Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 September 2008
During 1981, excavation of a large sand and gravel pit in Tattershall Thorpe, Lincolnshire, revealed many traces of Neolithic occupation and three Roman pits (fig. 8). In the southwestern part of the site, a sub-rectangular feature, aligned approximately east-west (pl. IIa), was found to contain a large number of iron tools and other objects, including Roman coins and glass which initially caused the material to be reported as Romano-British. Subsequently, however, a few objects were identified as post-Roman, and they are enough to show that the material was buried in the seventh century or possibly a little later. Because the soil in the area is very acid, conditions for the survival of organic material were poor, but a few fragments of human bone were recovered nevertheless, and it is therefore assumed that the feature was a grave with an inhumation. The objects had been deposited in two discrete assemblages, at each end of the grave.
1 National Grid Reference TF 238 608.Google Scholar
2 Chowne, P., Healy, F. and Bradley, R., The Excavation of a Neolithic Settlement at Tattershall Thorpe. Lincolnshire, East Anglian Archaeol. 57 (Gressenhall, 1992). The excavator, Dr Chowne, has discussed the site at length with me, and I am indebted to him for the opportunity to become involved with an important discovery.Google Scholar
3 Chowne, P., ‘Tattershall Thorpe’, Lincolnshire Hist. and Archaeol. 17 (1982), 74–5.Google Scholar
4 Many of their opinions are cited in this article, and I am grateful to them. In particular, thanks are owed to Lesley Webster of the Department of Medieval and Later Antiquities, British Museum, who had already seen and commented on much of the collection in 1982.
5 A version of this paper was presented at the International Socìety of Anglo-Saxonists' Fifth Meeting, held at the State University of New York at Stony Brook in July 1991. It was prepared for publication during a sabbatical term, for which I am grateful to the University of Southampton.
Since this paragraph was written, a similar plea for further investigation has been made by Welch, M., Anglo-Saxon England (London, 1992), p. 116: ‘The future publication of this exciting large assemblage will mark an important contribution.’Google Scholar
6 Chief Conservator, City of Lincoln Archaeological Unit.
7 Others involved in this work were K. Foley, F. Macalister, R. Allman, and J. C. Dean.
8 Those made by Watson, J. of the Ancient Monuments Laboratory, English Heritage, are cited below, and are taken from her report, Identification of Mineral-Preserved Wood Associated with a Tool Hoard from Tattershall Thorpe, Lincolnshire, Ancient Monuments Laboratory Conservation Report, no. 3823 (London, 1982).Google Scholar
9 White, R., ‘Investigating the Tattershall Thorpe Hoard’, Lincoln Archaeol. 1989/90, ed. Jones, M. (Lincoln, 1990), pp. 16–20.Google Scholar
10 Helpfully clarified in a drawing in Müller-Wille, M., ‘Der frühmittelalterliche Schmied im Spiegel skandinavischer Grabfunde’, FS 11 (1977), 127–201, figs. 1 and 2.Google Scholar
11 Arrhenius, B., ‘Eine Goldschmiedgrab von Hovgardsberg, Vendel, Uppland, Sweden’, FS 13 (1979), 393–414, at 404–7.Google Scholar
12 Munksgaard, E., ‘A Viking Age Smith, his Tools and his Stock-in-trade’, Offa 41 (1984), 85–96, at 86Google Scholar. A later, English parallel from Thetford, Norfolk, weighs 605 grams: Goodall, I. H., ‘Iron Objects’, in Rogerson, A. and Dallas, C., Excavations in Thetford, 1948–59 and 1973–80, East Anglian Archaeol. 22 (Gressenhall, 1984), 77–106, no. 4.Google Scholar
13 Alnus sp., identified by J. Watson of the Ancient Monuments Laboratory, English Heritage.
14 Cf. another Thetford tool: Goodall, ‘Iron Objects’, no. 10.
15 Cf. pairs from Tjele, Denmark (Munksgaard, , ‘Viking Age Smith’, p. 85 and fig. 1)Google Scholar, and from Hérouvillette, France (Decaens, J., ‘Un nouveau cimetière du haut moyen âge en Normandie, Hérouvillette (Calvados)’, Archéologie médiévale 1 (1971), 1–187, at 115).Google Scholar
16 Whitfield, N., ‘Round Wire in the Early Middle Ages’, Jewellery Stud. 4 (1990), 12–28Google Scholar; the Tattershall Thorpe tool is illustrated and discussed on p. 23.Google Scholar
17 Scott, B. G., Early Irish Ironworking (Belfast, 1990), pp. 21–6.Google Scholar
18 Probably Buxus sp., identified by J. Watson.
19 This was suggested by C. A. Morris.
20 This idea derives from the tentative identification made of a rather different object in a Scandinavian hoard: Arwiddson, G. and Berg, G., The Mästermyrr Find: a Viking-Age Tool Chest from Gotland (Stockholm, 1983), no. 56. If it is correct, the upper drawing in fig. 9f should be viewed the other way up.Google Scholar
21 Tilia, sp., identified by J. Watson.
22 E.g. Craddock, P. T., ‘Metalworking Techniques’, ‘The Work of Angels’, ed. Youngs, S. (London, 1989), pp. 170–4, at 170–1: cat. nos. 183, 185 and 187–8.Google Scholar
23 This was suggested by G. Speake.
24 As in the Mästermyrr hoard; Arwiddson and Berg, Mästermyrr Find., no. 85.
25 V. I. Evison, ‘The Glass Vessel’, in Rahtz, P. and Watts, L., ‘Pagans Hill Revisited’, Arch J 146 (1989), 330–71, at 341–5, esp. 343. Professor Evison commented on the Tattershall Thorpe fragment at the Salisbury symposium.Google Scholar
26 Identified by E. Crowfoot and mentioned in Owen-Crocker, G., Dress in Anglo-Saxon England (Manchester, 1986), p. 187Google Scholar. Further work is needed to establish whether certain objects were individually wrapped, or if they were wrapped in significant groups – see Welch, , Anglo-Saxon England, p. 116.Google Scholar
27 Evison, V. I., ‘Anglo-Saxon Glass Claw-Beakers’, Arcbaeologia 107 (1982), 43–76, at 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28 Speake, G., A Saxon Bed Burial on Swallowcliffe Down: Excavations by F. de M. Vatcher (London, 1989), pp. 72–4.Google Scholar
29 Renner, D., Die durchbrochenen Zierscheiben der Merowingerzeit (Mainz, 1970), p. 63 and table 5, nos. 100–9.Google Scholar
30 Speake, G., Anglo-Saxon Animal Art and its Germanic Background (Oxford, 1980)Google Scholar, ch. 3. As Speake demonstrates, discussion of the date of the introduction of this style in England and Francia is too closely related to its presence in the ‘Queen Arnegunde’ burial for comfort – but see Périn, P., ‘Pour la datation de la tombe d'Arégonde, épouse de Clotair ler, découverte en 1959 dans la basilique de Saint-Denis’, Archéologie médiévale 21 (1991), 21–50, for a reconciliation.Google Scholar
31 E.g. Böhner, K., Die fränkischen Altertumer des Trierer Landes, Germanische Denkmäler der Völkerwanderungzelt, ser. B (1958) I, table 26Google Scholar; Young, B. K., Quatre cimetières mérovingiens de l'est de la France, BAR International ser. 208 (Oxford, 1984), 127, 214 and 217Google Scholar; Ament, H., Die fränkischen Grabfunde aus Mayen und der Pellenz (Berlin, 1976), tables 17 and 32.Google Scholar
32 Musty, J., ‘The Excavation of Two Barrows, One of Saxon Date, at Ford, Laverstock, near Salisbury, Wiltshire’, Ant J 49 (1969), 98–117, at 106–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33 Speake, , Swallowcliffe, pp. 72–4 and fig. 88.Google Scholar
34 Scull, C., ‘A Sixth-Century Grave containing a Balance and Weights from Watchfield, Oxfordshire, England’, Germania 64 (1986), 105–38.Google Scholar
35 Capelle, T. und Vierck, H., ‘Modeln der Merowinger- und Wikingerzeit’, FS 5 (1971), 41–100, at 71–5Google Scholar; Speake, , Animal Art, p. 71Google Scholar; Watkin, J. R., ‘A Frankish Bronze Bowl from Barton-upon-Humber,’ Lincolnshire Hist. and Archaeol. 15 (1980), 88–9.Google Scholar
36 I am very grateful to B. Ager of the Department of Medieval and Later Antiquities, British Museum, for this information.
37 Wilson, D. M., ‘Craft and Industry’, The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Wilson, D. M. (Cambridge, 1976), pp. 254–82.Google Scholar
38 E.g. Morris, C. A., ‘A Late Saxon Hoard of Iron and Copper-Alloy Artefacts from Nazeing, Essex’, MA 27 (1983), 27–39.Google Scholar
39 V. I. Evison, ‘Objects of Bronze and Iron’, in Haslam, J., ‘A Middle Saxon Iron Smelting Site at Ramsbury, Wiltshire’, MA 24 (1980), 1–68, at 33–9.Google Scholar
40 Arwiddson and Berg, Mästermyrr Find, nos. 77–8.
41 E.g. the pair in the Hérouvillette grave: Decaens, Hérouvillette, grave 10.
42 Speake, , Animal Art, p. 71.Google Scholar
43 One of the coins has not been separated from an iron ring to which it has become fixed by corrosion, so no attempt has been made to see if the coins fit into a recognizable pattern, a fraught exercise at the best of times: see Scull, , ‘Watchfield’, pp. 120–3.Google Scholar
44 E.g. Jutas, Hungary and Poysdorf, Austria: Salin, E., La civilisation mérovingienne, 4 vols. (Paris, 1950–1959) 111, 213–16.Google Scholar
45 Werner, J. ‘Fernhandel und Naturalwirtschaft in östlichen Merowingerreich nach archäologischen und numismatischen Zeugnissen’, Berichte der vomanisch-germanischen Kommission 42 (1961), 307–6.Google Scholar
46 Arwiddson and Berg, Mästermyrr Find, nos. 27 and 28.
47 Ibid.
48 Speake, , Animal Art, p. 97.Google Scholar
49 For useful discussions, see, e.g., Salin, , Civilisation mérovingienne, pp. 213–15Google Scholar; Müller-Wille, , ‘Schmied’, pp. 126–37Google Scholar; Speake, , Animal Art, p. 96Google Scholar; Ryan, M., ‘Links between Anglo-Saxon and Irish Early Medieval Art: Some Evidence of Metalwork’, Studies in Insular Art and Archaeology, ed. Karkov, C. and Farrell, R., Amer. Early Med. Stud. 1 (Miami, FL, 1991), pp. 117–26, at 118–19Google Scholar; Scott, , Irish Metalworking, pp. 171–212Google Scholar; Cramp, R., ‘Northumbria and Ireland’, Sources of Anglo-Saxon Culture, ed. Szarmach, P. E. (Kalamazoo, MI, 1986), pp. 185–201Google Scholar; Welch, , Anglo-Saxon England, pp. 112–16.Google Scholar
50 Bruce-Mitford, R., The Sutton Hoo Ship-Burial III.2, ed. Evans, A. C. (London, 1983), 842.Google Scholar
51 Decaens, Hérouvillette, grave 10.
52 I am grateful to P. Chowne for information about the grave's location and the topography of the area.
53 E.g. Speake, Swallowcliffe.
54 I am grateful to J. Wilford for investigating this for me.
55 Goodier, A., ‘The Formation of Boundaries in Anglo-Saxon England’, MA 28 (1984), 1–21.Google Scholar
56 Eagles, B. N., The Anglo-Saxon Settlement of Humberside, BAR Brit. ser. 68 (Oxford, 1979), esp. fig. 124.Google Scholar
57 Evison, , ‘Claw-Beakers’, pp. 52–7Google Scholar; idem, ‘Glass Vessel’; Campbell, E., ‘A Blue Glass Squat Jar from Dinas Powys, South Wales’, BBCS 36 (1989), 239–45.Google Scholar
58 Speake, , Swallowcliffe, pp. 72–4 and fig. 88.Google Scholar
59 Scull, , ‘Watchfield’, pp. 123–6.Google Scholar
60 B. Ager, pers. comm.
