North Foreland

What seems like forever ago I told you all about Mysterious Margate, so now as promised it is the turn of North Foreland.  For those not in the know, North Foreland is an area within the locality of Broadstairs.  It has a well defined Iron Age past and provides a nicely sized area for discussion.  There are several sites for us to explore; St Stephen’s College (Boast et al 2006), Stone Road (Moody 2005a), Bishops Avenue/Hamilton Lodge (Moody 2005b), Lanthorne Road (Hurd 1913), Albert Lodge (Hart 2006a), Castle Keep Hotel (Hart 2006b) and ‘Beauforts’ (Hart 2005).

 

St Stephen’s College (Boast et al 2006)

 

 St Stephen's College, site plan, The North

St Stephen's College, Site Plan, The South

This site is particularly complex so we will approach it one phase at a time.  It is rich in Iron Age archaeology and the principal features consist of post built structures, linear features (including 50 post holes), rectilinear enclosures and a number of pits.

 

Phase 1

 

This phase dates to c.500-300/250BC so can be characterised as being Middle Iron Age in nature.  It was suggested by Boast that the sporadic nature of the features may mean that this was a seasonal site.  There are several large, air-tight storage pits which bolter this theory as they are likely to have contained foodstuffs.  They provided an area of storage away from the nucleated settlement; however I am unsure as to the seasonality of their use.  The area in which they are located has soil well suited to growing crops and an expanse of land that can be used for animal husbandry, it therefore seems as though seasonality in this instance leads to a waste of land.  The climate remains constant across the Isle and as such there seems little reason for the site to be undesirable at any given period of the year.  Environmental sampling suggests that the level of chaff present is consistent with cereal processing, thus meaning that the site may be related to industry.  This is enhanced from the variety of animal bones that are present; the sample is indicative of animal husbandry rather than feasting.  A further point of interest is the presence of marine shell.  Within Britain there is a distinct lack of evidence relating to Iron Age peoples exploiting the sea, with the exception of salt production.  Therefore their discovery is something of a mystery, particularly as the site offered potential examples of net sinkers.  If fishing was occurring, it is unlikely that it would have been conducted off the jagged coast of North Foreland, instead I would suggest that it was taking place further South towards Joss Bay or along the coast of Margate.  In these areas the sea is far more accessible, yet the evidence of fishermen is currently missing from these locations.  It is possible that wide scale storage was taking place at St Stephen’s College; however, I am more inclined to suggest that this was a small nucleated settlement and that the excavation missed the area of occupancy.  It seems illogical to store so much, so far away from a settled area.

 

The pottery assemblage for this phase enhances the link the residents had with the sea.  There are several examples of localised pottery; however, there is a strong Continental flavour.  The highlight of this is a sherd from a vessel which has distinct parallels with those known at Neuville-sur-Escaut, particularly around the 450-300BC mark.  Along with the ceramic evidence noted at Hartsdown, Margate, it is becoming increasing clear that Middle Iron Age Thanet had strong Continental links, despite it generally being accepted that Britain as a whole was relatively isolated during this period.

 

There is also burial evidence for this period, firstly in Pit 4228; sadly this is the final resting place of a neonatal, this can often be interpreted as infanticide, however, I do not feel this is the case in this particular instance.  The site is also the resting place of an individual with unilateral ankylosis; this means the person in question would experience a great deal of discomfort when pressure was applied in the mouth.  The result would be that large pieces of food and meat in general may have been particularly difficult to consume.  The survival of the individual into adult life suggests a tolerant and compassionate society, willing to care for others and assist them with their needs.  I therefore question why they would practice infanticide and conclude that the neonatal remains were a result of nature’s cruelty as oppose to that of society.

Phase 2

Broadly speaking this phase encompasses c.300/250-50BC, there is some overlap with Phase 1, but it interestingly ends before the Roman invasion.  The principal features relating to this phase is an enclosure running parallel to a hollow way and a 50 post palisade.  The interpretation of this phase is debated, but, on initial observation I sided with a cattle kraal, until I looked deeper.  The cattle kraal, for me, was certain from the palisade and the formation of an extensive boundary, however, pottery found within the post holes was of an Early Iron Age nature.  This makes me doubt the cattle kraal theory, but at the same time I am not ready to embrace the enclosure as being a defended enclosure for times of trouble.  Firstly the enclosure is only 0.1ha, which I feel is too small an area to sustain a community, secondly there is limited evidence that such a protective enclave would have been required.  Further to this there are limited 4 and 6 post structures, so where would people have sheltered?  These structures are interpreted in the report as being granaries; this would be in keeping with a potential defended interior, however in this case I do not think it is the case.  Instead I propose that these structures are in fact housing, there is a distinct lack of roundhouses upon Thanet, this is possibly due to ploughing and the loss of the tell tale drip gully.  I however believe that it may be a case that they were never there in the first place.  Instead I think that the population of Thanet lived it houses similar to those on The Continent, this would mean they would leave rectangular traces consistent with the long-house culture.

 

If the 6 post structures are related to dwellings, those that are 4 post may well be granaries, but why would one nucleated settlement need so many and why would they be enclosed?  Maybe this relates to the economic expansion of the area, possibly even by the decedents of those in Phase 1.  Increased production, would require increased storage, perhaps the dwelling was that of a merchant, a trader, even an Iron Age entrepreneur?  Okay so maybe an entrepreneur is pushing it and I should watch a little less of The Apprentice and the Junior version, but, I hope you are following my point!  I believe this enclave to be a centre for trade, whether there was power for the people who may or may not of lived there I do not know and I am not overly concerned by it either.  What I do know is nearby a potin coin hoard has been found, the original Phase 1 site has seemingly progressed and the levels of external influences speak for themselves.  The pottery assemblage is key to this; Flanders’ La Tène III inspired pottery is present, particularly the S-profile noted on a number of locally produced sherds.  This suggests prolonged contact with the Continent, the pottery of Flanders is considered to be so accepted that it was becoming a feature of Late Iron Age Thanet.  People were so accepting of it that it had almost become their own.  There is also evidence for pottery indigenous to more localised regions, with several sherds consisting of fabrics associated with Folkestone.  This suggests a level of contact with East Kent; however, it is notably rare in comparison to vessel sherds inspired by Flanders.

 

So far, St Stephen’s College is depicting the region as being affluent, secure, complex and economically developing, while highlighting a community that was able to trade and demonstrate compassion.

 

Stone Road (Moody 2005a)

Stone Road, Site Plan

 

This site does not demonstrate the richest collection of Iron Age features, particularly in terms of occupation evidence.  However it remains of interest.

Firstly I will discuss the presence of a high number of animal bones.  The species present included cattle, sheep/goat, pig, dog and horse.  A study was conducted to determine if the bones were evidence of a butchery site, due to such high volumes.  The study concluded that the gnawing was consistent with general domestic consumption and the notions of wide scale butchery are quickly lost.  However, there is a distinct lack of domestic occupation evidence; the site lacks pits, linear features and post holes.

The site did produce further features, most of which are Roman and are found much higher than the numerous bones, so it is safe to assume that they are unconnected.  The site does contain 6 prenatal inhumations, each with sherds of Late Iron Age pottery, which acts as dating evidence.  These inhumations are truncated by Roman features, so it can be assumed that there was no settlement present when Roman construction began.  The graves were presumably unmarked to the invaders eye, or it is unlikely that they would have been disturbed.  The presence of pottery and the nature of the burials are indicative of deliberate acts, suggesting that it was a form of traditional practice, at least in this region.  It is possible that the site is at the edge of a Late Iron Age burial ground, but what about those bones?  Well there is plenty of evidence of feasting at Iron Age funerals, so why should these 6 tiny individuals be any different; time had been taken to bury them, so surely they would have received all rites.

 

Bishops Avenue/Hamilton Lodge (Moody 2005b)

 

Bishops Avenue, Site Plan

 

This site dates from the Middle to Late Iron Age and consists of linear ditches and 4 post structures.  The fill from the linear ditches yielded high amounts of faunal remains and as such comparisons have been made to Stone Road.

Despite the presence of structures and animal bone, there is very little in the way of material culture.  28 sherds of a single rusticated storage jar, with parallels to those found in Ebbsfleet, were discovered at date to c. 500-300BC.  This gives the earliest date for potential landscape use; however, due to the amount of the vessel that survives it is potentially a deliberate deposit.  There is little else to suggest a hoard, just a single vessel in an unusual location.  There are several sherds of Later Iron Age pottery associated with the 4 post structures, suggesting that they are secondary to the activity relating to the rusticated storage jar.  There is also a single potin coin, c.150-50BC, but it is unlikely that this is representative of anything more than casual loss.

I have already mentioned the faunal comparisons and the findings are supportive of the limited material culture.  The bone assemblage at this site is in far poorer condition than those at Stone Road.  This maybe indicative of two things, firstly the deposition was much earlier, making the bones contemporary with the vessel or secondly the soil is more acidic and that has caused the damaged.  There is little evidence as to the purpose of the bone assemblage at Bishops Avenue, but, I ma inclined to believe that the assemblage is related to the rusticated jar in some way and entirely unrelated to the structures.  The purpose of this site is very difficult to untangle with such limited evidence and as such it needs to be further considered in relation to other local finds and more importantly excavations.  Unfortunately the inhabited nature of the environment makes this unlikely.

 

Lanthorne Road (Hurd 1913)

 

This excavation took place in the early 1900’s and there is little in the way of a record and definitely no site plan.  I have included it though…you are probably wondering why, while thinking I may have gone a touch mad, but there is a method…I promise!

All that was recorded was the discovery of a vessel; it was black ware, local and nothing particularly special.  It was decorated with ‘nail marks’ and had some comb detail on a number of sherds.  Its interest comes with its parallels to vessels in Dumpton, hardly a million miles away I know, but when I couple it with a mixture of faunal remains and geographical positioning, I think it gets interesting.  During this time Thanet, much like today, had a network of tracks.  Some of these we know, whereas other areas seem isolated, this is one of those.  The evidence is suggestive of a route way that we were possibly unaware of, this is very tentative and possibly circumstantial, but considering the high presence of potin coins in the area, entirely possible.  North foreland lacked a sea connection, but Dumpton did not…see there is some method!

 

Albert Lodge (Hart 2006a), Castle Keep (Hart 2006b) and ‘Beauforts’ (Hart 2005)

The location of these sites in North Foreland, made me certain when I picked up the reports that I would find more archaeological gold…but there was nothing, not a single Iron Age sherd, not one tiny coin, not even a post hole.  Either this was not the place to be in Iron Age Thanet, or something is a miss.  Well I’m going with the latter…I do not believe that nothing happened here, in such close proximity to other evidence, instead I think it is lost.  This area has been agriculturally significant for hundreds and hundreds of years and it has been a desirable spot for construction.  So, imagine the amount of ploughs that have turned that soil, the amount of holes dug for foundations.  Now consider how our post holes, pits and ditches would survive it.  It is hardly surprising that we have a feature free zone.  I have included this to make the point that a lack of evidence is not always evidence for a lack of landscape use…an important archaeology lesson!

 

What does all this mean?

 

Well unlike Hartsdown, North Foreland is complicated and little bit messy.  It clearly saw Iron Age life, definitely in the Middle and Late periods and we know the Romans found it too.

From the evidence we have seen it seems that St Stephen’s College was the place to be, it was multi-phase and expanding, suggesting a strong and stable economy.  The presence of Continental material culture and inspiration was clear and life was seemingly good.  However, it is difficult to place Stone Road and Bishops Avenue into that picture, were they areas of industry? Or of trade? Do they hint at a regional house form? Maybe it is the possible missing evidence at Castle Keep, ‘Beauforts’ and Albert Lodge that held the answers.  As in the case of Hartsdown, consideration needs to be given as a whole, the geographical area considered is not huge; there is a danger of missing big picture through looking at little ones.  Stone Road and Bishops Avenue could have easily have been one site, focusing on the exact same thing during the Iron Age.  North Foreland is without doubt thriving, but this evidence has provided more questions than it has answers.

 

The next area I will explore is Central Broadstairs, but be sure to keep North Foreland in mind while reading…I have a feeling it has a lot more to offer. 

 

Until then keep exploring and keep in touch via Facebook, Twitter and email: musingsofanunemployedarchaeologist@hotmail.co.uk

Infleuntial Reading

Boast et al. 2006 Excavations at St Stephen's College, North Foreland, Broadstairs Kent: Archaeological Excavation Report Thanet Archaeological Trust Unpublished

Hart, P.C. 2005 'Beauforts', North Foreland Avenue, Broadstairs, Kent: Archaeological Report Thanet Archaeological Trust Unpublished

Hart, P.C. 2006a Groundworks Associated with the Construction of a Swimming Pool at Albert Lodge, North Foreland, Broadstairs, Kent: Archaeological Watching Brief Report Thanet Archaeological Trust Unpublished

Hart, P.C. 2006b The Construction of a Block of 16 Self-Contained Flats, Former Castle Keep Hotel and Forelands, Joss Gap Road, Broadstairs. Kent: Interim Archaeological Watching Brief Report Thanet Archaeological Trust Unpublished

Hurd, H. 1913a; 1913b; 1913c. Some Notes on Recent Archaeological Discoveries at Broadstairs Thanet Archaeological Trust Unpublished

Moody, G 2005a Land to Rear of 103 Stone Road, Broadstairs, Kent: Archaeological Report Thanet Archaeological Trust Unpublished

Moody, G. 2005b Hamilton Lodge, Bishops Avenue, Broadstairs: Archaeological Report Thanet Archaeological Trust Unpublished

Have you done your bit?

As I am sure many of you are aware a ridge near a hillfort in Sheffield is under threat, I urge you all to sign the petition if you haven't already done so.  It is easy to think that it's not in your area so doesn't matter...however that could not be further from the truth.  The ridge in question is poorly understood and is yet to have secure dating. By signing the petition to save it you allow for the potential of further investigations and studies to be conducted. It maybe argued that construction would allow for investigation; however the monument would be lost and could never be studied in conjunction with its wider landscape.  The local and national significance of this ridge is unknown, however what is known is that it forms a piece of our historic puzzle...who knows what piece it may be.

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/the-planning-inspectorate-refuse-planning-permission-to-build-houses-on-the-historic-roman-ridge-2

New Ways to Keep in Touch!

Worried you may miss an update? Well worry no more, I have a few new ways that you can keep in touch...

If you are a Facebook kinda person this one is for you, a brand new fan page... https://www.facebook.com/MusingsOfAnUnemployedArchaeologist

If Twitter is more your thing then you can keep track @ArchaeologyMuse

If all that is a bit too much and you just have a question or suggestion feel free to send an email to...

musingsofanunemployedarchaeologist@hotmail.co.uk

Mysterious Margate

This one has taken a while to reach you and I can only apologise for that.  I have been fortunate enough to be involved in some interesting, but time consuming, projects of late and wanted to make sure that my Thanet research was done properly.  I’ve been missing the Isle of late and yesterdays Dreamland announcement gave me the blog nudge that I needed.  I hope you have enjoyed my other bits and bobs, but, now we return to the research that I was so frantically trying to tie together this time last year…how time flies!

For those of you that don’t know Margate is a relatively small town located on the Northern coast of Thanet, once popular with seaside holiday makers, it now finds itself in the heart of the art scene thanks to the Turner Contemporary.  Was it that much different in the Iron Age? Well here are a few case studies…I’ll let you make your own mind up, but I may give a few handy hints along the way.

The top triangle marks the point of the Margate coast line, pop back to … if you need a little recap on the environment.

The circles marked 1,2 and 3 provide a rough location of the sites that will be considered, time will be spent considering their features, finds and interpretations, before I give you a round up of Iron Age Margate.  (My apologies for the size of this image causing the post to become untidy, but it is the only way that numbers can be made out)

The Hartsdown area of Margate is the area featured, its’ relatively compact and encompasses an area of land either side of the B2052.  The sites to be featured are Tivoli Park (Perkins 1996), Hartsdown Technology College (Gardner and Gibbon, undated) and Hartsdown Park (Boast 2007).  Original site drawings will be reproduced in order to provide clarity.  I also wish to take this opportunity to explain to you my chronology…

Early Iron Age (c800-500BC)

Middle Iron Age (c500-300BC)

Late Iron Age (c300BC-AD43)

Belgic Phase (c150BC-AD43)

As you can see these dates all overlap, this is because the dates were not determined by the Britons themselves, instead they are decided by those that study them.  You may read other texts, blogs etc that have a varied dating system to mine, I certainly experience this during my research…but these are the periods I found to be most frequently attested to within Thanet.

Firstly we shall investigate Tivoli Park; throughout this section reference will be made to Perkins’ site plan below…

 

 

You maybe wondering why the area consists of 13 individual sites while I am considering it as one, well the area was excavated as part of the Community Woodland Project and was conducted through the use of test trenches.  What we see on the above site plan is what was excavated and mapped.  It is estimated that we have only discovered approximately 2% of Tivoli Park’s archaeology, in terms of area.

Tivoli Park appears to have been occupied in one form or another from the Bronze Age right through to the Romans.  The area is pottery rich making the dating of features particularly secure, in turn this allows for a site narrative to develop.

Early Iron Age activity appears to be directly following activities undertaken within the Bronze Age; it was probably even conducted by the same people.  All that was likely to have changed for them was the pottery they were using.  Site 2 provides an area where a possible wooden structure was situated, but, the lack of adjacent features suggests that it was not used for settlement purposes.  There is a lack of ditches and pits associated with domestic sites.  Further to this Early Iron Age material has been found within ditches forming Bronze Age Barrows.  With this in mind I would suggest that the postholes found at Site 2 represent a structure that was in someway related to the ritualised landscape of Bronze Age Tivoli Park.  The ritualised nature of the landscape maybe characterised by the presence of the Shottendane River, water is thought to have been particularly important to the Britons and their predecessors.   It is possible that there was a spring or unusual feature within the river in this area, making it a particularly attractive location for the commemoration of the dead. 

In close proximity is Site 3, these interlocking semi-circular structures are interpreted by Perkins (1996) as being animal corrals of an Early Iron Age date.  Much like the structure in Site 2 it appears to be a particularly isolated feature, this leads me to associate it more with a ritualised landscape than that of a settlement.  With the exception of pottery the feature yielded little in the way of finds, this would make it an extremely clean settlement and furthers my suggestion that it is related to Bronze Age landscape.

Some 400m to the West is a sub-rectangular ditch enclosing a posthole.  The purpose of this is also ambiguous; however, its location upon the natural ridge is unusual.  It did contain sherds of Early Iron Age pottery and has the potential to be associated with the Bronze Age landscape.  It does appear to be out of use and not considered important by the Late Iron Age as it seems it has been truncated by a ditch which forms an alignment with the known Late Iron Age enclosure.  This is unlikely to have occurred if the inhabitants were consistent as they would be aware of a social significance to the structure.

The centre of the Site Plan is the focus of Middle Iron Age activity, more specifically Sites 5-9.  This covers some 200m of the entire excavated area, revealing features such as rectangular enclosures, multiple ditches, clusters of postholes and pits considered to be for storage purposes.  In my opinion this is strong evidence of a settled community, further supported by the discovery of a shale bracelet, cowry shell and weaving comb within Site 5, along with two spindle whorls in Site 7.  Site 7 also yielded a fragment of an Early Iron Age brooch, the occurrence of this could suggest that the settlement is associated with features in Sites 2 and 3; however, a single fragment is not enough to form an entire settlement.  At the very least I would expect a presence of contemporary pottery.  Instead I would suggest that the brooch was a treasure possession, possibly an heirloom which broke beyond repair. 

Sites 5-8 appear to be on a varied alignment to that of Site 9, this is suggestive of two phases of construction or even two separate communities.  It is possible that the natural ridge acted as a boundary marker for differing social groupings, however, both Site 6 and Site 7 encroach this ridge.  It is also likely that the settlement stretches in both a Northerly and Southerly direction, suggesting that we only have a snippet of the overall Middle Iron Age activity within the area.

Late Iron Age activity is present within the site but limited in nature.  Site 1 is a Roman trackway, frequented with Late Iron Age pottery, suggesting its construction was in fact earlier.  This is also supported by the presence of the Bronze Age Barrow landscape; they are known to be located along trackways and are thought by some, including myself, to provide a means of navigating wider landscapes.  Site 10 is also Late Iron Age in date, the purpose of the rectangular enclosure containing two large pits is unknown, but it appears to face a South-Easterly direction and extended investigation into that area may have provided us with further answers.  The lack of extensive Late Iron Age material culture could mean one of two things that the Middle Iron Age community curate their wares well or the site was largely abandoned.  I personally feel abandonment is more likely, with the potential for a new occupation area to have been constructed in an unexcavated area in close proximity to Site 10.

 

Now we turn our attentions to Hartsdown Technology College.

 

As the Site Plan indicates there are relatively few features within this excavation and in comparison to Tivoli Park the area excavated is tiny.   The archaeology is still insightful and the two curvilinear ditches both appear large enough to be considered of a bounded nature.  Their varied direction suggests that they are separate and possibly provide an insight into agricultural practices.  The presence of a gully and pit in association with enclosure 1 certainly enhance this idea.  A considerable amount of environmental studies have been conducted within this assemblage.  Firstly there are low numbers of animal bones; this suggests that the processing of livestock is unlikely to have taken place here.  Secondly there is a presence of wheat and barley but not chaff, this is indicative of cultivation, but, again not of processing, suggesting that the produce was transported in order for that to occur.  This evidence furthers conclusions that this was not a settled area but instead an agricultural one, demonstrating Iron Age field systems.

The dating of this site is particularly problematic, its’ agricultural nature means that there is little need for material culture, at least not in the forms that survive.  There is some material culture, which is of particular interest when considering the nature of socio-economic trends.  Within Pit 2009 a large amount of an individual ring based vessel, of La Tène influence and possibly even of origin was discovered.  The vessel dates loosely to the 5^th-4^th centuries BC and as such tentatively dates the field system.  There is also some evidence of contemporary fine and coarse wares, which could be indicative of more than a field system.  When this is taken into consideration with the crouch inhumation located within the large ditch of Enclosure 1 a clearer picture maybe painted.  The style of the inhumation is contemporary with both the La Tène influenced vessel and the other known pottery; it is therefore possible that despite varied location they are associated with the burial of the individual.

Interestingly the La Tène vessel was not the only object yielded by Pit 2009; it also provided two awls and an annular brooch fitting.  The awls are known to be of Early Iron Age date, but, were also used within the Bronze Age.  The annular fitting has not previously been attributed to an Iron Age context and Gardener and Gibbon (Undated) suggest that the objects were deliberately deposited in this location.  They further this by noting that they are related to the inhumation, however, if this were to be the case the objects would have had to have been passed through several generations, this I feel is unlikely and instead the items placed within a Late Bronze/Early Iron Age context, likely to be in relation to the Bronze Age hoarding tradition apparent across Thanet.  It is possible that upon burying the known individual these items were disturbed and the La Tène vessel placed as an additional offering.

 

Hartsdown Park

The final site to be considered is that of Hartsdown Park, Football Pitch (Boast 2007).  Unfortunately there is little information regarding the site due to a lack of funding for post-excavation analysis.  What is known can be found within the 2007 edition of Archaeologia Cantiana within the area given to Thanet Archaeological Trust in order to document their annual work.  The archaeological record is still particularly interesting, presenting us with thirteen individual inhumations dating from the Late Iron Age into the Early Roman Period.  The individuals buried across such as wide time span show a continuity of land use, this is suggestive that the same community remained in the area.  Further to this it illustrates that during a period of assumed upheaval, this community at least, continued their burial practices and retained their sacred lands.  In addition approximately twenty pits were found in close proximity, each filled with a variety of pottery and animal bone.  There is suggestion that some of the pits provide evidence of Late Iron Age stone quarries, this is however tentative and should be viewed with an air of caution.

 

What does this all mean?

Well firstly with some certainty I can say that the Hartsdown area of Margate was occupied from the Bronze Age to the Roman Period, what appears to change is the intensity of this occupation.  It is thought that the Shottendane River would flow in the Winter, but, provide marsh land through the Summer months, this coupled with the spring would have made this a fascinating place to the Bronze Age inhabitants of Thanet and as such it is easy to understand why it featured within a ritual landscape. 

By the Middle Iron Age a well established settlement had developed, this is potentially due to its’ proximity to a broad bay harbour.  The ability to access the sea allowed inhabitants to access the world, well the Wantsum, Thames and North Sea at least.  Aerial photography has prompted discussions relating to larges ditches, commonly associated with defended settlements; in this instance possibly a promontory settlement, such as that suggested at North Foreland.  This is supported by the inter-regional connectivity demonstrated at both Tivoli Park and Hartsdown Technology College.  The former provided evidence of contact with Western Britain in the form of shale bracelets, along with more distant contacts in the form of a cowry shell, originating in the Mediterranean or even Northern Africa.  The latter yielded a vessel of La Tène style, this shows not only contact but lasting influence, suggesting that contact and cultural exchange had been occurring over a longer period than we may have originally thought.  This illustrates the importance of considering sites in conjunction with one another as oppose to individually, it has allowed for a clearer image of the Middle Iron Age to be produced.

For Middle Iron Age Margate to be receiving such commodities it must have been providing something in return.  This takes us back to the College, the environmental samples coupled with the features points to an organised agricultural society, working within a field system allowing for the production of surplus.  Such surplus becomes as valuable as the grain required for sustenance as it creates an economy which allows the community to benefit.

By the Late Iron Age we appear to have a settlement shift with the known Tivoli park settlement, at least in our section, being abandoned.  However there is evidence for Late Iron Age activity including a metalled trackway, this suggests change and with known increase in Roman contact this is easily understood.  The desire to move slightly further inland is however slightly baffling and at present I can offer little in the way of an explanation.  Traditional this would be viewed as being as a result of an influx of Belgic peoples, however I fail to see how this would see an end to a well established community, instead I would expect to discover an extension of it.  Further to this the Hartsdown Park site is within relatively close proximity to the Middle Iron Age settlement and agricultural land, thus suggesting that there was a sustained population living within the area during the Late Iron Age and into the Early Roman Period.  I have little doubt that community remained the same during these late stages due to burial continuity, but, unfortunately many of their secrets remain just that.

 

From our first set of case studies it is clear to see that Margate was home to a vibrant community throughout the Iron Age.  Its’ geographical location is likely to be key to this; however, the settlement size is far larger than I ever thought I would find within Thanet for the period.  Traditionally the Middle Iron Age is viewed as a mysterious phase in Iron Age histories, its’ not quite proto-historic and is too close to be considered prehistoric, this ambiguity leads to an inability to categorise and such often leaves it forgotten.  Margate is beginning to shed some light on this forgotten era, but as ever has provided so many unanswered questions! I guess we will just have to keep digging….

 

I hope you have all enjoyed our return to Thanet and her beautiful Iron Age past, feel free to provide me with your thoughts and suggestions on the material discussed in this post.  As always it would be lovely to hear from you all…so until we explore North Foreland, it’s bye for now :o)

Influential Reading

Boast, E. 2007. Bronze and Iron Age Occupation: Hartsdown Park, Margate in Archaeologia Cantiana Vol. 127 pp429

Perkins, D.R.J. 1996. The Trust for Thanet Archaeology: Evaluation Work Carried outin 1995, Hartsdown Community Woodland Scheme Margate in Archaeologia Cantiana Vol. 116 pp 265-281

An Adventure in Cornovii Territories...

What better way is there to spend a summer’s day than exploring a hillfort? None…I didn’t think so! So this Silure ventured deep into Cornovii territory to explore Old Oswestry Hillfort.  Due to a few technical issues there are only photos of the Southern end of the fort; it seems the Cornovii want the Northern end to remain a mystery.

The site is now looked after by English Heritage, but quite fittingly it is part of a working farm and is now home to an array of sheep and cows.  Some of you may disagree with this, but the condition is perfect and preservation is better than many similar sites such as Cadbury Castle.  Besides this the sheep and cows provide some much needed character and make it far easier to picture in a Time Team type way what the inner hillfort may have looked like.

The above picture is probably my favourite of the day, it’s the tour guides having a well earned rest! Along the Northern half of the Hillfort the sheep graze freely and seem keen to show visitors the way to go and even wait for you if you stop. Not sure if the Cornovii would have been quite to welcoming to a Silure, or anyone else for that matter, this is one huge set of defences after all.  These lovely ladies greet you at the Western enterance and pretty much stay with you until you get to the Eastern enterance, then they cut through one of their many paths and rest on the second rampart.

English Heritage provides much information about Oswestry Hillfort so I won't go into too much detail here.  My focus is largely on the original phase, which is the hillfort plateau, the first and second rampart and probably the entrence ways.  The entrance to the East seemed to be situated slightly off the usual South-East axis that most hillforts conform to, this maybe a later edit to the monument, but, it seemed unlikely when assessing the ramparts.

This is the view from the top of the fort looking down the Eastern entrance way, as you can see the opening curves to the North, but, it then swings back to the South.  It is now used as a passage way for cows, who very kindly let me stand amoung them to get this shot...I had to be extra brave! If the original entrance way swung back to the South I don't know, but that is the direction of the modern farm.

My last real observation, at least archaeologically speaking was an 'earthwork' to the South of the hillfort as shown below:

As you can all see, it's quite a substantial mound, but the trees hide the shape very well.  This maybe a coincidence however, its' location and size have made me suspicious of its' origins.  I haven't been able to find any information on the mound, but judging by the tree line it has an expansive flat area at the top.  The upper image also shows signs of  a second lower tree line, possibly indicative of a ditch.  It is not unknown for Iron Age communities to occupy multiple earthworks within such close proximity, possibly accommodating a large population.  I feel it is more likely to be for seasonal use, with their livestock benefiting from such structures during the Winter months, Summer uses is a little more ambiguous however!

Overall Old Oswestry Hillfort is one of the best hillforts I have had the fortune to visit and I definitely recommend that if given the chance you all visit!

Rotten Romans in Wroxeter

I'm told all good things come to an end...well the Romans saw to that! I'm no lover of those pesky Romans and firmly believe that they should have stayed in Rome, but, just for a sunny July afternoon Wroxeter changed that! Another very well looked after English Heritage site and very reasonable entry prices too (always a bonus).

The good old audio guide comes into its' own here, it allows you to take the site in on your own terms so you can do it as slowly or as swiftly as you like. I was shocked by how slowly I explored considering its' origins, but for the first time ever, I think I truly appreciated what it must have been like for the Britons when the Romans turned up.  The monumental scale of Wroxeter's bath house really made me take a step back, the whole landscape would have become unrecognisable overnight...there is little wonder there was so much objection yet so much adaptation.  Such changes must have been horrifying but at the same time mysterious.

Roman Wroxeter largely remains safely underground, the only section 'open' is the bath house and a small market place that was in such close proximity to the baths I would assume they worked hand in hand.  Below shows a image looking across the site from just behind the short lived outdoor pool:

The surviving height of the structure shocked me, considering its' antiquity, but much of it is below floor level and demonstrates a beautiful hypercaust system:

The level of preservation is remarkable and as such in small areas there is Roman 'cement' still visible, I was slightly concerned that this can be walked over and is regularly and not always by children! In a similar fashion visitors spend a great deal of time sitting and standing on walls, so it remains to be seen how much longer it will remain in such lovely condition.

You may or may not know that the infamous Wattling Street ran through the center of Roman Wroxeter and still makes its' present felt today:

After crossing the road I was greeted by this...I'm sure you will agree its a pretty impressive building:

This was built by modern tradesmen using the techniques and technologies of the Romans.  It was filmed and turned into a mini television series for Channel 4.  I'm sure you all agree they did a marvelous job and can appreciate how excited I was to nose in a Roman Town house.  I mean it isn't something you do everyday afterall....then I was greeted with this.....

Not exactly the Romano-British furnishings I was expecting! I can honestly say I have never been so disappointed with a heritage experience in my life....I was almost speechless! The work that has gone into the construction was truly let down by the lack of furnishing the town house.  I was eager to have an archaeological experience that truly allowed me to appreciate the Roman use of space...it seems I will have to visit Pompeii afterall!  This did not ruin my adventures in the lands of the Cornovii but it was definitely a long way from enhancing it.  Much of the blame is to lie with English Heritage and the way they build the town house up to be such a beautiful reconstruction...which structurally it is, but it is hardly the full experience that is alluded to in advertisements, thankfully this was an addition to my adventure and not the purpose of it!

The image of the mosaic is by far the best from inside the house, it's such a sweet little thing, even if it is upside-down to the visitor. Hopefully one day the room will be dressed in a way that reflects his character and brings that added dimension to the town house.

I hope you enjoyed my little adventure and should you want to share a few of your own I would love to read them...you know where the comments box is :o)

The Long Awaited Archaeo-Pasts 2012!

The National Museum Wales Archaeo-Pasts conference took the audience from the Palaeolithic right through to Gothic Wales on a whistle stop archaeological tour…and we didn’t even have to leave our seats! I don’t usually do reviews so you may have to bear with me a little bit.

First up was Elizabeth Walker and a rather interesting talk about Neanderthals, in particular those found at Pontnewydd Cave, it thought that teeth found here represent 16 individuals: 7 adults and 9 juveniles with the youngest believed to be around 8 years old.  During the question session the subject of DNA studies was addressed, this was particularly interesting when Elizabeth indicated that there were talks of undertaking such analysis on the Pontnewydd populations.  This will allow for increased understanding of Neanderthal DNA and any genetic links between them and atomically modern humans.  I felt this was the most interesting element of her work, however, it was only hinted at during the actual lecture.  Much time was spent providing background information on previous excavations, which was of course interesting, but personally I would have preferred more details on upcoming projects.  An evaluation of the Red Lady was also undertaken, including interesting thoughts from the antiquarian discoverer who over the course of an evening changed his opinions on the human remains considerably.  He begun believing that it was a Roman merchant and ended with the theory that it was in fact a woman and the presence of ochre staining was indicative that she was a Roman prostitute.  We have since discovered that she is in fact a he and lived during the Mesolithic…a little bit before those Romans!

Next up was Dr Richard Bevins who presented his recent findings on the origins of the Stonehenge bluestones.  For those not in the know he explained that these stones are thought to have been moved from Wales to the Salisbury Plain where they formed part of the world famous Stonehenge.  Unfortunately this paper was very heavy on the geology and chemical components aspects which meant a great deal of it went over my head…after all I am only a baby archaeologist!  There were many images of geological features and detailed images of aspects needed to indentify a rock outcrop to the stones placed within Stonehenge.  Excitingly (well I think so), I did grasp that it is almost confirmed that the bluestones of Stonehenge are in fact Welsh and are thought to come from a small outcrop in the lowlands of the Preseli range.  There were of course more precise details within the lecture, however, I don’t feel it’s my place to share this…after all I would want to share such exciting discoveries on my own terms if I am ever fortunate to be involved in such a project.

For me the next talk was by far the highlight of the day…a lecture by none other than Prof. Mike Parker Pearson about the age old mysteries of Stonehenge!  Suddenly uncomfortable chairs were no longer an issue!  Firstly an interesting interpretation was provided for the whole of the Stonehenge landscape…provided in a funny sort of way by an ethnographic study that wasn’t.  By this I mean an individual connected to Parker Pearson originating from Madagascar suggested that it was all very simple and us archaeologists were making the whole thing far too complicate; wood was for the living and stone was for the ancestors.  This was met with a little caution due to the passing nature of the initial comments, however as studies progressed it made more and more sense.  At Stonehenge there are of course a large number of huge stones and surrounding them has been in the region of 57 cremations.  In nearby Durrington Walls a suspected settlement of a reasonably large size, cremations and burials are nowhere to be found, but the buildings are of timber.  The same is seen at Woodhenge, although not known to work elsewhere the concept seems to be working well within the Stonehenge landscape.  There is nothing to say that Britain was not regionalised at this time after all.  On a personal note I feel it is quite fitting that timber represents the transitional nature of human life, with stone representing the permanent memory of people we have known and those of distant relation who we just hear tales about.  

The second theory is also rather impressive and I’m looking forward to my copy of Stonehenge: Exploring the Greatest Stone Age Mystery to arrive so I can find out more.  We were treated to enough of this to make us want more.  The great debate on the movement of the stone used to construct Stonehenge is age old…was it people or was it glacial movement?  Personally I believe it was done by people and so does Parker Pearson, with glacial movement being highly unlikely due to them not quite reaching the Wessex region. Now that bit is pretty much settled here is the even bigger question and the even bigger theory…Why?

Stonehenge represents local Wessex stone and the distance Welsh stone.  These stones were brought together to form a new entity in the Salisbury Plain that we know as Stonehenge…but Why?  Well in accordance to Parker Pearson it was the coming together of two large social groupings with differing ethnic backgrounds.  He suggests that there was a group that moved into the Wessex region bringing with them farming and other social developments, probably from the region of the Low Countries.  Contemporary with this he believes that a similar social group moved into the Preseli region, probably from Western France or even the Iberian Peninsular.  The Preseli landscape has a huge amount of chambered tombs, dolmans and standing stones making the area significant to the surrounding population, which is deemed to be relatively large and powerful in order to create such monumental structures.  Add to this that the period was known to be violent, with c.6% of known skulls to have impact fractures, 50% of which were lethal.  By c.3400BC causeway enclosures such as Hambledon Hill had been fortified suggesting that violent acts were becoming organised.  This is also a point where regionalisation is known in pottery forms, suggesting self governing social groupings linked by a common material culture.  Those found in Preseli and those within Wessex are stylistically different and such appear to be very separate social groups. But you are still asking Why?

Well this was a period of social uncertainty, therefore change occurs.  Parker Pearson suggests that the two social groups were forming a bond by merging their ancestral communities on the Salisbury Plain and as a result Stonehenge was formed.  The bluestone of Preseli was used in order to represent the ancestors of those living in modern Wales and the local stone was used to represent the ancestors of modern Wessex.  This merger could arguably be the earliest instance of multiculturalism in Britain…not such a modern idea after all! This theory is very much in its’ infancy and it’s hoped that DNA studies may shed more light on the notion of ethnically variable groups being represented within the excavation cremations of Stonehenge so watch this space….

Next up was an insight into my beautiful Iron Age from the perspective of the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS).  I was pleasantly surprised and disappointed by this talk all at the same time… the archaeologist in me was amazed by the work done by Mark Lodwick with the metal-detectoring community in reporting their finds, but the Prehistorian in me was disappointed with the level of detail relating to Iron Age Wales…just no pleasing some people.  Mark detailed a localised metal detector find which has lead to a full excavation and associated study on a prehistoric settlement that was previously unknown to archaeologists.  All the way through metal detectorist were involved along with the local community and school groups.  This prompted me to truly appreciate what PAS does for the archaeological community and I can’t help but feel people like Mark do not receive the recognition that they deserve!

After a lunch break proceedings got all historical and I found it harder to be captivated by the lectures, this is in no way a reflection of the speakers just my interests…but I did my very best to focus to continue my review.

Dr Stephen Harrison was first after lunch with the Vikings…this got me interested; I mean who doesn’t love a Viking?  He boldly took on the challenge of re-visiting antiquarian discoveries of Viking burials within Britain and Ireland, 6 of which are known to be in Wales.  He quickly explained the nature of burials, those with swords were naturally ‘male’ and those with beads were obviously ‘female’.  I do like a bit of gender archaeology and wasn’t the least bit shocked when we were told that the antiquarians made the graves fit a type if they didn’t do it on their own with artefacts changing between graves very easily!  This made his thesis very complicated and in the little snapshot we had it was an extremely interesting paper, modern technology has made the ‘male’ ‘female’ ideas problematic and where possible bones have been given their true gender regardless of associated artefacts.  It was unclear whether Dr Harrison had stuck with the ‘male’ ‘female’ tags…I sincerely hope that he hasn’t and a new system was utilised to avoid further issue in future studies.  Gender is always a complicated issue when considering passed society as it is virtually impossible not to inflict our own ideals upon what we study.  Gender rarely manages to achieve a happy medium and I think that’s part of the appeal in studying it…

Next up was Roman Caerleon…I have grown up visiting this site and was very excited about the lecture Dr Andrew Gardner and Evan Chapman I’m did their very best and everyone else in the room was delighted with their information…but my love for the site left me wanting more.  I thought there was too much about previous excavations by other organisations and not enough Caerleon excitement.  I loved the explanation of the warehouse discovery and the details of the armour and how it had to be block excavated, I just wanted more of that and less history of excavation.

Edward Besly was next up with more Romans, this time it was all about the money as he explored Wales’ coin hoards…well 3 of them.  I could have listened to more of this too; who knew so much social history could be documented on such a tiny piece of metal?  I was amazed to learn that some 65,000 Roman coins are known in Wales…not bad considering how much resistance we gave them during conquest.  The burial circumstances were unknown but in the Newport hoard coins minted in a 150/160 year period were presented, representing 12 Emperors.  Most of these coins were like new, there was little ware and may well have come straight from the mint.  It is thought that these coins are long-term family savings, so despite being located within close proximity to Caerleon they are likely to be civil rather than military.  Across the 3 hoards depictions of numerous Emperors were present along with some depictions of their wives and heirs.  More interestingly imagery was present from Gaul, Italy and Egypt.

Last was Dr Mark Redknap and his gothic ivories… this was a difficult one for me, my interest level was particularly low for this one and unfortunately unlike the other historical lectures nothing really captured me.  Much of the depictions were religious in nature so unsurprisingly were found in or near churches and cathedrals… if the ivories had been more representative of social depictions I would probably have been a little more inspired.  I’m sure for those interested it was really interesting but for me it was a little flat.  I was however taken by the story of the Ivory that was found in Llandaff Cathedral, only half of it was known and is kept within the Origins Gallery, National Museum Wales, Cathays.  What had become of the other half was a mystery until a visit to Liverpool, sitting snug in one of their galleries lay the other half; this was indentified through style and other means.  on confirming them as a pair a cast was carefully made of each, which reunited them briefly, then each original and its missing piece was sent to its’ respective home.  This tale made me realise that you never know when your little mystery maybe resolved or how it will reveal itself.

All in all Archaeo-Pasts 2012 was an amazing day of discovery and I’m already looking forward to Archaeo-Pasts 2013! I don’t think I could have found a better way to kick off my Festival of Archaeology!  This week I am off to Oswestry Hillfort and Wroxeter’s Roman Town so watch this space…next time I promise pictures and lots of them. I’m also hoping to continue the Thanet series this week because I’m missing my beautiful Isle and I’m sure you are all waiting to see what happens next.

Bye for now and don’t forget to leave your comments and share your thoughts, it’s always good to hear from you all!

1000 Views!

I can't quite believe it, just wanted to say a huge THANK YOU to all you lovely readers for sticking with me! In my last post I promised a conference review and it is on its way I promise, hopefully tomorrow.  Nothing short of perfect will do! Once again thank you all for reading :o)