Yorkshire Archaeology Today 15

YORKSHIRE

No.15

ARCHAEOLOGY TODAY

Heslington in Focus

Inside: Heslington East Hungate Update Conserving Cannons

YORK ARCHAEOLOGICAL TRUST

Yorkshire Archaeology Today Autumn 2008 Contents Hungate Update: Two Years On

1

Hungate Finds 3 Community Archaeology

8

A Ditch In Time Heslington East 11 What’s In A Pot?

15

Cannons To The Right of Them... 19 Stonegate Voices

24

Number 15 Editors: Richard Hall and Lesley Collett Picture editing, design and layout: Lesley Collett Printed by B&B Press, Parkgate, Rotherham Yorkshire Archaeology Today is published twice a year.

UK subscriptions: £8.00 a year.

Overseas subscriptions: £12.00 (sterling) a year.

To subscribe please send a cheque payable to Yorkshire Archaeology Today to: York Archaeological Trust, 47 Aldwark YO1 7BX or through Postgiro/CPP to: ACCOUNT 647 2753 National Giro, Bootle, Merseyside, GIR 0AA Yorkshire Archaeology Today is published

by York Archaeological Trust. Editorial and contributors’ views are independent and do not necessarily reflect the official view of the Trust.

Copyright of all original YAT material reserved; reproduction by prior editorial permission only. © September 2008 York Archaeological Trust is a registered charity, Charity No. 509060: A company limited by guarantee without share capital in England number 1430801.

Tel: 01904 663000 Email: ckyriacou@yorkat.co.uk http://www.yorkarchaeology.co.uk ISSN 1474-4562 Unless stated otherwise, illustrations are by Lesley Collett and Russell Marwood; photos are by Mike Andrews and members of YAT staff: all are © York Archaeological Trust

Cover Photo

YAT photographer Mike Andrews filming the excavation and lifting of a Bronze Age wooden trough, Heslington East near York

1

Hungate Excavations:

Season 2 Draws To An End As the end of the second year of the Hungate excavations draws to a close, it will be a period of change for the project as the focus for the excavation strategy transforms and further long-term goals appear on the horizon. The last two years have seen excavations in Blocks A to E as well as the projected Focal Building area and the Block H centrepiece excavation. In the coming 12 months further areas of Block H will be excavated and the Block F building footprint will be excavated.

However, it is to Block H that we turn our attention for this update on progress.

The H1 Excavation Since the spring of 2007 the H1 part of the centrepiece Block H area has been under constant excavation and this element of work has now come to an end. During the 15 months of excavation the team working in this area have travelled back in time from the slum clearances of the 1930s to the Norman Conquest, and possibly even earlier.

One of the broad insights to be gleaned from this slice across the Hungate area is how much of an influence the underlying natural landscape has had on the development of this plot of land over 1000 years or more. In removing the archaeological deposits from this space we have uncovered the underlying geology. This has revealed that at the eastern end of the plot (towards Dundas Street)

Focal Building Hungate: excavation areas within the development blocks

2

thick bands of clay and deposits of sand lie relatively close to the surface, whereas to the west (towards Hungate itself) these deposits fall away and fresh water springs seep up through the soft strata. It is these changes in the below-ground conditions of the land that have had a direct effect on its development.

Looking at the eastern end of H1, where the clay deposits are closest to the surface, this area appears to have been a focus forlarge clay extraction pits (upwards of 3m in diameter and 2.5m deep) during the medieval period, and by the early 19th century this more stable ground was utilised for the construction of Dundas Street. The relatively stable nature of this stiffer clay deposit, which probably forms a low ridge descending from Aldwark towards the River Foss basin, was also integral for the siting of the medieval church of St John’s in the Marsh, built during the 12th century.

When looking at the western portion of H1 a different pattern can be discerned, as the clay deposits dive away to the west and the land becomes wetter. This greater depth, as well as the fact that the soft and wet nature of this ground would not sustain pits of such

Myriad inter-cutting pits in the H1 area.

The water in the base of some of these pits percolates up through the underlying sands and clays.

a large size and depth, made it impossible to access the clay as a raw resource. Instead, a sequence of myriad smaller pits were dug through this area from, at least, the 11th century until the 16th century. A number of these pits had been sunk and maintained as wells, revealing that the springs occurring here were utilised from an early period (19th-century wells have also been found in this area). The sinking of the wells through this space clearly illustrates that it was far too wet for building on and it would appear that this relatively open land presented opportunities for the deposition of rubbish and cess in other pits over the centuries.

Greater detail on the past use of this closely scrutinised plot of land will be revealed through the post-excavation process, which started during the summer of 2008.

This greater detail will undoubtedly appear in a subsequent edition of this magazine.

Public Participation and Education During the 15 months that excavation on the H1 area has been ongoing, the whole of the Block H site has been open to the public through guided site tours and frequent open

3 days. This public access has seen over 10,000 people visit the site during this time. In conjunction with visitor opportunities the Hungate project has concerted education, outreach and public participation elements.

YAT’s summer training school has been hosted at Hungate for the past two years and has had over 500 trainees and placements come through its doors during this time. Over 100 other trainees, community volunteers, young people and school children have also been involved in the excavation. The Community Archaeology element of the excavation has been a huge success, with a core excavation group turning up two days a week every week to get involved with their heritage.

Season 3 With the H1 area now complete it is full steam ahead with the large H2 part of the Block H excavation. The large majority of the 19th- and 20th-century archaeology in H2 will have been completely excavated towards the end of 2008, after which the underlying deposits will have to be uncovered. The

uncovering of earlier levels will require the removal of the late 19th-/early 20th-century version of Haver Lane, a cobbled road surface that has become quite symbolic to the project. However, the story of Haver Lane itself can only be answered by peeling back the layers of time and this is something that will enrich our understanding of this area across the previous centuries.

Archaeology Live 2008 placements and trainees working in the H1 area.

To assist in formulating future excavation strategy a deep trench has already been sunk into the western corner of the H2 area (close to where Hungate meets The Stonebow).

The team in this corner have been working their way down through the layers of time and this trench should give us some interesting insights into what awaits us in the next three years.

Peter Connelly

STOP PRESS

Excavators working in the deep trench in H2 have uncovered a plank-lined cellared building of the same construction as the Viking-Age buildings of Coppergate. The full story of this discovery will appear in the next issue of Yorkshire Archaeology Today.

4

Finds from Hungate – Update At the time of writing (July 2008), the excavations on Hungate have produced approximately 4850 small finds, or individual finds of interest, with more being added every day. Full analysis of all these finds will take place once excavations have been completed, but in the meantime, some of the more interesting objects are being studied, and brief accounts of them published on our website at www. dighungate.com. A selection of some of those found recently appears below: text by Nicky Rogers (NR), Steve Allen (SA), Dr Susan White (SW) and Dr Ailsa Mainman (AM).

Ampulla This complete but damaged small metal flask which was recently found at Hungate is a medieval ampulla. Ampullae were made to carry holy water and other miracle-working liquids and were primarily sold to pilgrims; in the Holy Land, these were being made as early as the 6th century A.D. It was the pilgrimage boom beginning with the martyrdom of Thomas Becket at Canterbury Cathedral in the second half of the 12th century which sparked the mass production of ampullae for pilgrims in the West. It was believed that water tinged with Thomas Becket’s blood could bring about miraculous cures: many went on pilgrimage and obtained this water from Canterbury, but Canterbury water was also deposited in practically every church so that it was available closer to home. As well as acting as a vessel to hold the precious fluid, an ampulla was also a memento of a pilgrim’s journey; with a loop to each side, it could be worn on a cord or chain around the neck.

One method of identifying metals known as X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy has shown that many ampullae were made of almost pure tin. They were made by a process called slushcasting, which involved pouring molten tin into a mould and then quickly inverting it so as to pour out the molten core and leave behind a comparatively thin walled vessel. In order to work successfully, this technique needed pure tin. An ampulla mould made of stone was found in building work at 34 Shambles in 1974.

The form of the Hungate ampulla suggests it dates from the mid 14th to 16th centuries.

Earlier ampullae tended to include a framework around the flask, and two examples of these were found at Coppergate, possibly depicting York’s own saint, St. William. The Hungate ampulla appears to be the only one of its type that has been found in any of our excavations in York, and further research is needed to determine a more precise date, and to see if there is any significance to the decorative motifs used on it. NR

Wooden bowl

The bowl seems to have been associated with food preparation or eating. Much of the inside is stained with the same sort of dark staining from oils and fats that can be seen on modern wooden tools used in the kitchen. At some stage the bowl was very close to a fire – some small charred patches can be seen on the inside, just below the rim.

Measuring about 80mm in height from base to rim and originally around 230mm in diameter, enough of the bowl survives for us to compare it with other finds from other excavations. The most similar object we have been able to find is a bowl which was excavated from a site at 33-35 Eastgate, Beverley, East Yorkshire. This came from a medieval pit dated to the mid-fourteenth century and our bowl is so close in appearance it is almost certainly of the same date.

At the end of its useful life the bowl had split along the grain. This half of the bowl was thrown into a rubbish pit which became rapidly waterlogged and prevented the wood from rotting away completely. The other half of the bowl was not found, although the pit was fully excavated. Wood is a material which can be and was recycled and it is likely that the missing portion of the bowl ended up in a fire. SA

Bone socketed point At least ten of these objects have now been identified amongst the material emerging from the Hungate excavations, but although these are not uncommon finds on archaeological sites, particularly from Saxon and Viking Age deposits, no one is quite sure what their function was. Each is typically made from a cattle leg bone, one end of which has been hollowed out and the inner tissue removed to form a socket for a handle; the point is roughly shaped by oblique strokes from a tool such as an axe, sometimes subsequently trimmed with a knife.

Suggestions for possible uses for these objects have included tips of skating poles for pulling skaters along, tallow holders, or tools for use in leatherworking. Signs of wear on many examples indicate that the pointed end must have been the working end of some sort of tool, but so far, there is no agreement amongst archaeologists as to what sort of craft this tool was most likely to have been involved in. NR

5

This find, from one of the pits on Hungate, is about 45% of a face turned wooden bowl. It was cut from a section of Alder trunk wood which had been split in two then roughly shaped before being mounted on the spindle of a pole lathe and turned. Marks from the chisels and gouges made during this shaping are still clear on the interior and exterior faces of the object. The rim is rounded and there are two parallel grooves carved around the outside of the bowl for decoration. The base is slightly rounded and a turned step has been created to emphasize the transition from wall to base.

6

Stone vessel This fragment of the body of a stone vessel has been identified as being made of steatite, also known as soapstone. Steatite or soapstone is a term used in the description of metamorphic rocks composed mainly of talc. This stone is easy to work, and it can also be heated without the risk of fracture, so it is particularly suitable for vessels exposed to heat, such as cooking vessels: this is almost certainly what this vessel was used for, as it has sooting on both the inside and outside. Sometimes these vessels had iron loop handles, as seen on a fragment found at Coppergate, but there is no evidence of any on this particular bowl. These vessels were typically thick walled, and this fragment found at Hungate is no exception, measuring 1.5cm thick. Unfortunately, the rim of the vessel has broken off, making it difficult to estimate its original diameter, but it must have been in excess of 32cm across.

The main sources of steatite in and around Britain are Shetland, Norway and Greenland. Although Shetland may appear to be the nearest source to York, it is in fact more likely that this bowl came from Norway; very few examples of Shetland steatite vessels have been found beyond Scotland, apart from a few recovered in the Faeroe Islands. It seems probable that this bowl was the personal possession of someone from Norway who was in York – or Jorvik as it would have been then – sometime during the Viking period. NR

Clay Pipe Hungate has produced this very unusual clay pipe bowl in the form of a woman’s head.

She is a lady of, shall we say, character; and our clay pipe specialist, Dr Susie White from Liverpool University had this to say about her: “The pipe is French and was made in a three-piece mould, as opposed to the two-piece moulds which were commonly used by British firms.

A mould line can be clearly seen running down the side of the face. It is decorated with coloured enamels, now much abraded, to pick out certain features, such as the eyes, and elements on the bonnet. Some of these pipes are real masterpieces, and although this lady is not exactly an oil painting, you could be kind and say that the pipe is a ‘fine example of its type’.

The French manufacturers specialized in this kind of ornate figural pipe from about the 1830s right up until the 1920s and had agents in this country to sell them. By the 1920s most of the French firms had closed down. This one from Hungate is likely to be an early example, and probably dates from sometime in the 1830s or 1840s. Originally it would have had a clay stem, although a lot of these French pipes were socketed for use with a bakelite type stem.”

This pipe is just one from the most recent group of pipes which have been sent to Liverpool for study. Watch this space for more as Hungate is producing hundreds of examples, some very ornate indeed. AM/SW

While straight hair may be the fashion of today, objects found at Hungate indicate that it was not always so. Recently, excavators have been finding numerous examples of wig curlers, made of white fired clay similar to that used to make tobacco pipes. In use, these simple objects – possibly made by the same manufacturers as clay tobacco pipes – would have been rolled in damp paper, and then the wig hair wrapped around. The wig was then baked to set the curls. As this group found at Hungate shows, the curlers varied in sizes, the smaller curlers being used to make tighter curls than the larger ones.

The fashion for curled wigs was particularly popular in the late 17th to 18th centuries, and was favoured by both men and women of means. NR

Seal mould This object is a reminder that during the medieval period, cloth making was an important craft in York. This rectangular stone block was used as a mould to cast lead alloy cloth seals. This particular mould has been worked on two faces; one face may have been unused because the shape cut out for the casting does not appear correct. The replacement has been cut on the other face.

Cloth seals were used as a mark of quality control, and were devised specifically for marking commercial textiles; they had a similar function to hallmarks on precious metalwork. Generally, one seal noted the maker of the cloth, and another represented an official marking of the cloth as fit for sale by the alnager who was the officer of the Crown doing the quality check with his deputies. When cast, one disc had an integral rivet and there was a corresponding hole in the other disc; a strip connected them. The seal would be attached to a piece of cloth by folding the discs around each side of the textile so that the rivet fitted through the cloth and into the hole; the rivet was then bent over and the seal stamped with one die, or between two dies, in order to close it firmly and record the maker or quality mark. We have found a few cloth seals in excavations in the city, though none so far at Hungate; parts of two found at Union Terrace are pictured here.

Two disc seals such as those cast in this mould were the norm in medieval England up until the late 16th century when four part seals were developed. Cloth making became a significant craft in York during the 13th century, so we can suggest a date for the making of this object is likely to be sometime between the 13th and 16th centuries. NR

7

Wig curlers

8

Archaeology in the Community Members of local community groups take part in excavations at Hungate

Community Archaeology is becoming a popular phrase in archaeology at the moment. Community archaeologists are being employed by organizations such as YAT, local authorities and museums services all over the country.

It’s not that this is a new idea; local people have been working as volunteers on excavations, or forming their own archaeological societies, for many years. In recent years however, most archaeology has been carried out as part of the development process by professional teams from a growing number of archaeological units. At the same time as archaeology has become more professionally dominated, it has become more popular through greater exposure on television, so there is a demand from people to get involved just as it became more difficult for them to do so.

At the beginning of the new millennium the Greater York area had a flourishing set of local history groups, some of whom wished to get involved with archaeology as a means to understand their local historic landscape better. This interested members of the York Archaeological Forum, a group that included

the City Council, the University of York, English Heritage, the Council for British Archaeology, the Yorkshire Museums Trust, some local groups and York Archaeological Trust. Funds were raised to investigate ways in which local communities could be supported and encouraged to study their local historic environment. It was from this investigation that a bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund was developed proposing the Greater York Community Archaeology Project, in 2005 the proposal was accepted and the project began.

York Archaeological Trust was proud and excited to be asked to host the project.

The Greater York Community Archaeology project is now in its fourth year of five and is flourishing. The project provides the greater York area with a community archaeologist to be a contact point for local groups, to set up initiatives to help develop skills and confidence, to provide professional advice and help, to loan equipment to groups and to reach out to those who might not otherwise benefit from getting involved with archaeology.

The community archaeologist, Dr Jon Kenny, is in regular touch with 32 groups in and around York. The existing network of

timelineyorkplus.weebly.com/

One of the central aspects of the Greater York Community Archaeology project has been to develop skills and confidence. This has in part been carried out through a series of monthly study days. The subject matter has been directed at groups who want to make a start researching many aspects of the historic environment around them, and have included such topics as recording and surveying landscapes, using aerial photography, using geophysical survey, using fieldwalking recording standing buildings and churches, recording hedgerows and even how to go about archaeological excavation.

Some local community groups have been able to raise funds to employ local archaeological units to run their excavations for them.

9

history and archaeology groups around York had already formed their own loose association called Timeline York Plus, a group that meets quarterly and produces its own newsletter. There is no formal constitution, the members simply convene at a different host each time and present each other with a taster of what they are doing. This is an excellent forum in which people can exchange ideas and suggestions, helping to encourage activity across the area. The community archaeologist reports on the project each quarter to the Timeline meetings as this is an ideal opportunity to stay in touch. To promote communication across the groups in the area the community archaeologist maintains a wiki website that can be viewed at: http://

Others used the community archaeologist to help them carry out geophysical surveys, fieldwalking, topographic survey and even test pit excavation.

The Poppleton Archaeology Group have had excellent results using geophysics to continue investigating the moated manor site in their landscape, following on from a Time Team investigation in the village. At Cawood to the south of York the group has been variously supported by the HLF, English Heritage and students from University of York to study the Castle Garth there. Now with the support of the community archaeologist they have been able to take their investigations further by excavating test pits on the Garth. At Stockton on the Forest, the local group have just used the project geophysics equipment, and the support of the commu-

10

nity archaeologist, to survey the fields either side of a previous pipeline project. The pipeline had necessitated archaeological excavation of a Romano-British farmstead along its length, but now the local group is using project resources to understand the landscape around the farmstead.

Developing skills and confidence in archaeological excavation is not a simple process, so it was fortunate for the community archaeologist that York Archaeological Trust began work on a major urban excavation at Hungate in York at the end of 2006.

With the support of the community archaeologist and YAT there is now a thriving volunteer team contributing to the excavation at Hungate. With the long term in mind this can only be positive for community archaeology around York, training as many as 60 people in the skills of archaeological excavation, recording and analysis.

Not everyone in the community thinks archaeology is for them. Yet there are so many aspects to it that all kinds of people can benefit. The community archaeologist has set about showing this by offering workshops in all kinds of subjects for primary schools in York. Workshops have covered history (inevitably), mathematics, science and art. Nearly 1,000 children have benefited from the workshops and having an archaeologist around some schools has helped children understand the history around them in lots of new ways.

The potential for archaeology to reach out to people is also being illustrated by work with the York People First, a self help group for people with learning difficulties.

The community archaeologist has formed a club for members who meet once a month to visit interesting sites and produce articles for the York People First Newsletter.

The Hungate excavations are also proving a vital community resource; not only is there a community volunteer team on site, the community archaeologist has also been able to help YAT offer work as reparations for young people on the York Youth Offending Team programme. This is an innovative way to allow young people to make reparations for offences that they have committed in the York community and to learn in some small way the discipline and work place structure that will help them to make the most of their lives.

The combination of support and encouragement in greater York for community archaeology projects will see a steady growth in the understanding both of local landscapes and the wider hinterland that surrounds York. There are so many communities both geographic and special interests or needs that one can only see community archaeology flourishing in the years to come.

Jon Kenny

11

A DITCH IN TIME...

Further Excavations at Heslington East, York

R

egular readers may remember an account in our last issue of initial discoveries on the site of the University of York’s Campus 2 expansion to the east of Heslington. The work progressed though the summer, despite the seemingly unending rain, and investigation of the area designated A1 is now complete and work is under way on the excavation of area A2.

The initial work in A1 identified at least two potential palaeochannels, or ancient watercourses, running off the glacial moraine of Kimberlow Hill, upon which the Badger Hill estate sits. Investigations carried out for the Trust by Dr Chris Carey of Oxford Archaeology, to try and trace these earlier water courses, and to see how they related to the extensive archaeological sequence being investigated by the Trust, showed that there was a sequence of north-south channels running across the site. Timber from one of these channels returned a radiocarbon date of 1500BC (Bronze Age).

These palaeochannels appear to have been exploited throughout the prehistoric period

up to the end of the Iron Age, and a pond feature located in the north-west corner of the site may have been deliberately sited over one of the channels to collect water. The work on the water courses may provide a context for the large number of worked flints dating from the Mesolithic (c. 10,000 to 5500 years ago) through the Neolithic (c.4000-2000BC) to the Bronze Age (2000-750BC), which were found in the area around the pond and in small quantities all around the site.

No definite features have yet been found which can be associated with these earlier periods. However, there is the possibility that features from these earlier periods may be identified during post-excavation process as the phasing of the site is refined, for there is tantalising evidence for earlier pits below the later Iron Age north-west-south-east ditches, close to the water hole. One of these pits contained a wooden trough or hollowed cylinder, and initial assessment of the woodworking technology suggested that it was manufactured in the Bronze Age; a date that may be supported by the pottery and worked flint recovered from the pit.

Excavation of a Bronze Age wooden trough or hollowed cylinder. A radiocarbon date of 930780BC has now been obtained from this object

12 Plan of features in areas A1 and A2: Iron Age field boundaries and roundhouses

In May 2008 an additional area was stripped adjacent to the east of A1. This revealed a continuation of the Iron Age fields identified in the original area of excavation in A1, and showed that there were at least two regularly laid out fields associated with the round houses identified in the western part of the site. They form part of an ordered landscape lasting from around 300BC perhaps into the

1st century AD. On the whole there was very little evidence for Roman activity but, on the eastern limit of the new area, one ditch was very distinctive as it had a 90 degree bend in it just before it exited the excavated area. This produced a smashed pot along with a Roman coin of the 2nd or 3rd century AD. The evidence points to the Iron Age landscape being modified or partly maintained, perhaps by

13 Inset: Aerial photograph of the enclosure at the northern end of area A2 ( ŠEnglish Heritage / NMR.)

the Romans living in the buildings identified in excavations by the University of York Archaeology Department on the south side of Kimberlow Hill, several hundred metres from our excavations. The only other evidence for Roman activity came from an isolated cremation burial found to the west of the main A1 excavations.

In the newly stripped area there was also the suggestion of an earlier field system; this was represented by two ditches which were on a more east/ west alignment, and which were truncated by the later ditches. Across the whole of the newly stripped area there was also clear evidence for the medieval ridge and furrow ploughing that had been seen in the geophysical surveys of the site.

14

Within the original area of A1, investigation of the Iron Age north-west/south-east ditches, possibly associated with the water feature was fully excavated and formed part of the Iron Age field system. Below these ditches a series of irregularly spaced pits was identified, many with a single wooden stake within them. The function and date of these pits is at present far from clear.

At the water hole itself, the layers of cobbles that had been used to fill it in and level it up were stripped off. This showed that it consisted of a series of inter-cutting pits.

One of these was lined with wattle work and timber, initially identified in the excavated quadrant reported in Yorkshire Archaeology

The cobbled area which incorporated evidence for metalworking

Today 14, and suggesting careful management of the feature. Further groups of pits were found around the north-south ditches and one contained an unexpected discovery - a human skull. Whether this was some form of ritual deposit is unclear, and work on investigating this surprising and somewhat gruesome discovery is under way.

More conclusive evidence for metal working than the few artefacts mentioned in Yorkshire Archaeology Today 14 has been found close to the western edge of A1, in

the form of a large spread of cobbles with several inclusions of iron slag and smithing cake fragments. There has also been evidence for crucible fragments among the pottery collected from the site. The cobble spreads and pits appear to represent the waste or hard standing from a kiln, perhaps just beyond the edge of the trench, supporting the old archaeological adage that the best finds are under the spoil heap!

In A2, work got under way in August following the completion of the removal of top soil, a process that had got under way before last winter’s weather had put a stop to it. It became clear that in A2 there was the continuation of the field system identified in A1 but also a large, square enclosure with an entrance on its southern side. This enclosure appears to form the focus for a further set of extensive field systems and again probably dates to the 3rd century BC to 1st century AD. The enclosure is some 30m across and within it there is at least one very large round-house, measuring at least 10m across, and a series of ring gullies and pits containing burnt stone.

The sections put across this ditch show that it is on average 2m wide and up to 1.5m deep.

Along the eastern side of A2 there is evidence to suggest that there is a trackway, although this is far from certain as work is still in progress. Tantalisingly there is also evidence starting to appear for some early features containing worked flint that may relate to the early prehistoric activity in A1. With work on the main excavations starting to draw to a close, a more complete account of the discoveries in A2 will appear in the next issue of Yorkshire Archaeology Today. Already, however, it can confidently be affirmed that the excavation has revealed a significant prehistoric and Roman landscape at Heslington that will have a profound impact on how we perceive the area around what was to become Eboracum and its subsequent changing use and development. All this is possible thanks to the University of York’s commitment to and funding of the archaeological investigations, for which we are most grateful.

Gareth Dean

15

What’s in a pot?

What’s in a pot?

The Iron Age pottery from at Heslington The Iron Age potterycavations from excavations at East, York.

Heslington East, York.

Excavations at Heslington East (see Yorkshire Archaeology Today No. 14) have produced between 500 and 1,000 sherds of prehistoric pottery and nearly every day more are being unearthed! As such, it is probably one of the largest assemblages of prehistoric pottery ever excavated in this area, on the outskirts of the City of York, though a considerable amount of prehistoric pottery has been found elsewhere in the Yorkshire Wolds and in the Vales of York and Pickering.

Other collections of prehistoric pottery include those housed at the Yorkshire Museum; some vessels are nearly complete and often with find spots in Yorkshire, but few, if any, are from York itself.

They are generally not well dated and many of the excavated examples were dug up by antiquarians using less scientific methods than those employed today.

In the past researchers have mainly concentrated their efforts on the cemeteries of the uplands of the Yorkshire Wolds and the North Yorkshire Moors; therefore much more emphasis has been placed on funerary assemblages. The assemblage from East Heslington appears to be mainly domestic material and may help researchers to redress this imbalance in the future

ex-

Top: View along one of the major N-S ditches and (inset) decorated rim sherd Below: Fragments of possible crucible

16

Most of the pottery found at Heslington appears to consist of undecorated jars, probably used in a domestic context, for storage, cooking and eating, and although there appear to be some useful organic deposits within a few of the vessels, further analysis of the contents will be necessary before their precise function can be determined. Only a handful of sherds are decorated. These include a row of tiny incised fingernail impressions on the internal edge of the rim of a small jar (opposite, top), and a row of pinch marks around the external edge of the rim of another jar (opposite, below).

A few sherds from a crucible also point to some sort of ‘industrial’ process such as the heating of metal or glass on the site. So far only a fragment of one blue glass hooped bead has been found, and it is not clear yet where this bead might have been made.

However, evidence of metalworking has been found. This includes primary evidence in the form of iron slag and evidence of secondary working in the form of smithing hearth ‘cakes’. These activities appear to have taken place some distance away from the settlement and associated pottery.

The distribution of the pottery across the site will be of interest in determining how the pottery was thrown away after use. For example, in some cases almost complete pots and sherds appear to have been disposed of in specific features, rather than randomly scattered. This has also been noted by Val Rigby when looking at prehistoric pottery from the Yorkshire Wolds. Here she sees a common pattern of disposal or rather the

Top right: Decorated rim sherds Right: Major features yielding finds of prehistoric pottery

Below: a pair of perforated jet objects of unknown function, possibly toggles or pendants

17 Left: Near-complete vessel found near the top of the waterhole feature Below: sherd of possible Late Bronze Age bucket urn

placement of pottery and other artefacts in “sets” in specific features. As yet it is not clear whether or not a similar process is happening here; associated finds, including a pair of jet objects, have yet to be analysed.

The pottery from Heslington comes from four main types of feature: roundhouse gullies, roundhouse enclosures, a waterhole/ stock pond and four ditches which emanate from the pond and combine to form one main ditch which runs from the north to the south of the site, bisecting it.

The majority of the pottery was found in the roundhouse gullies and enclosures.

Pottery from the roundhouse gullies appears to date from the 3rd/2ndcentury BC. Elsewhere the pottery seems to have been placed close to the entrances of such dwellings and it has been suggested that this may have some ritual significance.

One almost complete vessel (photo, top left, and drawing, next page) appears to have been placed on top of the silted-up waterhole after it had gone out of use, perhaps sometime in the middle Iron Age. Another vessel (top right), which was recently discovered in the main north/south ditch, is thick walled, coil built and crudely made, suggesting that

it belongs to the bucket urn tradition of the Late Bronze Age/early Iron Age, though we await specialist confirmation.

Even broken rim sherds appear at least occasionally to have been placed rather than discarded. For example, a series of rim sherds from a beaded rimmed jar were found on top of each other, with their rims forming a series of concentric arcs, in the middle of the main ditch. These are thought to date to somewhere around the 3rd/2nd century BC. This behaviour may also continue into the Roman period, when a flagon appeared to have been deliberately placed at the corner of a Roman field boundary ditch.

The precise meaning behind what may be deliberate placing of vessels at strategic points in the landscape and with specific sets of artefacts is not clear; whether for ‘ritual’ or more prosaic reasons. We hope that future research on the material from this site will help to elucidate this.

Visual identification suggests that much of this assemblage may resemble pottery from the Wolds area as well as that of the Vales

18

of Pickering and York, though there may be more than one fabric type. Until analysis of local clay samples and the types of temper from the site are compared with that of the pots themselves, as well as others excavated previously in Yorkshire, we will not know which pots were made locally and which, if any, were imported from elsewhere.

three”; date (how old is it?), trade (where has it come from?) and function (how was it used?) (Orton, Tyers and Vince 1993).

In order to attempt to answer these questions we hope to analyse the fabrics by petrological methods (which will identify the geological sources of the raw materials), and quantify and draw representative vessels so that we can compare them with other similar assemblages from the area. Watch this space!

Anne Jenner

Iron Age tribes in the York area

Several tribes are known to have inhabited the region during the Iron Age. These include the Parisi, who are known to have built their square barrow burials as nearby as Skipwith, just 10 miles (15km) south-east of York, though the majority are found on the higher areas of the Wolds, at present thought to be the heart of their tribal homeland. Other tribes who are thought to have occupied areas a little further afield include the Brigantes, who are known to have lived in the area of the Vale of Pickering and the Loidis, from the Leeds area.

Comparison of the fabrics, forms and decorative techniques employed on this assemblage with pottery thought to be used by the various tribes, in particular that of the Parisi both in France and after they had emigrated to the Yorkshire Wolds, might help to shed light on the development of this tradition, if it is in fact related to pottery recovered from East Heslington. However, the fabrics and forms found here may be unique to the site.

Further analysis and research will continue throughout the summer and autumn months in an attempt to answer the fundamental questions that can be asked of all excavated pottery types including “the big

Drawing of the vessel from the waterhole feature (previous page)

References

Manby, T. G. 2003 in Manby T. G. et al (eds): ‘The Archaeology of Yorkshire: An assessment at the beginning of the 21st century’.

Yorkshire Archaeological Society Occasional Paper No 3.

Orton, C., Tyers, P. and Vince, A. 1993: Pottery in Archaeology. (Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology) Rigby, V. 2004: ‘Pots in Pits: The British Museum Yorkshire Settlements Project 198892’. East Riding Archaeologist Vol 11.

19

(Alfred, Lord Tennyson)

Above: Studland cannon

Over the summer, the conservation team has taken delivery of five iron cannons, recovered from several different shipwreck sites, and the Trust’s conservation facility in Walmgate now echoes to the thud of lump hammer upon marine encrustation as the cannons are gradually exposed and conserved. The conservation of iron from marine environments is complex and time consuming and these projects present us with a number of challenges over the coming months. Iron artefacts recovered from the sea are usually encrusted with a thick and hard crust of concretion – a substance which is almost as hard as concrete. As the thickness of this encrustation increases, corrosion of the iron reduces as oxygenated seawater cannot penetrate through to the metal. In effect, the concretion acts as a passivating layer, and the level of preservation of larger artefacts including cannons and anchors is often excellent. However, smaller iron objects often corrode away to nothing and all that survives within the concretion is an empty void. As the concretion forms, the iron absorbs salts from the seawater, especially chlorides, which are very harmful and promote further corrosion. The main aim of the conservation programme is to remove as much of the chlorides as is possible from the iron to ensure long-term survival.

The conservation problems become magnified where composite objects are concerned

– iron cannon with wooden carriages attached are not easy objects to treat successfully.

The earliest gun in date is a wrought iron artillery piece, recovered in the 1980’s from a shipwreck in Studland Bay, off Poole on the English south coast. The wreck, thought to be that of an armed Spanish merchant vessel is now designated and protected by the UK Government, and dates from between 1485 to 1530. Following recovery and initial concretion removal the gun has undergone passive conservation at the Royal Armouries’ Fort Nelson complex (just outside Portsmouth) for the last 20 years. English Heritage has now commissioned the University of Bournemouth to collate and publish the extensive archive from the excavations led by Keith Jarvis from Poole Museum and we have been tasked with the stabilisation and investigation of the gun. (Incidentally, I conserved a number of the smaller artefacts from the wreck whilst working in Portsmouth during the late 1980s).

The naming of such artillery pieces is fraught with problems, but suffice to say that the one from the wreck can be defined as a wrought iron breech loader constructed from wrought iron longitudinal staves reinforced by circular iron hoops which were hammered over the barrel whilst hot and allowed to cool and contract in situ – the same construction method employed for wooden barrels.

20

Measuring just over 2.0m in length with an internal bore of 180mm, the cannon is still loaded with stone shot (the shot is held fast in the muzzle of the cannon by iron corrosion products, see photo, below), with the gunpowder contained in a separate breech chamber which was inserted into the rear of the barrel. Both barrel and breech chamber still sit in the remains of the oak sledge (or carriage) which was used to support and manoeuvre this type of weapon. Unfortunately much of the sledge has eroded during its long immersion underwater, for as the ship sank, the heavier iron barrel turned turtle and the wooden sledge was exposed uppermost on the seabed, vulnerable to scouring and biological activity.

Whilst a number of these weapons have been recovered and conserved, the Studland Bay cannon is unusual in that large iron bands have been used to fasten the barrel to its wooden sledge, and our next task will be to investigate these further. The iron has probably corroded away to nothing and we will attempt to make casts of the fastenings by injecting silicon resin into the empty spaces within the surviving concretion.

Shot held in the muzzle of the Studland cannon by concretion

The next stage of the conservation process will be tricky – in an ideal world we would physically separate the wood and iron, as each material requires conservation treatments that

are not always compatible with one another.

However, initial inspection suggests that too much damage would occur to both wood and iron if we attempted separation. We are currently considering a number of options which would rule out the need to take the cannon apart. To date, most techniques developed for composite objects have been tested on smaller objects. Scaling-up processes for a 2m long cannon, weighing around 100Kg, presents a new round of challenges which we’ll need to consider carefully before agreeing upon the appropriate technique.

Up until the mid sixteenth century the main armament for warships comprised a mix of wrought iron breech loaders and cast bronze (usually referred to as brass) muzzle loading cannon (as, for example, on the Mary Rose). But by the time of the Spanish Armada the main weaponry comprised cast iron guns of varying sizes. Naval warfare strategy had changed from one where short-ranged brass and wrought iron guns were used to disable ships at close range to one where ships could blast enemy ships from a distance using new cast iron muzzle loaders.

The transition from brass to cast iron was brought about by a number of factors including improvements in cast iron production, economic factors (iron was cheaper than bronze), as well as improvements to the type of black powder used to ignite the guns.

We now have two examples of this innovative muzzle-loading artillery piece in the labs in York for study and treatment. Tudor cast iron ordnance came in a wide range of sizes and each type was given a name according to size (as opposed to the later tradition of naming artillery pieces based on the weight of the shot); for example the largest gun was called a cannon royal, then there were demicannon, culverins, demi-culverins, “bastards” and so forth. Debate still rages as to whether the Alderney artillery are examples of a saker or a minion, so will be called “cannons” here for the sake of argument.

The cannons were recovered during the early summer from the wreck of an Elizabe-

21 Alderney Cannon 3 at the Tower of London prior to concretion removal

than ship that sank half a mile off the island of Alderney in 1592. We know that the ship sank in 1592 as there is a dated document in the Public Records Office which mentions an unnamed ship “cast away about Alderney” which was carrying dispatches from Lord Burghley to General Sir John Norreys, who was in command of an English army in Brittany.

Found over 30 years ago, the wreck has given up over 1500 artefacts and concretions which have all been studied and conserved.

We have been involved with the project for the last 12 years and I conserved the first cannon recovered from the wreck in 1994.

The two cannons (designated Cannon 1 and 3) were transported to the Tower of London in June this year, where Mags Felter and I took part in a “public de-concretion” to raise awareness of the project, raise funds for the ongoing excavation and demonstrate the role of the conservator to a wide audience. Whilst both cannon were heavily concreted, it was still possible to discern features including cordage wrapped around the barrel (photo, top), and the remains of the sides (cheeks) of the wooden carriage. Cannon 1 is less well preserved, has lost its carriage and has suffered damage whilst exposed on the seabed.

To remove the concretion, the time honoured method of hammer and cold chisel was employed with the whole process being

filmed for a documentary to be screened on the BBC in early 2009. As the concretion peeled away like an onion skin, exposing the black iron surface beneath (which rapidly oxidised to rust), additional features were exposed. As with the first cannon conserved in 1994, the cannon muzzles were sealed with wooden bungs or tampions (below), and further sealed with traces of wax (still awaiting analysis but likely to be tallow). This indicated that both cannons were loaded with cast iron cannon balls and ready to fire, although the gunpowder would have lost its effectiveness after all these years. (Well, that’s what we told the Tower authorities when they became concerned about the potential risk to visitors!) The fact that each of the cannons was loaded doesn’t imply that the ship was

Wooden tampion still in place in the muzzle of one of the cannon

22

involved in a battle – ships often went to sea with all guns loaded and ready to fire, just as a precaution.

Each cannon had its weight (14cwt, or 1568 pounds) stamped into the barrel above the touch hole, in each case marked as “14 0 0”. Other markings discovered await the results of further investigation and will be reported on later. One cannon had its lead apron (the lead sheet protecting the touch hole) still tied in place, waiting to be removed for priming.

Further remarkable discoveries were made during concretion removal, including one musket, remains of two leather shoes, traces of an iron helmet decorated with copper alloy rosettes, several fragmented wooden powder flasks and a ceramic hand grenade.

All these items had become embedded within the encrustation around the cannon and were carefully recorded, removed and transported to York for continued treatment.

Hammer and cold chisel were employed to remove the concretion

Following the safe arrival of both cannons in York, we have now removed the remains of the wooden gun carriage, during which we discovered the well-preserved remains of the wrought iron trunnion plate used to hold the cannon in place on its carriage. Whilst it was a nice surprise to find that the iron was well preserved (small objects of wrought iron tend to completely disintegrate under water)

a bigger surprise awaited us when it was discovered that the trunnion plate was decorated with a simple incised chevron pattern. Elizabethan gun founders certainly took pride in their work.

The task now is to remove the iron shot still lodged at the breech of each cannon, the problems being that the oakum wadding (essential for creating a tight fit, thereby ensuring that the force of the explosion propels the shot out of the muzzle of the cannon) has swelled as a result of waterlogging, as well as the corrosion of the iron ball itself. A combination of chemical and physical methods will be used.

Salt removal from each cannon is likely to take around two years. Initial treatment will comprise electrolysis to reduce the corroded outer iron surface and remove residual concretion, and the method has the effect of increasing the rate of salt removal.

Up to now, the conservation of the cannons has involved mechanical cleaning but now it’s time to introduce some hard science into the procedure.

Electrolysis is a well established conservation technique for marine iron, and involves setting up an “electrolytic cell” using two electrodes, termed the anode (usually sheet steel or steel mesh) and the cathode (the cannon), an electrolyte (an electrically conductive solution), and a power source to supply current.

When a current is applied, chemical reactions occur at both anode and cathode: oxygen is evolved at the anode, whilst at the cathode the corrosion products are reduced to metallic iron and hydrogen gas is evolved. At the same time the negatively charged chloride ions within the cannon are attracted towards the anode.

Chloride removal will be monitored, and once levels have been reduced to an optimum concentration each cannon will be washed, dried and finally coated with a corrosion inhibitor such as tannic acid. The wooden carriage elements will be put through our standard wood conservation process of impregnation with Polyethylene Glycol wax (commonly referred to as PEG) and then freeze-dried.

23

Both cannons will be returned to Alderney where they will join the previously conserved cannon on display in the Island’s museum, making for a remarkable display of Elizabethan ordnance. All three cannons are virtually identical (with length around 2.29m. and muzzle diameter around 0.88m) and represent, in the words of Mensun Bound , a “…coordinated, uniform weapon system, a weapon system that gave Britain a domination of the seas that lasted until the 20th century.

As well as showcasing our work on the deconcretion of the cannons, the BBC documentary will also feature the casting and firing of a replica in order to assess their effectiveness and capabilities. Don’t miss it!

Our last two cannons have travelled all the way from Inishbofin, a small island off the Galway coast in Ireland for conservation (see Figure 7). Both cannons appear to be identical (around 1.5m in length) and Ruth Brown tells us they were cast in a French gun foundry during the 18th century. These cannons were probably used either by the local community or by the lord of the manor for defensive purposes. One cannon was deconcreted by the mechanical excavator immediately upon discovery. Fortunately the archaeologists working in the vicinity were able to prevent the deconcretion of the second cannon and we will be able to reveal it in a more controlled fashion. Traces of wood are visible in the muzzle, which suggests that each cannon is possibly loaded. Again the proposed treatment is to flush out harmful salts using electrolysis and intensive washing.

its long journey to stabilisation. Then, the only sounds to be heard will be the gurgle of gas emanating from the battery of electrolysis tanks, until the next concreted cannon takes its place in the queue. Already in line is a small bulwark mounted swivel gun and several large breech chambers from the Studland Bay site, and there are another 10 cannons sitting on the Alderney seabed.

The particular challenge with these two cannons is that when they are returned to the island the plan is to display them outside during the summer months, where they will be exposed to salt-laden sea spray. The task now is to find a robust coating that will withstand the rigours of the environment whilst protecting the iron, and I am currently talking with corrosion scientists concerned with the protection of oil rigs.

Smith, R.D. 1988. Towards a new typology for wrought iron ordnance. In Guns From The Sea, Special issue reprinted from The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology, Vol 17, No 1. pp 5-16

Very soon the heavy thud of hammer on concretion will cease as each cannon begins

Ceramic hand grenade lurking within concretion

Ian Panter Principal Conservator

Bibliography

Ladle, L.,1993. A Spanish Shipwreck off the Dorset Coast. The Studland Bay Wreck. Poole Museum Heritage Series. Poole Museum Service.

Monaghan, J, and Bound, M., 2001. A Ship Cast Away About Alderney.

Investigations of an Elizabethan shipwreck. The Alderney Maritime Trust. pp 47-54.

Websites:

For more information, images and video clips of the cannons from the Alderney wreck at the Tower of London go to: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/programmes/elizabethsarmada/article1.shtml

For more information on the Alderney wreck and the work of the Alderney Maritime Trust, go to: http://www.alderneywreck.com/

24

Stonegate Voices

As announced in the last Yorkshire Archaeology Today, York Archaeological Trust has just started a new oral history project, hot on the heels of its hugely successful oral history book on wartime York, Rations, Raids and Romance: York in the Second World War by Van Wilson. The new oral history project focuses on the area surrounding Barley Hall, the 14th-century building bought by York Archaeological Trust in 1987 and subsequently restored to its former glory.

Right: Barley Hall during restoration in 1987

At the centre of the area is Stonegate. Stonegate is well-known for its elegant buildings and interesting shops, but there is a wealth of history behind the façades with businesses such as printers, music shops, dancing academies, gown shops and milliners, as well as the York Medical Society, pubs and non-conformist churches, all having existed here.

Local historian Van Wilson has now begun interviewing people who lived or worked in this area, and is amassing a huge amount of fascinating historical information and images.

If you are interested in being interviewed for this project, which will culminate in a book, the third in the Trust’s Oral History Series, and an exhibition, please contact Christine Kyriacou at York Archaeological Trust, 47 Aldwark, York YO1 7BX Tel: 01904 663006 Email: ckyriacou@yorkat.co.uk

JOIN THE FRIENDS OF YORK ARCHAEOLOGICAL TRUST Receive YORKSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGY TODAY twice a year Receive the Annual Report of YORK ARCHAEOLOGICAL TRUST

Specialist Weekend Courses

Free, unlimited entry to JORVIK, Coppergate Free, unlimited entry to DIG, St Saviourgate 10% discount in the DIG shop 10% discount on the training dig 30% discount on all the Trust’s academic publications when purchased direct (one of each publication per person) Access to the Trust’s highly acclaimed lunchtime lectures

An Introduction to Fieldwork 24th - 26th October 2008

A special programme of visits, day schools, lectures, site tours and social events.

This course will give beginners and those

By joining you will be contributing directly to the work of York

with some basic knowledge the chance to

Archaeological Trust. The Friends donate every penny of profit

find out and take part in fieldwork based

directly to the Trust to further its important and exciting work.

at the unique Hungate site. Delegates will get the chance to excavate the site, and explore archaeological techniques with the

Membership rates Adult

£19.00 pa

experts from York Archaeological Trust, as

Joint Adult (2 adults at same address)

£27.00 pa

well as see behind the scenes and find out

Family (2 adults and all children at same address) £31.00 pa Over 60s

£17.00 pa

Joint over 60s

£23.00 pa

Student in full-time education

£17.00 pa

Overseas member (sterling)

£30.00 pa

Life membership (single)

£200.00

Life membership (couple)

£250.00

To join The Friends, send a cheque payable to FOYAT to: The Friends, York Archaeological Trust, 47 Aldwark, York YO1 7BX

more.

Cost per person: £120.00. (£110 for all those who have already taken part in the Training Dig at Hungate) Email: trainingdig@yorkat.co.uk or telephone 07908 210026 to enquire or book a place.

A group of historians, art historians and archaeologists will discuss the life and legacy of Wilfrid, Bishop of York and Abbot of Ripon and Hexham.

Among the speakers will be Professor Richard Bailey (Emeritus Professor of Anglo-Saxon Civilisation, University of Newcastle), Paul Bidwell (Head of Archaeology, Tyne and Wear Museums), Eric Cambridge, Dr Katy Cubitt (Department of History, University of York), Dr Richard Hall (Director of Archaeology, York Archaeological Trust), Dr Jane Hawkes (Department of History of Art, University of York), Professor Éamonn Ó Carragáin (Department of English, University College Cork), Professor Alan Thacker (Institute of Historical Research, London) and Professor Ian Wood (Department of History, University of Leeds).

The conference will take place in St William’s College, beside York Minster and will include a visit to Ripon and Hexham on 12th September.

Further details will be posted on the YAT website (www.yorkarchaeology.co.uk) as they become available.

In this issue...

www.yorkarchaeology.co.uk