Adisham Mill: Romano-British Temple and Ritual Landscape
During early 2017, the author, whilst searching the newly released Google Earth Satellite coverage of East Kent, noted what revealed to suggest a previously unknown and rare in Kent, Romano-British Temple (Templum) site, within a ploughed field on a broad Upper natural chalk ridge (British Geological Survey) adjacent north to the former 19th century site of Adisham Mill (Fig 1), and close up (Fig 2).
The site is situated at TR 20568- 54712 (centred), at an elevation of 60m AOD. The site occupies
On the opposing south side of the hill 597m from the temple, are an additional cluster of three ring-ditches with two further south. Varying in size, they measure between 11m to 27m. Close by, measuring 18m in diameter, a monument resembling a Neolithic Causeway enclosure with three entrances is visible. At the centre, a curious
2.85m2 rectangular feature could represent a ritual platform (Fig 5).
During 1773, six barrows were recorded at two locations adjacent to the road close to the former Adisham Mill site, (Faussett
1856). Although none of these are currently visible in Google historical imagery, recent Faussett map research by the author and Keith Parfitt has enabled the location of all six former barrows to be securely located. Dover Archaeological Group holds this analysis. On the opposing south side of the hill 597m from the temple, are an additional cluster of three ring-ditches with two further south. Varying in size,
Acknowledgements:
Firstly our gratitude to the landowner Robert D.E. Spencer, Garrington Farm nr Canterbury for his kind permission to access his property to survey the site.
Keith Parfitt for help with Rev B Faussett research and the geophysical survey
team: Elissia Burrows (Osteo- forensic Archaeologist), Emily Brown (Archaeologist), David Earnshaw, Marilyn White and Darcey Burrows (aged 7).Bibliography
ARCHI UK 2018. www.archiuk. com accessed 9th Nov 2018.
British Geological Survey, Canterbury. Sheet 289, Solid and Drift Edition. 1982.
Faussett.B 1856, Inventorium Sepulchrale, (ed C. Roach Smith), London. p144.
Margary I.D., “Roman Roads in Britain “. 3rd Edition Nov 1997 the northern gentle sloping side just below the hill summit that rises to 68m AOD. This location affords an uninterrupted panoramic view to the north, east and west of the monument and would have been seen for several miles in most directions.
The site lies within an arable clay- with-flints field enclosed on its northern axis by Adisham Road, Shepherds Close Road to the west and the Bramling Road that bisects the hill 55m south of the temple.
The former Romano-British town of the modern City of Canterbury (Durovernum Cantiacorum), lies
6.7km to the NW and the site of a Romano-British settlement (ARCHI UK), now the village of Adisham,
2.2 km SE of Adisham Mill.
The main Richborough to Canterbury Roman road (Margary route 10) is situated some 3.28km north of the site and the Dover to Canterbury Roman road (Margary route 1a) 2km to the west.
The local hinterland has been carefully observed using Google Earth by the author since its release in 2002. Some 600m south of the temple, at least two ring-ditches were noted in 2013. However, closer observation within the new 2017 image reveals three ring-ditches, with a further ring- ditch that appears to represent a Neolithic causeway monument (Fig 3), all discussed below.
In September 2018, the author organised a geophysical survey of the temple site that, despite dry soil conditions, produced a reasonable ground-truthing image supporting the Google Earth view that indicates some extensive plough erosion.
The results suggest the site has been systemically robbed of building material with no indications of remaining in situ structural materials either from the central tower, Cella or the surrounding ambulatory or veranda (Figs 3 & 4).
Conspicuous in its absence, field- walking by the team failed to produce any contemporary building material or associated pottery. The temples measurements taken from the satellite image are approximate: The outer ambulatory measures 15m x 15m, the central tower (Cella)
8m x 8m and the colonnades spaced at 2.56m. There is no visual evidence for steps alluring to the position of the portico.
Directly south 1m from the templum, two ring-ditches measuring 8m and 9m in diameter both indicate central inhumations oriented east-west.
Situated 259m to the north, a single ring-ditch measures 12m in diameter and just south a further ring-ditch indicates a central inhumation and measures 7m in diameter. At least seven scattered inhumations are situated near the temple.
Up to ten further randomly scattered burials, more or less facing east-west, can be observed north of the temple site. Viewed as a broad dark band, boundary ditches enclose or cut through the site (Fig 1). A large enclosure is present 195m north of the temple and probably dates to the Iron
Age. Due west is many enclosures, likely to date from the Iron Age to the Romano-British periods. they measure between 11m to 27m.
An unknown feature 98m north of the temple consists of two curious rows of presumably post-pits forming an arrow-shaped feature orientated north and measures 67m in its entire length (Fig 6).
Bramling road is worthy of some note; connecting the hamlet of Bramling near the village of Wingham (known for Romano- British occupation including a villa), potentially alludes to a former Roman route. Leaving Bramling the road traverses Adisham Mill hill before descending the gentle southern slope and continuing in straight sections, doglegging at three intervals passing
Cold Harbour Farm (a name synonymous with Roman roads), before connecting to the Dover to Canterbury Roman road alignment.
Adisham Downs holds an important ritualistic landscape spanning the Bronze Age to the Anglo- Saxon period. Several fields surrounding the features mentioned above currently remain obscure from Google Earth historical imagery due to crop type.
Opposite page
Fig 1: Aerial view of Roman-British Temple site
Top right
Fig 2: Close-up of aerial view
Second right
Fig 3: Geophysical survey results of the site
Third right
Fig 4: Interpretation of geophysical survey results
Fourth right
Fig 5: Aerial of possible Prehistoric monument
Bottom right
Fig 6: Aerial view showing unknown feature to the north of site