Tag Archives: burial

Find of The Month – August

This month’s find might not look like much. It is a pretty run-of-the-mill ‘willow pattern’ plate, and you probably noticed it’s also broken. So what makes it so special? Well, we’re currently writing up what we hope will be our first major monograph, on a post-medieval cemetery in Brentford, West London. This plate, along with another similar one, a pewter plate and a blue and white tin-glazed cup were all found in graves.

It is possible that these vessels contained salt, believed to provide protection and ward off decay, but we don’t really know for sure. Rare examples of plates or saucers are known from other burials in London and from sites further afield, for example at St. Mary’s Church (Leicester), St. Peter’s Church (Barton-upon-Humber, Lincolnshire) and at St. Nicholas’s Church (Wetwang, East Yorkshire).

So this plate is special, not because of what we know about it, but because of what we don’t. The person with whom this was buried died less than 200 years ago, and yet already the reasons for this tradition have been lost.

Find of the Month, September

by Cova Escandon (Archive Supervisor)

An unusual set of jewellery was found from the grave of an adolescent individual from a Roman Necropolis in Lincolnshire, dated to the 4^th century AD. The grave good assemblage is made up of a group of copper-alloy, bone and iron bangles, along with a copper-alloy chain, glass beads and one copper-alloy ring.

Bracelets made of all types of materials were most common in Britain during the 4^th Century AD, and had been used by the Romano-British elite since early Roman times, often fabricated with precious metals. However, around the time of the 4^th Century AD, the use of these bangles became more common in the general population with materials such as bone or copper alloy used instead of precious metals. Such bangles were often worn with between six and sixteen bangles on both wrists. This practice would explain the large amount of fragments of metal bangles found in domestic contexts from the late Roman period. In the set found by Allen Archaeology, there were also several fragments of bone bangles which became very popular during the 4^th century.

Eight copper alloy bracelets were discovered within the grave, all in different styles, three of them decorated. Such decoration includes an incised decoration of a repeating pattern of III X III, and on other bangles motifs including a wavy line with associated dots, faint cross-hatching, and a ring and dot design can be seen. Interestingly, this ring and dot pattern is also present on one of the bone fragments, suggesting that this group of metal and bone bangles were designed to be worn together.

III X III decoration on copper alloy bangle

Ring and dot detail on the copper alloy bangle

Three of the bone fragments have holes drilled through one end and one fragment also has an iron rivet still attached. Two other fragments are joined together by a thin copper-alloy plate, suggesting that these bangles could have been made in sections and then attached together.

I always find curating these sort of finds a little bit bittersweet. On one hand they are very pretty and interesting artefacts, highly useful in being able to date the burial. But on the other side, they remind us that what we have in front of us is a human being, carefully buried with personal items.

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

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 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

Excavating cremations

Warning: Images of human remains feature in this post

Several of Allen Archaeology’s recent site excavations have revealed a particularly interesting aspect of ancient mortuary practice: human cremation burial urns.

Some of the pots we have retrieved date from the Bronze Age, Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon periods, and are known to have been used as early as the Mesolithic in Britain (c.5500 BC), although this method began to fall out of favour following the widespread adoption of Christianity in Western Europe.

Early Anglo-Saxon (5th–6th Century AD) stamped cremation urn found near Fakenham, Norfolk

Unlike modern cremations practices that produce ‘ash’, archaeological cremation burials consist of pieces of bone of varying size, often being quite large and identifiable. The reason for this difference is down to the processing method. Whilst modern crematoriums use industrial furnaces (that burn at temperatures of 870-980 °C) and a machine to pulverize the dry bone fragments into a fine powder, cremations in the past would have been performed much differently. The deceased would have been placed on a wooden pyre and required constant attention to keep the fire burning, particularly when the weather would not cooperate (surely not?!). The result is a lot of small chunks of cracked and discoloured bone which are then placed (in part or altogether) into a pre-made urn, and buried.

Due to the fragility of the urns and their importance as a burial, they are carefully removed on site and sent back to the office to be excavated – this happens exactly the same way as on site, but at a much smaller scale! The contents of the urn are removed in levels or ‘spits’, and records including photographs and drawings are taken before and after the removal of each cross-section and full layer. Due to having to work in a pot with a diameter of roughly 13cm compared to a pit or ditch of 1 to 2m, a completely different set of tools is needed. Lay down the shovel and trowel, and pick up your clay art tools and tweezers! Once the bone is removed it is passed through several sieves (10mm, 5mm & 2mm), with the remains of varying sizes weighed rather than counted. These are then bagged according to their size, with any recognisable elements bagged separately.

Excavating a cremation burial

So now the bones have been excavated, what can we tell from them? More than you think. The colouring of the remains, the amount the bones have warped from their original shape and their completeness can reveal information about the temperature of the fire, if there were any problems during burning (such as weather or incomplete incineration), how the body might have been placed on the pyre and whether the body was clothed or burned as dry bone. Duplicate elements of bone will also alert you as to whether more than one individual is present within the urn, as can the cumulative weight of the fragments.

Also, other remains such as macrobotanical or charcoal fragments can aid in the interpretation of the pyre construction, whilst ‘grave goods’ given to the cremated individual might also survive.

Fragments from a Romano-British cremation urn burial found at North Killingholme, Lincolnshire

A roundup of the week

It’s been a busy week at AAL so this weeks blog is a little round-up of what we’ve been up to.

Warning: Images of human remains feature in this post

You might have already seen the excitement on our site at University of Lincoln. During monitoring works we uncovered human remains dating from the Roman period close to the River Witham.

Tobin has been visiting a site in Cumbria where we have been undertaking a Watching Brief

Rachel working on Damian's site near Peterborough

Damian has had a team out working on an evaluation near Peterborough.

The geophysics team enjoying a break in coastal Lincolnshire

Rob has been out with a team to start a large geophysics project on the Lincolnshire coast where they’ve been contending with a lot of weather but enjoying the location!

Fee’s been working hard in London

Al is dealing with challenging conditions in Brentford

Work is continuing on our “big” project in Market Harborough where the team are undertaking an open area excavation

Bryn has been working hard processing environmental samples

Yvonne has joined the archives team and is getting up to speed as Cova heads off on maternity leave

Nasha has been busy editing reports and dealing with publicity.

Josh has been analysing lithics for a specialist report

Digital Techniques: Structure from Motion (SfM) Photogrammetry

Warning: Images of human remains feature in this post

If you’re involved in the heritage sector then chances are you’ve seen a three dimensional (3D) model of an archaeological site, feature or artefact that you can view and interact with on a computer screen or mobile device. It’s likely this was created using SfM, which operates under the basic principle that 3D structure can be resolved using overlapping images. Photogrammetry is the science of making measurements from photographs. Therefore, SfM photogrammetry is the use of photographs to accurately record 3D models from which measurements and details can be recorded. I could go into more detail regarding the technique itself works but for now lets just assume it’s tantamount to magic!

Capturing a collard urn

We’ve been exploring the possible uses here at AAL for a couple of years now after initially learning about its potential from the master of archaeological photography, Adam Stanford (http://www.aerial-cam.co.uk/). Initially we trialled the technique out in the field for the recording of skeletons and masonry because these are two often poorly recorded feature-types; that and our office at the time was somewhat unsuitable for artefact recording (to put it mildly) and my spare bedroom/dark room at home was full of kittens. What we found was that, if recorded properly on site, the technique allowed for a more accurate record of the feature from which a traditional illustration could be made and disseminated to specialists to aid in their assessment/analysis.

Example of a record using SfM on site

It also allowed us to revisit these features from the comfort of the office (the new one, not the old one) and examine them in closer detail than we had time for on site.

Masonry recording

By the time my fieldwork marathon was complete we had a new head office in Lincoln with plenty of space for us to experiment with SfM on artefacts. Trial and error was key here, and there were many failed attempts before finally working out a methodology fit for the task (credit must go to Hugh Fiske for providing the inspiration needed to complete this and I’m sure you’ll agree he’s made some beautiful models, http://www.archaeo3d.me.uk/)

Part of the company ethos here focusses on training for all, and as soon as we were happy with the workflow we began training others in this recoding technique. Currently we’re building up a portfolio of models so that in the near-future we can showcase them online for everyone to access, so watch this space.

Chris training Andrea and Charlotte in Structure from Motion