KENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY  -- RESEARCH   Studying and sharing Kent's past      Homepage

Archaeologia Cantiana -  Vol. 89    1974  page 126
Excavations at Eccles Roman Villa, 1973: Twelfth Interim Report.
By A. P. Detsicas, M.A., F.S.A. Scot

against the inner face of the south-west wall of Room 11; if water had been circulating, this obviously would not have occurred.
   The most likely interpretation compatible with the excavated evidence is that Room 132 was a small plunge-bath over a hypocaust, used in conjunction with Room 11, a tepidarium. No direct evidence was found for base- or pila-tiles for the suspension of this hypocaust, which must have been completely removed during the building of the subsequent baths in Period V; likewise, no evidence survived for any mason's marks on the underfloor for the siting of the pilae. However, in view of the small size of Room 132, such marks would have been superfluous as very few pilae would have been needed at the central part of the room to support the hypocaust's bridging-tiles, resting on the buttressed corners of the north-east wall and on the offset of the room's south-west wall. Room 132 would have been supplied with hot water from the furnace, Room 7,20 by means of the partly demolished opus signinum channel leading from this furnace to the west corner of Room 9 where it turns at right angles and points directly towards Room 132. In 1962, it was recorded that this channel 'outflowed just beyond the west corner of Room 9';21 but, in the light of this year's new evidence, from this point onward the water supply could have been carried by pipes across the 7 ft. (2.10 m.) width separating this 'outflow' from the south-east wall of Room 132. On reaching this wall, the piping would have continued through the south-east wall of Room 132 and ducted into the plunge-bath.
   If this interpretation, based on the excavated evidence, of Rooms 11 and 132 as a tepidarium and a plunge-bath, respectively, proves acceptable, there remains the problem of water disposal. It is not impossible that water was drained out of Room 11 through piping across Room 8 and towards the main drain passing outside Rooms 4 and 2;22 on the other hand, even indirect evidence for the draining of Room 132 is lacking. Logically, it should have been drained into the substantial drain known to be passing underneath Room 19 (Period V),23 by means of a channel or, more probably as the subsoil between Room 132 and the drain was undisturbed, piping through the room's southwest wall; the demolition of this wall may have removed any direct evidence for such piping, though an indication supporting its probable existence is the fact that the top of the drain under Room 19 (Period V) was found collapsed at the point where the drain changes direction, i.e. at the point nearest to the west corner of Room 132. In any case, Room 132 could not be completely drained because its floor level was
   20 Ibid., fig, 2,
   21 Ibid., 132.
   22 Ibid., fig. 2.
   23 Ibid., 128-9.

Previous page        Back to Page listings       Next Page       

For details about the advantages of membership of the Kent Archaeological Society click here

Back to Contents Page     To Arch. Cant. List      To Publications On-line      To Research Page      To Homepage

Kent Archaeological Society is a registered charity number 223382
Kent Archaeological Society 25th March 2013

This website is constructed by enthusiastic amateurs. Any errors noticed by other researchers will be to gratefully received
so that we can amend our pages to give as accurate a record as possible. Please send details too research@kentarchaeology.org.uk