The Lympne Roman Settlement Geophysics Survey

By Guy Topham, Fiona Jarvest, Mike Pearson & Richard Taylor

Background

Lympne’s Roman history, as we know it, originated with the construction of a port, known as Portus Lemanis, beside a lagoon with an entrance to the sea near what is now West Hythe. From the documentary evidence, it is reasonable to assume that the port was associated with a naval base in the 2nd century AD. Towards

the end of the 3rd century, around 275AD, the Romans constructed a fort as one of the 13 Saxon Shore Forts built along the east and south coasts of England.

The ruins of substantial walls are visible down the escarpment on a site known as Stutfall.

Prof. Sir Barry Cunliffe excavated the Roman fort between 1976-78. He stated in his report that Lympne was a ‘location of some significance’ both early in the Roman period and later in the 4th century. Reasons for the importance lay in the port’s access to the Continent, and a Roman road network: a direct link to Canterbury along Stone Street; the Clifftop road along the northern edge of the Weald via Ashford to Maidstone and onwards to London; and a route to Dover. Further academic research by the University of Kent’s Archaeology team (public lecture 2015) identified the importance of Lympne in an international context in the late Roman period.

Evidence for Roman occupation at Lympne almost wholly relates to the fort, and archaeological activity centred on the Stutfall site with excavations by Roach- Smith in 1850 and Cunliffe in the 1970s. Cunliffe confirmed the layout of the fort, Roach- Smith’s discovered a bathhouse, but importantly, no indication of a civilian settlement nearby.

In 2014 Malcolm Davies approached SHAL (Studying History and Archaeology in Lympne) for support carrying out resistivity surveys in and around the fort at Stutfall. The aim was to find evidence for an earlier phase of the fort, and its harbour, implied by the discovery

of an earlier Roman altar dedicated to Neptune (now in the British Museum), together with several tiles marked CLBR located in the foundations of the fort’s east gate. Lloyd Bosworth from the University of Kent undertook a complimentary magnetometry survey in 2015.

Both survey results led to a trial trench excavation over a specific

Top

Fig 1: Initial Mag Data carried out in Area 1

Bottom, left

Fig 2: Areas of Geophysical Survey

Bottom, right

Fig 3: 3 Areas of Geophysical Mag Data geophysical anomaly within the fort (KAS Newsletter 109: 30-31) in May 2018, under the supervision of archaeologist, Richard Taylor. The outcome of the excavation was inconclusive and found no additional evidence for an earlier fort. After that, and again using resistivity, Malcolm turned attention to search for a road which would have led to the earlier fort. Still, no evidence for such a route has so far been found.

Results

Malcolm’s next focus was on fields to the north and east of Shepway Cross, approximately 1km northeast of Stutfall. SHAL had previously expressed interest in the visible landscape with a possible road running along the field boundary, and where brick, tile and pottery were visible on the ploughed field. Malcolm had also discovered that in previous years many

Roman coins had been found in one of the fields. With the landowner’s permission, he undertook further resistivity surveys. The results indicated additional work was needed, and the services of Richard Taylor were sought to conduct an initial magnetometry survey measuring 90m x 270m, the results of which were very significant (Fig 1). A fieldwalking exercise on the same day by SHAL members revealed a considerable number of pieces of brick, tile and pottery.

Following these results, landowner permission was sought to continue investigations in the surrounding area, culminating in seven days of the survey over twelve months, covering three separate fields producing sixteen hectares of geophysical data for processing. The survey was carried out using the KAS Magnetometer by Richard Taylor and Fred Birkbeck, supported by SHAL.

Area 1

At the southern side of survey Area 1 is (1), a group of positive rectangular linear anomalies that are suggestive of boundary ditches, foundation or robber trenches associated with structures or buildings characteristic of the distinctive form of late Iron Age/ Romano-British Ladder Settlements based around a trackway. One possible extent of a trackway is a positive linear (enclosure boundary) anomaly heading north (5), with (1) displaying parcels to the east side of the trackway. Additional parcels (2) are found to the west of the possible trackway (5). Toward the eastern side of survey Area 1 is (3), a positive curvilinear anomaly which continues into the adjacent woodland, characteristic of an enclosure. At the northern end of survey Area 1 is (4), which appears to be a series of positive rectangular linear anomalies or parcels, suggesting the ‘Ladder Settlement’ continues

for approximately 400m further north. Scattered throughout survey Area 1 are several positive curvilinear anomalies of varying sizes. Depending on both size and shape, these anomalies can range from postholes, pits or other soil-filled hollows. There are several positive curvilinear anomalies (6) within the ‘Ladder Settlement’, suggesting the likelihood of pits associated with habitation or industry. At the southern

Top to bottom

Fig 4: Area 1 looking northeast

Fig 5: Area 1 Mag Data

Fig 6: Area 1 Interpretation

Fig 7: Area 1 Interpretation edge of survey Area 1 is (9), a large area of magnetic noise. These are likely to relate to ferrous waste, areas of burning and other detritus accumulating around an area of a known demolition site of Beacon House, which was present on the 1929-1952 OS Map. Toward the centre of survey Area 1 is a field drain or service pipe (10), which extends east-west across the site and likely turns south towards the Aldington Road. Areas of magnetic noise are present in the northern and southern extents of the site, especially in and around the ‘Ladder Settlement’ area. These are likely to relate to a combination of ferrous waste, thermoremanent material and other detritus accumulating around the margins of a probable settlement or industrial location. Scattered randomly throughout survey Area 1 are several strong and weak dipolar responses, examples of which are highlighted as (11). The characteristic dipolar responses of pairs of positive and negative ‘spikes’ suggest near-surface ferrous metal or other highly fired material in the plough soil.

Area 2

Toward the northwestern of survey Area 2 is (12), two positive curvilinear anomalies that are suggestive

of an entranceway up to 12metres wide, leading into what may have been a large enclosure. To the west of (12) appears a group of positive rectangular linear anomalies (13) that are probably associated with the southern extent of the ‘Ladder Settlement’. The results seem to show that (13) truncates (12), implying the possible entranceway is earlier than the ‘Ladder Settlement’. Extending from the southwestern corner of survey Area 2 is a right-angled and strong positive rectilinear anomaly (14) suggestive of a large enclosure, at least 50 meters across. The results seem to show that (14) also truncates (12), again implying a later date than the possible entranceway to an earlier enclosure. At the northern side of survey Area 2 is (15), two positive linear anomalies that are suggestive of a trackway up to 8 meters wide, heading south into what appears to be a large enclosure area to the east of (14). (15) does to truncate other anomalies. However, (16), a right-angled positive linear anomaly appears to respect (15) on its eastern flank, creating an enclosure, bounded by (17), a further strong positive curvilinear anomaly to the south. At the east side of survey Area 2 is (18), a discrete right- angled positive linear anomaly that appears to form

a different enclosure. To the east of (18) are several large positive anomalies which may represent pits or quarrying and have since become soil-filled. These anomalies have positive curvilinear anomalies either surrounding or adjacent to the pits. To the east of (16) is a faint positive straight linear anomaly (20), which may be a modern pathway. (21), (22), (23) and (24) are separate areas of magnetic noise and likely relate to a combination of ferrous waste, thermoremanent material and other detritus accumulating around the margins of a probable settlement. Scattered randomly throughout survey Area 2 are several strong and weak dipolar responses (annotated in orange). The characteristic dipolar responses of pairs of positive and negative ‘spikes’ suggest near-surface ferrous metal or other highly fired material in the plough soil.

Above (top to bottom)

Fig 8: Area 2 looking south toward escarpment Fig 9: Area 2 Mag Data

Fig 11: Area 2 Interpretation

Fig 12: Area 2 Interpretation

Above (top to bottom)

Fig 10: Looking south towards English Channel from escarpment Area 2

Fig 13: Area 3 Mag Data

Fig 14: Area 3 Interpretation

Fig 15: Area 3 Interpretation

Area 3

Towards the west of survey Area 3 is (25) a large rectangular positive anomaly which sits within (26), a further series of positive rectangular linear anomalies suggestive of parcels, similar to (2) and found to the west of the possible trackway (5). To the east of (26) there is further evidence for the central trackway

(27) around which the ‘Ladder Settlement’ is based. At the centre of survey Area 3 is (31), a large dipolar reading within an enclosed area of (26), that suggests an area of highly fired or thermoremanent material, such as a furnace or oven. There are similar dipolar readings (28) and (29) toward the north of survey Area 3, which exhibit similar properties to (31). Toward the southeastern corner of survey Area 3 is (30), a large area of magnetic noise and likely relate to a combination of ferrous waste, thermoremanent material and other detritus accumulating around the margins of (26).

Discussion

The results are startling and suggestive of a late Iron Age/Romano-British ‘Ladder Settlement’ based around a central trackway, visible in parts in all three survey Areas. In addition to the visible enclosures or parcels attached either side of the central trackway, several detached linear and curvilinear features are visible in survey Areas 1 and 3, which may indicate farming or agricultural activity. Also, the investigation in survey Area 2 revealed potential Iron Age earthworks in the form of an entranceway, which is truncated to the north by the ‘Ladder Settlement’, and what appears to be a part of a separate sizeable rectangular enclosure to the south. Within survey Area 2 there are other large additional enclosures, and a large trackway, none of which can yet be identified as contemporary with the likely Iron Age or Romano/British features, but certainly add to a potential picture of a continually-extended settlement east over some time, perhaps post-Romano/British.

Given Area 1 amassed over 600 Roman coins in the 1980s dated AD 330 to AD 380, it is known that similar grouping of coins found in similar settlements relates to the presence of Roman authorities working to extract agricultural produce for the Annona militaris. Still, without further investigation, this is a theoretical viewpoint about the possible role and function of the site.

What relationship this settlement has with Stutfall is not clear; being approximately 1km to the northeast, it may be located on a previously unknown route toward Stutfall, but this is conjecture. Alternatively, Area 2 may have revealed an earlier fortification for which the settlement served as a vicus. Either way, the investigation has identified a complex site containing an intricate series of anomalies with considerable potential for future research.

With grateful thanks to Michael Owen and William Hurley for allowing the surveys to be undertaken on their land.

Members of SHAL: Guy Topham, Mike Pearson, Fiona Jarvest, Pamela Clark, Georgina Donaldson, Dave Earnshaw, John East, Judith East, and Alison Jackson plus Simon Read and Andy Fifield for the metal detecting.

Above (top to bottom)

Fig 16: Combined Area Interpretation Fig 17: SHAL members and Richard Taylor discussing survey strategy