational bases, the Zero station was supplied with electricity via a generator to power the radio equipment and lighting (there are surviving electrical fittings). The radio aerial was cleverly hidden within the bark of a nearby oak tree. This important feature makes this site somewhat unique in that part of the aerial wire can still be seen protruding from the nearby tree close to the main entrance. In February of this year, a small task group from KDRG conducted a clean-up operation within the Zero station removing an accumulation of rubbish and other debris that had been deposited over a period, much of it alas left by visitors to this important site. The clean-up enabled an initial survey of the chambers and record photographs to be taken. It is planned to do a return visit to carry out a more detailed survey so that a complete record plan can be produced. Any items thought to be of possible archaeological value have been retained. SOURCES Lampe, D (1968), The Last Ditch, Cassell, London. Warwicker, R (2002) With Britain in Mortal Danger, Cerberus, Bristol. British Resistance Archive, accessed 03/10/2022 from https://www.staybehinds.com/station/hollingbourne-instation Winter 2022 | 25 The tile fragments in (Fig 1) were recovered from the upper ditch fill. Anyone excavating a known Roman site with buildings will understand that roof tile (tegula) fragments are a regular find. However, I did not realise it at the time, but upon taking the fragments home to clean, all seven pieces fitted together, but the whole left-hand side was missing. I rebuilt the tile to show how it would have looked when a component of a Roman roof. The tegula weighed six kilograms and formed a rectangle, 40.5cm long, 31.5cm wide across its top and 28.5cm across the bottom, looking slightly trapezoidal. The bottom of the tile is narrower so that it fits between the ridges of the tile laid below once on the roof (Fig 3). The Hartlip tile is likely later (after AD 240) due to several factors: early Roman roof tiles were longer (c.48cm, reducing to c.41 cm by AD 240); early tiles were much more rectangular, unlike the Hartlip tile, which is slightly trapezoidal; and interestingly, whilst there were no nail holes in early Roman tiles, but this example has a nail hole toward the top (Warry, 2006). Whilst millions of tegulae were manufactured and used during the Romano-British period (AD 43 to AD 410), the Hartlip tile is a tangible reminder of the construction, lifespan and eventual disappearance of a local villa. The Hartlip tile has now been gifted to Hartlip Junior School to help their Roman studies. REFERENCES Warry, P. (2006) Tegulae: Manufacture, Typology and Use in Roman Britain. Oxford: Archaeopress. Top, leftFig 2: Roof tile reconstruction Top, rightFig 3: Mock-up of 4 tegulae joined, bonded and imbrex (curved) tiles placed over tile ridges BottomFig 4: Schematic diagram of Hartlip Tile 26 | Kent Archaeological Society Recent work at the Lower Palaeolithic site at the West Gravel Pit, Fordwich, Kent, has confirmed the presence of early humans in the area between 560,000 and 620,000 years ago. This breakthrough, which involved controlled excavations and radiometric dating, comes a century after Acheulean handaxes were first discovered at the site. The latest research confirms that early humans, possibly Homo heidelbergensis, occupied Kent and the surrounding areas in this period – when Kent was still attached to Europe. It provides the first dated evidence for human habitation in Kent before the Anglian Glaciation and makes Fordwich one of the earliest dated Palaeolithic sites in Northwest Europe. LOCATION AND TOPOGRAPHY The West Gravel Pit site near Fordwich is two miles Northeast of Canterbury at NGR TR 180 588. (Fig 1) The West Pit, also called the High Pit with two further pits, was formed through extensive gravel quarrying in the 1920s and early 1930s (Figs 2 & 3) During the quarrying work, hundreds of Acheulean handaxes were recovered from the West Pit by workers and collectors on an informal basis (Smith 1933b, 165.) There is little contemporary information on where the handaxes were recovered in the West Pit stratigraphy. The pit is thought to have originally been roughly 350 × 150 m in size, with gravel having been worked to depths of between seven and twenty feet – 2 to 6 metres (See Fig 4). The West Pit is farther up the valley than the other two pits away from the river Stour. It is near the top of a steep hill (OD 41-44m) on the southern bank of the Great Stour, which flows northwards in a chalk valley (Figs 1, 2 & 3). THE GEOLOGY OF THE WEST PIT The course of the River Stour has shifted south-eastwards progressively from an originally more northerly course, there being a series of erosion THE 600 000-YEAR OLD LOWER PALAEOLITHIC SITE AT THE WEST GRAVEL PIT, FORDWICH, KENT By Frank Beresford AboveFig 1: Sketch Map to show the location of the West Gravel Pit and the distribution of the three Divisions of the Third Terrace between Canterbury and Littlebourne (from Ashmore 1980, 84, Fig 1; after Smart et al., 1966, 270, Fig 15 1 = Upper Division 2 = Middle Division 3= Lower Division Winter 2022 | 27 surfaces, between 30 and 120 metres in echelon successively eastwards, only the lowermost of which preserve gravel spreads (Coleman 1952.) The BGS Memoir for the area (Smart, et al. 1966, 245) notes four terraces of the River Stour marking earlier courses flowing in a Northerly direction from near Chilham. The third, which includes the Fordwich gravels, consists of up to three distinct levels of gravel (Fig 1), each corresponding to a phase of river deposition and separated by marked terrace bluffs incised during the intervening period of downcutting. The West Pit gravels at NGR TR 180588 are believed to belong to the middle division of the third terrace (Smart et al. 1966, 270). Reginald Smith (1933b, 165) noted that the tongue of high ground between the rivers is covered in patches with gravel and brick-earth resting on Thanet Sand and forms a plateau about five miles long at about the 100 ft. level. So, the West Pit gravels are fluvial in origin. Their base is the Thanet Formation at 40 m OD, or slightly higher, overlain by interstratified, then diffuse gravels and sands (2-6 m thick) succeeded by current-bedded sands and thin gravel, with solifluction debris (‘trail’) at the top. Smith’s description of the geology of the West Pit has been used by the current researchers as their primary reference point and is given in full in Box One below. According to Smith (1933b), the Thanet sands are followed by the main mass of gravel (The Lower Main Gravel) which displays little in the way of clear stratification, followed by a clear band of sand and one further thinner, upper layer of gravel (The Upper Main Gravel), which is in turn covered by loam and soil (Fig 2) SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS AT THE WEST PIT SINCE THE 1920S. 189 Acheulean handaxes from the West Pit collected in the 1920s are now curated at the British Museum, and thirty-four more are curated at the Herne Bay Museum. An unknown number of bifaces, flakes and cores entered other private collections or were lost as part of the aggregate output. Table One below summarises the significant developments and research relating to the Palaeolithic artefacts found TopFig 2: Two workers standing in front of the sedimentary deposits in the West Pit during gravel extraction in the 1920s/early 1930s showing the stratification (Photo: E Williams.)MiddleFig 3: A further view of the sedimentary deposits in the West Pit during gravel extraction in the 1920s/early 1930s (Photo: E Williams.) BottomFig 4: John Wymer’s 1977 Sketch Map of the West Gravel Pit showing the location of his section (Wymer 1977) BOX ONE: SMITH’S 1933B DESCRIPTION OF THE GEOLOGY OF THE WEST PIT ‘The gravels rest on Eocene sands, the horizon in contact with the gravel-base being in all probability near the junction of the Thanet and Woolwich beds. The constitution is normal—subangular flints, many Eocene flint pebbles, as well as flint and ironstone derived from the Lenham beds. As a whole, the deposit is not well bedded, yet it is clearly water-laid. In the lower parts it is interstratified with sand; then follows the main mass of gravel, almost without structure. Above are more sands, markedly current-bedded; and at the top of the exposed section a further thin layer of gravel is seen. The upper part of the section shows Trail.’ 28 | Kent Archaeological Society Date Development Reference 1920s to early 1930s Acheulean handaxes 'collected in quantity' by Dr. Ince of Sturry, Dr. Armstrong Bowes of Herne Bay and Dr. Willock of Addiscombe, Croydon. Smith 1933a 1932 In a letter to Reginald Smith dated 13th June 1932, Dr Willock states: ‘the flints only seem to occur when they are working on the extreme western portion of the surface. The grab works from West to East, and as it moves Eastwards the chance of finding anything diminishes.’ British Museum Archives in the Sturge Room, Franks House. Roe 1968, 14 1933 Implements from high-level gravel near Canterbury – A report by Reginald Smith of the British Museum. He wrote, 'Some hundreds of implements have been found in this pit near the brow of the hill and this accumulation at the edge of a high and level stretch of gravel has to be explained.' Smith 1933b 1977 Seven flakes and a core were found by John Wymer while digging a single test section 50 metres south of the northwest corner of the pit at TR 179587 in July 1977. All were in situ in the Lower Main Gravel. Wymer 1977 1968 Derek Roe attributes the Fordwich handaxes to Group V of his ovate dominant handaxe tradition. The handaxes in this group have in common an extreme roughness of manufacture, a narrowness and irregularity in shape and a tendency to large size. He suggested that Group V were 'the best attested, earliest handaxe industries of Britain.' Roe1968, 61&75 1968 John Wymer also noted the crude stone-struck handaxes at Fordwich and suggested they belonged to a separate and earlier stage of the Acheulian culture Wymer 1968, 68. 1980 The typology and age of the Fordwich handaxes – a research report by May Ashmore. She concluded that 'while there are many crudely worked rough handaxes from Fordwich, there are also several well-made, regular, more 'evolved' distinct types.' Ashmore 1980 1981 Derek Roe again stressed the archaic appearance of the Fordwich handaxes and noted that they had the highest mean value of 0.69 for the ratio of thickness/breadth of any of his selected sites. Roe 1981, 104-108 1998 David Bridgland found nine flakes et al. in two small section cuttings. Three in the Lower Main Gravel. Bridgeland et al. 1998, 42 2020 and ongoing A research team led by Alastair Keys produces the first excavation and dating of artefacts discovered in situ at Fordwich, alongside their technological analysis and relationship to those previously recovered. 251 flint artefacts, including 238 flakes, cores, scrapers, and a small piercing or boring tool were discovered in two trenches. The team also collected sixteen sediment samples, dated using infrared-radiofluorescence (IR-RF) dating. Key A. et al. 2022 Table One A Chronology of significant developments and research at West Pit AboveFig 5: An idealised cross-section showing the location of the 2020 excavations (Based on Keys et al., 1922, Fig 3) Winter 2022 | 29 in the West Pit since quarrying commenced in the West Pit in the 1920s. Before 2020, only three test sections were dug at the pit, one in 1977 and two in 1998, all connected with subsequent society visits. THE EXCAVATIONS AND SAMPLE COLLECTION IN 2020 During 2020, two 1x1 m trenches were dug into a portion of preserved gravel terrace on the edge of the West Pit quarry (Figs 5 & 6). The primary goal was to confirm whether these sediments retained evidence for the presence of hominins in the form of lithic artefacts. Lithic artefacts were recovered from both excavated trenches. In addition, eleven samples were collected from freshly cleaned outcrops for infrared-radiofluorescence (IR-RF) dating led by Tobias Lauer at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology at Leipzig in Germany. Infrared-radiofluorescence (IR-RF) dating determines the point at which feldspar grains were last exposed to sunlight, providing information on the deposits’ burial age. Within the two trenches, samples were principally collected from sand lenses (samples 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11) or the only visible band of sand (samples 4, 7, and 8.) Collecting samples from the Lower Main Gravels was impossible as no sand lenses were exposed. Repeat samples were taken from several locations. Cross sections of the two trenches give the sedimentary layers, and the location of the samples within these are shown in Fig 6. Due to the close stratigraphic alignment between David Bridgland and colleague’s 1998 sections and Smith’s 1933 description of the gravels where the original handaxes were found, five samples were also taken from one of the 1998 trenches so that the artefacts discovered in the 1920s could be dated. Two samples were taken from the base of the loam above the thin uppermost gravel layer (samples 13 and 17.) A further two were taken from the first (upper) sand layer in between two gravel layers (samples 14 and 16.) One final sample was taken from a lower sand layer within the main gravel mass (sample 15.) Cross sections TopFig 6: Trenches A (right) and B (left) following the 2020 fieldwork. They confirm Smith’s 1933 account of the stratigraphy in the main gravel. The numbered yellow triangles indicate IF-RF Sample locations (Based on Keys et al., 1922, Fig 3) BottomFig 7: One of two sections exposed in 1998. The numbered yellow triangles indicate IF-RF Sample locations (Based on Keys et al., 1922, Fig 3) 30 | Kent Archaeological Society Original Sample Number Lab Sample L-Eva Age in ka err (ka) Collated Age in ka (approx. mean age) Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) Association Site Date Stratification Level 3 n/a 2020 Base of soil 6 n/a 2020 Sand Lens (ICF) 9 2279 410 27 MIS 11 2020 Sand Lens (UMG) 5 2275 347 22 approx. 372 +/- 7 MIS 10 or 11 2020 Sand Lens (ICF) 11 2281 372 22 2020 Sand Lens (ICF) 10 2280 375 21 2020 Sand Lens (ICF) 1 2271 385 21 2020 Sand Lens (ICF) 2 2272 383 21 2020 Sand Lens (ICF) 4 2274 570 36 approx. 542 +/- 30 MIS 14 2020 Middle Sand 7 2277 513 30 2020 Middle Sand 8 n/a 2020 Middle Sand 13 2282 379 21 - MIS 10 1998 Base of loam 17 2286 455 24 approx. 437 +/- 7 MIS 12 1998 Base of loam 14 2283 423 29 1998 Upper Sand 16 2285 437 29 1998 Upper Sand 15 2284 433 23 1998 Middle Sand No sample was assigned to number 12. Ages could not be returned for three samples due to a lack of appropriately sized feldspar grains. Table TwoThe Infrared-Radiofluorescence (IR-RF) ages returned from the Sixteen sediment samples collected in 2020 (Keys et al., 1922) AboveFig 8: The complete stratigraphic profile of the 2020 excavations at Fordwich Pit and those from 1998 show the sample locations. (Keys et al., 1922, Supplementary information) Winter 2022 | 31 of this trench giving the sedimentary layers and the location of the samples within these are shown in Fig 7. An Infrared-radiofluorescence dating methodology is given in the original report (Keys et al. 2002, 7 to 10.) THE RESULTS OF THE INFRARED-RADIOFLUORESCENCE DATING The results obtained from the samples are shown in Table Two. The results showed that three age clusters are present in the sediment. Two clusters, one from approximately 372 000 years ago (372 ka) and another from around 542 000 years ago (542 ka), is located in the 2020 excavation, while the third, approximately 437 000 years ago (437 ka) date cluster is from the 1998 exposure investigated by Bridgland et al. (Table Two and Fig 6). The Middle Sand (above the Lower Main Gravel) at 542 000 years ago broadly correlates with Marine Isotope Stage 14 (Fig 13). The Upper Main Gravel and the Intermediate Coarse Flints at 347 000 to 410 000 years ago correlate with Marine Isotope Stages 10 and 11. The younger age for the upper part of the sequence has been interpreted to be the result of later reworking of the uppermost part of the fluvial aggradation during Marine Isotope Stage 12. The upper sand layer and loam in the 1998 section at 379 00 years ago to 455 000 years ago correlate with Marine Isotope Stages 10 and 12, and the Middle Sand Layer at 433 000 years ago correlates with Marine Isotope Stage 12. Caution should be applied to the age interpretation Depth in cms. from the surface of the main gravel mass Number of Artefacts found at this level Percentage of Artefacts found at this level Associated Layer (As named in figure four) 0-10 22 8.76 Upper Main Gravel 10-20 10 3.98 20-30 21 8.37 30-40 19 7.57 40-50 41 16.33 50-60 17 6.77 Intermediate Coarse Flint 60-70 5 1.99 70-80 4 1.59 80-90 10 3.98 Middle Sand Layer 90-100 14 5.58 Lower Main Gravel 100-110 16 6.37 110-120 31 12.35 120-130 19 7.57 130-140 16 6.37 140-150 6 2.39 Total 251 100 Table ThreeAbsolute and relative frequencies of artefact concentrations throughout the excavated gravel sequence from both trenches as measured from the surface of the main gravel mass. The associated sediment layers do not perfectly align with the depth increments. (Based on Keys et al., 1922, Table Three)of the middle sand layer due to the lack of repeat sampling. These stratigraphic levels from the 1998 section are not present at the 2020 excavations (Fig 8). The upper limits of the sediment at the 1998 excavations and 2020 excavation are broadly level (Fig 8). This means that, when measured to the underlying Lambeth Group sands, the stratigraphic units in the 1998 section are deeper (both altitude and unit thickness) than in the 2020 section. Both the 1998 and 2020 excavations are toward the extreme west of the pit, where the letter from Dr. Willock that was contemporary with the original quarrying activity suggested that most handaxe artefacts were found. THE EARLIEST SECURELY DATED ACHEULEAN SITE IN BRITAIN Fluvial deposition at Fordwich West Pit is interpreted as having occurred during cold climatic periods with high-energy fluvial activity, potentially in a braided river system. Artefacts produced and discarded by hominins in previous warm climate periods would have formed part of this fluvial activity and deposition. So Fordwich represents fluvial aggradation of previously disposed stone tools. As a result, the dating method delivers the minimum age of the artefacts found in the dated sediment layer and the layers below. Although there is no contemporary information about where in the West Pit stratigraphy the handaxes retrieved from the West Pit by workers and collectors on an informal basis in the 1920s were recovered, many would have been in situ in the Lower Main Gravel having remained untouched by the later MIS 12 period 32 | Kent Archaeological Society TopFig 9: Bowes Collection Handaxe 77 collected in July 1924 (Drawing: M. Moores; Photo: F. Beresford) BottomFig 10: Bowes Collection Handaxe 298 collected on the 15th April 1926 (Drawing: M. Moores; Photo: F. Beresford) Winter 2022 | 33 of fluvial aggradation while others would have been in the Upper Main Gravel and been part of the reworking of this gravel which took part during this subsequent cold climatic period. A similar distribution is evident in the positions of the artefacts that were recovered during the excavations in 2020 (Table Three) 47% were in the Lower Main Gravel. Ten percent were in the Middle Sand Layer, which correlates with Marine Isotope Stage 14 and 43% were in the Upper Main Gravel and Intermediate Coarse Flint. With the exclusion of the loam and upper gravel/sand layer, the gravels at the 2020 excavations broadly match Smith’s 1933 description of the main gravel mass from which the Fordwich West Pit handaxes were recovered. Consequently, after also considering the abraded nature of many of the lithic tools, the 2020 Research Team (Key et al.) propose that hominins most likely discarded artefacts found in the Lower Main Gravel during Marine Isotope Stage 15 or MIS 15 but possibly earlier confirming the presence of early humans in Kent and the surrounding area between 560,000 and 620,000 years ago (Table Two). Many of the handaxes would have been retrieved AboveFig 11: Bowes Collection Handaxe 323 collected on the 28th July 1926 (Drawing: M. Moores; Photo: F. Beresford) LeftFig 12: Two examples of the retouched pieces and a core from the West Pit, Fordwich in 2020. The double-pointed retouched implement is top left, the largest scraper is bottom left and the largest core is on the right (© Alastair Key; Keys et al., 1922) 34 | Kent Archaeological Society from this level. This age suggests that the Lower Main Gravel in the Fordwich West Pit is the earliest securely dated site producing Acheulean handaxes in Britain. Artefacts found in the Upper Gravel were discarded by hominins during Marine Isotope Stages 13 or 15 or earlier. In this context, the majority were likely reworked from MIS 15 and formed an integral part of the MIS15 Acheulean assemblage. Future work is planned to gain additional insights into the complex fluvial architecture of the site. This will provide a better understanding of the distinct MIS 14 and MIS 12 periods of fluvial aggradation, along with the erosion and reworking processes. THE 1920S LITHICS Of the three known collections from the 1920s, the largest was that made by Dr Thomas Armstrong Bowes MA MD FSA (1869–1954.) He first visited the West Pit, or High Pit as he called it, in December 1923 when he retrieved eleven artefacts. His final visit was made in May 1932, when he had accumulated about 540 artefacts for his collection. Smith (1933b) described his collection, stating it “contains 220 artefacts that may be regarded as unrolled pear-shaped hand-axes of the peculiar Fordwich facies. There are ten of this type in a rolled condition and fifty-seven of St. Acheul character. There are also five cores, three good flake implements...….and a large number of amorphous flakes, with a few facetted butts.” Three of the handaxes from the Bowes collection are shown in Figs 9, 10 & 11. AboveFig 13: Warm and Cool Marine Isotope Stages up to one million years before present (right to left.) The West Pit at Fordwich is dated to the MIS 15 interglacial period. LeftFig 14: Location of the West Pit, Fordwich Site and other early Pre-Anglian Palaeolithic Sites in Northwest Europe. Sites with simple cores and flake technology (blue dots); Sites with Acheulean Technology (red dots); Homo heidelbergensis type site (green dot); Furthest extent of the MIS 12 (Anglian) Ice Sheet (black dotted line); Cromerian Period Shoreline (green) The arrows show possible communication routes during interglacial (red) and glacial (blue) periods. (Based on Antoine et al. 2019, Fig 1) Winter 2022 | 35 THE 2020 LITHICS In 2020, no further handaxes were recovered, so the Acheulean attribution relies upon those found in the 1920s to early 1930s. However, 238 lithic artefacts, mainly flakes, were recovered from the gravels in the two excavated trenches (Table Three) 112 were located in the Lower Main Gravel. There were four cores, three scrapers, one double-pointed implement, and two notched flakes, while a further flake displayed evidence of continuous retouch on a portion of its edge (Fig 12) OTHER RELATED SITES Cold glacial periods repeatedly drove populations out of northern Europe, and until recently, there was only limited dated evidence of Britain being recolonised during the warm periods in between. Now that it is securely linked to MIS 15 (Fig 13), the West Pit at Fordwich has become crucial to our current understanding of the pre-Anglian Palaeolithic in Northwest Europe. There are two earlier non-Acheulean British sites with simple core and flake technology; Pakefield in Suffolk is linked to MIS 17/19. At approximately 900,000 years old, Site 3 at Happisburgh in Norfolk is the oldest archaeological site in northern Europe (Figs 13 & 14). Two French Sites with Acheulean technology also pre-date the West Pit site. The French site at Moulin Quignon in Abbeville has evidence of hominins using this technology in Northwest Europe during MIS 17. The 700 000-year-old site with Acheulean technology of la Noira in the Loire Valley in Central France also pre-dates Fordwich and is one of the most technologically diverse pre-MIS 13 sites in Europe (Figs 13 & 14). Four British sites with Acheulean technology, Rampart Field, Warren Hill, Brandon Fields and Maidscross Hill, all along the former valley of the Bytham River in East Anglia, are also linked to MIS 15. However, currently, they are less secure in their attribution than Fordwich. The Bytham River was removed by the ice sheet during the MIS 12 Anglian glacial period. The site with Acheulean technology at Boxgrove in Sussex is securely dated to MIS 13 and later than West Pit, Fordwich (Fig 14). THE WEST PIT PALAEOLITHIC PEOPLE The currently emerging dating and lithics evidence reveals that successive small groups of hominins moved into North-west Europe during the Middle Pleistocene period. The new dating evidence from the West Pit at Fordwich indicates the presence of early people using Acheulean lithics technology in what is now Kent during MIS 15, dating to approximately 560 000–620 000 years ago. They are currently the earliest known inhabitants of the Kent area, although, during this period, the area would have been linked to Europe across a landscape that is now submerged beneath the North Sea and the English Channel. When this new dating evidence is combined with the discoveries in East Anglia along what was the Bytham river valley and with those in the Somme valley, it is now clear that hominins occupied large tracks of northwest Europe during MIS 15 and were almost certainly at least intermittently occupying a majority of what is now southern Britain. The large handaxe assemblages from the West Pit at Fordwich and the four sites along the Bytham River in East Anglia suggest a more prolonged occupation and larger population sizes that were greater than those of a few small explorative groups. It has been suggested that the West Pit people arrived in Kent having moved north along a projection of the current Somme valley (see the possible communication routes marked in Fig 14. However, the Channel River would have proved a formidable barrier on this route which they would have to cross or circumnavigate, so it is also possible that they travelled from the East through Doggerland, the name given to the landscape that is now submerged beneath the North Sea. WHO WERE THEY? Assigning the West Pit people to a defined group within the genus Homo is difficult. The Boxgrove people from MIS 13 have been linked to a group of humans known as Homo heidelbergensis, and it is suggested that the West Pit people were an earlier form of this group. The Type Site for Homo heidelbergensis is Mauer in Germany (Fig 14), where the Mauer mandible (Fig 15) was found in 1907 in fluvial sands deposited by the Neckar River 10 km southeast of Heidelberg, Germany. In 2010, two independent dating techniques, the combined electron spin resonance/U-series method used with mammal teeth and infrared radiofluorescence applied to sand grains as used at Fordwich, were used to date the type-site of Homo heidelbergensis at Mauer to 609 ± 40 ka. This result demonstrated that the mandible is the oldest hominin fossil reported from central and northern Europe (Wagner GA et al. 2010.) Boxgrove is the earliest site in Britain with fossils of the genus homo, and they are also thought to be of Homo heidelbergensis. A tibia was discovered in 1993, and two teeth were found separately in 1995 and 1996. The tibia is the only postcranial element of Homo heidelbergensis in Northern Europe However, since 1909, the name Homo heidelbergensis has subsequently been applied to an extensive and very variable range of hominin fossils dated to the Middle Pleistocene in Europe and Asia Africa, where the term Homo rhodesiensis has also been used. Recently Mirjana Roksandic and colleagues (Roksandic M. et al. 2022) have proposed that this large and diverse Homo heidelbergensis group should be split into three and that many of the fossils from Western Europe currently assigned to Homo heidelbergensis be reassigned to Homo neanderthalensis to reflect the early appearance of Neanderthal derived traits in the Middle Pleistocene in the region. This proposal does not preclude the possibility of other human populations in the area simultaneously. So were the West Pit People an early form of Homo neanderthalensis, or were they members 36 | Kent Archaeological Society of another human population, in the area? This complex question remains unresolved. WHAT NEXT? Current research will ensure we learn more about the West Pit People. Further work is planned by the 2020 Team (Key et al.) to gain additional insights into the complex fluvial architecture of the West Pit site. Peter Knowles is also actively pursuing his PhD research into the Palaeolithic in the Stour Valley. Most recently, he has rediscovered, in the basement of the Powell Cotton Museum in Birchington, a collection of six boxes of Pleistocene fossils wrapped in newspapers from the 1920s collected by Percy Powell-Cotton from a site in the Stour Valley. This fossil material has the potential to reveal more about the local environments from 600 000 years ago to 50 00 years ago. In addition, the author has commenced a reappraisal of the technological characteristics of those artefacts found in the West Pit in the 1920s and now in the British Museum. This should provide a baseline for comparing the technological characteristics of other Acheulean handaxes from Kent and the surrounding area now in museum and private collections. Did the West Pit People leave a distinctive lithic signature that can be recognised at other sites? AboveFig 15: The Mauer mandible (Photo: K Schacherl) REFERENCES Antoine P, Moncel M-H, Voinchet P, Locht J-L, Amselem D, Herisson D, Hurel A, Bahain J-J. 2019: The earliest evidence of Acheulian occupation in Northwest Europe and the rediscovery of the Moulin Quignon site, Somme valley, France. Science Rep. 9, 13091. Ashmore A. M., 1980 The typology and age of the Fordwich handaxes. Archaeologia. Cantiana 96, 83–117. Roksandic M, Radovic P, Wu X-J, Bae CJ. 2022: Resolving the “muddle in the middle”: The case for Homo bodoensis sp. nov. Evolutionary Anthropology. 31:20–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.21929 Bridgland D.R; Keen D. H; Schreve D. C; White M. J. 1998: Quaternary Drainage of the River Stour 3.2 Fordwich in The Quaternary of Kent and Sussex 41-42 (editors: JB Murton, CA Whiteman, MR Bates, DR Bridgland, AJ Long, MB Roberts, MP Waller). London, UK: Quaternary Research Association Coleman A. 1952: Some aspects of the development of the Lower Stour, Kent. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, London 63: 63-86. Key A, Lauer T, Skinner MM, Pope M, Bridgland DR, Noble L, Proffitt T. 2022: On the earliest Acheulean in Britain: first dates and in-situ artefacts from the MIS 15 site of Fordwich (Kent, UK). Royal Society Open Science 9: 211904. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211904 Roe DA. 1968: British Lower and Middle Palaeolithic handaxe groups. Proceedings of the. Prehistoric Society 34, 1–82. Roe DA. 1981: The Lower and Middle Palaeolithic periods in Britain. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Smart, J.G.O., Bisson, G., Worssam, B.C. 1966: The Geology of the Country around Canterbury and Folkestone HMSO. Smith RA. 1933a: Demonstration in the Prehistoric Section of the British Museum with special reference to stratified stone implements. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 1933 Vol. 44; Issue 2, 52-64. Smith RA. 1933b: Implements from high-level gravel near Canterbury. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society of East Anglia 7, 165–170. Wagner GA et al. 2010: Radiometric dating of the type-site for Homo heidelbergensis at Mauer, Germany. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 19 726–19 730. Wymer 1977: Fordwich 30th July – 31sh1977 in Notebook Volume 6, 198 to 201. from Mepham L. 2008: The JJ Wymer archive. Archaeology Data Service, York. Wymer, J. 1968. Lower Palaeolithic Archaeology in Britain as represented by the Thames Valley, London, 1968. Acknowledgements The author would like to thank Alastair Keys for agreeing to use the figures from the recent paper. Also, Nick Ashton and the Sturge Room team at the British Museum (Franks House) for their help. Figs 2, 3, 9, 10 and 11 are courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. Finally, he would like to thank Stan Matthews for his helpful comments and suggestions after reading an earlier version of this paper. Winter 2022 | 37 THE HOODEN HORSE A KENT CHRISTMAS CUSTOM By Dr Geoff Doel, University of Canterbury Christ Church Among distinctive regional Midwinter folk customs in Britain are several featuring animal disguises, particularly men dressed as horses. Most famous is the Welsh Mari Lwyd, featuring a skull, but in East Kent, we have the Hooden Horse, a man under sacking carrying a carved wooden horse’s head, who performs with attendants and, in the 19th century, used to tour from farm to farm over the Christmas period, particularly on Christmas Eve. Canterbury solicitor and local historian Percy Maylam wrote the definitive book on the Hooden Horse in 1909, featuring an interesting account of Gavelkind. Only 303 copies were printed, and it is rare and valuable. Percy’s great-nephew Richard Maylam, Mick Lynn and myself have edited a new edition with extra articles for the History Press. Percy meticulously researched documents and correspondence and witnessed the custom many times, first experiencing it as a young man in Thanet in the 1880s, which he vividly describes: “Anyone who has spent a Christmas in a farm-house in Thanet – it has been my good fortune to spend five – will not forget Christmas Eve…The front door is flung open, and there they all are outside, the ‘Waggoner’ cracking his whip and leading the Horse … which assumes a most restive manner, champing his teeth, and rearing and plunging, and doing his best to unseat the ‘Rider’, who tries to mount him, while the ‘Waggoner’ shouts ‘whoa!’ and snatches at the bridle. ‘Mollie’ is there also! She is a lad dressed up in woman’s clothes and vigorously sweeps the ground behind the horse with a birch broom. There are generally two or three other performers besides, who play the concertina, tambourine or instruments of that kind.” TopFig 1: St Nicholas at Wade Hoodeners, Sarre, 1905 (Maylam) BottomFig 2: St Nicholas Hoodeners, Canterbury 21 Dec 2019 (Geoff Doel) 38 | Kent Archaeological Society Percy Maylam’s numerous accounts include a letter of 1891 recounting the custom some 45 years earlier from one who went the rounds with the Hooden Horse: “It was always the custom on Christmas Eve with the male farm-servants in our parish of Hoath and neighbouring parishes of Herne and Chislet, to go round in the evening from house to house with the Hoodining Horse, which consisted of the imitation of a horse’s head made of wood, life-size, fixed on a stick about the length of a broom handle: the lower jaw… was made to open with hinges, a hole was made through the roof of the mouth, then another by the forehead coming out by the throat, through this was passed a cord attached to the lower jaw, which when pulled…caused it to open; on the lower jaw large headed hob-nails were driven in to form the teeth…As soon as the doors were open the ’horse’ would pull his string incessantly and the noise made can be better imagined than described…I have seen some of the wooden heads carved out quite hollow in the throat part, and two holes bored through the forehead to form the eyes. The lad who played the horse would hold a lighted candle in the hollow, and you can imagine how horrible it was to one who opened the door.” Percy Maylam visited, arranged photographs of, and described survivals of the declining custom at St Nicholas at Wade, Walmer and Deal in the Edwardian period, the Deal party only had two members, but his intervention at St Nicholas brought back the recently discarded Mollie. A letter sent to me in the 1980s from Naomi Wiffen, brought up in Deal, shows the custom still lingering at Christmas shopping in the 1930s: “I remember as a child being taken out on Christmas Eve to the High Street in Deal where the shops would be open very late, and it was the only time Deal children were allowed out in the evening, as parents were very strict. As we would be looking at the lighted shops, and listening to the people selling their wares, a horrible growl, and a long horse’s face would appear, resting on our TopFig 3: Canterbury Hoodeners New Inn (Geoff Doel 2016) BottomFig 4: The Tonbridge Mummers & Hoodeners with Richard Maylam & the Lord Lieutenant of Kent at the Kent County Show. 1999shoulder and when one looked round, there would be a long row of teeth snapping at us with its wooden jaws. It was frightening for a child. Usually, there would be a man leading the horse, with a rope, and another covered over with sacks or blankets as the horse.” Percy Maylam provided the raw material for a revival. After a break of 40 years, St Nicholas at Wade Hoodeners began a lively rebirth in the 1960s with the addition of a village play, which is still going strong in the capable hands of Ben Jones, who helpfully provides an excellent website and archive. Several new sites and revivals sprang up in Thanet and elsewhere; the Broadstairs Folk Festival adopted the Hooden Horse as its symbol, and morris sides such as The East Kent, Dead Horse and Hartley introduced hooden horses. My Tonbridge Hoodeners Winter 2022 | 39 frequently performed at KAS events organised by Margaret Lawrence and at the Kent County Show and on ‘South at Six’, featured a death and revival play scripted by Nick Miller and myself, which was influenced by Dorset and Cheshire horse traditions from the villages of Symondsbury and Antrobus traditions. South East Arts sponsored a book on the custom by my wife Fran & myself, which inspired the creation of a chain of Hooden Horse pubs, talks on the custom and further revivals. James Frost, a leading researcher and lecturer on performing Arts and organiser of the Canterbury Hoodeners, has masterminded an exciting new exhibition on Hoodening at Maidstone Museum from 8 February to 17 June 2023, featuring two horses stored in the Museum and many other fascinating artefacts, with talks, panel discussions and performances. Above, leftFig 5: Hooden Horses from Wingham at Maidstone Museum (Photo Geoff Doel) Above, rightFig 6: Isobel & Hooden Horses at Maidstone Museum (Geoff Doel 1983) Percy’s book and the exhibition explore a possible link with the vibrant Summer hobby horse tradition. Are they all remnants of early horse cults, as Percy suggests, or independent traditions? 19th century accounts emphasise festive enjoyment, money and beer! “We wish ye a merry Christmas And a happy New Year, A pocketful of money and A cellarful of beer.” (The Eythorne Hoodeners) I’d be interested to hear of any further information on the custom from KAS members please (geoffdoel@btinternet.com). 40 | Kent Archaeological Society MEDWAY HISTORY SHOWCASE 2022 By Pete Joyce On the 15th of October 2022, approximately ninety people gathered at the RE Museum in Gillingham for the initial Medway History Showcase. The idea initially came from Pro Mark Connelly at University Kent Canterbury under the guises of the Institute for Historical Research (IHR), and the inaugural event was held as Kent: The gateway to the world in April at the Westgate Hall in Canterbury; this was to be followed by a similar event in Medway. The concept of the event was to provide a cross-over platform between the three tiers of history and archaeology that we regularly encounter: the academic, local societies and those with interest but no involvement. The format conceived was quite simple. Eight short talks with minimal amounts of academic language and jargon; engaging exhibitions and a family-friendly environment with plenty of space for people to meet, explore and engage. Unfortunately, the Medway event had to be postponed for several reasons, and during the summer, Mark asked if I would run a rescheduled event with his guidance and backing. We decided that we would not make significant changes, so I contacted Rebecca Nash at the Royal Engineers Museum to ask if they would still like to host and what availability they had. After that, it was a case of confirming with the original speakers that they were still available. As with these great ideas, it never turned out to be that simple, and as we got to the sixth draft of the itinerary, I was beginning to TopFig 1: MHS exhibitors at the splendid surorundings of the Royal Engineers Museum BottomFig 2: Sheila Sweetinburgh and Jason Mazzocchi, CKHH and Lossenham Project Winter 2022 | 41 wonder if we would ever get there. I am incredibly grateful to colleagues inside and outside of KAS who stepped in at short notice to give talks, especially Elaine Gardner of the Friends of Medway Archives (FOMA), who offered to give an unscripted talk when a speaker tested positive for Covid on the day. The talks ranged from the Roman period through to WW1. They covered subjects ranging from Walking from London to Dover in the Dickensian period to the building of the Navy Memorial in Chatham. The exhibitors were equally varied, from the Centre Kent History and Heritage (CKHH) and the Lossenham project to Kent Defence Research Group (KDRG), who brought their expertise and some serious archaeological finds. There were representatives from Medway and Kent Archives, and we were also joined by Mr Martin Stoneham, the chair of the Friends of the Royal Engineers Museum. The day turned out to be as hoped and met the organising criteria. Throughout the day, there was a steady buzz from the centre of the museum, where the exhibitors were set up, and the auditorium was packed for each of the talks. There was plenty of networking between the talks, and other projects and research opportunities have already begun to flourish (See article on Medieval Animals). The feedback was generally positive, and plans are underway to repeat the events next year with a theme of Industry. Top, leftFig 3: Colin Welch of KDRG exhibiting artefacts courtesy of the award-winning @craterlocatorsTop, rightFig 4: JJ immersed in past issue of the Magazine BottomFig 5: Carolyn Oulton discussing www.kent-maps.online – a site that provides themed essays about Kent using interactive maps and images If you would like to be involved in this excellent opportunity to showcase history or archaeology in 2023, or you wish to discuss how the Society can help your local history society, please email me at outreach@kentarchaeology.org. 42 | Kent Archaeological Society SOMETHING AT THE END OF THE GARDEN A SECRET SECOND WORLD WAR RADIO LISTENING POST IN NORTHFLEET By Victor Smith Under the end of the rear garden of an ordinary-looking house in Mayfield Road, Northfleet, there was a top-secret radio listening post during the Second World War. Here, in a small bunker, the householder, the late Mr Stan Martin, spent many hours during the war years in a lonely vigil sitting in front of his radio set. With his headphones pressed against his ears, he strained to listen for the sounds of enemy radio transmissions. Mr Martin was a member of a still little-known and unsung network of people of the Radio Security Service (RSS). Most were wireless enthusiasts, popularly called ‘radio hams’ who had volunteered to serve their country. This organisation was initially intended to listen in for any enemy agents transmitting from Britain. Not many agents are thought to have been found by this method (only 44 illicit transmissions having been detected in the entire country), so the role of the RSS was broadened to include listening for enemy transmissions from outside Britain. In the process, it moved from the ambit of MI5 to MI6, concerned with foreign intelligence. This organisation was a specialised adjunct to the primary service intelligence gathering network, including the ‘Y’ stations whose work included detecting German Enigma-code messages. Potential RSS operators were ‘sounded out’ individually for their willingness to serve and were security-vetted. In time there were around 1500 of them spread over the United Kingdom, divided into nine regions, each controlled by a captain of the Royal Corps of Signals. They were classified as Voluntary Interceptors (VIs). Most were unpaid. They undertook a minimum of 9-12 hours of listening per week, in 3-hour watches, on a shift basis with other operators, to ensure 24 hours coverage. Such volunteers could include teenagers, pensioners and those in key reserved occupations important for the war effort, such as Mr Martin. He worked at a power station in Gravesend, which produced vital electricity supplies. Mr Martin’s bunker had originated as a private garden air raid shelter. Reached down steps from the garden and through a minuscule ‘lobby’ is a single 2.3 m. x 1.8 m. rectangular room in which the radio-listening equipment, a table and a chair were located. It has a 1.7 m high flat ceiling. Electric light provided crucial illumination. AboveFig 1: Portrait of Stan Martin Winter 2022 | 43 A wall-mounted fan was installed for ventilation. Outside there was a radio mast next to the bunker. When the author visited in 2002, there were traces inside the bunker of where there had been electrical fittings as well as a folding table. VI stations across the country were generally at the operators’ homes, utilising any suitable, convenient or adapted space. As with other operators, Mr Martin used his equipment. Later in the war, some operators received updated receivers, especially from the United States. In the foreground to the right in the photograph of the bunker’s interior is an American AR-88 receiver, thought to have been provided for VIs from about halfway through the war. Mr Martin was in Home South Group 2, with its headquarters at Leatherhead. His abilities were soon recognised, and he became leader of one of its sub-divisions (G10), which had operators from Plumstead to Sittingbourne and north of the Thames at Grays and Thurrock. It was their task to listen in to radio traffic sent in morse code from various places, whether from occupied Europe or elsewhere, including Southern Ireland, where British ship movements were sometimes reported to the enemy. In the words of Mr Martin, ‘our duties were to monitor a very wide range of frequencies….within which they would carry out a general search over a specified band …and…copy traffic from known suspect services.’ Among the broad range of radio transmissions listened to by VIs up and down the country, there would be those of the Abwehr, Gestapo and other sources. Many were encoded; in such cases, their meaning was not understood by the VIs. Signals to Britain from resistance groups in occupied Europe reporting the results of Allied bombing raids were sometimes also heard. The task of radio listening was painstaking, requiring immense patience and considerable skill. Indeed, Mr Martin and many of his fellow VIs had already developed aural abilities to hear, understand and record messages when they appeared faded. The messages copied by the VIs were passed on daily for assessment and, where necessary, decoding by the intelligence services, being sent via a post office box at Barnet. This was part of the larger picture of information gathering centred on the now-famous Bletchley Park. Receipt of these logs to VIs was acknowledged with a standard abbreviated response including, in the case of findings from general searches, ‘Suspect – More Please’, when the radio source concerned was expected to provide more or continuing information. As a group leader, Mr Martin received paperwork from the RSS daily to ensure that his operators would cover the most wanted frequencies. After 1941, in an attempt to help operators deal with possible awkward questions from suspicious neighbours, they were given the ‘cover’ of the Royal Observer Corps membership and presented with a beret, badge and armband. But the pattern of their lives and movements did not quite square with what people knew of the function and routine of that organisation. Mr Martin commented, ‘I often wondered how many of my VIs could distinguish TopFig 2: Stan Martin’s house on Mayfield Road in 2022 BottomFig 3: Plan of the underground radio listening post in Mayfield Road, Northfleet (Victor Smith) 44 | Kent Archaeological Society the difference between a Wellington bomber and a Heinkel or a Junkers 88’. Because of Mr Martin’s position as leader of a sub-division, there were ‘strange’ visitors from the RSS calling into the house for an exchange of documentation. This led to speculation and the circulation of rumours among neighbours that ‘something was going on’. There was also an allegation to the authorities, paralleled in the case of some other VIs, that spying was being carried out from the premises. The last straw was when a particularly troublesome neighbour who had, in error, received an envelope from the RSS correctly addressed to Mr Martin put it into a post box and marked it ‘Not known at this address.’ A government official subsequently visited Mr Martin’s neighbour(s), and, thereafter, these problems ceased. Although when the VI network was first proposed, some doubts about the effectiveness of such an organisation had been expressed. However, it proceeded, and its value to national defence and the war effort became recognised, whether for supplying individual information items or contributing to the wider intelligence picture. Unknowingly to Mr Martin in Northfleet, he might have contributed significant intelligence insights. At the end of the war, in what might have seemed for some of them an anti-climax, the VIs were stood down, a certificate of appreciation being issued to them by, so far as they were concerned, an unknown Mr H.J. Creedy at the War Office. Many considered this an insult and would have preferred an acknowledgement of their service from Winston Churchill or the King, albeit as a duplicated signature. AboveFig 4: Interior of Mr Martin’s bunker (undated) Mr Martin had taken his job seriously. He never forgot that what he heard over his headphones was not just abstract intelligence information but affected people’s lives. Not least was the effect on him of the SOS calls from ships sinking after being struck by U-boat torpedoes, yet unable to assist in any way. The memory of this haunted him until he died in 1993. Some of the radio equipment which Mr Martin used has been preserved by the Imperial War Museum, which took it into its collection in 1995. Other items were acquired by a private radio historian and enthusiast elsewhere in Kent. There might be more to be discovered about the VI service in Kent, although it is thought that many M16-related records have been destroyed and that others have not yet been placed in the public domain. This article is a tribute to the memory of the late Stan Martin and the other VIs of the Radio Security Service. It is an enhanced version of the writer’s article, Mr. Martin’s Secret War, which the Gravesend Historical Society published in their Historic Gravesham, No. 50 (2004), pages 7-9. For the latter purpose, the photographic portrait and the image of the inside of the bunker, as well as the typescript notes of Mr Martin, were kindly made available to the writer by his daughter, Pamela. She also shared recollections from her father and reviewed the then text. More recently, new information has been received from the Radio Society of Great Britain and the Bletchley Park Trust. This has been added. The photograph of Mayfield Road and the scale plan of the bunker are from the writer. The Gravesend Historical Society are thanked for their permission to include material from the original article. Winter 2022 | 45 ROMAN SETTLEMENT AT SHEPWAY CROSS, LYMPNE By Richard Taylor A SHAL (Studying History and Archaeology in Lympne) community excavation on farmland near Shepway Cross has revealed a Romano-British roadside settlement. Following earlier work carried out in the 1970s and 80s by the Ashford Archaeological Group and Dr Sam Moorhead, the background to the excavation began in 2018 when SHAL and Malcolm Davies commissioned Richard Taylor to conduct a geophysical (magnetometry) survey of three fields. The results were intriguing. The survey was completed by February 2020, and SHAL then worked hard to assure the landowners that a community excavation was required (Fig 1). This came to fruition in August this year; a successful two-week community evaluation not only confirmed the initial aims – it’s a Romano-British site – but has thrown up other possibilities/questions regarding function and date. Three evaluation trenches were sited over geophysical anomalies. Trench 1 was sited over a strong, rectangular magnetic anomaly which duly turned up a wall, two in-situ floor tiles, a post hole, numerous Romano-British pottery sherds, a few coins and a significant amount of lead and iron slag. The current thinking is a small industrial/workshop site. Trench 2 was sited over a quiet area inside what appeared to be an enclosure. We thought this was an area some distance away from the likely concentrated industrial TopFig 1: Lympne magnetometry results showing settlement MiddleFig 2: Looking west at Trench 1 BottomFig 3: Floor tiles in Trench 1 46 | Kent Archaeological Society TopFig 4: Roman cremation burial – bichonical beaker (right) containing cremated remains Middle, leftFig 5: Samian dish with barbotine decoration Middle, rightFig 6: Possible North Gaulish beaker BottomFig 7: Hobnails visible as remains of buried shoe(s) Winter 2022 | 47 and occupation areas to the south; our hope was for burials, and we were not disappointed. The machine bucket clipped the top of a Samian dish (AD 145-185), revealing a nice three-vessel cremation burial, including in-situ hobnails from a pair of boots/shoes (Figs 4–7). The cremation burial wasn’t lifted but carefully recorded, backfilled, and the position was taken with GNSS. Trench 3 (east field) produced many Romano-British finds from varied contexts, including c.60 coins, the majority early fourth century, and a variety of box flue tile fragments with different patterns but no structures, that is, until the final day when the machine returned. We excavated a small sondage c.900mm in depth into a more consistent context. This revealed a small linear ditch containing three coins (again, early fourth century) and a quantity of animal bone. The current thinking is that this year’s excavation area is possibly a vicus serving a fortification situated south across Aldington Road (Fig 9), both likely around from the second century and used until well into the fourth century. SHAL’s excavation proved successful regarding the archaeological results and community engagement, with many local residents and other local groups involved in the two-week project. SHAL would like to extend their sincere gratitude to the landowners for this community project’s continued access and support. Plans are underway to return next year to examine additional geophysical targets to better understand the site’s function. TopFig 8: Trench 3 looking east MiddleFig 9: Possible fortification situated south acrosss Aldington Road BottomFig 10: Local resident and SHAL member Dave Earnshaw undertaking forensic excavation and cleaning of the cremation burial 48 | Kent Archaeological Society ROMAN VILLA WITH BATHHOUSE AND HYPOCAUST SYSTEM REVEALED NEAR TROSLEY By Richard Taylor A fieldwork team uncovered the remains of a Roman villa near Trosley. Along with the wall foundations of the main villa building, the discovery of a partially intact hypocaust system came during an excavation led by the Society. They were helped by experienced volunteers and residents on a September community excavation. Site director, Richard Taylor, who led the excavation along BelowFig 1: Excavations at Trosley Roman Villa KAS Archaeological excavations on farmland near Trosley have revealed a Roman villa and possible bathhouse containing the remains of an underfloor heating system (hypocaust). with KAS General Manager Clive Drew, explained that the presence of the hypocaust – which likely heated a bathhouse – suggested the occupants were reasonably high status. Three evaluation trenches were sited over cropmarks identified by Chris Blair-Myers (Fig 2); one sited over the main building (Trench 1) and two over what was thought to have been an ancillary building (Trenches 2 & 3). Winter 2022 | 49 Trench 1 revealed wall foundations of a villa building composed of mortared ragstone and flint. The interior sub-floors remain and are composed of compacted chalk. Fortunately, the foundations fit the cropmark projections, so the extent of the building can be extrapolated with a degree of confidence (30m x 15m). In addition to third and fourth-century pottery, Trench 1 revealed a quantity of multicoloured painted wall plaster, which likely adorned the interior walls of the villa (Fig 4). Trench 3, sited over the ancillary building, revealed a concentration of building rubble and, toward the west, an exterior mettled surface constructed of compacted flints (Fig 6). Excavations in Trench 2 revealed a wall foundation to the east and a curved wall or apse-like feature to the west of what we believe to be a bathhouse. A sondage adjacent to the east wall revealed a pillar – pilae stack – is part of the underfloor heating system beneath the bathhouse (Fig 8). Operating a hypocaust was expensive and required a constant supply of fuel – firewood – and a workforce to run it. The system worked on the principle of hot gases circulating in enclosed airspace within the bathhouse. The Roman-British would likely use laid tiles for their floors and ceramic tile for their wall spaces. Sealing the building’s interior was essential to prevent smoke and harmful gases from escaping into the rooms. A layer of ash and soot surrounding the base of the stack has been sampled to try and understand the type of wood used as fuel. A hypocaust system would’ve ensured warm and inviting spaces if working correctly. However, due to the expense and the labour needed to tend the fires, a hypocaust was limited to villas of the wealthy and public buildings. Richard commented, “1700 years ago, heating your home was expensive, so nothing has changed.” The community excavation was part of the more comprehensive KAS Trosley Heritage Project and uncovered several artefacts, TopFig 2: Cropmark projections of the villa complex identified by Chris Blair-Myers using Google Earth, with Trenches 1-3 overlaying BottomFig 3: Aerial view of Trench 1 showing wall foundations and sub-floors (chalk) 50 | Kent Archaeological Society Top leftFig 4: Multicoloured wall plaster from villa interior Top, rightFig 5: Aerial view of Trenches 2 & 3 sited over bathhouse building MiddleFig 6: Mettled surface (left) to the west of bathhouses building BottomFig 7: Looking north at the pilae stack; evidence of ash/soot can be seen at the base, sealed with backfill material Winter 2022 | 51 including an amphora-shaped belt adornment (dated c.375 AD), a small Romano-British key, two 4th-century coins, pottery and a quantity of wall plaster from the main villa building, some pieces still showing vibrant colours. The KAS team first identified the villa’s location using Google Earth (2007) images, showing crop markings outlining the site. September’s excavation was carried out with the help of over 50 volunteers, and members of the community were invited to view the excavation trenches and artefacts on the final day. “Overall, it was a big success,” added Richard. “We proved the presence of a likely high-status Roman-British villa complex, as indicated on the Google Earth images, had lots of local interest and school visits. So it was terrific and engaged the local community with their Romano-British past.” The Society plan to return next year (September 2023) with another community excavation to investigate the bathhouse further. Before this, it is hoped the Society survey team will have an opportunity to conduct a geophysical survey of the surrounding fields to reveal other possible archaeological targets for research. From dating the pottery and coins, the team could estimate that the villa likely dated back to the 3rd and 4th centuries. A Top, leftFig 8: Apse-like structure/wall on the west side of the bathhouse building Top, rightFig 9: Fourth-century copper alloy amphora strap-end BottomFig 10: Constantine II coin (c.330-5 AD)relatively wealthy farmer probably occupied it. But these Roman-British farmers weren’t the first residents in the area – the nearby Coldrum Long Barrow dates to around 3900 BC, meaning some of the nearby lands were probably being farmed for thousands of years before the villa appeared. Perhaps this suggests a continuity of settlement in the area that goes back c.5000 years, which is not surprising given its idyllic location and agricultural potential. The villa is like just one episode in a much greater time frame. 52 | Kent Archaeological Society School Visits During the excavations, visits were made by classes from Trosley Primary school. Children from Years 3 to 6 explored the site, engaged in artefact handling and suggested scenarios about what life may have been like at the villa. A selection of their thoughts is shared on these pages. Work Experience The excavation enabled Henry Shepherd, a Year 11 student at Maidstone Grammar School to undertake a period of work experience on-site, undertaking and learning a variety of new skills: I am a year 11 student at Maidstone Grammar School studying for my GCSEs. I have always enjoyed History; over recent years, I have also developed an interest in Classical Civilisations. When I got the chance to participate in a local archaeological excavation, I was excited about the opportunity. The process began last year when the Kent Archaeological Society carried out preliminary fieldwalks and dug test pits after crop markings were identified on Google Earth following a particularly dry period. This, along with a resistivity survey, suggested the presence of the main villa and another outhouse, potentially a bathhouse. We spent six days in September excavating and recording three evaluation trenches, whilst metal detectorists swept the surrounding area. The first day I was at the site, Richard Taylor, the lead archaeologist helped to show me the ropes and introduce me to the tools I would become accustomed to by the end of the week: an archaeologist’s best friend, the trowel, used to expose finds and cut through mud and soil; a bucket for excavated soil; a spade for cleaning loose debris off the trench floor, a pair of gloves and, finally, a kneeling mat to protect my knees. I enjoyed the excavation, using the tools I had learnt how to use to gradually chip away at the earth and unveil objects not touched or seen in thousands of years. On the first day, we began to find ceramic building materials and what was possibly building Winter 2022 | 53 foundations; in the surrounding field, detectorists uncovered five Roman coins – this helped to build a sense of certainty that what we had under our feet was truly a Roman villa site. I was introduced to resistivity surveying. This consists of connecting two metal rods with a current flowing through them to the ground. It can suggest the presence of certain features, such as walls if it gives a reading of high resistance from where the current has encountered an obstruction. From the survey I helped conduct in the manor house garden, we identified a line of high resistance leading out from the manor house to an unused field, which could be a path leading to a building lost to time. Throughout the rest of the week, I spent some time cleaning the finds. This is quite an interesting job since it allows you to examine all the finds, such as building materials, colourful wall plaster and more. Added to this, on the penultimate day of my time at Trosley, I helped to detect a nearby field. It was the perfect example of beginner’s luck, within twenty minutes, we had found a silver coin dating to AD 1687 during the reign of King James I and a tiny jewellery box-style key later identified as Roman. Throughout the entire week, I felt like part of the team and was welcomed with open arms by everybody there. I also learnt a lot from all the experienced excavators and archaeologists there who helped me. I hope I can do something similar in the future. I want to thank the Kent Archaeological Society for the opportunity and kindly allowing me to take home a bucket of tools to use on future digs. Henry Shepherd 54 | Kent Archaeological Society INTRODUCING THE SOCIETY’S OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT OFFICER – PETE JOYCE My name is Pete Joyce. I am a mature PhD student at Canterbury Christ Church University working on 18th-century charity in the lower Medway valley. Before that, I did a MA(Res) on Rev Caleb Parfect, who was instrumental in promoting and founding the national SPCK workhouse movement in Strood. Although I come later in life to the professional world of history and archaeology, I have always had an interest and have been fortunate to visit many historic sites worldwide. Between starting my undergrad some twelve years ago and leaving the armed forces in the 90s, I have been involved in several industries, from professional camera sales and teaching photography to being a steward in a golf club. For the last four years, I have been a lay chaplain to the CCCU community as part of the chaplaincy team there. This wide and dynamic range of jobs has always been built around my ability to communicate and my organisational skills, two values that I hope members will notice in my work with the Society. I am excited by this new role and this new direction for me in my life. I feel that we are living in a great time for history and archaeology. Of the many lessons of Covid, I think the most striking is a newfound appreciation for the places we live and a new desire to tell the histories and stories that make our communities what they are. The recent death of HLM Queen TopPeter Joyce MiddlePete with his two boys, JJ and Mr B BottomPete finding an unknown Charles 1 Book of Common Prayer in the CCCU LibraryElizabeth II has shown nationally that history is far from a political football to be kicked into touch to the benefit of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics). Instead, it is the DNA of our communities, and the Society plays a vital role in keeping that alive both in the ancient county of Kent and on the national stage with our partners in other counties. Although I really look forward to meeting members at the events we are planning to host both online and in person, I look forward to the members’ input, suggestions and guidance on how I can help promote the Society. So if you have an idea, the local historical society is looking for a speaker, the local archaeology society needs some instruction, tiny Jenny’s teacher needs some lesson ideas, or you have a great local history/archaeology event and want to have a cuppa and chat about it then please email me at outreach@kentarchaeology.org. Happy history and archaeology and I look forward to hearing from you soon. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. 55 Winter 2022 | NOTICES ARCHAEOLOGIA CANTIANA AVAILABLE Canterbury Cathedral Archives and Library have two runs of Archaeologia Cantiana available to a good home. The volumes would need to be collected. Further details below – note there are likely/definitely gaps in the runs! • Archaeologia Cantiana (vol.1 (1858) – vol.122 (2002)) – potentially with gaps • Archaeologia Cantiana (vol. 33 (1918) – vol.116 (1996)) - with gaps Also available are three volumes of Archaeologia (vols. 106, 108, 109). If interested, please contact: (Mrs) Fawn Todd, Cathedral Librarian (she/her) Canterbury Cathedral Archives & Library Telephone: +44 (0)1227 865330 Fawn.Todd@canterbury-cathedral.org LIBRARY OF ARCHAEOLOGIA CANTIANA – VOLUMES 1 (1858) TO 143 (2022) I would pass them on in one single transaction. I am not able to make about sixty visits to the Post Office! Ideally, someone would collect them from me in Walmer. Any reasonable offer would do it! Please get in touch with Peter Tann at peter.tann@btinternet.com NEW BOOK RELEASE: ARCHAEOLOGY ON THE FRONT LINE 70 YEARS OF RESCUE 1952–2022 ACROSS KENT AND S.E.LONDON By Brian Philp This much-awaited book is a second edition covering the first 50 years recorded in the (sold-out) first edition but adding another 20 years of Events and Sites up until 2022. With 300 pages, it has 350 illustrations, the great majority colour. It describes the battles, strategies and victories over this long period with sites saved by instant recording or preservation, often in the face of severe problems. These include the Roman Forum in London, the Royal Abbey at Faversham, four Roman forts at Dover and Reculver, six Roman villas, two Saxon cemeteries, three palaces and four manor-houses. It also lists the many published reports that are an unmatched record of publication across the county, now totalling over 400. Many awards have followed this uniquely Kentish progress. Whilst often amusing but sometimes hard-hitting, an important feature is the acknowledgement by name of over 240 key team members of the 2,000 who joined in the numerous training, excavation, presentation and reporting events. Nor are the cringe-worthy Gremlins left out! The slightly anonymous character of this epic Kentish tale is the author, who started his archaeological career on 6th February 1952 whilst at Bromley Grammar School. That day the head declared, “The King has died”, and closed the school. Instead of leaving, Brian slipped into the library to discover a book on the Roman shore-forts. He began his long career with 40 years of excavation on the lost fort at Dover, 18 years of excavation on the eroding fort at Reculver and 700 other projects. Hence Archaeology on the Front Line. Order your copy from: Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit, 18 Highfield Avenue, Orpington, Kent BR6 6LF. Price £20.00, plus £4 postage. All those thanked in the text, or who were Council for Kentish Archaeology supporters, have rightly earned a 20% discount. Please make cheques payable to KARU. RESEARCH OPPORTUNITY Evolution of a downland landscape: Nonington 700–1400 Suitable for a Masters by Research, either full-time or part-time, we at the Centre for Kent History and Heritage at Canterbury Christ Church University have some funding for a historical landscape project based in east Kent. Are you interested in Kent’s early medieval history? Have you ever wondered how the different estates in the countryside came into being during the time of the Kingdom of Kent and beyond, and how they developed either side of the Norman Conquest as the pressure of the Norman presence came to bear on the Kentish countryside? If so, then this project may be just right for you! Called ‘The Evolution of a Downland Landscape: Nonington 700–1400’, we know there is a good corpus of charter and other documentary materials and evidence from archaeological and topographical work. For preliminary enquiries, please get in touch with me at sheila.sweetinburgh@canterbury.ac.uk and we can discuss your ideas. If undelivered, please return to: Kent Archaeological Society, c/o Marsham Street Community Centre, 39-48 Marsham Street, Maidstone, Kent ME14 1HH 2023 DIARY OF SOCIETY EVENTS Date Host Event Location TBC Kerry Brown Andrew Richardson Ozengell Collection Launch TBC 17th January 2023 Clive Drew Chair of Trustee 2023 Address by Kerry Brown Online 21st January 2023 Fieldwork Committee Conference Grimond 1, University of Kent, Canterbury 7th February 2023 Kerry Brown Mission to England: reinvestigating the origins of St. Augustine’s Abbey ParishProf Ken Dark St Paul’s without walls, Church Street St. Paul’s, Canterbury 21st February 2023 RIchard Taylor KTS Charles Shee Online 7th March 2023 Simon Elliot Why we don’t speak Latin?Prof John Lambshead Maidstone Museum 18th March 2023 Fieldwork Forum Lees Court Estate 20th May 2023 Lin Taylor Place Name Group, Meopham Walk Meopham 20th May 2023 Trustees Annual General Meeting UKC (TBC) TBC Pete Joyce Prof David Killingray Stuart Bligh Publications Conference North Kent 18th November 2023 Mark Bateson Place Names Conference Royal Engineers Museum (TBC) 21st October 2023 Outreach MHS23 Royal Engineers Museum Further details for each event will be published on the website and social media nearer the scheduled time WHAT’S ON... The KAS Place-Names Group plan a guided walk following a possible route of the Meopham Anglo-Saxon charter boundary on Saturday, 20th May. Group member John Death, who has made a detailed study of the boundary, will lead the walk. While places are free, they are limited, owing to the logistics and safety risks of leading a large group of people around the countryside and along some public roads. • Walk date: Saturday 20th May 2023 • Time: 1.00 p.m. to 4.30 p.m. approx • Start: Meopham Railway Station (car parking is available, but there is a charge) • Finish: Meopham Railway Station • Distance: 7.7 kms or a little under 5 miles • Grade: easy, though some steep hills in places, a mixture of (mostly) minor roads and public footpaths through woods and open countryside • Further details: we hope to break the walk for a brief rest and refreshment at the Cock Inn, Henley Street, Luddesdown. Members of the Place-Names Group trialled the route on 14th August 2021. Mark BatesonPlace-Names Group Chair mark.bateson@kentarchaeology.org.uk THE KENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY PLACE-NAMES GROUP PRESENTS: A WALK AROUND THE MEOPHAM ANGLO-SAXON CHARTER BOUNDARY