Iron age farmstead, south of Marrow Lane Farm (EHER 2463)

Iron Age farmstead comprising a circular hut within a sub-rectangular enclosure first noted in 1955, recorded as a cropmark in 1959 and excavated in 1963 and again in 1967-8. The majority of the pottery found was of Iron Age 'A' type with the exception of two Belgic sherds. Other finds included loom weights, a bronze awl and an iron ringlet. The farmstead may have been constructed in the early-mid 3rd century BC and was destroyed by fire early in the 1st century BC.

Original HER entry merged with NRHE data import. An Early Iron Age farmstead at Vince's Farm. The site was first noted when deep-ploughed in 1955 and was first seen as a cropmark in 1959. <1> <2> The site was trial trenched by B. Blake of Colchester Museum in 1963 with further excavations by P.R. Holbert and the Colchester Archaeological Group in 1967-68. <1> <3> The site consisted of a circular hut, 15.25m (50 feet) in diameter with inner post-holes and hearth, later surrounded by a sub-rectangular ditched enclosure 100 by 60 feet, with a probable internal palisade. The majority of the pottery was of Iron Age 'A' type with the exception of two Belgic sherds. Other finds included loom weights, a bronze awl and an iron ringlet. The farmstead may have been constructed in the early-mid 3rd century BC and was destroyed by fire early in the 1st century BC. <1> <3> <4> Drury (in <7>) considered the Vince's Farm site to have been excavated in a rather unsatisfactory fashion in 1967-8. He added that the site must be broadly contemporary with the settlements at Little Waltham (TL 71 SW 18) and on the basis of the published evidence, Rodwell <5> tentatively suggested a minimum of three phases of development; the single phase interpretation suggested by the excavators and supported by Harding <6> is clearly incorrect. The first phase seems to have been a single isolated hut, to which a small enclosure, probably defined by a palisade, was subsequently added. Finally, the enclosure seems to have been enlarged and defined by a ditch. The form of the hut in each phase is unclear, due to the inadequacy of the published evidence. Rodwell <5> suggested that the hut may have formed part of a 'village' similar to Little Waltham (Period II) settlement but aerial photography, to date, has failed to disclose other cropmarks in the immediate vicinity. Site listed in gazetteer cropmark complex described. <8> Other references: <9> <10> <11> <12> See also aerial photographs and NMP cropmark plot: <13> <14> <15>