Since 2002 it has been exposed, investigated and now fully consolidated by professional masons, with the stone slabs at the position of the gate re-erected into position (3)

The stonework leading up to the sluice-gate would have stood at least 2 metres high, and was battered (angled backwards), well mortared and regularly coursed. It was built to funnel water towards a sluice-gateway that consisted of large ashlar blocks, four set on top of each other oneither side of the narrow slipway, with a thick timber gate. Each block was slightly shorter than the one below. Central recesses are about 12 inches (300mm) across and deep enough to have held a thick timber gate between jambs; this could have been raised by a rack and pinion device. From here water was allowed into Moor Pond (3)

At a later stage, some top stonework on either side of the sluice was cut away to allow for a timber trough or launder to cross the sluice at an acute angle. This trough was built of wood, with horizontal planking at the sides, at least two inches (50mm) thick. How thick the timber base was is unclear, as is whether the top of the trough was enclosed or open. It was more likely boarded on all four sides. Upright metal rods occur on either side of where the trough passed through the banks behind the stone walling, and these show that the trough was about 2ft (0.6m) wide and 4 feet (1.2m) high. The rods were arranged at 3 feet (0.9m) intervals and had small iron plates at their base which acted as brackets to help hold the horizontal timbers and maintain the vertical sides. Although most of the rods had been subsequently cut and bent over near their tops, one was found with a similar plate found at the top end; this suggests the full enclosure of the trough. Large nails and bolts have also been found along the line of the trough. (3)

At either end of the trough, which was about 36 feet (11m) long, drystone walling was added in the later stage at the flanks of embanked earth to help funnel water towards and away from the trough. This stonework was not mortared and was of rougher construction than the original mortared walling. Similar drystone walling was added to the east side of the main sluice walling, and perhaps on the west side, but this area is now still hidden beneath banking that supports a large tree and its roots. Drystone walling has also been partly exposed at the west end of the trough. The line of the trough has been partly excavated and is now made visible to the public by the inclusion of gravel (contained within timber lining) within the excavated east section and on the top of the unexcavated west part. (3)

Water for the original sluice came from an embanked holding area north of the sluice (roughly triangular in shape) which held water that came via a leat from a reservoir further to the north (Top Upper Dam). Water for the trough came from a more naturally shaped open area of water to the east of this holding area, which is still partly under water today and may derive water from springs. The trough took water over to the north end of another leat and from here water flowed towards Papplewick Lane and eventually provided a head for a water-wheel at the mill close to Grange Farm. (3)

The east sluice was uncovered, revealing a near vertical wall on the north side of the excavation, made up of between 7 and 9 courses of sqaure-cut stone. There were three large shaped blocks providing a slot to hold the sluice-boards in place. They were seen to extend to a depth of 1.10m from the top, but the base was not found. On the south side of the sluice a 1.5m length of vertical retaining wall was exposed, seen to extend to a depth of 1.30m from the top (but the base was not found). (2)

The height of the sluice block exposed on the north side is close to the height of the remaining blocks at the nearby South Sluice, perhaps indicating that the two sluices were worked in conjunction with each other. Of course, if there is a block missing at the south sluice that would probably have been a little higher than the east sluice. (1)

The curving wall on both sides of the central sluice blocks may suggest that water could be allowed to flow through the aperture in either direction, at different times. This is in sharp contrast to the arrangement at the South Sluice, where the curved walls on the north of the feature channel towards the south but the south wall is straight, at right angles to the direction of flow. (1)

The style of stonework exposed at the East Sluice resembled the stonework in the northeast wall of the South Sluice more than that in the ‘jaws’ of the South Sluice. We have concluded that the north-east segment of the South Sluice was probably a late-stage modification, and so we could suggest that the East Sluice is likely to also be part of this later phase. (1)

<1> Stephen Walker, 2014, Moor Pond Woods, Dam Banks East Sluice: Archaeological Project Report (Unpublished document). SNT5696.

<2> Laura Binns, 2017, Report on an Archaeological Audit and an Appraisal of Future Archaeological investigation - Moor Pond Woods - Papplewick (Unpublished document). SNT5693.

<3> R. Sheppard, 2007, Recent Investigation and Conservation of Some Historic Structures at Moor Pond Wood, Papplewick, Nottinghamshire (Unpublished document). SNT5698.