Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abbey in 2014
Emily Gillott
Dec 2014
Written By
EG
Read by
UMS
Signed off
UMS
Report date
2014
Contents
Page no.
Illustrations
1.0 Introduction
7
7
5.0 Methodology
5.1 Trench 1
5.2 Trench 2
5.3 Excavation processes
11
11
11
11
6.0 Results
13
7.0 Conclusions
16
References
17
Illustrations
Fig 1
Fig 2
Fig 3
Fig 4
Fig 5
Fig 6
Fig 7
Fig 8
Fig 9
Fig 10
Fig 11
Page no.
6
6
7
10
13
13
14
14
14
15
15
1.0 Introduction
Nottinghamshire County Council has carried out two phases of archaeological work
at Rufford Abbey this year, aimed at finding out more about the monastic buildings
on the site.
The development of the abbey and its estate, from its foundation in 1146 until it was
dissolved in 1536, is poorly understood. In addition little is known about any of the
ancillary buildings beyond the main abbey cloister.
One main excavation took place on the site between 1956 and 1957 and focussed on
revealing the foundations of the main abbey buildings. Many of the details of this
excavation, however, were unclear. More recently geophysical work has been
carried out across the scheduled area but the results had not been tested by groundtruthing.
Two areas were investigated in 2014 with the aim of beginning to answer some of
the questions about the site, and with the additional aims of assessing the condition
of the sub-surface remains and contributing to a new Conservation Management
Plan for the site.
The work comprised two Archaeological Field Schools and involved students and
volunteers from across the county and beyond generating interest internationally.
The material from the excavation is currently being processed and analysed, but it is
possible to suggest some preliminary interpretations.
To find archaeological evidence for the ancillary buildings that once formed
part of the monastic complex.
To understand how well the geophysical survey results reflect the buried
archaeology, and to aid in our further interpretation of the geophysical
results
To provide opportunities for local people to engage directly with their historic
environment
These themes fit in with the research plan identified in the East Midlands Heritage ,
the Research Agenda for the region (Knight, Vyner and Allen, 2012), specifically:
-
8.6.1 What was the impact of the Reformation upon ecclesiastical buildings
and monastic estates? It is assumed that the monastery was dismantled
rather than aggressively destroyed, but archaeological evidence has not been
scrutinised with a view to expanding on this idea. Is there evidence of
controlled demolition on the site, and are later features influenced by the
earlier buildings?
Fig 1: The location of Rufford Country park within the wider landscape.
(Image from www.openstreetmap.org)
Fig 2: Showing the location of the trenches in relation to the abbey buildings
and turning circle.
Period
12th Century
16th Century
Early 17th Century
Late 17th Century
19th Century
An excavation was carried out but the Ministry of Public Building and Works
in 1956 after the north wing was demolished. The main concern of the
Ministry at the time was to protect the standing medieval remains, and the
excavation was designed to trace the outline of the monastic buildings.
Narrow trenches revealed in-situ walls, but there are no context descriptions
or section drawings, and few photographs.
and to a depth of 2.1m metres. The trench revealed 19th century brick
foundations from a previous building, and pottery of comparable date.
A watching brief was carried out in 1987 on a narrow service trench to the
north-west of the Turning Circle, and across part of the Abbey Meadow. The
work was overseen by the County Archaeologist, Mike Bishop, and was
recorded on the countys Historic Environment Record. The work revealed
what appeared to be rubble core of walls, or rubble spread, encountered at a
depth of 20cm below the turf. The date of the features was not determined
but the area was subsequently added to the scheduled monument
designation.
Various other watching briefs have been carried out in the Country Park, few of
which are relevant to the work described here.
No certain trace of the ancillary buildings that would normally be associated with an
abbey complex have been detected so far by either the geophysical surveys or
excavation work on the Scheduled area, so the presence of an infirmary, gatehouse,
and Priors lodgings remains speculative. Several later garden features have been
shown to remain below ground. Previous excavation has not focussed on these
features, so currently the only way there exists of dating the features is through
relative dating extracted from mapping evidence.
The only trace of an associated medieval building comes from outside the Scheduled
area, from excavation work carried out in 1987 to remedy subsidence (L5517 Notts
HER). The excavation was on a dyke that carried diverted water from the Rainworth
Water. The work revealed evidence of a nearby tile kiln in the form of wasters of
floor and roof tiles, and also produced evidence of a mill of probable Medieval date,
in the form of faced sandstone blocks associated with large timbers. One in-situ wall
was revealed, held together with pinkish mortar and green-grey clay, interpreted as
revetment for the dyke. A mill is shown at this location on the 1725 estate map.
Archaeological Work
Date
Excavation to east of present building
1956
(Listed as Scheduled Monument
1961)
Watching Brief (equivalent) to east of present building
1982
Watching Brief (equivalent) NW of turning circle
1987
(Scheduled Monument listing amended
1992)
Watching Brief to east of present buildings
1995
Watching Brief to east of present buildings
2000
Geophysics GPR in Courtyard
2005
Geophysics Resistivity Survey on Abbey Lawn
2006
Geophysics Gradiometry Survey on Abbey and Long 2006
Meadows
Excavation- in Rose Garden to west of present buildings
2008
Watching Brief east of Coach House
2009
Watching Brief in car park and adjacent play area
2009
Watching Brief on the Abbey Lawn
2010
Watching Brief in visitor car park
2011
Fig 4: Showing chronology of known and dateable archaeological works carried out
within the Scheduled Area.
10
5.0 Methodology
The 2014 season of excavation involved two trial trenches dug over two phases of
work. Both trenches were located within the Scheduled Area.
The trench locations were agreed prior to commencement with Tim Allen (Inspector
of Ancient Monuments) of English Heritage, Ursilla Spence (N.C.C. Senior
Archaeologist), N.C.C. Countryside Services Manager, and Rufford Abbey Country
Park Site Manager, and were subject to Scheduled Monument Consent (SMC)
The trenches were accurately located through the use of GPS equipment and Total
Station survey, taking into account topographical and practical constraints.
5.1 Trench 1
This was located on the Abbey Lawn adjacent to the base of the night stairs. The
purpose of this trench was to try and locate the north and west walls of the abbey
church, neither of which had been positively identified in the 1956 excavation. It
was also hoped that this trench would clarify some of the details of the 1956
excavation, as no stratigraphic or contextual information survives from the work.
The trench was L shaped and placed to intercept the geophysical responses thought
to indicate the northern and western extent of the church. Modern kerbstones
placed in the lawn to define the outline of the abbey church meant that the trench
had to be dug in several sections.
5.2 Trench 2
This was located on the Abbey Meadow, adjacent to the well and set across the
earthwork bank that runs east-west to the north of the well. This trench was
designed to investigate the nature of the earthwork bank, and to establish if the well
is associated with any structural remains. Trench 2 was split into two parts. The
northern-most part was placed to intercept the earthwork bank to investigate its
nature. The southern part was L shaped and placed adjacent to the well.
5.3 Excavation process
Turf was removed with a turf cutter and stored in cool damp conditions in order to
protect it from scorching. Excavation was carried out using hand tools including
mattock and trowel. Both areas were dug in spits of 10cm until archaeological
features were uncovered. Features were excavated in reverse chronological order
wherever possible, and sondages were used to examine foundation trenches and
other similar features. Maximum extent for each trench was 35 square metres with
a contingency for each of 6 square metres.
Single context recording was used, and context sheets included written descriptions,
stratigraphic relations and preliminary interpretations. The NCC site supervisors also
maintained site notebooks into which sketch plans and sections along with notes on
contexts, finds, excavation conditions, etc were entered as appropriate.
11
The trenches were accurately located using GPS equipment and by Total Station
survey. Small finds were accurately plotted in 3D using the Total Station, which was
also used for taking spot heights across the excavated areas.
All artefacts were collected and are in the process of being washed, marked,
recorded and conserved. Some will have to be sent to specialist for analysis. No
finds relating to the Treasure Act, 1997, were recovered.
A few small disarticulated and redeposited fragments of human remains were
recovered, and these were carefully bagged and retained for later reburial.
A colour digital photographic record was maintained throughout the excavation
showing general location shots of each test pit, along with general views of each pit
as excavation progressed, in addition to the archaeological photographs of sections
and in plan.
Each trench was excavated by volunteers and students with a range of experience
levels, under the close supervision of the Community Archaeologists from
Nottinghamshire County Council.
12
6.0 Results
Much of the material from the two phases of excavation is still being processed and
analysed, but it is possible to comment on some initial results and preliminary
interpretations.
Wall foundations in both trenches were encountered at a surprisingly shallow depth;
particularly in Trench 1 where some foundations were encountered less than 20cm
below the turf. In Trench 1 the foundations revealed were around 1.4m wide and
several courses deep in most places. The construction was of faced stone and rubble
infill. It was apparent that the walls had been demolished to the same level across
the excavated area, though when this happened is not yet clear. There was some
evidence for reuse of not only the materials making up the foundation, but also of
the foundations themselves. The wall in the east part of the trench appeared to
have a gravel surface adjacent to it.
Fig 5: Significant wall
foundation revealed in the
east part of Trench 1,
showing the possible
gravel surface adjacent.
13
Very little medieval material was recovered from Trench 1. Finds of modern
material, probably deposited during the final demolition phase of the country house,
were recovered from this trench, particularly from the north side of the wall on the
western part of the trench. These included plastic bags, cans and fencing materials.
Much of the remaining material recovered appears to be earlier post-medieval,
though specialist analysis is required to provide tighter dating.
An area of blackened material and plaster was recorded in the central part of the
trench. Due to the restricted area for excavation it was not clear what this
represented, but it is hoped that further analysis of the samples and other
information will help with interpretation.
Fig 7: An area of blackened material and Fig 8: The north part of Trench 2
plaster in Trench 1, at the intersection of showing traces of the earthwork feature
two wall foundations.
after deturfing.
Fig 9: The north part of Trench 2
showing the dark ploughsoil layer
beneath compacted sand.
which gave way to a demolition layer composed of large amounts of ceramic roof
tiles. This in turn came down onto a rough wall foundation made of re-used
medieval stone packed together with clay. Adjacent to this was a fragment of a clay
floor, containing sherds of medieval pottery, coal, and fragments of woven copper
alloy wire. Trench 2 also contained reused dressed sandstone of possible medieval
date, but it is not clear at this stage whether these were part of a structure.
15
7.0 Conclusions
The excavations from 2014 have shown that the archaeological remains survive in
good condition within at least some parts of the Scheduled Area, and that in some
cases they are complex and can yield a lot of hitherto unknown information about
the site.
Trench 1 produced substantial wall foundations, possibly of differing dates, which in
places contained reused stonework of 12/13th C date (Coppack,G., and Harrison, S.
pers comm). It is thought that some of these were medieval foundations that have
been reused at a later date. Investigation of the relationship of these foundations to
the standing ruins at present suggests they are not in the correct place to be part of
the church structure, provided that current understanding and interpretation of the
standing remains is correct.
It is possible that some of the foundations are remains of a previously-unknown
early post-dissolution house, but further excavation would be required to investigate
this idea. Some of the foundations may make use of earlier features, but it was clear
that the excavation did not provide answers about the layout or phasing of the
abbey church. The consensus is that a larger area would have to be excavated to
provide satisfactory answers to these questions.
The earthwork bank revealed in Trench 2 is likely to be a driveway depicted on a
map of 1835, although it is not possible at present to suggest a construction date for
it given that no dating material was recovered from it or associated contexts.
However further analysis may provide relative dating against other contexts within
the trench.
The archaeological remains adjacent to the well are complex and interpretation will
depend upon the dating of the artefacts and upon analysis of the subtle changes of
the contexts. It is clear that the well is not an isolated structure, and that there
certainly were medieval buildings in its immediate vicinity, as evidenced by the roof
tiles, floor surfaces, and wall foundation. The makeup of the floor levels suggests
that the associated structure or structures may have been fairly flimsy outbuildings
or workshops.
The fragments of copper alloy weaving may all represent pieces of the same single
item; perhaps a piece of jewellery or clothing fixing.
Further processing and analysis will refine the initial interpretations offered here.
16
References
http://list.english-heritage.org.uk
Arrow Geophysics, 2005, Ground Penetrating Radar Survey at Rufford Abbey in
Nottinghamshire.
Gilyard-Beer, R., 1965, Rufford Abbey, Nottinghamshire, In Journal of Medieval
Archaeology Volume IX, 1965, pp 161-163
Gover, J.E.B., Mawer, A. & Stenton, F.M., 1979, The Place Names of
Nottinghamshire, English Place-Name Society Volume XVII.
Knight, D, Vyner, B., & Allen, C., 2012, East Midlands Heritage; An Updated Research
Agenda and Strategy for the Historic Environment of the East Midlands.
Masters, P., 2006, Gradiometer Survey; Abbey and Long Meadows, Rufford Abbey
Masters, P. & Bunn, D., 2006, Resistivity Survey; Abbey Lawn, Rufford Abbey, Notts.
McGee, C. & Perkins, J., Rufford Abbey, undated document
Nottinghamshire County Council Archaeology Site Book 6 (p25); held by
Nottinghamshire Historic Environment Record.
17