Project Design for an Archaeological Survey and Evaluation at Bridge Farm, Ringmer, East Sussex

Transcription

1 Culver Archaeological Project, Culver Farm, Church Road, Barcombe, Sussex, BN8 5TR. Web: Project Design for an Archaeological Survey and Evaluation at Bridge Farm, Ringmer, East Sussex Produced by: David H Millum AIfA, MA, BA JUNE 2012 SUMMARY This project design sets out the aims and methodology for an archaeological survey and evaluation at Bridge Farm, Ringmer, East Sussex. The archaeological survey and evaluation will be part of a larger community archaeological project, aimed at involving local members of the public, schools and special interest groups in the investigation, interpretation and management of their local heritage. The project is being undertaken by the Culver Archaeological Project (CAP), a local archaeological group investigating the historic landscape of the Upper Ouse Valley in the parishes of Barcombe and Ringmer. CAP not only aims to conform to a high standard of archaeological research but also seeks to actively involve the local community in the discovery and interpretation of their local history and archaeology. The Bridge Farm site was discovered in 2011 during a programme of geophysical and field walking surveys. The results show what appears to be a substantial Romano-British settlement site, with evidence of roads and enclosures, surmounted by a large ditch of possible military origin. As yet no intrusive investigation has been undertaken and the full nature and extent of the below ground archaeology is unknown. SITE LOCATION The project site comprises of the fields forming Bridge Farm, Nr. Lewes, East Sussex, BN8 5BX. The fields comprise a series of meadows and agricultural fields situated in the bend of the River Ouse, to the west and south of Bridge Farm, centred on National Grid Reference , map reference TQ (Figure 1). There are no Scheduled Monuments, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, or areas subject to Higher Level Stewardship agreements, known within the project area. GEOLOGICAL AND TOPOGRAPHY The underlying geological structure of the site is sedimentary with the Ouse valley cutting through east west bands of Lower Greensand and Weald Clay which are heavily mantled with Head and River Terrace deposits (Figure 2). The site lies on the eastern bank of the Ouse floodplain, north of Lewes, which comprises deep alluvium flanked by margins of first and second terrace valley gravels. The area supports gleyic argillic brown earths of the Waterstock Association soils on the floodplain, with pelo-alluvial gley Fladbury 3 Association soils adjacent to the river (Millum, 2011). 1

2 Figure 1: Location map of the Bridge Farm project site Figure 2: Solid and drift geology of the site area (BGS 2010) 2

3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND In the late 1990s a wing corridor-type Romano-style building was discovered in Dunstalls Field on Culver Farm, Barcombe with other casual finds indicating much wider Romano period activity and possible settlement. This led to the discovery of an adjacent aisled building and a further T-shaped building forming a reasonably sized 3 rd century villa complex (Figure 3) and subsequently a detached bath house in the next field. Excavation of these buildings was undertaken by the Institute of Archaeology, University College London (UCL), the Mid Sussex Field Archaeology Team (MSFAT) and the Centre for Community Engagement Department of the University of Sussex, under the joint directorship of David Rudling, MIfA and Chris Butler, MIfA. Figure 3: A conjectural reconstruction of the villa complex by Andy Gammon Concurrently the Culver Archaeological Project (CAP), under director Robert Wallace, was investigating the wider historical landscape around the villa complex; discovering a substantial Roman road and instigating an extensive programme of geophysical surveys, systematic field walking, evaluation trenching and open area excavation along the road s corridor, to the west of the River Ouse in Culver and Cowlease Farms, Barcombe (Appendix 1). This work has identified several previously unknown sites of roadside activity, including industrial sites and potential ritual sites. Research by CAP has also revealed activity from the Mesolithic period onwards within the surrounding area, including several instances of Middle Bronze Age activity, one of which is thought to be one of the earliest waterlogged sites discovered in Sussex (Allen, 2011). For a list of existing reports and articles regarding the CAP see Appendix 3. PROJECT CONTEXT Background In 2011 a programme of geophysical and field walking surveys was undertaken upon Bridge Farm, as part of CAP s wider investigation of the surrounding landscape. The surveys revealed evidence of a substantial amount of below ground archaeology, with magnetometer survey data showing what appears to be a large double-ditched enclosure, seemingly overlaying a grid of roads, buildings and enclosures (Figure 4). This has been interpreted as a potential Romano-British settlement site, surmounted by a later enclosure of possible military origin. The settlement site is located upon the junction of the east - west Greensand Way from Chichester and the London Lewes road, number 14 (Margary, 1973), which ran through the Wealden iron producing area; a crucial aid to early Roman expansion. This, and the site s location upon a tidal and therefore navigable section of the River Ouse, would have made it an ideal trading post. It is 3

4 possible that a settlement in this situation may have included an administrative post to control such trade and even an official staging post or mansio. Coins and pottery dating from the first century through to the 5 th have been found on sites within the surrounding landscape. The Bridge Farm geophysical survey results suggest the pattern of roads and buildings are cut and overlain by the large double-ditch enclosure suggesting that this defensive feature post-dates the larger settlement. This may well have been thrown-up as a defensive measure during the 4 th century when it is suggested that Saxon raiding, up inland waterways, may have led to the demise of many rural villas including the one across the river at nearby Barcombe. Figure 4: Image of the geophysical survey (D. Staveley) Part of the site comprises of intensively farmed arable land subject to regular ploughing and subsoiling along with soil compaction avoidance techniques. All the land is well below 10m OD and within the River Ouse flood plain. Both these factors have the potential of damaging and/or altering 4

5 the archaeology of the area and this, combined with a real danger of night-hawking, puts the archaeology on this site at risk of irreparable damage. The potential risk to the site and the regional, if not national, importance of the archaeology, especially if a Roman military presence can be established, supports the use of the intrusive works suggested within this design. Fieldwork & Post-Excavation The on-site project work will include systematic metal detecting; geophysical surveys (usually magnetometer and /or resistivity) and archaeological evaluation. These are discussed in further detail in the Aims and Methodology section, below. These will be undertaken in stages beginning with the metal detecting and magnetometer survey in November/December 2012, and further geophysical survey and evaluation in July / August Following the metal detecting and survey stage, a programme of post-excavation assessment will be undertaken to asses any metal finds recovered and process pottery recovered from this and earlier programmes of fieldwalking. A post-excavation assessment report will be produced following this. A second stage of post-excavation assessment will follow the survey and evaluation project in July / August Community Archaeology The on-site project work will be undertaken as part of a wider community archaeology project, for which Heritage Lottery Funding has been obtained. The community project will invite local people, of all ages and abilities, to take part in the discovery and interpretation of their shared local heritage, through the survey and evaluation of the site and the dissemination and interpretation of the project s result. The on-site fieldwork project in July / August 2013 will be managed and run as a community training dig, aiming to train local volunteers in a wide range of archaeological skills, techniques and ideas, whilst learning about their own, and others, history and archaeology. The project will comprise numerous individual community archaeology elements aimed at involving local members of the public, school children and local special interest groups. These include: Schools metal detecting sessions including teaching of metal detecting techniques to the children and educational games and activities based around the finds that have been found and the archaeology of the site; Production and delivery of a series of talks and lectures to the local community; local special interest groups, and regional special interest groups; Articles and advertising in local newsletters, leaflets and ezines, websites and through social media; 6 week summer community training dig comprising programmes of geophysical survey and excavation of four evaluation areas and on-site finds processing and post-excavation work; School site visits during the summer project, including test pitting and finds identification sessions and various other activities; Weekly workshops on particular topics, such as surveying, recording, illustration and photography and finds processing / pottery analysis; 5

6 Guided site tours every Sunday, with opportunities for question and answer sessions; Dissemination of the project s results through onsite blogs and updates on websites and social media; the production of post-excavation reports; production of information leaflets and articles; and production and display of interpretation panels; AIMS & METHODOLOGY Aims of the Community Project To actively encourage the involvement of the local community in investigating, interpreting and managing their historic environment; To educate and promote a greater understanding within the local communities of their local heritage and that of the wider surrounding historic landscape; To offer opportunities for volunteers of all levels to gain practical experience of archaeological field work, including geophysical survey, evaluation trenching and all manner of field techniques, as well as post-excavation assessment; To highlight the importance of the heritage to local communities and lay the foundations for the beneficial utilisation of their heritage resource for the future; Aims of the Fieldwork To establish the nature, date, purpose and state of preservation of the buried features, interpreted from the geophysical survey images (Figure 4) and the results of the systematic field walking (Millum, 2012a); Assessment of the archaeological potential of the various fields surrounding the core area by further geophysical surveying; An assessment of the archaeological potential of the site, the condition of any surviving archaeology and the impacts form past and future land-use; To record and preserve the archaeology before it suffers any further damage and highlight the importance of the heritage to local communities; To accumulate sufficient data to produce an informed report of the archaeology of the site, including recommendations for further works and ideas on the conservation and management of this resource; To formulate a plan of how future works could be targeted and undertaken effectively, efficiently and in a way which benefits the local community; 6

7 FIELDWORK METHODOLOGY Personnel and standards The fieldwork will be mainly undertaking by volunteers under the supervision of qualified field archaeologists in a logical and systematic programme to produce the greatest degree of information with the minimum disturbance to the site. Where less experienced personnel are involved greater instruction will be given and if possible novices will be paired with more experienced personnel. No fieldwork of any kind will be undertaken without the instructions from a CAP Project Manager and prior consent from the land owners. All fieldwork will be carried out in accordance with the Institute for Archaeologists Standards and Guidance (2008) and the East Sussex County Council s Standards for Archaeological Fieldwork, Recording and Post-excavation in East Sussex (2008). Metal Detecting The systematic metal detecting will be undertaken in December 2012, following the harvesting of the current field crops. Specific permission has already been granted for this period of access. This will be undertaken by established, accredited metal detecting groups under the supervision of CAP. It is anticipated that children from the local community, via the local primary schools, will be invited to come along and assist in the recovery of artefacts under adult supervision either at this or a subsequent session. All finds will be plotted to the GB National Grid referenced site grid with significant artefacts being spot located by GPS or similar method. Specific procedures for this survey as listed in the CAP design for metal detecting surveys (Millum, 2012c) will be applied. This work will mitigate the consequences and/or deter any attempted night-hawking. The metal detecting surveys will follow closely the recommendations outlined in Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field evaluation (Jones D. M., 2008) Geophysical surveying Several fields in the immediate area of the interpreted features have still to be surveyed using geophysical equipment and areas that have been surveyed by magnetometer can still profitably be investigated by an earth resistance survey as the processes can often produce different anomalies. As some of the areas are under permanent grass a programme of geophysical surveys will be undertaken throughout the project, including volunteer training in summer This will produce a fuller and clearer picture of the buried features including any subsidiary roads heading away from the interpreted settlement area. The geophysical surveys will follow the recommendations outlined in Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field evaluation (Jones D. M., 2008) Excavation Trenches During the summer of 2013 a series of targeted areas of evaluation will be undertaken, located by reference to the geophysical results. This will aim to establish the potential depth and condition of the archaeological features and also expose targeted areas which will assist in interpreting the main site. It is proposed to excavate four small open areas as shown in Figure 5. The suggested locations are an attempt to balance the research aims of the project with both the conservation of the archaeology and the long term land management of the area. These areas have been targeted following discussions with the land-owner and advice from Casper Johnson, the County Archaeologist at East Sussex County Council. 7

8 Trenches A & B (2 x 10m x 15m) offer a unique location to interpret the connection between the defensive ditch structure and the settlement (a classic which cuts which? question), as well as giving a contrast and compare opportunity between the preservation and depth of features both inside and outside the ditch, and within the different modern contexts of ploughed arable field and grassed meadow. This will provide vital data for the future land management advice for the site Trench C (15m x 15m) targets a very distinctive feature which appears industrial in nature and could therefore provide valuable details about activity in the settlement as well as setting it in its wider context. Although fully within the grassed meadow it is very close to the river and therefore at greater risk of regular seasonal inundation. Trench D (20m x 5m) is located across the modern field boundary where the hedge is depleted and only a barbed wire fence separates the fields. The excavation will cross the large bank which exists between the fields on the line of the trenched enclosure. It gives a continuous section between the two fields revealing the considerable change in level and a section of the bank and ditch feature which has not been degraded by recent ploughing. Figure 5: Proposed location of the four targeted excavation trenches for 2013 The trenches that encroach into the northern field (House Field) have been kept to an area which will cause the least inconvenience to its agricultural use, especially if the excavation can be timed to fall within the period between harvest and sowing. The trenches in the meadow have been kept to a modest proportion over areas vital for interpretation of the site. 8

9 The southern field (Little Park Brook), being under permanent pasture, does not have the seasonal restrictions caused by crop rotation and harvesting of the larger arable fields on Bridge Farm and will not have been affected by recent sub-soiling of the ploughed areas. This makes this field the perfect control area for the project as well as being potentially available for fieldwork for most of the year. The meadows are, however, the most at risk to seasonal flooding and potential surface hoof damage by stock in wet conditions. It is for these reasons that part of the initial season of excavations will take place within this area. Once the depth of the archaeology is established the over burden in excavation trenches may be carefully cleared using a flat bucket on a mechanical digger under the instruction of a qualified archaeologist and in accordance with the CAP risk assessment document (Wallace, 2012). This procedure will not take place at a time when volunteers, students or other non-essential personnel are in the proximity. Spoil from the excavations will be inspected to recover any artefacts or ecofacts of significance with metal detectors being deployed regularly over both the spoil and the excavated surfaces. Recording All archaeological features encountered will be recorded in accordance with recommended standards with a full written record being kept using standard context record sheets supported by a daily site diary and photographic record. Plans at 1:20 scale and sections at 1:10 of all excavated areas and cuts will be drawn on plastic tracing film. All features recorded will be located on a site grid related to the GB National Grid and the general site and significant features will be referenced to Ordnance Datum. Any finds discovered that fall within the statutory definition of treasure, as defined by the Treasures Act 1996, will be reported to the Finds Liaison Officer at Barbican House, Lewes for assessment and supervision of the mandatory procedures. Significant archaeological features will be reported to the County Archaeologist at the earliest opportunity. In the event of human remains, either inhumations or cremations, being found work will cease and the statutory provisions of Section 25 of the Burial Act 1857 will be followed with the ESCC Archaeologist being informed immediately. The requisite licence from the Ministry of Justice will be obtained. Site Access A general principle of access for official CAP projects has been arranged with the land owners, with specific periods of access to be arranged with the farm manager, Mark Stroude, who is also the current chairman of the overall Culver Archaeological Project. The positive attitude of the owners towards the archaeological investigations on these farms is a major contributory factor to the continued success of the project. 9

10 ARTEFACT COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL STRATEGY General and special (small) finds All general finds will be recorded by the context in which they were located with special finds given a unique identifying number and three dimensionally located. All artefacts will be dealt with in accordance with the CAP General Finds Collection Strategy document (Appendix 2) and after recording the artefacts will be archived or disposed of in accordance with CAP overall policy. Ecofacts Soil samples will be taken from specified contexts and floated to locate environmental data. The resulting residues will be examined by senior personnel to assess suitability for specialist investigation and reporting. Environmental sampling will be based on procedures outlined for field evaluation projects by English Heritage in Environmental Archaeology (Jones D. M., 2011). Ownership of artefacts It has been agreed with the land owners that all artefacts without great monetary value shall become the property of CAP on collection. Valuable items will remain in the ownership of the landowners. On-site artefact conservation Participants will be informed of those items, such as metal, glass and other susceptible objects, which should be reported to the designated finds supervisor who will undertake any necessary immediate on-site conservation in accordance with the procedures recommended in First Aid for Finds (Watkinson & Neal, 1998) and by the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) in Conservation Advice Notes (Jones, Paterson, & Spriggs, 2005). Conservation of the general finds will be secured by storage of the assemblage in appropriate, robust containers with suitable packing material used to restrict internal movement and create the requisite conditions for the specific artefact. Post-Fieldwork Methodology Those finds that are not susceptible to damage by water will be washed in clean pure water, using a soft brush and then marked with the site and context codes. Other items will be carefully dry brushed. In most cases cleaning is only needed to assist identification and to remove excess soil prior to weighing and recording and therefore care will be taken not to over-clean items. All items will be dried naturally before re-bagging and/or boxing. The contents of each bag will be recorded on to the pro-forma sheet by number of items and weight under the designated type to form the paper record of the data collected. The paper record will be subsequently transposed into a Microsoft Excel computer database to form a digital record and to aid interpretation of the data. REPORTING Preparation A separate report will be prepared for each fieldwork project to include: Non-technical summary - Introductory statement - Aims and purpose of the evaluation Methodology - An objective summary statement of the results - Conclusion, including a confidence rating - Data including table of basic quantification of finds Any specialist reports initiated - Location of archive - References 10

11 Publication and Dissemination Proposals The reports will be added to the CAP archive and sent to the Sussex Archaeological Society s library at Barbican House, Lewes. A summary sheet and digital copy will be posted on to the CAP website, and sent to the ESCC Archaeologist for inclusion in the county HER and to the NMR office at Swindon. Further dissemination of the results will be accomplished through websites, and social media and through the production of power point presentations and interpretation panels within the village; in accordance with the aims of the community project as discussed above. Copyright CAP will hold the copyright for all data recorded and reports written from this fieldwork. Maps included in this document were prepared using Ordnance Survey data supplied by EDiNA digimap service under the University of Sussex licence, Crown copyright/database right ARCHIVE DEPOSITION The archive is currently housed at the CAP archive store at Culver Farm. HEALTH & SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS Health and safety of workers and the public will be a prime concern with the project conforming to the Health and Safety at Work Act, 1974 and the CAP Health and Safety on Site guidelines (Wallace, 2012) will be available to all personnel. All personnel will attend an induction meeting where risks and procedures will be explained and will be required to notify a director or site supervisor of any health issues relevant to their participation on site. Special care and attention will be taken whenever younger children are on site. A general risk assessment has been made for the CAP (Wallace, 2012) and accident recording procedures put in place, prior to any works commencing. All members of CAP staff will carry a mobile phone and be aware of the contact details of the local emergency services. MONITORING PROCEDURES A qualified archaeologist will undertake a monitoring role of the participants during the fieldwork. Results and adherence to practice will be monitored by the overall director of the project. Summaries of the fieldwork will be submitted to the ESCC Archaeologist. OTHER CONTINGENCY ARRANGEMENTS Insurance CAP is insured for public liability and for those participating in organised fieldwork. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS CAP would like to thank: Mark & Harold Stroude for their continued support in allowing access to their land, David Staveley for many weekends of magnetometer surveying and the images of the results and Casper Johnson and Greg Chuter of the County Archaeologists Department for their interest and invaluable advice. 11

12 REFERENCES Allen, M. J. (2011, December). Prehistoric Wetlands Discovery. Sussex Past & Present (125), pp Jones, D. M. (Ed.). (2011). Environmental Archaeology. Swindon: English Heritage. Jones, D. M. (Ed.). (2008). Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field Evaluations. Swindon: English Heritage. Jones, J., Paterson, E., & Spriggs, J. (2005). Conservation Advice Notes. London: Portable Antiquities Scheme. Margary, I. D. (1973). Roman Roads in Britain, 3 rd ed. London: John Baker Publishers Ltd. Millum, D. H. (2011). Mapping the Archaeology of Ringmer Parish to AD Lewes: unpublished University of Sussex dissertation held at the Barbican House library, Archaeology Room, ref Millum, D. H. (2012a). Report of the field-walking results from 2011 at House Field, Bridge Farm, Wellingham, East Sussex. Unpublished report for CAP. Millum, D. H. (2012b). Project Design for General Fieldwalking at Culver Farm, Barcombe, East Sussex. Unpublished design for CAP. Millum, D. H. (2012c). Project Design for the Systematic Metal Detecting Survey at House Field, Bridge Farm, Wellingham, East Sussex. Unpublished design for CAP. Wallace, R. H. (2012). CAP General Health and Safety on Site and Risk Assessment. Culver Farm, Barcombe: unpublished CAP report. Watkinson, D., & Neal, V. (1998). First Aid for Finds (3rd ed.). London: Rescue/UKIC Archaeology Section. 12

13 APPENDIX 1: CAP Geophysical survey results in the Surrounding Landscape 13

14 APPENDIX 2: CAP general policy for the retaining or disposal of artefacts TYPE RECORD LOCATE CONSV MARK CBM tile & brick Pottery Prehistoric worked flint Fire-cracked flint General & Tile General & Pottery By context Wash Those kept By context Wash unless fragile or whole. ANALY- SIS BY CAP ARCHIVE OR DISCARD Keep representative selection plus any pieces of interest. Discard remainder in marked location after weighing. Yes Expert Keep all for specialist analysis, selected drawing and selection for archive General & PH flint By context Wash Yes Expert Keep all for specialist analysis, selected drawing and archive General By context Wash No CAP Sort, weigh and discard, keeping representative selection Charcoal General By context Bag as found No Expert Bag and send for analysis and carbon 14 dating. Foreign stone General By context Dry brush Those kept CAP Unworked sort, quantify and discard Worked sort weigh and keep Slag General By context Wash or brush No CAP Keep a sample of type, quantify and discard the rest. Glass General By context Wash. Box Yes Expert Keep all for specialist analysis and archive. Roman glass can look modern. Animal Bone General By context Wash unless degraded Yes Expert Keep all for expert analysis and archive Human Bone Skeleton 3D location & plan Wash unless degraded No Expert Alert requisite authorities Keep all for expert analysis and potential reburial Shell General By context Rinse lightly Iron in General By context obviously and/or 2D disturbed contexts Iron in all other contexts Gold, silver, coins & copper alloy Small find Small find 3D location 3D location Wall plaster Small find 3D location Wood & leather Grain & seeds Small find Small find record 3D location 3D location Dry brush, prick bags, add silicone gel No Expert Keep all for specialist analysis and archive No CAP and/or Expert Keep all. Likely to need expert conservation and analysis prior to archiving. On a Roman site iron nails can be fairly common. Keep dry No Expert Send for expert conservation and analysis prior to archiving Damp surface only Keep as found Keep as found No Expert Pack in acid free tissue for expert analysis and archive No Expert Keep in conditions as found with soil packed around it. Keep dark and cool for expert conservation and analysis prior to archive and possible carbon 14 dating No Expert Bag and send for analysis and potentially carbon 14 dating 14

15 APPENDIX 3: List of CAP reports and articles Date Type Title Author Remarks 2006 Report Culvermead Excavation Journal R. Wallace BA Report 2006 Report Culvermead Excavation Grey Lit R. Wallace BA Report 2006 Report Court House Field Excavation Report 2005 R. Wallace BA Report 2007 Report A previously unknown Roman road: Offham to the Greensand Way near Barcombe Mills R. Wallace MA MA dissertation 2007 Report Culver Mead water-logged timber radiocarbon results 2009 Report Barcombe environs Roman landscape and hydrology: the hidden Roman waterways Dr M. J. Allen MIfA Dr M. J. Allen MifA 2010 Diary The Chronicles of Culver K. Fromings, MA 2010 Article Barcombe Roman Villa D. R. Rudling MIfA, C. Butler MIfA, R. Wallace MA 2010 Report Barcombe: The Wilderness 2010 Dr M. J. Allen (TQ141424) geoarchaeological resume MIfA Results from C 14 test from 2006 trench 1 st interin report A lighter look at Pond Field 2010 British Archaeology Included references to the road excavations at Culver Farm AEA0190 (TW10) Finding of p/h stake 2011 Poster A New Roman Town in East Sussex J. Oldham Scatter plots and pie chart 2011 Report Report on the finds excavated in 2007: Pond Field, Culver Farm, Barcombe, E. Sussex 2011 Article Romano-British hanging lamp: rare lamp unearthed at Culver Farm, Barcombe 2011 Article Prehistoric Wetlands Discovery: a new Middle Bronze Age waterlogged site in Sx 2012 Report Report of the field-walking results from 2011 at House Field, Bridge Farm... D. H. Millum, MA AIfA D. H. Millum, MA AIfA Dr M. J. Allen MIfA D. H. Millum, MA AIfA Generic finds report & initial interpretation Sussex Past, Sussex Express, Lost Scroll Sussex Past 125 Scatter plots and tables 2012 Article The secrets of Barcombe s Bog are revealed.. R. Taylor Sussex Express Briefing A conjectural interpretation of the recent discovery in the Upper Ouse Valley 2012 Design Design for a field evaluation project for at Bridge Farm, Wellingham Design Project design for field evaluations and excavations for the CAP 2012 Design Project design for general fieldwalking at Culver Farm, Barcombe, Sussex 2012 Design CAP health and safety on site and risk assessment D. H. Millum, MA AIfA D. H. Millum, MA AIfA D. H. Millum, MA AIfA D. H. Millum, MA AIfA 2012 Articles Culver: an intriguing first 7 years D. H. Millum & R. Wallace 2012 Report The Roman pottery from excavations in Culver Mead, courthouse Field and Pond Field, Barcombe between 2005 and 2010 Brief for funders and allied groups The fieldwork design Generic project design Generic field walking design R. Wallace, MA Risk assessment After pottery report in Sussex Past 128 and The Lost Scroll Dr M. Lyne Specialist pottery report for the excavations to date 15