GREAT WITCOMBE ROMAN VILLA, GLOUCESTERSHIRE CONSERVATION STATEMENT

Contents 1. . $. '. +. .. Introduction Underst!ndin" t#e site Si"ni%ic!nce o% t#e site Conser(!tion !nd )!n!"e)ent issues ,o-icies Bi/-io"r!0#1 $ & 1* 1 1'

A00endices 1. English Heritage Files 2. List of consultees and acknowledgements 15 17

Rob Iles

English Heritage 2 !

1. INTRO2UCTION 1.1 B!c3"round "his conser#ation statement is being $re$ared b% English Heritage as $art of a national initiati#e b% the &e$artment for 'ulture( )edia and *$ort to $roduce such documents for all of its $ro$erties. "hese documents are intended to $ro#ide a better understanding of the significance of those sites( to identif% im$ortant issues affecting them and to inform their future management. 1. Co)0i-!tion o% t#is re0ort

"his re$ort was com$iled in earl% 2 2 b% Rob Iles( then I+) for ,loucestershire. Further minor additions were made in +ugust 2 !. "he $olicies for this site were discussed at the site team in 2 2.

'o$ies of the final re$ort will be distributed to -iall )orrisse%( 'arole .wen and Loraine /nowles( all within English Heritage *outh 0est .ffice. 'o$ies are also being su$$lied to the -)R and 'ount% *)R.

UN2ERSTAN2ING THE SITE .1 Loc!tion !nd settin" o% site ,reat 0itcombe Roman 1illa lies 5 miles south east of ,loucester and 1 miles from 'irencester on the western side of the 'otswolds on its scar$ slo$e. Ermin *treet( the road between those two Roman towns( lies less than a mile to the northeast. )ore than one $re#ious writer has drawn attention to the site as being 2one of great beaut%3 and L%sons( its first e4ca#ator( said( 2the situation is $articularl% striking3. "he #illa lies on a slo$ing site( facing south south east( o#erlooking a small combe with a stream flowing northwards. "here are e4tensi#e #iews on all sides e4ce$t the west where the ground rises stee$l% u$ to 'oo$ers Hill and High 5rotheridge. "he #illa lies on cla% below the u$$er slo$es of oolitic limestones and sands. +s a result there are man% s$rings abo#e and below it. It was this unusual setting sheltered but with wide #iews and $lentiful water( which seems to ha#e attracted its first Roman owner to a site not $re#iousl% built on. -e#ertheless it was a difficult site to build on for two reasons6 first the degree of slo$e meant that it had to be built in terraces( some $arts cut back into the slo$e and other $arts built out6 secondl%( the nature of the underl%ing cla% meant the ground hereabouts is $rone to be unstable. + marked feature of the #illa is both the substantial buttressing of man% of its walls and the slum$ing of other walls( notabl% at the lower ends of its two e4ca#ated wings. . T#e 2isco(er1 !nd su/se4uent in(esti"!tions o% t#e site

"he Roman #illa was disco#ered during the u$rooting of an old ash tree on the estate of *ir 0illiam Hicks in 1717. )ost of the #illa around the inner court%ard( with a central $ortion and two wings( on southeast and northeast sides( was then e4ca#ated for him b% *amuel L%sons 817219. .n L%sons death in 171: *ir 0illiam Hicks continued e4ca#ations and e4$osed another rectangular building( some 1 m to the southeast b% the stream. 0illiam Hicks;5each ga#e the immediate area around the e4ca#ated #illa into ,uardianshi$ in 1:1:. *ubse<uentl% it was decided b% the )inistr% of 0orks 2to re; e4ca#ate the site( $rior to consolidation of the fabric3 8'lifford 1:5=( 59. )rs 'lifford started the e4ca#ation in 1:!7 but was onl% able to re;e4ca#ate the southwest wing $rior to the outbreak of 0orld 0ar II. "he re;e4ca#ation of the centre and east wing was finall% undertaken 1:> ;1:7! b% Ernest ,reenfield but was not $ublished before his death6 an account of his work was $ublished much later 8Leach 1::79. + significant article on the inter$retation of the #illa e4ca#ation was written b% &a#id -eal 81:779 who had been able to discuss the results with the e4ca#ator. English Heritage commissioned 'otswold +rchaeological "rust in 1::: to co; ordinate a $rogramme of recording. "his consisted of recording and anal%sis of the e4$osed stonewalls in the guardianshi$ area and #arious sur#e%s of the en#irons of the

area. "his showed that the ma?orit% of #isible stonework was modern reconstruction( that the #illa had a second( outer( court%ard and that there were man% more associated structures both b% the stream and elsewhere including a $ossible shrine or mausoleum 8Holbrook et al forthcoming9. .$ 2escri0tion o% Gu!rdi!ns#i0 Monu)ent 5e6c!(!ted !re!7 Essentiall% the ,uardianshi$ monument consists of the #illa( with three wings and the inner court%ard( as first e4ca#ated b% L%sons and re;e4ca#ated b% 'lifford and ,reenfield. Leach( generall% following on from ,reenfield@s own $lans and notes( $ro$osed there were three main $eriods for #illa occu$ation in the Roman and earl% $ost;Roman $eriods 8the first $eriod consists of a few $rehistoric finds and an Iron +ge ditch under the -E wing9A ,eriod 5Vi--! 0#!se I7 H;sha$ed #illa was built in fairl% short s$ace of time 2during the first half of the third centur%( $ossibl% closer to +&2 than later3. "his is based $rimaril% on finds e#idence. ,eriod $ 5Vi--! 0#!se II7 )a?or building modifications and embellishment to all $arts of #illa. 2Later !rd centur% reconstructionB( but some modifications $robabl% =th centur%3. ,eriod ' 5,ost (i--! Occu0!tion8 92esertion9 Cossible change of use from c +& !7 referred to b% 'lifford as 2*<uatters econom%3. -o finds of 5th centur% but im$ossible to date the end of this $eriod. "he fact that there are some $roblems with the dating is ine#itable when a site has been so com$letel% e4ca#ated and re;e4ca#ated o#er a $eriod of 15 %ears. 'lifford 81:55( 25;>9 thought the initial building of the #illa dated to the end of the first centur%. Holbrook 8forthcoming9( <uoting #arious mosaic s$ecialists( suggests that the building ma% be 2slightl% earlier than Leach $ro$osed( and also that the Ceriod ! alterations to the lower bath;house occurred earlier than those in other $arts3. It should also be noted that Leach includes the detached southwest bathhouse in the $hase I #illa whereas -eal 81:77( Fig 19 and R'H)E 81:7>9 gi#e it as $hase II. +nother oddit% is the reference Leach 81::7( 12=;>9 makes of ,reenfield@s records mentioning structural foundations below the lower end of the southwest wing. *e#eral commentators ha#e also drawn attention to detached $hase I bathhouse in that area. "he southwest wing alwa%s seemed to ha#e included two bathing suites. Howe#er the% were both elaborated for the $hase II #illa( $articularl% the lower or southerl% one. )rs 'lifford thought there were eight mosaic floors in this wing. In the central room( between the two bathhouses( was a room with a sandstone floor at the centre of which is a stone cistern and buttresses on the north wall are thought to ha#e contained niches. Later authorities ha#e followed L%sons@ inter$retation of this room as a water shrine.

"he central range seems to ha#e been a wide corridor with an o$en colonnade on the south gi#ing #iews down into the combe below and be%ond. "he southerl% wall was high and buttressed from $hase I but e4tra buttresses were added in $hase II along with a grand central $ortico and some form of water feature. .n the north side of this range was a single large room( $ossibl% a triclinium or dining room. +t first it was rectangular( with an added a$se( but in $hase II it was made octagonal and ma% ha#e been two store%s and so could ha#e been <uite an im$osing structure. 5oth the corridor and the $ossible triclinium had high <ualit%( $atterned stone floors. "he rooms on the northeast range seem much less grand. +t the higher( or northern( end was a kitchen with related rooms ad?oining. "he other end of this wing was hea#il% modified and enlarged in the $hase II #illa to become a large aisled structure with a siDeable $orch on its east side. *uch buildings are often associated with the running of an agricultural estate and were $ossibl% combined with $ro#iding accommodation for workers and ser#ants. ,reenfield e4ca#ated the inner court%ard. It might ha#e been e4$ected that there was a formal garden or water features here but no e#idence was found be%ond metalling which co#ered drains carr%ing water awa% from all three wings. &uring $hase II of the e4ca#ated #illa a wall was built from the lower ends of the southwest and the northeast wings( thereb% enclosing the court%ard. "here has been a good of deal of s$eculation about the a$$earance of the #illa( its use and ownershi$ based ?ust on the e4ca#ations of the buildings around the inner court%ard. +t least three reconstruction drawings ha#e been attem$ted 8-eal 1:77( Fig !6 5edo%ere 2 1( Fig 11= and Leach 1::7( Fig =!9. "he% all show a #er% im$osing #illa built on different le#els and with man% of its $arts ha#ing two store%s. -ow that it is known that there was also an outer court%ard it is $ossible to sa% that ,reat 0itcombe belongs to one of a #er% small grou$ of #er% large sum$tuous #illas which were de#elo$ed in the =th centur% +&. )ost of this grou$ of #er% large #illas are in the 'otswolds. "raditionall% the large Roman #illas are thought to be the centre of a large estate so that the% were both grand countr% residences of a wealth% and influential $ersonEfamil% and also the centre of a large farming enter$rise. Leach 81::7( 1!!;=9 $ostulated that the #illa belonged to the descendents of a #eteran of Legio II +ugusta( settled on an estate established here at the foundation of colonia at ,loucester. *ome twent% %ears ago ,raham 0ebster 81:7!9 s$eculated that 'hedworth and ,reat 0itcombe Roman 1illas had a number of unusual features which meant the% might not ha#e been farming units but rural sanctuaries with e4tensi#e accommodation for $ilgrims. 0hilst this idea has not gained general acce$tance it does still ha#e some adherents. Fndoubtedl% ,reat 0itcombe #illa is a <uite unusual site 8see also below9. .' 2escri0tion o% Ro)!n %e!tures in surroundin" !re! "his section is based u$on the field and geo$h%sical sur#e%s co;ordinated b% 'otswold +rchaeological "rust in 2 . "he initial results a$$ear #er% im$ressi#e but it should be borne in mind that all need to be #erified b% e4ca#ation.

>

"he #illa a$$ears to ha#e had an outer court%ard with the southwest and northeast ranges e4tending down the slo$e. +t roughl% half wa% along the o$en( southern side of this outer court%ard is a s$ring( around which there seems to ha#e been a built structure. "he o#erall siDe of the double court%ard #illa was about 75m b% 75m. +t the base of the combe beside the stream there are the remains of three $robable structures within an enclosure of at least .7 ha. "he largest is the one first e4ca#ated b% *ir 0illiam Hicks in 172 . "he $lan is like a sim$le #illa and is aligned with the detached bathhouse of the e4ca#ated $hase I #illa. "he field sur#e%or for 'otswold +rchaeological "rust( )ark 'orne%( $oints out that Leach 81::7( 1!2;!9 had suggested this link and that it ma% be the $redecessor of the larger #illa. "o the south of the #illa is a $latform abo#e an area of the stream with a lot of tile wasters( indicating kilns nearb%. "he geo$h%sical sur#e% here re#ealed a strong magnetic res$onse reminiscent of kilns. + number of other areas of strong magnetic anomalies in the field to the north and north east of the e4ca#ated #illa ma% also be furnaces or kilns. "he geo$h%sical sur#e% also confirmed most of the field e#idence for building $latforms. .ne area where the two sur#e%s coincided strongl% was a building $latform a little abo#e and south west of the e4ca#ated #illa. "he slo$ing ground there re<uired <uite a marked terrace( on which was found Roman material including tesserae8from a mosaic), and ad?oining it another s$ring site. 'orne% has suggested that this site could be a tem$le or mausoleum on the basis of com$arison with other e4ca#ated sites. .+ Condition o% t#e e60osed re)!ins !nd 0#!ses o% re0!ir Relati#el% little is actuall% known about the conser#ation of the historic fabric e#en for the 1:7 @s. "he main $hases of re$air a$$ear to ha#e beenA 1717.7=5uilding of the two co#er structures o#er mosaics in lower bathhouse from standing Roman masonr%. 1: 7 1:2 @s 1:=5.5: 1:> 'o#er buildings re;roofed following colla$se of thatch. *ome re$airs following ,uardianshi$ in 1:1:. 'onsolidation to southwest wing as e4ca#ated b% )rs 'lifford. )ain drain dug from abo#e the e4ca#ated #illa down through the central wing( the inner court%ard and into the #alle% below.

1:> @s G earl% 1:7 @s 'onsolidation work seems to ha#e followed ra$idl% on from each season of ,reenfield@s e4ca#ations( $articularl% for the central and northeast wings of the e4ca#ated #illa. Further information about those $hases of re$air is $ro#ided in a$$endi4 1 8Files 'onsulted9 It is worth adding a few comments on the condition of the fabric here. 0hen first e4ca#ated b% L%sons the state of $reser#ation was #er% high( at least in $arts like the lower half of southwest wing. He describes the central room of that

wing with door ?ambs standing o#er > ft 81.7m9 high and walls in a $erfect state to a height 5ft =in of > ft 81.>;1.7m9. 0hen first o$ened the% were co#ered with a coat of stucco 2 in 8 5cm9 thick( $ainted in $anels of different colours. "he greater $art of this soon fell off due to weathering 8<uoted in 'lifford 1:5=( :9. "he consolidation carried out on the south west wing( following )rs 'lifford@s e4ca#ations( is $ointed with a cementatious mortar but it has sur#i#ed well and is largel% made u$ of original Roman fabric( although some of it ma% be reused. "hat is in stark contrast to the consolidation works in the 1:> @s and earl% 1:7 @s according to the fabric sur#e% undertaken b% 'otswold +rchaeological "rust. "his showed that the works on the central and northeast ranges is almost entirel% modern reconstruction, although one $resumes it is co#ering original fabric. "he stone used for that reconstruction was local and of such $oor <ualit% that it had not been used before in the area. "he co#er buildings incor$orate large areas of Roman fabric in their walls but the main reason for building them was to $ro#ide a roofed co#er for some of the mosaics. "he sur#i#al of the mosaic in room 1 is #er% limited but it is still set in its original lime mortar floor. "he mosaics in the other co#er building( for rooms 5 and >( are more com$lete but still fragmentar%6 the% are less com$lete than when drawn b% L%sons in 1717.

$ ASSESSMENT O: SIGNI:ICANCE AN2 ,OTENTIAL $.1 St!tutor1 2esi"n!tions "he guardianshi$ area is currentl% the onl% $art of the #illa that is a scheduled monument. Howe#er the rest of the #illa and man% of the associated Roman features are likel% to be scheduled as the% are also of national im$ortance. ,reat 0itcombe Roman 1illa lies within the 'otswolds +rea of .utstanding -atural 5eaut%. $. St!te)ent o% !rc#!eo-o"ic!- si"ni%ic!nce "here are well o#er > known e4am$les of Roman #illas in England and some authorities belie#e there ma% ha#e been more than 15 originall%. "he% were $robabl% the countr% houses of the wealth% elite in Romano;5ritish societ%( the focal $oint of an e4tensi#e rural estate. +s well as domestic accommodation the% often included a bath suite( aisled houses( rectangular court%ard and farm buildings. "he main domestic range and the o#erall $lan ha#e classical o#ertones( as do man% of the indi#idual features of a t%$ical #illa. "here are a small number of #er% large #illas( at the moment numbering not much than a doDen. "he% are larger and more o$ulent #ersions of ordinar% #illas. + $articular distinguishing feature is ha#ing more than one court%ard with domestic ranges around both. "he% are more classical in terms of design and architectural features. *uch ma?or #illas would ha#e been owned b% the #er% wealthiest sections of Romano;5ritish societ%. ,reat 0itcombe( as known from the recent sur#e% work( is $robabl% an e4am$le of these ma?or #illas. "hat said it still has man% unusual features which make it <uite distincti#e e#en for a #illa of this t%$e. $.$ ,otenti!- o% /uried de0osits "he $otential for sur#i#al of below ground remains on the site of the whole #illa needs to be considered in two $arts. First( the guardianshi$ site or inner court%ard has been so hea#il% e4ca#ated and re;e4ca#ated that it might be e4$ected that little archaeological $otential sur#i#es. -e#ertheless there will be still some areas below consolidated solid features which ma% $reser#e some earl% de$osits. *econdl% the remains of the outer court%ard must be considered to ha#e high $otential from both the fact that it has not been $re#iousl% e4ca#ated and because the $reser#ation had been <uite remarkable for some areas first e4ca#ated b% L%sons. "he $otential for all the other associated remains in the surrounding landsca$e must also be considered <uite high. "he ground is $ermanent $asture and much of it <uite stee$. "he small #illa;like site b% the stream( e4ca#ated b% *ir 0illiam Hicks( was said to ha#e been destro%ed but e#en that seems to ha#e at least $artl% sur#i#ed according to the field e#idence. "he area b% the stream is also dam$ and $alaeo; en#ironmental $otential ma% be <uite good. .#erall the $otential for sur#i#al of the #illa com$le4 and surrounding landsca$e must be high. In turn that means the #alue of these remains for future research must be

e<uall% good. It could contribute to man% ke% <uestions such as how a large #illa functioned in relation to its estate enter$rises( how it might ha#e de#elo$ed and understanding the links with a $ossible religious function. $.' Si"ni%ic!nce o% site;s settin" !nd !s ! (isitor !ttr!ction "he guardianshi$ area is ne#er going to be a ma?or #isitor attraction. 0hilst the o#erall $lan of the inner court%ard of the #illa is laid out it is difficult to a$$reciate because of the #ar%ing le#els and the lack of s$ectacular features( such as #isible mosaics as at 'hedworth. In addition the $roblems of access make it im$ossible to encourage and $ro#ide for large numbers of #isitors. Howe#er( the setting of the site is s$ectacular and generall% unim$aired. It was the unusual site with wide #iews and #er% $lentiful su$$l% of water which must ha#e strongl% attracted its original builder. It is considered im$ortant that the setting of the #illa should be maintained( and where o$$ortunities arise( it could be enhanced. $.+ O(er!-- si"ni%ic!nce o% Gre!t Witco)/e Ro)!n Vi--! ,reat 0itcombe is one of a small grou$ of #er% large Roman 1illas in England. It has se#eral unusual features and is set within a landsca$e with high $otential for future research. Howe#er as an e4am$le for $ublic dis$la% of Roman 1illas in the 'otswolds it comes a $oor second behind the large Roman 1illa at 'hedworth( belonging to the -ational "rust. -e#ertheless the actual site and setting of ,reat 0itcombe 1illa is <uite s$ecial.

'. CONSERVATION AN2 MANAGEMENT ISSUES '.1 Conser(!tion o% t#e Gu!rdi!ns#i0 Site "he re$air of the badl% eroded and frost shattered stonework of the e4ca#ated #illa is the outstanding issue with this $art of the site. Howe#er this is $rimaril% a matter of $resentation and cost rather than conser#ation of historic fabric. "he se#ere $roblems associated with e4$osed stonework relates $rimaril% to those areas which were newl% built( not conser#ed( in the 1:> @s and earl% 1:7 @s. "he stone used in the rebuilding of the 1:> @s and 1:7 @s is a local limestone which had not been used historicall% because of its unsuitabilit%. "hat basic $roblem is com$ounded b% the s$ecial conditions of the site( namel% its #er% wet nature and the fact that it is a frost $ocket. +ll these factors ha#e meant that there is a need for a continuing and e4$ensi#e maintenance $rogramme. It has not been $ossible to kee$ u$ with that $rogramme since the English Heritage direct labour force was disbanded. + re$ort b% & * E#ans +ssociates in 1::5 de#ised a short term;term holding e4ercise to bu% time for long term $reser#ation and $resentation $olicies to be de#ised. "he% $resented three o$tions6 the chea$est cost H>>( and that e4cluded work to the foundations and the re$lacement of detached stones. '. Conser(!tion o% t#e rest o% t#e (i--! !nd !ssoci!ted re)!ins in (icinit1 "he outer court%ard of the #illa( the other remains b% the stream below and other features on ad?acent land are #irtuall% all in $ermanent $asture fields on ground too wet or stee$ to $lough. It must be considered that the% are generall% in stable condition although this will need monitoring and re;assessing when the% ha#e been scheduled. '.$ H1dro-o"1 "he site is #er% wet as there are s$rings abo#e and below the #illa. "he main $roblems with the dam$ness seem to be associated with those areas rebuilt in the 1:> @s and earl% 1:7 @s( that is the central range and $articularl% the northeast one. + h%drological stud% was undertaken as $art of the 'otswold +rchaeological "rust sur#e% in 2 . "he main conclusion from that work seemed to be that more research needs to be undertaken. Howe#er( if some of the larger areas of #ertical stonework were $artiall% co#ered again the current $roblems with frost;thaw action would be diminished. '.' Visitors; %!ci-ities, !ccess !nd inter0ret!tion "he onl% facilities for #isitors is a small English Heritage car $ark for about > cars about to ! m to the north of the guardianshi$ area. "his car $ark is not used #er%

11

hea#il%6 I ha#e ne#er seen it full on all m% #isits to the site. )an% $eo$le use the car $ark as a con#enient starting $oint for countr%side walks or dog walking. 0heelchair access to the to$ of the guardianshi$ area is $ossible( albeit not #er% smooth( and does re<uire a hel$er. .nce a wheelchair user has arri#ed at the to$ of the site it would not be $ossible for them to see much more than the #iew and the inter$retation board because of the stee$ness of the slo$e. "he onl% on site inter$retation is a single coloured board at the to$ of the site. "his is a good modern board with a reconstruction drawing for that #iew and a short but useful te4t. Howe#er once $eo$le walk be%ond that board the stee$ness of the slo$e and the nature of the $resentation scheme make walking around the site #er% confusing and difficult. Fnderstanding the site is e#en more $roblematic. "here is no access to the co#ered buildings which ha#e to be ke$t locked. "here is no doubt that the stee$ness of the slo$e( the #arious le#els of the rooms in the side wings would make an% form of $resentation difficult. +s it is some areas of the site are close to original le#els but man% are not and there is no wa% for a #isitor to begin to a$$reciate this. Howe#er the site is sheltered( has #er% good #iews and is a$$reciated as an e4cellent $icnic s$ot in the summer. "he onl% time the site is hea#il% #isited is for s$ecial o$en da%s run b% the 'otswold +.-5 0arden *er#ice about three times a %ear. "hese are <uite $o$ular with local $eo$le and include demonstrations of things like Roman cooker% and $eo$le are allowed to #iew the mosaics. "here ha#e been some $roblems with car $arking in some %ears as large numbers ha#e #isited leading to $arking on ad?acent farmland. Last %ear the landowner was #er% concerned about a coach which $arked on their land. "here are no records of #isitor numbers in recent %ears but it is thought the% must be less than 1 a %ear outside of the o$en da%s. "he latter can attract u$ to 2 #isitors on a good da% but it is thought that numbers must be down in recent %ears. "he main audience for these o$en da%s is a local one. '.+ He!-t# !nd S!%et1 + recent Health and *afet% audit showed that the guardianshi$ site $osed some $roblems for #isitors. "his is due to a combination of factors. First there are a number of stee$ dro$s of u$ to 2.5m high for some of the reconstructed areas. *econdl%( if an%one was to be #isiting alone and had a bad fall the% might not be able to get hel$ as the site is often little #isited and not #isible from the nearest house. "he nature of the reconstruction and $resentation also leads to an e4acerbation of these $roblems. 1isitors often walk on the walls( as it is not clear what route the% should follow. *ome of the walls are flattish to start with and then suddenl% <uite $reci$itate. "he $oor condition of the masonr% also leads to the greater likelihood of an accident occurring.

12

,OLICIES

+.1 T#e Re0!ir o% t#e reconstructed <!--s in "u!rdi!ns#i0 !re! "he continuing erosion and weathering of the reconstructed walls is the outstanding issue for the guardianshi$ monument. 1arious schemes( ranging from large scale re$air and rebuilding to reburial with surface marking out( ha#e been considered for some 2 %ears at least. "here is no sim$le solution e#en if finance was a#ailable. In current circumstances it is $ro$osed that a staged a$$roach is ado$tedA 8a9 *hort;term re$air and tid%ing e4ercise o#er the ne4t two %ears whilst a longer;term $ro$osal is drawn u$. 8b9 + long term and sustainable scheme is deri#ed from acti#e consideration of the #arious o$tions a#ailable for the site and funding o$$ortunities. +. ,resent!tion !nd inter0ret!tion o% t#e (i--! !nd its -!ndsc!0e

"hese matters are best dealt with as $art of the long;term scheme outlined abo#e 85.1b9. +.$ Conser(!tion o% t#e Ro)!n %e!tures outside o% "u!rdi!ns#i0 !re!s + significant number of nationall% im$ortant features ha#e been identified in the landsca$e surrounding the guardianshi$ area. "he% are not in an% immediate threat but the% will be considered for scheduling in the English Heritage )onument Crotection Crogramme for Roman monuments in ,loucestershire. +.' Rese!rc# "he immediate research need is to $ublish a summar% of the recent archaeological sur#e%. It is ho$ed that this can be achie#ed in ne4t few %ears. + draft article with $lans has alread% been $roduced 8to be $ublished in the Transactions of Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society). "he recent sur#e% has highlighted a number of $otential research themes 8see !.! abo#e9. It is ho$ed that these ma% be taken forward in future %ears as $art of a long; term management and $resentation $rogramme and in association with other research initiati#es on Roman rural settlement in the region. +.+ Settin" o% site It is im$ortant that this is maintained and where $ossible enhanced. +.. ,!rtners#i0 !nd outre!c# It is antici$ated that the de#elo$ment of the long term scheme for the management and $resentation of the guardianshi$ site will be de#elo$ed with other local conser#ation bodies. It could form $art of a wider initiati#e addressing the conser#ation and inter$retati#e needs of Roman rural settlements in ,loucestershire

1!

and the 'otswolds. *ome initial discussions ha#e alread% taken $lace with the ,loucestershire 'ount% 'ouncil +rchaeolog% *er#ice and -ational "rust staff from their HI and at 'hedworth Roman 1illa. .ther rele#ant bodies are the museum ser#ice at 'irencester and $ossibl% ,loucester and 'heltenham.

1=

BIBLIOGRA,H=

5edo%ere( , de la 1::! Roman Villas and the Countryside. English Heritage 'otswold +rchaeological "rust 2 Great Witcombe Roman Villa, Gloucestershire A study of its fabric and en!irons. + Re$ort for English Heritage 'lifford( E ) 1:5= "he Roman 1illa( 0itcombe( ,loucestershire. Bristol " Gloucestershire Transactions 7!( 5;>: Holbrook( - et al forthcoming ,reat 0itcombe Roman 1illa. Bristol " Gloucestershire Transactions Leach( C 1::7 Great Witcombe Roman Villa, Gloucestershire A Re#ort on e$ca!ations by % Greenfield &'()*&'+,. 5+R 5rit *eries 2>> -eal( & * 1:77 0itcombe Roman 1illaA + Reconstruction. In +$ted( ) R et al 8eds9 Ancient -onuments and their .nter#retation( 27;= . Chillimore R'H)E 1:7> .ron Age and Romano*British -onuments in the Gloucestershire Cots/olds. Ro%al 'ommission on Historical )onuments in England For information on other sources consulted see +$$endi4 .ne

15

A,,EN2I> ONE ; ENGLISH HERITAGE :ILES

T#e )!in %i-e series %or t#e site is AA ?1 1., %irst cre!ted %o--o<in" sc#edu-in" in 1@1@. :i-e 0!rts consu-ted %or t#is Conser(!tion St!te)ent 91 A 91 0t "he scheduling files. Cart 2 was created for an )CC re#ision in 1::>. It is $lanned to undertake another re#ision of the scheduling in 2 2; ! so there ma% soon be a 0t $. 9 0t 1 "his is the first works file and relates to 1:2 @s and 1:! @s. "his has some information on the resetting of the larger mosaic in concrete in 1:2 6 it seems that there was ne#er sufficient funds to deal with second mosaic8now in $ieces9. "antaliDingl% small amount of information 8on costs9 for e4ca#ation and consolidation re$airs. File in CR.. 9 0t Further information on mosaic and wall re$airs. "here a$$ears to ha#e been a mason based there in earl% 1:5 @s. Iuite a lot of detail on road access $roblems and #isitor figures and custodian6 latter disa$$eared b% 1:57 and site closed. 1isitor nos; 1:=7A 7>=6 1:=7A11176 1:=:A77!6 1:5 A:216 1:51 1:55. File in CR.. 9 E 0t "his e4ca#ation file relates mainl% to attem$ts to get ,reenfield@s e4ca#ation written u$ between 1:7= and 1:: . Interestingl% there are also a few $a$ers at beginning of file on conser#ation of site 8other rele#ant E2 works files lost thenBB9. + $ress release of =E1:71 sa%s site o$en after reno#ation but no custodian and so buildings with mosaic not o$en. "here are two interesting memos from I *tuart( I+)( on E2E $t2. "he first( of 5E1:7!( sa%s he3 J was disturbed to see how badl% the e4$osed stonework is weathering. I belie#e )r )orle% faced similar $roblemsJ3. "he second memo. of 7E1:7!( refers to +) 5oard Re$ort of .ct 1:7! about dealing with Roman ,uardianshi$ *ites and 'onsolidation. He also sa%s again 2Jmasonr% continuing to break u$. Either it is re$laced or the monument must be backfilled. Is the ad#ice of +) 5oard still our $olic% G that we treat whole of the remains as a marking out e4erciseB ,i#en the amount of stone re$lacement I think it makes sense.3 "he res$onse from ' Koung( CI+)( said the% should 2J continue $olic% of ! dimensional marking;out. "he latter #iew was endorsed b% L Hurst( +'I+)( and + *aunders( 'I+).

Be1 %i-es sou"#t /ut not !(!i-!/-e in ** 9 0t$ 0orks file for 1:> ;1:77. Registr% ne#er said this was destro%ed but was not located. -iall )orrisse% located 8in +ugust 2 !9 a set of the monthl% *ite Re$orts for 1:>1; 1:75. "hese were com$iled b% the staff doing the re$airsErebuilding on site and do 1>

not gi#e much detail but careful scrutin% could $robabl% be <uite illuminating. "hese *ite Re$orts will be $ut on the E2C'2 file 8see new files below9. 9 0t' 0orks file for 1:72;1:7>. Registr% said this file had been destro%ed. 9 0t+ 0orks file for 1:71;1::>. Registr% said this was $ut awa% in 1::> but ne#er located it. 9 E 0t1 E4ca#ation file 1:>5;1:7 . -o mo#ement on this since 1::1 but not located.

Ne< %i-es %or Gt Witco)/e !nd re-!ted )!tters 9 ,-!n Co(er 5,C7 1, A $ "hese files ha#e been created in 2 2 for material collected for this statementA ,C1 ; 'otswold +rchaeological "rust *tud% 82 9. 1ols 1 M 2 ,C C 'o$ies of main rele#ant $ublications. )onthl% 0orks *ite Re$orts 1:>1;1:75 8see E2 $t! abo#e9. Clus re$orts82 !9 on the Roman 5athhouse at 5eau$ort Cark( E *usse4( another case of a ! %ear old Roman e4ca#ation in long and dire need of reburial. ,C$ G +ssorted co$ies of file notes( re$orts( -)R and *)R material( $hotos. A2M 1 ? Ro)!n sites in G-oucesters#ire Cots<o-ds G see $ara 5.> abo#e.

17

A,,EN2I> TWO ACBNOWLE2GEMENTS AN2 CONSULTATION

5oth the 'ount% *)R and the -)R su$$lied material for this *tatement and I acknoweledge the hel$ the% $ro#ided. ,rateful thanks to Caul Roberts for information on 5eau$ort Cark( E *usse4.

&rafts of this *tatement were circulated to the followingA EH *ite "eamA 'hris *mith( -iall )orrise% and 5ob "hom$son .ther EH staffA ,ar% *tone( "on% Rees( &iane Herrod( Francis /ell% and 'arol .wen .thersA Lan 0ills 8,loucestershire 'ount% 'ouncil9( -eil Holbrook 8'otswold +rchaeolog%9 and Chil 5ethell 8-ational "rust9 "hanks are e4$ressed to all who made comments.

17