Friday brings resolution to some of our questions and raises more problems for our team of University of Kent students, our stalwart volunteers and the Trust team. When I mentioned that we had finished a segment through the ring ditch yesterday I meant that we thought we had finished.
In our second segment through the ring ditch, a heavy day of digging revealed two distinct cuts on the eastern and western sides. The western cut had a symmetrical profile, with steeply sloping upper edges breaking to a deep straight sided cut and breaking sharply at the bottom at the flat base. This cut is much more like the typical section of a well preserved ring ditch in Thanet.
So why does our first segment which we thought we had completed yesterday (see yesterday’s post) look so different? What are the prospects for the third segment being excavated further along the north eastern edge?
The issue was resolved today when it turned out our first ditch segment, with the strange benched profile and possible recut, was excavated only to the top of a compacted fill of chalk rubble and silt. Having pondered the situation with a fresh pair of eyes on the feature (thanks PCH) the chalk had to go! Two tons of chalk rubble stand no chance against the team armed with finely honed skills with a mattock and considerable progress was made toward matching the ditch profile with its neighbor immediately to the north, solving the problem of why these two segments appeared so different to each other.
The second segment presents a new problem now, with a clear second cut feature, which seems to have been excavated on the inner edge of the ring ditch. Is it discrete pit or evidence for a much more substantial recut ditch? Time and much more excavation will tell.
Further north the third segment excavated through the ring ditch to add more to our understanding of the plan of the ditch circuit , looks as if it will also end up being as deep as the other two segments.
There’s more progress to report on the southern side of the site, where we have been excavating our segments through a later feature, possible a quarry pit, but perhaps a more substantial feature. A section through undisturbed deposits and another emptying a previous section excavated in 1982 have found among some shallower pit cuts. a steep sided cut feature which extends into both areas of excavation. Are these simply random chalk quarries or is this one of the deep cut sunken features, possibly once associated with structures, that we have encountered many times before in Thanet? We have more definition of our targets here now but the questions are not resolved yet…
Lucky we have another week to go! More updates after a well earned weekend of rest for the team.
In a later period, as yet undetermined, the southern edge of the round barrow was cut by a series of pits and possibly a large cut feature. We bagan to try to define the dimensions and shape of the feature by excavating another small section into it, As we make progress with this the nature of the later features will be more clearly defined and perhaps dated in the next few days of work at the site.
Iron Age and Roman reenactors De Bello Canzio will be with us over the day at Archaeology for You. With authentic costumes, armour and artefacts this will a be a fascinating glimpse into the past.
Celebrations for the Trusts 25th Anniversary continued on Saturday 27th of April 2013 with a day conference titled Exploring our Past – Preserving our Heritage, also held at the Broadstairs campus of Canterbury Christchurch University.
Once the congregation of archaeological and heritage minded people attending the conference finished their welcoming teas and coffees at the Touchdown Bar, they swiftly moved to the large lecture theatre for the start of the conference at 9.45 am. The Chairman of the Trust for Thanet Archaeology, Simon Perry, gave a welcoming speech and introduced the first talk, given by Rod LeGear.
Rod, a retired mining engineer and a founding member of the Kent Underground Research Group, explained how Thanet’s chalk geology has been exploited in the past by local industry and agriculture. Raw chalk, taken from underground sources ranging from shallow pits to more extensive mines where thousands of tons were produced, was used as a fertiliser and burnt to produce lime for agriculture and to make bricks for the thriving building industry which created Thanet’s sea side suburbs. Many of these pits and mines have been put to other uses and remain visible in Thanet’s landscape with careful observation and historical research. Rod’s presentation drew attention to these industries as valid parts of our heritage and records of lives and labour of many people.
Dr. Mark Samuel, an architectural archaeologist based in Ramsgate, followed Rod with a talk on a survey that explored the remains of defensive structures that were built to protect the Pegwell Bay area under the threat of German invasion during the early years of the Second World War. Images were shown of the remains of many of the defences that can still be seen in the landscape today with careful observation and a relatively modest amount of field work. Mark explained how the defences were expected to be used in the event of a German invasion and presented some of his ideas about how the importance of the south coast of Thanet and Pegwell Bay might have been perceived during the Second World War, perhaps explaining why many of the sites he surveyed had been lost to history until his survey and research uncovered this secret landscape.
Emma gave a presentation on the history and importance of Margate Pier, beginning by discussing how the research for the talk was produced for a survey of the pier carried out by the Trust in 2005, in the planning stages for the original design of the Turner Contemporary. A history of the pier was given, beginning with its construction in 1810 and Emma explained how the pier has had a variety of uses for leisure and industry since its construction. Many people were intrigued by the miniature railway which once ran along the harbour wall, prompting much discussion after the talk and later in the lunch break. Emma finished by mentioning some of the changes that have occurred to the fabric of the pier that have left visible traces connected to the development of the town, making the pier a key element of Margate’s historic townscape which records the changing emphasis of the lives and industries that have made Margate thrive in the past.
The final speaker of the morning session was Nick Dermott, Conservation Officer for Thanet District Council, who talked about how, as pioneers of mass entertainment, Thanet’s historic townscapes were shaped by the early growth of the leisure industry. Beginning by looking at the history of pleasure gardens and the remarkable survival of one example at Ranelagh Grove at St Peters, Nick went on to talk about the history of Margate as an archetype of the seaside town where beach holidays originated. Nick spoke about the popularity of sea bathing in Margate and even the contemporary issues surrounding the development of mixed and even naked bathing. Keeping to the beaches, other forms of entertainment were touched on, such as the popular Donkey rides on the beach and Punch and Judy shows. Nick also looked at other forms of entertainment from Margate’s past away from the beach; the theatres, music halls, cinemas, Winter Gardens, West Cliff Hall and the importance to Margate of the development of Dreamland. The presentation was richly illustrated with wonderful and rare photographs, posters and books which reflected the rich diversity of Thanet as a tourist destination in the past present and future.
The first presentation in the afternoon session after lunch, was given by Bob Pantony, a long standing member of the Isle of Thanet Archaeological Society. Ably assisted in his slide show by Mr. Bob Varnham, Bob Pantony spoke of the contribution of Doctor Arthur Rowe of Margate, and his father before him, to the study of the Geology and Archaeology of Thanet in the early 20th century. Dr. Rowe’s private archaeological collection was bequeathed to the people of Margate and included finds from his own excavations as well as discoveries made during the expansion of Thanet’s towns, along with material his father, Dr. Thomas Smith Rowe, had collected. The senior Dr. Rowe was firmly established as an early archaeologist in Thanet who contributed a great deal to the collection that his son left to the people of Margate and Bob had even traced an interesting line drawn portrait of him from a local newspaper. Images were shown of many of the items that were formerly in the collection, some of which are now held by the British Museum. Attention was drawn to the poor state of preservation of much of the Rowe bequest material in other collections which has not been properly conserved. It was evident from Bob’s efforts to trace the items from the Rowe Bequest that Arthur Rowe was a pioneer of intellectual enquiry into Thanet’s past, an important element of Thanet’s historic ‘peoplescape’.
The second aspect of David’s talk explored ideas for Heritage lottery funded projects in the region, based on his extensive experience of successful bids for Heritage Lottery funding for community heritage projects. Giving an overview of the lottery grants that can be used by local groups to promote heritage and examples of successful Young roots and Our Heritage grants, David spoke in detail about the community archaeology projects that these grants funded. Hand-outs prepared by David on the grants available, as well as examples of successful bids for guidance on what could be included in a grant application were included in the conference packs given out to people attending. The last presentation looked forward to integrating participation and enjoyment of Thanet’s Heritage as long term goal for the Isle’s ‘peoplescape’. A challenge was set to the heritage community of the region, to replicate projects with the scope and scale of some of the examples that were shown in David’s presentation.
