Plate 7.
Field Archaeology Specialists
The results from Intervention 2 are significant for a number of reasons. It is clear that the construction of the gasworks involved below-ground structural activity, in this instance represented by a discrete cellar. This single cell, below-ground structure was clearly designed to house the large gas main which continued beyond both the limit of F4 and F6. This suggests, at the very least, that a substantial service trench and possibly more below-ground structures have truncated pre-gasworks archaeology at the site. The interruption of the gas main itself might suggest that there was a valve or tap, presumably dismantled during demolition, housed either below-ground or projecting to ground floor height thus enabling the gas main to be turned off if necessary. The orientation and position of the gas main would suggest that it was supplying gas from the works to residential areas further into the city.
When superimposed onto the 1850 auction map of the gasworks, Structure 1 reflects the alignment of the above-ground buildings shown on the map (Fig 5 JPEG/DWF). The position, orientation and construction of F4 all suggest that this wall belongs to the buildings visible on the map. The fact that F4 was built three rows deep suggests that the wall was required to take more weight and had greater structural importance when compared to F3, F5 and F6 (Plate 7). If F4 is in fact supporting an external wall at ground floor height then this has implications for the interpretation of the buildings above-ground. The 1850 map labels this room of the range 'office', but it seems clear that this was either a late adaptation of the function of the room, or it also incorporated a valve house where control of gas being delivered out of the gasworks took place. It is equally possible that the valve house was a discrete adaptation of an earlier building and that the results of Intervention 2 do not reflect the archaeology elsewhere in the vicinity.
|
|
|
|
Plate 7. |
Structure 1, when superimposed onto the 1850 auction map shows that F4 is 0.40m offset from the southeastern elevation but shares the same alignment. Not only does this suggest that F4, being structurally unique in Structure 1 as a foundation for an above-ground external wall, is part of the range of buildings depicted in 1850, it also demonstrates that the map is a fairly reliable guide to the remains, below-ground, of the gasworks. The map then has some value for deposit modelling in the immediate vicinity at least in terms of footings likely to be encountered and almost certainly for the location of elements of the gasworks most likely to have been deeply founded, for example, the gasometers. It also allows for the location of specific elements within the gasworks to be pinpointed with some degree of accuracy, for example, the location of the retort house.
During excavation it became clear that there is some potential for contamination at the site. No contaminants were contacted directly although the odour of C1015 may indicate that the processes undertaken at the gasworks have left residues of hydro-carbons within deposits on the site. It may be that the site the potential for contamination varies throughout the site according to the position of key structures, for example, the location of holding tanks or the retort house may be 'hot spots' for contamination whereas the position of Intervention 2 has low potential for contamination being the administrative centre for the site.
The removal of F5 and F7 revealed that below, and in between structural activity belonging to the gasworks, earlier archaeology survives. The rubbish pit or ditch, F9, cut by Structure 1 contained post-medieval ceramic building material in some quantity suggesting that structural activity, if only that contacted in demolition deposits, may have taken place nearby. It seems unlikely that this is further midden dumping at Hungate since the effort of excavating a rubbish pit suggests some effort to control the surrounding environment not normally associated with rubbish dumps. The brown soil into which F9 had been excavated, however, does suggest that earlier post-medieval midden creation has been contacted in Intervention 2. This deposit contained domestic refuse including oyster shell and animal bone although no direct dating evidence was recovered. The accumulation of brown soils in the late to post-medieval period due to dumping of organic matter in the form of household compost, night soil and other refuse would appear to be the origin of this deposit. Such soils are often a rich source of information about these periods particularly in terms of the diet of the people using the area for waste disposal thereby providing insights as to their status.
