The geophysical survey and trial trenching revealed evidence for a Late Iron Age/Early Romano-British settlement within the west of the Site. The settlement activity was contained within two large and intersecting enclosures, and although it is tempting to suggest that these represent a shifting of focus between the Iron Age and Romano-British periods, there is no clear differentiation between the small material assemblages from each area. (2)

Following a period of unenclosed late Iron Age settlement, a large-scale enclosure system was laid out across the landscape. This was mainly achieved by the creation of a series of interlinking rectilinear ditched boundaries to form a 'ladder' or 'washing line' enclosure system. (4)

Two principle enclosures formed a possible 'ladder' system, each of which was orientated on a broadly north-west to south-east alignment. Both enclosures were demarcated by substantial ditches that had been well maintained, with evidence of clearing out and sequential re-cutting events along the inner edges. They were joined along a northwest-southeast aligned section of ditch group. (4)

Results of a magnetometer survey identified large and small enclosures, curvilinear ditches and pits. The larger enclosures appear to be differing in dates as the ditches intersect each other. A second enclosure containing internal features and a ditch leading from its south-east corner towards a small enclosure. The report suggests that this smaller enclosure is associated with the larger one as it is a similar alignment. (1)

Each of these enclosures had a single sub-enclosure inside it, although these were not necessarily contemporaneous with the initial creation of the large enclosure; the sub-enclosure formed by two ditch groups appears to be a later addition. (4)

Due to the limited evidence of domestic activity, it is suggested that one enclosure may have functioned as a small stock management enclosure, which appears to have fallen out of use by the mid to late 2nd century AD. The interpretation is further strengthened by the entrance being in the corner, which allows livestock to be corralled and funnelled. It is on a slightly different alignment to the much larger enclosed area to the east. In general, this is likely to represent an earlier phase of activity at the site and this can be attested by the Late Iron Age pottery amongst the assemblages from the fills of the enclosure ditch. (3)

The second enclosure is part of a much larger scheme of land management identified in previous work across the larger site, and the excavations only targeted the western corner of this. Although a quantity of Late Iron Age to early Roman pottery was recovered from the ditch, this is likely to be residual from earlier activity in the localised area, as early fills also contained late-3rd to 4th century ceramics. (3)

The section of the second enclosure ditch excavated during the strip, map and record is the most northerly part of the feature and appears to be furthest away from the main areas of possible domestic activity. Despite this, there was some evidence for domestic waste being dumped in the northwest corner of the enclosure ditch. (3)

One evaluation trench represents the intersection between the two large enclosures, and as the ditches forming the northeastern limits of the southern enclosure are stratigraphically late, it is assumed that the settlement shifted south. (2)

Recutting of ditches was prevalent in both areas, with the ditches being maintained despite the erosion of the clay natural. The shallow wide ditch forming the eastern edge of the northern enclosure most likely formed a hollow way or drove way, and it is feasible that the northernmost enclosure was utilised for stock control. Although the geophysical survey indicates a continuous enclosure boundary, the ditch in related trench was narrow and deeper; as such the eastern boundary of the northern boundary may continue towards the southern enclosure as a drove way hinted at by the anomaly targeted (but not found) by another related trial trench. (2)

Shallower gullies and ditches form small internal boundaries within the larger enclosures, and are particularly prevalent in the south where they may demarcate areas of housing or other structures. The concentration of charred plant remains in one trial trench also points to occupation within the southern enclosure. (2)

There is no clear differentiation between the northern and southern enclosures, although the presence of a shallow hollow way forming the eastern extent of the northern enclosure suggests that this area was not used for habitation. (2)

The southern area may also have been solely used for stock control but the small material assemblage, including quantities of charred plant remains, a brooch and possible stylus hints at occupation in at least one of the enclosures. (2)

This phase of activity contained over 50% of the total pottery by number of sherds recovered from the strip, map and record programme, comprising pottery of later Iron Age, Late Iron Age and Early Romano-British date, as well as wares that could only be given a broad Iron Age, Roman or Late Iron Age to Early Roman date. In many cases, sherds of later Iron Age and/or Late Iron Age were found in the same contexts as those of Early Romano-British date. However, no Early Romano-British pottery was recovered from primary fills of original ditch cuts, but only within secondary and later fills of those features, or within fills (including primary fills) of ditch recuts. Where the various wares were found together, at least some of the later Iron Age and Late Iron Age wares were obviously abraded and fragmented, particularly in the case of the former. Moreover, the wares could have been used contemporarily for pottery from the Margidunum hinterland. (4)

Taken together, the finds dating evidence suggests that the enclosure system originated during the Late Iron Age, perhaps from around the late 1st century BC onwards. These features were later recut, perhaps towards the very end of the Iron Age, into the Early Roman period, when there was a slight modification of the layout. (4)

The radiocarbon dating evidence from the features from this phase of activity spans the Late Iron Age to Early Romano-Britis periods. (4)

<1> CGMS, Land at Shelford Road, Radcliffe-on-Trent Nottinghamshire (Unpublished document). SNT5026.

<2> Chris Harrison, 2013, Land at Shelford Road, Radcliffe on Trent: Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation (Unpublished document). SNT5758.

<3> Julian Thorley and Alice Forward, 2021, Archaeological Strip, Map and Record Report: Land at Grooms Cottage, Radcliffe-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire (Unpublished document). SNT5827.

<4> C. Collins and K. Poole, 2020, Land off Shelford Road, Radcliffe-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire: Report on an Archaeological Strip, Map and Record (Unpublished document). SNT5853.