More information : (TL 372 583) Moat (NR) (1)
"A rectangular area 106 ft E to W by 156 ft is surrounded by a
ditch 13 ft to 25 ft wide, almost completely filled on the N
but up to 5 ft deep, and wet, on the S. A ditch 12 ft wide and
3 ft to 4 ft deep runs E for 40 ft from the N end of the
surviving part of the E side. The interior on the S is raised
1 1/4 ft for a distance of 56 ft from the S side. Scarps and
ditches S of the site apparently mark the boundaries of closes
shown on the enclosure and tithe maps of 1836". (2)
The feature previously published as waterfilled is now dry
except for a small puddle at the NE extremity where, as well as
an outward extension, a slight inturning suggests a N arm.
There is no other evidence for this, a baulk on line appears to
there in its own right and not as the remains of a ditch. Two
similar sized platforms ranged northwards may have been
associated but not in a defensive capacity, although authority
2 seems to have identified their central break as a nearly
filled moat ditch.
The area to the S is now being developed as a small housing
estate.
Published 25" survey revised. (3)
Possibly a mutilated homestead moat, the moat being perimeter/
decorative rather than defensive.
The site was partially excavated by L M Groube in 1975, for
Cambridgeshire Archaeological Committee. A limited excavation
of the interior produced no features and the ditch was crossed
by a ramp paved with large stones and bricks (after 1850). The
absence of this site from the 1837 enclosure map suggests it
may not be Medieval. (4)
This moat has been further reduced by ploughing. Only small
segments of the east and west arms survive as shallow
depressions 0.5m to 0.8m in depth. The south arm, visible as a
rubble filled depression has a shallow pond at its west end.
Published 1:2500 survey revised (5)
Groube's excavations were preceded by a trial excavation carried out by C Hazelgrove in 1974. This produced evidence which suggested that the moat dated from the C12/C13. However Groube subsequently contradicted this interpretation of the site, and claimed a C19 date for the moat, based on the results of his excavation of 1975. Hazelgrove addressed all the points raised by Groube's interpretation, and restates the case for a C12/C13 date for the Hardwick moat. A major obstacle to the resolution of this problem is that the finds from the 1974 trial excavation have been lost (6-7)
The moat described by authorities 1-7 above is obscured by trees on air photographs but numerous other platforms, scarps and ditched enclosures can be seen immediately to the north and south. These features, which are centred at approximately TL 3720 5824, lie on the same alignment as the supposed moat and also occupy a strip of land which is the same width. This broader context may indicate that the 'moat' is infact just part of a linear arrangement of settlement enclosures. The earthworks appear to be no longer extant on the latest 2013 vertical photography but the site of the moat is obscured by trees so no assessment could be made of its survival.
(8-9) |