Tag Archives: finds

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.

Baku and Bifaces

By Rupert Birtwistle, Project Supervisor

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

Rupert in his natural environment

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

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

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

The National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan

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

Hard at work assessing an assemblage

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

Kilns and kiln furniture!

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

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

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.

Our Volunteering Experience

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

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.

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!

Find of the Month, June – Roman graffiti and stamped pottery

Written by Cova Escandon (Project Supervisor, Archives)

This month has brought us some very lovely finds including some stamped pottery and roman graffiti from a site in Staffordshire!

Graffiti was common in Roman times and was probably considered a type of self-expression. In Pompeii, more than eleven thousand examples have been unearthed. The graffiti covered all sorts of subjects, from mockery, poems, love declarations, puns, political propaganda, advertising for rent, and prostitutes… even announcements like a reward for returning a copper pot stolen from a shop! There are also numerous examples of what seems to be people practising alphabet letters or sentences in order to learn to write or improve their skills, a sensible idea considering paper was very expensive, and walls were free!

As well as graffiti, pottery was sometimes marked with a stamp. This was sometimes done as the pottery was loaded into the kiln, often as they were of communal use. Since the work was standardized and stylistically homogeneous, a record was kept of the number of ceramics loaded into the kiln. This could also be recorded on a plate baked with the rest of pottery. It is also possible that the ceramicist wanted to sign their work. Here are a few examples of stamped mortaria and stamped samian ware, recently excavated from a site in Staffordshire. The stamp on the mortarium sherd is an example of the work of the potter Brucius or Bruccius who is believed to have been based at Brockley Hill during the period AD 80-100 (Fiske 2018). It can be closely paralleled with an example from Gorse Stacks in Chester (Cuttler et al 2012, Fig. 2.22.61; M2).

The samian ware stamp is believed to read ‘AVSTRIM’.

Stamped mortaria from a site in Staffordshire

Stamped samain ware an excavation in Staffordshire

Stamped samian ware from a site in Staffordshire

In graffiti, the inscription was made by scratching into the wet clay with a pointed tool. It is written in Roman Cursive Script, the everyday form of handwriting. It would be used by merchants keeping business records, children learning to write, and quick informal text. It was most commonly used between the 1^st Century BC and the 3^rd Century AD and was often used to provide a description of the contents of the pot!

We think it possibly reads as ‘ulvia’ – what are you interpretations?

Roman amphora with grafito inscription from a site in Staffordshire

Many thanks to H. G. Fiske for providing a written interpretation of the stamped mortarium sherd (Fiske 2018).

Cuttler, R., Hepburn, S., Hewitson, C. and Krawiec, K., 2012, Gorse Stacks – 2000 Years of Quarrying and Waste Disposal in Chester, BAR British Series 563, Birmingham Archaeology Series No. 13

An introduction to finds processing and conservation

By Lucie (Volunteer from the University of Lincoln)

I’m currently studying for a degree in Conservation of Cultural Heritage at the University of Lincoln and have just finished my second year. As part of the course I have to do a six week work placement to gain some experience of working in the world of conservation, and as I hope to specialise in archaeological conservation when I graduate, I chose to come to Allen Archaeology. This seemed like a perfect opportunity to not only see how a commercial archaeology company works but also to get some hands-on experience.

I’ve been working in the finds department, processing the finds which involves cleaning bags and bags of objects that have come from the various sites that the company are excavating. So far this has mostly comprised sherds of pottery and animal bones along with a few iron nails and pieces of ceramic building material (CBM). Once the finds are clean and dry they are marked and repackaged in labelled bags ready to be archived.

However, it’s not all been bits of broken pottery. I was lucky enough to be given a large Iron Age bowl to work on that had been excavated from one of the sites and was still encased in the clay soil from which it had come from. I carefully removed the soil layer by layer using various tools from my conservation tool kit to ensure there was nothing else within the soil and also to ensure that I didn’t cause any damage.

Conservation of the Iron Age pot in progress

Details of the ‘slash-ware’ start to emerge!

Once as much of the soil as possible had been removed and the pot had had a chance to dry out a little I washed the remaining soil off it using a toothbrush and left it to dry thoroughly. After it had been cleaned there was a pattern visible on the outer surface which is apparently called slash-ware because it looks like it has been slashed. To be one of the first people to see it since it went into the ground is a real thrill and for me, part of the excitement of working with archaeological finds.

Pottery sherds after conservation

I’m really enjoying my time here, getting to be hands on with the finds is great and to be given objects that are thousands of years old to clean is a dream come true for me as this is a job I have wanted to do since I was young.

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