Category Archives: Project Archaeologists

Allen Archaeology Abroad

By Alice Beasley, Project Archaeologist

For the past 8 years I have been travelling to the island of Rousay, Orkney to participate in an excavation on a multiphase site at the Knowe of Swandro run by the University of Bradford in collaboration with the William Patterson University and the City University of New York as a student training excavation. Thanks to the powers that be here at Allen archaeology my time in Orkney continued out of university and into my professional career. The site consists of a Neolithic burial chamber surrounded by Iron age, Pictish and Viking settlement.

The site is constantly under threat from coastal erosion and, despite covering the excavation with nearly 40 tonnes of stone every year, damage is being done. This summer I had the pleasure of working near the chambered tomb attempting to record and remove the rubble built up against it in the Iron Age. We have a lot of evidence that the tomb has been altered during this period ( https://www.swandro.co.uk/dig-diary/dig-diary-saturday-21st-july-photo-clean-frenzy) when a large round house was built right on the top of the mound probably recycling stone from the tomb itself.

After finding a new wall on day 1 I carefully excavated a collapsed roof above layers of rubble riddled with voids and pottery all built up to support a rather crudely made wall that was probably part of a cell like structure tacked onto the outside of the tomb. Nothing on this site is simple which is one reason why I like it so much, walls appear then disappear into other buildings, and are refaced many years later, some buildings have been dug out and smaller ones built within, and others have been completely backfilled and built on top of. All this information adds up to give a very complete history of the site. I get to spend all day working on a beach with amazing views and the infamous changeable Orkney weather, which this year has been very kind to us.

Part of the wall structure

It would be very remiss of me not to mention the Pictish smithy, a fantastic partially subterranean building, home to a copperworking smith using Viking technology for the alloys and leaving his (or her) sooty handprints on the stone anvil. Almost every day amazing artefacts are found be it a painted pebble, worked antler or an almost complete pot. I would highly recommend visiting the website set up by the Swandro – Orkney coastal archaeology trust website www.swandro.co.uk for more in depth information including a dig diary!

The very exciting Pictish smithy!

Weekly Round-up

Following on from yesterday’s ‘Ask and Archaeologist’ day we thought we’d do a little office round up to give you an insight into what our staff have been working on this week!

Our Finds and Archive Department have been busy this week preparing finds for archive deposition and preparing material to go off to the relevant specialists. We have also had a number of volunteers come to work with us from the University of Lincoln over the past month and this week we welcomed Roksana and Louise who have been washing various finds from some of our recent sites and marking the pottery ready for archive deposition.

Roksana and Louise marking some pottery from a recent site

The head of our geophysics team, Rob, has been doing some digitisation for a large linear infrastructure site in Lincolnshire as well as doing a watching brief in a small village just outside Lincoln. Mia, one of our Project Supervisors, has been busy working on some building recording reports for a range of sites in Lancashire and Cambridgeshire.

Rob of our Geophysics team looking very studious!

The Heritage Research Team (affectionately known as Heritage HQ) have been working on a variety of desk-based assessments for sites in Nottinghamshire, Cambridgeshire, and Lancashire. Heritage team member Harvey has been out visiting sites in Cambridgeshire and Nottinghamshire and has discovered some interesting cropmarks just outside of the Cambridgeshire Archives at Shire Hall which relate to the site of the old county prison. He thought it might have been a Roman building associated with a known Roman settlement to the north. Better luck with your interpretation next time Harvey, it happens to the best of us! Thanks to the effect of the hot weather on the ground, a lot of cropmarks have now become clearly visible across the UK.

Possible cropmarks visible outside of the Cambridgeshire Archives

And of course, our field teams have been busy across the country! With sites in Lincolnshire, Leicestershire, Suffolk, and Cambridgeshire (amongst others!) our field archaeologists have been working hard to excavate and record an array of archaeological features. We’ve also had some great finds from our sites this week, including some complete Roman vessels from a site in Lincolnshire!

Our field team having fun on site in Leicestershire

So it has been a busy week for us all here at Allen Archaeology and with the food festival coming to Lincoln this weekend I’m sure a few of our staff will be visiting!

Why do we examine pottery?

By Alice Beasley, Project Archaeologist

Pottery is one of the most frequently found artefacts and it is used to determine the date, status and use of a site. Today I have chosen to write about 3 ceramic vessels found within graves from a site to the south of Lincoln to illustrate how artefacts both clarify and confuse the process of determining date. The excavated part of the cemetery consisted of 23 individuals buried in a variety of directions and positions but in rough rows expected of a cemetery. Other features uncovered included pits, ditches and pottery kilns dating from the 2^nd century AD and a large quarry pit with 4^th century AD finds. These vessels were the only ceramic grave goods and will be used to date the burials more accurately than the stratigraphy would allow because most of the graves are discrete features – they do not cut into nor are they disturbed by other features on site.

Pottery vessels found in graves from a site to the south of Lincoln

The first vessel has been painted with a cream slip in a double zig zag over a dark brown colour coat. It is a pear-shaped beaker very similar to vessels produced in the Nene Valley in the 4th century. Interestingly this pot has no rim. “Ritual killing” of vessels is when a pot is broken or pierced in such a way that its original function is removed. Beakers are presumed to be drinking vessels so by removing the rim it’s function has been taken away. The break is very jagged and fresh suggesting that it occurred around the time of burial.

The second vessel is also a colour coated beaker, again produced in the 4^th century. It is known as a slit folded beaker, about half of this vessel is missing and there are no signs of the purposeful damage seen on the first vessel as the breaks show signs of wear. Another example of this type of pot was found in Lincoln in a rubbish dump at The Park (Darling 1988, fig 39, 437).

These two vessels would lead us to believe the burials are of a 4^th century date, which stratigraphically makes sense assuming that all the bodies were buried within a short period of time as a small number of them cut into earlier ditches.

The third vessel is a complete carinated bowl in a local greyware fabric. This type of vessel is fairly common in Lincoln during the mid to late 2^nd century. Affectionately named the B334 this vessel is known to have been produced in Roxby, Newton-on-Trent and Market Rasen and presumably other locations that are yet to be identified (Darling et al. 2014, 136). The beakers suggest the graves are much later than the rest of the activity on site but the bowl suggests a contemporary date. Was the pot buried soon after it had been used? Has it been kept for over 100 years to later be buried with someone? Is this an earlier grave associated with the other features on site? The pot has been used, there is some damage to the rim that has been worn smooth over time so it is possible it was an heirloom, especially as the grave cut aligns with the rest in the row which would suggest it was of a similar date to the other two graves.

The production dates of these pots will be used in conjunction with the archaeological and osteological (skeleton) information, so the final interpretation is not reliant on these three vessels alone, but understanding them it goes a long way to help us tell their story.

References:

Darling, M J, 1988, The pottery in Darling, M J and Jones M J (ed), 9-37; 46-50

Darling M J and Precious B, 2014, A corpus of roman pottery from Lincoln, Lincoln archaeological studies 6, Oxford: Oxbow

Jones, M J (ed.), 1999, The defences of the lower city, excavations at the Park and West Parade 1970-2 and a discussion of other sites excavated up to 1994, The Archaeology of Lincoln, 7-2, York: CBA res rep, 114

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.

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

Pineapples and Pteridomania!

By Dominika Czop, Project Archaeologist

Last week I was sent on an archaeological adventure in beautiful Shropshire. I accompanied our new Senior Project Officer, Craig. Our task was to investigate what is hidden under the ground next to the walled garden in Weston Park. We discovered foundations of a pinery-vinery!

I hope everyone likes pineapples because pinery-vinery was a greenhouse for pineapples. Pineapples were first grown in the Netherlands, and British gardeners learnt the art of growing this exotic fruit from the Dutch. Therefore it comes as no surprise that the first British grown pineapples were cultivated by a Dutch gardener, Henry Telende, who worked in Sir Matthew Decker’s Pembroke Villa in Richmond. As a fruit that is very expensive and difficult to grow in northern climates, pineapple, like other exotic plants, became a symbol of wealth and status. Unlike today when we can buy one at any time, only two hundred years ago people rented pineapples to show off to their guest or even send them to the king or queen as a royal gift!

The majestic pineapple, once available for hire

Unlike citrus fruit, which could be grown in orangeries, pineapples require constant heat as they grow all year round. Since the 17^th century heated greenhouses were used in Britain. Hot air flues inside cavity walls allowed heating of entire length of the garden wall. Furnaces that provided the heat for the walls can be seen along the southern wall of the Walled Garden in Weston Park. Unfortunately furnaces required constant attention – they had to be supplied with fuel, produced soot, which could block the hot air flues and created danger of fire. Fumes from the furnaces also damaged or killed the plants in greenhouses. Different techniques of growing pineapples and providing heat inside of the greenhouses developed during the 18^th and 19^th century. First pineapples were grown in tan pits and then moved to heated hothouses to mature. James Justice described his success in growing pineapples in 1728 at his estate in Crichton, Scotland. He combined tanners’ pits and greenhouse into one stage of growing and maturing pineapples. The pineapple pots were placed in a pit filled with layers of pebbles, manure and tanners’ bark, which provided a source of stable heat for few months.

Pinery-vinery wall

The use of pinery-vinery was proposed by Thomas Hitt in 1757. It had a dual function of growing pineapples and grapes. Pineapples were grown in a greenhouse on the south side of the heated wall and grapes grew on the north side inside of the walled garden. Unfortunately growing pineapples and grapes together required a lot of effort and was very expensive, therefore it was later abandoned. Presence of arches in the lower part of the pinery wall in Weston Park indicates that the vines were planted there and they could grow inside of the greenhouse as well as the other side of the heated wall. This early 19^th century invention also allowed greater space for the roots of the vine. Nails inserted between the bricks allowed the vines to spread across the whole surface of the wall.

Greenhouses became more popular in Britain after the invention of the Wardian case in 1829 and abolition of the glass tax in 1845.This new development led to the fern craze (Pteridomania!) in Britain. Availability of cheap glass and invention of well sealed greenhouses allowed growing of tropical plants on a larger scale, even in the fumes filled London. Despite the popularity of the heated greenhouses and success of the pineapple growing, this type of horticulture was abandoned with the arrival of imported exotic fruit.

Today anyone interested in past horticulture and pineries can visit the Lost Gardens of Heligan and Tatton Park or the Pineapple Summerhouse at Dunmore. There are also other places which still have standing structures associated with pineapple growing, and perhaps in future they will be restored to bring crops of British grown pineapples!

Best site hut biscuit with Faith

How long have you worked for Allen Archaeology?

I have been working for the company as a PA for almost a month after completing my 3 month Traineeship through ‘Allen’.

How would describe your excavation technique?

After being given a feature to excavate, I like to ponder at the rather often ambiguous impressions on the ground (if there are any!) to establish a starting point. Or ‘Edge’ as a finicky Archaeologist would like to call it. I then use my trusty trowel and spade to scrape and dig away the mud that is almost identical, but not identical to, the mud surrounding it. Aka the ‘Fill’ and the ‘Cut’. During the time of excavation, I will sometimes over-analyse the hole I’m digging which helps me think about the bigger picture. It’s amazing how much the history and the apparent irony of a muddy hole can teach you!

How long have you been working in archaeology?

4-6 months

How did you get into archaeology?

I wouldn’t leave

What is the best thing about your job?

The awareness that people before you stood where you stand and lived their lives in the same world that would be totally unfamiliar to us.

Specialist skills?

Hawk-eye

Best site hut biscuit?

Caramelised Biscuits

Best site hut biscuit with Harvey

What is your job role?

Project Archaeologist working in the Heritage Department. I do desk-based assessments, occasional building surveys, and general GIS work for illustration.

How long have you worked for Allen Archaeology?

About five months at the time of writing.

How would you describe your excavation technique?

Messy unfortunately. I’m better at keeping my desk neat than I am at cleaning up section edges…and my desk isn’t exactly tidy…

How long have you been working in archaeology?

On and off since 2015, starting from the end of my second year of university.

How did you get into archaeology?

I stumbled into it really, and found it a good fit. I was working in a bookshop on the high street looking for something better to do, so on a whim I looked into Hull University and chose archaeology. While I was there I found my way into research projects and volunteering on digs and in museums, then after that I ended up working in geophysics with little bits of excavation here and there on evaluation jobs. It was a really fast trajectory, especially given I didn’t do history or anything similar at GCSE or A-level. Everyone I’ve met in archaeology has been very encouraging, which helps. It’s a very friendly profession.

Archaeology in its natural environment

What is the best thing about your job?

It can push you towards being a bit of a generalist I think, at least it has done in my experience, so it’s a really good excuse to keep buying more and more books (‘I need them for work!’). Being able to keep reading up and applying that knowledge immediately is one of the most rewarding things about archaeology. I like going out on site visits too, there’s nothing like seeing archaeology in its natural environment!

Specialist skills?

Asking questions that lead to more questions rather than answers…so maybe research skills?

Best site hut biscuit?

Fruit shortcake! The little round flowery shaped ones with sugar on top, lovely with a cup of tea. Plus because they’re small you can eat quite a few at once.

Best site hut biscuit with Nicky

What is your job role?
Senior Project Archaeologist

How long have you worked for Allen Archaeology?
I have worked for AAL since September 2015 with a quick travelling break to New Zealand in the middle. Although I did have a coffee and cake with a Historian out there so I’m going to call it a ‘research break’…

How would describe your excavation technique?
One cut. One fill.

One cut, one fill

How long have you been working in archaeology?
Since September 2014

How did you get into archaeology?
I wrote a list of ideal jobs when I was about 8 with Archaeologist appearing second on the list after marine biologist but I don’t like boats so here I am!

What is the best thing about your job?
I love working outdoors, having in depth site discussions about why anyone would want to dig so many holes (pot calling kettle black me thinks), the copious amount of biscuits, finding really shiny things, finding not so shiny things, the list could go on!

Specialist skills?
Onsite recycling enforcer

Best site hut biscuit?
The mighty Hob nob! ‘Hobnob’ also incidentally was used in the early 19th century to mean ‘to socialise’ – something all archaeologists like to indulge in, if not with hobnobs then with other grain related products. Making me love Hobnobs even more, if possible!