Source/Archive record SCH5385 - Land off Holmes Chapel Road, Congleton Cheshire: Geophysical Surveys

This report presents the results of geophysical surveys at the site of National Monument No. 13499, a long mound near Congleton, Cheshire, undertaken in order to aid the interpretation of the monument. The works comprised geomagnetic survey totalling c. 1ha over the entire mound, and targeted areas of earth electrical resistance survey and ground‐penetrating radar (GPR). Conclusions 6.1 Geomagnetic, earth electrical resistance and ground penetrating radar surveys were undertaken over a possible Neolithic Long Barrow on land to the south‐west of Holmes Chapel Road, near Congleton, Cheshire. 6.2 The geomagnetic survey detected two concentric anomalies, which could be interpreted as ditch circuits, at the north‐west end of the mound, but no evidence of ditches flanking the entire length of the mound. A possible causeway has been detected through both circuits on their north‐west side. The mound does not sit centrally within these ditch circuits. The mound and the ditches may be unrelated; if this is the case it is likely that the mound overlies the ditches. 6.3 Possible structural elements have been detected at the north‐west end of the mound by both GPR and earth electrical resistance; these could reflect features such as a stone chamber or entrance to the long barrow, but do not connect to the mound and as such could be unrelated. 6.4 These features outside the mound, the ditches and possible structures, could contain information to help date the mound, if it can be assumed that the ditches pre‐date the mound. 6.5 The earth electrical resistance data indicates that the mound is constructed of stone elements. Further stone work continues outside the mound, perhaps unrelated to the mound itself. 6.6 A geomagnetic anomaly that may represent a possible stone kerb has been detected along the north‐east edge of the mound; this would be consistent with a long barrow interpretation. 6.7 The presence of mature oak trees and their associated root action makes interpretation of any possible timber features very difficult. 6.8 No obvious chambers or voids have been detected in the geophysical survey, but the majority of the body of the mound has not been tested by either earth electrical resistance or GPR. Further survey over the body of the mound may shed light on any possible structural components of the monument. 6.9 The GPR data has detected a probable slope in the natural deposits below the topsoil at the north‐west of the mound which would be consistent with Higham’s interpretation that the mound formed naturally. However the concentration of dipolar magnetic anomalies and high resistance anomalies on the mound itself indicates that the mound is probably man‐made and not a natural feature. 6.10 Although the presence of a possible stone revetment, and the probable man‐made nature of the mound are consistent with the interpretation of the mound as a long barrow, the geophysical evidence alone cannot conclusively state that the mound at Congleton is a Neolithic long barrow. The lack of indicative features, such as flanking ditches and chambers or voids within the mound itself, could suggest an alternative interpretation.