Culver Archaeological Project, Culver Farm, Church Road, Barcombe, Sussex, BN8 5TR.
Email: info@culverproject.co.uk
Web: www.culverproject.co.uk
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 543200 114400, map
reference TQ432144 (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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
Figure 1: Location map of the Bridge Farm project site
Figure 2: Solid and drift geology of the site area (BGS 2010)
2
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
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 3rd 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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
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 5th 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 4th 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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
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 2013.
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 2013.
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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)

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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
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 2013. 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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
 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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
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,
www.culvrerproject.co.uk, 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 2010-12.
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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
REFERENCES
Allen, M. J. (2011, December). Prehistoric Wetlands Discovery. Sussex Past & Present (125), pp. 6-7.
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, 3rd ed. London: John Baker Publishers Ltd.
Millum, D. H. (2011). Mapping the Archaeology of Ringmer Parish to AD 1349. Lewes: unpublished
University of Sussex dissertation held at the Barbican House library, Archaeology Room, ref
930.1028.
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
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
APPENDIX 1: CAP Geophysical survey results in the Surrounding Landscape
13
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
APPENDIX 2: CAP general policy for the retaining or disposal of artefacts
ANALYSIS BY
CAP
TYPE
RECORD
LOCATE
CONSV
MARK
CBM – tile &
brick
General &
Tile
By context
Wash
Those
kept
Pottery
General &
Pottery
By context
Yes
Expert
Prehistoric
worked flint
Fire-cracked
flint
General &
PH flint
General
By context
Wash
unless
fragile or
whole.
Wash
Yes
Expert
By context
Wash
No
CAP
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
CAP
Slag
General
By context
Glass
General
By context
Wash or
brush
Wash.
Box
Those
kept
No
Yes
Expert
Unworked – sort, quantify and discard
Worked – sort weigh and keep
Keep a sample of type, quantify and discard
the rest.
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
Rinse
lightly
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.
CAP
ARCHIVE OR DISCARD
Keep representative selection plus any
pieces of interest. Discard remainder in
marked location after weighing.
Keep all for specialist analysis, selected
drawing and selection for archive
Keep all for specialist analysis, selected
drawing and archive
Sort, weigh and discard, keeping
representative selection
Keep all for expert analysis and potential
reburial
Shell
General
By context
Iron in
obviously
disturbed
contexts
Iron in all
other
contexts
Gold, silver,
coins &
copper alloy
Wall plaster
General
By context
and/or 2D
Small find
3D
location
Small find
3D
location
Keep dry
No
Expert
Send for expert conservation and analysis
prior to archiving
Small find
3D
location
No
Expert
Pack in acid free tissue for expert analysis
and archive
Wood &
leather
Small find
3D
location
Damp
surface
only
Keep as
found
No
Expert
Grain &
seeds
Small find
record
3D
location
Keep as
found
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 carbon14 dating
Bag and send for analysis and potentially
carbon14 dating
14
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)
APPENDIX 3: List of CAP reports and articles
Date
2006
2006
2006
2007
Type
Report
Report
Report
Report
2007
Report
2009
Report
2010
Diary
Title
Culvermead Excavation Journal
Culvermead Excavation Grey Lit
Court House Field Excavation Report 2005
A previously unknown Roman road: Offham
to the Greensand Way near Barcombe Mills
Culver
Mead
water-logged
timber
radiocarbon results
Barcombe environs Roman landscape and
hydrology: the hidden Roman waterways
The Chronicles of Culver
2010
Article
Barcombe Roman Villa
2010
Report
2011
Poster
Barcombe:
The
Wilderness
2010
(TQ141424) geoarchaeological resume
A New Roman Town in East Sussex
2011
Report
2011
Article
2011
Article
2012
Report
2012
2012
Article
Briefing
2012
Design
2012
Design
2012
Design
2012
Design
2012
Articles
2012
Report
Author
R. Wallace BA
R. Wallace BA
R. Wallace BA
R. Wallace MA
Remarks
Report
Report
Report
MA dissertation
Dr M. J. Allen
MIfA
Dr M. J. Allen
MifA
K.
Fromings,
MA
D. R. Rudling
MIfA,
C. Butler MIfA,
R. Wallace MA
Dr M. J. Allen
MIfA
J. Oldham
Results from C14test
from 2006 trench
1st interin report
Report on the finds excavated in 2007: Pond
Field, Culver Farm, Barcombe, E. Sussex
Romano-British hanging lamp: rare lamp
unearthed at Culver Farm, Barcombe
Prehistoric Wetlands Discovery: a new
Middle Bronze Age waterlogged site in Sx
Report of the field-walking results from
2011 at House Field, Bridge Farm ........
The secrets of Barcombe’s Bog are revealed..
A conjectural interpretation of the recent
discovery in the Upper Ouse Valley
Design for a field evaluation project for
2012-13 at Bridge Farm, Wellingham ....
Project design for field evaluations and
excavations for the CAP
Project design for general fieldwalking at
Culver Farm, Barcombe, Sussex
CAP health and safety on site and risk
assessment
Culver: an intriguing first 7 years
D. H. Millum,
MA AIfA
D. H. Millum,
MA AIfA
Dr M. J. Allen
MIfA
D. H. Millum,
MA AIfA
R. Taylor
D. H. Millum,
MA AIfA
D. H. Millum,
MA AIfA
D. H. Millum,
MA AIfA
D. H. Millum,
MA AIfA
R. Wallace, MA
The Roman pottery from excavations in
Culver Mead, courthouse Field and Pond
Field, Barcombe between 2005 and 2010
Dr M. Lyne
D. H. Millum
& R. Wallace
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
Scatter plots and pie
chart
Generic finds report &
initial interpretation
Sussex Past, Sussex
Express, Lost Scroll
Sussex Past 125
Scatter plots and tables
Sussex Express 6.1.12
Brief for funders and
allied groups
The 2012-13 fieldwork
design
Generic project design
Generic field walking
design
Risk assessment
After pottery report in
Sussex Past 128 and
The Lost Scroll
Specialist
pottery
report
for
the
excavations to date
15
©CAP2012 (Revised 24/6/2012)