3/. The Survey Course - University College London

INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY, 

UCL 

ARCL 2021: Archaeological Surveying 

2012-13 

Year 2/3 Option, 0.5 unit 

Co-ordinator: Mark Roberts 

mark.roberts@ucl.ac.uk 

Rm: 307. 0207 679 7535 

Teachers: Mark Roberts and Robert Kaleta

Contents 

1/. Background 5 

2/. The Survey Course (Specific) 14 

3/. The Survey Course (General) 19 

4/. Reading List and Bibliography 24 

Appendix 1 

Setting up the total station 27 

Appendix 2 

Historic Environment Record and scheduling description for the barrows and cross 

dykes 29 

Appendix 3 

Students attending the surveying course 37 

Appendix 4 

Useful telephone numbers and contacts 37 

Acknowledgements 37 

2

List of figures 

Cover Page. Contour map showing the South Downs escarpment and southern 

Weald around Heyshott Down. 

Fig. 1. Location of the barrows above the coombes of Gadd’s Bottom and Combe 

Bottom at the western edge of the map. Blue square = 1km 2 . 5 

Fig. 2. Map of the Heyshott and Graffham Down from 1840, showing the barrow 

cemetery, cross dykes, and other barrows along the ridge. 6 

Fig. 3a. Detail from the 1874 25inch sheet. 7 

Fig. 3b. Detail from the 1897 25inch sheet. 7 

Fig. 3c. Detail from the 1978 25inch sheet. 8 

Fig. 4. Geological map, showing structural features, drainage and the location of 

barrows on the downs and Folkestone Beds. 9 

Fig. 5. Digital terrain model of the downland escarpment at Heyshott , looking ESE. 

Fig. 6. Digital terrain model of the downland escarpment at Heyshott, looking WSW. 

Fig. 7. Contour model of the Heyshott/Graffham area showing the site undergoing 

investigation. 11 

Fig. 8. Aerial photograph showing the site, the white track is the South Downs way. 

Fig. 9. Devil’s Humps postmap SC2009, showing location of all recorded heights, 

taken as spot heights and strings. 14 

3 

10 

10 

12

Fig. 10. LISCAD generated model of the Devil’s Humps SC2009. 15 

Fig. 11. Google Earth image of the downland block between Sutton (left) and Bow 

Hill (right). The southern edge of the Weald is visible in the foreground and the 

Coastal Plain and English Channel in the background. 15 

Fig. 12. DTM of Barrow C at the Devil’s Humps, Bow Hill, looking NW. 16 

Fig. 13. Plane table drawing of Bowhill/British Camp. 17 

Fig. 14. Digital terrain model of Goosehill Camp looking SW, showing the 

relationship of the monument to the valley side relief. 18 

Fig. 15. The Scheduled Ancient Monuments and Chichester District Council HER 

recorded sites on the scarp edge at Heyshott Down. 36 

Rear Cover. Students surveying at Boxgrove in 2010. 

4

1/. Background 

This year’s surveying course will take place on the Murray Downland Trust Nature 

Reserve at Heyshott Down, West Sussex [NGR SU 9065 1651 (central)], in 

November 2012. The site is situated to the north east of the West Dean Estate, on the 

southern boundary of the Cowdray Estate and the northern boundary of the 

Goodwood Estate. The course will involve surveying the topography of, and 

monuments on, a c. 150 x 100m block of downland located along the northern ridge 

of the South Downs escarpment, overlooking the Weald. At least nine Bronze Age 

barrows and possibly two more are located in the survey area, which also contains 

four cross ridge dykes, a further series of dykes is located 175m to the east of the 

survey area (Figs. 1, 2). As well as the academic teaching aims of the course (see 

below), the research aim is to provide an up to date topographic survey of the 

monuments, subsidiary monuments, and their immediate landscape setting. The data 

generated will be combined with that already compiled in the Historic Environment 

Record (HER), and will form part of a complete, integrated, topographic and 

monument survey of the downland block between the Rivers Arun and Lavant. 

Fig. 1. Location of the barrows above the coombes of Gadd’s Bottom and Combe 

Bottom at the western edge of the map. Blue square = 1km 2 . 

5

Six barrows appear clearly on the earliest Ordnance Survey maps of the area, along 

with the scarp perpendicular dykes, which are designated as “intrenchments”; also 

visible are three further barrows on the ridge to the east. The scarp perpendicular cross 

dykes are found at various locations along the escarpment ridge. Unlike at Bow Hill, 

where a group of cross dykes partially encircles the summit of Bow Hill, and where it 

is postulated that these bank and ditch constructions were constructed at key points 

around the summit to complement and enhance the natural topography of the hill 

(Tilley 2004); the purpose of these downland escarpment cross dykes remains 

unknown. 

Fig. 2. Map of the Heyshott and Graffham Down from 1840, showing the barrow 

cemetery, cross dykes, and other barrows along the ridge. 

The 1874 25inch map continues to show six barrows together with the cross dykes; by 

1897 the number of recorded barrows has increased to nine and it remains this number 

on the 1978 map. This sheet also shows the post-war spread of forestry up the scarp 

and onto the ridge (Figs 3a-3c). 

6

Fig. 3a. Detail from the 1874 25inch sheet. 

Fig. 3b. Detail from the 1897 25inch sheet. 

7

Fig. 3c. Detail from the 1978 25inch sheet. 

The barrow cemetery and dykes on Heyshott Down are located within the Parish of 

Heyshott, some 12km NNE of Chichester, the county town of West Sussex (Figs. 1, 

4), and 20km north of the current coastline of the English Channel at Aldwick, west of 

Bognor Regis. 

The site is situated on the Seaford and Lewes Nodular Chalk Members (LNCM), 

producing a thin Brown Rendzina soil (343i), which constitute part of the eroded 

Cretaceous Chalk surface of the southern limb of the Weald-Artois Anticlinorum (Fig. 

4). On this part of the downland block, known as the South Downs, the solid geology 

comprises the Upper and Middle Chalk Formations of the Chalk Group that, with 

minor structural exceptions, young and dip southwards towards the downland dip 

slope (Aldiss 2002). In the scarp slope face below the LNCM, the basal member of 

the Upper Chalk, the full range of the Middle and Lower Chalk can be seen in a 

downward aging sequence. At the base of the scarp the older deposits of the Upper 

Greensand Formation, Gault Formation and Lower Greensand Group exhibit a 

parallel disposition to the scarp face (Fig. 4). Younger deposits overlying the Chalk 

are the reworked Palaeogene cover known as “Clay-with-flints”; valley sediments 

8

Fig. 4. Geological map, showing structural features, drainage and the location of 

barrows on the downs and Folkestone Beds. 

associated with the Lavant fluvial system and its feeders/tributaries; and mixed Head 

deposits which are preserved in heads of some of the escarpment coombes, at the base 

of the slope and out onto the Gault Fm. 

The extant topography of the landscape around Heyshott, is largely the result of 

subaerial weathering on the gently uplifting solid geology. Initial uplift and exposure 

of the Chalk probably predated the major episodes of tectonism but it is the latter, 

orogenetically driven, events that are associated with the formation of the major 

anticlinal and synclinal structures of the region. Subsequent to these major tectonic 

pulses, the anticlinorum was breached and the sub-Chalk Cretaceous geology of the 

Weald exposed. During the Pleistocene Epoch, the final shaping of the downs took 

place, with most landscape contouring occurring at the end of glacial periods when 

snow and ice field melt carried vast amounts of material off the downs and over the 

scarp and dip slopes (Figs. 5, 6). This process occurred as a result of blanket mass 

movement deposition and also sediment discharge through valley systems, both 

fluvial and dry (coombes). 

9

Fig. 5. Digital terrain model of the downland escarpment at Heyshott , looking ESE. 

Fig. 6. Digital terrain model of the downland escarpment at Heyshott, looking WSW. 

10

The site is situated on the crest of the E-W orientated downland escarpment, 

overlooking the Weald to the north and the downland block and coastal plain to the 

south (Fig. 7). The barrows and associated cross dykes sit on the highest part of the 

ridge in this area, at heights between 225 and 230m OD. The terrain to the north of 

the site, the scarp face, falls away steeply into the Weald, to the south the fall is 

gentler and represents the bedrock dip of the eroded southern margin of the relict 

anticlinorum. 

Fig. 7. Contour model of the Heyshott/Graffham area showing the site undergoing 

investigation. 

The northern scarp slope is characterised by spurs of Chalk irregularly separated by 

steep sided coombes. The southern slope contains the heads of many of the long 

coombes which feed into the upper section of the Lavant Valley (Figs. 4-7). Drainage 

in the present day is largely by percolation through the Chalk but at times of heavy 

11

precipitation the long dry valleys carry water southwards into the Lavant. The scarp 

ridge represents the watershed in this area; drainage from here is to the north into the 

catchment of the River Rother. Springs rise from the base of the Chalk, such as 

Coster’s Brook at Cocking and those to the east around Sutton and West Burton, at 

the eastern end of the Singleton Anticline (Fig. 4). Further springs emerge on the 

Gault Formation and form the SE-NE trending shallow valleys that are cut into the 

Folkestone and Sandgate Formations. The monuments are located on a ridge of high 

ground: Heyshott Down, between Manor Farm Down to the west and Graffham Down 

to the east. They sit in a slight col between two high points at 233m OD; the ground 

immediately in the vicinity of the barrows rises from c. 225m at the westernmost 

barrow to c. 230m OD at the easternmost. The ground the barrows occupy is the 

highest section on the ridge between the Cocking Gap and the River Arun, the only 

higher ground is the hill at Crown Tegleaze, set back from the ridge above 

Upwaltham, which can be clearly seen in Figure 6. 

Fig. 8. Aerial photograph showing the site, the white track is the South Downs way. 

12

The known monuments to be surveyed on Heyshott Down have undergone 

remarkably little formal investigation given their location and physical presence 

(Appendix 2) (Curwen 1929; Grinsell 1934); yet they remain one of the most 

impressive groups of monuments on the South Downs of Sussex. Accordingly, they 

have been chosen to undergo modern topographic and geophysical survey as part of 

the 2012 Institute of Archaeology Surveying Course. The nine barrows are a mix of 

types including bowl barrows, a bell barrow, a very well preserved disc barrow and 

various smaller barrows of indeterminate type, probably saucer barrows. 

The overlap of barrow types and their west to east orientation along the ridge is a 

combination more redolent of some of the larger Wessex barrow cemeteries 

(Garwood 2003), such as the Net Down and Winterbourne Stoke barrow groups in 

Wiltshire, (Green and Rollo-Smith 1984; Marsden 1999; Woodward 2000) and 

Oakley Down in Dorset (Reed and White 1970); as is their spatial relationship with 

the neighbouring cross dykes (Tilley 2010) (Fig. 2). Saucer barrows and disc barrows 

are comparatively rare in this part of southern England, and are distinguished from the 

more common bowl barrows by their morphology (Grinsell 1934, 1941). The 

combined topographic and geophysical survey is designed to:- 

Link the monuments into the topography of the downland escarpment. 

Identify the precise number of barrows in the group. 

Identify the size and types of barrows more accurately. 

Elucidate the spatial and temporal relationships of the barrows to each other 

and the cross dykes. 

Resolve the basic construction methods of each barrow type. 

Identify other features within and outside the main monument group. 

Demonstrate the exact extent and form of the cross dykes. 

The work on the Heyshott Down barrows will also contribute to the ongoing study of 

the Early-Middle Bronze Age transition (Brück 2000; McInley 1997), where the 

cultural confluence of Beaker and Wessex style barrow construction and burial 

method has a vital role to play in interpreting this critical period in British prehistory. 

The temporal relationship between the cross dykes and the barrows remains to be 

13

elucidated but this section of the South Downs between the Cocking Gap and the 

Arun Valley contains some of the best examples of scarp perpendicular monuments, 

and subsequent further survey study will focus on this landscape. 

2/. The Survey Course (Specific) 

A major aim of the course is to produce an accurate digital map of the topography of, 

and archaeological monuments on, the escarpment edge at Heyshott Down, similar to 

that generated during the 2008, 2009, and 2011 survey courses and the 2009-12 field 

courses (Figs. 9, 10). 

Fig. 9. Devil’s Humps postmap SC2009, showing location of all recorded heights, 

taken as spot heights and strings. 

14

Fig. 10. LISCAD generated model of the Devil’s Humps SC2009. 

At the beginning of the course, the site will be walked to establish the parameters and 

features of the monument that will be surveyed. This exercise will be followed by an 

attempt to locate any other features not on the monument map compiled by Chichester 

District Council (Fig. 15, Appendix 2), and to link the monuments to the broader 

topography (Fig. 11). 

Fig. 11. Google Earth image of the downland block between Sutton (left) and Bow 

Hill (right). The southern edge of the Weald is visible in the foreground and the 

Coastal Plain and English Channel in the background. 

15

Having established the features to be surveyed, a series of benchmarks will be set up 

across the site. The source of the 2012 survey course benchmarks will be by GPS 

(Global Positioning Satellites), which provide 3D co-ordinates; these comprise an 

easting, northing and height above sea-level. The co-ordinates will be measured to a 

set of permanent master bench marks set up on the first morning of the course; from 

these benchmarks each group will transfer co-ordinates into temporary bench marks 

(TBM) in their own survey area. Following this process, which will be taught as a 

single group exercise, the group shall split into four separate teams, each of which 

will survey a specific part of the area that includes some of the monuments outlined in 

Appendix 2. The accumulated data will be ‘drawn-up’ during the late afternoon at 

Goodwood or in the West Dean Scout Hut during periods of very inclement weather. 

Each group will survey their features using a combination of spot heights and strings, 

to produce a basic but complete coverage of their allotted features (Fig. 13). At the 

end of the course the initial drawing will have been completed, and the data generated 

to create the drawing will be utilised by other software packages such as SURFER to 

create a rendered model that illustrates the monuments in their topographic context 

(Figs 12-14). 

Fig. 12. DTM of Barrow C at the Devil’s Humps, Bow Hill, looking NW. 

16

In addition to the Total Station survey, the course will also consider other methods of 

recording, such as those utilised by Dave McOmish at the Bow Hill ‘British Camp’, 

including the use of the plane table and dumpy level (Fig. 13). 

Fig. 13. Plane table drawing of Bowhill/British Camp. 

In the field, students will also be asked to consider and evince the setting, chronology 

and possible future excavation of the monuments and adjacent features, and ascertain 

how the survey can be tailored and used to facilitate these objectives. Back at the 

Institute, group tutorials will examine further manipulation of the survey data, 

17

including image enhancement and draping the monuments on the downland 

topography (Figs. 11, 12, 14). 

Fig. 14 Digital terrain model of Goosehill Camp looking SW, showing the 

relationship of the monument to the valley side relief. Colour scale in m OD. 

18

3/. The Survey Course (General) 

Aims of the course 

The course seeks to provide students with an understanding of the principal surveying 

techniques employed by field archaeologists and provide training in undertaking a 

detailed survey of archaeological remains using a Total Station; together with writing- 

up and interpreting the resultant survey in a broader archaeological context. 

Objectives of the course 

This course is designed to give students 

1. An overview of the issues involved in archaeological surveying. 

2. Practical understanding and experience in topographical surveying. 

3. The opportunity to develop teamwork skills along with the ability to prioritise and 

structure tasks within a set time period. 

4. The ability to download data from the total stations and undertake preliminary 

analysis. 

5. The ability to undertake the production of maps and images of the topographic 

survey. 

6. Experience of combining other archaeological information with the survey to 

produce a written report and discussion of the site. 

7. The basic knowledge from which to critically assess the applicability of individual 

methods to specific survey situations, and assess survey data presented by 

others. 

8. A sharpened awareness of the processes involved in presenting the results of an 

archaeological survey, through the completion of a written report. 

Course Information 

This handbook contains the core information about the content and administration of 

the course. Further information on coursework guidelines is available at 

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/administration/students/handbook and should be 

read prior to coming on the course and during the production of the course work. 

Additional information regarding the area to be surveyed, surveying techniques and 

instruments to be used will be provided during the course and via the reading list. If 

19

students have queries about the objectives, structure, content, assessment or 

organization of the course, they should consult the Course Teachers, one of whom is 

the course co-ordinator. 

Teaching Methods 

The Course will be taught by Mark Roberts and Robert Kaleta. 

The majority of the course will be taught during a five-day field course at Heyshott 

Down, with the students staying in the racehorse stable complex at Goodwood. The 

first day will be spent introducing the course, undertaking an initial review of the area 

to be surveyed and discussing the equipment to be used. The majority of the 

following four days will be spent in the field undertaking a detailed survey. The 

students will be divided into small groups, each with its own total station. In the late 

afternoons students will return to Goodwood to download that day’s survey data and 

discuss the results. There will also be de-briefing meetings to distribute the raw data 

and discuss the assessment exercise that will be undertaken in the weeks following the 

course, back at the Institute of Archaeology. For general points of interest or enquiry 

during the course, students should approach Mark Roberts who is the course co- 

ordinator. 

Teaching Schedule 

Teaching will take place from 08.30 to 16.00 and 18.00 to 19.00 each day with short 

breaks in the morning (10.30) and afternoon (14.30), in addition to a lunch break of 

45 minutes (12.15-13.00). This timetable will require students to have prepared their 

lunch and be ready to leave Goodwood at 08.00 each morning, in order to make best 

use of the available day light: you will return to Goodwood around 16.40, when it gets 

dark. The last part of the working day will be used to download the survey data and 

discuss results. 

Prerequisites 

There is no formal requirement to take another course or courses before taking this 

course, but it is assumed that most students will have taken part in the first-year field 

archaeology course at West Dean and will thus already have had some introduction to 

the survey area landscape and use of the total station. 

20

Workload 

The initial five-day field-course (c. 50 hours) is followed by four hours of class 

discussion and computing practicals. You are expected to undertake more extensive 

background reading, research and computing work to complete your assignment, and 

you should allow around 90 hours for this. 

Method of Assessment 

This course is assessed by a single 4000 word illustrated report based on the survey 

you undertook. 

The report should be in three parts. 

1. An introduction to the Heyshott Down survey area including discussion of any 

other evidence for the prehistory and history of the area that may be relevant 

to understanding the survey (e.g. previous research; maps; data from the 

Historic Environment Record – (HER); Archaeology Data Service – (ADS); 

English Heritage Pastscape etc.). (30%). 

2. The main body of the report should consist of work pertaining to the survey 

methods undertaken, which will include; description of the equipment used; 

methodologies employed during the survey; the aims and objectives of the 

survey; an assessment of the suitability of the methodology used; and technical 

and practical difficulties potentially affecting the results of the survey. (40%). 

3. The final part of the report concerns the processing of the master survey data 

(which you will each be supplied with after the field course). This work will 

involve the production of plans; a discussion of those plans based on your 

observations during the survey course; integration of the plans and survey data 

with other lines of evidence (e.g. the magnetometry survey) relevant to our 

understanding of the monuments on the downland scarp slope, and the 

environment within which they are located. You might also wish to briefly 

discuss your recommendations for further research and by what methods 

(30%). 

21

The report should be fully illustrated with location maps and survey drawings 

produced to publication standard, the usual use of references and a bibliography:- 

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/administration/students/handbook/referencing 

The size of each component of the report should reflect the marking weighting, 

although some leeway is permissible. 

Submission of the report 

The deadline for submission has been set for 17.00 on Friday 18 th of January 2013. 

Please see http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/administration/students/handbook for 

further details concerning the marking system, return of coursework etc. 

Any questions then please come and see me in my office or e-mail me at 

mark.roberts@ucl.ac.uk 

Health and safety 

Everyone attending the course must have filled in a health and safety/personal details 

form before the start of the course. The Institute has a Health and Safety policy and 

code of practice that provides guidance on field and laboratory and work etc. All 

work undertaken in the Institute is governed by these guidelines and students have a 

duty to be aware of them and to adhere to them at all times. This is particularly 

important in the context of this practical field course. A copy of the completed risk 

assessment for this course will be available for consultation both in the field and at the 

Institute. 

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/administration/common/fieldwork/safety 

(Fieldwork section). 

Please ensure that you are up to date with your tetanus injections. 

a) You will need clothing to cope with all weathers but mainly the cold and wet. 

A complete set of waterproofs and strong waterproof shoes or boots are 

advisable. Staff shall refuse to allow inadequately equipped students to 

participate in the course. 

b) Make yourself aware of the location of the First Aid Kit (there is always one 

kit in MBR’s vehicle). Any accident must be reported to the responsible 

member of staff at once and an Accident Report Form completed following 

22

any accident. If you become aware of a hazard, inform one of the course 

teachers or another responsible member of staff immediately. 

c) All tools and equipment must be used as instructed. When not in use they 

should be stacked as instructed so as not to cause hazards. 

d) Do not walk off on your own, please advise a member of staff if you need to 

leave the survey area or the Goodwood accommodation. 

e) In general follow the relevant sections of the Country Code: 

Guard against all risks of fire. 

Fasten all gates. 

Keep to paths across farmland. 

Avoid damaging fences, hedges and walls. 

Leave no litter. 

Safeguard water supplies. 

Protect wildlife, wild plants and trees. 

Go carefully on country roads. 

Respect the life of the countryside. 

f) Take particular care on country lanes. Keep to edge of the road facing 

oncoming traffic. Carry a torch and wear bright clothing after dark and do not 

walk alone after nightfall. 

You are required to comply with all instructions contained in the UCL Fieldwork 

Approved Code of Practice available from the fieldwork section at:- 

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/administration/common/fieldwork 

Food and Drink 

Those staying at Goodwood will be provided with materials to make their own packed 

lunch; breakfast and a hot evening meal will be provided each day (see preliminary 

information sheet circulated by e-mail and on Moodle on 22/10/12). You should 

make sure that you take an adequate supply of drinking water up to the site each day. 

A flask for carrying hot drinks would also be beneficial. Please note that NO 

ALCOHOL is allowed on site and none should be consumed off-site during working 

hours. This is a health and safety regulation, and any infringement of this rule will 

result in expulsion from the course. There will be opportunities for sociable drinking 

in the evenings, please do this in moderation, return to Goodwood in good time and 

23

take care not to disturb the residents or other students who may be resting. Please 

note that the Goodwood stable block is a NON-SMOKING area. Anyone smoking 

during the survey course should do so with consideration for others and make sure 

there is no risk of fire. 

4/. Reading List and Bibliography 

Aldiss, D.T., 2002. Geology of the Chichester and Bognor District. Sheet description 

of the British Geological Survey, 1:50,000 Sheet 317 and Sheet 332 (England and 

Wales). Keyworth: British Geological Survey. 

Allcroft, A.H., 1916. Some earthworks of West Sussex. Sussex Archaeological 

Collections 58, 65-90. 

Archaeology Data Service. 2012. Heyshott Barrrows [ADS] Import RCN - 

NMR_NATINV-249410 

http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archsearch/browser.jsf 

Bettess, F., 1998. Surveying for Archaeologists. Durham: University of Durham. 

[ARCH AL 12 BET; TEACHING COLLN ARCH 2518] 

Bowden M. (ed.), 1999. Unravelling the Landscape: an inquisitive approach to 

Archaeology. Stroud: RCHME Tempus. [INST ARCH AH BOW] 

Bowden, M., 2002. With alidade and tape: graphical and plane table survey of 

archaeological earthworks. Swindon: English Heritage. (Free download from EH 

website. 

Brück, J., 2000. Settlement, landscape and social identity: the Early-Middle Bronze 

Age transition in Wessex, Sussex and the Thames Valley. Oxford Journal of 

Archaeology 19(3), 273-300. 

24

Curwen, E.C., 1918. Covered Ways on the Sussex Downs. Sussex Archaeological 


Curwen, E.C., 1929. Prehistoric Sussex. London: The Homeland Association Ltd. 

Curwen, E.C., 1939. The Iron Age in Sussex. Sussex Archaeological Collections 80, 

214-216. 

Drewett, P.L., 2003. Field Archaeology: an introduction. London: UCL Press. 

English Heritage. 2008. Geophysical survey in archaeological field evaluation. 

Swindon: English Heritage. 

English Heritage. 2012. Pastscape: Monument Number 249410. 

http://www.pastscape.org.uk/hob.aspx?hob_id=249410 

Franks, A., 1854. British barrows near Chichester. Sussex Archaeological Collections 

7, 51-54. 

Garwood, P., 2003. Round Barrows and Funerary Traditions in Late Neolithic 

Bronze Age Sussex. In D. Rudling (ed.), The Archaeology of Sussex to AD 2000 )47- 

68). King's Lynn: Heritage Marketing and Publication Ltd. 

Ghilani, C. D. & Wolf, P. R., 2008. Elementary Surveying: An introduction to 

Geomatics. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. 

Green, C. and Rollo-Smith, S., 1984. The excavation of eighteen round barrows near 

Shrewton, Wiltshire. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 50, 255-318. 

Grinsell, L.V., 1931. Sussex in the Bronze Age. Sussex Archaeological Collections 

72, 30-68. 

Grinsell, L.V., 1934. Sussex barrows. Sussex Archaeological Collections 75, 217- 

275. 

25

Grinsell, L.V., 1941. Sussex barrows: supplement no. II. Sussex Archaeological 


Harcourt, L.V., 1847. Celtic Antiquities near Chichester. Sussex Archaeological 


Harding, A.F., 2000. European Societies in the Bronze Age. Cambridge: CUP. [see 

Chapter 3 Burial pp 73-123]. 

Howard, P., 2007. Archaeological Surveying and Mapping: recording and depicting 

the landscape. London: Routledge. 

McKinley, J., 1997. Bronze Age ‘barrows’ and funerary rites and rituals of 

cremation. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 63, 129-45. 

Marsden, B.M., 1999. Early Barrow Diggers. Stroud: Tempus. 

Musson, R.C., 1954. An illustrated catalogue of Sussex Beaker and Bronze Age 

Pottery. Sussex Archaeological Collections 92, 106-24. 

Pasquinucci, M. and Trément, F. (eds), 2000. Non-Destructive Techniques Applied 

to Landscape Archaeology. Oxford: Oxbow Books. 

Peters, F., 2002. Bronze Age Barrows: factors influencing their survival and 

destruction. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 18 (3), 255-264. 

Reed, R. and White, D.A., 1970. The excavation of a bowl barrow at Oakley Down, 

Dorset 1968. Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society, 

92, 154-167. 

Roskams, S.P., 2001. Excavation. Cambridge: CUP. 

26

Seager-Thomas, M., 2008. From potsherds to people: Sussex prehistoric pottery. 

Sussex Archaeological Collections, 146, 19-52. 

Smith, H., 1870. Note on Prehistoric burial in Sussex. Sussex Archaeological 


Subramanian, R., 2007. Surveying and Levelling. Oxford: OUP. 

Tilley, C., 2004. Round Barrows and Dykes as landscape Metaphors. Cambridge 

Archaeological Journal. 14 (2), 185-203. 

Tilley, C., 2010. Interpreting landscapes: geologies, topographies, identities. 

Walnut Creek CA: Left Coast Press. 

Uren, J. & Price, W. F., 2006. Surveying for Engineers. Basingstoke: Palgrave 

Macmillan. 

Woodward, A., 2000. British Barrows: a matter of life and death. Stroud: Tempus. 

Appendix 1 Setting up the Total Station 

1. Place the tripod over the survey control point; try to get the centre of 

the tripod top approximately over the centre of the survey control 

point. 

2. Set the tripod up so that it is roughly level; the height of the plate 

should be as high as the shortest operator’s shoulder. This setting 

enables everybody present to use the total station. 

3. Place the total station on top of the tripod. Hold it very carefully and 

try to keep two hands on the machine at all times. There is a screw 

27

under the tribrach of the total station that attaches to the tripod. The 

1200,800 and 700 series total stations have a laser plummet. Once the 

machine is attached to the tripod turn the machine on. It should 

default to a levelling and laser plummet screen (this action will depend 

on internal settings). The laser plummet will appear as a red dot 

beneath the total station. Carefully move the tripod until the laser 

plummet is located over the control point. Turn the thumbscrews until 

the plummet is central over the survey point/nail. Heel the tripod in so 

that it is stable (it does not to be underground) 

4. Centre the laser plummet again; turning the thumbscrews does this. 

5. Now use the spirit level on the tribrach to level the tripod. Level the 

tripod by adjusting the legs. The thumbscrews should be used for fine 

adjustment only. 

6. Once you have it level, the laser plummet will have moved away from 

the survey point. Use the thumbscrews to re-centre the plummet. The 

tripod will need levelling again (with the tripod legs) but should need 

to make smaller adjustments. 

7. Eventually you will have the tripod level with the plummet nearly 

directly over the survey point. To make the final adjustment then 

loosen the screw that holds the tribrach to the tripod. You should only 

have to move the plate a small distance to centre the plummet. Re- 

level with the thumbscrews (this action should only involve a small 

adjustment). 

8. Finally level the machine using the electronic level. This will appear as 

a horizontal and vertical bar or as a pictorial representation of a bulls 

eye spirit level (depending upon the machine used). 

9. Exit out of the levelling screen. 

28

10. The height of the total station must now be measured. The height 

should be from the ground to a mark on the side of the total station 

that corresponds to the centre of the telescope. Keep the tape measure 

as straight as possible. The height should be recorded to the nearest 

millimetre. Record the height in your notebook. 

11. The total station is now ready to work. We shall learn how to use the 

system programmes in the field. 

Appendix 2. Scheduling description for SAMs 20032 – 31207: Round 

barrows and cross dykes. (CD=Chichester District) 

DISTRICT HER NUMBER: CD1753 

Name: Bowl barrow - Heyshott Down 

Monument Type: BOWL BARROW Period From: Bronze Age 

Narrow Type: Period To: 

Monument Type: BARROW CEMETERY Period From: Bronze Age 


Status: Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM) Grade/Ref: 20032 Prev 

Grade/Ref: 224a 

Parish: Heyshott 

Map Sheet: SU91NW NGRX: 490583 NGRY: 116579 

Remarks: A group of nine bowl barrows on Heyshott Down was listed in 1934. 

Barrow A was 21 paces in diameter and 6ft high, with a hollow centre {1}. In 1971 

all except H were under rough pasture and only B showed any trace of ditches. 

Barrow A was 20m in diameter and 2m in height, with a central excavation crater {2}. 

By 1975 the barrows had been cleared of scrub and were under rough pasture {3}. 

CD1753 is the westernmost barrow of an E-W linear cemetery of 10 round barrows 

situated along a chalk ridge towards the N of the South Downs. These all survive as 

earthworks and range in size from 11-34m in diameter and 0.3-2.60m high. Seven 

barrows have hollows and disturbances suggesting that they were once partially 

excavated. CD1753, a bowl barrow, has a mound 19m in diameter and 2m high. 

Surrounding the mound is a ditch which has become in-filled over time and is now 

only visible as a slight depression to the SE but survives as a buried feature c. 3m 

wide around the mound. Scheduling revised, Barrow 1 {4}. 

{1} Sussex Barrows 

Date: 1934 Author: Grinsell, L.V. 

Journal/Serial: Sussex Archaeological Collections Volume/part: 75 

Specific Ref p.246 

{2} SU91NW19 (OS Record card) 

29

Date: 1971 Author: OS Field Investigator 

Journal/Serial: Volume/part: 

Specific Ref 

{3} SU91NW19 (West Sussex SMR Record card) 

Date: 1975 Author: Aldsworth, F.G. 


Specific Ref 

{4} EH Revised Scheduling Document 

Date: Author: English Heritage 








Grade/Ref: 224b 




Barrow B was 38 paces in diameter and 7ft high, with a ditch {1}. In 1971 all except 

H were under rough pasture and only B showed any trace of ditches. Barrow B was 

27.5-29.0m in diameter, with a ditch 4m wide and up to 1m deep and had a large 

central excavation crater {2}. By 1975 the barrows had been cleared of scrub and 

were under rough pasture {3}. CD1754 forms part of a linear E-W cemetery of 10 

round barrows situated along a chalk ridge towards the north of the South Downs. 

The barrows all survive as earthworks and range in size from 11-34m in diameter and 

0.3-2.6m high. Seven barrows show evidence of hollows and disturbances. CD1754, 

a bowl barrow, is second from the west with a central mound 34m in diameter and 

2.6m high. The mound is surrounded by a quarry ditch which has become partially 

infilled over time but remains as an earthwork feature c.3m wide around the mound. 

The barrow was known locally as 'Heyshott Barrow' and has a central hollow in the 

mound which suggests that it was once partially excavated. Scheduling revised, 

Barrow 2 {4}. 








Specific Ref 




30

Specific Ref 






Narrow Type: Bowl barrow Period To: 




Grade/Ref: 224c 




Barrow C was 12 paces in diameter and 1ft high, truncated {1}. In 1971 all except H 

were under rough pasture and only B showed any trace of ditches. Barrow C was 

11.5m in diameter and 0.6m in height, with a low, hummocky appearance {2}. By 

1975 the barrows had been cleared of scrub and were under rough pasture {3}. 

CD1755, a bowl barrow, is one of an E-W linear cemetery of 10 round barrows 

situated on a chalk ridge towards the north of the South Downs. The barrows all 

survive as earthworks varying in size from 11-34m in diameter and 0.3-2.6m high. 

Seven barrows show evidence of hollows and disturbances. 1507, the third barrow 

from west, is a much slighter earthwork than CD1754 to the west and has a central 

mound 11.5m in diameter and 0.5m high. Surrounding the mound is a quarry ditch 

which is no longer visible but survives as a buried feature c.3m wide. Scheduling 

revised, Barrow 3 {4}. [NGR in Scheduling document is inaccurate - NGR for HER 

record corrected 19.11.2010 based on 2007 APs IS-L] 








Specific Ref 




Specific Ref 






31



Narrow Type: Barrow cemetery Period To: 


Grade/Ref: 224d 




Barrow D was 10 paces in diameter and 1ft high {1}. In 1971 all except H were 

under rough pasture and only B showed any trace of ditches. Barrow D was 8.5-6.5m 

in diameter and 0.5m in height, with a low, hummocky appearance {2}. By 1975 the 

barrows had been cleared of scrub and were under rough pasture {3}. CD1756, a 

bowl barrow, is one of a linear E-W cemetery of 10 round barrows situated along a 

chalk ridge towards the N of the South Downs. The barrows all survive as earthworks 

varying in size from 11-34m in diameter and 0.3-2.6m in height. Seven barrows show 

evidence of hollows and disturbances. CD1756 is the fourth barrow from the west 

and has a mound 12m in diameter and 0.3m high, with a surrounding quarry ditch 

which is no longer visible at ground level but survives as a buried feature c.3m wide. 

Scheduling revised, Barrow 4 {4}. [NGR in Scheduling document is inaccurate - 

NGR for HER record corrected 19.11.2010 based on 2007 APs IS-L] 








Specific Ref 




Specific Ref 










Grade/Ref: 224e 



32


Barrow E was 15 paces in diameter and 2ft high {1}. In 1971 all except H were under 

rough pasture and only B showed any trace of ditches. Barrow E was 15.5m in 

diameter and 0.7m in height, with a large central excavation crater {2}. By 1975 the 

barrows had been cleared of scrub and were under rough pasture {3}. CD1757, a 

bowl barrow, is one of a linear E-W cemetery of 10 round barrows situated along a 

chalk ridge towards the N of the South Downs. The barrows all survive as earthworks 

and range in size from 11-34m in diameter and 0.3- 2.6m in height. Seven of the 

barrows show evidence of hollows and disturbances. CD1757 is the fifth barrow from 

W and has a mound 14.5m in diameter and 1.2m high. The surrounding quarry ditch 

has become in-filled over time and is no longer visible at ground level but survives as 

a buried feature c. 3m wide. Scheduling revised, Barrow 5 {4}. [NGR in Scheduling 

document is inaccurate - NGR for HER record corrected 19.11.2010 based on 2007 

APs IS-L] 








Specific Ref 




Specific Ref 










Grade/Ref: 224f 




Barrow F was 14 paces in diameter and 5ft high, with a hollow centre. {1} In 1971 all 

except H were under rough pasture and only B showed any trace of ditches. Barrow F 

was 14.5m in diameter and 1.2m in height, with a large central excavation crater. {2} 

By 1975 the barrows had been cleared of scrub and were under rough pasture. {3} 

CD1758, a bowl barrow, is one of a linear E-W cemetery of 10 round barrows situated 

on a chalk ridge towards the N of the South Downs. The barrows all survive as 

earthworks varying in size from 11-34m in diameter and 0.3-2.6m in height. Seven of 

33

the barrows show evidence of hollows and disturbances. CD1758 is the sixth barrow 

from W and has a mound 13.5m in diameter and 1.3m high, with a surrounding ditch 

which has become infilled over time and is no longer visible at ground level but 

survives as a buried feature c.3m wide. Scheduling revised, Barrow 6. {4} [NGR in 

Scheduling document is inaccurate - NGR for HER record corrected 19.11.2010 based 

on 2007 APs IS-L]. 








Specific Ref 




Specific Ref 










Grade/Ref:224g 




Barrow G was 12 paces in diameter and 3ft high, with a hollow centre. {1} In 1971 all 

except H were under rough pasture and only B showed any trace of ditches. Barrow G 

was 11.5m in diameter and 1m in height, with a small central excavation crater. {2} 

By 1975 the barrows had been cleared of scrub and were under rough pasture. {3} 

CD1759, a bowl barrow, is one of a linear E-W cemetery of 10 round barrows situated 

along a ridge towards the N of the South Downs. The barrows all survive as 

earthworks varying in size from 11-34m in diameter and 0.3-2.6m in height. Seven of 

the barrows show evidence of hollows and disturbances. CD1759, the seventh barrow 

from W, has a mound 11m in diameter and 1m high. The quarry ditch has become 

infilled over time and is no longer visible at ground level but survives as a buried 

feature c.3m wide. Between CD1759 and CD1760 to the E is a segment of cross dyke 

(CD1764). Scheduling revised, Barrow 7. {4} [NGR in Scheduling document is 

inaccurate - NGR for HER record corrected 19.11.2010 based on 2007 APs IS-L] 



34






Specific Ref 




Specific Ref 




Name: Disc barrow - Heyshott Down 

Monument Type: DISC BARROW Period From: Bronze Age 

Narrow Type: Disc barrow Period To: 




Grade/Ref:224h 




Barrow H was 17 paces in diameter and 1.5ft high. {1} In 1971 all except H were 

under rough pasture and only B showed any trace of ditches. Barrow H was 16m in 

diameter and 0.5m in height, with a large central excavation crater and badly 

mutilated, with a hummocky appearance and overgrown with scrub. {2} By 1975 the 

barrows had been cleared of scrub and were under rough pasture. Barrow H is 

possibly a bank barrow comprising a circular bank. {3} CD1760, a disc barrow, is 

one of a linear E-W cemetery of 10 round barrows situated along a chalk ridge 

towards the N of the South Downs. The barrows all survive as earthworks and vary in 

size from 11-34m in diameter and 0.3-2.6m high. Of the barrows seven show 

evidence of hollows and disturbances. CD1760, the eighth barrow from W, comprises 

a circular bank 15m in diameter and 2m wide which stands 0. 4m high, defining a flat 

central area, or platform, without a central mound. Scheduling revised, Barrow 8. {4} 

[NGR in Scheduling document is inaccurate - NGR for HER record corrected 

19.11.2010 based on 2007 APs IS-L] 








Specific Ref 

35




Specific Ref 



Fig. 15. The Scheduled Ancient Monuments and Chichester District Council HER 

recorded sites at the scarp edge on Heyshott Down. 

36

Appendix 3 Students attending the surveying course 

Group 1 Group 3 

Brigid Geist Josh Matthews 

Tom Lovett George Manaton 

Will Waring Sally Morris 

Group 2 Group 4 

Ophelia Hirst Tristan French 

Jordan Hassell Nikolay Kolev 

Richard Taylor Alice Dowsett 

Special Guest Charles Conway 

Appendix 4 Useful telephone numbers and contacts 

Mark Roberts Mobile. – 07803 500321 

Robert Kaleta Mobile. – 07883 154514 

Goodwood Education Office. – 01243 755157 

Penny Morris: Stable dormitory. – 01243 755036 – 07713 502688 

Mike Edwards: Murray Downland Trust. – 01730 810482 – 07747 696936 

John Murray: Murray Downland Trust. – 01730 812325 

Richard Marks: Manor Farm. – 

Jaap Roell: Goodwood Estate Property Manager. – 07809 899596 

St. Richard’s Hospital Chichester. – 01243 788122 

Doctor: Lavant Surgery. – 01243 527624 

Acknowledgements 

The compilation of this handbook has been greatly facilitated by James Kenny at 

Chichester District Council HER department; Richard Massey and David Baines of 

English Heritage; Mark Taylor, County Archaeologist for West Sussex; and Charlotte 

Frearson and Sandra Bond, at the Institute of Archaeology. 

The following have all been instrumental in helping to set up the course: Simon Ward 

of the Murray Downland Trust; Jaap Roell, Darren Norris, Sarah Stewart and Penny 

Morris of the Goodwood Estate. 

37

3/. The Survey Course - University College London

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?