Probable location of Roman rubbish pits and probable inhumation burials, in a gravel pit near Newmarket Road, Great Chesterford (EHER 13960)

Probable site of Roman rubbish pits (one containing three human skeletons), Roman pottery, a coin, tiles and bricks. This record is considered to be the most likely location of the discovery, although EHER 4929 and EHER 4949 represent two other possible locations of the discoveries.

Possible Roman inhumation and other pits. "Rubbish pits exposed in the large gravel pit on the left-hand side of the road as we went from the railway station over the bridge towards Great Chesterford" were excavated by Hughes in the early 19th century. <1> They were filled with animal bones, shells of oyster, mussel, whelk, and snail, Roman pottery, Samian ware, a coin of Claudius II and roman tiles, bricks etc. One pit contained three skeletons, amphora sherds, Samian ware, pottery and two rings (one brass, the other iron). <2> Site Assessment: Quarried away. Professor T. McKenny Hughes undertook excavation of the rubbish pits exposed in the parish gravel pit in the 1870s. Near the bottom of one of the pits he found a layer of charcoal and a layer made up of the fragments of an amphora, and three human skeletons lying as if the bodies had been hurriedly thrown in. A brass ring was lying close to the head of one of them and an iron ring was picked up nearby. The pit itself contained many pottery sherds, including a samian saucer or lid with the potter’s mark CONSTAS and another samian vessel stamped SATINUS. A second pit was excavated with Baron von Hugel, where they: "were struck by the great variety of the objects, the small number of each kind, and their fragmentary state. The household rubbish appeared to have been thrown in so that it sunk towards the centre. It was covered at intervals with layers of earth, sand, or gravel, and fine sand lining the sides often facilitated the descent of burrowing animals. Among the animal remains found were the bones of a small breed of cattle apparently closely akin to Bos longifrons, also of sheep, pig, fox, cat, and partridge. This was the second time that I had found the bones of the common cat among the Roman remains at Chesterford. There were shells of oyster, mussel, whelk, and of two species of snail (Helix aspersa and H. nemoralis). Fragments of earthenware occurred in abundance: some vessels were nearly perfect, some beautifully ornamented. The variety of these defies description; for the purposes of comparative archaeology they must be figured or exhibited in accessible cases. There was a fragment of samian ware with the potter’s mark CONATIUS F., and another with the two final letters of a name and OF. A coin of Claudius II. was picked up … but its position in the pit was not observed. There was the debris of houses such as bricks, and flanged and perforated and grooved tiles, also wattle and timber with nails and other iron fastenings in it. About two-thirds down we came upon a large piece of squared timber 6 feet [1.83m] in length and 1 foot [0.3m] across. Here was unmistakable evidence of houses near but of the foundations of those houses we had as yet found no trace." <3> Note: This record is mapped to the location of the parish gravel pit where the rubbish pits were probably discovered and excavated. The parish gravel pit is shown on the 1st edition OS map, and its location matches the description given in <1> as being 'on the left-hand side of the road… from the railway station over the bridge towards Great Chesterford'. So whilst it is not possible to say for certain, it is considered highly likely that this is the true location of the discovery. However, EHER 4929 is another record for the same discovery but it is mapped to another possible (less likely) location, directly adjacent to the Newmarket Road bridge. This is an older record and probably represents an early attempt at mapping the location of the finds just using the description given in <1>. The equivalent NRHE record for these finds has been accessioned into EHER 4929 because it shares the same mapped (though probably incorrect) location. Furthermore, the NRHE record description also makes reference to a third record, EHER 4949 (undated human remains found in a gravel pit), and suggests this is a more accurate location (than that in EHER 4929) for the finds. It is not possible to say for certain if the human remains recorded in EHER 4949 are the same as those recorded here. If they are the same, it is considered most likely that this record represents the true location of the discovery. The precise date of the excavation of the finds is also uncertain. Source <1> describes the discovery as in the early 19th century, whilst source <3> attributes the event to the 1870s (late 19th century). Prior to the accessioning of the NRHE record, EHER 4929 attributed the discovery to possibly the early 20th century, whilst the linked event record (EEX38427) attributes the date of the excavation as 1904.