Tag Archives: commercial archaeology

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!)
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…

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
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
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 12th century has it that he visited the town in 934 to pay his respects to the tomb of the 8th 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 Killingwoldgraves Cross
The Killingwoldgraves Cross
The Walkington Cross
The Walkington Cross

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 15th 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

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 16th 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
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
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

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!

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.

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 4th 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 4th 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 4th 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 4th 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
III X III decoration on copper alloy bangle
Ring and dot detail on the 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.

Fragment of decorated bone bangle
Fragment of decorated bone bangle

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.

By Kelly Corlett-Slater

I am a History and Archaeology student at Bishop Grosseteste University and I have been volunteering at Allen Archaeology for four weeks during the summer holidays. During my time here I have been doing post-excavation finds processing with Archive Supervisors Yvonne Rose and Cova Escandon; washing and marking finds from a late Roman kiln site in north Lincolnshire.

My favourite artefacts so far have been large fragments of ‘kiln furniture’ which now appear as very heavy, dark grey pieces of baked clay which would have formed part of the internal workings of a Roman kiln. These would have been in the form of kiln supports, a floor, and possible dividers or ‘wheels’ where the pottery was placed for firing. These were covered in powdery black silt which was easy to wash off. When these artefacts were clean and dry, the evidence as to how they were made becomes apparent. I was able to distinguish the folds in the clay, the fingerprints of the potter or kiln-maker, and the indent marks of straw and twigs that would have occurred when the clay was first used to line the kiln.

Kiln furniture from a site in North Lincolnshire

Kiln furniture from a site in North Lincolnshire

Allen Archaeology’s trainee Roman pottery specialist, Alice Beasley, explained how the kiln would have looked and functioned, describing how the repeated firing of the kiln would have melted the inclusions within the clay giving it an overall denser and darker appearance.

At least 4,500 sherds of pottery have been recovered surrounding the six kilns on site, with many pieces showing evidence of unsuccessful firing. These have bubbles on both the inner and outer surface that have expanded and exploded in the kiln during firing. To me these are more fascinating than successfully fired pieces of pottery! These unsuccessful broken sherds occur when the potter has not sufficiently beaten the clay to remove excess air bubbles or if sufficient temperatures have not been reached during the firing process.

Pottery sherds showing evidence of unsuccessful firing

Pottery sherds showing evidence of unsuccessful firing

Having just completed Antony Lee’s Roman Archaeology module at BGU, I learnt a lot about the different types of Roman pottery found in Lincolnshire and how they were made. Volunteering at Allen Archaeology has compounded this knowledge giving me the wonderful opportunity to have hands on experience with these artefacts and having experts answering my many questions. I have thoroughly enjoyed my time here and look forward to returning to do some more voluntary work in the future.

By Roksana P. Drobinoga and Louise Wood

We have just finished our first year on the BA Conservation of Cultural Heritage degree course at the University of Lincoln and decided to do some volunteering work during the summer break to improve our knowledge of areas related to the conservation field and to see what happens to the objects before they get to the specialists.

On our first day we started with the Archive Supervisor, Yvonne Rose, explaining what happens to the objects when they arrive from the sites currently being excavated. We were given a tour of the building and shown the offices, the artefact processing room where the objects are cleaned and placed in trays according to their site codes and context numbers, and the drying room where the artefacts are left on designated shelves and in appropriate environmental conditions. We were also shown a number of artefacts which have already been processed and are in storage; for example, Saxon brooches and Roman hair pins.  Later, objects are numbered and bagged ready to be given to the archive supervisor to be catalogued before being sent to specialists for further examination.

Our role was finds processing which meant that we were responsible for cleaning the artefacts after they had arrived from site, marking them once they were dry, and bagging them in preparation for cataloguing. We have learnt that each type of material has to be treated differently. For example, you cannot mark shell or human bone and you cannot wash metal objects. We now have a better understanding of the marking/numbering and cataloguing processes.

Roksana (left) and Louise (right) cleaning objects in the artefacts processing room

Roksana (left) and Louise (right) cleaning objects in the artefacts processing room

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our experience with Allen Archaeology has been educational and informative and it was fascinating to handle objects that have been hidden away for hundreds of years! It was interesting to meet some of the archaeologists, hear their stories and learn about their work. In the future, when we receive historic artefacts to work on as part of our course or careers, we will know how much the object has been through and how many people have been involved before it reaches us.

 

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

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!

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

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

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!