The Corridor House (Building 4) consisted of a substantial rectangular building with stone foundations, situated some 80m downhill to the south of the main villa house (Building 1). It lay immediately- outside the villa enclosure wall and was excavated over two seasons, in 1999 and 2001. Excavation showed that the walls of the building had been extensively and systematically robbed, apparently during the Roman period and subsequent ploughing had caused further damage. Building 4 was aligned N-S, following the slope of the lull and lay between the 14 and 15 metre contours. It was apparent that several phases of development must be represented within the structure overall. At the heart of Building 4 lay a central range measuring internally some 12m (N-S) by 6.00 m (E-W). A cross-wall had originally divided this range into two rooms, of almost equal size: the North Room measured 5.98 m (E-W) by 5.85 m (N-S), whilst the South Room was 6.00 m (E-W) by 5.50 m (N-S). There seems little doubt that this Central Range represents the earliest part of the building and that it constituted a modest detached dwelling, set just outside the south-east comer of the walled villa enclosure. Where surviving, the foundations for the walls were of similar dimensions and construction. They ranged in width from 0.75-0.80m. The Central Range was surrounded on the west, south and east sides by a broad corridor or gallery, 2.14-2.33m in width internally. Its outer walls had again been thoroughly robbed and there is no surviving evidence to show whether the walls were exactly- contemporary with the Central Range or represented a later addition. At the northern end of the east wall the foundation had been wholly destroyed by ploughing but there seems little doubt that it originally abutted the south-eastern comer of the villa enclosure wall, crossing the line of the adjacent boundary ditch. Sometime after its original construction. a short section of the corridor wall had been removed in order to allow the excavation of a 0.50m deep, L-shaped construction pit for the insertion of a small hypocausted room at the south-west comer of the building. The room had internal dimensions of 3.20m (E-w) by 1.98 m (N-S). Its sub-floor consisted of a layer of coarse cream mortar poured onto flint cobbles with a total thickness of 0.16m. This sub-floor supported the outer walls and a network of central pilae. The small, rectangular stoking-chamber lay at the north-west comer of the main room, although very little of its structure had survived. An area of poured opus signinum over flint cobbles, measuring 0.75m (E-W) by 0.58m (N-S), abutted the northern edge of the main sub-floor and this is likely to represent the base for the furnace arch. Eventually, the heated room was abandoned and the structure was systematically robbed down to basement level. There can be no doubt that this occurred sometime during the Roman period as large amounts of domestic rubbish. including some 1.700 sherds of pottery, were subsequently- dumped into the basement. The date of the pottery spans the period c. 100-250 AD. Shallow trenches located about 0.50m beyond both the east and the west corridor wall foundations assigned here to Phase la indicate these walls had subsequently been replaced by new ones, to provide a broader corridor, now some 3.50m in width. The general layout of Building 4, with its two-roomed Central Range sunounded by broad corridors, a hypocausted room, evidence for painted walls and probable tessellated floors, leaves no doubt that this structure represents a domestic dwelling, rather than an agricultural building. The overall impression gained is that Building 4 was a dwelling for the use of inhabitants who were of lower status to those living in the main villa house, although still closely- connected with the establishment. Most probably it was first constructed soon after the middle of the second century and had been abandoned by the middle of the third century.

Tlie available information suggests that Building 4 constituted a subsequent addition to the original layout of the Minster villa complex. Such a development could be interpreted as providing evidence for the growing prosperity and status of the proprietor of the estate, who perhaps increasingly distanced himself from the day-to-day ninning of a working farm. Eventually, such routine matters were delegated to a trusted bailiff. who was provided with his own house outside the owner's private walled enclosure. (information summarised from source) (1)

<1> K. Parfitt, 2006, The Roman villa at Minster in Thanet. Part 3 the corridor house, building 4 (Article in serial). SKE51651.