Norfolk Heritage Explorer

Location

Full description

December 2007. Norfolk NMP.
A probable settlement of unknown date is visible as cropmarks on aerial photographs (S1)-(S3), centred at TG 2877 1313. The site is evident as a linear arrangement of rectilinear enclosures and boundary ditches, ranged along what is now a field boundary but may once have been (at least in part) a road or trackway named Ravensgate Way, depicted on a map of 1585 (NHER 8127; map reproduced schematically in (S4)). What may be further elements of the settlement have been identified immediately to the north (NHER 50728) and south (NHER 50730). In addition, although they are separated by some 570m, cropmarks further to the north (NHER 50727) are similar enough in alignment and character to suggest that they formed part of the same probable settlement, ranged along a curvilinear trackway or road (now followed for some of its length by the parish boundary, see NHER 50727), which joined to Ravensgate Way at its southern end. If this is the case, with the settlement and trackway following Ravensgate Way before turning away north towards Wroxham, a late medieval or early post medieval date seems most likely. The site would have occupied a former common-edge position in relation to Mousehold Heath. Whether there is any connection with the possible site of Little Rackheath (Rackheath Parva) church and deserted settlement, thought to lie 400m to the northwest (NHER 12639), is unclear. Alternatively, given its similarity to sites mapped in Lincolnshire (S5) and elsewhere, a late prehistoric to Roman date is also plausible. Finds recovered from the vicinity (e.g. NHER 36254) range in date from the prehistoric to post medieval periods.

The site is visible for approximately 900m, curving around from northeast to southwest. It overlaps with an area of more fragmentary and less coherent cropmarks (NHER 50725), with which its relationship is unclear. In comparison with NHER 50727 to the north, there is considerable variation in the size and shape of the enclosures, although they are still broadly rectilinear in plan. One, centred at TG 2896 1318, which may be subdivided or instead represent two conjoined enclosures, measures 91m long and 58m wide, using the modern field boundary as its southeastern limit. The remainder are too fragmentary for meaningful dimensions to be recorded. It is notable that more than one phase of activity may be represented, by crossing ditches and slight changes in orientation. In particular, at TG 2865 1301, a double-ditched element representing a trackway or part of an enclosure appears to overlie, or be overlain by, a more regular pattern of ditches.
S. Tremlett (NMP), 10 December 2007.

October 2011. Geophysical Survey.
A geophysical survey in the field immediately south of these cropmarks recorded an L-shaped ditch as a positive linear anomaly running north-south from the northern edge of the field and then curving east. This may be an extension of the enclosures noted here.
See NHER 56800 and report (S6) for further details.
H. Hamilton (HES), 20 April 2015.

December 2011. Trial Trenching.
Seven 50m long trial trenches were excavated in order to investigate the anomalies detected during the geophysical survey but no evidence of the L-shaped ditch was observed. This feature was likely the result of variations in the natural geology.
See NHER 56800 and report (S7) for further details.
H. Hamilton (HES), 8 May 2015.

May 2021. Geophysical Survey.
Magnetometer survey of entire field.
This survey identified a range of linear anomalies around the southern and eastern margin of this field that clearly relate to the same group of remains as these cropmarks. The majority of the geophysical anomalies have corresponding cropmarks, although the reverse is not true; with many of the cropmarks being associated with no evidence for surviving sub-surface remains.
See reports (S8) and (S9) and NHER 66694 for further details.
P. Watkins (HES), 7 March 2023.

September-December 2021. Trial Trenching.
Evaluation of part of western half of field.
This evaluation saw a number of trenches placed across the cropmarks at the western end of this group, which lie some distance from the main enclosures. A number of ditches were recorded in this area, several of which are likely to correspond with the mapped cropmarks. Dating evidence was limited to a small number of medieval pottery sherds, which were recovered from several east-to-west and north-to-south aligned features.
See report (S10) and NHER 66694 for further details.
P. Watkins (HES), 7 March 2023.

Monument Types

• BOUNDARY DITCH (Unknown date)
• ENCLOSURE (Unknown date)
• RECTANGULAR ENCLOSURE (Unknown date)
• RECTILINEAR ENCLOSURE (Unknown date)
• SETTLEMENT (Unknown date)
• TRACKWAY? (Unknown date)
• BOUNDARY DITCH (Early Iron Age to Roman - 800 BC? to 409 AD?)
• ENCLOSURE (Early Iron Age to Roman - 800 BC? to 409 AD?)
• RECTANGULAR ENCLOSURE (Early Iron Age to Roman - 800 BC? to 409 AD?)
• RECTILINEAR ENCLOSURE (Early Iron Age to Roman - 800 BC? to 409 AD?)
• SETTLEMENT (Early Iron Age to Roman - 800 BC? to 409 AD?)
• TRACKWAY? (Early Iron Age to Roman - 800 BC? to 409 AD?)
• BOUNDARY DITCH (Medieval to 19th Century - 1066 AD to 1900 AD)
• ENCLOSURE (Medieval to 19th Century - 1066 AD to 1900 AD)
• RECTANGULAR ENCLOSURE (Medieval to 19th Century - 1066 AD to 1900 AD)
• RECTILINEAR ENCLOSURE (Medieval to 19th Century - 1066 AD to 1900 AD)
• SETTLEMENT (Medieval to 19th Century - 1066 AD to 1900 AD)
• TRACKWAY? (Medieval to 19th Century - 1066 AD to 1900 AD)

Associated Finds - none

Protected Status - none

Sources and further reading

Related records