Author Archives: site_manager

Differing approaches to archaeological fieldwork

Written by Michał Górzyński, Project Archaeologist (Heritage Research)

During my studies and after graduation I worked on a number of excavations conducted by universities, museums and private companies in Poland. This gave me a basic understanding of the methods used in archaeological fieldwork and I then assumed that these methods would be the same elsewhere! That’s why after my first day of work on an archaeological excavation in Britain, I was so surprised to find many differences between the methods I had learnt in Poland and the methods used in the UK.

The basic structure of field investigation (excavating features and then recording them and the artefacts) is the same, but the methods of how to excavate, and the type of tools to use are different (except maybe using shovels!).

For example let’s use the excavation of a pit. The first step is the same, make a line to divide the feature in two and then start excavating one half to get a section through the feature. After that, according to Polish methodology, you would cut a box shape around the feature to explore the surrounding stratigraphy. This results in one half of the feature staying untouched and the other half showing a full section plus a small area around it. This is opposed to British fieldwork methods where only the feature is half-sectioned and the surrounding ‘natural’ is left untouched (unless there are other archaeological features).

The next step is to record the feature by drawing and photographing the section. In Poland, there is often only one person is doing the recording, most often the site supervisor. There are no context sheets, all the necessary information is inputted into excavation notebooks. When this is done the half of the pit which is left needs to be excavated, but this time following the cut of the feature. Again, after excavation of this half, drawing and photographic documentation is undertaken by the field supervisor. All measurements on site are taken with a dumpy level and staff and it is rare that a GPS is used. In my work in the UK, as is common on most archaeological excavations, the features are recorded by the excavator using context sheets, photography and drawing, as well as a GPS to mark where the features are spatially within the site.

Michal Gorzynski — Michal looking very happy on site!

I’m really happy that I have had the opportunity to learn Polish and British fieldwork methods, because both make me better archaeologist. I am now enjoying my time working on a secondment in the Heritage Research Team at Allen Archaeology where I am building on my knowledge of British archaeology.

if you’re interested in finding out more about British fieldwork and the work we do at Allen Archaeology have a read through some of our previous blog posts!

A Day in the Life of… Fabian Danielsson (Project Supervisor, Fieldwork)

I’ve been with Allen Archaeology for close to 4 years now, and have been working as a Supervisor for just over a year. My working life, like many others at Allen Archaeology, is split between periods in the office and periods out on site.

On site, my job is essentially twofold – making sure that every archaeological feature gets excavated to a high standard and on time, and making sure the recorded archive is of a good quality. To do this, a site usually starts by stripping the topsoil off the site with a mechanical excavator, and surveying in the revealed features by GPS. I then work out what needs to be excavated – we usually have a target percentage for how much of each type of feature we excavate, and also all relationships between features so that we can work out the stratigraphy of the site (the chronological order that things happened).

I then provide guidance and advice to the guys and girls digging, adjusting methods and strategies as necessary. The features are then recorded by the excavator: everything gets a drawn section, a drawn plan and a colour photograph, as well as a context sheet which creates a written description. This is the recorded archive, which I will ideally check daily to make sure it all makes sense and is correct.

Fabian in his natural habitat (complete with wellies, mud and survey kit!)

Once a site has been finished, the archive is essentially the only record that is left of the site, so when it gets to the office we need to make sure it is handled correctly. This involves downloading photographs and survey data, logging finds and scanning drawings onto the computer. Once everything is in order we can write a report, although this does not always happen immediately after a site is finished as it depends on the requirements of the project. A report has several components, including selected photographs and drawings, specialist reports of the finds recovered, and the historical background of the site. The bulk of the report consists of a written summary of what was found – this can be anything from a few paragraphs for very small sites to over 300 pages for some of the really big sites!

At the end of the day though, it’s time to go home and watch a bit of Gardener’s World…

Getting cross in East Yorkshire

By Chris Clay, Director

Even after all these years in the job, every now and then you have the pleasant surprise of learning something new.

Recently I was writing a specification for a geophysical survey in East Yorkshire, just outside Beverley, and came across an HER entry for ‘site of a medieval cross’. Not that unusual you may think, but this is sat by the roadside, all on its own on the edge of an agricultural field outside the town.

The site of one of the sanctuary crosses outside Beverley

So, doing a bit more investigation, I found out that this a medieval ‘sanctuary cross’. Still none the wiser, I carried on my investigations.

Most people are familiar with the concept of sanctuary, a place of refuge offered by the church ‘no questions asked’, to someone who may have come to the attention of the local authorities, and popularised by the story of Quasimodo seeking sanctuary for Esmerelda in Notre Dame.

However, in almost all cases, the area of sanctuary is restricted to a cathedral, a church or its precinct. Beverley however, is in the most unusual circumstance of being able to offer this protection to anybody who sought sanctuary throughout the entire town.

*Quasimodo seeks sanctuary for Esmerelda in Notre Dame*

This unusual position was reportedly bestowed upon the town as a result of the benefaction of King Athelstan. A legend that surfaced in the 12^th century has it that he visited the town in 934 to pay his respects to the tomb of the 8^th century Bishop John of York. Athelstan is said to have attributed his victory over the Scots at the Battle of Brunanburh in 937 to Bishop John (later St. John of Beverley), and showered gifts upon the town and its minster, including the creation of a sanctuary extending for a mile around John’s tomb. Documentary references mention a total of five crosses, sited on the main roads out of Beverley, of which three now survive.

The developing cult of St. John brought pilgrims from all over the country, with the benefits of trade that this also brought turning Beverley into a prosperous market town. This allowed it to avoid much of the ill effects of the ‘harrying of the north’ after the Norman Conquest, and absolving the town of many other duties such as some forms of taxation, military service and attendance at court. St. John was later associated with numerous military victories, including Agincourt, and it was tradition that when the king requested militia from the shire of York, Beverley would send one man with the banner of St. John.

So, the cult of St. John brought many benefits to the town, but what was the effect of the grant of sanctuary across the whole town? Some records survive from the late 15^th century, recording that 132 men and women sought sanctuary between 1478 and 1499, mostly from surrounding counties, but with a handful from further afield. Of these, around 100 were accused of murder, and 20 fleeing debt. Men were often recruited to join the army; in 1303 Edward I pardoned ten men from Beverley who were accused of murder on condition that they join his army.

Sanctuary was supposed to last for only 30 days, while the church sought a pardon, but many settled for longer and became citizens of the town. However in 1460 a decree was passed that sanctuary men could not become burgesses of the town.

Sanctuary became less and less popular in the later Middle Ages, as the system was abused by criminal gangs repeatedly committing crimes and then returning to the safety of the church. It was also seen as a symbol of the power of the church and was further impacted by the Dissolution of the monasteries under Henry VIII. Gradually the number of crimes for which sanctuary could be sought declined, and by 1624 the practice was entirely abolished.

References

https://walkington-life.co.uk/home/the-walkington-sanctuary-stone/
https://irlsey.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/sanctuary-crosses-beverley-east-yorkshire/
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/yorks/east/vol6/pp2-11

A Day in the Life of…. Rob Evershed (Senior Project Officer, Geophysics)

I’ve now been with Allen Archaeology for 8 years and 7 months, and have managed in that time to drag myself kicking and screaming up to the exalted heights of Senior Project Officer (mostly in charge of geophysics, but also other stuff too). I can normally be found in one of two places, either chained to my desk writing up reports or helping other people with GIS issues (along with Charlotte and Mia), or out in the world on geophysics missions (or sometimes, very rarely, actually digging). I’ve found the higher up the totem pole I get, the more time I have to spend in the office. This is all well and good when it rains, or during the winter, but can occasionally be a little disheartening when the weather is nice and I’m hearing about exciting sites others are currently on.

Here I am clearly providing wise words of informative encouragement

The location for such adventures can be as far afield as Suffolk, Staffordshire, Yorkshire or even into Wales. Have magnetometer can travel.

So with a trusty minion in tow, (occasionally we require more than one team for larger jobs – I try to not let the power get to my head) I head out to the required area. I’ve worked on a large number of geophysical projects over the last 7 or 8 years, from tiny areas of less than a hectare to mammoth cable route jobs- surveying a 60m wide area for a length of 50 or 60km. Unsurprisingly during that period I’ve encountered all possible weather conditions, from blizzards to torrential rain, and thick fog to baking hot summer days. The one constant being a steady 1.5 or 1.6m/s walk across a field.

Slightly too much snow proving tricky, properly equipped with snow goggles too

Localised flooding not preventing surveying

The first job when we arrive on site is to set out the grids. Prior to the job commencing, I make sure I’ve set out grids (20m or 30m) on the computer, and we use the GPS to mark out the corner of each grid with bamboo canes- no metal allowed as it affects the readings of the magnetometer. My trusted minion will then start pegging out, we have 20cm long red pegs to go in between the bamboo canes suitably spaced to provide equal transects for me to walk along. In the meantime I’m attempting to balance the magnetometer before I can start surveying.

Balancing the magnetometer is somewhat of an art rather than a science. I need to find a magnetically quiet spot within the field to run the set-up balance program- this zeros the machine’s two probes in the earth’s magnetic field and with each other. However in order to properly locate a magnetically quiet area I need a balanced machine, and to accurately balance the machine I need a magnetically quiet area….

Once a suitable location has been found (in some cases we’ve had to take the machine away from the site to a different location, balance it, and then drive back very carefully to the site taking care not to bump the machine on the way), I run through the set-up program on the machine. This sort of looks like I’m doing a very slow square dance, involving spinning around and rotating the machine at set intervals. This process can take some time, and often I’ll run the set-up program a number of times before I’m happy that the machine is properly balanced, not complaining, and ready to start.

The rest of my time is spent walking up and down the field in either 20 or 30m transects, counting up to 21 or 31 respectively, and trying to keep my pace constant, whilst trying not to trip over and vegetation or crops that happen to get in my way, or fall down any rabbit holes. Keeping a constant pace is very important as it means that any anomalies that are revealed by the survey are displayed in the correct location on the results. We almost always use a zig-zag pattern for surveying, and if I don’t keep my pace constant it can be very clear in the results when linear features end up looking distinctly broken up and not wonderfully linear in nature. Tricky situations involve surveying up and down slopes, or through slightly thicker than optimum vegetation.

Finally, when the area has been surveyed (or the machine has filled up, it holds about 3 hectares of survey data before it needs downloading and deleting), I get to hook the magnetometer up to a laptop, download the data and get my first look at the survey. This is the best part of the day, as I’m seeing results which can reveal archaeological features that can be up to several thousand years old. Or the exact locations of modern services like gas or water pipes- they tend to show up very well.

Weary but buoyed up by happy exercise endorphins I head back to the office to show off all the exciting things I’ve found. If there’s still more to survey then I can look forward to another day walking up and down fields, if the job is complete it’s back to being chained to my desk to write the report up.

Occasionally I get to interact with local wildlife or people, mostly to explain that what I’m doing is a bit like some of the stuff they’ve seen in Time Team.

A curious local inquiring about what I’m doing

Cartography and Cartouches

By Isobel Curwen, Heritage Research Supervisor

As part of our work in the heritage research, we spend some of our time visiting various historical archives up and down the country to look at historical maps and documents covering an array of locations. These maps can vary in date, size and condition and include early tithe and enclosure (sometimes inclosure) maps, to maps produced by the Ordnance Survey.

Whilst looking at these maps we’ve noticed that some of the earlier maps are highly decorative with symbols and illustrations so being the curious sort of people we are we thought we’d delve into what these are and why they’re used.

These decorative emblems are referred to as cartouches and commonly frame map titles and other information about the map itself. Cartouches were first thought to be used on Italian cartography during the 16^th century and originated due to the fact that the colour applied by hand to maps engraved on copper plates obscured the fine lines of the engraver. Therefore, cartouches were introduced to aid the decorative character of the map without detracting from its geographical intricacies (Garfield, 2012; Adams et al, 1975). Often containing cursive handwriting, cartouches can be iconographic, descriptive, and ornate, and have often been observed for their symbolism, social commentary and artistic beauty.

One example we have recently discovered is on the Survey of the County of Kent, engraved and published by Jonathon Andrews, Andrew Dury, and William Herbert in 1768. In this example, the cartouche is very large and shows the Royal Coat of Arms in the centre.

Cartouche from the Survey of the County of Kent, Andrews, Dury and Herbet, 1768

Another cartographer, famous for his heavily stylised maps, is John Speed. Speed’s maps are highly decorative and often include drawings of cherubs, coats of arms, and separate plans of major cities. In this plan of the British Isles, London and Edinburgh are drawn as separate illustrations and the map is adorned with a myriad of decorative detail including some rather ominous looking sea creatures in the English Channel!

The Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland', John Speed, 1611 — ‘The Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland’, John Speed, 1611

In another recent archive trip we also came across this lovely seal on the Dartford Bignores Estate Enclosure, awarded in 1877. Enclosure maps, and their associated Enclosure Awards, were produced as a result of the Parliamentary Enclosure Acts which became common from 1750. Such seals on Enclosure Awards and maps testify to the accuracy and quality of the map, as determined by Enclosure Commissioners.

Dartford Bignores Estate Enclosure Awrd Seal, 1877

As we’ve observed, decorative embellishment was often used on early maps partly to give character to the map but also to provide awareness into the social commentary of the period. They also give us an insight into the mind of the map-maker! As such, some early maps are highly colourful and descriptive, and, although may not be hugely accurate, are certainly works of art in their own right!

Map images used with permission from Kent History and Library Centre

References

Adams, I, H., et al, 1975, Cartouches, Imago Mundi – The International Journal for the History of Cartography, Vol 27: 1

Garfield, S., 2012, Welcome to Amerigo (p. 103-125), In: On the Map – Why the World looks the way it does, London, Profile Books Ltd

Romans, Remembrance and Ritual

By Isobel Curwen, Heritage Research Supervisor (and osteologist on the side)

Warning: images of human remains feature in this post

Last month, we were invited by the International Bomber Command Centre (IBCC) to take part in their ‘Hands on History’ event as part of National Tourism Week. This event saw many attractions within Lincoln (and the UK) open their doors for free!

So on a sunny Saturday morning at the beginning of April I find myself arriving at the IBCC carrying a box containing the remains of a decapitated Roman individual (SK 1026). Luckily I didn’t get too many strange looks…

Wondering why? During 2014 – 2016 Allen Archaeology were involved in the excavation work prior to the IBCC and the memorial Spire being built. Early geophysical investigations had identified several anomalies within the area which were then investigated by a series of excavations in the location of the IBCC building and spire, the car park and the access road off Canwick Hill (Evershed, 2014).

During the course of the archaeological works on the site, the excavations revealed the remains of three Roman pottery kilns, two corn dryers, and 15 Roman burials, dated to the 2^nd to 3^rd centuries. Several possible quarry pits and linear ditches were also found. The final report is forthcoming, and will be published in due course, but preliminary analysis of the results of the archaeological investigations suggest that the site was formerly a self-sufficient Roman settlement complete with corn dryers and ditches marking the boundaries of the settlement. It is thought that the quarry pits were used to mine for limestone, a readily accessible resource which was used to build many parts of Roman Lincoln. The geographical location of the site, on high ground within close proximity to the city was also an important factor.

Interestingly, the graves were found on a variety of alignments and one individual was found with the head and some of the cervical vertebrae between the legs (suggesting they were decapitated), and another individual was found buried prone (face down). Burials of this type are occasionally found in Roman cemeteries and are referred to as ‘deviant’ burials.

So, bearing all this in mind, the event at the IBCC was Roman themed and I took along the individual that had been decapitated as well as plans and photographs of the site during the excavation. I laid out the individual in the way they were found in the grave and got many questions as to why I had put the head by the feet! I secretly enjoyed the look on people’s faces when I told them why…

It was a busy day and we had around 90 people visit. Personally, it was a great experience to be able to explain to people that the IBCC, now a focus for Bomber Command during WWII, was once a Roman settlement. Even more exciting was to be able to be showing an individual that was found beneath the building we were actually standing in!

Many thanks to Cova, Yvonne, Harvey and Chris for their help in the preparation of this exhibition and on the day itself too! Thanks also go to Emily from the IBCC for organising the event and for asking us to be involved.

Evershed, R., 2014, Archaeological Evaluation Report – Geophysical survey by magnetrometry for the proposed Bomber Command Memorial and Interpretation Centre, Canwick Hill, Canwick, Lincolnshire, Allen Archaeology Ltd

Best site hut biscuit with Tash

It’s been an exciting and busy time at AAL and after a short hiatus the blog is now back up and running, starting with a little bit about Tash Brett, Project Archaeologist!

What is your job role?

Project Archaeologist

How long have you worked for Allen Archaeology?

Almost 2 years

How would describe your excavation technique?

If in doubt, wack it out!

How long have you been working in archaeology?

Overall 5 or so years

How did you get into archaeology?

Through Operation Nightingale. I volunteered on their site on Salisbury Plain and have loved it ever since. No one can say their first dig was an Anglo-Saxon burial ground!

What is the best thing about your job?

Seeing all the wonderful finds that come through the office and learning how to differentiate between different types of pottery.

Specialist skills?

I have a couple of years of archiving experience, and I do enjoy that type of work and can do it pretty well, so I would say that might be my main skill in archaeology.

Best site hut biscuit?

Depends on the weather – right now it’s sunny so could happily go for a bourbon!

‘A cooler than average sedimentary rock’

As part of studying for my degree in Conservation at the University of Lincoln I took the opportunity to work on placement at Allen Archaeology. I was keen to work with Allen after my interest in archaeology was sparked during my second year studies at a time where I was working on excavated Anglo-Saxon burial finds. I’ll admit however, like (most) archaeologists I have now met, I was initially exposed to archaeology through watching countless episodes of ‘Time Team’ as a child with my father!

So for six weeks I have been diving into a world of pottery, CBM, human remains, tonnes of mud, and of course plenty of tea and biscuits. The majority of my time has been spent ensuring that the site finds have been sufficiently cleaned along with marking and repackaging them ready for archiving and dispatch onto various museums. One type of find that I have found particularly interesting while working here is flint, which I really enjoyed getting the chance to examine and research further into.

Invasively worked ‘knife’

Flint is a cooler than average sedimentary rock and a form of the mineral quartz. It was an invaluable material through the majority of the prehistoric period. Flint has a unique cryptocrystalline molecular structure which is what makes it so hard and durable, and when this stone is struck, it fractures easily and cleanly into uniform flakes with a very sharp edge, capable of even cutting flesh. It’s definitely a clear winner over other kinds of rock which just break uselessly. Plus, the stone-age folk didn’t want to labour away wasting time and resources crafting a tool out of a softer rock that wouldn’t even be able to last! They realised that flint was tough enough to be used over and over, but was also workable, breaking predictably, allowing skilled, reliable tool making techniques to emerge.

A site of Allen’s in Norfolk yielded many lithic artefacts and tools which I got to inspect, including an ‘end and side scraper’ and an ‘invasively flaked knife’. Flint tools come in numerous variations such as scrapers, knives, arrowheads, piercers, awls, microliths and many more, which were used in all matter of tasks through day to day life.

Upon close examination, both the scraper and knife show signs of reworking in the form of tiny uniform chips along several edges, along with rippling which radiates like shock waves from the original strike point. These features distinguish them from naturally occurring flint and allow us to determine that they were in fact modified by ancient man. The function of a scraper tool was likely for stripping fat from skins in hide working or for working wood, and could have been either held by hand or attached to a handle. Similarly, a knife may have been used for cutting through flesh or simply as a multipurpose tool.

Flint scraper

These finds, which appear to have been manufactured during the late Neolithic, give a fascinating insight into what life in the period was like. Archaeology allows us to reconnect with our past and for me it’s a privilege to handle objects such as these which may have once served as crucial elements of survival. I personally love to speculate about the life and story behind archaeological finds and envision our younger world and its people. It makes it all very real!

This placement has definitely reinforced my passion for the subject, and I and can’t wait to further my knowledge and experiences.

Baku and Bifaces

By Rupert Birtwistle, Project Supervisor

Welcome to my first blog post, which considering I’ve been at the company 4 years now is probably a little overdue. Despite delays, it is now my pleasure to report on my current research trip in Azerbaijan. Over the next three months I will be taking you on a journey across Eastern Europe to the far away mountainous region of the Caucasus, for reasons which I assure you are (mostly) academic.

Rupert in his natural environment

In addition to being a Project Supervisor here at Allen Archaeology Ltd I live a double life as a PhD student at University of Leicester. As part of my PhD program I am turning my attention to Palaeolithic Azerbaijan, specifically the transition from the Lower to Middle Palaeolithic. ‘Why Azerbaijan?’ you may ask, and for that I should thank my old university lecturer Keith Wilkinson, University of Winchester, who taught me that the most important factor in determining a research area is not just the archaeology, but the quality of the local wine. Hence (mostly) academic.

My project is directed towards the transition between the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic and the development of Levallois techniques (prepared core technologies) in the region between 400,000 and 200,000 years ago. To do this I will be analysing material from four previously excavated sites, Azykh cave, Shish-guzey, Gadir-dere and Gayaly, the latter three all being open air sites.

The Caucasus is a mountainous region that stretches from the Black Sea Coast in the east and the Caspian Sea in the west. It was an important migratory corridor for hominins during Palaeolithic times as it offered a link between Africa, Asia, and Europe. The comparative absence of archaeologists working in Azerbaijan has left a large gap in the Palaeolithic record for the region, exacerbated by Azerbaijan being the least mountainous of all the Caucasian countries, which has left it out in the cold as researchers have favoured cave environments, specifically in Armenia. Together with disputes between the neighbouring countries, the Palaeolithic potential of Azerbaijan has never been explored by an international researcher.

The National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan

So at the beginning of August I put away my work clothes and hung up my trowel (for now) to embark on a Palaeolithic journey across Europe to Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, my new home. I was soon into my work at the Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences (pictured above). The assemblages and environment were tricky to get to grips with initially and I had to draw upon all my experience as an archaeologist when after my first visit to the bathroom I was faced with a squat toilet.

Hard at work assessing an assemblage

During August I have focused on analysing material from Shish-guzey (pictured above) and Azykh Layer V. Analysis of both assemblages has characterised the material as Late Acheulean, although I have also been able to identify elements of Levallois technology amongst the cores, tools and flaking habits of the hominins. This is very exciting news indeed. The stone tools from both assemblages are made from various types of volcanic rock, basalt and andesite, with the occasional exotic, non-local material thrown in, flint, chert and obsidian (see images below).

One interesting element is that although the assemblages are Late Acheulean, there appears to be a considerable lack of handaxes, the so-called hallmark of the Acheulean. It seems the hominins had already started to explore the use of prepared core methods as the tools kits evolved to become more reliant on flaked tools, rather than the Palaeolithic ‘Swiss army knife’ approach. Furthermore, and much to my complete surprise, I have discovered evidence that hominins were using bone to fashion tools. This is rare in the Lower Palaeolithic, and is an activity thought to represent behavioural modernity in Homo sapiens. Nonetheless, the evidence here is compelling and will be published during the coming year.

From top to bottom: 3 non-Levallois points, a small biface, Levallois core, and a retouched blade

It’s been busy, hectic at times, and a learning curve to some of the problems of studying or working in a foreign country. I have been attending Russian classes twice a week in the evenings, and have managed to expand my vocabulary by 6 words “where is the real toilet located”?

I must be doing something right as I managed to receive a decent haircut and the first time of asking, although I though 50 minutes for essentially a military short, back and sides was a little excessive, but I pleased I came through unscathed. Thankfully hairdressing technology has evolved somewhat since the Palaeolithic…

Editor’s note: We look forward to seeing the (unfermented) fruits of Rupert’s ongoing research.