 early period. As figure \[fig:uvotearly\] demonstrates, these is little evidence of temporal variation in five of the six bands. Each is consistent with a constant flux. There is a hint of declining flux in the last observations taken in the reddest, $V$, band but the substantial uncertainties on this data preclude a firm identification of afterglow flux. No other band shows a comparable decline during the observation interval.

![Early time optical and ultraviolet photometry from [*Swift*]{}/UVOT. The flux density in the $B$ and $U$-band and the three ultraviolet wavebands shows little evidence of variation. There is a hint of declining flux in the $V$-band, but given the large photometric errors in this band, any decline is difficult to constrain with any accuracy. \[fig:uvotearly\]](lightcurve_plot2.ps){width="0.99\columnwidth"}

![Comparison of averaged early time optical and ultraviolet photometry from [*Swift*]{}/UVOT (red, crosses), with the late time observations of the host from other sources (see section \[sec:sed\]). The UVOT observations are averaged from T0+0hr to T0+19hr. The late time observations are taken at several years post-burst. Nonetheless, the UVOT observations are consistent (within the photometric errors) with the host galaxy data, suggesting that any afterglow was below the UVOT detection limit. \[fig:uvotcomp\]](comp_early_phot.ps){width="0.99\columnwidth"}

In figure \[fig:uvotcomp\], we compare this early time UVOT data, now integrated across the 19 hour observation assuming no temporal variation, with the late time host galaxy data described in sections \[sec:whtim\] and \[sec:sed\]. While observations in $U$ and $B$ are not available at late times, the measured flux in the early time integrated $V$ band and near-ultraviolet bands are consistent with that in late time observations of the host galaxy. With the exception of possible variation the $V$-band data, no afterglow is detected within the photometric errors, suggesting that any optical supernova was at or below the UVOT detec