Category Archives: Archive

Digital Past Conference Workshop

By Shoned Jones (Project Supervisor)

During this year’s Digital Past Conference in Aberystwyth, we were invited to attend and take part in a workshop discussing the management and archiving of digital datasets. A number of organisations were asked to attend the workshop and give short presentations on how they use digital data.

Along with Allen Archaeology the speakers were from; Archaeology Data Service, The Discovery Programme, DigVentures, Historic England, Wessex Archaeology and the University of Bradford.

Chris Casswell, the head of fieldwork at DigVentures and Li Sou, a PhD student from Bradford hosted the workshop.

While a number of topics, including storage space and metadata were covered, the one most affecting our sector was archiving. In commercial and field archaeology we are required by law to archive the data that we collect for clients as part of the planning process. If you are unfamiliar with this archiving method please follow the link here to our blog explaining archiving.

The main observation was of a blinkered understanding by research groups of the differing archiving requirements commercial units deal with on a daily basis. There is a lack of cohesion with regard to the physical archives and the proposed use of digital archiving with ADS.

Archiving requirements and field methodologies differ from county to county. Field methodologies are usually very similar with differences usually in the kind of cameras used and the specificity of the sampling method (how much we excavate and environmentally sample). However, archive requirements can differ greatly and with technology changing at such a rapid pace and companies working in all different parts of the country it is an issue that is becoming more and more important.

While in the past a small to medium archaeology companies may only work in one county and only deposit in one archive, the nature of commercial archaeology now enables companies to work all over the country. This is a wonderful opportunity for a company and for archaeologists to encounter all sorts of archaeology in their career without having to work the ‘archaeological circuit’ (working on temporary contracts from company to company). However, it does make the work of our post-excavation archiving teams difficult.

These differences are down to a number of reasons. Funding is foremost in this and it is not an easy fix. The issues that other groups brought in also include differences in storage requirements and having appropriate systems to store and process the metadata. These are also not easy fixes and require much collaboration between many different groups, including commercial archaeology units. This conference was one of the first to begin the conversation and in bringing together people from all sectors of archaeology I am optimistic that we will develop something that is more suited to both research groups and commercial companies.

3D image created by Shoned of a medieval ankle-boot found in Lincoln

P.S Some of the terms used in this blog are quite industry heavy, here for your perusal is a Glossary to give you a hand.

Archiving:

All of the information that we acquire on an archaeological site, context sheets, photographs, the final report and finds are all deposited within the local archive for the area of that site. In order for that data to be compatible with other data that other companies and research groups deposit, it must be submitted to conform with specific requirements which can be unique to each archive, .i.e. photograph formats (TIFF or JPEG), report formatted as pdf.

Digital vs Physical Archiving:

Physical archives are the finds themselves (pottery, animal bone etc) and the paper documents that were created on site, such as the context sheets, printed photographs (in the case of film photographs, slides and negatives), printed copies of the report and such.

Digital archiving are the photographs as digital media (JPEG, TIFF) archived using ADS (Archaeological Data Service), by uploading the files to a digital archive. This can include digital versions of the report, 3D models, GIS projects, CAD drawings, Geophysical data etc. I could go on and on.

Metadata: data that describes and gives information about other data e.g. a photograph that contains information regarding the date and time it was taken.

Find of the Month, March – Soda Water Torpedo Bottle

By Cova Escandon (Project Supervisor Archives)

The find of the month for March is a Lee and Green Ltd. torpedo bottle. It is made of plain glass and you can read on its body ‘Sleaford’ and ‘Spalding’.

Lee and Green Ltd. Torpedo Bottle

Arthur Green and Ranyard Lee opened an aerated water bottling factory in Spalding in 1885. The factory was located on Albion St. and built by John Richard Carter in 1824. It was sold in 1846 to Henry Bugg the Younger and William Henry Bugg. A few years later, the premises were used temporarily as a guano store, before being sold to Lee and Green. They also had factories in Sleaford, Bourne, Boston and Skegness.

The first ‘torpedo bottles’ appeared at the end of the 18^th Century as a solution to the problem of containing gas in glass bottles. At this time, glass bottles were not strong enough to contain the gas so they would often explode. Glass capable to contain the gas was very expensive, so it was reserved for luxurious liquids such as champagne. Cheaper drinks like ginger beer were contained in stoneware bottles. The torpedo shape would stop any air leaking as it prevented the bottle from being stood up, keeping the cork moist as a result of being in contact with the soda, so it wouldn’t shrink (something still done today with other drinks such as wine). Pouring the drink would also be easier and it would be better adapted for packing carriage. It did present advantages for the merchant and the consumer too as the consumer would have to finish the drink before putting down the bottle! The bottles were also easy to transport via boat on flat shelves with holes on them so they wouldn’t fall over when the ship moved.

1914 marks the end of the torpedo bottle era. They are no longer necessary as they are replaced by Malenstrone’s 1901 patent that allows normal shaped bottles to contain gas.

‘The Story of Lee and Green’ Exhibition is currently on display at Sleaford Museum.

The Story of Lee & Green

International Women’s Day 2018

This year for International Women’s Day we’ve been thinking about how women are represented in the archaeological record. The archaeology of gender has become a large part of our interpretation, where previously women’s lives were overlooked by antiquarians in favour of kings and emperors, work has been done to readdress this imbalance. We’ve picked three of our most interesting examples for discussion.

Recently excavated head pot, ‘Marion’

Neither face pots nor head pots are especially common, but have been found distributed widely across Britain including around 50 examples from York, a famous example of which depicts the Empress Julia Domna (York Museums Trust n.d). Head pots appear to be almost exclusively found in Roman Britain and North Africa, and are generally made of finer fabric than face pots (Braithwaite 2011). While researching this piece it seemed like a majority appear to be depictions of women. Our example, Marion, was found in Bourne, Lincolnshire. We chose the nickname Marion as we thought the frills around her face looked like a medieval headdress.

Saxon chatelaine

Chatelaines (sometimes referred to as chatelaine chains) were a popular item of women’s dress from around the 7^th century in Anglo-Saxon England, and are sometimes found in the burials of female individuals (Owen-Crocker 2004). The chatelaine itself was attached to a belt worn at the waist, with smaller objects hung from it and thought to be worn by the female head of the household, indicating a level of status. Common items carried during the period included functional items like keys and personal hygiene (metal picks, small spoons intended for the cleaning out of one’s ears, etc) (ibid). Later, Viking women’s fashion dictated one’s personal items were often hung from brooches which are themselves commonly (but not exclusively) associated with the burial of women (ibid).

The misidentifying of an individual’s gender in archaeology based on materials remains isn’t uncommon, prominent examples include the ‘Red Lady of Paviland’, identified as Roman female in 1823 due to the presence of ivory and rings (assumed to be female items) but later revealed to actually be a man from the Upper Palaeolithic period, and the Skaill boat burial in Orkney, which was assumed to be male based on the presence of finds believed to be associated with warriors (a sword, an axe, a spear etc.), but was later identified as female (Hedenstirna-Jonson et al 2017). The example in Orkney was still presumed to be a man even after osteological analysis in the 1970s identified the individual as a woman (Laskow 2017)!

19th century ribbon from the grave of a female adult

During excavations in a 19^th century burial ground a fashionable silk gauze ribbon with self-woven stripes was found in the burial of an adult female. Several other examples of fashion ribbons were also found, personal touches allowing those interred to retain elements of their identity after burial.

You can also find our previous blog posts for International Women’s Day here:

2017: https://www.allenarchaeology.co.uk/christina-colyer-lincolns-trowel-blazer/

2016: https://www.allenarchaeology.co.uk/international-womens-day/

References:

Braithwaite, G., 1984, Romano-British Face Pots and Head Pots, Britannia, 15, 99–131, accessed online 08.03.2018: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/britannia/article/romanobritish-face-pots-and-head-pots/0D323526CEF3BF9A4A7A500BABB1AC9D

Hedenstierna-Jonson C, Kjellström A, Zachrisson T, et al. A female Viking warrior confirmed by genomics. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2017;164:853–860, accessed online 08.03.2018: https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.23308

Laskow, S., 2017, Found: Evidence That a Lavish Burial Honored a Viking Warrior Woman, accessed online 08.03.2018: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/viking-warrior-woman-burial-birka

Owen-Crocker, G.R., 2004, Dress in Anglo-Saxon England, 2^nd ed, Woodbridge: Boydell Press

York Museums Trust, n.d., accessed online 08.03.2018: http://www.historyofyork.org.uk/themes/roman/roman-head-pot

Find of the month March – a selection of finds chosen by our work experience student, Matt.

By Matt and Yvonne Rose (Archive Project Supervisor)

For February, just for a change, there’s a slight twist to “Find of the Month”. For the past three Thursdays the finds and archiving team has been joined by work experience student Matt. He’s been busy washing the usual assortment of pottery, tile and animal bone, so to make the days more interesting we’ve shown him an array of the more exciting finds from past excavations. We asked him to choose two of his favourite finds, along with a few other questions, so that we could find out a bit more about Matt and his interests. Here are the results:

How long have you been interested in archaeology?

Since I was around 7 years of age (10 years ago).

How did you become interested in archaeology?

I became interested in history by watching Time Team on the TV in my own time. It encouraged me to go outside and try it for myself. Ever since I started finding actual finds of importance I enjoyed it more and more, up to this day. Now I wish to continue further with a regular job in either archaeology or palaeontology.

What is your favourite period in history?

Probably Roman.

Which finds have you liked the most, and why?

The Roman face pot (nicknamed Marion) because it is a very nice pot from my favourite period in history. I would also like to do some research on it at some point in the future.

I like the Palaeolithic flint blade due to the fact that it is very old (around 10 000 years). I also like to think about the many different ways it could have been used. I love the history behind it.

Palaeolithic flint blade

The Roman face pot (Marion)

What would you like to find in the future?

A hoard of Roman coins or something gold!

We wish Matt well in his remaining weeks with us and hope he finds that gold one day!

Find of the Month December: Clay Pipe Bowl

Decorated clay pipe bowl

By Cova Escandon, Finds Supervisor

On 27^th of July 1586, Sir Walter Raleigh brought back three unknown weeds from one of his trips to the New World. They were the plants of potato, maize and tobacco.

Although tobacco was most likely to have been known in England before this date through Spanish and Portuguese sailors, Raleigh was the first person to introduce smoking as a fashionable habit in the court of Elizabeth I. Imagine the first time these courtesans saw smoke coming out of someone’s nose and mouth! It is said that one of Raleigh’s servants threw water on him thinking he was on fire. Smoking soon became very popular, and it was even thought to be beneficial to health. It was highly recommended to heal conditions such as worms, halitosis and toothache. Even during the Great Plague (1665) it was thought to clean the air, so schoolboys at Eton College would smoke a pipe at breakfast. But at the beginning of the 17^th Century some voices started speaking against its use. One of them was King James I who wrote a famous text called ‘Counterblast to Tobacco’ where he condemned the use of the aforesaid plant. He also destroyed the crops existing in England and taxed severely the import from America. Despite this, the use of tobacco continued to grow until the 1930s. It was around this time that clay pipe use declined due to competition from cigarettes.

The pipe bowl that we bring to you today was found in Lincoln and made at the Watkinson Clay Pipe Factory in Market Rasen. This factory was founded in 1843 by George Spencer Watkinson and it was very successful until 1893 when wooden pipes started being more popular. Watkinson’s son, George Spencer Watkinson Junior, wrote a journal of his memories of the factory and drew sketches describing the process of making clay pipes. This source of information is priceless as not much is known about this type of factory.

Back in those days, each factory would produce their own designs incorporating the name of the manufacturer or place of production. Our pipe bowl is beautifully decorated with a trophy, possibly related to horse racing, and what appears to be thistles and roses in a laurel crown. On the rim of the bowl you can read MARKET RASEN. Interestingly, we know that the Watkinson Factory often used another design showing a chained slave on one side and the personification of Liberty on the other. This antislavery decoration is highly unusual in the tobacco industry, given its close relationship and dependence on the slavery system.

As you can see in the photograph, the stem of the pipe is missing. We actually often find them with short stems, or none at all, and one reason is that in the second half of the 19^th Century, pubs would provide pipes for their clients to smoke: the customer would break the end of the stem, fill the bowl with tobacco and smoke, returning it to the landlord once he had finished. The next client would break the stem and start again. This artefact not only is a beautiful piece of art, it is also a little window into our past.

Find of the month October – a Roman buckle

Roman buckle

By Yvonne Rose, Archives Supervisor with Mike Wood, Project Manager and Finds Specialist

Our find of the month for October is a rather nice example of a Roman buckle. This type of triangular-shaped buckle dates to the second half of the 4^th century and is found at predominantly military sites in Britain. Indeed, ours was found in Lincoln, just outside the east wall of the Roman city. In this period of history, buckles are still a relatively rare find, much less common than brooches.

The buckle was discovered together with other artefacts in the grave of an adult male. The other associated objects include a crossbow brooch, a small silver mount, a fragment of decorated copper strip which could be part of another brooch, the broken plate of a further buckle, as well as 10 iron nails which may indicate the presence of a coffin. All of these objects are typical of the burials of males from positions of authority in the late Roman Empire.

Buckles with triangular plates are known from both the late Roman and early Anglo-Saxon periods. Roman ones usually have openwork plates with D-shaped or, as with ours, kidney-shaped frames; whereas the Saxon ones tend more towards oval frames and solid plates.

The buckle is made from cast copper alloy and measures 50mm in length. The pin is present, as are three copper alloy rivets, one in each corner of the plate. From the junction with the frame, the arms of the plate extend to meet at a cleft terminal lobe with a pointed projection either side. The heart-shaped aperture of this buckle is particularly attractive.

German archaeologist H. W. Böhme studied buckles with integral triangular plates as part of his survey of late Roman artefacts in Britain, and the settlement of England by the earliest Anglo-Saxons (Böhme 1986, Liste 1, Abb. 5, Abb. 14). He dated them to the middle or second half of the 4th century and his map shows that they are found in small numbers not only in the British Isles but also along the European frontier of the Roman Empire, along the Rhine and Danube rivers.

Böhme, H W, 1986, Das Ende der Römerherrschaft in Britannien und die Angelsächische Besiedlung Englands im 5. Jahrhundert, Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 33 pt. 2

Find of the month: September – a Roman bangle

Roman glass bangle

Yvonne Rose, Archives Supervisor and Mike Wood, Project Manager and Finds Specialist

Our find of the month for September is this spectacular fragment of glass bangle, found in the rather unremarkable setting of a ditch fill in North Lincolnshire.

This is a Kilbride Type 2, named after H. E. Kilbride-Jones who, in 1938, created a detailed typology of early Roman glass bangles. The Type 2 bangles are characterised by having from one to three narrow, twisted cables, generally blue and white, fused lengthwise onto a translucent core, most commonly ice-green or blue, but occasionally colourless. They are usually D-shaped or triangular in section. If it had been complete, our bangle would have had an internal diameter of approximately 60mm.

Bangles of all materials are most common in Britain during the 4th century. The major exception to this are the coloured glass bangles which, by contrast, appear to have been at the height of fashion in the earlier centuries of Roman occupation in Britain. Despite their relatively short lifespan, there are many examples of this type of bangle in the north of England, and even Scotland. Recent work has indicated that this type has been found on several sites north of the Humber in the former Parisi territory. It has been suggested that they may have been manufactured in Roman forts, using raw materials brought over from the continent, and this would explain the spread northwards.

There has been some debate about what precisely these glass rings were used for, and whether all of them were worn as arm or leg ornaments. It has been suggested that some of the broken fragments appear to have had a value as amulets of some sort, with an example found deposited with a cache of stones, fossils and other coloured glass objects in an empty burial cist in a prehistoric cairn at Cairnhill, Aberdeenshire. However, the most commonly accepted theory is that they were used as anklets, armlets, bracelets or possibly even for tying up hair.

Find of the month: August – a prehistoric bead

The shale bead

Yvonne Rose, Archives Supervisor

In 2015 we excavated a very wet site close to the Brayford Pool in Lincoln. One of the finds, which is due to head off to the museum very soon, is this lovely example of a shale bead. It was found during analysis of the samples which was a lucky catch!

The bead has broken down the middle, probably along a natural stress line. Shale is a type of sedimentary rock which is made up of layers and layers of compressed clay and other minerals such as quartz, and as a consequence it can easily laminate along these layers. XRF (X-ray fluorescence) was used to determine the material, as jet and shale can look quite similar. XRF uses X-rays to work out the elemental breakdown of the item; different elements react differently to x-rays and by seeing how the x-rays react, technicians can work out the elemental make up of an object.

The bead is a roughly oval shape with a hole in the centre which has most definitely been drilled. The shape of the hole suggests that it was drilled from both sides rather than straight through from one side. This bead would mostly likely have been one of many on a necklace or other form of strung jewellery. The bead itself doesn’t show any sign of hard wearing suggesting that it was a fairly new bead or necklace, or that it was only worn for special occasions.

This bead was quite difficult to date from its shape alone. Artefacts manufactured from materials such as shale, with its propensity to laminate especially as it dries out, tend not to survive the centuries. This results in an incomplete archaeological record of all the styles and construction methods used throughout the Neolithic and Bronze Age eras, meaning accurate comparison for dating purposes is not always possible. The closest beads in appearance to ours are from a shale and amber necklace from Balmashanner, Angus in eastern Scotland which date from around 800 BC. As you can see from the picture, there are broad similarities to our bead but it’s not quite the same style. From this comparison we can assign a broad date range for our bead to around 1000‒800 BC.

We can have a lovely specimen of a shale bead but without an extensive record collection to compare it, we can only guess to at its age. So keep digging and finding lots more shiny beads!

Find of the month: July – worked bone from Cambridgeshire

Lucie Evans, Branston Academy

Our find of the month for June is a collection of carved animal bones engraved with a ring and dot decoration. They were found on farm land located in South Cambridgeshire. The bones in question were found in the fill of an oven which has been dated to the Iron Age. It appears that a pit was later dug into the centre of the oven and objects discarded into it. The pit contained layers of silty and organic deposits and the four pieces of worked bone were found along two metal objects. The appearance of ridge and furrow cropmarks and an Iron Age enclosure ditch suggest an agricultural community having occupied this area.

Worked animal bone

There has been a bit of a debate within the office as to what the worked bones would have been used for. Whilst three look as if they were just used to practice the design of dot and ring on, one of them has has been shaped with a rounded end. They are all made of animal bone, not antler (which seems to be the preferred choice of the time). Three were crafted from long bone while the rounded end piece is made of metapodial (long bones found in the hands and feet of mammals which connect the digits to the centres).

One suggestion of what they may have been turned into is a comb beater which would have been used to push down ‘weft threads’ when weaving.

The ring and dot pattern can be found on objects from pottery to bone; it is used nationwide and across the centuries. The ring and dot pattern would have been created with an Iron Age compass tool, which helped to create the perfect circles. This simple design would has been described as ‘folk art’ as it would have been simply used to make the piece more interesting.

I find these pieces really interesting as to me it shows the gradual skill learning and perfecting taking place, and although it is most probably down to my imagination I see these as the slow progression of an ‘individual’ in their craftsmanship.