Watching Brief on works for a disabled access ramp - Rufford Abbey 2009

8/18/2019 Watching Brief on works for a disabled access ramp - Rufford Abbey 2009

1/15

Nottinghamshire Community Archaeology

Watching Brief

On works for the construct ion of a disabled accessramp at Rufford Abbey, Ollerton, Nottinghamshire.

August 2009


2/15

2

Report on

Watching brief on works for the construction of a disabled access ramp at

Rufford Abbey, Ollerton, Nottinghamshire, June 2007

By Emily Gillott

NCA Report Number 002

Prepared By

Nottinghamshire Community Archaeology

Nottinghamshire County Council

Trent Bridge House

Fox RoadWest Bridgford

Nottinghamshire

NG2 6BJ

Tel: 0115 9 823 823

Fax: 0115 9 772 418

Site Code: RADA07

NGR: 464580, 364725


3/15

3

Contents

Illustrations 4

Introduction 5

Site Location 6

Archaeological and Historical Background 8

Aims and Objectives 9

Methodology 9

Results 10

Conclusion 14

Project Information 15


4/15

4

Illustrations

Page

6 - Fig 1: Showing the location of Rufford Abbey and the watching brief.

7 - Fig 2: Map showing the location of the drain uncovered by the trench.

9 - Fig 3: Overview of the work area.

10 - Fig 4: View of the drain feature from above.

10 - Fig 5: View of the interior looking NE.

10 - Fig 6: View of the interior looking SW.

11 - Fig 7: Showing the wall divided into sections.

12 - Fig 8: Showing wall-section C sat directly on top of section B.

12 - Fig 9: Showing the different layers identifiable in the section of the

hole made for the works.

13 - Fig 10: The lens of glass within layer 9 of the stratigraphy.

13 - Fig 11: Fragment of glass with quatrefoil decoration.

13 - Fig 12: Centre of a piece of crown glass.


5/15

5

Introduction

In 2007 an extensive programme of improvement works took place at Rufford

Abbey. Part of the improvements involved the construction of a disabled

access ramp. The ramp is located between the Coach House and Orangery,

and is to provide access from the Coach House courtyard to the gardens.

There was the likelihood that work would uncover archaeological remains,

and so a watching brief was carried out by the County Council Archaeologists.

The work on site by contractors initially uncovered a brick-built drain, which

was found to contain water. This then required the extension of the trench,

which then revealed a brick-built wall.

Photographs were taken inside the drain feature, and the wall was cleaned

and photographed. Photographs were also taken of the side of the trench in

order to give an idea of the stratigraphy.


6/15

6

Site Location

Fig 1: Showing the location of Rufford Abbey and the watching brief.

Rufford Abbey Country Park is located approximately 2 miles south of Ollerton

to the east of the A614 road. There are a number of main buildings on the

site; one of which is the Coach House (now a coffee shop). The work to

construct a disabled access ramp took place directly to the east of this

building.

Figure 1 shows the location of Rufford Abbey Country Park, on the A614 ‘Old

Rufford Road’ which runs between Ollerton in the north and Nottingham in the

south.


7/15

7

Fig 2: Map showing the location of the drain uncovered by the works.

Figure 2 shows the location of the works in relation to the buildings (orange

areas). The grey areas represent tarmac footpaths. The drain and wall both

run NE-SW.

The geology in the area is Sherwood Sandstone.


8/15

8

Archaeological and Historical Background

The earliest recorded lord of Rufford is a Saxon named Ulf. After the Norman

invasion of 1066 William I gave the land at Rufford to Gilbert de Gant. The

Domesday Book contains a reference to the village of Rugforde. The village

was small, and may not be on the site of Rufford Abbey. Gilbert de Gant gave

a gift of land to the Cistercian Order, and the villagers were evicted when the

abbey was founded in 1146.

The original abbey building was a wooden one, which was replaced in stone

from around 1160 onwards. The abbey established 21 outlying granges, andits chief source of income was from the wool trade.

During the 15th century Rufford Abbey met with a period of decline, and the

Abbey was frequently unable to pay all of the taxes it owed to the King. It was

one of the first to be dissolved by Henry VIII. In 1537 Rufford Abbey and its

land were granted to George Talbot, 4th Earl of Shrewsbury.

The 6th Earl was the first to have any real interest in the abbey. He turned the

abbey into a country house, which was added to on numerous occasions over

the years. The country house passed into the hands of the Savile family in

1626. The Savile family were responsible for removing most of what was left

of the mediaeval abbey for the construction of a grand new wing. In the late

1800s the 1st Baron Savile was the last in his family to make extensive

renovations to the estate, and it was during this period that the estate

experienced something of a ‘golden age’. The two World Wars had a

devastating effect on the estate, and in 1938 it was sold off. Rufford Abbey is

now owned by the County Council as part of a Country Park for public usage.

Recent improvements have led to the construction of a disabled access ramp

to the east of the Coach House. Work uncovered a wall of several phases

and a drain, both constructed in hand-made brick.


9/15

9

Aims and Objectives

The objectives of the archaeological work were to;

1) Take photos from inside the brick-built drain to try to establish how far it

went, and the internal construction.

2) To try to establish what the wall-feature was and what the phases of

construction were.

3) To try to date either feature.

Methodology

The original trench was dug by contractors, who uncovered the wall and drain

during the course of their work. Archaeologists were then brought in to

investigate. Photographs were taken of the inside of the drain using a 4

megapixel digital camera. The clean-up of the wall was done by hand using

trowel, hand shovel, and brush. Heavy rain the previous night meant that the

work area was sodden underfoot, and a lot of material had been washed in

from the sections. Photographs were taken of the wall of the trench from a

variety of angles.

Fig 3: Overview of

the work area. The

hole into the drain

is beneath the

paving slab, and

the drain runs

parallel to the wall

from SW to NE.


10/15

10

Results

The Drain

Fig 4: View of the drain

feature from above showing

the hole made into it.

The drain or culvert is constructed of hand-made bricks. It runs NE-SW and

lies at a depth of approximately 1.5m below present ground level. The

thickness of the upper section of the drain, which is arched, is 23cm (13

inches). At the point where the hole was made through the roof of the drain it

was possible to see around 5m up and down the tunnel with the aid of the

flash. As far as can be seen to the NE (see Fig 5) the lower section of the

wall is constructed in large faced pieces of sandstone. There don’t seem to

be any branches or changes in directions along this section to the NE.

Fig 5: View of the interior looking NE Fig 6: View of the interior looking SW


11/15

11

To the SW (see Fig 6) the lower section is only constructed in stone for

approximately 2m. After this it looks like there is possibly a vertical access

shaft, although it is very difficult to tell from the photos. Beyond this the arch

of the tunnel begins again, though the profile of the upper arch seems slightly

different to the preceding section, and it looks to be constructed entirely of

brick. It also seems to have taken on a more westerly course,

The feature could be contemporary with the construction of the coach house

or stable block. It is currently full of foul water, and is clearly out of use, but it

could once have been a freshwater culvert. If this is the case it could be to do

with managing water to the Orangery (constructed in 1725) or various phases

of water-features in the gardens. The use of stone in the construction could

mean that the brick part of the culvert was built onto an existing, older

structure. There is another possibility that the stone may have been reused

from elsewhere, or readily available, and made use of in this way.

The Wall

The technique of the construction suggests that it is not later than Georgian

in date. It consists of three separate phases, which have been labelled on Fig

7 as A, B and C.

Fig 7: showing the wall

divided into sections

representing likely

phases of construction.


12/15

12

Wall-sections A and B may be alterations to the same structure, but C is a

separate, later construction. Part B looks to be some sort of boundary wall,

intended to be seen above ground, and constructed in an earlier Jacobean

style (a width of a brick-and-a-half). It is not clear whether A was built before

or after B. Wall-section A is only keyed into B by two bricks, so perhaps A is a

terminal, added at a later date as an alteration.

Fig 8: Shows wall-section C sat directly on

top of section B.

Fig 9: showing the different layers identifiable

in the side of the hole made for the works.

Section C is sat on top of the earlier wall (see Fig 8) and is made from similar

hand-made bricks. This is a substantial stepped brick footing; which may be

for a substantial building, or it may have been over-engineered, which is

common in earlier brick structures where builders are still applying masonry

techniques to brick constructions. The footing sits directly on top of wall-

section B, and for a foundation to be built at this level there must have been

substantial movement of earth to bring the level of the ground up.

The wall (B and A) may have been demolished down to a lower level, and theground around it filled with levelling material. The stratigraphy of the material


13/15

13

surrounding the wall supports this. Layer 9, shown on Fig 9, appears to be

one thick layer of assorted levelling material. It includes a variety of building

and construction rubble including tiles, bricks, pebbles and mortar. This layer

also contains a lens of glass laid down in a single deposit or dump, which was

observed in the west-facing section of the hole dug for the works. Figure 10

shows the lens of glass within layer 9. Some of the glass fragments appear to

have been painted, and Figure 11 shows the remains of an apparent

quatrefoil design. The preservation of the paint was so poor it could be

destroyed simply by touching it.

Fig 10: The lens of glass within layer 9 of thestratigraphy.

Fig 11: Fragment of glass with quatrefoildecoration, in what appears to be white and

pale blue paint.

One of the pieces of glass appears to be the centre or ‘bullseye’ of a piece of

crown glass (see Fig 12). In some parts of Europe crown glass was being

made as early as the 14th century, but in Britain its production is more likely to

be from the Tudor period and onwards.

Fig 12: The centre of a piece of crown glass.

This piece could have been used for

decorative purposes, or it could be a

waste fragment from a larger piece

which was brought to the site to be

cut to size. The lens of glass

represents a single-phase dump of

material which may have been

removed as a result of renovations.


14/15

14

Conclusion

There has been a substantial amount of earth movement and water

management in this area. This is not surprising given the proximity of this

section of drain or culvert to the water tower, Orangery (originally a bath-

house), and stable blocks. Culverts would have been needed to transport

fresh water, and drains needed to channel waste water down to the river. The

gardens also had extensive water features, and the drain may have fed into

these. If the culvert is contemporary with the Orangery it could be expected

to be from around 1725, though an earlier date may be possible given that

part of the culvert is constructed in stone.

The adjacent brick structure seems to actually be two structures; the earlier of

which contained two phases. The earlier structure is a wall, no earlier that

post-medieval and no later than Georgian in date given its construction, with a

terminal added as a later alteration. Later it seems the wall was demolished

to a lower level, and then the ground built up around it. A new structure was

then built, with one of the stepped footings resting on the earlier wall.


15/15

15

Project Information

NCA Project Code RADA 07

NCA Report Number 002

Watching brief undertaken by Emily Gillott on 13th and 20th of June 2007.

Documents

Watching Brief on works for a disabled access ramp - Rufford Abbey 2009