PRN 64448 Fieldwalking identified a dense scatter of Medieval roofing tile, but crop growth restricted artefact retrieved to a small sample from the centre of the plot.{1}{2} The tile scatter corresponded to an increase magnetic susceptibility readings, and very minor magnetic anomalies.{3} It was recommended that evaluation trenches were excavated at the earliest opportunity. Three trial trenches were opened but none produced evidence of arvchaeological deposits, so no further work was recommended other than to monitor the area during construction.{4}{5} The watching brief discovered the remains of wall foundations and further archaeological features. A layer of silty clay subsoil of variable thickness was distributed across the site masking underlying deposits.{4}{5} Five separate areas were excavated. In Area 1 at the southern end of the site, there was a series of ditches, curvilinear gullies and two pits. The ditches appeared to have been sealed by an episode of deliberate dumping, which in turn pre-dated the gullies. The ditches were generally dated to the thirteenth century while the dumping layer dated to just after the thirteenth century. All of the gullies contained a relatively sterile brownish fill, with three gullies producing finds dating to the between the thirteenth and fifteenth centuries. A very large irregular pit, possibly a quarry pit, was found in the northeast corner of Area 1. It produced thirty sherds of thirteenth to fifteenth century pottery and four fifteenth to seventeenth century sherds, as well as thirty-five fragments of Medieval tile. In Area 2, three wall foundations were recorded, together with two other foundations and two large post-pad footings. A further nine postholes, four pits and three gullies or ditches were also identified. An extensive layer of building rubble was partially exposed and it is likely that extensive stone robbing had taken place making the task of reconstructing the layout of th site more difficult. In total, three distinct structures could be discerned. Structure A was formed by six postholes which appeared to form a linear alignment. The true nature of Structure A was not determined. Structure B was by far the most substantial feature, defined by three segments of wall foundations. The southern and eastern segments had a single layer of vertical or slightly pitched limestone blocks overlain by a layer of hoizontal limestone fragments bonded by mortar. The northern wall had two courses of oppositely pitched limestone blocks forming a herringbone pattern in section. A few level pieces suggest this too had been overlain with horizontal stones. The distance between the two ends would give structure B an internal length of approximately 30m. As no western wall was recorded it is impossible to be sure of the width. Stone footings or pad-stones were also excavated, where stacked horizontal limestone fragments were set in sub-rectangular pits. The walls and stone footings suggests some form of aisled building, possibly a barn. Concentrations of limestone rubble and tile fragments were visible across much of the eastern half of Area 2, measuring up to 15cm deep. The tile included a nibbed fragment and an unusual piece with a relief stamped pattern. The tile fragments and associated pottery found within the structure dated to the late 12th to mid- thirteenth century AD. Another stone footing was recorded at the northern tip of Area 2. It was apparently isolated, though it is likely that this feature formed part of another structure (Structure C) possibly extending to the west of the pipeline. A number of miscellaneous pits and postholes were also recorded in Area 2, some of which were directly associated with the structures. Area 4 comprised a large linear feature, running broadly parallel to the bridleway on the boundary of the two fields. This feature appears to be an open drain recorded on the 1956 Ordnance Survey map. Traces of a former hedgerow were also noted along its nothern edge. It is not possible to be sure of the longevity of this ditch, although the presence of tile and later thirteenth to fifteenth century pottery could indicate a Medieval origin. A fragment of 12th century grave-marker (showing signs of later re-use) was retrieved from the uppermost fill of this ditch.{4}{5} It is clear from the stone foundations that we are dealing with at least two significant structures. One of these structures may have been an aisled barn. Analysis of soil samples suggests the collection, processing and storage of grain on site. Vernacular buildings of this type would have required substantial outlay of money and labour, the most likely source of both being nearby Haverholme Priory (PRN 60740). Both the pottery and tile assemblage supports the contention that the site was associated with the nearby priory. The ware-type composition of the glazed jug, mainly Nottingham and Lincoln types, is not typical of local rural assemblages where a significant number of vessels are usually from a local source. At the priory site, however, Nottingham and Lincoln wares were common among the pottery recovered from excavations (ELI7333). Tile fragments recovered from this site are very similar to those found during the excavation of a tile kiln at the priory. The fragment of grave-marker provides further evidence for a link between the two sites. The grave-marker is of a type produced between 1120 to 1180 AD. This date range would make its transfer from Haverholme Priory a distinct possibility as the stone is unlikely to have travelled far. The archaeological remains may represent buildings associated with the priory's home farm or grange.{4}{5}