No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 November 2011
The three seasons of excavation 1969–71 have provided details of occupation lasting continuously from the third century until the nineteenth century. In the Roman period cobbled streets and timber buildings, pits and wells have been excavated but they show little sign of rigid planning. The streets continued to be used in the fifth and sixth century when huts of post-built and grubenhaus type were constructed. Some parts of the interior were now ploughed.
In the eighth and ninth centuries timber buildings, storage pits, and cess pits were concentrated in one area close to the south wall of the Roman fort. Near by a well, constantly used from the Roman period and subsequently relined with timber, was abandoned and used as a rubbish tip. Some additional buildings and pits belonging to the ‘hall complex’ of late Saxon date were found. Medieval features included boundary ditches, a lime kiln and slaking pit, and a timber building. Some areas of the interior were cultivated throughout this time.
In the early sixteenth century a large store building was erected in masonry: it was demolished late in the sixteenth century. Thereafter the fort was used as a prison camp until the early nineteenth century. Various features of this period were found.
The Landgate was further excavated bringing to light structural details of Roman, Saxon, and medieval date. Limited excavation in the priory exposed details of the claustral buildings.
page 70 note 1 Three interim accounts have been published: ‘First Interim Report 1961–3’, Antiq. Journ. xliii (1963), 218–27Google Scholar; ‘Second Interim Report 1964–6’, xlvi (1966), 39–49; ‘Third Interim Report 1966–8’, xlix (1969), 62–74. A brief survey of the Saxon cultural sequence was published in Ibid. 1(1970), 67–85.
page 72 note 1 Antiq. Journ. xliii (1963), 226Google Scholar.
page 73 note 1 Type RIC 179.
page 73 note 2 Antiq. Journ. xlvi (1966), 43Google Scholar.
page 74 note 1 Antiq. Journ. xlix (1969), 66–7Google Scholar.
page 77 note 1 Antiq. Journ. xlvi (1966), 43–7Google Scholar; xlix (1969), 67–9.
page 78 note 1 Antiq. Journ. xlix (1969), 67–9Google Scholar.
page 79 note 1 A fuller account of this structure is given in Post-Medieval Archaeology, 5 (1972), 188–90.
page 79 note 2 VCH. Hants, iii, 157.
page 79 note 3 Cal. S.P. Dom. 1581–90, p. 257.
page 80 note 1 Antiq. Journ. xliii (1963), 222–3Google Scholar.
page 81 note 1 J. C. Dickinson, The Origins of the Austin Canons and their Introduction into England (1950), p. 124.
page 81 note 2 I am grateful to Professor Barry Cunliffe and to Mr. S. E. Rigold for discussing aspects of this work.
page 81 note 3 Antiq. Journ. xliii (1963), pi. xxxvGoogle Scholar.
page 81 note 4 Ibid, xlix (1969), p. 64, fig. 2.
page 81 note 5 For a full architectural description of the church, see: N. Pevsner and D. Lloyd, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight (Buildings of England No. 32: 1967), pp. 382–6.