HER 444 DESCRIPTION:- Scheduled Monument Description:- Summary of Monument Iron Age defended settlement called Soudley camp, 430m north-east of Soudley Bridge. Reasons for Designation During the Iron Age a variety of different types of settlement were constructed and occupied in south western England. At the top of the settlement hierarchy were hillforts built in prominent locations. In addition to these a group of smaller sites, known as defended settlements, were also constructed. Some of these were located on hilltops, others in less prominent positions. They are generally smaller than the hillforts, sometimes with an enclosed area of less than 1ha. The enclosing defences were of earthen construction. Univallate sites have a single bank and ditch, multivallate sites more than one. At some sites these earthen ramparts represent a second phase of defence, the first having been a timber fence or palisade. Where excavated, evidence of stone- or timber-built houses has been found within the enclosures, which, in contrast to the hillfort sites, would have been occupied by small communities, perhaps no more than a single family group. Defended settlements are a rare monument type. They were an important element of the settlement pattern, particularly in the upland areas of south western England, and are integral to any study of the developing use of fortified settlements during this period. Despite visitor pressure, bracken growth and erosion the Iron Age defended settlement 430m north east of Soudley Bridge survives comparatively well and will contain archaeological and environmental evidence relating to its construction, longevity, trade, agricultural practices, social organisation, territorial significance, domestic arrangements and overall landscape context. History See Details. Details This record was the subject of a minor enhancement on 9 July 2015. The record has been generated from an "old county number" (OCN) scheduling record. These are monuments that were not reviewed under the Monuments Protection Programme and are some of our oldest designation records. The monument includes an Iron Age defended settlement situated on a steeply sloping spur forming the valley side of a meander in the Soudley Brook and also overlooking the valley of one of its major tributaries at the point of confluence. The settlement survives as a roughly triangular enclosure defined on the western side by a single rampart bank measuring up to 2m high with a 9.1m wide and 1m deep outer ditch. The north east and south eastern sides are formed by the steep natural scarp slopes. There is a single central entrance in the rampart. In total the settlement covers approximately 0.36ha {Source Work 2873.} Soudley Camp consists of an enclosed area of not more than one-eighth of an acre situated on end of a ridge. The defences on the north and west consist of a bank of great strength with an outer ditch. On the south side the escarpment of the hill forms a natural defence and on the east there is only a slight bank. Visible on aerial photographs. {Source Work 862.} A small level topped projection triangular in shape, 150 feet long with a strong bank and ditch on the west. The other sides have steep natural defence. The gap in the bank seems to be modern or at least not original. The small area enclosed and the massive bank, maximum 13 feet high from the bottom of the ditch suggest a medieval rather than Iron Age origin, catalogued as 'castle'. {Source Work 862.} This earthwork has the appearance of a small Iron Age promontory fort. It is roughly triangular and occupies the end of a spur. The western and wider end is protected by a very large bank and ditch which is Iron Age in character and has an entrance in the centre, the north-east and south-east sides are protected by precipitous natural slopes. The site overlooks the junction of three valleys. {Source Work 862.} D. King is authoritative on castles but the identification of this earthwork as medieval is rather conjectural. The only artificial defence to be seen is the rampart cutting off the end of the spur, and this is generally 2 meters high with a 1 meter deep outer ditch. It has more of an Iron Age appearance than a medieval one, where a defensive bank or wall would normally be carried right round the perimeter irrespective of any natural defence. The central simple gap in the rampart has been defaced by modern dumping, but is almost certainly an original feature. Excavation is necessary for certain classification but on balance on Iron Age origin seems more likely. {Source Work 862.} Grassed platform of the interior of the site visible on Fairey aerial photographs, as is a possible short section of ditch on west side. {Source Work 133 & pers. comm. S. Brown.} Univallate earthwork enclosure. {Source Work 1174.} Investigation of molehills produced five sherds of Romano-British Severn Valley Ware pottery, several pieces of haematite and bloomery slag, charcoal and a flint flake. {Source Work 3874.} NMR Short Listing - flint flake and pottery found. {Source Work 2850.} 1956 - On Sunday 8th April 1956, Scott-Garrett visited Soudley Camp. He commented that molehills showed red and black, and that he got a small piece of terracotta pottery from one, which showed traces of glaze on the inside. {Source Work 7553.} 1991 - In FC compt 436a, 378. {Source Work 2610.} 2000 - A management plan of Soudley Camp was undertaken by Gloucestershire County Council Archaeology Service. The most serious management issues needing to be addressed were identified as visitor erosion and mountain bike tracks and scrub encroachemnt of bracken and gorse. {Source Work 5754.} 2003 - This area was mapped at 1:10,000 scale as part of the English Heritage: Gloucestershire NMP project. The Iron Age promontory fort is visible on aerial photographs. {Source Works 4249, 7549, 3318.} 2006 - The management plan of 2000 was revised and the management issues remained the same, as the recommendation to remove scrub and undergrowth from the interior of the site and the earthworks demarcating its western edge had not been implemented because it had been felt that given local circumstances, this would exacerbate the problems of visitor erosion to the bank by removing its protective coverage of undergrowth and scrub. It was felt that clearance of undergrowth should be deferred until all existing erosion scars had healed, when further discussions between the interested parties could take place {Source Work 8595}. 2009 - Generally satisfactory but with significant localised problems. {Source Work 9917.} 2014 Updated management plan. See Source Work 12624. Heritage at Risk Register 2015 Generally unsatisfactory with major localised problems - bracken {Source Work 13737.} 2016 - Information from the HARPO to indicate that this monument should be taken off the Heritage at Risk register this year after there has been bracken and scrub removal and the establishment of a grass sward {Source Work 10426.} 2017 - Section 42 license issued by Historic England on 20/07/2017 - SL00164832 - for a geophysical survey {Source Work 10426.} 2017 - Community excavation at Soudley Camp, Ruspidge and Soudley. Three trenches and five testpits were dug, targeting annomalies identfied in geophysical survey, visible earthworks and the centre of the enclosure. Trench 1 targeted an earthwork, and excavation revealed a north-south aligned sandstone block wall overlain by a modern deposit, and a stone rubble deposit that was not excavated. Trench 2 targeted an east-west anomaly identified in geophysical survey. The potential feature was not found in excavation, although natural geology was not reached. Two stone rubble deposits were recorded containing a mixture of prehistoric to modern finds indicating modern disturbance. Finds from these deposits included a flint scraper, glass, pottery and a number of scored/grooved stones. A pit or large posthole in the trench contained stone packing including a fragment of a beehive quern, and further fragments of scored stone. Also identified were a possible stakehole, mound of stones and charcoal rich layer. A flint scraper was found in the turf of this trench. Trench 3 was located in the western side of the enclosure ditch and the cut was identified. Sandstone blocks, possibly part of a revetment, were found on the ditch's western side and an upper fill of the ditch contained a flint scraper. An area of compacted sandstone fragments possibly formed part of an entrance to the enclosure, although the deposit was not excavated and no finds were recorded within it. Test Pits 1 to 5 contained no identifieable features but a mixture of finds dating from the Roman to modern periods was recovered from deposits within them. The finds included a fragment of tile of of Roman to medieval date, modern glass, ceramics, pottery and plastic, a small ammount of slag/possible hearth base, Roman pottery and slag, and fragment of quern stone. {Source Work 17364.} |