EAST ANGLIAN ARCHAEOLOGY

Frontispiece Silver-gilt keystone garnet disc brooch from Grave 23

for Catherine Hills

The Anglo-Saxon
Settlement and Cemetery
at Bloodmoor Hill,
Carlton Colville, Suffolk
by Sam Lucy, Jess Tipper
and Alison Dickens

with contributions by
Sue Anderson, Rachel Ballantyne, James Barrett,
Alex Bayliss, Nancy Beavan-Athfield,
Mark Blackburn, Steve Boreham, Diana Briscoe,
Christopher Bronk Ramsey, Adrian Challands,
Jane Cowgill, Natasha Dodwell, Lorrain Higbee,
Steven Laurie, Andrew Lawler, Peter Marshall,
Gerry McCormac, Karen Milek, Tamsin O’Connell,
Rog Palmer, Rachel Parks, Jennifer Price, Ian Riddler,
Richard Sabin, Christopher Scull, Robin Standring,
Cathy Tester, Johannes van der Plicht
and Penelope Walton Rogers

principal illustrations by
Jane Matthews, Mike Court, Matthew Brudenell and
Andrew Hall, with Iain Forbes, Letty Ten Harkel,
Vicki Herring and Jacqui Hutton

artefact photographs by
Dave Webb

East Anglian Archaeology

Report No. 131, 2009

Cambridge Archaeological Unit

EAST ANGLIAN ARCHAEOLOGY
REPORT NO.131

Published by
Cambridge Archaeological Unit
Department of Archaeology
University of Cambridge
Downing Street
Cambridge CB2 3DZ

in conjunction with
ALGAO East
www.algao.org.uk/cttees/regions

Editor: Keith Wade

Managing Editor: Jenny Glazebrook

Editorial Sub-committee:
Brian Ayers, Director, The Butrint Foundation
Owen Bedwin, Head of Historic Environment, Essex County Council
Stewart Bryant, Head of Historic Environment, Hertfordshire County Council
Kasia Gdaniec, Historic Environment, Cambridgeshire County Council
David Gurney, County Archaeologist, Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service
Adrian Tindall, Archaeological Consultant
Keith Wade, Archaeological Service Manager, Suffolk County Council
Peter Wade-Martins, Director of the Norfolk Archaeological Trust

Set in Times Roman by World Tree using Adobe InDesign™

Printed by Henry Ling Limited, The Dorset Press

© CAMBRIDGE ARCHAEOLOGICAL UNIT

ISBN 978 0 9544824 6 6

East Anglian Archaeology was established in 1975 by the Scole Committee for Archaeology in
East Anglia. The scope of the series expanded to include all six eastern counties and
responsibility for publication was transferred in 2002 to the Association of Local Government
Archaeological Officers, East of England (ALGAO East).

For details of East Anglian Archaeology, see last page

Cover illustration
A view across the site during excavation, showing the sampling techniques used. Photo: CAU
 Contents

List of Colour Plates vi III. Fish bone, by Rachel Parks and James 304
List of Plates vi Barrett
List of Figures vi IV. Botanical evidence, by Rachel Ballantyne 305
List of Tables viii V. Associated material culture 316
List of Contributors ix VI. Stable isotope analysis of human and faunal 317
Acknowledgements x remains, by T. C. O’Connell and A. Lawler
Foreword xi VII. Discussion 321
Summary/Résumé/Zusammenfassung xii
Chapter 6. Phasing, Analysis and Site
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background Organisation
I. Introduction 1 I. Introduction 322
II. Geology, topography and landscape use 1 II. Absolute dating, by P. Marshall, J. Tipper, 322
III. Evidence from aerial photography, with 4 A. Bayliss, F. G. McCormac, J. van der Plicht
Rog Palmer and Robin Standring and C. Bronk Ramsey
IV. Bloodmoor Hill in its Anglo-Saxon context 7 III. Site phasing 329
V. Evaluation and excavation history 12 IV. Site modelling 357
VI. Research aims 15 V. The organisation of activities within the 366
VII. Excavation methods 17 settlement
VIII. Layout of the volume 20
Chapter 7. The Human Burials, by Christopher
Chapter 2. Pre-Saxon Activity Scull
I. Introduction 22 I. Introduction 385
II. Prehistoric activity 22 II. Stratigraphy: relationships with Structure 44 385
III. Roman activity 22 and Surface Deposit F159/182
III. Post-depositional disturbance and grave 387
Chapter 3. The Settlement Remains robbery
I. Introduction 38 IV. Catalogue of inhumations, by Sam Lucy 387
II. Sunken-featured buildings (SFBs) 38 (stratigraphy), Natasha Dodwell (human
III. Wall-post buildings 101 bone), Christopher Scull (grave-goods) et al.
IV. Surface deposits 116 V. Material culture: dating and comparanda 404
V. Pits 121 VI. Dating and phasing 414
VI. Hearths and oven bases 150 VII. Burial practice 416
VII. Site formation processes 152 VIII. Summary and overview 419
VIII. Discussion 162 IX. Demography and population size 420
X. Social identities and social structures 422
XI. Cemetery organisation and development 423
Chapter 4. The Settlement: Material Culture XII. Burial and community 424
Assemblages
I. Introduction 171
II. Dress and personal possessions 171 Chapter 8. Local, Regional and National
III. Household furnishings and equipment 191 Contexts
IV. Pottery, by Jess Tipper 202 I. The Anglo-Saxon settlement: a summary 427
V. Buildings 243 II. The local context 428
VI. Occupations, industry and crafts 249 III. The regional context 429
VII. Horse equipment and weaponry 275 IV. The wider context 430
VIII. Discussion 278

Chapter 5. Economic Resources Bibliography 435

I. Introduction 279 Index, by Sue Vaughan 452
II. Mammal and bird bone, by Lorrain Higbee 279

v
 List of Colour Plates

Frontispiece Silver-gilt keystone garnet disc Colour Plate IV Oven F259 164
brooch from Grave 23 Colour Plate V Micromorphological thin sections 166
Colour Plate I Top: Wall-post building Structure 163 Colour Plate VI Selected settlement finds 167
39 with metre-squares of F11/503 Colour Plate VII SFB Structure 9 under excavation 168
in the background. Bottom: Colour Plate VIIISFB Structure 5 half-excavated, 168
Surface Deposit F11/503 under Surface Deposit F11/503
Colour Plate II SFB Structure 12, under 164 Colour Plate IX Selected grave-goods from 169
excavation Graves 11 and 15
Colour Plate III Top: Surface Deposit F1. Middle: 165 Colour Plate X Selected grave-goods from 170
Surface Deposit F8/275. Bottom: Graves 22 and 23
Close-up of Surface Deposit F1

List of Plates

Plate I Overhead aerial photograph centred on 6 Plate IX The silver anthropomorphic pendant 178
the site location Plate X Part of clay ring, or fender, from 246
Plate II Bloodmoor Hill under crop 10 Structure 25
Plate III Oblique aerial photograph, showing 15 Plate XI Obverse and reverse of the Anglo- 275
the site under excavation Saxon sceat
Plate IV SFBs Structures 20 and 22 18 Plate XII The main cemetery area under 387
Plate V SFB Structure 6 55 excavation
Plate VI SFB Structure 12, pre- and 61 Plate XIII Graves 3 and 4 388
post-excavation Plate XIV Grave 25 402
Plate VII Spread of animal bone in Surface 120 Plate XV Possible tapestrywork on one of the 412
Deposit F1 woolcombs from Grave 11
Plate VIII Surface Deposit F11/503 120 Plate XVI Grave 28 417

List of Figures

Fig. 1.1 General site location 2 Fig. 2.5 Roman artefacts 36

Fig. 1.2 (a) Simplified geology (b) simplified 3 Fig. 3.1 Location of sunken-featured buildings 39
soil distribution (c) soil capability map Fig. 3.2 Length/breadth of SFBs compared 40
Fig. 1.3 Aerial photographic survey 5 with West Stow
Fig. 1.4 Anglo-Saxon sites in East Anglia 7 Fig. 3.3 Length/breadth of phased SFBs 40
Fig. 1.5 Anglo-Saxon sites and finds in the 8 Fig. 3.4 Length/breadth of SFBs compared 41
Bloodmoor Hill area with wall-post buildings
Fig. 1.6 Selection of metal-detected finds from 9 Figs 3.5–39 Plans, sections and photographs 48–100
the Bloodmoor Hill area of SFBs
Fig. 1.7 Plan of evaluation trenches and 13 Fig. 3.40 Location of wall-post buildings 103
excavation areas Fig. 3.41 Length/breadth of wall-post buildings 104
Fig. 1.8 Details of excavation areas 14 in comparison to West Stow halls
Fig. 1.9 SCCAS evaluation trenches against 14 Fig. 3.42 Diagram showing possible lines of 106
CAU base plan tie-beams in Structures 39, 41, 45a,
Fig. 1.10 Reproduction of part of original base 18 46 and 47
plan Figs 3.43–50 Plans and photographs of wall- 108–16
Fig. 1.11 Distribution of sieved 1m squares 19 post buildings
across the site Fig. 3.51 Location of surface deposits 117
Fig. 1.12 Key to plans and sections 20 Fig. 3.52 Sections through surface deposits 119
Fig. 2.1 Plan of Roman features: Phase 1 and 2 23 Fig. 3.53 Plan and section of Hollow F301 121
Fig. 2.2 Plan of Roman Building I 26 Fig. 3.54 Location of pit groups and isolated 122
Fig. 2.3 Plan of Roman Building II 27 pits
Fig. 2.4 Plan of Roman Building III 28 Fig. 3.55 Plan of area around Structures 1 to 5 123

vi
Fig. 3.56 Plan of area around Structures 25 to 124 Fig. 4.52 Tools associated with textile 269
32 manufacture
Fig. 3.57 Plan of area around Structures 16 to 126 Fig. 4.53 Spindlewhorls 270
18 Fig. 4.54 Distribution plot of textile tools 272
Figs 3.58–69 Plans, sections and photographs 128–45 Fig. 4.55 Loomweights 273
of pit groups and isolated pits Fig. 4.56 Distribution plot of loomweights 274
Fig. 3.70 Location of oven bases 149 Fig. 4.57 Bone pin-beaters 275
Figs 3.71–73 Plans and sections of oven bases 151–2 Fig. 4.58 Horse equipment 275
Fig. 3.74 Sieved and spitted metre-squares 161 Fig. 4.59 Weaponry 276
within Structure 4 and Structure 22 Fig. 4.60 Miscellaneous artefacts 277
Fig. 4.1 Finger-rings, bracelets and brooches 172 Fig. 5.1 Frequency of main livestock species 280
(I) for main feature types
Fig. 4.2 Distribution plot of finger-rings, 173 Fig. 5.2 Frequency of main livestock species 280
bracelets and brooches for areas of the site with more than
Fig. 4.3 Brooches (II) 174 150 POCASs
Fig. 4.4 Beads and pendants 176 Fig. 5.3 Frequency of main livestock species 280
Fig. 4.5 Distribution plot of beads and 177 for the Anglo-Saxon period
pendants Fig. 5.4 Triplot 290
Fig. 4.6 Pins 180 Fig. 5.5 Triplot 290
Fig. 4.7 Distribution plot of pins 181 Fig. 5.6 Scatter plot of measurements of cattle
Fig. 4.8 Pin shaft diameters by phase 182 and deer astragalus 302
Fig. 4.9 Dress-fasteners 183 Fig. 5.7 Plan of post-built Structures 39 and 310
Fig. 4.10 Distribution plot of dress-fasteners 184 40, showing the sampled post-holes
Fig. 4.11 Belt-fittings and chatelaine elements 185 Fig. 5.8 Agricultural equipment 316
Fig. 4.12 Distribution plot of belt-fittings and 186 Fig. 5.9 Carbon and nitrogen isotopic values 320
chatelaine elements of faunal and human samples
Fig. 4.13 Combs 188 Fig. 5.10 Comparison of carbon and nitrogen 320
Fig. 4.14 Distribution plot of combs 189 isotopic values of males, females and
Fig. 4.15 Personal possessions 191 unsexed humans
Fig. 4.16 Furniture fittings 191 Fig. 5.11 Comparison of mean human carbon 321
Fig. 4.17 Non-pottery vessels 192 and nitrogen isotopic values from
Fig. 4.18 Glass vessel fragments 194 Carlton Colville, Berinsfield and
Fig. 4.19 Knives I 195 Butler’s Field
Fig. 4.20 Knives II 196 Figs 6.1–8 C14 figures 323–9
Fig. 4.21 Other implements 198 Fig. 6.9–11 Initial settlement phases 337–9
Fig. 4.22 Cooking equipment 198 Fig. 6.12 Distribution plot of contexts with 340
Fig. 4.23 Whalebone chopping boards 199 more than ten Roman pot sherds
Fig. 4.24 Miscellaneous fittings 201 Fig. 6.13 Roman pot by mean sherd weight 341
Fig. 4.25 Proportion of fabric types within the 205 and weight in Surface Deposit F159
fills of SFBs (by weight) /182
Fig. 4.26 Fabric types in the fills of structures 206 Fig. 6.14 Distribution of flint in Surface 342
by (a) weight in g (b) percentage Deposit F159/182
Fig. 4.27 Fabric types in the fills of pit groups, 207 Fig. 6.15 Distribution plots of Roman pottery 343
surface deposits and hollow F301 by by phase
(a) weight in g (b) percentage Fig. 6.16 CBM in surface deposits by weight 344
Fig. 4.28 Distribution of bossed pottery 210 and mean weight
Fig. 4.29 Distribution of stamped pottery 211 Fig. 6.17 Slag in surface deposits by weight 345
Fig. 4.30 Distribution of vessel links (both 221 and mean weight
actual sherd joins and non-refitting Fig. 6.18 Distribution plot of biotite-tempered 346
sherd links) pottery
Figs 4.31–41 Anglo-Saxon pottery 228–38 Fig. 6.19–22 Finds by spit in Surface Deposit F1 347–8
Fig. 4.42 Structural ironwork and iron 244 Fig. 6.23 Distribution plot of flint across the 349
fittings site
Fig. 4.43 Lock furniture 245 Fig. 6.24 Distribution of flint by spit in Surface 350
Fig. 4.44 Metalworking tools 250 Deposit F1
Fig. 4.45 Distribution plot of metalworking 251 Fig. 6.25 Assemblage profiles of Surface 353
tools and hones Deposit 159/182, Structure 14 and
Fig. 4.46 Hones 252 Structure 19
Fig. 4.47 Crucibles I 262 Fig. 6.26 Close-up plan of the potential 354
Fig. 4.48 Crucibles and moulds II 263 metalworking area
Fig. 4.49 Woodworking tools 266 Fig. 6.27–28 Finds by spit in Structure 14 and 355–6
Fig. 4.50 Distribution plot of woodworking, 267 Structure 19
stoneworking and leatherworking Figs 6.29–33 Assemblage profiles of structures, 357–61
tools surface deposits and pit groups
Fig. 4.51 Leatherworking tools 268

vii
Fig. 6.34 Close-up plan of Structures 9, 10 and 362 Fig. 6.49 Distribution of all finds in Surface 380
related features Deposit F159/182 against grave
Fig. 6.35–37 Final site phase plots 363–5 location
Fig. 6.38 Close-up plan of Structures 11–15 366 Fig. 6.50 Activity zones by phase 383
and 41–43 Figs 7.1–2 Cemetery plan and key 386–7
Figs 6.39–41 SFBs by phase 367–9 Figs 7.3–23 Grave plans and associated 389–403
Fig. 6.42 Plot of animal bone by weight and 370 artefacts
distribution of cut and chopped bone Fig. 7.24 Textiles recorded 411
Fig. 6.43 Distribution of quernstone fragments 371 Fig. 7.25 Radiocarbon results: estimation of 416
Fig. 6.44 Distribution of oven remains and fired 372 cemetery start and end date
clay clusters Fig. 7.26 Correspondence analysis results 419
Fig. 6.45 Distribution plot of hearth bottoms 374 Fig. 8.1 Bloodmoor Hill in its historical 428
and tuyeres landscape
Fig. 6.46 Distribution plot of hammerscale 375 Fig. 8.2 Map of potential trade contacts with 430
plates the site
Fig. 6.47 Distribution plot of crucibles 376 Fig. 8.3 Plans of comparative sites 431
Fig. 6.48 Distribution plot of sieved and 377
unsieved HBs and slag

List of Tables

Table 1.1 CAU site codes and details for 16 Table 3.68 Stratified finds distribution in 162
Bloodmoor Hill excavations Structure 22
Table 1.2 Comparison of recovery rates by 21 Table 4.1 Bead types at Bloodmoor Hill and 177
sieving for three features West Stow (settlement and cemetery)
Table 2.1 Finds associated with Roman ditches 25 Table 4.2 Knife types by phase 195
Table 2.2 Finds associated with Roman pits 29 Table 4.3 Summary of Anglo-Saxon pottery 203
Table 2.3 Late Iron Age and Roman pottery 30 by fabric group
fabrics Table 4.4 Pottery in the fills of structures, pit 204
Table 2.4 Late Iron Age and Roman pottery by 31 groups and surface deposits by fabric
phase and feature type group
Table 2.5 Quantities (count) of Roman tile by 34 Table 4.5 Summary of decorated pottery 208
fabric and form Table 4.6 Contextual detail of bossed pottery 212
Table 2.6 Thicknesses of RBT and possible 34 Table 4.7 Contextual detail of stamped pottery 215
types Table 4.8 Rim-sherd fragmentation (5% 217
Table 2.7 Distribution of CBM by phase, 34 completeness)
feature type and form Table 4.9 Vessel links between fills within the 219
Table 2.8 Fired clay in Roman features by 35 same feature
fabric type Table 4.10 Vessel links between features 222
Table 2.9 Fired clay in Roman features by 35 Table 4.11 Nail types by feature 243
feature type Table 4.12 Quantities of fired clay by fabric 246
Table 2.10 Comparative data on nearby Roman 37 group
rural settlements Table 4.13 Quantities of fired clay by type 247
Table 3.1 Summary data for SFBs 43 Table 4.14 Fired clay by phase and feature type 247
Tables 3.2–35 Finds associated with SFBs 49–101 Table 4.15 Miscellaneous metalwork by feature 253
Table 3.36 Summary data for wall-post 102 Table 4.16 Count and weight of slag by type 254
buildings Table 4.17 Mean weight of different categories 257
Tables 3.37–41 Finds associated with wall-post 109–15 of slag
buildings Table 4.18 Results of EDXRF analysis on 261
Table 3.42 Finds associated with surface 118 crucibles and moulds
deposits Table 4.19 Internal diameter of spindlewhorls 271
Table 3.43 Pits and pit groups adjacent to SFBs 125 by phase
Table 3.44 Vessel links between pits and SFBs 125 Tables 5.1–35 Animal bone tables 279–301
Tables 3.45–60 Finds associated with pit groups 128–48 Tables 5.36–8 Fish bone tables 304–6
and isolated pits Table 5.39 Summary of bulk sampled Anglo- 307
Table 3.61 Finds associated with oven bases 150 Saxon contexts
Table 3.62 Contexts sampled for 153 Table 5.40 Charred plant remains within post- 309
micromorphological analysis built Structures 39 and 40
Tables 3.63–66 Micromorphological results 154–9 Table 5.41 Frequency (no. of samples where 310
Table 3.67 Stratified finds distribution in 162 present) of charred plants in Surface
Structure 4 Deposit F1

viii
Table 5.42 Frequency (no. of samples where 312 Table 6.9 Total weight of slag recovered from 378
present) of charred plants in SFBs main features
Table 5.43 Charred plant remains within pits 314 Table 6.10 Finds categories by phase (a) number 384
F315, F368, F374 and F513 (b) weight) (c) mean weight
Table 5.44 Most frequently charred plant taxa 315 Table 7.1 XRF results for the silver bar and 410
Table 5.45 Human and faunal isotopic results 319 disc
Table 6.1 Radiocarbon results 332 Table 7.2 Summary of preserved textiles 413
Table 6.2 Dating justifications 335 Table 7.3 Radiocarbon results 415
Table 6.3 Finds totals: (a) number and weight 352 Table 7.4 Summary of sex and age at death of 420
by feature type (b) by percentage individuals buried at Bloodmoor Hill
Table 6.4 Finds totals: mean weight by feature 353 Table 7.5 Ranking of inhumations by number 421
type of categories of artefact types
Table 6.5 Surface deposits: finds densities 353 Table 8.1 Comparative data from 433
Table 6.6 Evidence from main metalworking 373 contemporary early Anglo-Saxon
features settlements
Table 6.7 Contexts with ‘grooved gritstones’ 377
Table 6.8 Sieved and unsieved metalworking 378
debris from main sieved features

List of Contributors

Sue Anderson Adrian Challands

CFA Archaeology Ltd, Old Engine House, Eskmills The Old School House, Glinton Road, Helpston,
Park, Musselburgh EH21 7PQ Peterborough PE6 7DG
Rachel Ballantyne Jane Cowgill
Dept of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, 25 Main St, South Rauceby, Sleaford, Lincolnshire
Downing St, Cambridge CB2 3DZ NG34 8QG
James Barrett Alison Dickens
McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge Archaeological Unit, Dept of Archaeology,
University of Cambridge, Downing St, Cambridge CB2 University of Cambridge, Downing St, Cambridge CB2
3ER 3DZ
Alex Bayliss Natasha Dodwell
English Heritage, 1 Waterhouse Square, 138–42 Cambridge Archaeological Unit, Dept of Archaeology,
Holborn, London EC1N 2ST University of Cambridge, Downing St, Cambridge CB2
Nancy Beavan-Athfield 3DZ
Rafter Radiocarbon Laboratory, Institute of Geological Lorrain Higbee
and Nuclear Sciences, Box 31, Lower Hutt, New 2 Knights Cottages, Knights Farm, Fitzhead, Somerset
Zealand TA4 3JY
Mark Blackburn Steven Laurie
Dept of Coins and Medals, Fitzwilliam Museum, Sidgwick Museum of Geology, University of
University of Cambridge, CB2 1RB Cambridge
Steve Boreham Andrew Lawler
Quaternary Palaeoenvironments Group, Department of Dept of Archaeology, University of Cambridge,
Geography, University of Cambridge, Downing Place, Downing St, Cambridge CB2 3DZ
Cambridge CB2 3EN
Sam Lucy
Diana Briscoe Cambridge Archaeological Unit, Dept of Archaeology,
Archive of Anglo-Saxon Pottery Stamps, 124 Cholmley University of Cambridge, Downing St, Cambridge CB2
Gardens, London NW6 1AA 3DZ
Christopher Bronk Ramsey Peter Marshall
Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Research Laboratory for Chronologies, 25 Onslow Road, Sheffield S11 7AF
Archaeology and the History of Art, Oxford University,
Gerry McCormac
Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford
School of Archaeology and Palaeoecology, The Queens
OX1 3QY
University of Belfast, Northern Island, BT7 1NN

ix
Karen Milek
Dept of Archaeology, University of Aberdeen, St
Mary’s, Elphinstone Road, Aberdeen AB24 3UF
Tamsin O’Connell
McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research,
University of Cambridge, Downing St, Cambridge CB2
3ER
Rog Palmer
Airphoto Services, 21 Gunhild Way, Cambridge CB1
8QZ
Rachel Parks
Dept of Archaeology, The King’s Manor, University of
York, York YO1 7EP
Jennifer Price
formerly Dept of Archaeology, University of Durham
Ian Riddler
Tatra, Diddies Rd, Stratton, Nr Bude, Cornwall EX23
9DW
Richard Sabin
Dept of Zoology, Natural History Museum, Cromwell
Road, London SW7 5BD
Acknowledgements
This project has had a relatively long and complex
history, and there are many people to thank. On the exca-
vation side, we would first like to acknowledge the work
that Richard Mortimer, the site director, put into all
seasons of the excavations, and thank him for his
continued interest in, and help with, the post-excavation
analysis. CAU staff, students and volunteers on the site
comprised Marcus Abbott, Oscar Aldred, Emma Allen,
Katrina Anker, Nick Armour, Rachel Ballantyne, Emma
Beadsmoore, Marc Berger, Simon Birnie, Natasha
Dodwell, Steve Every, Paula Geraghty, Jon Hall, Anne
Howrie, Jonathon Le Huray, Candy Hatherley, John
F o u l k e s , D a v e K e n n y, P a u l M a s s e r, N i k o l a s
Papadimitriou, Martin Redding, Sam Roberts, Anna
Stocks, Chris Thompson, Jess Tipper, Gwilym Williams
and Zoe Woods. Particular thanks go to Adrian Charlton
who assisted with metal detection on the site and to Paul
Durbidge for volunteering on site and for facilitating the
recording of local finds. We would also like to acknowl-
edge the assistance of Andrew Chapman and Mark Owen
from Bovis Homes and Peter Graves and Tony
Middlebrook from Wimpey Homes. English Heritage
stepped in to fund the post-excavation analysis and publi-
cation, and we thank Tim Cromack, Christopher Scull,
Philip Walker, Gareth Watkins and Tim Williams for that;
Kath Buxton and Kim Stabler from English Heritage
monitored the project, and have been most constructive.
Bob Carr of Suffolk County Council Archaeological
Service and Keith Davies of Carlton Colville Parish
Council gave valuable advice. Finally, Richard Mortimer
and the rest of the site staff would like to mention the
Green Jack Brewery and the staff of The Triangle,
x
Christopher Scull
English Heritage, 1 Waterhouse Square, 138–42
Holborn, London EC1N 2ST
Robin Standring
Cambridge Archaeological Unit, Dept of Archaeology,
University of Cambridge, Downing St, Cambridge CB2
3DZ
Jess Tipper
Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service, Shire
Hall, Bury St Edmunds, IP33 2AR
Cathy Tester
Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service, Shire
Hall, Bury St Edmunds, IP33 2AR
Johannes van der Plicht
Centre for Isotope Research, University of Groningen,
Nijenborgh 4, NL 9747, AG Groningen, The
Netherlands
Penelope Walton Rogers
The Anglo-Saxon Laboratory, Marketing House, 8
Bootham Terrace, York YO30 7DH
Lowestoft, and The Bell, Carlton Colville, without
whom, they say, the project would not have been possible.
The excavations generated a huge number of finds,
and we would particularly like to thank Norma
Challands, Jason Hawkes, Gwladys Monteil and Jennifer
Wills, as well as the rest of the CAU finds team, for their
work on the material. We would also like to thank the
members of English Heritage’s Centre for Archaeology:
Justine Bayley, Eleanor Blakelock, Dylan Cox, David
Dungworth, the late Glynis Edwards, Vanessa Fell, Tariq
Mahmoud, Lucy Skinner and Jacqui Watson, for their
conservation and investigation of the grave-goods and
other finds and XRF investigation of the crucibles and
copper alloy artefacts.
Our specialists also have people whom they wish to
individually acknowledge. Lorrain Higbee would like to
thank the following for their help and advice during her
analysis of the Bloodmoor Hill assemblage: Umberto
Albarella (Sheffield University); Polydora Baker
(English Heritage, Centre for Archaeology, Portsmouth);
Jerry Herman (Natural History Museum, Scotland) and
Jacqui Mulville (Cardiff University). Ian Riddler would
like to thank Richard Sabin (Natural History Museum)
for help with identification of the whale vertebrae. Karen
Milek would like to thank Jennifer Heathcote (Ancient
Monuments Lab, English Heritage), Jess Tipper (Suffolk
County Council) and Charly French (University of
Cambridge) for valuable discussion about the internal
deposits of sunken-featured buildings, and Roger
Langohr (University of Ghent, Belgium) for his insights
into the formation and morphology of clay bands. The
thin sections were made by Julie Miller. Tamsin
O’Connell and Andrew Lawler would like to thank Chris
Swaysland and Natasha Dodwell (both CAU) for assis-
tance with isotopic sampling; Mike Hall and James Rolfe
of the Godwin Laboratory, University of Cambridge, for
help with isotopic analysis, and Sarah Finney, Dept of
Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, for help with
sandblasting. This work was done primarily as part of
Andrew Lawler’s undergraduate project work at the Dept
of Archaeology, University of Cambridge. Rachel
Ballantyne would like to thank Alan Clapham and Martin
Jones for help and advice with plant assemblage analyses.
Jess Tipper wishes to thank the following people for
their help and advice towards the completion of the
Anglo-Saxon pottery report: Alan Vince (fabric anal-
ysis); Diana Briscoe (stamped pottery); Paul Blinkhorn
(Ipswich Ware); Lyn Blackmore, Christophe Grünewald,
Yann Hollevoet, Titus Panhuysen and Pin Verwers (who
all looked at, and offered advice about, the Continental
pottery). Christopher Scull would like to thank the
following for their generous help and advice: John Blair;
Birte Brugmann; Hilary Cool; Uta von Freeden; Rebecca
Gowland; Simon Mays; Karen Høilund Nielsen and
Penelope Walton Rogers.
Sam Lucy would like to thank Jane Cowgill for some
preliminary identifications; Miranda Aldhouse-Green
for her help with the pin finial identification; Adrian
Challands for some helpful comments on puzzling pieces
of metal; Steven Laurie for his petrological identifica-
tions; Edwin Rose (Norfolk SMR) for supplying relevant
site data; John Newman, Jude Plouviez, Kieron Heard
and Andrew Tester for help with Suffolk information;
Christopher Scull for his helpful discussions on the settle-
ment and his description and discussion of the unusual
Foreword
In place of a (now often standard) softly atmospheric
reconstruction painting, the ‘hard-edged’ sample-square
photograph that announces this volume was intended to
make a s tatem ent. It evokes the s i m i l ar l y
‘chequerboarded’ front cover image of the Cambridge
Archaeological Unit’s other recent East Anglian Archae-
ology report, A Line Across Land (Gdaniec et al. 2008).
Though, concerned as that volume is with prehistoric
investigations along the Isleham–Ely pipeline, it may
seem an odd companion piece to Bloodmoor Hill’s
Anglo-Saxon excavations, it is a matter of the Unit
restating its long-running commitment to sampling
methodologies.
As outlined in Chapter 1, the Bloodmoor Hill field-
work, which eventually expanded from a moderate-scale
programme to a major settlement excavation, generated
considerable controversy in its day, even featuring in The
Times. This primarily derived from the perceived threat of
developer-funded competitive tendering to established
County practices. It now goes without saying that the
obvious quality of the fieldwork programme and its
ensuing publication should have completely dispelled any
doubts on this matter. Indeed, the CAU has never held that
there need be any intrinsic difference between develop-
ment- and public-sector archaeology; it is only a
xi
bow brooch; Martin Allen for his comments on the silver
disc; Mark Blackburn for comments on the sceat, coin
blank and hacksilver; Richard Reece for his comments on
the Roman coins; Elizabeth O’Brien for information on
comparative sites; Carl Heron for help with the bitumen
identification; Alan Vince for his work on the pottery thin
sections, and both he and Maggi Darling for comments on
the crucibles; Kasia Gdaniec for her work on the prehis-
toric pottery; Val Fryer and Pete Murphy for their work on
the environmental remains; Rob Scaife for his assessment
of the pollen; and Chantal Conneller for her work on the
prehistoric flint.
Within the CAU, we would like to thank Grahame
Appleby for his help with databases, distributional anal-
ysis and feature descriptions and Jacqui Hutton for her
help with distributional analysis of the settlement finds,
and other assistance with the post-excavation work. Finds
illustrations were principally by Mike Court, Andrew
Hall, Matt Brudenell and Letty Ten Harkel, with contri-
butions by Vicki Herring and Jacqui Hutton; computer
graphics were by Jane Matthews, with Andrew Hall and
Iain Forbes; artefact photographs are by Dave Webb, and
the site photographs are by CAU staff, unless otherwise
attributed.
Finally, we would like particularly to thank Catherine
Hills for her extremely useful comments on the text, and
for suggestions which contributed towards the interpreta-
tion of the site; Helena Hamerow for some acute and
constructive external reader’s comments; and, lastly,
Christopher Evans, who through many lengthy discus-
sions has contributed more to the shape and content of
this volume than he perhaps realises.
distinction of funding sources, and each must be
academically prioritised and research-directed.
Going to print at time when a number of published
fieldwork accounts are relegating their specialist studies
to CD format, with their printed texts variously taken up
with site/landscape narratives, this volume is, instead,
thoroughly comprehensive in its many facets. Indeed, at
first glance, it could be said to have an almost archaic
quality and adherence to ‘old values’. Yet, a close reading
shows that this is far from the case. It is evident that the
possibilities of specialist-supported, hard-copy text
formats are far from exhausted and that they still have
great unexplored potential for richly textured fieldwork
accounts. Moreover, amid its fulsome scholarship and
specialist detail, there is much that is new here.
In order to appreciate this, the site’s fieldwork geneal-
ogies — that we invariably dig as much in relationship to
what has been dug before (and published) as to what is in
the ground — should be declared from the outset: specifi-
cally, West’s West Stow (1985) and Hamerow’s Mucking
(1993). This does not just relate to their being the compa-
rable East Anglian Anglo-Saxon settlements, but also to
the issue of whether Grubenhäuser/Sunken Feature
Buildings (SFBs) had raised timber floors. Accordingly,
the involvement of Jess Tipper — then fresh from his PhD
researches concerned directly with this question (Tipper
2004) — in Mortimer’s fieldwork team was not acci-
dental. Backgrounding our excavations would also be
Carver’s Sutton Hoo researches (2005), not only for ‘sur-
vival’ issues on light soils comparable to those at
Bloodmoor Hill, but also for their application of ‘hard
science’ to Anglo-Saxon excavations. In the case of this
project, a barrage of groundbreaking techniques were
exploited, among which feature Bayliss’s intensive radio-
carbon dating programme of organic residues from the
pottery, O’Connell’s isotopic analysis of the inhumations
within the cemetery and Milek’s soil micromorphology
studies; the last of these was particularly relevant to the
SFB ‘floor’ issue and the composition of the site’s exten-
sive Saxon surface deposits.
Within a context of Anglo-Saxon settlement studies,
the project’s sampling methodology can only be consid-
ered innovative and, coupled with an emphasis on
artefact-distribution analyses, now bears fruit. The ratio-
nale underlying this is, of course, that how one excavates
determines what is recovered and, in turn, what can later
be discussed. While it could be argued that these are just
the values of long-established fieldwork practice, if so,
they have rarely seen such detailed demonstration. Here,
the application of standard spit-dug and/or sieved
metre-sampling excavation units has allowed uniquely
nuanced insights into the formation processes contrib-
uting to the matrices of the site’s many pits, SFBs and
surface deposits. This has allowed micro-level resolution
of its occupation strata, and among the many highlights of
Summary
Excavations at Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk,
by the CAU have revealed a well-preserved and almost
complete early Anglo-Saxon settlement, dating from the
6th to early 8th centuries AD, and a mid to late 7th-century
cemetery, which lay within the settlement itself and
included high-status female graves. The total excavated
area exceeded 30,000 sq m , and produced the remains of
2
thirty-eight structures associated with sunken features
(Grubenhäuser or SFBs), at least nine well-defined
post-buildings (including one post-in-trench), four exten-
sive ‘midden’ heaps or surface spread concentrations, and
approximately 270 pits, as well as five hearth or oven
bases. The site is remarkable for the amount of metal-
working debris in evidence: over 160kg of metalworking
slag, including hearth bottoms, crucibles and moulds,
together with extensive collections of apparently scrap
metal, which was found in concentrations indicative of
distinct industrial areas. The site also produced large
Résumé
Les fouilles entreprises à Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton
Colville dans le Suffolk par la CAU (Cambridge Arche-
ology Unit) ont révélé une implantation bien préservée et
pratiquement complète datant de la première période
xii
this volume is the understanding achieved concerning the
site’s surface deposits, how they accumulated and were
variously reworked. Noteworthy is the degree to which
the distribution of earlier artefact categories (specifically,
prehistoric flint and Roman pottery) illuminates both the
character of the subsequent Anglo-Saxon depositional
practices and, also, the times at which the settlement’s
ground-surface levels must have been truncated. Such
apparently minor matters, and what they tell of the
period’s settlement organisation, are what ultimately
provide a platform to readdress ‘big themes’ — for
example, the nature of villages and estate centres in this
period, long-standing questions to which these excava-
tions centrally contribute.
Finally, there is the matter of the volume’s dedication.
As is always the case with multiple authorship, individual
personal attribution is unrealistic and professional
acknowledgment is the only feasible option. Based in
Cambridge and working in East Anglia, our choice was
obvious. This volume is dedicated to Catherine Hills —
not only for her regional fieldwork legacy, scholarship and
friendship, but for her Anglo-Saxon inspirations
generally.
Christopher Evans
Director, Cambridge Archaeological Unit
Cambridge, June 2007
assemblages of Anglo-Saxon pottery, fired clay, animal
bone and other materials. The structures and other features
from the site are fully described, and the finds assem-
blages analysed by category, in order to characterise the
status and nature of the settlement and its associated activ-
ities. The excavation methodology employed, whereby a
proportion of features, including the surface deposits,
were dug in spits and metre-squares, has enabled a
detailed analysis of artefactual and soil movement across
the site through time. Thus, the formation and growth of
surface deposits, and the collection and dispersion of
rubbish deposits from surface to subsoil feature, are
outlined through a series of distribution plots. The end
result is a multi-faceted study of one of the most complete
early Anglo-Saxon settlements yet to be excavated, which
concludes that the settlement may have been an early form
of estate centre with associated high-status burial and
industrial activity.
anglo-saxonne (entre le sixième et le début du huitième
siècle de notre ère); ainsi qu’un cimetière compris entre le
milieu et la fin du septième siècle. Ce cimetière se trouvait
à l’intérieur de l’implantation et intégrait des tombes de
femmes d’un haut niveau social. Dans sa totalité, la zone
fouillée dépassait les 30 000 m et contenait les restes de
2
trente-huit structures associées aux éléments suivants :
des bâtiments au plancher affaissé (Grubenhäuser ou SFB
: bâtiment au plancher affaissé ), au moins neuf bâtiments
bien définis et construits sur des poteaux (y compris un
bâtiment avec un poteau placé dans une tranchée), des
« ordures ménagères » disposées en quatre grands tas ou
concentrées en surface, environ 270 fosses et cinq foyers
ou bases de fours. Le site est remarquable pour la quantité
de débris découverts qui résultent du travail du métal. On a
ainsi trouvé 160 kg de scories liées au travail du métal qui
comprenaient des bases de foyer, des creusets et des
moules ainsi que de grandes quantités de matériaux. Il
s’agissait apparemment de débris métalliques qui étaient
concentrés dans des lieux caractéristiques de la présence
de zones industrielles bien marquées. Le site contenait
également différents matériaux comme de grandes
quantités de poterie anglo-saxonne, d’argile brûlée et d’os
d’animaux. Les structures et les autres éléments du site
sont minutieusement décrits et les ensembles d’objets
Zusammenfassung
Bei Ausgrabungen am Bloodmoor Hill bei Carlton
Colville, Suffolk, konnte die CAU eine gut erhaltene,
fast vollständige frühangelsächsische Siedlung aus
dem 6. bis frühen 8. Jh. sowie ein Gräberfeld aus der
zweiten Hälfte des 7. Jh. innerhalb der Siedlung
freilegen, das Gräber hochstehender Frauen aufwies.
Die 30.000 m große Grabungsfläche enthielt Reste von
2
38 mit Grubenhäusern assoziierten Strukturen,
darunter mindestens neun klar erkennbare
Pfostenbauten (einschließlich einer Pfostenreihe), vier
ausgedehnte Abfallhaufen oder Konzentrationen von
Streufunden im Oberflächenmaterial, rund 270 Gruben
sowie fünf Herd- oder Ofensockel. Auffällig war die
Menge an Abfällen, die auf Metallverarbeitung
hinwiesen – mehr als 160 kg Metallschlacke (darunter
Herdböden, Schmelztiegel und Gussformen sowie
umfangreiche Komplexe von augenscheinlichem
Metallschrott), die in Konzentrationen auftrat, die auf
ausgewiesene gewerbliche Bereiche schließen lassen.
Die Ausgrabung förderte außerdem größere
Sammlungen angelsächsischer Tonwaren, gebrannten
Lehm, Tierknochen und andere Materialkomplexe
zutage. Die Strukturen und sonstigen Merkmale der
xiii
découverts sont analysés par catégories afin de définir le
statut et la nature de l’implantation et de ses activités
associées. En utilisant une méthode archéologique où un
certain nombre d’éléments (comprenant des dépôts en
surface) ont été fouillés en procédant à l’examen de
couches de carrés d’un mètre, il a été possible d’analyser
en finesse les mouvements des artefacts et du sol sur le site
pendant différentes périodes. Ainsi, la formation et le
développement des dépôts en surface ainsi que
l’accumulation et la dispersion des dépôts de déchets
depuis la surface vers le sous-sol sont présentés dans leurs
grandes lignes à partir d’un ensemble de zones de distribu-
tion. Nous aboutissons ainsi à une étude à facettes de l’une
des premières implantations anglo-saxonnes les plus
complètes qui aient été fouillées. Il résulte de cette étude
qu’il s’agit peut-être de la forme précoce d’un ensemble
de domaines associés à des tombes d’un haut niveau social
et à des activités industrielles.
(Traduction: Didier Don)
Stätte sind detailliert beschrieben, dabei wurden die
Fundkomplexe nach Kategorien analysiert, um den
Status und das Wesen der Siedlung und der dortigen
Aktivitäten zu charakterisieren. Die verwendete
Ausgrabungsmethode, bei der ein Teil der Strukturen,
einschließlich der Oberflächenbefunde, in ein mal ein
Meter großen Grabungsquadraten untersucht wurde,
ermöglichte eine detaillierte Analyse der vonstatten
gegangenen Artefaktverlagerungen und
Bodenbewegungen. Ausbildung und Wachstum der
Oberflächenbefunde sind ebenso wie die Ansammlung
der Abfälle und ihre Ausbreitung von der Oberfläche in
den Unterboden in einer Reihe von Verteilungsplänen
dargestellt. Das Resultat ist eine vielschichtige Studie
zu einer der am vollständigsten erhaltenen
frühangelsächsischen Siedlungen, die noch auf
Ausgrabung wartet. Die Studie gelangt zu dem
Schluss, dass die Siedlung ein frühes Gutszentrum
gewesen sein könnte, dem Grabstätten hochstehender
Personen und gewerbliche Aktivitäten angeschlossen
waren.
(Übersetzung: Gerlinde Krug)
 1. Introduction and Background
I. Introduction
Excavations at Bloodmoor Hill by the CAU in 1998 (close
to an area of known 5th- to 7th-century burial) revealed
a well-preserved and almost complete early Anglo-Saxon
settlement and associated cemetery dating from the 6th to
the early 8th century. This overlay a small Romano-British
settlement of the 2nd to 3rd century. Subsequent smaller
excavations in 1999, 2000 and 2001 in areas not previously
available have added further information. Excavations
were funded by Bovis Homes, Wimpey Homes and English
Heritage; the post-excavation and publication phases were
fully funded by Wimpey Homes and English Heritage. The
site director was Richard Mortimer, whose valuable input
into the initial stages of analysis is gratefully acknowl-
edged (cf. Mortimer 2000, Dickens and Mortimer 2002,
Dickens et al. 2006). The total excavated area exceeded
30,000sq m, and produced the remains of thirty-eight struc-
tures associated with sunken features (Grubenhäuser or
SFBs), at least nine well-defined post-buildings (including
post-in-trench), four extensive ‘midden’ heaps or surface
spread concentrations, and approximately 270 pits, as well
as five hearth or oven bases. Altogether, the site produced
a very large finds assemblage, including over 281kg of
animal bone, 176kg of fired clay, 19kg of metal (nearly
3000 individual items), over 160kg of metalworking slag,
and over 104kg of pottery, including 6284 Roman sherds
and 6520 Anglo-Saxon sherds. Although surface deposits
were in evidence, the original ground surface and bases
of features had been subject to a high degree of bioturba-
tion (see Milek, Chapter 3), resulting in the overall loss
of stratigraphic distinction in the sandy soil of the site
(i.e. original ground and floor surfaces could no longer
be distinguished; similar destructive effects in sandy soils
have been observed at the Anglo-Saxon cemetery of Sutton
Hoo: Carver 2005).
Within the settled area, a west–east aligned cemetery
of twenty-six graves (some furnished with mid to late
7th-century grave-goods) was discovered, along with two
outlying graves (one a double burial). An extensive mate-
rial culture assemblage was recovered, mainly from the
sunken features, pits and surface spreads, which evidences
social, economic and technological practices such as metal-
working and textile production, as well as animal and crop
husbandry. The limits of the settlement have been defined
to the west, east and south, while the northern boundary
appears to lie under housing constructed in the 1980s and
90s.
Despite over eighty years of investigation, substantial
and well-published early Anglo-Saxon settlements are
still few in number: the canon includes Bishopstone, West
Sussex (Bell 1977); Cowdery’s Down, Hants (Millett and
James 1983); West Stow, Suffolk (West 1985); Mucking,
Essex (Hamerow 1993); Pennyland, Bucks (Williams
1993); Catholme, Notts (Losco-Bradley and Kinsley
2002), Yarnton, Oxon (Hey 2004) and Barrow Hills, Oxon
(Chambers and McAdam 2007), to which Bloodmoor Hill
can now be added. Further major sites at New Wintles
(Oxon) and Chalton (Hants) remain unpublished, despite
excavations being completed at both over thirty years ago,
1
while West Heslerton, North Yorkshire (completed 1995)
is forthcoming (Powlesland forthcoming).
All of these sites, including Bloodmoor Hill, possess
both sunken-featured buildings (SFBs) and post-built
structures, but in varying proportions, ranging from four
SFBs and fifty-seven post-built structures at Chalton
(1:14.3) to sixty-nine SFBs and fourteen post-built struc-
tures at West Stow (4.9:1) (Tipper 2004, tab. 3). While
there appears to be a geological component to this, with
settlements on chalk having demonstrably fewer SFBs,
there appear to be real differences between settlements on
other soils (Tipper 2004, 24, table 3). The ratio of 3.8:1 at
Bloodmoor Hill falls within the known range, and reflects
its location on sand (see Boreham, this chapter, below). The
site is distinctive in both in its methodological approach
(see below), with excavation and recording techniques
designed to allow distributional analysis and investigation
of the movement of material around the site, and also in its
very nature. The presence of surface deposits is extremely
unusual for an early Anglo-Saxon settlement, and allows
a more nuanced interpretation of formation processes
and depositional practices; a large number of pits, which
contain similar types of material to that found in the SFBs,
also contributes to this. Finally, the presence of a short-
lived cemetery within the settlement core itself (rather than
located remotely, or at the edge of the settled area, as at
West Heslerton and Mucking) is highly unusual, and may
indicate that this settlement is something more than just a
‘normal’ rural settlement.
This chapter will outline the landscape context of
the site, first in terms of geology and topography, then in
terms of known and documented sites in the local area.
The Anglo-Saxon context of the settlement will then be
outlined, at both regional and local levels, before the
various stages of archaeological fieldwork, research objec-
tives and excavation strategies are described.
II. Geology, topography and landscape use
The site lies towards the northern extent of the Sandlings
of Suffolk, the band of sand soils and sand which forms
the coastal area of Suffolk from the river Deben in the
south to past Lowestoft in the north (Fig. 1.1; Pl. I).
The site itself sits around 1km inland, just to the north
of an intermittent clay ridge extending from the Suffolk
clayland to the west. This broad ridge extends to the east
from the bluff that is known as Bloodmoor Hill (Pl. II);
the underlying geology of the central spine is heavy clay,
giving way to lighter sands and gravels on the north and
south-facing slopes to either side. The site itself lies on
the north-western slope running down from the bluff; the
underlying geology here is sand, and the altitude between
8 and 10m OD. North of the bluff is a broad shallow
valley, whose sides rise gently to heights of c.18m; the
valley itself is just over 2km wide and runs from south-
west to north-east. Beaches and cliffs lie to the east,
while the broad flood plain of the river Waveney (which
here forms the county boundary with Norfolk) lies to the
north-west. The river Waveney is linked to the sea by
 © Crown Copyright and/or database right. All rights reserved. Licence number 100048686.

Figure 1.1 General site location, showing built-up areas and topography

2

© Crown Copyright and/or database right. All rights reserved. Licence number 100048686.
Figure 1.2 Details of Bloodmoor Hill in its
geographical context showing (a) simplified geology (b)
simplified soil distribution (c) soil capability map
3
the flooded valley of Oulton Broad and Lake Lothing,
through which it once flowed.
Landscape use
By Steve Boreham
(Fig. 1.2)
Introduction
The two most obvious features of this landscape are the
North Sea coast with beach and cliffs to the east, and the
broad flood plain of the Waveney valley, at or below sea
level, to the north-west. Linking these two systems is the
narrow ria (flooded valley) of Oulton Broad and Lake
Lothing. Today the linkage is entirely artificial, with Oulton
Dyke connecting Oulton Broad to the river Waveney,
which enters the sea at Great Yarmouth. However, in the
distant past, probably during the last glacial period, the
waters of the Waveney cut a more direct route into the
North Sea basin though Lake Lothing and Lowestoft.
To the south, the valley of the Hundred River flows
eastwards towards the sea near Kessingland, where its
egress to the sea is blocked by an accumulation of beach
sand known locally as Benacre Ness. The interfluves
between the major valleys effectively form a dissected
plateau reaching c.25m OD. There are many minor,
mostly dry, dendritic valleys extending across the area,
but one of the largest trends south-west–north-east from
Carlton Colville towards Lowestoft. It is worth noting that
the rapidly receding (up to 1m per year in places) cliff-
line has truncated the plateau between Kessingland and
Kirkley, so that the exact coastal landscape that existed
more than a millennium ago has been destroyed.
Settlements appear to be located on the edges of the
plateau, avoiding both valley floors and the plateau top.
The site at Bloodmoor Hill follows this pattern, and
occupies a north-facing slope with excellent sight-lines
north-east (towards Lowestoft) and south-west along the
unnamed stream valley, and across the valley towards
the present site of Carlton Colville. The dissected plateau
forms several low north-east–south-west trending ridges,
along which communication routes seem to be aligned
as they converge on Lowestoft. Constrictions and cols in
river valleys form crossing places between ridges. The
natural harbour at Lowestoft must have been a major
focus of activity, particularly in Anglo-Saxon times.
Geology and soils
The simplified geology of the area, taken from the
Lowestoft Sheet 176 British Geological Survey 1:50,000
map, is shown in Fig. 1.2a. Much of the area is underlain
at depth by the Crag Formation, which overlies Chalk
bedrock. The Crag outcrops on valley sides, mostly along
the Hundred River valley, but otherwise the landscape is
dominated by younger deposits. The plateau is composed
of a sheet of Anglian (Lowestoft Formation) glacial till
(boulder clay) up to 10m thick, which overlies various
Anglian outwash sands and gravels. The remaining
deposits are Holocene in age and include beach gravel and
sand, peat and alluvium.
The simplified distribution of soils in the area (taken
from the Soils of Southern England Sheet 4) is shown
in Fig. 1.2b. Brown sands capped by stagnogley soils
underlie much of the plateau, although small areas of
brown earths are mapped to the north and north-west.
Soils developed on peats and alluvial gleys mark out the
valley floors, while sand pararendzinas have developed on
coastal accumulations of sand and gravel. Unfortunately, a
large part of the urban area around Lowestoft has not been
mapped. The close correspondence between the soils and
geology is evident in this area, although even a cursory
comparison of Figs 1.2a and b reveals that not all outcrops
of till have developed poorly drained stagnogleys.
Soil capability and land use
In order to further investigate the relationship of soils,
geology and landscape with probable land-use patterns,
a soil capability map has been constructed (Fig. 1.2c),
which attempts to combine the most salient elements of
the topography, soils and geology, while predicting soil
types for the unmapped urban areas. The soil capability
map can be decoded directly as a land-use map. It seems
likely that the poorly drained seasonally waterlogged wet
clay soils of the plateau tops would not have been suitable
for agriculture or indeed settlement (although a Bronze
Age and Iron Age roundhouse and enclosure have recently
been excavated 0.7km to the south-east on this clay
plateau: J. Tipper, pers. comm.). It is probably reasonable
to suppose that these areas would have been left uncleared
in the Anglo-Saxon period, given the apparent preference
for settlement on lighter soils, and probably supported an
oak–hazel–ash woodland. Such woodland would have
provided a diversity of resources, including pannage,
timber and underwood and cobnuts. In contrast, the fertile
clay-loam soils occurring at the plateau edge, where the
till was better drained, would have provided ideal arable
farmland. However, the sandy soils of the lower valley
slopes would have provided only winter pasture, since
they are nutrient-poor and dry out quickly in the summer.
The alluvium of the valley floors would have provided
summer pasture, while the peatlands of the larger rivers
might have supported low-density rough grazing.
It is immediately clear from the environmental report
(see Ballantyne, Chapter 5) that there is ample evidence
for arable activity close to the site, in the form of charred
cereal grains (barley, wheat and rye), beans, and weeds
associated with soil disturbance. The broad apron of
plateau-edge fertile clay-loam to the east of the site at
Bloodmoor Hill is the closest area of land capable of
arable production, and the most likely candidate for the
production of this evidence. The presence of hazelnuts,
wild apple and sloe all point to woodland resources close
by, probably to the south-east on the poorly drained clay
soils of the plateau top. Reeds were clearly also available
from the wet meadows and fen areas on the valley floor to
the north-west.
Similarly, the fish bones from Bloodmoor Hill (see
Parks and Barrett, Chapter 5) show the range of resources
being exploited by the occupants of the site. The pres-
ence of freshwater carp family (Cyprinid) bones suggests
that local non-tidal streams and rivers were being fished.
However, fish such as smelt, eel, and flounder were prob-
ably obtained from sheltered estuarine environments, the
closest of which is Lake Lothing. Marine fish such as
herring, cod, mackerel, horse mackerel, plaice and rays
can be caught with relative ease from the beach, or more
probably from a small craft within 10km of the coast.
However, members of the halibut family are generally
large deepwater fish. Their presence at the site suggests
that they are the product of a developed fishing industry.
4
This is perhaps not surprising when the proximity of the
natural harbour of Lake Lothing is considered.
Conclusions
Settlement at Bloodmoor Hill is ideally located to access
a complex tapestry of land-use resources. Significant
areas of woodland, arable land and summer and winter
pasture would have been accessible within a kilometre
or so from the site. In addition, the direct access to the
natural harbour of Lake Lothing to the north-east along the
unnamed valley would have made utilisation of maritime
and fishery resources relatively easy. The settlement site
was located on free-draining soils and on a plateau-edge
communication route, possibly close to a crossing point in
the valley, and was protected from severe easterly winter
gales by a low ridge between the site and the coast.
III. Evidence from aerial photography
with Rog Palmer and Robin Standring
(Plate I; Fig. 1.3)
Although a desk-based assessment was carried out as an
early part of the project (see below), the aerial photographic
element of this had consulted a rather limited range of
material. Subsequently a more detailed study was carried
out as part of the post-excavation analysis (Fig. 1.3).
The photographs examined, and a more general
scan of specialist cover in the Carlton Colville environs,
suggests that there has been very little aerial archaeolog-
ical observation in the area. Only one flight by CUCAP
recorded cropmark information (their other photographs
being ‘panoramas’), while the input from Derek Edwards
(Norfolk Landscape Archaeology) and English Heritage
targeted moats in the area — presumably in conjunction
with that phase of the Monument Protection Programme.
However, the best times of year for photographing moats
are not usually those during which there are likely to be
any indications of sub-surface archaeological sites. The
information is largely compiled from the range of vertical
photographs held at the National Monuments Record,
(NMR), Unit for Landscape Modelling (ULM formerly
CUCAP), Suffolk County Council and the US National
Archives (NARA), and the work is likely to provide only
a partial record of past features in the area around the
Bloodmoor Hill site.
Pre-medieval
One definite round barrow/ring-ditch was photographed
in 1980 at TM 5144 9067 as a ring-ditch with arcs of an
asymmetrical inner ditch. It was visible as a low mound
in 1946, 1951 and 1967 but may have been damaged by
the passage of builders’ vehicles when houses were built
to the south in 1989. Arcs of a possible ring-ditch are also
faintly visible to the north-east at TM 5149 9071, and
those of another were noted at TM 5196 9060 in bare soil
on vertical photographs taken in January 1980. The feature
showed as dark ‘ditches’ with a lighter internal ‘mound’
and may indicate the site of a round barrow. Other features
— soils ridges and a pipeline — were visible in the same
field and indicate that sub-surface features were visible
as soil differences at that date. The site is now under
housing.
Photographs taken in June 1986, centred on TM 521
900, show a series of near-parallel ditches. It is probable
 © Crown Copyright and/or database right. All rights reserved. Licence number 100048686.
Figure 1.3 Plot of information from aerial photographic survey by Rog Palmer (Air Photo Services)

that these are part of the field systems examined as part
of the main investigations on the site (see below). There
is possibly some confusion with more recent ditched
field boundaries and Fig. 1.4 attempts to distinguish one
from the other. No other photographs examined showed
features in this area.
Medieval and possibly medieval
A moat site was mapped by the Ordnance Survey at TM
5125 8942. When last photographed (2002), the moat was
tree-covered. Several features are mapped as ‘soil ridges’
within TM 51 90. These may remain from medieval ridge
and furrow but it is uncertain whether that type of culti-
vation was practised in this locality. On the photographs
examined no ridge and furrow was identified outwith the
mapped area and the ridges may be a result of more recent
land use.
Second World War anti-invasion defences
A zigzag defensive line runs broadly south-east to north-
west about 200m east of the main site (Fig. 1.3). The line
was made up of two main features, a row of concrete cubes
and an anti-tank ditch, and was designed to encircle the
west side of Lowestoft. Many examples of such cubes and
ditches are known from Suffolk and other coastal areas
(see Lowry 2002; Hegarty and Newsome 2007), although
the mismatch between the cubes and the ditch makes for
a curious defensive arrangement. This apparent misalign-
ment reflects two phases in the construction of defences,
which are best illustrated by the air photo evidence.

5
 Plate I The excavation area overlain on a German air photo from 3 September 1940. The patchwork of fields
surrounding the site is shown prior to the post-war expansion of Lowestoft. A defensive line of anti-tank cubes
connecting Oulton Broad with the coast shows as a white scar running east of the site. Photo mosaic of frames 7(R)
and 8(R) from sortie GB 1053, GX 10372 SG of 3/9/1940 (US National Archives)

The cubes were put in place by the time of German
photography in September 1940, and stretched between
Oulton Broad and the coast near Pakefield Hall (Plate
I). The anti-tank ditch is first shown freshly cut (and not
completed) by RAF survey from July 1941. Subsequent
German photography from August 1942 shows that this
ditch connected with a more extensive network of defences
running south and c.0.5km inland from the coast. Adjacent
to the site, the defensive line remained until 1947, when
the ditch was backfilled and the cubes removed. Almost
all of the mapped length is now under modern housing or
industrial development.
Two small rectangular features situated close to an
angle of the ditch (TM 5269 9012 and TM 5280 9002)
were recorded between 1941 and 1947 and had been
levelled by 1955. Between 1941 and 1947 they appeared
as rectangular embanked features with internal walled
divisions. These external walls appeared to be too thick
for a normal structure (i.e. as may have remained from
derelict cottages) and were probably intended to protect
and screen guns (each structure being positioned to allow
firing along a different section of the ditch). The features
do not appear on German photography from 1940 so
are most likely to be part of the defensive ‘upgrade’ that
occurred with the construction of the ditch in 1941.
Possible features and those of unknown origin
Suggestions of straight-cut features, possibly ditches,
lying adjacent to a probable natural feature were identified
on the 1986 verticals at TM 5125 8942. A possible small
square feature that may be sub-surface walls or founda-
tions was identified at TM 5163 8980 on Ordnance Survey
verticals taken in 1970. Slight traces of apparent straight-
cut ditched features that include right-angled components
were identified on the 1986 verticals at TM 5175 8920.
Non-archaeological features
Features mapped as ‘different soil’ tend to cross the
Assessment Area on a roughly east–west alignment, with
a ‘tributary’ running south. The Soil Survey map (SSEW
1983) shows this to follow the shape of a deposit of

6
different soil (see above) and this is the probable origin of
the different tones noted on the photographs.
Land use
Between 1941 and 1946 many of the smaller fields were
under pasture with the remaining land in arable use. By
the 1980s virtually all the land that had not been built over
was in arable use. This effectively opened the area for
aerial survey, had any been undertaken for archaeological
purposes.
IV. Bloodmoor Hill in its Anglo-Saxon
context
(Figs 1.4–1.5)
East Anglia is a key region within early Anglo-Saxon
settlement archaeology, containing as it does two of the
major published sites (Mucking and West Stow), along
with a range of other contemporary or partly contemporary
sites, such as those in the Thetford area and that emerging
through recent investigations at Coddenham. The sites at
Brandon and Ipswich, which appear to have been founded
during the 7th century, also provide further contextual
background (see Fig. 1.4 for location).
The sequence of settlement and cemeteries at Mucking
was excavated from 1965 to 1978 under the direction of
Margaret and Tom Jones, and was primarily funded by the
© Crown Copyright and/or database right. All rights reserved. Licence number 100048686.
Figure 1.4 Locations of other Anglo-Saxon settlements and cemeteries in East Anglia
7
Department of the Environment, with responsibility for
writing up the site passing to the British Museum/English
Heritage project in 1985. The large-scale rescue excava-
tions on the gravel terrace, which was due to be destroyed
by gravel quarrying, eventually covered around 18ha, and
revealed a complex multi-period landscape, with remains
from the early Neolithic to the medieval periods (Clark
1993); the settlement extended beyond the excavated area
to the west and south-west (Tipper 2004, 35). The excavated
Anglo-Saxon remains comprised over 200 Grubenhäuser
and over fifty post-hole buildings, and their publication
(Hamerow 1993) was based on Hamerow’s doctoral thesis
on the pottery and spatial development of the site. Reports
on the two Anglo-Saxon cemeteries are forthcoming
(Hirst and Clark in prep.). The settlement was interpreted
as a shifting settlement, dating from the early 5th to the
early 8th century, located around (and across) two stable
cemetery sites (Hamerow 1993, 86, 89). It is still unclear
whether the southern part of the site, consisting predomi-
nantly of Grubenhäuser, was a functionally distinct zone
(cf. Welch 1985, 15). The lack of post-hole buildings there
might have been a function of preservation in this area,
which had been affected by deep ploughing and over-
stripping by the dragline (cf. Hamerow 1993, 1–2, 8), or
might simply have stemmed from a lack of recognition
of such structures in the early years of the excavation, in
the area of the site with complex underlying prehistoric
features (including a mass of visible post-holes).
 © Crown Copyright and/or database right. All rights reserved. Licence number 100048686.
Figure 1.5 Anglo-Saxon sites and metal-detected finds in the Bloodmoor Hill area (see Fig. 1.6 for details of finds)
This model of shifting farmsteads was one that was
clearly established at West Stow. Here, Stanley West
defined the progressive movement of three farmsteads
across the low sand knoll on which the site was based (West
1985, 149–52). Excavations covering an area of 1.8ha
took place seasonally from 1965 to 1972, in advance of
destruction. These were, again, funded by the Department
of the Environment, and followed on from some small-
scale excavations by Vera Evison from 1957 to 1961. The
excavations revealed fourteen post-hole buildings and
sixty-nine SFBs, and a layer of buried soil c.0.3–0.45m
deep across the whole site, which was referred to as the
general cultural layer (West 1985, 9–10); while most of
this was removed by machine, the final few inches were
cleaned by controlled shovel-scraping, and were shown
to contain considerable amounts of cultural material,
although there were no discrete concentrations that may
have indicated surface dumps. Although West saw the
occupation as dating from the 5th to the mid-7th century,
the presence of 381 sherds of Ipswich Ware (whose
introduction is now dated to the first quarter of the 8th
century: Blinkhorn 1999, 8–9) suggests that the settlement
in fact lasted several decades longer (Tipper 2004, 53); the
ditched enclosures present date to this latest phase.
Several contemporary sites are now also known in
the Thetford area: these include Redcastle Furze and its
environs, Melford Meadows and Kilverstone. Most of the
known early Anglo-Saxon activity within Thetford itself
8
is concentrated to the west of the modern town, in the area
known as Red Castle and further to the west. Excavations
at Red Castle itself and at nearby Redcastle Furze revealed
artefacts, pits, ditches and structures associated with
sunken features (Andrews 1995, 1), while the intensive
middle Saxon occupation at Brandon Road, further to
the east, was also preceded by some earlier Anglo-Saxon
activity, with denser Anglo-Saxon occupation revealed
in more recent excavations (Atkins and Connor forth-
coming). In the same general area, excavations in 1999
at Brandon Road West produced sunken features (one
with a claw-beaker fragment), post-holes and pits of the
early Anglo-Saxon period, with similar features coming
from the work for the Thetford Bypass, just to the north,
including a 6th-century SFB with unfired loomweights,
a copper alloy girdle-hanger and a lugged pottery bowl
(here preceded by Romano-British settlement evidence
and situated within the zone of mid-Saxon settlement).
Melford Meadows (Mudd 2002) comprised eleven
SFBs, two ‘hollows’ (or post-less SFBs), thirty-two pits
and three ovens, in just over a hectare of excavation. Finds
included 680 sherds of early Anglo-Saxon pottery and ten
copper alloy artefacts (including a wrist-clasp and an ear
scoop); environmental evidence suggested an increase
in pastoral emphasis when compared with the preceding
Romano-British settlement (ibid., 114–16). The early
Anglo-Saxon settlement at Kilverstone, dated to between
the 6th and 7th centuries AD, consisted of ten buildings
 Figure 1.6 Selection of metal-detected finds from the Bloodmoor Hill area (information from SMR records)
associated with sunken features, four post-built halls and
seven pits, loosely spread over the area of a former Roman
farmstead. Finds included 100 handmade Anglo-Saxon
sherds, fired clay and animal bone, but no metal artefacts,
except for two (probably Roman) iron nails (Garrow et
al. 2006).
The site at Coddenham was identified through metal-
detector activity, which produced a wealth of 6th- and
7th-century artefacts and coins (including numerous
Merovingian and early English gold coins and primary
silver sceattas, along with other gold and copper alloy arte-
facts). In 2004, a geophysical survey and trial-trenching
9
(commissioned by the BBC for a television series)
produced evidence for settlement; the geophysical survey
identified two possible SFBs, while a major post-in-trench
building measuring 11m by 7m and probably dating to the
7th century was located, planned and partly excavated
during the trial-trenching (Newman 2004). Metalworking
activity was evidenced by an iron-smithing hearth base and
gold scrap ready for reuse, as well as unfinished copper
alloy artefacts and off-cuts (ibid.). One suggestion is that
this site represents an early minster complex (ibid.).
Information on the mid-Saxon settlement at Brandon,
Suffolk, is based on a now dated brief assessment report
 Plate II Bloodmoor Hill under crop (from south)
(Carr et al. 1988); post-excavation analysis of the site is
still ongoing. The site comprised twenty-five post-built
and post-in-trench structures, at least one church, two
cemetery areas and an industrial zone, located on an
intermittent sand ‘island’ at the edge of the fenland near
Hockwold. Unusually, the site possessed an intact occupa-
tion horizon 0.1–0.15m deep, which was fairly continuous
across the site, and it was from this layer that the majority
of finds were recovered; preliminary analysis suggested
the development of surface rubbish heaps, often near to
enclosure boundaries (ibid., 372–3). The pottery (almost
exclusively Ipswich Ware, or contemporary with it; ibid.,
375) and other artefacts, including many of higher status,
suggests a date range of the early 8th to the later 9th
century for the bulk of occupation. The site is potentially
a small monastic settlement.
Ipswich, in contrast to its small-scale beginnings in the
7th century, grew into a major trade and production centre
during the 8th and 9th centuries, and covered about 50ha
(Wade 1988). Founded as a de novo settlement, probably
before AD 650, there may have been earlier farmsteads
in the vicinity (some of which may have been associated
with the major cemetery at Hadleigh Road). Evidence for
various crafts, such as spinning, weaving, bone-/antler-
/horn-working and ironworking, are widespread, but they
were apparently carried out at a low level of intensity,
suggesting cottage industries, whereas the pottery industry
supplied the whole of the East Anglian kingdom (and
beyond) with the eponymous Ipswich Ware. Imported
pottery from the Rhineland, Flanders and northern France
is evidence of engagement in longer distance trade, and
the site appears to have been a consumer, rather than a
producer of food, although the town may have had associ-
ated farms.
The coastal region of north Suffolk/south Norfolk in
which Bloodmoor Hill is located is not one with a mass
10
of known Anglo-Saxon settlement archaeology, although
cemetery evidence is slightly better represented. The area
immediately around Bloodmoor Hill, however, is remark-
ably devoid of cemetery finds (cf. Lucy 2000, fig. 1.1);
with the exception of the barrow burial on the hill itself
(described below), the nearest cemeteries are possibly
evidenced by some chance finds of probable grave-goods
at Burgh Castle (Meaney 1964, 225–6), several kilome-
tres to the north, and a handful of burials at Pewter Hill,
Kirby Cane (ibid., 177), a similar distance to the west.
More substantial cemeteries further afield include the
7th- to 8th-century inhumation cemetery at Caister-on-
Sea, Norfolk (Rumbelow 1937, 180–2), and the 5th- to
6th-century inhumation cemeteries at Bergh Apton (Green
and Rogerson 1978) and Morning Thorpe (Green et al.
1987). To the south of Bloodmoor Hill, the nearest known
cemetery lies over 50km away at Snape, Suffolk (Filmer-
Sankey and Pestell 2001).
While stray and metal-detector finds from the area of
Bloodmoor Hill are dealt with below, the wider local area
is poorly represented in these terms (Fig. 1.5). Excavations
in 2003/4 by Suffolk County Council Archaeological
Services at St Peters Road, Carlton Colville, of around
2000sq m immediately east of Carlton Hall and some 70m
north-east of the parish church revealed extensive evidence
of late Saxon to medieval fence and ditch boundary lines
and associated pottery (Newman 2004). This provides
good archaeological evidence for the documented mano-
rial centre of Carlton Hall, but the occupation sequence
does not, however, extend back into the mid-Saxon period;
the only other potential evidence for this period comes
from a site on the Carlton Colville bypass (some 950m
to the north of the Bloodmoor Hill settlement), where an
investigation also by SCCAS identified a post-built rectan-
gular structure associated with handmade Saxon pottery.
A similar building has also now been discovered immedi-
ately to the east (ibid.).
Little is known of Anglo-Saxon occupation and
activity in the surrounding area, with the exception of the
renowned barrow burial on Bloodmoor Hill itself. This was
opened in 1758, in one of the first recorded excavations of
an Anglo-Saxon grave, and was reported to the Society of
Antiquaries on Thursday, 2 April 1761 as follows:
Mr Duane presented to the Society Engravings of two curious
Medals, or coins, in his possession, with the name Avitus on each
of them, the one of Gold, the other of Copper … The Gold Medal
was found, together with an onyx set in gold, in digging a Barrow,
in the year 1758, on Bloodmore Hill, near Pakefield, or Lowestoft
in Suffolk. They both hung about the Neck of a Skeleton. (Minute
Book for January 1757 to May 1762, 318, reproduced as Appendix
VII.2 in Boulter 1995)
The Rev. James Douglas further reported:
In Mr Duane’s sale an Onyx set in gold that accompanied a gold
coin of the Emperor AVITVS, set in a rim and a gold loop, to
hang it as a pendant. They were found in May, 1758, in a barrow
on Blood Moore Hill, near Peake-Field and Layftoff in Suffolk,
with a necklace of rough garnets, to which they were a pendant.
The necklace is in my possession. The Onyx, with an intaglio of
tolerable workmanship, represented Castor and Pollux. (Douglas
1793, 8n)
The gold coin was later reidentified as a Visigothic
coin of devolved ‘Justin’ type (Rigold 1975, 667; EMC
Ref. No. 1758.0001). In the same publication, Douglas
also noted (1793, 82):
Fig. 11, A crystal, with an engraved cross upon it. From a barrow
with coins of the Lower Empire, on Blood-moore Hill, near Peake-
field and Lowestoft in Suffolk, in May, 1758 by Mr Gardner a great
collector of these relics. (cited in Newman 1996, 76)
There thus appear to have been two different sources
for the material reported by Douglas: that acquired by the
antiquarian Matthew Duane (who appears to have had no
intimate knowledge of East Anglia), and that acquired by
Mr Gardner (Newman 1996, 76). It is, however, unclear
whether other barrows or graves were being opened on the
site. Newman (ibid.) reports that further finds were made
in the area in 1778, as recorded by the author of a manu-
script history for the Hundred of Mutford:
November 10th, 1778, searching the same field found 3 ancient
beads, one blue and white striped, the others plain red and yellow’;
Mr Davidson at the same time found 19 of which 1 glass, 2 or 3
amber, some double, some of different colours and sizes. (Anon.
1806)
The History then notes: ‘In a field … called Blood-
mere Field have been found many ancient beads, spears
etc’. An accompanying sketch map seems to suggest that
they were centred on TM 518 897/8 (Boulter 1995). Some
further evidence comes from a County History of 1846:
A mound of earth at the eastern extremity of the parish, near
Parkfield retains the name Bloodmoor Hill and is believed to mark
the site of a battle-field. A Mr Downing, in sinking a pit, about the
year 1780, at this spot came upon the remains of armour, spears,
horse-bits and broken stirrup irons. Mr Reynolds, then the Rector
of Gisleham, stopped further search, and insisted on their being
reburied, where they now probably lie. (Suckling 1846, 245 cited
in Newman 1996, 76)
This antiquarian evidence would seem to suggest the
presence, in the vicinity of the barrow, of a perhaps earlier
flat-grave cemetery dating to the 5th and 6th centuries.
11
Bloodmoor Hill itself was originally the site of the
junction of three parishes: Carlton Colville, Pakefield and
Gisleham (at TM 5187 8980; Boulter 1995). Pakefield
parish has now been absorbed into Lowestoft and Carlton
Colville. Field-name evidence from the tithe maps indi-
cates that there was probably a mill on Bloodmoor Hill,
and Boulter (ibid.) suggests that the Anglo-Saxon barrow
burial, whose location remains uncertain, may have been
used as a physical base for this; Newman (1996, 76–7)
also thinks this possible, and further suggests that the
1799 enclosure map of Gisleham/Pakefield, which labels
the area as ‘Mootway Common’, might indicate that the
area in general, and the barrow in particular, may have
served as a meeting place for the Mutford Hundred, to
which all three parishes belonged.
Mapping of previous and recent metal-detector finds
(Figs 1.5–1.6) can help to refine the potential locations of
the barrow and flat-grave cemetery. The vast majority of
the reported finds come from the area to the west of that
which has been subject to archaeological evaluation. From
the area which lies between TM 512 894 and TM 519 899
have been reported the following:
(a) SF 1571: head of a cruciform brooch (Fig. 1.6f);
fragments of a brooch consisting of a gilded foot and
catchplate (Fig. 1.6b); knob from a cruciform brooch
(Fig. 1.6k); head and bow of a small cruciform brooch
(Fig. 1.6i).
(b) SF 1573: cruciform brooch missing its foot; silver
sceatta; foot of a cruciform brooch, of horse’s head
form, apparently burnt (Fig. 1.6l).
(c) SF 1608: fragment of a 7th-century composite
disc brooch (Fig. 1.6a); 6th-century gold pendant
(Fig. 1.6c); complete cruciform brooch (Fig. 1.6g); a
second coin pendant using a solidus of Clothar II.
(d) two further detached knobs from cruciform brooch(es),
and possibly a spearhead.
These are spread out over a relatively wide area and
may indicate an extensive cemetery stretching west from
the brow of Bloodmoor Hill itself, where the barrow may
lie (this being 100 metres or so to the south-west of its
presumed location). The sceatta, along with a fragment
of an 8th- to 9th-century caterpillar ‘ansate’ brooch
(Fig. 1.6m) from the same area, would perhaps support
Newman’s suggestion (1996, 76) that this area may have
been used as a meeting place subsequent to its being a
place of burial (although Pantos 2006, 167 n. 34, suggests
that the associated finds are too early in date to relate to
the use of the area for late Anglo-Saxon hundred courts).
Furthermore, a geophysical survey undertaken in the
original evaluation phase over the possible cemetery area
appears to indicate the location of the barrow itself (J.
Tipper, pers. comm.).
Two further finds have been reported around 500m to
the south-east of the settlement site: a copper alloy sleeve
clasp of Hines Type B18 (SF 450) and a cast gilt copper
alloy buckle of anthropomorphic form (SF 451); these
potentially represent another (perhaps limited) area of
burial, although the area in which they were found has
now been built on. Finally, a small number of finds may
have derived from the settlement site itself. SF 2151 was
found in a back garden in Deepdale, just to the north of
the excavated area; this Frankish or Merovingian quatre-
foil brooch (Fig. 1.6e) may indicate that the northern part
of the settlement had already been built on by the 1980s.
Another foot of a cruciform brooch was found in 2000
(Fig. 1.6d), its location simply recorded as ‘Bloodmoor
Hill’. The most intriguing find, though, was made in
1998, when a silver anthropomorphic pendant (Pl. IX)
was recovered by an amateur metal-detectorist after the
initial phase of excavation. The precise provenance is
not clear but it is likely that the object came from a spoil
heap whose contents derived either from the excavated
area itself or from an adjacent building site. This find is
described in Chapter 4.
Intriguingly, although the metal-detector finds now
(perhaps) provide quite a reasonable picture of the loca-
tions of two distinct burial areas, no such reported finds
(with the exception of the anthropomorphic pendant and
the quatrefoil brooch) are said to have been located in the
area of the settlement site. This near-invisibility of settle-
ment sites in metal-detected assemblages is, however,
common (Chester-Kadwell 2005).
V. Evaluation and excavation history
Several phases of modern archaeological evaluation have
been carried out in the vicinity of Bloodmoor Hill. The
first, by Suffolk County Council Archaeological Services
(SCCAS) in 1994–5, focused on the c.19ha area to the
north and east of the hill (termed CAC 013) (Boulter 1995),
with the aim of determining whether the early Anglo-
Saxon cemetery indicated by the barrow burial and later
metal-detector finds stretched further to the east. This first
evaluation comprised a desktop survey, trial-trenching,
a metal-detector survey and limited geophysical survey
(this last took place in the presumed area of the cemetery,
outside the specified evaluation area; the potential barrow
suggested above was not recognised in the report). The
most extensive site identified during this evaluation was
a c.1ha area towards the north-west corner of the evalu-
ated area (centred on TM 5208 9002) which contained
evidence for large numbers of features and a possible
occupation layer; these produced finds dating mainly
to the late Roman and early Anglo-Saxon periods, but
were little investigated, as it was assumed that any site
below the ‘dark earth’ characterising the so-called occu-
pation layer would be well preserved. It was suggested
that the Roman material may have originated elsewhere
and been imported onto the site during the later years of
use (ibid.). Recommendations for further archaeological
work in advance of any development were made. The
second stage of evaluation covered the area immediately
to the west, c.5.5ha centred on TM 5185 8995 (CAC 014;
Boulter 1996), and identified medieval and post-medieval
field boundary ditches.
Following a change of site ownership and subsequent
submission of a detailed planning application by Bovis
Homes, parts of the areas covered by these two evalua-
tions were determined as requiring mitigation (following
a brief issued by Suffolk County Council Archaeological
Conservation Team, based on the results of the evalua-
tions: Carr 1997). It had been decided that the ‘core’ area
identified in the SCCAS 1995 evaluation (as judged by the
presence of ‘dark earth’) should be preserved as an area
of public space (the ‘preserved central area’); archaeo-
logical excavation was therefore restricted to areas outside
this core zone. Work was thereafter conducted by the
12
Cambridge Archaeological Unit between 1998 and 2001,
in advance of various phases of housing development (and
resulted in some controversy: see an article in The Times
for 24 February 1998).
Excavation began on the site in January 1998
(Areas A–D; Figs 1.7–1.8; Pl. III). It became rapidly
apparent that the SCCAS identification of a ‘dark earth’
was mistaken, the dark spreads actually being ‘midden’
deposits or surface spreads and areas of dense features, the
‘spreads’ being relatively contained in extent. Moreover
(see Fig. 1.9), the evaluation had failed to identify the real
concentration of settlement features, with the so-called
‘preserved central area’ being neither central, nor the
most important part of the site. The lack of excavation
during the evaluation meant that, even though a number of
trenches had exposed parts of SFBs (some of which were
excavated), and one even passed through the middle of the
cemetery, with two graves partly exposed in plan (but not
excavated), these were not identified as such at the time
(being classified as pits). As a result, the sheer density of
underlying settlement had not been appreciated, and the
extent of the Roman features had not been recognised.
In addition, although the settlement was said to peter
out towards the eastern edge of the evaluated area, this
turned out not to be the case. Following discussion with
English Heritage, funding was granted to carry out addi-
tional evaluation to the east. This identified a good eastern
edge to the settlement zone, some 75m further east than
was presumed from the evaluation. Following this, the
remainder of the area still available between the new edge
of excavation and the eastern limit of settlement features
was stripped and excavated (Area E). This confirmed the
petering out of the settlement to the east and found several
further structures, pit clusters and two additional graves,
one a double burial. Two additional trial trenches (Areas F
and G, also funded by English Heritage) were opened up
to the far west of Area C, to further evaluate the settlement
density past the existing edge of excavation.
In the summer of 1999, a short digging season inves-
tigated the central (Area H) and far western (Area J) parts
of the site, which had not been available previously. This
was conducted as a dig providing intensive training for
graduate would-be professional archaeologists and was
funded by English Heritage; a magnetic susceptibility
survey was carried out in Area J. Following this, in
March 2000, a short excavation, again funded by English
Heritage, was conducted in the area of the former Bovis
storage compound, which had not been accessible in
1998 (Area K), and in a strip along the southern edge of
excavation (Area M). These revealed four further sunken
features, pits and another post-in-trench building, while at
the south-eastern edge of excavation a wet area, possibly
the end of a palaeochannel, was identified, which the
archaeological features appeared to respect. An area to
the south of Area M (Area L) was also monitored while
a small temporary car-park was being installed (this
involving some topsoil stripping); three pits were observed
and excavated, and a significant quantity of Saxon pottery
was recovered, along with some metal artefacts found
using a metal-detector. Finally, in 2000, the area on the far
west, known as Swallowfields (Area N), was stripped and
excavated; this was done in advance of house-building by
Wimpey Homes, who met the excavation, post-excavation
and publication costs for this area. Medieval and Roman
remains, particularly ditches, were recorded, but no early
Figure 1.7 Plan of evaluation trenches and open excavation areas: all years

13
 Figure 1.8 Details of excavation areas

Figure 1.9 SCCAS evaluation trenches shown against CAU base plan

14
 Plate III Oblique aerial photograph, showing the site under excavation, with housing already under construction.
The ‘preserved central area’ is clearly visible in the centre of the photograph (Ann Woods)
Anglo-Saxon archaeology was found, confirming that the
western edge of the Anglo-Saxon settlement area lay to
the east.
In addition, an area to the south-east of the main settle-
ment core (previously evaluated under CAC013) was
re-evaluated by the CAU in 2001, with evaluation trenches
widened where necessary to excavate significant features,
which included ditches and a further structure associated
with a sunken feature (Area O). This work was also funded
by English Heritage.
The project thus began as developer-funded, based
on parameters determined by the SSCAS evaluation. The
site, however, proved to be more complex, extensive and
archaeologically important than had been presumed. As a
consequence, it was felt by English Heritage that Bovis
Homes had met their statutory requirements, and all the
developer funding (with the exception of that for Area N,
which involved a different developer) was put into the
excavation and post-excavation assessment phases for
Areas A to D, while over time an agreement was reached
with English Heritage to fund the further stages of excava-
tion and the subsequent analysis and publication stages.
The site codes, excavation areas, their extent and their
funding providers are detailed in Table 1.1.
15
VI. Research aims
Background and context
The Bloodmoor Hill project was developed in a context in
which excavated early/middle Saxon settlement evidence
is rare nationally, with only a handful of sites investigated
on a large scale since the mid-1970s, and even fewer
published. This is especially true for the early medieval
period in East Anglia, where, in contrast, cemeteries are
well represented in the literature. West Stow and Mucking,
both excavated over thirty years ago, have become ‘type
sites’ both for the region and on a national level. These are
often the basic references for other excavations, no matter
how different the natural and/or cultural landscape might
be. It is clear, however, that many settlements cannot
easily be directly compared with these and categorised
as shifting groups of farmsteads unless clear evidence of
spatial organisation exists.
Settlements of this period clearly vary in size and
extent, with some showing at least limited evidence of
organisation. A few sites do show more complex arrange-
ments; the excavation at West Heslerton indicated a
high degree of spatial variation in the layout, which was
far removed from a shifting pattern of loosely clustered
farmsteads, and suggests that the sophistication and
complexity of settlement development elsewhere may
have been misunderstood. It would appear that, as more
sites are excavated, it actually becomes harder to fit them
into one all-encompassing definition. However, very few
Site code/year/phase Area Sq. metres
CAC 016 1998 — Phase 1 A 4685
B 6001
C 911
D 3227
E 2321
CAC 016 1999 — Phase 2 H 2925
J (inc. F & G) 1797
CAC 016 2000 — Phase 3 K 1802
M 626
CAC 016 2000(2) — Phase 4 N 4025
Tr. 1–3 200
CAC 016 2001 — Phase 5 O; Tr. 1–14
Total
Table 1.1 Details of site codes, excavated areas and funding
settlements have been completely excavated or delimited
and partially excavated sites will always be problematic
to interpret. The opportunity to recover the (very near)
complete settlement plan at Bloodmoor Hill meant that the
site was therefore considered a high priority.
Although there is apparently ubiquitous evidence for
settlement shift and population expansion in both Suffolk
and Norfolk during the 7th century (Wade 1997, 48) few
settlements which straddle the late 6th to early 8th centuries
in the region have been investigated through excavation on
a large scale. The early Anglo-Saxon settlement at West
Stow does possess Ipswich Ware pottery but the excava-
tions suggested that the greatest extent of occupation was
in the 5th to mid-7th centuries (West 1985). The high-status
settlement at Brandon has been dated to the 7th–9th centu-
ries, therefore beginning slightly later than the settlement
at Bloodmoor Hill (Carr et al. 1988); however, the settle-
ment site at Redcastle Furze, Thetford, at 6th-/7th-century,
is much closer in date (Andrews 1995).
Within this broad background a series of research
objectives were defined and refined throughout the field
and post-excavation phases of the project. Several key
issues were identified and these informed both method-
ology in the field (see below) and subsequent analysis
of the data. It was also recognised early in the fieldwork
that the site at Bloodmoor Hill was unusual in having a
considerable number of pits relating to the Anglo-Saxon
occupation, normally a rarity on settlements of this period,
as well as the SFBs, the surface deposits and the post-built
structures, making it one of the most complete data sets
available.
Specific research objectives
These research objectives were never considered to be
exclusive of any other lines of analysis, and were viewed
more as a means of providing focus. Broadly, they break
down into the following areas:
Character, status and longevity of the Anglo-Saxon
settlement
Although, again, not intending to constrain thought or
consideration of alternatives, it was felt useful to bear in
mind three of the prevailing models of Saxon rural settle-
ment. The first of these is the wandering settlements (or
Wandersliedlungen). This is a model partially defined on
16
Total Excavation funding
17145 Bovis Homes
4722 English Heritage
2428 English Heritage
Wimpey Homes
4225 (Swallowfields site)
1692 English Heritage
30212
the continent, but favoured in the interpretation of some
key English sites, such as West Stow (West 1985) and
Mucking (Hamerow 1993). Simply put, this involves the
shifting of settlement and related elements across the land-
scape, examples of which include West’s travelling Hall
and SFB clusters at West Stow and Hamerow’s loosely
clustered groups of shifting farmsteads at Mucking. The
second model is the fixed settlement nucleus(i), which
arises principally from Tipper’s reassessment of the data
from Mucking (Tipper 2000), where he argues for fixed
settlement nuclei within which there is internal shifting
of individual structures — that is, abandonment and
rebuilding nearby. He cites the alignment of structures,
evidence of repair and rebuilding and discrete clusters of
buildings as being among the evidence for this model of
settlement. The third model is that of planned settlement,
and is based on Powlesland’s interpretation of settlement
pattern at West Heslerton (Powlesland 1998), where he
cites functional and associated spatial variation (e.g.
housing and craft zones) as among the principal evidence.
Indeed, he goes so far as to suggest that the scale of the
settlement and the evidence for planned spatial differences
point towards urbanism or proto-urbanism by the end of
the 5th century (1998, 6.5.6).
Consideration of the number, variety and function of
structural types on the site
For each structural type the following questions were to
be considered: architecture, structural longevity, form and
function, reuse and structural sequence, abandonment and
backfilling, and resources. The settlement is unusual in
consisting of post-hole buildings, SFBs, pits and surface
deposits. Better understandings of these relationships
between these features may be used to inform studies of
similar sites with a more limited range of features.
Study of site and feature formation processes
An examination of disposal regimes through the fragmen-
tation and distribution of material within and between the
different deposits on the site (e.g. surface deposits, SFB
and pit fills) was proposed in order to better understand
both the use of structures and the site, and structures’
disuse and abandonment. Of particular significance was
the study of pottery refitting within and between features
in order to understand the movement of material across
the site, between the midden and surface spreads and the
negative features, and also the association between SFBs
and adjacent pits, of which several appeared to be in close
spatial proximity.
Attempt to better understand the relationship between
the Saxon settlement and the inherited archaeological
landscape
This would include evidence for curation/use of older arte-
facts, examination of the location of the settlement within
features of the Roman field system and investigations of
issues of material residuality from activities earlier than
the Saxon settlement.
To better understand the character of the Bloodmoor Hill
community through full analysis of the cemetery and its
related elements
This was to include (a) full osteological and pathological
research on the human remains in order to better understand
the diversity of age, sex, disease, etc. in this population; (b)
an attempt to refine the date and status of the site cemetery
and better understand the relationship between the date of
the skeletons and the deposition dates of the objects buried
with them; (c) examination of the economic status of the
site, based on the presumption that the ability to acquire,
and dispose of, precious-metal jewellery implies both the
means to dispose of an economic surplus and access to
networks of trade or exchange; (d) a consideration of how
the material signature of the community, as expressed in
the burials, might differ from that apparent in the settle-
ment assemblages, and what this says about the inferences
to be drawn from such assemblages, about the different
cultural contexts existing within such communities, and
about the cultural, depositional and post-depositional
processes structuring the settlement record.
Examination of the number, extent and nature of craft/
industrial areas.
The intention here was particularly to examine whether
specific metalworking areas could be defined and whether
there were particular zones for carrying out separate crafts
or whether evidence for these different activities was more
widely distributed. It was also intended to investigate the
extent of material associated with spinning and weaving
(e.g. spindlewhorls, loomweights) in order to see whether
spinning or weaving locations could be identified.
Although the general level of environmental survival
on the site was very poor it was still considered impor-
tant to attempt to carry out basic analyses of the density
of charcoal and seeds found across the site, particularly as
this evidence may also provide further material for dating
purposes. Although bone preservation is generally poor,
the overall assemblage is large. Therefore, an effort should
be made to use this body of evidence to increase our under-
standing of agricultural systems, provisioning and diet, and
food preparation and disposal, and to reconstruct animal
husbandry patterns, if possible. Another economic issue to
be considered was the exploitation of coastal/estuarine and
marine resources and the relationship of the community to
the non-domestic resources available to it; examinations
of these matters would be based on the incidence of wild
species recovered.
17
Character of the Roman site
Following the possibility suggested in the evaluation
that the Roman material derived from an off-site source,
the analytical potential (and indeed presence) of the
preceding Roman remains was initially underestimated.
Reassessment in the light of the actual results confirmed
that the Roman material was certainly in situ, and probably
represented a settlement. Subsequently, characterisation of
this settlement was reinstated as a research objective.
VII. Excavation methods
Each excavation area was first mechanically stripped using
a 360° tracked excavator with a toothless ditching bucket.
Detailed ground plans were made of all archaeological (and
natural) features thus exposed. Following stripping, metal-
detecting was carried out, with the location of any finds
plotted on the base plans. These main base plans were at a
scale of 1:50 (Fig. 1.10), and were complemented by direct
digital capture using an EDM. Following hand-cleaning
with hoe and trowel, a varied suite of sample excavation
techniques was employed.
Sunken features were, where possible, fully excavated,
with two opposing quadrants initially hand-excavated by
context, allowing the longitudinal and axial sections to be
recorded (Pl. IV). This was considered the minimum, and
in most cases the remaining quadrants were also hand-
excavated. Bulk samples, for macrobotanical remains,
were taken from each quadrant. For further information
on the various excavation strategies for these features,
see Chapter 3. Pit excavation was determined by size.
Discrete pits of less than 2m in diameter were initially
half-sectioned, while larger examples were 50%-sampled
in opposing quadrants. Groups of intercutting pits, where
excavation in section was inappropriate, were excavated in
plan and in their entirety.
Burials were individually planned and recorded,
although a small number where human bone was no longer
present were not recognised as burials during excavation,
and so were treated as pits and half- or quadrant-sectioned.
Grave fills were removed by trowel until human remains or
grave-goods were encountered. After planning, recording
and lifting the visible bone fragments, the soil in the base of
the grave, together with any accompanying skeletal frag-
ments, was retrieved as three separate bulk samples: the
soil from the head area first, then that from the torso/pelvis
and arms, and finally that from the legs and feet. These
samples were wet sieved to recover the bone fragments
and teeth, being passed through 4mm and 2mm meshes;
the residues from the 4mm screening were hand-sorted,
and those from the 2mm screenings retained for scanning
for identifiable fragments.
Ditches were base planned, and were variably
sampled. Ditches which were identified as of Roman date
in the field (and which tended to be virtually devoid of
finds) were sampled at intersections with other features
in order to identify stratigraphic relationships, although
those belonging to the former trackway were more inten-
sively dug. Post-medieval ditches were treated in a similar
manner except where they cut through structures; in these
locations they were excavated more intensively in order to
recover residual material.
Surface deposits were excavated using 1m squares,
often in several spits, but at varying degrees of intensity
 Figure 1.10 Reproduction of part of original base-plan, showing Roman Building III cut by Anglo-Saxon features

Plate IV SFBs Structures 20 and 22 after 50% excavation (from south-west)

(Colour Pl. I). The following percentages of the surface deposit associated with metalworking to the south,
deposits were excavated: of the central trackway surface F159/182, 49%; and the smaller surface deposit to its east,
deposit, F1, 66%; of the trackway deposit to the east, F342, 78%. Oven bases were excavated in plan and in their
F8/275, 15%; that to the west, F11/503, 29%; the surface entirety.

18
19
Figure 1.11 Distribution of excavated and sieved 1m squares across the site

Figure 1.12 Key to plans and sections
Plans other than the main base plans were drawn at a
scale of 1:20, except for graves and skeletons, which were
planned at 1:10; all sections were at 1:10, except where
smaller scales were appropriate. The photographic record
consisted of black and white slides, complemented by
colour slides.
With regard to environmental sampling, with the excep-
tion of the policies adopted for graves and sunken features
(discussed above), features such as pits, hearths and post-
holes, which were generally half-sectioned, were sampled
from the unexcavated half of the feature after recording,
generally taking a fifteen-litre bulk sample, although in
potential metalworking areas 100g samples for hammer-
scale testing were also taken. On the whole, however, soil
conditions meant that environmental remains were very
poorly preserved (see Ballantyne, below). The Unit-modi-
fied version of the Museum of London Recording System
(Spence 1990) was employed throughout; a key to all
figures is presented in Fig. 1.12.
Sieving
Early in the initial stages of the excavation a methodology
was devised for the systematic sieving of deposits. This
had several varied aims in mind. One was to provide a
standard unit of comparison, not just for analysis within
this site but between sites. It was suggested that other
sites being excavated in Suffolk were employing a similar
technique and that comparative material would be readily
available. In the end the comparative data proved elusive,
but the basic principal still held for intrasite comparisons.
The sieving programme concentrated on targeting a unit
control block across the site (i.e. a 1x1m sample box).
Sieved collection also particularly targeted areas of dense
metalwork and pottery after hand-excavation (and finds
retrieval) of the relevant context. The mesh size used was
6mm. The distribution of the sieved squares is shown in
Fig. 1.11.
Within SFBs, following initial hand-excavation of two
opposing quadrants, a central block of 1sq m was removed
in 10cm spits and sieved. This was designed to give detailed
control of vertical finds distribution. The large Surface
Deposit F1 was divided into 1m grid squares and exca-
vated in 10cm spits. A central east–west baulk was totally
sieved as described above. Some pits were included in the
sieving programme as the intercutting nature of many of
the groups precluded isolation of a 1sq m unit.
For the purpose of comparing recovery rates between
the sample unit employed and a higher volume of
sieving, one SFB (Structure 14) was 50% sieved and one
(Structure 19) was 100% sieved. The results were compared
with the results from a 1m column from a different SFB
(Structure 21). The comparison considered finds from
both the sieved and non-sieved fractions. Four principal
20
material types were considered: bone, charcoal, pottery
and slag (Table 1.2). As might be expected, sieving the
deposits greatly increases the number of items recovered
when compared with hand-excavation alone. In general,
however, the percentage increase by weight is smaller (this
almost goes without saying because the individual items
are much smaller). Without commenting at this stage on
how useful this additional material might be for analytical
purposes it is interesting to note the broad consistency
in the results across the three different samples. Using
weight, bone recovery increased by 8–29%, charcoal
recovery increased by 62–94%, pottery recovery increased
by 23–30% and slag recovery increased by 17–26%. This
very simple comparison serves merely to demonstrate the
validity of comparing recovery rates from different sized
samples across different feature types on the basis of the
relative consistency of percentages within one feature type.
Detailed analysis of the material itself is in Chapter 6.
Sieving is a well-established technique that has fallen
somewhat out of favour in recent times. However, the
increase in volume of material recovered in any given
excavation does not substitute for quality of data. Even the
very simple breakdown shown in Table 1.2 demonstrates
that for some categories of material between 25 and 100%
of what actually survives is not being taken account of
in site analyses. Although the high degree of fragmenta-
tion may add little to the understanding of the artefactual
assemblage of the site, intrasite analysis of such 100%
samples can provide valuable information about depo-
sitional and transformational processes such as potential
middening (cf. Evans 2003, 206–8; Evans and Hodder
2006, 146–52).
The archive
The complete archive, consisting of all records and finds
(paper, drawn, photo, X-radiograph and digital), from all
seasons of excavation, was prepared in accordance with
the guidelines laid down in Management of Archaeological
Projects (English Heritage 1991), and has been deposited
with Suffolk County Sites and Monuments Record under
the site code CAC016.
VIII. Layout of the volume
This volume will first (Chapter 2) outline the prehistoric
activity in the immediate area, before describing the small
Roman settlement that underlay the major Anglo-Saxon
settlement, detailing its structures, enclosure system and
finds assemblages. This provides the physical background
against which the Anglo-Saxon settlement was laid out (for
the associated trackway and some of the enclosure ditches
seem to have still been extant, as some other features may
have been). It is therefore necessary to grasp the layout
of the Roman settlement in order to understand the distri-
bution of material of this period in the later Anglo-Saxon
features.
The bulk of the volume is then taken up with descrip-
tion and discussion of the Anglo-Saxon settlement and
cemetery (information on the limited amount of medieval
and post-medieval features is available in the archive).
The overall aim of the excavation and post-excavation
analysis was to bring to publication a near-complete
settlement site of the Anglo-Saxon period, along with
its associated cemetery, which would address settlement
layout and change, especially in terms of the relationships
between different types of structures and other features,
such as surface deposits and pits; the dates and potential
causes of site foundation and abandonment; agricultural
provisioning and the extent of specialisation and localisa-
tion of craft and industrial activities; resourcing networks,
particularly the question of engagement with long-distance
trade; and how the cemetery related to the settlement as a
whole, in terms of the social and ideological associations
of the burials.
Chapter 3 details the structural evidence for the settle-
ment — the structures, pits, surface deposits and oven
bases — alongside brief summaries and tabulations of
their associated finds assemblages (though these are dealt
with in more detail in the following chapter). Following
this are the results of micromorphological, finds and
stratigraphic analyses of a sample of these features, which
attempt to discern the formation processes involved with,
for example, the infilling of the sunken pit associated
with a former SFB, or the forming of a surface deposit.
First, though, the structures themselves are discussed,
with particular attention paid to how they might be recon-
structed, their possible functions, and the ways in which
they were treated after disuse.
Chapter 4 deals with the main artefactual assemblages,
except for those associated with agriculture, which are
presented in Chapter 5. Given the completeness of the
settlement plan, the finds are dealt with in functional
categories (‘personal possessions’, ‘metalworking’, and
so on), as it was felt important to treat various categories
of material (metalworking tools, slag, crucibles, scrap
metal, for example) as coherent groups in order to under-
stand the processes involved in their generation, and to
present their typological and chronological associations
in a coherent manner (the SCCAS evaluation finds have
been incorporated). While some thought is given here to
their distribution across various features, the main distri-
butional analyses of the functional categories is presented
in Chapter 6.
Chapter 5 presents the economic and environmental
evidence, with faunal, botanical and marine remains
reported on and their significance analysed in terms of site
provisioning and agricultural activity. Chapter 6 deals first
with the site phasing, presenting the results of the detailed
radiocarbon-dating programme, before outlining concep-
tual models for how the site was phased. There follows
a detailed discussion about the formation of surface
deposits of material, and of the ways in which material
moved around the site during the Anglo-Saxon period.
Formal phase models of the settlement are then presented.
Following this, phased distributional analyses of the main
activities evident on the site are outlined in order to draw
out the chronological and functional changes seen in the
settlement’s occupation.
Chapter 7 details the evidence from the cemetery,
with a grave catalogue which integrates descriptions of
the graves, skeletal information and descriptions of the
grave-goods, followed by a wide-ranging discussion
of the dating of the cemetery, its cultural and religious
affiliations and the social significance of the burial rite.
Finally, Chapter 8 attempts to place the settlement in its
local, regional and wider context, relating the excavation
findings to wider issues in Anglo-Saxon archaeology and
history. Jess Tipper was the principal author of Chapter 3,
and Sam Lucy of Chapters 2, 4, 5, 6 and 8.

Material Data Non-sieved Sieved fraction Total % in sieve Non-sieved Sieved ave
fraction ave weight weight
Structure 21 Bone Number 680 366 1046 34.99
F130 Weight (g) 2985 264 3249 8.13 4.39 0.72
1m column Charcoal Number 12 87 99 87.88
Weight (g) 19 31 50 62.00 1.58 0.36
Pottery Number 91 111 202 54.95
Weight (g) 781 240 1021 23.51 8.58 2.16
Slag Number 11 29 40 72.50
Weight (g) 287 103 390 26.41 26.09 3.55
Structure 14 Bone Number 3 16 19 84.21
F41 Weight (g) 26 10 36 27.78 8.67 0.63
50% sieved Charcoal Number 7 108 115 93.91
Weight (g) 3 25 28 89.29 0.43 0.23
Pottery Number 283 323 606 53.30
Weight (g) 1845 781 2626 29.74 6.52 2.42
Slag Number 787 837 1624 51.54
Weight (g) 8395 1780 10175 17.49 10.67 2.13
Structure 19 Bone Number 86 291 377 77.19
F200 Weight (g) 364 150 514 29.18 4.23 0.52
100% sieved Charcoal Number 2 544 546 99.63
Weight (g) 7 108 115 93.91 3.50 0.20
Pottery Number 242 335 577 58.06
Weight (g) 1850 666 2516 26.47 7.64 1.99
Slag Number 2472 12073 14545 83.00
Weight (g) 30092 18886 48978 38.56 12.17 1.56

Table 1.2 Comparison of sieved fraction results from Structures 21, 14 and 19

21
 2. Pre-Saxon Activity
I. Introduction
Like earlier Anglo-Saxon settlement, Roman-period
rural settlement in north Suffolk/south Norfolk is poorly
documented and not well understood. Such settlements
are, like their later counterparts, associated with timber
construction, and substantial numbers of such settle-
ments have begun to be excavated and published only
since the introduction of proper planning regulation and
developer-funded excavation.
The evaluation by SCCAS had already identified
a significant Romano-British component within the
excavation area, although the nature of this remained
unclarified. The CAU excavations revealed a major
Roman trackway feature running along the northern
side of the excavation area and an associated enclosure
system, together with a substantial artefactual assemblage
of that date: over 6000 sherds of pottery, mainly of 2nd-
to 3rd-century date, along with over 45kg of Roman-type
ceramic building material (CBM). While the assessment
report was equivocal about the location of the Roman
period settlement that was obviously associated with this
quantity of material, post-excavation analysis revealed
that it coincided with the core of the Anglo-Saxon settle-
ment (although occupation was not continuous between
the two). Features of this Roman settlement included, as
well as the trackway (within which Anglo-Saxon surface
deposits later accumulated) and the ditched enclosure
system, several pits, two cremation deposits and at least
three structures.
Further sites within the immediate area are sparse,
although a network of probable Roman routeways is
in evidence (Fox 1900, 129), three of which may have
crossed near the site (Pl. I). Some finds have been found
eroding out of the cliffs at Pakefield, 1km to the east;
these include a probable corn-drying kiln, coins, pieces
of roof tile and mortaria and numerous sherds of pottery
(Fox 1900, 140; also SMR No. GSE031-MSF 16400 and
GSE034-MSF 17464). The Saxon shore fort of Burgh
Castle lies 18km to the north-west in Norfolk (Johnson
1983). Recent excavations on the Carlton Colville bypass
have revealed Iron Age and Roman enclosure ditches and
part of a Roman post-built rectangular structure, which
possibly overlay a circular post-setting (Burnham et al.
2003, 334).
II. Prehistoric activity
Very few actual features could be ascribed to the pre-
Roman period: only Pit F622 in Area O was assigned
a definite prehistoric date in post-excavation, and was
dated by its associated flint and single sherd of probably
Bronze Age pottery. Two other pits in the same excava-
tion area, [5100] and [5101], were possibly of a similar,
or earlier, date. Otherwise, all pre-Roman material from
the site was recovered from later features, and can only
give a general indication of the site’s previous use.
A small prehistoric pottery assemblage consists
of small, abraded sherds of Bronze Age pottery of
22
mixed traditions, with single sherds recovered from
Structures 19, 20 and 21, and from Surface Deposit
F182, Pit F374 in Pit Group L, and Roman ditch F7.
The level of abrasion and their incorporation into later
contexts indicates their residual sub-context, probably of
surface elements prior to redeposition. At best they mark
the presence of localised Bronze Age occupation dating
to the first half of the second millennium BC — identified
by the decorated Beaker sherds and some of the plain-
ware sherds — but, lacking primary contexts for these
sherds, the type and significance of such occupation
remains unknown (K. Gdaniec, pers. comm.). The sherds
do, however, cluster in the centre of the excavated area,
and may indicate some localised activity.
The prehistoric flint assemblage (1122 pieces in total)
represents a longer range of activity, and is spread over
a wider area; raw material was a high-quality black flint,
probably from a nearby secondary gravel source. Late
Mesolithic material is represented by microliths, burins,
scrapers and knapping debitage. A barbed and tanged
arrowhead, a fragment of a triangular knife, borers,
and a polished axe fragment indicate a late Neolithic/
early Bronze Age presence, while middle/late Bronze
Age material is represented by a range of amorphous
retouched items, crude cores and knapping debris. This
appears to represent low-level Mesolithic utilisation of
the landscape, the range of tool types suggesting a variety
of unspecialised activities, while the later material indi-
cates continuous reoccupation of the area from the late
Neolithic to the late Bronze Age/early Iron Age, but again
with no specialised activities visible (C. Conneller, pers.
comm.). A recent excavation 300m to the south-west of
the site (on the northern slope of Bloodmoor Hill itself
at TM 5180 8990) has produced evidence for at least
two late Bronze Age or Iron Age roundhouses, about
8m in diameter, associated with a number of four-post
structures, possible cremations, pits and ditches (post-
excavation still in progress; K. Heard, pers. comm.).
III. Roman activity
(Fig. 2.1)
Introduction
Following this intermittent prehistoric activity, there is
no indication of any use of the site until the laying-out
of a settlement probably in the earlier part of the 2nd
century AD. Associated with an enclosure system were
a number of pits, a small number of structures and traces
of surface heaps of material. Intriguingly, the bulk of the
Roman material culture from the site was recovered not
from these Romano-British features but from the fills of
later Anglo-Saxon structures, pits and surface deposits.
The pottery, CBM and other artefactual assemblages
are described and discussed below, and the possibility
raised that the bulk of this material was not ‘residual’,
in the sense of being accidentally reincorporated into
later features, but in fact had been deliberately moved
around the site (particularly from extant surface heaps
into abandoned structures and open pits) during the
 Figure 2.1 Plan of Roman features: (top) Phase 1 and (bottom) Phase 2
earlier Anglo-Saxon period. The implications of this will
be further discussed in Chapter 6.
The Romano-British enclosure system
The principal feature of the enclosure system was a
double-ditched trackway which ran east-north-east–west-
south-west across the excavation area; the ditches forming
the boundaries of this feature were generally V-shaped
and ranged in width from 1.10m to 2.50m; they were up
to 0.60m deep (Fig. 2.1). The area to the south of the main
trackway was divided into enclosures by a number of
ditches (these displaying a variety of profiles up to 1.65m
wide and 0.60m deep); these formed a rectilinear system
with some obvious entranceways. In the initial phase of
23
the settlement there appear to have been two main enclo-
sures, both with visible entrances to the south, although
entry from the trackway would presumably have been
facilitated. This enclosure system then seems to have
been replanned. A north–south double-ditched hedge-
bank, with single ditches (F7/F530/F575 and F229) more
bowl-shaped in profile and up to 1.40m wide and 0.40m
deep, ran through the centre of the previous enclosure to
join the trackway in the north. This was elaborated with
ditches to east and west, to form a large pair of enclo-
sures. To the north of the main trackway further ditches
appear to demarcate more fields, and possibly another
trackway, but these run out of the excavation area. While
the associated structures are generally difficult to phase,
Roman Type Animal Anglo- Roman CBM Fired Unfired Lava Slag Metal Other
features bone Saxon pottery Clay clay quern
pottery
7 Ditch - - 6 (149g) - 1 (25g) - - - - Flint flakes and core (4, 62g); 2
Bronze Age sherds
48 Ditch - - - - 1 (1g) - - - - 2 flints (14g)
65 Ditch - - 2 (20g) - - - - - -
68 Deposit - - 138 - 78 20 - 1 (6g) 1 (5g) Fired clay includes near-complete
in F69 (1374g) (228g) (789g) triangular loomweight; possible
quernstone frag (250g); at least 4
vessels represented
69 Ditch - - 4 (10g) - - - - - -
70 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
100 Ditch 72 - 144 1 (79g) 127 1 (26g) 10 (11g) - 4 (24g) Flint flakes and blade (11, 219g);
(145g) (1266g) (1239g) metal includes 2 nail fragments
and lock-plate <6299>; fired clay
includes possible triangular
loomweight
101 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
102 Ditch - - 12 (72g) 1 (12g) - - - - 2 (24g) 1glass fragment; 1 sherd
post-med pottery (18th C
stoneware)
103 Ditch 7 (24g) 1 (3g) 34 2 (43g) 7 (96g) - - 3 (19g) - Flint flakes (3, 32g); 1glass
(227g) fragment (13g); one post-med
sherd (17th C)
104 Ditch - - 2 (37g) 2 (17g) - - - - 1 (2g) Metal comprises nail fragment
105 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
140 Deposit 27 (18g) - 9 (202g) - - - - 13 (13g) 1 (3g) Flint flake (5g); metal comprises
in F7 nail fragment
143 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
144 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
204 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
227 Ditch 25 - 71 - 6 (131g) - - 30 2 (10g) Metal includes 1 nail; 7 oyster
(189g) (949g) (125g) shells
228 Ditch - - 2 (18g) 1 (30g) - - - - -
229 Ditch - - 75 1 (18g) - - - - - Near-complete Roman pot
(710g)
230 Ditch - - - 1 (14g) - - - - - CBM is post-medieval
239 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
278 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
281 Surface - - 1 (4g) - - - - 1 (34g) -
deposit
290 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
298 Ditch 4 (85g) 20 1 (1g) - 1 (5g) - - - 1 (1g) NB Must be AS spread in top of
(382g) Roman ditch?
299 Ditch - - - - - - - - 1 (1g) Metal is a tack
304 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
311 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
312 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
313 Gully - - - - - - - - -
314 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
358 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
393 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
405 Surface - - 14 (87g) - 1 (1g) - - - -
deposit
406 Surface 1 (17g) 6 (38g) 44 3 (265g) 5 (975g) - 5 (25g) - 4 (37g) Flint flakes (3, 30g); metal
deposit (478g) includes nail and knife blade
<6453>
417 Surface - - 4 (120g) - 6 (104g) - - - -
finds
421 Ditch 80 - 53 1 (33g) 3 (10g) - - 43 2 (4g) Flint flakes (3, 15g); metal
(111g) (449g) (253g) includes a nail; single oyster shell
422 Ditch - - - - - - - - -

24
Roman Type Animal Anglo- Roman CBM Fired Unfired Lava Slag Metal Other
features bone Saxon pottery Clay clay quern
pottery
426 Ditch 20 (86g) - - - - - - - - 1 sherd prehistoric pottery
427 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
428 Bank - - - - - - - - -
429 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
430 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
433 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
434 Ditch 3 (10g) - 3 (31g) - - - - - 9 (12g)
435 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
438 Surface - - 1 (17g) - - - - - -
find
530 Ditch 13 (63g) - - - - - - - -
531 Ditch - - 1 (3g) - - - - - -
556 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
562 Ditch - 4 (19g) 3 (58g) - 1 (4g) - - - 2 (16g) Metal comprises 4th-century coin
<12969> and Roman knife
<12963>
568 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
575 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
581 Ditch - - 8 (169g) - - - - - -
600 Ditch - - - - - - - - - Bronze Age pottery (27, 59g)
601 Ditch - - - - 1 (1g) - - 1 (3g) -
602 Ditch - - - - - - - - - 1 sherd post-med pottery (2g)
603 Ditch - - - - - - - - -
607 Ditch - - - - - - - - - Iron Age pottery (19, 52g)
608 Ditch - - - - - - - - -

Table 2.1 Finds associated with Roman features (other than pits)

Building I clearly belongs to Phase 2, as it cuts across the
southern enclosure ditch of Phase 1.
Fills of these Romano-British ditches were gener-
ally lacking in material (Table 2.1); they contained small
assemblages of animal bone, CBM, fired clay (with the
occasional larger assemblage representing the remains of
triangular loomweights) and the occasional fragment of
glass or metalwork. Romano-British pottery was slightly
better represented, but quantities are still small when
compared with the amounts recovered from some of the
later Anglo-Saxon features.
Romano-British buildings, pits and cremations
Buildings
Three Roman buildings were identified: a large range-
type building (Building I); a possible circular structure
or hayrick (Building II); and a post-in-trench building
(Building III). More may have existed, but been too trun-
cated by later features to be identified; it is also possible
that some of the post-hole alignments identified as prob-
ably Anglo-Saxon by their east–west orientation also
belong to this period.
Building I
(Fig. 2.2)
Building I was a large post-built structure located to the west of (and
aligned with) the central hedgeline; it comprised at least thirty-five
larger post-holes, along with at least seventy-four smaller post-holes
or stake-holes. The structure occupied an area that measured around
18.5m N–S and 12.0m E–W, although it was heavily truncated by post-
medieval ditch F122 on its eastern side, and so may have been wider.
It was also truncated on its west side by Anglo-Saxon Structures 14
and 41. The major post-holes were generally 0.40–1.00m in diameter
and 0.18–0.54m deep, with steep to vertical sides and rounded or flat
bases; several had indications of post-pipes, suggesting that elements of
this building had been allowed to decay in situ. The south-west corner
of the structure had four post-holes ([424], [426], [428] and [929])
inserted into a beam-slot, F56 (this, coincidentally, was cut through by
Anglo-Saxon post-in-trench Structure 41). F56 was c.5.50m in length
by 0.50m in width and c.0.15–0.27m in depth, and was aligned N–S.
The fill of this slot comprised mid to dark brown silty sand [429] and
contained eleven sherds (47g) of Roman pottery and a single sherd
(7g) of Anglo-Saxon pottery. The post-holes measured c.0.50–0.75m in
diameter and 0.27–0.42m in depth. The fill of pit/post-hole [424] (F54)
included one sherd (19g) of Roman pottery, one large fragment (389g)
of burnt clay and one fragment (10g) of slag. All the finds derived from
the upper fill, a dark brown to black sandy silt ([423]) 0.12m deep. The
fill of pit/post-hole [426] (F55) included eight sherds (56g) of Roman
pottery, fifty-four fragments (273g) of vitrified hearth lining and eight
fragments (22g) of slag, suggesting that this feature may have been
a small furnace. All finds except two sherds (11g) of Roman pottery
derived from the upper fill, a very dark brown to black sandy silt ([425])
0.20m in depth. The fill of [428], a very dark brown to black sandy
silt similar to [425], contained two sherds (10g) of Roman pottery. The
high charcoal content of the post-pipes in these post-holes suggests that
this corner of the building had suffered burning. This is not true for the
majority of other major post-holes associated, which generally had grey
to brown sandy silt fills. The mass of smaller post-holes and stake-holes
clustered in a 3.5m-wide band inside the eastern and northern walls of
the building; these were 0.15–0.40m in diameter and up to 0.42m deep,
although most were 0.10–0.20m deep. Many had vertical sides and
pointed bases, suggesting posts driven straight into the ground surface.
These presumably indicate internal partitioning within the structure,
although their confused pattern suggests rearrangement over time.
While the east, north and west walls were all well represented by post-
holes and stake-holes, none were observed along the probable southern
wall-line, perhaps suggesting that this was constructed differently,
perhaps using sill-beam techniques. This may have been the main

25
 Figure 2.2 Plan of Roman Building I
farmstead building of the replanned Roman settlement (it cuts across
the earlier phase of the Roman enclosure system). Finds material from
the structure was relatively sparse: eighty-nine sherds of Roman pottery
dating from the mid-2nd to the early 4th century were recovered, along
with some fired clay, CBM and animal bone; in addition, an iron pin, a
fragment of copper alloy sheet and two iron rod fragments were found.
Building II
(Fig. 2.3)
Building II consisted of ten bowl-shaped features which may have acted
as post supports. Arranged loosely into a circular structure measuring
14.0m in diameter, these pits or post-holes all had yellow-brown sandy
fills; they ranged in size from 0.45m by 0.45m to 0.75m by 0.60m, and
were 0.09–0.20m deep. Finds were limited to a handful of greyware
pottery sherds, as well as some butchered animal bone from F98. This
size of structure, with shallow possible post-settings, can only have
been a non-permanent structure such as a hayrick.
26
Building III
(Fig. 2.4)
Building III (F576) was a post-in-trench timber building which measured
9.90m in length (min) by 5.80m in width. It had an internal floor area of
c.57.4sq m and was aligned approximately N–S. The south-east corner
of the building had been cut away by Pit Group H.
The ground plan of the structure consisted of individual post-holes
set in a narrow vertical-sided trench ([4904]) measuring c.0.45–0.80m
in width and c.0.25–0.60m in depth (from the stripped surface). The
northern side of the building had suffered from severe truncation,
while the southern part of the trench had been cut into the slope and
was consequently much better preserved. Two fills were defined in the
trench, the lower fill of which comprised grey-brown silty sand [4905],
0.17–0.27m in depth, and was sealed below an upper fill of mid-brown-
grey sandy silt ([4906]) 0.05–0.35m in depth.
Only three clear post-holes were distinguished through the fill
of the trench ([4917], [4918] and [4919]) along the southern wall of
the building, although the sections indicate the survival of post-pipes
along the trench, with [4905] as possible packing around the posts. The
post-holes measured c.0.25–0.35m in diameter and c.0.04m in depth
below the base of the foundation trench. There was no evidence of any
 Figure 2.3 Plan of Roman Building II
doorways and the foundation trench was continuous along both the east
and west long sides of the building.
No internal structural features were defined. No material culture
was found within the internal area of the building, although the fill of
the trench did contain a small quantity of residual material. The lower
fill ([4905]) contained a single small sherd (4g) of Anglo-Saxon pottery
and a small fragment (3g) of fired clay, while the upper fill ([4906])
contained four sherds (13g) of Anglo-Saxon pottery, two fragments
(22g) of tile and three fragments of slag (267g). These were, however,
all found in the same general area as later Anglo-Saxon pitting, and may
therefore be intrusive.
Pits
A number of pits of probable Romano-British date
were also identified; diagnostic finds included trian-
gular loomweight fragments and assemblages of solely
Romano-British pottery, but it is possible that some of
these features may, in fact, have dated to the Anglo-Saxon
period (Table 2.2). The pits were generally either sub-
circular (ranging in size from 0.40m to 2.00m in diameter
and 0.11m to 0.36m deep) with U-shaped profiles, or sub-
oval (ranging in size from 1.00 by 0.50m and 0.38m deep
to 3.00 by 1.20m and 0.35m deep) with either steep sides
and flat bases or U-shaped profiles. Again, associated
assemblages were generally small, although a few had
more sizeable collections of animal bone or Romano-
British pottery. One interesting deposit, F68, was placed
into the top of infilled ditch F69; this consisted of at least
four vessels (see Tester, below), along with a quernstone
fragment and fragments of triangular loomweights.
F68
F68 was a small sub-circular hollow or depression ([458]) c.0.60m in
diameter and 0.12m deep, located above an earlier infilled ditch butt-
27
terminal, F69. The feature contained a large deposit of Roman pottery
(138 sherds, 1374g, representing at least four vessels of 2nd- to mid-
3rd-century date), unfired clay (789g), non-lava quernstone (250g)
and at least two (near) complete triangular loomweights, within pale
yellow-brown sandy silt [457]. Unusually, no animal bone was present,
perhaps confirming the earlier dating of this feature.
Cremations
Two probable cremation deposits were recovered from
the site, although one was heavily disturbed. Although
cremation F140 could potentially be dated by its associ-
ated vessel to the early to mid-2nd century, its location in
the infill of a Phase 2 ditch suggests that this pot was old
when buried.
F140
F140 was a whole carinated buff ware jug placed into the upper levels
of partly infilled ditch F7; the pot both contained and was surrounded
by patches of black earth, which presumably represents the remains of
pyre material. The bone contained within this complex was degraded,
but its size appeared to suggest prenatal or neonatal remains. Other
material associated included plentiful charcoal and a single iron nail;
the environmental sample taken from this context also produced small
mammal bones, which were possibly intrusive.
[2564]
Context [2564] was a small cremation pit at the edge of Roman ditch
F421 which had been heavily disturbed both by its truncation by
post-hole [2563] and by rabbit burrowing (rabbit bones were found
comingled with fragments of surviving bone). A single sherd of pottery
remained associated.
Summary
Excavations have thus revealed a minor Roman rural
settlement and associated enclosure and field systems.
 Figure 2.4 Plan of Roman Building III
It was not in occupation throughout the whole of the
Roman period, but probably came into use in the earlier
2nd century and went out of use in the mid to later 3rd
century (see Tester, below). Associated with this settle-
ment were at least three structures: a major post-built
structure which may have constituted the main farmstead
building, a post-in-trench building that lay outside the
main enclosures and may have been a barn-like structure,
28
and a more temporary circular post-built structure which
perhaps acted as a hayrick. During the Roman occupation
two cremation deposits were placed in ditches that had
already started to fill up, and at least two surface heaps
of debris began to accumulate in boundary locations. The
specialist reports (below) give more detail on the associ-
ated material culture.
Roman pits Animal Anglo- Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
bone Saxon pottery clay
pottery
13 - - 3 (12g) - - - - 3 (5g) - 1 flint flake (3g)
68 - - 132 (1327g) - 68 (152g) 20 (789g) - 1 (6g) 1 (5g) Quernstone (250g);
fired clay includes
triangular loomweight
fragments
107 - - 1 (2g) - - - - - -
108 - - 1 (1g) - - - - - -
109 - - 1 (5g) - - - - - -
114 - - 1 (4g) - - - - - -
131 - - 1 (6g) 1 (39g) - - - - - 1 retouched flake
(19g)
148 1 (1g) - 7 (62g) - 7 (26g) - - 4 (91g) - Flint (1, 13g)
149 179 (315g) - 33 (271g) 2 (23g) 6 (18g) - 9 (80g) 4 (152g) 1 (11g) 1 retouched flint
chunk (30g)
150 32 (161g) - 17 (176g) 1 (36g) 13 (106g) - - 3 (21g) 1 (5g)
151 80 (720g) - 1 (6g) - - - - - -
158 111 (637g) - 1 (13g) - 9 (2g) - - - - Burnt flint (5, 177g); 3
flints (51g)
169 8 (23g) - 1 (4g) 2 (176g) - 1 (79g) - - -
171 - - 3 (77g) 1 (3g) - - - 1 (6g) -
197 - - 2 (10g) - - - - - -
201 - - 1 (7g) - - - - - -
211 - - 1 (3g) - 2 (3g) - - - -
246 146 (537g) - - - - - - 3 (18g) -
248 - - 2 (10g) - - - - 4 (4g) -
250 - - 3 (9g) - - 3 (1g) - - 1 (36g) Burnt flint (1, 11g)
271 - - 8 (64g) - 1 (45g) - - - -
277 - - 1 (4g) - - - - - -
283 11 (12g) - 1 (13g) - 1 (18g) - - - -
401 62 (704g) - 1 (3g) - 1 (3g) - - - -
555 - - 1 (4g) - - - - - -
569 - - 1 (8g) - 10 (1080g) 1 (374g) - - - Flint (2, 56g); fired
clay is a triangular
loomweight
580 - - 2 (22g) - 8 (244g) - - - - Flint (8, 206g); fired
clay is a triangular
loomweight

Table 2.2 Finds associated with Roman pits

Romano-British pottery Hull’s (1963) Camulodunum typology and Going’s

By Cathy Tester
Introduction
Excavation produced a total of 6281 sherds of wheel-made
late Iron Age and Roman pottery weighing 42,036g, with
an estimated vessel equivalent (EVE) of 48.54 based on
525 measurable rims. Table 2.3 shows the quantities by
fabric; the full list by context and catalogue number is
included in the archive.
Methodology
The pottery was quantified by sherd count, weight and
estimated vessel equivalent (EVE). Roman wares were
classified using the type series devised for recording
Roman pottery at Pakenham (unpublished), which was
supplemented here by Hawkes and Hull’s (1947) and
Chelmsford typology (1987) when necessary. Forms were
noted as they occurred and each ‘sherd family’ given a
separate entry on the database table. A x10 microscope
was used to identify the fabrics. Table 2.3 provides a key
to the fabrics present in this assemblage, listing them
by common name followed by the codes used for this
report. SCCAS pottery recording forms were used and
the results were input onto an Access 97 table.
The wares
A total of thirty-seven LIA/Roman fabrics or fabric
groups was identified, which included local, regional,
provincial and imported finewares and coarsewares: the
majority of the assemblage, however, consists of local
coarsewares, as is typical for a rural site.

29
Fabric name Code No. % No. Wt(g) % Wt Eve % Eve Av wt(g)
Amphora AA 39 0.6 2284 5.4 58.6
Black Burnished Ware category 1 BB1 12 0.2 124 0.3 28 0.6 10.9
Black-surfaced wares BSW 1217 19.4 7133 17 1075 22.1 5.9
Miscellaneous buff wares BUF 47 0.7 681 1.6 55 1.1 14.5
Miscellaneous buff ware mortaria BUFM 2 0 41 0.1 20.5
Central Gaulish black-slipped wares CGBL 14 0.2 44 0.1 46 0.9 3.1
Colchester buff wares COLB 3 0 59 0.1 19.7
Colchester buff ware mortaria COLBM 5 0.1 197 0.5 28 0.6 39.4
Colchester Colour-Coated Wares COLC 48 0.8 142 0.3 76 1.6 3
Early shell-tempered wares ESH 1 0 18 0 18
Grey micaceous wares black-surfaced GMB 248 3.9 2813 6.7 487 10 11.3
Grey micaceous wares grey-surfaced GMG 17 0.3 210 0.5 18 0.4 12.4
Grog-tempered wares (Belgic) GROG 2 0 11 0 5.5
Miscellaneous sandy greywares GX 4237 67.5 25222 60 2604 53.6 6
Miscellaneous grey mortaria GXM 2 0 47 0.1 23.5
Hadham red wares HAX 2 0 2 0 1
Hadham red mortaria HAXM 1 0 15 0 15
Late shell-tempered wares LSH 10 0.1 181 0.4 18.1
Nene Valley Colour-Coated Wares NVC 52 0.8 153 0.4 25 0.5 2.9
Nene Valley white ware mortaria NVWM 2 0 124 0.3 11 0.2 62
Oxfordshire red colour-coated wares OXRC 1 0 6 0 6
Miscellaneous red fineware RF 7 0.1 19 0 6 0.1 2.7
Miscellaneous red coarse wares RX 122 1.9 474 1.1 69 1.4 3.9
Miscellaneous red mortaria RXM 1 0 9 0 9
Unspecified samian SA 5 0.1 55 0.1 8 0.2 11
Central Gaulish samian (Lezoux) SACG 51 0.8 452 1.1 116 2.4 8.9
East Gaulish samian SAEG 39 0.6 251 0.6 46 0.9 6.4
Central Gaulish samian (Les Martres) SAMV 1 0 3 0 6 0.1 3
East Gaulish samian (Rheinzabern) SARZ 28 0.4 628 1.5 120 2.5 22.4
South Gaulish samian SASG 1 0 14 0 14
Storage jar fabrics STOR 3 0 268 0.6 89.3
Unspecified colour-coated wares UCC 43 0.7 169 0.4 13 0.3 3.9
Unknown UNK 4 0.1 19 0 4.8
Verulamium-region white ware VRW 2 0 5 0 2.5
Verulamium-region white ware VRWM 1 0 67 0.2 12 0.2 67
mortaria
Miscellaneous white wares WX 7 0.1 49 0.1 7
Miscellaneous white ware mortaria WXM 4 0.1 47 0.1 5 0.1 11.8
Total LIA and Roman pottery 6281 100 42036 100 4854 100 6.7

Table 2.3 Late Iron Age and Roman pottery fabrics

Imports
Finewares
Imported finewares are not common. They equate to 2.2% of the
total assemblage count, 3.4% of the weight and 7% of the EVEs
and consist mainly of samian from South, Central and East Gaulish
production centres. The earliest is South Gaulish, a single Dr 27 cup
which is Flavian. Central Gaulish samian includes a single sherd from
Les Martres-de-Veyre which is Trajanic but the rest is probably from
Lezoux and the forms identified are mainly Antonine. Forms include
cups Dr 33, dishes Dr 18/31 or 31, platters Wa 79 and 80 and bowls Dr
37 and Curle 21. The latest samian is East Gaulish and includes pieces
from Rheinzabern and other East Gaulish production centres which
date from the late 2nd to mid-3rd centuries. Forms include dishes Dr
18/31, platters Wa 79 and bowls Dr 31, 38, 37 and Curle 21.
The other imported fineware is Central Gaulish black-slipped
ware (CGBL); this is represented by an uncertain beaker form and a
hemispherical cup (Pit F68) which are mid-2nd- to early 3rd-century.
Coarsewares
Imported coarsewares consist of thirty-nine South Spanish (Baetican)
amphora sherds. Because of their size, amphora account for 5.4% of
the assemblage weight but less than 1% of the count. The sherds are
all non-diagnostic body sherds which were widely dispersed, occurring
singly or in twos. Three-quarters of them were found in Anglo-Saxon
or unphased features. Some of the larger sherds may have been reused
for construction or repairs in later features.
Provincially traded and late specialist wares
Twelve sherds of Black Burnished Ware (BB1) were collected. They
include straight-sided dish types with a bead rim (type 6.18), plain rims
(type 6.19.1–2) and grooved rims (type 6.19.3), which date from the
mid-2nd century onwards.
Late specialist wares, which are a feature of the late and latest
Roman period, form a very small proportion of the pottery assemblage,

30
7
Feature phase Feature type No. % No. Wt(g) % Wt Eve % Eve Av Wt(g)
Prehistoric Flint scatter 5 0.1 8 0.0 0 0.0 1.6
Total prehistoric features 5 0.1 8 0.0 0 0.0 1.6
Roman Cremation 10 0.2 212 0.5 47 1.0 21.2
Ditch 381 6.1 4051 9.6 408 8.4 10.6
Pit 156 2.5 1540 3.7 265 5.5 9.9
Total Roman features 547 8.7 5803 13.8 720 14.8 10.6
Anglo-Saxon Grave 159 2.5 837 2.0 105 2.2 5.3
SFB 2321 37.0 10934 26.0 1283 26.4 4.7
Hollow 15 0.2 88 0.2 11 0.2 5.9
Oven/hearth 4 0.1 26 0.1 0 0.0 6.5
Pit 743 11.8 6945 16.5 698 14.4 9.3
Post-hole building 35 0.6 161 0.4 14 0.3 4.6
Post-in-trench building 93 1.5 390 0.9 59 1.2 4.2
Surface deposit 1615 25.7 10165 24.1 1220 25.1 11.6
Total Anglo-Saxon features 4985 79.4 29546 70.3 3390 69.8 5.9
Post-medieval Ditch 22 0.4 175 0.4 35 0.7 8.0
Total post-medieval 22 0.4 175 0.4 35 0.7 8.0
features
Unphased Pit 261 4.2 1785 4.2 195 4.0 6.8
Post-trench (build) 14 0.2 66 0.2 4 0.1 4.7
Post-hole 5 0.1 35 0.1 14 0.3 7.0
Post-hole (build) 108 1.7 747 1.8 76 1.6 6.9
Other 334 5.3 3871 9.2 440 9.1 11.6
Total unphased features 722 11.5 6504 15.5 729 15.0 9.0
Total 6281 100 42036 100 4854 100 6.7

Table 2.4 Late Iron Age and Roman pottery by phase and feature type

equalling only 1.4% of the total assemblage count, weight and EVEs.
Most common are Nene Valley products, which are all late 3rd- or 4th-
century and are represented by colour-coated wares (NVC) that include
plain and indented beakers, a jar, a castor box and straight-sided dishes
and a white ware mortarium (NVWC). Two non-diagnostic sherds of
Hadham red wares (HAX), a Hadham red ware mortaria (HAXM) and
six late shell-tempered (LSH) jar sherds from possible south and east
Midlands sources, which are also late 3rd- or 4th-century, were found.
Oxfordshire red colour-coated wares (OXRC), which are 4th-century,
are represented by just a single body sherd.
Local and regional wares
Finewares
Local and regional finewares are not common but ‘finer’ elements
are also recognised within the broader greyware fabric groups. In this
collection finewares make up 1.6% of the sherd count and 2% of the
EVEs.
Colchester Colour-Coated Wares (COLC) belong to the mid-2nd
to early 3rd century and include beakers which are indented or bag-
shaped with cornice and plain rims. Some are roughcast and some are
rouletted; one ‘scale beaker’ was identified. Unspecified colour-coated
wares (UCC) may include some Colchester, Hadham or atypical Nene
Valley products. The sherds are mostly small and few forms were
identified except, broadly, beakers: some of these are indented and one
has a cornice rim.
Coarsewares
Local and regional coarsewares account for the greatest part of the
assemblage count (94.2%), weight (88.8%) and EVEs (89.7%), and are
dominated by several broad greyware groups (BSW, GM, GX) which
typically make up the bulk of rural Roman pottery assemblages in this
region.
The earliest wheel-made coarsewares are two grog-tempered
(GROG) sherds and one early shell-tempered ware (ESH) sherd. These
are non-diagnostic, but belong to the first half of the first century AD.
Black-surfaced wares (BSW), which consist of all the non-
micaceous black-surfaced wares from a variety of unknown but
presumed local sources, account for 19.4% of the sherds, 17% of the
weight and 22% of the total EVEs. Early BSW can range in date from
the second quarter of the 1st century AD to the early 2nd century AD
and some of the earliest pieces can have very ‘Romanising’ fabrics
which contain abundant black grog and burnt organic material. In this
collection the earliest pieces are represented only by abraded body
sherds. Forms identified are globular beakers, high shouldered jars and
cordoned jars. Later BSW forms date from the 2nd century onwards
and include high-shouldered beakers and jars, most of which can be
only broadly classified. Dishes are BB1/BB2-style straight-sided types
with rounded or pointed bead rims (6.18), plain rims (6.19.1 and 6.19.2)
or rims delineated by one or more grooves (6.19.3 and 6.19.4).
Micaceous wares in the black- and grey-surfaced variants make
up 4.2% of the sherd count, 7.2% of the weight and 10.4% of EVEs.
In this collection, the black-surfaced variant (GMB) outnumbers the
grey-surfaced (GMG), which contributes 0.5% or less to the combined
totals. All GM wares have a fine-textured fabric with abundant mica
and few other inclusions, and a source in the north of the county is
suggested. The nearest known kilns are at Flixton and Homersfield.
Like BSW, GM fabrics have an early and a late component and a
significant fineware element. The range of early forms includes a type
5.4 wide-mouthed jar with a mid-body groove which is late 1st- to early
or mid-2nd-century, as well as sherds from cordoned and carinated jars,
although no certain forms were identified. Later GMB forms which
date from the 2nd century onwards include BB1/BB2-style high-
shouldered beakers (types 3.10 and indented 3.12) and straight-sided
dish types with beaded or pointed rims (6.18) and grooved rims (6.19.3
and 6.19.4). A narrow-mouthed ‘corrugated’ jar or beaker (layers 457
and 649 in Pit F68), substantially complete and with no close parallels
but similar to Hull’s Cam 396 (1963 fig. 58, 19) or Going’s H26, was
also found (AD 130–170).
Miscellaneous sandy greywares (GX) are the largest fabric group
and account for more than two-thirds (67.3%) of the sherds, 60% of
the weight and almost half of the total EVEs (46%). They also have the
lowest average sherd weight (6g), with many small and abraded sherds.
It is possible that some post-Roman sherds are unidentified among the

31
8
non-diagnostic body sherds. The range of forms identified is not large
because of the size of the sherds but only a few of the datable pieces
are earlier than the 2nd century. Jars are the chief vessel class and most
of them could only be broadly classified due to their ‘brokenness’, but
the earliest forms are a Cam 228 with a narrow shoulder cordon and
high-shouldered jars type 4.1, which are mid or late 1st century in date.
The rest of the jars belong to the 2nd and 3rd centuries and consist of
narrow-mouthed jars or bottles which include bifid-rimmed Going G26
(frilled) and G28, a ledge-rimmed jar (Going G5) and round bodied jars
(type 4.5). Dishes are BB1/BB2-style straight-sided types with rounded
or pointed bead rims (6.18), plain rims (6.19.2), grooved rims (6.19.3
and 6.19.4) and a single example of flanged type (6.17).
Miscellaneous storage jar fabrics (STOR) in reduced and oxidised
fabrics which date throughout the Roman period are almost absent in
this collection (three sherds, 268g). The remaining coarsewares are
oxidised and include red, buff and white wares which, altogether, make
up less than 4% of the assemblage.
Miscellaneous red wares (RX) include two flagons, a narrow-
mouthed jar and a bifid-rimmed jar, but mainly they are represented by
single non-diagnostic body sherds which are in general very small and
thinly spread across the site. Among these are a few sherds which could
not be certainly identified as Hadham or Oxfordshire products and
the possibility that some sherds are post-Roman (either wheel-made
Saxon imports or medieval), but remain unrecognised among the non-
diagnostic body sherds, cannot be ruled out either.
Colchester buff wares (COLB) include three flagon body sherds
and several flanged mortaria (COLBM) which belong to the mid or
late 2nd century. Miscellaneous buff wares (BUF), some of which may
also be Colchester products, include an uncertain dish and flagon and,
most notably, an early 2nd-century carinated jug (type 1.10 or Cam
379A (Hull 1963)) from Cremation F140. This form was produced
at Colchester, West Stow and possibly Pakenham, but this particular
example is more likely to come from Colchester.
Verulamium region white wares include two non-diagnostic
body sherds (VRW) and a Going D3 bead and flange type mortarium
(VRWM), which are mid or late 2nd-century in date. Miscellaneous
white wares (WX) are all non-diagnostic but probably come from
flagons. Four white ware mortaria (WXM) sherds include a Going D3
type and non-diagnostic body sherds, and are probably East Anglian
products.
Deposition and phase
The Roman pottery quantities by phase and feature type
are displayed in Table 2.4, which shows that the majority
of the Roman pottery came from features assigned to the
Anglo-Saxon period. The largest quantities by weight of
Roman pottery from single features came from Anglo-
Saxon features Pit F232 (2991g), Surface Deposit F182
(2482g) and Structures 19 (2454g) and 14 (2387g).
Roman features
A total of 547 sherds of Roman pottery weighing 5803g
and with 7.20 EVEs were recovered from twenty-three
features assigned to the Roman phase and another one
of possible Roman date. These equal 8.7% of the total
assemblage count, 13.8% of the weight and 14.8% of the
EVEs.
Ditches
Fifteen ditches produced 381 sherds of pottery (4051g, 4.08 EVEs).
The largest groups came from ditches F100 (113 sherds, 1101g, 0.88
Eves), F227 (seventy sherds, 936g, 1.18 EVEs), F63 (seventy-two
sherds, 703g, 0.35 EVEs) and F421 (fifty-two sherds, 537g, 0.73
EVEs). Ditch F63 contained a substantial proportion of a single type
4.5 jar which dates from the mid-2nd century onwards. The amounts
from other Roman-phased ditches were almost negligible. Ditch F103
has thirty-four sherds of Roman pottery and the remaining ditches have
nine sherds or fewer each. The pottery from all of the ditches has the
same dates — early or mid-2nd to mid-3rd centuries. Ditch F7 may
be slightly earlier (early to mid-2nd century) but it produced only six
sherds, which would not be sufficient as dating evidence.
Pits
Four pits produced 156 sherds of pottery (1540g, 2.65 EVEs). Pit F68
(138 sherds, 1354g, 2.46 EVEs) contained an early/mid-2nd-century
group which included a Central Gaulish black-slipped ware cup, east
32
Gaulish samian and the GMB corrugated beaker or jar, as well as
other local greyware jars. Pit F150 (which stratigraphically pre-dated
Building I) included sixteen sherds with a mid or late 2nd-century date.
The amounts from the other pits (F569 and F581) was negligible, with
only one sherd from each.
Cremations
Two cremations produced ten sherds of pottery. Cremation F140
contained the early or mid-2nd-century carinated buff ware jug, which
had joining sherds redeposited in nearby Anglo-Saxon Structure 12.
Anglo-Saxon features
One hundred and thirty-six features assigned to the
Anglo-Saxon phase produced 79.4% by count, 70.3%
by weight and 69.8% by EVEs of the Roman pottery
assemblage. As it has been through a longer deposition
cycle, the pottery is more fragmentary and is represented
by higher sherd counts, lower weights and lower EVEs
per feature. This is reflected in an overall average sherd
weight of just 5.9g.
A total of 2321 sherds (10,934g, 12.83 EVEs) was recovered from the
fills of thirty-five SFBs. This represents more than a third of the sherd
count (37%) and just over a quarter of the total assemblage weight
and EVEs (26%). This total is exaggeratedly high because SFBs were
more intensively excavated (100%) as a policy and a proportion of the
contexts were sieved.
Eleven surface deposits (1154 sherds, 8044g, 10.63 EVEs)
accounted for about a fifth of the assemblage (18.4% of the count,
19.1% weight and 21.9% EVEs). Again, this total is exaggerated
because some of these layers were intensively excavated in gridded
squares, a proportion of which were sieved. The largest groups are from
F159 (346 sherds, 2379g, 2.34 EVEs), F182 (444 sherds 2482g, 4.09
EVEs) and F342 (150 sherds, 1516g, 2.31 EVEs). Very few forms are
identified within these groups because of the small average sherd size;
the most datable are the jars and dishes, which belong to the 2nd and
3rd centuries. The fabric range includes imported and local finewares
and coarsewares which mainly fall within the same 2nd-century and
early to mid-3rd-century date range, but it also includes some of the
earlier ‘Romanising’ black-surfaced wares.
Fifty-four pits produced 743 sherds (6945g, 6.98 EVEs) making
up about 11.8% of the count, 16.5% weight and 14.4% EVEs. Pit F232
contained the largest group — 158 sherds (2991g, 2.90 EVEs), which
consisted exclusively of coarseware dishes and jars all dating from the
early or mid-2nd to the mid-3rd centuries. Its fabric range does not
include any imports or finewares. This feature had a higher than average
sherd weight of 18.9g, which may indicate a shorter deposition cycle.
Pit F237 contained 119 sherds (584g, 1.08 EVEs). This group was
more fragmentary, with an average sherd weight of 4.9g and few forms
could be identified except, broadly, as jars, which probably range in
date from the mid-2nd century onwards. The group consisted mainly of
local coarsewares with a few single sherds of central and East Gaulish
samian and small sherds of unspecified colour-coated wares.
Surface Deposit F1 produced 461 sherds (2121g, 1.57 EVEs) which
equalled 7.3% of the count, 5.0% weight and 3.2% EVEs. Twenty-six
graves produced 159 sherds (837g, 1.05 Eves) equalling 2.3% of the
count, weight and EVEs.
Unphased features
A total of 722 sherds (6504g, 7.29 EVEs) representing
11.5% of the count, 15.5% of the total weight and 15%
EVEs came from features and contexts which were
unphased. These included pits, post-holes and unstrati-
fied and surface collections. Unstratified and surface
collections (334 sherds, 3871g, 4.40 EVEs) accounted
for 5.3% of the count, 9.2% of the assemblage weight
and 9.1% EVEs.
Discussion
Early Roman wares are present in small amounts and
although they do not date any features they do indicate
limited activity on the site or in its vicinity during the
mid to late 1st century AD. From a ceramic point of view,
however, the main period of Roman activity on this site
was the 2nd and 3rd centuries, as this is the period to
which the bulk of the datable Roman pottery belongs.
After that there is a considerable reduction in the amount
of discarded pottery, which suggests that the Roman field
system had been infilled long before the end, if not by
the middle, of the 3rd century. Had occupation continued
into the later Roman period there would have been more
locally made pottery because it remains the dominant
component in most late Roman groups. Among the
locally made wares there are almost none of the forms
that are exclusive to the late Roman period and although
there are forms present that could have been produced
in the 4th century these are all long-lived types that are
more likely to have reached the site by the mid-2nd or
3rd centuries. Late specialist wares represent a small
proportion of the Roman assemblage. Although they do
indicate late Roman activity somewhere in the vicinity,
the sherds are thinly spread across the site and do not
date any features; most of them are small and abraded
and occur singly in Anglo-Saxon or unphased features,
with just a few coming from ‘possible’ Roman surface
deposits. Their condition suggests that they have been
through a long deposition cycle and may even owe their
presence on the site to post-Roman activity.
The assemblage composition shows that the inhabit-
ants of this site relied almost entirely on local or regional
wares for their pottery requirements. The dominance of
locally made wares is typical in assemblages from other
rural settlement sites in the county, including that from
the nearby Carlton Colville Bypass site (CAC026 Tester
forthcoming b). The occupants of the site had some access
to continental imports in the 2nd and 3rd centuries but
the range is limited to samian and allied Central Gaulish
black-slipped wares. There is no evidence that they had
access to late continental imports such as Mayen ware.
Although most of the samian was found in post-
Roman features, there was no evidence of its having
been deliberately curated, although the possibility cannot
be ruled out. However, none of the features which are
typical of curation or reuse generally, such as trimming
of bases or high proportions of complete base circumfer-
ences, were apparent in this collection. The only unusual
thing about the samian is its higher than usual rim EVE
(7%) but this is accounted for by the presence of several
substantially complete rim circumferences and the noto-
rious durability of these vessels once broken.
Because most of the Roman pottery assemblage has
been redeposited in later features, there is a high degree
of fragmentation which limits the range of types identi-
fied. Despite this, jars are broadly the main vessel class
identified and in the three major fabric groups, jar EVEs
outnumber dishes and other open forms by more than 5:1
in fabric GX and 2:1 in GMB; in BSW they are almost
equal because of the popularity of BB1/BB2-type dishes.
Large storage jars are nearly absent and it is appears they
were not as common in this part of the county as they are
on sites further south, such as Handford Road, Ipswich
(Tester forthcoming a), where they can form very signifi-
cant components of total Roman assemblage weights
because of their size and thickness. Very few mortaria
were found — a maximum of just sixteen vessels is
represented, which is also typical for rural sites; the same
was true in the Bypass assemblage.
33
Ceramic building material
By Sue Anderson
Introduction
A total of 706 fragments (46,835g) of ceramic building
material (CBM) was collected from this site. Of this, 672
pieces (45,646g) were Roman, the remainder being medi-
eval and post-medieval. A full quantification by context
is available in the archive.
Methodology
The CBM was quantified by catalogue number, fabric
and type, using fragment count and weight in grams. The
presence of burning, combing, finger marks and other
surface treatments was recorded. Roman tile thicknesses
were measured and, for flanged tegulae, the form of
flange was noted and its width and height were measured.
Data was input into an MS Access database.
Fabrics
Fourteen basic fabric groups were identified, as follows:
calc medium sandy with coarse chalk, reduced grey
cp fine–medium sandy micaceous with red clay pellets, fairly
soft, pale orange, sometimes poorly mixed with white clay
streaks
cp2 harder version of cp, often with grey core
csf coarse sandy with unburnt flint
est estuarine clays containing sparse calcareous material, mixed
yellow, pink and purple
fs fine sandy, very dense matrix, very hard fired
fsfe fine compacted fabric with very coarse ferrous fragments, dark
red
fsg fine sandy with red grog
fsm fine sand and mica, some voids, soft, pale buff
ms medium sandy, occasional very fine calcareous inclusions,
hard buff-orange
msf medium sandy with occasional flint and sparse clay pellets,
hard, buff surfaces, orange-red core
msfe medium sandy with ferrous inclusions, deep red
msg medium sandy with red grog
wms medium sandy, white firing, modern
Roman tile
Table 2.5 shows the quantities of Roman tile by fabric
and form. The wide variety of fabrics present is inter-
esting, and suggests that the CBM used at the site in the
Roman period was from more than one source. Some of
the fabrics present in the Roman group had equivalents
in the post-Roman CBM assemblage (details in archive),
presumably indicating a fairly local source for these.
Seventy-nine fragments of flanged tegulae (FLT),
representing forty-four tiles, were collected. Flange
widths and heights were recorded where possible, and
tile thicknesses measured. Twenty-four flange heights
were in the range 35–53mm, thirty-two widths were
between 17mm and 35mm, and thirty-six tile thicknesses
were between 15mm and 28mm (the majority being
20–25mm). Flanges were generally knife-trimmed close
to the base, and three examples of underside cut-outs and
one of a simple upper cut-out were observed. Flanges
were generally sub-rectangular in section, although
several had sloping or slightly concave inner sides.
Twenty-three fragments represented sixteen imbrices
(IMB). Most had signs of smoothing on the outer surface,
although several were poorly finished. A few were slightly
corrugated. Thicknesses varied from 12mm to 22mm, but
most were 15mm thick.
Fabric BOX FLT IMB RBT Patterns used were generally latticing or N-shapes. On
calc 1
one fragment, <4767>, the edge of a circular cut-out was
evident.
cp 29 33 9 331
Other Roman tile (RBT) was not identifiable to
cp2 32 1 26 specific types. The 533 remaining pieces represented a
fs 1 1 10 maximum of 407 tiles. Fifteen pieces had curving finger
fsfe 2 marks on the upper surface, the more complete examples
fsg 1 6 of which were all in the form of parabolic curves. This
fsm 4 14
type of ‘signature’ was most commonly used on flanged
tegulae. Thicknesses may also provide a clue to the orig-
ms 4 6 1 93
inal function. Table 2.6 shows the numbers of measurable
msf 3 3 11 38 tiles in ranges of thickness, and suggestions of type.
msfe 6 At least 216 fragments of Roman tile (approximately
msg 4 a third of the total assemblage of this date) showed
msm 2 evidence of burning, usually in the form of partial or
Totals 37 79 23 533 complete reduction and/or vitrification. Roman tiles were
often reused in Saxon hearths and ovens, and they were
probably brought to site from various sources for this
Table 2.5 Quantities (count) of Roman tile by fabric and purpose. However, none of this assemblage came from
form features identified as ovens/hearths.

CBM by feature and phase

Thickness No. Possible type
Table 2.7 shows the distribution of CBM by form in
14–19mm 28 Flanged tegula the main phases and feature types. This shows that the
20–24mm 37 Flanged tegula majority of Roman tile (and in fact most of the post-
25–29mm 26 Flanged tegula? Roman CBM) was recovered from Anglo-Saxon features,
30–34mm 47 Floor/wall brick particularly SFBs. The largest groups of Roman CBM
35–39mm 28 Floor/wall brick
were from Structure 19 (thirty-five fragments, 1048g),
Structure 20 (eighteen fragments, 1013g), Structure 37
40–44mm 6 Floor/wall brick
(eighteen fragments, 1264g), Structure 30 (sixteen frag-
45–49mm 0 Floor/wall brick ments, 956g), Structure 14 (fourteen fragments, 913g)
50–54mm 1 Wall brick and Structure 31 (thirteen fragments, 1195g). There is no
particular correlation between the amounts of burnt clay
Table 2.6 Thicknesses of RBT and possible types and CBM in these features. In fact, Structure 32, which
produced the largest quantity of burnt clay, contained no
CBM at all, while the next largest group of burnt clay,
Thirty-seven pieces of box flue tile (BOX) were iden- in Structure 37, was associated with the largest group
tified. They varied in thickness from 13mm to 24mm, of CBM (by weight). Other relatively large groups were
though most were in the range 16–20mm. Twenty-seven recovered from pits F232 and F237 (both over 2kg),
pieces showed signs of combing; the number of teeth and from some of the surface spreads, but no feature
on the combs was recorded where possible, and exam- produced more than forty-nine fragments of Roman tile.
ples with four, five, seven, nine and ten teeth were seen. The post-Roman material (details in archive) in Anglo-
Roman post-Roman
Phase Feature type BOX FLT IMB RBT EB LB PAN PEG DP
Roman Ditch 21 1
Pit 3 28 10 19
Beam-slot building III 1 1
unphased Post-hole (build) 6 1
Pit 2 3 29
Other 7 2 1 64 7 1 2
Anglo-Saxon SFB 15 15 3 169 1 3 1 2
Beam-slot building 1
Pit 1 5 2 56 2 1
Grave 2 14 2 1
Hollow 5
Surface deposit 9 24 7 140 1 2 2
Post-medieval Ditch 8 1 1
Quarry 1

EB – Early Brick (medieval); LB – Late Brick (post-medieval); PAN – pantile; PEG – peg tile; DP – drainpipe

Table 2.7 Distribution of CBM by phase, feature type and form

34
9
Fabric description
Fine sandy micaceous, light brown to brick red, tiny voids, some red clay pellets,
soft. Surfaces often pale buff-orange.
Medium sandy micaceous, light brown to orange, voids, some ferrous/red clay
inclusions, harder.
Medium sandy with fine flint, brown, some voids.
Dense, fine-medium sandy with white and red clay pellets, pinkish. Some pieces
may be abraded Roman tile.
Table 2.8. Fired clay in Roman features by fabric
Feature Type No. Wt/g
Ditch 141 1373
Oven/hearth etc 45 2790
Pit 131 4915
Surface Deposit 11 152
Structure 82 461
Total Roman 410 9691
Table 2.9 Fired clay (including loomweights) by feature
type
Saxon features is presumably either intrusive or wrongly
identified.
Discussion
In terms of fabric types, forms and surface treatment,
there is nothing unusual in this assemblage of Roman tile
in comparison with others from the county. On Anglo-
Saxon sites Roman tile was often brought in for recycling
as hearth linings, and although no examples were recov-
ered from oven/hearth features on this site, it was clear
that a high proportion of the material had been exposed
to fire. However, unlike the situation at some Anglo-
Saxon sites where Roman tile is far more abundant than
burnt clay, as at Brandon, it seems that the inhabitants of
Bloodmoor Hill were more likely to manufacture their
own hearth linings and domes from the local clay than to
salvage material from nearby Roman sites.
Fired Clay
by Sue Anderson
Ten ditches assigned to the Roman phase produced small
quantities of fired clay, most of which was featureless
(Tables 2.8–9). However, there were some possible
triangular loomweight fragments and flat pieces with
right-angled corners in F100, a brick-like fragment in F7
and a right-angled piece in F406. Triangular loomweights
were recovered from pits F68, F569 and F580 and oven/
hearth [4648], all of which were in msf fabric. Fragments
from Pit F55 within Building I were all pieces of vitrified
hearth lining, suggesting that the feature may have been
a small furnace (fifty-four fragments, 273g). Two of the
larger fragments were concave, either because of a stake
impression or simply a curving interior.
Glass
Just two fragments of Roman or possibly Roman glass
were recovered from the excavations: a fragment of a
4th-century cup found in Anglo-Saxon Surface Deposit
F1, and a fragment from a thin-walled vessel, also prob-
35
11
Code No Wt/g
fsm 103 843
msm 91 999
msf 213 7847
cp 3 2
ably of Roman date, found in Surface Deposit F159/182
(identifications by Prof. Jennifer Price).
Metalwork
with Adrian Challands
Fig. 2.5
Very few metal artefacts could be positively dated as
Roman; these consisted of a handful of brooches, a small
number of coins, one or possibly two knives, a lock-plate
and a steelyard fragment; other items are only possibly of
this date. Most were recovered either from later features
or during surface collection, and their importation onto
the site in the post-Roman period cannot be ruled out —
this is particularly the case for the brooch fragments and
the coins, which are reasonably common finds on early
Anglo-Saxon settlement sites. Only the knife (R7), the
4th-century coin (R22) from ditch F562 and the lockplate
(R9) from F100 are clearly datable finds in situ.
R1. Bracelet, copper alloy. Solid ?cast? penannular bracelet,
tapering to 7mm wide; oval cross-section, with plain, slightly
expanded terminals; silvered on some parts of surface; Roman?
Diam: 55mm; W: 15mm; Th: 5mm.
6243/14118/Topsoil.
R2. Bow brooch fragment, copper alloy. Bow and part of head-
plate of simple bow brooch; no decoration obvious on bow, but
may be masked by corrosion. No pin or catchplate; late Iron
Age/early Roman. L: 20mm; W: 13mm; Th: 5mm.
5022 (F612)/13036/Subsoil.
R3. Possible brooch, Fe. Thin flat disc with slightly upturned
rim; heavily corroded but X-ray hints at possibly cell-work in
centre; some randomly oriented mineral-preserved wood also
in centre. Roman? Diam: 38mm; Th: 2mm.
2020/6459/Surface find.
*R4. T-shaped brooch, copper. Slender bow with catchplate
surviving; circular section head-bar with possible linear deco-
ration; fragment of pin surviving; 1st–2nd century. L: 34mm;
W: 25mm.
4825/12970/Subsoil.
R5. Fragment of bow brooch, copper alloy. Bow only, decorated
with panels of incised lines and raised boss; Roman? L: 24mm;
W: 17mm; Th: 6mm.
6267/14142/Topsoil.
R6. Brooch fragment, copper alloy. Probably a fragment of a
Nauheim derivative; only the bow remains, with incised
central line decoration; broken at both ends; 1st century AD.
L: 28mm; W: 5mm; Th: 1.8mm.
6280/14155/Topsoil.
*R7. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 33mm) set central to
the blade; widens gradually to meet it; blade itself is triangular
with straight back and cutting edge, though worn; Roman (cf.
Manning 1985 Type 16). L: 71mm; W: 17mm; Th: 5mm.
4853 (F562)/12963/Roman ditch.
R8. Possible knife tip, Fe. Appears to have a tapering section, and
ends in a point; both back and cutting edge have downward
curves (cf. Manning 1985 Type 6 knives with hooked blades);
Roman? L: 48mm; W: 15mm; Th: 3.5mm.
M029/6512/MD spot find.
R9. Lock-plate, Fe. Lever-lock type; inside a rectangular plate
arrangement measuring 31mm by 20mm, the X-ray clearly
shows the spring and tumbler in situ; Roman.
 962 (F100)/6299/Roman ditch.
*R10. Miniature chisel, copper alloy. Cast, square-section shaft,
bulbous middle and tapering down rectangular-section to chisel
edge. Similar finds have been identified as Bronze Age and
possibly Roman (Pendleton 1999, 30–1), but an Anglo-Saxon
date cannot be ruled out. L: 47mm; W: 7mm; Th: 5mm.
6223/14098/Unstratified.
R11. Coin, copper alloy. Sestersius of Trajan, AD 98–117 (very
worn). Obv: Legend illegible, bust right. Rev: Illegible. Minted
AD 98–117.
479/6814/Subsoil.
R12. Copper sestertius. Faustina Senior: wife of Antoninus Pius,
died AD 141 (memorial coin struck after death). Obverse:
Bust of Festina, facing right (inscription — missing and illeg-
ible). Reverse: [AVGVST] A S. C. Probably Pietas standing
left holding patria and sacrificing at altar. Condition: reduced
in diameter and well worn, probably antique at time of loss
(perhaps used as a weight?).
1643/6824/Anglo-Saxon Surface Deposit F182.
R13. Coin, copper alloy. Sestertius of Marcus Aurelius,
AD 161–80 (slightly worn/corroded). Obv: MANTON-
INVSAVGTRPXXIX Laureate bust, right. Rev: IMP[----
-?]. Female figure, standing left, holding standard and staff,
between SC. Minted AD 174–5.
6210/14085/Unstratified.
R14. Coin, copper alloy. As of Commodus, AD 180–92 (very
worn). Obv: Legend illegible, bust right. Rev: Legend illeg-
ible, female figure standing left, holding staff and patra.
Minted AD 180–92.
6266/14141/Topsoil.
R15. Coin, copper alloy. As (very corroded). Obv: Traces of
unidentifiable bust, right. Rev: illegible. Visible traces suggest
a 2nd-century date.
6272/14147/Topsoil.
R16. Coin, copper alloy. As or dupondius (very worn). Obv: Legend
illegible, traces of bust, right. Rev: Legend illegible, traces of
standing figure. Minted c.2nd century AD.
2073/6864/Surface find.
R17. Coin, copper alloy. Sestertius; 2nd century.
MD425/12537/MD spot find.
R18. Coin, copper alloy. Dupondius Philip II AD 244–9. Obv:
Legend illegible, traces of bust, right. Rev: illegible. Minted
AD 244–9.
1272 (F130)/6783/Anglo-Saxon Structure 21, SW quad.
R19. Coin, copper alloy. Radiate (very corroded). Obv: Legend
illegible, traces of radiate crowned head, right. Rev: Legend
illegible, traces of standing figure. Minted c.last two thirds of
the 3rd century AD.
MD469/12561/MD spot find.
R20. Coin, copper alloy. Very corroded and illegible. On size basis
minted c.last two-thirds of the 3rd century to the end of the 4th
century AD.
3181/6869/Post-medieval ditch.
R21. Very corroded unidentifiable coin fragment. On size basis
minted c.last two-thirds of the 3rd century to the end of the 4th
century.
4024 (F1)/12574/Anglo-Saxon Surface Deposit F1.
R22. Coin, copper alloy. Constantine I (AD 308–37). Obverse:
CONST[ANTI NVS] MAX[AVG], laureate and rosettes,
cuirassed in paudamentum, bust facing right. Reverse: [GLORI
AEX]ER CITVS, two soldiers, facing with two standards
between them. Mint Mark: CONST with symbol between two
standards. Minted at Arelate (Arles) AD 330–5.
4801 (F562)/12969/Roman ditch.
R23. Coin, copper alloy. Constantinian. Obverse: illegible. Reverse:
Gloria Execitus type, two soldiers with standards between
them. Minted AD 330–5.
0000/12981/Surface find.
R24. Coin, copper alloy. Theodora 2nd wife of Constantius I
(slightly worn/slightly corroded). Obv: FLMAXTHEO-
DORAEAVG Laureate and draped bust, right. Rev: PIETAS-
ROMANA Empress standing, facing head right and holding
Figure 2.5 Illustrations of selected Roman artefacts two children. Mint Mark •TR[?] Trier. Minted AD 337–41.
MD427/12539/MD spot find.
R25. Coin, leaded copper. Magnentius Decentius/Constantius
Gallus: AD 350–4.
M016/6502/MD spot find.
R26. Coin, copper alloy. Barbarous copy (unofficial issue); offi-
cial issues minted AD 346–61. Obverse: Pearl diademed
head, facing right. Reverse: Fel Temp Reparatio type; soldier

36
 Rural settlements Major farms
Bloodmoor Hill West Fen Road, Ely Haddon, Cambs. Kilverstone, Norfolk Orton Hall Farm Langdale Hale,
Cambs.
Area (ha) 1.5 2.3 2.5 2 1.5 1.8
Pot no. 6284 1915 c.7000 5776 44000 14381
Pot wt (kg) 42.1 - - 38.2 743 315.8
Coin no. 20 15 81 60 63 81

Table 2.10 Comparison of Bloodmoor Hill Roman assemblage with other rural settlements and major farms

spearing fallen horseman. M. M. CO[?] Probably just a copy
of any mint mark. Paralleled in Hill (1949 plate 1 no. 31).
Diam: 14.4mm.
M263/6717/MD spot find.
R27. Coin, copper alloy. Valentinian I or Valens, minted between
AD 364 and 378. Obverse: illegible (appears to have been
hammered flat). Reverse: Emperor facing, head left, with right
hand raising kneeling woman, in left hand holding Victoriola
(hammered?). Legend: [RESTITVTOR REIP]. Mint mark:
illegible. Diam: 21.1mm.
564 (F4)/6862/Anglo-Saxon Pit Group E.
*R28. Steelyard fragment, copper alloy. Roman type, with incised
line decoration; cf. Margeson (1993) no. 289. L: 54mm;
W: 20mm; Th: 8mm.
6234/14109/Topsoil.
Discussion
The evidence outlined above suggests that the Roman
settlement at Bloodmoor Hill represented a subsist-
ence-level rural farmstead (Table 2.10). The quantity of
pottery recovered is relatively small compared with other
excavated sites (for example, the 227kg recovered from
Great Holts Farm in Essex (Germany 2003, 97) and the
225kg from Spong Hill in Norfolk (Gurney 1995, 94)),
but is in line with the comparatively short time-scale over
which this site appears to have been used, and its appar-
ently low status.
The chronology of the coinage recovered indicates a
site in use from the earlier 2nd century, as does the pottery.
The picture from the coinage is confused, however,
by so few of them being recovered from contempo-
rary features: most were recovered from Anglo-Saxon
contexts. The coinage profile is therefore peculiar (R.
Reece, pers. comm.), and does not allow comparison
with any other Roman settlements; it may be that some of
the 4th-century coinage was imported onto the site from
somewhere else during the Anglo-Saxon occupation, and
does not derive from the underlying Roman settlement,
which seems to have largely gone out of use by the end
of the 3rd century.
This settlement did, however, provide both a material
and a landscape context for the Anglo-Saxon settlement
which was founded at least 200 years later: material, in
the sense that there appear to have been extant surface
deposits of Roman material which came to be used as
the basis for similar Anglo-Saxon acts of deposition (see
Chapters 3 and 6), and landscape, in that the trackway
and enclosure ditches seemed to act as a physical frame-
work for the Anglo-Saxon settlement. The remainder
of the volume deals with this subsequent Anglo-Saxon
settlement: Chapter 3 describes the archaeological
features; Chapters 4 and 5 the artefactual and environ-
mental assemblages; Chapter 6 deals with phasing and
analysis of the settlement and its associated material
culture; Chapter 7 discusses the associated cemetery;
and Chapter 8 offers some local, regional and national
perspectives on the significance of the site at Bloodmoor
Hill.

37
11
 3. The Settlement Remains
I. Introduction
The CAU excavations at Bloodmoor Hill revealed a
settlement plan composed of a variety of structural types
and associated features, along with a short-lived intra-site
cemetery. Thirty-eight SFBs (sunken-featured buildings,
otherwise known as Grubenhäuser), nine earthfast post-
hole buildings and one post-in-trench timber building
dating to the Anglo-Saxon period were recorded.1 In
addition, there were approximately 200 individual pits
(including recuts) and five possible oven bases or hearths.
There were also a number of extensive surface deposits,
particularly across the northern part of the site, where
they were preserved within the earthworks of the earlier
Roman trackway.
The combination of all these elements within one
settlement is particularly unusual: other early Anglo-
Saxon sites have produced evidence for surface deposits
(West Stow), for pit complexes (Catholme) and for
intra-site cemeteries (Mucking, although it could be
argued that these are actually at the boundaries of their
contemporary settled areas; two closely associated intra-
site burials dated to the Anglo-Saxon period or later were
also found at West Stow: West 1985, 58–9), but none
shows the whole range as does Bloodmoor Hill. It was
recognised very quickly after the start of excavation that
comparison between different feature types, particu-
larly in terms of material assemblages, would be a vital
element of interpreting and understanding the settlement
history, and excavation strategies were adapted accord-
ingly. The sieving strategies were felt to be important,
both in establishing what is lost in material terms through
hand collection alone, but also in order to give a ‘base-
line’ comparison through which intra-site variability
between feature fills could be assessed (sieving and exca-
vation strategies are dealt with in depth in Chapter 1).
Throughout, the assumption has been made that, with the
exception of graves, the use-life of a feature (a post-hole,
a sunken feature, a pit) is distinct from what happens to
that feature once out of use: the contents of the fill are
not assumed to be of primary deposition (see Chapter 6
for further discussion). While the associated assemblages
are summarised within the catalogue descriptions of this
chapter, they are mainly used as a means of establishing
termini post quem, and not the function of that indi-
vidual structure or pit group. The main emphasis within
this Chapter is on describing the features themselves; a
functional approach is adopted for the material culture
assemblages, which are discussed and described in the
following chapter.
II. Sunken-featured buildings (SFBs)
SFBs have been recognised as a feature of early Anglo-
Saxon settlements since the excavations by E. T. Leeds
at Sutton Courtenay in the 1920s (Leeds 1923, 1927).
Interpretations of them as the main building type have
shifted over the years, with the subsequent recognition
of various types of post-built structures at many sites, as
38
have opinions as to their nature: Leeds, and many others,
assumed that the associated debris found within the pits
had been generated by their occupation, and they were
seen as little more than hovels (Leeds 1936, Radford
1957). This interpretation was followed in the first few
years of the excavations at Mucking (cf. Tipper 2004,
16), with only the interim report into the contemporary
excavations at West Stow forcing a change. Stanley
West (1969) argued that these structures were not strictly
sunken huts, but rather had planked floors at ground level
covering the pit, which thus acted as storage or air space
(although he did still think that ‘household refuse seems
to have been allowed to accumulate under and around the
houses in the most sordid fashion’). Detailed analysis of
the evidence from the three major sites at Mucking, West
Stow and West Heslerton (Tipper 2004) has now estab-
lished that the debris associated with the fill of sunken
features should, rather, be regarded as post-depositional
refuse, infilling the pit after the once-associated struc-
ture had gone out of use; this material should therefore
be regarded as secondary, or even tertiary, with some
evidence for the middening of material elsewhere in the
meantime, rather than the deposition of primary rubbish.
These issues of interpretation are reflected on below,
with regard to the structures and their fills excavated at
Bloodmoor Hill (Fig. 3.1).
Dimensions
There was considerable disparity in the size of SFBs
at Bloodmoor Hill (Fig. 3.2), which varied from
3.00 x 2.80m (Structure 31) up to 6.70 x 5.00m
(Structure 18) (out of thirty-four SFBs with complete
measurements). Lengths varied from 3.00m to 6.70m
and widths from 2.30 to 5.00m. Length to breadth ratios
ranged from 1:1 (Structure 21) to 1.9:1 (Structure 17),
although most were between 1.1:1 and 1.5:1. There
were a number of very large SFBs within the group at
Bloodmoor Hill. Four were c.6.00m or greater in length
(Structures 17, 18, 22 and 30). Surface area ranged
from 8sq m (Structure 1) up to 33.4sq m (Structure 18).
However, it seems likely that the original surface area of
most would have been greater, allowing for truncation
to the upper part of each sunken feature, although it is
difficult to estimate the level of the contemporary ground
surface. In comparison, at West Stow, with a comparable
sandy geology, the largest SFB measured 5.80 x 4.60m in
area (SFB 15; West 1985).
There is a large overlap between the size of SFB pits
at West Stow and those at Bloodmoor Hill, although there
is considerable variation within the settlements (Fig. 3.2).
Those from Bloodmoor Hill lie towards the upper part of
the size range. This is similar to the pattern for post-built
structures between the two settlements (Fig. 3.41). The
mean length of SFBs was 4.59m, which compares with
4.14m at West Stow and 4.00m at Mucking. The mean
width of 3.52m compares with 3.26m at West Stow and
3.23m at Mucking (Tipper 2004, 64–5).
It has proved possible to phase twenty-one SFBs at
Bloodmoor Hill that possess complete plans (Table 6.2).
Based on these, there is clear evidence to show a chrono-
39
Figure 3.1 Location of sunken-featured buildings, shown against a backdrop of other Anglo-Saxon features
 Figure 3.2 Length/breadth plot of SFBs at Bloodmoor Hill compared to those at West Stow

Figure 3.3 Length/breadth plot of SFBs at Bloodmoor Hill by phase

logical trend of increasing size with time. In general,
the largest SFBs were late in date (Fig. 3.3). However,
size alone cannot be used to phase SFBs in the absence
of other dating evidence. Two of the longest (but not
widest) structures have been phased to the 6th century
(Structures 10 and 17) while the three largest structures
(Structures 18, 22 and 30) are phased to the late 6th or the
first half of the 7th century (Phase 2a). However, those
from Phase 2a are spread across the entire size range
while, in comparison, those phased to the second half
of the 7th century (Phase 2b) are, without exception, all
grouped towards the upper end of the size range. This fits
in with the general trend evidenced on settlements across
the country for SFBs to increase in length during the 7th
century, although there was no corresponding increase in
width or depth (Tipper 2004, 66–8).
The base area, however, is crucial to the traditional
interpretation of SFBs as sunken-floored buildings (i.e.
with the base of the pit as the floor) as this measure-
ment represents the real size of the internal area of the

40
 Figure 3.4 Length/breadth plot of SFBs at Bloodmoor Hill compared to wall-post buildings
building. The surface area of SFBs was often consider-
ably larger in size than the base area (out of thirty SFBs
with both measurable surface and base areas), because
the sides generally sloped inwards to the base. The base
length was between 8% and 47% smaller than the surface
length. In eight SFBs the difference in length between
the surface and base was 1.00m or more; the base of
Structure 25 (4.00m) was 1.90m shorter than the surface
(5.90m). Only a few had steep or near-vertical sides, as
had, for example, Structure 20 (see below).
The maximum depth of the SFBs varied between
0.10m (Structure 28) and 0.65m (Structures 2, 5 and 17),
with a mean depth of 0.38m. The SFBs were all reason-
ably shallow, considering that they were dug into sand;
only thirteen were over 0.40m deep. In comparison, the
depth of SFBs at West Stow ranged from 0.15–1.00m
(SFB 17) with a mean of 0.50m; eleven were greater
than 0.65m in depth. The mean depth of Grubenhäuser at
Mucking was 0.43m. It seems very likely that the upper
part of features at Bloodmoor Hill have been truncated,
particularly upslope towards the southern end of the
site, although it is difficult to estimate by exactly how
much. Two structures (1 and 34), in particular, had been
heavily truncated and the post-holes in both were, as a
result, located outside the sunken feature. Structure 32, in
the south-east part of the site, also showed considerable
evidence of truncation. The ridge post-holes lay outside
the sunken feature, which was an irregular shape, almost
certainly as result of heavy truncation to the upper part of
the feature. Those structures located towards the northern
end of the site, within the earlier trackway, have prob-
ably suffered little truncation (Structures 5, 9, 16 and 17).
Structures 5 and 17 were the two deepest hollows on the
site (both 0.65m in depth), while the depth of Structure 9
(0.45m) was above the mean of 0.38m. Structure 16 was
much shallower (0.30m) but this feature was altogether
41
much smaller and lacked post-holes; it could possibly be
the remains of a pit.
Variation in depth at Bloodmoor Hill does not appear
to be solely a function of preservation, however. The
shallowest features were not all in the southern part of
the site, towards the top of the hill, and the southernmost
SFB (Structure 24) measured 0.60m in depth. Depth also
varied considerably between adjacent SFBs; Structure 30
measured 0.55m in depth while Structure 29, less than
2.50m to the north, measured 0.31m in depth.
In addition, there does not appear to be a close rela-
tionship between surface area and depth. The largest SFB
(Structure 18) was 0.25m deep. The depths of nine SFBs
that measured over 5.00m in length varied from 0.13m
(Structure 26) to 0.65m (Structure 17).
Wall-post buildings and SFBs form two discrete
groups, particularly in terms of length (Fig. 3.4).
However, eleven SFBs were longer and twenty-one
wider than wall-post Structure 40, the smallest example.
Stanley West suggested that a building with a suspended
floor was significantly larger than the area of the sunken
feature, increasing the floor area by between 100 and 200
sq. ft. (9.3–18.6sq m) (West 1985, 115). If we allow for
a gap of 0.50m between the wall line and edge of the
pit, this would increase the size of the largest structure
with a sunken feature (Structure 18) up to 7.00 x 6.00m,
increasing the floor area from 33sq m to 46sq m (without
allowing for possible truncation). Even with this increase,
the two structure types still form two separate groups,
although the difference is mainly in terms of length rather
than breadth, with nine SFBs 5.00m or more in width.
Form
The SFBs were generally sub-rectangular in shape,
although there was considerable variation. Two
(Structures 3 and 21) had sub-square-shaped sunken
features and one (Structure 10) was oval. Several small
irregularly shaped hollows (Structures 31 and 37) have
also been identified as possible structures.
Their sides varied from a gradual to a steep slope
and a number were near-vertical, but none had any clear
evidence of side collapse or erosion, which might indicate
that they had been protected from erosion and collapse
by a suspended floor (Tipper 2004, 74–6). A number of
SFBs had one or more narrow slots (Structures 14, 20,
30 and 35), post-holes (Structures 12 and 22) and/or
shallow and wide slots or trenches (Structures 12, 21 and
22) at the base of the sides, which indicates some form of
lining, either in the form of planks, posts and/or possibly
turf walls. A number of others had additional post-holes
around the sides of the sunken feature; examples include
Structures 22 and 38.
In Structure 12, phased to the second half of the 7th
century, the remains of a wide but shallow trench, 0.60m
wide x 0.12m deep (max), were defined. Post-holes were
set into this trench and a number of post-pipes were
defined through the fill of the trench. Reasons for the
lining of some structures are unclear, but may have related
to function, status and, possibly, date (see Chapter 6).
This evidence is similar to that from one of two SFBs
(Building 125) excavated on St Peter’s Street, Ipswich,
which was of a similar size, measuring 5.20 x 4.20m in
size and 0.60m in depth, and also dated to the 7th century
(Suffolk SMR No. IAS 5203). There was a line of post-
holes along the base of the north side, although there did
not appear to be a foundation trench, and stake-holes were
present in the base on the eastern side of the feature. It
has been suggested that this building had a sunken floor,
with a possible stepped entrance in the north-west corner
(K. Wade, pers. comm.).
There are also a number of other early to middle
Anglo-Saxon SFBs on other sites with post-holes or with
a shallow trench around the sides (Tipper 2004, 74–6).
In comparison, the late Saxon examples lacked evidence
of ridge posts and are more comparable with the contem-
porary sunken-featured (and probably cellared) buildings
at Brandon Road, Thetford, rather than with those at
Bloodmoor Hill (Dallas 1993).
The majority of SFBs had irregular but roughly
flat bases and in several cases the base was slightly
concave or undulating (for example, Structure 19). Three
possessed (slight) hollows in the base of the sunken
feature (Structures 14, 35 and 37). Structure 14 had
a large shallow ovate-shaped pit or hollow along the
base of the southern side of the sunken feature, which
measured 1.70m by 0.70m in area and 0.10m deep.
Structure 35 had a distinct hollow 3.40 by 1.00m in area
(max) and c.0.15m deep across the northern half. The
function, if any, of these hollows is unknown. They are
perhaps comparable to the shallow slots observed in two
Grubenhäuser at Mucking and on several other sites,
which are often interpreted as structural evidence for the
location of a loom (GHs 56 and 136; Hamerow 1993, 17,
figs 60 and 66; Tipper 2004, 88, 169–70 and table 28).
There were several possible shallow scoops in the base
of Structure 37 but these might have been the remains
of post-holes or simply an uneven base. There were also
many animal burrows on the base of all the SFBs, not
to be mistaken for stake-holes, although the occasional
isolated post-hole was defined in the base of several.
It appears that the base of the sunken features had
not formed the floor surface. There was no evidence of
42
prepared or eroded floor surfaces or floor planks that had
been laid across the base of any of the SFBs. The lower
fills of two structures (Structures 4 and 22) were investi-
gated using thin-section micromorphological analysis (see
Milek, below). Neither contained evidence of a primary
deposit that could have formed while the buildings were
in use, either as a trampled surface or as sediment that
accumulated in the air space beneath elevated floor
boards. A thin compact and ‘crust-like’ deposit across
the base of Structure 22 was shown to be a natural clay
and iron band resulting from post-depositional processes
(illuviation of clay), rather than a trampled floor deposit.
Therefore, the formation of such contexts is not consid-
ered to relate to the original function of the buildings and
they are almost certainly post-abandonment fills.
A small number of SFBs had slight, and in several
cases prominent, ledges around the base of the sunken
feature (Structures 13, 21, 25, 29, 30 and 35). Structure 25
had a prominent shelf or ledge around the sides meas-
uring up to c.0.80m in width and up to 0.30m in height
above the base of the sunken feature. Structure 30 had
multiple ledges 0.15–0.25m wide and c.0.07m high
around the northern, southern and western sides, giving a
distinct stepped profile. The ledges were clearly defined
with sharp edges which remained intact for only a very
short space of time after excavation because they were
dug into soft sand. In both structures the ridge post-holes
were set through the ledges and in Structure 30 a short
slot had been cut through the ledge along the southern
side of the sunken feature. The reason for these ledges
is unclear, although it seems unlikely that they were the
result of trampling and erosion in the central hollow and
more probable that they were protected by a suspended
floor (Tipper 2004, 84–5).
There was no evidence of entrances down into the
base of the sunken features, in the form of either post-
holes and other features that might suggest revetted steps
or perhaps a worn entrance hollow, and there was no
evidence, such as post-holes for door-posts, to suggest
the location of doors into larger ground-level buildings.
Stanley West argued that entrances probably faced south-
wards at West Stow (in buildings aligned east to west) to
allow maximum light into the buildings, although there,
too, there was no physical evidence for them (West 1985,
120).
There was a possible burnt deposit, perhaps the
remains of an insubstantial hearth, on the base of
Structure 26. It consisted of a sub-circular deposit of
burnt clay c.0.40m in diameter on the base of the hollow.
However, Structures 26 and 31, and also possibly 28,
were similar and rather ill-defined shallow hollows
0.10 to 0.20m deep. Rather than structures with sunken
features that were covered by a suspended floor, it seems
possible that these were perhaps more like covered
working hollows, although the base of these sunken
features was little different from the others, which had
no evidence of trampled floors. There was little other
indication of internal features. These are possibly compa-
rable to a structure excavated at Flixton (FLN 061 1120),
which possessed a very shallow hollow surrounded by
post-holes set in trenches on the long sides, and with two
large ridge post-holes located centrally at each end (S.
Boulter, pers. comm.).
 Structure Length (m) Breadth (m) Depth (m) Post-holes Type Ledge/s Hollows Slot/s Fills Orientation
1 3.30 2.90 0.20 2 2 post-hole 1 ENE–WSW
2 <3.20 3.60 0.65 1 2 post-hole 1 ENE–WSW
3 3.90 3.80 0.52 2 2 post-hole 2 ENE–WSW
4 4.40 3.60 0.40 2 2 post-hole 2 ENE–WSW
5 4.00 3.50 0.65 2 2 post-hole complex ENE–WSW
6 3.70 0.50 1
7 2.30 0.40 1
8 0.40
9 4.00 3.40 0.45 3 2 post-hole derivative complex NE–SW
10 5.40 2.90 0.36 2 2 post-hole 2 ENE–WSW
11 3.20 2.75 0.13 4 2 post-hole derivative 1 E–W
12 5.65 5.00 0.50 16 6 post-hole derivative y 3 ENE–WSW
13 4.80 4.00 0.23 1 1 post-hole? y 2 ENE–WSW
14 4.30 2.90 0.30 1 1 post-hole derivative y y 2 ENE–WSW
15 4.60 4.00 0.41 0 post-hole-less? 1 ENE–WSW
16 4.20 3.25 0.30 0 post-hole-less 1 E–W
17 6.40 3.40 0.65 4 2 post-hole derivative 3 NE–SW
18 6.70 5.00 0.25 6 6 post-hole derivative 2 ENE–WSW
19 4.80 3.10 0.34 3 1 post-hole derivative 2 ENE–WSW
20 5.70 4.70 0.40 9 6 post-hole derivative y 2 ENE–WSW

43 14
21 4.60 4.60 0.40 2 2 post-hole y y 3 ENE–WSW
22 6.00 4.10 0.45 7 4 post-hole derivative y 3 ENE–WSW
23 3.60 3.40 0.40 0 post-hole-less 1 E–W
24 4.50 3.10 0.60 2 2 post-hole 2 N–S
25 5.90 3.50 0.57 2 2 post-hole y complex NE–SW
26 5.70 4.10 0.13 7 hollow 1 N–S
27 4.00 3.20 0.40 2 2 post-hole NNE–SSW
28 4.50 3.10 0.10 5 hollow 1 ENE–WSW
29 4.00 3.20 0.31 2 2 post-hole y ENE–WSW
30 6.40 4.40 0.55 4 2 post-hole derivative y y complex ENE–WSW
31 3.00 2.80 0.21 5 hollow 1 E–W
32 3.80 3.60 0.30 2 2 post-hole 1 ENE–WSW
33 4.40 3.10 0.30 2 2 post-hole 1 ENE–WSW
34 4.00 2.50 0.38 2 2 post-hole 3 E–W
35 4.40 3.40 0.35 2 2 post-hole y y 2 ENE–WSW
36 4.10 3.00 0.22 6 2 post-hole derivative 1 NE–SW
37 3.60 2.80 0.26 1 1 post-hole derivative y 2 ENE–WSW
38 4.20 3.40 0.50 8 2 post-hole derivative 3 ENE–WSW

Table 3.1 Summary data for SFBs

Post-holes: classification
Thirty-two SFBs have been classified by the number of
post-holes (Table 3.1). Twenty-one were two post-hole
or two post-hole derivative structures, with opposing
gable or ridge post-holes located in the centre of the
short sides of the pit. Two-post-hole derivative structures
(for example, Structures 11 and 38) possessed additional
post-holes, many of which probably held secondary
supporting or replacement posts.
The majority of the ridge post-holes were located at
the junction between the side and the base, or straddling
the side, of the sunken feature, although the position
varied. In Structures 11, 21, 29 and 35 the post-holes
straddled the upper edge of the sunken feature while
in Structure 25 the post-holes were set in from the
(upper) edge by c.1.00m, and both were slanted inwards.
However, their location was not necessarily consistent
on both sides of the sunken feature; in Structure 3 the
eastern ridge post-hole was located outside the sunken
feature while the opposite, western, post-hole was located
inside. In Structure 24 the post-holes were, unusually,
diagonally opposed across the sunken feature, so that the
alignment of the post-holes was diagonal to the central
axis of the sunken feature. The distance between ridge
post-holes (in twenty-six measurable examples) ranged
from 3.15m (Structure 32) to 5.90m (Structure 18), with
a mean of 4.30m.
In a number of sunken features there were additional
post-holes on the central axis (Structures 11, 18, 29 and
38 and also possibly 17, 33 and 36). In Structure 11 there
were two additional post-holes at the eastern end, both
outside the sunken feature. In Structure 30, there were
two post-holes at the eastern end, both on the central
axis: one straddled the sloping side while the other was
located c.1.00m inside the (upper) edge of the pit; this
was presumably a subsequent addition to replace or rein-
force the existing post. They indicate that these buildings
were maintained and repaired.
Structures 12, 18 and 20 were of the six post-hole
derivative type, with two ridge post-holes and four
corner post-holes, as well as additional post-holes around
the edge of the sunken feature. All three were among the
largest SFBs, with the smallest of the three (Structure 20)
measuring 5.70m by 4.70m in area. In Structures 12 and
18 the corner post-holes were located inside the edge of
the sunken feature, while in Structure 20 the southern
corner post-holes protruded beyond the edge of the
sunken feature and those in the north were set inside
its corners. There was also one possible four post-hole
derivative structure (Structure 22), with ridge post-holes
and also post-holes along the north and south long sides
of the sunken feature.
The western (or northern) ridge post-holes ranged
from 0.23m (Structure 9) to 0.80m (Structure 38) in
depth (excluding truncated Structures 1 and 23), while
the eastern post-holes were between 0.20m (Structure 9)
and 0.72m (Structure 25), with the mean depths of the
eastern and western post-holes 0.44m and 0.47m respec-
tively. While there were some appreciable differences
between the depths of the main post-holes, there is no
consistent relationship between them. For example, the
eastern ridge post-hole of Structure 22 was 0.60m and
the western post-hole was only 0.40m deep, while in
Structure 38 the western post-hole was 0.80m and the
eastern post-hole was 0.50m deep. The corner post-holes
44
ranged from 0.10m to 0.30m deep in Structure 20 and
between 0.50m and 0.70m in Structure 18. Several of the
ridge post-holes had post-pipes which ranged from 0.24 to
0.35m in width. In Structures 12 and 20 post-pipes were
defined through the fill of the sunken feature, indicating
that several posts had decayed in situ. In Structure 20 the
south-east and north-west corner posts were defined as
post-pipes through the lower fill, which indicates that
at least the lower part of these posts decayed after the
deposition of the fill. There was evidence from a number
of other examples (for instance, Structure 22 and 38) to
show that the base of the post, set into the post-holes,
had decayed before the post-abandonment infilling of
the sunken feature. Similar evidence has been produced
within the oldest reconstruction at the rebuilt village of
West Stow, where the bases of posts have completely
decayed while the building is still standing (West 2001,
70 and pt 48).
At least two structures (16 and 23, both of which
were small SFBs, and also possibly 15) had no post-
holes. Several had only a single post-hole or only one
definite ridge post-hole (Structures 14, 19 and 37, and
also possibly 13). This suggests that these structures were
constructed differently, although it is possible that the
posts stood directly on the ground (Tipper 2004, 71–4). In
comparison, at West Stow seven SFBs lacked post-holes,
twenty-three had six post-holes, two had four post-holes
and thirty-two had two post-holes (West 1985).
Construction
The SFBs are reconstructed as ground-level buildings
with a suspended floor above the pit (after West 1985),
based on the detailed stratigraphic evidence from the
excavations and on comparative study (Tipper 2004). It
is suggested that the sunken feature formed one compo-
nent of a slightly larger building. There was, however,
little archaeological evidence to indicate the form of the
superstructure even in the northern part of the site where
the preservation of deposits was good.
The base area was often considerably smaller than the
surface area and, in many cases, would not have made a
practicable living space if the floor was on the base of the
sunken feature. However, if this type of building had a
suspended floor, the actual area of each building would
have been greater than the sunken feature. Assuming the
floor planks rested on joists around the pit, if these were
set back from the upper edge of the excavated pit then
the size of the actual building would have been greater in
both length and breadth than the sunken feature itself.
Like most other examples across the country, the
absence of evidence for structural features around the
outside of the pits suggests that these did not signifi-
cantly penetrate the subsoil. Instead, perhaps this type
of building was constructed with horizontal beams that
formed a frame lying directly on the ground surface, onto
which vertical wall planks and also the horizontal floor
planks could be pegged. This technique might have been
similar to that employed in some of the experimental
reconstructions at the rebuilt village of West Stow, which
have been pedestalled above the level of the current
ground surface as a result of erosion around the buildings
(West 1985, 121 and fig. 289; 2001).
A large quantity of sand would have been generated
by the excavation of sunken features; c.15.5m3 of sand
would have to have been moved to create the sunken
feature associated with Structure 30. It seems reason-
able to suppose the spoil dug out was deposited close by
and not transported a great distance from its origin. It
could have been used to infill an adjacent and abandoned
sunken feature, if one building was simply replaced
by another in the immediate vicinity, but this does not
explain the often large quantities of material culture
within the fills of SFBs (see below). Alternatively, the
spoil was possibly spread across the surface around
a (newly excavated) sunken feature. This would artifi-
cially raise the ground level around these buildings and
might explain why structural features relating to walls
did not penetrate the natural and leave a physical trace. It
would also increase the relative depth of SFBs, perhaps
providing more usable storage spaces below a suspended
floor. Alternatively, it is possible that (some of) the struc-
tures were constructed with turf walls and that the lower
fills of the sunken features could be the remains of turf
from the original building that was simply pushed back in
(Tipper 2004, 80–1; Powlesland forthcoming). However,
this also does not explain the often large quantities of
material in the fills.
Function
The function of the SFBs is difficult to ascertain. In
common with the evidence from so many sites of this
period, the fills of the SFBs at Bloodmoor Hill often
contained large quantities of material culture. Elsewhere,
the contents of sunken features have often been used
to identify the function of these buildings. However, it
seems likely that most of this material was deposited
during post-abandonment infilling (see below), and need
not have any relationship to the function of the original
building (cf. Tipper 2004, chap 8). The material within a
sunken feature cannot (usually) be directly linked to the
use of the original building and it may well have derived
from activities within several buildings (see below).
That said, much of the material culture within the fills
of sunken features may well have been stored and used
within this building type, and therefore their function in
general may be indicated by this type of evidence.
It seems reasonable to suppose that large deposits of
bulky and heavy items in sunken features, such as groups
of loomweights and also discrete deposits of animal bone,
fired clay or metalworking evidence (see below), have
come either from that building or at least from the imme-
diate vicinity. In particular, large groups of loomweights
(and lumps of unfired clay that were most probably the
remains of others) occurred in a number of SFBs, within
their lower fills and on or close to the base of the sunken
features (cf. Tipper 2004, 165–8; see Chapter 4). Five
SFBs contained over 10kg of fired and unfired loom-
weight material and two contained over 20kg (although
the overwhelming majority of material was unfired, and
there was no evidence of orderly rows of loomweights, as
have been found on sites such as West Stow, Upton and
Mucking: Tipper 2004, 165–8). Structure 20 contained
22,779g of unfired material compared with just 81g of
fired material, and Structure 21 had 20,236g of unfired
material and 592g of fired material. Using a mean weight
of 422g for each loomweight based on four complete
examples (two fired and two unfired, excluding the
largest and anomalous weight of 808g), this works out
to around fifty-four and forty-nine loomweights in total
within Structures 20 and 21.
45
While single, small and portable objects may been
have moved considerable distances across the site, it is
hard to imagine that these loomweight deposits have
been moved a great distance. This might also explain
the relative lack of loomweights in the surface deposits;
no unfired clay and only four fragments (101g) of fired
clay loomweight material (out of c.20kg in total) were
recovered from Surface Deposit F1. While this could be a
result of differential preservation between feature types,
the condition of both pottery and bone was only slightly
better in the SFBs (and pits) than in the surface deposits. In
addition, we might still have expected to recover deposits
of unfired clay from the surviving surface deposits even
if they were no longer recognisable as loomweights.
Moreover, the occurrence of these loomweight groups
on or close to the base of the sunken features, combined
with the lack of evidence for prolonged weathering and
erosion to the base and sides of the features, demonstrates
that the loomweights were deposited on (or very soon
after) abandonment of the buildings. Taken together, the
evidence might imply that the loomweights simply fell
into the base from the floor above and, therefore, were
stored and/or used in that building. However, they could
have been dumped in from elsewhere, although prob-
ably from within the immediate area, like the slag in the
sunken features of Structures 14 and 19 (see below).
It has been suggested that groups of loomweights, and
other objects, on or close to the base of a sunken feature
were possibly ritual deposits that marked the construction
or abandonment of a building (Gibson with Murray 2003,
210–11; Tipper 2004, 169; see below). Alternatively, they
might have been stored below the floor; the cool environ-
ment and stable humidity below a suspended floor would
have been ideal for unfired loomweights. However, the
deposit on the base of Structure 20 sealed the remains of
a semi-complete pot (V152; see Tipper, Chapter 4). Most
of the sherds from this vessel were concentrated in two
adjacent metre squares in the north-west part, and on the
base, of the sunken feature (161 sherds weighing 790g),
although sherds were also recovered from the north-east
and south-west parts and there was even a sherd from
the upper fill in the north-west part (but this might be
the result of post-depositional disturbance). A further
four sherds (58g) of the same vessel came from the fill
of an adjacent pit (F255); this pit also contained over
3kg of unfired clay loomweight material and 184g of
fired clay loomweight fragments. The level of dispersal
suggests that the remains of the vessel were scooped up
and simply thrown into the sunken feature and pit after
breakage. Given the relationship between the vessel and
the loomweight deposit, it seems likely that both were
simply the result of mundane rubbish disposal rather than
ritual deposition or storage below the floor.
SFBs might well have had a range of functions; it is
probably misleading to ascribe single and fixed functions
to particular buildings (Rahtz 1976, 76; Tipper 2004,
184–5). Certainly, we should not assume that those with
loomweights on the base were all specialist weaving
sheds, and we must be careful not to over-emphasise
the importance of textile processing, and weaving in
particular, because it is one of the few craft activities
that leaves a tangible trace. It is not difficult to imagine
individual buildings, some of which were of consider-
able size, being used for a variety of purposes, including
domestic activities (living, eating and sleeping), craft
activities and storage. In addition, many activities prob-
ably took place outdoors, at least when the weather was
good; warp-weighted looms were not fixed pieces of
equipment and could have been stood against an external
(end) wall to maximise light.
Structural decay and infilling
Most of the sunken features had broadly similar bi- or
tripartite fill sequences, suggesting that they were rapidly
backfilled, although examples of single uniform fills
and complex fill sequences also existed. The majority,
however, contained two distinct fills, occasionally above
a thin primary weathering or infill layer which was in
some cases represented by a slight artefact scatter on the
base of the pit. In general, the two fills were described
as a deep lower fill of mixed mid-brown silty sand and
a shallower upper fill of dark grey to black silty sand,
usually no more than a few centimetres deep.
The character of the fills within two SFBs (Structures 4
and 22) was studied in detail (see Milek, below). The
origin of the materials used to infill the sunken feature
associated with Structure 4 was difficult to ascertain
due to the low quantity of anthropogenic material and
the poor preservation and high level of decomposition of
organic matter. Except for an elevated organic content,
the anthropogenic component of the upper fill [294] was
unexpectedly low; however, this fill contained sixty-nine
Anglo-Saxon pot sherds (860g) as well as c.5.8kg of
animal bone, along with a variety of other finds. The lower
fill of Structure 22 appeared to be the result of rapid and
intentional dumping, with a possible aeolian component
to the fill, which occurred immediately after the structure
had been abandoned. Unfortunately, plant macrofossils
were generally poorly preserved and were thus unable
to shed further light on the organic content of their fills
but it has been suggested that the macrofossils within the
fills of sunken features may represent material from the
same activities represented in Surface Deposit F1. The
upper fill might be the remains of a general surface layer
or occupation material, similar to the interpretation of the
upper or post-hut fills of SFBs at West Stow (West 1985),
where the surface layer was ‘caught’ in the hollow caused
by the settling and compaction of the lower fills within
sunken features.
The fills of the SFBs contained nearly half of the total
finds assemblage from the site (over 48% by weight). The
amount of material varied considerably between indi-
vidual SFBs and between material types within individual
features. They often contained a selection of material,
most frequently pottery and animal bone, with a varied
range of other object types, but some sunken features
produced relatively little. Nearly half the Anglo-Saxon
pottery from the site (c.2800 sherds weighing c.25kg
and representing 2332 vessels) derived from the fills of
sunken features (see Tipper, Chapter 4). The fills of ten
SFBs each contained over 1kg of Anglo-Saxon pottery,
and two had over 3kg (Structures 17 and 30). The fills of
fifteen SFBs contained the remains of over fifty different
vessels and six contained over 100; Structure 17 contained
the remains of nearly 450 broken vessels. There were
also c.1800 identified animal bones or POSACs (parts of
skeletons always counted during faunal recording) in the
fills of the sunken features (c.42% of identified bone),
although the total quantity of fragments was significantly
higher than this (over 25,000 fragments weighing over
46
100kg) because recording was limited to ‘parts of the
skeleton always counted’ (see Higbee, Chapter 7). The
fills of ten SFBs each contained over 5kg of animal bone,
and two had over 10kg (Structures 24 and 35).
With the exception of a small number of possible
primary disposals deposited on or soon after use and
at an early stage in the refuse cycle, such as the sherds
of the broken vessel V152 in Structure 20 that must
have been simply collected up and dumped directly
into the abandoned sunken feature, and also the heavy
or bulky materials such as the groups of loomweights
in their fills (see above), the material within SFBs was
very fragmented. Most pots were represented by one or
two sherds while a small number were represented by
several sherds, indicating different discard histories. In
general, the material in the fills appeared to be the result
of tertiary deposition. Tertiary material is defined as rede-
posited secondary material, such as that deriving from
intermediate surface dumps subsequently moved into a
sunken feature (Schiffer 1972; 1976, 30–1; 1987); the
way in which these deposits accumulated (on other sites)
has been the subject of detailed study (cf. Tipper 2004).
The SFBs seem to have been intentionally infilled with
varying quantities of fragmented material culture within
a soil matrix. The sides of sunken features were gener-
ally sharp, with little evidence of weathering, erosion and
collapse even when cut into fine soft sand, which indicates
that they must have been infilled relatively quickly after
the original building had gone out of use, and presumably
after the superstructure had been dismantled. There was
also no evidence to show that material had accumulated
gradually through the filtering of material between the
floor planks over the pit, as Stanley West suggested at
West Stow (West 1985); the presence of large fragments
of material within the lower fill, such as the loomweight
groups or the two large whale bone vertebrae in the fill
of Structure 12, indicates that the material did not slip
down cracks between the planks, unless there were some
very large gaps or unless planks were lifted and material
buried while the building was still in use. In addition, the
detailed soil analyses of two SFBs suggested there was
also no evidence that sediment had accumulated below
elevated floor boards.
The presence of surface dumps is shown, in particular,
by the surviving surface deposits and by the often large,
mixed and fragmented assemblages within the SFBs.
However, there was no evidence to indicate the source
of these deposits in relation to individual buildings. They
could have been close by, if we imagine that rubbish was
deposited immediately outside and around the walls; if
this material was simply pushed into the sunken feature
after disuse, it would then directly relate both to the
function and date of the building. However, this raises
an important question about what was going on inside
these buildings, which are generally interpreted as ancil-
lary craft workshops or storage buildings. It is difficult
to imagine that all this rubbish derives from activities in
one building, given the large and varied assemblages in
many SFBs.
If living areas were kept relatively clean, rubbish
must have been shifted away from the buildings, and
some of it possibly disposed of outside, or at least on the
edge of, the settlement (Tipper 2004, 157–9). Material
filling in sunken features would then bear no relation-
ship to individual buildings and might have been moved
some distance. This is suggested, in particular, by the
high level of fragmentation of the Anglo-Saxon pottery
and also by the vessel links between different features
across the site (see Tipper, Chapter 4). That said, differ-
ences in proportions of pottery fabric types, for example,
that might relate to chronological differences between
pot groups, do emerge across the site. There were also a
number of vessel links within the fills of individual SFBs;
some of these might be the result of primary disposal
(see above), deposited directly into a sunken feature, but
others might have been deposited originally in surface
heaps and subsequently moved to fill in an abandoned
sunken feature; sherds from the same vessel ended up in
the same sunken feature even though they may have been
deposited elsewhere first, which indicates there was not
significant reworking of these intermediate dumps.
There was a total of c.2300 sherds (c.11kg) of residual
Roman pottery within the fills of the SFBs, and two struc-
tures (14 and 19) each contained over 500 sherds (over
2kg). Several features contained large quantities of Roman
pottery; eight contained over 100 sherds, although twenty
contained fewer than twenty sherds. Clearly, this material
has not come from activities within the same building
and there is little to suggest that the Roman pottery had
been deliberately curated (see Tester, Chapter 2). With
the exception of Structure 17, those features containing
large quantities of Roman material were all located close
to the core of Roman activity in the central part of the
site. It seems likely that this material derives from surface
heaps created in the earlier Roman settlement which were
subsequently used to fill in abandoned SFBs or, alterna-
tively, from infilled Roman features encountered during
the excavation of a later SFB in the immediate vicinity,
which was simply dumped en masse into an adjacent
sunken feature. This is suggested by the (Roman) sherd
links between Structure 19 and, over 11.00m to the south,
Pit 232, and between Structure 13 and Surface Deposit
F342, separated by 90.00m from east to west.
Two SFBs (Structures 14 and 19) contained an
abundance of metalworking evidence, and, in partic-
ular, extremely large quantities of slag (see Cowgill,
Chapter 4). Structure 14 contained over 10kg and
Structure 19 c.47.5kg (over 80% of slag within the fills
of sunken features). These two SFBs also contained
exceptionally large quantities of Roman pottery but
this is simply because the Anglo-Saxon metalworking
activity was concentrated within the core of earlier
Roman activity; i.e. there is no functional relation-
ship between Roman pottery and metalworking (see
Chapter 6). Nevertheless, both types of material appear
to have been similarly treated as rubbish and dumped
en masse, opportunely, in the closest abandoned and
open sunken feature. The slag within Structures 14 and
19 seems to result from the wholesale redeposition of
one or more surface dumps immediately to the south of
Structure 19 (in the area of the later cemetery) where
the overwhelming majority of metalworking evidence
was concentrated. These deposits, which contained very
little other domestic refuse (Structure 14 contained just
two fragments (<1g) and Structure 19 ten sherds (17g) of
Anglo-Saxon pottery), appear to represent the tidying-up
of this area, possibly in preparation for the inception of
the cemetery. There were smaller quantities of slag in a
number of other SFBs.
47
In Structure 35 there were three complete cattle
skulls along with a large quantity of butchered animal
bone located within the upper fill and, in particular,
at the interface with the lower fill (over 13kg of bone
came from the fill of this sunken feature). The upper
fill also produced an extensive metalwork collection.
The lower fill of the same SFB had a smaller, but still
sizeable, collection of animal bones, which included an
articulated goose wing, and a large assemblage of unfired
clay loomweight material (almost 5kg in total, or c.11
loomweights based on the mean of 422g for each weight)
as well as a small quantity of fired loomweight frag-
ments. Comparable deposits have been defined on other
sites, and these are usually interpreted pragmatically in
terms of casual rubbish disposal: in this case, given the
different material categories, from a variety of activities
(Tipper 2004, 150). In contrast, at Cresswell Field, Oxon,
complete animal skulls and articulations were interpreted
as deliberate, special and possibly ritual deposits (Hey
2004, 74). Four cattle skulls and two horse skulls were
found at the interface of the lower and upper fills in SFB
7395, apparently laid on the surface of the primary fill
along with several large fragments of limestone (one of
top of one of the skulls). At Godmanchester, Cambs, it
was suggested that groups of loomweights on or close to
the base of the SFB were possibly ritual deposits (Gibson
with Murray 2003, 210–11).
Given the considerable evidence for unusual, special
or placed deposits throughout later prehistory, we do need
to consider the possibility that similar deposits might also
have been made on sites during the Anglo-Saxon period
(cf. Hamerow 2006), and to be aware of the occurrence of
special deposits for various types of find, such as animal
bone, pottery, metalwork or even loomweight groups.
However, small (complete) objects, such as spindle-
whorls that still appear to have a utilitarian value, might
have fallen through gaps between pegged floor planks
during the life of the building, and unless they occur on
the base it seems highly unlikely that these were founda-
tion or closing deposits. They occurred almost always
among other fragmentary objects and varied material
types and therefore it is difficult to see these as ritual or
placed deposits. It seems more likely that they are the
result of post-use dumping of refuse, although it does
not explain why complete objects were simply thrown
away. In addition, it is extremely hard to identify when
a deposit of multiple potsherds from a single vessel is
the result of simple rubbish disposal at an early stage in
the refuse cycle, or when it might have had some special
or greater significance. In many ways, all material in
subsurface features is significant and special, given that
it could have been disposed of in other ways.
On the whole, the evidence suggests that the mate-
rial used to infill SFBs was probably from discrete and
single phase rubbish heaps. The material might have
been generated while that building was in use but, with
the exception of primary disposals on the base, it does
not seem to have a direct relationship with the function
of the original building and it does not necessarily derive
from activities within the immediate vicinity of the
SFB. Clearly, the processes involved in the deposition
of material within SFBs were varied and the contents of
individual features may have been the result of a variety
of processes.
 [4663]

[4667]

[4665]

Structure 1

8.38m
SSE NNW
[4666]

[4667]

ENE 8.38m
WSW
[4664]
[4666]
[4665]
[4667]
[4662]
[4663]

0 2
metres

Figure 3.5 Plan, sections and photograph (from south) of Structure 1

48
 Description
The SFBs were excavated by hand using a variety of
techniques and, in general, in four quadrants; opposing
quadrants provided two complete sections across each
pit. A number were excavated in 0.10m spits and in 1.00m
squares in order to enhance the spatial resolution of finds
and for comparison with the surface deposits, which were
also excavated in 1.00m squares. Additionally, the fills
of a number were wet or dry sieved to compare against
hand recovery. Bulk samples of each fill were taken for
environmental analysis (see Ballantyne, Chapter 5) and
several were sampled for soil micromorphological anal-
ysis (see Milek, below). Particular attention was given
to cleaning the stripped surface around the SFBs, espe-
cially in the northern part of the site where several SFBs
were preserved below surface deposits, in order to make
sure any features that might relate to the superstructure
were not overlooked. Four (2, 13, 15 and 18) were only
half-excavated; the western side of Structures 2 and 15
and the central part of Structure 18 had been cut away
by post-medieval ditches. Three (Structures 6, 7 and 8)
were observed in section only during 1998, in the side of
a machine-excavated trench between Areas C and H.
All dimensions given are maximums, unless otherwise
indicated, and depths are from the machined surface.
Structure 1
(Fig. 3.5)
Structure 1 (F522) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit with rounded corners measuring 3.30m by 2.90m
and 0.20m deep. The feature was heavily truncated by machine-
stripping, and produced no finds.
The pit cut [4667] possessed sloping sides down to an irregular
and concave base which measured c.2.60 x 2.60m in area. Two post-
holes were defined in association with this pit, which is interpreted as
the remains of a two-post-hole structure; these were ridge post-holes
[4663] and [4665], c.4.00m apart, which were located centrally along
the short sides, but c.0.40m beyond the upper edge, of the pit. It seems
probable that these post-holes were originally located on the edge of
the pit and now lay outside as a result of truncation. The eastern post-
hole [4663] was c.0.40m in diameter and 0.30m deep and the western
post-hole [4665] measured c.0.30m by 0.20m and 0.16m deep; both had
suffered considerable animal disturbance. A possible slot (no context
number issued) was defined against the northern side of the pit (c.1.10m
by 0.23m and 0.16m deep); it was filled with brown sand that may have
been the remains of a horizontal beam decayed in situ. The slot was
sealed below pit fill [4666], a single homogeneous deposit of grey silty
sand, which had also suffered some animal disturbance.
Structure 2
(Fig. 3.6)
Structure 2 (F305) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit (c.3.20m in length (min) by 3.60m in width and
0.65m in depth. Its western half had been truncated by later ditch [5164]
and field drain [5162].
The pit cut [4700] (= [3210]) possessed steep sloping sides down
to a slightly concave base c.2.80m wide. A single post-hole (c.0.50
by 0.30m in area) was located centrally along the short eastern side,
straddling the upper slope of the pit (no context number issued). It
seems probable that there would also have been a post-hole along the
western side of the pit, which is therefore interpreted as the remains of
a two-post-hole structure. The pit contained a single fill of dark black-
ish-brown sandy silt [4699] (= [3211]) including frequent flecks of
burnt clay and charcoal, which had suffered extensive animal and root
disturbance. It produced 7th-century knife No. 207, along with small
amounts of animal bone and Anglo-Saxon pottery, and larger quantities
of fired and unfired clay (Table 3.2).
Structure 3
(Fig. 3.7)
Structure 3 (F9) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit with rounded corners measuring 3.90m in length
by 3.80m in width and 0.52m in depth (max); its north-west corner cut
through an earlier ditch F60, and its southern edge had been slightly
truncated by Evaluation Trench 14.
The pit cut ([250]) possessed very gradually sloping sides down to
a concave base c.3.15 x 2.40m in area. It is interpreted as the remains
of a two-post-hole structure, as two large post-holes ([254] and [259])
were located centrally along the east and west sides of the pit, c.4.00m
apart. The eastern ridge post-hole ([254]) (c.0.40m in diameter and
0.30m deep) lay on the outer edge of the pit; it was sealed by the upper
fill of the pit ([251]) and may originally have been dug inside the pit,
lying outside as a result of truncation. The western ridge post-hole
([259]) (c.0.40m in diameter and 0.30m deep) straddled the side of the
pit and was sealed by the lower fill ([252]). A further post-hole ([256])
(c.0.70m long (max) and c.0.40m deep) with a conical-shaped profile
lay along the southern edge of the pit.
The lower fill consisted of grey silty sand [252], which was 0.13–
0.20m in depth across the base of the pit, and produced a moderate
assemblage of animal bone and fired clay, along with a limestone sharp-
ener (No. 313). This was sealed below the upper fill ([251]) of dark
brown to black silty sand c.0.30m in depth. In addition to slightly larger
assemblages of animal bone and fired clay, this upper fill also produced
Anglo-Saxon pottery (as well as a single sherd of Roman), some lava
quern fragments, and a sizeable metalwork assemblage which included
a handle (No. 152), three hooks (Nos 256–7, 245), a bar (No. 416) and
a nail-making plate (No. 282); the last of these, at least, is strongly
associated with metalworking (Table 3.3). Both fills had suffered from
some animal disturbance.
Structure 4
(Fig. 3.8)
Structure 4 (F19) consisted of an irregular ENE–WSW-aligned sub-
rectangular sunken feature or pit with rounded corners measuring
4.40m by 3.60m and 0.40m deep.

Structure 2 Animal Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
bone pottery pottery clay
Main fill 99 (339g) 7 (98g) - - 214 (1353g) 19 (639g) - - 3 (22g) Metal includes knife
No. 207

TableTable 3.2 Finds

3.2 Finds associated
associated with Structure
with Structure 2 2

Structure 3 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired clay Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery
Upper 119 (685g) 26 (435g) 1 (6g) - 22 (336g) - 10 (66g) - 26 Metal includes handle No.
(1299g) 152, 2 hooks (Nos 245, 256),
bar No. 416 and nail-making
plate No. 282
Lower 67 (418g) - - - 14 (100g) - - - - Limestone sharpener No. 313

TableTable 3.3 Finds

3.3 Finds associated
associated with Structure
with Structure 3 3

49
Figure 3.6 Plan, section and photograph (from east) of Structure 2

50
Figure 3.7 Plan, section and photograph (from south) of Structure 3

51
Structure 4 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired clay Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery
Upper 1795 (5768g) 69 (860g) 8 (59g) 3 (277g) 582 (2648g) - - 109 (2934g) 37 Polished stone and quernstone
(251g) (230g); pottery spindlewhorl
No. 356; fired clay includes
partial loomweight; metal
includes pin No. 46,
wrist-clasp No. 101, ?copper
alloy bowl fragments No. 162,
knife blade No. 200, needle
fragment No. 342 and 5 nails
Lower - - - 1 (181g) - - - - -

TableTable
3.4 Finds associated
3.4 Finds with with
associated Structure 4 4
Structure

The pit cut ([293]) possessed sloping sides down to an irregular but
roughly level base c.3.60 x 3.00m in area. The pit is interpreted as the
remains of a two-post-hole structure, as two large post-holes [396] and
[397] were located centrally along, and straddling, the east and west
sides of the pit, c.4.00m apart. The eastern ([396]) (c.0.30m in diam-
eter and 0.35m deep) and western ridge post-holes ([397]) (c.0.40m
in diameter and 0.42m deep) were both apparently sealed below the
lower fill of the pit ([311]). This lower fill consisted of grey-brown silty
sand [311], which was 0.10–0.15m in depth across the base, and sloped
up the sides of the pit. This was sealed below the upper fill ([294])
of very dark grey to black silty sand c.0.30m in depth. All the finds,
save for a single piece of CBM, were contained within the upper fill:
these consisted of large assemblages of animal bone, Anglo-Saxon
pottery, fired clay (possibly oven material from nearby F259, as well
as partial loomweight fragments), slag (and related material including
two mould fragments for annular brooches) and metalwork, including
a pin (No. 46, possibly of the mid-7th century onwards), a 6th-century
wrist-clasp (No. 101), a possibly 7th-century knife blade (No. 200), a
needle fragment (No. 342) and possible copper alloy bowl fragments
(No. 162), as well as a polished stone and quernstone (No. 433) and a
pottery spindlewhorl (No. 356) (Table 3.4).
Structure 5
(Fig. 3.9)
Structure 5 (F523) consisted of an irregular ENE–WSW-aligned sub-
rectangular sunken feature or pit measuring 4.00m in length by 3.50m
in width and 0.65m in depth; its southern half cut through an earlier
ditch ([5168]) forming the southern boundary to the Roman trackway.
The relationship of the pit to Surface Deposit [4743], which also sealed
the Roman ditch, was not clearly established.
The pit cut ([4728]) possessed steep sloping, and in parts stepped,
sides down to a slightly concave base c.3.45 x 3.20m in area. It is
interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole structure, as two ridge
post-holes c.3.70m apart were located centrally along the short sides,
and straddling the slope, of the pit. The western ([4729]) and eastern
([4732]) post-holes were of a similar size (both c.0.60m in diameter
and 0.65m deep), although the latter was slanting inwards at an angle
of 70 degrees. This might have occurred as a result of later movement,
possibly during the removal of the post. The remains of a post-pipe
in the base of [4729] was evidenced by a dark grey-brown silty sand
([4727]) containing frequent flecks of charcoal, indicating that the base
of the post had decayed in situ. However, both post-holes were sealed
below the lower fill of the pit ([4723]).
The fill of the pit was characterised by a complex sequence with
three main deposits ([4723], [4722] and [4677]). The lowest fill, on the
base of the pit, consisted of a discrete layer of redeposited natural sand
[4742] c.0.12m in depth located at the base of the western side; it might
have been the result of side collapse. This was sealed by a layer of dark
grey to black silty sand ([4723]) (= [4697]), which was c.0.10–0.15m
in depth and which extended across the base, and up the eastern side,
of the pit. The middle fill of the pit appeared to be redeposited natural,
a light orange-brown to grey-brown silty sand ([4722]) (= [4692]) with
yellow sand lenses [4741], which was c.0.35m in depth (max) and
sloped down into the centre of the pit. This was sealed by [4678], a layer
of brown sand c.0.10m deep. The upper fill of the pit consisted of dark
grey to black sand [4677] (= [4679]). It was located within the central
hollow formed by the accumulation, and subsequent stabilisation, of
the lower fill around the sides of the pit, and was c.3.00m x 3.00m
in area and c.0.40m in depth (max). All three fills produced quantities
of finds, although in varying amounts (Table 3.5). Only the lower fill
contained unfired clay (with loomweights represented), although fired
clay was present in all three fills (partial loomweights being recognised
in the upper fill). The upper fill produced large quantities of slag and
metalwork; substantially less was recovered from the middle fill, and
none came from the lower. Similarly, this upper fill also produced the
largest quantities of animal bone and Anglo-Saxon pottery, although
the other fills also had these present. The three fills therefore appear to
represent different acts of deposition, to judge by the quantities of the
different types of finds represented.
Structures 6, 7 and 8
(Pl. V)
Three possible sunken features, Structures 6, 7 and 8, were defined in
section only during the construction of a storm drain beneath the road
separating Areas C and H; finds assemblages from each were therefore
minimal, and not representative.
Structure 6 (F410) was defined as a sunken feature or pit
([3238]) measuring c.3.70m in width (N to S) and c.0.50m
in depth. The single fill consisted of homogeneous dark grey-
brown sand [3239].
Structure 7 (F411) was defined as a sunken feature or pit

Structure 5 Animal Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
bone pottery pottery clay
Upper 70 (238g) 69 (652g) 5 (88g) - 114 (701g) - - 141 (2773g) 23 (178g) Fired clay includes partial
loomweight; metal includes
buckle-plate No. 113, loop No.
258 and 2 nails
Middle 23 (42g) 24 (271g) - 1 (105g) 18 (164g) - - 4 (394g) 1 (4g)
Lower 7 (6g) 34 (485g) - 1 (80g) 23 (116g) 41 (1134g) - - - Pottery spindlewhorl No. 357;
unfired clay contains
loomweights
W gable - 1 (6g) - - 1 (10g) - - - -
post-hole
E gable - 1 (14g) - - - - - - -
post-hole

TableTable
3.5 Finds associated
3.5 Finds with Structure
associated 5
with Structure 5

52
15
Figure 3.8 Plan, section and photograph (from south) of Structure 4

53
 [4732]

[4729]
[4728]

Structure 5

SW NE 8.92m

[4677]/[4679]
[4722]

[4678]
[4742] [4722]/[4692]
[4741]
[4723]/[4697]

[4727] [4728]
[4729] [4733]

[4732]

0 2
metres

Figure 3.9 Plan, section and photograph of Structure 5

54
 Plate V SFB Structure 6, recognised and recorded during construction of a storm drain

([3240]) measuring c.2.30m in width (N to S) and c.0.40m in
depth. The single fill consisted of homogeneous dark brown
sand [3241].
Structure 8 (F412) was defined as a sunken feature or pit
([5171]) measuring c.0.40m in depth. The southern edge of
Structure 8 intersected with a smaller pit (F413), although the
relationship between the two was not established.
Structure 9
(Fig. 3.10)
Structure 9 (F514) consisted of a NE–SW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 4.00m by 3.40m and 0.45m deep. Its
southern edge cut through an earlier ditch which formed the southern
boundary to the Roman trackway (F533); the same edge had been also
cut away by at least two later pits (F517 and F629 in Pit Group D).
The pit cut ([4627]) possessed steep sloping, and in parts stepped,
sides down to a roughly level base c.3.80 x 2.60m in area. It is inter-
preted as the remains of a two-post-hole derivative structure, as three
post-holes were associated with it. Two ridge post-holes were located
centrally along, and straddling, the short sides of the pit, c.3.80m apart:
the eastern ([4769]) was c.0.40m in diameter and 0.23m deep, and the
western ([4770]) was c.0.30m in diameter and 0.20m deep. There was a
further post-hole ([4768]) c.0.30m in diameter and 0.20m deep located
along, and at the base of, the northern side of the pit.
The fill of the pit was characterised by a complex sequence with
three main deposits ([4619], [4616] and [4603]) with irregular and
indistinct boundaries between them. The lowest fill of the pit comprised
compacted mid-brown sand [4619], which was c.0.04m in depth. This
was sealed by a layer of dark grey to black silty sand ([4673]) (= [4618])
containing frequent charcoal inclusions, c.0.10m in depth (max) on the
eastern side and tailing off across the rest of the pit, and also a thin
layer of dark grey to black silty sand ([4690]), 0.08m deep, below mid
to dark grey sand [4689], which was c.0.19m in depth. The middle
fill of the pit comprised mid-brown to grey sand [4616], which was
c.0.25m in depth (max). After the deposition of [4616], the southern
side of the pit had been cut away by two smaller pits (F517 and recut

Structure 9 Animal Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
bone pottery pottery clay
Upper 831 (4139g) 59 (793g) 6 (7g) - 435 (3255g) 4 (16g) 78 (168g) 31 (533g) 7 (48g) Opaque yellow glass bead No.
(Surface 32; metal includes pin No. 56
Deposit) and ?arrowhead No. 406
Middle 245 (366g) 17 (234g) 1 (3g) - 70 (505g) 36 (362g) - 7 (121g) - Fired clay spindlewhorl No.
358; fired clay includes partial
loomweight
Lower 175 (930g) 20 (324g) 2 (25g) 1 (194g) 45 (238g) 18 (292g) - 3 (81g) - Unfired clay contains
loomweights

TableTable 3.6 Finds

3.6 Finds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 9 9

Structure 10 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 1465 (4984g) 62 (932g) 7 (21g) 2 (402g) 573 - 20 (31g) 3 (25g) 3 (26g) Metal includes possible vessel
(4066g) fragment No. 157 and knife
No. 174
Lower 264 (874g) 15 (168g) 14 (55g) 1 (195g) 53 (231g) 133 - 6 (123g) - Pottery spindlewhorl No. 359;
(3015g) flint blade (4g); unfired clay
contains loomweights
W post-hole 4 (4g) 1 (2g) 1 (2g) - 1 (3g) - - - 1 (1g)
E post-hole 10 (4g) - - - - 5 (258g) - - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights

Table
Table 3.7 3.7 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Structure
Structure 10 10

55
Figure 3.10 Plan, sections and photograph (from east) of Structure 9

56
Figure 3.11 Plan, sections and photograph (from east) of Structure 10

57
Figure 3.12 Plan, sections and photograph (from west) of Structure 11

58
Structure 11 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay
pottery pottery
Main fill 54 (234g) 7 (52g) 9 (64g) - 26 (141g) 17 (238g) 62 (156g)
W post-hole - - - - - -
E post-hole 18 (34g) - - - 3 (9g)
2nd E 7 (4g) - - - -
post-hole
TableTable 3.8 Finds
3.8 Finds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 11 11
F518). Subsequently, the upper part of the pit was filled with dark grey
to black silty sand [4603], which was c.0.45m deep (max). This deposit
was later divided into two separate layers. The lower of these was a
slightly darker deposit ([4603B]) c.0.30m in depth (max), which might
represent the upper fill of the pit that accumulated before the surface
deposit or, alternatively, it might be part of the surface deposit within
and across the hollow of the earlier infilled sunken feature, similar to
[1764] in Structure 17. The upper part of the deposit ([4603A]), which
was slightly browner and mottled, was c.0.15m in depth and extended
beyond the pit. This is interpreted as the surface deposit sealing the
pit. There was little difference between the finds assemblages associ-
ated with the lower and middle fills: both contained moderate amounts
of animal bone, Anglo-Saxon pottery and fired and unfired clay (with
partial loomweights represented in both), along with small amounts of
slag and Roman pottery (Table 3.6). The upper fill, in contrast, had far
larger amounts of animal bone (with a wider variety of species repre-
sented), Anglo-Saxon pottery and fired clay and slag, with lava quern,
metal (including early to mid-6th-century pin No. 56 and possible
arrowhead No. 406), glass bead No. 32 and spindlewhorl No. 358 also
present.
Structure 10
(Fig. 3.11)
Structure 10 (F512) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-ovate
sunken feature or pit with curved east and west short sides; it measured
5.40m in length by 2.90m in width and 0.36m in depth (max), and
cut through two earlier N–S-aligned ditches ([5152] and [5154]). Its
southern edge had been truncated by Evaluation Trench 17. The south-
west corner of Structure 10 intersected with a pit previously excavated
in this trench and the relationship between the two features could not
be defined.
The pit cut ([4594]) possessed sloping sides down to a roughly
level base c.4.60 x 2.10m in area. It is interpreted as the remains of a
two-post-hole structure, as two post-holes were located centrally along,
and straddling, the short sides of the pit, c.4.60m apart: that to the west
([4608]) was c.0.45m in diameter and 0.38m deep and that to the east
([4612]) was c.0.60m by 0.40m and 0.40m deep; both were sealed
below the lower fill of the pit ([4589]).
This lower fill consisted of grey-brown sand [4589] (= [4591])
with irregular lenses of dark brown sand; it was c.0.28m in depth (max)
around the sides and sloped down to c.0.05m in depth in the centre of
the pit. The upper fill ([4588]) (= [4590]) comprised dark black sand
and was located within the central hollow formed by the accumulation,
and subsequent stabilisation, of the lower fill around the sides of the
pit; it was c.3.30m x 2.50m in area and c.0.28m in depth (max). Again,
differences were observed in the contents of these fills (Table 3.7):
the upper fill contained far larger assemblages of animal bone, Anglo-
Saxon pottery and fired clay (including possible daub), and only the
upper fill produced metalwork (including mid-5th- to 7th-century knife
No. 174 and decorated strip No. 157) and lava quern fragments, while
only the lower fill produced unfired clay (this containing loomweights).
Both fills had suffered some animal disturbance, further indicated by
the presence of rabbit bones in the western post-hole.
Structure 11
(Fig. 3.12)
Structure 11 (F501) consisted of an E–W-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 3.20m in length by 2.75m in width and
0.13m in depth.
The pit cut [4273] possessed sloping sides down to a roughly level
base c.2.90 x 2.40m in area. It is interpreted as the remains of a two-
post-hole derivative structure, as four post-holes were associated. Two
ridge post-holes were located centrally along the short sides and strad-
dling the edge of the pit, c.3.40m apart: to the west [4275] was c.0.60m
19 59
Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
clay
2 (150g) 4 (8g) Fired clay includes possible
loomweight; metal includes
disc-headed pin No. 59
- - 5 (1g)
- - - 5 (2g)
1 (7g) - - 4 (2g)
in diameter and 0.25m deep and to the east [4279] was c.0.40m in diam-
eter and 0.40m deep; both were sealed below the fill of the pit ([4270]).
Two additional post-holes were located immediately to the east of
[4279], outside the area of the pit: [4277] was c.0.35m in diameter and
0.35m deep and [4296] was c.0.50 by 0.40m and c.0.10m deep; these
presumably held secondary posts, either to support an unstable post or
as direct replacements for the post in [4279]. The stratigraphic relation-
ship between the three inter-cutting post-holes was not established.
The fill of the pit was a single deposit of grey-brown sand [4270] (=
[4272]), which had suffered some animal disturbance, with a thin and
irregular crust-like layer of compact dark brown sand towards the base
and across both the ridge post-holes. This contained small amounts of
finds in the usual categories, and also produced the late 6th- to mid-7th-
century disc-headed pin No. 59 (Table 3.8).
Structure 12
(Fig. 3.13; Pl. VI; Colour Pl. II)
Structure 12 (F5) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-square
sunken feature or pit measuring 5.65m in length, 5.00m in width and
0.50m in depth; it truncated two earlier Roman ditches (F7 and F229),
and also intersected with Structure 43, a wall-post building on the same
alignment. No post-holes were defined through the infilled pit ([206])
of Structure 12, possibly because they had been removed by it, although
post-holes cut into backfilled features are difficult to distinguish.
The pit cut ([206]) possessed steep sloping (near-vertical) sides
down to a roughly level base c.5.10 x 4.40m in area. Sixteen post-holes
were defined in association with this pit, which is interpreted as the
remains of a six-post-hole derivative structure. There were two large
ridge post-holes located centrally, c.5.00m apart, against the east and
west sides of the pit: at the east [237] was c.1.10m by 0.75m and 0.40m
deep and, at the west, [244] was c.1.00m by 0.50m and 0.30m deep;
both were apparently sealed below the lower fill of the pit ([216]). Post-
holes were defined in the corners ([236] and [240] (= [228]) on the east
side and [231] and [243] along the west side) and along the sides of the
pit. The corner post-holes varied in size: [243] was c.0.35 by 0.25m
and 0.20m deep, while [240] was c.0.50 by 0.40m and 0.70m deep.
Excluding the corner post-holes, there were five post-holes along the
northern side of the pit ([232], [233], [234], [235], [246]), which were
spaced c.0.60–0.80m apart and up to c.0.30m from the edge of the pit.
All these post-holes were of a similar size, c.0.30m in diameter, but
varied in depth from c.0.10m to 0.40m. Three post-holes were defined
along the southern side ([208], [241], [242]), spaced from c.0.30–1.20m
apart, although there was a gap of c.2.40m between [242] and [243], the
south-west corner post-hole. These were of a similar size to those along
the north side of the pit, and ranged in depth from 0.15m ([208]) up
to 0.70m ([242]). There was only a single post-hole ([247]) along the
western side of the pit to the south of ridge post-hole [244]; this was
0.18m in depth. There was also one possible shallow post-hole ([227])
0.05m in depth on the eastern side of the pit.
A shallow U-shaped slot or trench ([230]) c.0.40–0.60m wide and
0.12m deep (max) was defined around the base of the south-east corner,
and also along part of the north side of the pit. The post-holes had
apparently been set into the base of this slot. Furthermore, a deposit of
brown sand c.0.40–0.60m wide was defined around part of the sides and
a number of post-pipes were defined through this fill. This deposit may
represent the remains of turf walling, laced with timber posts, around
the sides of the pit. A deposit of yellow-orange sand ([214]) c.0.10m in
width (max) was also defined around part of the sides; this is possibly
the result of side slippage and/or disturbance.
The fill of the pit was characterised by three distinct deposits. Thin
layers of yellow, pale brown and grey-brown sand and silty sand ([216])
and compacted dark brown sand were defined across the base of the pit;
in total these were c.0.10–0.15m in depth. There were several lenses of
charcoal and ash and a more substantial discrete deposit of charcoal-rich
Figure 3.13 Plans and sections of Structure 12

60
 Plate VI SFB Structure 12, before from west (top) and after from south (bottom) 100% excavation
material ([213]) c.0.10m in depth. The main fill of the pit ([205]) was a
pale to dark grey and pale brown (silty) sand 0.40m in depth (max) with
irregular lenses of dark brown sand. This was sealed by the upper fill,
a very dark brown to black silty sand mixed with yellow to pale brown
sand ([204]), possibly a result of disturbance; this was c.0.20m in depth
(max) across the central part of the hollow. The bulk of the finds thus
derived from the lower and middle fills (Table 3.9). On this occasion
there were no substantial differences between the fills: both produced
61
moderate to large amounts of the usual material, with each producing a
worked whale vertebra (Nos 236–7), fired and unfired clay loomweight
fragments, and fifty fragments of possible daub with wattle impressions
c.12–22mm in diameter; only small amounts of CBM, slag and metal-
work (including three pins, Nos 50, 62 and 69; two datable forms were
of the early 7th to the mid-8th century) were found in the middle and
not the lower fill, as were two large non-lava quernstone fragments and
a possible meerschaum spindlewhorl (No. 360).
Structure 12 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 65 (261g) 5 (95g) 14 (72g) 2 (149g) 31 (232g) - - 7 (82g) 4 (2g)
Middle 115 (924g) 17 (165g) 44 (284g) 3 (174g) 66 (191g) 80 (1617g) - 6 (26g) 13 (58g) 2 quernstone fragments
(3694g); ?meerschaum
spindlewhorl No. 360;
whalebone vertebra fragment
No. 236; flint side scraper and
utilised flake; fired clay
includes partial loomweight;
unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal includes 4
pins (Nos 50, 62 and 69),
chatelaine link No. 122 and a
nail fragment
Lower 91 (1645g) 13 (120g) 13 (95g) - 64 (689g) 76 (952g) - - - Flint utlised flake; worked
vertebra fragment No. 237;
fired clay includes 1 whole
and 1 partial loomweight;
unfired clay contains
loomweights
Slot [230] - - - - - - - 1 (11g) -
E gable post-hole - 1 (23g) - - - - - - -
Post-hole [208] 7 (29g) - - - - - - - -
Post-hole [227] 3 (2g) - 1 (3g) - 4 (4g) - - 1 (16g) -
Post-hole [228] 4 (2g) - - - 7 (10g) - - - -
Post-hole [231] 6 (4g) 1 (18g) - - - - - - -
Post-hole [234] 1 (1g) - 1 (2g) - 1 (69g) 2 (146g) - - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights
Post-hole [236] 3 (1g) - - - 26 (63g) - - - -
Post-hole [240] - - 1 (3g) - - - - - -
Post-hole [241] 5 (28g) - - - - - - - -
Post-hole [242] 4 (3g) - 1 (3g) - - - - - -
Post-hole [243] - - - - 1 (37g) - - - -

TableTable 3.9 Finds

3.9 Finds associated
associated withwith Structure
Structure 12 12

Structure 13 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 144 (230g) 3 (17g) 31 (200g) 1 (18g) 8 (16g) - - 4 (33g) 3 (1g) Green glass bead No. 29;
metal includes nail
Lower 108 (317g) 2 (35g) 82 (195g) - 42 (79g) 29 (338g) - 11 (110g) 9 (22g) Unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal includes
possible nail fragments

TableTable
3.10 3.10
FindsFinds
associated withwith
associated Structure 13 13
Structure

Structure 13
(Fig. 3.14)
Structure 13 (F72) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 4.80m in length by 4.00m in width and
0.23m in depth.
The pit cut [476] possessed gradually sloping sides down to a
roughly level base c.4.00 x 3.50m in area. There appeared to be a slight
ledge c.0.30m wide and c.0.10m high along the eastern side of the pit.
A single post-hole ([1084]) was defined in association with this pit,
which is interpreted as the remains of a one-post-hole derivative struc-
ture, although it is possible that there were further post-holes within
the unexcavated part. The post-hole (c.0.30m in diameter and 0.20m
deep) was located on the central axis of the pit but within its central-
west part, c.1.70m from the western (upper) edge of the cut; its fill was
indistinguishable from the lower fill of the pit ([478]).
The fill of the pit was characterised by two distinct deposits that
had suffered some animal disturbance. The lower and main fill of the
pit ([478]) was greatest in extent around the sides of the pit and sloped
down into the centre; it was 0.20m in depth (max). It comprised brown
sand with irregular and discontinuous lenses of dark brown sand and
several possible wind-blown sand lenses. The upper fill consisted of
dark grey-brown silty sand [477], which was located in a small hollow
within the centre of the pit and measured c.2.60 by 2.00m in area and
c.0.23m in depth (max). Despite the differences in appearance, both
fills produced very similar quantities and types of finds (Table 3.10):
the only notable differences were that unfired clay was found only in
the lower fill, and the single piece of CBM was in the upper fill, which
also produced a later 7th- to 8th-century glass bead (No. 29).
Structure 14
(Fig. 3.15)
Structure 14 (F41) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 4.30m in length by 2.90m in width
and 0.30m in depth, whose southern side had been cut through by
Structure 42.
The pit cut [1085] possessed gradually sloping sides down to a
roughly level base c.3.50 x 2.50m in area. It is interpreted as the
remains of a one-post-hole derivative structure, with a single post-hole
([1147]) c.0.30m in diameter and 0.10m deep located on the central
axis in the western half of the pit, c.1.30m inside the (upper) edge of

20 62
Figure 3.14 Plan, section and photograph (from south) of Structure 13
63
Figure 3.15 Plan, section and photographs (from west) of Structure 14, with inset showing hollow [1148], filled
with [392], extending into the SW quadrant of the sunken feature, pre-excavation

64
Structure 14 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 19 2 504 10 428 6 26 814 125 Flint block and utilised flake
(36g) (<2g) (1898g) (404g) (1853g) (39g) (761g) (4284g) (713g) (86g); metal includes
?finger-ring fragment No. 5,
?pin fragment No. 70, knife
blade fragment No. 218, chain
link No. 240, a stud, hinge
fragment No. 271, chisel No.
283, 2 tools (Nos 292–93),
shears loop No. 351, 7 nails, a
tack and 2 hobnails
Lower - - 32 5 171 5 - 809 300 Fired clay includes partial
(268g) (511g) (1115g) (152g) (5891g) (4103g) loomweight; metal includes a
broken copper alloy applique
(No. 150), 3 knife blade
fragments (Nos 183, 194,
219), ?hook No. 248, key
fragment No. 275, ?padlock
case fragment No. 281, chisel
No. 286, punch and 5 other
tools (Nos 287, 294, 334,
340), shears loop No. 352,
sickle fragment No. 423,
spearhead fragment No. 413,
decorated copper piece No.
420, 16 nail fragments, 2
hobnails and 5 tacks

Table
Table 3.113.11 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Structure
Structure 14 14

the cut. A further post-hole ([1970]) immediately outside the north-east
corner of the pit was not thought to relate to this structure. A shallow
U-shaped slot ([1971]) 1.05m by 0.24m and 0.04m deep was defined at
the base of, and along, the western side of the pit, and a large shallow
ovate-shaped pit or hollow ([1148]) c.1.70m by 0.70m and 0.10m deep
lay along the southern side of the pit. All three of these features were
filled with the lower fill of the pit ([392]).
The fill of the pit was characterised by two distinct deposits that
had suffered some animal disturbance. A thin and discontinuous layer
of dark grey-brown sand ([392]) (= [393]) c.0.07m in depth lay across
the base of the pit; this incorporated a large flint block (0.50m long) in
its north-west part. This deposit was sealed by a thin and discontinuous
crust-like layer of compacted dark brown sand that was probably the
result of clay panning. The upper and main fill of the pit comprised
brown sand [384] with irregular lenses of compact dark brown sand, and
was 0.30m in depth. These fills produced very similar finds assemblages
which contrasted with those found in many other sunken features. They
were characterised (both upper and lower) by very large quantities of
slag, including substantial numbers of crucibles, and metalwork, the
latter incorporating large amounts of scrap material (the recognisable
pieces were largely broken or fragmentary, but did include hobnails), as
well as the important assemblage of metalworking tools (Table 3.11).
Both were also characterised by large quantities of Roman pottery
and of fired clay, including possible fire bars and partial loomweights.
Unusually for an SFB, Anglo-Saxon pottery was at a minimum (with
just two small sherds in the upper fill), as was animal bone; lava quern
was, however, present in quite substantial quantities in the upper fill. It
would appear that the source material for these assemblages was very
similar, and possibly related to a semi-industrial process. Datable items
include 7th-century knives Nos 183 and 194.
Structure 15
(Fig. 3.16)
Structure 15 (F106) consisted of an E–W-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 4.60m in length by 4.00m in width and
0.41m in depth (max); its western edge had been cut through by a later
ditch (F122).
The pit cut ([1086]) possessed gradually sloping sides down to
a roughly level base c.2.00m wide. No post-holes were defined in
association with this pit, which is interpreted as the remains of a post-
hole-less structure, although it is possible that they were located in the
unexcavated part.
The fill of the pit was characterised by a single homogeneous
deposit, described as dark brown sand [1010], which had suffered
extensive root and animal disturbance (as indicated by the presence
of rabbit and brown rat bones). It produced a small finds assemblage
which mainly consisted of Roman pottery and CBM (Table 3.12), along
with some slag and fired and unfired clay (the latter containing loom-
weight fragments).
Structure 16
(Fig. 3.17)
Structure 16 (F213) consisted of a NE–SW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or hollow with rounded corners measuring 4.20m in
length by 3.25m in width and 0.30m in depth; it truncated two earlier
ditches (F433 and F434), which formed the northern boundary to the
Roman trackway.
The hollow [1765] possessed sloping sides down to a concave base
c.2.70 by 1.90m in area. No post-holes were defined in association with
this hollow, which is interpreted as the remains of a small post-hole-less
structure.
The fill of the pit was characterised by a single deposit of very
dark brown to black sand [1766] (= [2619], [2620]), which had suffered
extensive animal disturbance. The fill was slightly lighter around the
edges of the hollow ([1772]) although there was no definite boundary
with [1765] and this difference may have been a result of disturbance.
The fill of the pit was indistinguishable from the fill of Surface Deposit
F8, which had survived in the remains of the Roman trackway; aside
from quite large quantities of animal bone and Anglo-Saxon pottery,
there was little of note about the finds assemblage (Table 3.13).
Structure 17
(Fig. 3.18)
Structure 17 (F212) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 6.40m in length by 3.40m in width and
0.65m in depth; it truncated two earlier ditches F433 and F434, which
formed the northern boundary to the Roman trackway.
The pit cut ([1964]) possessed sloping sides down to an irregu-
lar but roughly level base c.5.40 by 2.90m in area. It is interpreted as
the remains of a two-post-hole derivative structure, as four associated
post-holes were identified. Two large ridge post-holes were located
centrally along the short sides of the pit and c.5.60m apart: at the east
end [2383] was c.0.50m in diameter and 0.40m deep, and at the west
[1965] was c.0.50m in diameter and 0.45m deep. The latter was sealed
by a pale grey sand ([1966]) that sloped down the side of the pit and
over the post-hole; this may represent fill from the earlier ditch that
had collapsed down into the pit. It is unclear whether or not the two
post-holes were sealed below the crust-like deposit [1963] on the base
of the pit, but no post-pipes were visible through its fill. Two further
post-holes were defined: [2385] (c.0.35 by 0.25m and 0.30m deep) was
located c.1.20m to the west of [2383], but to the north of the axis of the
two ridge post-holes; [2384] (c.0.40m in diameter and 0.30m deep) was

22 65
Figure 3.16 Plan, section and photograph (from north) of Structure 15

66
Structure 15 Animal Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
bone pottery pottery clay
Main fill 76 (92g) 2 (5g) 52 (296g) 8 (350g) 13 (324g) 17 (820g) - 14 (133g) 4 (5g) Unfired clay contains
loomweights

TableTable
3.123.12 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Structure
Structure 15 15

Structure 16 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay quern
Main fill 1866 133 11 (24g) 4 (155g) 169 (501g) - 22 (165g) 7 (21g) 4 (15g) Metal includes 2 nail
(4054g) (1059g) fragments

TableTable
3.13 3.13
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 16 16

Structure 17 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 1925 (5506g) 322 (1889g) 77 (162g) 7 (257g) 1109 - 4 (7g) 19 (202g) 13 (43g) Opaque white/blue glass bead
(surface (1399g) No. 22; 2 fragments
deposit) ?quernstone (65g); siltstone
spindlewhorl No. 363; pottery
spindlewhorl No. 361; utilised
flint flake (5g); antler comb
fragment No. 134; metal
includes pin No. 71, buckle
loop No. 111, a stud, silver
disc No. 398, fish hook No.
428 and 3 nail fragments.=
Middle 892 (2765g) 127 (959g) 38 (149g) 2 (18g) 667 23 (266g) 5 (12g) 20 (182g) 11 (30g) Amber bead No. 37; pottery
(1299g) spindlewhorl No. 362; fired
clay includes partial
loomweight; unfired clay
contains loomweights
Lower 292 (328g) 63 (571g) 5 (7g) - 283 (507g) 42 (284g) - 13 (156g) 14 (11g) 2 amber beads (Nos 38–9);
unfired clay contains
loomweights
N post-hole 3 (6g) - 1 (4g) - - - - - -

TableTable
3.14 3.14
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 17 17

located at the base of the northern side of the pit. Both were apparently
sealed below [1963].
The fill of the pit was characterised by three main deposits with
irregular and indistinct boundaries, which had suffered considerable
animal disturbance. A thin crust-like layer of compacted dark brown
to grey silty sand ([1963]), which was c.0.03m in depth, was defined
across the base of the pit, and was probably the result of clay panning.
This was sealed by [1921] (= [1906]), a mid-yellow-grey to dark grey
sand c.0.25m in depth, which was in turn overlain by a deposit of pale
grey sand ([1922]) 0.26m in depth around the western side of the pit.
Both were sealed below [1811], a mid-grey sand, which was 0.28m in
depth (max) and extended across the entire pit. The upper fill of the
pit ([1764]) filled the remaining hollow and was described as black
silty sand 0.25m deep. However, this deposit was indistinguishable
from Surface Deposit F8, which had survived within the remains of
the Roman trackway, and it apparently extended beyond the edge of
the pit; [1764] is interpreted as the remains of the surface deposit that
accumulated in and across the hollow, similar to [4603] in Structure 9.
Overall, the fill was characterised by large numbers of finds, especially
the upper and middle deposits, which contained substantial quanti-
ties of animal bone (particularly of cattle), Anglo-Saxon pottery and
fired clay (possibly including part of an oven dome); only unfired
clay (containing partial loomweights) was restricted to the middle and
lower deposits (Table 3.14). Other notable finds included four beads
(an early 7th-century glass bead from the upper deposit (No. 22), and
three amber beads (Nos 37–39) from the middle and lower), one stone
(No. 363) and two pottery spindlewhorls (Nos 361–2) from the upper
and middle deposits, and a mid-7th- to mid-8th-century antler comb
fragment (No. 134), a metal pin (No. 71), a possibly 7th-century buckle
loop (No. 111), a silvered disc (No. 398) and a fish hook (No. 428), all
from the upper deposit.
Structure 18
(Fig. 3.19)
Structure 18 (F178) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 6.70m in length by 5.00m in width and
0.25m in depth; it cut through an earlier ditch F421 (= F239), and its
central part had been cut through by later ditch F202. Both the infilled
ditch and the pit were scored by a series of N–S-aligned ploughmarks
0.10m in width and 0.30–0.40m apart, which were preserved within a
slight hollow containing mid-grey-brown sand [1456], c.5.00m wide by
0.15m in depth (max).
The pit cut [1676] (= [1767]) possessed sloping sides down to a
roughly level base, c.5.60 by 4.70m in area. Six post-holes were defined
in association with this pit, which is interpreted as the remains of a six-
post-hole derivative structure. There were two large ridge post-holes,
located centrally along the short sides of the pit, c.5.90m apart: the
western post-hole ([1679]) was c.0.45m in diameter and 0.60m deep,
and the eastern post-hole was unexcavated. A small post-hole ([1694])
c.0.15m in diameter and c.0.20m deep lay along the central axis of the
ridge post-holes, and post-holes c.0.45m in diameter and 0.70m deep
were defined in both the north-west ([1677]) and south-east ([1699])
corners of the pit. Post-hole [1677] had a stepped profile, with a wide
upper part c.0.45m in diameter and 0.20m deep containing fill [1678],
above a narrower lower part c.0.20m in diameter and 0.20m deep
containing fill [1681]. A further small post-hole ([1719]) c.0.30m in
diameter and 0.25m deep lay centrally along the south side, and strad-
dling the slope, of the pit.
The fill of the pit was characterised by two distinct deposits. A
discontinuous crust-like layer of compacted dark grey sand c.0.10m in
depth ([1696]) (= [1670], [1697]), containing patches of unfired clay in
the north-west part, lay across the base of the pit (it is not clear whether
this deposit overlay the post-holes); this was sealed by a deposit of

23 67
Figure 3.17 Plan, section and photograph (from south) of Structure 16

68
 Figure 3.18 Plan and sections of Structure 17
reddish-brown sand ([1675]) c.0.10m in depth around the north-west
sides of the pit. The upper and main fill of the pit ([1627]) comprised
mid-brown to grey sand 0.25m in depth (max) containing occasional
lumps of unfired clay and charcoal. These fills produced a generally
small finds assemblage (Table 3.15), with the exception of unfired clay
(containing partial loomweights), the majority of which came from the
upper fill; this fill also produced two pins (Nos 49 and 55; the former
probably of mid-7th-century onwards date, the latter of early to mid-
6th-century). Spindlewhorl No. 364 was found on the surface of this
feature.
Structure 19
(Fig. 3.20)
Structure 19 (F200) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 4.80m in length by 3.10m in width and
0.34m in depth (max). A line of eight post-holes c.0.80m to the south
of, and parallel with, the pit edge, and three further post-holes aligned
N to S, could be part of a wall-post building replacing or replaced by
the sunken feature. Alternatively, they could possibly be the remains of
fence-lines. It seems unlikely that they related to Structure 19 itself.
The pit cut [1624] possessed sloping sides that varied from near-
vertical along the north and south sides to more gradual around the other
two sides of the pit, down to an irregular base c.4.40 by 2.90m in area
which had a prominent ridge c.0.05m in height in the west half. There
were three possible associated post-holes, and the feature is interpreted
as the remains of a one-post-hole derivative structure. All three were
located at the western end of the pit, although only [1725] (c.0.60 by
69
0.20m and 0.25m deep) lay inside the pit: this straddled the sloping pit
side. Two further post-holes ([1730] and [1763]) to the west probably
related to the structure, and might represent additional supports. These
measured 0.50–0.55m in diameter by 0.15–0.20m in depth. The fill of
all three post-holes consisted of very dark grey to black sand which was
indistinguishable from the main fill of the pit ([1625]). There were three
other shallow features on the base of the pit ([2235], [2236] and [2237])
that were probably the result of burrowing.
The fill of the pit was characterised by two main deposits, which
had suffered considerable animal disturbance. A thin layer of very dark
grey to black charcoal-rich sand ([1682]) c.0.04m in depth, containing
a large quantity of slag, lay across the base of the pit. This was often
indistinguishable from the upper and main fill of the pit ([1625]) and it
may simply have been part of the same deposit. A deposit of brown sand
([1671]) c.0.18m in depth was defined around the north-east edge of the
pit; this was possibly the result of side collapse, wind-blown accumula-
tion or animal disturbance. The upper and main fill [1625] comprised
dark grey to black charcoal-rich silty sand c.0.20–0.28m in depth. This
deposit was slightly lighter around the sides of the pit [1669] (= [1672]),
possibly as a result of side collapse and animal disturbance. All the fills
contained large quantities of metalworking debris, fired clay (including
partial loomweights and some possible fragments of render) and also
Roman pottery; this was indicative of a single source of material for the
infilling of this pit (Table 3.16). There was also a group of large flint and
several limestone (?) blocks up to c.0.30m in length in the upper part
of [1625], probably the result of a single dump. Unlike the very similar
deposit in Structure 14, these fills did contain small quantities of Anglo-
Figure 3.19 Plan, section and photograph of Structure 18

70
Structure 18 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 34 (110g) 41 (306g) 11 (44g) 1 (34g) 53 (191g) 183 - 12 (98g) 5 (8g) Pottery spindlewhorl No. 364;
(1265g) flint ?core (47g); unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
includes 2 pins (Nos 49, 55)
Lower 10 (14g) 2 (14g) 1 (17g) 1 (1g) 5 (5g) 40 (375g) - 1 (1g) 2 (16g) Unfired clay contains
loomweights
NW post-pipe 2 (20g) - - - - - - - -

TableTable
3.15 3.15
FindsFinds
associated with with
associated Structure 18 18
Structure

Structure 19 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 310 (402g) 8 (18g) 441 29 (804g) 1242 - 6 (11g) 11262 698 Utlised flint flake; fired clay
(2005g) (4888g) (36651g) (2096g) includes 4 partial
loomweights; metal includes
pin fragment No. 72, cosmetic
tool No. 139, ?stylus head No.
267, 4 knife fragments (Nos
180, 195, 201, 224), 3 chain
links (Nos 239, 241), 2 staples
(Nos 267, 270), 3 studs,
strap-hinge No. 269,
adze-hammer No. 318, chisel
No. 326, ?fish-hook No. 427,
42 nails or fragments and 6
hobnails
Lower 67 (112g) 3 (5g) 110 (431g) 7 (252g) 241 - - 2919 174 (590g) Sandstone sharpener No. 298;
(1075g) (10082g) fired clay includes 2 partial
loomweights; metal includes
finger-ring No. 3, 3 pins (Nos
45, 48, 66), punch No. 288,
decorative sheet fragments, 8
nails or fragments and 15
hobnails
W post-hole - - 3 (5g) - 5 (3g) - - 62 (102g) 4 (3g)
2nd post-hole - - 5 (15g) - 7 (21g) - - 61 (401g) 4 (5g) Metal includes a nail fragment
3rd post-hole - - - - 1 (2g) - - 112 (235g) 1 (1g)

TableTable
3.16 3.16
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 19 19

Saxon pottery and animal bone, although no unfired clay was present.
The metalwork assemblage was interesting: recognisable artefacts
included pins (Nos 66, 48 and 45, of early 7th- to mid-8th-, mid-7th- to
late 9th- and possibly 6th-century date respectively), knife fragments
(Nos 180, 195, 201 and 224; one definite and one probably 7th-century,
another mid-5th- to late 6th-century), chain-links (Nos 239–40) and
hobnails, as well as a stylus head (No. 137), an ear-scoop (No. 139),
a finger-ring (No. 3), an adze-hammer (No. 318), a punch (No. 288), a
chisel (No. 326) and a sandstone sharpener (No. 298); like the deposit
in Structure 14, this may represent the raw material for metalworking,
alongside some associated tools and crucible fragments.
Structure 20
(Fig. 3.21)
Structure 20 (F134) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 5.75m in length by 4.70m in width and
0.40m in depth; its southern half had been cut through by later ditch
F156, and its northern half slightly truncated by Evaluation Trench 5.
The pit cut [1324] possessed vertical sides along the north and
south long sides but with a more gradual slope on the east and west
short sides; these descended to a roughly level base c.5.10 by 4.10m in
area. Nine post-holes were defined in association with this pit, which is
interpreted as the remains of a six-post-hole derivative structure. There
were three large ridge post-holes, located centrally along the short
sides of the pit: two at the eastern end ([1541] and [1542]) and one at
the western end ([1511]). The distance between post-holes [1542] and
[1511] was c.4.90m. The two eastern post-holes lay on the central axis
of the pit: an outer ([1542]) was c.0.50m in diameter and c.0.60m deep
and was placed against the side of the pit, and an inner ([1541]) was
c.0.35m in diameter and c.0.50m deep; this inner post was probably a
secondary addition, either as a prop to support an unstable post or as a
direct replacement, but this could not be demonstrated stratigraphically.
Both post-holes contained a lower fill of uniform dark grey sand sealed
below [1480], a mixed grey-brown sand c.0.50m in depth. A possible
post-pipe c.0.35m in width was defined through this fill, above post-
hole [1541], which would suggest that the inner post had decayed in
situ; the lower fill of the sunken feature [1411] had accumulated against
this post-pipe. The western ridge post-hole ([1511]), which was c.0.60m
in diameter (max) and c.0.40m deep, contained two fills: a lower fill
of dark grey to black sand ([1513]), possibly the remains of the base
of a post-pipe, and an upper fill of clean yellow-brown sand ([1512]),
perhaps slumped or wind-blown natural. The post-hole appeared to be
sealed by the lower fill of the pit ([1397]). A further small post-hole
([2415]) c.0.40 by 0.30m and c.0.10m deep lay in the base, immediately
to the north-east of [1511], and this might also have held an additional
supporting post.
Post-holes were defined in all four corners of the pit: [1535] and
[2241] were in the north-east and south-east corners, while [2400]
and [1584] were in the north-west and south-west corners. Those in
the southern half protruded beyond the edge of the pit, while the two
in the north were set inside the corners of the pit cut, with a gap of
c.0.20m between them and the northern side of the pit for a narrow slot
([1626]). Post-hole [1535] (c.0.80 by 0.40m and 0.30m deep) contained
a large quantity of unfired (loomweight) clay that may have entered
the post-hole when the post was withdrawn but could have been used
as post-packing; it was sealed below [1522]. Post-hole [2241] (0.80
by 0.55m (max) and 0.10m deep) contained a post-pipe through the
lower fill of the pit ([1397]), indicating that the post had decayed in situ.

26 71
Figure 3.20 Plan, sections and photograph (from south) of Structure 19

72
 [1535]
[1324]
[2414]

[2400]

[2413] [1541]

[1542]

[2415]

[1511]

[1521]
[2241]

Structure 20
[1584]

WSW ENE 9.66m

[1325]
[1397]
[1411]
[1512] [1480]
[1324] [1489]
[1511]
[1540]
[1513] [1481]
[1541] [1542]

N S 9.74m SE NW
9.60m
[1325]

[1522] [1411] [1325] [1397]

[2414]
[1539] [1324]

S 9.73m SE NW 9.71m
N

[1324] [1324]
[2241] [2241]
[1626]
[1535]
[1542]

NW SE 9.51m NW SE SW NE 9.33m 0 2
9.66m
metres
[2413] [2415]
[2400]

Figure 3.21 Plan and sections of Structure 20

73
Structure 20 Animal Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
bone pottery pottery clay
Upper 1032 30 (228g) 52 (203g) 7 (564g) 569 22 (189g) 5 (79g) 55 (378g) 15 (66g) ?Quernstone fragment (28g);
(3975g) (3196g) pottery spindlewhorl No. 365;
unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal includes
link No. 126, hook No. 128,
miniature horse No. 415 and 1
nail
Lower 781 210 (1161g) 72 (256g) 11 (449g) 409 866 - 41 (317g) 20 (66g) 1 siltstone, 1 meerschaum and
(3173g) (2610g) (21437g) 2 pottery spindlewhorls (Nos
366–9); bone pin-beater No.
393; fired clay contains 2
partial loomweights; unfired
clay contains loomweights;
metal includes possible bucket
pendant No. 43, safety-pin
brooch No. 19, needle No.
343, pin/needle No. 347,
fish-hook No. 425, a stud and
2 nails
Slot 55 (204g) - 4 (31g) - 7 (25g) 4 (42g) - - -
E gable 133 (363g) 6 (23g) 1 (1g) - 71 (337g) 6 (141g) - 4 (39g) 1 (11g) Metal comprises shield mount
post-hole No. 409
W gable 9 (29g) 2 (19g) 3 (20g) - 2 (4g) 12 (38g) - - - Unfired clay contains
post-hole loomweights
NE corner 12 (56g) - - - - 92 (3063g) - - - Unfired clay contains
post-hole loomweights
SE corner 44 (376g) 2 (21g) - - 5 (4g) 2 (155g) - - - Unfired clay contains
post-hole loomweights
NW corner 4 (35g) 1 (8g) - - - - - - -
post-hole

TableTable
3.17 3.17
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 20 20

Post-hole [1584] (0.40m in diameter and 0.15m deep), in the south-
west corner, was defined after the removal of the lower fill ([1397]);
the north-west corner post-hole ([2400]), which was 0.55m in diameter
(max) and 0.10m deep, also had a post-pipe through the lower fill of
the pit ([1397]), indicating that it too had decayed in situ. A post-hole
([1521]) 0.60 by 0.30m and 0.10m deep also lay along the southern
side, and in the base, of the pit. A further two post-holes ([2413] and
[2414]) lay on the north-west corner of, but outside, the pit and these
may also have related to the structure. A narrow slot ([1626]) 5.30m by
0.20m (max) and 0.10m deep was defined along the length of the north-
ern side, at the base of the pit; it was filled with dark grey-brown sand
[1522] that might possibly have been the remains of a horizontal beam
wedged behind the two corner post-holes which had decayed in situ.
The fill of the pit was characterised by two main and distinct
deposits, which had suffered considerable animal disturbance. A thin
and discontinuous layer of compact dark brown sand ([1489]) 0.02m
in depth was defined in the south-west part and on the base of the pit.
Immediately above the base of the cut, in the north-west part of the pit,
there was a large deposit of Anglo-Saxon pottery from a single vessel
(V152), which was sealed by a spread of unfired clay loomweight
material. The clay deposit was sealed by the lower fill of yellow-brown
sand ([1397]) (= [1411]): this extended across the entire base and was
a maximum of 0.33m in depth (max); where it sloped down into the
centre of the pit it was 0.05m in depth (min). It seems to have accumu-
lated around the edges but this is possibly a result of greater compaction
and stabilisation in the centre of the pit. The upper fill ([1325]) was
located within the hollow in the centre of the pit and was 0.28m in depth
(max). It comprised dark grey-brown to black sand containing flecks of
charcoal and burnt clay. Both upper and lower fills produced substantial
finds assemblages (Table 3.17), particularly of animal bone (especially
cattle), Anglo-Saxon and Roman pottery and fired clay. The metalwork,
while not a substantial assemblage, included a possible bucket pendant
(No. 43), a 7th-century safety-pin brooch (No. 19) and a miniature
horse figurine (No. 415); the fills also produced five spindlewhorls
(Nos 365–9) and a bone pin-beater (No. 393).
Structure 21
(Fig. 3.22)
Structure 21 (F130) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-square
sunken feature or pit measuring 4.60m in length and 0.40m in depth;
it cut through earlier ditch F278, and had apparently been cut by a
small Pit F141 (this was only defined in section after it had been half-
removed) and a small post-hole [1323] that appeared to relate to the
later pit.
The pit cut [1129] possessed steep sides down to a roughly level
base c.4.30m in length, with a slight ledge or step around the south-east
corner of the pit; this was c.0.20m in width and was c.0.07m above the
lowest part of the base. It is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-
hole structure, as two large post-holes were located centrally along, and
straddling, the east and west sides of the pit, c.4.70m apart. The eastern
ridge post-hole ([1286]), which was c.0.40m in diameter and 0.50m
deep, was slanted inwards at an angle of 70 degrees. This might have
occurred as a result of later movement, possibly during the removal of
the post. A deposit of disturbed natural ([1309]) around the outer edge
of the post-hole might also indicate movement and/or extraction of the
post. [1286] was sealed by the lowest fill of the sunken feature ([1274]).
The relationship of the western ridge post-hole ([1287]), which was
c.0.40m in diameter and 0.50m deep, with the fill of the pit ([1153])
was unclear.
A shallow U-shaped slot ([2470]) c.0.60m wide (max) and 0.10m
deep was defined around the south-west corner of the base, and also
around the north-east corner ([2471]), where it was c.0.35m wide and
0.05m deep. The fill of [2470] was described as black charcoal-rich
silty sand c.0.02m in depth above a mixed black sand, while that in
[2471] was a dark grey-brown sand. Slot [2470] was sealed below
[1153], while [2471] was sealed below the thin crust-like layer ([1274])
that extended across the lower part of the base.
The fill of the pit was characterised by three distinct fills which
had suffered extensive animal disturbance. A thin crust-like layer of
compacted dark brown sand [1274] c.0.03m deep extended across the
base of the pit. This sealed the eastern ridge post-hole and slot ([2471]).
Several concentrations of unfired clay loomweights were noted within
this layer, confined to the northern side of the pit, although it is possible
that they were actually directly on the base of the pit and were sealed
by [1274]. [1274] was sealed by [1261] (= [1153]), a very pale brown
sandy loam c.0.25m in depth. The interface between this and the upper
fill was indistinct (even though the two fills were quite different), possi-
bly as a result of disturbance. The upper fill ([1130]) comprised dark
grey-brown silty sand c.0.30m in depth. There were mixed and irregu-
lar lenses of dark brown sand throughout both lower and upper fills,

28 74
Structure 21 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 735 (2059g) 43 (295g) 110 (483g) 12 (569g) 200 81 (1115g) 22 (270g) 35 (241g) 22 (134g) Opaque yellow glass bead No.
(1437g) 31; 2 flint blades (36g); fired
clay contained 3 partial
loomweights; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
includes 3 pins (Nos 60,
78–9), rivet from bone comb
No. 135, hooked plate No.
272, bridle bit-link No. 402;
1st-century Roman coin No.
396 and 2 nails
Middle 159 (658g) 11 (59g) 23 (138g) - 43 (279g) 132 - 3 (80g) 7 (94g) Grooved stone (63g);
(5260g) sandstone hone No. 296;
unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal includes
?vessel repair No. 167, 2
knives (Nos 179, 220)
Lower 88 (230g) 3 (9g) 5 (11g) 1 (19g) 22 (435g) 411 - 1 (6g) 1 (1g) Quartzite sharpener No. 309;
(14250g) fired clay includes partial
loomweight; unfired clay
contains loomweights
Slot 35 (143g) - - - 2 (150g) 12 - - 2 (1g) Fired clay contains partial
(777g) loomweight; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
includes hooked tag No. 106
E post-hole 9 (69g) - - - 2 (3g) - - - -
W post-hole 11 (67g) 1 (<2g) 1 (2g) - 1 (2g) - - 1 (63g) -

TableTable
3.18 3.18
FindsFinds associated
associated with Structure
with Structure 21 21

probably a result of clay panning, and it seems possible that [1274],
across the base of the pit, was also a natural deposit that formed at the
interface with the pit cut. An extensive finds assemblage was recovered
from all three fills (Table 3.18): the upper fill produced large assem-
blages of animal bone, Anglo-Saxon and Roman pottery and fired and
unfired clay (both containing partial loomweights), as well as some lava
quern fragments, slag and metalwork, while the middle and lower fills
produced less of each material, save for the unfired clay (again contain-
ing loomweight fragments). Notable among the small finds were a
6th- to 7th-century glass bead (No. 31), a sandstone hone (No. 296) and
quartzite sharpener (No. 309), three pins (Nos 60 and 78–9, the former
of mid to late 7th-century date), two knives (Nos 179 and 220; the latter
7th-century in date), a rivet from a bone comb (No. 135), a bridle bit-
link (No. 402) and a hooked tag of the 7th to 11th century (No. 106), as
well as a 1st-century coin (No. 396).
Structure 22
(Fig. 3.23)
Structure 22 (F126) consisted of a large ENE–WSW-aligned sub-
rectangular sunken feature or pit measuring 6.00m in length by 4.10m
in width and 0.45m in depth, which truncated the butt-terminal of an
earlier ditch F278, and whose south-west edge also intersected with
a pit or possible grave F276 (although the relationship between them
was not established). The north side of the feature had suffered some
modern disturbance.
The pit cut ([1101]) possessed steep sloping sides down to a roughly
level base c.5.40 by 3.90m in area, which had suffered from animal
and root disturbance. It is interpreted as the remains of a four-post-hole
derivative structure, as seven post-holes were associated with it. Two
large post-holes were located centrally along, and straddling, the east
and west sides of the pit, c.5.20m apart. The eastern ridge post-hole
([2483]) was c.0.75 by 0.60m (max) and 0.60m deep and contained a
possible post-pipe ([2484]), c.0.25m in diameter, of pale pinkish-grey
sand. This was sealed by a slumped deposit ([1305]) within the hollow
over the top of the post-hole. The western ridge post-hole ([1304]) was
c.0.70 by 0.50m and 0.40m deep and was sealed below the lower fill
of the pit ([1271]), which sloped down into the upper half of the post-
hole.
A further large post-hole ([3276]), which was c.0.80m in diameter
and 0.80m deep, lay along the south side, to the west of centre, strad-
dling the (lower) sloping side of the pit. This was sealed by a possible
slumping deposit ([2481]). Two smaller post-holes, [1306] (c.0.35m in
diameter and c.0.50m deep) and [1307] (c.0.20 by 0.25m and 0.30m
deep), were defined along the north side and in the base of the pit, oppo-
site [3276]. A small post-hole ([3279]) c.0.40m in diameter and 0.30m
deep lay in the south-west corner of the pit, with a possible post-pipe
([3280]) 0.23m in diameter. This was sealed below [1305], a possible
slumped side deposit. A slight hollow or scoop in the north-west corner
of the pit might indicate the position of a post on the opposite side. A
further small post-hole ([1308]) 0.30m in diameter and 0.15m deep lay
in the north-west part of the pit. No post-holes were identified in the
eastern corners of the pit. However, a shallow U-shaped slot ([2488])
c.0.40m wide and 0.05m deep was defined around the base of the north-
east corner (the stratigraphic relationship between this and the eastern
ridge post-hole [2483] could not be determined). The slot was filled
with dark brown to black silty sand which contained abundant charcoal,
bone and some pot, as well as several lumps of unfired clay. It was
sealed below the lower fill of the pit ([2474]).
The fill of the pit was characterised by three main deposits which
had suffered considerable animal disturbance. A crust-like layer
of compacted grey silty sand ([1271]) (= [2474]) c.0.10m in depth
(max) was defined across the base of the pit, sealing the post-holes.
In places, this fill appeared to consist of three separate fine layers: a
lower compacted reddish-brown silty sand below greyish-yellow sand
and compacted dark grey sand. Several concentrations of unfired clay
(probably loomweights) were noted within [1271], although it is possi-
ble that they were actually located directly on the base of the pit and
sealed by this layer. Deposits of yellow sand ([1281]) c.0.10m in depth
and reddish-brown sand ([1305]) c.0.40m in depth were defined around
the eastern side of the pit. These were very similar to the natural sand
and might represent side collapse. They were sealed by pale brownish-
grey sand [2472], which was 0.23m in depth and contained frequent
patches of unfired clay; this extended across the entire pit but, unfor-
tunately, it was not distinguished during the excavation of the western
half (finds were recorded collectively with the upper fill ([1100])). The
remainder of the pit was filled with a homogeneous deposit c.0.40m in
depth ([1100]), described as brownish-grey sand with occasional stones
<0.10m in size. This upper fill had suffered severe animal disturbance
(partially evidenced by the recovery of mole bones). Predominant
among the finds assemblages of the upper and lower fills were fired
and unfired clay (all containing partial loomweights), while only the
middle fill produced any lava quern (Table 3.19). The small metalwork
assemblage included three pins (Nos 57, 67 and 80), one of which was
of mid-6th- to mid-7th-century date, a belt mount (No. 116), three
knives (Nos 178, 186 and 211), two of which are 7th-century, and the
other mid-5th to 7th-century, and a fish-hook (No. 424), among others;

29 75
Figure 3.22 Plan, sections and photographs (from west) of Structure 21

76
Figure 3.23 Plan, section and photograph (from west) of Structure 22

77
Figure 3.24 Plan, section and photograph (from south) of Structure 23

78
 Structure 22 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 1010 (1673g) 59 (213g) 110 9 (124g) 97 (1490g) 231 - 100 (520g) 13 (57g) Glass fragments Nos 168 and
(455g) (5705g) 173; ?quernstone fragment
(130g); chalk spindlewhorl
No. 370; quartz hone No. 307;
utilised flint flake (9g); fired
clay contains 4 partial
loomweights; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
includes pin fragment No. 67,
?vessel repair No. 165, 2
knives (Nos 178, 211),
fish-hook No. 424 and a nail
Middle 73 (426g) 4 (28g) 6 (44g) 3 (503g) 9 (79g) - 18 (200g) 6 (61g) 6 (45g) Pottery spindlewhorl No. 371;
metal includes 2 pins (Nos 57,
80), ?belt-mount No. 116,
mount No. 158, knife No. 186
Lower 158 (496g) 8 (144g) 20 (53g) 1 (19g) 23 (3100g) 272 - 4 (24g) 1 (1g) Fired clay includes partial
(3289g) loomweight; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
comprises copper alloy link
No. 125
Slot 3 (51g) - 2 (25g) - - - - - -
E gable 37 (229g) 4 (26g) 6 (26g) - 5 (1067g) 47 (703g) - - - 2 siltstone spindlewhorls (Nos
post-hole 372–3); unfired clay contains
loomweights
W gable 3 (31g) - - - - - - - -
post-hole
N post-hole - 1 (6g) - - - - - - -
[1307]
S post-hole 32 (34g) - - - - - - - -
[3276]
SW post-hole 2 (2g) - - - - - - - -
[3279]

Table
Table 3.193.19 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Structure
Structure 22 22

Structure 23 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Main fill 9 (45g) 36 (284g) 1 (3g) 2 (303g) 20 (402g) 67 - 1 (28g) 1 (27g) Quartzite hone No. 310; fired
(1581g) clay includes partial
loomweight; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
comprises skewer No. 231

TableTable
3.20 3.20
FindsFinds associated
associated with Structure
with Structure 23 23

the fills also produced four spindlewhorls (Nos 370–3), a possible claw
beaker base fragment (No. 168) and a quartz hone (No. 307).
Structure 23
(Fig. 3.24)
Structure 23 (F579) consisted of an irregular E–W-aligned sub-
rectangular sunken feature or pit measuring 3.60m in length by 3.40m
in width and 0.40m in depth; its south-west corner cut through an
earlier pit (F580).
The pit cut ([4912]) possessed sloping sides down to a roughly
level base c.3.20 by 2.70m in area. No post-holes were defined in
association with this pit, which is interpreted as the remains of a post-
hole-less structure.
The fill of the pit was characterised by a single deposit ([4911])
described as mid brown to grey silty sand with lenses of yellow sand,
containing common to frequent charcoal flecks and occasional patches
of charcoal-rich silty sand. The finds assemblage was generally small,
save for a considerable quantity of fired and especially unfired clay
(which both included partial loomweights), a skewer (No. 231) and a
hone (No. 310) (Table 3.20).
Structure 24
(Fig. 3.25)
Structure 24 (F626) consisted of a N–S-aligned sub-rectangular sunken
feature or pit with rounded corners measuring 4.50m in length by
3.10m in width and 0.60m in depth; its southern half cut through an
earlier ditch (F620).
The pit cut ([5122]) possessed steep sloping sides down to a roughly
level base c.3.20 by 2.30m in area. It is interpreted as the remains of a
two-post-hole structure, as there were two deep ridge post-holes located
along the short sides at the junction between the side and base of the pit,
c.3.50m apart (oddly, the post-holes were diagonally opposed across
the pit): to the south [5119] was c.0.30 by 0.25m and 0.73m deep and,
to the north, [5121] was c.0.25m by 0.20m and 0.65m deep. Both post-
holes were apparently sealed below the lower fill of the pit ([5116]).
The fill of the pit was characterised by two fills, which had suffered
some animal disturbance (rabbit bones were recovered from the upper
fill). A number of complete unfired clay loomweights were located
directly on the base of the pit. These were sealed by the lower fill
([5116]), which lay around the sides of the pit and was c.0.45m in depth
(max); it sloped down into the centre of the pit, where it was c.0.15m
in depth. The upper fill ([5115]) was located within the central hollow
formed by the accumulation, and subsequent stabilisation, of the lower

30 79
 Figure 3.25 Plan and section of Structure 24
fill, and was c.0.43m in depth (max). The upper fill produced a mass of
animal bone (predominantly of cattle), with a substantial assemblage of
Anglo-Saxon pottery and fired clay; with the exception of the unfired
clay mentioned above, finds from the lower fill were far fewer, although
it did produce pottery spindlewhorls (No. 375) and a 7th-century knife
(No. 213) (Table 3.21).
Structure 25
(Fig. 3.26)
Structure 25 (F335) consisted of an NE–SW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit with rounded corners measuring 5.90m in length
by 3.50m in width and 0.57m in depth.
80
The pit cut ([3356]) (= [3357]) possessed sloping sides with a
distinct stepped profile down to a roughly level base c.4.00 by 2.30m
in area. A prominent shelf or ledge measuring c.0.40–0.80m in width
and c.0.10–0.30m in height above the base was defined around the
sides. Two post-holes were defined in association with this pit, which
is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole structure. These were
located centrally along the east and west sides and c.4.00m apart, and
were placed against the ledge and stepped in from the (upper) edge of
the pit by c.1.00m. The eastern ridge post-hole ([3556]) was c.0.70 by
0.60m and 0.72m deep and slanted slightly inwards at an angle of 85
degrees, while the western ([3336]) was c.0.50m in diameter and 0.70m
deep and slanted inwards at an angle of 75 degrees; both were sealed by
the lowest fill of the pit ([3516]).
Structure 24 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 1224 (11324g) 93 (897g) 1 (3g) - 855 (1395g) 12 (97g) - 1 (38g) 7 (29g) Utilised flint flake;
unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal
comprises fish-hook
No. 430 and a nail
Lower 98 (983g) 36 (531g) - - 17 (138g) 57 (2208g) - - 3 (24g) Pottery spindlewhorl
No. 375; unfired clay
contains
loomweights; metal
includes knife No.
213 and perforated
strip No. 418
S gable - 1 (12g) - - - 10 (70g) - - - Pottery spindlewhorl
post-hole No. 374; unfired clay
contains loomweights

Table 3.213.21
Table Finds associated
Finds withwith
associated Structure 24 24
Structure

Structure 25 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 718 (3755g) 57 (797g) 22 (264g) 5 (250g) 124 - 90 (420g) 5 (277g) 12 (32g) AS pot includes 14 continental
(4407g) sherds; 3 sharpeners (1
siltstone, 2 sandstone; Nos
300–1, 317); fired clay
includes partial loomweight;
metal includes 4 pins or
fragments (Nos 54, 68, 82)
and buckle No. 112.
Middle 270 (1225g) 23 (217g) 2 (38g) - 16 (596g) 105 86 (759g) 1 (88g) 2 (34g) Antler comb fragment No.
(2420g) 133; AS pot includes 5
continental sherds; fired clay
includes 3 partial
loomweights; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
comprises knife No. 208 and
?ferrule No. 243.
Lower 44 (162g) - - - 9 (418g) 267 - - 1 (26g) Fired clay includes 2 complete
(6690g) loomweights; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
comprises pin No. 81
E post-hole 6 (21g) 3 (28g) - - - - - - -
W post-hole 1 (5g) 1 (3g) - - - - - - -

TableTable
3.22 3.22
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 25 25

Structure 26 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Main fill 696 (1251g) 28 (369g) 3 (53g) 3 (345g) 77 (511g) 6 (40g) 113 (871g) - 3 (4g) AS pottery includes a
continental sherd; sandstone
sharpener No. 302; antler
comb fragment No. 132; fired
clay includes partial
loomweight; metal comprises
pin No. 65, spangle No. 53
and sceat No. 399
S post-hole 28 (50g) - - - - - - - -
N post-hole - 5 (82g) - - - - - - -
Oven base - - - - 244 (3149g) - - - -

TableTable
3.23 3.23
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 26 26

32 81
Figure 3.26 Plan, section and photograph (from north-east) of Structure 25

82
Figure 3.27 Plan, section and photograph (from north) of Structure 26

83
 The fill of the pit was characterised by a complex fill sequence,
which had suffered some animal disturbance. The lowest fill consisted
of a thin deposit of grey sand ([5218]) c.0.05m deep sloping down the
eastern side of the pit. This was sealed by [3516] (= [3287], [3301],
[3308], [3325], [3335], [3495]), a compacted and ‘crust-like’ dark
brown sand, 0.08m in depth (max), across the central base of the pit,
but not across the ledge. This fill and [5218] both contained lumps of
unfired and lightly fired (probable loomweight) clay, although it is
possible that the clay was directly on the base of the pit and actually
sealed by [5218] and [3516]. Deposits of complete unfired clay loom-
weights and fragments of several others, some of which were fired,
were strewn across the ledge in the north-west ([3500]) and south-east
parts of the pit, but also down the slope and along the base edge of
lower fill [3516]. These were sealed by [3488] (= [3331]), a clean grey-
brown sand containing further loomweight fragments, which sloped
down the sides of the pit and was c.0.10m in depth (max); this in turn
was sealed by [3470] (= [3315], [3289], [3487]), a charcoal-flecked
dark grey-brown sand, which extended across the entire base of the pit
and was 0.52m deep (max). Above this lay [3467] (= [3314], [3466]),
a pale grey-brown sand that sloped down into the centre of the pit and
was 0.20m in depth (max). The upper fill ([3431]) (= [2492], [3282],
[3283], [3284], [3285], [3286], [3288], [3428]) was located in the
hollow formed by the accumulation of the lower fills around the sides
of the pit and by the subsequent compaction and stabilisation in the
centre. This comprised dark grey (-brown) silty sand 0.30m in depth,
which contained charcoal and burnt clay flecks. It is notable that the
unfired clay was found only in the lower and middle fills (Table 3.22),
while Anglo-Saxon and Roman pottery (which included continental
early medieval sherds), lava quern and slag were all found only in the
middle and upper fills (the vast majority of the animal bone was also
recovered from these two fills). The large deposit of fired clay in the
upper fill contained fragments of at least one possible hearth ‘fender’,
a possible fire bar, some vitrified hearth lining and partial loomweights.
Five pins/fragments (Nos 54, 68, 81–2, one possibly of mid-5th- to
mid-6th-century date), a 7th-century knife (No. 208) and a 7th-century
buckle (No. 112), along with three sharpeners (Nos 300–301 and 317)
and a mid-7th- to mid-8th-century antler comb fragment (No. 133),
were also recovered from this feature.
Structure 26
(Fig. 3.27)
Structure 26 (F379) consisted of a shallow irregular N–S-aligned sub-
rectangular sunken feature with rounded corners measuring 5.70m
in length by 4.10m in width and 0.13m in depth (max). The feature
consisted of a shallow concave hollow ([3607]) without a distinct
cut, which was filled with very dark grey-brown sandy silt [3290],
which contained frequent patches of black and pale brown sand. It is
interpreted as the remains of a possible shallow structure or working
hollow, similar to Structures 28 and 31. An irregular sub-circular-
shaped deposit of burnt clay ([3636]) c.0.40m in diameter and c.0.03m
thick was defined on the base of the hollow in the southern and deepest
part of the feature. The natural sand immediately below this deposit
was scorched, indicating that the clay had probably been burnt in situ.
It could possibly be the remains of an oven base or hearth within the
hollow, but this identification is not certain.
Seven shallow possible post-holes were defined in association with
Structure 26. There were two possible ridge post-holes: [3643], 0.40m
in diameter and 0.07m deep, with a dark grey charcoal-rich fill, and
[3661], 0.55m by 0.40m and 0.17m deep, with a slightly lighter grey
sand fill; these were located c.4.70m apart along the north and south
short sides of the hollow respectively. There were two post-holes in the
north-east part of the pit: [3608] was c.0.20m in diameter and 0.08m
deep and [3609] was 0.30m in diameter and 0.20m deep. There were also
two possible post-holes along the south-east edge of the hollow, both of
which were very shallow: [3659] was c.0.35m in diameter and 0.08m
deep and [3660] was c.0.50m in diameter and just 0.03m deep. There
was a further post-hole ([3662]) c.0.50m in diameter and 0.21m deep
in the north-west part of the hollow. All the post-holes were apparently
sealed below the fill of the hollow ([3290]). This fill produced moderate
quantities of the usual finds material (again with a predominance of
cattle in the animal bone, and an unusually high proportion of chalk-
tempered fired clay); the Anglo-Saxon pottery included a continental
sherd, there was a mid-7th- to mid-8th-century antler comb fragment
(No. 132) and the metalwork included a mid-7th- to mid-8th-century
pin (No. 65), a possibly mid-5th- to mid-6th-century spangle (No. 53)
and the Series B sceat (No. 399), which was minted c. AD 685–700,
and would not have been in circulation after c. AD 720 (Table 3.23).
84
Structure 27
(Fig. 3.28)
Structure 27 (F337) consisted of a NNW–SSE-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit with rounded corners measuring 4.00m in length
by 3.20m in width and 0.40m in depth.
The pit cut [3297] possessed sloping sides down to a roughly level
base c.2.80 by 2.20m in area. The sides of the pit showed evidence of
disturbance, either by trampling or animal burrowing. It is interpreted
as the remains of a two-post-hole structure, as there were two ridge
post-holes located centrally along the short sides of the pit, c.4.30m
apart. The northern post-hole ([3304]), which was c.0.50 by 0.40m
and c.0.35m deep, straddled the upper edge of the pit and contained
evidence of a post-pipe c.0.25m wide. The southern post-hole ([3366]),
which was c.0.40 by 0.35m and 0.27m deep, was located outside the
upper edge of the pit. The relationship between the post-holes and the
fill of the pit was unclear.
The fill of the pit was characterised by three distinct deposits,
which had suffered some animal disturbance. A thin layer of light to
mid brown silty sand ([3300]) containing occasional clay fragments,
some of which were identifiable as loomweight fragments, was defined
across the base of the pit; this was c.0.05m in depth, and was sealed
by the main fill of the pit, described as grey-brown silty sand [3299],
c.0.20–0.25m in depth. The upper fill ([3298]) was located within the
small hollow in the centre of the pit presumably formed by the stabili-
sation and compaction of [3299]; this measured c.2.85m in length by
c.2.30m in width and c.0.10m in depth, and was described as very dark
brown silty sand. The majority of the unfired clay (with identifiable
loomweight fragments) was recovered from the middle and lower fills,
while the majority of the other finds was recovered from the middle
and upper fills (Table 3.24); with the exception of the unfired clay, only
a moderately sized assemblage was recovered, although the middle
fill did produce a later 7th- to 8th-century glass bead (No. 28), a bone
pin-beater (No. 391), a possible palm cup fragment (No. 171) and a
possibly 7th-century knife (No. 203).
Structure 28
(Fig. 3.29)
Structure 28 (F340) consisted of a shallow irregular ENE–WSW-aligned
sub-rectangular sunken feature with rounded corners measuring 4.50m
in length by 3.10m in width and 0.10m in depth (max); it intersected
with the north-east corner of Structure 47 and it is possible that some
or all of the post-holes in the base ([3307], [3433], [3434], [3576] and
[3578]) may relate to this building.
The feature consisted of a shallow concave hollow ([3303])
without a distinct cut, filled with very dark grey to black sand [3302],
with frequent patches of mid-brown and yellow sand. The feature is
interpreted as the remains of a possible shallow structure or working
hollow similar to Structure 26. There was one post-hole ([3576])
c.0.60m in diameter and 0.17m deep straddling the western edge of the
hollow, whose relationship with the fill of the hollow ([3302]) was not
established. A further four post-holes were identified: post-hole [3434]
(c.0.40 by 0.25m and 0.15m deep) was located c.3.30m to the east of
[3576], roughly on the central axis of the hollow. A large post-hole or
small pit ([3433]) c.0.70m in diameter and c.0.25m deep lay in the
north-west part of the base, as did a large post-hole ([3307]) 0.70m by
0.50m and 0.35m deep. A further post-hole ([3578]) c.0.45m in diam-
eter and 0.10m deep lay against the southern side and in the south-east
part of the hollow. Post-hole [3434] was apparently filled with [3302],
while the other three were sealed below the fill of the hollow and could
conceivably have been cut by it. It is possible that these three post-holes
([3307], [3433] and [3578]) might relate to Structure 47. This would
suggest that Structure 28 is later than the wall-post building but this
relationship is uncertain given the difficulty of distinguishing small
post-holes cut into backfilled features. The main fill produced a small to
moderate finds assemblage, but did include a large polished stone frag-
ment and fired and unfired clay loomweight fragments (Table 3.25).
Structure 29
(Fig. 3.30)
Structure 29 (F339) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit with rounded corners measuring 4.00m in length
by 3.20m in width and 0.31m in depth.
The pit cut ([2494]) (= [3296]) possessed sloping sides down to
a roughly level base c.3.40 by 2.40m in area. There was a slight ledge
or step around the west and north-west sides, which was c.0.60m wide
(max) and c.0.10m in height above the base of the pit. The southern
edge of the pit showed evidence of disturbance, either by trampling or
animal burrowing. Two large ridge post-holes located centrally along
the short sides of the pit, c.3.80m apart, were defined in association with
this pit, which is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole structure.
Figure 3.28 Plan, section and photograph (from east) of Structure 27

85
Structure 27 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 181 (690g) 7 (54g) 9 (43g) - 128 (761g) 7 (93g) 15 (297g) 2 (49g) - Unfired clay contains
loomweights
Middle 416 (1520g) 26 (152g) 24 (121g) 1 (34g) 66 (569g) 432 16 (154g) 3 (61g) 5 (13g) Opaque green glass bead No.
(8501g) 28; bone pin-beater No. 391;
fired clay includes partial
loomweight; unfired clay
contains loomweights; glass
palm cup fragment No. 171;
metal includes knife No. 203
Lower 5 (13g) 1 (16g) 1 (1g) - - 82 (1982g) - - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights
N post-hole 4 (21g) - - - - 1 (104g) - - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights

TableTable
3.24 3.24
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 27 27

Structure 28 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Main fill 281 (1401g) 12 (98g) 8 (60g) 2 (273g) 64 (115g) 9 (365g) 8 (6g) 4 (1g) 5 (13g) Large polished stone fragment
(4000g); fired clay includes
partial loomweight; unfired
clay contains loomweights;
metal includes stud
Central 3 (53g) - - - - - - - -
post-hole
NE post-hole - 1 (7g) - - - - - - -
NW 2 (18g) - - - - - - - -
post-hole

Table
Table 3.253.25 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Structure
Structure 28 28

The eastern ridge post-hole ([2647]), which was 0.30m in diameter and
0.34m deep, was located against the inner side of the pit; the western
ridge post-hole ([2648]), however, straddled the outer edge of the pit
and measured c.0.20m in diameter and 0.36m in depth. This post-hole
was apparently defined from the stripped surface of the pit, indicating
that it had decayed in situ. The relationship between the eastern post-
hole and the fill of the pit was not clearly defined.
The fill of the pit was characterised by two main and distinct depos-
its, which had suffered some animal disturbance. There was a large
quantity of fired clay fragments spread across the north-east part of the
base. These were sealed by the lower fill [2496], which also contained
some fragments of fired clay, and was a mixed grey-brown sand c.0.25m
in depth (max) around the sides and sloping down into the centre of the
pit, where it was c.0.15m in depth. The upper fill of dark brown to
black slightly silty sand [2495] (= [3295]) was located within the small
hollow in the centre of the pit, measuring c.2.30m in length by c.2.10m
in width and c.0.20m in depth (max). There was a large quantity of
animal bone located on the northern side of the pit within the upper fill
(3146g), which is indicative of a discrete disposal episode or dump.
Otherwise, the finds assemblage was moderate in size (Table 3.26), but
did produce two pins (Nos 83 and 64, the latter of mid-7th- to mid-10th-
century date), a possibly 7th-century knife (No. 204), an awl (No. 338)
and a mid to late 6th-century reticella glass bead (No. 23).
Structure 30
(Fig. 3.31)
Structure 30 (F341) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 6.40m in length by 4.40m in width and
0.55m in depth.
The pit cut [3310] possessed sloping sides with a distinct stepped
profile down to a roughly level base c.5.00 by 3.00m in area. A prominent
shelf or ledge was defined around the northern, southern and western
sides; this measured c.0.50m in width by c.0.10m in height above the
base. Along the northern side, two ledges 0.15–0.25m in width and each
c.0.07m in height were defined, giving a distinct stepped profile to the
pit cut. Four post-holes were defined in association with this pit, which
is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole derivative structure.
Three large ridge post-holes were located centrally along the short sides
of the pit: two at the eastern end ([3421] and [3422]) and one at the
western end ([3339]). Post-holes [3421] and [3339] were c.5.80m apart.
At the eastern end, the outer post-hole ([3421]), which was c.0.30m in
diameter and c.0.65m deep, straddled the sloping side of the pit; the
inner post-hole ([3422]) was c.0.55m in diameter and 0.55m deep, and
was located c.0.80m to the west and c.1.00m inside the (upper) edge
of the pit. The inner post was possibly a secondary addition, either as
a prop to support an unstable post or as a direct replacement, although
this could not be demonstrated stratigraphically. Both post-holes were
sealed below the lower fill of the pit ([3338]). The western ridge post-
hole ([3339]), which was c.0.60 by 0.40m and 0.60m deep, was located
against the outer edge of the pit and set through the ledge; it was sealed

Structure 29 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 561 (3146g) 48 (276g) 27 (141g) 4 (180g) 130 (461g) - 35 (162g) 8 (439g) 26 (52g) Metal includes pin No. 83,
knife fragment No. 204, awl
No. 338 and a nail
Lower 234 (980g) 34 (213g) 22 (196g) 1 (18g) 98 (599g) 168 1 (1g) 2 (2g) 2 (2g) Reticella bead No. 23; unfired
(7457g) clay contains loomweights;
metal comprises pin No. 64
and a tack

TableTable
3.26 3.26 Finds associated with Structure 29
CAPTION

35 86
Figure 3.29 Plan, sections and photograph (from north-east) of Structure 28

87
Figure 3.30 Plan, section and photograph (from west) of Structure 29

88
Figure 3.31 Plan, section and photograph (from east) of Structure 30

89
Structure 30 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 489 (2641g) 93 (1110g) 61 (449g) 6 (165g) 78 (787g) 19 (160g) 6 (40g) 3 (159g) 4 (27g) Fired clay includes partial
loomweights; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
includes knife No. 197, punch
No. 339 and a nail
Middle 470 (2964g) 133 (1460g) 87 (458g) 5 (635g) 109 (765g) 80 (1271g) 37 (183g) 5 (93g) 6 (12g) Includes 2 sherds of Ipswich
Ware; stone ?spindlewhorl No.
377; flint awl and blade (9g);
fired clay includes partial
loomweight; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
includes wrist-clasp No. 102
and a nail
Lower 73 (653g) 86 (561g) 50 (241g) 6 (160g) 81 (1087g) 516 - 1 (8g) 5 (77g) Pottery spindlewhorl No. 376;
(8160g) utilised flint flake (6g); fired
clay includes complete
loomweight; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
includes pin fragment No. 84,
knife No. 181, weight No.
401, shield boss apex No. 408
W gable - 1 (107g) 4 (24g) - - 2 (421g) - - -
post-hole
E gable - 1 (5g) - - 4 (3g) - - - -
post-hole
Slot - - 2 (3g) - - - - - -
NW post-hole - - - - 1 (3g) - - - 1 (2g) Metal comprises finger-ring
(No. 2)

TableTable
3.27 3.27
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 30 30

below fill [3333]. The fourth post-hole ([3358]) was c.0.40m in diam-
eter and c.0.40m deep and lay towards the north-west corner of the pit,
at the base of the ledge. Two further post-holes were defined around the
outer edges of the pit. On the northern side, post-hole [3518] appeared
to have been cut by the pit and, on the eastern side, post-hole [3327] cut
through the infilled pit.
A narrow slot ([3443]) 1.00m by 0.20m and 0.22m deep lay against
the central-southern side of the pit, where it was set through the ledge.
The slot was filled with very dark yellow-brown sand that might possi-
bly be the remains of vertical or horizontal timber which had decayed
in situ. The slot was sealed below pit fill [3332]. No other slots were
defined around the sides of the pit, although a discrete deposit of dark
grey sand ([3334]) 1.75m by 0.35m and 0.12m deep and containing
lightly fired (loomweight?) clay lay on the ledge, but without a cut. A
similar patch of dark grey charcoal-rich sand ([3337]) c.1.20 by 0.30m
and 0.05m deep also lay on the ledge in the south-east part of the pit.
The fill of the pit was characterised by a complex sequence, which
had suffered some animal disturbance. The lowest fill ([3338]), a
discontinuous layer across the base of the pit, was a mixed yellow-
brown sand 0.03m in depth. This was sealed by [3333] (= [3323], [3324]
and [3326]), a grey-brown sand c.0.10m in depth. Nine complete lightly
fired clay loomweights, and fragments of others, were strewn across
the base in the north-east part of the pit. These were defined within
layer [3333], but it seems possible that they were directly on the base
and actually sealed by this fill. Further complete and semi-complete
loomweights lay against the north and eastern sides of the pit in the
layer directly above [3333], which comprised orange-grey sand [3389]
(= [3317]), 0.37m deep (max). It seems possible that these were also
part of the initial loomweight deposit, and were strewn across the base
and up the sides of the pit. Fill [3389] was sealed by fill [3312] (=
[3318] and [3332]), a charcoal-flecked (pale) grey-brown sand that
sloped down into the centre of the pit and was 0.34m in depth (max).
The interface between [3312] and the upper fill [3311] was indistinct;
a separate number ([3322]) (= [3321]) was issued but this was subse-
quently shown to be a result of rodent activity within the upper fill.
The upper fill ([3311]) (= [3313]) was located within the central hollow
formed by the accumulation of the lower fills around the sides of the pit
and by the subsequent compaction and stabilisation in the centre. It was
described as dark grey sand containing charcoal and burnt clay flecking,
and was c.0.30m in depth. The upper fill, in particular, had suffered from
extensive burrowing; a large burrow ([3316]) c.0.30m in diameter was
defined across the south and eastern sides of the pit. While the majority
of the unfired clay (some of which had wattle impressions 9–18mm in
diameter) was thus found in the lower and middle fills, all other finds
categories, with the exception of the metalwork, were predominantly
found in the upper and middle fills (Table 3.27). Notable small finds
included a finger-ring (No. 2), a pin fragment (No. 84), two 7th-century
knives (No. 181 and 197), a 6th-century wrist-clasp (No. 102), a punch
(No. 309), a lead weight (No. 401), a shield boss apex (No. 408) and
two pottery spindlewhorls (Nos 376–7); the Anglo-Saxon pottery from
the middle fill included two Ipswich Ware sherds.
Structure 31
(Fig. 3.32)
Structure 31 (F343) consisted of an irregular E–W-aligned sub-
rectangular sunken feature or hollow measuring c.3.00m in length by
2.80m in width and 0.21m in depth (max); its northern half had been cut
through by a later ditch F156.
The feature consisted of an irregular concave hollow ([5242])
filled with dark grey-brown sand [3319]. The feature is interpreted as
the remains of a possible shallow structure or working hollow. Five
possible post-holes were associated with this feature, although only
two were investigated. There were post-holes measuring c.0.25–0.30m
in diameter in the south-east ([3320]) and south-west ([3341]) corners
of the pit. There were also two further possible post-holes along the
eastern side and one along the north-west part of the hollow. All the
post-holes were apparently sealed below the fill of the hollow ([3319]).
There were also two ovate pits ([3361] and [5243]) associated with
this feature; these were located in the north-east part of the hollow. Pit
[5243] (c.1.30m by 0.80m and 0.40m deep), which had been cut by the
later ditch, was filled with burnt sand [3243], although it was unclear
whether or not the burning had occurred in situ. Pit [3361] (c.1.00m by
0.65m in area) lay immediately to the south. A further small pit ([5244])
c.0.50m by 0.40m in area lay on the south-west edge of the hollow; it
was filled with a large fragment of mill-stone (No. 439; 5000g) and a
large block of stone. Otherwise, the finds assemblage was small and
unremarkable, although it did produce a (possibly early Roman) cleaver
(No. 228) and an iron vessel handle (No. 153) (Table 3.28).
Structure 32
(Fig. 3.33)
Structure 32 (F567) consisted of an irregular ENE–WSW-aligned sub-
rectangular sunken feature or pit measuring 3.80m in length by 3.60m

38 90
Figure 3.32 Plan, sections and photograph (from north) of Structure 31

91
Figure 3.33 Plan, section and photograph (from west) of Structure 32

92
Structure 31 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired clay Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery
Main fill 41 (96g) 12 (69g) 76 (690g) 13 21 (145g) - 30 (24g) 2 (243g) 4 (108g) Quernstone fragment (5000g);
(1295g) metal comprises handle No.
153, cleaver No. 228, chain
No. 127 and a nail

TableTable
3.28 3.28
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 31 31

Structure 32 Animal Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired clay Lava quern Slag Metal Other
bone pottery pottery
Main fill 16 (138g) 47 (382g) 8 (55g) - 878 34 (425g) 15 (110g) 2 (55g) 4 (105g) Glass claw beaker fragment
(12078g) No. 169; fired clay includes 2
partial loomweights; unfired
clay contains loomweights;
metal includes knife No. 190,
padlock key No. 278
E post-hole 12 (103g) - - - 4 (54g) - - - -

Table
Table 3.293.29 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Structure
Structure 32 32

in width and 0.30m in depth; its north-west corner was irregular and
had been heavily truncated.
The pit cut ([4866]) possessed gradually sloping sides around the
south and west parts and steeper sloping sides around the east and north
parts, down to a concave base c.2.00 by 1.90m in area. It is interpreted
as the remains of a two-post-hole structure, as there were two ridge
post-holes located centrally along the short sides of the pit. They lay
c.0.80–1.25m beyond the pit’s upper edge, and were placed c.6.15m
apart. It seems probable that they were originally located on the edge of
the pit, lying outside as a result of later truncation; the western post-hole
([4872]) measured 0.32m in diameter by 0.07m in depth and the eastern
post-hole ([4873]) measured 0.40m in diameter by 0.24m deep.
The fill of the pit was characterised by a single homogeneous
deposit of mid-brown to blackish-grey sand [4867] containing frequent
charcoal flecks, with lenses of vitrified sand; it became slightly darker
brown to black towards the base of the deposit. There were large flint
nodules, chalk lumps and large burnt rounded stones up to c.0.25m in
length, throughout the fill, and also burnt clay fragments concentrated
towards the north-east part of the pit. Fired clay thus dominates the finds
assemblage, with other material only in small quantities (though includ-
ing the claw fragment from a claw beaker (No. 169); the metal did,
however, include knife No. 190 and padlock key No. 278 (Table 3.29).
Structure 33
(Fig. 3.34)
Structure 33 (F550) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit with a curved northern edge measuring 4.40m in
length by 3.10m in width and 0.30m in depth.
The pit cut ([4822]) possessed sloping sides down to a slightly
concave base c.3.80 by 2.50m in area. It is interpreted as the remains
of a two-post-hole structure, as there were two ridge post-holes located
along the short sides of the pit, c.3.90m apart. On the eastern side, post-
hole [4871] (c.0.50m by 0.40m and 0.60m deep) was located at the
base of the slope and, on the western side, post-hole [4876] (c.0.40m
in diameter and c.0.50m deep) straddled the sloping side of the pit.
Both post-holes apparently contained evidence of post-pipes c.0.24m
in width located against their outer edges.
The fill of the pit was characterised by a single homogeneous
deposit, which had suffered some animal disturbance towards the
base of the pit. This fill comprised light grey-brown silty sand [4821]
and contained frequent complete, and fragments of, unfired clay
loomweights (with a slight concentration towards the base of the pit),
charcoal, and medium to large flint nodules. Other finds were minimal,
although the small finds included two glass beads (Nos 25 and 34,
the former possibly of mid-5th- to 6th-century date, the latter of the
7th to 8th century), a pottery spindlewhorl (No. 378), a pin fragment
(No. 85), a shield mount (No. 410) and a sandstone sharpener (No. 304)
(Table 3.30).
Structure 34
(Fig. 3.35)
Structure 34 (F564) consisted of an E–W-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 4.00m in length by 2.50m in width and
0.38m in depth.
The pit cut ([4855]) possessed steep sloping sides down to a roughly
level base c.3.80 by 2.20m in area. It is interpreted as the remains of
a two-post-hole structure, as there were two ridge post-holes located
along the short sides of the pit, c.4.00m apart. On the western side, post-
hole [4861] (c.0.40m by 0.30m and 0.48m deep) straddled the sloping
side of the pit, and, on the eastern side, post-hole [4865] (c.0.40m in
diameter and 0.35m deep) straddled the upper edge of the pit. The fill of
[4861], a mid to dark brown sand, contained a large quantity, including
large fragments, of charcoal. Both post-holes were apparently sealed
below the lower fill of the pit ([4858]).
The fill of the pit was characterised by three distinct fills, which
had suffered some animal disturbance. The lower fill comprised light to
mid-brownish-yellow sand [4858], which was located around the sides
of the pit and was c.0.20m in depth (max); this sloped down into the
centre of the pit, where it was c.0.04m in depth. This was sealed by a
deposit of grey to black sand ([4857]) c.0.15m in depth (max), contain-
ing frequent charcoal, ash and burnt clay; this was located in the central
hollow formed by the accumulation, and subsequent stabilisation, of
the lower fill. The upper fill comprised mid-grey to mid-brown sand
[4856] with flecks and lumps of charcoal, and was c.0.27m in depth
(max). Overall, the finds assemblage was minimal, aside from moder-
ate amounts of fired clay from the middle and upper fills, including a
possible hearth edge (Table 3.31).
Structure 35
(Fig. 3.36)
Structure 35 (F333) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 4.40m in length by 3.40m in width and
0.35m in depth; it truncated an earlier ditch (F204), which formed the
southern boundary to the Roman trackway.
The pit cut ([3267]) possessed sloping sides down to an irregu-
lar base c.3.70 by 2.90m in area and encrusted with iron pan. There
was a distinct ledge in the south-east part of the feature c.1.10m in
width by 0.02m in height, and a shallow elongated hollow (c.3.40m by
0.60–1.00m and c.0.15m deep) along the length of the base in the north-
ern half of the pit; this was filled with a thin lens of light to mid-grey
sandy silt ([3291]) 0.02m in depth, which was flecked with charcoal.
The pit is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole structure, as two
post-holes c.4.40m apart were located centrally along the short sides,
straddling the edge of the pit: the eastern one ([3292]) was c.0.35m
in diameter and 0.45m deep and the western ([3294]) was 0.26m in
diameter and 0.51m deep. Both were sealed below the lower fill of
the pit ([3274]), which had slumped down into the top of the infilled
post-holes. A possible slot c.1.00m long and c.0.30m wide lay along the
southern side, and at the base, of the pit (no context number issued).
The fill of the pit was characterised by two main and distinct
deposits, which had suffered some animal disturbance. The lower

93
39
Figure 3.34 Plan, section and photographs (from west) of Structure 33

94
Figure 3.35 Plan, section and photograph (from west) of Structure 34

95
 fill consisted of mottled dark grey sand [3274] (= [3275]) containing
frequent charcoal flecks; this was 0.26m in depth (max) around the
sides and sloped down to c.0.05m in depth in the centre of the pit,
sealing [3291]. The upper fill of the pit [3268] (= [3269]) comprised
very dark grey to black sand 0.33m in depth (max) containing charcoal
and daub flecks. However, the boundary between the lower and upper
fills was very indistinct. There was a large quantity of animal bone
within the upper fill (c.9500g) which was located, in particular, at the
interface with [3274]; it included three complete cattle skulls in the
north-west part of the pit indicative of a discrete disposal or dump. This
upper fill also contained an extensive metalwork assemblage, including
four pins (Nos 86–9), three knives (Nos 187, 225 and 210, the first of
7th-century date, the last of mid-5th- to 7th-century date) and an awl
(No. 337), as well as fragments of two mid-7th- to 8th-century antler
combs (Nos 130–1) and two bone pin-beaters (Nos 392 and 394). The
lower fill produced a large assemblage of fired and unfired clay (both
containing loomweight fragments), and a smaller, but still sizeable,
collection of animal bones, which included an articulated goose wing
(Table 3.32).
Structure 36
(Fig. 3.37)
Structure 36 (F332) consisted of an NE–SW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 4.10m in length by 3.00m in width and
0.22m in depth; it truncated an earlier ditch F434, which formed the
northern boundary to the Roman trackway.
The pit cut ([3246]) possessed steep sloping sides down to a level
base c.3.80 by 2.65m in area, with several patches of iron pan. Six post-
holes were defined in association with this pit, which is interpreted as
the remains of a two-post-hole derivative structure. There were two
large ridge post-holes located centrally along the short sides of the pit,
c.3.80m apart: at the west end [3249] was 0.48m in diameter and 0.61m
deep and, at the east, [3251] was 0.55m in diameter and 0.65m deep.
Both post-holes were sealed below the fill of the pit [3247]. There was
a further small post-hole ([5233]) c.0.20m in diameter located c.0.60m
to the west of [3251], on the central axis of the pit. This might have held
an additional post, perhaps as a prop to support an unstable post. Two
post-holes ([3253] and [3255]) were defined in the south-east corner,
protruding beyond the edge of the pit. The earlier of the two ([3255]),
which was c.0.45m in diameter and 0.30m deep, contained the remains
of a post-pipe filled with grey silty sand. This post-hole was cut away

Structure 33 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Main fill 16 (13g) - 3 (13g) 3 (455g) 33 (540g) 84 - 2 (19g) 8 (28g) 2 glass beads (Nos 25, 34);
(2787g) polished stone (538g); annular
fossil ?used as weight (300g);
pottery spindlewhorl No. 378;
sandstone sharpener No. 304;
unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal includes
shield mount No. 410, pin
fragment No. 85 and 3 nails

Table Table 3.30 Finds

3.30 Finds associated
associated with Structure
with Structure 33 33

Structure 34 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper - 10 (96g) 2 (3g) 1 (48g) 57 (461g) - - 1 (25g) 7 (4g) Metal includes a stud
Middle 16 (62g) 14 (121g) - - 55 (1812g) 4 (54g) - 2 (81g) -
Lower - 2 (25g) - - - - - - -
W gable - 1 (11g) - - - - - - -
post-hole

TableTable
3.31 3.31
FindsFinds associated
associated with Structure
with Structure 34 34

Structure 35 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Upper 1692 (9587g) 72 (743g) 7 (39g) 3 (256g) 114 6 (62g) 61 (240g) 4 (258g) 30 (286g) Quartzite sharpener No. 308;
(1235g) fragments of 2 antler combs
(Nos 130–1); bone pin-beater
No. 392; fired clay includes 3
partial loomweights; metal
includes 3 pins (Nos 87–9),
hook No. 121, bucket handle
No. 151, 3 knives (Nos 187,
210, 225), pot hook No. 230,
awl No. 337, fish-hook No.
431
Lower 646 (3629g) 41 (321g) 5 (17g) 2 (101g) 32 (1789g) 186 1 (7g) 5 (38g) 4 (7g) Bone pin-beater No. 394; fired
(4856g) clay includes 2 partial
loomweights; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
includes pin No. 86
E post-hole 15 (150g) 3 (39g) - - 4 (44g) 4 (162g) - - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights

TableTable
3.32 3.32
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Structure
Structure 35 35

96
Figure 3.36 Plan, sections and photographs (from west) of Structure 35, with inset showing the three cattle skulls in
the north-west part of the pit.

97
Figure 3.37 Plan, section and photograph (from west) of Structure 36

98
Figure 3.38 Plan, section and photograph (from south) of Structure 37

99
 Figure 3.39 Plan and section of Structure 38
on its south-west side by [3253] (c.0.40m in diameter and 0.44m deep),
which also contained the remains of a post-pipe c.0.15m in diameter. A
further post-hole ([3265]) 0.35m by 0.27m and 0.11m deep lay in the
south-east part of the pit.
The fill of the pit was characterised by a single homogeneous
deposit of pale grey brown slightly silty sand [3247] (= [3248]),
which had suffered extensive animal and root disturbance. There was,
however, a mixed light grey and beige sand deposit c.0.04m in depth
across the base of the pit, which is interpreted as disturbance at the
interface with the earlier ditch, and a thin and irregular lens of dark
brown sand towards the base. There were also several complete unfired
clay loomweights strewn across the base in the north-west part of the
pit. Aside from these, the finds assemblage was minimal (Table 3.33).
Structure 37
(Fig. 3.38)
Structure 37 (F382) consisted of a small and irregular ENE–WSW-
aligned sub-ovate sunken feature or pit with rounded corners measuring
3.60m in length by 2.80m in width and 0.26m in depth; it truncated an
earlier ditch F204, which formed the southern boundary to the Roman
trackway, and its southern edge had been cut away by later Pit F383.
100
The pit cut ([3614]) possessed sloping sides down to an irregular
base c.3.20 by 2.50m in area. The feature is interpreted as the remains
of a one-post-hole derivative structure. There was one possible ridge
post-hole ([5241]), which was c.0.50m by 0.40m and c.0.08m deep,
located along the western side of the pit, although it was set in from the
upper edge of the pit by c.0.60m. There were several possible shallow
scoops in the base that might have been the remains of shallow post-
holes. The largest of these was located in the south-east part of the pit
and measured c.0.90 by 0.70m in area and 0.07m in depth (no context
numbers issued).
The fill of the pit was characterised by two main and distinct depos-
its, which had suffered some animal disturbance. The main fill of the
pit comprised very dark grey-brown sand [3615] (= [3627], [3628] and
[3629]) c.0.26m in depth (max) containing occasional charcoal. This
was sealed below a deposit of burnt clay and stone ([3626]) c.1.35 by
0.90m and 0.03m deep. It seems likely that this material originated
from an oven or similar structure, although it was not in situ and had
been dumped into the top of the infilled sunken feature. Otherwise, the
finds assemblage was only distinguished by large amounts of animal
bone and CBM in the main fill (Table 3.34).
Structure 36 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Main fill 28 (37g) 38 (200g) 2 (14g) 3 (639g) 7 (25g) 63 (1622g) - - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights
SE post-hole - 1 (3g) 2 (8g) - - - - - -
W post-hole 4 (6g) - - - - - - - -

Table 3.333.33
Table Finds associated
Finds withwith
associated Structure 36 36
Structure

Structure 37 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired clay Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery
Upper 36 (233g) 5 (71g) - 1 (174g) 544 (9717g) - - - -
Main fill 1070 (4916g) 40 (551g) - 17 (1090g) 43 (184g) 10 (167g) 10 (8g) - - Hammerstone (865g)

Table
Table 3.343.34 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Structure
Structure 37 37

Structure 38 deposit of mid-brown silty sand c.0.30m in depth ([3002]), containing

(Fig. 3.39)
Structure 38 (F286) consisted of an ENE–WSW-aligned sub-rectangular
sunken feature or pit measuring 4.20m in length by 3.40m in width and
0.50m in depth.
The pit cut ([3000]) possessed sloping sides, varying from a
gradual slope on the northern side to near-vertical on the south side,
which descended to a roughly level base c.3.80 by 2.90m in area. Eight
possible post-holes were defined in association with this pit, which is
interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole derivative structure. There
were two large ridge post-holes located centrally along the short sides
of the pit, c.3.80m apart. The western ridge post-hole ([3026]), which
was c.0.40m in diameter and 0.80m deep, contained a post-pipe c.0.20m
in diameter ([3027]) consisting of light brown silty sand flecked with
charcoal. The eastern post-hole ([3033]) was c.0.35m in diameter and
c.0.50m deep, and also contained evidence of a possible post-pipe
([3034]) 0.24m in diameter. Both post-holes were apparently sealed
below the lower fill of the pit ([3003]). There was a possible additional
eastern ridge post-hole ([5236]) c.0.50m in diameter and 0.35m deep
located immediately to the east of [3033], outside the pit, which also
appeared to be sealed below the lower fill of the pit ([3003]). A further
large post-hole ([3032]) c.0.60m by 0.50m and c.0.30m deep lay along
the south side, straddling the slope of the pit, and there was also a
smaller possible post-hole ([5237]), which was c.0.30m in diameter,
c.0.90m to the west and at the base of the slope. Three possible small
post- or stake-holes ([5238], [5239] and [5240]) were located along the
base of the north side of this pit, and were 0.20–0.25m in diameter.
The fill of the pit was characterised by three main and distinct
deposits, which had suffered some animal disturbance. A compact layer
of dark brown silty sand c.0.10m in depth (max) ([3003]) lay across
the base and extended up the sides of the pit. This was sealed by a
occasional small stones, flecks of charcoal and burnt clay. The upper
fill of the pit comprised very compact dark brown silty sand [3001],
c.0.10m in depth. The interface between this and [3002] was appar-
ently hard and compacted. Overall the finds assemblage was moderate
in size, although quite large quantities of Anglo-Saxon pottery were
recovered from the middle and upper fills, and quite large quantities of
unfired clay (including loomweight fragments) came from the middle
and lower fills. Small finds included a glass bead (No. 26), a pottery
spindlewhorl (No. 379), a needle fragment (No. 349) and an arrowhead
(No. 405) (Table 3.35).
III. Wall-post buildings
There was a small group of post-built, or wall-post,
structures defined at Bloodmoor Hill, comprising nine
possible earthfast post-hole (or post-pit) buildings and
a further post-in-trench building (Fig. 3.40, Table 3.36).
The evidence for these was generally moderate to poor; a
number of the post-hole buildings were clear in the field
(particularly Structures 39, 40, 41 and 47) but the others
had less complete ground plans. The group of buildings
at Bloodmoor Hill are typical, in both size and construc-
tion, of the early Anglo-Saxon period.
The total of ten Anglo-Saxon post-built structures
should be seen as a minimum number. The ground plans
of further earthfast post-hole buildings might exist within

Structure 38 Animal Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
bone pottery pottery clay
Upper 25 (136g) 93 (722g) 4 (102g) - 62 (384g) 19 (317g) - 6 (132g) 1 (16g) Opaque yellow glass bead No.
26; pottery spindlewhorl No.
379; unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal comprises
nail
Middle 98 (582g) 136 (1211g) 5 (16g) - 124 (520g) 90 (1474g) - 5 (64g) 1 (1g) Unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal comprises
pin or needle fragment No.
349
Lower 5 (15g) 20 (131g) 2 (9g) - 7 (161g) 59 (1145g) - - 1 (8g) Unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal comprises
arrowhead No. 405
W gable - 3 (19g) 1 (27g) - 1 (66g) - - - -
post-hole
S post-hole - 1 (24g) - - - - - - -

Table 3.353.35
Table Finds associated
Finds withwith
associated Structure 38 38
Structure

44 101
the mass of other unphased post-holes but no obvious
rectangular buildings were apparent. Many post-holes
survived only as shallow skims and it is quite possible
that others have been completely destroyed; a number of
the buildings have incomplete ground plans. The eastern
ends of Structures 39 and 40 have been completely
destroyed, although it is likely that this was caused by
the later medieval/post-medieval field boundary F122,
which was aligned from north to south across the site.
This evidence might indicate there were further post-hole
buildings on the site (possibly smaller and more tempo-
rary structures and shelters). Short lines of post-holes, of
which there were many across the site, could be all that
remain of further buildings, but the temptation to create
other, more doubtful, post-built structures has been
resisted (except as potential structures indicated on the
phase plans presented in Chapter 6); for example, there
might be the remains of a further building to the north
of Structure 45 and one or more buildings to the north
of Structure 46. However, these add little to the overall
discussion of this structural type. Alternatively, they
could be the remains of fence-lines.
Furthermore, given the difficulty of dating small
post-holes, it is easily possible that some were Roman in
date and were associated with the earlier occupation. The
overwhelming majority of post-holes contained no mate-
rial culture, and even fewer contained datable material.
A post-hole containing a sherd of Roman pottery could
possibly be Roman in date, with the sherd being incorpo-
rated in the fill during or after the use of the structure, or
possibly at the time of construction, but equally a Roman
sherd in the fill of a post-hole could be residual within a
later Anglo-Saxon feature.
Dimensions
The earthfast post-hole buildings varied from
4.70 x 3.30m (min) (Structure 40) up to 10.70 x 4.60m in
area (Structure 43, but only a partial plan of this building
was defined), although the majority ranged between 8.00
and 10.00m in length by 4.00 to 5.00m in breadth. In
comparison, the largest post-hole building at West Stow
measured 9.75 x 4.27m (Hall 2), at Handford Road,
Ipswich, 9.00 x 4.50m (Hall [2976]) and at Flixton,
c.20km to the west of Bloodmoor Hill, 13.00 x 6.00m
(Hall [1200]) (West 1985; Boulter 2005, table 4 and
pers. comm.). There is a large overlap between the size
of post-built structures at West Stow and Bloodmoor
Hill (Fig. 3.41). However, as with the SFBs, those from
Bloodmoor Hill lie towards the upper part of the size
range.
The post-in-trench building was (slightly) larger
than all the earthfast post-hole buildings. The internal
floor area of Structure 42 was c.66sq m, compared with
c.42sq m for West Stow Hall 2 (Fig. 3.41). In particular,
the width of the post-in-trench building was, at c.5.75m,
c.0.50m wider than the widest post-hole structures, of
which two with well-defined plans were over 5.00m wide
(Structures 39 and 41). The largest of the six post-hole
buildings at Flixton was over 5.00m in width and one out
of seven post-hole buildings at Broome Quarry, c.17km
to the west of Bloodmoor Hill, was over 5.00m wide; the
largest post-hole building at Broome (M959) measured
10.3 x 5.1m in area (S. Boulter, pers. comm.; Robertson
2003).
Walls
All the wall-post buildings were constructed with vertical
posts, closely spaced from c.0.50 to 1.00m apart, set in
either single earthfast post-holes or wall-trenches (see
below), with irregularities in both their spacing and
positioning in most wall-lines. With the exception of
Structure 39, which showed some evidence to suggest
the long walls had both single and double posts, wall-
lines were defined by lines of single posts. Only the
largest hall at West Stow (Hall 2) showed evidence for
double post-holes and there were only two buildings at
Mucking (PHB 2 and PHB 10) with evidence of double
posts (West 1985, fig. 10; Hamerow 1993, figs 54 and
56). At Catholme, there was some evidence to show
that doorways, in particular, were marked by double or
multiple posts (Losco-Bradley and Kinsley 2002, 87).
However, Structure 39 was not especially larger than the
other post-hole buildings so it does not appear that the
use of double posts had a direct relationship to the size of
the structure. Some of the post-holes might have been the
result of repair or replacement of decayed posts.
Post-holes generally ranged from c.0.20–0.60m
in diameter and c.0.05–0.35m in depth (0.70m max),
although clearly they would have been considerably
deeper from the original ground surface; gaps between

Structure Length (m) Breadth (m) Area (sq m) Post-holes Entrances Internal partition Alignment Type
39 9.30 5.30 49 42 South side? ENE–WSW Earthfast post-hole
40 4.70 3.30 15.5 12 ENE–WSW Earthfast post-hole
41 8.90 5.30 47 39 East end ENE–WSW Earthfast post-hole
42 11.50 5.75 66 25 Opposed entrances, West end ENE–WSW Post-in-trench
south and north side
43 10.70 4.60 49 21 South side? South-east side? ENE–WSW Earthfast post-hole
44 9.00 5.30 48 26 East side? NNW–SSE Earthfast post-hole
45a 8.70 4.30 37 32 Opposed entrances, ENE–WSW Earthfast post-hole
south and north side?
45b 9.20 3.75 34.5 16 ENE–WSW Earthfast post-hole
46 7.35 4.50 33 20 NNW–SSE Earthfast post-hole
47 8.65 4.50 39 32 South side? ENE–WSW Earthfast post-hole

Table 3.36 Summary data for wall-post buildings

102
103
Figure 3.40 Location of definite wall-post and post-in-trench buildings, against backdrop of other Anglo-Saxon features
 Figure 3.41 Length/breadth of wall-post buildings in comparison to West Stow halls
post-holes indicate that others were shallower and have
been completely destroyed. There was little evidence
for the size or shape of the actual posts, other than the
maximum size which is indicated by the size of the
post-holes; there was only very occasional evidence of
post-pipes, staining and packing. There was no evidence
at Bloodmoor Hill to suggest that end walls were particu-
larly weaker — i.e. that post-holes were smaller or
shallower — and there was no clear evidence to suggest
that the corners were especially weak.
There was no evidence of external raking timbers,
which have been defined on several other sites, particu-
larly at Cowdery’s Down but also on several buildings
at Brandon (Millett and James 1983; A. Tester, pers.
comm.).
Few finds came from within the fills of post-holes
(from both external walls and internal partitions), and
there was little to indicate that material that might have
been related to activities within the original buildings had
filtered into post-holes. However, the extensive sampling
of post-hole fills from Structures 39 and 40 revealed quan-
tities of charred grain (rye and barley in particular) to be
present in the fills of three post-holes of Structure 39, all
located along the southern wall and including the (prob-
able) post-holes of the doorway. It has been suggested
that these fills represent slumped accumulations of a
surface spread (see Ballantyne, Chapter 5) but it is just
possible that they represent placed deposits. There was no
evidence of other deliberately placed (‘special’) deposits
within any of the post-holes associated with the buildings;
such deposits have been identified on a number of sites
and are generally interpreted as foundation (or possibly
closing) deposits (Tipper 2004, 150–1; Hamerow 2006).
There was no direct evidence for the type of wall clad-
ding used in any of the structures. The absence of daub
points to the use of wood, presumably in the form of either
horizontal or vertical planks. However, unless buildings
were destroyed by fire, the daub would be unlikely to
104
survive; experimental reconstruction at the rebuilt village
of West Stow has demonstrated that (unfired) daub would
simply degrade and break up through processes of weath-
ering and erosion, leaving absolutely no trace. A small
quantity of fired clay fragments with wattle impressions
and flat surfaces have been identified as possible daub,
and there was also some evidence of caulking in the fired
clay assemblage (see Anderson, Chapter 4). Clay sources
are abundant within the immediate vicinity (to the south)
of the settlement and would almost certainly have been
accessible; local clay was exploited during the post-
medieval period for brick production, as evidenced by
the presence of numerous clay extraction pits and the still
extant brick works c.1.5km to the south of Bloodmoor
Hill (Suffolk SMR no. GSE 025).
Wall-trenches
One building (Structure 42) had a foundation trench,
which was aligned east-north-east–west-south-west
in the central-western part of the site. The north-east
corner of the trench cut through the infilled hollow
of Structure 14, which demonstrates at least that
Structure 42 was not constructed during the first phase
of occupation. Moreover, there were two 7th-century
knives within the fill of Structure 14. This evidence
suggests that the post-in-trench building was more likely
to have been constructed later in the 7th century, while
Structure 14 was constructed earlier. The trench was up
to 0.80m in width and 0.60m in depth. In general, the
post-holes within the trenches were of similar depths to
the trenches, although some of the larger post-holes in
Structure 42 continued by up to 0.20m below the base of
the trench. The post-holes contained similar fills to the
trenches, although several possible post-pipes or ghosts
were defined through the fills of the trenches. Where
the evidence survived, particularly on the western side
of Structure 42, the posts (evidenced by the post-holes
and/or post-pipes) were closely spaced. However, the
position of the posts was not detected in the eastern half,
either because the base of the individual post-holes did
not penetrate below the base of the trench or because the
fills of their post-pipes could not be distinguished from
the fill of the trenches.
There was little material culture from the fills of
the trenches to indicate that they had acted as artefact
traps during the use of the building. However, had a
gully developed within the upper part of the trench, as
evidenced in Structure C12 at Cowdery’s Down, it would
almost certainly have been destroyed by later truncation
(Millett and James 1983, fig. 66).
Entrances
Possible doorways were defined in six of the wall-post
buildings. In Structure 42 there was clear evidence for
the position of the doors, which were marked by the two
breaks in the wall trench. These demonstrate that there
were opposing doorways on the north and south long
sides of the building, although they were to the west of
centre. The evidence of doorways in the earthfast post-
hole buildings was less certain. In Structure 39, a slightly
wider gap of c.1.40m between the post-holes approxi-
mately midway (although the eastern end of the building
had been destroyed) along the (long) southern side might
indicate the location of a plausible doorway. Even though
few doorways could be defined, it is assumed, based on
the evidence from better preserved examples elsewhere,
that most buildings had opposed entrances located
midway along the (north and south) long sides of build-
ings (James et al. 1984). This was also clearly the case
for the post-in-trench Structure 42 at Bloodmoor Hill.
Floors and internal features
There was no evidence for beaten earth or trampled
or worn floors within any of the wall-post structures,
but, again this is probably a factor of preservation, as
the original ground surface had been destroyed across
most of the site. Given the abundance of clay within the
immediate area, it is possible that buildings had prepared
floor surfaces; several of the well-preserved buildings at
Brandon possessed evidence of clay floors and rammed
chalk and clay-over-flint floor surfaces (A. Tester, pers.
comm.). The features at Bloodmoor Hill could also have
had planked floors, either laid directly on the ground
surface or, more probably, raised up and pegged onto
floor joists.
There was no evidence for internal features such
as a hearth, although any such features would almost
certainly have been destroyed by later truncation (with
the possible exception of any in Structures 39 and
40, which were located close to the surviving surface
deposits at the northern end of the site). Additionally,
in those instances where the ground plans of wall-post
buildings intersected with SFBs, there was no evidence
of floor surfaces from the wall-post buildings that had
slumped into earlier hollows. It is also likely that several
of the SFBs post-dated some of the wall-post buildings
(see Chapter 6). In comparison, at the Royal Opera House
site, Covent Garden, the buildings from the first phase
of Anglo-Saxon occupation (Period 3, c. AD 600–675)
all possessed internal floors and one building (B3) had
a circular brickearth hearth or oven and two other hearths
edged with cattle metapodials (Malcolm and Bowsher
with Cowie 2003, 23).
105
Several of the buildings had lines of internal post-
holes that are indicative of internal walls or partitions.
Structure 41 showed evidence for a partition at the
eastern end of the building in the form of an irregular line
of four post-holes separating off an area c.1.70m wide.
Structure 43 also showed some (equivocal) evidence for
a partition or internal feature in the south-east part of the
building. There was clear evidence for an internal parti-
tion at the western end of Structure 42, indicated by a
short trench containing two post-holes located c.1.25m
to the east of, and aligned parallel to, the western wall
of the building. This would have demarcated an area
c.0.75–1.00m in width at the western end of the building.
There was also a possible line of three internal post-holes
located immediately to the east of this first partition
which might indicate a different partition. While the area
defined by the partition is quite narrow, there are many
other comparable examples; in PHB 2 at Mucking and in
Building N at Thirlings the area defined by the partition
walls was c.1.00m wide (Hamerow 1993, fig. 54; O’Brien
and Miket 1991, fig. 7). However, these areas could be
much wider: the internal partition in AS14 at Catholme
was c.2.50m from the northern end wall (Losco-Bradley
and Kinsley 2002, fig. 3.25).
There was no evidence for central or aisle posts in the
form of post-holes along the long central (or ridge-line)
axis. Other post-holes did lie within the internal area of
wall-post buildings, but some of these might be inci-
dental to the structure, relating rather to earlier or later
features.
An oven base or hearth (F254) cut by a pit was defined
within the internal area of Structure 44 but it seems likely
that this pre-dated the building; unfortunately the feature
was destroyed by illicit metal-detecting before excavation
had taken place. In Structure 45a, a small sub-circular
oven base (F259) lay in the north-east part of the internal
area, although it was not necessarily contemporary with
the building; it had possibly been cut through by a later
post-hole.
Reconstruction
There was no evidence of definite internal supporting ridge
posts or of external raking timbers, in either buildings
that had earthfast post-holes or that with wall-trenches.
This evidence suggests that the buildings at Bloodmoor
Hill (and elsewhere during this period) were wall-post
buildings, in which the thrust of the roof was borne by the
walls. Therefore, it would seem that the superstructure
of both earthfast post-hole and post-in-trench buildings
would have been quite similar, apart from the construc-
tion of a continuous trench in the latter; the trench seems
to have little implication for the construction of the
superstructure.
It has been cogently argued, by Philip Dixon in partic-
ular, that the structural integrity of this type of building
was maintained by the use of tie-beams, which direct the
thrust of the roof down the walls (Dixon 1982, 2002; Day
forthcoming; West 1985, 111). The tie-beams could have
been supported directly on the post tops or, alternatively,
placed above a wall-plate, which is perhaps more likely
in this case given the slight irregularities in the spacing
and positioning of post-holes, and thus posts, on the long
sides; symmetry of the posts in the long sides of the
buildings was low and many post-holes were not clearly
paired across the length of the building (Fig. 3.42).
 Figure 3.42 Diagram showing possible lines of tie-beams in Structures 39, 41, 45A, 46 and 47
Ratio of wall-post structures to SFBs
The ratio of wall-post structures (both earthfast and post-
in-trench) to SFBs was 1:3.8. In comparison, the ratio
was slightly lower at West Stow, which had seven halls,
with a total of fourteen possible post-built structures and
sixty-nine SFBs, giving ratios of 1:9.85 (max) or 1:4.9
(min).
Supposing the settlement was occupied for approxi-
mately 200 years, based on the evidence for ten wall-post
structures (min), and, as an order of magnitude, supposing
they each had a fifty-year lifespan (it was possibly much
shorter, but may have been longer), this would suggest
there were probably two or three post-built structures on
the site at any one time. Assuming that SFBs had a similar
lifespan, and, based on the evidence from the reconstruc-
tions at the rebuilt village of West Stow, this seems quite
reasonable (several of the reconstructions are now thirty
years old and with repairs would quite probably last as
long again: West 2001), this would give a figure of nine
or ten contemporary SFBs (with a ratio of three or four
SFBs to one post-built structure).
Orientation of buildings
The prevailing alignment of both the wall-post struc-
tures and SFBs was east-north-east to west-south-west,
following the local topography. However, two wall-post
buildings (Structures 44 and 46) were aligned north-
106
north-east–south-south-west. Similarly, out of thirty-five
SFBs where orientation could be established, five were
aligned east to west, while twenty-three were aligned
east-north-east to west-south-west, four north-east to
south-west, two north to south (Structures 24 and 26)
and one north-north-east–south-south-west. It seems
likely that the effect of pre-existing buildings and other
features within the settlement, including the open areas
(i.e. the use of settlement space, both built and unbuilt),
might also have been a significant factor in determining
the alignment and arrangement of buildings, as Helena
Hamerow acknowledged at Mucking, compared with the
usual argument, based on environmental determinism,
that orientation was a pragmatic and practical response
to the natural elements, designed to minimise stress from
the prevailing wind and to maximise sunlight and heat
retention (Hamerow 1993, 51).
Settlement pattern: dating, phasing and function
The dating and phasing of the earthfast post-built
structures is based on simple spatial relationships and
alignments; no firm stratigraphic evidence or datable
material is associated with them. It is, therefore, subjec-
tive and limited in scope. The absence of finds can be
explained by the nature of the archaeological deposits,
which were small constructional features and not rubbish
deposits; finds are rarely recovered in association with
wall-post buildings even where preservation is good,
which might suggest that buildings were generally kept
clean, although the evidence from Flixborough and
Brandon, where the conditions of preservation were
exceptional, might suggest otherwise (C. Loveluck, pers.
comm. and A. Tester, pers. comm.).
Based on the relationship between Structures 14
and 42, there is evidence from Bloodmoor Hill to show
that the post-in-trench technique of construction was a
development chronologically later than earthfast post-
hole construction, although it seems likely that buildings
using both techniques of construction would probably
have been standing at the same time unless there was a
contraction in the size of the settlement. At Catholme,
which has one of the largest groups of wall-post build-
ings to have been excavated and published, and which
are dated to the 7th–9th centuries, there is also some
(stratigraphic) evidence to show that trench construction
was generally later in the site sequence, although post-pit
construction continued to be used alongside it, some-
times in the same structure (Losco-Bradley and Kinsley
2002, 120). However, this construction technique was not
defined at either West Stow (with the possible exception
of Hall 7) or Mucking.
The distinction between the two techniques has been
shown to have some chronological significance across the
country, with the use of wall trenches increasing during
the 6th and 7th century, particularly for larger buildings,
and becoming predominant during the 8th and 9th centu-
ries (Marshall and Marshall 1993). The post-in-trench
building at Bloodmoor Hill is also the largest building on
the site: the area of Structure 42 is c.17sq m larger than the
largest earthfast post-hole building. However, there are
many earthfast post-hole buildings on other settlements
that are larger than this: for example, PHB 1 at Mucking
measured 12.6 x 6.8m in size and Hall [1200] at Flixton
measured 13 x 6m; their internal areas were c.20sq m
and c.12sq m larger than Structure 42 (Hamerow 1993,
fig. 54; S. Boulter, pers. comm.).
There were several earthfast post-hole structures
that intersected with SFBs (Structure 43 and 12, and
Structure 47 and 28), but the relationships between
these buildings could not be determined with certainty
due to the difficulty of trying to distinguish post-holes
cut into backfilled features. The spatial juxtaposition of
Structures 41 and 42, which are c.11.00m apart and on
the same alignment in the same part of the site, might
suggest that one replaced the other or at least that the
position and alignment of one influenced those of the
other. However, it is extremely difficult to phase indi-
vidual wall-post buildings. A number of graves within
the cemetery possibly respect the area of Structure 44,
which might suggest that the siting of the cemetery was
influenced by the position of an extant, or partly disman-
tled, building. However, several graves lay within the
internal area of Structure 44 and the relationship may
thus be coincidental, although it is just possible that the
building formed some sort of mortuary structure (see
Chapters Five and Six for further discussion).
It seems likely, given the ratio of wall-post buildings
to SFBs (1:3.8), that the wall-post buildings were focal
structures for contemporary groups of associated SFBs.
At West Stow, Stanley West referred to the seven largest
post-hole buildings as ‘halls’ to ‘demonstrate the essen-
tial function of these buildings, as the focal points of the
107
family units’ (West 1985, 112). He argued that the SFBs
formed discrete groups around each post-hole building,
‘so that the functions and status of the two types of build-
ings must be complementary’; i.e. post-hole buildings
were dwellings, while SFBs were ancillary structures
(West 1985, 150).
We should not immediately assume, however, that
specific buildings or building types (both wall-post and
sunken-featured buildings) had single and/or fixed func-
tions, either within or between settlements, and individual
buildings probably meant different things to different
people (Tipper 2004). In Beowulf, the poet’s description
of Hrothgar’s great hall, Heorot, provides ‘a picture of a
royal and aristocratic milieu’ where all public business
took place (Cramp 1957, 57). While clearly this passage
has its limitations, wall-post buildings may have been the
great communal halls where the reception and feasting
of families and visitors took place, and not simply (or at
least far more than) just dwellings. It is also possible that
the wall-post buildings had a second floor, perhaps in the
form of floor planks pegged across the tie-beams (giving
additional strength and rigidity to the structure), accessed
via a step ladder; this could have created nearly double
the amount of internal floor space. Also, there is no reason
why SFBs could not have been used as dwellings.
At Bloodmoor Hill, there was neither a close spatial
relationship between groups of SFBs and individual
wall-post buildings, as found on a number of continental
sites such as Wijster, in central Drenthe (van Es 1967),
nor a clear spatial differentiation of structural types, as
shown at West Heslerton, North Yorkshire (Powlesland
forthcoming); the evidence is perhaps more comparable
to that from Mucking (Hamerow 1993).
It is difficult to relate many SFBs to specific wall-post
buildings. Many were not adjacent to wall-post buildings
and cannot be related to other buildings, although it is
possible that the evidence of other wall-post buildings
could have been completely destroyed, particularly in
the southern part of the site, and the central grouping of
the wall-post buildings might be more apparent than real.
Moreover, the limits of the settlement were not reached
on the northern side (Chapter 6) and it seems possible
that further remains, including wall-post buildings, lay
to the north.
However, an attempt can be made to define relation-
ships between some structures, based on simple spatial
patterning and intuitive interpretation of the site plan.
SFBs 20, 21, and 22 possibly respect the location of
wall-post Structure 44, or possibly even the location
of the cemetery. Structures 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30
possibly respect the location of one or both of the wall-
post Structures 46 and 47 (and possibly Structure 45).
Structure 28 intersected with 47 and, although the rela-
tionship between the two of them was not established,
they were clearly not contemporary buildings. This might
suggest that Structure 28 was contemporary with wall-
post Structure 46, c.6.00m to the north-west. Furthermore,
both SFB Structures 26 and 27 were aligned approxi-
mately north to south like wall-post Structure 46, which
may indicate that one or both of them were contemporary
with the wall-post building. It seems unlikely, however,
that the two SFBs (Structures 26 and 27) were contem-
porary, if the sunken features are interpreted as one
component of a larger structure, as their hollows were just
over 1.00m apart. Similarly, Structures 19 and 45, 21 and
Figure 3.43 Plan and photograph of Structures 39 and 40 (from east)

108
22, and also, possibly, 16 and 17, were (probably) located
too close to each other, allowing for a more substantial
structure above their hollows, to be contemporary.
It is tempting to suggest that post-in-trench Structure
42 may have been contemporary with, and related
to, Structure 12, located c.18.00m to its north-east;
Structure 12 is phased to the 7th century based on the
material culture assemblage from the infill. If this sugges-
tion is correct, it would indicate that SFB Structure 12
cut through, and thus post-dated, wall-post building
Structure 43; the relationship between these two build-
ings could not be stratigraphically established.
Description
Many post-hole arrangements were defined after machine-
stripping, and these were immediately planned before
the stripped surface was disturbed or before it dried out,
although these areas were subsequently cleaned by hand
and replanned to clarify features. Where wall-lines were
incompletely defined, particular attention was given to
try to establish the location of ‘missing’ post-holes (i.e.
the gaps were recleaned and, as a final resort, truncated).
Single context numbers were assigned to post-holes
unless post-pipes or stains were defined. Post-holes were
half-sectioned. Bulk samples from the fills of post-holes
from several buildings were taken for environmental
analysis.
Structure 39
(Fig. 3.43)
Structure 39 (F508) consisted of a rectangular arrangement of forty-two
post-holes aligned ENE to WSW. These represent the foundations of
an earthfast post-hole timber building which measured approximately
9.30m in length by 5.30m in width and had an internal floor area of
c.49sq m. The eastern side of the building was not clearly defined, with
the exception of a single post-hole [4562], and had presumably been
destroyed by later truncation.
Several of the post-holes along the southern side may, in fact,
relate to the smaller Structure 40 immediately to the south of and on
the same axis as Structure 39. The chronological relationship between
the two structures could not be determined stratigraphically, although
it seems likely that they represent separate buildings. There was a clear
distinction between the post-hole fills of each structure: those from
Structure 39 were, in general, a dark grey-brown to black silty sand
while those from Structure 40 were pale grey sand. However, it is also
possible, although perhaps unlikely, that they formed one large building
with a southern annex or, indeed, one building with a small enclosure or
yard attached to the southern side.
The ground plan of Structure 39 consisted of double and also single
post-holes, the majority of which measured c.0.30–0.75m in diameter
and 0.10–0.35m in depth, and were spaced c.0.70–0.95m apart (meas-
ured from centre to centre). A wider gap of c.1.40m between post-holes
[4519] and [4529] along the long southern side may indicate the loca-
tion of a doorway. Post-hole [4519], which marked the location of the
eastern doorpost, was augmented with at least one additional post,
possibly for an entrance jamb. There were also a number of other post-
holes outside the ground plan that possibly related to this structure.
There was no evidence for a beaten earth or trampled floor within
Structure 39 and there was no evidence for other internal features,
such as a hearth, although the slight remains of surface deposits were
preserved in several places. There were also several mottled patches in
the natural sand within and around the structure, but these did not seem
to be the remains of archaeological features.
Structure 39 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM
pottery pottery
Post-holes 4 (6g) 9 (47g) 5 (26g) - 4 (13g)
Table 3.37 Finds associated with Structure 39
109
The fills of a number of the post-holes possessed small material
culture assemblages, including a total of fourteen sherds (73g) of
pottery, nine (47g) of which were Anglo-Saxon (Table 3.37). The fills
of six post-holes contained small miscellaneous or unidentifiable frag-
ments of iron and/or copper alloy; there were also minimal amounts of
animal bone and fired clay, along with four fragments of slag (111g).
Structure 40
(Fig 3.43)
Structure 40 (F511) consisted of a rectangular arrangement of twelve
post-holes (min) aligned ENE to WSW immediately to the south of
Structure 39. These represent the foundations of a small earthfast post-
hole timber building measuring approximately 4.70m (min) in length
by 3.30m in width, with an internal floor area of c.15.5sq m. The eastern
side of the structure was not clearly defined, and had presumably
been destroyed by later truncation. The relationship between the two
structures could not be determined stratigraphically but, as discussed
above, it seems likely that they represent separate buildings.
The ground plan of Structure 40 consisted of single small post-
holes, the majority of which measured c.0.25–0.40m in diameter and
0.05–0.20m in depth, and were spaced c.0.50–0.70m apart centre to
centre. There was no evidence for a beaten earth or trampled floor
within Structure 40 and there was no evidence for other internal
features, such as a hearth, although the slight remains of a surface
deposit was preserved in the central southern part of the structure. No
material culture was found within any of the post-holes or within the
internal area of the structure.
Structure 41
(Fig. 3.44)
Structure 41 (F125) consisted of a rectangular arrangement of thirty-
nine post-holes aligned ENE to WSW. These represent the foundations
of an earthfast post-hole timber building measuring approximately
8.90m in length by 5.30m in width, with an internal floor area of
c.47sq m.
The ground plan of Structure 41 consisted of single small post-
holes, the majority of which measured c.0.20–0.60m in diameter and
0.10–0.50m in depth, and were spaced c.0.50–0.75m apart centre to
centre. There was evidence of a post-pipe, which measured 0.11m in
diameter, in only one of the post-holes [270]. There was no obvious
evidence for the location of the doorways but there was some evidence
for an internal partition wall at the eastern end of the building in the
form of an irregular line of four post-holes, which separated off an area
c.1.70m wide. There were also a number of other post-holes within
the internal area, and immediately outside, that might relate to this or
another structure immediately to the east or north-east, but these did not
appear to form a clear pattern.
The fills of a number of the post-holes possessed small material
culture assemblages, including a total of fourteen sherds (53g) of
pottery, all of which were Roman (Table 3.38). One of the internal post-
holes ([1122]) contained c.150g of burnt clay; otherwise, finds were
minimal.
Structure 42
(Fig. 3.45)
Structure 42 (F39 and F62) was a post-in-trench timber building
measuring 11.50m in length by 5.75m in width and aligned
approximately ENE to WSW, with an internal floor area of c.66sq m.
The north-east corner of the building cut through the pit of the earlier
infilled Structure 14.
The ground plan of the structure consisted of individual post-holes
set in a narrow trench ([439] = [377]) measuring c.0.50–0.75m in width
by c.0.05–0.25m in depth. The majority of the post-holes measured
c.0.20–0.55m in diameter and c.0.10–0.55m in depth. Some of the
larger post-holes continued below the base of the trench by as much
as c.0.20m in depth. Two of the post-holes ([372] and [374]) along the
western side of the building showed evidence of post-pipes c.0.20m in
width. There were gaps c.1.00m wide in the trench along the south and
Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
clay
- - 4 (111g) 22 (15g)
Figure 3.44 Plan and photograph of Structure 41 (from west)

110
 Figure 3.45 Plan and photograph of Structure 42 (from west)
north long sides, opposite each other c.4.00m from the western end of
the building. These mark the location of opposing doorways.
No material culture was found within the internal area of the
building, although the fill of the trench did contain a small quantity
of material. The fill of the western half (F39) comprised light brown
silty sand [376] and contained a small finds assemblage, including
fourteen sherds (56g) of Roman pottery, four fragments (179g) of burnt
clay and one fragment (26g) of slag. The fill of the eastern half of the
trench (F62) consisted of mid to dark grey-brown silty sand [438] and
contained twenty-nine sherds (157g) of Roman pottery, one large frag-
ment (811g) of burnt clay, one fragment (3g) of slag, and one of metal
(17g). The fills of several post-holes also contained small quantities of
material: a total of twenty-nine sherds (101g) of Roman pottery, thirty-
two fragments (455g) of burnt clay, three fragments (5g) of slag and
small fragments of copper alloy (1g) and iron (1g).
111
There was some evidence for an internal partition at the western
end of the building; this was indicated by a short trench or slot ([454])
(F67) c.2.50m in length by c.0.45–0.75m in width and 0.12–0.20m
in depth, located c.1.25m to the east of, and aligned parallel to, the
western wall of the building. This would have demarcated an area
c.0.75–1.00m in width, but it is not necessarily contemporary with
the building. Deep post-holes [455] and [459], c.0.50m in depth, were
located at either end of this slot, with a further post-hole ([464]) on
the eastern edge of, but possibly later than, the trench. Both post-
holes contained a number of large stones up to 0.30m in length, which
had been probably used as post-packing. The upper fill of this trench
comprised very dark brown to black sandy silt [453], 0.12m in depth
and flecked with charcoal, which contained two sherds (8g) of Roman
pottery and a small quantity of burnt clay (8g) and possible loomweight
fragments (30, 129g). However, this fill sealed both the post-holes and
might, therefore, post-date the feature. There was also a possible line of
Structure 41 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
Post-holes 17 (34g) - 14 (53g) - 2 (212g) - - 4 (22g) 1 (3g)

Table 3.38 Finds associated with Structure 41

Structure 42 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
E post-trench 3 (50g) - 29 (157g) - 1 (811g) - - 1 (3g) 1 (17g)
W post-trench - - 14 (56g) - 4 (179g) - - 1 (26g) -
E post-holes - - 9 (18g) - - - - - 2 (2g)
W post-holes - - 20 (83g) - 32 (455g) - - 3 (5g) -
Slot - - 2 (8g) - 25 (8g) - - - -

Table 3.39 Finds associated with Structure 42

three internal post-holes ([925], [1020] and [1021]), 0.20–0.45m deep,
located c.0.50–0.75m to the east of F67 and c.0.75–1.50m apart. The fill
of [925] contained two sherds (9g) of Roman pottery and two fragments
(40g) of burnt clay and [1020] contained a single sherd (9g) of Roman
pottery (Table 3.39). The high amount of Roman pottery present in the
fills of Structure 42 can be accounted for by the fact that it overlay
Roman Building I, truncating some of the earlier features.
Structure 43
(Fig. 3.46)
Structure 43 consisted of a rectangular arrangement of twenty-one
post-holes aligned ENE–WSW. These make up the plan of an earthfast
post-hole timber building measuring approximately 10.70m in length
(max) by 4.60m in width, with a possible internal floor area of c.49sq
m. The western end of the building intersected with Structure 12, which
was on the same alignment, but the relationship between them was not
defined; either the post-hole building had been cut away by Structure 12
or the post-holes could not be distinguished through the earlier infilled
pit ([206]). The building also overlay two earlier Roman ditches (F229
and F230), although its central-eastern part had been cut away by post-
medieval ditch F2.
The ground plan of Structure 43 consisted of single small post-
holes, the majority of which measured c.0.20–0.55m in diameter and
0.10–0.70m in depth, and were spaced c.0.65–1.00m apart centre to
centre. No entrances were clearly marked; it is tempting to suggest
that the gap between post-holes [1469] and [1471], with two small
additional post-holes [1468] and [1470], could mark the location of
an entrance c.1.50m in width in the southern long wall, but this is not
entirely convincing. A possible internal partition is indicated by the
arrangement of five post-holes in the south-east part of the building. The
relationship with Pit F180 in the south-east corner of the building may
be fortuitous but they could possibly have been contemporary. Pit F180
(c.1.60 by 1.30m and 0.55m deep) contained a small material culture
assemblage, including twenty-one fragments (299g) of slag, 427g of
animal bone and three sherds (14g) of Roman pottery. Alternatively, the
pit may relate to two other similar-sized pits (F181 and F187) immedi-

Figure 3.46 Plan of Structure 43

112
49
Figure 3.47 Plan and photograph of Structure 44 (from west)

113
Structure 44 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay
pottery pottery
Post-holes 8 (80g) 2 (9g) 35 (289g) - 5 (19g)
Table 3.40 Finds associated with Structure 44
ately to the north; F181 was shown to pre-date Structure 43. A number
of other post-holes immediately to the east of the building may relate to
this or another possible small structure.
A single sherd (6g) of Roman pottery was the only material culture
associated with this building (excluding Pit F180); it came from the fill
of a post-hole.
Structure 44
(Fig. 3.47)
Structure 44 consisted of a rectangular arrangement of twenty-six
post-holes aligned NNE–SSW. These make up the plan of a possible
earthfast post-hole timber building measuring approximately 9.00m in
length (max) by 5.30m in width, with an internal floor area of c.48sq m;
the western side of the building was not clearly defined and the south-
eastern part appears to have been removed by several graves within
the cemetery (6, 7, 8 and 9). A number of graves (10, 15 and 16) on
the eastern side possibly respect the area of the structure. While this
relationship may be little more than fortuitous, we should not rule out
the possibility that the building formed some sort of mortuary structure.
A possible small grave (F243), aligned N–S, appeared to be located
along the western side of the structure, but the relationship between
them was unclear. A further five graves (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) lay within the
internal area of the building.
The ground plan of Structure 44 consisted of small post-holes, the
majority of which measured c.0.30–0.40m in diameter and 0.20–0.40m
in depth, and were spaced c.0.60–1.00m apart centre to centre. The
northern and possibly the southern walls possessed double post-holes,
indicating that the construction used a double-post or plank arrange-
ment along at least two sides of the building. There was no evidence
of post-pipes or post-packing in any of the post-holes. A wider gap of
c.1.40m between post-holes [1949] and [2276] along the eastern side
may indicate the location of a doorway but this is uncertain given the
incomplete plan. It is probable that there was a corresponding doorway
Figure 3.48 Plan of Structure 45A and 45B
114
50
Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
clay
3 (1g) - 54 (488g) 1 (36g)
on the western side but this side of the building was not clearly defined.
There were also a number of other post-holes within the internal area,
and immediately outside, which may have related to the structure.
There was no evidence for a beaten earth or trampled floor within
Structure 44, although overlying surface deposits were preserved in this
part of the site (F159/F182). An oven base or hearth (F254), cut by
Pit F264, was defined within the internal area; unfortunately the feature
was destroyed by illicit metal-detecting before excavation had taken
place. This feature would have been located approximately midway
along the western side but it is unclear whether or not it actually related
to the structure. A number of pits (Pit Group G (F264, F240, F238,
F166, F167, F183)) also lay within the internal area of the building,
concentrated in the southern half. These post-date the building and the
cemetery.
The fills of a number of the post-holes possessed small material
culture assemblages (Table 3.40), including a total of thirty-seven sherds
(298g) of pottery, all but two of which were Roman, and fifty-four frag-
ments (488g) of slag; one post-hole produced an iron bar fragment,
which was possibly a tool such as a chisel. The carbonised organic
residue adhering to the inside of one Anglo-Saxon sherd (1894AA),
from the fill of post-hole [1950], was radiocarbon-sampled. These
post-hole fills, however, seem to represent elements of Surface Deposit
F159/182, which spread out over this area in the 7th century, although
the material within it had built up over a longer period of time.
Structure 45
(Fig. 3.48)
Structure 45 consisted of a rectangular arrangement of forty-eight
post-holes aligned ENE–WSW. These make up the incomplete and
overlapping plans of two probable earthfast post-hole timber buildings.
The chronological relationship between the two structures was not
defined.
Structure 45 Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM
pottery pottery
Post-holes 51 (62g) 1 (5g) 6 (41g) 2 (20g) 11 (42g)
Table 3.41 Finds associated with Structure 45
The most complete structure (45A) consisted of thirty-two
post-holes representing the foundations of a building measuring
approximately 8.70m in length by 4.30m in width, with a possible
internal floor area of c.37sq m. The ground plan consisted of single
small post-holes, the majority of which measured c.0.25–0.50m in
diameter and 0.05–0.35m in depth, spaced c.0.60–0.90m apart centre to
centre. No entrances were clearly marked; it is tempting to suggest that
the gaps between post-holes [1936] and [1937] and [2214] and [2220]
could mark the location of opposed entrances c.1.00–1.60m in width
along the northern and southern long walls, but these are not entirely
convincing. A small sub-circular oven base (F259) lay in the north-east
part of the internal area, although it was not necessarily contemporary
with the building; it had possibly been cut through by a later post-hole
[2281].
The second structure (45B) was less complete and more uncertain
than the first and it could even be the remains of a fence-line. The
southern side, which was the most clearly defined part of this structure,
was offset by c.1.80m to the south of Structure 45A. Sixteen post-holes
Figure 3.49 Plan of Structure 46
52
115
Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
clay
- - 3 (14g) -
made up the ground plan of a structure which measured approximately
9.20m in length by 3.75m in width and had a possible internal floor area
of c.34.5sq m. Of the single small post-holes, the majority measured
c.0.25–0.55m in diameter (although several were much larger) and
0.05–0.40m in depth, and were spaced c.0.60–2.25m apart centre to
centre. The northern side was not clearly defined.
A number of post-holes associated with Structures 45a and 45b
contained small assemblages of residual and/or intrusive material
(Table 3.41), including six sherds (41g) of Roman pottery, three frag-
ments of slag (14g), eleven fragments (42g) of burnt clay and one
fragment (9g) of tile, and one possible fragment of medieval brick
(11g).
Structure 46
(Fig. 3.49)
Structure 46 consisted of a rectangular arrangement of twenty post-
holes aligned NNW–SSE. These make up the plan of a possible
earthfast post-hole timber building measuring approximately 7.35m in
 Figure 3.50 Plan of Structure 47
length (min) by 4.50m in width, with an internal floor area of c.33sq m;
the north and south short sides of the building were not clearly defined
and the ground plan was incomplete. There were also a large number of
other possible post-holes in the immediate area that might relate to this
or another structure, or represent possible fence-lines.
The ground plan of Structure 46 consisted of small post-holes, the
majority of which measured c.0.25–0.50m in diameter and 0.05–0.30m
in depth, spaced c.0.60–1.00m apart centre to centre; there was no
evidence of post-pipes, or post-packing, in any of the post-holes. There
was no evidence of any doorways, but there were a number of other
post-holes within the internal area, and immediately outside, that may
have related to the structure. There was also no associated material
culture.
Structure 47
(Fig. 3.50)
Structure 47 consisted of a rectangular arrangement of thirty-two
post-holes aligned ENE–WSW. These represent the foundations of an
earthfast post-hole timber building measuring approximately 8.65m in
length by 4.50m in width, with a possible internal floor area of c.39 sq
m. The north-east corner of the building intersected with Structure 28,
but the relationship between them could not be defined; similarly, the
relationship between Pit F365 and the south-east part of the building
was unclear.
The ground plan of Structure 47 consisted of single small post-
holes, the majority of which measured c.0.20–0.50m in diameter and
0.05–0.35m in depth, spaced c.0.30–0.85m apart centre to centre. No
entrances were clearly marked; it is tempting to suggest that the gap
between post-holes [3552] and [3553] could mark the location of an
entrance c.1.00m in width along the southern long wall, but this is not
entirely convincing. There were a number of post-holes within the
internal area of the building, and possibly relating to it, although they
did not appear to form a distinct pattern.
There was a small assemblage of residual material associated with
this structure, including twelve sherds (35g) of Roman pottery from the
fills of five post-holes, a single sherd (5g) of Anglo-Saxon pottery and a
single small fragment (2g) of burnt clay.
116
IV. Surface deposits
The settlement at Bloodmoor Hill was unusual in having
clear evidence for the build-up of material in the form
of surface deposits (Colour Pl. III). Similar deposits
(often termed ‘middens’) are rare on contemporary sites,
although they have been identified at the mainly Middle
Saxon sites of Flixborough (Lincs) and Brandon (Suffolk)
(Loveluck 1997; Carr et al. 1988). The ‘general cultural
layer’ identified at West Stow (West 1985, 9–10, 60) may
have been of a similar nature, however, and at Mucking
‘the late loam to the east of GH128 is completely made
up of Saxon rubbish, grass-tempered sherds, animal
bones and burnt flints, in a 16in concentration’ (Hamerow
1993, 19), suggesting perhaps that similar deposits may
have been present here, although the surface was largely
stripped. At Brandon an intact occupation horizon
c.0.10–0.15m deep was defined across the whole site,
with surface rubbish heaps also defined, often close to
enclosure boundaries (Carr et al. 1988, 373), while at
Flixborough material was dumped outside buildings
during the first phase of occupation (later 7th to early
8th century), before a change in disposal methods which
saw major episodes of repeated dumping into a central
zone within the settlement (Loveluck 1997, 191; 2001,
91). These massive dumps contained vast quantities of
pottery, animal bone and metalwork, and can be described
as more formal middens than any of the features from
other sites, which even in their more substantial forms
are better described as surface heaps or dumps.
117
Figure 3.51 Location of surface deposits, shown against backdrop of other Anglo-Saxon features
Surface Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
deposit pottery pottery clay
F1 13335 1178 465 53 (3474g) 5809 - 564 968 148 (675g) Fired clay includes a
(39001g) (8096g) (2136g) (20427g) (2854g) (12279g) loomweight fragment; 2
quernstones and a whetstone
(No. 295); bone cylinder No.
422; spindlewhorl No. 383;
glass bead No. 24, amber
pendant No. 42 and amethyst
bead No. 36; metal includes
finger-ring No. 1, spangle No.
52, annular brooch No. 9, lace
tag No. 107, 5 knives (Nos
184-5, 191, 199, 215), bracelet
fragment No. 7, 2 needles
(Nos 341, 346), latchlifter No.
279, hook No. 246, holdfast
No. 260, 2 buckles (Nos
209–10), vessel repair No.
163, ear-scoop No. 138, mount
No. 140 and rivet No. 144
F8/F275 2719 298 51 (349g) 34 1504 - 14 (19g) 34 17 (121g) Glass bead No. 27;
(7602g) (2517g) (1557g) (2211g) (1132g) spindlewhorl No. 384; metal
includes pin No. 92, knife No.
216, holdfast No. 261,
latchlifter No. 280, tool No.
335 and needle No. 344
F11/F503 918 380 119 21 (1491g) 914 1 (35g) 17 (13g) 310 106 (540g) Hone No. 315; polished axe
(3210g) (2448g) (700g) (4001g) (5709g) fragment and flint scraper;
metal includes wrist-clasp No.
103, knives Nos 193, 209,
rivet No. 145, handle No. 154,
hook No. 232, rove No. 264,
shears No. 354 and pin No. 90
F159/F182 830 35 (225g) 783 74 420 (4320g) - 51 (178g) 4825 125 (862g) 2 hones (Nos 297, 315); metal
(2319g) (4702g) (40379g) (38317g) includes 2 pins (Nos 61, 91),
strap-clasp plate No. 117, 4
knife fragments (Nos 182,
221-3), hook No. 249, key
fragments Nos 276–7, tongs
fragment No. 291, adze
fragment No. 319, 4 paring
chisels (Nos 322–5),
chisel/gouge No. 331, mason’s
pick No. 336, needle No. 348
and 2nd-century coin No. 397
Hollow 64 (182g) 84 (812g) 18 (51g) 5 (179g) 14 (84g) - 10 (8g) - 1 (3g) -
F301
F342 102 (156g) 24 (175g) 150 (1516g) 14 (608g) 26 (310g) - 58 (304g) 2 (14g) 7 (104g) Metal includes possible
Roman blade No. 229 and
possible Roman adze blade
No. 320

TableFinds
Table 3.42 3.42 Finds associated
associated with surface
with surface deposits
deposits

At Bloodmoor Hill these deposits (which we have
consistently described as surface deposits, to avoid pre-
judging their nature) were mainly contained within the
former Roman trackway area to the north of the main
settlement area, although two further deposits (F159/182
and F342, described below) were situated within the
core of the settlement, in close association with the main
cemetery area and the two outlying burials (which may
or may not be coincidence; see Chapter 6). Sampling
and excavation strategies employed are described fully
in Chapter 1; analysis of the deposits’ formation and
dispersal can be found in Chapter 6.
All the deposits were investigated using 1.00m squares
excavated in 0.10m spits, where depth permitted. Surface
Deposit F1 and Deposits F342 and F182 were excavated
in their entirety, while the other surface deposits were
intensively sampled (Fig. 3.52).
Surface Deposit F1
(Figs 3.51 and 3.52)
Surface Deposit F1 was a dark grey-brown to black silty sand deposit
concentrated within the remains of the earlier Roman trackway, and
thus aligned E–W. This highly decomposed organic deposit measured
c.31.50m in length (E–W) by 13.00m in width (N–S) and formed a low
mound c.0.40m in height (max). It sealed the infilled ditches of the
trackway (F433 and F434 in the north and F435 in the south) and it also
sealed a buried soil [2531] within the trackway, which formed a hollow
c.0.35m in depth (max). The deposit tailed off rapidly on the north and
south sides of the track. It survived for c.0.35m in depth below the
modern ground surface, below the topsoil [001] (c.0.20m in depth)
and a subsoil and possible colluvial deposit [2529] (c.0.10m in depth).
Structure 9 and Pit Groups C and D probably lay below F1, or at least
were not clearly defined until the surface deposit had been excavated.
F1 was distinct from the other surface deposits (F8 to the east and
F503 to the west) preserved within the hollow of the trackway, both

53 118
119
Figure 3.52 Sections through surface deposits; surface deposits themselves are shaded; inset map shows location of sections
 Plate VII Spread of animal bone in Surface Deposit F1, spit C
in terms of its depth and the quantity of associated material culture
recovered. It appeared to have been a particular concentration of mate-
rial (Pl. VII), rather than simply the remains of a buried soil or ground
surface which had survived in a hollow as a result of differential pres-
ervation; given the level of organic decomposition and compaction, the
deposit would have been originally much greater in extent, possibly
something more akin to a heap than a low mound. The feature may have
accumulated over a short period with rapid deposition or it may possi-
bly have been the result of smaller repeated dumping events. Material
may also have been removed from the deposit and transported away,
either for use or deposition within the settlement or for use as manure
on the land. The central part of the surface deposit, an area c.3.70m in
width, had been destroyed by a modern pipe trench aligned N–S.
Datable finds included a possibly late Roman copper alloy finger
ring (No. 1), a 7th-century amethystine quartz bead (No. 36), a 6th- to
7th-century amber pendant (No. 42), a spangle (No. 52), possibly of
mid-5th- to mid-6th-century date, a 6th- to 7th-century fragmentary
annular brooch (No. 9), a 7th- to 8th-century lace tag (No. 107), and
three 7th-century knives (Nos 184–5, 191) (Table 3.42). While the
majority of the fired clay could not be identified, some smoothed frag-
ments possessed wattle impressions (see Anderson, Chapter 4).
Surface Deposits F8/F275 and F11/F503
(Figs 3.51 and 3.52; Pl. VIII)
A dark buried soil was preserved in a narrow, discontinuous band
c.175.00m in length within the remains of the ditched trackway. Surface
Deposit F8/F275 measured c.44.00m in length and was located to the
Plate VIII Surface Deposit F11/503, with all initial squares excavated (from east)
120
east of Surface Deposit F1, while Deposit F11/F503 was defined for
c.78.00m to the west of F1, and was interrupted by the line of the
modern road. Like F1, these surface deposits were preserved mainly
within the remains of the trackway, and were therefore aligned E–W;
they curved SW and measured c.10.00–11.00m in width and c.0.20m
in depth (max). The deposits comprised dark brown to black silty sand.
Structures 16 and 17 and Oven Base F338 lay below Surface Deposit
F8/F275 and Structure 5 lay below F11/F503 [4743].
There was a further possible surface deposit or spread within the
trackway in the area of Structures 35, 36 and 37, and also Pit Group J,
which could have been an (interrupted) continuation of the same surface
deposit F8/F275.
Datable finds included a later 7th- to 8th-century green glass bead
(No. 27), a 6th-century wrist-clasp (No. 103) and two 7th-century
knives (Nos 193 and 209) (Table 3.42). The high proportion of flat,
slab-like pieces of fired clay in F8/F275 perhaps related to its proximity
to the Oven Base F338 (see Anderson, Chapter 4).
Surface Deposit F342
Surface Deposit F342 was located immediately to the south of
Structure 30, and measured c.10.00m E–W, 4.00m N–S and 0.15m
in depth (max). It comprised mixed dark grey-brown silty sand, with
blackish-grey and dark brown patches. No clear relationship was
defined between this deposit and Structure 30; the upper fill [3311] of
the sunken feature was indistinguishable from the surface deposit and
the stratigraphic relationship between the two features could not be
established with certainty. A number of small pits and post-holes were
defined below Surface Deposit F342, although this does not necessarily
mean that the cut-features pre-dated the surface deposits, simply that
their fills could not be distinguished through the surface deposits. For
example, the relationship between the surface deposit and Pit F424,
which contained a very dark brown silty sand fill [2534] that was
noticeably darker than F342, was not clearly defined stratigraphically.
However, the distribution of material culture across the surface deposit
is instructive: a concentration of finds in the 1m-square immediately
above the pit [2500] might suggest that the pit cut actually through
the surface deposit; nine out of a total of twenty sherds of Anglo-
Saxon pottery from F342 were in square [2500]. An associated find
was a possibly Roman cleaver (No. 228) and an adze blade (No. 320)
(Table 3.42).

Surface Deposit F159/F182

(Figs 3.51 and 3.52)
F159/F182 was an irregular deposit located over and to the west of the
cemetery, Structure 44, Pit Group G and Oven Base F254; it measured
c.15.00m E–W by 12.00m N–S and comprised very dark brown to
black silty sand c.0.20m in depth (max), with evidence for considerable
burrowing and root disturbance. Datable finds include a possibly mid
to late 7th-century pin (No. 61) and a 2nd-century coin (No. 397)
which was well-worn (and perhaps used as a weight) at the time of loss
(Table 3.42).

Hollow F301
(Fig. 3.53)
F301 consisted of a large sub-circular-shaped sunken feature or hollow
measuring 5.50m in length (E–W) by 5.80m in width (N–S) and 0.25m
in depth. The hollow was located over earlier ditches (F298 and F299),
which formed the southern boundary to the Roman trackway, and also
over the corner of an earlier enclosure on the south side of the track.
The hollow [5245] possessed sloping sides down to a roughly level
base. No post-holes were defined in association with this hollow, which
is interpreted as the remains of a possible post-hole-less structure or
working hollow similar to Structure 16. It was filled with light to mid-
brown silty sand [3030] with concentrations of charcoal in the north-east
and south-east parts. It contained a sizeable finds assemblage, including
Anglo-Saxon pottery and animal bone (Table 3.42).
V. Pits
There were a large number of pits at Bloodmoor Hill,
which is quite unusual for a site of this period (Fig. 3.54).
Most settlements of this period are characterised by a
general scarcity of pits (other than those belonging to
SFBs). Relative to the size of the site and number of
buildings, only a small number (around fifty Anglo-Saxon
examples) were identified at Mucking (Hamerow 1993,
20). At West Stow, located on a similar geology, there
were seventy-nine pits, with a further twenty possible
examples (West 1985, 55–7, fig. 230). Why there are
such a large number of pits at Bloodmoor Hill, compared
to other settlements of this period, is difficult to explain.
There was considerable variety in the size and form
of individual pits. The majority were sub-circular or sub-
ovate in shape, although there were also sub-rectangular
examples (e.g. cut [1583] in Pit Group F) and several
elongated (or grave-shaped) pits (e.g. F345) and some
were irregular. Their sides varied from gradual to vertical,
with occasionally undercut sides, and were also some-
times irregular; bases varied from curved or rounded to
roughly level. Their dimensions varied considerably, from
c.0.50m to c.5.00m across and from c.0.10m to c.0.95m
deep. Some were difficult to classify. The largest indi-
vidual pit in Pit Group F (cut [1583]) measured c.3.70m
by 3.25m and 0.95m deep, and could possibly be a small
(but deep) SFB. It seems possible that Structure 16, inter-
preted as an SFB, could possibly be a shallow pit.
Many of the individual pits were shown to be inter-
secting, and the recutting of earlier infilled pits was
Figure 3.53 Plan and section of Hollow F301
common. In many cases, these pits appeared to form
spatially discrete clusters, which have been analysed as
groups as an aid to interpretation. This gives a total of
fourteen pit groups (A to N), with a minimum of ninety-
nine recuts in total. Like the individual pits, the size of pit
groups varied, from two or three inter-cutting pits (groups
A, E and H) up to fifteen inter-cutting pits, including all
recuts (group K).
These groups are to a certain extent subjective; several
other possible clusters, such as those pits to the west and
north-west of Structure 3 (F10, F12 and F16), were not
assigned to a pit group, but probably could have been
(Fig. 3.55). Further analysis of Pit Group G has indicated
that several pits assigned to this group (F235, F232 and
possibly F267) might be phased to the earlier Roman
occupation. Fifteen other pits (five of which showed
evidence of recutting or were in fact more than one pit),
which could not easily be related to clusters have been
included in the catalogue because they were in some way
notable either in form or for their material culture assem-
blages. In addition, there were a further eighty-four pits
identified as dating to the Anglo-Saxon period.
Several of the pit groups, in particular K and M,
showed evidence of multiple recuts. A number of these
recuts were on top of each other, in such a way as to indi-
cate that earlier backfilled pits must have been dug out.
Some were cut almost entirely through earlier backfilled
features. If the reason for digging pits was to extract
sand (see below), some of the pits would presumably
have needed to be dug in adjacent locations, in areas of
undisturbed natural. If so, this would suggest that the
earlier pit/s were no longer visible on the surface. The
inter-cutting pit groups compare to the pit-clusters at
Catholme, interpreted as possible quarry-pits for peri-
odic sand extraction (Losco-Bradley and Kinsley 2002,

121
122
Figure 3.54 Location of pit groups and isolated pits, shown against backdrop of other Anglo-Saxon features
40, fig. 3.9). At Catholme it seemed that old pits were
not backfilled after excavation (ibid.), in contrast to the
evidence at Bloodmoor Hill.
The clustering of multiple pits in quite limited
areas, often adjacent to sunken features (see below),
might indicate that individual groups were limited in
time, representing intense activity over a relative short
period perhaps associated with the life of an adjacent
building. Alternatively, it could indicate activity over a
much longer period of time, given the number of recuts
and the probability that pits were backfilled before new
ones were excavated. Furthermore, the concentration
of multiple pits in limited areas suggests that they were
possibly constrained and limited by the use of space,
even though there was no physical evidence for bounda-
ries. At Catholme, fire-pits and charcoal pits, as well as a
number of green-stained pits, were preferentially located
Figure 3.55 Plan of area around Structures 1 to 5
123
in peripheral places, close to boundaries (Losco-Bradley
and Kinsley 2002, 32–40).
A number of pits and pit groups appeared to lie in
close spatial proximity to sunken features, frequently
only a metre or so from their sides (Fig. 3.56, Table 3.43).
These varied from single pits, in the case of Structures 32,
33 and 34, to multiple, inter-cutting pits, in the case of
Structures 29 and 30, although there was a tendency
towards three separate (re-) cuts (Structures 1, 12 and
23). This spatial proximity is clearest in the south-west
part of the settlement, where the density of features was
relatively low, between Structure 32 and F565, 33 and
F566 and 34 and F557.
Across the rest of the site, the pattern is less clear-
cut because of the higher density of occupation; pits
could thus relate to one or more buildings. Several SFBs
(Structures 26 and 27) did not apparently have pits in
close spatial association. There was no clear spatial rela-
 Figure 3.56 Plan of area around Structures 25 to 32
tionship between pits and wall-post buildings. Several
pit groups could have been associated with one or more
SFBs. Pit Group B was located between Structures 3
and 4 and could relate to one, both or neither of these
structures, while there were also a number of single pits
(not assigned to a separate pit group) to the west and
north-west of Structure 3. There were also a number of
‘isolated’ pits and many others that could not be spatially
associated with individual structures.
While there was a relatively small number of pits at
Mucking, compared to the number of Grubenhäuser,
a similar spatial relationship was noted between some
pits and buildings, and Hamerow suggested that there
might have been an association between these (Hamerow
1993, 20). At Broome, there was only a single SFB and
a single pit, compared with seven post-hole buildings,
but there did appear to be a close spatial relationship
between the SFB and pit, which was located c.2.50m to
124
the SFB’s east (Robertson 2003, 233, fig. 8). Similarly,
at the Criminology site settlement, Cambridge, the two
SFBs each appeared to be spatially related to single
pits (Structure 2 with Pit F4 and Structure 3 with F3),
although their locations in relation to one another were
not consistent (Dodwell et al. 2004, fig. 25). However, at
West Stow the pits were scattered across the settlement
and it is difficult to relate pits to specific buildings (West
1985, fig. 230).
The location of these pits, where they appeared to
have a close spatial relationship to SFBs, was often on
the northern side of the sunken features, although there
was variation (Table 3.43). Few were located along the
southern side of sunken features; if the associations are
correct, this might add some weight to the argument that
the doorways were located on the south side of these
buildings. However, the relationship might be fortuitous,
given that the settlement was in use for c.200 years. Many
Structure Pit/pit group Location Minimum distance (m) Structure phase Pit phase
1 A NW 1.60 2a 2a
3 F10 NW 0.80 2a 1
3 F12 W 0.95 2a
3 F16 NW 2.90 2a
3 or 4 B SW/SE 1.50 1 or 2a 2a
5 N NW 2.00 1 1
9 C N 1.50 1 1
10 D N 2.40 1 1
11 F502 N 1.20 2a
12 E N 1.00 2b 2b
13 F73 N 1.70 2b
17 16 W 2.00 1 1
23 H N 1.20 1 1
25 I NE 1.20 2b 1/2a
28 F368 E 0.50 2b
29 K E 3.00 2a 1/2a
30 L E 0.70 2a 2a
31 M S 2.00 2a 2a
32 F565 NE 4.00 2a
33 F566 SW 1.15 2a
34 F557 NE 0.90 1
35 J NE 0.80 2a 2a
36 334 SE 1.00 2a

Table 3.43 Details of pits and pit groups adjacent to SFBs

pits seem to be immediately adjacent to the SFBs and
if the actual area of this building-type was considerably
larger than the sunken features, as has been suggested,
then the pit/s would have been immediately against the
wall-line in several cases.
A shallow elongated hollow (F414) aligned north–
south was defined on the south-west side of Pit Group L,
while a similar feature (F536) was defined on the south
side of Pit Group C. It is tempting to suggest that these
features could be the remains of worn hollows created
during the excavation of the (other) pits in these groups.
If so, the orientation of these hollows might give some
indication of the direction of access and extraction.
Where both SFBs and pits or pit groups could be
positively phased (see Chapter 6), the concordance of
phasing was generally good (with several exceptions),
which adds some support to the suggestion that these
features were both spatially and temporally related. In
several cases, SFBs and adjacent pits were linked by
parts of the same pots (Table 3.44). In addition to these,
there was a vessel link (V179) between Structures 16 and
17, c.2.00m apart; it is possible that Structure 16 was
in fact a large, shallow pit (Fig. 3.57). That said, there
was also a vessel link (V125) between the upper fill of
Structure Pit Location Minimum Vessel number
distance (m)
5 F525 S(E) 1.40 V312
20 F255 E 2.00 V152
30 L (F323) E 8.75 V229
Table 3.44 Vessel links between pits and SFBs
Structure 9 and Pit F226, which was c.36.00m to the east
of the structure and clearly not adjacent to it.
The evidence indicates that these features were open,
and most likely infilled, at the same time and with at
least some material from the same source. However, the
relationship is complex because the dynamics of infilling
of the sunken features and the pits were very different.
It is difficult to estimate how frequently pits were dug.
Individual pits could have been dug out in a very short
period of time, and probably represent the work of a single
event. Given the apparent absence of weathering and
erosion to their sides, they seem also to have been infilled
over a relatively short period of time, the whole sequence
lasting perhaps several days, if not less. Intersecting pit
groups could have been created over a number of years,
if they were dug periodically. In contrast, sunken features
would probably have been filled in many years after they
were originally excavated, depending on the lifespan of
each building. If a building had an estimated life of forty
years (it might have been much shorter, but could have
been longer), then a new sunken feature might only have
been excavated every five or so years, based on an esti-
mated occupation of 200 years for the settlement (max)
divided by the total number of SFBs (thirty-eight).
Pits appear to have been dug and infilled in a short
period of time, whereas sunken features might have been
open (below a suspended floor) for a number of decades.
Presumably, sherds were deposited in sunken features
after the building had been dismantled, although sherds
could have slipped between floor planks.
Not one of the pits provided definite evidence of their
original use. It seems highly unlikely that the pits were
excavated simply for the burial of material culture (i.e. as

125
56
 Figure 3.57 Plan of area around Structures 16 to 18

receptacles for the disposal of rubbish) given the (likely)
presence of abandoned SFBs across the settlement. Some
of the pits contained considerable amounts of material
culture, although the quantities varied between pits and
some contained relatively little material. In general, their
fills appear for the most part to be incidental to their use,
much like those of the sunken features.
The majority of the pits contained one, two or three
distinct fills described mostly as brown through to dark
grey and black silty sands, although several showed more
complex fill sequences. Many had steep and clean sides
which, like those of the SFBs, indicates that they must
have been infilled relatively quickly. Several, however,
had some signs of slumping and erosion presumably

126
caused by use or post-use weathering and erosion:
examples include pits [4717] (Pit Group C), and [4901]
(Pit Group H). The upper fill ([1457]) of Pit F168 (Pit
Group F) was analysed using thin section soil micro-
morphology (see Milek, below). The content of this fill
was very similar to the fills of the sunken features, being
a sandy clay loam with a fine mineral component that
appeared dark brown owing to organic staining and the
presence of fine organic fragments. It contained negligible
quantities of anthropogenic material, which indicates that
this pit was not used for the dumping of general refuse
from the settlement (although it did contain seventy-two
sherds of Anglo-Saxon pottery (522g) from sixty-seven
different vessels).
Like the SFBs, the pits seem to have been intention-
ally and rapidly infilled, post-use, with varying quantities
of fragmented material already incorporated within a soil
matrix. Six pit groups and one pit (F255) each contained
more than fifty sherds of Anglo-Saxon pottery; three
pit groups contained over 100 sherds (I, J and L). Pit
Group L contained 269 sherds (c.3kg) representing some
224 vessels; the fills of only three SFBs contained more
pottery. However, one of the largest pits (F565) contained
just five sherds (21g). There were also varying amounts
of Roman pottery within the pits; the largest amount came
from Pit Group G (c.300 sherds weighing just under 4kg),
which was situated within the core of the earlier activity.
As mentioned above, it is possible that several of the pits
in this group could be earlier Roman features.
There were over 5kg of animal bone fragments
within three pit groups (G, J and L) and one (J) contained
over 13kg, although the largest quantity came from the
single Pit F255, which contained c.15kg. Four pit groups
contained over 100 identified bones or POSACs (C, G,
I and J) but the highest number (176 POSACs) came
from a single pit (F255). Again, there was great variation
between pits. Several pits also contained loomweight
fragments. Pit Group M contained over 1kg of unfired
clay, of which several fragments were identifiable as the
remains of loomweights. Pit F255 contained over 3kg of
unfired clay, with a number of identifiable loomweight
fragments and a single fired clay loomweight fragment
(as well as a further c.2.5kg of other fired clay). The fill
of this pit also produced a variety of metal and worked
bone artefacts.
Many pits produced small to moderate, and generally
unremarkable, material culture assemblages. However,
a number of the pits contained unusual deposits compa-
rable to a small number of assemblages within SFBs.
There was a deposit of animal bone in Pit F345, at the
interface of the lower and upper fills, which included two
(semi-) complete cattle skulls and a horse skull. The fill
of pit F425 contained a large fragment of cattle skull and
a scapula as well as a large fragment of lava quernstone
and large flint nodules. The fill of F366, in Pit Group L,
contained frequent fire-cracked stones and numerous
animal bones, including a complete cow skull, which
was located in the centre of the pit but above the base.
The fill of [3086], also in Pit Group L, contained a large
and varied assemblage. The fill of F368, two inter-cutting
pits, also produced a finds assemblage which included
over 3kg of animal bone, fish bone, quite large quanti-
ties of both Anglo-Saxon and Roman pottery, and also a
number of metal artefacts. Similarly, the fill of pits F255,
F376 (Pit Group J) and [3525] in Pit Group I contained
127
exceptionally large and varied material culture assem-
blages. Whether or not some or all of these deposits were
special and deliberately placed, as opposed to simple
rubbish disposal, is difficult to ascertain. While a single
animal skull could always have been the result of the
immediate disposal of primary and noxious butchery
waste, the material culture assemblages in pits such as
F368 and F255 stand out because of the combination,
quantity and variety of material categories that had been
brought together before deposition.
There was probably a variety of reasons for the crea-
tion of pits. No definite fire-pits — characterised by
scorched sides and in situ burning and often containing
quantities of fire-cracked stones — were identified at
Bloodmoor Hill (see Losco-Bradley and Kinsley 2002,
32–3, fig. 3.5), although the fills of several (e.g. F34 in
Pit Group B and F366 in Pit Group L) contained fire-
cracked stones that might have been used in a fire-pit.
None of the pits appear to be the remains of latrines, with
evidence of a superstructure above the pit, and there were
no green-stained fills indicative of cess-pits (ibid., 36–40,
fig. 3.7). No clay-lined pits were defined.
Few pits showed evidence of in situ burning. A small
number of pits (F237, F242, F264 and possibly F240), all
in Pit Group G, might be described as so-called charcoal
pits, associated with metalworking; they contained large
quantities of charcoal and metalworking evidence (F237
contained over 6kg of slag). There was no evidence to
show that charcoal was actually produced within them,
although the base of Pit F264 was scorched, as though
burning material had been dumped into the pit. It seems
more probable that the burning took place elsewhere,
prior to deposition. Many other pits across the site
contained dumps of charcoal. Some of the pits in group
N appeared to show evidence of in situ burning, and
many in this group contained charcoal deposits as well
as large amounts of metalworking waste, indicating that
these were associated with smithing. At Bestwall Quarry,
Dorset, twenty-four ‘charcoal pits’, out of a total of over
1000 charcoal-filled pits, most of which are likely to have
been Anglo-Saxon in date, have been radiocarbon-dated
to c. AD 650–800 (L. Ladle, pers. comm.). It has been
suggested that these round or ovate-shaped pits, which
typically had a thick lower fill of charcoal overlying
burnt sand, were associated with iron-working and were
possibly used as clamps in the production of charcoal
for fuel. Similar charcoal-filled pits were identified at
Catholme (Losco-Bradley and Kinsley 2002, 36). These
contained large quantities of charcoal but the sides of
these pits were not scorched; either the burning was of
low temperature or the carbonised material had been
burnt elsewhere (ibid.). Another possibility is that some
of the pits were excavated for sand for flux, given the
evidence for metalworking, as was suggested at Yarnton
(Hey 2004, 129).
The great variation in both form and size, which seems
almost random within individual pit groups, indicates
that many pits were not dug particularly carefully. The
lack of uniformity might indicate that (many of) the pits
were not in themselves important, their function lying
instead in what was extracted from them. Many pits may,
therefore, have been for sand extraction. At Catholme,
there were four pit-clusters made up of intersecting pits,
also cut into sand, which were comparable to the inter-
cutting pit groups at Bloodmoor Hill (Losco-Bradley
and Kinsley 2002, 40). On that site, it was suggested that
these might have been the result of small-scale and peri-
odic quarrying.
The sand was presumably extracted for a variety of
uses. Where there is a close spatial relationship between
single pits or pit groups and SFBs, the sand could have
been extracted for use within the adjacent building. The
sand may have been added to clay as temper in pottery,
or used in the maintenance of the building itself, if it was
added with organic material to clay in daub for walls. It
could have been used to patch and repair floors and paths,
or to fill worn hollows in front of entrances, although this
seems less likely as material from the surface could simply
have been scraped into them and levelled off (rather than
creating pits which then also needed to be infilled). It
could even have been dug and kept to put out fires within
buildings. The pits and pit groups at Bloodmoor Hill
clearly suggest that the extraction of sand was an impor-
tant aspect of the settlement activity, even though the use
of the sand is not immediately obvious.
Description
The pits were half-sectioned and hand-excavated;
complex and irregular-shaped intersecting pit groups
were sectioned in an attempt to establish their inter-
cutting relationships. In most cases, the second half was
subsequently excavated to recover total material culture
assemblages. Environmental samples were taken from
pit fills (see Ballantyne, Chapter 5) and one (F168 from
Pit Group F) was sampled for detailed soil analysis (see
Milek, below).
In addition to the pits described individually and in
groups below, eighty-four other features were identified
as pits dating to the Anglo-Saxon phase of occupation
(see Table 3.60). Those notable for their finds assem-
blages include F220, F383, F386 and F392, each with
over 1kg of animal bone; [4675], with its large amount
(1585g) of fired clay; and F307 and F519, with large
amounts of slag. The following had recognisable metal-
work and other artefacts: F132 (snaffle-bit and glass
bead); F276 (possible brooch); F307 (knife tip and pin of
7th- and mid-7th- to 8th-century date respectively); F351
and F392 (knives in each, both mid-5th- to 7th-century in
date); F386 (pins, possibly of mid-7th-century onwards
date); and F391.
All dimensions given are maximums, unless otherwise
indicated, and depths are from the machined surface.
Pit Group A
(Fig. 3.58)
Pit Group A (F509) consisted of three adjoining sub-circular-shaped
pits aligned N to S and located c.1.50m north-west of Structure 1.
The southernmost pit ([4524]) (1.15m by 0.90m and 0.20m
deep) possessed steep concave sides down to a concave base. The fill
consisted of mid-grey silty sand [4523]. Its northern edge had been cut
by pit [4522], which was of a similar size and shape (1.00m by c.1.25m
and 0.30m deep) and had sloping sides down to a roughly level base.
The fill was a very soft mid-greyish-black silty sand ([4521]) 0.30m
in depth.
Pit [4526] was located immediately to the north of [4524]. It was
1.25m by 1.00m and 0.25m deep, with sloping sides down to a concave
base, although its northern part had been truncated during machining.
The fill consisted of very dark grey to black fine silty sand [4525], with
scattered patches of yellow coarse sand (probably redeposited natural).
All three pits contained handfuls of Anglo-Saxon pottery, small amounts
of animal bone and small to moderate amounts of fired clay, including a
recognisable loomweight fragment in [4522] (Table 3.45).

Figure 3.58 Plan of Pit Group A
Pit Group B
(Fig. 3.59)
Pit Group B consisted of at least eight pits, several of which were inter-
cutting, located between and to the south of Structures 3 and 4, within
an area measuring c.7.50m from N to S and c.7.25m from E to W.
F17 consisted of at least three inter-cutting pits. Pit [286], contain-
ing fill [281], was c.1.95m (min) in length and 0.38m (min) deep, with
steep and slightly undercut sides down to a concave base. This had been
cut away by another pit [283] (1.70m by 1.30m and 0.55m deep). Only
the base of this pit, with a slightly concave profile, survived, as it too
had been truncated. Its fill was a dark brown to black silty sand ([282])
0.20m in depth. The latest pit in this sequence, [260] (3.35m by 1.70m
and c.0.30m deep), was sub-rectangular, although it may represent two
smaller inter-cutting pits. This pit had steep sides down to a roughly flat

Pit Group A Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
[4524] 2 (46g) 2 (39g) - - 3 (28g) - - - -
[4522] 21 (233g) 4 (39g) 1 (1g) - 21 (294g) - - - - Fired clay
includes partial
loomweight
[4526] 42 (94g) 3 (8g) - - 63 (778g) - - - -

Table 3.45 Finds associated with Pit Group A

128
 Figure 3.59 Plan and photograph of Pit Group B (from south)

Pit Group B Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
[286] 8 (95g) - - - - - - - -
[283] 146 (823g) 2 (15g) - - 129 (89g) - 2 (6g) - -
[260] 263 (920g) 15 (186g) - 1 (24g) 69 (280g) - - - 4 (35g) Quartzite hone No. 305; metal
includes annular brooch No.
10 and knife No. 206
[298] 81 (475g) 7 (70g) - - 100 (651g) - 1 (5g) 6 (33g) 1 (2g)
[291] 38 (152g) 6 (48g) - 2 (458g) 14 (121g) - 17 (11g) - 5 (31g) Metal includes rove No. 265
[332] 41 (105g) 9 (66g) 2 (26g) - 6 (30g) - - 2 (81g) 1 (15g)
[330] 22 (29g) 1 (105g) 1 (10g) - 21 (71g) - - - -
F35 200 (494g) 5 (51g) - - 19 (87g) - - 5 (44g) 1 (5g) Metal comprises nail fragment

Table 3.46 Finds associated with Pit Group B

Table 3.46 Finds associated with Pit Group B

129
 Figure 3.60 Plan, section and photograph of Pit Group C (from north)

Pit Group C Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
[4715] 20 (35g) 1 (21g) - - 7 (49g) 15 (147g) - - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights
[4717] 458 (1076g) 1 (62g) - - 49 (145g) - - 2 (30g) 11 (17g)
F536 86 (309g) 1 (6g) 1 (5g) - 8 (53g) - - - -
F521 489 (3249g) 18 (312g) 2 (7g) - 33 (432g) 5 (47g) - 24 (136g) 3 (15g) Opaque glass bead No. 33;
unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal includes
pin No. 47

TableTable
3.47 Finds associated
3.47 Finds with Pit
associated Group
with C
Pit Group C

Pit Group D Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
F517 40 (319g) 14 (111g) - 2 (112g) 7 (119g) 30 (79g) - - 1 (10g) Utilised flint flake (5g); metal
comprises binding No. 238
F518 - - - - - - - - -
F629 - - - - - - - - -
F537 114 (913g) 7 (96g) 1 (8g) - 7 (47g) - 1 (6g) 3 (25g) -
F538 14 (45g) 1 (13g) - - 1 (7g) - - - -
F539 32 (183g) 1 (15g) 2 (8g) 1 (47g) - - - 1 (16g) -
F540 4 (36g) 2 (21g) - - - - - 2 (61g) -

TableTable
3.48 3.48
FindsFinds
associated with with
associated Pit Group D D
Pit Group

130
base and contained a single uniform fill ([261]), a dark yellow-brown
to black silty sand. It also contained the largest finds assemblage,
including a 6th- to 7th-century annular brooch (No. 10), a 7th-century
knife (No. 206) and a sharpener and hone (Nos 305–6); its predeces-
sors produced relatively smaller amounts of animal bone, Anglo-Saxon
pottery and fired clay (Table 3.46).
F18, to the south-east of F17, consisted of two inter-cutting pits.
The earliest pit, [298] (2.00m by 1.75m and 0.31m deep), was sub-
ovate in shape, with sloping concave sides and an irregular base (which
may indicate that the feature was actually two smaller pits). The fill
was of black sand [299=1219]. The later pit, [291] (1.00m in diameter
and 0.43m deep), which cut through its north-west side, was sub-circu-
lar with a concave profile. It also contained a single black sand fill
([292=1218]).
F34, located to the south-west of F17, consisted of two inter-cutting
pits. The earliest pit, [332] (2.20m by 1.60m and 0.38m deep), was
sub-rectangular, with sloping concave sides down to a flat base. Its fill
consisted of dark grey-brown silty sand [331=1222], 0.30m in depth.
The eastern edge of this pit had been cut away by a smaller sub-circu-
lar pit, [330] (0.90m in diameter and 0.22m deep), with a similar fill
[329=1221]. Both pits were sealed by a thin layer of brown sand mixed
with grey-brown silty sand [328], 0.08m in depth, which contained a
large quantity of burnt stone (8000g).
F35 was a sub-circular pit ([335]) (c.1.60m in diameter and 0.35m
deep) located immediately south of F17. Its northern edge had been
previously excavated in Evaluation Trench 14. The pit had concave
sides down to a flat base. The lower fill was a dark grey silty sand
([334=1220]) 0.25m in depth that was sealed beneath [333], a dark grey
brown silty sand 0.15m deep.
Pit Group C
(Fig. 3.60)
Pit Group C consisted of four inter-cutting pits spanning an area c.4.50m
from N to S and 2.30m from E to W, and located immediately north of
Structure 9. The pit group was apparently sealed by Surface Deposit F1,
although the interface between the base of the surface deposit and the
top of the pits was very indistinct.
F500 consisted of two inter-cutting pits ([4715] and [4717]) trun-
cated on the north side by Pit F521 and possibly cutting F536. The
relationship between the two pits was unclear; the western-most [4715]
(1.40m wide and 0.65m deep), had near-vertical sides and a roughly
level base, with a pale brownish-grey silty sand fill ([4716]) containing
patches of redeposited natural yellow sand. The eastern pit ([4717]),
which was 1.30m wide and c.0.75m deep, had vertical sides with a
sharp break of slope to a roughly level base. Its lower fill consisted of
very dark blackish-brown friable sandy silt [4719], 0.15m deep, which
was sealed by pale brownish-grey silty sand [4718], c.0.60m deep, with
patches of slumped or redeposited natural yellow sand on the vertical
sides of the cut.
F536 was a tapering elongated shallow feature 1.80m by 0.80m
and c.0.15–0.25m deep aligned N–S, and was possibly the remains of
two inter-cutting pits. Its cut, [4720] (= [4731]), had steep to shallow
sides with a stepped east–west profile down to a concave base. The fill
was light brownish-grey to dark brown silty sand [4721] (= [4730]).
Figure 3.61 Plan of Pit Group D
131
The latest pit, F521, was located on the northern edge of the pit
group, cutting pits [4715] and [4717]. It was sub-circular and 1.90m
by 1.60m and 0.60m deep; the cut ([4713]) (= [4647]) had near-verti-
cal sides down to a roughly flat base. Its fill consisted of three distinct
deposits, although these were observed only in section. The lowest
was black charcoal-rich sandy silt [4714c] (= [4642a]), c.0.05–0.15m
deep, with a thin gravel lens at its base. This was sealed by [4714b] (=
[4642b]), a darker greyish-brown sandy silt c.0.35m deep; the upper fill
was mid-greyish-brown sandy silt [4714a] (= [4642c]), c.0.20m deep.
Both this pit and [4717] contained substantial quantities of animal and
fish bone (with a variety of species of both), along with sizeable quanti-
ties of fired clay. F521 also produced a large amount of Anglo-Saxon
pottery (312g), a glass bead (No. 33) and a metal pin (No. 47), possibly
of mid-7th-century-onwards date (Table 3.47).
Pit Group D
(Fig. 3.61)
Pit Group D was located immediately south of, and post-dated,
Structure 9: the structure’s south-west corner was cut away by F517
and its southern side by F629; these two pits also cut through an earlier
E–W ditch F533, which formed the southern boundary to the Roman
trackway. The pit group consisted of seven pits spanning an area
c.4.70m from E to W and 4.00m from N to S. All but one (F540) of
the pits inter-cut. With the exception of F540, all the pits in this group
appeared to be sealed below the Surface Deposit F1.
F517 was sub-rectangular and c.2.00m by 1.10m and c.0.35m deep;
the pit cut ([4631]) (= [4755]) had sloping sides down to a concave
base. Its lower fill was dark brown silty sand [4634], c.0.20m in depth,
sealed by mid–dark grey silty sand [4633], c.0.10m in depth. Pit F518
appeared to be a secondary recut of F517, cutting through the southern
half of the earlier pit. Its cut [4632] (0.75m in width and 0.35m deep)
had steeply sloping sides down to a V-shaped base and contained a
single mid-brown silty sand fill [4635].
The eastern edge of F517 had been cut by an irregular sub-rectan-
gular Pit F629; its cut, [4765] (c.1.55m by 1.15m and 0.38m deep), had
steep sides and a concave base and contained a single fill of dark brown
to black silty sand with some pale grey patches.
Pit F537 [4654] cut through the southern edge of F517. It was
ovate, 1.15m in width and c.0.40m deep, and had concave sides down
to a level base, with a lower fill ([4653]) 0.10m deep, sealed by [4652],
which was c.0.30m deep. Its eastern edge was cut away by Pit F538, an
ovate pit ([4659]) 1.10m in width and c.0.40m deep, with a single fill
([4660]). The eastern side of F538 had been cut away by the latest pit in
the sequence (F539), an ovate pit ([4657]) 1.00m in width and c.0.30m
deep, with a single fill ([4658]).
The southern-most pit in the group, F540, was located immedi-
ately south of F539 and was sealed below Surface Deposit F503. The
pit ([4655]) was ovate, 1.95m by 0.95m and c.0.25m deep. All these
pits produced generally small and unremarkable finds assemblages
(Table 3.48).
Pit Group E
(Fig. 3.62)
Pit Group E (F4) consisted of three inter-cutting ovate shaped pits,
F127, F128 and F129, spanning an area c.5.75m from E to W and 3.00m
from N to S, and located immediately north of Structure 12.
The central and earliest pit, F128 [1224] (c.2.00m by c.1.55m and
0.95m deep), had sloping and stepped sides, possibly as a result of
recutting, down to a concave base. It contained five separate deposits.
The lowest fill was orange sand [1178], which was 0.15m deep and
contained lenses of compact mid-brown silty sand. This was sealed by
[5260] (= [217]), a grey-orange sand c.0.10m in depth with brown silty
sand lenses. Above this lay [5259] (= [215]), a dark grey-brown silty
sand c.0.10m in depth with brown silty sand lenses. This was sealed
below [5258] (= [212]), which consisted of light grey-brown sand
c.0.10–0.25m in depth with brown silty sand lenses with orange sand.
The upper fill consisted of mid-grey sand [1125], 0.35m in depth. F128
was cut by Pit F127 on its western edge and by F129 on its eastern
side.
The western pit, F127 [1223] (= [222]) (2.90m by 1.45m and
0.85m deep), had steep sloping sides with a concave base, and the
fill consisted of three main deposits. The lowest fill ([221])(=[1177])
consisted of lenses of pale grey, beige and dark grey fine sand with
lenses of compact mid-brown silty sand, and was 0.15–0.20m deep.
This was sealed by [220] (= [1124]), a pale grey-brown sand containing
lenses of brown silty sand, which was c.0.45m in depth (max). The
upper fill ([219]) (= [1224]) was grey-brown sand 0.25m in depth.
F129 [1225] (= [226]) was 3.10m by 1.70m and 0.75m deep,
and possessed sloping and stepped sides down to a flat base. Its fill
consisted of five distinct deposits. The lowest comprised fine, clean and
 Figure 3.62 Plan, section and photograph (from north) of Pit Group E

Pit Group E Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
F127 93 (607g) - 33 (234g) - 47 (336g) - - 11 (117g) 3 (16g) Metal comprises Roman coin
No. 395 and 2 nails
F128 7 (6g) - 10 (147g) - 18 (5g) 10 (42g) - 2 (5g) 1 (9g) Metal comprises nail
F129 803 2 (41g) 24 (307g) 2 61 - - 6 (67g) 2 (14g) Fired clay includes partial
(4324g) (1058g) (1138g) loomweight; metal includes
knife No. 192; bone includes
worked whale vertebra No.
234.

TableTable
3.49 3.49
FindsFinds associated
associated with
with Pit Pit Group
Group E E

132
 Figure 3.63 Plan and photograph (from east) of Pit Group F

Pit Group F Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
[1583] 211 (581g) 84 (555g) 48 (114g) 6 (276g) 104 (322g) 24 (186g) 36 (117g) 85 (556g) 16 (20g) Glass bead No. 35; metal
includes ferrule No. 242 and a
nail
[1560] 4 (2g) 4 (17g) 8 (21g) - 14 (39g) - 5 (2g) 6 (45g) -
[1563] 18 (11g) 3 (34g) 2 (1g) - 65 (380g) - - 1 (20g) -
[2324] 9 (24g) 1 (5g) - - - 19 (141g) - 1 (11g) - Unfired clay contains
loomweights
[2419] - - - - - - - - -

TableTable
3.503.50 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Pit Group
Pit Group F F
133
 compact pale yellow sand [1123], 0.20m in depth, with frequent lenses
of compact pale brown silty sand. This was sealed by [217] (= [225]), a
grey-orange sand 0.10–0.20m in depth with brown silty sand lenses, and
[215] a dark grey-brown silty sand c.0.25m deep with brown silty sand
lenses. [212] (= [224]) consisted of light grey-brown sand with brown
silty sand lenses, which measured c.0.20–0.35m in depth, and had
disturbed orange sand throughout the deposit. The upper fill consisted
of dark brown silty sand [211] (= [223] and [1126]), 0.35–0.45m deep,
containing occasional small sub-angular gravel mixed with lenses of
fine dark brown silty sand, patches of clean yellow and pale grey sand.
F127 and F129 both contained medium to large animal bone
assemblages and sizeable amounts of Roman pottery, with very little
Anglo-Saxon pottery represented, although the small to medium
amounts of fired clay (including possible daub with wattle impres-
sions up to c.20mm in diameter, and partial loomweights), slag and the
possibly 7th-century knife (No. 192) in F129 are all characteristic of
pits of Anglo-Saxon date; a whale vertebra (No. 234) and a 4th-century
coin which had been hammered flat (No. 395) were also associated
(Table 3.49).
Pit Group F
(Fig. 3.63)
Pit Group F (F168) consisted of three adjoining pits aligned NE to SW
and located c.6.50m south of Structure 18. A further two pits ([2419]
and [2324]) may also have been associated with this pit group.
The central and largest of these pits, [1583] (= [1622]) (3.70m by
3.25m and 0.95m deep), was sub-rectangular and aligned NE to SW,
with steeply sloping and stepped sides (including a ledge c.0.50m wide
and c.0.25m above the base), and a roughly level base. Its fill comprised
several deposits when seen in section, although only two were observed
during excavation: the lower ([1514]) was c.0.45m in depth, and the
upper ([1457]) was c.0.50m in depth (max). In the north-east part of the
pit the lower fill ([1514]) comprised three distinct layers. The lowest
comprised pale grey-brown sand c.0.20m deep, with a discrete patch
of black silty sand 0.10m deep defined within this deposit. This lower
fill was sealed below a layer of yellow sand 0.10m in depth that was
possibly redeposited natural, containing irregular lenses of brown silty
sand; this was localised to the southern side of the pit. The upper part of
[1514] was pale grey sand c.0.20m deep, with moderate stone and small
gravel inclusions. In the south-west part of the pit, [1514] was shown
to overlie three lower and distinct fills. The lowest of these was pale
grey to red sand [1566], c.0.15m in depth, which apparently extended
around the base and lower side of the pit. This was sealed by [1567],
a red to grey and yellow sand, c.0.35m in depth. Both were sealed by
a discrete deposit of yellow-brown gravelly sand ([1588]) c.0.12m in
depth. The upper fill of the pit consisted of dark blackish-grey sand
[1457], 0.30–0.50m deep, within the hollow formed by the compac-
tion and stabilisation of the lower fills. This pit produced sizeable
amounts of animal bone, Anglo-Saxon (and Roman) pottery, fired and
unfired clay, slag, lava quern and CBM, as well as a glass bead (No. 35)
(Table 3.50).
The northern pit, [1560] (1.80m by 1.30m and 0.25m deep), was
sub-ovate, with sloping steep sides down to a concave base. The animal
or root-disturbed fill comprised two different deposits: the lower was a
thin band of pale grey sand ([1562]) 0.05m in depth. This was sealed by
[1561], a black silty sand c.0.20m in depth (max), with lenses of yellow
sand at the interface with the base. [1561] was indistinguishable from
[1457], with which it merged.
The southern pit, [1563] (1.50 by 1.20m and 0.50m deep), was very
similar in character to [1560]. It was also sub-ovate with steep sloping
sides down to a concave base, and its fill was also characterised by two
distinct deposits. The lower fill was light grey sand [1565], 0.20m in
depth, with charcoal, red sandy patches and a sizeable amount of fired
clay. The upper fill consisted of dark grey silty sand [1564], 0.20m in
depth. Again, the relationship with pit [1583] was not distinguished.
Located c.1.20m to the north of [1560], pit [2324] (F274) (1.65m
by 1.20m and 0.50m deep) was sub-ovate with steep sloping sides down
to a roughly flat base. The fill consisted of three different deposits: the
lowest was grey-brown sand [2323], c.0.10m in depth; this was sealed
by [2322], a disturbed grey sand c.0.10m in depth, while the upper fill
of the pit consisted of dark grey sand [2321], 0.25m in depth. Few finds
were recovered from this pit, aside from unfired clay loomweights.
A further small pit might also be associated with this group. Pit
[2419] (1.50m by 0.90m and 0.25m deep) was located c.2.50m west of
[1583], cutting through an earlier infilled Roman ditch F421. This pit
was also sub-ovate and had steep sloping sides down to a concave base,
with a single fill of dark grey sand. No finds were recovered.
Pit Group G
Pit Group G was located in the central part of the site, in the area
of Structure 44. It was also the area in which the cemetery was
subsequently sited and a number of pits had been truncated by graves.
The group consisted of at least twelve pits, within an area spanning
c.14.00m east–west and 8.00m north–south. Six of the pits (F166,
F167, F183, F238, F240 and F264) were located within the internal
area of Structure 44, although they post-dated it. Eight of the pits in
this group (F237, F242, F264, F238, F183, F240, F167 and F166) were
contained within the area of the Surface Deposit F159/F182, which was
described as black charcoal-rich sand: this was indistinguishable from
the fills of the pits and they were only defined after the surface deposit
had been removed.
Several of the pits were cut by graves and vice versa, although
we cannot be absolutely certain of the relative chronology given the
amount of animal disturbance in this area. Grave 21 cut through pits
F235 and F232, while F166 and F167 cut through Grave 3, F238 cut
through Grave 1, Pit F267 cut through Grave 11, scoop F263 appeared
to cut Grave 12 and Pit F240 cut through Grave 5. These relationships
give us an important chronological sequence for the burials. This might

Pit Group G Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
[2500] - - - - - - -
F166 96 (558g) - 1 (3g) - 5 (17g) - 1 (27g) 2 (39g) - Flint pressure-flaked tool
(12g)
F167 384 (2120g) 1 (15g) - - 2 (12g) 8 (152g) - - - Bone includes whale vertebra
No. 235
F183 196 (828g) 4 (22g) 4 (15g) 1 (82g) 10 (111g) - 65 (214g) 3 (38g) - Polished stone (763g)
F232 68 (440g) 3 (47g) 158 23 33 (288g) 28 (660g) - 1 (9g) 5 (69g) Two polished stones (3049g);
(2991g) (2534g) fired clay includes 2 partial
loomweights; metal includes
?bolt-plate No. 274 and a nail
F235 12 (153g) 1 (2g) - - 1 (10g) - - - 1 (2g) Metal comprises pin No. 93
F237 138 (332g) 3 (6g) 118 (580g) 33 44 (159g) 1 (5g) - 1009 9 (53g) Sandstone sharpener No. 299;
(2566g) (6188g) metal includes ?bracelet
fragment No. 6, fish-hook No.
429 and 4 nails
F238 309 (1022g) 4 (33g) 4 (7g) - 2 (16g) - - 6 (534g) 5 (30g) Metal includes 2 nails
F240 51 (62g) - 4 (28g) 1 (28g) 57 (239g) - - 14 (203g) 1 (3g) Mudstone hone No. 314
F242 - - - - 1 (25g) - - 19 (155g) -
F264 - 1 (3g) 8 (92g) - 14 (25g) - - 2 (2g) -
F267 81 (225g) 5 (25g) 4 (64g) - - - 1 (109g) 4 (35g) -

TableTable 3.51 Finds

3.51 Finds associated
associated with
with Pit Pit Group
Group G G

134
suggest that other pits in this group also post-dated the cemetery and
it shows that they are not, in fact, part of a close chronological group.
In fact, pits F232, F235 and F237 all appear to pre-date the cemetery,
while the rest of Pit Group G post-dates it. The pits are described below
from west to east.
F237 had been dug into the hollow of an earlier infilled N–S ditch
(F421). It lay immediately north of, and intersected with, Pit F242 and
these two features may have been related. There was a post-hole ([1852])
on the north-east edge of the pit and a further possible post-hole within
its south-east part. These were thought to relate to Structure 44 and their
relationship with the pit was not established. The pit [1849] (c.1.40m in
width and 0.50m deep) was an irregular sub-square shape with irregular
steep sloping sides down to a concave and bowl-shaped base. Its fill
was black charcoal-rich sand [1850] (= [1851], [1975] and [1976]),
which was indistinguishable from the Surface Deposit F159/F182 (this
lay across the entire area but, perhaps not coincidentally, centred on pits
F237 and F242). The fill contained a large finds assemblage, including
6188g of slag, 2566g of tile, 2000g of stone and 121 sherds of pottery
weighing 586g, of which all but three were Roman (Table 3.51).
F242 [1900] (c.1.40m by 1.20m and 0.12m deep) was an irregular
sub-square pit or hollow also located above ditch F421; a deposit of
unfired clay ([1941]) appeared to have been dumped on its western
edge. A possible post-hole was defined in the north-east part of the pit,
although its relationship with the pit was not established. The material
filling this feature was indistinguishable from [1850] within Pit F237
and the Surface Deposit F159/F182, described as black charcoal-rich
sand [1902].
F264 [2256] (c.1.00 by 0.80m and c.0.20m deep) was a sub-circu-
lar pit truncating the eastern side of a burnt clay oven base or hearth
(F254 [2254]), which had been destroyed by illicit metal-detectorists
before detailed recording. The lower fill consisted of a deposit of char-
coal-rich material ([2258]) that had apparently been dumped into the
base of the pit, which had been scorched by this material. The upper fill
was described as pale to mid-brown sand ([2257]).
F238 (1.40m by 0.40m (min) and 0.40m deep) was a sub-circular
or sub-ovate pit with a concave profile, which had been truncated across
its northern side by later E–W ditch F156. The southern side of the pit
apparently cut through the northern edge of Grave 1. The lower fill
consisted of dark grey-brown silty sand [1856], 0.09m in depth and
containing redeposited sand patches. The upper fill was dark grey-
brown sandy silt [1855], 0.30m in depth.
F183 [1484] (1.40 by 1.35m and 0.40m deep) was a sub-circular pit
with steep sloping sides down to a level base. The lower fill consisted
of mixed yellow and red sand [1555], c.0.30m in depth (max). This
was sealed below [1483], a very dark brown to grey-black silty sand
c.0.25m in depth (max).
Apparently cutting through the north-west corner of Grave 5, F240
[1893] (c.0.70m in diameter and 0.30m deep) was a sub-circular pit
contained a single fill of charcoal-rich black silty sand [1892].
Cutting through the western edge of Pit F166 and also truncat-
ing the western half of Grave 3, F167 [1450] (1.40m in diameter and
c.0.25m deep) was a sub-circular pit with sloping sides and a flat base.
The lower fill comprised mottled grey-brown sandy silt [1431], 0.12m
in depth, which was sealed by dark grey-brown silty sand [1422], 0.24m
in depth. This pit contained a large amount of animal bone, including
two fragments of worked whale vertebrae (No. 235).
F166 truncated the eastern half of Grave 3 and had been cut away
on the north-west edge by Pit F167. It was a large sub-ovate pit 1.70m
by 0.65m and 0.43m deep (max), and aligned NW–SE, although it
possibly comprised two smaller pits. It contained a single fill ([1423]),
a mottled grey-brown silty sand with a very dark deposit in the base
of the pit.
A shallow sub-circular pit or scoop ([2350]) was defined on the
south-west edge of Grave 12; it measured c.0.75m in diameter and
0.15m in depth. This feature contained an unusual deposit of ?slag
and/or iron-rich sand containing the mineralised remains of reeds. This
feature appeared to cut through the grave, although there was much
disturbance in the area and the relationship must remain uncertain.
The northern side of F267 possibly cut through the southern edge
of Grave 11 but this remains uncertain as the northern part of the pit
had been subsequently truncated by the later ditch F156. F267 was an
irregular sub-ovate pit ([2293]) c.1.60m by 1.20m and 0.52m deep,
with steep concave sides down to a flat base. The lower fill consisted
of pale to mid-brown sand [2292], 0.21m in depth, possibly comprising
wind-blown accumulation. The upper fill was mid to dark grey-brown
sand [2291], 0.26m in depth, which had suffered considerable root and
animal disturbance.
The northern side of F235 appeared to have been cut away by
Pit F232, while both had been cut by Grave 21 and the later ditch F156.
F235 was a large irregular sub-circular pit ([1842]) c.2.00m in diameter
135
and 0.60m deep, with steep sides down to a roughly level base. The
lower fill was mid-greenish-yellow sand [2308], 0.26m in depth, which
was sealed by a pale to mid-brown sand ([1841]), 0.30m in depth. It
produced a metal pin (No. 93).
F232 appeared to cut the northern edge of Pit F235 but had been
cut away by Grave 21 and also by the later ditch F156. It was a sub-
circular or sub-ovate pit with gradual to steep sides (possibly the result
of erosion). The lower fill consisted of mid-brown silty sand [1832],
0.10m in depth. This was sealed by [1831], described as dark grey-
brown sandy silt 0.30m in depth. The pit as a whole contained a large
finds assemblage, including 161 sherds of pottery weighing 3038g, of
which all but three were Roman, 3049g of worked stone, 2534g of tile
and 1500g of stone (Table 3.51).
Pit Group H
(Fig. 3.64)
Pit Group H (F577) consisted of three inter-cutting sub-circular pits
which cut the south-east corner of Roman Building III.
The northernmost pit, [4903] (c.1.40m in diameter and 0.45m
deep), was sub-circular, with steep concave sides and a flat base. The
fill comprised dark brown silty sand [4902]. Its southern side had been
cut away by pit [4901].
Immediately to the south-east of [4903] was a second sub-ovate
pit, [4896] (c.1.70 by 1.50m and 0.40m deep), which also had steep
concave sides and an irregular flat base. The fill of this pit was also
a dark brown silty sand ([4895]), and its finds assemblage included
a pottery spindlewhorl (No. 380), a 7th-century knife (No. 188), a
round-shave (No. 233) and unfired clay loomweights (Table 3.52); its
north-western side had been cut away by [4901].
Pit [4901] (c.2.10 by 1.90m and 0.90m deep) was, therefore, the
latest and also the largest of the three pits in this group. It was sub-
circular, with sloping concave sides down to a concave base. Four
distinct fills were defined. The lowest fill was described as clean
(orange-) brown silty sand [4900], 0.08m in depth (this possibly a result
of weathering and/or erosion to the sides). This was sealed by a layer
of charcoal ([4899]) 0.08m in depth, and dark grey silty sand [4898],
0.30m in depth. The upper deposit consisted of very dark brown silty
sand [4897], 0.50m in depth. All three pits produced moderately sized
assemblages of Roman and Anglo-Saxon pottery, and animal bone
(Table 3.52).
Pit Group I
Pit Group I consisted of seven pits located immediately to the north-
east of Structure 25, in an area spanning c.10.00m from east to west and
c.5.50m from north to south. Pit [3566] (c.2.50m by 1.70m and 0.52m
deep) was sub-ovate, with sloping sides varying from gradual around
the southern side to steep around the northern side, and a slightly
concave base. The lower fill of the pit was purple-grey silty sand [3587],
c.0.30m in depth. The upper fill ([3567]) consisted of brown silty sand
0.20m in depth. Pit [3616] (c.1.15m by 0.90m and c.0.25m deep) was
ovate with a shallow concave profile. The fill consisted of grey-brown
silty sand [3617]. Unfortunately, this feature had been destroyed by
metal-detectorists before excavation.
Pit [3525] (c.2.90 by 1.90m and 0.50m (max) deep) was an irregular
sub-ovate pit with sloping sides and a sloping base, which was deepest
in the southern part of the pit. The lower fill was grey and pale to mid-
brown silty sand [3557], 0.10m deep. This was sealed by a deposit of
dark brown silty sand ([3526]) 0.30m in depth (max), which appeared
to contain several large burnt patches. This pit produced large quantities
of animal bone (3543g), Anglo-Saxon pottery (476g), fired clay (438g,
including partial loomweights) and slag (401g) (Table 3.53).
Pit [3520] (c.2.65m by 2.20m and 0.44m deep) was of a similar size
and shape to [3525], with gradually sloping sides down to a roughly
level base. The fill sequence of this pit was similar to that of [3525]. The
lower fill consisted of a grey and pale to mid-brown silty sand ([3522])
0.10m in depth, below an upper fill of grey-brown silty sand ([3521])
0.35m in depth; its finds assemblage also included sizeable quantities of
animal bone, Anglo-Saxon pottery and fired clay (Table 3.53).
Pit F385 [3630] (1.30m by 1.00m and 0.40m deep) was a sub-
square pit with a concave or bowl-shaped profile. It contained a lower
fill of grey-brown silty sand fill c.0.05m in depth below the main fill,
which consisted of very dark grey silty sand [3654], 0.35m in depth. It
did not produce any finds.
F378 [3652] comprised two separate pits, although these were
recorded as a single feature using the same context number. The eastern
pit (c.1.00 by 0.75m and 0.35m deep) was sub-ovate, with steep sloping
sides down to a roughly level base. The lower fill consisted of a dark
grey-brown silty sand 0.25m in depth, below a shallow upper fill of
dark grey charcoal-rich silty sand c.0.10m in depth. Both fills were
recorded with a single context number ([3606]). The western pit was
 Figure 3.64 Plan, sections and photograph (from north-east) of Pit Group H

Pit Group H Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
[4903] 30 (202g) 14 (195g) 1 (11g) 1 (36g) 9 (29g) - - - -
[4896] 30 (433g) 21 (270g) 3 (70g) - 21 (113g) 7 (187g) - - 2 (158g) Pottery spindlewhorl No. 380;
unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal comprises
knife No. 188 and
round-shave No. 333
[4901] 66 (636g) 28 (208g) 4 (118g) - 25 (462g) 4 (92g) 7 (40g) - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights

TableTable
3.52 3.52
FindsFinds associated
associated withGroup
with Pit Pit Group
H H

136
Pit Group I Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
[3566] 220 (802g) 8 (31g) - - 27 (85g) - - - -
[3616] - - - - - - - - -
[3525] 105 (3543g) 57 (476g) 3 (14g) 1 (36g) 95 (438g) - 27 (62g) 13 (401g) 2 (4g) Fired clay includes 2 partial
loomweights
[3520] 374 (1857g) 45 (400g) 1 (6g) 6 (262g) 57 (334g) - 1 (146g) 1 (22g) 2 (4g) Fired clay includes partial
loomweight; metal comprises
2 nails
F385 - - - - - - - - -
F378 - - - - - - - - -

TableTable
3.533.53
FindsFinds associated
associated withwith Pit Group
Pit Group I I

slightly larger (1.15m by 1.10m and c.0.30m deep), with steep sides
down to an irregular base. The fill sequence was similar to that in the
first pit and was accordingly given the same context number ([3606]).
Neither pit produced any finds.
Pit Group J
Pit Group J consisted of six pits and an area of irregular hollows or
scoops (F376 and F377) located immediately to the east of Structure 35
and to the west of Structures 36 and 37, in an area spanning c.11.50m
from north to south by 8.50m from east to west. It seems possible
that the irregular shallow hollows may simply have been the result of
trampling, wear and erosion between features, rather than excavated
pits. They were filled with a dark brown to black sand which covered
the entire area, masking the underlying features and obscuring
Structure 35 and Pit Group J, and which appeared to be a continuation
of the surface deposit to the west contained within the remains of the
earlier trackway.
F350 consisted of two inter-cutting sub-ovate-shaped pits, both
of which overlay the earlier infilled E–W ditch F204 ([3441]), which
formed the southern boundary of the Roman trackway. The earliest pit,
[3364] (c.3.35m by 1.10m (min) and 0.50m deep), had steep sloping
sides down to a concave base. It contained a single fill of slightly
pinkish pale to mid-grey sand [3426]. The pit had been truncated on the
western side by a larger pit, [3440] (c.3.35m by 2.25m and 0.46m deep),
which had steep sides, with a stepped profile on the north side, down
to a roughly level base. The main fill of this pit was very dark brown,
occasionally black, silty sand [3365], although the lowest c.0.05m of
this fill ([3427]), at the interface between the pit cut and the infilled
ditch, was quite mixed. Pit [3440] had a very large finds assemblage,
including a varied collection of animal bone (7811g), Anglo-Saxon
pottery (485g), CBM (559g), fired clay (482g) and unfired clay (197g,
including loomweights) (Table 3.54).
F331 consisted of two inter-cutting sub-circular pits which cut
through the earlier infilled ditches F433 and F434 (these forming the
northern boundary of the Roman trackway). The earliest and largest
pit, [3245] (c.2.40m long and 0.40m deep), had a gradual slope on
the eastern side and a steeper slope around the western side, down to
a roughly level base. The pit contained a single dark brown sand fill
([3242]), although most of the pit had been cut away by the slightly
smaller but deeper pit [3245] (c.1.60m long and 0.65m deep). The
lower fill of this pit was very dark brown to black sand [3244], c.0.40m
in depth, containing moderate to frequent charcoal flecks. The lowest
0.25m of this fill was heavily iron panned. The upper fill of the recut
consisted of very dark brown to black sand [3243], c.0.25m in depth.
Finds included moderate amounts of animal bone, Anglo-Saxon pottery,
fired clay and lava quern fragments.
Also overlying the infilled ditch F434, F402 was a small and
shallow sub-circular pit c.0.90m by 0.70m and 0.16m deep, with a
concave profile and dark grey to black sand fill which produced a small
finds assemblage, including unfired clay loomweights.
F376 was a large irregular feature consisting of at least seven
shallow inter-cutting scoops or hollows ([3560]) measuring c.5.00m
from north to south by 3.30m from east to west, but only c.0.10m in
depth. It overlay the earlier infilled E–W ditch F630, which was associ-
ated with the Roman trackway. The feature was filled with very dark
grey to black sand which produced a large assemblage of animal bone
(1409g), Anglo-Saxon pottery (249g), fired clay (863g), unfired clay
(203g, including loomweight fragments), and a pottery spindlewhorl
(No. 381). One definite and distinct pit or large post-hole was defined
on the western edge of F376, in the form of a small sub-ovate pit, [3612]
(c.0.65m by 0.45m and 0.30m deep), whose fill was indistinguishable
from that of [3650].
F377 was located immediately to the east of F376, and was of a
similar character, consisting of an irregular row of at least nine inter-
cutting shallow scoops or hollows ([3580]) measuring c.7.25m from
north to south by c.2.00m from east to west and up to c.0.15m in depth.
Like F376, the feature was filled with very dark grey to black sand
([3581], [3582] and [3583]), but produced markedly fewer finds. One
distinct pit or large post-hole was defined on the north-western edge of
F377, in the form of a small sub-circular pit, [3561] (c.0.65m by 0.60m
and 0.40m deep), whose fill was indistinguishable from [3581].
Pit Group K
(Fig. 3.65)
Pit Group K (F315) was a large inter-cutting pit complex spanning
c.5.65m by 3.60m in total extent and located c.3.00m east of
Structure 29 (although is not necessarily contemporary with it), and
north of Pit Group L. At least fifteen separate pits were defined, all very
similar in character; they were generally sub-circular or ovate in shape
with concave shaped bases, and measured up to 2.10m by 1.10m in area
([3451]) and up to 0.54m in depth ([3507]), although most were from
0.20m to 0.35m deep. The nature of their fills was generally quite similar,

Pit Group J Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
[3364] 37 (122g) 1 (12g) - 1 (15g) 1 (1g) - - - 4 (4g) Metal includes tack
[3440] 990 (7811g) 29 (485g) 7 (37g) 3 (559g) 80 (482g) 14 (197g) 50 (75g) - 1 (1g) Flint awl; unfired clay
contains loomweights
[3245] 17 (61g) - - 2 (94g) - - - -
F331 63 (344g) 19 (227g) - - 17 (243g) - 12 (453g) 1 (12g) 2 (43g) Metal includes holdfast No.
259
F402 32 (212g) 3 (18g) - - 2 (28g) 2 (128g) - - 1 (16g) Unfired clay contains
loomweights
F376 225 (1409g) 25 (249g) 2 (67g) - 74 (863g) 17 (203g) 5 (1g) - 2 (5g) Pottery spindlewhorl No. 381;
unfired clay contains
loomweights
F377 120 (468g) 10 (123g) - - 11 (28g) - - - -

Table
Table 3.543.54 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Pit Group
Pit Group J J

64 137
Figure 3.65 Plan, section, reconstruction and photograph (from south-west) of Pit Group K

138
Pit Group K Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
[3509] 98 (752g) 15 (63g) 12 (53g) - 171 (980g) - - 2 (26g) 1 (5g) Metal comprises a nail
[5253] - - - - - - - - -
[3511] 1 (10g) - 2 (17g) - - - - - 1 (1g)
[3447] 7 (93g) - 6 (53g) - 2 (33g) - 4 (11g) - -
[3444] 11 (47g) 1 (4g) 3 (33g) - 1 (1g) - 6 (14g) - -
[3478] - - - - - - - - -
[3476] 14 (127g) 3 (47g) - - 1 (7g) - - - -
[3458] 18 (68g) 1 (2g) - - - - - - -
[3452] 16 (120g) - - - 27 (83g) - - 2 (107g) 5 (54g) Metal includes hook No. 250
and 2 nails
[3451] 90 (579g) 8 (48g) 8 (35g) - 27 (81g) - - - -
[3507] 7 (60g) - 1 (21g) - - - - - -
[3484] 12 (17g) - - - 8 (43g) - - - -
[3485] 160 (1358g) 26 (183g) 14 (74g) - 117 - - - 1 (3g) Metal comprises a nail
(1044g)
[3479] 346 (1332g) 10 (215g) - - 83 (360g) - - - -
[3513] 1 (1g) 1 (4g) - - 2 (16g) 6 (56g) - - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights

Table
Table 3.553.55 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Pit Group
Pit Group K K

consisting of grey-brown sand with varying quantities of redeposited
natural sand, charcoal and burnt clay, and including charcoal lenses; in
several cases the fills sloped down into the base of a pit, suggesting that
the deposits had been dumped from a particular side.
The close spatial relationship between the pits might indicate
that they had been excavated within a relatively short period of time.
However, each one had been at least partially backfilled before another
pit was dug and, as a result, it proved possible to define a sequence for
most of the pits in this group (see Fig. 3.65).
Pit [3509] (0.75m by 0.45m (min) and 0.35m deep) appeared to be
sub-circular in shape (where it survived); its fill consisted of slumped
natural at its edges with grey-brown silt towards the centre ([3510]). It
had been truncated by [3511]. Pit [5253] (1.00m by 0.50m (min) in area)
had also been truncated by [3511]. Pit [3511] (1.00m long and 0.70m
wide) was a small sub-circular feature with a dark beige to grey sand fill
([3512]). Pit [3511] was itself cut by [3447]. Only [3509] contained a
moderately sized finds assemblage, which included animal bone (752g)
and fired clay (980g, including probable oven material) (Table 3.55).
Pit [3447] (1.15m by 0.70m and 0.30m deep) was a shallow sub-
circular feature with steep straight slopes and a sharp break of slope to
a flat base. The lower fill consisted of grey-brown sand [3448], c.0.30m
in depth. This was sealed by a dark brown silty sand with burnt clay
inclusions ([3449]) measuring c.0.20m in depth, which merged with fill
[3085] in pit [3444]. Pit [3447] had been cut by [3444] and [3451].
Very similar in character to [3447], pit [3444] (1.10m by 1.00m
and 0.30m deep) had steeply sloping sides down to a concave base.
The lower fill of this pit consisted of grey-brown silty sand [3445],
c.0.06m in depth, which was sealed by beige-brown sand deposit
[3446], c.0.30m deep. The upper fill [3085] merged with [3449], the
uppermost fill of pit [3447].
The fill of pit [3478] (1.40m long and 0.70m wide (min)) comprised
redeposited natural yellow sand with charcoal fragments ([3477]);
the pit had been cut away on its eastern side by [3476] (1.60m long
and 0.85m wide). The lowest fill of [3476] consisted of a thick black
charcoal lens ([3475]) which was sealed below pink-grey sand [3464].
The upper fill consisted of a band of redeposited natural sand ([3463])
c.0.10cm thick, which had slumped down the eastern edge of [3478]. It
had been cut by [3458] (1.20m by 1.00m (min) and 0.20m deep). The
lower fill of this pit consisted of a thin lens of black charcoal ([3460])
c.0.02m in thickness. The upper and main fill was yellow-grey-brown
sand [3459], c.0.10m in depth. [3458] had been cut away on its western
side by pit [3452].
Pit [3452] (1.70m by 1.05m (min) and 0.20m deep) appeared to be
sub-circular in shape; it had steeply sloping sides down to a concave
base. The lower fill consisted of yellow-brown sand [3455], c.0.04m in
depth. This was sealed by an ash and charcoal lens ([3456]) measuring
c.0.05m in depth, which appeared to have been tipped or washed in
from the east side of the pit. This was sealed by mixed yellow-brown
sands [3457], c.0.25m in depth, which contained a discrete charcoal
lens and occasional burnt clay. The upper fill consisted of a mixed pale
yellow-grey-brown sand spreading from the west ([3461]) and 0.38m in
depth, with frequent burnt clay inclusions spreading from the west side
of the pit. [3452] was possibly cut by [3476] and [3478]. Its western
side had been cut by [3451].
Pit [3451] (2.10m by 1.10m and c.0.30m deep) was large and
ovate, with steep concave sides and a concave base. The lower fill
of this pit comprised a thick band of weathered natural yellow sand
([3462]) located on the northern side of the pit. Fill [3453] consisted of
grey sand, c.0.16m in depth, with ashy dark grey charcoal inclusions.
This was sealed by a dump of yellow-brown sand ([3454]) (= [3480]
and [3486]) c.0.22m in depth, located on the northern side of the pit.
The upper fill of [3451] comprised dark grey silt sand [3450], contain-
ing frequent charcoal inclusions. This pit also cut [3484], [3447] and
[3507].
The north-eastern part of pit [3507] had been cut away by [3451]
and the south-east part had been cut away by [3485]. The pit (1.85m
by 1.25m (min) and 0.54m deep) appeared to be ovate. The lower fill
comprised a slump of weathered material ([3506]) up to 0.25m thick
in the north and west parts of the pit. This was sealed by a deposit of
creamy beige-brown sand c.0.25m in depth with occasional charcoal
and fired clay ([3505]).
The fill of pit [3484] (1.00m by 0.50m (min) and 0.14m deep)
consisted of pale grey-brown silty sand [3483], containing burnt clay
inclusions. It was cut by [3451] and [3479], and probably [3507] and
[3485].
Pit [3485] (1.70m by 0.80m and 0.19m deep) was an ovate pit
whose sides varied from a gradual to a steep slope; it had an irregu-
lar but roughly flat base. The lowest fill consisted of mixed natural
sand [3508], 0.09m in depth, which was probably the result of later
animal disturbance. This was sealed by [3504], a black loamy deposit
c.0.06m thick with charcoal and burnt clay, which appeared to have
been tipped in from the north and west sides of the pit. Fill [3486] (=
[3454] and [3480]) consisted of creamy pale brown sands c.0.19m deep
with occasional charcoal and burnt clay, and partially sealed [3504].
The upper fill consisted of very dark brown-black sandy loam [3503],
with frequent charcoal and burnt clay, which might represent a deposit
of burnt clay dumped from the south-west side of the pit. In addition,
this pit produced sizeable assemblages of animal bone (1358g), Anglo-
Saxon pottery (183g) and fired clay (1044g). This feature cut pit [3507],
located on its west side, and had been cut by [3479], on its east side.
Pit [3479] (c.1.60m by 1.70m and 0.25m deep) was sub-circular,
with steep concave sides and a concave base c.1.00m in diameter. The
lowest fill consisted of grey silty sand [3482] with charcoal flecks and
fragments, which was c.0.25m thick on the south-east side and tailed
off towards the north-west, indicating that it been dumped into the pit
from the south-east side. This was sealed by [3481], a mixed yellow-

66 139
Pit Group L Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
[3088] 520 (2225g) 81 (1229g) 5 (47g) - 472 - - 1 (44g) - Fired clay includes partial
(5919g) loomweight
[3086] 878 (3521g) 35 (429g) 6 (71g) 2 (166g) 134 (151g) - - 2 (48g) 11 (50g) Fired clay includes partial
loomweight; metal includes
?bracelet fragments No. 8,
hooked plate No. 403 and 4
nails
[3094] 230 (820g) 12 (110g) - - 22 (7g) - - - -
F414 18 (56g) 12 (89g) 3 (10g) - 46 (195g) - - - -
[3537] 45 (127g) 27 (255g) 2 (19g) - 42 (309g) - - 85 (973g) 4 (6g) Pottery spindlewhorl No. 382;
fired clay includes partial
loomweight
[3535] 52 (200g) 27 (233g) 1 (1g) - 87 (424g) - - 1 (149g) - 2 quernstone fragments and a
potboiler (429g); fired clay
includes partial loomweight
F323 12 (23g) 22 (245g) 3 (107g) 1 (59g) - - - - -
[3429] 400 (1723g) 41 (241g) 6 (20g) 1 (3g) 5 (21g) - - - 2 (10g) Metal comprises 2 nails
F325 57 (245g) 12 (150g) 4 (171g) - 1 (16g) - - - - Utilised flint flake (49g)

Table 3.56 Finds associated with Pit Group L

Table 3.56 Finds associated with Pit Group L

Figure 3.66 Plan and section of Pit Group L

67 140
brown redeposited natural sand 0.18m in depth. The upper fill consisted
of grey-brown silty sand [3480] (= [3454] and [3486]), 0.20m in depth,
containing very occasional flecks of charcoal and fired clay. These fills
produced sizeable assemblages of animal bone (1332g), Anglo-Saxon
pottery (215g) and fired clay (360g). Pit [3479] also cut pits [3484]
and [3513].
Pit [3513], located on the southern edge of the pit complex, meas-
ured c.0.65m in length by 0.45m in width (min). It appeared to be
ovate-shaped, although the northern part had been cut away by [3479].
The fill of [3513] was characterised by two distinct deposits. The lower
fill of this pit consisted of slumped or weathered redeposited natural
[3514], which was sealed by dark grey silty sand [3515].
Pit Group L
(Fig. 3.66)
Pit Group L was located immediately east of Structure 30 (although
was not necessarily contemporary with it) and also to the south of Pit
Group K; these might have actually been part of one large pit group
and the division into two separate groups for discussion is to a certain
extent arbitrary. This pit group consisted of at least ten (and possibly as
many as thirteen) pits ― some of which were inter-cutting and some
of which were discrete features ― spanning c.10m east–west by 6.75m
north–south. Like Pit Group K, the individual pits were very similar in
character, being generally sub-circular or ovate in shape with concave
shaped bases, and measured up to 2.50m by 2.30m in area ([3086])
and up 0.65m in depth ([3429]), although most were from 0.20m to
Figure 3.67 Plan and section of Pit Group M
141
0.45m deep. Their fills were generally quite similar, with the lower
fills consisting of pale to mid grey-brown sand and the upper fills of
dark grey to black, with varying quantities of charcoal and burnt clay
(Table 3.56).
F321 consisted of three or four inter-cutting pits aligned E to W.
The earliest and westernmost pit, [3088] (2.00m by 2.10m and 0.45m
deep), was sub-ovate, with sloping sides down to a level base. The lower
fill consisted of pale grey-brown silty sand [5250], c.0.25m in depth,
sloping down the western side of the pit. This fill contained frequent
burnt clay fragments (464 fragments weighing c.5700g). This was
sealed by [5249], a mid-grey silty sand c.0.30m in depth. The upper fill
[3089] consisted of pale grey-brown silty sand c.0.25m in depth, which
merged imperceptibly with fill [3087]. The eastern edge of [3088] was
cut away by pit [3086].
The stepped profile of the central and largest of these pits, [3086]
(2.50m by 2.30m and 0.55m deep (max)), indicates that this probably
comprised two separate pits, with an earlier pit on the eastern side
(c.1.00m wide and 0.45m deep) cut away by a later pit on the western
side (c.1.25m wide and 0.55m deep). The lower fill consisted of pale to
mid-grey-brown silty sand [5248], c.0.15m in depth, which contained
evidence of significant root and animal disturbance. The upper fill
consisted of lenses of compact dark brown silty sand ([5247]) c.0.30m
in depth. This was sealed by [3087]. Pit [3086] was cut by [3094] on its
eastern edge; the latter (1.50m long and 0.40m deep) was sub-circular
with steep sides and a stepped and irregular base. The main fill consisted
of pale grey-brown silty sand [3095], c.0.15m in depth, sealing a prob-
Pit Group M Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
F370 69 (767g) 1 (2g) 19 (60g) 2 (106g) 9 (98g) 1 (56g) - - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights
F369 76 (587g) 18 (224g) 17 (61g) 3 (179g) 21 (208g) - 3 (25g) 5 (51g) 1 (22g)
F371 2 (23g) - 3 (48g) - - - - -
[3533] 46 (398g) 3 (11g) 1 (13g) - - 37 (1042g) - - 1 (32g) Unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal comprises
knife No. 182
[3501] 15 (144g) - - - 2 (17g) - 6 (109g) - -
[3498] 143 (1248g) - 3 (17g) - - - 30 (12g) - -
[3497] 350 (1273g) 6 (31g) 5 (155g) 1 (33g) 9 (73g) - - - -

Table
Table 3.573.57 Finds
Finds associated
associated withwith Pit Group
Pit Group M M

able lower fill of light grey-brown silty sand c.0.10m in depth. Fill
[3087] sealed all three pits and merged with [3089] and [3095], making
them difficult to distinguish. This fill comprised grey-brown silty sand
and varied in depth from c.0.10m to 0.20m. These pits contained gener-
ally large finds assemblages (especially within [3087]), particularly of
animal bone (over 2kg in [3088] and over 3.5kg in [3086], Anglo-Saxon
pottery (81 sherds in [3088]) and fired clay (5919g in [3088], including
probable oven material).
F414 was a shallow elongated pit aligned N–S ([3436]); it was
2.70m by 0.90m and 0.20m deep, and intersected with the southern side
of pit [3088] (F321), although the relationship between the two pits
was not established. The fill comprised dark silty sand [3437], contain-
ing large fragments and small flecks of burnt clay that sealed a much
disturbed lighter brown fill.
F374 consisted of two or three inter-cutting pits aligned E to W.
The easternmost and largest of these pits, [3537] (2.90m by 0.80m and
0.40m deep), was roughly ovate with irregular sloping sides down to
a concave base; this probably represented the remains of two different
pits. The lowest fill was confined to the western side of the pit and was
sandy with dark grey patches ([3559]) and 0.10m in depth; it may have
been deposited as a result of weathering or slumping. This was sealed
by [3558], a light grey silty sand 0.17m in depth with some patches
of natural sand. The upper fill was very dark brown sandy silt [3538],
0.30m in depth. This pit produced a moderately sized finds assemblage,
with a pottery spindlewhorl (No. 382), partial fired clay loomweights
and a significant quantity of slag (973g). The western edge of [3537]
had been cut away by a smaller sub-circular pit ([3535]) 1.70m by
1.20m and 0.45m deep, which had sloping sides and a flat base. Its
fill was very dark greyish-brown silty sand [3536]. This produced a
similar finds assemblage, with moderate amounts of animal bone and
Anglo-Saxon pottery, but also two non-lava quernstone fragments and
a potboiler.
A sub-circular pit, F323 [3090] (2.20m by 1.25m and 0.35m deep),
had steep sloping sides down to an irregular concave base; the profile
might indicate that there were actually two intercutting pits, although
they were excavated as a single pit. A single uniform fill was observed
([3091]), which comprised dark grey to black sandy silt 0.35m in
depth.
The fill of pit [3429] (F366 = [2599]) (1.90m by 1.60m and 0.65m
deep) comprised dark sandy soil [3430]; a black charcoal-rich silty soil
towards the centre contained frequent fire-cracked stones and numerous
animal bones, including a complete cow skull, which was located in the
centre of the pit and c.0.15m from the base.
F325 consisted of two or three shallow sub-circular-shaped inter-
cutting pits ([3096]), each c.0.80m in diameter, which together spanned
an area 1.80m by 0.90m and 0.20m deep (max). The fill of the pits
was characterised by two distinct deposits; there was no discernable
difference between the individual pits. The lower fill was beige to light
brown material [3098], c.0.10m in depth, although it did not form a
continuous layer across the base. The upper fill consisted of black silty
sand [3097], 0.15m in depth, which contained a large quantity of char-
coal with fragments up to c.0.20m in length.
Pit Group M
(Fig. 3.67)
Pit Group M was a large inter-cutting pit complex spanning c.4.65m
by 4.00m and located c.2.50m south of Structure 31 (although the pit
group was not necessarily contemporary with it). There were at least
eight separate pits in the group, all very similar in character. The pits
were generally sub-circular or ovate in shape with concave bases, and
measured up to c.1.75m in width and up 0.50m in depth [3533]. In
common with many of the other inter-cutting pit groups, the nature of
the pit fills was generally quite similar, and is described as pale grey,
grey-brown to very dark grey silty sand, with varying quantities of
charcoal.
The easternmost pit (F370), which was earliest in the sequence,
was elongated, ovate-shaped and c.1.50m by 1.40m and 0.40m deep.
The pit cut ([3534]) had steep sloping sides down to a concave base. A
small post-hole ([3539]) 0.30m by 0.20m and 0.20m deep, apparently
cut by [3534], was defined in the southern part of the pit. The lower fill
was very dark grey silty sand [3529], 0.10m in depth. This was sealed
by [3472], a pale brown silty sand measuring c.0.30m in depth. The
western side of the pit had been cut away by F375 ([3533]).
F375 consisted of at least three or four inter-cutting pits. Overall,
these measured c.2.20m in length by 1.40m in width and 0.50m in depth.
The earliest pit, [3533] (c.1.75m wide and 0.50m deep), had near-vertical
sides with a roughly flat base. Its lowest fill was compact greyish-brown
sand [3527], which formed a thin layer c.0.05m in depth on the base.
This was sealed by [3519], a grey-brown sand 0.40m in depth containing
occasional charcoal mixed with sand. This fill contained a large quan-
tity of unfired clay (c.1000g), some of which was clearly loomweight
material, as well as a 7th-century knife (No. 182) (Table 3.57). This pit
had been cut away by a recut that contained [3501], a dark grey silty
sand 0.10m in depth (min). This had been almost completely truncated
by a second recut that contained fill [3498], a dark grey sand 0.40m in
depth. The fourth pit in this sequence contained two separate fills. The
lower fill was a very dark grey silty sand ([3497]) (= [3499]) 0.25m in
depth, with compacted charcoal. The upper fill ([3473]) consisted of
very dark brown silty sand 0.15m in depth. These pits were cut by F371
([3532]) and, subsequently, F369 ([3531]).
F371 [3532] (1.40m wide (max) and 0.40m deep) was circular with
steep concave sides (a stepped profile indicated a recut) and a concave
base. The pit contained three fills, of which the upper two related to
the later recut. The lowest fill comprised dark grey silty sand [3530],
0.15m in depth, containing frequent charcoal flecking. This was sealed
by [3502], which was probably the lower fill within the recut. This fill
consisted of yellowish-brown, occasionally greyish, silty sand 0.15m
in depth. The upper fill was pale to dark brown silty sand [3473],
c.0.10–0.15m in depth.
The latest pit in the sequence (F369) was located in the centre of
the pit group, cutting pits F371 ([3532]) and F375 ([3533]). The pit
[3531] was ovate with steep and stepped sides and a flat base. The fill
was characterised by two deposits, of which the lower fill was dark grey
silty sand [3474], c.0.30m in depth, while the upper ([3471]) measured
0.15m in depth and consisted of very dark brown silty sand.
Pit Group N
(Fig. 3.68)
Pit Group N lay to the north and south of Structure 5, although two
pits (F525 and F526) were isolated to the south of the structure. A
pre-excavation magnetic susceptibility survey (see Chapter 6) had
indicated a ‘hotspot’ within this area, suggesting the presence of
hearths and potential metalworking activity; consequently a series
of soil samples were taken across the area to test for the presence of
hammerscale. During excavation, large amounts of slag and metal items
were recovered, and the nature of the archaeological remains — pits,
some of which showed evidence of in situ burning, defined below a
layer containing the bulk of the metalworking waste — supports the
interpretation of this group of pits as the location of a smithy area.

68 142
 Figure 3.68 Plan of Pit Group N

The pit/layer complex was only defined after the removal of
[4610], a dark grey-black spread of soil that contained large numbers
of Anglo-Saxon pottery, slag and metal finds and stretched over an area
approximately 5m E–W and 3.5m N–S. The spread then resolved into
two distinct features, termed F519 and F520. These comprised respec-
tively layers [4620], [4639] and [4640] to the west, and [4638] and
[4641] to the west; all were characterised by a very fine soft black silty
sand with large amounts of charcoal, moderate inclusions of medium-
sized and large, mainly burnt, stones, large amounts of slag, often
still in large fragments and in association with fired and unfired clay
(and charcoal) representing hearth linings, crucibles and moulds, and
complete and fragmentary metal artefacts (Table 3.58). The excava-
tor noted that many of the large slag pieces had their exterior concave
surfaces still oriented downwards, and suggested that this area may in

143
Pit Group N Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pottery pottery clay
F519 87 (328g) 18 (166g) 2 (4g) - 8 (26g) 14 (138g) - 242 93 (178g) Metal includes 4 nail
(3580g) fragments
F520 6 (45g) 5 (54g) 1 (2g) - 7 (21g) - - 72 (840g) 19 (73g) Metal includes annular brooch
fragment No. 11 and 7 nail
fragments
[4749] - - - - - - - 7 (62g) -
[4776] - - - - - - - - -
[4772] - 1 (3g) - - - - - - -
[4696] 27 (114g) 3 (36g) - 2 (45g) - - - 26 (327g) 15 (30g) Metal includes 3 nail
fragments
[4751] 1 (2g) - - - 5 (8g) - - 6 (15g) 6 (9g)
[4767] - 1 (5g) - - - - - 1 (18g) -
[4771] - 1 (14g) - - 2 (16g) - - 14 (42g) -
[4778] - 2 (12g) - - 3 (14g) - - 15 (48g) 8 (7g) Metal includes 1 nail fragment
[4779] - - - - 2 (42g) - - 11 (44g) 7 (23g) Metal includes knife point No.
198
[4773] - - - - - - - - -
F525 - 1 (17g) - - - - - - -
F526 - - - - - - - - 14 (48g) Metal includes arrowhead No.
407

TableTable
3.58 3.58
FindsFinds associated
associated with with Pit Group
Pit Group N N

fact represent the metalworking location itself. The pits which were
found to lie under F519 and F520 may have been involved in this activ-
ity, particularly [4696], which lay centrally under F519 (i.e. in the area
from which the bulk of that feature’s finds were recovered). Pit [4696]
was rounded, 1.16m in diameter and 0.30m deep, with sloping sides
and a rounded base. The fill ([4695]) was described as black silty sand;
the excavator did, however, notice a difference between its fill and the
layer which overlay it.
From left to right, the pit sequence comprised: [4749], a circular pit
0.77m in diameter and 0.12m deep with steep to sloping sides, a flattish
base, and a dark brown charcoal-rich silty sand fill; [4772], an irregular
oval-shaped pit 0.44m in diameter and 0.09m deep with sides sloping
to a pointed base, and a similar fill; [4771], a roughly rectangular pit
0.70m by 0.90m and 0.17m deep, with steep sides, a rounded base,
and a more patchy distribution of charcoal through its fill; [4751], an
oval pit 0.52m by 0.38m and 0.10m deep, with irregular sides sloping
to a pointed base; [4767], an oval pit 0.44m by 0.30m and 0.08m deep,
with sloping sides to a pointed base; [4778], a roughly oval pit 1.60m
by 1.10m and 0.43m deep, with sloping sides to a pointed base and a
mixed fill comprising a charcoal-rich deposit above a pale grey silty
sand; and [4779], a sub-circular pit 0.60m in diameter and 0.28m deep,
with steep sides to a flat base and a mixed mid to dark grey sand fill with
charcoal-rich patches. To the north lay a small stake-hole ([4776]) which
produced no finds, while to the south (but still north of Structure 5) lay
[4773], a circular pit 0.34m in diameter and 0.29m deep with almost
vertical sides and a flat base; this was filled with large lumps of charcoal
(possibly burnt in situ), but produced no other finds.
The other associated pits lay to the south of Structure 5. F525 was
a shallow oval pit 1.00m by 0.70m and 0.08m deep, with shallow sides
and a rounded base. F526 was a sub-circular pit 0.60m in diameter and
0.12m deep, with vertical sides and a flat base. Along with pits [4751]
and [4779], to the north of Structure 5, this pit contained a large amount
of hammerscale within its sample. The group might also include pits
F29, F38 and F309, all in the immediate area of Structure 5.
Individual pits
(Fig. 3.69; Table 3.59)
F10 was a sub-circular pit ([265]) c.1.10m in diameter and 0.35m deep,
located immediately north-west of Structure 3 and overlying an earlier
infilled NE–SW-aligned ditch (F60). The pit had steep sloping sides
down to a roughly level base. The lowest fill comprised grey-red-brown
sand [264], 0.20m in depth, located against the southern side of the pit.
This was sealed by dark brown silty sand [263], 0.15m in depth. The
upper fill of this pit was brown silty sand [262], 0.15m in depth.
F12 was a sub-circular pit ([269]) c.1.50m by 1.40m and 0.30m
deep, located immediately south-west of Structure 3 and overlying
an earlier infilled NE–SW-aligned ditch (F60). The pit had gradually
sloping sides down to a roughly level base, although its southern edge
had been truncated by Evaluation Trench 14. The lower fill was dark
grey to black silty sand [268], 0.05m deep, which was sealed by a
similar dark grey to black silty sand ([267]) 0.10m in depth. This fill
included a large fragment of charred whale vertebra. The upper fill of
this pit was described as dark grey-brown silty sand [266], 0.10m in
depth. This pit also produced an iron knife (No. 217).
F16 consisted of two inter-cutting sub-ovate pits ([1216] and
[1217]) spanning an area of c.2.70m by 2.20m and located c.3.00m
north-west of Structure 3. The eastern pit, [1217] (1.40m by 1.10m
(min) and 0.25m deep), had a concave base. The western pit, [1216]
(c.2.20m by 1.50m and 0.25m deep), was probably the later of the two
pits, and had sloping sides down to a roughly flat base. The lowest fill
was dark grey silty sand [279], 0.06m deep, which was confined to the
base of the western pit ([1216]). This was sealed by dark grey to black
silty sand [278], 0.10m in depth, which extended across both pits. The
upper fill consisted of dark grey silty sand [277], 0.10m in depth.
F66 was a sub-circular pit ([1415]) c.1.30m in diameter and 0.50m
deep, located immediately west of Structure 15. It overlay an earlier
infilled NE–SW-aligned ditch (F65 [451]), and had steep sloping sides
down to a roughly flat base. The fill was dark grey-brown silty sand
[1414] (= [452]), which produced a moderately sized finds assemblage,
including a metal pin (No. 94), a 7th-century onwards hooked tag
(No. 105) and Roman tile (c.400g), including box flue tile (139g) and
flanged tegulae (93g).
F73 consisted of a deep sub-ovate pit ([918]) 1.40m by 0.85m and
0.95m deep, located c.1.60m north of Structure 13. The pit had steep,
and in places undercut, upper sides which then sloped gradually to a
concave base. The lowest fill comprised clean pale grey sand [924],
0.15m deep, with occasional small bands/lenses of compact dark grey
silty sand. This fill contained around ten large unburnt flint nodules
weighing 3300g and located in the south-west part of the pit; they were
probably part of a single deposit. This was sealed by [923], a charcoal
layer 0.05m in depth (max), consisting of frequent to abundant small
charcoal fragments in dark grey silty sand, concentrated mainly in the
south-west part of the pit. The upper fill of the pit was mid-grey sand
c.0.70m in depth with some pale orange and pale brown sand; there
were bands of dark brown silty sand towards the base of the deposit.
F255 was a sub-ovate pit ([2206]) c.2.60m by 1.85m and 0.60m
deep, located east of Structure 20 and south of Structure 45. The pit had
steep sloping sides around the south, east and west sides, and a stepped
profile with a ledge c.0.60m in width on the northern side; it had an
irregular but roughly level base. The fill comprised very dark brown to
black loamy sand [2207], which was heavily burrowed, but contained
a large quantity of finds. Predominant was the massive amount of
animal bone (14,808g), with evidence of duck, chicken, passeriform,
goat and roe-deer alongside the more common species; eel, carp and

69 144
Figure 3.69 Plan and section of Pit F10; Plan, section and photograph (from south-east) of Pit F502; Plan of Pit
F566; Plan and section of Pit F255; Plan, section and photograph (from east) of Pit F565

145
Isolated Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pits pottery pottery clay
F10 241 (599g) 11 (235g) 1 (3g) - 39 (60g) - - - -
F12 343 (2130g) 1 (27g) - - 26 (125g) - - - 3 (40g) Metal includes knife No. 217
F16 379 (978g) 18 (302g) 7 (99g) 1 (140g) 31 (18g) - - - -
F66 26 (158g) 1 (5g) 19 (125g) 9 (414g) 38 (512g) - 7 (24g) 2 (43g) 4 (11g) Metal includes pin No. 94 and
hooked tag No. 105
F68 - - 132 (1327g) - 68 (152g) 20 (789g) - 1 (6g) 1 (5g) Quernstone (250g)
F73 113 (228g) 2 (12g) 30 (160g) 3 (58g) 21 (184g) 22 (422g) - 2 (85g) 1 (15g) Unfired clay contains
loomweights
F151 80 (720g) - 1 (6g) - - - - - -
F255 2981 (14808g) 69 (747g) 23 (102g) 3 (389g) 446 113 68 (234g) 32 (449g) 18 (121g) Polished stone (81g); flint awl
(2673g) (3104g) (11g); bone pin No. 100 and
comb fragments No. 129; fired
clay includes 5 partial
loomweights; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
includes 2 knives (Nos 196,
212), pin No. 95, slip-knot
ring No. 119 and binding No.
411
F324 19 (685g) 15 (140g) - 1 (215g) 6 (37g) - - - 7 (46g) Dolerite hone No. 316; metal
includes cruciform brooch No.
15 and a nail
F334 111 (571g) 17 (233g) 2 (28g) - 7 (71g) 42 (294g) - - 1 (1g) Unfired clay contains
loomweights; metal comprises
fish-hook No. 432
F345 842 (4325g) 10 (83g) 38 (138g) 1 (4g) 93 (795g) - 1 (2g) 1 (79g) - Amber bead No. 41
F346 15 (27g) - 11 (103g) 4 (246g) 25 (306g) - 2 (4g) 1 (114g) - Utilised flint flake (9g)
F368 499 (3323g) 43 (468g) 39 (240g) - 69 (502g) 2 (128g) 30 (59g) 3 (15g) 13 (160g) Fired clay includes 2 partial
loomweights; unfired clay
contains loomweights; metal
includes chatelaine link No.
123, knife No. 214,
metalworking clips No. 289,
?spearhead socket No. 412
and shears No. 353
F425 22 (1052g) - 2 (11g) 1 (35g) - - 41 (825g) - -
F502 453 (1622g) 2 (14g) 4 (14g) 1 (39g) 51 (510g) 16 (224g) 15 (14g) 7 (41g) 8 (13g) Sandstone hone No. 303;
metal includes ?knife point
No. 226
F527 71 (351g) - - - 10 (27g) 56 (125g) - - - Utilised flint flake (15g)
F557 - 1 (7g) - - 1 (4g) 1 (15g) - 1 (12g) 3 (1g)
F565 - 5 (21g) - - - - - - 3 (1g)
F566 6 (20g) 12 (113g) 1 (12g) - 2 (7g) 100 - 1 (16g) - Flint scraper (14g); unfired
(1718g) clay contains loomweights
F628 57 (330g) 4 (43g) - - 3 (11g) 5 (49g) - - - Unfired clay contains
loomweights

TableTable
3.59 3.59
FindsFinds associated
associated with with selected
selected Anglo-Saxon
Anglo-Saxon pits pits

founder/plaice bones were also identified. In addition, large amounts
of Anglo-Saxon pottery (69 sherds, 747g), fired clay (2673g, including
five partial loomweights and several flat pieces with wattle or larger
roundwood impressions), unfired clay (3104g, also including loom-
weights), lava quern fragments (234g) and slag (449g) were recovered,
as well as a variety of metal artefacts, including two 7th-century knives
(Nos 196 and 212), a pin (No. 95) and a slip-knot ring (No. 119). This
pit also produced the largest amount of worked bone artefacts, includ-
ing an early 7th- to mid-8th-century bone pin (No. 100) and mid-7th- to
mid-8th-century double-sided composite comb fragments (No. 129), as
well as a probably prehistoric (?curated) flint awl.
F324 was a shallow sub-circular pit or hollow ([3092]) c.2.00m in
diameter and 0.17m deep, located west of Structure 35 and overlying
the infilled E–W-aligned ditch F204 [3093], which formed the south-
ern boundary of the earlier (Roman) trackway. The fill was dark grey
slightly silty sand, and produced from its relatively small assemblage a
dolerite hone (No. 316) and a 6th-century cruciform brooch (No. 15).
F334 consisted of two inter-cutting sub-circular pits located
immediately east of Structure 36. Both pits overlay the earlier infilled
E–W-aligned ditch F434, which formed the northern boundary of the
Roman trackway. The earliest pit, [3272] (2.00m by 1.80m and 0.50m
deep), had gradually sloping sides down to a concave base. The single
fill comprised black to brown silty sand [3273]. Its northern edge had
been cut away by a slightly smaller pit ([3270]), which was 1.95m by
1.50m and 0.45m deep and had steep concave sides down to a concave
base. The fill ([3271]) was very similar to [3273]. Notable finds included
unfired clay loomweight fragments and a fish-hook (No. 432).
Located immediately south-west of Structure 31 and south of
Pit F346, F345 was an elongated sub-rectangular or grave-shaped pit
2.45m by 1.05m and 0.70m deep, with vertical sides down to a flat base.
The lower fill of this pit comprised dark grey silty sand [3377], c.0.25m
in depth, with a high charcoal content. The upper fill ([3343]) consisted
of pale to mid-grey silty sand, with darker patches, c.0.45m deep. At
the interface of the lower and upper fills was a deposit of animal bone,
including two (semi-) complete cattle skulls and one horse skull, as
well as 445g of fired clay; further finds of Anglo-Saxon and Roman
pottery, animal bone and fired clay came from the upper and lower fills
themselves. This pit also produced an amber bead (No. 41).

70 146
Other AS Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pits pottery pottery clay
3 1 (1g) - - - - - - - 24 (354g) Metal includes rove No. 266
and handle No. 155
6 - - 1 (6g) - - - - - -
14 1 (9g) 1 (3g) 2 (14g) - - - - 6 (29g) - 1 hammerstone (149g); 2 flints
(11g)
23 37 (52g) 6 (37g) 1 (3g) - 8 (47g) - 23 (13g) 1 (120g) - 1 non-Roman pot (3g); 3 flint
flakes (13g)
27 1 (13g) 1 (5g) - - - - - - -
33 11 (12g) - 1 (2g) - 4 (47g) - - - - 1 non-Roman pot (3g)
40 1 (1g) 9 (76g) 1 (3g) - 4 (142g) - - 1 (3g) 1 (1g) 1 non-Roman pot (4g); 1 flint
flake (8g)
46 - 3 (56g) - - - 7 (73g) - - 4 (24g)
47 - 1 (10g) - 1 (72g) 6 (250g) - - - 1 (3g) 1 non-Roman pot (5g); metal
comprises nail
55 14 (4g) 4 (45g) 10 (66g) - 50 (68g) - - 8 (22g) - Burnt flint (3, 22g); 1 flint
core (81g)
132 56 (80g) 1 (5g) 1 (12g) - 14 (40g) - - 7 (31g) 2 (47g) Glass bead No. 21; flint flake
(1g); metal includes snaffle bit
No. 404
137 29 (52g) - 5 (37g) - 2 (9g) - - 14 (125g) -
141 - 1 (13g) 1 (2g) - - - - - -
142 97 (527g) - 9 (55g) - 16 (6g) - - 10 (51g) - 1 flint blade (1g)
145 - - 5 (38g) - - - - - -
152 4 (1g) 1 (5g) 4 (22g) - 1 (5g) - - - -
155 2 (19g) 4 (46g) 2 (7g) 3 (410g) 2 (9g) - - 2 (11g) 2 (5g) 2 non-Roman pot (5g); flint
core (53g); 1 fragment of
CBM is late medieval
176 8 (14g) - 1 (3g) - 3 (102g) - - 1 (133g) -
180 97 (427g) - 3 (14g) - 6 (28g) - - 21 (299g) - Burnt flint (2, 3g)
192 - 1 (34g) 2 (23g) - - - - - - Flint flake (14g)
194 - - 1 (10g) - - - - 1 (5g) -
196 - - 1 (3g) - - - - 2 (37g) -
203 - - 1 (11g) - - - - - 1 (1g)
220 619 (2527g) 6 (39g) 16 (113g) - 15 (85g) - 29 (20g) 37 (474g) - Some grinding stone types
(16, 463g)
221 10 (76g) 1 (5g) 2 (10g) - 36 (169g) - - 9 (452g) - Charcoal (20, 7g)
226 105 (697g) 6 (49g) 1 (14g) 1 (250g) 16 (46g) 1 (10g) - 2 (3g) - 1 flint flake (1g); fired clay
contains partial loomweight
274 9 (24g) 1 (5g) - - 9 (58g) 10 (83g) - 1 (11g) - 1 flint; unfired clay includes
loomweight fragment
276 19 (176g) 2 (10g) 1 (6g) - 3 (27g) - - 4 (51g) 2 (9g) 1 flint; metal includes possible
mount No. 143
280 - 1 (5g) - - - - - - -
287 - 1 (3g) 1 (1g) - 11 (321g) - - 1 (57g) -
300 - 1 (3g) - - 1 (8g) - - - 2 (7g) Metal includes nail
307 58 (340g) 18 (165g) 3 (17g) 1 (6g) 16 (88g) - - 79 (2873g) 4 (23g) Flints (6, 188g); burnt flint (1,
24g); metal includes knife tip
No. 202, pin No. 63 and a nail
326 - 1 (4g) - - 3 (44g) - - - -
329 3 (19g) 2 (6g) - - - - - - 1 (2g)
330 - 1 (4g) - - - - - - -
346 15 (27g) - 11 (103g) 4 (247g) 25 (306g) - 2 (4g) 1 (114g) - One retouched flake (9g)
347 4 (1g) 2 (27g) 2 (56g) - 10 (226g) - - - - Burnt flint (1, 1g)
348 19 (283g) - 2 (63g) - - - - - 1 (5g) Metal is nail fragment
351 66 (221g) 6 (39g) 1 (10g) - 18 (218g) 14 (197g) 27 (29g) - 10 (166g) Flint flake (2g); metal includes
knife No. 176 and modern
shell case (surface find)
352 - 1 (3g) - - 14 (68g) - - - -
354 51 (180g) 1 (46g) - 1 (7g) - - - - -
355 32 (217g) 12 (110g) 7 (40g) - 10 (55g) - 1 (1g) - - Burnt flint (2, 109g); flint
flake (2g); fired clay includes
small loomweight

71 147
Other AS Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
pits pottery pottery clay
365 30 (118g) 1 (65g) 16 (76g) - 1 (4g) - - - 1 (8g)
367 90 (438g) 2 (31g) 1 (27g) 1 (14g) 20 (452g) - 3 (3g) - -
383 205 (1229g) 9 (78g) 1 (7g) 1 (86g) 24 (108g) 3 (25g) - - - Flint (1, 3g)
386 298 (1087g) 12 (60g) 2 (10g) - 33 (131) 11 (32g) - 1 (11g) 1 (1g) Burnt flint (5, 9g); metal
comprises pin No. 51
387 22 (83g) 1 (13g) - - 7 (37g) - - - - Mortar (1, 7g)
389 66 (89g) 5 (76g) - - - - - - -
391 47 (56g) - - - - - - - 1 (8g) Burnt flint (1, 5g); metal
comprises pin No. 96
392 343 (1176g) 9 (82g) 2 (53g) 1 (200g) 110 (993g) - 45 (99g) 3 (19g) 4 (58g) Flint flakes (10, 48g); metal
includes knife No. 177
395 - 1 (2g) - - - - - - -
397 43 (55g) 1 (25g) - - 9 (144g) - - - -
400 7 (17g) 2 (22g) - - 2 (58g) - - - -
415 1 (26g) 1 (2g) - - - - 1 (114g) - 2 (9g) Metal comprises 2 nails
416 - - - - - - - - 2 (21g) Metal comprises pin/needle
No. 350 and a nail
424 14 (54g) 1 (1g) - 4 (4g) 6 (31g) - - 3 (37g) 2 (36g) 2 flints (20g); worked stone
(222g); metal includes a nail
504 233 (945g) 3 (12g) 1 (8g) - 26 (128g) 10 (120g) - 4 (300g) - 1 flint (12g)
513 23 (6g) 2 (2g) 2 (2g) 8 (902g) 12 (190g) - - 1 (2g) 3 (2g)
516 177 (665g) 2 (9g) - - 22 (114g) - 26 (132g) - 3 (1g)
519 113 (441g) 31 (284g) 1 (3g) 2 (45g) 72 (358g) 14 (138g) - 268 (3907g) 108 (208g) 1 non-Roman pot (1g); burnt
flint (1, 4g); flints (6, 204g);
metal includes 6 nails
520 6 (45g) 5 (54g) 1 (2g) - 21 (165g) - - 83 (884g) 26 (96g) 7 flints (68g); metal includes
knife point No. 198 and
annular brooch fragment No.
11
525 - 1 (17g) - - - - - - -
526 - - - - - - - - 14 (48g) Metal includes possible
arrowhead No. 407
528 - 2 (7g) - - - - - 1 (21g) -
534 - - - - - - - - - Flint (1, 36g); 1 sherd undated
pot (3g)
560 8 (21g) 4 (22g) - - 4 (2g) - 9 (250g) - 7 (2g)
570 - 1 (18g) - - - - - - -
572 - 2 (14g) - - - - - - -
578 7 (2g) 2 (6g) - - 19 (21g) - - - 4 (3g) Flint (61g)
[1716] 30 (120g) 1 (2g) - - - - - - -
[4644] 3 (2g) 1 (7g) 3 (7g) 2 (180g) 1 (3g) - - - - Flint (3, 97g)
[4645] - - 1 (1g) - 3 (1g) - - - 8 (2g) Flint (1, 36g)
[4650] 2 (17g) 1 (4g) - - - - - - -
[4675] 47 (125g) 2 (7g) - - 91 (1585g) - - - - 1 flint
[4695] 27 (114g) 3 (36g) - 2 (45g) - - - 26 (327g) 15 (30g) Metal includes 3 nail
fragments
[4734] - 1 (13g) - - 2 (16g) - - 14 (42g) - Burnt flint (3, 17g)
[4735] - 2 (11g) - - 3 (14g) - - 15 (48g) 8 (9g) Burnt flint (1, 1g); flint (1,
5g); metal includes a nail
[4740] - 1 (3g) - - - - - - -
[4745] - - - - - - - - 1 (1g)
[4748] - - - - - - - 7 (62g) -
[4750] 1 (2g) 1 (2g) - - 5 (8g) - - 5 (10g) 6 (9g)
[4766] - 1 (5g) - - - - - 1 (18g) -
[4777] - - - - - - - - 10 (45g) Burnt flint (1, 4g); metal
includes 2 nail fragments and
a rivet
[4827] - 4 (10g) - - - - - - -
[4828] - 2 (5g) - - - - - - - Flint (1, 5g)

Table Table 3.60 Finds

3.60 Finds associated
associated with probably
with other other probably Anglo-Saxon
Anglo-Saxon pits pits

72 148
149
Figure 3.70 Location of oven bases, shown against backdrop of other Anglo-Saxon features
 F368 consisted of two inter-cutting ovate pits located immediately
east of Structures 28 and 47. The stratigraphic relationship between
the pits was not established. There were also a number of other pits
in close proximity (F365, F367, F373 and F401). The northernmost
pit, [3494] (2.00m by 1.10m and 0.40m deep), had gradually sloping
sides down to a concave base. The lower fill comprised mid-yellow-
brown sand [3493], 0.15m in depth. This was sealed by fill [3492],
which consisted of mixed dark brown and black silty sand 0.10m in
depth. Immediately to the south was a very similar, although slightly,
larger pit ([3489]) 2.20m by 1.30m and 0.60m deep, whose lower fill
comprised mid-yellow-brown sand [3491], 0.05m in depth and very
similar in character to [3493]. A deposit of mixed mid to dark grey
and pale brown silty sand was defined around the south-east part of the
pit [3490]. This was sealed by fill [3469], a dark grey to black sandy
silt 0.25m deep, which contained a high proportion of charcoal. The
upper fill was very dark black sandy silt [3468], 0.10m deep. Both pits
[3494] and [3489] were sealed by a deposit of dark grey-brown silty
sand 0.15m in depth with frequent patches of dark grey to black mate-
rial ([3465]); the boundary between this fill and [3468] and [3492] was
indistinct. This fill was very similar in character to the upper fills of the
other pits in the immediate vicinity and it may represent the remains of
a buried soil across this part of the site. Taken together, they produced
a large finds assemblage. Over 3kg of animal bone produced evidence
for red deer and roe deer, as well as the more usual species; fish bone
(atlantic mackerel and horse-mackerel) was also present. Both the fired
clay (502g) and unfired clay (128g) produced loomweight fragments;
there were quite large quantities of both Anglo-Saxon (43 sherds, 468g)
and Roman (39 sherds, 240g) pottery, and the metalwork assemblage
include a possibly Roman knife (No. 214), a chatelaine link (No. 123),
metalworking clips (No. 289), a possible spearhead socket (No. 412)
and shears (No. 353).
F425 consisted of two conjoining small pits or large post-holes
located immediately south-east of Structure 30. The relationship
between the pits and Surface Deposit F342, which stretched across
this area, was not clearly defined. The southern pit ([3342]), which was
c.0.80m by 0.50m and 0.50m deep, was ovate with steep sides down
to a concave base, its fill consisting of pale yellow-grey and yellow-
brown sand and including a large fragment of cattle skull and a scapula,
lava quernstone (380g) and abundant large flint nodules <0.20m in
length. The northern pit ([3359]), c.0.55m by 0.45m and 0.51m deep,
was similar, containing a fill that produced a large fragment of lava
quernstone (450g), a number of large flints and chunks of chalk near
the base.
F502 consisted of two inter-cutting sub-circular pits located
c.1.00m north of Structure 11. The earliest pit ([4291]), c.1.30m by
1.20m and c.0.45m deep, had steep sloping sides down to a concave
base; its lower and main fill was pale grey darkening to mid-brown
sand [4290], 0.30m in depth. The western side of [4291] had been cut
away by another very similar pit ([4289]), 1.15m by 1.15m and 0.60m
deep, with very steep sides to a concave base. The lower and main fill of
this pit consisted of grey-brown sand [4288], 0.35m in depth. Both pits
were sealed by a deposit of dark grey sand ([4271]) c.0.20m in depth,
with flecks of charcoal and dark brown mottling dispersed throughout
the fill and irregular lenses of dark brown iron panning disturbed by
animal burrowing. The fills produced a fairly large amount of animal
bone (1622g, including roe deer, alongside more usual species), fired
and unfired clay, as well as a sandstone hone (No. 303) and a probable
knife point (No. 226), possibly of Roman date.
F527 consisted of at least three or four inter-cutting pits (although
it was only assigned a single cut number in the field) located c.10.50m
north of Structure 9 and aligned E–W. The pit complex [5133] spanned
an area 3.90m long and 1.90m wide. The earliest pit (c.1.10m wide (min)
and 0.25m deep) was located on the western side of the pit complex
and had near-vertical sides down to a flat base; its fill comprised pale
silver to brown sand [5134]. Its eastern side appeared to have been
cut away by a deeper pit with a concave base (0.75m wide (min) and
Oven bases Animal bone Anglo-Saxon Roman CBM
pottery pottery
F338 5 (85g) 4 (40g) 1 (19g) - 1249
F372 - - - -
F259 15 (26g) - 3 (7g) - 319 (2556g)
F254 4 (1g) - 3 (9g) - 12 (24g)
F379 [3636] - - - -
Table 3.61 Finds associated with oven bases
150
0.45m deep), the fill of which consisted of pale brown sand [5131].
This had also been truncated on the eastern side by a later pit, of a
similar depth, that contained a deposit of charcoal ([4775]) c.0.05m in
depth in its base. The base of the pit beneath this deposit was a burnt
orange/pale red colour, indicating that the material was still hot when
it was dumped in the pit. The latest pit was located on the eastern side
of the pit complex and was c.1.10m wide (min) and c.0.60m deep; its
lowest fill, located against the eastern side of the pit, consisted of very
pale silver sand [5132], c.0.30m in depth. This was sealed by [5130], a
mid-brown silty sand 0.15m in depth, and [4753] (?= [4754]), 0.35m in
depth, which also extended across the three earlier pits. The upper and
final fill was located in a hollow across the middle of the pit complex:
this was dark grey silty sand [4752], c.0.20m in depth.
Located immediately north-east of Structure 34, F557 [4842] was
a sub-circular pit 1.60m by 1.00m and c.0.55m deep, with steep sloping
sides down to an irregular and stepped base; there was a possible post-
hole in the base indicated by [4849], a possible post-pipe consisting
of black charcoal-rich silty sand, 0.15m wide and c.0.25m deep. This
was surrounded by [4850], a mixed red-brown sand with some flint
nodules and occasional charcoal fragments, which might have acted as
post-packing. These lowest fills were sealed by a thin band of compact
burnt sand, c.0.02m in depth, and compact bright red burnt sand [4848],
0.40m deep, with occasional lumps of harder sand and frequent, occa-
sionally burnt, flint. This deposit was concentrated on the northern side
and appeared to have been dumped in from that side. The upper fill
consisted of compact and slightly clayey red-brown sand c.0.30m in
depth, and was confined to the southern side of the pit. This was indis-
tinguishable from a surface deposit, or the ploughed-out remains of the
upper part of the pit, that extended c.0.25m out from the edge of the pit.
This pit produced only a handful of finds.
Located c.4.00m north-east of Structure 32, F565 [4860] was a
circular pit 2.50m by 2.30m and 0.70m deep with steep sloping sides
down to a concave base. The fill was a mixed mid to dark grey brown
silty sand ([4859]) with a dark brown crust-like pan at the interface
with the pit cut, which produced some scraps of metal and five sherds
of Anglo-Saxon pottery.
Located immediately south-west of Structure 33, F566 [4862] was
a sub-circular pit 1.00m by 0.90m and 0.40m deep with vertical sides
down to a concave base. The lower fill was dark grey-brown silty sand
[4864], 0.20m deep, sealed below pale grey-brown silty sand [4863],
c.0.20m in depth, which contained unfired clay loomweight fragments,
but few other finds.
F628 consisted of at least two inter-cutting sub-ovate pits ([5113])
spanning an area of c.1.20m by 1.00m and located c.2.00m north of
Structure 24. The earliest pit, which was c.1.00m wide and 0.25m deep,
was cut by a deeper pit 1.15m wide and 0.50m deep. The fill of both
pits comprised uniform dark brown and occasionally black sand [5114],
and produced fragments of unfired clay loomweights, alongside a small
amount of animal bone and Anglo-Saxon pottery.
Details of other Anglo-Saxon pits and their associated
finds can be found in Table 3.60.
VI. Hearths and oven bases
Five oven bases of probable Anglo-Saxon date were
found (Fig. 3.70; Table 3.61). Three comprised a layer of
stone overlain by a layer of burnt clay, while the other
two were simply layers of burnt clay. Unfortunately, two
oven bases were destroyed before they could be recorded
in detail (F254 and F372). One probable hearth lay on the
Fired clay Unfired Lava quern Slag Metal Other
clay
- - - -
(5489g)
363 (1601g) - - - -
- - 2 (22g) -
- - 1 (1g) 1 (12g)
244 (3149g) - - - -
base of the sunken feature associated with Structure 26
(F379).
It seems likely that each oven base would originally
have had a domed-shaped clay superstructure above the
surviving base. Fired clay fragments identified as struc-
tural remains of hearths and ovens were recovered from
the fills of a number of SFBs and from pits (see Anderson,
Chapter 4). The remains of part of an oven dome were
recovered from the fill of Structure 17 (over 3kg of fired
clay in total came from this SFB), immediately west of
oven base F338, and there was a large deposit of fired
clay, which included one possible hearth ‘fender’, a
possible fire bar and some vitrified hearth lining, in the
fill of Structure 25 (over 5.5kg of fired clay in total came
from this sunken feature), close to oven base F372. The
remains of an oven base seem to have been dumped into
the abandoned SFB of Structure 37 (over 9kg of fired
clay in total). A number of others contained dumps of
unidentified fired clay fragments; for example, the fill of
Structure 32 contained c.32kg of fired clay. Nearly 17kg
of fired clay was recovered from Surface Deposit F1.
Like other bulky and heavy items within the fills of SFBs
and pits, it seems probable that these fired clay deposits
came from the immediate vicinity.
None of the oven bases was clearly related to partic- Figure 3.71 Plan of Oven Base F254
ular buildings, although F254 lay within the internal area
of wall-post building Structure 44. F254 was located
within the same area as the metalworking evidence and
could possibly have been associated with this activity.
Presumably there were many more hearths and oven
bases, particularly within buildings (see above), which
have simply not survived. The quantities of fired clay
suggest that there could have been between ten and twenty
ovens/hearths originally (see Anderson, Chapter 4).
Oven Base or Hearth F254
(Fig. 3.71)
F254 was a discrete sub-circular feature composed of burnt clay,
measuring c.0.75 by 0.40m in plan, which is interpreted as an oven
base or hearth. The feature had been cut away on its eastern side by a
later pit (F264) but unfortunately had been destroyed by illicit metal-
detecting before detailed excavation and recording had taken place. It
was located within the internal area of Structure 44 but it is unclear
whether this feature actually related to the building.

Oven Base F259

(Fig. 3.72)
F259 was located in the north-east corner of Structure 45a, although the
oven base was not necessarily contemporary with the building and it
appeared to have been cut through by a later post-hole ([2281]). It was
a small sub-circular feature ([2282]) c.0.75m in diameter, comprising
a layer of large burnt stones below burnt clay (c.8kg in total), with a
number of flat slab-like fragments, some of which had signs of slight
vitrification.

Oven Base F338

(Fig. 3.73)
F338 was located c.2.50m east of Structure 17, overlying an earlier
infilled ditch ([2491] (F433)), which formed the northern boundary to
the Roman trackway. This oven base had an irregular sub-circular shape
and measured c.1.55m by 1.35m in area; it consisted of a foundation
layer of stones [2676] below a layer of burnt clay [2490] (c.16kg in total
from around and including the oven base; Table 3.61). The upper surface
of the feature had been scored by a plough furrow aligned N–S. There
was a concentration of burnt clay fragments and stone fragments in the
area immediately to the east of the oven base, and also a concentration
of charcoal ([2489]) immediately to the south; a spread of very dark
grey to black charcoal-rich silty sand lay over an area of c.6.00m to the Figure 3.72 Plan and section of Oven Base F259
south of the oven base, which was distinct from the rest of the Surface
Deposit F8 within the remains of the trackway.

151
 Figure 3.73 Plan and photograph of Oven Base F338
Oven Base F372
F372 was located immediately north of pit [3566] (Pit Group I) and
north-east of Structure 25. This oven base was sub-circular in shape,
c.1.10m in diameter, and consisted of a foundation of stone blocks
([3564]) below a layer of burnt clay ([3565]). Unfortunately, the
oven base was destroyed by illicit metal-detectorists before detailed
excavation and recording had taken place.
Oven Base or Hearth F379 (Structure 26)
An irregular sub-circular-shaped deposit of burnt clay ([3636]) was
defined on the base of possible shallow structure or working hollow
Structure 26; it measured c.0.40m in diameter and c.0.03m in thickness.
The natural sand immediately below this deposit was scorched,
indicating that the clay had probably been burnt in situ. The feature
could possibly the remains of a small oven base or hearth within the
hollow.
VII. Site formation processes
In order to understand the formation processes leading to
the build-up of the archaeological deposits at Bloodmoor
Hill, two approaches are used here. The first is soil
micromorphological analysis, which attempts to identify
whether any original ground or floor surfaces survived
in selected features. Following on from this, a case study
using information from features investigated by sieving
and spitting aims to characterise in more detail the nature
of their fills.
152
Micromorphological analysis
by Karen Milek
Introduction
Bloodmoor Hill is situated near the Suffolk coast on
Lower Pleistocene and Pliocene marine sands. The region
experiences a subhumid temperate climatic regime. The
site is at an elevation of 8–10m AOD, on a gentle northern
slope.
Several features on the site contained deposits that
were of particular geoarchaeological interest, which
served as a focus for the micromorphology sampling
program that was carried out by C. A. I. French and K.
Milek during site visits in April and May 1998, and by
excavators with the Cambridge Archaeological Unit.
These features included spreads of ‘dark earth’ in the
northern part of the site, Saxon sunken-featured build-
ings (SFBs) and pits, as well as brownish-red, undulating
bands that were found running through both anthropo-
genic features and the natural yellow sands on the site.
A total of twenty-five micromorphology samples were
taken from these features, of which four samples were
chosen for detailed analysis for the purpose of this assess-
ment. Samples <5> and <6> were taken from the base
of the fills of two SFBs (Structure 4 and Structure 22),
while sample <21> was taken from the fill of a large pit
in Pit Group F that was thought to serve as an interesting
comparison with the fills from the SFBs. Sample <25>
was taken from a spread of ‘dark earth’ on the northern
edge of the site (Surface Deposit F275). At Bloodmoor
Hill, there were several such spreads, most of which did
not contain very much refuse in the form of artefacts or
bones, and they cannot be considered to be middens in
Sample Feature Feature type Contexts sampled Context description (field) Preliminary interpretation (field)
<5> Structure 4 SFB [294] Very dark silty loam; occasional small Fill
gravel; rich in organic material, bone,
burnt bone; finds include iron and bronze
[311] Silty sand with frequent small to ?Primary deposit
medium-sized gravel
<6> Structure 22 SFB [2472] Pale brownish-grey silty sand; contains Secondary fill
patches of yellow sand and yellow and
greenish-grey clay; finds included a quern
stone fragment, a large slab of burnt clay,
pottery and bone
[2474] Dark grey (10 YR4/3) compacted silty Primary deposit at the base of the SFB;
sand; occasional charcoal flecks; contains crust-like characteristics may be due to
abundant yellow and greenish-grey clay input of mud and compaction by trampling
natural Mottled yellow fine sand (10 YR6/6 and Natural sand immediately below the cut of
5/6) the SFB
Brownish-red (10 YR4/4) silty fine sand Probably an iron pan
Mottled yellow fine sand Natural sand
<21> F168 Large pit [1457] Blackish-grey sand; occasional flint Secondary fill
cobbles, pebbles and charcoal fragments,
tooth
natural Mottled yellow fine sand Natural sand immediately below the cut of
the pit
F275 ‘Dark earth’ Mottled 10 YR3/2 and 3/6 silty sand; Possible sheet midden
spread occasional small charcoal fragments and
pebbles; rare bone fragments and iron
nodules; narrow band of dense 10 YR2/2
undulates through the deposit
<28> natural Yellow sand Natural sand immediately below the ‘dark
earth’ deposit

Table 3.62 Contexts sampled for micromorphological analysis

the usual sense of the word. A summary of the features
and contexts sampled for this assessment can be found in
Table 3.62.
Objectives
1. Area A, SFBs Structure 4 and Structure 22
To determine composition and mode of deposition of
the primary and secondary fills within the SFBs, as
well as the fine brownish-red concretions frequently
found close to the base of these deposits. This
information was intended to contribute towards the
following objectives:
1.1. To determine whether the primary fill of the SFBs
was a trampled floor surface, or whether it resembles
occupation debris that fell through floorboards while
the structure was in use.
1.2. To provide insights into the activities that may have
taken place inside the SFBs based on the organic and
anthropogenic residues contained within the primary
fill.
1.3. To determine whether the secondary fills of the SFBs
were the result of natural or anthropogenic deposi-
tional processes or a combination of the two. Poten-
tial processes include natural slumping of the sides of
the features, silting up, wind-blown sand deposition
and intentional dumping by humans. A comparison
of the secondary fills of the SFBs, a large pit [1583]
and the ‘dark earth’ spread (F275) will determine if
these deposits were similar in composition and mode
of deposition.
1.4. To determine the conditions responsible for deposi-
tion of the fine brownish-red concretions at the base
of the SFBs.
2. Area A, F168, Pit Group F
To determine the composition and mode of deposi-
tion of the fill of the large pit [1583].
2.1. To provide data with which to compare the fills of the
SFBs, in order to determine the degree of similarity
between the source and mode of deposition of the
material infilling the negative features on the site.
3. ‘Dark earth’ F275
To provide additional detail about the composition
and microstructure of the ‘dark earth’ spread and to
determine the composition and origin of the narrow,
undulating, brownish-red bands running through it.
This information was intended to contribute towards
the following objectives:
3.1. To determine the relationship between the surface
deposit and the rest of the site by comparing the
micromorphological characteristics of the deposits
in F275 with deposits within pits and SFBs. Of
particular interest was the degree of similarity
between the surface deposit and the material infilling
negative features on the site; it was necessary to
investigate this in order to determine if both are a
result of similar depositional processes, and if there
is evidence for waste materials having a complex
history of movement around the settlement.
3.2. To determine the precise composition of the narrow,
brownish-red bands (thought in the field to be iron
pans) that undulate through the ‘dark earth’ spread,
and the conditions responsible for their deposition.
4. Assessment of potential
To assess whether or not it would be worthwhile to
continue the program of micromorphological anal-

153
74
 Structure Coarse mineral component (>60µm)
Sample Feature Context Microstrat. Texture Microstructure Porosity Coarse/fine Coarse/fine Quartz Chert Potassium Plagioclase Hornblende Glauconite Muscovite Relic Schist Calcite Phytoliths Pollen
no. unit (60µm) ratio related Feldspar iron nodules
distribution
<5> Str 4 [294] 1 sandy bridged grain 30% 65:35 chitonic,    - - - -  - -  -
clay gefuric, some
loam porphyric
[311] 2 sandy spongy 25% 55:45 chitonic,    - - - -  - -  -
clay porphyric
<6> Str 22 [2472] 1 sandy bridged grain 30% 70:30 chitonic,    - - - -  - -  -
loam gefuric
[2474] 2 sandy spongy 20% 60:40 chitonic,    - - - -  - -  -
clay porphyric

154
loam
natural 3 sand single grain 60% 95:5 chitonic    - - - -  - - - -
and pellicular
natural 4 sandy spongy 25% 65:35 chitonic,    - - - -  - - - -
(clay clay porphyric
band) loam
natural 5 sand single grain 60% 98:2 chitonic    - - - -  - - - -

77
Frequency class refers to appropriate area of thin section (following Bullock et al. 1985)
- – present in trace amounts (<1%);  – very few (<5%);  – few (5–15%),  – frequent (15–30%);  – common (30–50%)

Table 3.63 Contexts sampled for micromorphological analysis (SFBs Structures 4 and 22): structure and coarse mineral components
 Fine mineral component Coarse organic component (>60µm) Fine organic component (<60µm) Other inclusions Pedofeatures
(<60µm)
Sample Feature Context Microstrat. Nature Birefringence Charcoal Fresh Plant Plant tissues Brown Fine Amorphous Bone Aggregate Aggregate Laminated Non-lamin- Amorphous Excrement Excrement
no. unit of fine fabric (XPL) roots tissues (slight organic organic (yellow) of sandy of clay loam dusty clay ated dirty iron (mamillate) (vermiform)
mineral (strong decomp- staining of fragments clay loam coatings clay impregnation
material decom- osition) fine (black) with coatings of fine
(PPL) position) mineral laminated mineral
material dusty clay material
coatings
<5> Str 4 [294] 1 brown, dark mosaic  - - -    - - - -   - -
brown, speckled,
dotted granostriated
[311] 2 brown, mosaic  - - -     - -    - -
reddish speckled,
brown, granostriated
dotted
<6> Str 22 [2472] 1 brown, dark mosaic  - - -   -    - -  - -

155
brown, speckled,
dotted granostriated
[2474] 2 brown, dark mosaic  - - -   - - -   -   -
brown, speckled,
reddish granostriated
brown,
dotted

78
natural 3 brown, n/a  - - -  - - -   - -
dotted
natural 4 brown, n/a  - - -  - - - -  - - - 
(clay reddish
band) brown,
speckled
natural 5 brown, n/a  - - -  - - - - - - - - - 
dotted

Frequency class refers to appropriate area of thin section (following Bullock et al. 1985)
- – present in trace amounts (<1%);  – very few (<5%);  – few (5–15%),  – frequent (15–30%);  – common (30–50%)

Table 3.64 Contexts sampled for micromorphological analysis (SFB Structures 4 and 22): fine mineral components, organic components, other inclusions, pedofeatures
 ysis for the site, depending on the degree to which
micromorphological analysis was able to fulfil the
above objectives.
Method
Micromorphology samples were taken from vertical
sections in the field with the aid of Kubiena tins ranging
in size from 11x5x5cm to 14x7x5cm. The samples
were then sealed in plastic and carefully labelled with
orientation and provenance details. At the McBurney
Geoarchaeology Laboratory at the University of
Cambridge they were air-dried, impregnated with a
crystic polyester resin, and thin sectioned following the
method outlined by Murphy (1986). The sections were
first analysed over a light-box without magnification, and
then under transmitting light microscopes using a range
of light sources (plane polarised light, reflected light and
with crossed polarisers) at magnifications ranging from
x5.8 to x250 (Colour Pl. V). Thin section descriptions
conform to the internationally accepted terminology
outlined by Bullock et al. (1985) and Stoops (2003),
and components and features within the sediments were
semi-quantified with the aid of frequency charts in the
same handbooks. Micromorphological characteristics are
summarised in Tables 3.63–4.
Sample <5>: SFB Structure 4
Description
Sample <5> was taken from the north-facing section in Structure 4
(see Fig. 3.8), an SFB that had been excavated in quarters in order to
expose as many vertical sections as possible. It incorporated [311], the
primary fill within the feature, as well as the secondary fill above, [294].
Unfortunately, the sample does not include the boundary between [311]
and the natural sand below the cut of the feature.
The sand component of [294] and [311] was identical, being
composed mainly of quartz with significant amounts of chert and
potassium feldspar, and trace amounts (i.e. <1%) of plagioclase, horn-
blende, glauconite and muscovite (see Table 3.63). There was also
approximately 5% iron nodules, which were sand-sized, rounded and
sub-rounded, and had smooth, well-defined boundaries. Since these
characteristics are typical of iron nodules that have been transported
rather than formed in situ, these iron nodules were classified as relic
features of the subsoil and included in the sand component. The size
fraction of the sand was mainly coarse, medium and fine (100–2000µm),
with most being medium sand (250–500µm). The surface of the sand
grains was smooth to undulating, and they were a variety of shapes,
ranging from angular to sub-rounded. The same suite of minerals, grain
sizes and shapes were found throughout all of the samples and contexts
analysed, with only very minor variations.
The organic component of [294] and [311] also differed very little,
consisting mainly of organic staining of the fine mineral material.
There were also some charcoal fragments and a significant number of
fine black organic fragments that could either be charcoal or partially
decomposed organic matter. Also embedded in the fine mineral mate-
rial were a significant number of phytoliths. The phytoliths were of all
sizes and shapes, and included spiny rods, smooth rods, bulliforms and
trapezoids, indicating that they came from a variety of plant parts. They
were no longer in situ, but had been reworked into the fine mineral
material. In addition, both [294] and [311] contained nodules with a
yellow and brown amorphous fabric that either coated or bridged sand
grains, or took the form of rounded, sand-sized nodules, some of which
were discrete and some of which embedded several sand grains. These
nodules had unusual properties in crossed polarised light, having a very
low birefringence (white) that was either mosaic speckled or microc-
rystalline (i.e. birefringent crystals were <2µm, so small that the nodule
almost appeared isotropic). Some of these nodules also contained
vivianite, a blue crystal consisting of a compound of phosphorus and
iron that forms under reducing conditions. Although not every yellow
nodule contained viviante, they all had very similar optical properties,
and it is likely that all of them were made up of a combination of phos-
phorus and iron. In archaeological contexts, the formation of vivianite
is normally associated with at least periodic waterlogging (e.g. a high
and/or fluctuating water table) and an abundant source of phosphorus,
156
such as bone, excrement, or high concentrations of plant matter. Due
to the advanced level of decomposition of the organic matter in these
and all of the contexts analysed in thin section, it is not possible to
determine the source of the high amounts of phosphorus indicated
by the presence of vivianite. It would appear not to be bone, judging
from the low quantities of bone in both contexts. The smooth, rounded
nature of the yellow nodules, and the fact that all of them had discrete
boundaries, indicates that they had been transported or reworked into
the sediment and that they were no longer in situ.
The sedimentary characteristics that distinguished [294] and [311]
were the fine mineral component (the amounts and types of silt and
clay) and to a lesser extent the anthropogenic component (amounts
of charcoal and bone). [294] was a sandy clay loam in which the fine
mineral component was a silty clay stained brown by humified organic
matter, which formed coatings and bridges between sand grains and
occasionally completely embedded them. The birefringence of the clay
(i.e. its optical properties in crossed polarised light) was predominantly
mosaic speckled, although occasional granostriation indicates that peri-
odic wetting and drying of the sediment had caused the clay to swell
and shrink, a process that eventually causes it to orient itself parallel
to the surface of sand grains. Very rarely, the clay component took
the form of non-laminated, dirty (very impure, or silty) clay that was
present in the form of clay coatings and bridges between sand grains,
and coatings over bridges of fine organo-mineral material. Although
they were very silty, the clay in these pedofeatures was moderately to
well oriented and had a continuous orientation pattern, which indicated
that they were illuvial in origin. They were therefore formed by the
post-depositional translocation of silty clay by rain water percolating
from the upper soil horizons (probably the topsoil) down into [294].
Except for the elevated organic content, the anthropogenic component
of [294] was unexpectedly low. Charcoal was present in proportions of
only 1–2%. There was one small highly weathered and abraded bone
fragment that measured 1.7mm at its longest dimension.
In contrast, [311] was a sandy clay with a much higher clay content
than the context above. The larger amount of fine mineral material
coating and embedding sand grains had the result of decreasing poros-
ity and creating a microstructure that was spongy rather than bridged
grain. This would have had the effect of making [311] feel denser and
more compact in the field. In addition to having a fine mineral compo-
nent similar to that described for the context above, the clay content in
[311] was elevated by the presence of significant numbers of laminated
dusty clay coatings (5–10%). These coated and formed bridges between
sand grains, were strongly oriented and had a continuous orientation
pattern, indications that they were the result of illuviation. In addition,
the fact that the clay coatings were multi-laminated indicates that they
were the result of successive and repeated illuvation events. The clay
coatings tended to group together in horizontal or subhorizontal bands,
a characteristic that will be discussed further below, but there was also
clay accumulation between bands. These bands appeared red in thin
section in both plane polarised and crossed polarised light, probably
due to iron being leached from the upper horizons and precipitated
along with the clay. In addition to the higher clay content of [311], it
had a slightly higher charcoal content than the context above, and a
large bone fragment that was heavily cracked and weathered.
Interpretation
Context [311], the lower fill of Structure 4, does not possess the
characteristics that are generally considered to be typical of trampled
floor deposits. These characteristics include a compact structure,
horizontal or sub-horizontal cracks (planar voids), and, depending on the
function of the structure, the presence of horizontally bedded occupation
debris such as pottery, bone, shell, ash and/or plant tissues (Courty et al.
1994; Gé et al. 1993). There is also no evidence to suggest that [311]
is a sediment that accumulated below elevated floor boards. Sediment
filtering down into the cavity below raised floor boards is expected to
undergo a degree of sorting, and, in contrast to the trampled surface, is
expected to be uncompacted, porous and relatively undisturbed except
by bioturbation (Milek 1997). None of these characteristics were
visible in [311], which was mainly distinguished from the secondary
fill in Structure 4 by having a significant quantity of illuviated clay. The
process of clay illuviation may be related to anthropogenic activities
taking place on the surface of the soil (e.g. surface clearance and/or
ploughing, which destabilises clay), but the process itself is entirely
post-depositional and natural. The formation of this context is therefore
not related to the original function of the building and cannot be used to
interpret the activities that may have taken place inside Structure 4.
Although micromorphology sample <5> did not include the cut
of the feature or the natural sand below, the section drawing (Fig. 3.8)
shows that [311] was a relatively thin deposit (maximum 13cm thick)
of nearly uniform thickness which ran parallel to the cut of the SFB.
The boundary between the fill of the SFB and the natural sand below is
probably responsible for the concentration of illuviated clay just above
the cut of the feature. Fine clay bands, sometimes termed lamellae,
have often been the subject of study in natural contexts, where they
tend to occur in sandy soils in humid or subhumid temperate regions
similar to Bloodmoor Hill. Although the mechanism of their formation
is not universally agreed upon, and it is likely that slightly different
mechanisms are at work in different areas, it has been noted that they
frequently form parallel to the original textural stratification of the
parent material, owing to its influence on the downward movement of
water (Dijkerman et al. 1967). In particular, boundaries between coarser
and finer material, or between more porous and less porous material,
can stop a wetting front because of differences in capillary forces.
Once the wetting front has stopped, clay can settle out of suspension
by evaporation and gravitation and be deposited horizontally along or
near the boundary (Dijkerman et al. 1967; Gile 1979; Schaetzl 1992).
In addition, it is not uncommon for these clay bands to have a much
higher percentage of iron than the layers above or below, indicating
that they formed under conditions which also allowed the oxidation
of iron (Folks and Riecken 1956; Gray et al. 1976). Such conditions
would have been present at the lower boundary of a wetting front that
was carrying iron leached from upper horizons. It is therefore very
likely that the concentration of clay-iron bands within context [311]
is a result of the boundary between the anthropogenic fill of the SFB
and the natural sand, which would have stopped or slowed downwards-
moving water carrying iron and clay. This view is supported by the
nature, orientation and distribution of the other clay bands found on the
site and examined in thin section (see below).
The upper fill, [294], does not exhibit the characteristics typical of
natural fill mechanisms such as weathering profiles, slumping of sides
and silting up sequences. Natural fill mechanisms have been studied
mainly in ditches and pits, where weathering tends to cause alternating
bands of coarse, frost-shattered material and finer rainwash (Bell 1990).
In contrast, both the section drawing and micromorphological analysis
reveal [294] to be an homogeneous, uniform fill, with no evidence of
internal stratification. However, ditches and pits are generally much
deeper relative to their width than SFBs, and there are limits to the
extent to which these natural fill mechanisms can be applied to the
wider, shallower SFBs. For example, while weathering and slumping
may be expected to affect the sides of SFBs, these processes will have
little affect on the broad, horizontal surface of their interiors. Abandoned
SFBs, if left as exposed negative features, could be expected to stabi-
lise and be colonised by vegetation relatively quickly, resulting in the
development of a stable soil horizon. Since neither weathering profiles
nor topsoil development are visible in the fills of Structure 4, and since
the fills are homogeneous and contain small amounts of anthropogenic
material (charcoal and bone) and a very high humic organic content,
they are probably the result of intentional and rapid dumping immedi-
ately after the SFB was abandoned.
The origin of the materials used to infill Structure 4 is difficult to
ascertain due to the low quantity of anthropogenic material and the poor
preservation and high level of decomposition of organic matter. Owing
to the low anthropogenic component it cannot be viewed as a midden
deposit, and it is only possible to speculate that the material came from
within the settlement, perhaps from the excavation or the cleaning-out
of another pit or SFB. Although it is not wise to speculate too far, it is
worth pointing out that the presence of vivianite in the fill of Structure 4
may indicate something about the source of the sediment. It is possible,
for example, that the material originated from the cleaning-out of a pit
that had contained the conditions necessary for the development of
vivianite: i.e. an abundance of phosphorus in the form of plant matter
or cess, and reducing conditions. In addition, an aeolian sand and silt
component cannot be ruled out, but these materials, if present, had the
same mineralogical makeup as the rest of the soils and sediments on the
site. Such materials, if present in fairly low quantities, would quickly
be reworked into the fill by the soil fauna which were clearly active
within the deposit. There are no layers or zones of well-sorted sand or
silt in either the thin section or the section drawing that would indicate
substantial accumulation of aeolian materials.
Sample <6>: SFB Structure 22
Description
Sample <6>, which was taken from a south-facing section (Fig. 3.23)
within Structure 22, included the lower fill of the SFB, the ‘crust’ at
the base of the feature, the cut of the feature and the natural yellow
sand below. Approximately 2cm below the cut of Structure 22 was a
fine brownish-red horizontal band that ran through the natural yellow
subsoil, and this band was also sampled.
157
Altogether, five microstratigraphic horizons were identified in
sample <6>, for which detailed micromorphological descriptions
can be found in Tables 3.63 and 3.64. As in sample <5>, all of these
layers were dominated by medium and fine sand; they also had
the same mineral suite as sample <5> (see above). Slight variations
included trace amounts of calcite in [2472] and [2474=1271]. The
fills of Structure 22 also differed from the natural sand in that they
had a significantly higher fine mineral component (silty clay stained
brown by decomposed organic matter), a higher organic component
(mainly silt-sized fragments of black organic matter and charcoal), and
an anthropogenic component (bone). In contrast, the natural, quartz-
dominated sand contained almost no silt or clay (<5%) and therefore
exhibited no brown organic staining.
In common with sample <5>, both the natural and the fills in
sample <6> were heavily bioturbated by soil fauna, a characteristic that
had already been noted in the field. Reworking by soil fauna created
a very open, porous fabric in the natural sand (60% porosity), and
resulted in the formation of vermiforms — worm channels infilled with
finer, more organic material. The fills above were less porous, because
of the greater amount of fine mineral and organic material in the void
spaces, but they nevertheless had a reworked, open fabric (30% poros-
ity). Faunal activity had also disrupted the boundaries between [2474]
and the layers above and below, causing the boundary to undulate and
small aggregates of clay from [2474] to be reworked into [2472] above
and the natural sand below.
In thin section, [2472], the lower fill of Structure 22, was very
similar to the fill of Structure 4 ([294], described above). However, in
addition to the dark brown, silty and organic clay that coated and bridged
sand grains, this context also contained a trace amount of pollen and
two very small, highly weathered bone fragments (1.5mm and 180µm
respectively). Unlike [294], [2472] did not contain amorphous yellow
aggregates or vivianite.
[2474], the thin ‘crust’ at the base of the SFB, also bore many simi-
larities to [311], at the base of the SFB described above. Like [311],
[2474] contained significant quantities of illuviated clay in the form of
reddish (iron-rich) laminated dusty clay coatings around sand grains
and bridges between sand grains. The deposition of illuviated clay and
iron in void spaces had caused a decrease in porosity (20%) and is the
reason why the layer felt so dense and compacted in the field. The only
anthropogenic inclusion in [2474] was one very small (500µm) highly
weathered bone fragment.
In addition, [2474] was distinguished by the presence of a very
large, subrounded aggregate of clay loam (mud) resting directly on the
boundary with the natural yellow sand. This aggregate is likely to be
one of the pieces of ‘unfired clay’ (possibly daub or loomweight frag-
ments) that were found in large quantities in the lower fills of Structure
22 (below). This aggregate was very dense (c.10% porosity) and
consisted mainly of silt and clay, the sand component being only c.40%.
It should be noted that the distribution of the sand embedded within
the clay was very uneven — some zones within the aggregate have a
much higher proportion of sand than others. However, there were no
fining up sequences or any other evidence for internal sorting within the
aggregate. The mineralogy of the sand within the aggregate was similar
to the subsoil and all of the other contexts investigated in these thin
sections, with the exception that it had a higher quantity of muscovite
(c.2%, rather than the trace amounts found in the other sediments). As
muscovite grains are generally in the smaller size ranges (fine and very
fine sand), they probably reflect the original low energy depositional
environment that was also responsible for the deposition of so much
silt and clay. Throughout the aggregate, the clay had oriented itself
around sand grains and in cross-shaped patterns, exhibiting a granostri-
ated and reticulate striated birefringence fabric under crossed polarised
light. Such patterns in the orientation of clay indicate repeated wetting
and drying of the fabric (FitzPatrick 1993). The aggregate did not
contain any anthropogenic inclusions, but did contain approximately
2% fine black amorphous fragments that could be either charcoal or
decomposing organic matter. Like the rest of [2474], the aggregate had
been subjected to post-depositional clay illuviation, which left rare,
non-laminated dusty clay coatings within void spaces. The boundaries
of this aggregate were undulating and disrupted on all sides by post-
depositional soil fauna activity.
Below the cut of Structure 22, within the natural yellow sand, a fine
brownish-red continuous band had been observed in the field. In thin
section, this band was found to contain significant quantities of clay
in the form of laminated dusty clay coatings around sand grains and
bridges between sand grains (20–25%), all of which had been stained
red by oxidised iron.
Interpretation
Due to the density and compaction of [2474] in the field, there was
some hope that this crust-like layer may have been the original floor
surface at the base of the SFB, and that it might provide some indication
of the activities that had taken place inside. Unfortunately, thin section
analysis did not support the hypothesis that [2474] was a floor. The
compact structure of [2474] relative to the contexts above and below it
was due to the presence of illuviated clay in the void spaces. In addition,
this layer showed no evidence of the horizontal crack structure or platy
structure that is normally associated with trampling, and there was a
virtual lack of anthropogenic inclusions. The clay loam at the base of
the feature was an aggregate rather than an intentionally constructed
clay floor surface, and it is possible that it is a fragment of daub or
loomweight that fell or was thrown into the base of the structure during
the process of abandonment. The complete lack of anthropogenic build-
up or evidence for trampling at the base of the structure is surprising
and difficult to explain. It is possible that floor boards were placed at the
base of the structure, thereby preventing any build-up of anthropogenic
materials, and that these boards were removed when the structure was
abandoned. At any rate, both [2472] and [2474] should be viewed as
post-abandonment fills, with the lower fill at the base of the structure
differing mainly in the quantity of post-depositional illuviated clay and
iron it contained. Once again, the presence of this clay-iron band at the
base of the SFB was probably due to the boundary with the natural sands
below. The natural sands had much larger pore spaces than the loamy
fills and therefore a much lower moisture tension would have been
required to allow percolating rainwater to move down into this layer
(Miller and Gardner 1962). This would have inhibited or completely
stopped the infiltration of any downward-moving water front carrying
suspended clay and reduced iron, and evaporation and gravitational
settling at this boundary would have caused the accumulation of clay
and iron in the form of a band at the base of the feature (Dijkerman et
al. 1967).
The remaining fill of the SFB, like [294] in Structure 4, appears
to be the result of rapid and intentional dumping immediately after the
structure had been abandoned. Once again, the source of the material
is difficult to ascertain, but the small bone fragments and elevated
organic component suggest that the material came from the settlement
itself, perhaps from the digging or cleaning out of another pit or SFB.
Although the suite of minerals within the fills of Structure 22 was
nearly identical to that of the natural sands below and the other fills
examined in thin section, the trace amount of calcite in these fills may
suggest that the fill material came from an area on the settlement that
was not immediately adjacent to this SFB. Once again, it is possible that
there is also a wind-blown component within these fills. If so, it is made
up of the same materials that are surrounding the SFB, and it has been
completely reworked into the fill by bioturbation.
The clay-iron band within the natural sands below Structure 22 was
created by the same processes that have already been discussed with
reference to the clay-iron bands in [311] and [2474]: i.e. clay illuvia-
tion and iron precipitation at the point at which a downwards-moving
wetting front was slowed or stopped. The reason for the stopping of
a wetting front at this depth (c.2cm below the cut of Structure 22) is
not as certain, since there is no obvious boundary within the natural
sands. It was noted that the sand at the bottom of thin section <6> was
dominated by fine sand rather than the medium sand that had dominated
the layers above. It is possible that this slight change in texture formed
a subtle boundary which was sufficient to halt or at least to temporarily
inhibit a wetting front. Once some clay had been deposited, forming an
incipient band, this boundary would have become a preferential loca-
tion for the deposition of clay and the precipitation of iron, and the band
would promote its own growth (Dijkerman et al. 1967).

Sample <21>: Pit Group F

Description
Sample <21> was taken from a west-facing section within Pit [1583],
from the upper fills and the natural sands on the northern edge of the pit.
In thin section, the boundary between [1457] and the natural sands was
visible, but diffuse and undulating, and it had clearly been disturbed by
bioturbation. In comparison with the natural sand in sample <6>, which
was almost completely devoid of fine mineral or organic material (see
Table 3.64), much of the fine mineral and organic material from the fill
had been worked into the natural sands below the cut of [1583] (see
Table 3.66). This is an indication of enhanced biological activity within
the pit. Both the fill and the natural contained traces of fairly fresh roots
(cellulose partially preserved), and root action no doubt contributed to
the mixing of the two contexts.
The content of [1457] is very similar to the fills of both of the SFBs
described above (see Tabs 3.65 and 3.66) Like these other fills, [1457]
was a sandy clay loam with a fine mineral component that appeared dark

158
 Fine mineral component Coarse organic component (>60µm) Fine organic component (<60µm) Other inclusions Pedofeatures
(<60µm)
Sample Feature Context Microstrat. Texture Nature of Birefringence Charcoal Fresh Plant Plant tissues Brown organic Fine organic Amorphous Bone Aggregate of Aggregate of Laminated Amorphous Excrement
no. unit fine mineral Fabric (XPL) roots tissues (slight staining of fine fragments (yellow) sandy clay clay dusty clay iron (mamillate)
material (strong decomposi- mineral (black) loam with coatings impregn-
(PPL) decomp- tion) material laminated ation of fine
osition) dusty clay mineral
coatings material
<21> Pit [1457] 1 sandy dark brown, mosaic  - - -   - -  - -  
Group F clay brown, speckled,
[1583] loam organo- granostriated
mineral,
dotted
natural 2 sandy dark brown, mosaic  - - -   - - - - -  -
loam brown, speckled,
organo- granostriated
mineral,
dotted
<25> F275 1 sandy dark brown, mosaic  - - -   - - - - -  -
loam brown, speckled,
organo- granostriated
mineral,
dotted
2 sandy dark brown, mosaic - - - - - - - -

159
    

80
clay reddish speckled,
loam brown, granostriated
dotted
3 sandy dark brown, mosaic  -  -   - -  - -  -
loam brown, speckled,
organo- granostriated
mineral,
dotted
4 sandy dark brown, mosaic  -  -   - - - -   -
clay reddish speckled,
loam brown, granostriated
dotted
5 sandy dark brown, mosaic  - - -   - -  - -  -
loam brown, speckled,
organo- granostriated
mineral,
dotted
6 loamy dark brown, mosaic  - - -   - -  - -  -
sand brown, speckled,
organo- granostriated
mineral,
dotted

Frequency class refers to appropriate area of thin section (following Bullock et al. 1985. - – present in trace amounts (<1%);  – very few (<5%);  – few (5–15%),  – frequent (15–30%);  – common (30–50%)

Table 3.66 Contexts sampled for micromorphological analysis (F168 and F275): fine mineral components, organic components, other inclusions, pedofeatures
brown due to organic staining and the presence of fine organic fragments.
However, the microstructure of [1457] also indicated a greater level of
biological activity. Most of the dark brown organo-mineral material
was in the form of small aggregates between sand grains, and many
of these aggregates were rounded enough to be identifiable as faunal
excrement. An open, microaggregated soil fabric is generally thought
to be heavily reworked by soil fauna. Besides the organic component,
[1457] contained no clear anthropogenic inclusions. One amorphous
yellow aggregate (probably phosphatic) adhering to a quartz grain had
smooth, rounded edges and was most probably transported or reworked.
The only other unusual inclusion was a small aggregate of clay (1.5mm
diameter) that contained a fungal spore, horizontally bedded diatoms
and mica grains, fine sand that included elevated quantities of glauco-
nite, and some iron mottling. The original source of this aggregate is
likely to have been a tidal marsh, and it must have been transported to
the site intentionally for use as daub or loomweight.
Interpretation
Like the SFB fills examined in thin section, the upper fill of [1583]
contained negligible quantities of anthropogenic material. The
elevated organic component (and thus the level of biological activity)
in [1457] is undoubtedly due to human activity on the settlement, but
the poor organic preservation and high level of decomposition make it
impossible to interpret the nature of the original organic material (e.g.
whether plant matter or dung). It is possible that the clay aggregate
was transported to the site for use as daub, but this too is present in
too low a quantity to indicate very much about the source of the fill.
It is only possible to say that this pit was not used for the dumping of
general refuse from the settlement. Like the SFB fills, there may be an
aeolian component in [1457]. If so, this wind-blown material contained
the same grain sizes and mineralogy as the dumped material, and had
been completely reworked into the sediment.
Sample <25>: ‘dark earth’ spread
Description
Sample <25> was taken from the west-facing section of Feature 275,
incorporating the ‘dark earth’, the natural yellow sand, and several
continuous brownish-red undulating bands. In the section photograph it
was possible to see that these bands ran through both anthropogenic and
natural layers, but did tend to follow the boundaries between horizons
that were slightly different in colour (presumably due to differences in
texture and organic content), and often traced the undulations and pits
of small animal burrows.
In thin section, the ‘dark earth’ was very similar in composition
to the upper fills of the SFBs ([294] and [2472]), but contained even
fewer anthropogenic inclusions( see Tables 3.65 and 3.66). It was a
sandy loam with a similar mineral suite to the other contexts already
discussed, but with a slightly higher proportion of plagioclase and a
slightly lower proportion of the minerals previously found in trace
amounts: hornblende, glauconite and muscovite (see Table 3.64). Like
the upper SFB fills, the ‘dark earth’ had an open, bridged grain structure
(30% porosity) that was created by silty clay, stained brown by decom-
posed organic matter, that formed coatings around and bridges between
sand grains. Surprisingly, there was even less anthropogenic material in
the ‘dark earth’ than in the SFB fills, with only one horizon having one
very small fragment of highly weathered bone. The main anthropogenic
input was the organic component, which included charcoal fragments,
strongly decomposed plant tissues (no cell structure left), and silt-sized
black organic fragments that could be either charcoal or humified plant
matter.
The natural sand below the ‘dark earth’ was more mixed with the
sediment above than the natural sand below the SFB Structure 22. It
had a significantly lower proportion of fine mineral material (silt and
clay) and organic material than the ‘dark earth’ above, but a combina-
tion of soil fauna activity and percolating rainwater had worked some
organic and fine mineral material downwards and mixed it with the
natural sands. This had created a microstructure that was a combination
of bridged grain (sand grains linked by fine organo-mineral material)
and single grain (sand grains in isolation)
In thin section, two fine clay-iron bands, and part of a third, were
identified. Like the other clay-iron bands described above, these
differed from the surrounding sediments only in the quantity of in situ
laminated dusty clay coatings that were stained red by oxidised iron
(15–30%). The formation of multiple clay-iron bands throughout the
‘dark earth’ profile was a product of internal stratification, however
subtle, which acted to halt the progress of a downward-moving wetting
front. Microstratigraphic unit 2, the uppermost clay-iron band in sample
<25>, seems to be at a boundary between two slightly different layers,
the lower of which was more porous (40% porosity rather than 30%).
160
Similarly, microstratigraphic unit 4, another clay-iron band, seems to
be resting on a layer with slightly less fine organo-mineral material
and organic matter, which would have the effect of creating larger pore
spaces.
Interpretation
The ‘dark earth’ spread was formed by the intentional dumping of organic
material, but the lack of bones, pottery, daub, or other anthropogenic
inclusions indicates that it was not a general refuse deposit or midden.
Anthropogenic material survives only in the form of charcoal, silt-sized
black organic fragments and strongly decomposed plant tissues, and
unfortunately the preservation of plant matter here, as on the rest of the
site, is too poor to allow more precise interpretations about the original
source of the material. The internal stratification of the ‘dark earth’ is
likely to be the result of multiple dumping events.
Conclusions
Floors and fills of sunken-featured buildings
Neither Structure 4 nor Structure 22 contained evidence
of a primary deposit that could have formed while the
building was in use, either as a trampled floor surface,
or as sediment that accumulated in the air space beneath
elevated floor boards. The ‘crusts’ observed at the base of
these features were not in fact a product of human activity,
but of the post-depositional illuviation of clay that formed
fine Bt horizons at the boundary between the fills and the
natural sand. The lack of a primary occupation deposit in
SFBs is a recurring problem in Anglo-Saxon archaeology,
although few sites have been investigated using micro-
morphological analysis. Some of the SFBs at Mucking
were recorded as having a remnant of clay floors and
occupation layers (Hamerow 1993, ll,14) and trampled
and worn floors were seen as being indicated by a lower
central area and a concentration of occupation debris
(Jones 1974, 198). At West Stow (West 1985) and West
Heslerton (Powlesland 1998), excavators have suggested
that occupation material accumulated gradually below
floor boards suspended above the pit, but recent research
into the nature and composition of SFB fills has found
many examples of fills dominated by post-abandonment
collapse and dumped materials (Tipper 2004).
The micromorphological analyses of SFB fills at
Bourn Bridge, Cambridgeshire by French (1996), West
Heslerton (Yorkshire), Stratton (Bedfordshire) and
Svågertop, Malmö (Sweden) by Macphail (Goldberg
and Macphail 2006, 240–44) and Sherbourne House,
Lechlade, Gloucestershire by Heathcote (1999) had
results similar to those at Bloodmoor Hill. These fills
were unstratified, homogeneous and heavily reworked
by soil fauna, and there was a surprising lack of anthro-
pogenic inclusions. One possible explanation is that the
SFBs had wooden floor boards which were not suspended
above the pit, but which were instead at the base of
the pit, perhaps on transverse wooden supports, as has
been observed in well preserved SFBs (waterlogged or
charred) in early medieval Scandinavia and Frisia (e.g.
Madsen 1975, 6). Such wooden flooring would prevent
the accumulation of anthropogenic material, would
protect the underlying sands from trampling, and could
be removed when the structures were abandoned. The
homogeneous fills within all of the SFBs so far studied
using micromorphological analysis support Pollard’s
(1996) view that these pits were intentionally backfilled
soon after the structures were abandoned. However, as
they contain an elevated organic content but very little
in the way of general refuse or midden materials, all that
can be said about the source of the fills is that they came
from the soils at the surface of the settlement. Macphail
et al. (2006) have also suggested that the soil infilling
SFBs may be derived from turf construction materials
but, if this is the case, all of the original horizonation
normally seen in turf has been reworked by soil fauna.
It is also possible that there is a wind-blown component
within these fills, which has been completely reworked
into the sediment by bioturbation.
‘Dark earth’ deposits and the fills of pits and SFBs
The ‘dark earth’ spread and the upper fills of the SFBs
and the large pit all had very similar micromorphological
characteristics. The fact that the mineralogy, size and
shape of the sand component was virtually identical in all
of the contexts indicates that all of the fill materials came
from the settlement itself or its immediate vicinity. The
very few aggregates of clay that are likely to have come
from tidal marsh environments and which were incorpo-
rated into the fills as inclusions were probably brought
to the site to be used as daub or for other clay artefacts,
such as loomweights. These and the very few minute
bone fragments in the fills were the only anthropogenic
inclusions, and they indicate very little except that the
pits and the ‘dark earth’ were not the result of general
refuse or midden deposits. The material is likely to have
come from the surface of the site.
The mode and rate of deposition is slightly different
in all of the contexts studied. While the SFBs seem to
have been filled in a single dumping event soon after the
structures were abandoned, the large pit [1583] seems to
have been left open and exposed for a period prior to its
final infilling. Although the thin sections at the base of
the pit could not be investigated for this assessment, the
section drawing shows layers of coarse material at the
base of the pit as well as slumping on its sides, both of
which can indicate exposure to weathering processes. In
contrast to the fills of the SFBs and the large pit, the ‘dark
earth’ spread appears to have been a product of several
different dumping events, all of which resulted in the
deposition of materials differing very slightly in texture
and organic content.
Figure 3.74 Sieved and spitted metre-squares within Structure 4 and Structure 22
161
Clay-iron bands
The fine brownish-red undulating bands that were found
running through the ‘dark earth’ spreads and other
anthropogenic features on the site, as well as through the
natural yellow sands, were found to be thin Bt horizons,
known as clay-iron bands or lamellae, which commonly
form in sand in humid or subhumid temperate climatic
conditions. These were an entirely natural phenomenon,
and were caused by percolating water stopping on some
type of subsurface boundary, which allowed the deposi-
tion of suspended clay and reduced iron. Because they
can form at very subtle boundaries (e.g. where there is a
very slight change in texture or porosity), they tended to
trace the boundaries of features and animal burrows, and
formed clay-rich crusts at the bases of several sunken-
featured buildings.
Stratigraphic case study
In order to compare the results of the micromorphological
analyses with data from the archaeological sampling, two
structures were examined in more depth. Structures 4 and
22 (the subject of micromorphological samples <5> and
<6> respectively) had both been subject to an intensive
programme of sieving and spitting, in order that their
constituent fills be understood in more detail. Structure 4
had seen a central core of four 1m x 1m squares exca-
vated in 10cm spits, with the north-east and south-west of
these ‘columns’ also sieved. Structure 22 saw its north-
west and south-east quadrants divided into metre-squares
and likewise dug in 10cm spits, with around 50% of these
also sieved (Fig. 3.74).
In order to compare like with like, two metre-square
columns from each feature, which had been both dug in
spits and sieved, were examined by finds composition.
The finds from the sieved and unsieved fractions were
amalgamated by spit, in order to give the total finds
assemblage, by category, for each column; these are
presented in Tables 3.67–3.68. The ‘mean sherd weight’
for each category by spit was calculated by amalgamating
the data for the two columns. Looking first at Structure 4
(Table 3.67), the finds profile supports Milek’s interpreta-
tion (above) of rapid and intentional dumping of material
after abandonment: there is a complete absence of unfired
Structure 4: all finds (sieved and unsieved) Structure 22: all finds (sieved and unsieved)
Unfired clay NE SW MeanSW Unfired clay NW2 SE2 Ave MSW
A 0 0 0.00 A 0 0 0.00
B 0 0 0.00 B 6 (55g) 22 (240g) 10.54
C 0 0 0.00 C 34 (710g) 34 (246g) 14.06
D 0 0 0.00 Bone NW2 SW2 Ave MSW
Bone NE SW MeanSW A 71 (60g) 12 (59g) 1.43
A 515 (824g) 159 (399g) 1.81 B 44 (49g) 27 (94g) 2.01
B 479 (1366g) 126 (330g) 2.80 C 61 (30g) 39 (20g) 0.50
C 178 (546g) 28 (141g) 3.33 Slag NW2 SW2 Ave MSW
D 5 (52g) 0 10.40 A 11 (48g) 7 (34g) 4.56
Slag NE SW MeanSW B 8 (36g) 3 (10g) 4.18
A 17 (364g) 32 (742g) 22.57 C 2 (9g) 3 (19g) 5.60
B 10 (127g) 24 (516g) 18.85 AS pot NW2 SW2 Ave MSW
C 0 3 (107g) 35.67 A 7 (19g) 1 (15g) 4.25
D 0 0 0.00 B 2 (5g) 3 (12g) 3.40
AS pot NE SW MeanSW C 0 3 (10g) 3.33
A 3 (53g) 12 (72g) 8.33 Roman pot NW2 SW2 Ave MSW
B 4 (108g) 6 (58g) 16.60 A 9 (20g) 6 (42g) 4.13
C 6 (92g) 3 (27g) 13.22 B 5 (27g) 0 5.40
D 3 (24g) 0 8.00 C 2 (5g) 6 (25g) 3.75
Roman pot NE SW MeanSW
A 0 4 (11g) 2.75 Table 3.68 Stratified finds distribution in Structure 22
B 1 (10g) 2 (3g) 4.33
C 4 (6g) 0 1.50
D 0 0 0.00 comprised the thirty-eight SFBs, along with at least nine
structures of wall-post construction, together with an
Table 3.67 Stratified finds distribution in Structure 4 extremely large pit assemblage, unusual surface deposits
of material and associated soil, and five hearth or oven
bases. Together, this represents one of the best-excavated
and most complete early Anglo-Saxon settlements yet
clay, with the majority of animal bone, slag and Anglo- to be investigated in Britain. Analysis has determined
Saxon pot sherds found in the top 20cm of fill, although that original occupation surfaces have not survived, as a
there were still considerable quantities, particularly of result of severe bioturbation and related chemical proc-
animal bone, in the lower spits. ‘Mean sherd weights’ esses in the sandy soils of the site. The detailed nature of
for each category of material are generally high (regard- the recording does, however, allow for an in-depth study
less of the spit level), suggesting deposition of relatively of the ways in which material came to be moved around
fresh material, particularly in the case of Anglo-Saxon the site.
pot sherds and slag. While summaries of associated finds have been listed
Structure 22 presents a rather different profile alongside the structures and other features for reference,
(Table 3.68). Here, unfired clay was present in consid- these associated artefactual and ecofactual assemblages
erable quantities, particularly in lower spits (with mean are more fully described and analysed in the following
weight actually increasing with depth), while the other two chapters. They are dealt with there according to func-
categories were more dominant and less fragmented in tional categories, in order to be able to provide a more
the upper spits. This profile seems to imply a process of nuanced analysis of the nature of the settlement and its
sequential dumping of material, potentially of unfired associated activities. Chapter 6 then goes on to combine
clay loomweights in initial dumps, succeeded by more these two forms of evidence, structural and material, in
general refuse comprising greater amounts of animal order to establish a detailed phasing for the site and to
bone, slag and pottery. These assemblages, however, explore in more depth the distribution and nature of asso-
are generally more fragmented than those in Structure 4, ciated activities.
and may represent material that had already undergone
primary deposition and suffered a degree of breakdown Endnote
and weathering, perhaps on existing surface deposits. 1. Structures are numbered from north-west to south-east across the
site, with the SFBs followed by wall-post buildings. The structure
numbers were issued during the post-excavation stage of analysis;
feature numbers were issued in the field to (most of) the structures.
VIII. Discussion
This chapter has described and discussed the nature of the
structural evidence, which for the Anglo-Saxon period

162
79 80
Colour Plate I Top: Wall-post building Structure 39, from the east, half-excavated with metre-squares of F11/503
in the background. Bottom: Surface Deposit F11/503, from the west, all initial squares excavated

163
Colour Plate II SFB Structure 12, under excavation (viewed from the west)

Colour Plate IV Oven F259 half-excavated (from west)

164
Colour Plate III Top: Surface Deposit F1 after topsoil-stripping (from north). Middle: Surface Deposit
F8/275 after excavation (viewed from west). Bottom: Surface Deposit F1 after excavation (from west)

165
 (a) – Sample <5>, Structure 4, context [294] (partially crossed polarisers). Sand grains coated and bridged by silty clay stained brown by
decomposed organic matter. Angular black speckles are minute charcoal fragments.
(b) – Sample <5>, Structure 4, context [311] (partially crossed polarisers). Composition similar to (a), but with the addition of laminated clay
coatings (red-orange) created post-depositionally by multiple illuviation events. This is one of the clay-iron bands observed in the field.
(c) – Sample <6>, Structure 22, context [2472] (partially crossed polarisers). Similar composition to (a), shown at a lower magnification.
Although dominated by quartz sand, the organic pigmentation of the fine mineral material coating and bridging the sand grains gave the sediment
a brownish-grey colour.
(d) – Sample <6>, Structure 22, context [2474] (partially crossed polarisers). Similar composition to (b), shown at a lower magnification. The
red-orange clay coatings in the upper half of the photograph formed the clay-iron band observed in the field.

Colour Plate V Micromorphological thin sections

166
Colour Plate VI (a) cruciform brooch No. 16; (b) front and side views of the silver pin finial No. 44;
(c) unusual bow brooch No. 15 (not to scale).

167
Colour Plate VII SFB Structure 9 under excavation, with baulk of Surface Deposit F1 left standing
(from south-east)

Colour Plate VIII SFB Structure 5 half-excavated, under Surface Deposit F11/503 (from north-west)

168
 Colour Plate IX Selected grave-goods from Grave 11: (a) girdle-hanger (No. 12) and (e) silver bar and disc (No. 19);
and from Grave 15: (b) casket handle (No. 4); (c) lace-tag (No. 21); (d) casket padlock corroded together with mounted
chalcedony bead (Nos 5 and 12), iron ring (No. 9) and copper alloy mount (No. 14); (f) casket hinge (No. 1); (g) casket
hinge (No. 2); (h) casket hinge (No. 3) (not to scale).

169
Colour Plate X Selected grave-goods from Grave 22: (a) gold pendant (No. 1) and associated glass fragment (No.
2); (b) glass beads (Nos 3–6); (c) silver linked pin (No. 12); (e) silver wire slip-knot rings (Nos 7–9); and from
Grave 23: (d) silver gilt keystone garnet disc brooch (No. 1) (not to scale).

170
 4. The Settlement: Material Culture
Assemblages
I. Introduction
The early Anglo-Saxon settlement at Bloodmoor Hill
produced a large artefactual and ecofactual assemblage.
Excluding the finds from the cemetery, there were 6772
Anglo-Saxon pottery sherds (over 58kg), 2896 metal arte-
facts and scrap pieces (over 19kg), 28,530 fragments of
fired clay (over 176kg, plus over 141kg of unfired clay),
25,948 pieces of slag (over 161kg), 2642 fragments of
lava and other worked stone (over 69kg) and 63,438 frag-
ments of animal bone (over 280kg).
In comparison, West Stow produced an Even larger
artefactual assemblage, including 53,570 sherds of
Anglo-Saxon pottery and around 175,000 animal bones,
but far less metalwork and slag. This pattern also held
true for Mucking, which produced around 32,000 sherds
of Anglo-Saxon pottery (data for other categories was not
easily available, but bone preservation was poor). The
effect of off-site deposition should, however, be borne in
mind: the redeposition of parts of surface deposits (see
Chapter 6), the high proportion of missing assemblages
suggested in the pottery report (see Tipper, below),
coupled with the poor bone preservation on the site
make it very difficult to say whether Bloodmoor Hill was
‘richer’ or ‘poorer’ in artefactual terms, compared with
contemporary sites. It is, however, a sizeable assemblage,
with good sampling control, which can be intensively
investigated.
The artefactual material is here analysed by category
(after Margeson 1993), rather than published by feature
or structure (see, for example, West 1985). This reflects
the assumption that in the case of negative features, such
as structure fills and pits, the associated finds assemblage
represents a post-use accumulation or deposit which
cannot be used to ascertain the function of that feature. It
was therefore thought more valuable to analyse material
in functional groupings, in order to characterise the activ-
ities on the settlement which gave rise to the assemblages
(these are further discussed in Chapter 6). Discussions of
categories and sub-categories are followed by individual
catalogue entries, where contextual information is given
in the order: context number (feature)/catalogue number/
context description; illustrated items are marked with an
asterisk. All catalogued artefacts have been assigned a
unique number within this volume, for ease of reference
(those already catalogued in Chapter 2 being prefixed
with R, and pottery vessels and moulds/crucibles having
their own sequence, prefixed with V). Attempts have been
made to assign dates to individual items, both by using
the accepted chronologies but also by employing the
stratigraphic and radiocarbon dating evidence outlined in
Chapters Three and Six to assist in refining dates where
possible. All metal identifications, other than iron and the
generic copper alloy, have been determined through XRF
analysis: most of the copper alloy from the settlement
was analysed in this way by the Centre for Archaeology,
English Heritage. All metal items were X-rayed, and the
radiographs were used extensively in the cataloguing
171
and illustration process, particularly in the case of the
ironwork, which was generally in poor condition, with
significant surface flaking and some disintegration.
One notable aspect of the distribution of material
culture across the site, further explored in Chapter 6, is
the presence in specific SFBs and surface deposits of
what has been termed here ‘scrap metal assemblages’.
Found particularly in Structures 14 and 19, and in Surface
Deposits F1 and F159/182, and strongly associated with
the presence of large quantities of metalworking slag in
the same features, these scrap assemblages consisted of
large number of broken artefacts, along with quantities
of bars, strips, sheet fragments and so on. These seem to
have been collections of metal destined for recycling, but
deposited before this had taken place.
II. Dress and personal possessions
Dress fittings
Finger-rings and bracelets
(Figs 4.1–4.3)
The settlement produced four finger-rings and a further
possible example. Two (Nos 1–2) are possibly of Roman
date, although they were found in Anglo-Saxon features;
they are therefore described in this chapter, as they may
represent Anglo-Saxon use or curation. One is a complete,
unbroken ring, as presumably was the other (though now
fragmentary); both are decorated with transverse grooves.
Similar ribbing is seen on the later 4th-century finger-
rings from the Lankhills cemetery (Clarke 1979, 318,
figs 70, 87), and these are presumably curated or recycled
items. The other datable ring (No. 3) is of the spiral form,
which is typically found in 5th- and 6th-century contexts,
although it may ultimately be of Romano-British origin
or inspiration (MacGregor and Bolick 1993, 169–71).
One of the three possible bracelet fragments may also
be Roman in date: No. 6 may be a damaged fragment
of a Roman cable twist bracelet, dating from the early
2nd century to the end of the Roman period (Cool 1995,
72, figs 95.9, 95.12; Crummy 1983, no. 1770), examples
of which have occasionally been found in Anglo-Saxon
deposits (cf. one from Shakenoak, Oxon: Brodribb et al.
1972, fig. 30.132). Only one of these decorative items is
unbroken, and this is probably Roman in date. The distri-
bution of these personal items coincides with that of the
major metalwork and slag assemblages in surface spreads
and Structures 14 and 19 (Fig. 4.2), and the majority of
these items have obviously become incorporated into a
scrap metal assemblage, rather than representing normal
patterns of loss.
*1. Finger-ring, leaded copper. D-section, decorated with
continuous transverse grooves; later Roman? Diam: 19mm;
Th: 2mm.
4098 (F1)/12579/Surface Deposit F1.
 Figure 4.1 Illustrations of selected finger-rings, bracelets, annular and fragmentary bow brooches (with an inset
showing the bow brooch from Bloodmoor Hill compared with great square-headed brooches of Hines Group 16
from (left) Morning Thorpe (Norfolk) Grave 214 (after Green et al. 1987, 267, fig. 364) and (right) Hadleigh Road
Ipswich (Suffolk) after West 1998, fig. 63). All at 1:1 except insets at 1:2

*2. Finger-ring fragment, leaded bronze. Cast, D-sectioned,
decorated with continuous transverse grooves; later Roman?
L: 18mm; W: 5mm; Th: 2mm.
3518/6846/Structure 30, northern post-hole.
*3. Finger-ring, copper. Spiral ring, currently of just under two
loops, but one end is broken. The other terminal resembles
the shape of a Roman ‘snakeshead’ ring, but no decoration is
visible. The coils are of oval section. Internal Diam: 11mm;
External Diam: 16mm.
1669 (F200)/6770/Structure 19, SE quad, spit 1.
4. Finger-ring fragment, Fe. Rectangular-sectioned and plain.
L: 14mm; W: 5mm; Th: 1.6mm.
4628 (F11)/12697/Surface Deposit F11/F503, spit 5.
5. Ring fragment, Fe. Flat and rectangular in profile, undecorated;
possibly part of a finger-ring. L: 16mm; W: 8mm; Th: 2mm.
384 (F41)/8981/Structure 14, NW quad, spit 1.
*6. Possible bracelet fragment, Fe and ?Cu. Two ?copper alloy
wires coiled around a curving iron rod fragment; possibly
a fragment of a later Roman cable twist bracelet. L: 26mm;
Diam: 3.5mm; postulated bracelet would be around 50mm in
diameter.
1976 (F237)/6365/Pit Group G.
7. Possible bracelet fragment, leaded brass. Small square-
section bar widening out to flat-section terminal, though
both ends broken. No visible decoration. L: 29mm; W: 6mm;
Th: 1.6mm.
109 (F1)/6802/Surface Deposit F1.

172
 Figure 4.2 Distribution plot of finger-rings, bracelets and brooches
8. Possible bracelet fragments, leaded copper. Very thin tapering
strips which possibly join, decorated with a central line of
zigzag incisions; if a bracelet, the whole has been straightened
out; some MPOs associated, but in random arrangement. Max
L: 59mm; W: 7mm; Th: 0.4mm.
3087 (F321)/6840/Pit Group L.
Brooches
(Figs 4.1–4.3; Colour Plate VI, a, c)
Remains of six annular brooches were recovered: five are
fragmentary, while a sixth (No. 13) is whole, but possibly
a mis-cast, as the hole for the pin attachment is wrongly
placed. All are flat in profile, and none shows evidence of
moulded ridges or notches for the pin; the dress material
must have been pulled through to be pierced by the pin
(cf. Ager 1985, 2; MacGregor and Bolick 1993, 82). The
majority are narrow band annulars (Ager Type G, where
the diameter divided by the band width is greater than 4.5;
Ager 1985, 2), with one unclassified and one broad band
(Ager Type E). Five are of copper alloy (two of leaded
copper, one leaded brass, one leaded bronze and the other
unanalysed) and one of iron; all were found in the northern
part of the settlement, either along the line of the surface
deposits within the Roman trackway, or just to the north.
It is possible that they were part of scrap metal assem-
blages, rather than representing accidental losses; at least
one seems to be a mis-cast (presumably being put back
into a scrap metal assemblage for potential recycling),
while the others may have seen use as dress accessories
first. They show a low proportion of decoration though,
with just two being ornamented with ring and dot decora-
tion (very similar to one of those from Mitchell’s Hill,
Icklingham: MacGregor and Bolick 1993, no. 10.23);
in comparison, just three of thirty-five annular brooches
from the cemetery at Empingham II were plain (Timby
173
1996, tab. 18). Indeed, there is definitive evidence that
annular brooches were being manufactured on-site: the
discovery of part of an annular brooch mould demon-
strates this (see Crucibles, below). It is possible that the
majority of the annular brooch fragments recovered here
were manufacture breakages. Their accepted date range
runs from the 5th century until well into the 7th century,
although the examples here are not the small, elegant or
silver examples which can characterise their later form
(Hines 1984, 260–1).
The contexts in which two of the cruciform brooches
were found suggest a different interpretation (Fig. 4.3).
The largely complete brooch (No. 16) was found in the
south of the site, during hurried excavations during car-
park construction; one of the cruciform feet (No. 17)
was also recovered from the surface in this area, as was
a Roman T-shaped brooch (No. R4). It is possible that
these brooches may represent heavily disturbed grave-
goods from destroyed graves. If so, the largely complete
cruciform brooch must have been an anachronism. It is
missing a side knob, and could no longer have functioned
as a brooch: an iron bar has been inserted through the lug
to secure the remaining side-knob, thereby preventing
any further attachment to clothing by the pin; the foot had
also been broken off and fixed back on using a riveted
plate. This brooch is an example of Mortimer Type Z,
dated to the later 6th and earlier 7th century; given its
condition when buried, this appears to have been a old,
but presumably much-valued, piece (hence the repairs).
Use as a grave-good in the middle of the 7th century
(and thereby contemporary with other burials within the
settlement) cannot be ruled out.
The unusual bow brooch (No. 15) is here discussed
by Chris Scull. The brooch has seen repair and appears
Figure 4.3 Illustrations of selected cruciform, safety pin and possible disc brooches. All at 1:1 except No. 16 at 3:4

174
in its present form to be a remodelling and reuse of a
larger original. The fact of gilding allows us to discount
the possibility that this was the salvage reuse of a new
failed casting rather than the reuse of an old and damaged
piece. Both pin-lug and catch-plate are secondary, the
original catch-plate being lost when the footplate was
broken, and there has been some effort to square-off
and remodel the broken footplate below the lappets. The
holes in the headplate also appear secondary. Those at
either side of the headplate where the edge has been cut
in are probably rivet holes intended to secure decorative
attachments like the side-knobs of a cruciform brooch.
Those at the corners may have had a similar function, but
are very close to the edge of the metal.
What was the original form of the brooch? The lappets
would indicate a cruciform brooch of Mortimer’s class D
(Mortimer 1990, 108–9) but neither bow nor headplate
are consistent with this. The bow is of a form seen on
a few florid cruciform brooches (Mortimer Class Z) but
which is far more typical of great square-headed brooches,
in particular brooches of Hines’ Group 16 (Hines 1997,
118–33, plates 51–65). The headplate cannot be paralleled
among cruciform brooches but is very similar to the inner
panel of the headplates of some Group 16 great square-
headed brooches in its size, shape and proportion to the
bow; transverse panels are also a feature of the headplate
inner panel on a number of Group 16 brooches (Hines
1997, plates 51–65). If it were not for the lappets, there-
fore, identification of this piece as having been cut down
and remodelled from a great square-headed brooch would
seem overwhelmingly likely, the lack of decorative detail
on the headplate being explained by wear on the original
and deliberate abrasion during remodelling. Even with
the form of the lappets this seems the most likely expla-
nation if they can be accepted as a remodelling of part
of the footplate upper border of the original brooch. The
only alternative explanation that seems plausible is that
this was originally a brooch which had characteristics
of both great square-headed and florid cruciform types
(Leeds 1949, 78–89; Mortimer 1990, 93–107; Hines
1997, 153–6). If this analysis of the original form of the
brooch is correct then its manufacture may be dated to
the second or third quarter of the 6th century (Mortimer
1990, 109–78; Hines 1997, 223–79). Repair, remodelling
and reuse suggest that it was old when lost or discarded
and so a date in the second half of the 6th century for its
discard is proposed.
The only other definite brooch from the settlement
came from a more secure context; indeed, it is the only
brooch recovered from the core of the settlement. The
copper safety-pin brooch (No. 19) was recovered from
the lower fill of Structure 20, and presumably represents
an accidental loss which had become incorporated into a
rubbish deposit. The brooch is complete but undecorated,
and is securely dated to the 7th century (Speake 1989,
47–9; Geake 1997, 54–5); it is characteristic of the move
to lighter female dress accessories at this time (Hamerow
1993, 61; Meaney and Hawkes 1970, 36). While these
brooches often have flattened bows, others with rounded
bows are known in silver from G205 at Kingston Down
(Kent) and in bronze from Shudy Camps G19 (Speake
1989, 47–9); they are distinguished from similar Iron
Age brooches by virtue of their springs being coiled once
(White 1988, 40–1). The possible mid-Saxon disc brooch
175
(No. 20) is fragmentary, and its identification remains
tentative.
*9. Annular brooch, leaded copper. Fragmentary; perforation
hole associated with some iron corrosion products (possibly
from the pin); decorated on upper face with lines of EVEnly
spaced impressed dots along the inner and outer edges (not
continuous); Ager Type G; 6th to 7th century. L: 42mm;
W: 7mm; Th: 1mm; Brooch diam. c.45mm.
55 (F1)/6797/Surface Deposit F1.
*10. Annular brooch, leaded bronze. Flat-sectioned and of slightly
uneven width, pin missing, undecorated. Possibly a mis-cast,
as the pin attachment hole is not complete, sitting too far into
the centre; Ager Type G; 6th to 7th century. Diam: 46mm;
W: 7mm; Th: 1.4mm.
261 (F17)/6806/Pit Group B.
*11. Annular brooch fragment, Fe. Rectangular-sectioned; broken;
no decoration apparent; Ager Type G; 6th to 7th century.
L: 35mm; W: 7mm; Th: 2mm; Brooch diam. c.47mm.
4638 (F520)/12699/Anglo-Saxon pit
*12. Annular brooch, leaded brass. Broken, undecorated; Ager
Type G; 6th to 7th century. Diam: 42mm; W: 7mm; Th: 1mm.
0000/6815/Surface find.
*13. Annular brooch fragment, leaded copper. Sheet, decorated
with impressed dots around inner and outer edge of upper
surface; around half the brooch survives; Ager Type E; 6th to
7th century. Diam: c.46mm; W: 11mm; Th: 1.5mm.
MD428/12540/MD spot find.
14. Annular brooch fragment, copper alloy (not analysed).
Broken on all sides, with part of a circular perforation
remaining; undecorated; 6th to 7th century. L: 19mm;
W: 10mm; Th: 1mm.
MD480/12565/MD spot find.
*15. Bow brooch of leaded copper; ‘uncorroded’ surface of leaded
bronze, gilded (Colour Pl. VIc). Broken and incomplete, with
most of original footplate lost. Face: rectangular headplate has
central panel of five plain rectangles within a raised border
and is pierced at the sides and upper corners as though to take
rivets; bow has grooved central rib with square boss and trans-
verse lines within grooved borders on either side; footplate has
paired lappets with zoomorphic heads. Back: pin-lug of sheet
metal soldered to reverse of headplate, fragments of iron pin
adhering to lug; catch-plate of sheet metal riveted to reverse
of footplate, rivet heads visible on face of brooch. L: 62mm
(description by Christopher Scull).
3182 (F324)/6922/Anglo-Saxon pit.
*16. Cruciform brooch, copper (Colour Pl. VIa). Complete except
for one side knob. The head-plate has a recessed central panel
decorated with a raised double ‘8’ motif. The cast top-knob
and remaining detachable side-knob are each decorated with
a stylised mask bordered by stylised inward-facing animal
heads. The bow has a central cast ridge. The lappets are
rectangular and each has a central incised square surrounded
by incised dots and ‘s’ shapes. The panel between the lappets
has an impressed quatrefoil motif. A ridged panel below this
terminates in a stylised mask with surrounding stylised animal
heads, as on the knobs, but with a large protruding tongue-like
panel at the foot. The foot-plate was broken in antiquity, and
has been fastened back on using an additional T-shaped plate
applied to the rear of the brooch with five rivets (still in situ).
The pin has been lost, although the catch-plate and lug remain.
An iron bar has been horizontally inserted through the lug, and
appears to have been used to fasten the remaining side-knob
firmly to the head-plate. The brooch was cast as a whole, apart
from the side-knobs. This is a florid type, a Mortimer Type Z,
dating to the later 6th to early 7th century, although, given the
repairs to this brooch, and its broken nature, it may have been
deposited at a slightly later date. L: 156mm; W: 61mm.
4823/13485/Subsoil.
*17. Cruciform brooch fragment, leaded copper. Part of the foot
plate of a developed cruciform brooch, with a face mask set
over a bifurcated foot terminal, rounded at the bottom; late 6th
to early 7th century. L: 30mm; W: 36mm; Th: 2.2mm.
4824/13509/Surface find.
*18. Cruciform brooch fragment, copper alloy. Foot only; devel-
oped form (Mortimer Type Z), with humanoid mask and
?upturned birds’ heads; late 6th to early 7th century. L: 38mm;
W: 42mm; Th: 5mm.
0000/6852/Subsoil.
*19. Safety-pin brooch, copper. Safety-pin type (cf. Geake 1997,
54–5), with bow running parallel to the pin, turning and
widening into a sub-triangular-shaped catch-plate; undeco-
rated; 7th century. L: 26mm; W: 11mm; Th: 3mm.
1397 (F134)/6764/Structure 20, SW quad, spit 3.
*20. Fragmentary possible disc brooch, bronze, backward-looking
animal type?; 8th to 9th century. L: 19mm; W: 14mm;
Th: 3mm.
MD437/12544/MD spot find over Surface Deposit F1.
Beads and pendants
(Figs 4.4–4.5)
A total of twenty-one beads (classified using terminology
after Brugmann 2004) were recovered from the settle-
ment: five amber, one amethyst, ten monochrome glass
and five polychrome glass (Table 4.1). Cylindrical,
Figure 4.4 Illustrations of selected glass and other beads and pendants. All at 1:1
176
annular and barrel-shaped forms are represented, with no
correlations between form and material. All are presum-
ably of Anglo-Saxon date, with date ranges from the
mid-5th to the early 8th century, though one (No. 21)
is as yet unparalleled. A high proportion (24%) are of
amber; this compares to 9% (seven of seventy-eight)
from the West Stow settlement (West 1985, table 7).
Given that amber beads are a characteristic (mid to late)
6th-century artefact (Huggett 1988, 64), this presum-
ably reflects the more intensive 6th-century occupation
at Bloodmoor Hill, as compared to the longer usage at
West Stow, which seems to have been occupied from the
early 5th until at least the early 8th century (based on
the presence of Ipswich Ware). Although it is generally
assumed that amber was a Baltic import, there are also
 Figure 4.5 Distribution plot of beads and pendants

localised East Coast deposits in Britain from Cromer bead (No. 22) of the first half of the 7th century from its
in Norfolk to as far north as Aberdeen (Huggett 1988, upper fill (this is consistent with radiocarbon dates from
64). The amethyst bead is a rare find from East Anglia the same fill) and three amber beads (potentially a short
(Huggett 1988, fig. 2), and similar beads are generally string) from its middle and lower fills (Nos 37–39; if
found in very late 6th- to later 7th- or early 8th-century these are later 6th century in date, the fill of the structure
contexts, with major concentrations in Kent (ibid., 66; may have accumulated slowly). Structure 33 had both
Evison 1987, 60), and a peak of popularity in the later a polychrome (No. 25) and a monochrome glass bead
part of this period (Geake 1997, 41). (No. 34); as classified, these are of divergent date, with the
In terms of distribution, the beads are quite widely polychrome bead assigned to the later 5th or 6th century
scattered across the east and central parts of the site, (although this is only tentative) and the monochrome
although two structures had two or more beads within bead to the later 7th or 8th century. Surface Deposit F1
their fills (Fig. 4.5). Structure 17 had a polychrome glass produced the amethyst bead (No. 36) and a polychrome
glass bead (No. 24), while Structure 9, which underlay
Bead type Bloodmoor West Stow West Stow this area of the spread, produced a further monochrome
Hill settlement cemetery settlement glass bead (No. 32; this bead cannot be closely dated,
Amber 5 51 7 although the middle fill of Structure 9 (the upper fill
Amethyst 1 - - of which produced the bead) had an associated radio-
Monochrome glass 9 91 46 carbon date of cal AD 520–580). Overall, bead numbers
are average: the twenty from Bloodmoor Hill compare
Polychrome glass:
with thirty-four from the settlement at Mucking (Essex:
Reticella 1 6 1
Hamerow 1993, 60, including a single amethyst); the
Trails/Stripes - 4 2 seventy-eight beads from West Stow represent an unusu-
Zig-zag 1 2 1 ally large number from a settlement site of this date (West
Crossing trails - 19 5 1985, table 7).
Crossing trails with 2 5 6 There were also two possible pendants from the settle-
dots ment: an amber disc (No. 42) which is also presumably
Dots - 2 2 mid to late 6th century in date (although small amounts
Combed trails - - 1
of amber have been found in 7th-century graves; Geake
1997, 47), and a tentatively identified bucket pendant
Misc 1 13 7
(No. 43). These are usually found in groups of one or two
Total 20 193 78 in graves, but are sometimes in groups of up to twelve,
arranged around the neck; they have a wide geographical
Table 4.1 Bead types at Bloodmoor Hill and West Stow distribution, and are found mainly in cemeteries of the
(settlement and cemetery) later 5th and 6th centuries (Dickinson 1993, 50–2; Brush

177

Plate IX The silver anthropomorphic pendant,
found by Adrian Charlton
1993, 100; these have an earlier continental origin, as
fifteen are known from the 2nd- to 4th-century crema-
tion cemetery of Preetz, Holstein (Brandt 1960, 31)).
This may therefore have been old when buried, as it was
found in the lower fill of Structure 20, along with the 7th-
century safety-pin brooch (No. 19).
The anthropomorphic pendant (Pl. IX) recovered by
a metal-detectorist after the initial phase of excavations
is also a highly unusual piece. It was described in the
Treasure Annual Report as follows:
Silver three-dimensional bearded male figure,
wearing a cap and belted knee-length trousers; the
trousers, hands and face are all gilded; a suspension
loop is attached to the cap … This pendant belongs
to a small group of related amuletic figures dating to
the early Anglo-Saxon period, all from sites near the
east coast, from Lincolnshire to Kent. Four others
are known, two from Kentish graves datable to the
7th century, the others without context. Two of these
are male and two female; all are of bronze, but are
similar in scale to the silver figure, and have a number
of features in common, including their gestures and
feet joined together. Only one of the others, however,
from the 7th-century cemetery at Breach Down,
Kent, appears to be clothed — a male figure who
wears the same short trousers, but is clean shaven,
and sports a pony tail. One other has a pendant loop,
but the rest seem to have been without any attach-
ment, and may have been used in cult contexts.
First half of 7th century; L: 43mm; Wt: 12.2g; XRF
indicates 93% silver content (Webster 2000).
*21. Fragmentary bead, glass. Cylindrical terracotta bead with
applied light blue bands at top and bottom and applied band
of yellow dots between (probably four or five in total); central
perforation 8.8mm in diameter (unclassified). Diam: 19.8mm;
Ht: 20.0mm.
178
1167 (F132)/6924/Anglo-Saxon pit fill.
*22. Bead, glass. Opaque white short barrel-shaped bead with
light blue crossed waves and blue dots; central perforation
2.8mm (Guido 1999, Type 3iiib; Brugmann 2004, Koch34
Blue, though large example); AD 600–650. Diam: 11.6mm;
Ht: 6.9mm.
1764 (F212)/6925/Structure 17, NE quad, second spit.
*23. Fragmentary bead, glass. Half of a medium cylindrical reti-
cella bead, with three parallel reticella trails, alternating ‘s’
and ‘z’, of red, opaque yellow and transparent; central perfo-
ration 5.0mm in diameter (Guido 1999 Type 8xviii; Brugmann
2004, reticella); mid to late 6th century. Diam: 17.4mm;
Ht: 16.7mm.
2496 (F339)/6937/Structure 29, NE quad.
*24. Fragmentary bead, glass. Transluscent blue glass annular bead
with applied white wave/zig-zag; central perforation 7.5mm in
diameter (Guido 1999, Type 5ix; Brugmann 2004, unclassi-
fied). Diam: 17.0mm; Ht: 6.8mm.
4007 (F1)/12491/Surface Deposit F1.
*25. Bead, glass. Opaque blue glass short barrel-shaped bead with
four applied dots of white over red; possibly with degraded
applied white trails; central perforation 3.3mm in diameter
(possibly Brugmann 2004, overlying crossing wave or mottled
blue); AD 450–580. Diam: 13.6mm; Ht: 10.1mm.
4821 (F550)/12976/Structure 33, NW quad.
*26. Bead, glass. Opaque yellow barrel-shaped of circular cross-
section with central perforation 3.0mm in diameter (Brugmann
2004, orange); AD 580+. L: 3.8mm; Diam: 5.2mm.
3001 (F286)/5425/Structure 38, NE quad, upper fill.
27. Fragmentary bead, glass. Opaque green short cylinder with
central perforation 4.9mm in diameter (Guido 1999, Type
5i; Brugmann 2004, wound spiral); later 7th to 8th century.
Diam: 8.1mm; Ht: 6.1mm.
2118 (F275)/6930/Surface Deposit F8/F275.
*28. Fragmentary bead, glass. Opaque green short cylinder with
central perforation 4.4mm in diameter (Guido 1999, Type
5i; Brugmann 2004, wound spiral); later 7th to 8th century.
Diam: 7.6mm; Ht: 5.1mm.
3299 (F337)/6941/Structure 27, SW quad.
*29. Bead, glass. Opaque green short cylinder bead with central
perforation 4.1mm in diameter (Guido 1999, Type 5i;
Brugmann 2004, wound spiral); later 7th to 8th century.
Diam: 7.3mm; Ht: 4.9mm.
477 (F72)/8683/Structure 13, NE quad, spit 2.
30. Bead, glass. Opaque green short cylinder bead with central
perforation 3.0mm in diameter (Guido 1999, Type 5i;
Brugmann 2004, wound spiral); later 7th to 8th century.
Diam: 5.5mm; Ht: 6.0mm.
1625 (F200)/9773/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 1.
*31. Bead, glass. Opaque yellow annular bead with central perfo-
ration 3.7mm in diameter (Guido 1999, Type 4i; Brugmann
2004, short round cylinder); 6th to 7th century. Diam: 9.3mm;
Ht: 4.9mm.
1130 (F130)/9152/Structure 21, SE quad, spit 2.
*32. Bead, glass. Fragment of an opaque yellow cylindrical bead,
of circular cross-section, with large central perforation 3.1mm
in diameter (Brugmann 2004, round cylinder); AD 550–650.
L: 8.7mm (min); Diam: 6.9mm (min).
4603 (F514)/12493/Structure 9, NW quad.
*33. Fragmentary bead, glass. Opaque barrel-shaped bead, but too
degraded to determine colour or decoration (possibly translu-
cent green or mosaic?); central perforation 3.4mm in diameter.
Diam: 9.6mm (min); Ht: 11.9mm.
4642 (F521)/12494/Pit Group C.
*34. Fragmentary bead, glass. Medium barrel-shaped blue/green
glass bead with central perforation 5.4mm in diameter (Guido
1999 Type 5x; Brugmann 2004, wound spiral); later 7th to 8th
century. Diam: 10.5mm; Ht: 9.0mm.
4821 (F550)/12977/Structure 33, SW quad.
35. Possible bead, glass. Too broken and corroded to confirm
shape, dimensions or colour.
1457 (F168)/8732/Pit Group F.
36. Bead, amethyst (identified by Steven Laurie). Fragment of an
asymmetrical barrel-shaped bead of probably sub-triangular
section; small central perforation 1.6mm in diameter; 7th
century. L: 18.7mm; Diam: 9.1mm (min).
4004 (F1)/12490/Surface Deposit F1.
*37. Bead, amber. Barrel-shaped, of circular cross-section, slightly
off-centre oval perforation 2.6mm in diameter. L: 6.7mm;
Diam: 7.4mm.
 1811 (F212)/6926/Structure 17, NW quad.
*38. Bead, amber. Cylindrical, of sub-triangular cross-section,
with small central perforation 2.0mm in diameter. L: 10.7mm;
Diam: 10.4mm.
1906 (F212)/6928/Structure 17, SW quad.
*39. Bead, amber. Cylindrical, of sub-rectangular cross-section,
with small central perforation 2.2mm in diameter. L: 10.3mm;
Diam: 9.3mm.
1963 (F212)/6929/Structure 17, SW quad.
40. Bead, amber. Fragmentary, but probably representing a single
bead; form and dimensions indeterminate.
3362/6938/post-hole
41. Bead, amber. Fragment of a probably barrel-shaped bead of
circular cross-section. L: 12.1mm.
3343 (F345)/7699/Anglo-Saxon pit
*42. Pendant, amber. Sub-circular disc with off-centre perforation
2.6mm in diameter; thinning towards the perforation; 6th to
7th century. L: 15.9mm; W: 13.5mm; Th: 4.8mm.
(F1)/6919/Surface Deposit F1.
*43. Possible bucket pendant, leaded bronze. Flat strip shaped into
a ring, with a round base applied to one side; organic material
accumulated inside base. Diam: 16mm; Ht: 7mm.
1397 (F134)/6765/Structure 20, NW quad, spit 2.
Pins
(Figs 4.6–4.8)
The metal pins from the site (see below for comments on
the solitary bone pin) were classified using the typology
devised by Ross (1991); iron pin fragments were distin-
guished from nail fragments by virtue of their having
round-sectioned shafts and no obvious nail-like heads or
associated roves. A total of fifty-four metal pins or pin
fragments was recovered from the settlement excava-
tions, of which seven are of copper alloy and forty-seven
of iron (Fig. 4.7). A further four items (one of silver, two
of copper alloy and one of iron), interpreted as being
probable or possible pin finials, were recovered, as well
as two spangles. The most unusual find is the tiny silver
bird (No. 44; Colour Pl. VIb), recovered during metal-
detecting in Area J, away from any identified features;
it appeared to have originally been mounted on a loop.
Tentatively identified as of Roman date, and as a cockerel
(M. Aldhouse-Green, pers. comm.), this would have had
mythological associations with Mercury (Green 1976,
12). While no direct parallel has been traced, similar
fine detailing (with plumage indicated by carefully
incised lines) can be seen on the bronze eagle figurine
from Verulamium (Waugh and Goodburn 1972, 144,
fig. 49.158), while the larger marble figurine of a cock-
erel from Old Bradwell is a close stylistic parallel (Green
1976, pl. IIIe). Other examples of small bronze cockerels
which had obviously once been mounted come from
Wroxeter (Green 1976, 149, no. 50) and Richborough
(Wilson 1968, 97–8, pl. XL.149), while the same site
produced three naturalistic bird-headed pins (ibid.,
pl. XLII.168–9; Henderson 1949, 132, pl. XXXIX.140).
While this may simply be a residual Roman find, its
striking appearance makes it an obvious candidate for
a curated item. The other slightly unusual finial is that
of bead-reel-bead form No. 45, recovered from the rich
scrap metalwork assemblage in Structure 19: this item is
possibly late Roman.
Of the fifty-four metal pins, seventeen could be clas-
sified after Ross (1991). There are five possible examples
of his Type I (organic-headed type: Ross 1991, 151–3) and
a further potential finial (No. 46); one (No. 47) possibly
of his sub-group I.i (with a pyramidal point opposite the
shaft end); and four of sub-group I.ii (Nos 48–51, with
a round or square-sectioned end). Of the last group, the
179
two iron examples produced evidence of their potential
wood, bone or antler heads: a rivet associated with No. 48
and corrosion product visible on the X-ray of No. 49.
Ross assigns this type of pin a tentative date range of
AD 650–875, based on their presence at the mid-Saxon
sites of Flixborough, Ipswich, Southampton and York,
although pins of this date tend to have narrower shafts
than two of the possible examples at Bloodmoor Hill
(ibid., 153, 381–2). That from Structure 18 (No. 49) was
associated with the more firmly dated hook-headed pin
No. 55, in a fill overlying pottery which is radiocarbon
dated to cal AD 530–630, while that from F521 in Pit
Group C (No. 47) was associated with pottery radio-
carbon dated to cal AD 540–585; an earlier start date
for this type of pin (perhaps those with thicker shafts,
as the thinner examples sit more comfortably in a later
7th-century context) can be tentatively proposed. The
identification of a possible terminal of a Ross Type XIII
(ball-headed type, No. 54) must remain very tentative, as
the associated context produced radiocarbon dates of cal
AD 640–700 and 650–690, whereas Type XIII is dated to
the earlier 6th century (ibid., 182).
The two small spangles or tags (Nos 52–53) are
possibly remnants from pins of Ross Type VIII (spangle-
headed type, Ross 1991, 167–75), which he dates to the
6th century; one was securely associated with the sceat
of AD 690–710 in the fill of Structure 26, and would
therefore have been very old when buried. These arte-
facts are used in other ways too: Meaney (1981, 189–90)
details how they sometimes form part of a necklace (as at
Holywell Row G1; Berinsfield G64 is a further example:
Boyle et al. 1995, fig. 67.2), while one found affixed to
a smaller ring by the side of the head of G77 at Linton
Heath was apparently used as an ear-ring.
Two examples of Ross Type XVII (hook-headed type;
Ross 1991, 198–201), both of iron, were recovered from
the fills of Structure 9 and Structure 18. The proposed
date range of AD 500–550 for these may perhaps need
extending slightly, as that from Structure 9 (No. 56)
overlay a context radiocarbon dated to cal AD 520–580,
and that from Structure 18 (No. 55; see above) overlay a
context of cal AD 530–630.
Two of the three examples of Ross Type L (Nos 57
and 59; Kingston disc-headed type, also known as
cheese-headed at West Stow) are of iron and were found
in structure fills (the other leaded copper example No. 58
was a metal-detector find just to the south of Structure 25).
Their accepted date range of AD 580–650 accords with
the dating available for these structure fills, and their
lengths fall within the known range of 35–60mm (Ross
1991, 224), although the head width of No. 59, at 2.5mm,
is narrower than the normal range of 3–6mm (ibid.). Two
are of the form L.i.a.1 (no collars, plain and tapering,
no lines on the shaft; ibid., 227), while No. 59 has the
swollen shaft which distinguishes it as form L.i.b (ibid.).
Examples of these pins from southern East Anglia are
invariably found on settlement sites, although they are
also known from graves in Kent and the Upper Thames
Valley (ibid., 231).
Two examples of Ross Type LVI (Castle Dyke
wedge-headed type; Ross 1991, 239–40) were
recovered: one (No. 60) of copper from the fill of
Structure 21, and one (No. 61) of iron from surface
spread F159/F182. The later 7th-century date suggested
by similar finds from Castle Dyke and Dover (ibid.)
 Figure 4.6 Illustrations of selected pins, spangles and finials. All at 1:1 except no. 44

is supported here: the example from Structure 21 was
situated above a context containing a 7th-century or
later hooked tag (see below). Similarly, the later 7th- to
early 8th-century dating of the three spiral-headed pins
(Ross Type LXVI, 1991, 269–79) is supported by their
associated contexts: the iron example (No. 62) from
the middle fill of Structure 12 stratigraphically overlay
the fill of the eastern gable post-hole which produced a
radiocarbon date of cal AD 590–680, while the high tin
bronze example from Structure 29 (No. 64) lay below
a fill containing a probably 7th-century knife fragment.
The two iron examples (Nos 62–63, which Ross 1991,
273, notes as rare) appear to have been made from wire
split at one end, while the high tin bronze example with
narrowing terminals was probably cast. Such delicate
pins have been assigned a higher than normal status at
Southampton (Hinton 1996, 29–30); it is interesting
that similar finds have been found at the probable and

180
 Figure 4.7 Distribution plot of pins, spangles and finials
possible religious houses of Hartlepool, Brandon and
Flixborough.
The solitary example of an inverted-pear-headed pin
(No. 65; Ross Type LXIX, 1991, 288–95) falls into sub-
group LXIX.i, as the diameter of the head is less than
3mm; the proposed dating of AD 650–750 is strongly
supported by the discovery of a Series B silver sceat
dated to c.AD 690–710 in the same context. The iron
ball-headed pin (No. 66) is somewhat difficult to classify,
owing to its small size: on form alone, it would fall into
Ross Type LXX (ball-headed type, Ross 1991, 295–305),
but would be the example with the smallest head known;
examples of this size of type LXVIII (biconical-headed
type) are known; they have very similar date ranges, and
a later 7th-century date would be consistent with other
finds from Structure 19.
The other pins and pin fragments (No. 68, of
leaded copper; No. 69, of tinned copper/gunmetal; and
Nos 69–99, of iron) are difficult to assign independent
dates (especially as only four of these are unbroken). A
possible method, however, is to use shaft diameter as a
rough indication. By assigning approximate half-century
date ranges to structure and pit fills, where possible
(through the use of radiocarbon dates and other datable
material), an interesting pattern emerges (Fig. 4.8). Pins
from probably 6th-century contexts (N=4, all of iron)
have an average shaft diameter of 3.65mm and a range
of 3.2–4mm; those from earlier 7th-century contexts
(N=12) have an average shaft diameter of 2.39mm and a
range of 0.8–3.6mm, while those from later 7th-century
and later contexts (N=26) have an average shaft diameter
of 2.7mm and a range of 0.9–4mm (this representing the
full range of iron shafts, while copper alloy shafts fell
within the range 1.0–2.0mm). One thing that is striking
181
about this patterning is the dramatic increase in pins in
datable later 7th-century contexts, and the higher propor-
tion of copper alloy pins (the only copper alloy pins from
6th- or early 7th-century contexts are the untyped tinned
copper/gunmetal (No. 67) from Structure 22 and the fine
spiral-headed pin (No. 64) in Structure 29, which should
probably be dated towards the middle of the 7th century).
This patterning suggests the introduction of new dress
styles during the 7th century, and may also suggest the
introduction of new metalworking techniques in the mid
to later 7th century. While Ross (1991, 139) states that
most middle to late Saxon wrought or cast pins have a
shaft diameter of 1.75–3mm, the pin sequence from
Bloodmoor Hill clearly has earlier and finer examples
than this, and the possible use of strip-drawing for pin
manufacture must be considered. The patterning from
Bloodmoor Hill does, however, support Ross’s argument
that the casting tradition began in the 7th century, for the
first time producing pins less than 2.5mm in diameter
(ibid., 371).
The pin sequence from Bloodmoor Hill is therefore
an extensive one: the metal pins from here number fifty-
four (as against sixteen from West Stow: eight of iron,
six of copper alloy and two of silver). It is, however,
largely a fragmentary assemblage: only fifteen of the
fifty-four pins are unbroken (five of these being copper
alloy). Only fourteen of the pins (all of which were iron,
and all broken) came from the scrap metal assemblages
in Structures 14 and 19 and Surface Deposit F159/F182;
the rest appear to have been accumulated within more
‘normal’ domestic assemblages, and represent a more
everyday pattern of loss and breakage. The scarcity of
bone pins (just one, No. 100, as against twenty-one from
West Stow and over sixty from West Heslerton) probably
 Figure 4.8 Chart showing shaft diameters of pins by phase in which they were found
reflects the aggressive soil conditions over much of the
site, rather than a true pattern of usage, although there is
some evidence that bone artefacts were not as important
here as at some other contemporary sites.
*44. Pin finial, silver. A very delicately fashioned finial in the form
of a cockerel, with markings on the wings and chest and inset
eyes; possibly mounted on a loop originally. Probably Roman.
L: 12mm.
MD407/12530/MD spot find Area J.
*45. Pin finial, high tin bronze. Bead-reel-bead form, with flat
head and attachment hole for pin shaft. Possibly late Roman
(cf. Crummy 1983, Type 6 bone pins), but similar decoration
seen on the collars of a range of mainly 6th-century pin types.
Diam: 4mm; L: 10mm.
1682 (F200)/6775/Structure 19, NW quad.
46. Possible pin-head, copper. Rounded bar, with one flat end,
which X-ray reveals to have been turned; possibly from an
organic-headed pin; Ross Type I; ?AD 650–875. L: 15mm;
Diam: 5mm.
294 (F19)/6741/Structure 4, spit 1.
47. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned and tapering to point, head crudely
pointed; possibly organic-headed; Ross Type I.i; ?AD 650–
875. L: 77mm; Shaft Diam: 3.4mm.
4642 (F521)/12706/Pit Group C.
48. Pin, Fe. Knob-headed (with construction detail visible on X-
ray); round-sectioned shaft, broken; possibly organic-headed,
with ?rivet securing head to shaft; Ross Type I.ii; ?AD 650–
875. Diam: 4.6mm; overall L: 15mm; Shaft Diam: 2mm.
1672 (F200)/6120/Structure 19, SW quad, spit 1.
49. Pin fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned, shaft broken; stepped in
slightly at the head end for 3mm, which is surrounded by lots
of corrosion product; presumably a different material forming
a pin head; Ross Type I.ii.a; ?AD 650–875. L: 16mm; Shaft
Diam: 4mm.
1627 (F178)/6729/Structure 18, SE quad, spit 1.
*50. Pin, tinned bronze. Very fine, needle-like pin, with delicately
turned head, formed into a small knob with fine incised lines
underneath; ?Ross Type I.ii.c; ?AD 650–875. L: 33mm; Shaft
Diam: 1mm.
205 (F5)/6740/Structure 12, SE quad, spit 2.
*51. Pin, leaded bronze. Round-sectioned shaft and finely turned
tapered head; possibly organic-headed type; Ross Type I.ii.c;
?AD 650–875. L: 58mm; Shaft Diam: 1.2mm.
3635 (F386)/6850/Anglo-Saxon pit
*52. Spangle, copper alloy (not analysed). Rectangular, but tapering
to rounded end with central perforation. Decorated at the other
end with two pairs of incised parallel lines; possibly remnant of
a Ross Type VIII spangle-headed pin, AD 450–550. L: 16mm;
W: 9mm; Th: 0.5mm.
53 (F1)/6796/Surface Deposit F1.
*53. Small spangle, copper alloy (not analysed). Thin rectangular
sheet with rounded corners (one broken); perforation central
to one side, which is slightly curved. Irregular pattern of
impressed dots on one side; possibly remnant of a Ross Type
182
VIII spangle-headed pin; AD 450–550. L: 15mm; W: 8mm;
Th: 0.5mm.
3290 (F379)/6843/Structure 26, SE quad.
54. Pin terminal, Fe. Solid ball; possible remnant of a Ross Type
XIII, ball-headed type; AD 450–550. Diam: 6.5mm.
3288 (F335)/6205/Structure 25.
*55. Pin fragment, Fe. Hook-headed, round-sectioned, point broken
off; Ross Type XVII, AD 500–550. L: 26mm; Diam: 3mm;
Shaft Diam: 2.5mm.
1627 (F178)/8915/Structure 18, SE quad, spit 1.
*56. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned; hooked over at one end, pointed at
the other; Ross Type XVII; c.AD 500–550. L: 62mm; Shaft
Diam: 4mm.
4603 (F514)/12690/Structure 9.
*57. Pin, Fe. Disc-headed; Ross Type L.i.a.1; AD 580–650.
L: 46mm; Shaft Diam: 2.2mm (head Diam: 5.5mm).
2472 (F126)/6017/Structure 22, NE quad, spit 2.
*58. Pin, leaded copper. Disc-headed with round-sectioned shaft;
Ross Type L.i.a.1; AD 580–650. L: 43mm; W: 5mm; Shaft
Diam: 2mm.
SF 36/6795/MD spot find.
*59. Pin, Fe. Disc-headed, round-sectioned swollen shaft, with no
mouldings; Ross Type L.i.b; AD 580–650. L: 41mm; Shaft
Diam: 2.3mm; Head Diam: 2.5mm.
4270 (F501)/12655/Structure 11, SW quad.
*60. Pin, copper. Oval-sectioned with splayed head; Ross Type
LVI, ?AD 650–700. L: 41mm; W: 4mm; Th: 1.5mm; Shaft
Diam: 2mm.
1129 (F130)/6760/Structure 21, NW quad, spit 3.
*61. Probable pin, Fe. Round-sectioned, with flattened splayed
head, which is bent at a right-angle; Ross Type LVI; ?AD 650–
700. L: 42mm; W: 13mm; Shaft Diam: 4mm.
1516 (F182)/6321/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
*62. Pin, Fe. Solid, round-sectioned shaft, with bifurcated head
(broken); this would probably have been spiral-headed; Ross
Type LXVI.i; AD 650–750. L: 79mm; Shaft Diam: 4mm.
205 (F5)/6003/Structure 12, NE quad, spit 3.
63. Pin, Fe. Solid, round-sectioned shaft, with bifurcated
head (broken); this may have been spiral-headed; point
missing; ?Ross Type LXVI.i; AD 650–750. L: 45mm; Shaft
Diam: 3.5mm.
3206 (F307)/6044/Anglo-Saxon pit
*64. Pin, high tin bronze/tinned. Spiral-headed with narrowing
terminals, probably cast, solid shaft; Ross Type LXVI.ii;
AD 650–950. L: 47mm; W: 6mm; Shaft Diam: 1.5mm.
2496 (F339)/6788/Structure 29, NW quad.
*65. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned; small inverted-pear head; slight
swelling on shaft; Ross Type LXIX.i; AD 650–750. L: 58mm;
Diam: 2.3mm; Shaft Diam: 1.8mm.
2074 (F379)/6461/Structure 26.
*66. Pin, Fe. Ball-headed, with slight swelling on shaft; point
broken; Ross Type LXX.i, AD 625–750 or LXVIII.i,
AD 630–750. L: 23mm; Shaft Diam: 2.1mm; overall Head
Diam: 1.6mm.
1672 (F200)/6119/Structure 19, SW quad, spit 3.
67. Pin fragment, tinned copper or gunmetal. Head missing, slightly
bent, still sharp at point. L: 30mm; Shaft Diam: 1.7mm.
1100 (F126)/6757/Structure 22, NW quad, spit 3.
*68. Pin, leaded copper, with tinned surface. Solid shaft, head prob-
ably broken (or very plain). L: 32mm; Shaft Diam: 1.3mm.
3288 (F335)/6787/Structure 25.
69. Possible pin or nail fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned and
pointed, broken along shaft. L: 23mm; Shaft Diam: 4mm.
205 (F5)/6003/Structure 12, NE quad, spit 3.
70. Possible pin fragment, Fe. Head missing, round-sectioned
shaft. L: 21mm; Shaft Diam: 1.9mm.
384 (F41)/6154/Structure 14, NW quad, spit 3.
71. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft tapering to point; head missing.
L: 70mm; Shaft Diam: 3.2mm.
1764 (F212)/6039/Structure 17, SW quad, spit 2.
72. Pin fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned, head missing but sharp
point remains. L: 29mm; Shaft Diam: 2mm.
1625 (F200)/6074/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 2.
73. Four probable pin fragments, Fe. All probably round-sectioned.
Max L: 20mm; Shaft Diam: 3–4mm.
1625 (F200)/9776/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 1.
74. Pin fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned. L: 12mm; Shaft
Diam: 3mm.
1625 (F200)/9823/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 1.
75. Pin fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned. L: 18mm; Shaft
Diam: 3mm.
1625 (F200)/9845/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 2.
76. Pin fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned. L: 17mm; Shaft
Diam: 3mm.
1672 (F200)/10060/Structure 19, SW quad, spit 2.
77. Pin fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned. L: 11mm; Shaft
Diam: 2mm.
1672 (F200)/10064/Structure 19, SW quad, spit 3.
*78. Pin, Fe. Complete, round-sectioned and slightly expanded
at head, otherwise plain. L: 72mm; Diam: 4mm; Shaft
Diam: 3mm.
1130 (F130)/6026/Structure 21, SE quad, spit 2.
79. Pin shaft, Fe. Head missing; round-sectioned. L: 57mm; Shaft
Diam: 3.5mm.
1130 (F130)/6027/Structure 21, SE quad, spit 2.
80. Pin, Fe. Head missing; round-sectioned shaft, tapering to
point. L: 46mm; Shaft Diam: 2.7mm.
2472 (F126)/6016/Structure 22, NE quad, spit 1.
81. Pin, Fe. Head too corroded to determine form; round-sectioned
shaft tapering to point. L: 87mm; Shaft Diam: 4mm.
3495 (F335)/6208/Structure 25.
82. Two pin fragments, Fe. One possibly complete with ?turned
head. L: 22mm; Shaft Diam: 0.9mm. Other broken both ends.
L: 14mm; Shaft Diam: 1.2mm. Both very fine.
2492 (F335)/6203/Structure 25, SW quad.
83. Pin, Fe. Head missing; round-sectioned shaft tapering to point.
L: 53mm; Shaft Diam: 0.8mm.
2495 (F339)/6046/Structure 29, NE quad.
Figure 4.9 Illustrations of selected dress-fasteners: wrist-clasps and a hooked tag. All at 1:1
183
84. Pin fragment, Fe. Only part of round-sectioned shaft remains.
L: 23mm; Shaft Diam: 1.2mm.
3317 (F341)/6053/Structure 30, SE quad.
85. Pin fragment, Fe. Only part of round-sectioned shaft remains.
L: 28mm; Shaft Diam: 3.5mm.
4821 (F550)/12961/Structure 33, SE quad.
86. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft tapering to point, head missing
and head end bent. L: 72mm; Shaft Diam: 3.3mm.
3274 (F333)/6201/Structure 35, SW quad.
87. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft tapering to point, head missing.
L: 37mm; Shaft Diam: 3.6mm.
F333/6202/Structure 35, spoil heap.
88. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft tapering to point, slightly bent;
head missing. L: 91mm; Shaft Diam: 3.5mm.
3268 (F333)/6198/Structure 35, NE quad.
89. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft tapering to point, slightly bent;
head missing. L: 94mm; Shaft Diam: 3.4mm.
3269 (F333)/6199/Structure 35, SW quad, spit 2.
90. Pin fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft, broken, tapering to
slightly bent point. L: 24mm; Shaft Diam: 2.7mm.
4425 (F503)/12677/Surface Deposit F11/F503.
91. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned; head either plain or missing.
L: 50mm; Shaft Diam: 1.7mm.
1742 (F182)/6340/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
92. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned with a splayed, flattened head
and broken tip. L: 86mm; Head Diam: 5.2mm; Shaft
Diam: 3.7mm.
690 (F8)/6291/Surface Deposit F8/F275.
93. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned, head missing, slightly bent.
L: 42mm; Shaft Diam: 3.3mm.
1841 (F235)/6348/Pit Group G.
94. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned with plain, slightly splayed, head.
L: 89mm; Head Diam: 3.7mm; Shaft Diam: 3.1mm.
452 (F66)/6285/Anglo-Saxon pit
95. Pin, Fe. Long, round-sectioned pin; shaft slightly bent and
head missing. L: 97mm; Shaft Diam: 3.9mm.
2207 (F255)/6369/Anglo-Saxon pit
96. Pin, Fe. Round-sectioned; head either missing or simple and
very slightly splayed. L: 94mm; Head Diam: 4.7mm; Shaft
Diam: 3.7mm.
3656 (F391)/6430/Anglo-Saxon pit
97. Pin, Fe. Head missing; shaft is round-sectioned, tapering to
point. L: 88mm; Shaft Diam: 4mm.
M232/6689/MD spot find.
98. Pin fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft, tapering to point;
head missing. L: 27mm; Shaft Diam: 3mm.
M252/6706/MD spot find.
99. Pin fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft, tapering to point;
head missing. L: 34mm; Shaft Diam: 2mm.
MD422/12621/MD spot find.
 Figure 4.10 Distribution plot of dress-fasteners
A bone pin
by Ian Riddler
A bone or antler pin (No. 100) has a flattened triangular
head which is decorated on both sides by dot patterning.
The shaft is circular in section and is neither hipped nor
widened; the tip is now missing. It can be compared
with bone or antler pins from Catterick and Wharram
Percy (Wilson et al. 1996, fig. 12.6; MacGregor 2000b,
fig. 60.70), which also have triangular heads and short
shafts of circular section, although the shafts are slightly
widened in each case above the point. Short bone or
antler pins with a variety of head forms are first seen in
contexts of c. AD 625–650, and continue in use until the
middle of the 8th century (MacGregor 1985, 116; Foster
1990, 151; Riddler et al. forthcoming). Only a few of
them are decorated and this is usually with dot patterning
of the type seen here, although it occurs otherwise on
pins with globular rather than triangular heads, as with
examples from Canterbury, Catterick, Dover and West
Stow (Blockley et al. 1995, fig. 504.1019; Wilson et
al. 1996, fig. 12.7; Philp 2003, fig. 62.175; West 1985,
fig. 36.9).
*100. A near-complete bone or antler pin with a flattened triangular
head. The pin has a slightly sinuous apex and a shaft of circular
section; the tip is missing. L: 33mm; W: 5.5mm.
2207 (F255)/6932/Anglo-Saxon pit.
Fasteners
(Figs 4.9–4.10)
Other dress fasteners recovered from the settlement
comprised wrist-clasps, hooked tags and a solitary
lace-tag. All four wrist-clasps (Nos 101–4) are of sheet
metal construction (all Hines 1993, Type B), are broken
184
or fragmentary, and are divorced from their other half;
their find pattern probably represents accidental losses
or incorporation into rubbish deposits, although No. 103
was recovered from one of the surface deposits, and may
have been part of a scrap metal assemblage. These all
indicate a dress style current in East Anglia throughout
the 6th century. The two small and delicate hooked tags
(Nos 105–6) probably also represent similar disposals or
losses. These items were introduced in the 7th century,
and the ring and dot decoration seen on No. 106 is quite
common (Hinton 1996, 10–11). These are probably fairly
early examples (later tags are more likely to be cast, or
made from thicker sheets), and may have been used
as garter-hooks (two examples from Winchester were
found around the knees of a skeleton), or for fastening
a bag or purse (ibid.). The solitary lace-tag from the
settlement (No. 107) was recovered from the Surface
Deposit F1; similar examples have been recovered from
7th- and 8th-century contexts such as the barrow burial
at Swallowcliffe Down (Speake 1989, fig. 43.12). The
number of fasteners recovered here is comparable with
that reported from the West Stow settlement.
*101. Wrist-clasp, bronze with some very high tin areas. Rectangular
plate with two perforations; female half; applied tinned copper
plate (identified by XRF) carrying repoussé zoomorphic orna-
ment; Hines Type B13c; 6th century. L: 43mm; W: 22mm;
Th: 1.9mm.
294 (F19)/6744/Structure 4, NE quad.
*102. Wrist-clasp, copper alloy (not analysed). Male half of Hines
Type B16 plate clasp, rectangular, but with scalloped outside
edge. Each of the four scallops contained a perforation hole
(two of these now missing), and each of these is surrounded
by ten stamped rings arranged in a circle around the hole; 6th
century. L: 35mm; W: 17mm; Th: 0.5mm.
3312 (F341)/6791/Structure 30, NW quad.
*103. Wrist-clasp, leaded bronze. Broken into two fragments, with
a piece missing; one perforation visible. Faint panel of decora-
tion (?gilding) visible towards the fastening edge; Hines Type
B7; 6th century. L: 46mm; W: 18mm; Th: 1mm.
4451 (F503)/12588/Surface Deposit F11/F503.
*104. Wrist-clasp, leaded copper. Broken along the fastening edge
(no rivet holes present), rectangular in shape with rounded
corners, decorated along edges with EVEnly spaced circular
indentations; Hines Type B7; 6th century. L: 38mm; W: 19mm;
Th: 2mm.
MD444/12547/MD spot find.
*105. Hooked tag, bronze. Triangular, with two attachment holes
at the top (one broken); hook broken off; undecorated; 7th to
11th century. L: 24mm; W: 9mm; Th: 0.5mm.
1414 (F66)/6821/Anglo-Saxon pit
106. Hooked tag, leaded copper. Triangular, with two adjoining
attachment holes at the top. Decorated with ring and dot orna-
ment; terminates in fine, backward-facing plain hook; 7th to
11th century. L: 28mm; W: 11mm; Th: 0.6mm.
2470 (F130)/6784/Structure 21, SW quad.
Figure 4.11 Illustrations of selected belt-fittings and chatelaine elements. All at 1:1
185
107. Lace-tag, bronze. Formed from rolled sheet, cut at top,
with riveted element applied to one side; 7th to 8th century.
L: 11mm; Diam: 5mm.
94 (F1)/6799/Surface Deposit F1.
Belt-fittings and accessories
(Figs 4.11–4.12)
Remains of eight buckles (loops, plates or both) were
recovered from the settlement site, together with a number
of belt-fittings and potential chatelaine components.
Most distinctive is the buckle-tongue from a shield-
tongue buckle (No. 108; Marzinzik Type I.2). This is a
large example of its type, resembling the tongues seen on
buckles from Alfriston G48 and Finglesham G2; increase
in size and weight appears to be a chronological develop-
ment in this buckle type, and it seems safe to date this
example to the mid-6th century or later (Marzinzik 2003,
 Figure 4.12 Distribution plot of belt-fittings and chatelaine elements
19, pl. 3, 5). While these buckles are often considered
to be continental imports, local copies were also made
(ibid.). The four oval buckle loops of oval or round section
(Nos 109–12; Marzinzik Type I.11a–i) are difficult to
date closely, and were found here in contexts dating from
the 6th to the later 7th century. The buckle with rectan-
gular leaded gunmetal plate (No. 113; Marzinzik Type
II.19b) is a popular East Anglian form, but, again, is not
closely datable (ibid., 47). The two remaining identified
buckles (Nos 114–15) are both probably of later 6th- to
7th-century date (ibid., 33, 51); the small No. 115 may
perhaps be a scabbard buckle (cf. the silver examples
from Ford, Wilshire: Musty 1969, illustrated in Cameron
2000, fig. 30 no. 40). Of the other belt-fittings, the unusual
No. 116 deserves comment. While only tentatively iden-
tified as a belt-fitting, this elaborate silvered piece must
signal higher status, whatever its use. The distribution
of these buckles and belt-fittings is fairly widespread,
with the majority recovered from building fills or surface
deposits (Fig. 4.12); they probably represent a mixture of
accidental loss or disposal and incorporation into scrap
metal assemblages. The shield-tongue, however, was
found in the very south of the site, close to where graves
may have been destroyed (see above); it is possible that
this surface find may have been a disturbed and broken
grave-good.
The possible chatelaine components comprise
two iron slip-knot rings (Nos 119–20), an iron hook
(No. 121), three iron links (Nos 122–4), two copper alloy
figure-of-eight links (Nos 125–6) and a copper chain
(No. 127), the majority of which were recovered from
building and pit fills in the central core of the settlement
(and were probably not part of scrap metal assemblages).
The iron links (Nos 122–4), with the attachment loop
186
formed by wrapping the end around the shaft several
times, have parallels in G134 at Dover Buckland (Evison
1987, fig. 55.7g) and at Kingston Down (Meaney 1981,
fig. V.a.1, after Faussett 1856, pl. XII). The iron hook
(No. 121), though superficially reminiscent of hooked
tags, is too robust for this purpose, and may possibly have
formed part of a chatelaine (cf. the iron loop from G31
at Shudy Camps; Lethbridge 1936, fig. 6.B.2) or could
be a fragment of a clip (cf. the two examples fastened
onto an iron ring in G178 at Butler’s Field, Lechlade;
Boyle et al. 1998, fig. 5.101.3). The figure-of-eight links
(No. 125 of leaded copper and No. 126 of leaded bronze)
are paralleled in, for example, G164 at Dover Buckland
(Evison 1987, fig. 63.3) and the cemetery at West Stow
(West 1985, fig. 266.9), while a whole chain made up of
similar links was recovered from Berinsfield G64 (cf.
MacGregor and Bolick 1993, 267, no. 57.1). The suspen-
sion loop (No. 128) is paralleled by an example from a
probable 5th- to 8th-century settlement at Coddenham in
Suffolk (West 1998, 22, fig. 22.13).
*108. Buckle-tongue, leaded bronze. Shield-tongue buckle but
missing loop and rivets, heavy, with white metal coating;
probably an import from either Frankia or Kent; Marzinzik
Type I.2; mid-6th to early 7th century. L: 40mm; W: 18mm;
Th: 9mm.
5108/13235/Subsoil.
*109. Buckle, Fe. Simple oval-sectioned oval frame with slightly
broadened tongue base and pin in situ; Marzinzik Type I.11a–i.
W: 27mm; L: 21mm; Th: 7mm.
4055 (F1)/12638/Surface Deposit F1.
*110. Buckle, Fe. Oval, round-sectioned frame with iron pin still
attached; Marzinzik Type I.11a–i. W: 18mm; L: 15mm;
Th: 4mm.
83 (F1)/6266/Surface Deposit F1.
111. Buckle-loop, leaded copper. Oval buckle-loop, of rounded
cross-section, thinner where pin would have been attached.
 Plate and tongue missing; Marzinzik Type I.11a–i. W: 21mm;
L: 11mm; Th: 3mm.
1764 (F212)/6777/Structure 17, NE quad, spit 1.
112. Buckle, Fe. Small round-sectioned oval buckle with pin still
attached; Marzinzik Type I.11a–i; small amounts of possible
MPOs associated. W: 19mm; L: 14mm; Th: 4mm.
3287 (F335)/6739/Structure 25.
*113. Buckle-plate, leaded gunmetal. Folded sheet with cut-out for
pin; rivet hole still contains iron at other end; no MPOs present;
Marzinzik Type II.19b. L: 21mm; W: 13mm; Th: 6mm.
4679 (F523)/12600/Structure 5.
*114. Buckle-plate fragment, copper alloy (not analysed).
Rectangular, with three rivet holes arranged in a triangle (one
with rivet surviving) and gilding on the front; incised line
decoration around the edges; Marzinzik Type II.24a; late 6th
to 7th century. L: 17mm; W: 18mm; Th: 1.1mm.
6233/14108/Topsoil, during evaluation.
*115. Buckle, bronze. Narrow oval loop, with buckle-plate and
tongue still attached; buckle-plate probably rectangular,
though now broken, with two rivets still in situ; Marzinzik
Type II.24b–ii; later 6th to 7th century. Buckle-loop L: 8mm;
W: 1.8mm; Buckle-plate W: 7mm; L: 12mm.
MD475/12564/MD spot find.
*116. Possible belt-mount, Fe and silver. Rectangular iron plate
with silver sheet applied to one side; this has four pairs of
small rectangular cut-outs exposing the iron underneath; rivets
survive at either end. Possibly a belt-spacer, or another sort
of mount, perhaps for a furniture item? L: 59mm; W: 12mm;
Th: 2.1mm.
2472 (F126)/6015/Structure 22, NE quad, spit 1.
117. Plate from a strap-clasp, leaded brass. Rectangular sheet,
folded in two and riveted together (leaded copper rivet still
in situ); plate is not recessed for the frame, but the riveted end
is rounded. There are medieval examples, but this is a simple
form. L: 18mm; W: 10mm; Th: 3.5mm.
175 (F159)/6803/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
118. Possible strap-end, copper alloy (not analysed). Rectangular,
plain folded sheet, with two flattened sheet rivets (another
possibility is a repair to the rim of a copper alloy vessel, as a
third sheet appears to lie between the folded sides); L: 33mm;
W: 27mm.
MD423/12536/MD spot find.
*119. Slip-knot ring, Fe. Remains of at least one larger or two
smaller rings, in fragments. If multiple, then possibly from a
necklace; if larger, then perhaps a fastener-ring, for example
from a toilet-set.
2207 (F255)/6370/Anglo-Saxon pit.
*120. Slip-knot ring, Fe. Fragment, original diameter of ring:
c.20mm. L: 19mm; Diam: 0.9mm.
3174/6484/Surface find.
*121. Hook, Fe. Triangular plate with two perforations set one over
the other; tapering gradually to round-sectioned hook which
is slightly angled backwards; 7th to 11th century. L: 29mm;
W: 11mm; Th: 3mm.
3268 (F333)/6195/Structure 35, SE quad.
*122. Chatelaine link, Fe. Link-end is formed by drawing the metal
into a wire and twisting it around the shaft six times, leaving a
loop at the head. L: 63mm; Diam: 3mm.
205 (F5)/6001/Structure 12, NE quad, spit 1.
*123. Chatelaine link, Fe. Round-sectioned, slightly bent at
the tip, with the loop formed by drawing the end into wire
which is then wrapped around the shaft five times. L: 60mm;
Diam: 2.5mm.
3468 (F368)/6419/Anglo-Saxon pit
124. Chatelaine link, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft, slightly bent at
tip; loop formed by ?wire wound around three times. L: 54mm;
Diam: 4mm.
MD421/12620/MD spot find.
*125. Link, leaded copper. Figure-of-eight, welded. L: 14mm;
W: 6mm; T: 2.5mm.
1271 (F126)/6759/Structure 22, NW quad.
*126. Link, leaded bronze. Figure-of-eight, welded. L: 22mm;
W: 9mm; T: 3mm.
1325 (F134)/9253/Structure 20, NE quad, spit 2.
*127. Chain, copper. Three-strand braided wire formed into a chain
(part of a chatelaine?), formed into a loop at one end and
broken at the other; the whole is bent in the middle, and made
inflexible by corrosion. L: 44mm; Diam: 3mm.
F343/6793/Structure 31.
187
*128. Suspension loop, leaded bronze. Rectangular plate with two
rivet holes tapering to curving hook of rounded cross-section,
which then flattens to a point. L: 20mm; W: 5mm; Th: 3mm.
1325 (F134)/6763/Structure 20, NE quad, spit 4.
Personal possessions
Combs
by Ian Riddler
(Figs 4.13–4.14)
Fragments of at least six combs were recovered from five
separate contexts (with a possible seventh represented by
the solitary rivet No. 135). Both single- and double-sided
combs are represented, with the former predominant.
The double-sided composite combs consist of a fragment
from the centre and one side of a comb (No. 129) and
a separate tooth segment (No. 134). The comb fragment
(No. 129) is undecorated, although saw marks from the
cutting of the teeth are prominent on both sides, revealing
that there were originally four teeth per centimetre on
one side and five per centimetre on the other. The stubs
of the teeth show no signs of wear. The connecting plates
are cylindrical and show no tendency to taper to either
end. Comparable combs with cylindrical untapered
connecting plates and prominent saw marks came from
Bantham, Burwell Grave 79, Castledyke Grave 10,
Dover, Ipswich, Lundenwic, Melbourn, Pakenham,
Pennyland, Thetford, West Stow and Wharram Percy (Fox
1955, fig. 3.1; Riddler 1986, 51 and 53–4; Lethbridge
1931, fig. 30.5; Drinkall and Foreman 1998, fig. 55.7;
Philp 2003, figs 40.29 and 60.155–7; Riddler et al. forth-
coming; Cowie et al. 1988, fig. 38.5; Duncan et al. 2003,
fig. 16.10; Brown et al. 1954, fig. 29f; Riddler 1993,
fig. 58.38; Knocker and Wells 1967, fig. 15.8; West 1985,
figs 30.15, 33.8, 36.10, 49.1, 52.3, 72.4, 76.5 and 252–3;
Milne and Richards 1992, fig. 30.5). The examples from
West Stow provide a part of the dating framework and
represent the most complete examples of the comb type.
Two examples (West 1985, figs 49.1 and 52.3) come from
contexts of late 5th- to early 6th-century date, and the
6th-century dating is substantiated by an example from
Castledyke Grave 10 (Drinkall and Foreman 1998, 287).
Two examples from Dover are associated with Frankish
ceramics, suggesting a 7th-century date (Philp 2003, 8),
and the Bantham combs have also been assigned to that
century (Riddler 1986, 53–4). All of the other examples,
forming the majority of the sample, belong to the period
from the mid-7th to the mid-8th century. This includes
the combs from West Stow SFBs 1, 2, 3 and 15, as well
as several from the middle Saxon production centres at
Ipswich and Lundenwic. A number of these combs have
coarser teeth on one side of the comb, as is the case here.
Conceivably, therefore, this specific type of double-sided
composite comb became more common from c.AD 650
onwards, although it had earlier antecedents. The combs
are undecorated, although saw marks from the cutting of
the teeth form a conspicuous feature of the design.
Fragments of four separate single-sided composite
combs can be reconstructed, although comparatively
little can be said of one comb (No. 133), which survives
in very poor condition. Another (No. 132) includes the
central parts of both connecting plates, alongside six
antler tooth segments, which are hatched diagonally on
their upper surfaces. The tooth segments do not project
beyond the line of the connecting plates, which are
Figure 4.13 Illustration of how recovered comb fragments fit together, with a reconstruction of how No. 132 was
composed. All at 1:1

188
 Figure 4.14 Distribution plot of combs
divided into panels within triple framing lines. The two
central panels have opposed fields of triangular lattice
patterning and to either side of these partially impressed
triple ring-and-dot patterns lead to two thinly incised
lines forming a long triangle. The complete version of
this comb can be established by comparison with a close
parallel from the Burwell cemetery (Lethbridge 1931,
fig. 34). The similarities between the two combs strongly
suggest that they were produced in the same workshop.
The Burwell comb, from Grave 83, has only one panel
of triangular hatching at the centre, but the panels to
either side are almost identical to the Bloodmoor Hill
comb, and they are clearly a stylised representation
of a beast head, seen in profile. Simplified versions of
profile beast heads can also be seen on an 8th-century
comb from Hamwic (MacGregor 1985, fig. 49d). The
Burwell grave has been dated to the second half of the
7th century, partly on the basis of the comb (Hawkes
1973, 198; Speake 1989, 54). Combs of this type are not
found before the middle of the 7th century, and continue
into the first part of the 8th century (Geake 1997, 63;
Riddler et al. forthcoming).
The remaining two single-sided composite combs
both came from the same context. One comb (No. 130)
includes parts of two connecting plates, alongside an
end segment and three tooth segments. In this case,
the tooth segments project above the line of the back
of the comb and they are hatched diagonally. This type
of crested decoration is seen in a more restrained form
with comb No. 132 above and occurs in a very similar
manner on examples of late 7th- or 8th-century date from
Coddenham, Ipswich (Buttermarket), West Stow and
York (Riddler forthcoming; Riddler et al. forthcoming;
West 1985, fig. 272.1; Rogers 1993, fig. 682.5710). The
189
decoration of the connecting plates of this comb is rela-
tively plain and simple. The panelled style is retained,
alongside doubled framing lines, but the panels them-
selves are blank. The decoration recalls a further comb
from Burwell, as well as an example from Greyfriars
Road at Ipswich (Lethbridge 1931, fig. 36.5; Riddler et
al. forthcoming).
The other comb from this context (No. 131) is repre-
sented merely by part of a connecting plate, as well as
an accompanying tooth segment. The connecting plate
is decorated by two rows of single ring-and-dot motifs
set within panels separated by a single vertical line and
two diagonal lines. Single ring-and-dot motifs lie within
panels on the Edix Hill, Barrington comb, as well as a
comb from Brandon Road at Thetford (Malim and Hines
1998, fig. 3.63; Dallas 1993, fig. 159.2). On one of the
Coddenham combs doubled versions occur in groups
of four, alternating with paired diagonal lines (Riddler
forthcoming).
Part of an antler connecting plate can be reconstructed
for a comb (No. 133) and it is sparsely decorated, with two
bands of vertical incised lines defining the central part of
the comb. Stylistically, this is a different form of decora-
tion, in which framing lines and panels are abandoned
in favour of vertical bands that separate the connecting
plates into three long areas; the design belongs firmly to
the 8th century. It can be seen on the series of single-
sided composite combs with bone connecting plates
known from Abbots Worthy, Brandon, Hamwic, Ipswich,
Wharram Percy and York (Riddler 2001, 66) and it is
common thereafter, with lattice designs seen to either side
of blank central areas on combs from Brandon, Dragonby
and Ipswich (May 1996, fig. 23.1.6; Riddler et al. forth-
coming). Sparse decoration of this sort is also seen on
semi-double combs of 8th-century date (Blockley et al.
1995, fig. 510.1156; Riddler et al. forthcoming).
The prevalence of single-sided composite combs
within the assemblage can be seen as a reflection of the
general situation in the late 7th and early 8th century,
when such combs were particularly common. At the
same time, it has been noted that single-sided composite
combs are more abundant within middle Saxon sites in
East Anglia and Northumbria (Riddler 2004, 146–7).
Three types of site have been identified on the basis of
the forms of comb present and Bloodmoor Hill falls
into the third type, for which single-sided composites
are predominant. Other members of this group include
Brandon, Cottam, Flixborough, Ipswich, Sedgeford and
York (Riddler 2004, 147).
The close relationship between several of the single-
sided composite combs and those from the Burwell
cemetery is intriguing, given that the two sites lie a
considerable distance apart, with Burwell situated to
the west of Newmarket. Equally close relationships
— denoting the products of a single workshop — have
been established between the Coddenham combs and an
example from West Stow, and those sites are well sepa-
rated, if not quite so far distant (Riddler forthcoming).
The broader similarities noted above with combs from
Ipswich reflect comb design in the southern and western
parts of East Anglia in the later 7th and 8th centuries.
Panelled designs within framing lines, which effectively
define the Burwell combs, belong to the period from the
second half of the 7th century to the first part of the 8th
century. Thereafter, combs with panels of lattice design
without framing lines come to the fore at both Ipswich
and Brandon, and extend into the 9th century (Riddler et
al. forthcoming). The panelled design is replaced by long
fields of decoration, with the centre of the comb often left
blank. The framing lines that characterise all but one of
the single-sided composite combs from Bloodmoor Hill
effectively disappear at this time.
*129. Part of a double-sided composite comb, including fragments
of two connecting plates, together with four tooth segments,
fastened by two iron rivets. A separate tooth segment
<7383>, from the same context, also belongs to this comb.
The connecting plates have parallel edges and a shallow D-
shaped section. They are undecorated, although they include
prominent saw marks on both edges, visible on both sides of
the comb. The riveting is EVEnly spaced and passes through
one tooth segment, securing the other three on one edge. The
surviving teeth show no signs of wear. L: 87mm; W: 53mm;
Tooth Values: 4 and 5 per cm
2207 (F255)/6931, 6933 and 7383/Anglo-Saxon pit
*130. A comb fragment, consisting of two connecting plate frag-
ments, three tooth segments and an end segment, as well
as an iron rivet. All now separate and in twelve pieces. The
connecting plates stem largely from the centre and one end
of the comb while the two segments also come from the
middle section. The connecting plates are both decorated by
double framing lines, cut by saw, with bands of three vertical
lines set between them at regular intervals. The ends of the
connecting plates include vertical bands of five thin lines. Saw
marks are visible on the lower edge. The end segment has a
back that curves upwards to a rounded point, with a straight
outer edge. The teeth are graduated in a shallow curve. The
tooth segments have gently curved backs with a continuous
diagonal line pattern across them. Only one tooth survives and
it has numerous lateral wear lines along most of its length.
They can also be seen on the stubs of the other teeth, and are
more pronounced on one side than the other. Made of antler
throughout. L: 94mm; W: 14mm; Tooth Values: 4 per cm.
3269 (F333)/6939, 5795 and 5801/Structure 35, SW quad,
spits 1 and 2.
190
*131. A fragment of the middle section of an antler connecting plate
for a single-sided composite comb, pierced by an iron rivet.
The connecting plate is decorated by two rows of single ring-
and-dot designs, set within single bounding lines to top and
bottom, with traces of double vertical framing lines on one
edge. The pattern is divided into two panels by a single vertical
line at the centre, crossed by diagonal lines. Saw marks are
present on the lower edge. A tooth segment <5795> probably
also belongs with this comb. It is riveted on one edge and
is crested above the line of the connecting plate. L: 57mm;
W: 19mm; Tooth Values: 4 per cm.
3269 (F333)/6939/Structure 35, SW quad, spit 2.
*132. A fragment of a single-sided composite comb, consisting
of parts of two antler connecting plates as well as six antler
tooth segments. The connecting plates are elaborately deco-
rated within triple framing lines. Two panels at the centre of
the comb are separated by four thin vertical lines and each
contains two opposed triangles of dense lattice pattern. To
the side of this lies a partially impressed triple ring-and-dot
design, with two diagonal lines extending from it towards
the end of the connecting plate. Faint saw marks are visible
on the lower edge. Both connecting plates are decorated in
the same manner, although one is wider than the other and
the shallow connecting plate has a rectangular section. The
thicker connecting plate has a conventional D-shaped section.
The tooth segments have lightly curved backs with diagonal
hatching across them. Each is riveted on one edge. No teeth
survive. L: 93mm; Tooth Values: 4 per cm; Estimated original
length of connecting plates: 160mm.
3290 (F379)/6940/Structure 26.
*133. A fragment of a single-sided composite comb, which survives
in poor condition. Part of an antler connecting plate can be
reconstructed, and five iron rivets also survive, as well as at
least four antler tooth segments. The connecting plate is deco-
rated to either side of the centre by bands of vertical lines.
Seven lines are visible on one side and there are at least four
on a separate fragment. No other decoration is visible. The
connecting plate has been gnawed along its lower section.
L: 70mm; W: 18mm; Tooth Values: c.6 per cm.
2493 (F335)/6936/Structure 25.
134. An antler tooth segment for a double-sided composite comb.
From a broad comb with wide connecting plates. Only the
stubs of the teeth remain. Tooth Values: 5/5 per cm.
1764 (F212)/4354/Structure 17, SE quad, spit 2.
135. Rivet, Fe. Once part of bone comb, as mineral preserved bone
identified around shaft. Diam: 3.4mm; L: 11mm.
1130 (F130)/9088/Structure 21, NW quad, spit 3.
Other personal possessions
(Fig. 4.15)
The only other items which can be regarded as personal
possessions are the two tentatively identified iron ear-
scoops (Nos 138–9) and the pair of leaded bronze tweezers;
these three items all came from deposits which have
produced evidence for scrap metal assemblages, and may
have been destined for recycling. The tweezers (No. 136)
are a common Anglo-Saxon form (cf. MacGregor and
Bolick 1993, nos 38.4, 38.7, 38.20 etc.), and an example
of Green’s Type I (functional bronze tweezers of Roman
type, but possibly Anglo-Saxon production: Green 1973,
105), which are not closely datable. The stylus head
(No. 137) is only a tentative identification, and was found
in a scrap metal assemblage.
*136. Tweezers, leaded bronze. Made from a flat strip which expands
towards the ends; these are in-turned and thinned; plain and
slideless. L: 51mm.
MD434/12543/MD spot find.
*137. Possible stylus head, Fe. Triangular plate tapering to square-
section tang, where broken. L: 15mm; W: 14mm; Th: 4.5mm.
1625 (F200)/6072/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 2.
*138. Possible ear-scoop, Fe. Square-sectioned rod with a rounded
spatulate end; other end is bent at an angle and broken.
L: 48mm; Diam: 4.9mm.
4232 (F1)/12654/Surface Deposit F1.

Figure 4.15 Illustrations of selected personal
possessions. All at 1:1, except No. 137 at 1:2
139. Possible ear-scoop, Fe. Square-section tang widens into
possibly spatulate tool, though broken. L: 23mm; W: 9mm;
Th: 4mm.
1625 (F200)/6104/Structure 19, SW quad, spit 2.
Shoe accessories
A total of forty Roman-type hobnails was recovered
from Anglo-Saxon features: one from Surface Deposit
F1, four from the fill of Structure 14 and thirty-five from
the fill of Structure 19. These all have solid domed heads
(with diameters of 7–10mm) and short, square-sectioned
shafts (lengths 9–18mm). All were found in association
with scrap metal assemblages, and represent material
destined for recycling. The source of these hobnails is
still obscure, but it is worth noting that the number of
hobnails represented here would probably be fewer
than those used to stud a single boot (see, for example,
the completed studded sole from London illustrated in
Manning 1985, pl. 63, R104, or that from Shakenoak,
Oxon: Brodribb et al. 1973, fig. 75.2). Mackreth (1996,
100) suggests that most boots required between twenty
and sixty-five hobnails, although examples with greater
numbers are known. In contrast with Bloodmoor Hill, the
Romano-British farmstead at Orton Hall Farm produced
522 hobnails (ibid.).
III. Household furnishings and equipment
Furniture fittings
(Fig. 4.16)
A range of potential furniture fittings was recovered from
the settlement, mostly from scrap metal assemblages in
the surface deposits and the fill of Structure 14. As well
as the possible mounts detailed below (Nos 140–3),
which may have once decorated items such as boxes and
clothing (cf. those described in MacGregor and Bolick
1993, 238–44), these comprise three copper alloy rivets
(Nos 144–6), a leaded bronze stud (No. 148), a decorated
hooked strip (No. 147) and four copper alloy tacks (not
listed; lengths range from 15–25mm and shaft diameters
from 3–12mm; heads are rounded and flat, shafts are of
rounded or square section).
191
Figure 4.16 Illustrations of selected furniture fittings.
All at 1:1, except No. 143 at 1:2
*140. Openwork mount fragment, copper alloy (not analysed). Two
attachment holes and double ring-and-dot decoration on the
face; the rivet holes suggest use as a mount, but other cut-outs
suggest use as a trial-piece? L: 32mm; W: 12mm; Th: 2.5mm.
6207 (F1)/14082/Surface Deposit F1.
141. Mount, copper alloy (not analysed). Hemispherical plate with
central perforation with iron rivet still in situ; one projection
off the base survives; decorated with pierced holes. L: 30mm;
W: 27mm; Th: 1mm.
6245/14120/Topsoil.
142. Sheet, copper alloy (not analysed). Fragment of mount or
binding strip, decorated with ‘V’ shape of double row of
impressed dots within incised lines; broken across possible
perforation. L: 24mm; W: 22mm; Th: 1.8mm.
6219/14094/Unstratified.
*143. Possible mount, Fe. Fragmentary mount with a raised central
boss; could also possibly be a shield fitting. Badly corroded.
Diam: 35mm.
2369 (F276)/6380/Anglo-Saxon pit.
144. Small rivet, copper alloy (not analysed). Flat circular head,
circular-section shaft. Diam: 6mm; overall depth: 5mm.
4018 (F1)/12571/Surface Deposit F1.
145. Rivet, copper alloy (not analysed). Flat ?circular head, broken,
with section of round-sectioned shaft surviving. Diam: 9mm;
overall depth: 7mm.
4334 (F503)/12584/Surface Deposit F11/F503.
146. Large rivet, copper alloy (not analysed). Indented circular
head, round-section shaft hammered flat at end. Diam: 15mm;
overall depth 18mm. Additional piece with one circular and
one flat end. Diam: 9mm; L: 11mm.
4610 (F11)/12593/Surface Deposit F11/F503, spit 3.
*147. Hooked strip, copper alloy (not analysed). Rectangular strip
decorated with punched dots; simple hook at one end and
broken at the other. L: 31mm; W: 8mm; Th: 0.6mm.
6215/14090/Unstratified.
148. Stud, leaded bronze. Head and shank cast as one; straight-
sided, round-section shank, broken; solid hemispherical head
decorated with raised radiating lines. Possibly Roman or medi-
eval? (For a possible parallel, cf. Crummy 1988, no. 3193 and
Margeson 1993, no. 525). Diam: 13mm; overall L: 18mm.
1625 (F200)/6766/Structure 19, SW quad, spit 1.
Vessels (non-pottery)
Metal and wood vessels
(Fig. 4.17)
The settlement produced a number of remnants of stave-
buckets, beaten metal vessels and repairs from wooden
vessels. The majority of these came from contexts which
did not appear to represent scrap metal assemblages, and
they may therefore be considered accidental losses or
deliberate disposals in pit and structure backfills.
The triangular mount (No. 149) was probably once
part of a bronze-bound wooden bucket (though such
 Figure 4.17 Illustrations of selected non-pottery vessels. All at 1:1, except Nos 151, 152 and 154 at 1:2
mounts were also used on turned wooden vessels and
drinking horns). Such mounts are generally triangular,
and were inserted under the rim of the top hoop of a
bucket, being riveted through the apex (Cook 2004, 40).
Arnold (1982, 58) argued for a clearly defined group
of bronze-bound buckets with repoussé decoration of
arcades and dots on binding strips and occasionally on
triangular mounts (as here); these are found in their most
elaborate form in France, although he argues that those
with simpler decoration (i.e. without animal-style orna-
ment) may possibly be of southern English manufacture,
though probably imitating the Frankish style; these
192
continental vessels are generally dated to the late 5th
and early 6th centuries (Parfitt and Brugmann 1997, 81).
One oddity of the example here is that the only surviving
rivet hole is found in the upper corner (the apex is now
missing). Usually, these mounts do not have upper rivet
holes, although some examples do: that in G92 at Mill
Hill Deal (Kent), for example, is riveted centrally along
its upper edge (Cook and Cameron 1997, 246–8, fig. 81).
In terms of date, the example here could be 6th- or 7th-
century: examples have been found in the rich later
7th-century barrow burials of Swallowcliffe Down and
Roundway Down (both Wiltshire), for instance (Speake
1989, 54–8, figs 48–50).
Other items which probably belonged to buckets
include the appliqué (No. 150), which may possibly be
the end of a slender bucket-plate escutcheon (cf. Arnold
1982, 58, fig. 14), and the four iron handles. One iron
handle (No. 151) is of rectangular section, and exceeds
200mm in diameter, a measurement which Cook (2004,
40) sees as the cut-off between bucket handles and
smaller examples belonging to other items such as boxes.
Similar handles are seen with the 7th- to 8th-century
iron-bound buckets in G140 and G148 at Butler’s Field,
Lechlade (Boyle et al. 1998, figs 5.53.17 and 5.90.16),
and with the slightly earlier bronze-bound example from
G27 at Alton, Hampshire (Evison 1988, fig. 31.8). The
three handles of rounded section (Nos 152–4) are more
problematic, as they do not appear to correspond with the
normal profiles of bucket handles as outlined by Cook
(2004, 40, fig. 5; although a similar rounded handle from
Shakenoak was interpreted as a handle from a small
bucket: Brodribb et al. 1972, 90, fig. 40.178). These may,
therefore, have belonged to different kinds of vessel; a
copper alloy Gotlandkessel from Sewerby Grave 49 had
a similar round-sectioned handle, for example (Hirst
1985, fig. 51.5).
Bloodmoor Hill did, in fact, produce an example of
a Gotlandkessel (No. 159), with unperforated triangular
lugs. Unfortunately, like the hanging bowl escutcheon
also described below, it was recovered in an extremely
fragmentary condition from a spoil heap during the
first season of excavation (with the spoil derived from
either topsoil stripping or a nearby building site), and its
original location cannot be determined: such bowls are
often found as grave-goods, and it seems likely that their
discovery represents further unidentified graves from
within or near the settlement. They have a reasonably
widespread distribution over central and eastern England
(Vierck 1972, 189–98, 218–20), but are not common
finds: Vierck (in 1972) could only map fifteen sites with
such vessels. The other iron handle (No. 155) may have
come from the lid of a barrel.
The two bossed copper alloy strips (Nos 156–7) may
be remnants of a perlrandbecken, a copper alloy bowl
with decorated rim; alternatively, they may be remains
of decorated bucket bindings (cf. the bucket bindings
and perlrandbecken from G11 Butler’s Field, Lechlade
(Boyle et al. 1998, figs 5.37.5 and 5.38.6)). Other poten-
tial copper alloy vessels are indicated by the three scrap
fragments (also an iron example (Nos 161–4)), and the
basal escutcheon from a hanging bowl (No. 160), while
the presence of wooden vessels is documented by the
discovery of copper alloy repair clips (Nos 165–7: all
that would have survived following decomposition)
(cf. examples from Dover Buckland (Evison 1987, 105,
fig. 60) and GH63 and 81 at Mucking (Hamerow 1993,
60, figs 121.1, 132.2)).
*149. Triangular mount, tinned copper. Thin beaten sheet, trian-
gular, but broken, with at least one corner perforated, and
possibly another perforation in the centre. Decorated with a
complex pattern of inscribed lines and punched dots. Single
lines of closely spaced dots run up the left and right sides, with
further semi-circles of dots decorating the interior area. The
base of the triangle has a panel of closely spaced vertical lines
topped by a double horizontal line; above this, a horizontal
row of dots is contained within two double-incised lines,
and vertical incised lines run up the centre of the artefact,
193
containing a vertical row of dots. L: 35mm; W: 40mm; Th:
<1mm.
MD468/12560/MD spot find.
*150. Applique, copper alloy (not analysed). Broken into two pieces;
arrow-shaped with a bulbous end; perforated at the centre and
at the end; fashioned from thin sheet. L: 30mm; W: 12mm;
Th: 0.7mm.
393 (F41)/6754/Structure 14, NE quad.
*151. Bucket handle, Fe. Formed from narrow, rectangular-section
rod, one end missing, omega-shaped loop in the same plane;
strap would have sat upright in the hand. L: 225mm; W: 10mm;
Th: 3mm.
3154 (F333)/6480/Structure 35.
*152. Handle, Fe. Round-sectioned and curved, broken at one end,
with the start of a hook at the other before break. L: 114mm;
Diam: 6mm.
251 (F9)/6916/Structure 3, SW quad.
153. Probable handle, Fe. Semi-circular loop, round-sectioned,
broken at both ends, which may once have had curled termi-
nals; possibly from a bucket or other vessel. L: 158mm;
Diam: 6.5mm.
3319 (F343)/6211/Structure 31, NE quad.
154. Probable handle, Fe. Round-section shaft, tapering and bent
back on itself to form hook. L: 130mm; Diam: 7mm.
750 (F11)/6441/Anglo-Saxon Surface Deposit F11/F503.
155. Double-ended ?handle, Fe. Central bar is rectangular
sectioned and tapering at both ends towards the non-identical
triangular plates, both of which have ends bent over. Appears
to be blacksmith-made, and central section appears to be a
handgrip; perhaps used as a handle for a wooden cover on a
container such as a barrel (with the flattened ends bent to grip
a 105mm wide plank); no nail-holes (similar handgrips seen
on old manhole covers). L: 185mm; W: 60mm (description by
Adrian Challands).
562 (F3)/6914/Anglo-Saxon pit.
*156. Strip, copper alloy (not analysed). Decorated with two circular
bosses pressed out from underneath; possibly a fragment of the
rim of a perlrandbecken, or of a decorated strip from a bucket;
?6th century. L: 13mm; W: 10mm; Th: 0.5mm.
0000/13040/Subsoil.
157. Strip, copper alloy (not analysed). Decorated with two circular
bosses pressed out from underneath; possibly a fragment of the
rim of a perlrandbecken, or of a decorated strip from a bucket;
?6th century. L: 13mm; W: 8mm; Th: 1mm.
4590 (F512)/12592/Structure 10, NW quad.
*158. Mount, copper alloy (not analysed). Possibly a mount or
partial band from a stave-bucket. Rectangular sheet, broken
along two sides and most of bottom. Two ring-and-dot decora-
tions mid-way down, and X-ray reveals a row of six probably
filled perforations along the bottom edge (perhaps rivet holes,
or for decorative purposes). The two edges are slightly curved.
L: 38mm; W: 29mm; Th: 0.6mm.
2472 (F126)/6781/Structure 22.
159. Very fragmentary bowl, copper. Globular vessel beaten from
single sheet of copper, with rounded base. Rim Everted,
with pair of imperforate triangular lugs; a Gotlandkessel; 6th
century.
0000/6918/Spoil heap.
*160. Internal hanging bowl escutcheon, copper alloy (not analysed).
Thick disc with slightly convex back. The front of the disc
has a rim (2.4mm wide and 0.7mm deep) and a concentric
ridge (1.0mm wide, 0.7mm deep and 25mm diameter) which
form cells. Remains of blue and traces of red enamel indicate
that the cells were filled with decorative enamel. Traces of
a soldered fixing are only present on the rear, at one side of
the disc; 7th century. Diam: 39mm; Th: 5mm (description by
Adrian Challands).
0000/6921/Spoil heap.
161. Sheet fragments, Fe. Some refit, and two have a vessel-like
rim; possibly fragments of an iron vessel? Max L: 42mm.
853/6447/Surface find.
162. Possible bowl fragments, leaded copper. Very thin and fragile
sheet fragments, hammered and fragmentary. Largest meas-
ures L: 33mm; W: 20mm; Th: 0.3mm.
294 (F19)/6743/Structure 4, NE quad.
163. Fragment, copper alloy (not analysed). Small piece of
beaten metal, possibly from a vessel. L: 29mm; W: 13mm;
Th: 1.8mm.
6208 (F1)/14083/Surface Deposit F1.
 Figure 4.18 Glass vessel fragments, shown in relation to drawings of complete vessels
(after Harden 1956, fig. 25); not to scale
164. Possible vessel fragment, copper alloy (not analysed).
Thickened towards rim, but bent and crudely pierced.
L: 34mm; W: 21mm; Th: 2mm.
MD450/12551/MD spot find.
165. Possible vessel repair, copper. Sheet thickens where folded
over to form a rim, hammered. Undecorated and corroded.
L: 51mm; W: 24mm; Th: 1.5mm.
1100 (F126)/6756/Structure 22.
*166. Possible vessel repair, bronze. Thin sheet folded over so as to
form a curving rim. Cut edges on the outside face, but broken
on the inside. L: 25mm; W: 18mm; Th: 3mm.
318/6809/Post-hole.
167. Possible vessel repair, bronze. Thin hammered rectangular
sheet folded in two to form a rim, and then edges have been
folded over more after use. Edges appear to be cut rather than
broken. L: 33mm; W: 10mm; Th: 1.5mm.
1153 (F130)/6782/Structure 21, SW quad, spit 2.
Glass vessels
with Jennifer Price
(Fig. 4.18)
Six fragments of probable or definite Anglo-Saxon glass
were recovered from the excavations, as well as two frag-
ments of medieval window glass and two fragments of
Roman glass vessel reported on in Chapter 2. One base
fragment and one claw fragment from different claw
beakers were recovered, along with two possible frag-
ments of palm cups, and two other pieces which were not
attributable to particular vessel types. With such small
fragments, precise dating is difficult (claw beakers, for
example, span the 5th to the 7th centuries in various
forms), although plain palm cups (of which there are
two examples here) date to the later 6th and 7th century
(Harden 1972, 89–91). While generally thought to have
been manufactured in northern Gaul and the Rhineland,
194
some types may also have been produced in Britain,
probably in Kent (Evison 1982).
*168. Dark blue fragment of base, rolled out, round and up. High
tubular base with pontil mark, and a short section before body.
Diameter 45mm. Dimensions 24 x 19mm, 6.5mm thickness.
Possible base from claw beaker.
1100 (F126)/4256/Structure 22, SW quad, spit 2.
*169. Fragment of bulbous brown translucent glass, with occasional
bubbles. Fragment of a claw from a claw vessel. Faint swirling
linear striation lines (associated with manufacturing tech-
niques?). Dimensions 28 x 13mm. Dated to 5th–6th centuries.
4867 (F567)/12978/Structure 32, NW quad.
*170. Fragment of light yellow brown translucent glass, slight
curvature — saggy shaped body of vessel. Moderate bubbles,
slightly abraded on exterior. Dimensions 26 x 17mm, 2mm
thickness. Possible palm cup.
2392 (F1)/3171/Surface Deposit F1, spit 2.
*171. Fragment of glass with slight curvature — body of bag shaped
beaker. Moderate bubbles, abraded on exterior. Dimensions
14 x 14mm, 3mm thickness. Possible palm cup.
3299 (F337)/5627/Structure 27, SW quad.
*172. Fragment of blue semi-translucent glass from a thick walled
vessel. Moderately abraded. Dimensions 14 x 10.5mm, 3mm
thickness.
3686 (F321)/8204/Anglo-Saxon pit.
173. Blue fragment which could have been affected by fire as it has
been slightly melted. Dimensions 12 x 12.5mm. Date uncer-
tain.
1100 (F126)/4317/Structure 22, SW quad, spit 2.
Implements
Knives
(Figs 4.19–4.20)
The settlement site produced a total of fifty-four knives
and fragments from a variety of features. They have
been classified using Evison’s scheme (1987, 113–16);
five of her six types are represented here: Type 1 (with
curved back and curved cutting edge, dated c.450–700),
Type 2 (with straight back and curved cutting edge, dated
c.450–600), Type 3 (with angled back and curved cutting
edge, 7th-century), Type 4 (with curved back and straight
cutting edge, 7th-century) and Type 5 (with angled back
and straight cutting edge, 7th-century). The majority of
these are the 7th-century types 3, 4 and 5 (see Table 4.2).
In general, the date-ranges of the knives corresponded
reasonably well with their contexts: only two of the Type
3, 4 or 5 knives were found in contexts which could be
definitely assigned to the 6th century (the exceptions
being a Type 4 knife in Pit Group N and a possible Type 4
in Structure 4). The two knives of Type 2 were, however,
both found in later 7th-century structure fills, although it
should be noted that one of these was with the probable
scrap metalwork assemblage from Structure 19 — these
knives could well have been old when deposited.
Figure 4.19 Illustrations of selected knives I. All at 1:2
Evison type Phase 1 Phase 2a
1 (c.450–700) 1 2
2 (c.450–600) 0 0
3/3? (c.600–700) 0 2
4/4? (c.600–700) 2 5
5 (c.600–700) 0 2
Unclassified 1 1
Table 4.2 Knife types by phase
195
All but one of the knives were of Anglo-Saxon date
(the exception being the possibly Roman No. 214 found
in Pit F368), and all can be classed as domestic tools;
none had a blade length exceeding 121mm, well short of
the accepted cut-off of 180mm which characterises the
larger seax blades, and below the length range of 130–
170mm for the large knives found in many 7th-century
adult male burials (Härke 1992b, 162). The majority,
forty knives or fragments, were broken, fragmentary
or worn when deposited; of these, half were recovered
either from the scrap metal assemblages within the
fills of Structures 14 and 19, or from one of the surface
deposits (no unbroken knives were recovered from these
contexts); the remainder were found in pits and other
structure fills. While we have no way of knowing if the
apparently ‘unbroken’ knives did in fact have broken
handles, it is interesting that they were not found among
the scrap metal assemblages; these appear to have been
deliberately selected, something which seems to support
the recycling argument.
Phase 2b Phase 2 Unphased
1 0 2
2 0 0
0 1 0
3 3 9
2 1 1
5 2 6
 Figure 4.20 Illustrations of selected knives II. All at 1:2
The numbers of knives recovered compares well with
excavations elsewhere: West Stow (West 1985, 124)
produced sixty-six knives, many of which were broken or
heavily worn (and none with a blade length longer than
110mm), while Mucking (Hamerow 1993, 64) produced
sixty knives or fragments. Neither site report, unfortu-
nately, gives any more detail on the breakdown into types
which would enable greater comparison.
*174. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 10mm), splaying
gradually to curving back and very worn, but probably curving
cutting edge (Evison Type 1; 450–700). L: 94mm; W: 10mm;
Th: 5mm.
4589 (F512)/12671/Structure 10, NW quad.
*175. Knife, Fe. Complete; rectangular-section tang (L: 38mm)
gradually splays to meet blade, which has curving back and
cutting edge (Evison Type 1; 450–700). L: 130mm; W: 15mm;
Th: 5mm.
3182/6469/Post-hole.
*176. Knife, Fe. Complete; rectangular-section tang (L: 26mm)
gradually splays to meet blade, which has curving back and
cutting edge (Evison Type 1; 450–700). L: 85mm; W: 12mm;
Th: 3mm.
3171 (F351)/6482/Anglo-Saxon pit.
177. Knife, Fe. Small blade, broken at tip and on tang, with curving
back and cutting edge (Evison Type 1; 450–700). L: 70mm;
W: 10mm; Th: 2.3mm.
3674 (F392)/6431/Anglo-Saxon pit.
178. Knife tip, Fe. Curved back and curved cutting edge; tang
missing (Evison Type 1; 450–700). L: 57mm; W: 10mm;
Th: 3mm.
1100 (F126)/6012/Structure 22.
*179. Knife, Fe. Complete, with curved cutting edge and straight
back; tang L: 31mm (Evison Type 2; c.450–600). L: 139mm;
W: 15mm; Th: 5mm.
1153 (F130)/6028/Structure 21, NE quad, spit 2.
180. Knife fragment, Fe. Part of blade, tip missing and broken at
tang; curving cutting edge and straight back (Evison Type 2;
450–600). L: 69mm; W: 19mm; Th: 6mm.
1625 (F200)/6091/Structure 19, SW quad, spit 2.
196
*181. Knife, Fe. Bottom-set rectangular-section tang (L: 35mm)
splays gradually into blade with angled back and curving
cutting edge (Evison Type 3; 7th-century). Some MPOs on tang
indicate a horn handle; randomly oriented vegetable matter is
preserved on blade. L: 124mm; W: 22mm; Th: 6mm.
3333 (F341)/6209/Structure 30, NE quad.
*182. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 25mm but broken)
angled slightly upwards; splays gradually into blade with
angled back and curving cutting edge (Evison Type 3; 7th-
century); powdery and barely distinct mineral-preserved horn
on broken stump of tang; also randomly oriented chopped
vegetable matter on blade surface. L: 106mm; W: 18mm;
Th: 5mm.
3527 (F375)/6429/Pit Group M.
183. Knife blade fragment, Fe. Very corroded; tang and end of
point missing; blade appears to have angled back and possibly
curving cutting edge (possibly Evison Type 3; 7th-century).
Possibly has corroded remains of a scabbard, as charred wood
was identified on the object. L: 119mm; W: 23mm; Th: 5mm.
392 (F41)/6170/Structure 14, SE quad.
*184. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 30mm) splays into
blade with curving back (the curve coming near the tip) and
worn, but probably straight cutting edge (Evison Type 4; 7th-
century). L: 108mm; W: 15mm; Th: 5.5mm.
4071 (F1)/12642/Surface Deposit F1.
*185. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-sectioned tang, broken (L: 13mm),
widens sharply into blade with curving back and straight
cutting edge (Evison Type 4; 7th-century). L: 134mm;
W: 21mm; Th: 7mm.
4086 (F1)/12645/Surface Deposit F1.
*186. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 14mm) tapering to
straight-edged blade and curving back (Evison Type 4, 7th-
century). MPO on tang identified as horn; MPOs on the blade
are randomly orientated chopped vegetable matter; perhaps
grass? L: 82mm; W: 13mm; Th: 5mm.
2472 (F126)/6018/Structure 22, NE quad, spit 2.
*187. Knife, Fe. Complete except for very tip; rectangular-section
tang (L: 38mm) widens sharply to meet blade, which has
straight cutting edge and curving back (Evison Type 4; 7th-
century). L: 115mm; W: 12mm; Th: 4mm.
3144 (F333)/6474/Structure 35.
*188. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 17mm) set at bottom
of blade expands sharply at the top; blade has a curving
back and straight cutting edge (Evison Type 4; 7th-century).
L: 57mm; W: 12mm; Th: 5mm.
4896 (F577)/12967/Pit Group H.
*189. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 22mm) expands
sharply into blade with straight cutting edge and curving back
(Evison Type 4; 7th-century); blade is slightly bent; indistinct
MPOs on tang. L: 102mm; W: 11mm; Th: 3mm.
2087/6462/Surface find.
*190. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 37mm) splays into
blade with curved back and straight cutting edge (Evison Type
4; 7th-century). L: 122mm; W: 17mm; Th: 5mm.
4810/12960/Structure 32, surface find.
191. Knife blade fragment, Fe. Tang missing, but straight cutting
edge and curving back (Evison Type 4; 7th-century). L: 79mm;
W: 13mm; Th: 5mm.
4007 (F1)/12631/Surface Deposit F1.
192. Knife fragment, Fe. Part of blade, tip missing; curving back
and probably straight cutting edge (?Evison Type 4; 7th-
century). L: 61mm; W: 13mm; Th: 4mm.
211 (F4/F129)/6278/Pit Group E.
193. Knife fragment, Fe. Rectangular-sectioned tang (L: 20mm)
splays gradually to blade, broken; probably curving back and
straight cutting edge (Evison Type 4; 7th-century). L: 55mm;
W: 15mm; Th: 4mm.
4628 (F11)/12697/Surface Deposit F11/F503.
194. Possible knife blade fragment, Fe. Tip missing; straight
cutting edge and curving back (Evison Type 4; 7th-century).
L: 40mm; W: 24mm; Th: 4mm.
392 (F41)/6160/Structure 14, SW quad.
195. Knife blade fragment, Fe. Straight cutting edge and curving
back (Evison Type 4; 7th-century). L: 46mm; W: 20mm;
Th: 3mm.
1625 (F200)/9776/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 1.
196. Knife blade fragment, Fe. Straight cutting edge and curved
back (Evison Type 4; 7th-century). L: 48mm; W: 11mm;
Th: 4mm.
2207 (F255)/6368/Anglo-Saxon Pit F255, NW quad.
197. Knife tip, Fe. Curved back and straight cutting edge (Evison
Type 4; 7th-century). L: 37mm; W: 11mm; Th: 3mm.
3311 (F341)/6052/Structure 30, SE quad.
198. Knife point, Fe. Probably straight cutting edge and curving
back (Evison Type 4, 7th-century). L: 49mm; W: 11mm.
4725 (F520)/12727/Pit Group N.
199. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 20mm) widens
sharply into blade with curving back and worn, but probably
straight cutting edge (Evison Type 4; 7th-century). L: 99mm;
W: 10mm; Th: 4mm.
MD403/12616/MD spot find over Surface Deposit F1.
200. Probable knife blade fragment, Fe. Heavily corroded, but
suggestions of straight cutting edge and curved back (?Evison
Type 4; 7th-century). L: 96mm; W: 27mm.
294 (F19)/121/Structure 4, SW quad.
201. Probable knife blade fragment, Fe. Broken and twisted, but
probably straight cutting edge and curved back (?Evison Type
4; 7th-century). L: 55mm; W: 10mm; Th: 4.4mm.
1625 (F200)/6059/Structure 19, NE quad, spit 2.
202. Knife tip, Fe. Probably straight cutting edge and curving
back (?Evison Type 4; 7th-century). L: 40mm; W: 13mm;
Th: 4mm.
3206 (F307)/6044/Anglo-Saxon pit.
203. Knife, Fe. Broken mid-way down blade; off-centre tang 46mm
long; straight cutting edge and probably curving back (?Evison
Type 4; 7th-century). L: 94mm; W: 12mm; Th: 3.5mm.
3299 (F337)/6045/Structure 27, SE quad.
204. Knife blade fragment, Fe. Straight cutting edge and prob-
ably curving back (?Evison Type 4; 7th-century). L: 44mm;
W: 8mm; Th: 4.6mm.
2495 (F339)/6046/Structure 29, NE quad.
205. Knife blade fragment, Fe. Tang and point missing, but straight
cutting edge and slightly arched back (?Evison Type 4; 7th-
century). L: 79mm; W: 18mm; Th: 4mm.
2167 (F406)/6453/Surface deposit in top of Roman ditch.
*206. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section broken tang (L: 17mm)
splays into blade with angled back and worn, but probably
straight cutting edge (Evison Type 5; 7th-century). L: 80mm;
W: 12mm; Th: 5mm.
261 (F17)/6721/Pit Group B.
197
*207. Knife, Fe. Off-centre rectangular-sectioned tang (broken,
L: 16mm) angles sharply into straight cutting edge and angled
back (Evison Type 5, 7th-century). L: 101mm; W: 12mm;
Th: 4mm.
3211 (F305)/6043/Structure 2.
*208. Knife, Fe. Off-centre tapering rectangular-section tang
(L: 48mm) widens sharply into blade with angled back and
straight cutting edge (Evison Type 5; 7th-century). L: 138mm;
W: 17mm; Th: 4mm. Some leaves mineral-preserved on one
side.
3470 (F335)/6207/Structure 25, NW quad.
*209. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 23mm), widening
sharply to angled back and very worn, but probably straight,
cutting edge (Evison Type 5; 7th-century). L: 80mm;
W: 14mm; Th: 5mm.
4349 (F503)/12665/Surface Deposit F11/F503.
*210. Knife, Fe. Angled back and straight cutting edge; tang
L: 29mm (Evison Type 5; 7th-century). L: 111mm; W: 12mm;
Th: 5mm.
3268 (F333)/6197/Structure 35, NE quad.
211. Knife, Fe. Complete, with straight cutting edge and angled
back; tang L: 46mm (Evison Type 5; 7th-century). L: 131mm;
W: 14mm; Th: 5mm.
1100 (F126)/6009/Structure 22, NW quad, spit 1.
212. Knife, Fe. Blade <6372> joins with tang <6373> to form one
artefact: rectangular-section tang (L: 45mm) set at top of blade
splays gradually; blade has gently angled back and straight
cutting edge which has been worn into a slight curve at the tip
(Evison Type 5; 7th-century); mineral-preserved horn on tang.
L: 104mm; W: 13mm; Th: 4mm.
2207 (F255)/6272 and 6273/Anglo-Saxon Pit F255, SE quad.
213. Knife, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 28mm) splays out
to very worn blade, with probably angled back; cutting edge
worn away (Evison Type 3 or 5; both 7th-century). L: 81mm;
W: 15mm.
5116 (F626)/13242/Structure 24, NW quad.
*214. Knife, Fe. Top-set rectangular-section tang (L: 42mm) splays
gradually into blade with curving back and upwardly curved
cutting edge, giving tip a downwards point. Possibly a Roman
type (cf. Manning 1985 Type 6D); some random MPOs on
blade, but not distinct. L: 126mm; W: 14mm; Th: 3mm.
3465 (F368)/6420/Anglo-Saxon Pit F368, NW quad.
215. Knife tang, Fe. Rectangular-section tang (L: 42mm) angled
slightly upwards, and widening gradually into broken blade
(unidentifiable to type). L: 69mm; W: 14mm; Th: 3mm.
132 (F1)/6268/Surface Deposit F1.
216. Pieces refit to form possible knife blade fragment, Fe. Tapering
section bar with straight back, but fragmented cutting edge.
L: 45mm; W: 19mm; Th: 4mm.
843 (F8)/6293/Surface Deposit F8/F275.
217. Knife fragment, Fe. Rectangular-sectioned tang (L: 41mm)
splays into blade with straight back and worn cutting edge
(shape unclear). Tip broken. L: 95mm; W: 19mm; Th: 5mm.
266 (F12)/6718/Anglo-Saxon pit.
218. Probable knife blade fragment, Fe. Broken and corroded, form
cannot be determined. L: 63mm; W: 11mm; Th: 6mm.
384 (F41)/6142/Structure 14, SE quad, spit 2.
219. Possible knife blade fragment with ?bead? attached by corro-
sion (type unidentifiable). L: 49mm; W: 8mm; Th: 2.5mm.
392 (F41)/6160/Structure 14, SW quad.
220. Knife, Fe. Complete, with straight cutting edge and straight
back, though knife as a whole is curved along its central plane;
tang L: 33mm. L: 118mm; W: 14mm; Th: 3.2mm.
1153 (F130)/6029/Structure 21, NE quad, spit 3.
221. Possible knife blade fragment, Fe. Broken on all sides, but one
edge thicker than other. L: 31mm; W: 11mm; Th: 2.9mm.
1630 (F159)/6328/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
222. Possible knife blade fragment, Fe. Strip of tapering section,
possibly with curving back; blade edge does not survive.
L: 53mm; W: 7mm; Th: 4mm.
1646 (F182)/6336/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
223. Possible knife blade fragment, Fe. Too corroded to determine
form. L: 65mm; W: 10mm.
1901 (F182)/6357/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
224. Knife blade fragment, Fe. Form unidentifiable. L: 34mm;
W: 27mm; Th: 5mm.
1625 (F200)/9785/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 2.
225. Knife tang. Fe. Tang L: 31mm. L: 47mm; W: 11mm.
3268 (F333)/6195/Anglo-Saxon Structure 35, SE quad.
226. Probable knife point, Fe. Very symmetrical, with both edges
sharp and straight, meeting at the slightly bent point. Not a
common Anglo-Saxon form; possibly Roman, or possibly
not a knife; a spearhead tip or a razor might be possibilities.
L: 56mm; W: 15mm; Th: 4mm.
4271 (F502)/12656/Anglo-Saxon pit.
227. Possible knife blade fragment, although appears too rectan-
gular in section. L: 47mm; W: 12mm.
0000/6437/Non-feature.
Other implements
(Fig. 4.21)
Just two other implements were recovered from the
site: an unusual triangular blade (No. 229), with both
sides sharpened; this is possibly a reused fragment of a
Manning Type 2 knife (where the blade widens towards
the tip, the back slopes upwards, the edge is straight and
the tip sharply angled; Manning 1985, 110). This was
recovered from Surface Deposit F342, which is only
tentatively dated to the Anglo-Saxon period; the other
datable metalwork which it produced is all potentially
Roman. The cleaver (No. 228) is also potentially Roman,
being similar to Manning Type 5 cleavers, which were
usually used for butchering meat (Manning 1985, 120);
this, however, is not a tool type that changes greatly over
time, and it could easily be of Anglo-Saxon manufacture;
the feature from which it derived was certainly of Anglo-
Saxon date, and the cleaver did not form part of a scrap
metal assemblage (unlike many of the other potentially
Roman metal artefacts).
*228. Cleaver, Fe. Curving back (with a notch removed) and
straight cutting edge; point missing; rectangular-section tang
continues the curve of the back. Possibly an early Roman type
(cf. Manning 1985 Q101), though a small example. L: 85mm;
W: 32mm; Th: 8mm.
3319 (F343)/6057/Structure 31, SE quad.
*229. Blade, Fe. Triangular, with one end broken (possibly the
remains of a rectangular section tang?) and the other end
pointed, with both sides sharpened. Possibly an unusual
?Roman form of small knife. L: 55mm; W: 10mm; Th: 3mm.
2509 (F342)/6392/?Anglo-Saxon Surface Deposit F342.
Figure 4.21 Illustrations of selected other implements.
All at 1:2
Cooking and hearth equipment
(Fig. 4.22)
The pot hook (No. 230) is a relatively rare find from an
Anglo-Saxon settlement, although some have been iden-
tified in graves. The complete pot chain from Mound One
at Sutton Hoo (Fenwick 1983, 511–53) and the lower
element of one from an Anglo-Saxon settlement context
at Marlowe Car Park in Canterbury (Barford 1995, 1080,
fig. 469) indicate the types of arrangement used; the pot
198
hook would have been the lowest element of a more or
less complex chain, with examples from Sutton Hoo and
North Elmham (Goodall 1980, 514, fig. 267.89) being
particularly elaborate. Pot hooks themselves sometimes
show elaboration: the Canterbury example has a partial
twist to its shaft, and those from G2 at Holborough and
G34 at Chartham (both Kent) have a fully twisted shaft
(Evison 1956, 100–4). Plainer examples have been recov-
ered, however. Those from the middle Saxon smelting site
at Ramsbury in Wiltshire (Evison 1980, fig. 21.21) and
from G2 at Shudy Camps, Cambridgeshire (Lethbridge
1936, 23, fig. 11.1), have the end of the loop bent
outwards, rather than inwards as here, but otherwise are
very similar. It should be noted, though, that the closest
parallel to the Bloodmoor Hill example is an artefact
from Saxon Porchester (Hinton and Welch 1975, 197,
fig. 130.8) which was identified as a latchlifter, as it was
thought too delicate to be a pot hook. The example here
was from a secure Anglo-Saxon context, the upper fill
of Structure 35, which also produced the bucket handle
(No. 151); while these cannot be claimed to have been
used together, the pot hook is of a type which would
have suspended a single-handled vessel above a hearth.
The skewer (No. 231), which is closely paralleled by a
smaller example from Canterbury (Barford 1995, 1081,
fig. 470), may also have been used in food preparation.
This was the only metal artefact recovered from the main
fill of Structure 23.
*230. Pot hook, Fe. Square-section shaft with a sideways loop at
the top, bent through two right-angles at the bottom to form an
enclosed loop. L: 192mm; Diam: 6mm.
3268 (F333)/6196/Structure 35, NE quad.
*231. Probable skewer, Fe. Round-sectioned, tapering to point
at one end and tapering and bent into fine loop at the other.
L: 151mm; Diam: 5mm.
4911 (F579)/12968/Structure 23, NE quad.
Figure 4.22 Illustrations of selected cooking equipment.
All at 1:2
232. Hook, Fe. Rectangular-sectioned handle narrowing to round-
sectioned shaft which is bent and tapered to form a hook at the
end; function unclear (possibilities are a tool, a fragment of a
flesh-hook, or possibly a form of key). L: 104mm; W: 11mm;
Th: 3.6mm.
4364 (F503)/12666/Surface Deposit F11/F503.
Whalebone chopping boards
by Ian Riddler and Richard Sabin
(Fig. 4.23)
Five segments of whale vertebrae were recovered from
four separate contexts. None of the vertebrae is complete
Figure 4.23 Illustrated fragments of selected whalebone chopping boards; not to scale
199
and in two cases they have fractured into several frag-
ments. The articular surfaces are largely missing on
two vertebrae (Nos 233–4) but survive on two others
(Nos 236–7). The fifth piece (No. 235) is represented
merely by part of an unfused epiphyseal surface. The
vertebrae survive in reasonable condition but with parts
of the outer surfaces now degraded or missing. The small,
unfused vertebra (No. 236) has been cleaved cranio-
caudally but is otherwise unworked. More extensive
modification is visible on the three remaining vertebrae.
All three have been trimmed to a cylindrical shape.
Part of the articular surface on one vertebra (No. 234)
has been sawn away and deep knife cuts are visible on
another (No. 233). The third example (No. 237) has also
been cleaved axially and both articular surfaces retain
knife marks as a consequence of their use as working
surfaces. Lateral knife marks are present on the side,
possibly reflecting the separation of the vertebra from the
remainder of the animal. In most cases, the transverse
and spinous processes have been removed.
Two separate species of whale can be identified. One
of these, represented by two vertebrae (No. 233 and 234)
is a large cetacean, a term used here to denote animals
of c. 18 to 30 m in length, including both the sperm
whale and large baleen whales. Data collected by the
Natural History Museum, London, from 1913 to 2007,
show strandings of large baleen whale species are rela-
tively uncommon along the North Sea coast of England.
Beaked whales and sperm whales are encountered more
frequently. Animals may strand alive, be unable to return
to the sea and subsequently die. Carcasses of recently
deceased or decomposing animals may also wash ashore.
At this period, opportunistic exploitation of stranded
cetaceans is a much more likely scenario than an early
form of organised ‘whale hunting’. The two vertebrae
are likely to stem from one or more sperm whales. Two
further vertebrae (No. 236 and 237) stem from at least
one medium-sized cetacean, within the size range of
6.5 to 9.5 m and encompassing beaked whales, as well
as killer, pilot and minke whales; both fragments are
consistent with an identification as beaked whale.
The utilisation of whalebone in Anglo-Saxon and
medieval England has been reviewed recently (Gardiner
1997; Riddler 1998). For the early and middle Anglo-
Saxon periods two functional distinctions in the use of
whalebone can be identified. In the first instance, sections
taken usually from the ribs formed the raw material
for object manufacture. In this situation the waste is
encountered more often than the objects, as at the early
Anglo-Saxon settlement of Botolphs, or at middle Saxon
Hamwic, for example (Riddler 1990; Bourdillon and Coy
1980, 114; Riddler et al. forthcoming). In the second
case, the vertebrae were trimmed to cylindrical blocks
with near-flat working surfaces. One of the Bloodmoor
Hill vertebrae was certainly used in this way and two
others, which retain knife marks, may have had the same
function. Further examples of Anglo-Saxon whale verte-
brae used as working surfaces have come from Hamwic,
Sandtun and Whitby (Riddler 1998, 206–8). The majority
of surviving examples have been split axially, as is the
case here. Further afield, Curle has suggested that a
segment of whalebone from Birsay also functioned as
a cutting block (Curle 1982, 78 and fig. 50.293). Later
examples are also known (Gardiner 1997, 190–1).
The marks incised by knife onto the working surfaces
are visible on one vertebra (Fig. 4.23, No. 237) and can
be seen clearly on the Sandtun example (Riddler 1998,
fig. 1). They are invariably made by a knife or axe and
not by a saw, suggesting that the vertebrae served for
domestic tasks and were not necessarily confined to
antler and bone workers (Riddler 1998, 207). At the same
time, the Hamwic example was found in close proximity
to a property used by an antler and bone worker (Morton
1992, 144, 150–2 and pl. 6).
The distribution of whale vertebrae in Anglo-Saxon
England is predominantly coastal. Similarly, the distribu-
tion of waste material also reflects coastal activity, with
200
the principal assemblages coming from Hamwic, Ipswich
and London (Riddler et al. forthcoming). Finished prod-
ucts, however, travelled inland. Within middle Saxon East
Anglia they include a decorative plaque from Larling, a
scribal tablet from Blytheburgh, a comb connecting plate
from Brandon and several objects from Ipswich (Webster
and Backhouse 1991, 81 and 139; Riddler et al. forth-
coming).
Young mammals tend to be well represented in strand-
ings, for reasons that are not entirely clear (Gardiner 1997,
176). Further cetacean remains recovered from the East
Anglian coast include six vertebrae from early Roman
deposits at Brancaster and four fragments of whale from
post-Roman deposits at Caister-on-Sea (Hinchliffe and
Sparey Green 1985, 172; Darling and Gurney 1993, 134,
232 and 235). There was very little English whaling
activity during the Anglo-Saxon or medieval periods, in
contrast to the situation across the channel (MacGregor
1985, 31–2; Gardiner 1997, 175 and 179–80). Similarly,
although it has previously been argued that whales
were actively hunted in Scotland, this is now disputed
(MacGregor 1974, 106; Hallé 1994, 199).
*233. Twelve pieces of whalebone, all stemming from a single
vertebra, of which approximately 30–40% survives. The
fragments include one large piece, three smaller pieces and a
number of small fragments. The stub of one of the processes of
the vertebra survives on the main piece with traces of burning
above it. No upper or lower articular surfaces remain. There are
several deeply scored straight knife marks on one face. From
a large whale vertebra, suggested by the following: the partial
circumference of the centrum, apparent width of the vertebral
foramen, overall robusticity of bone (breadth of pedicle of
neural arch). Cf. sperm whale (Physeter catodon), possibly
one of the upper lumbar vertebrae. Ht: 185mm; W: 210mm;
Wt: 1242g.
2667 (F12)/3523/Anglo-Saxon Pit F12
*234. A fragmentary whale vertebra, of which approximately 50%
survives, with both articular surfaces largely absent. A small
area on one side confirms that the vertebra may have fused
but the opposite surface is unfused, indicating that fusion was
still in progress. Much of the outer surface is also missing and
the vertebra consists mainly of trabecular tissue. Part of one
articular surface has been cut away on one side, probably with
the aid of a saw. Fragment of large whale vertebra, suggested
by the following: partial circumference of the centrum. Nature
of the trabecular bone is consistent with larger cetaceans, e.g.
sperm whale. Ht: 154mm; W: 220mm; Wt: 1240g.
1126 (F129)/3745/Pit Group E
*235. Two fragments of the vertebral epiphysis from a large whale,
which has just fused with the diaphysis. The upper surface has
not been worked and there are no signs of any modification.
Ht: 131mm; W: 64mm; Wt: 77g.
1422 (F167)/3881 and 3883/Pit Group G
*236. A section of a whale vertebra, for which both articular surfaces
are unfused. The vertebra has been cleaved axially, with a
second cut at an angle on one side. Much of the surface of
the side is now missing. Approximately 40% of the vertebra
survives. There are no signs of any further modification.
The craniocaudal length of the centrum is short. This, plus
the partial circumference, is suggestive of a caudal vertebra
(supported by remaining surface morphology). Cf. ziphioid
(Hyperoodon?) beaked whale. Ht: 102mm; W: 132mm;
Wt: 355g.
205 (F5)/4553/Structure 12, SW quad.
*237. A cleaved segment of whale vertebra, representing approxi-
mately 25% of the original bone, split from the remainder.
The stub of a process remains on the curved outer surface and
there are traces of its removal with the aid of a knife or saw.
Both articular surfaces are fused and both have remnant knife
marks from their use as working surfaces. There is a small
black burnt patch on one surface. Lateral knife marks are also
present on the outer surface, around its midpoint, possibly
representing the removal of the vertebra from the remainder
of the mammal. The vertebra has been split craniocaudally,
 the vertebral foramen is broad, spinous process and transverse
processes missing (pedicle visible). Cf. lower lumbar or upper
caudal vertebra, not sperm whale, possibly large beaked whale
species (Hyperoodon?). Ht: 190mm; W: 184mm; Wt: 970g.
205 (F5)/4601/Structure 12, SE quad.

Miscellaneous fittings
(Fig. 4.24)
Miscellaneous fittings recovered from the site included
bindings, chain links, ferrules and hooks. While it is
difficult to assign definite functions to most of these, the
ferrules presumably protected the ends of rods or sticks
(cf. Hinton 1990, 1091–2), the chain links may have
formed part of pot or other chains (although the spherical
terminal of No. 239 would have made attachment to
other elements difficult), while the various iron hooks
(Nos 245–57) could have fulfilled a variety of roles.
Several appeared to form part of the scrap metal assem-
blages in Structures 14 and 19 and the surface deposits,
and may have been destined for recycling.
238. Binding, Fe. Rectangular-sectioned strip with tapered ends
fashioned into a binding for a rectangular object. L: 37mm;
W: 10mm; Th: 4mm.
4755 (F517)/12730/Pit Group D.
*239. Two attached chain links, Fe. Solid round-section shaft with
end knob looped over at the other end to attach to a figure-of-
eight loop. L: 131mm.
1625 (F200)/6063/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 2.
240. Chain link, Fe. Simple oval-sectioned loop with two
studs visible on X-ray on one side. L: 52mm; W: 23mm;
Th: 12mm.
384 (F41)/6136/Structure 14, SE quad, spit 2.
241. Half chain link, Fe. L: 56mm; W: 17mm; Th: 7mm.
1625 (F200)/6070/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 1.
*242. Ferrule, Fe. Conical form; top broken across what may have
been a perforation. L: 56mm; W: 17mm; Th: 9mm.
1514 (F168)/6319/Pit Group F.
*243. Possible ferrule, Fe. Sheet apparently folded into a cone, but
damaged. L: 34mm; W: 20mm.
3466 (F335)/6206/Structure 25, SE quad. Figure 4.24 Illustrations of selected miscellaneous
244. Possible ferrule end, copper alloy. Broken but pointed and fittings. All at 1:2
circular in section. L: 18mm; Diam: 20mm.
MD484, 401/12570/MD spot find.
*245. Hook, Fe. Rectangular-section tapering strip bent so as to form
a loop with an outward-facing projection; the shaft appears to 253. Hook, Fe. Rectangular-section shaft tapering to hook with
be surrounded by mineral-preserved bone. Perhaps a form of squared end. L: 67mm; W: 6mm; Th: 9mm.
handle? L: 90mm; W: 12mm; Th: 8mm. M015/6915/MD spot find.
251 (F9)/6917/Structure 3, NW quad. 254. Hook, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft bent into crude plain hook;
*246. Hook, Fe. Square-section shaft terminating in sharp hooked function unclear. L: 84mm; Diam: 6.5mm.
point; function unclear. L: 57mm; Diam: 6.4mm. M086/6913/MD spot find.
65 (F1)/6263/Surface Deposit F1. 255. Hook, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft bent into crude plain hook;
247. Hook, Fe. Rectangular-sectioned bar tapers sharply to form function unclear. L: 45mm; Diam: 5mm.
round-sectioned hook in same plane. L: 62mm; W: 13mm; M112/6912/MD spot find.
Th: 5.5mm. 256. Long hook, Fe. Square-sectioned rod looped over at one end
0000/13115/Subsoil. (other broken) to form a small hook, almost closed; function
248. Possible hook, Fe. Badly corroded, but hook appears delib- uncertain. L: 104mm; Diam: 10mm.
erate, plain. L: 25mm; W: 12mm; Th: 3mm. 251 (F9)/6004/Structure 3, NE quad.
392 (F41)/9050/Structure 14, NW quad, spit 3. 257. Small hook, Fe. Badly corroded, but apparently plain hook.
249. Hook, Fe. Rectangular-section shaft tapering to hook with L: 26mm; Diam: 4mm.
rounded end; not a fish-hook. L: 39mm; W: 7mm; Th: 9mm. 251 (F9)/6004/Structure 3, NE quad.
2263 (F159)/6377/Surface Deposit F159/F182. 258. Loop, Fe. Rectangular-sectioned bar, bent so as to form
250. Hook, Fe. Square-section solid shaft tapering to plain rounded omega-shaped loop, which has been secured using two rivets;
hook, broken. L: 82mm; Diam: 11mm. both ends are broken; could be a form of looped attachment;
3081 (F315)/6468/Pit Group K. possibly the end of an implement such as shears? L: 56mm;
251. Hook, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft, bent at a right-angle at the W: 24mm.
top, formed into simple plain hook. L: 37mm; Diam: 3mm. 4677 (F523)/12709/Structure 5, NW quad.
4000/12630/Spot find.
252. Hook, Fe. Round-sectioned rod, broken at top, rounded into
plain, blunt hook. L: 22mm; Diam: 3mm.
5000 (F610)/13053/Subsoil.

201
IV. Pottery
by Jess Tipper
(Figs 4.25–4.30)
Summary
The excavations at Bloodmoor Hill produced a large early
to middle Anglo-Saxon pottery assemblage, consisting
of 6479 handmade sherds weighing 55,446g.1 These
represent a maximum of 5655 vessels. There were 131
decorated sherds (c.1500g) within the handmade assem-
blage, representing a maximum of ninety-nine vessels.
The pottery is considered to date between the late 5th
and early 8th centuries, based on similarities of form,
fabric and decorative techniques with other assemblages
dating to the period and also on the radiocarbon analysis
of carbonised organic residues adhering to a sample of
forty-one pot-sherds. In addition, there were two sherds
(72g) from a single vessel of middle Saxon Ipswich Ware
pottery and twenty sherds (316g) from three different
vessels of imported Continental pottery.
Pottery by context type
Of the total handmade sherds, nearly half (2841 sherds
weighing 24,936g and representing 2332 vessels; 45%
by sherd weight) derived from the fills of structures (i.e.
SFBs). The quantity of pottery within the fills of indi-
vidual structures ranged from two sherds (Structures 14
and 15) or <2g by weight (Structure 14) up to 523 sherds
weighing 3521g (Structure 17). There was great varia-
tion between the fills of adjacent structures. Seven out
of thirty-five SFBs contained fewer than ten sherds of
pottery and eight contained over 100 sherds of Anglo-
Saxon pottery. The fills of fifteen had a density over
100g/m3; Structure 16 was the highest with a density of
350g/m3 (136 sherds weighing 1059g). Four had a density
below 10g/m3. There was also great variation between
fills of individual SFBs.
By weight, 24% of the assemblage (1913 sherds
weighing 13,442g and representing a maximum of 1801
vessels) derived from the main surface deposits (F1,
F8/275, F11/503, F159/182 and F342). Of these sherds,
1178 (8096g), representing 1103 vessels, came from
Surface Deposit F1 (60% of pottery from the main surface
deposits by weight). Twenty-four per cent (1310 sherds
weighing 13,208g) derived from the fills of pits; 868 of
these sherds (8852g), representing 773 vessels, derived
from the fills of pit groups. Eighteen sherds (83g), from
different vessels, were recovered from the fills of contexts
(principally post-holes) associated with post-hole struc-
tures and post-in-trench structures. Twenty-six sherds
(110g) came from the fills of graves, although there was
no evidence to show that either complete vessels or single
or multiple sherds had been placed as grave-goods.
In comparison, 78% of the early Anglo-Saxon pottery
at West Stow (c.42,000 sherds) derived from SFB fills
and at Mucking 86% of the pottery (c.9400 sherd groups)
was recovered from the fills of Grubenhäuser (West
1985, 178; Hamerow 1993, 23). At West Heslerton,
however, c.30% of the assemblage (c.23,500g) derived
from surface deposits, with c.50% of the total assemblage
by weight from the fills of Grubenhäuser (Tipper 2004).
202
The pottery fabrics
The pottery was studied macroscopically, with the aid of a
binocular microscope, and broadly grouped according to
the dominant tempering agent, although a wide range of
other inclusions was also present in these fabric groups.
Based on these initial groups, a representative range of
sherds (fifty-eight sherds in total) was analysed in thin
section to check the validity of the visual identifications
and also to determine whether or not the fabrics could
be assigned to a source on the basis of their petrological
and chemical composition (see below). Although the
broad groups were confirmed, the thin sections showed
a wide range of inclusion types and groundmass traits
and a number of the distinct inclusions identified in thin
section were simply not visible macroscopically (Vince
2003). Consequently, the assemblage was subsequently
reclassified using the sherds sampled in thin section as a
reference collection to create six major groups. However,
a number of conjoining sherds were actually assigned
different fabric groups, due to variations in the type, size
and frequency of inclusions, which highlights the diffi-
culty in assigning specific groups to handmade pottery. In
some cases, fabric, thickness, colour, surface finish and
also decoration varied considerably across individual
vessels. While the broad groups mask the variability
encountered in the whole assemblage, they are useful
for showing gross distributions of the major types within
and between features across the site.2 The thin section
analysis did, however, suggest that most of the pottery
fabrics could have been made from locally available raw
materials, although the fired clay samples analysed were
made from two distinctly different clays, neither of which
was precisely matched in the pottery samples (ibid.).
A further stage in the analysis examined clay samples
from fourteen localities within the Bloodmoor Hill area
for comparison (Vince 2005). This refined the original
conclusions, suggesting that only twenty-six of the sixty-
three pottery samples contained solely inclusion types
which were present in the local clays and sands. Twenty-
five samples could definitely be said to contain inclusions
not available locally, and a further seven samples were
unlikely to contain them.
Biotite granite
A total of 409 sherds weighing 5379g (c.10% of the total
assemblage by weight), and representing a maximum
of 330 vessels, contained moderate to frequent acid
igneous rocks and biotite inclusions, with fine to medium
rounded and sub-angular quartz inclusions. A distinct
sub-group of 192 sherds (3102g), from 148 vessels,
also contained moderate to frequent medium to coarse
(sub-) angular quartz fragments <3.5mm in size. There
were also occasional to moderate leached calcareous
inclusions, carbonised organic fragments or voids, mica
and occasional (iron-rich) sandstone sand fragments. Of
the total, sixteen sherds (153g), from different vessels,
also contained occasional to moderate leached calcar-
eous inclusions, while eighteen sherds (246g), from
different vessels, were tempered with a combination of
acid igneous rock fragments and moderate to frequent
organic inclusions. Eighteen structures contained biotite-
tempered pottery (182 sherds weighing 2800g in total),
although in only seven cases did biotite-tempered pottery
comprise more than 10% of the total. Sixty-four sherds
of biotite-tempered pottery weighing 1092g came from
Structure 17 (31% of the assemblage).
Calcareous
Five hundred and seventy-seven sherds weighing 6190g
(c.11% of the total by weight), and representing 457
vessels, were identified as calcareous-tempered. Actual
calcareous inclusions were rare, as a result of leaching in
the acidic burial environment, and most were defined as
voids. This fabric also contained occasional to frequent
fine to medium, and occasional coarse, rounded and
sub-angular quartz inclusions. Of the total, 126 sherds
(1655g), from 101 vessels, contained moderate to
frequent calcareous inclusions that appeared to be the
remains of oolitic limestone. Fifteen sherds (120g),
from twelve different vessels, also contained moderate
organic inclusions and/or voids, while sixty-two sherds
(675g), from fifty-six vessels, contained sandstone sand.
Occasional biotite granite fragments were also present,
as well as fragments of ironstone and/or iron-rich quartz.
In addition, occasional to moderate leached calcareous
inclusions occurred in sherds from many other fabric
groups, including biotite granite (ten sherds weighing
112g), grog (three sherds weighing 20g), organic-temper
(fifty-six sherds weighing 486g) and sandstone sand.
Twenty-eight structures contained calcareous-tempered
sherds (249 sherds weighing 2935g, forming over 10% of
the total pottery assemblage in sixteen cases). Structure 30
contained the most, with forty sherds weighing 680g
(21% of the assemblage).
Grog
One hundred and four sherds weighing 800g (c.1.4% of
the total assemblage), from eighty-five different vessels,
were identified with fine to coarse red grog inclusions
with occasional to frequent fine to coarse, rounded and
sub-angular quartz inclusions. This fabric also contained
occasional to moderate calcareous inclusions (three
sherds weighing 20g) and sandstone sand inclusions
(three sherds weighing 14g). In addition, nineteen sherds
(189g) with organic inclusions and voids also contained
grog fragments. Nine structures contained sherds of
grog-tempered pottery (sixty-four sherds weighing 436g)
but as a proportion of their complete assemblages none
contained over 10%.
Organic
In total, 1597 sherds (14,189g), representing a maximum
of 1464 vessels, were identified as organic-tempered.
These make up c.26% of the total assemblage by weight.
This fabric group included all sherds that possess
organic inclusions as the main temper, which ranges
from moderate to heavy, either as carbonised organic
matter or most frequently as organic voids. This fabric
also contained occasional to frequent fine to medium,
and occasional coarse, rounded and sub-angular quartz
inclusions. Of this total, nineteen sherds (189g), from
seventeen vessels, also contained occasional to moderate
grog inclusions, while fifty-six sherds (486g), from
fifty-two vessels, also contained moderate calcareous
inclusions. Sixty-five sherds (797g), from sixty vessels,
also contained moderate sandstone sand inclusions. There
were also occasional to moderate flint, ironstone (?) and
mica fragments. In addition, occasional to moderate
carbonised organic inclusions and voids occurred in
203
Fabric Count Weight (g) Maximum
vessels
Biotite granite 409 5379 330
Calcareous 577 6190 457
Grog 104 800 85
Organic 1597 14189 1464
Quartz 3204 22638 2859
Sandstone sand 588 6250 496
Total 6479 55446
Table 4.3 Summary of Anglo-Saxon pottery by fabric
group
sherds from many other fabric groups, including biotite
granite (eighteen sherds weighing 246g), calcareous and
sandstone sand. Thirty-two structures contained organic-
tempered pottery (614 sherds weighing 5896g), which
formed more than 10% of the assemblage in twenty-six
structures. Structure 17 contained the most: 123 sherds
weighing 652g (50% of the assemblage).
Quartz
In total, 3204 sherds weighing 22,638g (41% of the
total by weight), from a maximum of 2859 vessels, were
grouped as quartz-tempered. However, the quartz inclu-
sions varied considerably, from sparse to frequent, from
very fine to coarse, and from rounded to angular. A wide
range of other inclusions is also present, including occa-
sional to moderate leached calcareous inclusions, flint,
grog, iron, muscovite, organic inclusions and sandstone
sand. These form sub-groups of this general fabric group.
Thirty-five structures contained quartz-tempered pottery
(1442 sherds weighing 9776g) and this fabric formed
greater than 10% (by weight) of the assemblage in thirty-
three structures. Structure 30 contained the greatest
quantity of quartz-tempered pottery, with 195 sherds
weighing 1543g (48% of the assemblage by weight).
Sandstone sand
Five hundred and eighty-eight sherds weighing 6250g
(c.11% of the total assemblage), from 496 different
vessels, were identified as sandstone sand-tempered. The
group was characterised by common to frequent fine to
occasional coarse sandstone sand inclusions with fine to
coarse, rounded and sub-angular quartz inclusions. A wide
range of other inclusions is also present, including occa-
sional to moderate leached calcareous inclusions, flint,
iron, organic inclusions/voids and muscovite. Seventy-
seven sherds (756g), from sixty-nine different vessels,
were identified as coarse-grained Millstone Grit-type
sandstone sand with fine to medium rounded and sub-
angular quartz. This sub-group also contained occasional
leached calcareous voids and occasional mica. Twenty-
six structures contained sandstone sand-tempered sherds
(288 sherds weighing 3088g), although only eleven
assemblages from individual structures contained over
10%. Structure 24 contained the most, with fifty-seven
sherds weighing 724g (50% of the assemblage from this
structure).
Discussion
The overwhelming majority of the handmade pottery at
Bloodmoor Hill was identified as quartz-tempered (41%
83
Structure Biotite Calcareous Grog Organic Quartz Sandstone Total Max. vessels
1 - 1 (2g) - 5 (12g) - 6 (14g) 6
2 - 2 (58g) - 1 (4g) 4 (36g) - 7 (98g) 7
3 - 2 (25g) - 14 (263g) 8 (87g) 3 (81g) 27 (456g) 25
4 3 (59g) 4 (84g) - 4 (75g) 33 (273g) 25 (369g) 69 (860g) 57
5 2 (51g) 22 (303g) 10 (92g) 16 (168g) 55 (551g) 23 (256g) 128 (1421g) 105
6 - - - - - - 0 2
7 - - - - - - 0
8 - - - - - - 0
9 7 (194g) 21 (429g) - 14 (263g) 51 (403g) 3 (62g) 96 (1351g) 73
10 6 (146g) 13 (216g) - 18 (305g) 39 (401g) 2 (34g) 78 (1102g) 72
11 - - - 5 (48g) 2 (4g) - 7 (52g) 11
12 - - - 12 (169g) 25 (252g) - 37 (421g) 18
13 - - - 3 (39g) 1 (10g) 1 (3g) 5 (52g) 5
14 - - - - 2 (0g) - 2 (0g) 2
15 - 1 (2g) - - 1 (3g) - 2 (5g) 2
16 23 (314g) 6 (34g) 2 (13g) 16 (70g) 80 (477g) 9 (151g) 136 (1059g) 118
17 64 (1092g) 44 (283g) 26 (131g) 123 (652g) 227 (980g) 39 (383g) 523 (3521g) 447
18 2 (12g) - - 33 (284g) 5 (17g) 3 (7g) 43 (320g) 32
19 - - - 3 (11g) 7 (6g) - 10 (17g) 10
20 - 1 (5g) 4 (19g) 36 (258g) 201 (1089g) 9 (89g) 251 (1460g) 78
21 - 2 (9g) - 23 (129g) 26 (141g) 7 (84g) 58 (363g) 53
22 1 (6g) 1 (2g) 2 (5g) 33 (144g) 26 (203g) 13 (57g) 76 (417g) 73
23 4 (20g) 1 (8g) - 2 (8g) 25 (217g) 4 (31g) 36 (284g) 31
24 15 (280g) 12 (87g) 2 (13g) 9 (86g) 35 (250g) 57 (724g) 130 (1440g) 88
25 - 2 (15g) - 30 (537g) 30 (195g) 2 (6g) 64 (753g) 61
26 1 (18g) 1 (6g) - 21 (346g) 7 (43g) 2 (14g) 32 (427g) 24
27 - 4 (41g) - 8 (66g) 22 (115g) - 34 (222g) 31
28 1 (11g) 1 (11g) - 6 (58g) 5 (25g) - 13 (105g) 13
29 - 7 (55g) - 19 (134g) 52 (278g) 4 (22g) 82 (489g) 81
30 7 (141g) 40 (680g) 14 (136g) 33 (409g) 195 (1543g) 24 (292g) 313 (3201g) 282
31 - - - 1 (7g) 9 (33g) 2 (29g) 12 (69g) 12
32 1 (20g) 2 (53g) - 28 (189g) 13 (107g) 3 (13g) 47 (382g) 41
33 - 4 (52g) - 8 (72g) 20 (142g) 3 (16g) 35 (282g) 30
34 1 (18g) 1 (2g) - 2 (27g) 9 (98g) 14 (108g) 27 (253g) 16
35 6 (57g) 6 (46g) 1 (16g) 52 (595g) 37 (295g) 14 (94g) 116 (1103g) 105
36 - 4 (30g) - 10 (39g) 23 (126) 2 (8g) 39 (203g) 39
37 1 (7g) 6 (93g) - 12 (274g) 25 (244g) 1 (4g) 45 (622g) 42
38 37 (354g) 38 (304g) 3 (11g) 19 (167g) 137 (1120g) 19 (151g) 253 (2107g) 239
A - 2 (19g) - 3 (9g) 4 (58g) - 9 (86g) 9
B 1 (22g) 5 (63g) - 16 (206g) 23 (248g) 2 (22g) 47 (561g) 44
C - 2 (80g) 1 (3g) 5 (216g) 12 (102g) 1 (<1g) 21 (401g) 13
D 5 (98g) 1 (2g) - 1 (2g) 11 (61g) 7 (93g) 25 (256g) 21
E - - - - - - 0 0
F 1 (4g) 6 (32g) - 36 (404g) 46 (148g) 3 (23g) 92 (611g) 87
G 2 (36g) 1 (4g) - 12 (87g) 7 (26g) - 22 (153g) 22
H 1 (2g) 8 (39g) - 17 (229g) 19 (178g) 18 (225g) 63 (673g) 56
I 8 (56g) 4 (51g) - 20 (166g) 75 (587g) 5 (56g) 112 (916g) 101
J 5 (64g) 3 (20g) 2 (7g) 44 (649g) 53 (490g) 8 (150g) 115 (1380g) 107
K 6 (40g) 4 (22g) 8 (45g) 45 (449g) 2 (10g) 65 (566g) 63
L 11 (84g) 40 (486g) 8 (115g) 21 (248g) 175 (1847g) 14 (201g) 269 (2981g) 224
M 1 (3g) - - 17 (175g) 10 (90g) - 28 (268g) 26
F301 11 (91g) 10 (61g) 1 (3g) 3 (6g) 47 (474g) 12 (177g) 84 (812g) 65
F1 94 (1268g) 97 (974g) 8 (69g) 347 (2016g) 563 (3235g) 69 (534g) 1178 (8096g) 1103
F8/275 30 (292g) 31 (317g) 8 (98g) 51 (336g) 142 (1176g) 36 (298g) 298 (2517g) 272
F11/503 14 (123g) 37 (246g) 5 (29g) 102 (679g) 180 (995g) 42 (376g) 380 (2448g) 375
F159/182 2 (24g) 2 (12g) - 18 (113g) 12 (67g) - 34 (216g) 34
F342 2 (14g) 5 (58g) - 3 (37g) 13 (56g) - 23 (165g) 20

Table 4.4 Pottery in the fills of structures, pit groups and surface deposits by fabric group

204
84
205
Figure 4.25 Proportion of pottery fabric types within the fills of SFBs (by weight)
 Figure 4.26 Pottery fabric types in the fills of SFBs by (top) weight in g and (bottom) percentage
by weight or 50% by count; Table 4.3). Organic-tempered
pottery formed c.26% of the assemblage by weight (25%
by count). Both calcareous- and sandstone sand-tempered
sherds made up c.11% of the total by weight (c.9% by
count), followed by biotite (c.10% by weight and c.6%
by count). Grog made up less than 2% of the assemblage
by both weight and count.
Hamerow et al. (1994) reviewed the evidence for
organic- or chaff-tempered pottery. They suggested that
it increased in use in the southern part of the country
during the later 6th and 7th centuries AD but that this
type of pottery was less well represented and generally
later in date in East Anglia, falling within the early to
middle Anglo-Saxon phase (Hamerow et al. 1994, 14).
The assemblage from Bloodmoor Hill fits this general
pattern, although there are in fact very few sites exca-
vated on any significant scale and also published with
which the assemblage can be compared. At Mucking,
Hamerow suggested there was a ‘marked increase’ in
the use of grass- or organic-tempered pottery during the
6th and 7th centuries and, based on the distribution of
diagnostic artefacts and pottery attributes, she proposed a
model of shifting settlement (Hamerow 1993, 31, figs 15
and 27; see also Tipper 2004, 39–52 for a critical review
of the evidence). In Lundenwic chaff-tempered pottery
comprised up to 60% of later 7th- to mid-8th-century
assemblages (Blackmore 2003, 230). Unfortunately, no
detailed fabric analysis was undertaken at West Stow;
seven fabric groups were identified (including a ‘Chaffy’
class) but they were not quantified (West 1985, 129–30).
206
At Bloodmoor Hill there were significant differences
in the proportions of the major fabric groups within the
fills of structures and pit groups (Table 4.4; Fig. 4.25–7).
There is no distinct or large-scale patterning across the
site, such as a progression in the proportion of pottery
types from one side of the site to the other, but there are
some distinct similarities in the proportions of the fabric
types within deposits close to each other. The proportion
of the fabric types, and the overall quantity of pottery,
within Structures 9 and 10, c.6.5m apart, are very similar
(there is also a vessel link between these structures
(V178)), as are the assemblages within the adjacent
Structures 16 and 17, which also had a vessel link between
them (V179). There is also a distinct similarity between
the pottery assemblages within Structures 21, 22 and, to
a lesser extent, 20.
In the northern, eastern and southern parts of the site,
in particular, within Structures 4, 5, 9, 10, 16, 17, 24, 30,
32 and 38, there would appear to be a greater diversity
of pottery fabric types than in the central part of the site,
with in many cases five or six different fabrics present.
Furthermore, there would appear to be a positive correla-
tion between assemblages demonstrating fabric diversity
and the distribution of decorated pottery. Fifty-six deco-
rated sherds (out of seventy-two in total from the fills of
structures) were from the ten structures listed above; all
ten contained at least one decorated sherd, eight contained
more than one and there were eleven within the fills of
Structures 5, 17 and 38.
 Figure 4.27 Fabric types in the fills of pit groups, surface deposits and Hollow F301 by (top) weight in g
and (bottom) percentage
In contrast, there seemed to be more uniformity within
the pottery assemblages through the central part of the
site. The assemblages from Structures 11, 12, 13, 18, 19,
25, 26 and 28 were, on the whole, comprised of quartz-
and organic-tempered pottery; biotite-, calcareous-,
grog- and, to a lesser extent, sandstone sand-tempered
sherds occurred less frequently. There were only six deco-
rated sherds from the fills of these structures. However,
there was also variability within the data which should
not be overlooked. Structure 25 contained four incised
sherds: 71% of this assemblage was organic-tempered
(thirty sherds weighing 537g). The detailed fragmenta-
tion analysis (see below) indicates that the coherence and
integrity of the deposits is low and (some of) the differ-
ences observed between the assemblages are possibly a
factor of disposal.
It is difficult to define how much the variations relate
to temporal change, to differences in disposal mecha-
nisms, or perhaps to function and/or status. The fills
of several adjacent structures had very similar pottery
assemblages, with vessel links between them. On the
basis of this evidence, it could be argued that these build-
ings were contemporary. However, this implies that they
were taken down and backfilled at the same time with
material from the same source, which perhaps seems
unlikely. Alternatively, one building might have replaced
the other, with both hollows filled with material from a
single or similar source, perhaps from a discrete part of
the Surface Deposit F1 (see Chapter 6 for further discus-
sion).
207
The radiocarbon analyses of forty-one samples of
carbonised organic residues adhering to forty pot-sherds
(1333g), from thirty-three vessels, give absolute dates
for certain fabric types and decorative techniques: these
comprised ten sherds (494g) of biotite-tempered pottery
from seven vessels, four (187g) of calcareous-tempered
pottery (two combed) from three vessels, twelve (466g)
of organic-tempered pottery from eleven vessels, one
(10g) of grog-tempered pottery, four (75g) of sandstone
sand-tempered pottery (three bossed) from three vessels,
and nine (101g) of quartz-tempered pottery (five stamped
and incised) from different vessels.
The results of this work are shown in Chapter 6.
Clearly, there are still methodological problems inherent
in the technique of dating carbonised organic residues, and
the results are also constrained by the small sample size
for particular fabric types and, in particular, decorative
techniques. Nevertheless, it would appear that a possible
chronological distinction has been defined by the radio-
carbon dating. In particular, the biotite-tempered pottery
was clearly differentiated and exclusively 6th-century in
date, although residues from only seven different vessels
were sampled (from the fills of five different structures
and also Surface Deposit F1). In comparison, organic-
tempered pottery seems to span the entire date range of
the settlement, from the early 6th to late 7th century.
While the difficulty of dating individual structures and
phasing settlements is recognised (Tipper 2004, 25–6 and
chap. 7), an attempt has been made to compare the char-
acter of the pottery assemblages with the dating evidence
for their fills based on the presence of chronologically
diagnostic objects, while not assuming that the date of
the objects reflects the date of the pottery. Structures
that possessed a diversity of fabrics had terminus post
quos, based on diagnostic objects, ranging from the early
to mid-6th century (Structure 9) to the later 6th/early
7th century (Structure 17), and two contained possibly
7th-century objects (Structures 24 and 30). Structure 9
contained four decorated sherds (98g, excluding combed
sherds), including two stamped sherds, but Structure 17
contained eleven sherds (98g) of decorated pottery, of
which seven were stamped sherds.
In comparison, those assemblages possessing greater
uniformity of fabric types, generally in the central part
of the site, ranged from the late 6th to the mid-7th
century (Structure 11) to the later 7th–mid-8th century
(Structure 13), although three contained mid-7th–mid-
8th-century objects (Structures 19, 25 and 26). There
is not a clear chronological link between differences in
the proportions of the fabric types, and also decoration,
within the fills of structures and it should not be assumed
that the date of the diagnostic objects directly reflects
the date of the pottery. However, the group of structures
with a diversity of fabric-types do seem to have terminus
post quos that fall slightly earlier, mainly during the 6th
century, compared with those of the latter group, which
shows greater uniformity, which fall more in (the second
half of) the 7th century. Furthermore, there appears to
be a positive correlation between the occurrence of
biotite-tempered pottery and decorated sherds within the
fills of structures. Fifteen of the eighteen structures that
contained biotite-tempered pottery also contained one
or more decorated sherds (83%), out of 18 structures in
total (i.e. approximately half) that contained decorated
pottery; however, only five decorated sherds (52g) were
biotite-tempered (3.4% of decorated pottery by weight).
Vessel forms
Early Anglo-Saxon pottery comprises mainly bowls (open
forms) and jars (closed forms). Where vessel form could
be identified, the majority appear to be simple curved,
globular, straight-sided ovoid and low-bulbous jars, and
simple curved, straight-sided and inturned bowls. There
were no vessels with marked carinations in the handmade
assemblage. One possible sub-biconical vessel has been
identified (V34), which possessed stamped and incised
decoration, and came from Surface Deposit F275.
The majority of sherds were plain, featureless body
sherds. Most vessels were represented by single sherds
and the high level of fragmentation within the assem-
blage means that it has proved difficult to determine their
form. Consequently, no quantification of the assemblage
by vessel form has been attempted. There were a small
number of (near) complete profiles, including V28, a
small straight-sided bowl c.100mm in height and 140mm
in width; V45, a small curved bowl(?) c.120mm in height;
V68, a small curved bowl c.90mm in height and 115mm
in width; V77, a curved or possibly straight-sided ovoid
shaped jar c.150mm in height and 180mm in width; V83,
a small low bulbous or globular vessel c.80mm in height
(lower part not illustrated); V131, a curved bowl/jar
c.140mm in height and 170mm in width; and V99, a
globular bowl with a constricted opening, c.130mm in
height by c.230mm in width. In addition, there was one
complete vessel (V93), a small miniature vessel or cup
208
that measured 31mm in height by 38.5mm in width and
weighing 30g. This came from the fill of Pit Group L in
the eastern part of the site. There was also a sherd of a
second miniature vessel with a pinched and perforated
lug (V98).
Rim forms
There were 841 handmade rim-sherds weighing 10,637g
(19% of the assemblage by weight) from a maximum of
768 vessels (including complete vessel V93). In addition,
there were four rim-sherds (61g) from two Continental
wheel-made imports. The majority of handmade sherds
were simple Everted rims (489 sherds weighing 5973g
and deriving from 448 vessels), which are not in them-
selves diagnostic of vessel form (V46, for example, came
from a globular jar, and V59 from a curved bowl). There
were 167 short vertical rims (2397g), from 151 vessels
with constricted necks and generally curved or globular
vessels; some, however, were straight-sided ovoid in
profile (for example, V99 and V146). There were 110
vertical rim-sherds (1410g) deriving from 103 straight-
sided or hemispherical bowls (for example, V28 and
V95). Fifty-eight rim-sherds (713g), from forty-nine
vessels, were from bowls with restricted or inturned rims
(for example, V14 and V31).
Base forms
There were 583 handmade base-sherds weighing 11,248g
(20% of the assemblage by weight) from a maximum
of 505 vessels (including complete vessel V93). The
majority were simple flat-rounded bases (235 sherds
weighing 4751g and deriving from 202 vessels) and flat-
angled bases (178 sherds weighing 3706g and from 162
vessels). There were seven sherds (272g) from different
vessels with foot-stand bases, and also a single sherd
(27g) of a possible early Anglo-Saxon pedestal base
(V26). Two sherds (37g) came from a single vessel with
a probable sagging base. Rounded or curved bases are
almost certainly under-represented in the assemblage
because of the difficulty of distinguishing them from
other body sherds.
Lugged and pierced vessels
Three sherds (35g), from different vessels, possessed
possible suspension lugs (V8, V98 and V115). There was
one possible upright lug (14g), which had been formed
by thickening and raising a section of the rim, from a
straight-sided vessel (V8) within the fill of Structure 21.
There was a pierced upright lug (5g), pinched up from
the surface of the body, from a miniature vessel or small
cup (V98) from Surface Deposit F159. This is similar to a
Decoration Count Weight (g) Max. vessels
Bossed 21 438 18
Bossed and incised 2 43 2
Incised 44 294 36
Stamped 10 98 10
Stamped and bossed 3 50 2
Stamped, bossed and incised 1 24 1
Stamped and incised 50 604 30
Total 131 1551 99
Table 4.5 Summary of decorated pottery
miniature vessel with applied lugs from West Stow (West
1985, fig. 40). V98 had also been pierced with two small
holes in line with the lug. There was also one possible
applied blind lug (16g) on a straight-sided vessel (V115)
from Area H (surface find, location unknown). In addi-
tion, there was also a single sherd (34g) that had a small
drilled hole or perforation below the neck of the vessel
(V120), made after the vessel had been fired and presum-
ably used for suspension. The sherd was from Surface
Deposit F503.
There was one unusual perforated quartz-tempered
sherd (42g) from the fill of Pit Group J (V36). This
possessed a large central (?)hole, c.35mm in diameter,
with two smaller slanting perforations, presumably for
suspension. The sherd was possibly part of a lid, lantern
or heating stand, or was perhaps part of an unusual ‘swal-
low’s nest’ lug, but none of these explanations seems
entirely convincing and no clear parallels have been iden-
tified in other contemporary assemblages. A number of
unusual vessels have been found on the continent that are
not identical but which might possibly be comparable. In
particular, a complete vessel with a central hole and six
smaller openings (Tüllen) was part of a grave assemblage
(Grab 74) found at the foot of a female grave dated to the
last third of the 6th century, from a cemetery at Pfakofen,
Regensburg, Germany (Bartel and Codreanu-Windauer
1995, Abb. 4.10). The vessel was found in association
with a spindle and two spindlewhorls, and is thought to
have been used in textile production.
Clay disc or lid
There was one small sub-ovate disc (9g), c.37.5mm in
diameter and 7.5mm in thickness, in an oxidised quart-
tempered fabric. This came from the fill of Structure 34
(V138), and may possibly have been the lid of a mini-
ature vessel.
Decoration
There were 131 decorated sherds (1551g) within
the handmade assemblage (excluding combed and
fingertip-impressed pottery), representing a maximum
of ninety-nine vessels (Table 4.5). These form 2% of the
assemblage by sherd count (2.8% by weight), which is
similar to the proportion of decorated pottery at West
Stow (West 1985, 128). All the decorated sherds are illus-
trated in the catalogue.
The decorated pottery was spread across the entire
site, although it showed a tendency towards the northern,
eastern and southern parts of the site (Figs 4.28–4.29).
The largest proportion of decorated sherds by feature type
derived from the fills of SFBs, with sixty-eight sherds
(873g), forming a maximum of fifty-two vessels, from
the fills of seventeen SFBs. The fills of three SFBs (5, 17
and 38) each contained over ten decorated sherds, with
Structure 17 containing eleven decorated sherds (98g)
from ten vessels. Pit Group L contained seventeen deco-
rated sherds (158g) from ten different vessels. Surface
Deposit F1 contained fourteen sherds (128g) from eleven
vessels.
Sixty-eight decorated sherds (673g), from fifty-six
vessels, were tempered with quartz (37% by weight);
thirty-one sherds (384g), from sixteen vessels, were
tempered with sandstone sand. Fourteen sherds (200g),
from thirteen vessels, had an organic-tempered fabric
and there were ten sherds (183g), from six vessels, with
209
a calcareous fabric. Five sherds (52g), from different
vessels, were biotite-tempered and three sherds (59g),
from two vessels, were grog-tempered.
The decorative techniques that occur on the pottery
from Bloodmoor Hill are typical of the early Anglo-Saxon
period, and they are dated to between the late 5th/early
6th and 7th centuries AD based on the conventional typo-
logical sequence established by Myres (1977).
Carbonised residue samples adhering to five sherds
(48g) with stamped and incised decoration, from
different vessels, were sampled for absolute dating,
as were three bossed sherds (29g) from two different
vessels. Unfortunately, there were too few samples from
decorated sherds to be conclusive about the date of the
decorative techniques. There were only twenty-one deco-
rated sherds, from nineteen vessels, with residues (194g:
12.5% of all decorated sherds but just 0.9% of all sherds
that had residues), and of those that could be, all were
sampled.
Although there were only five samples submitted
for absolute dating, the results from these suggest that
stamped decoration is probably early in the chronological
sequence at Bloodmoor Hill: i.e. the (first half of the)
6th century. Two sherds from the upper fill ([1764]) of
Structure 17 (interpreted as the remains of the Surface
Deposit F8/F275 that accumulated in and across the
hollow) produced results of cal AD 410–550 and cal
AD 540–640 (95% probability; V15 and V106). Two
sherds from the fill of Structure 38 — one from the middle
fill ([3002]) and the other from the upper fill ([3001]) —
produced results of cal AD 390–550 and cal AD 420–600
(95% probability; V61 and V20). A further stamped and
incised sherd (V119), from the Surface Deposit F11/F503
[4353], produced a result of cal AD 380–550 (95% prob-
ability).
Three samples (three sherds from two different
vessels) were submitted to investigate the absolute date
of bossed pottery. The sample from one sherd (V67)
produced a result of cal AD 540–650 (95% probability).
The results from two bossed sherds from the same vessel
(V89) produced statistically inconsistent dates of cal
AD 425–560 and cal AD 560–670 (95% probability).
Bossed decoration
There were twenty-seven sherds (555g) decorated
with bosses, from a maximum of twenty-two vessels
(Table 4.6, Fig. 4.28). Twenty-one sherds (452g), from
sixteen vessels, had hollow bosses (pushed out from the
vessel wall), the majority of which were vertical, and six
(103g), from different vessels, possessed applied bosses.
Four sherds (67g) with vertical hollow bosses occurred
in association with incised decoration (V3 and V118)
and one of these, from V118, also had stamped decora-
tion (24g). In total, four bossed sherds (71g), from three
different vessels, also had stamped decoration (V1, V112
and V118). Myres suggests that the combination of bosses
with stamped decoration and linear panels, which occurs
on V118, is indicative of a 6th-century date (Myres 1977,
22 and 26–7).
The bossed pottery was dispersed widely across the
northern and eastern part of the site, without any distinct
concentrations. Six sherds (64g), from four different
vessels, came from the fill of Structure 4, although there
were also bossed sherds from the fills of seven other SFBs;
sixteen sherds (383g) in total, from fourteen vessels,
210
Figure 4.28 Distribution of bossed pottery across the site
211
Figure 4.29 Distribution of stamped pottery across the site
Vessel no. Structure Context Context type Type of boss Decoration 2 Decoration 3 Weight (g)
V1 4 00294 SFB fill Hollow round boss 15
V1 4 00294 SFB fill Hollow round boss Stamp A 1bi$ 13
V1 4 00294 SFB fill Hollow round boss Stamp A 1bi$ 11
V3 4 00294 SFB fill Hollow vertical boss Incised? 7
V4 4 00294 SFB fill Hollow vertical boss 12
V5 4 00294 SFB fill Hollow boss? 6
V25 35 03268 SFB fill Small hollow round boss 36
V38 03122 Surface find Applied vertical boss 17
V47 F191 01551 Pit fill Applied vertical boss 34
V50 F255 02207 Pit fill Applied vertical boss 6
V67 L 03087 Pit fill Small hollow vertical boss 6
V74 26 03290 SFB fill Applied vertical boss 12
V81 30 03332 SFB fill Hollow vertical boss 10
V84 F355 03388 Pit fill Hollow round boss? 7
V89 I 03521 Pit fill Hollow vertical bosses 21
V89 I 03521 Pit fill Hollow vertical bosses 10
V89 I 03521 Pit fill Hollow vertical bosses 13
V107 17 01811 SFB fill Hollow vertical boss 11
V110 17 01906 SFB fill Hollow vertical boss? 21
V112 F1 04004 Surface deposit Applied vertical bosses Stamp K 1bi 26
V117 F1 04221 Surface deposit Applied boss? 8
V118 F1 04250 Surface deposit Hollow vertical bosses Stamp A 5ai Incised 24
V123 10 04588 SFB fill Long hollow vertical bosses 68
V124 10 04590 SFB fill Hollow boss? 33
V129 9 04616 SFB fill Hollow vertical boss? 85
V118 9 04618 SFB fill Hollow vertical bosses Incised 36
V139 32 04867 SFB fill Hollow vertical boss 7

Table 4.6 Contextual detail of bossed pottery

came from the fills of SFBs. Eight sherds (128g), from
five vessels, were sandstone sand-tempered and eight
(112g), from six vessels, were quartz-tempered. Seven
sherds (166g), from different vessels, were organic-
tempered and three sherds (128g), from different vessels,
had a calcareous fabric. A single sherd (21g) possessed
biotite temper.
Incised decoration
There were ninety-seven incised sherds (965g), repre-
senting a maximum of sixty-seven vessels. Incised
decoration occurred by itself on forty-four sherds (294g),
from thirty-six different vessels. Many of the sherds
had simple horizontal, vertical and/or diagonal lines or
grooves, but many exhibited more elaborate designs,
with chevrons or pendent-triangles often in associa-
tion with stamped decoration. There were no examples
of incised hanging loops or swags (hängende Bogen)
or incised arches (stehende Bogen) in the assemblage.
Stamped and incised decoration was the commonest
combination of decorative techniques, with fifty sherds
(604g) representing a maximum of thirty vessels. Incised
lines occurred in association with bossed decoration on
two sherds (43g) from different vessels (V3 and V118). A
single sherd (24g), also from V118, had bossed, stamped
and incised decoration.
Seven possible vessels were decorated with chevrons,
four of which were in association with stamped decora-
tion: the seven comprised V9 (?), V24 (stamped, chevrons
and also possibly pendent-triangles), V34 (stamped), V55
(?), V71 (?), V94 (stamped, chevrons and also possibly
pendent-triangles) and V132 (stamped). Myres suggests
that stamped chevron pottery is generally attributable to
the 6th century (Myres 1977, 51). He thought that those
with empty chevrons were more likely to be earlier than
the more elaborately decorated vessels with the chevrons
filled with stamps.
Ten different vessels possessed possible pendent-
triangle decoration, which Myres thought was a
development from the chevron style during the 6th
century (Myres 1977, 52 and 55). With the sole exception
of V69, the pendent-triangles occurred in combination
with stamped decoration, on V2, V19, V23, V40 (?),
V48, V106, V108, V118 and V130; V118 also possessed
bossed decoration. In several cases (V16, V20 (stamped),
V61 (stamped), V65 (stamped) and V134) it was not
possible to determine if chevrons or pendent-triangles
had been used in the scheme.
Both chevron and pendent-triangle decoration had
a similar distribution pattern across the site, located
mainly in the northern part along the line of the east–west
trackway. In particular, the fill of Structure 17 contained
five decorated sherds (55g) from four different vessels
(V15, V16, V106 and V108) and the fill of Structure 38
contained six sherds (104g) from four different vessels
(V19, V20, V23 and 61). The main exceptions to this

212
86
distribution were the three vessels (ten decorated sherds
weighing 121g) from Pit Group L, c.48.00m to the south
of the trackway in the south-east part of the site (V69,
V71 and V94).
Stamped decoration
The site produced seventy-two stamps (four unclassifi-
able) displaying twenty-seven different motifs (Table 4.7,
Fig. 4.29). These occurred on sixty-four different sherds
(776g), from a maximum of forty-three vessels (c.1.4%
of the assemblage by weight).
Six sherds (104g), from different vessels, possessed
more than one stamp motif (V20, V23, V34, V41, V56
and V82). Two vessels (V23 and V34) possessed three
different stamp motifs. V23, from the lower ([3003])
and middle ([3002]) fills of Structure 38, possessed four
horizontal rows of three different stamp motifs (A 2ai,
A 4ai and A 5ax), separated by horizontal lines and above
a pendent-triangle enclosing stamp motif A 2ai; V34, a
sub-biconical shaped vessel, possessed a single row of
motif E 5ai, bordered above and below by horizontal
incised lines, above chevrons containing stamp motifs
A 4ai, E 5ai and H 1bii$ (see below).
Stamped decoration occurred frequently in combina-
tion with incised linear decoration. Many stamp motifs
were enclosed within linear rows or panels and separated
by horizontal incised lines, also in combination with
other decorative schemes: these include V18, V19, V20
and V23 (also enclosed within pendent-triangles), V34
(enclosed within chevrons), V37, V41, V48 (also with
pendent-triangles), V54, V56, V60, V79 (?), V82, V86,
V104, V109, V118 (also with empty pendent-triangles
and bosses), V126, V132 (also enclosed within chev-
rons) and V142. On fifteen vessels the stamped motifs
were enclosed within, or occurred in combination with,
chevrons or pendent-triangles. There were also several
examples (V1, V141 and possibly also V11) where the
stamped decoration was unenclosed, occurring without
incised linear decoration, although in some cases it was
not possible to discern the arrangement of the stamp
motif(s) given the small size of the sherds (for example,
V2).
Stamp motifs occurred in combination with bossed
decoration on five sherds (74g) from three different
vessels: above small round hollow bosses on V1 (three
joining sherds), which was from the upper fill ([294]) of
Structure 4 (motif A 1bi$); above applied bosses across
the shoulder on V112, from Surface Deposit F1 (motif
K 1bi); and with hollow vertical bosses and linear incised
decoration, forming pendent-triangles, on V118, which
was from Surface Deposit F1 (motif A 5ai).
The stamped sherds were spread throughout contexts
across the northern and eastern parts of the site, with
several sherds in the southern part, and they did not
appear to cluster in any one part of the site (Fig. 4.29). The
largest proportion of stamped sherds by context derived
from the fills of SFBs, with thirty-nine sherds (429g)
from the fills of ten structures forming a maximum of
twenty-five vessels. In particular, the fill of Structure 38
contained thirteen stamped sherds (201g), from six
vessels. Structure 5, located more than 200m to the west
of Structure 38, contained nine sherds (90g) from a single
vessel, and Structure 17, in the central-northern part of
the site, contained seven sherds (49g) from six vessels.
213
Surface Deposit F1 contained ten stamped sherds (114g),
from five different vessels.
Nearly half the stamped pottery (thirty-two sherds
weighing 352g from twenty-eight vessels) was quartz-
tempered (45% by weight), although stamping occurred
in all the major fabric groups. There were eighteen sherds
(252g), from seven vessels, tempered with sandstone
sand. Five sherds (46g) from a single vessel had a calcar-
eous fabric, while three sherds (59g) from two vessels
were tempered with grog, three sherds (39g) from two
vessels with chaff and three sherds (28g) from different
vessels with biotite.
Although it was not possible to define the complete
profile of any of the stamped vessels, the majority of
sherds were clearly from curved or globular jars, with
a single possible sub-biconical shaped vessel (V34).
Twelve stamped sherds (132g), from ten vessels,
possessed internal carbonised organic residues (17% of
stamped sherds by weight); two of these also had sooting
on their external surfaces, and this demonstrates that
at least some of the stamp-decorated vessels had been
used for cooking. A further stamped sherd (27g) also had
sooting on the external surface. The carbonised organic
residues on five stamped sherds (V15, V20, V61, V106
and V119) have been radiocarbon dated.
The Anglo-Saxon pottery stamps
The stamped sherds have been classified by Diana Briscoe
and recorded in the Archive of Anglo-Saxon Pottery
Stamps (Archive Site Reference BMH–373; Table 4.7).
There were no stamp dies from Bloodmoor Hill.
Category A
Category A includes all circular stamps. These are by far the most
common stamps from the early Anglo-Saxon period, representing
well over half the total identified motifs. Forty-eight sherds (608g),
representing a maximum of thirty-one vessels, possessed a Category A
stamp (excluding V85).
A 1ai The most basic stamp, being a simple dot impression. There
was a single sherd (18g) with a stamp classified as motif A 1ai
(V19).
A 1bi A negative ring. This is a very common stamp with a very
wide distribution and, as such, is completely undiagnostic.
However, these are very small examples and therefore paral-
lels can be sought. There are local parallels from Caistor-by-
Norwich, Markshall Farm, Morning Thorpe and Snape. There
were five sherds (64g) with a stamp classified as A 1bi at
Bloodmoor Hill, from three different vessels (V19, V102 and
V127). Within a site, it is possible to identify stamps made
with the same die. It is probable that the stamps on V102 and
V127 were like; i.e. made by the same die. The same applies
to the stamps on V19, although using a different die. The size
variations recorded are within the tolerance band of 1mm each
way from a median measurement.
A 1bi A sub-variation designated by a ‘$’ (dollar) sign, this describes
a very thin ring. Teresa Briscoe considered that some of these
were made by animal bones, but other, larger, versions may
have been made by a metal tube. There were four sherds (61g),
from three different vessels, with a stamp classified as A 1bi$
(V1, V2 and V141). It is highly probable that all these stamps
were made by the same die. This is also a very common stamp
with a very wide distribution and, as such, it is of very little
use for diagnostic purposes. There are local parallels from
Caistor-by-Norwich and Markshall Farm, but all except one
are smaller. The closest parallels in size and design come from
Eynsham Abbey, Oxon (13 x 13?mm), Willington, Derbyshire
(14 x 14mm), Mucking, Essex (15 x 15mm) and Appledown,
West Sussex (16 x 15mm).
A 2ai Two negative rings of equal proportions. There were two
sherds (26g), from the same vessel, with a stamp classified
as A 2ai (V23). This is an extremely common stamp and is
widely distributed. As such, it is of little use for diagnostic
purposes. The motif (not from the same die) is found locally
Vessel no. Structure Context Context type Motif 1 Motif 2 Motif 3 Decoration 2 Decoration 3 Weight (g)
V1 4 00294 SFB fill A 1bi$ Bossed 13
V1 4 00294 SFB fill A 1bi$ Bossed 11
V2 4 00294 SFB fill A 1bi$ 12
V10 21 01130 SFB fill A 5ai 21
V11 21 01153 SFB fill A 5di 5
V15 17 01764 SFB fill A 5bii Incised 14
V16 9 04603 SFB fill H 1bii$ Incised 5
V18 38 03001 SFB fill A 5ax Incised 22
V18 38 02328 SFB fill (surface) A 5ax Incised 8
V19 38 03001 SFB fill A 1ai Incised 18
V19 F301 02336 Hollow fill (surface) A 1bi Incised 15
V19 38 03002 SFB fill A 1bi Incised 27
V20 38 03001 SFB fill A 5aviii A 6ai Incised 5
V23 38 03003 SFB fill A 2ai Incised 10
V23 38 03002 SFB fill A 2ai A 4ai A 5ax Incised 16
V24 35 03268 SFB fill A 4ai Incised 9
V24 35 03268 SFB fill A 4ai Incised 4
V34 F275 02009 Surface deposit A 4ai E 5ai H 1bii$ Incised 41
V34 03126 Surface find E 5ai Incised 12
V37 03121 Surface find A 4aiii Incised 7
V39 03127 Surface find B 1ai 2
V40 35 03148 SFB fill (surface) A 4ci Incised 19
V41 F1 00069 Surface deposit M 1ai Incised 15
V41 F1 00069 Surface deposit E 1bi Incised 4
V41 F1 00069 Surface deposit E 1bi Incised 3
V41 F1 00069 Surface deposit E 1bi Incised 8
V41 F1 04020 Surface deposit E 1bi M 1ai Incised 16
V48 F8 01788 Surface deposit A 4ai Incised 6
V53 F1 02390 Surface deposit H 1bvi 2
V54 F275 02448 Surface deposit A 4av Incised 2
V56 29 02496 SFB fill A 4ai Incised 5
V56 L 03095 Pit fill A 4ai P 1ai Incised 19
V60 38 03002 SFB fill B 1bi Incised 31
V61 38 03002 SFB fill N 1ai Incised 9
V65 F301 03030 Hollow fill A 4ai Incised 21
V79 30 03324 SFB fill A 5fiv Incised 2
V82 30 03332 SFB fill A 5avi O / A 5ai Incised 7
V85 F355 03414 Pit fill O / A 4ai Incised 3
V86 L 03437 Pit fill A 5ai Incised 10
V94 L 03679 Pit fill A 4cii Incised 2
V100 F1 00121 Surface deposit O 0
V102 17 01764 SFB fill A 1bi 0
V103 20 01489 SFB fill O / C 1ai 27
V104 17 01764 SFB fill A 5avi Incised 6
V106 17 01764 SFB fill A 5ai Incised 14
V106 17 01764 SFB fill A 5fiv Incised 5
V108 17 01811 SFB fill B 1bi Incised 5
V109 17 01811 SFB fill A 4ai Incised 5
V112 F1 04004 Surface deposit K 1bi Bossed 26
V118 F1 04250 Surface deposit A 5ai Bossed Incised 24
V119 F503 04353 Surface deposit A 4ai Incised 6
V127 9 04603 SFB fill A 1bi 4
V130 F11 04628 Slot fill A 5fiv Incised 72
V132 5 04678 SFB fill A 5fiv Incised 3
V132 5 04679 SFB fill A 5fiv Incised 25

214
87
 Vessel no. Structure Context Context type Motif 1
V132 5 04692 SFB fill A 5fiv
V132 5 04692 SFB fill A 5fiv
V132 5 04692 SFB fill A 5fiv
V132 5 04697 SFB fill A 5fiv
V132 5 04697 SFB fill A 5fiv
V132 5 04697 SFB fill A 5fiv
V132 5 04697 SFB fill A 5fiv
V141 H 04902 Pit fill A 1bi$
V142 05110 Surface find A 4a
Table 4.7 Contextual detail of stamped pottery
at Caistor-by-Norwich, Markshall Farm, Morning Thorpe and
Snape.
A 4ai The ‘hot-cross-bun’ stamp, which is the most common of all
Anglo-Saxon motifs, with an extremely wide distribution. As
such, it is of very little or no use for diagnostic purposes. There
were ten sherds (132g), from a maximum of eight different
vessels, with a stamp classified as A 4ai (V23, V24, V34, V48,
V56, V65, V109 and V119).
A 4aiii A ‘hot-cross-bun’ stamp with irregularly shaped extended arms
— they have the depressed quarters much further apart. This
is a very common stamp with a very wide distribution and, as
such, is completely undiagnostic. The motif is found locally
at Caistor-by-Norwich, Markshall Farm, Morning Thorpe and
Snape. There was a single sherd (7g) with a stamp classified as
motif A 4aiii (V37).
A 4av A reversed ‘hot-cross-bun’, so that the cross is in negative. This
is an extremely rare stamp with only five examples recorded in
the Archive. They are from Elsham, North Lincs. (8 x 8mm);
Mucking, Essex (8 x 8mm); Porchester, Hants (8 x 8mm);
Spong Hill, Norfolk (12 x 12mm); and Westerwanna, Germany
(8 x 7mm). There was a single sherd (2g) with this motif at
Bloodmoor Hill (V54) but the stamp does not resemble any of
the other examples closely.
A 4ci An outlined positive cross with positive quarters in a nega-
tive circle. It is a fairly common stamp with a reasonably wide
distribution. There was a single sherd (19g) with this stamp
motif at Bloodmoor Hill (V40). Locally, four examples ranging
from 6 x 6mm to 9 x 9mm were found at Caistor-by Norwich.
The largest of these stamps is very similar to this stamp, but is
not the same. The most similar stamp is from Spong Hill Urn
3099, also measuring 9 x 9mm.
A 4cii An outlined positive cross, as in A 4ci, but with small positive
intrusions into the quarters. The same effect can be produced
by a B 2b die that has been impressed deeply. It is a fairly
common stamp with a reasonably limited distribution from
West Stow to the Humber estuary, but with one outlier in
Oxfordshire. The motif is found locally at Caistor-by-Norwich
and Morning Thorpe, and further afield at Lackford and West
Stow, Suffolk, and Spong Hill. There was a single sherd (2g)
with this stamp motif at Bloodmoor Hill (V94).
A 5a The rosette stamps, which are one of the most common groups.
They are classified according to the number of ‘petals’, so that
avi has six petals, avii has seven and so on. A 5ai describes
part stamps that it is impossible to classify. Four sherds (69g),
from different vessels, were classified as A 5ai (V10, V86,
V106 and V118).
A 5avi A circular negative rosette stamp with six petals. There were
two sherds (13g) with stamp motif A 5avi at Bloodmoor Hill,
from different vessels (V82 and V104). This is a reasonably
common stamp, with a wide distribution. The motif is found
locally at Caistor-by-Norwich, but is not from the same die;
the closest parallel comes from Lackford.
A 5aviii A circular negative rosette stamp with eight petals. This is a
very common stamp with a wide distribution and, as such, is
of little diagnostic use. There was a single sherd (5g) with this
stamp motif in the assemblage at Bloodmoor Hill (V20).
A 5ax A circular negative rosette stamp with ten petals. This is a rare
stamp, but with a very wide distribution. There is one local
parallel from Caistor-by-Norwich, although it is not like either
of those described here. There were three sherds (46g) with
215
88
Motif 2 Motif 3 Decoration 2 Decoration 3 Weight (g)
Incised 10
Incised 11
Incised 5
Incised 5
Incised 6
Incised 17
Incised 8
25
Incised 6
this stamp motif at Bloodmoor Hill, from two different vessels
(V18 and V23). 457AA and 1233AA (V18) were probably
made by the same die, but V23 was made by a different one.
Examples have also been found at Mucking, Field Dalling,
Spong Hill and Illington. The closest parallel is to V23 and this
comes from Thurmaston, Leics., and measures 14 x 12mm.
A 5bii A positive ‘cartwheel’ stamp with the spokes coming into a
central hub, plus positive infilling of the ‘spokes’; the negative
indentations produce a ring of ‘V’s. There was a single sherd
(14g) with this stamp motif at Bloodmoor Hill (V15). This is a
very rare stamp with only five examples in the Archive, three
of which come from the continent. The two English exam-
ples come from Worthy Park, Hants (9 x 9mm), and Girton,
Cambs. (11 x 10mm). The three continental examples come
from Galgenberg-bei-Cuxhaven, Germany; Wehden, Germany
(both 10 x 9mm) and Nordensee, Frisia (10 x 10mm). The
closest parallels are the Galgenberg and Nordensee stamps.
A 5di A segmented negative ring — a very common stamp. It has a
wide distribution. There are two local parallels from Caistor-
by-Norwich (10 x 10mm) and Snape (9 x 9mm), but neither
of them are similar. There was a single sherd (5g) with stamp
motif A 5di at Bloodmoor Hill (V11).
A 5fiv A negative rosette enclosed in a negative ring. This is an
uncommon stamp, with a limited distribution from West Stow
via the Midlands to the Humber estuary, with one outlier in
Chichester, Sussex. There is one local parallel from Morning
Thorpe (7 x 7mm); the closest match comes from Loveden
Hill, Lincs. (11 x 11mm). There were twelve sherds (169g)
with stamp motif A 5fiv at Bloodmoor Hill, from a maximum
of three vessels (V79, V130 and V132). The stamps on these
twelve sherds were probably made by the same die and may
possibly have come from the same pot. The size variations
recorded are within the tolerance band of 1mm each way from
a median measurement.
A6 This group includes all motifs where small plain round stamps
are used together. The expertise of the Anglo-Saxon potters
was such that the stamps were most probably made by using a
single die of the named types, but a few examples suggest that
a special die with the motifs arranged in twos, threes or fours
had been cut.
A 6ai A stamp where two A 1ai motifs have been used to make a
compound stamp. There was a single sherd (5g) with this
stamp motif at Bloodmoor Hill (V20). This is a rare stamp,
but it has a wide distribution from Gloucestershire to Norfolk.
Because of the nature of the stamp, parallels are impossible to
establish.
Category B
Category B covers all cross- and X-shaped stamps.
B 1ai This is the base stamp for the category, representing a negative
cross with arms not joined in the centre. Surprisingly, it is an
uncommon stamp. There is one local example from Morning
Thorpe, but it is not the same stamp. Most examples come
from the Trent Valley or from around Cambridge. Stylistically,
the closest parallels come from Girton and Loveden Hill.
There was a single sherd (2g) with this motif at Bloodmoor
Hill (V39).
B 1bii A negative cross with joined arms. These were two sherds
(36g) with this motif at Bloodmoor Hill, from different vessels
(V60 and V108). This is another uncommon stamp, found
 mostly in East Anglia. There are two local parallels, both from
Caistor-by-Norwich. The larger example (11 x 10mm) is the
more similar.
Category E
Category E includes all stamps shaped like triangles or chevrons.
E 1bi+ A simple positive chevron with a negative outline. The ‘plus’
symbol indicates a design where the ends of the chevron are
left open. Four sherds (31g) at Bloodmoor Hill were classi-
fied with stamp motif E 1bi, from a single vessel (V41). This
is a rare stamp, but has a wide distribution from St John’s,
Cambridge, via the Midlands, to Sancton, Yorks. None of the
six examples from elsewhere exactly parallels the Bloodmoor
Hill stamp, but there is a very similar stamp from Illington Urn
93 (7 x 10mm).
E 5ai A negative ‘keyhole’ motif enclosing a positive triangle
with a positive dot above it. There were two sherds (53g) at
Bloodmoor Hill with this stamp motif, from a single vessel
(V34). This is a rare stamp with a distribution limited to East
Anglia, plus one outlier from Loveden Hill. The Bloodmoor
Hill stamp is smaller than any of the other examples, the closest
being examples from Snape (6 x 3mm) and Great Ellingham
(5 x 7mm). There are larger examples from Field Dalling and
Lakenheath.
Category H
Category H covers the ‘S’, ‘Z’ and figure-of-eight stamps. It should
be noted that left- and right-facing stamps must be made by different
dies; they cannot be made by turning the die upside-down. Three sherds
(48g), from different vessels, possessed a Category H stamp.
H 1b This comprises outlined ‘S’ and ‘Z’ shapes. H 1bii describes a
positive right-facing ‘S’ stamp with a closed negative outline.
Again this is a large type and has been divided into sub-varie-
ties. The sub-variety identified by a $ (dollar symbol) describes
a thin ‘S’ stamp. This is an uncommon variety with only
twenty-nine examples, but with a fairly wide distribution from
Newton-in-the-Willows, Northants, to Sancton, Yorks. There
are no local examples; the closest parallel comes from Spong
Hill and measures 4 x 8mm, but is not the same die. There
were two sherds (46g) with motif H 1bii$ in the assemblage at
Bloodmoor Hill, from different vessels (V34 and V126).
H 1bvi A positive right-facing ‘Z’ with closed negative outline; there
was a single sherd (2g) with the motif in the assemblage (V53).
This is a rare stamp, with only nine examples recorded in the
Archive. They all come from East Anglia and Cambridge
except for one outlier from Wasperton, Warks. There are
no local examples; the closest parallel comes from Girton,
Cambridge, measures 6 x 8mm, and seems to appear on two
urns (M192 and M218; Myres 1977, fig. 295).
Category K
Category K covers all stamps that show or imitate animals, birds and
insects.
K 1bi A negative, long, thin, oval stamp with positive bands running
its length, commonly known as a ‘maggot’ motif. There was
a single sherd (26g) with this motif in the assemblage (V112).
This is another rare stamp with only sixteen examples recorded
in the Archive. All examples come from East Anglia and Essex,
except for one outlier from Worthy Park. The closest parallels
come from Mucking, but are not from the same die.
Category M
Category M covers stamps made by pieces of jewellery and other
miscellaneous bits of metal.
M 1ai An impressed notched negative rectangle. This is an uncommon
stamp, with only twenty-eight examples in the Archive, but it
has a wide distribution. There were two sherds (31g) with this
motif at Bloodmoor Hill, from the same vessel (V41). There
is one local example from Caistor-by-Norwich, but it is quite
different. There are no stamps in the Archive which parallel
this stamp.
Category N
Category N covers all stamps made with ‘impromptu tools’.
N 1ai Comb-teeth impressions. They are very common and it is
almost impossible to identify the dies unless the comb used
had broken teeth or a particularly unusual spacing. There was
a single sherd (9g) with this stamp motif in the assemblage
(V61).
216
Category P
Category P covers stamps with other geometric shapes.
P 4ai A negative stamp which has five or more sides and contains
a positive star or rosette. There was a single sherd with this
stamp motif in the assemblage (V56). This is an extremely
rare stamp with only one other example recorded, from Spong
Hill: it measures 10 x 9mm and has six sides, not five, so is not
comparable.
Category O
Category O covers all indecipherable stamps, which are, by their nature,
undiagnostic. Four sherds (37g) were assigned to this category.
Discussion
The pottery assemblage from Bloodmoor Hill has
produced a high proportion of very unusual stamps
(A 4av, A 5bii, H 1bvi, K 1bi and P 4ai). It is hardly
surprising to find a lot of the best parallels coming from
sites in East Anglia, but parallels were also found from
sites like Elsham, Snape, Mucking and Porchester. These
are also close to the sea and so it is just possible that these
rare stamps may belong to one or more coastal traders.
This would correlate with other parallels coming from
the Lark Valley and sites around Cambridge. They would
presumably be easier to access by sailing around the
coast and then using the river system, rather than travel-
ling overland across the Suffolk watershed. Given this,
the parallels from Caistor-by-Norwich and Markshall
Farm, and even Spong Hill, could presumably also have
travelled there by water.
Surface treatment and use
A large proportion of the assemblage was wiped with
a cloth or by hand to produce a smooth surface finish,
varying from a rough wipe to a smooth lustre; 1835 sherds
(16,804g) had lustrous surfaces. A total of 2533 sherds
(23,392g, c.42% by weight) had burnished internal and/
or external surfaces, which varied from a light burnish to
a very high gloss.
There were fourteen sherds (255g) with coarse
vertical combed lines from a straight-sided ovoid-shaped
vessel possessing a calcareous fabric (V125). Combing
is quite a rare surface treatment, and is usually seen as a
functional treatment to give a better grip for handling the
vessels (Hamerow 1993, 35), although it might also have
been used for decoration. All except three of the sherds
(32g) were from the fill of Structure 9, with a single sherd
from Surface Deposit F1 overlying the infilled feature,
and two sherds (21g), probably from the same vessel,
within the fill of Pit F226, located c.34m to the east of
Structure 9.
There was a single possible sherd with a fingertip-
impressed rim (2g), from the fill of a small pit ([4827])
(Area L) in the southern part of the site (V136).
A total of 2531 sherds (25,886g), from a maximum of
2133 vessels, had evidence of internal carbonised organic
residues and/or external sooting (c.46% by weight).
Twenty-four decorated sherds (247g) had evidence of
carbonised residues and/or sooting (c.16% by weight
of decorated sherds). The vessel with a combed surface
(V125), and also the single possible coarse-slipped sherd,
possessed both internal carbonised residue and external
sooting.
Method of manufacture
With the exception of the continental pottery and also the
Ipswich Ware pottery, all the early Anglo-Saxon pottery
was handmade, with varying levels of competence. Most
vessels were probably coil-built and have been carefully
finished, although the coils are not often visible in section.
They appear to have been fired in a bonfire- or clamp-
type kiln, resulting in the characteristic (reduced) dark
grey-brown/black colour. In total, 3242 sherds (33,615g)
showed evidence of some (often slight) oxidation, which
indicates variations in the conditions of firing.
Fragmentation
The Anglo-Saxon pottery from Bloodmoor Hill appeared
to be in a fair or relatively good condition, Even though
most vessels were represented by single sherds (see rim
fragmentation). Only 16.5% of the assemblage by weight
(1809 sherds weighing 9158g) was recorded as poor and
abraded; the majority of sherds (2009, weighing 29,554g
(53% by weight)), was recorded as being in good or fresh
condition, although there was some variation between
features and feature types. Of the sherds in the fills of
SFBs (14,837g), 60% was recorded as fresh or unabraded,
as was 53% (4663g) from the pit groups. Only 13% of
sherds from the SFBs and 14% from the pit groups were
in a poor and abraded condition. In comparison, 44%
of the pottery in the main surface deposits was fresh
(5951g), which is still quite high, while 22% was poor.
The mean sherd weight of the total assemblage was
low, at 8.6g (Stdev 10.8g). Sherd weight was strongly
skewed towards small sherds, with individual sherds
ranging in weight from <2g (582 sherds) up to 152g.
Three-quarters of the assemblage (4918 sherds) weighed
10g or less and 3346 sherds weighed 5g or less (52%). The
modal weight of sherds was 3g (12.4%). These figures
are distorted slightly because 922 sherds weighing 4361g
(Stdev 8.9g) were retrieved by sieving, using a coarse
5mm sieve, and during flotation. Of the sieved fraction,
90% weighed 10g or less and 77% weighed 5g or less;
nearly half (413 sherds) weighed 2g or less. If these are
removed from the total, mean sherd weight rises slightly
to 9.2g, but this figure is still quite low.
The mean (max) length of sherds was very low,
at just 34mm, and ranged from <20–122mm (Stdev
15.4mm). The distribution of sherds by length is skewed
towards small sherds; 5524 sherds were under 50mm in
length (85%), compared to 86% at West Stow and 80%
at Mucking (Tipper 2004, fig. 36). The modal length
of sherds was between 20mm and 30mm (33%). Only
twenty-six sherds were 100mm or greater in length. Of
sieved sherds, 94% were less than 50mm in length (868
sherds) and the mean length of sieved sherds was 25.5mm
(Stdev 13.1mm).
The mean sherd weight of pottery from all surface
deposits (7.5g) was below the average for the whole
site and from Surface Deposit F1 it was just 6.9g. This
compares to a figure of 8.8g for pottery from the fills of
SFBs and a mean sherd weight of 10.1g from the pits.
These figures indicate that the pottery from the fills
of SFBs and, in particular, pits was slightly larger and
less fragmented than pottery from the surface deposits.
However, there was considerable variation between the
fills of individual features; in the fills of SFBs, mean
sherd weight ranged from <2g in Structure 14 up to 16.9g
in Structure 3.
The mean sherd weight of pottery within the fills of
SFBs at Bloodmoor Hill is comparable to that within
twenty SFBs (c.57,000g) analysed at West Stow, which
217
Rim sherd fragmentation All rim sherds Rim sherds assigned
(%) eves (%)
1–5 41 14.6
6–10 168 59.8
11–15 57 20.3
16–20 12 4.3
21–25 2 0.7
26–95
96–100 1 0.4
Not estimated 560
Table 4.8 Rim-sherd fragmentation (% completeness)
had a mean sherd weight of 9.8g (Tipper 2004, 130–3).
At West Heslerton the mean sherd weight was slightly
higher, at 11.8g, while the mean sherd weights within
the surface deposits (10.8g) and also within the fills of
Grubenhäuser (13.2g) were considerably higher. At
Mucking the mean sherd weight of pottery from the fills
of twenty-nine Grubenhäuser was also higher, at 12.3g
(Tipper 2004, 118). At Pennyland the mean sherd weight
of the ‘domestic wares’ was 14.5g (Blinkhorn 1993,
247).
Rim fragmentation
Of the 841 rim-sherds, 281 sherds (6532g) had measur-
able rim diameters, and these represented a maximum
of 214 vessels; 560 sherds (67%) could not be assigned
rim diameters because they were too small and irregular.
The rim diameter of the measurable rims ranged from
35mm to 280mm, although 96% fell between 100mm
and 200mm. These represent a total of 27.2 estimated
vessel equivalents (EVEs), which is very low because
of the high level of fragmentation and almost certainly
underestimates the number of vessels. As a percentage
of the complete rim, individual sherds ranged from <5%
to 100%. Table 4.8 shows that c.75% of rim-sherds (by
count) had a rim percentage of 10% or less: i.e. 90% or
more of the rim was missing (excluding sherds that were
not assigned rim diameters). Several vessels had greater
rim percentages. Excluding the complete vessel V93,
seven rim sherds (53g) from the same vessel had a total
rim percentage of 68.5% (V152, not illustrated).
From this, brokenness can be calculated as sherds/
EVEs: 6479/27.2 = 238.2 sherds per vessel equivalent.
With a mean sherd weight of 8.6g, this makes 2049g per
vessel equivalent. These figures are very high because
over half the rim-sherds could not be measured.
Assuming that the 281 rim-sherds that could be meas-
ured are representative of all the rims, the rim-EVE value
becomes 27.2 × (841/281) = 81.4, and the brokenness
becomes 6479/94.9 = 68.3 sherds per vessel equivalent.
However, nonmeasurable sherds are normally smaller
than the measurable sherds. The average EVE of those
which could be measured is 27.2/281 = 0.097, i.e. about
9%. This is already quite low, but if it is supposed that
the others are half this value, to give an order of magni-
tude, the total EVE value is 27.2 + (841 – 281) × 0.049 =
54.64. This leads to a brokenness of 6479/54.64 = 118.6
sherds per vessel equivalent, with an average weight per
vessel of 1020g.
Completeness (EVE/EVReps: Orton, Tyers and Vince
1993, 173) has been calculated using only rim-sherds:
89
Vessel Feature Context Refit Count and weight
V7 Structure 12 Lower fill [216], NE 14 (196g)
Main fill [205], NE, SE and SW
Eastern gable post-hole [237]
One refit between the [205] NE and the post-hole
[237]
V19 Structure 38 Middle fill [3002], NE 3 (60g)
Upper fill [3001], NE
Hollow F301 Surface find
V23 Structure 38 Lower fill [3003], SW 2 (26g)
Middle fill [3002], SE
V77 Structure 30 Middle fill [3312], NW One refit within [3311] SE and one 10 (169g)
between [3312] NW and [3313] NE
Interface between middle and upper fill [3322], SW
Upper fill [3311], NW, SE and SW and [3313], NE
V132/ Structure 5 Lower/middle fill [4697] Three refits, within lower/middle fill 10 (104g)
V15 [4697], between lower/middle fill [4697]
and middle fill [4692] (two)
Middle fill [4692]
Middle/upper fill [4678]
Upper fill [4679], SE
Structure 17 Upper fill [1764], NW Sq. D
V143 Structure 24 Lower fill [5116], SW One refit between lower fill [5116] SW 3 (126g)
and upper fill [5115] NW
Upper fill [5115], NE and NW
V146 Structure 24 Lower fill [5116], NW 11 refits within [5115] SE 15 (250g)
Upper fill [5115], SE
V152 Structure 20 Lower fill [1397] = [1411], NE Sq. F, NW Sq. C, 169 (872g)
NW Sq. F, SW Sq. C
Upper fill [1325], SE
Pit F255
Fill [2207], NW and SW
V154 Structure 17 Lower fill [1921], NE Sq. A, B, D, F One refit between [1764] NE, Sq. A. and 11 (110g)
[1811] NE, Sq. A
Middle fill [1811], NE Sq. A and D, SW Sq. C
Upper fill [1764], NE Sq. A.
V158 Structure 22 Lower crust-like layer [1271], SE 4 (126g)
Lower crust-like layer [2474], NE or SW
Upper fill [1100], NE
V160 Structure 20 Lower fill [1397] = [1411], NE Sq. A, NW Sq. F One refit between lower fill [1411] NE 4 (49g)
Sq. A and upper fill [1325], NE Sq. A
Upper fill [1325], NE Sq. A and NW Sq. A
V166 Structure 24 Lower fill [5116], NE One refit between [5115] NE and NW 12 (104g)
Upper fill [5115], NE, NW and SE
V176 Structure 17 Middle fill [1811], SE Sq. D One refit between [1764] SE Sq. B and 7 (136g)
D, and one refit within [1811] SE Sq. D
Upper fill [1764], SE Sq. B, D and E
V178 Structure 9 Lower fill [4618], SE One refit between Structure 9 middle fill, 21 (439g)
SE and Surface Deposit F1 metre square
[4022] Spit C
Middle fill [4616], NE and SE
Upper fill [4603], SE and SW
Structure 10 Upper fill [4588], NE
Surface 11 different metre squares
Deposit F1
V179 Structure 16 Main fill [1766], [1772] and [2619], NNE, NNW Four refits, within [1766] SSW, between 19 (566g)
and SSW [1766] SSW and [2619] NNW, [1772]
NNE and [2619] NNW and between
[1811] SW Sq. C and [1764] NW Sq. E

218
92
Vessel Feature Context Refit Count and weight
V179 Structure 17 Middle fill [1811], SW Sq. C and D
(contd.) Upper fill [1764], NW Sq. E
Surface Two different metre squares
Deposit F1
Surface One metre square
Deposit F8
V205 Structure 5 Upper fill [4679] 5 (78g)
Middle fill [4692]
Pit F520 Cleaning layer [4638] over pit
Surface One metre square and one machine stripped
Deposit F275 segment
V229 Structure 30 Middle fill [3332], NE One refit between [3311] NW and Pit 5 (72g)
F323
Upper fill [3311], NW and SW
Pit Group L F323 Main fill [3091]
V230 Structure 30 Middle fill [3318], NW and [3332], NE One refit [3318] NW and [3311] NW 8 (103g)
Interface between middle and upper fill [3322], SW
Upper fill [3311], NW and SE
V235 Structure 30 Middle fill [3332], NE One refit 2 (74g)
Interface between middle and upper fill [3322], NE
V258 Structure 9 Lower/middle fill [4618], NE 2 (15g)
Middle fill [4616], NE
V267 Structure 18 Lower fill [1670] NW Four refits within [1627] NW 12 (214g)
Upper fill [1627], SE and NW
V271 Structure 20 Lower fill [1397], SW Sq. E One refit 2 (15g)
Post-hole [2400], NW corner
V277 Structure 17 Lower/middle fill [1922], SW Sq. C 10 (198g)
Middle fill [1811], NE Sq. A and D, SW Sq. C and
E
Upper fill [1764], NE Sq. E and F, SE Sq. B
V278 Structure 17 Lower fill [1906], SW Sq. A 4 (66g)
Lower/middle fill [1922], SW Sq. C
V280 Structure 17 Lower/middle fill [1922], SW Sq. C 5 (98g)
Middle fill [1811], NE Sq. A
V285 Structure 21 Middle fill [1153], SE Sq. F 4 (47g)
Upper fill [1130], SE Sq. D and H
V296 Structure 17 Lower fill [1921], NE Sq. A 2 (54g)
Lower/middle fill [1922], SW Sq. C
V298 Structure 9 Lower fill [4618], SE 4 (61g)
Lower fill [4619], SW
Middle fill [4616], SE and NE
V312 Structure 5 Lower/middle fill [4697] One refit between [4697] and [4679] 3 (62g)
Upper fill [4679], SE
Pit F525 Main fill [4693]
V341 Structure 17 Middle fill [1811], SE Sq. B 3 (27g)
Upper fill [1764], SE Sq. B
V342 Structure 17 Middle fill [1811], SE Sq. D and F 3 (20g)
Upper fill [1764], SE Sq. D
V343 Structure 17 Middle fill [1811], NE Sq. H and SW Sq. C 6 (64g)
Upper fill [1764], NE Sq. C and NW Sq. D
Unknown, SW Sq. D
V345 Structure 27 Main fill [3299], SW 2 (13g)
Upper fill [3298], SW
V359 Structure 35 Lower fill [3274], NE 6 (42g)
Upper fill [3268], SE

Table 4.9 Vessel links between fills within the same feature

219
93
 27.2 rim-EVEs gives 27.2/768 = 0.035
94.9 rim-EVEs gives 94.9/768 = 0.124
54.64 rim-EVEs gives 54.64/768 = 0.071
Based on these calculations, the vessels were at most
12.4% complete: i.e. over 87% of each vessel was missing
and/or was not recovered.
Refitting analysis
Vessel links have been sought between sherds across
the site, within individual contexts and features and also
between different feature types — in particular, between
the fills of SFBs, pits and surface deposits.3 The contex-
tual detail that accompanies the assemblage, combined
with the different types of deposits at Bloodmoor Hill,
has provided an important opportunity to investigate the
dynamics behind the assemblage.
Refitting has formed an important part of the analysis.
All rim-sherds and decorated sherds, as well as other
distinctive body sherds, were compared. In addition, all
the pottery from Structure 12 and Pit Group E, located
immediately to the north, was laid out together and
examined for sherd-links. All sherds from Structures 9
and 10, Pit groups C and D, and also Surface Deposit F1,
which was in the immediate vicinity of these features,
were examined. All the assemblages from Structures 18,
20, 21 and 22 were also compared. All the pottery within
the vicinity of the cemetery, including that from all grave
fills, Structure 44, Pit Group G and Surface Deposit
F159/F182, was analysed together for links. Finally,
all sherds with the same catalogue number (i.e. bagged
together) were examined for sherd links.
There were vessel links (both refits and non refit-
ting links) involving a total 1075 handmade sherds,
weighing 16,482g (c.30% by weight of the total assem-
blage). These represent a maximum of 258 vessels, with
forty-five comprising five or more individual sherds. In
addition, there were eighteen sherds weighing 260g from
a Continental vessel (V27) and also two sherds (72g)
from a single vessel of Ipswich Ware pottery (V361).
Vessel links within individual features
The majority of vessel links were defined within indi-
vidual features, and were often close together within the
same fill. This probably indicates that the sherds had
been deposited together or that they had broken on or
after deposition. However, sherds from the same vessel
were also separated in some instances by several metres
(Fig. 4.30). Vessel links were established between lower,
middle and/or upper fills of SFBs for thirty-four different
vessels (excluding the continental vessel V27), and also
between lower and upper fills of several pits (Table 4.9).
For example, in Structure 24 a refit (V143) was estab-
lished between the lower fill [5116] (south-west) and the
upper fill [5115] (north-west), with a further sherd from
the same vessel in [5115] (north-east).
There were seventeen sherds (313g) from a distinc-
tive vessel with a combed exterior surface (V125). Most
of the sherds (thirteen sherds weighing 260g) derived
from the upper fill ([4603]) of Structure 9, although this
deposit could possibly be part of the Surface Deposit F1
that filled the hollow of the earlier infilled pit. Two sherds
came from separate metre-squares of Surface Deposit F1,
directly over Structure 9, and two sherds (21g) were from
the fill of Pit F226, located c.36.00m to the east.
220
Twenty-one sherds (439g) were identified from a
distinctive biotite- and coarse quartz-tempered vessel
(V178). Five sherds (126g) came from the lower ([4618]),
middle ([4616]) and upper ([4603]) fills of Structure 9
and one sherd (30g) from the upper fill ([4588]) of
Structure 10, located c.6.00m to the south. The other
sherds came from eleven different metre squares within
Surface Deposit F1 up to c.8.00m from, although concen-
trated above and around, Structure 9.
There were also nineteen sherds (566g) from a biotite-
and coarse quartz-tempered vessel (V179), with twelve
sherds (221g) in the fill of Structure 16 and three (222g)
within the middle ([1811]) and upper ([1764]) fills of
Structure 17. Two sherds (65g) of the same vessel came
from Surface Deposit F8 and another two sherds (58g),
possibly from the same vessel, were recovered from
two metre squares of the Surface Deposit F1, located
c.39.00m to the west of Structure 16. However, while
there were refits between different quadrants within the
fill of Structure 16 and between the middle fill and upper
fills (and between different quadrants) of Structure 17,
there were no actual refits between the two features.
Vessel links between features
A small number of vessel links were established between
contexts across the site, varying from a few metres up
to c.145m apart (Table 4.10, Fig. 4.30). Five vessel links
were established between sherds separated by more than
50m: Vessels 132 (with fifteen vessel links), 205, 248,
304 and 305. These are of especial importance because
they demonstrate that material has been transported
considerable distances across the site between breakage
and final deposition (Tipper 2004, chap. 6).
The vessel links appear to be concentrated within the
surface deposits and cut features preserved in the remains
of the trackway across the northern part of the site. There
is a single possible vessel link aligned north-west–south-
east across the site, between the fill of Structure 4 and
Pit Group K (a distance of c.141m) (V248). The furthest
actual refit across the site connected sherds separated
by over 80m from east to west (V305): one sherd was
recovered from the lower fill ([4634]) of Pit F517 (Pit
Group D) and the other from a cleaning layer ([4641])
over Pit F520, both within the remains of the trackway.
There were a number of vessel links between the fills
of adjacent features and, in particular, between the fills of
several SFBs and nearby pits (Vessels 152, 30, 56, 152,
205 and 224). The links demonstrate that the vessels were
broken, and the sherds separated, prior to incorporation
in the different deposits.
The greatest number of sherds from a single vessel was
169 (872g), representing a curved jar with an Everted rim
(V152). Most of the sherds (161 sherds weighing 790g)
were located in the lower fill ([1397]) of Structure 20,
where they were concentrated in two adjacent metre
squares (C and F) in the north-west quadrant of the SFB.
This discrete deposit probably represents a primary
disposal, i.e. a large portion of a vessel deposited on or
after initial breakage. However, sherds from the same
vessel were also recovered from the lower fill within the
north-east (F) and south-west (C) quadrants, and also
from the upper fill ([1764]) of the north-east quadrant
(A). Furthermore, four sherds (58g) from the same vessel
were recovered from the fill ([2207]) of a separate pit
(F255), located c.2m to the east of Structure 20.
221
Figure 4.30 Distribution of vessel links (both actual sherd joins and non-refitting sherd links)
Vessel Structure Level Count Distance between features
V19 Structure 38 Middle fill (NE) 1 No joins between different features, located c.14m apart
Upper fill (NE) 1
Hollow F301 Uniform fill 1
V30 Structure 25 Upper fill 2 No joins between different features, located c.1.50m apart
Pit F392 Uniform fill 1
V31 Structure 16 Uniform fill 2 No joins between different features; Structure 16 and
Midden F1 metre square located c.18m apart
Midden F1 1 metre square 1
Surface Deposit F8 5 different metre squares 14
V33 Surface Deposit F1 2 different metre squares 2 1 sherd join between different metre squares, c.1m apart
Surface Deposit F8 1 metre square 1
V56 Structure 29 Lower fill (SW) 1 No joins between different features, c.7.75m apart
Pit Group L Uniform fill 1
V118 Structure 9 Lower fill (NE) 1 No joins between different features, c.3.50m apart
Surface Deposit F1 1 metre square above Pit 1
Group C
V125 Structure 9 Upper fill (NE, NW and SE) 13 No joins between different features; Structure 9 and Pit
F226 located c.36m apart
Pit F226 Uniform fill 2
Surface Deposit F1 2 different metre squares 2
V132/ Structure 5 Lower fill 4 No joins between different features, located c.127m apart
V15 (uncertain stamp-link between features)
Middle fill 4
Upper fill 1
Structure 17 Upper fill 1
V152 Structure 20 Lower fill (NE, NW, SW) 163 No actual joins between different features, c.2m apart
Upper fill (SE) 1
Pit F255 Uniform fill (NW, SW) 3
V178 Structure 9 Middle fill (NE and SE) 2 1 sherd join between middle fill of Structure 9 (SE
quadrant) and a Surface Deposit F1 metre square, c.0.25m
apart; Structures 9 and 10 located c.6.50m apart, Surface
Deposit F1 metre squares up to c.8m from Structure 9
Upper fill (SE and SW) 2
Structure 10 Upper fill (NE) 1
Surface Deposit F1 14 different metre squares 14
V179 Structure 16 Uniform fill (NNE and SSW) 12 No joins between different features; Structure 16 and
Midden F1 metre squares located c.39m apart, Structures
16 and 17 located c.2m apart
Structure 17 Middle fill (SW) 2
Upper fill (NW) 1
Surface Deposit F1 2 different metre squares 2
Surface Deposit F8 2 different metre squares 2
V205 Structure 5 Middle fill 1 No joins between different features; Structure 5 and Surface
Deposit F275 metre square located c.145m apart, Structure
5 and Pit F520 located c.3m apart
Upper fill 1
Pit F520 Uniform fill 1
Surface Deposit F275 2 different metre squares 2
V224 Structure 37 Uniform fill 1 No joins between different features, c.3.50m apart
Pit F334 Uniform fill 1
V229 Structure 30 Middle fill (NE) 1 1 sherd join different features, c.12m apart
Upper fill (NW and SW) 3
Upper fill 1
V248 Structure 4 Upper fill (NW) 1 No joins between different features, c.141m apart
Pit Group K Upper fill 2
V266 Pit Group M Lower fill 1 1 sherd join between different features, c.4.50m apart
Pit F345 Upper fill 1
V304 Pit Group D Lower fill 2 No joins between different features, c.83m aprt
Pit F519 Layer over pit 1
V305 Pit Group D Lower fill 2 1 sherd join between Pit Group D and F520, 81.50m apart
Pit F520 Cleaning layer 2

Table 4.10 Vessel links between features

222
92
 Four sherds (58g) from one vessel (V229) were
defined within the fill of the pit from Structure 30, with an
actual sherd join (20g) between the upper fill ([3311]) of
the south-west quadrant and the fill ([3091]) of Pit F323
(Pit Group L), located c.12.5m to the east. There were
also two sherds (32g) of this vessel from the upper fill
([3311]) of the north-west quadrant and one sherd (20g)
from the middle fill ([3332]) of the north-east quadrant
of Structure 30.
Within the Surface Deposit F1, one actual sherd join
(23g) was defined, with the two sherds separated by c.11m
from north to south in metre-squares [4091] and [4094]
(V287). In addition, there were a further six sherds (87g)
from this vessel spread across seven different metre-
squares.
Discussion
The majority of the pottery assemblage at Bloodmoor
Hill was shown to be very fragmented and abraded. Most
vessels were represented by single or, at most, several
sherds, although the breakage of a single pot would have
produced a great deal of material all at once. The quan-
tity of material contained within SFBs was often large,
although the pottery was very fragmentary, with only a
small proportion of the pottery from individual vessels
surviving (although refitting was difficult due to the large
number of featureless body sherds). The fact that primary
disposals were the exception rather than the norm indi-
cates that broken vessels were not simply gathered up
and tossed directly into open features such as a disused
SFB or other pit. Similarly, a number of vessel links were
defined in Surface Deposit F1 but there are no concentra-
tions of pottery indicative of primary disposals, and most
of the pottery does not appear to be at an early stage in
the refuse cycle. In fact, mean sherd weight is slightly
lower in F1 compared to the fills of SFBs, which would
suggest that material was more fragmented.
Instead, broken vessels seem to have had complex
and varying histories which saw sherds of some vessels
dispersed across the site and separated by over 100m
within different feature types, brought together with
sherds from other vessels in varying states of condi-
tion, and mixed with other artefact categories. While
some sherds may have been buried relatively quickly
after breakage it is clear that other sherds from the same
vessel were not, and may have been collected and moved
a number of times before final deposition. Furthermore,
the sherds from a number of vessels were separated
stratigraphically within the same feature, although some
of these instances might be the result of post-depositional
disturbance.
The extensive surface deposits at Bloodmoor Hill give
some indication of how material might have been incor-
porated on surface rubbish dumps before it was removed,
perhaps periodically as a dump got too large. Although
the total extent of the settlement was not defined, it seems
likely from the evidence recovered that many sherds were
simply not incorporated into the archaeological record,
probably being destroyed by weathering and trampling
during occupation, if they remained on exposed surfaces.
Some may have been destroyed by later processes, such
as agriculture, and some during topsoil stripping for
excavation (no fieldwalking survey was undertaken prior
to evaluation). Nevertheless, it seems possible that the
223
remainder was transported off-site (Tipper 2004, 157–9;
see Chapter 6 for further discussion).
Middle Saxon Ipswich Ware
A total of two sherds of Ipswich Ware pottery, weighing
72g, came from the excavations at Bloodmoor Hill
(V361, not illustrated). Ipswich Ware was manufactured
on a slow-wheel or turn-table, exclusively in Ipswich,
and has been dated to c. AD 725–850 (Blinkhorn 1999).
It reached London by c. AD 730, although it began to
dominate the London market around AD 750 (Blackmore
1999, 39; 2003, 234)
Both the sherds were of Blinkhorn’s Group 1 fabric
type. These are of a hard grey sandy fabric with fine
sub-angular quartz grains <0.3mm in size but with some
larger grains, and with occasional fine mica. The fabric
of these sherds also contained occasional carbonised
organic inclusions. Both were flat-angled base sherds,
although no base diameter or EVE could be established.
The external surface of the (lower) vessel wall had been
oxidised pale orange in colour, while the base was dark
grey-brown. The internal surface was pale brown, while
the core of both sherds was dark grey-brown.
The two sherds derive from the middle fill ([3312])
of Structure 30, in the eastern part of the site. The fill of
this structure also contained over 300 sherds (c.3200g)
of handmade early Anglo-Saxon pottery which included
three decorated sherds (19g). However, the upper part of
this pit had suffered extensive animal disturbance and
there is a strong possibility that the Ipswich Ware sherds
are intrusive.
Continental pottery
There were twenty sherds (316g) of wheel-turned conti-
nental finewares at Bloodmoor Hill, representing three
different vessels. They formed just 0.6% (by weight)
of the Anglo-Saxon period pottery. All the sherds came
from the fills of Structures 25 and 26, which were c.6.5m
apart, in the central-eastern part of the site.
Eighteen sherds (260g) were from a Merovingian
biconincal jar in a burnished reduced ware, decorated
with a cordon and slight horizontal corrugations on the
upper body and with vertical burnishing on the lower
body (V27). All the sherds of this vessel came from the
fill of Structure 25, and were distributed across all four
quadrants of the pit, within and between middle and
upper fills. The closest sources for this type of pottery
are in northern France/Belgium. A comparable biconical
vessel was found in Colchester in the early 20th century
(Evison 1979, fig. 16d). In Lundenwic these are among
the earliest and most common continental imports;
similar Merovingian biconical jars have been found in
contexts dated between the second half of the 6th and
late 7th century (Blackmore 2001, 29–30; 2003, 238–9,
fig. 20.P10).
There was also a rim-sherd (32g) of an oxidised jar
with a simple Everted rim (V29), identified as possible
Rhenish Walberberg-type ware, from the middle fill
of Structure 25. This type of pottery, made within the
region of the Cologne Vorgebirge, has been found in
contexts dated to between c.670 and the mid-8th century
in Lundenwic (Blackmore 2001, 30–2; 2003, 240).
The infilling of Structure 25 has a terminus post quem
between the mid-7th and early 8th century based on the
antler comb fragment No. 133 and several other datable
objects within its fill.
A single body sherd (24g) from an oxidised curved
vessel decorated with horizontal rouletting (V75), came
from the fill of Structure 26. The sherd has been identi-
fied as possible Meuse valley Huy-type ware, although
it is not impossible that this is also a Walberberg-type
ware (L. Blackmore, pers. comm.). The infilling of
Structure 26 has a similar terminus post quem to that of
Structure 25, between the mid-7th- and early 8th-century,
also based on a fragment of antler bone comb (No. 132),
a dress pin (No. 65) and also the Series B sceat (No. 399),
which would not have been in circulation after c.720.
Unfortunately, no scientific analysis has been undertaken
on any of the continental sherds.
It seems very likely that the vessels reached Bloodmoor
Hill via the so-called emporium or port-of-entry at
Ipswich, where imported continental pottery forms up
to 15% of the middle Saxon ceramic assemblage (Wade
1988, 96). Merovingian blackwares are present from
the outset in the 7th-century settlement at Ipswich on
the north bank of the Orwell (Scull 2002, 304). It seems
probable that all three of the vessels at Bloodmoor Hill
pre-date the appearance of Ipswich Ware, and must have
been deposited, at the latest, by the end of the first quarter
of the 8th century.
Imports arrived either as containers, as the belong-
ings of traders or as trade items themselves (Mainman
1993, 582–3). They might initially have been part of the
belongings of traders, possibly subsequently circulated,
perhaps through elite exchange, as desirable or unusual
items outside Ipswich. Blackmore has suggested that,
in Lundenwic, the continental wares probably arrived
alongside cargoes of quernstones, wine and luxury
goods, perhaps via the port of Dorestad, where similar
late 7th-century forms have been found (Blackmore
1999, 40–1).
Catalogue of selected Anglo-Saxon pottery
(Figs 4.31–4.41)
Anglo-Saxon pottery in the catalogue has been included
on the following criteria (illustrated vessels are aster-
isked): all decorated pottery; sherds possessing distinctive
attributes or surface treatment (for example, pierced or
lugged sherds, complete or near complete profiles of
vessels); sherds which contribute to a representative range
of vessel forms. For illustrated sherds, vessel complete-
ness has been estimated as a percentage (in increments of
5%), although in most cases vessels were represented by
single sherds which form less than 5% of the complete
vessel. Vessel height and maximum vessel diameter has
been also measured wherever this was possible.
Key: Base Diam: base diameter; Base EVE: estimated vessel equivalent
based on base sherds; Lug Th: Lug thickness; Rim Diam: rim diameter;
Rim EVE: estimated vessel equivalent based on rim-sherds; Vessel Ht:
vessel height; Vessel W: vessel width; Wall Th: wall thickness; Wt:
weight.
*V1. Stamped and bossed shoulder sherds of a curved vessel;
fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz with
occasional to moderate fine leached calcareous inclusions
(QTZRSA+CALCFO); smoothed lustrous surfaces; grey;
stamp motif A 1bi$ on the upper body, above and around a
small hollow round boss across the shoulder. Vessel complete-
ness: 5%; Wt: 39g (total of three joining sherds); Wall
Th: 5mm.
224
294/131AA/Structure 4, spit B; 294/151AA and 151AB/
Structure 4, SW quad, spit C.
*V2. Stamped body sherd; frequent fine to medium rounded and
sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); smoothed lustrous surfaces;
pale grey-brown surfaces, dark grey core; stamp motif A 1bi$.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 12g; Wall Th: 11.5mm.
294/137AA/Structure 4, SW quad, spit B.
*V3. Bossed and incised body sherd; fine to occasional coarse
rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); light burnished
exterior, abraded interior; orange-brown; shallow hollow
vertical boss bordered by one vertical incised line. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: 7g; Wall Th: >4.5mm.
294/143AD/Structure 4, NW quad, spit C.
*V4. Bossed body sherd; frequent fine to occasional coarse sand-
stone sand with fine to occasional coarse rounded to sub-
angular quartz, also occasional leached calcareous inclusions
<2mm (SST+QTZRSA); burnished surfaces; dark grey; slight
external organic residue; shallow hollow vertical boss. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: 12g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
294/149AA (part of 149AB?)/Structure 4, SW quad, spit A.
*V5. ?Bossed body sherd; frequent fine sandstone sand with fine
rounded to sub-angular quartz (SST+QTZRSA); burnished
surfaces; dark grey; internal and slight external organic
residue; possible shallow hollow boss. Vessel completeness:
<5%; Wt: 6g; Wall Th: 5mm.
294/149AB (part of 149AA?)/Structure 4, SW quad, spit A.
*V6. Rim sherd of a curved or straight-sided ovoid-shaped vessel
with a constricted opening and Everted rim (Rim Diam: 110mm;
Rim EVE: 12.5%); moderate to frequent organic inclusions
with frequent fine to medium and occasional coarse rounded
and sub-angular quartz <1.7mm (CHAFF+QTZRSA); light
burnished exterior, smoothed interior; dark grey core, dark
grey blotched orange-brown exterior, orange interior; slight
external carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness:
5–10%; Wt: 36g (two sherds); Wall Th: 8.5mm.
204/183AA and 183AB/Structure 12, quad 3.
*V7. Rim and body sherds of a small curved vessel with a tall
Everted rim (Rim Diam: 100mm; Rim EVE: 30%); fine and
occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz, with occa-
sional organic inclusions (QTZRSA+CHAFFO) (Radiocarbon
sample GrA-25923); burnished surfaces, abraded interior;
dark grey core/interior, pale brown/cream exterior, dark grey
exterior rim; external and internal carbonised organic residue.
Vessel completeness: 25–30%; Wt: 196g (total of fourteen
sherds; total weight of five joining sherds 193AC, 193AD,
193AE, 194AA and 211AA is 81g); Wall Th: 8.5–11.5mm.
205/190AA/Structure 12, quad 2, spit 2; 205/191AB/
Structure 12, quad 2; 205/193AC, 193AD, 193AE/Structure 12,
quad 2, spit 2; 205/194AA, 194AB, 194AC/Structure 12, quad
2, spit 3; 205/196AA/Structure 12, quad 3, spit 2; 216/204AA,
204AB, 204AC, 204AD/Structure 12, quad 2; 237/211AA/
Structure 12.
*V8. Rim sherd with an upright lug (Rim Diam and EVE not
established); frequent organic inclusions with fine to medium
and occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz
(CHAFFH+QTZRSA); smoothed lustrous surfaces; dark grey
core, dark grey-brown surfaces. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 14g; Wall Th: 10mm; Lug Th: 16mm.
1130/273AA/Structure 21, NE quad, spit 1.
*V9. Incised body sherd; frequent organic inclusions with frequent
fine red iron-rich (ironstone?) inclusions and fine to medium
rounded and sub-angular quartz (CHAFFH+QTZIRSA);
burnished surfaces; grey/dark grey; three incised lines forming
a chevron (?) pattern. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 5g; Wall
Th: 5mm.
1130/273AB/Structure 21, NE quad, spit 1.
*V10. Stamped body sherd; frequent fine to moderate coarse sand-
stone sand <1.5mm with fine rounded and sub-angular quartz,
and also occasional organic inclusions and occasional leached
calcareous inclusions (SST+QTZRSA); burnished surfaces;
grey/dark grey, orange-brown outer core 1mm in thickness;
stamp motif A 5ai. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 21g; Wall
Th: 8mm.
1130/286AB/Structure 21, NW quad, sq. 3, spit B.
*V11. Stamped body sherd; frequent fine quartz (QTZF); burnished
surfaces; grey; horizontal (?) row of stamp motif A 5di. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: 5g; Wall Th: 5mm.
1153/293AA/Structure 21, SW quad, spit 2.
*V12. Rim sherds of a small curved or straight-sided ovoid-shaped
vessel with a tall neck and Everted rim (Rim Diam: 110mm;
 Rim EVE: 35%); fine to medium and occasional coarse
rounded and sub-angular quartz <1.5mm, with occasional
organic inclusions and an angular flint? inclusion 2.2mm in
size; light burnished exterior, smoothed lustrous interior;
dark grey, blotched dark grey-brown exterior; slight internal
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 20–25%;
Wt: 103g (total of five joining sherds); Wall Th: 8mm.
1411/342AA/Structure 20, SE quad, spit 3.
*V13. Rim and body sherds of a small sub-biconical (?) shaped vessel
with an Everted rim (Rim Diam: 80mm?; Rim EVE: 15%); fine
to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz, occasional organic
inclusions, occasional iron-rich (ironstone?) inclusions, large
angular flint inclusion 5.5mm (QTZRSA+CHAFFO); smoo-
thed lustrous exterior, abraded interior; dark grey, blotched
orange interior; external carbonised organic residue. Vessel
completeness: 5–10%; Wt: 57g (total of three sherds); Wall
Th: 9–9.5mm.
1764/412AD/Structure 17, NE quad, sq. A, spit 1;
1764/418AA/Structure 17, NW quad, sq. B, spit 1;
1764/421AA/Structure 17, NW quad, sq. B, spit 1.
*V14. Rim sherds of an inturned bowl with a very short vertical
constricted rim (Rim Diam: 140mm; Rim EVE: 14%); fine to
occasional coarse sandstone sand <2.5mm, with fine rounded
and sub-angular quartz (SST+QTZRSA); burnished surfaces;
dark grey interior/core, orange-brown blotched grey exterior;
internal and slight external carbonised organic residue. Vessel
completeness: 5–10%; Wt: 41g (total of two sherds); Wall
Th: 5.5–6.5mm.
1764/422AA/Structure 17, NW quad, sq. B, spit 2;
1764/424AD/Structure 17, NW quad, sq. C, spit 2.
*V15. Stamped and incised body sherd; fine to medium rounded to
sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA) (Radiocarbon sample OxA-
13728); burnished surfaces; dark grey; internal carbonised
organic residue; two horizontal (?) incised lines above or below
stamp motif A 5bii. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 14g; Wall
Th: 5mm. Part of: 12218AA, 12236AA, 12244A–D, 12256A–
D.
1764/425AA/Structure 17, NW quad, sq. D, spit 1.
*V16. Incised body sherd of a sub-biconical (?) vessel; fine to
medium rounded and sub-angular quartz, also occasional
organic inclusions and occasional iron-rich (ironstone?) inclu-
sions (QTZRSA); burnished exterior, abraded interior surface;
grey; two horizontal incised lines above a three-line (empty)
pendent-triangle across the shoulder. Vessel completeness:
<5%; Wt: 17g; Wall Th: 6.5mm.
1764/440AC/Structure 17, SE quad, sq. D, spit 2.
*V17. Rim sherd of a large curved or globular vessel with a tall
everted rim (Rim Diam: 170mm; Rim EVE: 8%); frequent
organic inclusions with fine to medium rounded and sub-
angular quartz (CHAFFH+QTZRSA); light burnished
surfaces; grey/dark grey, blotched orange-grey exterior; slight
external carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness:
5–10%; Wt: 98g; Wall Th: 10mm.
1811/445AA/Structure 17, SE quad, sq. F, spit 1.
*V18. Stamped and incised upper body sherds of a curved or possibly
sub-biconical vessel with Everted rim (Rim Diam. and EVE
not established); fine to medium sandstone sand with fine to
occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz <1.2mm
(SST+QTZRSA); burnished but worn exterior, smoothed inte-
rior; grey/dark grey surfaces, grey-brown core; two horizontal
incised lines or neck-rings, above single horizontal rows of
stamp motif A 5ax separated two horizontal incised lines.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 30g (total of two sherds); Wall
Th: 5.5–6.5mm.
3001/457AA/Structure 38, NE quad; 2328/1233AA/
Structure 38.
*V19. Stamped and incised body sherds of a curved vessel; fine to
medium sandstone sand inclusions, with fine rounded and
sub-angular quartz and fine to occasional coarse leached
calcareous inclusions (SST+QTZRSA+CALCF); burnished
but worn surfaces; grey with pale grey-brown exterior (457AB
and 2066AA) to dark grey (1242AA); single horizontal row of
stamp motif A 1bi around the shoulder bordered above by a
band of three and below by two horizontal incised lines, above
two-line incised pendent-triangles enclosing stamp motif A
1bi. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 60g (total of three sherds);
Wall Th: 7.5–8.5mm.
3001/457AB/Structure 38, NE quad; 2336/1242AA/Hollow
F301; 3002/2066AA/Structure 38, NE quad, spit C.
225
*V20. Stamped and incised upper body sherd; fine to occa-
sional coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA)
(Radiocarbon sample OxA–13883); burnished surfaces;
grey, blotched brown exterior; substantial internal carbonised
organic residue; row of stamp motif A 5aviii above a single
horizontal line, above single line incised chevrons, pendent-
triangles enclosing stamp motif A 6ai. Vessel completeness:
<5%; Wt: 5g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
3001/457AC/Structure 38, NE quad.
*V21. Incised neck sherd; fine to occasional coarse rounded and
sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); burnished surfaces; grey; two
horizontal incised lines or neck-rings. Vessel completeness:
<5%; Wt: 7g; Wall Th: 6.5mm.
3003/461AA/Structure 38, SE quad.
*V22. Incised body sherd; medium to coarse rounded and sub-
angular quartz (QTZMRSA); burnished surfaces; grey;
external carbonised organic residue; two or three fine incised
lines. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 5g; Wall Th: 5mm.
3003/461AB/Structure 38, SE quad.
*V23. Stamped and incised body sherds of a curved or possibly
sub-biconical vessel; fine to occasional coarse rounded and
sub-angular quartz, with occasional organic inclusions and
occasional sandstone sand inclusions (QTZRSA+CHAFFO);
burnished surfaces; grey; four horizontal rows of three different
stamp motifs (A 2ai, A 4ai and A 5ax) which are separated by
single horizontal incised lines, above a single line pendent-
triangle containing stamp motif A 2ai. Vessel completeness:
5%; Wt: 26g (total of two sherds); Wall Th: 5mm.
3003/463AA/Structure 38, SW quad; 3002/2068AA/
Structure 38, SE quad, spit A.
*V24. Stamped and incised body sherd; moderate to frequent organic
inclusions with fine quartz inclusions, also occasional coarse
rounded quartz inclusions <2mm (CHAFF+QTZF); burnished
surfaces; dark grey; three-line chevron pattern enclosing
stamp motif A 4ai, above three horizontal incised lines, above
two-line chevrons, pendent-triangles containing stamp motif
A 4ai. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 13g (total of two joining
sherds); Wall Th: 6.5mm.
3268/473AA and 473AB/Structure 35, NE quad.
*V25. Bossed upper body sherd of a curved vessel; frequent
fine to occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz
(QTZFOCSA); light burnished surfaces; grey blotched pale
brown; small hollow round boss across the shoulder. Vessel
completeness: 5%; Wt: 36g; Wall Th: 9mm.
3268/477AA/Structure 35, NW quad.
*V26. Pedestal base sherds (Base Diam. and EVE not established);
moderate organic inclusions and frequent fine to medium
rounded and sub-angular quartz (CHAFF+QTZMRSA);
smoothed but worn surfaces; dark grey core, orange surfaces
blotched dark grey exterior. Vessel completeness: 10–15%;
Wt: 46g (total of two joining sherds); Wall Th: 11–14mm.
3269/484AB and 484AC/Structure 35, SW quad, spit 1.
*V27. Complete profile of a continental wheel-made biconical jar
with a narrow neck, tall Everted rim (Rim Diam: 70mm; Rim
EVE: 42%) and flat-angled base (Base Diam: 70mm; Base
EVE: 100%). ‘Northern French’ ware. Soft, fine and occa-
sionally coarser rounded and sub-angular quartz inclusions
with red-brown iron-rich (ironstone?) and occasional organic
inclusions (QTZIRSA); burnished exterior and smoothed
interior with fine horizontal striations. The burnishing has
been applied horizontally above the angle of carination and
vertically below; the interior and exterior surfaces vary from
grey to dark grey around the upper half of vessel to pale grey-
brown and orange-brown around the lower part, and blotched
dark grey. The central core is pale grey (3mm in thickness),
with orange-brown outer cores; the vessel is decorated with a
simple cordon around the neck and with irregular and shallow
horizontal grooves or slight corrugations around the shoulder.
Vessel completeness: 50%; Max vessel W: 130mm; Vessel Ht:
c.160mm; Wt: 260g; Wall Th: 4.5–7.5mm.
3288/487AA–AB/Structure 25; 3285/488AA–AB/Structure
25, NE quad, spit 4; 3289/489AC/Structure 25, NE quad;
3428/490AO–AU/Structure 25, SE quad; 3286/495AB/
Structure 25, SE quad; 3431/509AK/Structure 25, NW quad;
3466/511AK–AM/Structure 25, SE quad; 2492/513AI/
Structure 25, SW quad.
*V28. Complete profile of a straight-sided bowl with footstand base
and vertical rim (Rim Diam: 120mm?; Rim EVE: 25%; Base
Diam: not established); frequent organic inclusions with
fine rounded and sub-angular quartz (CHAFFH+QTZRSA)
 (Radiocarbon samples GrA-25925 and OxA-13710);
smoothed lustrous surfaces; grey/dark grey, orange-brown
exterior; substantial internal carbonised organic residue. Vessel
completeness: 20–25%; Vessel Ht: 98mm; Vessel W: 140mm;
Wt: 169g (total of two joining sherds); Wall Th: 15–15.5mm.
3428/490AA and 490AB/Structure 25, SE quad.
*V29. Rim sherd of a Continental wheel-made jar with a simple
Everted rim (Rim Diam: 180mm; Rim EVE: 17%). Probable
Rhenish Walberberg-type ware; hard, fine rounded quartz inclu-
sions with fine red-brown iron-rich inclusions (QTZIRSA);
smoothed and slightly burnished surfaces with fine horizontal
striations; buff orange surfaces and outer cores, pale grey
central core (3mm in thickness). Vessel completeness: 5%;
Wt: 32g; Wall Th: 4.5mm.
3470/510AB/Structure 25, NW quad.
*V30. Rim sherds of a large curved or globular vessel with an
Everted rim (Rim Diam and EVE: not established); frequent
organic inclusions, fine rounded and sub-angular quartz with
occasional to moderate calcareous voids <4mm and occa-
sional angular flint <12mm (CHAFF+QTZRSA+CALCO);
smoothed surfaces with occasional coarse calcareous voids;
dark grey core, pale brown interior, orange exterior. Vessel
completeness: 5–10%; Wt: 103g (total of three sherds); Wall
Th: 8.5–11.5mm.
2492/513AA and 513AB/Structure 25, SW quad;
3674/2272AA/Pit F392.
*V31. Rim sherds of an inturned bowl or a vessel with an irregular
inturned or short vertical constricted rim (Rim Diam: 140mm;
Rim EVE: 46% (five sherds); frequent fine to medium rounded
and sub-angular quartz, with occasional organic inclu-
sions and occasional leached calcareous inclusions <2.5mm
(QTZRSA+CHAFFO); smoothed lustrous surfaces, worn
interior; grey, grey-brown blotched orange and dark grey
exterior; slight internal carbonised organic residue. Vessel
completeness: 35–40%; Wt: 397g (total of 14 sherds); Wall
Th: 7.5–11mm.
708/784AA/Structure 16; 812/892AD–AF/Surface Deposit
F8; 895/1009AA/Surface Deposit F8; 1788/1847AF–AL/
Surface Deposit F8, spit 1; 1789/1848AA and 1848AB/Surface
Deposit F8, spit 1.
*V32. Incised body sherd; moderate organic inclusions and frequent
medium and occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular
quartz, also occasional iron-rich (ironstone?) inclusions
(CHAFF+QTZMRSA); burnished but abraded exterior,
smoothed but abraded interior; dark grey, orange-brown inte-
rior; single incised line. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 8g;
Wall Th: 7.5mm.
755/838AA/Spot find.
*V33. Rim sherds of a curved vessel, probably a bowl, with an
offset shoulder and an Everted rim with a slight outer lip
(Rim Diam: 120mm; Rim EVE: 25.5%); moderate to frequent
leached calcareous inclusions <2mm with fine rounded
and sub-angular quartz (CALC+QTZF); smoothed lustrous
surfaces, striated interior; frequent calcareous voids; dark
grey, blotched orange interior; slight internal and external
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 5–10%;
Wt: 47g (total of three sherds); Wall Th: 7–8.5mm.
824/898AA/Surface Deposit F8, spit A; 4072/10672AA/
Surface Deposit F1, spit A; 4710/12356AA/Surface Deposit
F1, spit A.
*V34. Stamped and incised upper body sherds of a biconical vessel;
medium to coarse red grog <2mm with medium to occasional
coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz <1.7mm and occasional
organic inclusions and occasional sub-rounded pebbles <7mm
(GROGC+QTZRSA+CHAFFO); burnished surfaces; grey/
dark grey; single horizontal row of stamp motif E 5ai bordered
above by a band of three horizontal incised lines or neck-rings
and below by two horizontal incised lines, above three-line
chevrons containing (in different panels) stamp motifs A 4ai,
E 5ai and H 1bii$, above three further horizontal incised lines.
The panel containing stamp E 5ai could possibly be part of
a pendent-triangle below the shoulder. Vessel completeness:
5%; Wt: 53g (total of two sherds); Wall Th: 8mm. Part of
1070AA.
2009/1029AA/Surface Deposit F275; 3126/1317AA/Surface
find.
*V35. Rim sherd of a curved or straight-sided ovoid-shaped vessel
with an everted rim (Rim Diam: 140mm; Rim EVE: 14%);
moderate fine to coarse leached calcareous inclusions
<2.5mm with frequent fine to occasional coarse sandstone
226
sand <2mm and fine to occasional coarse rounded and sub-
angular quartz, also a white sub-angular pebble 3.5mm in size
(CALC+SST+QTZRSA); burnished surfaces, worn interior;
dark grey, dark brown interior core, blotched grey-brown exte-
rior; external carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness:
5–10%; Wt: 62g; Wall Th: 9.5mm.
2331/1236AA/Surface Deposit F298.
*V36. Sherd of a perforated lid? The sherd has a large central (?)
perforation >33mm in diameter (c.40mm max.) and two
smaller slanting perforations c.15mm in diameter that have
been pushed through from the exterior of the sherd; frequent
fine to medium and occasional coarse rounded and sub-
angular quartz <1.5mm, also occasional organic inclusions
(QTZRSA); smoothed surfaces with internal ridges of clay
where the two slanting perforations have been pushed through
from the exterior; dark grey core, dark orange-brown exterior,
orange interior; Anglo-Saxon? Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 42g; Wall Th: 15.5mm.
3114/1299AA/Pit Group J (F376).
*V37. Stamped and incised upper body sherd; moderate to
frequent biotite inclusions with coarse sub-angular quartz
inclusions and also fine rounded and sub-angular quartz
(BIOTITE+QTZRCSA); worn surfaces; dark grey; two
horizontal incised lines above stamp motif A 4aiii. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: 7g; Wall Th: 6.5mm.
3121/1307AA/Spot find.
*V38. Bossed body sherd of a curved vessel; moderate organic
inclusions with frequent fine to occasional coarse sandstone
stone <1.5mm and some fine to occasional coarse rounded
and sub-angular quartz, also occasional iron-rich (ironstone?)
inclusions (CHAFF+SST+QTZRSA); light burnished exte-
rior, abraded interior; dark grey surfaces, grey-brown core;
applied vertical boss. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 17g;
Wall Th: 6mm.
3122/1309AA/Spot find.
*V39. Stamped body sherd; moderate biotite and frequent medium
to coarse sub-angular quartz <2mm, also with fine to medium
rounded quartz (BIOTITE+QTZRMCSA); burnished but worn
surfaces; grey/dark grey; stamp motif B 1ai. Vessel complete-
ness: <5%; Wt: 2g; Wall Th: 6mm.
1327/1319AA/Spot find.
*V40. Stamped and incised body sherd of a curved vessel; moderate
biotite and frequent medium to coarse sub-angular quartz
<3mm, with medium rounded quartz, also occasional organic
inclusions (BIOTITE+QTZRCSA); worn surfaces; grey;
slight internal and external carbonised organic residue; single
diagonal (?) incised line across the shoulder, possibly forming
a pendent-triangle, with stamp motif A 4ci. Vessel complete-
ness: <5%; Wt: 19g; Wall Th: 8mm.
3148/1340AA/Structure 35.
*V41. Stamped and incised upper body sherds; frequent fine to
medium leached calcareous (oolite?) inclusions <1mm with
fine to occasionally coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz
(CALCF+QTZF); light burnished surfaces with frequent
internal and external calcareous voids; pale grey; two rows
of stamp motif M 1ai and a single row of stamp motif E 1bi
separated above and below by bands of four horizontal incised
lines. Vessel completeness: 5%; Wt: 46g (total of five sherds;
total weight of four joining sherds 1422AD–AG is 30g); Wall
Th: 5.5–9mm.
69/1422AD–AG/Surface Deposit F1, spit C; 4020/10330AA/
Surface Deposit F1, spit B.
*V42. Rim sherd of a curved vessel with an Everted rim (Rim Diam
and EVE: not established). The neck has been pierced, post-
firing, with a small hole 3mm in diameter; moderate to frequent
leached calcareous (shell?) inclusions with fine to medium and
occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz inclusions
(CALC+QTZRSA); smoothed lustrous surfaces; grey, dark
grey exterior; internal and external carbonised organic residue.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 10g; Wall Th: 7.5mm.
262/1556AB/Pit F10.
*V43. Incised upper body sherd; moderate to frequent leached
calcareous inclusions <2mm with fine to occasional coarse
rounded and sub-angular quartz, also occasional iron-rich
(ironstone?) inclusions (CALC+QTZF); lightly burnished
exterior, smoothed lustrous interior; dark grey exterior, orange
interior, pale grey core; two horizontal incised lines. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: 4g; Wall Th: 6mm.
914/1629AC/Surface Deposit F11.
*V44. Incised body sherd; frequent organic inclusions and fine to
medium and occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular
quartz <1.4mm (CHAFFH+QTZRSA); abraded surfaces; dark
grey; one horizontal incised line. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 2g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
1061/1659AA/Pit F124, sq. 1, spit A.
*V45. Complete profile of a curved vessel with a vertical constricted
rim (Rim Diam and EVE: not established) and flat-rounded
base (Base Diam: 140mm?; Base EVE: 10%); frequent organic
inclusions with fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz
(CHAFFH+QTZRSA) (Radiocarbon sample OxA-13967);
smoothed lustrous surfaces; dark grey, dark grey-brown
blotched orange exterior; internal carbonised organic residue.
Vessel completeness: 10–15%; Vessel Ht: 116mm; Wt: 122g
(total of five sherds); Wall Th: 6.5–10mm.
1215/1692AA–AE/Pit F10.
*V46. Rim sherd of a globular vessel with an Everted rim (Rim
Diam: 120mm; Rim EVE: 16%); moderate organic inclusions
with fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz, also occa-
sional leached calcareous voids <2mm (CHAFF+QTZRSA);
burnished surfaces; dark grey, blotched grey-brown exterior;
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 5–10%;
Wt: 105g; Wall Th: 8mm.
1221/1697AA/Pit Group B (F34).
*V47. Bossed body sherd of a curved vessel; moderate organic
inclusions with fine to medium and occasional coarse quartz
(CHAFF+QTZRSA); burnished surfaces, striated interior;
grey, dark grey exterior; applied vertical boss across the
shoulder. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 34g; Wall Th: 7mm
(17mm max thickness).
1551/1762AA/Pit F192.
*V48. Stamped and incised body sherd of a curved vessel; fine to
occasional medium and coarse rounded and sub-angular
quartz (QTZRSA); worn surfaces; pale grey, dark grey exte-
rior, orange outer core; single horizontal row of stamp motif
A 4ai bordered above and below by two horizontal incised
lines, above two-line pendent-triangles containing stamp motif
A 4ai. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 6g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
1788/1847AA/Surface Deposit F8, spit 1.
*V49. Incised body sherd; fine to occasional medium and coarse
rounded and sub-angular iron-rich quartz (QTZIRSA);
burnished surfaces; dark grey, core partly reddish-grey; one
horizontal incised line. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 3g;
Wall Th: 6mm.
1975/1907AA/Pit Group G (F237), spit 1.
*V50. Bossed body sherd; frequent organic inclusions and fine to
medium and occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz
<1.9mm (CHAFFH+QTZRSA); burnished exterior, abraded
interior; dark grey; applied vertical boss blotched pale brown.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 6g; Wall Th: 6mm.
2207/1925AD/Pit F255, SE quad.
*V51. Incised neck sherd; moderate organic inclusions with
frequent fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz
(CHAFF+QTZRSA); smoothed surfaces; dark grey, dark grey-
brown exterior; fine vertical incised lines. Vessel complete-
ness: <5%; Wt: 3g; Wall Th: 8.5mm.
2274/1938AA/Surface Deposit F182.
*V52. Incised body sherd; frequent fine to medium and occasional
coarse quartz with occasional sandstone sand <1.5mm, and also
occasional iron-rich (ironstone?) inclusions (QTZRSA+SST);
burnished but abraded exterior, abraded interior; dark grey-
brown, blotched dark orange-brown; one vertical (?) wide
incised line or groove. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 18g;
Wall Th: >11mm. Part of 1990AC?
2363/1950AA/Surface Deposit F275, machine scrape 3.
*V53. Stamped body sherd; fine to occasional coarse rounded and
sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); burnished surfaces; dark
grey; row of stamp motif H 1bvi. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 2g; Wall Th: 4.5mm.
2390/1961AC/Surface Deposit F1, spit 1.
*V54. Stamped and incised body sherd; fine to occasional coarse
rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); burnished
surfaces; dark grey; single horizontal incised line above
stamp motif A 4av. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 2g; Wall
Th: 5.5mm.
2448/1989AA/Surface Deposit F275.
*V55. Incised body sherd; fine to medium rounded and sub-angular
quartz, also a sub-angular brown flint (?) inclusion 3.5mm in
size (QTZRSA); smoothed lustrous surfaces; grey/dark grey,
core blotched reddish-grey; wide incised lines or grooves in a
227
criss-crossed pattern. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 5g; Wall
Th: 8.5mm. Part of 1950AA?
2451/1990AC/Surface Deposit F275.
*V56. Stamped and incised upper body sherds of a curved vessel;
fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz, also occa-
sional biotite inclusions (QTZRSA); burnished surfaces; pale
grey, dark grey blotched orange-brown lower exterior; slight
internal carbonised organic residue; single horizontal rows
of stamp motif A 4ai and P 1ai bordered by bands of two
and three horizontal incised lines. Vessel completeness: 5%;
Wt: 24g (total of two sherds); Wall Th: 5.5mm.
2496/2016AA/Structure 29, SW quad, spit 2; 3095/2105AA/
Pit Group L (F321).
*V57. Rim sherd of a curved vessel with an Everted and slightly
bulbous rim (Rim Diam: 140mm; Rim EVE: 10%); fine
rounded and sub-angular quartz with occasional sandstone
sand, also occasional mica (QTZRSA+SST); light burnished
exterior/interior rim, smoothed and striated interior; dark grey,
blotched grey-brown interior; external and slight internal
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 5%; Wt: 22g;
Wall Th: 5mm.
3002/2067AC/Structure 38, NW quad, spit A.
*V58. Rim sherds of a curved, or possibly globular, vessel with an
Everted rim (Rim Diam: 140mm; Rim EVE: 17.5% (total of
two rim sherds)); fine to medium and occasional coarse quartz
<1.3mm (QTZRSA); burnished surfaces; dark grey; internal
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 5–10%;
Wt: 50g (total of two sherds); Wall Th: 3.5–4.5mm.
3002/2070AA–AB/Structure 38, SW quad, spit A.
*V59. Rim sherds of a small curved vessel, probably a bowl, with an
Everted rim (Rim Diam: 100mm; Rim EVE: 20% (total of two
rim sherds)); fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz
(QTZRSA); smoothed surfaces; grey, grey-brown blotched
orange exterior; slight external carbonised organic residue.
Vessel completeness: 15–20%; Wt: 43g (total of two sherds);
Wall Th: 4–5mm.
3002/2070AC–AD/Structure 38, SW quad, spit A.
*V60. Stamped and incised rim sherd of a curved, or possibly glob-
ular, vessel with a vertical constricted rim (Rim Diam: 140mm;
Rim EVE: 10%); fine to occasional coarse rounded and sub-
angular quartz (QTZRSA); burnished surfaces; grey/dark
grey; single horizontal row/s of stamp motif B 1bi separated
by single horizontal incised lines. Vessel completeness: 5%;
Wt: 31g; Wall Th: 5mm.
3002/2071AA/Structure 38, SW quad, spit B.
*V61. Stamped and incised upper sherd of a curved or globular
vessel; fine to occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular
quartz <1.3mm (QTZRSA); burnished surfaces; dark grey,
pale brown exterior blotched dark grey; internal carbonised
organic residue; horizontal incised line above two-line (?)
incised chevron or pendent-triangle enclosing stamp motif
N 1ai. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 9g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
3002/2071AB/Structure 38, SW quad, spit B.
*V62. Almost complete profile of a curved vessel with a vertical
constricted rim (Rim Diam: 200mm?; Rim EVE: 11%
(total of two rim sherds)) and flat-angled base (Base Diam:
not established); frequent fine to medium and occasion-
ally coarse sandstone sand <2.5mm with fine to medium
rounded and sub-angular quartz and occasional organic inclu-
sions (SST+QTZRSA+CHAFFO); burnished exterior, light
burnished but worn interior; grey, dark grey blotched grey-
brown and orange exterior, grey-brown interior rim. Vessel
completeness: 10–15%; Wt: 159g (total of nine sherds); Wall
Th: 4.5–7mm; Vessel Ht: >150mm.
3021/2072AA–AI/Surface Deposit F298.
*V63. Incised body sherd of a curved vessel; fine to occasional coarse
rounded and sub-angular quartz <2.5mm and moderate fine
leached calcareous inclusions (QTZRSA+CALCF); burnished
surfaces; orange, blotched dark grey; one diagonal (?) incised
line. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 13g; Wall Th: 4.5mm.
3030/2079AA/Hollow F301, NE quad, square 5, spit A.
*V64. Incised Everted rim sherds (Rim Diam: 200mm?; Rim EVE:
5% (total of two rim sherds)); fine to medium and occasionally
coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz with occasional grog,
and also occasional organic inclusions (QTZRSA+GROGO);
light burnished surfaces; grey core, orange-brown exterior
and interior cores, dark grey surfaces; three horizontal incised
lines or neck-rings. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 10g (total
of two sherds); Wall Th: 4–5.5mm.
3030/2081AB/Hollow F301, NE quad, square 1, spit B;
Figure 4.31 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 1–16. All at 1:2

228
Figure 4.32 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 17–26. All at 1:2

229
Figure 4.33 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 27–35. All at 1:2

230
Figure 4.34 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 36–54. All at 1:2

231
Figure 4.35 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 55–65. All at 1:2

232
Figure 4.36 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 66, 68–77. All at 1:2

233
Figure 4.37 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 78–86, 88–90. All at 1:2

234
Figure 4.38 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 92–112. All at 1:2

235
Figure 4.39 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 114–120, 122–125. All at 1:2

236
Figure 4.40 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 126–132. All at 1:2

237
 Figure 4.41 Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon pottery: Vessels 133–136, 138–148. All at 1:2

3030/2088AA/Hollow F301, NW quad, spit A.
*V65. Stamped and incised body sherd of a curved vessel; fine to
coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz <1.5mm (QTZCRSA);
smoothed lustrous exterior, smoothed but striated interior;
dark grey interior and core, pale brown exterior blotched
dark grey; three horizontal incised lines or neck-rings above
two-line chevrons or pendent-triangles enclosing stamp motif
A 4ai. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 21g; Wall Th: 6.5mm.
3030/2095AA/Hollow F301, SW quad, square 1, spit B.
*V66. Rim sherd of a (slightly) inturned vessel (Rim Diam: 100mm;
Rim EVE: 12.5%); fine to occasional coarse rounded and sub-
angular quartz and moderate fine leached calcareous inclu-

238
 sions (QTZRSA+CALCF); burnished exterior, light burnished
interior; dark grey blotched dark grey-brown exterior; internal
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 5–10%;
Wt: 39g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
3087/2100AD/Pit Group L (F321).
V67. Bossed body sherd; fine, medium to occasional coarse sand-
stone sand <1.5mm, with fine rounded and sub-angular quartz
and occasional iron-rich (ironstone?) and occasional leached
calcareous (oolite?) inclusions <1.5mm (SST+QTZRSA);
light burnished surfaces; dark grey, brown exterior; substan-
tial internal carbonised organic residue; small hollow vertical
boss. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 6g; Wall Th: 6.5mm.
3087/2100AH/Pit Group L (F321).
*V68. Complete profile of a small curved bowl with an Everted
rim (Rim Diam: 100mm; Rim EVE: 17% (two rim sherds)
and flat-rounded base (Base Diam: 70mm; Base EVE: 70%
(total of four base sherds)); fine with occasional medium and
coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz, and also occasional
fine leached calcareous inclusions (QTZF); light burnished
surfaces, striated interior; grey/dark grey; external and internal
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 35–40%;
Wt: 165g (total of six sherds); Wall Th: 5.5–8mm; Vessel
Ht: 90mm; Vessel W: 115mm.
3089/2101AA–AF/Pit Group L (F321).
*V69. Incised upper body sherds of curved vessel; frequent fine
to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA);
burnished exterior, abraded interior; grey exterior, pale grey
interior and core; three horizontal incised lines above three-
line (empty) pendent-triangles. Vessel completeness: 10–15%;
Wt: 211g (total of fifteen sherds); Wall Th: >7–11.5mm.
3089/2101AG–AT/Pit Group L (F321); 3686/2278AB/Pit
Group L (F321).
*V70. Incised short Everted and flat-topped rim sherd (Rim Diam
and EVE not established); fine to occasional coarse rounded
and sub-angular quartz <1.2mm, also an iron-rich (ironstone?)
inclusion (QTZRSA); burnished surfaces; orange surfaces,
grey core; one narrow diagonal incised line across neck. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: <2g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
3089/2101AX/Pit Group L (F321).
*V71. Incised body sherd; millstone grit-type sandstone sand?
with fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz
(SSTMG+QTZRSA?); burnished exterior, smoothed and
striated interior; pale orange, blotched dark grey; three feint
diagonal (?) incised lines, possibly forming a chevron pattern.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 5g; Wall Th: 7.5mm.
3089/2101BR/Pit Group L (F321).
*V72. Incised body fragment; frequent fine to medium rounded and
sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); smoothed exterior, abraded
interior; orange; single incised line. Vessel completeness:
<5%; Wt: 2g; Wall Th: >3.5mm.
3091/2102AO/Pit Group L (F321).
*V73. Incised upper body sherd; frequent fine to medium rounded
and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); burnished but abraded
surfaces; grey, dark grey exterior; two horizontal incised lines.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 5g; Wall Th: 6.5mm.
3273/2116AA/Pit F334.
*V74. Bossed body sherd; frequent fine to medium rounded and sub-
angular quartz (QTZRSA); light burnished exterior, abraded
interior; grey; applied vertical boss. Vessel completeness:
<5%; Wt: 12g; Wall Th: 5.5mm (12.5mm max. thickness of
boss).
3290/2121AJ/Structure 26, SW quad.
*V75. Rouletted body sherd of a continental wheel-made curved
vessel. Possible Meuse valley Huy-type ware; soft, fine with
occasional rounded and sub-angular quartz inclusions <1.2mm
in size, fine red-brown iron-rich (ironstone?) inclusions and
occasional leached calcareous inclusions <3mm in size
(QTZFI); smoothed lustrous exterior, smoothed interior with
horizontal grooves or hollows 9.5mm apart and occasional
calcareous voids <3mm in size; buff orange; horizontal rows
of rouletted decoration comprising triangular-shaped impres-
sions 3.5mm in height. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 24g;
Wall Th: 7mm.
3290/2121AK/Structure 26, SW quad.
*V76. Rim sherds of a (slightly) inturned bowl (Rim Diam: 120mm;
Rim EVE: 24% (total of two rim sherds)); moderate organic
inclusions with fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz
(CHAFF+QTZRSA); light burnished surfaces; finger marks
around the interior of the rim; dark grey, blotched orange exte-
rior; external and slight internal carbonised organic residue.
239
Vessel completeness: 15–20%; Wt: 91g (total of two sherds);
Wall Th: 5–7.5mm.
3311/2130AA and 2130AB/Structure 30, NW quad.
*V77. Rim and base sherds of a curved or possibly straight-sided
ovoid-shaped vessel with a vertical constricted rim (Rim
Diam: 140mm; Rim EVE: 21% (total of three sherds)), which
has a sharp inner angle, and flat-angled base (Base Diam:
not established); moderate to frequent leached calcareous
inclusions <3mm, including oolitic limestone inclusions,
and fine sub-angular quartz and occasional sandstone sand
(CALC+QTZRSA) (Radiocarbon sample OxA-13707);
burnished surfaces; dark grey, blotched orange exterior, calcar-
eous voids on both surfaces; external and internal carbonised
organic residue. Vessel completeness: 15–20%; Wt: 169g
(total of ten sherds); Wall Th: 5–6.5mm; Vessel Ht: 148mm
(estimated); Vessel W: 180mm.
3311/2130AC–AD/Structure 30, NW quad; 3311/2131AC–
AD/Structure 30, SE quad; 3311/2133AB/Structure 30, SW
quad; 3312/2134AA/Structure 30, NW quad; 3313/2136AC–
AD/Structure 30, NE quad, spit 2; 3322/2151AK–AL/
Structure 30, SW quad.
*V78. Rim sherd of a globular vessel with an Everted rim (Rim
Diam: 170mm; Rim EVE: 10%); fine rounded and sub-angular
quartz and occasional sandstone sand (QTZRSA+SSTO);
burnished exterior, smoothed and striated interior; dark
grey, blotched pale brown exterior; internal carbonised
organic residue. Vessel completeness: 5–10%; Wt: 59g; Wall
Th: 6.5mm.
3317/2139AA/Structure 30, NW quad.
*V79. Stamped and incised body sherd; fine to medium rounded and
sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); single horizontal (?) incised
line above stamp motif A 5fiv; burnished exterior, smoothed
interior; grey, dark grey exterior. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 2g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
3324/2155AA/Structure 30, SE quad.
*V80. Rim sherd of a large straight-sided ovoid-shaped (?) vessel
with an (upright) Everted rim (Rim Diam: 170mm; Rim
EVE: 15%); moderate organic inclusions with fine to medium
sandstone sand and fine to medium rounded and sub-angular
quartz, and also occasional iron-rich (ironstone?) inclu-
sions (CHAFF+SST+QTZRSA); light burnished surfaces;
grey/dark grey, pale orange-brown blotched grey/dark grey
exterior; slight external carbonised organic residue. Vessel
completeness: 10%; Wt: 121g (total of two joining sherds);
Wall Th: 9.5mm.
3332/2157AA–AB/Structure 30, NE quad.
*V81. Bossed body sherd; moderate to frequent fine to medium
leached calcareous inclusions <1mm with fine to medium and
occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz <1.6mm
(CALC+QTZRSA); hollow vertical boss; burnished surfaces;
grey. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 10g; Wall Th: 7mm.
3332/2157AD/Structure 30, NE quad.
*V82. Stamped and incised upper body sherd; fine to medium
rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); single (?) rows
of stamp motifs O/A 5ai and A 5avi separated by bands of two
horizontal incised lines; burnished surfaces; grey, dark grey
exterior. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 7g; Wall Th: 7mm.
3332/2158AA/Structure 30, NW quad.
*V83. Near complete profile of a small low globular vessel with
an Everted rim (Rim Diam and EVE: not established; Base
form: flat-rounded; Base Diam: not established); frequent
organic inclusions and frequent fine to medium rounded and
sub-angular quartz (CHAFFH+QTZRSA); smoothed lustrous
surfaces; grey/dark grey, orange blotched dark grey exterior;
slight internal carbonised organic residue. Vessel complete-
ness: 10%; Wt: 66g (total of three sherds); Wall Th: 8.5–
9.5mm; Vessel Ht: c.80mm.
3363/2175AA–AC/Pit Group J (F350).
*V84. Bossed body sherd; fine to occasional coarse rounded to sub-
angular quartz <1.3mm (QTZRSA); hollow round (?) boss or
lug; burnished surfaces; grey/dark grey. Vessel completeness:
<5%; Wt: 7g; Wall Th: 7.5mm.
3388/2185AB/Pit F355.
*V85. Stamped and incised upper body sherd; fine to medium
rounded and sub-angular quartz, also a grey pebble 6mm in
size (QTZRSA); two horizontal incised lines above stamp
motif O/A 4ai; burnished surfaces; grey/dark grey. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: 3g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
3414/2187AA/Pit F355.
*V86. Stamped and incised (slightly) everted rim sherd (Rim Diam:
not established; Rim EVE: <5%); fine to medium rounded and
sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); two horizontal incised lines or
neck-rings above stamp motif A 5ai; burnished surfaces; grey.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 10g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
3437/2193AA/Structure 30.
V87. Incised neck fragment; fine rounded to sub-angular quartz
(QTZRSA); two or three horizontal incised lines or neck-rings;
burnished surfaces; dark grey. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt:
<2g; Wall Th: 3.5mm.
3437/2193AG/Structure 30.
*V88. Rim and body sherds of a straight-sided ovoid-shaped
vessel with an Everted rim (Rim Diam: 120mm; Rim EVE:
20% (total of two rim sherds)); frequent organic inclu-
sions with fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz
(CHAFFH+QTZRSA); light burnished exterior, smoothed
interior; grey/dark grey, blotched pale orange exterior; internal
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 15–20%;
Wt: 200g (total of nine sherds); Wall Th: 7–10.5mm.
3469/2209AA–AI/Pit F368, SE quad.
*V89. Bossed body sherds of curved vessel; fine and occasional coarse
sandstone sand <2.5mm with fine to medium rounded and sub-
angular quartz, occasional organic inclusions and occasional
leached calcareous inclusions (SST+QTZRSA+CHAFFO)
(Radiocarbon samples GrA-25590 and OxA-14019); hollow
vertical bosses; burnished but worn exterior, smoothed lustrous
interior; dark grey, pale orange-brown exterior; internal carbo-
nised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 5%; Wt: 44g (total
of three sherds; total weight of two joining sherds 2234AA and
2234AB is 31g); Wall Th: 8.5mm.
3521/2234AA–AC/Pit Group I (F372).
*V90. Rim sherds of a globular vessel with a short Everted rim (Rim
Diam: 140mm; Rim EVE: 16.5% (total of two rim sherds));
fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA);
burnished surfaces, worn interior; dark grey, blotched dark
brown exterior; substantial external carbonised organic
residue. Vessel completeness: 5–10%; Wt: 68g (total of two
sherds); Wall Th: 5.5–7mm.
3521/2234AE/Pit Group I (F372); 3526/2235AA/Pit Group I
(F372).
V91. Incised body sherd; fine to medium and occasional coarse
rounded and sub-angular quartz <1.2mm (QTZRSA); two
horizontal incised lines; burnished surfaces; dark grey, pale
brown exterior. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: <2g; Wall
Th: 4.5mm.
3538/2238AK/Pit Group L (F374).
*V92. Rim sherd of a straight-sided ovoid-shaped vessel with an
Everted rim (Rim Diam: 140mm; Rim EVE: 15%); moderate
organic inclusions with fine to medium and occasional coarse
quartz <2mm (CHAFF+QTZRSA); light burnished exte-
rior, smoothed lustrous interior; grey/dark grey, pale grey-
cream exterior. Vessel completeness: 5–10%; Wt: 67g; Wall
Th: 9.5mm.
3581/2251AA/Surface Deposit F377.
*V93. Complete miniature vessel with vertical rim (Rim Diam: 35mm;
Rim EVE: 100%) and flat-rounded base (Base Diam: 200mm;
Base EVE: 100%); frequent fine to medium rounded and sub-
angular quartz (QTZRSA); smoothed lustrous surfaces; grey/
dark grey exterior, blotched orange rim core. Vessel complete-
ness: 100%; Wt: 30g; Wall Th: 6.5mm; Vessel Ht: 31mm;
Vessel W: 38.5mm (max).
3679/2274AA/Pit Group L (F374).
*V94. Stamped and incised body sherd; fine to occasional coarse
rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); two-line (?)
chevron pattern above two or three horizontal incised lines and
a further chevron pattern or pendent-triangle enclosing stamp
motif A 4cii; burnished surfaces; grey, dark grey exterior.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 2g; Wall Th: 5mm.
3679/2274AB/Pit Group L (F374).
*V95. Rim sherds of a hemispherical bowl with vertical rim (Rim
Diam: 120mm; Rim EVE: 18% (total of two rim sherds));
frequent fine and occasional coarse sandstone sand <2mm and
fine rounded and sub-angular quartz (SST+QTZRSA); light
burnished surfaces; dark grey. Vessel completeness: 15–20%;
Wt: 64g (total of two joining sherds); Wall Th: 8–8.5mm.
2512286AG–AH/Structure 3, NW quad.
*V96. Incised body sherd of a biconical vessel; fine to medium
rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); vertical incised
lines across the shoulder; smoothed exterior, abraded interior;
240
pale orange-brown. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 3g; Wall
Th: >3.5mm.
75/2803AA/Surface Deposit F1, spit B.
*V97. Incised body sherd; fine sandstone sand and fine rounded
to sub-angular quartz (SST+QTZRSA); fine criss-crossed
incised lines; burnished surfaces; dark grey. Vessel complete-
ness: <5%; Wt: 8g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
76/2812AB/Surface Deposit F1, spit B.
*V98. Rim sherd of a miniature vessel with a vertical rim (Rim
Diam: 60mm; Rim EVE: 10%). There is a pinched and pierced
upright lug on the body, which is set immediately below the
rim. The vessel has been also pierced with two small holes
5.5mm in diameter, in line with the lug and angled down-
wards through the vessel wall; fine rounded and sub-angular
quartz, with occasional fine leached calcareous inclusions
(QTZRSA+CALCFO); smoothed surfaces; pale orange, dark
grey central core. Vessel completeness: 5%; Wt: 5g; Wall
Th: 7.5mm (15mm with the lug).
1395/3860AA/Surface Deposit F159, SE quad, square A,
spit 1.
*V99. Complete profile of a globular vessel with a short vertical
constricted rim (Rim Diam: 170mm; Rim EVE: 12.5%) and
flat-angled base (Base Diam: 100mm; Base EVE: 17.5%); fine
to occasional coarse rounded to sub-angular quartz, occasional
leached calcareous inclusions and occasional sandstone sand
inclusions (QTZRSA) (Radiocarbon sample OxA-13752);
burnished surfaces; grey/dark grey core, pale orange blotched
dark grey exterior; slight internal and slight external carbonised
organic residue. Vessel completeness: 10–15%; Wt: 107g (total
of five joining sherds); Wall Th: 5–6.5mm; Vessel Ht: 130mm;
Vessel W: 230mm.
5116/13187AA–AE/Structure 24, NW quad.
*V100. Stamped body sherd; frequent fine to medium rounded and
sub-angular quartz and also occasional coarse sub-angular
quartz <1.2mm (QTZRMOCSA); stamp motif O; smoothed
but worn surfaces; grey/dark grey. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: <2g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
121/8633AB/Surface Deposit F1, spit 1.
*V101. Incised body sherd; fine to medium rounded and sub-angular
quartz (QTZRSA); single fine incised line; burnished surfaces;
dark grey, grey-brown exterior; external carbonised organic
residue. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 2g; Wall Th: 4.5mm.
1627/8883AC/Structure 18, SE quad, square A, spit 1.
*V102. Stamped body sherd; millstone grit-type sandstone sand?
and fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz
(SSTMG+QTZRSA?); stamp motif A 1bi; light burnished
exterior, smooth interior; pale grey, dark grey exterior. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: <2g; Wall Th: 4mm.
1764/8939AG/Structure 17, SW quad, square A, spit 1.
*V103. Stamped (?) body sherd; frequent fine to occasional coarse
sandstone sand <2.5mm with frequent fine to medium
quartz (SST+QTZRSA); possible stamp motif O/C 1ai; light
burnished exterior, worn interior; grey-brown core and inte-
rior, orange-brown exterior core, brown exterior blotched dark
grey. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 27g; Wall Th: 9.5mm.
1489/9479AA/Structure 20, SW quad, square F.
*V104. Stamped and incised upper body sherd; moderate grog
<1.5mm with fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz
(GROG+QTZRSA); two horizontal incised lines above stamp
motif A 5avi; light burnished surfaces; dark grey; internal
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 6g; Wall Th: 6mm.
1764/9505AB/Structure 17, NE quad, square B, spit 2.
*V105. Incised upper body fragment; fine and occasional coarse
sandstone sand with fine and occasional coarser quartz <1mm
(SST+QTZRSA); two horizontal incised lines; burnished
but worn exterior, abraded interior; grey/dark grey. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: <2g; Wall Th: >3mm.
1764/9519AA/Structure 17, NE quad, square D, spit 1.
*V106. Stamped and incised body sherds; fine to medium rounded and
sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA) (Radiocarbon sample OxA-
13708); two-line incised pendent-triangle enclosing stamp
motif A 5ai; light burnished surfaces; dark grey, blotched dark
brown exterior; internal carbonised organic residue; part of:
9549AB. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 19g (total of two
joining sherds; weight of three sherds from the same vessel
including 9549AB is 30g); Wall Th: 6–6.5mm.
1764/9528AA/Structure 17, NE quad, square E, spit 1;
1764/9549AA/Structure 17, NE quad, square G, spit 1.
*V107. Bossed body sherd; medium to coarse rounded and sub-
angular quartz <1.5mm with occasional organic inclusions
(QTZRSA+CHAFFO); hollow vertical boss; burnished
exterior, roughly smoothed interior; grey, dark grey exterior.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 11g; Wall Th: 6mm.
1811/9648AB/Structure 17, NE quad, square D.
*V108. Stamped and incised body sherd; fine to medium rounded
and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); two-line incised pendent
-triangle or chevron enclosing stamp motif B 1bi; burnished
surfaces; dark grey; slight internal carbonised organic residue.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 5g; Wall Th: 5mm.
1811/9671AA/Structure 17, NE quad, square H.
*V109. Stamped and incised Everted rim sherd (Rim Diam and EVE:
not established); fine rounded and sub-angular quartz with
fine leached calcareous inclusions (QTZRSA+CALCF); one
horizontal incised line or neck-ring above stamp motif A 4ai;
burnished surfaces; dark grey. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 5g; Wall Th: 6mm.
3679/9685AA/Structure 17, SW quad, spit B.
*V110. Bossed body sherd; biotite with rounded and medium to coarse
sub-angular quartz <2.2mm, also occasional organic inclusions
(BIOTITE+QTZRMCSA); hollow ?vertical boss; burnished
surfaces; grey, dark grey exterior. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 21g; Wall Th: 4.5mm.
1906/9701AD/Structure 17, SW quad, square A.
*V111. Incised upper body sherd; moderate biotite inclusions with
fine to coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz inclusions
<1.3mm, also occasional leached calcareous inclusion
(BIOTITE+QTZRSA); two horizontal incised lines or neck-
rings; burnished but worn surfaces; dark grey surfaces, grey
core. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 3g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
1766/10148AA/Structure 16, SW quad, square A, spit 1.
*V112. Stamped and bossed body sherd of a sub-biconical vessel;
moderate organic inclusions and frequent fine to medium
and occasional rounded and sub-angular quartz <2.6mm, also
occasional mica inclusions (CHAFF+QTZRSA); single hori-
zontal row of stamp motif K 1bi above closely spaced applied
vertical bosses across the carination; worn surfaces; dark grey-
brown, blotched orange-grey exterior. Vessel completeness:
<5%; Wt: 26g; Wall Th: 8.5mm.
4004/10235AA/Surface Deposit F1, spit A.
V113. Incised body sherd; fine to medium rounded and sub-angular
quartz (QTZRSA); two horizontal incised lines; burnished but
worn surfaces; dark grey; external carbonised organic residue.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: <2g; Wall Th: 4mm.
4032/10419AB/Surface Deposit F1, spit A.
*V114. Rim sherds of a large globular vessel with Everted rim which
has a sharp inner angle (Rim Diam: 200mm; Rim EVE: 20%
(total of two rim sherds)); moderate biotite and moderate to
frequent medium to coarse sub-angular quartz <3.5mm, with
medium rounded quartz, also occasional organic inclusions
(BIOTITE+QTZRCSA) (Radiocarbon sample OxA-13709);
burnished surfaces; dark grey, blotched grey-brown exterior;
internal and slight external (around the neck only) carbonised
organic residue. Vessel completeness: 5%; Wt: 238g (total of
two joining sherds); Wall Th: 8mm.
4035/10449AA–AB/Surface Deposit F1, spit B.
*V115. Rim sherd of a straight-sided vessel with a short upright
Everted rim (Rim Diam and EVE: not established). There is
a small applied round lug on the body c.18mm in diameter,
which is set 20mm below the rim; frequent fine to medium
rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); smoothed lustrous
but worn surfaces, striated interior; dark grey, blotched dark
brown exterior; slight internal carbonised organic residue.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 16g; Wall Th: 7mm (11.5mm
with the lug).
4115/10920AA/Surface find.
*V116. Rim sherds of a straight-sided ovoid-shaped or curved vessel
with a tapering short vertical constricted rim with a sharp inner
angle (Rim diam and EVE: not established); fine and occasion-
ally medium to coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz, occa-
sional iron-rich (ironstone?) inclusions (QTZF); burnished
surfaces; grey/dark grey, dark brown exterior; slight internal
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 5–10%;
Wt: 61g (total of two joining sherds); Wall Th: 8–9mm.
4220/11071AA/Surface Deposit F1, spit B; 4220/11078AB/
Surface Deposit F1, spit C.
*V117. Bossed (?) body sherd or solid lug; moderate to frequent
chaff with frequent fine to medium rounded and sub-angular
quartz (CHAFF+QTZRSA); solid boss or lug; light burnished
241
interior, worn exterior; dark grey; slight internal carbonised
organic residue. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 8g; Wall
Th: 6mm (8.5mm max).
4221/11082AC/Surface Deposit F1, spit A.
*V118. Stamped, bossed and incised body sherds of a curved vessel;
frequent fine to medium sandstone sand <2mm with fine to
occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz <2mm
(SST+QTZRSA); hollow vertical bosses with stamp motif
A 5ai above one horizontal incised line and two-line pendent-
triangles, framed by the bosses, with two further vertical incised
lines down the centre of each pendent-triangle; burnished but
worn surfaces; grey/dark grey surfaces, reddish-brown core.
Vessel completeness: 5–10%; Wt: 60g (total of two sherds);
Wall Th: 5.5mm.
4250/11252AA/Surface Deposit F1/F500, surface below
spit B; 4618/12063AB/Structure 9, NE quad.
*V119. Stamped and incised body sherd; frequent fine to medium
rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA) (Radiocarbon
sample OxA-14007); single fine incised line with stamp motif
A 4ai above and below (or either side); worn exterior, light
burnished interior; dark grey, orange exterior; substantial
internal carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness:
<5%; Wt: 6g; Wall Th: 8mm.
4353/11471AC/Surface Deposit F503.
*V120. Rim sherd of a curved, or straight-sided ovoid-shaped, vessel
with an irregular Everted rim (Rim Diam: 140mm?; Rim EVE:
8%). The neck has been pierced, post-firing, with a small hole
6mm in diameter; moderate to frequent leached calcareous
inclusions <1.5mm with fine quartz (CALC+QTZF); smoothed
lustrous surfaces, (vertical) striated exterior. There is also
a fingerprint on the exterior surface of the sherd. Frequent
calcareous voids on both surfaces; grey. Vessel completeness:
5%; Wt: 34g; Wall Th: 8.5mm.
4364/11500AA/Surface Deposit F503.
V121. Incised body sherd; moderate organic inclusions with
frequent fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz
(CHAFF+QTZRSA); single incised line; light burnished
but worn surfaces; grey, dark orange-brown exterior. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: 3g; Wall Th: 7.5mm.
4364/11500AF/Surface Deposit F503.
*V122. Incised (?) body sherd; frequent leached calcareous inclusions
<1.5mm with fine quartz (CALC+QTZF); two parallel fine
incised lines; worn surfaces; grey, blotched dark grey-brown
exterior. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 5g; Wall Th: 8mm.
4856/11833AB/Layer.
*V123. Bossed body sherd of a curved vessel; frequent organic inclu-
sions and fine to medium rounded and sub-angular quartz,
with a white flint inclusion 4mm (CHAFF+QTZRSA); hollow
vertical long bosses 72mm apart; light burnished surfaces;
grey/dark grey. Vessel completeness: 5%; Wt: 65g; Wall
Th: 8.5mm.
4588/11849AA/Structure 10, SW quad.
*V124. Bossed (?) body sherd or lug; moderate to frequent leached
calcareous inclusions <1.5mm with frequent fine sub-angular
quartz (CALC+QTZF); boss or lug across the shoulder. The
interior hollow has been subsequently filled with additional
clay; smoothed lustrous surfaces, striated interior; grey/dark
grey, pale orange-brown exterior; slight internal carbonised
organic residue; part of: 11843AB, 11849AC, 11849AF and
11861AA. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 53g (total of two
joining sherds); Wall Th: 10mm.
4590/11894AA–AB/Structure 10, NW quad, spit A.
*V125. Near-complete profile of straight-sided ovoid-shaped vessel
with an everted rim (Rim Diam: 170mm; Rim EVE: 19%)
with a (vertical) combed external surface; moderate to
frequent leached calcareous (shell?) inclusions <1.6mm, with
moderate fine rounded and frequent fine sub-angular quartz
(CALC+QTZRSA) (Thin section V2071; Radiocarbon samples
GrA-25592 and OxA-13966); smoothed lustrous interior with
striations from wiping. Frequent calcareous voids; dark grey,
blotched orange-grey exterior; internal and external carbon-
ised organic residue; ?part of: 2350AA, 2350AB, 10574AB
and 10659AA. Vessel completeness: 20–25%; Wt: 260g (total
of seventeen possible sherds from the same vessel is 313g);
Wall Th: 5.5–8mm; Vessel Ht: >156mm.
4603/11963AF–AG/Structure 9, SE quad; 4603/11976AA–
AE/Structure 9, NE quad; 4603/11979AB–AC/Structure 9,
NW quad; 4603/11983AA/Structure 9, NW quad, spit A;
4603/11990AA–AB/Structure 9, NW quad, spit B.
*V126. Stamped and incised upper body sherd; fine to medium rounded
and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); two horizontal incised
lines or neck-rings above stamp motif H 1bii$; burnished but
worn surfaces; grey/dark grey. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 5g; Wall Th: 6.5mm.
4603/11965AB/Structure 9, SW quad.
*V127. Stamped body sherd; fine to medium rounded and sub-
angular quartz (QTZRSA); stamp motif A 1bi; light burnished
surfaces; pale orange; external carbonised organic residue.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 4g; Wall Th: 7.5mm.
4603/11976AF/Structure 9, NE quad.
*V128. Rim and body sherd of a globular vessel with a short Everted
rim (Rim Diam: 200mm; Rim EVE: 7.5%); moderate to
frequent organic inclusions with fine rounded and sub-angular
quartz (CHAFF+QTZF) (Radiocarbon samples OxA-13726
and GrA-25589); burnished exterior, light burnished and stri-
ated interior; dark grey, blotched pale grey-brown surfaces;
substantial internal and external (around rim and lower body)
carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness: 5–10%;
Wt: 77g (total of two sherds); Wall Th: 9.5mm.
4603/11990AD–AE/Structure 9, NW quad, spit B.
*V129. Base sherd of a bossed curved or globular vessel (Base
form: flat-rounded; Base Diam and EVE not established);
moderate to frequent leached calcareous inclusions <1.5mm
with fine to coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz <2mm
(CALC+QTZRSA); base of a hollow vertical (?) boss;
smoothed lustrous but worn surfaces; dark grey, blotched pale
grey-brown surfaces; substantial internal and external (around
rim and lower body) carbonised organic residue. Vessel
completeness: 10%; Wt: 85g; Wall Th: 6.5mm.
4616/12045AA/Structure 9, NE quad.
*V130. Stamped and incised lower body sherd; frequent fine to
medium rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); two-line
pendent-triangle enclosing stamp motif A 5fiv; light burnished
surfaces; grey, orange-brown exterior. Vessel completeness:
5–10%; Wt: 72g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
4628/12101AA/Slot fill.
*V131. Near-complete profile of a curved vessel with a flat-topped
Everted rim (Rim Diam: 140mm; Rim EVE: 22.5%) and flat-
angled base (Base Diam and EVE not established); moderate
organic inclusions with fine rounded and sub-angular quartz,
with occasional medium sandstone sand and occasional iron-
rich (ironstone?) inclusions (CHAFF+QTZRSA) (Radiocarbon
sample OxA-14017); burnished exterior, light burnished but
worn interior; dark grey, brown blotched grey exterior; slight
internal carbonised organic residue. Vessel completeness:
20%; Wt: 210g (total of seven sherds); Wall Th: 5–10mm;
Vessel Ht: 140mm (estimated); Vessel W: 170mm.
4642/12147AA–AG/Pit Group C (F521).
*V132. Stamped and incised upper body sherds; flat-topped vertical
constricted rim with slight external and internal lip (12236AA;
Rim Diam: not established; Rim EVE: <5%); frequent fine to
medium sandstone sand with frequent fine rounded and sub-
angular quartz (SST+QTZRSA); single horizontal rows of
stamp motif A 5fiv separated by one and two horizontal incised
lines above (?) single-line chevron pattern enclosing the same
stamp motif; burnished surfaces; dark grey, exterior blotched
orange-brown; ?part of: 425AA. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 90g (total of nine sherds; total weight of four joining
sherds 12244AB, 12256AA–AC is 38g); Wall Th: 4.5–7mm.
4678/12218AA/Structure 5; 4679/12236AA/Structure 5, SE
quad; 4692/12244AB–AD/Structure 5; 4697/12256AA–AD/
Structure 5.
*V133. Incised body sherd; fine to medium rounded and sub-angular
quartz (QTZRSA); single fine incised line; burnished surfaces;
dark grey, grey-brown exterior; external carbonised organic
residue. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 12g; Wall Th: 6mm.
4692/12244AE/Structure 5.
*V134. Incised body sherd of a sub-biconical (?) vessel; fine to
medium rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); two-
line pendent-triangles across the shoulder; burnished exterior,
smoothed interior; grey/dark grey. Vessel completeness: <5%;
Wt: 4g; Wall Th: 5mm.
4692/12244AF/Structure 5.
*V135. Incised neck sherd; fine to medium sandstone sand with
rounded and fine to occasional coarse sub-angular quartz
(SST+QTZRSA); two fine horizontal incised lines or neck-
ring; burnished surfaces; dark grey, exterior grey-brown.
Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 3g; Wall Th: 6.5mm.
4806/12740AA/Surface find.
242
*V136. Decorated body sherd; fine to occasional coarse rounded and
sub-angular quartz (QTZRSA); fingertip-impressed decora-
tion or surface treatment; burnished exterior, light burnished
interior; dark grey surfaces, dark brown core. Vessel complete-
ness: <5%; Wt: 2g; Wall Th: 6mm.
4827/12750AD/Surface find.
V137. Incised body sherd; fine and occasional coarse rounded and
sub-angular quartz <1.3mm (QTZRSA); two horizontal?
incised lines; burnished surfaces; dark grey. Vessel complete-
ness: <5%; Wt: 4g; Wall Th: 5.5mm.
4856/12818AB/Structure 34, SE quad.
*V138. Clay disk, possibly a lid of a miniature vessel or a counter
with vertical or slightly inturned rim (Rim Diam: 37.5mm;
Rim EVE: 25%); fine to occasional coarse quartz <1.2mm
(QTZRSA); smoothed surfaces; orange. Vessel completeness:
45–50%; Wt: 9g; Wal Th: 7.5mm.
4867/12850AE/Structure 34, NE quad.
*V139. Bossed body sherd; moderate organic inclusions with fine to
medium rounded and sub-angular quartz, with also several
leached calcareous inclusions <2.5mm (CHAFF+QTZRSA);
hollow vertical boss; light burnished but worn exterior,
smoothed interior; dark grey, grey-brown exterior. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: 7g; Wall Th: 7.5mm.
4867/12855AL/Structure 32, SW quad.
*V140. Rim sherds of a straight-sided or slightly inturned vessel (Rim
Diam: 120mm; Rim EVE: 35% (total of three rim sherds));
frequent millstone grit-type sandstone sand and frequent sub-
angular quartz <0.5mm, also occasional organic inclusions
(SSTMG+QTZRSA) (Thin section V2077); light burnished
surfaces, worn interior; dark grey, pale orange-brown exte-
rior; internal and external carbonised organic residue. Vessel
completeness: 15–20%; Wt: 126g (total of three sherds); Wall
Th: 9–10.5mm.
4895/12891AA–AB/Pit Group H (F577); 4897/12898AA/Pit
Group H (F577).
*V141. Rim sherd of a stamped straight-sided ovoid-shaped vessel,
with an angular and hipped shoulder and vertical constricted
or slightly Everted rim (Rim Diam and EVE not established);
fine to occasional coarse rounded and sub-angular quartz
(QTZRSA); stamp motif A 1bi$; burnished surfaces; grey;
slight internal and slight external carbonised organic residue.
Vessel completeness: 5–10%; Wt: 25g; Wall Th: 4.5mm.
4902/12915AB/Pit Group H (F577).
*V142. Stamped and incised body sherd; frequent fine to coarse
rounded and sub-angular quartz (QTZCRSA); single (?)
horizontal rows of stamp motif A 4a separated by bands of
two horizontal incised lines; worn surfaces; pale grey-brown,
blotched grey exterior. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 6g;
Wall Th: 6mm.
5110/13130AA/Structure 17.
*V143. Rim sherd of a curved or globular vessel with a flat-topped
Everted rim (Rim Diam: 140mm; Rim EVE: 34% (total of
three rim sherds)); moderate to frequent fine to coarse iron-
rich sandstone stone <1.6mm with fine rounded to sub-angular
quartz, occasional organic inclusions and a rounded pebble
10.5mm in size (SSTCI+QTZRSA) (Radiocarbon sample
GrA-25950); burnished surfaces; dark grey, blotched brown
exterior; internal and external carbonised organic residue.
Vessel completeness: 5%; Wt: 126g (total of three sherds);
Wall Th: 6.5–7mm.
5115/13141AA–AB/Structure 24; 5115/13148AM/Structure
24, NW quad; 5116/13202AA/Structure 24, SW quad, spit 3.
*V144. Incised body sherd; frequent fine to medium rounded and sub-
angular quartz, also occasional organic inclusions (QTZRSA);
fine incised parallel lines, possibly combed decoration; worn
exterior, abraded interior; grey/dark grey, dark grey-brown
exterior. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 2g; Wall Th: >4mm.
5115/13148AG/Structure 24, NW quad.
*V145. Incised body sherd; fine to medium rounded and sub-angular
quartz, occasional to moderate fine leached calcareous inclu-
sions, also occasional organic inclusions (QTZRSA+CALCF);
fine incised lines; light burnished surfaces; grey/dark grey,
orange-brown exterior core; internal carbonised organic
residue. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 5g; Wall Th: 6mm.
5115/13148AH/Structure 24, NW quad.
*V146. Rim and body sherds of a straight-sided ovoid-shaped or
curved vessel with a short vertical constricted rim, which has a
sharp and distinct inner angle (Rim Diam: 170mm; Rim EVE:
18% (total of three rim sherds)); medium and occasionally
coarse sandstone sand inclusions <1.5mm, fine to medium
 sub-angular quartz, occasional to moderate fine to coarse gular); there was also a further shaft. Complete lengths
leached calcareous inclusions <3mm, occasional organic ranged from 9–19mm and head diameters from 3–13mm.
inclusions, occasional flint and occasional pebbles <4mm in
size (SST+QTZSA+CALC) (thin section: 13153AY V2082);
The vast majority were found within SFB fills, with six in
burnished surfaces, abraded exterior. Calcareous voids on Structure 19, two in Structure 14 and four in other struc-
interior surface; grey/dark grey, blotched brown/orange-brown tures; just one was recovered from a surface deposit. The
exterior; slight external carbonised organic residue. Vessel majority had, therefore, probably become incorporated
completeness: 20%; Wt: 250g (weight of fifteen sherds; total into scrap metal deposits.
weight of eleven joining sherds is 155g); Wall Th: 6–8mm.
5115/13153AB, 13153AH, 13153AY–AZ, 13153BA–BJ/ A similar picture is seen in greater numbers with the
Structure 24, SE quad; 5116/13187AG/Structure 24, NW iron nails. These were classified after Manning (1985,
quad. 134–5), who describes ten main types (the small number
*V147. Incised neck sherds; fine to medium sandstone sand, fine to
medium rounded and sub-angular quartz (SST+QTZRSA);
two horizontal incised lines or neck-rings; burnished exterior,
Feature type Str/F no. IB Unclassified
light burnished interior; dark grey surfaces, grey core. Vessel
completeness: <5%; Wt: 12g (total of two joining sherds); Structure 4 1 3
Wall Th: 5.5mm. 5 0 2
5116/13182AA/Structure 14; 5116/13191AA/Structure 24, SE
quad. 12 0 1
*V148. Incised body sherd; frequent fine to medium rounded and sub- 13 1 1
angular quartz <1mm (QTZRSA); single horizontal? incised
line; severely abraded surfaces; grey/dark grey, orange exterior 14 11 12
core. Vessel completeness: <5%; Wt: 7g; Wall Th: 7.5mm. 17 1 2
5116/13182AB/Structure 24. 19 25 16
20 3 0
21 2 0
V. Buildings 22 1 0
24 1 0
Structural ironwork
(Fig. 4.42) 29 1 0
A range of items could be classified as structural iron- 30 1 1
work: five holdfasts, four roves additional to those 31 0 1
belonging to the holdfasts, a staple, a wall-hook, thir- 33 0 2
teen studs and 373 nails or nail fragments. Holdfasts are 38 1 0
used to join two pieces of wood together when a nail is
Surface Deposit F1 9 5
insufficient (Manning 1985, 132–4); where wood thick-
ness could be calculated here, it ranged from very thin F8/275 1 0
(No. 261) to 51mm (No. 259). While the use of holdfasts F11/503 9 28
in ship-building is well documented, domestic uses are F159/182 4 18
also well known (cf. Goodall 1987, 181). The majority F342 3 1
of holdfasts were recovered from surface deposits or by F610 51 6
metal-detection, and were presumably part of scrap metal
Pit F4 1 3
deposits. Three complete roves and a further fragment
were recovered (Nos 263–5). While these normally act F35 0 1
as washers, as the examples associated with the hold- F47 1 0
fasts here do, that they have also been recovered from F168 1 0
a significant number of graves at other sites warrants F213 0 2
mention. Similar diamond-shaped perforated iron pieces F232 1 0
have been found as grave-goods at Dover Buckland, for
F237 1 3
example (among others, in Graves 1, 12 and 14: Evison
1987, figs 5.11, 8.2 and 10.10); all except one of the F238 0 2
Dover Buckland examples were found in female graves F300 0 1
dating up to c. AD 650, and were thought to have held F307 1 0
a rivet attaching a bag to a belt (Evison 1987, 118). The F315 3 1
solitary U-shaped staple from Structure 19 (presumably F321 2 2
scrap metal) would have held a fitting such as a chain or
F324 1 0
hasp in place, or been used with a hasp to secure a door
or gate (Goodall 1987, 181), and the probable wall-hook, F348 0 1
from a surface deposit, is self-explanatory. F366 1 1
The other items belonging to this category are studs F372 2 0
and nails. Studs here are characterised by having round- F415 2 0
sectioned shafts, while nails are square-sectioned. All are F416 1 0
of iron (similar copper alloy items are described under
F424 1 0
Household furnishings and equipment, above), and the
vast majority have flat or gently domed rounded heads. F519 2 6
Of the fifteen studs, six had solid domed heads, while F520 0 7
eight had flat heads (five of which were rounded, one of
which was triangular and one of which was sub-rectan- Table 4.11 Nail types by feature

243
 Figure 4.42 Illustrations of selected structural ironwork and iron fittings. All at 1:2
of Type 10 hobnails have been dealt with above). All
classifiable examples were of Type 1b, which are nails
less than 15cm long with square-section tapering stems
and flat heads which are sub-rectangular or rounded
(190 of 373 nails, or 51%, were so classified). Just ten of
these nails were recovered from Roman features, mainly
ditch fills (and some from the surface of these); six were
found in post-medieval ditches (probably residual), with
the rest either from securely dated Anglo-Saxon features
(N=276) or from undated features or surface collec-
tion (N=81; the majority of these were recovered from
metal-detection over surface deposits). Again, they are
concentrated in those features that seem to contain scrap
metal assemblages. Of the ninety-two nails from SFBs,
twenty-three came from Structure 14 and forty-one from
Structure 19; while fourteen other structures did contain
nails within their fills (these scattered across the site),
none produced more than four, with most producing
only one or two (Table 4.11). A further 135 came from
the Anglo-Saxon surface deposits (including fifty-seven
from the western part of the trackway in Area N, F610).
Fifty-one nails were recovered from twenty-two different
Anglo-Saxon pits; almost all of these produced at most
four, the two exceptions being F520 (seven) and F519
(eight), both in Pit Group N.
One question that arises with these nails, as with
much of the other metalwork assigned to the scrap
metal assemblages, is their date. At Mucking, around
500 nails (of around 900 metal artefacts in total) came
from Anglo-Saxon contexts, but analysis of their
distribution suggested that most or all were Roman in
date and residual (Hamerow 1993, 68). Similarly, at
the Spong Hill settlement, where there was a similar
preponderance of Manning Type 1 nails, the twenty-
five (of sixty-nine nails) from Anglo-Saxon features
were argued to be residual or intrusive (Rickett 1995,
77–82). At Bloodmoor Hill, it is less clear-cut. There are
certainly far fewer preceding Roman features to produce
residual material than at either Spong Hill or Mucking,
and what Roman features there are produced little in
the way of metalwork. Moreover, the similarity of the
nails perhaps suggests less variability than one would
expect from a ‘normal’ Romano-British assemblage. It
remains uncertain whether this is Romano-British mate-
rial deliberately selected for its reusable qualities, but one
should remember that some of the other metalwork from
244
the same features can definitely be dated to the 6th or
7th centuries. It is entirely possible that the bulk of the
metalwork here is of Anglo-Saxon date, with the addition
of some collected Romano-British pieces. In a way, it is
remarkable that, outside of the scrap metal assemblages,
the site produced so few nails from other features, given
that the buildings would have been constructed mainly
from wood; this may suggest a deliberate policy of recy-
cling usable ironwork when buildings were dismantled
or demolished.
*259. Holdfast, Fe. Square-sectioned shaft with flat, rounded
end passes through diamond-shaped rove and hammered
over; would have secured wood 51mm thick. L: 71mm;
Diam: 27mm.
3243 (F331)/6413/Pit Group J.
260. Holdfast, Fe. Square-sectioned nail, head missing but end
slightly flared and flattened, in situ through central perfora-
tion of sub-diamond-shaped rove; would have secured wood
19mm thick. Rove L: 23mm; W: 16mm; Th: 4mm; Nail
Diam: 5.8mm; overall L: 25mm.
6203 (F1)/14078/Surface Deposit F1.
261. Holdfast, leaded gunmetal. Nail has flat circular head, round-
sectioned shaft hammered flat at end; shaft passes through
irregular cut small washer; possible MPOs, but impossible
to identify; would have secured a thin piece of material.
Diam: 16mm; overall L: 11mm.
2450 (F275)/6838/Surface Deposit F8/F275.
262. Holdfast, Fe. X-ray shows that two square-section nails, both
broken, have been inserted through a rove-like plate at angles
to each other; some form of fastening. L: 20mm; W: 15mm;
overall L: 14mm.
6240/14115/Topsoil.
263. Holdfast, Fe. Square-sectioned shank with flat, rounded
end passes through diamond-shaped rove and hammered
over; would have secured wood 38mm thick. L: 55mm;
Diam: 31mm.
M004/6910/MD spot find.
*264. Rove and rove fragment, Fe. Complete example is diamond-
shaped with off-centre perforation. L: 34mm; W: 26mm;
Th: 5mm;
4628 (F11)/12697/Surface Deposit F11/F503.
265. Rove, Fe. Diamond-shaped, with a central perforation.
L: 38mm; W: 28mm; Th: 3.5mm.
1218 (F18)/6307/Pit Group B.
266. Rove, Fe. Diamond-shaped with large, slightly off-centre
perforation. L: 45mm; W: 25mm; Th: 5mm.
1868 (F3)/6355/Anglo-Saxon pit
267. U-shaped staple, Fe. L: 18mm; W: 15mm; Th: 4mm.
1625 (F200)/6072/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 2.
*268. Probable wall-hook, Fe. Square-section shaft, tapering and
bent back on itself to form plain hook; shaft widens into
a probable attachment plate, which is twisted and broken.
L: 84mm; Diam: 12mm.
M234/6908/MD spot find.
 Figure 4.43 Illustrations of selected lock furniture. All at 1:2
Iron door, window and furniture fittings
(Fig. 4.42)
Similarly, the general lack of metal fittings from doors,
windows and furniture probably says more about waste
disposal and recycling within the settlement than it
does about the original appearance of the structures; it
is notable that, once again, the majority of the ironwork
which falls into this category — a staple (No. 270) and
two hinge fragments (Nos 269 and 271) — was recov-
ered from Structures 14 and 19.
269. Probable strap-hinge fragment, Fe. Rectangular plate, broken
along one edge, with a central projection from the other which
would have attached to the partner plate. L: 49mm; W: 25mm;
Th: 2.4mm.
1625 (F200)/6088/Structure 19, SE quad, spit 1.
270. Staple fragment, Fe. Rectangular-section, bent. L: 22mm;
Diam: 5mm.
1625 (F200)/6095/Structure 19, SW quad, spit 2.
*271. Hinge fragment, Fe. Rectangular-section plate, tapering
slightly towards the looped attachment end. Possible nail
may be associated with the other end. L: 73mm; W: 30mm;
Th: 5mm.
384 (F41)/6140/Structure 14, SE quad, spit 3.
*272. Hooked plate, Fe. Rectangular plate, broken through a central
perforation, forming a hook at one end (this in line with the
plate, rather than at a right-angle); function unclear. L: 37mm;
W: 15mm; Th: 4mm.
1130 (F130)/6023/Structure 21, SW quad, spit 3.
Lock furniture
(Fig. 4.43)
Again, the majority of these iron items come from surface
deposits or from the fill of Structure 14; most are broken.
Only the padlock key (also broken) (No. 278) from the
fill of Structure 32 seems to have formed part of a more
‘normal’ rubbish deposit. Nevertheless, assuming that
the bulk of these items are of Anglo-Saxon date, they
do provide evidence for a concern with security on the
settlement in the form of lift-keys and latchlifters for
opening secured doors, bolts and bolt-plates for locking
them, and a padlock key for unlocking a chest or similar.
Padlock keys of Goodall Type A are known from 10th-
to 15th-century contexts at Winchester (Goodall 1990,
245
1006), and from earlier medieval contexts at York
(Rogers 1993, 1423–5); an example like No. 278, with
its elaborate stem, is probably of Anglo-Saxon date, as
Roman examples of similar padlock keys have L-shaped
stems (Manning 1985, 96). Late Saxon parallels are seen
at Thetford (Goodall 1984, fig. 132.180–2; Andrews
1995, fig. 71.31). The L-shaped lift keys from the surface
deposits and Structure 14 all have Roman, as well as
Anglo-Saxon, parallels. If No. 279 is a latchlifter, it is
probably of Anglo-Saxon date, as Roman latchlifters take
the form of No. 280 (Manning 1985, 88–9).
*273. Possible bolt, Fe. Round-sectioned rod, tapering to point, with
a projection at right-angles, also tapering to point. L: 140mm;
W: 42mm; Th: 8mm.
M204/6909/MD spot find.
*274. Possible bolt-plate, Fe. Rectangular plate with rounded end,
through which large perforation has been made (for receiving
a bolt?), while a smaller attachment hole lies further down
the plate, for attaching it to a doorframe; broken. L: 59mm;
W: 25mm; Th: 5mm.
1831 (F232)/6345/Pit Group G.
*275. Key fragment, Fe. L-shaped lift key with three teeth on the bit;
bow broken. L: 62mm; W: 33mm; Th: 6.5mm.
392 (F41)/6160/Structure 14, SW quad.
276. Possible key fragment, Fe. Possibly from an L-shaped lift-
key: L-shaped rod fragment, broken at both ends. L: 76mm;
W: 6mm; Th: 5mm.
2262 (F159)/6376/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
*277. Key, Fe. Fragment of a probable L-shaped lift key. Rectangular
section stem, broken; flat bit with one tooth remaining.
L: 53mm; W: 22mm; Th: 3mm.
1639 (F182)/6331/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
*278. Padlock key, Fe. Bit broken off, but shaped stem and looped
terminal survive; bit probably set laterally to stem (Goodall
1990, Type A). Probably for a barrel padlock, but cannot be
closely dated. L: 79mm; W: 24mm; Th: 3mm.
4867 (F567)/12964/Structure 32, SW quad.
*279. Possible latchlifter, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft looped into an
eye at one end, and angled vertically and then horizontally at
the other. L: 135mm; Diam: 3.2mm.
4088 (F1)/12646/Surface Deposit F1.
*280. Latchlifter, Fe. Roman type. Rod-like handle, broken; blade
is strongly curved (and twisted) with a gradual upturned tip.
L: 79mm; Diam: 5mm.
2454 (F275)/6386/Surface Deposit F8/F275.
*281. Possible lever-padlock case fragment, Fe. Plate fragment with
two smaller holes either side of a larger fragmentary slot (cf.
 Manning 1985, O66). L: 63mm; W: 27mm; Th: 6mm. Heavily
corroded.
392 (F41)/6168/Structure 14, SE quad.
Non-textile-related fired clay and daub
by Sue Anderson
Excluding annular loomweights and spindlewhorls (see
Textile manufacture below for description and discus-
sion of these), a total of 27,751 fragments of fired clay
(150,897g) was studied, of which 26,921 (144,682g)
derived from Anglo-Saxon features, and are commented
on here (Roman material is discussed separately in
Chapter 2). The fired clay was quantified by catalogue
number, fabric and type, using fragment count and weight
in grams. The presence and form of surface fragments
and impressions were recorded, and wattle dimensions
measured where possible. Data was input into an MS
Access database. The majority of this material was
heavily abraded and the softer fabrics were particularly
badly affected by post-depositional processes, as would
be expected. Approximately two-thirds of the fragments
in this assemblage weighed under 5g.
Eight very broad fabric types were identified in
Anglo-Saxon features; descriptions and quantities are
shown in Table 4.12. The assemblage is clearly domi-
nated by ‘fsm’. Fabric ‘msm’ was similar in colour to
surfaces on some fragments of ‘fsm’ and may simply
be a harder-fired version of the same clay type. Organic
impressions were relatively common in most of the
fabrics. All other fabrics made up a very small proportion
of the assemblage. Functional types were recorded where
possible, but the majority of this assemblage falls into the
‘Uncertain’ category. Table 4.13 shows the approximate
quantities of fragments identifiable to type.
Structural pieces
Fifty-seven fragments were identified as possible daub.
The majority of these, forty-nine pieces, were from
Structure 12, and had wattle impressions of various sizes
(c.12–16mm diameter) and flat smoothed surfaces. Daub
would be unusual in an early Anglo-Saxon building in
East Anglia, so this identification is uncertain. However,
the most plausible pieces, which had flat smoothed
surfaces and wattle impressions at right-angles to each

Fabric description Code No Wt (g)

Fine sandy micaceous, light brown to brick red, tiny voids, some red clay pellets, soft. fsm 24106 116190
Surfaces often pale buff-orange
Medium sandy micaceous, light brown to orange, voids, some ferrous/red clay msm 1473 12665
inclusions, harder
Medium sandy with fine flint, brown, some voids msf 561 7030
Sparse ill-sorted very coarse chalk/limestone/shell and occasional coarse quartz. Similar calc 587 6083
to msm but usually hard and quite brittle
Grass-tempered, red or black. Some fragments may be very abraded Saxon pottery org 35 284
Dense, fine–medium sandy with white and red clay pellets, pinkish. Some pieces may be cp 27 295
abraded Roman tile
Dense fine sandy, pale buff fs 26 186
Medium sandy with organic inclusions mso 1 62
Unidentified un 5 1
Unfired clay unf 100 488

Table 4.12 Quantities of fired clay by fabric group

Plate X Part of clay ring, or fender, from Structure 25 (photo: Sue Anderson)

246
other, were also from an Anglo-Saxon context, Surface
Deposit F1. Other fragments were from Pit F372.
Pit F321 produced sixty-seven fragments of possible
render in a calcareous fabric with smoothed surfaces.
Other fragments which may have fulfilled this func-
tion were tentatively identified among the pieces from
Structures 9, 19 and 20. One piece with a triangular
section from Structure 14 was probably a piece of
caulking.
Thirty-seven fragments <5526> from Structure 25
were reconstructable and appeared to be part of a ring
(Pl. X). The internal clay (fabric ‘msm’) was dark red
and the outer surface pale buff. The surviving length was
c.275mm and the piece was broken at both ends. The
curvature suggested an internal diameter for the ring of at
least 400mm. The pieces had a parabolic section (height
c.50–110mm) and undulating sides in plan (width varying
from c.80mm to 210mm), and curved sharply at one point,
so probably appeared more hexagonal than circular. The
upper surface was smoothed and this continued to the
edges of the base, although most of this was heavily pitted
and probably sat directly on soil. Both sides of the object
have a distinct edge, so the surface did not continue as a
lining for a hearth or pit. At one end there is what appears
to be an ‘impact crater’. This seems to have resulted in
the section affected having moved out of alignment. The
new alignment had been fire-hardened, so presumably
the object stayed in situ against the fire long enough for
this to happen. It suggests that the internal solid clay was
not fully hardened at the time of the impact. The most
likely interpretation of this object is that it was part of
a hearth edge or ‘fender’. Other fragments which may
have had a similar or related function were collected as
<5531> (smaller?) and <5547>, from the same feature.
The latter also contained a fragment with a trapezoidal
section which may be part of a fire bar.
Five pieces of vitrified hearth lining from a pit, two
structures and a surface deposit were also identified,
including a possible tuyere (<3557>) with a diameter of
c.35mm.
Uncertain function
The majority of fragments fall into this category, as many
were simply abraded pieces with no surfaces or impres-
sions. However, fragments with surfaces and/or wattle
impressions were also recorded in this group, as their
function was uncertain.
In general, fragments with wattle impressions had
surfaces which were smoothed and either slightly convex
or relatively flat. Fewer than 150 examples of these were
present in the assemblage. The wattles varied in diameter
from 7mm to 22mm, although most were in the range
Type Code No. Wt (g)
Crucibles CRUC 2 6
Daub? D? 57 1057
Render/caulking? R? 67 807
Hearth edging and lining HL 37 2384
Vitrified hearth lining VHL 5 31
Uncertain function Un 26753 140397
Table 4.13 Quantities of fired clay in Anglo-Saxon
features, excluding loomweights, by type
247
14–16mm. Where more than one wattle impression was
present in a single fragment they were generally roughly
parallel, with no evidence of interweaving. These frag-
ments were most likely to have formed parts of oven
domes. A few pieces had impressions of larger pieces
of roundwood, perhaps stakes or poles. The majority of
these types of fragments were recovered from the fills
of structures and pits, although some were from surface
deposits. Only one fragment was from an oven/hearth
(F338).
Also within the ‘uncertain’ category were approxi-
mately 400 flat pieces, often double-sided, which were
recorded as ‘slab-like’. They were generally in fabric
‘fsm’, and had a smoothed flat surface and a more irregular
underside. Sometimes the smoothed surface was white or
partially vitrified. They varied in thickness from c.9mm
to c.39mm, and some had the appearance of rudimentary
tiles. Similar pieces have been found at the middle Saxon
site of Staunch Meadow, Brandon (Anderson 2001), and
in Ipswich (K. Wade, pers. comm.). One possibility is that
these pieces could be fragments of linings for wooden
box hearths, but the impressions on the undersides do
not appear to indicate that the fragments were pressed
against wood. Several were recovered from Saxon oven/
hearth features F259 and F338, where they were presum-
ably used as a lining directly on the ground, but again
most came from the fills of SFBs and from pits. Hearth
fragments were found collapsed into several SFB pits
at West Stow, and some pieces with wattle impressions
were interpreted as a fire-back against the gable wall
(West 1985, 120).
Fired clay by feature and phase
Table 4.14 shows the quantities of fired clay in Anglo-
Saxon features by feature type. It is clear that the majority
of this assemblage is derived from the SFBs, surface
deposits and pits. This is not surprising, as these open
features would have been the perfect place for the depo-
sition of waste material. It does not necessarily imply that
the material was used in these structures. Large quantities
were also recovered from ovens and hearths, where the
material is likely to be in situ.
The largest quantities of fired clay from single features
came from Surface Deposit F1 and Structure 32, both of
which produced over 10kg. The size of fragments was
very different between the two features; average frag-
Feature phase Feature type No. Wt (g)
SFB 11520 65739
Post-in-trench 45 198
building
Posthole 9 34
building
Oven/hearth etc 1559 7978
Pit 3963 27344
Hollow 14 112
Grave 117 818
Surface deposit 8475 30175
Other 1 5
Total 25703 132403
Table 4.14 Fired clay by feature type (excluding
loomweights)
ment weight in the former was only 3g, while in the latter
it was 13g. It might be expected that material buried in
an open feature would be less abraded than that discarded
on a surface feature, but the average weights from the
structures vary considerably, from 1.5g in Structure 19
and Structure 17 to 25.1g in Structure 25, suggesting
varied deposition patterns. A few of the larger or more
interesting groups require more detailed discussion.
Unsurprisingly, given the small average size, very little of the large
quantity of fired clay (5808 fragments, 17,146g, average weight 2.95g)
from Surface Deposit F1 was identifiable. However, there were some
smoothed fragments with wattle impressions, particularly from [4023]
and [4024]. Context [4219] (part of surface deposit F1) contained
fragments with wattles at right-angles; these may be daub, perhaps
Roman and redeposited.
Structure 4 produced 580 fragments (2599g, average fragment
weight 4.5g), several of which had been heavily burnt, blackened and
vitrified. Structure 19 contained 1465 fragments (1831g, average weight
1.25g). There were several smoothed fragments, none of which had any
wattle impressions. Some of these may be fragments of render. This
feature also produced a crucible fragment (see Cowgill, below). This
structure was fairly close to oven F259, although it did not contain such
overfired material. The oven itself produced 311 fragments (2714g,
average weight 8.7g), most of which were slab-like and flat; some had
white, partially vitrified surfaces.
Some of the 2081 fragments (3226g, average weight 1.5g) from
Structure 17 were also smoothed and many of them were slightly
convex, but in this case several had wattle impressions. Context [1921]
(lower fill of Structure 17), in particular, contained thick fragments with
irregular smoothing that were likely to be part of an oven dome. In
the same area, Surface Deposit F275 produced 1113 fragments (4933g,
average weight 4.4g), and adjacent F8 402 pieces (2249g, average
weight 5.6g). A high proportion of flat, slab-like pieces was present in
these groups, perhaps relating to the nearby oven feature F338. This
contained 1248 fragments (5264g, average weight 4.2g), and, again,
many were slab-like.
Pit F255, adjacent to Structure 20, produced 440 fragments (2556g,
average fragment weight 5.8g). The larger fragments included several
flat pieces with wattle or larger roundwood impressions. Flat pieces
were also recovered from Structure 20, although most of the 1102
fragments (2546g, average fragment weight 2.3g) from this feature
were small and had no surfaces or impressions.
Some of the material from Pit Groups K and L, to the east of
Structures 29 and 30, produced several large slab-like fragments and
pieces with wattle and roundwood impressions, probably from ovens.
Pieces of render or caulking came from Pit Group L. Several smoothed
fragments were recovered from the smaller Structure 29 (236 pieces,
971g, average weight 4.1g), but none had wattle impressions. The
generally larger pieces from Structure 30 (294 fragments, 2362g,
average weight 8.0g) had wattle impressions varying in diameter from
9 to 18mm. This feature also produced a possible fire bar or brick-like
object. Structure 27 to the north of these produced 210 fragments (657g,
average weight 3.1g), again including several flat, smoothed or vitrified
surfaces, but no wattles.
Structure 25 (206 pieces, 5516g, average weight 26.8g) contained
fragments of at least one possible hearth ‘fender’ (described above),
as well as a possible fire bar, some vitrified hearth lining and other
vitrified fragments. Very little slag was found in this feature, so the
?hearth appears unlikely to be related to metalworking. It is quite close
to Oven F372, which produced 294 fragments (1012g, average weight
3.4g). There were several fragments with wattles of c.8mm diameter
and 20mm diameter at right-angles. Small pieces came from the oven
fill itself, one of which had a flat surface.
Small Structure 26 contained 298 fragments (3525g, average
weight 11.8g). The most interesting feature of this group was the high
proportion of calcareous-tempered clay, the majority of which pieces
were smoothed or flat. This feature produced 58% of the total Anglo-
Saxon ‘calc’ fabric group. Chalk-tempered fired clay is commonly
found on medieval sites in Suffolk and was probably used for oven
domes, but it was more likely to be used for loomweights in the early
Saxon period.
Structure 14 contained 567 fragments (1167g, average weight
2.1g), some of which may have been fragments of fire bars or brick-like
objects. One small piece had flat surfaces and a triangular section, and
may have been a fragment of caulking.
Approximately fifty fragments identified as possible daub were
recovered from the fill of Structure 12, which produced a total of
248
198 fragments (1830g, average weight 9.2g). These daub items were
smoothed flat and had straw impressions and large wattles, c.12–22mm
diameter. Pit Group E, to the north of this structure, also produced
several large fragments with wattle impressions up to c.20mm in
diameter (total thirteen fragments, 160g, average weight 12.3g). If this
material is daub, it is possible that it was redeposited from the underlying
Roman ditches F7 and F229, although only one of these produced any
fired clay. Structure 10, also cutting Roman ditches, contained a similar
range of material (total 626 fragments, 4366g, average weight 7g),
including a piece with wattles at right-angles. A similar assemblage
came from Structure 9 (553 fragments, 3965g, average weight 7.2g),
located at the northern end of the same ditches and ?overlain by Surface
Deposit F1.
Surface Deposit F503 produced 844 fragments (3724g, average
weight 4.4g). Most were small, but there were several with smoothed
or flat surfaces, a few vitrified pieces and at least two crucibles.
Structures 23, 32, 33 and 34 all produced several large fragments
with smoothed surfaces. These features, together with Structure 24, had
some of the highest average fragment weights (22.4g, 13.8g, 12.3g,
20.3g and 8.2g respectively). This may be related to their distance from
the main focus of settlement, as rubbish and soil deposited in them may
have suffered less reworking than would be likely in features located
closer to the centre. Large fragments from Structure 34 may have been
a hearth edge similar to that from Structure 25.
Distribution of weights of fired clay was plotted for the
structures. There is no particular correlation between size
of feature and quantity of clay — some of the smallest
features, such as Structure 37 (9221g) and Structure 32
(12078g) produced some of the largest quantities.
Quantities do not fall off or increase away from the
main focus of settlement, and those structures located
close to ovens have only moderate quantities of mate-
rial. However, it might be more profitable to consider
the scatter of material in related features. For example,
the features around and including Oven F259 produced
about 8kg of fired clay, those around Oven F338 almost
16kg, and those around Structure 25 c.7kg. The group
of features and pits including Structures 29 and 30
contained c.14kg. The identified ovens and hearths on
this site appear to be of different types and sizes, and
there is no reason to assume that they would require the
same quantities of fired clay in their make-up. However,
it is interesting to speculate that, if these quantities are
roughly representative, there could have been between
ten and twenty ovens/hearths originally.
Discussion
It is likely that the majority of this assemblage consists
of fragments from demolished oven domes and hearth/
oven floors. Fragments with parallel wattle impressions
were most likely to be from oven domes and usually had
slightly convex surfaces. Slab-like pieces were probably
used to line hearths and ovens, in the same way that
Roman tile was (see Chapter 2).
While there is a small amount of evidence for clay
being used as caulking and possibly as rendering, there
is no definitive evidence that wattle-and-daub was used
on this site in the early Anglo-Saxon period. Very few
sites of this date have produced evidence for wattle
and daub construction and, as daub is often used as a
generic term for fired clay, those which are unpublished
or have no specialist report have to remain doubtful. At
Mucking, Essex, 80kg of fired clay was recovered from
the Grubenhäuser, but very little of this was identifiable
as daub, compared with the large amounts from earlier
features (Hamerow 1993, 13). However, excavations in
Middle Saxon London have suggested that wattle and
daub construction was used by this period, at least in the
capital (Brown 2004; Goffin 2003).
VI. Occupations, industry and crafts
Metalworking
Tools
(Figs 4.44–4.45)
As well as extensive evidence for Anglo-Saxon metal-
working in the form of crucibles and slag (see below), a
number of metalworking tools were also identified: four
chisels, a set of metalworking clips, a nail-making plate,
a possible file, two punches, a possible tongs fragment
and five other potential tools. Except for the nail-making
plate, the clips and one of the chisels (this last a surface
find near to Structure 14), these were recovered from the
fill of Structure 14 (eight items), the fill of Structure 19
(one broken item) and Surface Deposit F159/F182 (one
broken item). It is interesting that, unlike much of the
associated metalwork assemblage in Structure 14, the
metalworking tools from this feature are largely complete
(though now heavily corroded). After the 7th-century
smith’s grave from Tattershall Thorpe, Lincolnshire
(Hinton 2000), this represents the most extensive assem-
blage of metalworking tools yet recovered from an early
Anglo-Saxon context.
The draw-plate or nail-making plate (No. 282) is of
particular interest, as this is only the second example to
be found in England. The only other, from Tattershall
Thorpe, while similar, has five holes rather than the four
seen here, all of them slightly countersunk; the holes in
the Tattershall object vary much more in diameter, ranging
from 1mm to 6mm, while the four holes on the example
here range only from 4.5mm to 5.7mm. The Tattershall
Thorpe example also has a slot along two-thirds of the
length, which this does not, but neither does the other
well-published example from the Viking tool chest at
Mästermyr in Gotland (Arwidsson and Berg 1983, 16,
31). The Mästermyr find is slightly larger than that from
Bloodmoor Hill, at 229mm long and 21mm thick, and
has holes which range from 6mm to 10mm in diameter
(ibid., 16). The function of these tools has been debated
(Hinton 2000, 26–31): one possibility, that of draw-
plate, depends on there being holes of differing size, so
that wires of different diameters could be produced and
lengths of wire could be successively reduced (ibid.;
Arwidsson and Berg 1983, 32). This is clearly not the
case for the Bloodmoor Hill example, where little reduc-
tion in diameter could have been achieved. An alternative
(as suggested for the Mästermyr tool) is that of nail-
making plate: a tapering shank could be put through one
of the holes and the wider end hammered to make the
head (Hinton 2000, 31). The tapering and burred ends of
the tool itself may be explained by arguing that the tool
was hammered into a block of wood, in order to keep it
secure, although a different arrangement may have been
in use for nail-making (ibid.). That this tool was in a
good condition when deposited in a clearly Anglo-Saxon
context (the fill of Structure 3), and that it has no Roman
parallels, provides strong evidence for Anglo-Saxon
metalworking on the site, as does the sizeable assemblage
of slag and crucibles (see Cowgill, below).
249
Chisels would have been used to cut through heated
metal bars, while punches would have been used to make
holes through metal pieces. Examples of both of these
have been recovered: three chisels (Nos 283–5), two
punches (Nos 287–8), and one which could be either
(its tip was too corroded for a proper identification to be
made) (No. 286). They are all of rectangular or square
section, with tapering shafts, some of which have burred
heads. It is also possible that those with burred heads were
used occasionally as small anvils (cf. Hinton 2000, 31).
Some of the five unidentified tools catalogued (Nos 292–
4) may also have been chisels or punches. Slightly
later Anglo-Saxon chisels are known from Thetford
(Goodall and Ottoway 1993, 99, fig. 118.5; Goodall
1984, 77, fig. 115.5–7) and punches are known from
GH105 at Mucking (Morris 1993, 70), the Anglo-Saxon
settlement at Spong Hill (Rickett 1995, 77), Tattershall
Thorpe (Hinton 2000, 31–4), Coppergate (Ottoway 1992,
515–19) and Thetford (Goodall and Ottoway 1993, 99,
fig. 118.4; Goodall 1984, 77, figs 116.8–9; Andrews
1995, fig. 68.1–4).
Clips would have been used by the smith to hold
small items; Hinton (2000, 28), discussing the only other
known example from Anglo-Saxon England, the much
larger riveted pair from Tattershall Thorpe, argues that
the length of the arms would have served to absorb
most of the impact from striking. The small pair from
Bloodmoor Hill (No. 289) would not have achieved this
as effectively, but may have held smaller items more
securely, in the manner of tweezers.
Files are known from Tattershall Thorpe (Hinton
2000, 34) and 10th-century Coppergate (Ottoway
1992, 521–2); the tentatively identified example from
Bloodmoor Hill (No. 290; too corroded to determine
the presence of filing teeth) is of a similar shape to the
Tattershall Thorpe examples, and is slightly larger than
the largest of the three from there, but is much larger than
the three from Coppergate.
Anglo-Saxon examples of metalworking tongs
are known from Tattershall Thorpe (Hinton 2000,
24–6, fig. 15.5), the middle Saxon iron smelting site at
Ramsbury, Wiltshire (two pairs, both broken; Evison
1980, 37, fig. 21.7–8), the settlement site at Shakenoak
(Brodribb et al. 1972, 94, fig. 42.192), and from G115
at Sibertswold in Kent (Faussett 1856, pl. xv, 2). These
all have a long grip and long handles, making them suit-
able for working with hot metal. Most known examples
are snub-nosed, but narrow pincers are known from
Canterbury (though these are from a medieval context:
Barford 1995, 1089). The fragment from Bloodmoor
Hill (No. 291) was recovered from a surface deposit, and
seems to have been intended for recycling.
These tools strongly suggest that metalworking was
taking place on the site during the Anglo-Saxon period,
something which is supported by the evidence from scrap
metal assemblages, slag and crucibles (see below). It is
also interesting that the fills in which this material has
been deposited were, on the whole, later 7th century in
date, and may in fact be among the latest features on the
site to have been created or infilled. Possible locations
for the metalworking activity will be further discussed
in Chapter 6.
 Figure 4.44 Illustrations of selected metalworking tools. All at 1:2
*282. Nail-making plate, Fe. Rectangular-section bar, burred at one
end, tapering at the other to a point, with four perforations
visible on the X-ray in the upper portion; no associated slot
is apparent. L: 166mm; W: 21mm; Th: 17mm. Hole diameters
(from burred end): 5.5mm; 5.0mm; 5.7mm; 4.5mm.
251 (F9)/6917/Structure 3, NW quad.
*283. Chisel, Fe. Rectangular-section bar tapering to fairly narrow
edge. L: 50mm; W: 16mm; Th: 10mm.
384 (F41)/6148/Structure 14, NW quad, spit 2.
*284. Chisel, Fe. Rectangular section bar with slightly bevelled top,
gradually tapering, but point broken off. L: 91mm; W: 16mm;
Th: 14mm.
0000/6433/Surface find.
*285. Chisel, Fe. Rectangular-section bar with slightly bevelled
top, tapering to fairly narrow edge, which is slightly broken.
L: 83mm; W: 13mm; Th: 10mm.
683/6290/Surface find.
*286. Chisel or punch, Fe. Bevelled head, rectangular-section bar
narrowing to heavily corroded point; difficult to determine
function precisely. L: 89mm; W: 16mm; Th: 11mm.
392 (F41)/6167/Structure 14, SE quad.
*287. Punch, Fe. Square-section shaft narrowing to square-section
point; possibly high lead content. L: 112mm; Diam: 8mm.
392 (F41)/6160/Structure 14, SW quad.
250
*288. Punch, Fe. Burred at top; rectangular section, tapering to a
broken-off point. L: 76mm; W: 23mm; Th: 19mm.
1672 (F200)/6118/Structure 19, SW quad, spit 3.
*289. Clips, Fe. Set of metalworking clips, used for gripping small
items. Parallel-sided strip, bent double to form tweezers-like
object. Probably complete except for very tips. L: 115mm;
W: 10mm.
3469 (F368)/6422/Anglo-Saxon pit.
*290. Possible file, Fe. Rectangular-section bar with tapering ends;
the right size and shape for a metalworking file, but too
corroded to see any filing marks; a possibility only. L: 210mm;
W: 13mm; Th: 7mm.
0000/6435/Surface find.
*291. Possible tongs fragment, Fe. Seems to be a section of the
handle and tong blade at the point where other arm would have
been attached with a rivet through the perforation. L: 49mm;
W: 19mm; Th: 8mm.
1642 (F182)/6334/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
292. Tool fragment, Fe. Rectangular-section bar (broken) sits at a
slight angle from thicker, narrower tang, as if has been twisted.
Tool type unclear. L: 75mm; W: 17mm; Th: 8mm.
384 (F41)/6149/Structure 14, NW quad, spit 3.
293. Tool fragment, Fe. Rectangular-section bar with slightly
rounded top; shaft broken. Could be a chisel or punch.
L: 31mm; W: 21mm; Th: 7mm.
 Figure 4.45 Distribution plot of metalworking tools and hones
384 (F41)/6141/Structure 14, SE quad, spit 1.
294. Three possible tools, all with square-section shafts, tapering;
only one point survives. L: 70mm; 63mm and 46mm;
Diam: 10mm; 7mm; 6mm.
392 (F41)/6160/Structure 14, SW quad.
Hones
with petrological identifications by Steven Laurie
(Figs 4.45–4.46)
Hones would have been used for sharpening knives
and the points of other implements, such as awls and
needles (Rogers 1993, 1315); coarser examples may
also have been used in the final stages of metalworking,
for the initial sharpening of tools, while finer stones
may have been used for fining the cutting edge during
metalworking (MacGregor 1982, 79). A variety of stone
types were used at Bloodmoor Hill, some of which may
have been reasonably local and derived from erratic
deposits (the quartzites), and others which were defi-
nitely imported (the possible greywhacke, from Wales,
the southern Scottish uplands or Scandinavia; the lime-
stone, possibly from the English Midlands; the dolerite
from northern England, Scotland or Scandinavia). The
solitary siltstone and the sandstones may also possibly
be non-local, but British. Comparison of stone types
against feature phase throws up an interesting pattern: the
sandstones, mudstones, limestone and siltstone examples
were all found in fills with a later 7th-century date, while
the quartzites and the imported dolerite example were
found in features of varying phase, from early to late in
the settlement sequence. This may suggest variations in
the stone supply to the site. Stone types characteristic of
Anglo-Scandinavian and medieval sites, such as schists
and phyllites, are not seen here, suggesting that the trade
251
routes which eventually brought them to Britain were not
yet operational (cf. Rogers 1993, 1315).
The distribution of the hones across the site suggests
that they were not intimately associated with metal-
working as such, for they are not strongly associated with
the scrap metal assemblages in the same way that other
metalworking tools are. Only five of the twenty-three
hones are associated with surface deposits, with a further
example in Structure 19; Structure 14 produced none,
despite its large collection of chisels and other tools.
Rather, this collection of stone sharpening implements
seems to have become incorporated into SFB and other
fills alongside more domestic refuse. The majority are
broken and/or worn, which would seem to support this.
*295. Hone, fine sandstone. Teardrop-section rectangular bar, broken
at both ends. L: 32mm; W: 43mm; Th: 20mm.
72 (F1)/2792/Surface Deposit F1.
296. Hone, micaceous sandstone. Probably rectangular and
tapering, but only small corner fragment remains. L: 53mm;
W: 31mm; Th: 26mm.
1153 (F130)/4857/Structure 21, NE quad, spit 2.
297. Hone, sandstone. Triangular end fragment, broken at both
ends and on one face. L: 70mm; W: 50mm; Th: 34mm.
1642 (F182)/6966/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
298. Hone, porous medium-grained sandstone. Irregular, sub-trian-
gular in section, broken. L: 53mm; W: 51mm; Th: 40mm.
1682 (F200)/5413/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 3.
299. Hone, fine sandstone with a little mica. Large, tapering,
one side smooth, the others rough. L: 126mm; W: 58mm;
Th: 46mm.
1975 (F237)/7310/Pit Group G.
300. Hone, fine to medium sandstone. Crescent-shaped and
rounded. L: 119mm; W: 64mm; Th: 15mm.
2492 (F335)/5492/Structure 25, SW quad.
301. Hone, sandstone with mica. Tapering, rectangular section,
broken at one end and axially. L: 82mm; W: 57mm;
Th: 24mm.
2492 (F335)/5492/Structure 25, SW quad.

Figure 4.46 Illustrations of selected hones. All at 1:2
252
302. Hone, fine micaceous sandstone. Broken-off fragment with
rounded edges on two sides. L: 42mm; W: 35mm; Th: 4mm.
3290 (F379)/7655/Structure 26.
303. Hone, micaceous sandstone. Rectangular section, broken
at both ends, on one edge and axially. L: 45mm; W: 58mm;
Th: 24mm.
4271 (F502)/11291/Anglo-Saxon pit.
304. Hone, fine-grained sandstone. Large flattish sub-rectangular
piece with one smooth edge and two smooth sides, the others
broken. L: 138mm; W: 87mm; Th: 25mm.
4821 (F550)/12775/Structure 33, SW quad.
305. Hone, metamorphic quartzite. Rounded in section and at ends.
L: 86mm; W: 25mm; Th: 23mm.
261 (F17)/3513/Pit Group B.
306. Hone, metamorphic quartzite. Rounded and worn. L: 82mm;
W: 40mm; Th: 12mm.
261 (F17)/3513/Pit Group B.
307. Hone, metamorphic quartzite. Rounded and worn. L: 77mm;
W: 42mm; Th: 11mm.
1100 (F126)/59/Structure 22, NW quad, spit C.
308. Hone, metamorphic quartzite. Oval-sectioned and rounded.
L: 79mm; W: 33mm; Th: 23mm.
3268 (F333)/5794/Structure 35, SW quad, spit 1.
309. Hone, sedimentary quartzite. One flat and one rounded surface.
L: 139mm; W: 120mm; Th: 22mm.
1176 (F130)/4882/Structure 21, SW quad.
*310. Hone, metamorphic quartzite. Rounded rectangular bar,
smooth and worn. L: 93mm; W: 39mm; Th: 17mm.
4911 (F579)/12937/Structure 23, NE quad.
311. Hone, sedimentary quartzite. Rounded in section and at ends.
L: 107mm; W: 53mm; Th: 25mm.
4232/11171/Surface Deposit F1.
312. Hone, chalk. Rounded, pitted and worn; possibly for polishing
rather than sharpening. L: 126mm; W: 67mm; Th: 23mm.
1482 (F159)/3921/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
313. Hone, fine-grained limestone. Worked on one surface only,
broken. L: 91mm; W: 68mm; Th: 39mm.
252 (F9)/4645/Structure 3, SW quad, spit D.
*314. Hone, mudstone, possibly a fine-grained greywacke. Rounded
rectangular bar, worn and broken at both ends. L: 85mm;
W: 35mm; Th: 18mm.
1892 (F240)/7215/Pit Group G.
*315. Possible hone, fine-grained mudstone. Triangular with rounded
edges and surface cracking. L: 57mm; W: 39mm; Th: 30mm.
4407 (F503)/11618/Surface Deposit F11/F503.
*316. Hone, dolerite. Tapering and worn. L: 118mm; W: 46mm;
Th: 14mm.
3157 (F324)/1343/Anglo-Saxon pit.
317. Hone, siltstone. Irregular and rounded. L: 91mm; W: 78mm;
Th: 16mm.
3285 (F335)/5519/Structure 25, NE quad.
Scrap metal
As well as those broken artefacts which could be identi-
fied to functional category, a total of 756 miscellaneous
fragments of metal were identified and classified into the
following groups: bars, discs, plates, points, rings, rods,
sheets, strips, tubes, wire and waste (droplets etc.). These
have all been catalogued, and descriptions are available
in the archive. Twenty-six of these were of lead, 203 of
copper alloy and 527 of iron. There were also 493 uniden-
tifiable pieces: seven of lead, twenty-five of copper alloy
and 461 of iron (many of which may be small pieces of
slag and other waste).
Of the classifiable pieces, the majority were associ-
ated with Structures 14, 19 and the surface deposits
(Table 4.15). Of the structures, twenty-five SFBs
contained some scrap metal, while only six contained
more than ten pieces: Structure 5 contained eleven
pieces, Structure 20 had fifteen, Structure 21 had twelve,
Structure 35 had eleven, while Structure 14 had eighty-
five and Structure 19 had 100. These latter two structures
were the only ones to contain large numbers of iron
bars and rods (possible smith’s stock), as well as large
 Cu Cu Fe Fe Pb Pb Grand
total total total total
Bar Plate Ring Rod Sheet Strip Tube Waste Wire Bar Disc Plate Point Ring Rod Sheet Strip Tube Waste Wire Disc Rod Sheet Strip Waste
Structure 1 1 1 1
3 1 1 2 2
4 2 2 1 3 4 6
5 1 2 3 6 1 1 8 11
9 1 1 2 2
10 1 1 1
11 1 1 1
12 1 1 1
13 1 1 1
14 1 1 5 8 15 15 21 17 7 10 70 85
15 1 1 1 1 2
17 2 1 3 1 1 1 3 6
18 1 1 1 1 1 3 4
19 1 7 1 1 10 16 8 1 1 27 26 11 90 100
20 1 1 2 4 1 6 3 1 11 15
21 2 2 2 4 3 1 10 12
22 1 1 1 1 2 1 5 6
24 1 1 1 1 2 3

253
100
25 1 1 1 1 2 3
28 1 1 1
29 1 1 1 3 3
30 1 1 2 1 1 3
32 1 1 2 2
33 1 1 1
35 1 1 2 1 1 4 1 1 1 8 1 1 11
Surface F1 15 4 1 4 24 6 2 2 10 17 5 1 43 67
Deposit F8/ 1 1 2 4 4
275
F11/ 8 1 1 10 4 3 1 6 14 24
503
F159/ 2 1 3 7 11 19 10 47 1 1 51
182
F301 1 1 1
F342 1 1 1
F610 3 2 1 6 6

Table 4.15 Miscellaneous metalwork by feature

numbers of iron plate, sheet and strip fragments that may
represent offcuts and waste from ironworking. These two
features also contained the largest numbers of copper
alloy sheets, and Structure 14 also produced a number
of copper alloy droplets, indicative of waste from copper
alloy working. In numerical terms, Structures 14 and 19
together produced 51% (twenty-five of forty-nine) of all
the miscellaneous copper alloy from the structures, and
69% (160 of 233) of the iron. Of the unclassifiable mate-
rial, they produced 79% of the iron (173 of 220, 152 of
which were from Structure 19) and 46% of the copper
alloy (six of thirteen, all from Structure 14).
The surface deposits show a similar picture, producing
a total of 154 classifiable miscellaneous pieces of metal
(thirty-eight of copper alloy, 115 of iron and one of lead).
The distribution of this material across the spreads was
not even, however: F1 produced 43% (twenty-four copper
alloy and forty-three iron); F159/F182 produced 32%
(three copper alloy, forty-seven iron and one lead), and
F11/F503 produced 17% (ten copper alloy and fourteen
iron), with the other spreads producing minimal amounts.
The only other features from the site which produced
more than ten pieces of miscellaneous metalwork were
two of the pits in Pit Group N, F519 and F520, which
produced seventeen and twelve pieces respectively; these
were also the only two pits to produce large numbers of
nails.
Within the copper alloy assemblage, a range of
alloys were identified through XRF analysis and some
patterning could be seen. The majority of strips and
sheets were of leaded, tinned or plain copper, while more
rings and rods were of bronze, leaded bronze or leaded
gunmetal. These were not exclusive patterns, however,
as brass and bronze strips and sheets and copper rings
were also identified. Such a range of alloys within this
scrap metal assemblage further supports the idea that
this material was being collected for eventual recycling.
Overall, the XRF analysis (of both identifiable artefacts
and scrap pieces) suggests a higher than usual proportion
of copper objects, and lower than expected numbers of
mixed alloy/gunmetal items, something which might be
explained by the presence of metalworking on the site
(Blakelock 2005, 21).
There thus appears to be a distinct metalworking
assemblage contained within a limited number of
features, namely Structure 14, Structure 19, Surface
Deposits F1, F159/F182, F11/F503 and Pit F519 (these
are the only features to contain forty or more pieces of
metal). Between them they contain 61% by count and
54% by weight of all the metal from the site, the majority
of the metalworking tools, and the majority of the scrap
metal (some of which may represent offcuts and waste
from the metalworking process, and some of which may
have been destined for recycling before it was deposited
in the features). Further discussion of this assemblage
can be found in Chapter 6.
Metalworking debris
by Jane Cowgill
(Fig. 4.47)
Recording methodology
A total of 28,290 pieces weighing c.153kg was recorded
from this site. The slag was recorded in two sepa-
254
rate phases: a detailed sample from selected features
(including Structures 4 and 14, comprising 5762 pieces
weighing c.39kg), was followed by the development of
an abbreviated recording system which was used for the
remainder (22,528 pieces weighing c.114kg). In order to
deal with the data as a whole, the more detailed records
from the first stage were summarised and added to the
simplified database. A recording sheet for the metal-
working debris was designed within Access to include
the following fields: Area; Catalogue number; Context;
Feature; Spit; Comments (on context information); Type;
Count; Weight; Fuel type; Comments (on slag, etc.).
This sheet was used for both phases of work, although in
different ways, and forms the basis for the Access data-
bases.
The detailed recording system will be described
first. During the first phase of recording all the main
types of slag from each catalogue number were recorded
separately (Table 4.16). The slag was identified on
morphological grounds by visual examination, some-
times with the aid of a x10 binocular microscope and
recorded on pro-forma recording sheets; this information
was then entered directly into the Access database. A note
of probable fuel type was recorded when fragments or
imprints were incorporated within the slag. Each piece
of slag was individually tested to identify whether it was
magnetic and the soil in the bags containing the slag (the
slag had not been washed) was checked with a magnet
for hammerscale. Measurements and more detailed opin-
ions, thoughts and comments are given in the comments
field. Given the unusual nature of the slag it became
apparent that it would not be possible to continue this
detailed level of recording in the time allowed.
The simplified system entailed rapidly dividing up
the slag into two basic groups recorded as either ‘HBs’
(hearth bottoms) or, more commonly, simply as ‘SLAG’.
The former comprises the denser, usually dark-coloured,
more ‘normal’ types of slag, while those in the latter
group are generally light in weight, often light grey to
cream in colour and cindery. These two categories were
then counted and weighed. The entries in the comments
field list, in order of frequency, the actual types present in
these two groups (fired clay, tuyeres and pieces of vitri-
fied clay are listed under SLAG). So for many catalogue
Type Count Weight
Iron-smithing slags
Iron-rich cinder 648 3495g
Hearth bottoms 347 18759g
Proto-hearth bottoms 161 3951g
Smithing-slag lumps 281 2212g
Non-specific slags
Cinder 453 1862g
Fired clay 48 159g
Slag 1869 4961g
Tuyere 205 2050g
Vitrified clay 125 798g
Crucibles 85 392g
Moulds 2 24g
Table 4.16 Count and weight of the slag recorded by
‘type’ (first phase of recording)
numbers there is only a single entry in the database.
Certain other forms of evidence have a separate entry
(for example, crucibles and slag containing copper alloy
droplets or corrosion products). Objects were selected for
illustration during the recording processes.
Many of the crucibles were extracted during the slag
recording process and added to those already boxed sepa-
rately by the Cambridge Archaeological Unit. Surfaces
of forty-three crucible and mould fragments were
analysed using energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence by
the Centre for Archaeology, English Heritage (Blakelock
2005). The crucibles were recorded using a x10 binocular
microscope and any copper alloy droplets attached to the
crucibles were noted.
Classification of slag types and processes that may have
been involved
Slag types form a continuum and divisions between
categories can be arbitrary and often dependent upon
their recorder. This problem is exacerbated for this site
because of the highly unusual nature of the slag, its
sheer quantity, and the duration of the recording time.
The standard ‘types’ were used when possible, but some
additional categories were added. As a warning note, the
form of the slag was sometimes as would be expected,
but the colour, weight and apparent composition may not
be as the category name suggests.
Iron-smithing by-products
Secondary smithing is the term used to described the
manufacture or repair of iron objects or the reuse of an
old artefact to produce a new one (i.e. hot working).
(Primary smithing is the forging of the bloom to a bar.)
Although this can be undertaken almost anywhere,
permanent forges were often built. The main features of
a forge are the hearth, often built waist-high, a bosh or
water container, the anvil and a pair of bellows. There
was usually a tuyere (TUY) on the hearth, or built into
it, to protect the bellows’ nozzle from the heat of the fire.
This often took the form of a cylinder or plate of clay or
Even a reused piece of tile perforated by a single hole,
which held and extended the bellows’ nozzle. The most
common fuel was charcoal, although from the Romano-
British period coal was occasionally used.
Iron smiths had a range of irons available to them,
varying from pure ferritic iron (fairly soft), iron containing
phosphorus (relatively hard) to steels (potentially very
hard, but more brittle), and were also probably involved
in reusing broken and damaged artefacts of varied iron
composition (McDonnell 1988; 1989). Steel is the best
material for use in the production of cutting or working
tools, since it can be heat treated to produce the optimum
toughness.
Secondary smithing produces a range of waste prod-
ucts, slag being the most common, and most of these are
predominately fayalitic (2FeO.SiO2). The classic form
is a ‘plano-convex accumulation of slag’, commonly
called ‘hearth bottom’, which is formed in the hottest
part of the hearth just below the tuyere (HB). The usual
shape is a convex base with a flattish top often with a
shallow depression formed by the blast of air from the
bellows. Proto-hearth bottoms are smaller versions,
removed earlier from the hearth. Another common waste
product is termed ‘smithing slag lumps’ (SSL), and these
develop as free slag within the fire in the hearth. They are
255
randomly shaped pieces of iron silicate that have failed
to coalesce with the ‘hearth bottom’. During formation
the slag would be in a plastic, or semi-molten, state and
would need to cool before the smith could remove it from
the hearth. The high temperatures produced in the hearth
can lead to considerable quantities of the clay wall and
the tuyere melting, leading to the formation of vitrified
hearth lining and an iron-rich cinder, the latter a silica-
rich slag (VITCLAY, FECIND). Flowed ropey tap slags
(TAP) are usually associated with iron smelting, but when
found in small numbers it is thought that they must also
be an iron smithing by-product. The above slags would
all have formed in the hearth.
The processes involved in the formation of these
hearth slags are not completely understood. The possible
‘ingredients’ include ash, sand, impurities in the fuel,
hammerscale and any iron that ‘burns’ (melts) in the
fire. Free iron oxide is extremely reactive with silicates
and therefore the hearth wall or tuyere will be attacked,
leading to the combining of the sand in the clays with the
slags. A result is that the hearth wall and/or the tuyere
may have to be repaired or replaced. In the final stages
of formation the ‘hearth bottoms’ can threaten, by their
increasing size, to block the tuyere hole and thereby
lessen the air draught into the hearth. When removed they
are snapped off the wall, which usually removes a certain
amount of the structure, again necessitating repair.
Iron is heated in the hearth within a reduction zone;
however, when it is taken out of the fire the surface will
oxidise and when hammered on the anvil this oxidised
layer sparks off, producing thin flat plates of scale
debris (plate hammerscale; HAMM) (Starley 1995). A
concentration of this scale within a smithy, therefore, can
indicate the location of the anvil (McDonnell 1992a and
1992b). Some smiths flux the iron to remove scale before
welding; this involves covering the metal surface with a
thin layer of sand either in the hearth or upon its removal
from the hearth. Any hammerscale that falls directly into
the hearth will combine with the hearth slags. The less
common spheroidal hammerscale, small droplets of slag
that have solidified and may be either hollow or solid, are
produced when iron is welded (Dungworth and Wilkes
2005).
Smiths, by careful management of the iron in the fire,
can reduce the amount of slag that is generated; it wastes
iron and is a nuisance product. Hammerscale, however,
will always be generated and is a major reason for iron
loss during the smithing process. While producing a
complex object (for example a pattern-welded blade
made from a number of different irons), over half of the
original iron stock may be lost to scale (H. Cole, pers.
comm.). In simplistic terms, the less iron is lost to slag
the more cindery the slag is likely to be; it is, therefore,
fragile and easily crushed underfoot by the smith or their
customers.
Unfortunately there is nothing that easily character-
ises a smithy archaeologically. An essential feature is
the hearth, but these may have been constructed at waist
height and therefore little or nothing that is ‘fired’ and
definable survives. Anvils and other tools are portable and
valued objects and the water bosh need not be a sunken
feature. The most important form of evidence is therefore
the hammerscale and slag. The presence of hammerscale
in quite large quantities is thought to be a significant
indicator of the presence of a smithy and in most circum-
stances this material will be found in an uncorroded
state and is easily retrieved with a magnet (though it is
often difficult to see among the soil). Another important
part of the iron-smithing assemblage that is frequently
overlooked are the iron fragments; among these are often
the bars, off-cuts and general detritus of a smith’s waste
products (see, for example, Ottaway 1992). Frequently
they appear to be amorphous lumps, particularly if the
iron is badly corroded.
Other forms of debris
Materials listed as vitrified clays (VITCLAY) may be
derived from any high-temperature process, not neces-
sarily iron smithing. It forms as a reaction between clay
linings, usually in hearths, and the alkali fuel ashes or
fayalitic slags. This material often has an uneven vitri-
fied face on one side and compositionally graduates to
fired clay (oxidised or reduced fired) on the back. Pieces
that may have become loose in the fire are totally vitri-
fied forming a brittle slag, and are classified as cinder
(CIND). Cinder may also be formed from another high
silicate source that has come into contact with the alkali
fuel ashes, such as crucible sherds discarded in the hearth
or crucible luting. Cinder is generally a cream or light to
mid grey in colour and at this site is often excessively
sandy. Fuel ash slags tend to be much smaller and a bit
more colourful and are the result of a reaction between an
alkali fuel ash and silicates from a whole range of sources
at an elevated temperature. They are not diagnostic and
can Even be found associated with domestic ovens. All
these forms of debris are brittle and relatively fragile and
will not survive if trampled under foot.
Description of slag types present
There is no evidence for iron smelting at the site but it is
difficult to establish what proportion of this assemblage is
a by-product of iron smithing. In terms of density, colour,
morphology and vesicularity, most of these slags are
unusual. On a very basic level it is thought that the hearth
bottoms, proto-hearth bottoms, smithing slag lumps and
iron-rich cinder are all probable iron-smithing by-prod-
ucts, whether recorded by type as ‘SLAG’ or ‘HB’. The
quantity recovered, given that it is an early Anglo-Saxon
site, is enormous. Although sieving was employed for
some of the contexts, this does not account for the small
average sizes. The range of the mean weights from the
key features ranges from 3g to 47g, with a mean of 16g
to 73g for the material recorded under the type HB (but
this also includes some smithing slag lumps)(Table 4.17).
At Flixborough, where the majority of the slag is post
9th-century in date, the mean for the hearth bottoms is
166g, which Starley states is ‘untypically small for Saxon
smithing debris’ (1999, 5).
The pale colour of some of the slag is not only due to
the smithing techniques employed but also to some post-
depositional processes superficially altering the surface
appearance of slag and making it appear ‘leached’; why
this happens is currently not fully understood (J. G.
McDonnell, pers. comm.). In extreme examples, such
as at the Romano-British site at Scole (Norfolk/Suffolk
border), many pieces are a creamy to light grey colour
with, sometimes, a powdery surface because the site
had been subjected to seasonal flooding (Cowgill et al.
forthcoming). Although pale and lightweight, some of
the pieces are magnetic, indicating some iron content,
256
probably either in the form of metallic iron or magnetite
(Fe3O4). Metal iron inclusions were also visible in many
of the pieces, Even those that were the most cindery.
The slag had not been washed and in some instances
was too coated in soil to be recorded. The dirt on the slag
will have concealed some features, the most significant
being the presence of non-ferrous droplets on or within
the slags. The lack of time to closely examine each piece
will no doubt also mean that some examples will not have
been identified. The amount of soil and the fact that many
pieces were encrusted with soil and corrosion products
meant that it was often difficult to identify the degree to
which the slag had suffered from abrasion, either from
weathering on a ground surface or from frequent redepo-
sition. A note has, however, been made in the ‘Condition’
field if some level of abrasion was apparent or if the
slag appeared to be particularly fresh. Those recorded as
encrusted are coated with soil and corrosion products to
the extent that the surface is no longer visible.
The material recorded as type ‘SLAG’
In the craft column in the database this material has not
been described as definite iron-smithing by-products
(FESMITH), although a high percentage will be. Instead,
if hammerscale was recognised among the soil it has
been noted in this column.
This slag is generally small, cindery and sandy with
non-fused sand visible on the surface of many pieces. The
quantity of sand and therefore silica in and on the slag
is a dominant feature of this assemblage. Many pieces
are cream to mid-grey or cream to mid-brown in colour,
although some (usually the glassier examples) are more
colourful, with greens and blues, and resemble large
pieces of fuel ash slag, albeit sometimes in the shape of
iron-smithing slag types (most notably hearth bottoms).
Most of the slag is both light in weight and small in
size (Table 4.17). The former characteristic is partially
due to the vesicularity of the slags, some of which is quite
bubbly, although the voids are generally small in size.
As would be expected, the hearth bottoms (including the
proto-hearth bottoms) are the category most likely to be
dense, although some have white or cream bubbly slag
attached to them. The mean weight of the slag recorded as
this type is 3.8g, owing in part to the sieving programme.
For some of the larger groups the count almost matches the
weight, as in, for example, catalogue numbers <09815>
and <09828>, or, indeed, <09835> and <09856> where
the count actually exceeds the weight (all context [1625]
F200, Structure 19).
Iron-rich cinder dominates the majority of these
groups; it is a category of slag that is often encountered but
generally in far fewer numbers than here, usually being
a minor component of a site assemblage. Many of these
pieces may actually be proto-hearth bottoms or smithing
slag lumps but, owing to very high silica content, have
been classified as cinder. Proto-hearth bottoms and cinder
are the most common categories at Bloodmoor Hill. Few
of the cindery hearth bottoms were large enough to be
described as such, so the term proto-hearth bottom was
used to describe these much smaller examples (sizes of
40mm x 40mm x 30mm were common). Cinder is consid-
ered an undiagnostic slag category, but its presence in
these groups with so many iron-smithing slags strongly
suggests that some, if not all of it, is a by-product of the
iron smiths. Some of the more colourful pieces may be
 Phase Group Feature Iron-smithing slags Probable iron-smithing slags* Crucibles Total slag mean
Count Weight Mean Hamms’ Plates Count Weight Mean
1 Pit N F519 5 126g 25g x 1 290 3619g 12g N 13g
1 Pit N F520 6 217g 36g 64 599g 9g Y 12g
1 Structure 17 F212 4 169g 42g 1 35 293g 8g Y 12g
1 Structure 4 F19 9 1452g 16g 89 1160g 13g Y 27g
1 Structure 5 F523 21 889g 42g x 1 124 2180g 18g N 21g
1 Structure 9 F514 7 294g 42g x 1 24 474g 20g N 25g
2a Pit F F168 10 183g 18g 2 74 417g 6g Y 7g
2a Pit L F374 6 748g 125g 37 322g 9g N 25g
2a Structure 22 F126 30 261g 9g 67 310g 5g N 6g
2a-b Grave 15 F252 18 400g 22g x 25 176g 7g N 13g
2a-b Grave 5 F241 30 677g 23g xx 201 1358g 7g N 9g
2a-b SD 1 F1 142 5568g 39g x 2 503 4572g 9g Y 16g

257
2a-b SD 11/503 F11 34 1133g 33g 227 2270g 10g Y 13g
2a-b SD 11/503 F503 27 1618g 60g 43 624g 14g N 32g
2a-b SD 159/182 F159 64 1767g 28g x 1 626 4639g 7g N 10g
2a-b SD 159/182 F182 223 7917g 35g xxx# 4 3592 18526g 5g Y 7g

100
2a-b SD 8/275 F275 7 508g 73g 14 188g 13g N 33g
2b Pit G F237 27 513g 19g xx 2 2153 5223g 2g Y 3g
2b Pit G F242 10 514g 51g xx (lge) 114 799g 7g N 11g
2b Structure 14 F41 99 2601g 26g xxx (lge) 3+ 1618 6524g 4g Y 5g
2b Structure 19 F200 751 10550g 14g xxxxx (lge) 550 14691 34671g 2g Y 3g
2b Structure 20 F134 15 329g 22g 74 328g 4g N 7g

* This category includes all the generally lighter slags, for example the iron cinder, cinder and vitrified clays
# All the hammerscale was recovered in environmental soil samples

Table 4.17 Mean weight of different categories of slag (based on the detailed sample)
associated with non-ferrous working or casting, but the
red glaze commonly found on crucibles associated with
copper alloy working was notable for its absence on the
cinder. In some instances it was impossible to distinguish
between the cinder and vitrified clays, both being largely
composed of vitrified or partially vitrified sands with
some clay component. Some will be vitrified crucible
fragments or pieces of crucible luting.
Fragments of a very large number of tuyeres were
found; they are a surprisingly common find from this site.
The most common characteristic is the presence of a fairly
regular hole (or traces of one) that has sometimes been
distorted by the high temperatures involved. It usually
has a vitrified rim and rarely on this site does it have a
slagged rim or a proto-hearth bottom attached (those in
Surface Deposits F1 ([04233] <11179>) and F11 ([906]
<03650>) are, however, examples). The tuyere fragments
suggest that more than one type was being used, possibly
by different crafts, but not enough of them survive in large
enough pieces for this to be established. The mean weight
of the pieces is only 10g, so many of the fragments are
very small. Most of these suggest that the tuyeres were
originally cylindrical but there are no complete air holes
or outer rim diameters and it was only possible to take
measurements from a few pieces. The diameters of the
four measured air holes all are within the range of 20–
25mm (F519 [04639] <12130>, F341 [03311] <08016>,
F182 [01543] <03977> and V160); this is at the larger
end of the 9–25mm range observed by Tylecote (1986,
142). A large tuyere air hole is an advantage for iron
smithing because it enables better fire control (H. Cole,
pers. comm.). The outer rim diameter also appears to be
fairly consistent in size, with three measuring c.160mm
(F200 [01672] <05403>, F182 [01637] <05747> and
F221 [01802] <07098>) and one with the larger diam-
eter of 180mm (F200 [01672] <10037>), although some
distortion is likely as they are all very vitrified. The
distance from the air hole to the outer rim was 25mm (F1
[04007] <10268>), c.50mm (F519 [04640] <12136>),
53mm (F514 [04603] <11953>) and 58mm (F1 [04069]
<10647>). If the tuyeres were cylindrical, as suggested,
this implies that the air hole was not centrally placed but
was sited just below the true centre. There is one piece,
however, with a right-angled corner following a straight
edge, that is only slightly vitrified; it could be a side
or a top edge (V160; Fig. 4.47A). If the straight edge
is projected it would be 22mm from the air hole. This
piece survives to a maximum thickness of 21mm. It may
represent a second type of tuyere, perhaps a block form,
or possibly the tuyeres were not truly cylindrical but had
straight tops. Most of the surviving tuyere fragments are
between 5 and 22mm thick, but one is an exceptional
32mm (F287 [02423] <07495>).
The clay matrix of the tuyeres was examined and very
little macroscopic variation in the fabric was observed.
The basic matrix is uniformly sandy with some variation
in coarseness, but this was not significant and it was not
possible to divide them up into formal fabric groups.
All of this material is relatively brittle and fragile
(particularly the cinder, vitrified clay, tuyere and crucible
categories) and if left on the smithy or workshop floor or
used for surfacing paths etc. would not have survived to
be recovered and recorded. The extant material is likely to
represent only a small fraction of the debris generated at
the site, and this needs to be borne in mind when consid-
258
ering the scale of the metalworking activities undertaken
at Bloodmoor Hill.
The material recorded as type ‘HB’
This type comprises hearth bottoms, proto-hearth bottoms
and smithing slag lumps and where there is no entry in
the comments field the piece(s) will be actual hearth
bottoms. These can all confidently be considered the by-
products of iron smithing. This material is much denser
and heavier and is more likely to be dark in colour (often
a browny dark grey) than that catalogued as ‘SLAG’,
although it is generally more cindery and paler than
would be expected. These pieces form a significantly
smaller percentage of the assemblage than the ‘SLAG’,
by count only 4.4% compared to 91%, but by weight
32.6% (compared with 63.8%), as the mean weight is a
much higher 39.8g. Actual hearth bottoms dominate this
type and there is some variability in morphology, with
some being the classic plano-convex form (for example
F307 [3206] <8345> and F418 [509] <529>) while
others are thin and plate-like (for example F374 [3559]
<7963> and F11 [906] <3650>). Most are fairly small,
but not as minute as those recorded from West Heslerton
(North Yorkshire: Cowgill and McDonnell forthcoming).
Comments made about the hearth bottoms apply equally
to the proto-hearth bottoms, although many more of these
are cindery, some being described as iron cinder.
The smithy slag lumps, as always, are very variable in
shape but some in this instance may be very small proto-
hearth bottoms, similar in size but less dense than those
at West Heslerton (example size 12mm x 20mm x 10mm:
F1 [21] <2625>).
Owing to the large number of iron corrosion flakes
from artefacts among the slag and attached soil, it was
sometimes difficult to identify whether hammerscale was
present, especially if the scale was very crushed. A large
amount of hammerscale was recovered with the slag
but most pieces are very small and crushed, and were
either trampled on while still in the smithy or after they
had been discarded. With this amount of slag very large
quantities of hammerscale must have been produced at
the site (an unavoidable by-product of iron smithing).
If it, with the slag, was discarded on middens the wind
will have distributed small quantities of it right across the
settlement. This may account for the small quantities of
scale found in many of the environmental samples. When
trying to identify smithies the quantity of hammerscale,
along with the size of individual pieces, is therefore what
is significant.
There is a very unusual category of smithing debris
from the site, which has been termed ‘plates’ as a ‘type’
in the database. These resemble very large pieces of
hammerscale and are equally magnetic but rather than
being silvery in colour are a matt dark grey. Usually one
side is flat and smooth while the back is more uneven and
pitted; however, other pieces are more irregular and may
be partially coated in a glossy black slag. Generally the
plates are 1–2mm thick, but the larger and thicker pieces
are up to 4mm thick. Rough oval/ball-shapes appear to
be the large equivalent of spheroidal scale; some of these
are incomplete and a rounded-bowl shape. Diameters of
c.7mm are quite common. This form of evidence was
mainly recovered from the sieved contexts.
The slags associated with working copper alloys
As has been previously stated, this will be an under-repre-
sented group. There are twenty-two pieces of slag and
a tuyere fragment (F41 [00393] <04112>) with copper
alloy droplets either on the slag surface or embedded
within the slag, the latter being visible only if the slag
has been broken at the appropriate point. This suggests
that many more pieces, but an unquantifiable amount,
may also contain copper alloys. Droplets were found in
or on nine hearth bottoms and proto-hearth bottoms, two
smithing slag lumps and three pieces of iron-rich cinder.
One very odd hearth bottom (F41 [00393] <04112>)
contained at least six droplets, including one measuring
8mm x 4mm, and had what appeared to be blocks of
vitrified sand or hearth lining in its upper surface. These
‘blocks’ were too big to have been crucible fragments.
Nine pieces of cinder with copper alloy droplets were
identified and some of these, especially the smaller ones
(seven weigh 2g or less) are likely to be vitrified crucible
fragments, similar to the two possible crucible rim sherds
from F41 ([00384] <04084>, weighing 13g). Composite
metal objects made from iron and copper alloy were
probably being forged by the smiths, with the copper
element in many instances forming the decorative finish.
These few examples can only hint at what may have been
quite an extensive use of copper alloys by the iron smiths
and it could imply that they were skilled in working both
types of metal.
Fuel
The only fuel that appears to have been used by the
smiths is charcoal, and some quite large pieces were
noted on and incorporated within the slags, Even some
of the quite cindery examples. Wood would not have
been used by the iron smiths and it is highly improbable
that coal was imported for this purpose. Judging by the
quantity of surviving slag it is likely that a large amount
would have been needed, especially if welding (indicated
by the presence of spheroidal hammerscale) was under-
taken with any regularity (for example, in the production
of edged tools). Nearby coppiced woodland is likely to
have been the source and although the charcoal could
have been made by the smith, woodmen are perhaps a
more likely source.
The source of the metals
Irons (and non-ferrous metals) are all easily recycled
and ‘old iron’ was likely to form a significant element of
an Anglo-Saxon smith’s stock. The amount of old iron
in circulation will always, however, diminish through
casual loss, deposition in burials and through loss to
hammerscale (the more complex the object being forged
the greater the loss), so new iron will always have to be
smelted. The source of this new iron for the Bloodmoor
Hill smiths is problematical, as smelting sites of this date
are rarely found. This is no doubt partly due to the fact
that dating evidence is rare, if non-existent, on such sites
and because evidence for the small furnaces that were
used is often ephemeral. Suitably rich ores for the tech-
nology used at that date to smelt iron are available close
to the site, mainly in the form of bog ores, so there is
no reason that iron was not locally produced, providing
adequate fuel was also available. Non-ferrous metals
would have had to be traded to the site and if there was a
local shortage of fuel for iron smelting, the various irons
259
required by the iron smiths may have also have been
imported trade items.
The crucibles and moulds
Jane Cowgill
(Figs 4.47–4.48)
There is an absolute minimum of 138 (558g) crucibles
and probable crucibles from the site, with a further
seventy-one possible examples recorded as ‘SLAG’,
‘POT’ or fired clay. Only sherds confidently identifiable
as crucibles have been catalogued as such in the type
column. The majority of the sherds are very small in size,
with many being no more than thumbnail-sized, and the
mean weight is just 4g, with the heaviest sherd weighing
45g (V165). A high percentage are rims and there are no
obvious basal sherds; in addition, no lids were recorded
and there is no evidence for their use.
All the crucibles were handmade using low-firing
iron-rich clays with a high quartz content. Some also have
a marine silt component; this is a different fabric to that
used for the pottery vessels found at the site. Vegetative
matter has been added as temper, which could have been
introduced as moss, roots or dung as the impressions are
circular in cross-section (Dr A. Vince, pers. comm.). The
quartz in the crucible fabric, and in this instance the luting,
enhances the refractory property of the clays, making
them more able to withstand the extremes of temperature
involved in melting metals. The thermal shock resistance
of the material needs to be able to cope with the differ-
ences in temperature in both the heating and cooling
processes. Having said that, these iron-rich clays are not
an ideal source for making crucibles, which may help to
explain why so many are so extensively vitrified and in
some instances may have blown apart (although this may
have occurred post-usage, if they were discarded into a
hearth).
There is a range of vessel forms, including bowl shapes
(for example, V152 and V154) and beakers (examples
include V165 and V161). However, only two possible
pouring lips have been recorded (V159 and V152),
although it is just possible that they could be a distor-
tion of the rims. The beakers seem to be tall vessels with
fairly straight sides and a rounded base. These may be the
more common type but with so few sherds being identifi-
able to form, this may be misleading or be a bias due to
their being more robust. The best-preserved of these has
a rim diameter of c.60+mm and the height of the body
survives to 60mm with no suggestion of an inturn to the
base (V161). The volume of metal these could therefore
contain would have been large. The bowl crucibles may
be more variable in size and shape, but so little of the
rims survive that reconstructing the vessel diameters and
the angle of the wall is very difficult, especially if they
are extensively vitrified. These are, however, a distinctly
different group to the beakers. There are only two thumb
pots, both with thin walls (4mm). One has a crazed and
slightly vitrified exterior from use (V156), while the
other appears not to have been used (V155). A third
possible example is visually similar and also has a crazed
and vitrified exterior, but there appears to be no curvature
to the vessel wall (F307 [3206] <466>, not illus.). There
are some apparently larger vessels: F11 [4610] <12004>
(not illus.) is perhaps bowl-shaped but has a rim diameter
that appears to be too large for a crucible, although it is
not measurable. There is one possible dish with a rim
diameter of c.120mm and a vitrified exterior. The degree
of vitrification suggests that it is unlikely to be a cupel
(V149). There are also two ‘miniature pots’ made from
the same fabric (V157 and F41 [393] <4113>; not illus.).
These are even smaller than the traditional thumb pots
and would have contained only a miniscule amount of
metal. Both have a deep-red oxidised fabric but when the
illustrated example was analysed it gave a reading for
zinc. Possibly they functioned as a sort of pellet mould,
to enable accurate alloys of the different metals to be
produced, but this interpretation ignores the basic fact
that they have an oxidised fabric. It is, however, possible
for a reduced fired vessel to become an oxidised red
colour if it is reheated in a very oxidising atmosphere (Dr
A. Vince, pers. comm.).
All the vessel types (except the thumb pots) generally
have a wall thickness of 8–12mm, increasing to about
16mm towards the base, although some of the beakers
are slightly thicker. The internal surface of most of the
vessels is smooth. The rim diameter range is from 40mm
(bowl V151 and thumb pot V156) to c.70–80mm (prob-
ably a bowl form, F508 [4547] <11817>; not illus.) with
the majority being c.60mm (seven examples that include
both bowl and beaker types; cf. Fig. 4.47).
There is extensive evidence for applied luting, usually
c.1–3mm thick, on the exterior of the vessels (examples
include beaker V164 and bowl V152), which is often
added to help the crucible survive the thermal shocks
involved in the processes. A clay less sandy than the
crucible fabric was usually selected for luting material to
help keep the vessel intact, but in all the instances noted
here a very quartz-rich sandy matrix has been applied. It
almost appears to have been in the form of a sandy slurry,
but most is now too vitrified for this to be confirmed
because it is usually this applied layer that has undergone
the most vitrification. Dr A. Vince (pers. comm.) noted
that the ‘glassy matrix suggests the external surface of the
vessels have been subjected to considerable heat (c.900–
1000ºC) that has produced rudimentary conchoidal
fractures and has caused the quartz inclusions to shear,
rather than the fracture to travel around the grains’.
The majority of the crucibles have some level of
vitrification, sometimes extremely high, which is why it
is expected that many of the pieces recorded as vitrified
clay or even cinder are actually crucible fragments. This
vitrification occurs at high temperatures, when the sand
in the fabric fluxes with the ash in the fire. Some of the
crucibles have vitrified internal and external surfaces (for
example, F35 [6130] <14059> and F41 [384] <9003>;
not illus.); some are completely vitrified through the
entire thickness of the sherd (for example, V163), while
others appear to have melted (V158 and F1 [4024]
<10390>; not illus.) — the latter perhaps because they
were discarded in a fire after becoming broken. Some
pieces of slag have such a high quartz content that it
is suspected that they are also molten crucibles (V171
even has a droplet of copper alloy on its surface). A few
vessels have fissures on the inner surfaces. The wall of
V165, along with some other examples, has been heated
to the extent that the entire fabric through the thickness of
the sherd is now vitrified and bubbly, giving some indi-
cation of the tensions suffered by the vessel. Only four
sherds do not exhibit some degree of vitrification on their
external surface (F11 [4609] <12004>, [4750] <12427>,
F41 [384] <8996> (these not illus.) and the unused thumb
260
pot V155). A number have a bright red glaze due to the
copper in the metal reacting with the vitrified layer (for
example V161 and V167); the latter also has a red glaze
on its internal surface, but this does not continue onto the
broken edges. A few exhibit a green glaze, similar to the
bright green encountered on medieval pottery (the unil-
lustrated [4118] <10924> is an example). Otherwise, the
vitrified layer is a mixture of glassy greys similar to that
found on crucibles from other periods.
Many of the sherds have a knobbly, dimpled external
surface, which is often very pronounced: V165 and V166
are examples. In all instances this surface is vitrified and
glazed to some depth. Charcoal imprints are sometimes
noticeable in the dimples (for example, V167) suggesting
that the vitrified/semi-liquid outer surface may have been
‘moulded’ by the charcoal bed in which the crucible sat
while it was being heated up with the aid of bellows. This
feature seems to occur more commonly on the beaker
forms, if not exclusively so, and it is also a major charac-
teristic of the assemblage.
All crucibles are usually reduced fired, because the
successful melting and casting of metals must be under-
taken in a reducing atmosphere. One vessel, however, has
an oxidised exterior (F508 [4547] <11817>; not illus.)
and others an oxidised interior surface (for example F41
[384] <236>; not illus.). There are a number of vessels
with an oxidised interior below which the fabric has
taken on a distinctly mauve to purple hue. In three of
these instances the external surfaces are reduced fired
and vitrified to some degree (F41 [392] <9053>, F41
[384] <4074>, F41 [392] <235>; not illus.). The small
sherds are made in crucible fabrics, appear to be from
crucible-sized vessels and are possibly bowls in form.
These sherds were shown to and discussed with Dr A.
Vince and although clear answers to these problems
could not be found some possibilities are suggested. The
vessels with an oxidised interior may have been refired
in an oxidising environment, after their use as crucibles,
although this is not an altogether satisfactory explanation
because a more ‘blotchy’ result would be expected. The
mauve-purple colouration found on some pottery vessels
is usually due to the fact that the fabric has been in contact
with salt (it is commonly the colour of briquetage, for
example). The marine silt inclusions in some of these
crucibles may, upon firing, have resulted in this colour
because of their natural salt content. However, not all of
the mauve-purple sherds have marine silts within their
fabrics. The only metalworking vessels that are normally
oxidised fired are the parting vessels, used for separating
gold from silver. The metal, in thin sheet form, is layered
in a mixture of crushed building material and salt, sealed
in a pot and then heated. The silver reacts with the salt to
form silver chloride, leaving the gold metal. The volatile
silver chloride meanwhile, having been absorbed by the
building material and ceramic vessel, is recovered later.
The use of salt in the process often gives the inside of the
vessels a mauve-purple tinge similar to that seen on some
of these vessels and, although parting vessels of this date
have not been recorded in England, it is probable that this
process was known and occurred at sites where gold and
silver were being worked.
There is very little actual metal on the crucibles.
Copper alloy droplets were identified on V161, a sherd
from a beaker crucible, and on a possible rim that is
totally vitrified (V171). There are also some droplets on
Phase Group Feature Catalogue no. Object Description Metal detected Illustrated
1 Structure 4 19 145 Mould Zn, Cu, Pb, Sn V169
1 Structure 4 19 146 Mould Zn, Cu, Sn V170
1 Structure 4 19 4654 Crucible Beaker? Zn, Cu, Sn
1 Pit N 519 12132 Mould? Cu, Pb, Zn, Sn V168
1 Pit N 519 12136 Crucible Beaker Cu, Sn V153
1 Pit N 519 12136 Crucible Bowl Cu, Sn
1 Pit N 519 12253 Slag? Cu, Sn
1 Structure 3 523 12225 Tuyere?
2a–b SD 11/503 11 12020 Crucible? Zn, Pb, Cu
2a–b SD 159/182 182 1755 Crucible Bowl Cu, Zn, Sn V150
2a–b SD 159/182 182 7044 Crucible Zn, Cu
2b Structure 14 41 224 Crucible Bowl Zn, Cu, Pb V151
2b Structure 14 41 227 Pot sherd? Zn, Cu, Pb, Sn
2b Structure 14 41 229 Pot sherd
2b Structure 14 41 230 Crucible Beaker? Cu, Zn, Sn V164
2b Structure 14 41 236 Crucible Zn, Pb, Cu
2b Structure 14 41 238* Crucible Zn, Pb, Cu, Sn
2b Structure 14 41 4048 Crucible Zn, Pb, Cu, Sn
2b Structure 14 41 4048 Crucible Zn, Cu, Pb, Sn
2b Structure 14 41 4060 Crucible Beaker Cu, Zn, Sn
2b Structure 14 41 4076 Crucible Beaker? Cu, Zn
2b Structure 14 41 4083 Crucible Beaker Zn, Cu V161
2b Structure 14 41 4084 Crucible Vitrified Cu, Pb, Sn V171
2b Structure 14 41 9003 Crucible Beaker? Cu, Zn
2b Structure 14 41 9008 Crucible Dish Zn, Cu V149
2b Structure 14 41 9017 Crucible Zn, Pb, Cu
2b Structure 14 41 235 Crucible Zn, Cu, Pb
2b Structure 14 41 4098 Crucible Beaker? Zn, Cu, Pb
2b Structure 14 41 9048 Crucible Cu, Sn
2b Structure 14 41 9053 Crucible Zn, Pb, Cu
2b Structure 14 41 9060 Crucible Zn, Cu V162
2b Structure 14 41 9067 Pot sherd Cu, Sn
2b Structure 14 41 222 Crucible Beaker Cu, Sn V161
2b Structure 14 41 4113 Crucible Zn, Cu, Pb, Sn V152
2b Structure 19 200 373 Crucible Zn, Cu
2b Structure 19 200 374 Pot sherd
2b Structure 19 200 5295 Mini pot Zn V157
2b Structure 19 200 5304 ? Zn, Cu
2b Structure 19 200 5349 Slag Zn, Cu, Pb, Sn
2b Structure 19 200 10024 Crucible Beaker Cu, Zn, Sn V157
? 307 466 Crucible Thumb pot? Cu, Zn, Sn
? 508 11817 Crucible Zn, Cu
? 527 12431 Crucible Bowl Cu, Sn V154
? 17 6806 Brooch Cu, Sn, Pb
? MD 428 12540 Brooch Cu, Sn, Pb

* Sherd not seen by author

Table 4.18 Results of EDXRF analysis on crucibles and moulds, undertaken by the Centre for Archaeology, English
Heritage (after Blakelock 2005)

the only piece for which there is evidence that it broke glaze and the results of the analyses (see below) both
during use (F41 [384] <9003>; not illus.). The broken indicate, however, that the majority (if not all) were used
edges of the sherd are vitrified and the droplets also cover to melt and perhaps refine and alloy copper metals/alloys.
one of the breaks. The fact that many have a bright red The small number of crucibles that appear to have been

261
101
Figure 4.47 Illustrations of selected crucibles and a tuyere: Vessels 149–160. 149–154 bowl forms; 155–156 thumb
pots; 157 miniature vessel; 158 vitrified beaker; 159 ?pouring lip; 160 tuyere. All at 1:1

262
Figure 4.48 Illustrations of selected crucibles and a tuyere: Vessels 161–171. 161–167 beaker forms; 169–170
moulds; 171 slag (probably crucible). All at 1:1

263
damaged during use and the very limited amount of metal
found on them suggests that they were being carefully
used and that the metalworkers valued their metals.
Qualitative analysis of forty-three crucible and mould
fragments and a copper alloy droplet was undertaken by
the Centre for Archaeology, English Heritage (Blakelock
2005), and the resultant report is summarised here
(Table 4.18). The surfaces of the objects were analysed
using energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF),
a non-destructive qualitative method of identifying the
elements present. Reconstructing the copper alloy type
from analysis of crucible or mould fragments is fraught
with difficulties because copper, zinc, tin and lead have
very different physical and chemical properties and the
proportions of metallic elements in the ceramic fabric
will not be the same as in the original melt. Often
when a copper alloy is melted the alloying elements
are more likely to become incorporated into the fabric
of the crucible than the copper, or at higher propor-
tions. The way they become absorbed by the ceramic
will also be very dependant on the way they are melted
and cast (particularly temperature and redox conditions;
Dungworth 2000).
The EDXRF analysis of the crucibles detected abun-
dant amounts of iron and other elements, such as silicon,
calcium and manganese, but these are present in the clay
rather than coming from metallurgical processes. The
crucible and mould fragments analysed revealed that
they had been used for melting copper alloys, but the high
amounts of zinc detected means that the identification to
specific alloys is difficult. When no zinc was present it is
likely that they were being used for bronze or a leaded
bronze. The droplet adhering to one of the pieces of slag
was probably also a leaded bronze (V171). Adding lead
to a bronze alloy improves the fluidity of the metal and
therefore makes it easier to cast, but it then becomes an
unsuitable metal for cold working.
No silver or gold was detected, but with so many
crucibles from the site it seems unlikely that these metals
were not also occasionally cast. Only a small percentage
of the assemblage has been analysed, but no noticeable
pattern between possible alloy type and crucible form is
apparent with the results so far, although further analyses
may alter this conclusion.
The moulds
There are two definite piece-mould fragments (V169
and V170, Table 4.18), although many more are likely to
exist among the assemblage, but were too small to iden-
tify. The mould fragments are reduced fired and are made
from a fabric similar to the crucibles, although the quartz
inclusions may be slightly smaller. Both have a shallow
circular band 8mm wide impressed into them, and were
clearly used to cast annular brooches. It is possible that
they are parts of the same mould, but the sherds do not
join and they differ marginally in thickness. One of the
annular brooches from the site was found to have been
cast in a leaded bronze (No. 10; Blakelock 2005). V168
is also a mould because not only has the clay been shaped
but the EDXRF results show that a leaded bronze has
been cast within it. There is also a very flat sherd that
may be a mould fragment Even though the back is vitri-
fied (F1 [151] <1496>; not illus.). No ingot moulds were
found and nor were any moulds made from stone, bone
or ivory; although more complex piece moulds or ones
264
used for the lost-wax process may have existed, none
were identified.
It would be anticipated, with such a large crucible
assemblage, that a range of copper alloy finds were being
cast at the site. The fact that they were making such thin
annular brooches indicates that the smiths were skilled,
because it is actually quite difficult to cast such small
amounts of metal into a thin object without the metal
cooling down too much in the process.
The fragile and crushable nature of these finds is,
again, pertinent as, like the slags, only a very small
percentage of the material is likely to have survived the
trampling on the workshop floor, initial discard onto a
midden, weathering and redeposition as backfill into an
abandoned hollow (and this may be a very simplistic
story of an ex-crucible’s life). The quantity of crucibles
and moulds recorded here is probably a mere fraction of
what was actually produced and used at the settlement
and this must have had some significant economic impli-
cations for the inhabitants themselves, the settlement’s
status and trading links.
*V149. Crucible rim sherd with vitrified exterior; reduced fired fabric
but yellow-grey interior; some organic temper. Rim Diam:
c.120mm; Th: 10mm. Possibly a dish form.
384 (F41)/9008/Structure 14, SE quad, spit 3.
*V150. Crucible rim sherd with vitrified exterior; sandy fabric. Rim
Diam: 60mm; Th: 10mm. Bowl form.
1516 (F182)/1755/Surface Deposit F159/182, spit 1.
*V151. Very small crucible rim sherd with vitrified exterior; some
organic temper. Rim Diam: 40mm; Th: 12mm. Bowl form.
384 (F41)/224/Structure 14, SE quad, spit 1.
*V152. Crucible rim sherd, bowl form with possible pouring lip, with
knobbly vitrified exterior; light grey; some organic temper.
Th: 14mm.
393 (F41)/4113/Structure 14, NE quad.
*V153. Crucible rim sherd with definite luting; vitrified back/luting.
Bowl form. Rim Diam: 60mm.
4640 (F519)/12136/Pit Group N.
*V154. Crucible rim sherd, bowl form with vitrified exterior; partially
luted?; uneven exterior. Rim Diam: c.60mm.
4752 (F527)/12431/Anglo-Saxon pit.
*V155. Crucible rim sherd from a thin irregular thumb pot type; exte-
rior not crazed, suggesting possibly unused. Th: 4mm.
4718 (F500)/13414/Pit Group C.
*V156. Crucible rim sherd from thumb pot; exterior surface very
cracked and slightly vitrified. Rim Diam: 40mm; Th: 4mm.
1625 (F200)/9762/Structure 19, NE quad, spit 2.
*V157. Rim sherd of a miniature vessel (mould?) with a tapering
vertical rim (Rim Diam: 20mm). The vessel has been formed
very simply, moulded and pressed into shape from a single ball
of clay; smoothed surfaces; orange. Wall Th: 15mm; Vessel
Ht: 30mm; Maximum vessel W: 45mm.
1625/5295AA/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 2.
*V158. Probable crucible rim sherd, which is totally vitrified and
appears to have melted. Beaker form.
4073 (F1)/10685/Surface Deposit F1, spit B.
*V159. Rim sherd from a large crucible with possible pouring lip; red
vitrified back.
392 (F41)/9048/Structure 14, NW quad, spit 3.
*V160. Tuyere fragment with brick-like right-angled edge; air hole
20mm in diam; Th: 21mm.
4641 (F520)/12143/Pit Group N.
*V161. Three joining crucible rim sherds from tall beaker form; very
vitrified knobbly exterior; sandy fabric with some organic
temper and copper alloy droplets. Rim Diam: 60+mm;
Ht: 60mm.
384 (F41)/4083/Structure 14, SE quad and 393 (F41)/222/
Structure 14, NE quad.
*V162. Crucible body sherd with knobbly red vitrified exterior incor-
porating charcoal imprints; yellowish interior; some organic
temper. Rim Diam: 60–80mm; Th: 10mm. Beaker form.
392 (F41)/9060/Structure 14, SE quad.
*V163. Crucible rim sherd, very vitrified knobbly exterior; interior
also vitrified (sherd partially melted, perhaps thrown on fire
after use?); some organic temper. Th: 10mm.
384 (F41)/4077/Structure 14, SE quad.
*V164. Crucible rim sherd; vitrified knobbly exterior, thin luting layer,
fawnish interior surface; some organic temper. Beaker type.
Th: 10mm.
384 (F41)/230/Structure 14, NW quad, spit 2.
*V165. Crucible body sherd, with vitrified knobbly exterior and
fissured inner surface, from a beaker type.
109 (F1)/2939/Surface Deposit F1, spit A.
*V166. Crucible body sherd with very vitrified knobbly exterior and
yellowish interior, beaker type. Th: 10mm.
393 (F41)/4113/Structure 14, NE quad.
*V167. Crucible sherd from near vessel base; very vitrified knobbly
exterior with noticeable charcoal imprints in dimples, red vitri-
fied interior (though not on breaks); very sandy fabric. Beaker
form? Th: 13mm.
1672 (F200)/10024/Structure 19, SE quad, spit 1.
*V168. Possibly a mould fragment, but nondescript shape.
4639 (F519)/12132/Pit Group N.
*V169. Mould fragment (though well fired), with circular impressed
design of a shallow band 8mm wide, for casting an annular
brooch. Reduced fired.
294 (F19)/145/Structure 4, SE quad, spit A.
*V170. Mould fragment, for an annular brooch, with a circular
impressed design of a shallow band 8mm wide. Reduced
fired.
294 (F19)/146/Structure 4, SE quad, spit B.
*V171. Probable crucible body sherd fragment, totally vitrified; very
sandy fabric and copper alloy droplets attached. Recorded as
slag in database.
384 (F41)/4084/Structure 14, SE quad, spit 2.
Woodworking, stoneworking and other tools
(Figs 4.49–4.50)
Seventeen probable or definite woodworking tools were
recovered from the settlement site: an adze-hammer,
two adze fragments, five paring chisels, two firmer and
two mortise chisels, three further chisels or gouges, a
round-shave and a further unidentified tool. Their distri-
bution was striking (Fig. 4.50): the fill of Structure 14
produced a paring chisel and the unidentified tool; that
of Structure 19 produced the adze-hammer and a mortise
chisel, while Surface Deposit F159/F182 produced an
adze fragment, four chisels and a chisel/gouge. While
some of these were fragmentary, broken or worn, others
appeared to be in good condition (particularly the adze-
hammer, and the round-shave found in Pit Group H to the
south). While they may have been intended for reuse, it
is possible that they were still viable tools when depos-
ited. Like the assemblage of metalworking tools (see
above), the majority of them were recovered from later
7th-century fills.
The adze-hammer (No. 318) is an unusual find.
Although definitely a carpenter’s tool, with clear Roman
parallels (Manning 1985, B14–B17), it has few parallels
in Anglo-Saxon England. Although this could therefore be
a Roman residual find within Structure 19, it is unbroken,
and in good condition, suggesting a later date. The two
probable adze blade fragments (Nos 319–20) are both
worn and broken, but still demonstrate the characteristic
flaring of the blade. These would have been small exam-
ples (cf. larger ones from 10th-century Thetford, which
are more complete: Goodall 1984, figs 117.11–12). Other
adzes are known from a late 9th- or 10th-century tool
hoard from Hurbuck, County Durham (Wilson 1968,
143).
The three definite and two possible tanged paring-
chisels (Nos 321–5) are quite closely paralleled by one
265
from 11th-century York (Morris 2000, 2110). This would
have been mounted in a wooden handle and pushed
along the wood grain by hand to give a smooth finish
to the surface (ibid.). It is of interest that Morris could
find no later medieval parallels for this tool, but does
give a number from 5th- to 7th-century contexts, such
as the four from West Stow (e.g. West 1985, figs 241.21
and 241.23), and she suggests that the York example may
have been residual.
With their bevelled edges, Nos 326 and 327 are prob-
ably mortise chisels, primarily used for heavier work
(Manning 1985, 23); the burring at the head of the solid
handle of No. 327 supports this. The blades of the two
possible firmer chisels (Nos 328–9) are both evenly
tapered; these are tools that would have been used for
general purposes by a carpenter or other woodworker
(Manning 1985, 22). The socketed tool (No. 330) is
missing its working edge, but was presumably either a
chisel or a gouge, as are a further two examples with solid
handles (Nos 331–2). Socketed gouges are known from
the metalworker’s hoard at Crayke, Yorkshire (Wilson
1976, 257–8). and the Stidriggs hoard (Leahy 2003, 18);
the latter also produced a socketed chisel.
Draw-knifes and round-shaves similar to No. 333 were
used to remove shavings from the surface of wood, with
the former having a flat blade and the latter a rounded one
(Leahy 2003, 22). Wilson (1976, 257) cites an example
of a draw-knife from Sandtun, Kent, but rules out the
possible example from the 9th- or 10th-century tool hoard
found in a lead cauldron at Westley Waterless, Cambs.,
on the basis of length. The Stidriggs hoard produced
a draw-knife, as did excavations at Marlowe Car Park
in Canterbury (Barford 1995, 1081), and a number of
round-shaves have also been found on earlier sites: one
came from the fill of GH139 at Mucking (Morris 1993,
70, fig. 153.2), two came from the Flixborough hoard
(Loveluck 2001, fig. 5.17), and one from Coppergate
(Ottoway 1992, 531–2); the last of these is argued to have
been used in cooperage (Morris 2000, 2113). A further
example came from a 10th- to 11th-century context at
Saddler Street in Durham (Carver 1979, fig. 13).
Other tools which might be expected in a carpenter’s
kit are axes, augers, saws and planes (Wilson 1976, 255),
but these are absent from Bloodmoor Hill; what we have
here are remnants of a tool-kit which have largely been
accumulated in an assemblage destined for recycling.
Stoneworking would probably not have been an
important craft within an early Anglo-Saxon settlement,
given that the buildings were constructed mainly from
wood. Only the dressing of querns and millstones and
other smaller stone items might have called for specialised
tools (cf. the tentative identification of a mill pick from
Coppergate: Ottoway 1992, 537). The two tentatively
identified tools, a possible modelling tool (No. 335), and
a possible miniature mason’s pick (No. 336), may have
been used in such manufacture. Although the mason’s
pick has paired spike blades, like Manning’s Roman
Type 1 mason’s pick, it is smaller than these earlier exam-
ples, and possesses a central tang rather than an open
socket (Manning 1985, 30). The tang is broken, which
may account for its deposition within a surface deposit.
The identification of the modelling tool is much more
tentative. The example here appears to correspond to
Manning’s Type 1 (1985, 31), with a triangular blade and
 Figure 4.49 Illustrations of selected stoneworking tools. All at 1:2
a slightly waisted rectangular-section stem; it may have
been used for shaping clay, wax or wet plaster (ibid.).
*318. Small adze-hammer, Fe. Angled at central circular socket,
expanding into straight-edged adze-blade on one side and
tapering into small, round-sectioned hammer head on the
other. L: 73mm; W: 22mm; Th: 15mm.
1625 (F200)/6067/Structure 19, NW quad, spit 2.
*319. Probable adze fragment, Fe. Rectangular-section shaft flaring
out to broken edge. L: 36mm; W: 28mm; Th: 12mm.
2544 (F182)/6401/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
266
*320. Adze blade, Fe. Blade splays out with straight sides to a worn
edge from a narrow, rectangular-section neck, broken. Blade is
angled slightly forward. L: 92mm; W: 33mm; Th: 16mm.
2523 (F342)/6394/Surface Deposit F342.
*321. Paring chisel, Fe. Rectangular-section tang widening into a
slightly asymmetrical blade. L: 87mm; W: 19mm; Th: 12mm.
392 (F41)/6171/Structure 14, SE quad.
*322. Paring chisel, Fe. A paring chisel, with rectangular-section
blade and long square-sectioned tang. This would have had an
attached handle (of which possible MPOs remain), and would
thus have been used with hand pressure only (cf. Manning
1985, B30). L: 130mm; W: 23mm; Th: 12mm.
6218 (F182)/14093/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
 Figure 4.50 Distribution plot of woodworking, stoneworking and leatherworking tools
*323. Paring chisel fragment, Fe. Sub-rectangular tang (broken)
widening to triangular blade (cf. Manning 1985 B43, B44,
which he dates to the Iron Age). L: 29mm; W: 17mm;
Th: 6mm; a rod fragment appears to have corroded onto it.
L: 26mm; Diam: 4mm.
1742 (F159)/6339/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
324. Possible paring chisel, Fe. Rectangular-section tang widens
into triangular blade; heavily corroded. L: 75mm; W: 24mm;
Th: 11mm.
2262 (F159)/6376/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
325. Possible paring chisel, Fe. Small, with square-section tang
widening to triangular blade. L: 37mm; W: 10mm; Th: 8mm.
1750 (F182)/6342/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
*326. Chisel fragment, Fe. Rectangular section handle 8mm by
11mm flared into bevelled cutting edge 15mm wide (cf.
Manning 1985 B38). L: 20mm. Probably a mortise chisel,
perhaps for use in carpentry.
1625 (F200)/10221/Structure 19, SW quad, spit 2.
*327. Probable mortise chisel, Fe. Slightly burred top, rectangular-
section shaft tapering to bevelled working edge. L: 113mm;
W: 12mm; Th: 11mm.
M132/6605/MD spot find.
328. Possible firmer chisel, Fe. Small solid rectangular-section
handle widens into parallel-sided blade, with corroded, but
slightly expanded and rounded tip; unspecified MPOs on
surface. L: 95mm; W: 10mm; Th: 5mm.
MD462/12625/MD spot find.
*329. Probable firmer chisel, Fe. Solid handle, rectangular tang,
wider bar, tapering in depth to slightly rounded edge. L: 75mm;
W: 20mm; Th: 15mm.
M123 (F404)/6597/Subsoil.
*330. Chisel or gouge, Fe. Slightly open, rounded split socket,
then solid rectangular-section shaft, broken. The working
end could either be a chisel or a gouge. L: 81mm; W: 18mm;
Th: 13mm.
787 (F404)/6446/Subsoil.
331. Probable chisel or gouge fragment, Fe. Solid, probably square-
sectioned bar with burred top, broken. L: 36mm; W: 27mm;
Th: 18mm.
1642 (F182)/6333/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
332. Probable chisel or gouge fragment, Fe. Slightly burred head,
rectangular-section, shaft broken, working end missing.
L: 33mm; W: 19mm; Th: 15mm.
267
M188 (F55)/6652/Anglo-Saxon pit.
*333. Round-shave, Fe. U-shaped straight-edged blade, with paired
down-curving tangs set at right-angles to its ends. The edge
is on the same side as the tangs. L: 131mm; W: 94mm. Both
Roman and Anglo-Saxon versions of this form are known.
4895 (F577)/12966/Pit Group H.
*334. Tool, Fe. Bevelled, rectangular-section head; parallel-sided
shaft tapers to rounded point; possibly for woodworking?
L: 79mm; W: 7mm; Th: 8mm.
392 (F41)/6176/Structure 14, SE quad.
*335. Possible modelling tool, Fe. Rectangular-section shaft widens
to triangular blade with straight edge and rounded corners (cf.
Manning 1985 C7). L: 96mm; W: 31mm; Th: 8mm.
886 (F8)/6296/Surface Deposit F8/F275.
*336. Possible miniature mason’s pick, Fe. Paired spike blades
with a central square-sectioned tang projection (broken) (cf.
Manning 1985 type 1). L: 53mm; W: 13mm; Th: 13mm.
1642 (F182)/6333/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
Leatherworking
(Figs 4.50–4.51)
Leather would have been an important medium on an
Anglo-Saxon settlement site, one used for belts, clothes,
shoes, bags, riding equipment and scabbards (Wilson
1976, 274). Four probable leather-working tools were
identified: two awls, both tanged (Nos 337–8), a possible
punch (No. 339) and a dome-headed tool that could have
been an awl or punch (No. 340). Awls were used for
piercing leather, so needed to be sharp and able to be held
comfortably in the hand (Manning 1985, 39). The two
definite examples here are of Manning Type 4b, those with
square-section tapering tangs; these would have been set
into bone, wood or antler handles (Ottoway 1992, 552).
One awl (No. 337) particularly resembles a group from
Coppergate with one arm of rounded and the other of
rectangular cross-section (ibid., 554). The blunting of the
punch point means that its function, whether for stamped

Figure 4.51 Illustrations of selected leatherworking
tools. All at 1:2
decoration or for cutting holes through leather, cannot be
determined. It should, however, be noted that all these
tools could equally have been used for the working of
bone, wood or metal (Ottoway 1992, 552).
Two iron awls and an iron punch were found in struc-
ture fills at Mucking (Morris 1993, 69–70, figs 132.3,
153.2 and 139.1); one at West Stow still retained its
bone handle (West 1985, fig. 188.1); five were found
at the iron smelting site at Ramsbury (Evison 1980,
37, figs 21.9–13) and three at Shakenoak (Brodribb et
al. 1972, 114, figs 48.261, 51.312 and 52.315). These
earlier awls tend not to have the diamond cross-section
which characterises later Anglo-Scandinavian awls from
Thetford and York (Goodall and Ottoway 1993, 102),
but often have one arm of rounded cross-section and the
other rectangular or square. Other examples of 10th- to
11th-century date at Thetford are of rectangular section,
however (Goodall 1984, 81, figs 34–40b), and earlier
examples from Redcastle Furze, Thetford, show that
the form does not change substantially (Andrews 1995,
figs 68.6–9). The tools found here, with the exception
of the broken dome-headed awl/punch (No. 340) from
the fill of Structure 14, which was probably intended for
recycling, were all found among more ‘normal’ structure
fills, indicative of domestic refuse. It may be significant
though, that, like the other major metalworking and
woodworking tools, they were all found in structure fills
dating to the later 7th century.
*337. Awl, Fe. Square-section shaft, ending in sharp, slightly bent
point at one end and a rectangular-section tang at the other.
L: 154mm; Diam: 6.5mm.
3129 (F333)/6470/Structure 35.
*338. Awl, Fe. Square-section tang tapering to round-section shaft,
point broken. Probably a leather-working tool, but could also
be a bradawl for woodworking. L: 50mm; Diam: 3.5mm.
2495 (F339)/6048/Structure 29, SE quad.
*339. Possible punch, Fe. Square-section tang tapering to triangular-
section shaft, point blunted (function uncertain). L: 58mm;
Diam: 5mm.
3311 (F341)/6050/Structure 30, NE quad.
268
*340. Tool, Fe. Domed head, square-sectioned shaft, broken. Unclear
function; possibly a hand-held awl or punch? L: 79mm;
Diam: 21mm.
392 (F41)/6179/Structure 14, SE quad.
Textile production
(Figs 4.52–4.54)
Like many other early Anglo-Saxon settlements, the
settlement site at Bloodmoor Hill has produced evidence
for spinning (in the form of spindlewhorls), weaving
(in the form of double-ended bone pin-beaters and clay
loomweights, both of which imply the use of warp-
weighted looms), cutting of cloth (in the form of shears)
and construction of fabric clothing and other items (in
the form of needles). These would probably have been
quite distinct activities, which may have taken place at
different times of the year and in different social situa-
tions.
In total, there were ten probable needles, five frag-
ments or complete sets of shears, thirty-one spindlewhorls
in various materials, four bone pin-beaters, and numerous
fired and unfired clay loomweights. (Within the cemetery,
Grave 11 produced a pair of woolcombs and a pair of
shears, and a further pair of shears was recovered from
Grave 12 (see Chapter 7).) Unlike much of the metal-
work detailed above, only a small amount of this material
was recovered from Structures 14 and 19 and the surface
deposits; the textile-related finds came predominantly
from the other SFB fills and a small number of pits. Only
the metal items did not follow this pattern: four of the
needles, the two shears fragments and one complete pair
of shears were associated with the scrap metal deposits in
these features, and must have been intended for recycling
(the complete shears from the spoil heap may also have
been associated with a surface deposit, as it would have
been disturbed by topsoil stripping). Of the remaining
metal items, Structure 20 produced three needles,
Structures 4 and 38 produced one each, as did Pit F416,
and Pit F368 produced the other complete set of shears.
The remainder of the textile-related assemblage
was similarly unevenly distributed, with certain struc-
tures producing extensive assemblages, and others no
evidence at all. Of the thirty-one spindlewhorls, for
example, Structures 17, 20 and 22 together produced
twelve (three, five and four apiece, respectively), and two
each came from Structures 24 and 30. Solitary examples
came from a further eight structures (Structures 4, 5, 9,
10, 12, 18, 33 and 38), while two were recovered from
surface deposits, three from pits and two from surface
collection. Similarly, several structures were charac-
terised by extensive deposits of unfired and fired clay
loomweights. While these were largely fragmentary, an
estimation of the minimum number of loomweights per
structure was made; this is necessarily a conservative
estimate, as many other unidentifiable fragments of fired
and unfired clay from the same features are also likely to
be derived from loomweights. Structures with more than
twenty loomweights form a tight cluster in the core of the
settlement, particularly in the case of Structures 20, 21
and 22 (with 86+, 44+ and 26+ respectively), but also in
the case of Structures 25, 27 and 30 (with 28+, 25+ and
40+). In each case, these loomweights appear in part to
form a basal, or primary deposit; however, all of these
structures also yielded other loomweights distributed
through the overlying fills. The significance of these
 Figure 4.52 Illustrations of selected tools associated with textile manufacture. All at 1:2
deposits is further discussed below, but it is worth noting
here that these six features between them also account for
three needles, eleven spindlewhorls and two of the four
pin-beaters from the settlement.
Needles and shears
Needles were distinguished from pins by virtue of their
having evidence for an eye, a very sharp point, or a very
fine shaft; some remain only possible identifications. The
majority are broken, and therefore their original lengths
cannot be calculated, but most are small and fine, with
the longest example only just exceeding 53mm in length.
Diameters range from 0.7–5mm. Where visible, eyes are
lentoid, perhaps indicating that the needles were formed
by splitting the end of the shank in two and partially
welding it back together to form the eye (Ottoway 1992,
545). Then, as now, different sizes of needle would have
been employed in different tasks (those from Structure 20
span the whole size range). Iron needles of comparable
size are known from deposits of similar date at Shakenoak,
although these are noted as unusual (Brodribb et al. 1972,
116, figs 52.322, 52.333, 53.340–1).
The three complete pairs of shears (Nos 353–5) range
from 152mm to 200mm in length, and are thus of a size
which would have been used in crafts such as weaving,
sewing or leatherwork (Ottoway 1992, 548). While two
of the complete examples (Nos 353–4) have the simple
U-shaped bow common to early and middle Saxon shears
(Ottoway 1992, 548), the other complete pair (No. 355)
and the two fragmentary loops (Nos 351–2) are of omega
form. While this is commonly claimed to be later Saxon
in date (Walton Rogers 1997, 1781; Ottoway 1992, 548–
50, gives examples from York, Thetford and Goltho), the
discovery of two of these loops in a secure 7th-century
context in Structure 14, plus another entire unstratified
269
example from a site which went out of use in the early
part of the 8th century, must give pause for thought and
suggest that this form had been introduced by the latter
part of the 7th century at least. This is supported by the
two pairs of shears found as grave-goods within the
cemetery, both of which have slightly expanded loops
rather than simple U-shaped ones.
341. Probable needle fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned shaft, broken,
tapering to sharp point. L: 36mm; Diam: 1.5mm.
4010 (F1)/12632/Surface Deposit F1.
*342. Needle fragment, Fe. Corroded, but eye is visible on X-ray.
L: 21mm; Diam: 2mm.
294 (F19)/121/Structure 4, SW quad, spit A.
343. Needle, Fe. Slight swelling below eye, which is broken; point
also broken. L: 53mm; Diam: 5mm.
1411 (F134)/9438/Structure 20, NE quad, spit 3.
*344. Needle, Fe. Point missing, but part of the eye survives.
L: 40mm; Diam: 1.6mm.
2131 (F275)/6450/Surface Deposit F8/F275.
345. Probable needle fragment, Fe. Head missing, round-sectioned
shaft with slight swelling before sharp point. L: 37mm;
Diam: 2.9mm.
1374 (F156)/6310/Post-medieval ditch, where it cuts fill of
Structure 20.
346. Hollow, needle-shaped object, copper alloy (not analysed).
Tapers to point, other end flattened and perforated; use uncer-
tain. L: 30mm; W: 3mm; Th: 2mm.
4022 (F1)/12573/Surface Deposit F1.
347. Probable needle fragment, Fe. Fine, rounded shaft, broken at
both ends. L: 24mm; Diam: 0.7mm.
1411 (F134)/9419/Structure 20, NE quad, spit 4.
348. Probable needle fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned, head missing.
L: 14mm; Diam: 1.2mm.
1516 (F182)/6320/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
349. Probable needle fragment, Fe. Round-sectioned, only the
point remains. L: 14mm; Diam: 1.7mm.
3002 (F286)/8343/Structure 38, SE quad, spit A.
350. Probable needle fragment, Fe. Head broken. L: 46mm;
Diam: 1.5mm.
3080 (F416)/6467/Anglo-Saxon pit.
351. Shears loop, Fe. Omega loop, probably from the top of a pair
of shears; both arms broken above where blade would have
been. L: 74mm; W: 22mm; Th: 14mm.
384 (F41)/6150/Structure 14, NW quad, spit 3.
352. Possible shears fragment, Fe. Omega loop, heavily corroded,
both arms broken. L: 56mm; Th: 9.4mm.
392 (F41)/6172/Structure 14, SE quad.
*353. Shears, Fe. Blades have slightly angled backs and straight
cutting edges; spring is U-shaped, widening slightly at the
curve. Complete. L: 152mm.
3469 (F368)/6424/Anglo-Saxon pit.
*354. Shears, Fe. Complete, with U-shaped loop; blades with
curving cutting edges and angled backs. L: 200mm.
4421 (F503)/12676/Surface Deposit F11/F503.
*355. Shears, Fe. Both arms nearly complete, with plain blade tops
and expanded omega loop. L: 192mm; Th: 28mm.
0000/6213/Spoil heap.
Spindlewhorls
The settlement produced thirty-one spindlewhorls:
eighteen of fired clay, ten of worked stone, two of lead
and one of cannel coal (Fig. 4.53). These items act as
a ‘fly wheel’ with a drop-spindle to help twist the yarn
during spinning (Henry 1999, 71); weights of less than
10g are suitable for use with flax fibres and high-quality
wool fibres, while those over 30g are more suited to
coarser fibres such as hemp (ibid., 72), with those of
intermediate weight used with everyday fabrics. Where
fragmentary, whole weights were estimated: these ranged
from 4g to 66g. Central perforations ranged in diameter
from 6mm to 15mm. Little correlation was seen between
material and perforation diameter, and between material
and weight, except that all five whorls over 44g were
of fired clay, and all three under 10g were of stone (one
fashioned from siltstone, and two others that were either
meerschaum or a calcite-quartz man-made substance
(Steven Laurie, pers. comm.). The only variables that
did appear to correlate were perforation diameter and
context phase: spindlewhorls recovered from 6th-century
Figure 4.53 Illustrations of selected spindlewhorls. All at 1:2
270
fills had perforation diameters of 8–15mm; those from
earlier 7th-century contexts ranged from 7mm to 11mm
and those from later 7th-century contexts ranged from
6mm to 9mm (Table 4.19). There was not such a strong
correlation with weight, although the four whorls under
15g all came from 7th-century contexts. While most of
the whorls were of Walton Rogers’ type A (A1 with one
flat face; A2 with two unequal flat faces: 1997, 1736),
five were of her type B (discoid, or with two equal flat
faces). There appeared to be no chronological distinction
between the contexts in which the two types were found.
Although type B whorls are found mainly in 10th- to
early 12th-century contexts in York, they have also been
noted as a minority at other earlier Anglo-Saxon sites in
East Anglia (Walton Rogers 1997, 1736–7), suggesting
that there may be considerable regional variation in the
forms employed.
This compares with nine spindlewhorls from the
Spong Hill settlement (six of fired clay, one of reused
Roman pot, one of chalk and one of sandstone; Rickett
1995, 138–9); fifty-one from Mucking (twelve sherd
whorls, twenty-five others of fired clay, and fourteen of
other materials including bone, shale and chalk (Hamerow
1993, 64–6); and eighty-eight from West Stow (forty-
five of fired clay, sixteen of reused Roman pottery, ten of
chalk, seven of bone, six of shale, three of stone and one
of lead; West 1985, 139). Perforation diameters of the
Mucking sherd whorls ranged from 6mm to 10mm, with
weights from 15g to 35g, while the measurements of the
disc-shaped fired clay whorls were 8–14mm for perfora-
tion diameter and 26–60g for weight (Hamerow 1993,
figs 42–43). At West Stow, perforation diameters for the
sherd whorls ranged from 2mm to 11mm, and for the fired
clay whorls (not just disc-shaped) 4–17mm (West 1985;
measurements taken from figures, no weights given).
Overall, the Mucking and West Stow whorls exhibit a
great deal of variation, both in form and size; the reuse of
 6mm 7mm 8mm 9mm 10mm 11mm 12mm+
Phase 1 1 3 1 4
Phase 2a 1 1 2 2 1 1397 (F134)/5073/Structure 20, spit 2.
Phase 2b 1 1 2 1
Table 4.19 Internal diameter of spindlewhorls by phase
sherds suggests that sometimes an ad hoc approach was
taken to their manufacture.
The spindlewhorls from Bloodmoor Hill and compar-
ative sites thus suggest that there is more variability in
earlier Anglo-Saxon forms than usually thought. It has
been suggested at Coppergate, for example (Walton
Rogers 1997, 1731), that whorls with perforation diam-
eters of 9–11mm are later Saxon or medieval, while those
with perforations of 4–8mm in diameter are Iron Age or
Roman. Such a rigid classification is not supported by the
evidence from these earlier sites: Walton Rogers (1997,
1741) also suggests that fired clay was little used for whorls
between the Iron Age and the 16th century, but again,
this is not supported: fired clay was the most widely used
material for spindlewhorls at Bloodmoor Hill, Mucking
and West Stow. One difference is that Bloodmoor Hill
produced no whorls fashioned from reused Romano-
British or Anglo-Saxon pottery sherds (C. Tester and J.
Tipper, pers. comm.); these were common at Mucking,
West Stow and Spong Hill.
356. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Plano-convex, plain, purpose-made;
large rounded central perforation Diam: 11mm; fragmen-
tary. Diam: 36mm; Ht: 12mm; Wt: 10g (Estimated whole
Wt: 20g).
294 (F19)/4667/Structure 4, SW quad.
357. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Deeper bun-shaped, plain, purpose-
made, fragmentary; rounded central perforation Diam: 15mm.
Diam: 44mm; Ht: 26mm; Wt: 8g (Estimated whole Wt: 40g).
4697 (F523)/12262/Structure 5, SE quad.
*358. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Bun-shaped, plain, part of one
face broken off; large central perforation Diam: 15mm.
Diam: 48mm; Ht: 22mm; Wt: 42g.
4616 (F514)/12044/Structure 9, SW quad.
359. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Discoid, facetted, plain, purpose-
made; rounded central perforation Diam: 8mm. Diam: 38mm;
Ht: 19mm; Wt: 11g (Estimated whole Wt: 33g).
4589 (F512)/11875/Structure 10, SW quad.
360. Spindlewhorl, ?meerschaum, or a calcite-quartz artificial
substance. Plano-convex, plain; rounded central perforation
Diam: 7mm. Diam: 30mm; Ht: 17mm; Wt: 4g.
205 (F5)/4521/Structure 12, NE quad, spit 1.
361. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Discoid, plain, purpose-made;
rounded central perforation Diam: 10mm. Diam: 41mm;
Ht: 9mm; Wt: 19g.
F212/4461/Structure 17, SW quad.
*362. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Fragmentary plano-convex, deco-
rated with two concentric lines of punched dots, purpose-
made; rounded central perforation Diam: ? Diam: c.40mm;
Ht: 16mm; Wt: 6g (Estimated whole Wt: 24g).
1811 (F212)/4404/Structure 17, SE quad.
363. Spindlewhorl, siltstone. Irregular plano-convex with large,
slightly off-centre perforation Diam: 14mm. Diam: 31mm;
Ht: 18mm; Wt: 16g.
1764 (F212)/4385/Structure 17, SW quad, spit 1.
364. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Bun-shaped, plain, purpose-made;
rounded central perforation Diam: 10mm. Diam: 44mm;
Ht: 22mm; Wt: 46g.
F178/5238/Structure 18, surface find.
365. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Bun-shaped, facetted on one side,
plain, purpose-made; rounded central perforation Diam: 9mm.
Diam: 36mm; Ht: 14mm; Wt: 17g.
1325 (F134)/4955/Structure 20, NW quad, spit 2.
271
101
*366. Spindlewhorl, siltstone. Plano-convex, very faint incised
line decoration; rounded central perforation Diam: 8mm.
Diam: 33mm; Ht: 17mm; Wt: 29g.
*367. Spindlewhorl, ?meerschaum or a calcite-quartz artificial
substance. Plano-convex, plain; rounded central perforation
Diam: 6mm. Diam: 26mm; Ht: 13mm; Wt: 6g.
1411 (F134)/5125/Structure 20, NE quad, spit 4.
368. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Bun-shaped, plain, purpose-made,
broken surfaces in places; rounded central perforation
Diam: 8mm. Diam: 34mm; Ht: 12mm; Wt: 12g.
1411 (F134)/5165/Structure 20, SE quad, spit 2.
*369. Spindlewhorl, fired clay with inclusions. Deeper discoid,
slightly facetted on upper side; rounded central perforation
Diam: 8mm. Diam: 33mm; Ht: 19mm; Wt: 26g.
1489 (F134)/9478/Structure 20, SW quad.
370. Spindlewhorl, ‘chalk’. Plano-convex, plain, broken on one
side; rounded central perforation Diam: 9mm. Diam: 37mm;
Ht: 16mm; Wt: 22g.
1100 (F126)/4117/Structure 22.
*371. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Discoid, with large burnt-out inclu-
sions, purpose-made; rounded central perforation Diam: 11mm.
Diam: 41mm; Ht: 14mm; Wt: 27g.
2472 (F126)/4299/Structure 22, NE quad, spit 1.
*372. Spindlewhorl, possible siltstone, probably non-local. Deeper
plano-convex, with concentric line decoration; rounded central
perforation Diam: 8mm. Diam: 33mm; Ht: 21mm; Wt: 31g.
1305 (F126)/4292/Structure 22, SW quad.
373. Spindlewhorl, possible siltstone, probably non-local. Convex-
rounded, plain; rounded central perforation Diam: 7mm; some
parts of upper surface broken off. Diam: 31mm; Ht: 12mm;
Wt: 8g.
1305 (F126)/4292/Structure 22, SW quad.
*374. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Plano-convex, plain, purpose-made;
rounded central perforation Diam: 10mm. Diam: 50mm;
Ht: 23mm; Wt: 59g.
5118 (F626)/13219/Structure 24, SE quad.
*375. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Discoid, with conical upper surface;
rounded central perforation, slightly broken around edges on
both faces Diam: 10mm. Diam: 48mm; Ht: 26mm; Wt: 54g.
5116 (F626)/13223/Structure 24, NW quad.
376. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Bun-shaped, plain, purpose-made,
fragmentary; rounded central perforation Diam: c.10mm.
Diam: 55mm; Ht: 22mm; Wt: 21g (Estimated whole
Wt: 63g).
3389 (F341)/8100/Structure 30, NE quad.
377. Spindlewhorl, natural stone. Sub-triangular natural rounded
perforated pebble, possibly reused as spindlewhorl; perfora-
tion Diam: 9mm. L: 44mm; W: 37mm; Ht: 21mm; Wt: 43g.
3322 (F341)/8057/Structure 30, SW quad.
378. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Plano-convex, plain, large burnt-
out inclusions, purpose-made, fragmentary; rounded central
perforation Diam: 9mm. Diam: 40mm; Ht: 16mm; Wt: 12g
(Estimated whole Wt: 24g).
4821 (F550)/12765/Structure 33, NW quad.
379. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Bun-shaped, plain, purpose-made,
fragmentary; irregular central perforation Diam: 12mm.
Diam: 46mm; Ht: 24mm; Wt: 19g.
3001 (F286)/5435/Structure 38, SE quad.
380. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. ?Plano-convex, plain, purpose-
made, fragmentary; rounded central perforation Diam: 9mm.
Diam: 28mm; Ht: 22mm; Wt: 6g (Estimated whole Wt: 24g).
4895 (F577)/12894/Pit Group H.
381. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Conoid-rounded, unfacetted, plain,
purpose-made; rounded central perforation Diam: 9mm.
Diam: 48mm; Ht: 22mm; Wt: 45g.
3560 (F376)/5686/Pit Group J.
382. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Conoid-angular, unfacetted, plain,
purpose-made; rounded central perforation Diam: 10mm.
Diam: 34mm; Ht: 25mm; Wt: 9g (Estimated whole Wt: 36g).
3538 (F374)/7953/Pit Group L.
*383. Spindlewhorl, fired clay. Conoid-rounded, unfacetted, with
vertical incised line decoration running from perforation to
shoulder; rounded central perforation Diam: ?; purpose-made
and fragmentary. Diam: ?; Ht: 19mm; Wt: 8g (Estimated
whole Wt: 32g).
106 (F1)/2923/Surface Deposit F1.
384. Spindlewhorl, ?cannel coal. Plano-convex, plain, purpose-
made; probably rounded central perforation. Diam: c.40mm;
Ht: 24mm; Wt: 8g (Estimated total Wt: 32g).
 Figure 4.54 Distribution plot of textile tools
2441 (F275)/6935/Anglo-Saxon Surface Deposit F8/F275.
*385. Spindlewhorl, lead. Conoid-angular, facetted, decorated
with incised herringbone pattern; rounded central perforation
Diam: 7mm. Diam: 25mm; Ht: 10mm; Wt: 28g.
6265/14140/Topsoil.
*386. Spindlewhorl, lead. Plano-convex; central perforation
Diam: 7.2mm. Diam: 26mm; Th: 12mm; Wt: 42g.
0000/12975/Surface.
Loomweights
with Sue Anderson
(Figs 4.55–4.56)
Of the fired clay examined by Sue Anderson, approxi-
mately 194 fragments were identified as probable Saxon
loomweights. Of these, 111 came from the fills of SFBs,
the others being recovered from several pits and surface
deposits. They were most commonly in fabrics ‘msm’
(seventy-five fragments) and ‘msf’ (forty-four frag-
ments), but were also frequently made in ‘fsm’, ‘calc’
and ‘org’ fabrics, and seventeen pieces were actually
unfired. The results from the analysis of this subset of
the material chosen for analysis were merged with the
remainder of the identified loomweights, leading to the
conclusions below.
Minimum numbers of fifty-eight fired and 365 unfired
clay loomweights were recovered from the settlement.
The high degree of fragmentation of both the fired and
unfired clay loomweights restricted the extent of analysis
possible, and only a small proportion could be classi-
fied into types: after Hurst (1959, 23–4), these types are
annular (where the thickness of the rim is less than the
diameter of the central perforation), bun-shaped (where
the central perforation is very small) and intermediate
(where the central hole is sizeable, but the thickness of
the ring is greater than the diameter of the perforation). Of
272
the twenty-eight loomweights which could be classified
(only four of which were fired; these are illustrated below),
just six (21%) were of annular form, with the remainder
being intermediate or borderline annular/intermediate.
This contrasts with the pattern from Mucking, where
83% (88 of 106) were annular and the remainder inter-
mediate or borderline annular/intermediate (Hamerow
1993, 66). Although intermediate types are assumed to be
chronologically later than annular ones (Hamerow 1993,
66), this is not supported by the contextual associations
at Bloodmoor Hill, where some intermediate examples
were found in 6th-century contexts, and some annular
examples in 7th-century contexts; a similar pattern was
seen at Mucking, and a substantial chronological overlap
argued for there (ibid.).
Overall, considerable variability is seen in loom-
weight diameter: these range from 80mm to 141mm,
with the majority (73%; 27 of 37 measurable examples)
falling into the 95–124mm range. Unlike at Mucking
(see Hamerow 1993, fig. 45), when loomweight diam-
eters were plotted by structure at Bloodmoor Hill, little
consistency was seen, with individual structures typically
displaying a range of diameters in excess of 30mm. This
may suggest that the loomweights from structures do not
represent the remains of individual looms, as was argued
at Mucking. Very few weights could be calculated,
owing to the degree of fragmentation: complete weights
could be recorded from only five examples, and were
302g, 322g, 500g, 562g and 808g; these fall within the
range of weighed examples from Mucking (Hamerow
1993, fig. 46). None appeared to have deliberate marks,
although <4885> from Structure 21 bore a possible warp
thread impression mark.
 Figure 4.55 Illustrations of selected near-complete loomweights. All at 1:2

The number of loomweights recovered from Pin-beaters

Bloodmoor Hill compares with the eighty-seven from
the Spong Hill settlement (all annular and of fired clay;
Rickett 1995, 135), over 200 at both West Stow and
Mucking (Tipper 2004, 165–6), and 151 from Pennyland,
Bucks. (Williams 1993, table 5).
*387. Loomweight, complete. Intermediate.
216 (F5)/4594/Structure 12, SE quad.
*388. Loomweight, complete but in fragments. Intermediate.
3500 (F335)/5570/Structure 25, NW quad.
*389. Loomweight, complete. Intermediate.
3389 (F341)/8100/Structure 30, NE quad.
*390. Loomweight, 50% complete. Annular.
3679 (F374)/8189/Anglo-Saxon Pit Group L.
by Ian Riddler (Fig. 4.57)
Fragments of four pin-beaters came from three separate
contexts. Although none of the pin-beaters are complete,
it is likely that all are of double pointed form, tapering to
either end from the centre. Two fragments (Nos 391–2)
stem from the middle section and one of these (No. 391)
retains a medial groove on one side, indicating that it
is made from bone. Both are oval in section, while the
pointed ends (Nos 393–4) are closer to a circular section,
with relatively sharp points. All four survive in poor
condition but retain traces of polish. Several of the pin-
beater fragments were recovered from the same feature

273
 Figure 4.56 Distribution plot of numbers of fired clay and unfired clay loomweights in SFBs
as two of the single-sided composite combs described
above, suggesting that they are of late 7th- or 8th-century
date.
Double pointed pin-beaters are commonly found on
Early and Middle Saxon settlements and they are associ-
ated with the warp-weighted loom, which utilised clay
loomweights (MacGregor 1985, 188–9; Riddler 1996,
136; Walton Rogers 1997, 1755–7). They served princi-
pally to separate warp threads on the loom, although they
were useful as utilitarian weaving tools. During the late
9th century the vertical two-beam loom was reintroduced
from the continent and evidence for the warp-weighted
loom diminishes, although it continued in use into the
late Saxon period in some areas (Walton Rogers 2001).
The majority of double pointed pin-beaters come from
early and middle Saxon contexts and they may have been
retained and used in pairs or sets (Riddler 1996, 136).
*391. A fragment of the middle section of a double pointed pin-
beater. Oval in section with a medial groove on one side,
indicating that it is made of bone. Traces of polish. L: 69mm;
W: 10mm; Th: 7mm.
3299 (F337)/5625/Structure 27, SE quad, spit 4.
*392. A fragment of a double pointed pin-beater, stemming from
the middle section and extending towards one end. Oval in
section, with traces of polish. L: 64mm; W: 9mm; Th: 7mm.
3268 (F333)/5790/Structure 35, SW quad.
*393. A fragment of one pointed end of a double pointed pin-beater,
surviving in poor condition. Circular in section, traces of
polish. L: 54mm; W: 7mm; Th: 7mm.
1397 (F134)/5056/Structure 20, NW quad, spit 3.
*394. A fragment from close to one end of a double pointed pin-
beater, surviving in poor condition. Traces of polish. L: 40mm;
W: 7mm.
3274 (F333)/5820/Structure 35, SW quad.
274
Commercial activity
(Pl. XI)
Only a single contemporary coin was found on the site:
the sceat of c.690–710 (No. 399), which was recovered
from the fill of Structure 26; otherwise the only coins
from Anglo-Saxon features were three of Roman date.
This low number of contemporary coins is not actually
unusual for a site of this date. Even Mucking, Essex,
produced only three coins from the excavations (three
primary sceattas of type BX together on the floor of
GH168), with a further two sceattas from a nearby field
(Hamerow 1993, 64), while none are reported from West
Stow (West 1985). The discovery of Roman coins in early
Anglo-Saxon contexts is not uncommon, particularly in
cemeteries (White 1988, 62–101), although comparable
finds from settlements are also known. West Stow, for
example, produced 289 Roman coins, ninety of which had
post-Roman damage (thirty-six were pierced, twenty-six
had clipped or chiselled edges, twenty-two had nicked
edges and eighteen were abraded; Curnow 1985, 76–81).
It was suggested that they may have been foraged from
the nearby Romano-British site at Icklingham, for West
Stow itself did not appear to have an immediate Roman
predecessor; they may have been collected for various
reasons, including use as curios, for attachment to neck-
laces when pierced, for gaming counters and for use as
weights (ibid., 77). Meaney (1981, 216) has noted the
tendency to leave coins unpierced in the later 6th and
7th centuries, perhaps indicating the growing trend for
keeping coins within bags rather than suspended from
necklaces or festoons. Mucking also produced consider-
able numbers of Roman coins, but many of these were
recovered from Romano-British features belonging to
the preceeding settlement, and not from Anglo-Saxon

Figure 4.57 Illustrations of bone pin-beaters. All at 1:1
features at that site. Given the presence of Romano-
British pottery, this lack of Roman coinage at Bloodmoor
Hill is intriguing, and suggests a low level of curation
compared with other contemporary sites.
Otherwise, the only other indicators of commer-
cial activity are the two possible weights, one of iron
(No. 400) and one of lead (No. 401), which are, intrigu-
ingly, of the same weight. It is possible, however, that
these were in fact spindlewhorls, as their central perfo-
rations have diameters of 9mm and 10mm and their
weights fall within the normal range for spindlewhorls on
the site, though they would be rather unusual forms (one,
though, resembles those fashioned from Romano-British
pot sherds known from other sites).
395. Coin, copper alloy (not analysed). Valentinian I or Valens,
minted AD 364–78. Obverse: illegible (appears to have been
hammered flat). Reverse: Emperor facing, head left, with right
hand raising kneeling woman, in left hand holding Victoriola
(hammered?). Legend: [RESTITVTOR REIP]. Mint mark:
illegible. Diam: 21.1mm.
564 (F4)/6862/Pit Group E.
396. Coin, copper alloy (not analysed). Cut As of one of the Flavian
emperors (AD 69–96). Illegible type. Wt: 5.81g.
1272 (F130)/6783/Structure 21, SW quad.
397. Coin, copper. Sestertius. Faustina Senior: wife of Antoninus
Pius, died AD 141 (memorial coin struck after death). Obverse:
Bust of Festina, facing right (inscription: missing and illeg-
275
Plate XI Obverse and reverse of sceat No. 399
ible). Reverse: [AVGVST] A S. C. Probably Pietas standing
left holding patria and sacrificing at altar. Condition: reduced
in diameter and well worn, probably antique at time of loss
(perhaps used as a weight?).
1643 (F182)/6824/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
398. Disc, silver. No inscription visible on X-ray; too light and
sharply rounded to be an Anglo-Saxon coin (Martin Allen,
pers. comm.). Possibly an intrusive fragment of post-medieval
button.
1764 (F212)/6879/Structure 17, SW quad, spit 2.
*399. Anglo-Saxon silver ‘sceat’ (penny), Series BIg (imitative)
(AD 685–700). Die Axis: 150; Wt: 1.23g. Obv: []AII[]m[OA?]
(no crossbar to A). Rev: OOIIIII[O?]OIImO. Would not have
been in circulation after c.720. Diam: 12mm; Th: 1.7mm.
2080 (F379)/6880/Structure 26.
400. Possible weight, Fe. Cylindrical, with central perforation. H:
16mm; Diam: 26mm, 28.0g.
384 (F41)/6214/Structure 14, NW quad, spit 1.
401. Weight, lead. Flattened circular weight with a central perfora-
tion. Diam: 37mm; Th: 6.3mm, 28.0g.
3324 (F341)/6873/Structure 30, SE quad.
VII. Horse equipment and weaponry
Horse equipment
(Fig. 4.58)
Complementing the animal bone evidence for horses
detailed in Chapter 5 were a few bridle fragments
recovered from settlement deposits. The snaffle bit was
universally used before the 11th century to control a horse
while riding (Ottoway 1992, 704). The bit was comprised
of two roughly equal links, each ending in a cheek-piece
comprised of a ring, which was in turn connected to
the bridle by a loop-eyed strap-fitting. Bloodmoor Hill
produced fragments of at least two bits (Nos 402 and
404), with hooked plate No. 403 possibly forming part of
a harness: cf. an interlocking pair of loop-endings which
would have attached straps 3.5mm thick, from Shakenoak
(Brodribb et al. 1972, 90, fig. 39.175), and others in
the horse-grave at Marston-St-Lawrence (Vierck 1972,
Abb. 58). Other examples of bit fragments are known
from Shakenoak (Brodribb et al. 1972, 90, figs 39.167–
70), Fishergate, York (Rogers 1993, fig. 701.5247),
Coppergate, York (Ottaway 1992, fig. 307.3840–7),
Figure 4.58 Illustrations of selected items of horse
equipment. All at 1:2
and Thetford (Goodall 1984, figs 138.253–7, 139.265).
Complete examples are known from the horse graves at
Bifrons, Market Overton, Little Wilbraham and Leighton
Buzzard (Baldwin Brown 1915, 422, 776, 786).
402. Probable bridle bit-link, Fe. Thick round-section rod, tapering
to thinner loops at each end (one bent backwards out of line).
L: 92mm; W: 9mm; Th: 9mm.
1130 (F130)/6024/Structure 21, SE quad, spit 1.
*403. Hooked plate, Fe. Oval plate with two perforations set one
above the other, tapering into round-sectioned plain hook.
L: 49mm; W: 12mm.
3074 (F321)/6464/Pit Group L.
*404. Snaffle-bit, Fe. Broken oval ring with one link still attached;
another link detached. Links have loops which are closed but
not welded.
1673 (F132)/6338/Anglo-Saxon pit.

Weaponry
(Fig. 4.59)
A limited range of weaponry was recovered from the
settlement features: one arrowhead, and two further
possible examples; a shield boss apex and two shield
mounts; a possible binding from a scabbard; and the
remains of three spearheads.
Arrowheads are generally rare from Anglo-Saxon
contexts, as they do not usually form part of the weapon
burial set (see Evison 1987, 30–1, for a list of probable
and possible examples). A parallel for No. 405 is seen
in GH58 at Mucking (Hamerow 1993, fig. 116.7a),
which also has a split socket; further parallels for this
undoubtedly Anglo-Saxon type come from Grave 178 at
Morning Thorpe, Norfolk (Green et al. 1987, fig. 354),
and Cremation 1051 at Spong Hill (Hills 1977, fig. 124).
The other arrowheads are harder to find parallels for. It
is possible that two of the items identified as possible
arrowheads in Grave 57 at Dover Buckland provide
parallels for No. 406: these are described as having
square-sectioned tangs embedded in wood. The most
complete was 61mm long, with a complete spike ‘like
an awl’ (Evison 1987, 30, fig. 32), and seems to resemble
closely the Bloodmoor Hill example.
Little can be said about the shield boss fragments
(Nos 408–10), except that they indicate the former use of
shields, possibly elaborate examples if the silvered disc
is correctly identified as a shield fitting, by occupants of
the site (cf. Evison 1987, 34). The two spearheads are
of different types (and the socket fragment represents
a third example). The long example of Swanton’s Type
D2 (No. 413) dates to the later 6th or 7th century, and
this type has a widespread distribution over southern and
eastern England, including East Anglia (Swanton 1973,
fig. 33; 1974). Examples of type C1 like No. 414 are
also widely distributed, but rarer in northern East Anglia
(Swanton 1973, fig. 10).
*405. Arrowhead, Fe. Split socket filled with mineral-preserved
wood (species not identified); small angled blade, covered in
randomly oriented chopped vegetable matter, perhaps grass.
L: 61mm; Diam: 12mm.
3003 (F286)/6042/Structure 38, NW quad.
*406. Possible arrowhead, Fe. Square-sectioned shaft leading to
round-sectioned point with a slight tang; unidentified MPOs
on shaft. L: 60mm; Diam: 6mm.
4603 (F514)/12689/Structure 9, NE quad. Figure 4.59 Illustrations of selected items of weaponry.
*407. Possible arrowhead, Fe. Rectangular-sectioned tang narrows All at 1:2, except 406 at 1:1
into solid shaft then widens into leaf-shaped point (looks like
a miniature spearhead); possible MPOs but unidentifiable.
L: 79mm; W: 9mm; Th: 4.4mm.
4694 (F526)/12713/Anglo-Saxon pit.

276
*408. Shield boss apex, Fe. Inserted apex, which has become detached
from its cone; button-headed on solid shaft, with a curving disc
at the base for attachment. L: 21mm; Diam: 16mm.
3389 (F341)/6056/Structure 30, NE quad.
*409. Shield mount, Fe. Circular flat disc with attachment shaft
(round-sectioned, 4.3mm in diameter) on rear. Diam: 29mm;
Th: 3.2mm (cf. Dickinson and Härke 1992, 27 Type a).
1480 (F134)/6036/Structure 20, SE quad, spit 3.
*410. Shield mount, silvered gunmetal. Circular disc, with four
potential attachment points on the reverse, with remains
of a silvered upper surface, undecorated. Diam: 40mm;
Th: 1.4mm.
F550/12982/Structure 33, SW quad.
*411. Binding, Fe. Two rectangular plates, affixed by two rivets,
both still in situ; must have functioned as a binding, perhaps
for a scabbard? L: 38mm; W: 11mm; Th: 11mm.
2207 (F255)/6373/Anglo-Saxon pit.
*412. Possible spearhead socket, Fe. Thick sheet formed into an
open cylinder; no internal rivets visible on X-ray but remains
of one possibly evident on surface. L: 64mm; Diam: 17mm.
3469 (F368)/6426/Anglo-Saxon pit.
*413. Spearhead fragment, Fe. Round, split socket (L: c.85mm)
with internal rivet visible on X-ray tapers into solid shaft of
probably round section, which is heavily corroded and broken.
Presumably originally widened into long spearhead blade;
mineral-preserved wood inside socket (Swanton Type D2; late
6th- to 7th-century). L: 260mm; Diam: 26mm.
392 (F41)/6907/Structure 14, SW quad.
*414. Small spearhead, Fe. Rounded split socket (L: 44mm), very
short section of solid round-sectioned shaft widening slightly
into slender leaf-shaped blade of lentoid section (Swanton
Type C1; 7th-century). L: 142mm; W: 15mm.
M155/6626/MD spot find.
Figure 4.60 Illustrations of selected miscellaneous artefacts. All at 1:1, except Nos 416–417 at 1:2
277
Miscellaneous (illustrated)
(Fig. 4.60)
A number of unidentified items are illustrated here, in
the hope that further information on them will be forth-
coming.
*415. Figurine, copper alloy (not analysed). Cast, elongated with
short legs, possibly representing a horse. This is perhaps a
symbolic mount, or a child’s toy figure. L: 38mm; W: 6mm;
Ht: 9mm.
6213 (F134)/14088/Structure 20.
*416. Bar fragments, Fe. Possibly originally from one rectangular
flat artefact which appears to have a strip associated around
its upper portion, perhaps a binding ring? Max L: 80mm, max
W: 21mm; Th: 6mm.
251 (F9)/6917/Structure 3, NW quad.
*417. Bar, Fe. Round-sectioned and substantial, curved towards one
end; substantial amounts of mineral-preserved oak surrounding
over two-thirds of its length, including the curved section;
function unclear. L: 225mm; Diam: 17mm.
2339/6457/MD spot find.
*418. Strip, copper alloy. Rectangular and slightly bent; both ends
have been cut so as to halve a centrally placed perforation.
Decorated with a faint incised line along each of the long
sides. L: 43mm; W: 13mm; Th: 0.6mm.
5116 (F626)/13238/Structure 24, NE quad.
*419. Strip, gilded copper. Rectangular and slightly bent; one end
broken, the other has a rivet in situ. The upper surface is
gilded. Function uncertain. L: 38mm; W: 8mm; Th: 1.6mm.
5107/13234/Subsoil.
*420. Unidentified piece, copper. Rectangular plate with upper and
lower edges decorated with incised lines. Appears to have been
bordered by two tinned copper rods; only one now survives.
Other copper alloy fragments apparently not associated (rod is
leaded copper and other fragment is probably leaded bronze).
L: 21mm; W: 17mm; Th: 2.1mm (all metal identifications by
XRF).
393 (F41)/6753/Structure 14, NE quad.
*421. Copper ring around a calciumphosphate piece; MPOs
comprise bone, hair and fur fibres in clumps running parallel
to each other.
2082 (F372)/6866/Oven base.
Hollowed cylinder
by Ian Riddler
(Fig. 4.60)
Approximately half of an undecorated bone cylinder
(No. 422), made from a cattle metatarsus, was recovered
from a midden. The cylinder has an inner recess along
one edge and is elegantly curved in profile. It is partially
perforated on the outside towards its centre, with addi-
tional marks on the inner surface at the same level.
Hollowed cylinders are comparatively rare finds in
Anglo-Saxon contexts, although they are common on the
Continent. The majority are made from antler, rather than
bone. Large assemblages of antler examples are known
from Haithabu and from Mikulčice (Czech Republic);
more locally, there are several examples from York
and Ipswich (Ulbricht 1978, 81; Becker 1989, 126–7;
Kavánová 1995, 205–9; MacGregor et al. 1999, 1999;
Riddler et al. forthcoming). Most are of 10th- to 12th-
century date (Ulbricht 1978, 81).
This cylinder differs from most continental examples
in that its height does not exceed its diameter, and it is
made of bone. The presence of an inner rebate recalls
an example, also of bone, from York, which has similar
squat proportions (MacGregor et al. 1999, fig. 958.7223).
The function of these objects is not entirely clear and
several alternatives have been proposed (Ulbricht 1978,
81–2; Kavánová 1995, 205). MacGregor et al. noted that
no examples have been found associated with shafts or
handles, but one cylinder from Haithabu was pierced by
an antler wedge, while another had an iron nail inserted
at one end, suggesting perhaps that they secured leather
or cordage which passed through them (MacGregor et al.
1999, 2000; Ulbricht 1978, 81 and taf. 43.1 and 5). An
example from Wolin was in fact associated with a wooden
shaft (Cnotliwy 1958, 231 and taf. 2.8). As an alternative,
they may have been suspended from a belt and used in
association with other objects (Ulbricht 1978, 81–2).
*422. An incomplete cylinder of bone, fashioned from a cattle
metatarsus, with evidence of the bone type surviving on the
inner surface. Lightly rounded on each edge on the outer
surface, with a rebate on one edge on the inner side. A trace
of a partially complete perforation is visible at the midpoint,
with two further marks on the inner surface at the same level.
L: 21mm; Diam: 25mm.
55 (F1)/8507/Surface Deposit F1.
VIII. Discussion
This chapter has described and discussed the artefactual
evidence from the settlement (with the exception of those
items associated with agriculture, which are discussed in
Chapter 5, and the grave-goods from the burials, which
278
are dealt with in Chapter 7). The extensive assemblage
has produced evidence for many aspects of life on
an Anglo-Saxon settlement: bodily adornment; food
preparation and serving; preparation and manufacture of
textiles; craft-working, especially metalworking. Much
of the evidence is derived from the exceptional metal-
work assemblage, which relates in part to the abundance
of evidence for metalworking on the site, as much of it
was recovered from scrap and other metal deposits that
seem to have been intended for recycling. It seems to have
been a happy coincidence that the bulk of this recycling
assemblage was deposited into two SFBs towards the
end of the occupation of the settlement (see Chapter 6);
although this cannot provide much evidence for the
distributional analysis of activities on the settlement (see
Chapter 6), it does provide a wealth of information about
which of those activities must have been taking place.
One important point to consider is the quantity of
material that was not recovered during the excavations,
presumably because it had already been removed from
the settlement area during the Anglo-Saxon period.
Tipper’s conclusion that only around 12% of the total
pottery remained to be excavated has implications for
other categories of material which may have become
similarly fragmented (and may account for the relatively
low levels of other materials, such as pottery and animal
bone, when compared with West Stow and Mucking; we
may be seeing depositional differences between sites).
The following chapter deals with the ‘environ-
mental’ evidence from the site (faunal, botanical and fish
remains), and provides an assessment of the subsistence
strategies of the site. All the information in Chapters 3,
4 and 5 is considered synthetically in Chapter 6, where
attempts are made to phase the Anglo-Saxon settlement
and examine the location of activities across the site and
change through time.
Endnotes
1. Unique key identifiers were assigned and the following recorded
for each sherd: count, weight (g), maximum length (mm), thickness
(mm), form (rim, neck, shoulder, body or base), (sub-) fabric,
decoration, surface treatment, presence of carbonised organic
residue and sooting, oxidation and also condition (based on simple
visual inspection). Rim and base diameters were calculated, along
with the percentage of the complete rim or base, and sherd links
were recorded, from which an estimated vessel equivalent (eve)
was obtained. The illustrated sherds together with all vessel links
have been assigned vessel numbers; multiple sherds from the same
vessel, illustrated together as one vessel, have been assigned a
single vessel number but also single sherds have a vessel number
(V1–V148). The pottery is referred to using their vessel numbers.
2. Detailed fabric descriptions of the illustrated sherds are listed in the
catalogue and the fabric sub-groups were recorded for each sherd in
the database.
3. Both actual refits and also non refitting connections or sherd links
(i.e. sherds from the same vessel but without a physical join) were
recorded and assigned individual vessel numbers. The latter is
subjective, given the variability within individual vessels, although
the analysis has erred on the side of caution.
 5. Economic Resources
I. Introduction
The previous chapter detailed the artefactual evidence
from the site, and highlighted how the Anglo-Saxon
settlement was founded in an area with pre-existing
Roman remains, including surface dumps of material.
Before moving on to look at the faunal and environmental
remains from the site, and their associated agricultural
material culture, it is first necessary to consider the
potential for residual Roman material to have biased the
assemblages discussed below. As Higbee states below,
the fact that residual Roman pottery has been recovered
from some features strongly suggests that some of the
animal bone must also be considered Roman. However,
the bias produced by this may not have been as dramatic
as might be expected. Firstly, those features with very
large quantities of residual Roman pottery (Structures 14
and 19 and Surface Deposits F159/182 and F342) did not,
in fact, produce large quantities of animal bone. Together,
these features produced 2.0% by number and 1.1% by
weight of total animal bone from the site, whereas they
produced 31.9% by number and 25.6% by weight of the
Roman pottery (see Chapter 6 for further discussion).
Secondly, it can be expected that where Roman-period
animal bone is found residual in Anglo-Saxon contexts
it would be more fragmented and thus less likely to be
included within POSAC counts (see below). The overall
patterns revealed by analysis of the animal bone from
Anglo-Saxon contexts can therefore be taken as repre-
sentative of the true patterning. The same is also true of
the fish bone and environmental remains. Identifiable
fish bone was recovered from only a small number of
contexts, none of which had significant amounts of Roman
pottery within them. Similarly, those few contexts which
produced well-preserved charred plant remains were not
significantly contaminated with residual material.
II. Mammal and bird bone
by Lorrain Higbee
(Figs 5.1–5.6)
Introduction
A large quantity of animal bone was recovered from the
site: 68,455 fragments or c.281kg. This came from all
areas of the excavation, with the exception of Area N;
relatively large quantities were recovered from areas
Period No. hand- % hand- No. dry sieved
recovered recovered
Roman 77 81
Anglo-Saxon 3,330 91 216
Post-medieval 8 100
Undated 379 99 1 0.2
Total 3,794 217
Table 5.1 Quantity of bone (POSACs only) recovered by different methods for each of the main periods/phases
279
A, D, E and H (see Table 5.3). The vast majority of the
assemblage was recovered by hand during the normal
course of excavation (c.89% by fragment count or 96%
by weight) and the remainder was retrieved by sieving.
A program of dry coarse sieving (using a 5mm mesh)
was carried out on site; this involved a significant propor-
tion of excavated deposits from selected feature types,
mostly SFBs. In addition, bulk samples were retained for
the retrieval of environmental remains: these were wet
sieved using a standard seraph tank, and bone was sepa-
rated from the resulting residue. Environmental samples
were not necessarily ‘whole earth’: some bones, particu-
larly large fragments, were occasionally hand-collected
prior to processing. Using the methods outlined below,
the total quantity of identified (or countable) material
recovered was 4145 fragments, of which c.92% was
recovered by hand, 5% by dry sieving and the remaining
3% by wet sieving.
Approximately 88% of the assemblage is Anglo-Saxon
in date and is discussed in detail below. The Anglo-Saxon
assemblage is considered as a whole, owing to factors of
residuality. Small quantities of animal bone were recov-
ered from Roman (c.2%), post-medieval (c.0.2%) and
undated (c.9%) contexts. This material does not merit
further consideration but is detailed in some tables and
the appendices lodged with the archive. It is worth noting
that residual Roman pottery has been recorded from some
Anglo-Saxon contexts and it must therefore be assumed
that some bone is also residual.
Aims and objectives
The main aims and objectives of the analysis are: to char-
acterise the Anglo-Saxon assemblage in terms of species
represented and their relative importance to the cultural
and economic life of the settlement; to look at disposal
patterning within the settlement area and between
different feature types; and to discuss the significance of
these results within a regional and national framework.
Methods
Identification
Identification was carried out using the author’s own
reference collection and the reference collection of the
Centre for Archaeology, English Heritage, Portsmouth.
Most, but not all, caprine (sheep and goat) bones are
difficult to identify to species; however, using the criteria
of Boessneck (1969) and Payne (1985) it was possible
% dry sieved No. wet sieved % wet sieved Total
18 19 95
6 113 3 3,659
8
3 0.8 383
134 4,145
 Figure 5.1 Frequency (by NISP) of main livestock species for main feature types

Figure 5.2 Frequency (by NISP) of main livestock species for areas of the site with more than 150 POSACs

Figure 5.3 Frequency of main livestock species by number of identified fragments (or NISP) and minimum number
of individuals (or MNI) for the Anglo-Saxon assemblage

280
to identify a selective suite of elements as sheep or goat
from the assemblage. Of the small number of caprine
bones that could be identified to species, the majority
were sheep and it is therefore assumed that most caprine
bones belong to sheep. The term ‘sheep’ will thus be
used throughout this report to refer to all undifferenti-
ated caprine bones as well as those positively identified
as sheep. The shape of enamel folds was used to distin-
guish between equid species, following Davis (1987);
only horses were positively identified. All post-cranial
bones were simply recorded as equid. Equid remains will
be referred to throughout this report as horse, although
it cannot be discounted that other equid species may be
included in this category. The Gallus/Numida/Phasianus
group of closely related galliformes are also difficult to
distinguish (see MacDonald 1992); however, no guinea
fowl or pheasant bones were positively identified, and it is
therefore assumed that fowl-like bones belong to chicken.
Post-cranial bones of hare and rabbit were distinguished
on the basis of size, while cranial fragments were distin-
guished on the basis of tooth morphology after Hillson
(1986, 77–80).
Quantification
Analysis of the assemblage was carried out following
Davis (1992a). In summary, a selective suite of mamma-
lian skeletal elements, termed ‘parts of the skeleton
always counted’ (or POSACs), were recorded as standard
and used in counts. In addition to the POSACs selected
by Davis, the following elements were counted: horn-
cores and antlers with a complete transverse section,
the occipital part of the cranium and navicula-cuboid.
Any non-countable elements from less common species
or elements displaying butchery marks or pathological
changes were also recorded but not used in counts.
Numbers of vertebrae (centra) and ribs (articular ends)
were also recorded to species where possible or to general
size category (e.g. cattle-sized or sheep-sized); this infor-
mation was collected in order to assess the representation
of this part of the body and, in the case of vertebrae,
record epiphyseal fusion information. Bones were only
recorded if at least 50% of a given part was present and
Dobney and Reilly’s (1988) zonal recording method was
incorporated for this purpose. Single condyles of cattle,
caprine and cervid metapodials were counted as halves, as
were the central pig metapodials. The recording of avian
bones was limited to bones from the wing and leg but
these were recorded only if they retained one complete
articular surface. Avian bones were also recorded using
a zonal method following Cohen and Serjeantson
(1996). The above methods of quantification reduce the
over-recording of fragmented material to give a truer
indication of species proportions. The number of speci-
mens identified to species (or NISP) was calculated for
all taxa but the minimum number of individuals (or MNI)
was only calculated for the most common taxa. The MNI
was calculated simply by dividing the total number of
fragments of each skeletal element by the number present
in the body.
Preservation, modification and pathology
Preservation was recorded using a modified version of
Behrensmeyer’s (1978) weathering stages: i.e. each
POSAC was graded on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 repre-
281
senting excellent and 5 poor preservation. Characteristics
that define these categories are as follows:
1 Bones exhibiting very little or no weathering or attri-
tion.
2 Bones exhibiting a slight degree of weathering —
usually small areas of flaking (or exfoliation) on the
outer surface (or cortex). This category also includes
a large number of loose teeth that have broken or
cracked occlusal surfaces.
3 Bones exhibiting a moderate degree of weathering
— usually exfoliation involving most of the cortical
surface and shallow, longitudinal cracks. This cate-
gory also includes teeth that have cracked apart as a
result of deterioration of the underlying dentine and
cementum.
4 Bones exhibiting more severe exfoliation involving
the entire cortical surface as well as deep cracks and
abraded edges. Bone in this category has a fibrous,
brittle texture.
5 Bones that have lost large areas of cortical bone due
to exfoliation and rounded edges due to abrasion.
Bones in this category are extremely fragile, with a
fibrous, brittle texture.
Information on gnawing, butchery and pathology was
recorded where present. Butchery was recorded by type
(i.e. chop, knife cut, sawn), position and orientation (using
standard anatomical terms and orientation). Pathological
conditions were categorised where possible and detailed
descriptions made as to form and location.
Ageing and sexing
The ageing data of Silver (1969) were used to assess
epiphyseal fusion of the post-cranial skeleton, and
fusion categories follow O’Connor (1989). Epiphyses
are recorded as ‘fused’ when the epiphyseal plate joining
epiphysis to metaphysis is closed, ‘fusing’ once spicules
of bone have formed across the epiphyseal plate, and
‘unfused’ if none of these changes have taken place. Bird
bones with ‘spongy’ ends were recorded as ‘juvenile’.
Tooth wear and mandible wear stages were recorded
following Payne (1973 and 1987) for sheep/goat, and
Grant (1982) and O’Connor (1989) for cattle and pigs.
A complete list of tooth wear and mandible wear stages
for mandibles retaining two or more cheek teeth (i.e. dp4/
p4–m3) is included in the archive.
Sexing using morphological characteristics was
undertaken only for pig canines and their alveoli. Boar
canines can be differentiated from sow canines on the
basis of their size, shape and root morphology (Schmid
1972, 80–1).
Biometry
In general, measurements follow Von den Driesch (1976),
with the following exceptions: measurements taken on
the humerus and cattle and caprine metapodials follow
Davis (1992a); shaft diameter (or SD) on caprine tibiae
was taken in the anterior–posterior plane; measurements
of horncores are the largest (Wmax) and smallest (Wmin)
diameters at the base; measurements on pig teeth follow
Payne and Bull (1988), with the addition of the width of
the central (or second) cusp of the third molar (or m3);
width measurements of cattle and caprine teeth were
taken across both cusps; and measurement of equid cheek
 Roman Anglo-Saxon Undated Total
Preservation
category N % N % N % N %
1 31 33 1348 37 137 35.9 1516 36.7
2 46 48 1609 44 160 41.9 1815 44
3 15 16 564 15.4 70 18 649 16
4 3 3 126 3.4 15 4 144 3
5 - - 12 0.3 1 0.2 13 0.3
Total 95 100 3659 100 383 100 4137 100

Table 5.2 Preservation of bone (POSACs only) by period/phase. Percentages calculated for total number of fragments
by period/phase (the small post-medieval assemblage has been excluded)

Preservation category
Area 1 2 3 4 5 Total
N % N % N % N % N %
A 394 37 469 45 160 15 32 3 - - 1055
B 77 40 78 41 28 14.5 8 4 1 0.5 192
C 42 32 64 49 22 17 2 2 - - 130
D 236 35 301 44 119 17 24 3.5 2 0.5 682
E 224 33 302 44.5 116 17 33 5 4 0.5 679
H 288 40 318 44 92 13 19 2.5 4 0.5 721
J 11 27.5 11 27.5 12 30 5 12.5 1 2.5 40
K - - 3 60 1 20 1 20 - - 5
M 4 22 10 56 2 11 2 11 - - 18
O 72 52 53 39 12 9 - - - - 137
Total 1348 1609 564 126 12 3659

Table 5.3 Preservation state of bone (POSACs only) by excavation area for the Anglo-Saxon assemblage. Percentages
calculated for total number of fragments by area

Preservation category
Feature type 1 2 3 4 5 Total
N % N % N % N % N % N
Graves 26 48 25 46 3 6 - - - - 54
SFBs 561 36.4 668 43.4 244 16 61 4 4 0.2 1538
Hollow 23 34 28 41 14 21 3 4 - - 68
Surface Deposit F1 188 32 320 54 78 13 8 1 - - 594
Oven/hearth - - - - 1 100 - - - - 1
Pit 465 40 474 41 166 14 48 4 8 1 1161
Post-hole (building) 1 100 - - - - - - - - 1
Other surface deposits 84 35 94 39 58 24 6 2 - - 242
Total 1348 1609 564 126 12 3659

Table 5.4 Preservation of bone (POSACs only) by Anglo-Saxon feature type. Percentages calculated for total number of
fragments by feature type

282
104
 Preservation category
Feature type/spit 1 2 3 4 5 Total
N % N % N % N % N %
Surface Deposit F1
1/A 73 37 92 47 28 14 4 2 - - 197
2/B 74 34 113 52 29 13 3 1 - - 219
3/C 38 24 103 65 17 10.5 1 0.5 - - 159
4/D 1 33.3 2 66.6 - - - - - - 3
Unassigned 2 12.5 10 62.5 4 25 - - - - 16
Total 188 320 78 8 594
SFBs
1/A 89 41 93 42 30 14 7 3 - - 219
2/B 59 31 85 44 41 21 7 3.5 1 0.5 193
3/C 28 27 52 51 18 18 4 4 - - 102
4 7 44 5 31 3 19 1 6 - - 16
6 - - 1 - - - - - - - 1
Unassigned 378 37.8 432 43 152 15 42 4 3 0.2 1007
Total 561 668 244 61 4 1538

Table 5.5 Preservation of bone (POSACs only) with depth for Anglo-Saxon surface deposits and SFBs. Percentages
calculated for total number of fragments by spit

Cattle Sheep/goat Pig Total

Area N N loose % loose N N loose % loose N N loose % loose N N loose % loose
mandibles teeth teeth mandibles teeth teeth mandibles teeth teeth mandibles teeth teeth
A 29 217 88 11 143 93 40 89 69 80 449 85
B 10 40 80 2 28 93 4 6 60 16 74 82
C 8 22 73 2 15 88 2 4 67 12 41 77
D 15 177 92 2 95 98 21 66 76 38 338 90
E 16 151 90 20 47 70 16 52 76 52 250 83
H 19 124 87 11 73 87 28 50 64 58 247 81
J 2 14 88 - 4 100 - 4 100 2 22 92
K - 3 100 - 1 100 - - - - 4 100
M 1 8 89 - - - 2 - 100 3 8 73
O 11 36 77 4 5 56 4 8 67 19 49 72
Total 111 792 52 411 117 279 280 1482

Table 5.6 Fragmentation state of Anglo-Saxon bone (POSACs only) expressed as the ratio between mandibles and loose
teeth for each main taxa by excavation area

Cattle Sheep/goat Pig Total

Feature type N N loose % loose N N loose % loose N N loose % loose N N loose % loose
mandibles teeth teeth mandibles teeth teeth mandibles teeth teeth mandibles teeth teeth
Graves 6 10 63 - 14 100 2 3 60 8 27 77
SFBs 52 355 87 31 180 85 35 101 74 118 636 84
Hollow 1 20 95 - 3 100 - 8 100 1 31 97
Surface Deposit 13 95 88 4 75 95 2 11 85 19 181 91
F1
Oven/hearth - - - - - - 28 43 61 28 43 61
Pit 37 235 86 16 113 88 47 94 67 100 442 82
Post-hole - - - - 1 100 - - - - 1 100
(building)
Other surface 2 77 97 1 25 96 3 19 86 6 121 95
deposits
Total 111 792 52 411 117 279 280 1482

Table 5.7 Fragmentation state of Anglo-Saxon bone (POSACs only) expressed as the ratio between mandibles and loose
teeth for each main taxa by feature type

107
283
 Cattle Sheep/goat Pig Total
Feature type N N loose % loose N N loose % loose N N loose % loose N N loose % loose
mandibles teeth teeth mandibles teeth teeth mandibles teeth teeth mandibles teeth teeth
Surface
Deposit F1
1/A 3 36 92 1 34 97 2 11 85 6 81 93
2/B 6 36 86 1 27 96 - - - 7 63 90
3/C 4 21 84 2 13 87 - - - 6 34 85
4/D - - - - - - - - - - -
Unassigned - 2 100 - 1 100 - - - - 3 100
Total 13 95 4 75 2 11 19 181
SFBs
1/A 6 73 92 1 27 96 3 17 85 10 117 92
2/B 6 33 85 6 26 81 1 20 95 13 79 86
3/C 1 10 91 1 12 92 3 5 63 5 27 84
4 - - - - 4 100 1 3 75 1 7 88
6 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unassigned 39 239 86 23 111 83 27 56 67 89 406 82
Total 52 355 31 180 35 101 118 636

Table 5.8 Fragmentation state of Anglo-Saxon bone (POSACs only) expressed as the ratio between mandibles and loose
teeth for each main taxa by spit

Chopping Cuts Sawn Total butchery Gnawing Charred/calcined

Period Taxa N % N % N % N % N % N %
Roman Cattle 1 2 - - - - 1 2 1 2 - -
Sheep/ - - - - - - - - - - 9 17
goat
Anglo- Cattle 110 6 4 0.2 1 0.05 115 6.25 61 4 16 1
Saxon Sheep/ 11 0.6 4 0.2 - - 15 0.8 9 0.5 5 0.3
goat
Goat 1 0.05 - - - - 1 0.05 - - - -
Pig 8 0.5 3 0.2 - - 11 0.7 19 1 9 0.5
Horse 12 0.7 2 0.1 - - 14 0.8 8 0.5 - -
Roe deer 2 0.1 1 0.05 3 0.15 - - - -
Red deer - - 1 0.05 1 0.05 2 0.1 - - - -
Cetacea 1 0.05 1 0.05 - - - 0.1 - - 2 0.1
Chicken - - 1 0.05 - - 1 0.05 - - - -
Duck - - 1 0.05 - - 1 0.05 - - - -

Table 5.9 Number (POSACs only) and percentage of butchered, gnawed and charred or calcined bones by period/phase.
The percentage is calculated from the total number of postcranial bones in that period

teeth follow Davis (1987). Withers height calculations
for the main domesticates follow the conversion factors
of Kiesewalter for horse, Matolcsi for cattle, and Teichert
for sheep and pig (see Von den Driesch and Boessneck
1974). Individual measurements are listed in the archive
and detailed analysis of this information is limited by
small sample size. To overcome this problem log ratios
were calculated for the means from pooled length, width
and depth measurements for the main livestock species.
These were compared to other contemporary datasets
using the student’s t-test and assuming equal variance.
The standards used for this analysis are: for cattle, the
means from the early Anglo-Saxon (phase 2) assemblage
from West Stow, Suffolk (Crabtree 1989); for sheep, the
means from a group of unimproved Shetland ewes (Davis
1996); and for pig, the means from the late Neolithic site
of Durrington Walls (Albarella and Payne 1993). Results
from this analysis are summarised in the text below; full
details are available in the archive.
Results
Preservation, fragmentation and taphonomy
The factors affecting bone preservation and fragmenta-
tion are many and varied (Binford 1981; Lyman 1994)
and they have a significant effect on what survives to be
recovered archaeologically and what survives that can be
identified. In addition to these factors, the methods used

284
110
Taxa Roman Anglo-Saxon Post-medieval Undated Total
Cattle 41 - 1924 (3) 3 201 (1) 2169
Sheep/goat 36 (2) 584 (2) 1 71 - 692
Sheep 1 - 11 (3) - 21 - 33
Goat - - 5 (4) - - - 5
Pig 11 - 685 (74) 1 38 (2) 735
Horse 1 (2) 244 (135) - 21 (29) 266
Dog - - 1 - - - - 1
Dog/fox - - - - - 2 (1) 2
Cat - - - - 3 - - 3
Red deer 1 (1) 7 (3) - - - 8
Roe deer 1 (1) 13 (13) - - - 14
Deer sp. - (1) - (3) - - - 0
Rabbit 3 (2) 93 (34) - 21 (3) 117
Mole - - 9 (1) - 4 - 13
Cetacea - - 4 - - 2 - 6
Chicken - - 17 (1) - - - 17
Chicken/pheasant - - 1 - - - - 1
Goose - - 7 (2) - - - 7
Duck - - 2 - - - - 2
Corvid sp. - - 1 - - - - 1
Accipitridae - - 2 - - - - 2
Passeriformes - - 1 - - - - 1
Turdus sp. - - 1 - - - - 1
Shrew sp. - - - - - 1 - 1
Rat sp. - - 1 - - - (1) 1
Small mammal - - - (1) - 1 (1) 1
Fish - - 45 - - - - 45
Common frog - - 1 - - - - 1
Cattle-sized - - - (225) - - (11) 0
Sheep-sized - (2) - (76) - - (35) 0
Total 95 (11) 3659 (580) 8 383 (84) 4145

Table 5.10 Number of specimens identified to species (or NISP) by period/phase. Figures in brackets are non-countable
bones which have been recorded in the database but have not been used in counts

Period Area Catalogue Context Feature Feature type Taxon No. No. Non- Comments
No. POCASs countable
Anglo-Saxon H 13429 4642 521 Pit Pig 25 4 At least two
individuals one of
which neonatal
Anglo-Saxon H 13416 4719 500 Pit Pig 5 Neonatal individual
Anglo-Saxon B 4769 1010 106 Grubenhaus Rabbit 23 6 At least two
individuals
Undated A 7348 1995 Post-hole Rabbit 9 2 One individual
(building)
Anglo-Saxon H 10585 4055 1 Midden Rabbit 7 3 Hind limbs of one
individual
Anglo-Saxon H 10793 4086 1 Midden Rabbit 8 5 One individual
Anglo-Saxon H 12053 4616 514 Grubenhaus Rabbit 22 3 At least two
individuals
Anglo-Saxon O 13217 5117 626 Grubenhaus Rabbit 17 14 At least one
individual
Undated B 3840 1385 149 Pit Sheep 27 9 One individual
Undated A 7250 1924 246 Post-hole Sheep 29 16 One individual
(building)
Roman D 13251 2564 Cremation Sheep 8 2 Neonatal individual

Table 5.11 Catalogue of complete/partial skeletons

285
112
Taxa Hand Dry sieved Wet sieved Total the results from analysis of preservation are skewed to
recovered some extent because they reflect the preservation state of
Cattle 1803 102 20 1925 POSACs only, which, by their very definition, are better
Sheep/goat 524 47 12 583 preserved relative to ‘non-countable’ bones and the large
Sheep 10 1 - 11 number of unidentifiable fragments.
Goat 5 - - 5
The ratio between isolated teeth and mandibles can be
used to give a gross indication of the fragmentation state
Pig 604 46 35 685
of an assemblage: these have been calculated for the main
Horse 235 9 - 244 domestic species and the results have been quantified by
Dog 1 - - 1 excavation area, feature type and depth. On this basis
Red deer 7 - - 7 the assemblage appears to be highly fragmented, with
Roe deer 13 - - 13 large numbers of loose teeth relative to mandibles from
Rabbit 90 2 1 93
all areas of the site (Table 5.6), although slightly lower
fragmentation rates were recorded for more peripheral
Mole - 9 - 9
areas of the excavation (i.e. C, H, M and O). Pig mandi-
Cetacea 4 - - 4 bles appear to be slightly less fragmented than cattle and
Chicken 17 - - 17 sheep/goat mandibles; the reasons for this are uncertain,
Chicken/pheasant 1 - - 1 but the apparent bias may simply be due to recovery.
Goose 7 - - 7 Loose cattle teeth are more likely to be recovered by hand
Duck 2 - - 2
than loose caprine and pig teeth because of their size, but
sieving should redress this imbalance. Indeed, the propor-
Corvid 1 - - 1
tion of loose caprine and pig teeth recovered by sieving
Accipitridae 2 - - 2 is marginally higher (at 11% and 15% respectively) than
Passeriformes 1 - - 1 the proportion of loose cattle teeth (9%) recovered by this
Turdus sp. 1 - - 1 method. Similar analysis by feature type (Table 5.7) indi-
Rat sp. 1 - - 1 cates that bone from hollow and surface spread deposits
Fish - - 45 45
is marginally more fragmented (91% of teeth are loose)
than bone from other feature types (most notably pits and
Common frog 1 - - 1
SFBs). In other words, bone from negative cut features is
Total 3330 216 113 3659 less fragmented than bone from sub-surface layers: this
latter portion of the assemblage is more likely to have
Table 5.12 Quantity of Anglo-Saxon bone (POSACs been rolled, trampled, reworked and redeposited. The
only) recovered using different methods pattern of fragmentation with depth (Table 5.8) indicates,
perhaps not too surprisingly, that bone from lower levels
is less fragmented.
to recover an assemblage will also have an effect (Payne Other taphonomic factors that need to be taken into
1992). Any single assemblage will have been subjected account are butchery and canid gnawing (Table 5.9).
to a combination of these processes and it can be diffi- Butchery marks were recorded on only 10% of all post-
cult to disentangle the individual effects and interpret the cranial bones from the Anglo-Saxon assemblage; the
results. However, some understanding of these processes majority are chop marks and were recorded on cattle
is necessary in the interpretation of any assemblage so bones. The apparently low incidence of butchery marks
an attempt has been made to identify the major factors may be due to preservation and fragmentation, which
influencing the Bloodmoor Hill assemblage. would also account for the higher incidence of chop marks
Preservation state was recorded for each countable relative to cut marks. Canid gnaw marks were recorded
bone (or POSACs) using the categories outlined above. on only 6% of post-cranial bones and the majority affect
The results have been quantified by period, and by exca- cattle bones. The low incidence of gnaw marks suggests
vation area, feature type and depth for the Anglo-Saxon that bone refuse was rapidly buried after disposal or that
assemblage. Overall, the assemblage is reasonably well dogs were unable to access the material.
preserved, with the majority of fragments assigned to
categories 1 (c.37%) and 2 (c.44%); of the remaining Occurrence and relative importance of species
19%, a significant proportion (c.16%) exhibit moderate A complete list of the species identified from all periods/
degrees of weathering (category 3), while the number phases is given in Table 5.10 and a catalogue of complete
of poorly preserved fragments is small (Table 5.2). This and partial skeletons is given in Table 5.11. In common
general trend is repeated for the assemblages from each with most archaeologically recovered animal bone assem-
period. Spatially there is no apparent difference in the blages from Britain, the majority of identified fragments
preservation state of bone from different areas of the site from Bloodmoor Hill belong to the three main livestock
(Table 5.3). Furthermore, there is no significant differ- species. Cattle, sheep and pig together account for c.88%
ence in preservation between feature types or with depth of the total number of specimens identified to species (or
(Tables 5.4 and 5.5); indeed it is apparent that the quan- NISP) from the Anglo-Saxon assemblage. Horse, dog,
tity of diagnostic bone recovered from each spit declines chicken, goose and duck are the only other domestic
with depth. These results are somewhat surprising given species identified from the Anglo-Saxon assemblage and
the ratio between the raw fragment count (68,455) and together account for c.7% of NISP. Wild species, such
number of countable bones (4145): even once conjoins are as deer, small mammals, wild birds, sea mammals, fish
taken into account, countable bones make up only 6% of and amphibians, are less common (c.5%). While some
the total number of bone fragments recovered. However, of these wild species may have been exploited for food

114
286
 Recovery method
Taxa/anatomical element Hand recovery Dry sieving Wet sieving
N % N % N %
Cattle
Astragalus 120 7 - - 2 10
Calcaneus 95 5 5 5 1 5
Navicular-cuboid 20 1 1 1 1 5
Phalanx 156 9 14 14 3 15
Loose teeth 719 40 65 64 8 40
Total 1110 62 85 84 15 75
Sheep/goat
Astragalus 9 2 1 2 - -
Calcaneus 5 1 - - - -
Navicular-cuboid 1 0.1 - - 1 8
Phalanx 5 1 2 4 3 25
Loose teeth 364 68 38 79 7 58
Total 384 72.1 41 85 11 91
Pig
Astragalus 13 2 - - 1 3
Calcaneus 11 2 - - - -
Navicular-cuboid - - - - - -
Phalanx 10 2 1 2 - -
Loose teeth 238 39 32 70 9 26
Total 272 45 33 72 10 29

Table 5.13 Recovery of small bones (POSACs only) by different recovery methods for main taxa from Anglo-Saxon
assemblage

Feature type Total

Taxa Grave Grubenhaus Hollow Midden Oven/hearth Pit Post-hole Surface
(building) spread
Cattle 27 823 35 309 - 591 - 139 1924
Sheep/goat 17 279 3 94 - 160 1 30 584
Sheep - 4 - - - 7 - - 11
Goat - 3 - 1 - 1 - - 5
Pig 5 244 20 121 1 264 - 31 686
Horse - 80 10 46 - 67 - 41 244
Dog - 1 - - - - - - 1
Red deer 1 4 - 1 - 1 - - 7
Roe deer - 7 - 1 - 4 - 1 13
Rabbit 4 67 - 21 - 1 - - 93
Mole - 9 - - - - - - 9
Cetacea - 2 - - - 2 - - 4
Chicken - 5 - - - 12 - - 17
Chicken/pheasant - 1 - - - - - - 1
Goose - 6 - - - 1 - - 7
Duck - - - - - 2 - - 2
Corvid sp. - - - - - 1 - - 1
Accipitridae - - - - - 2 - - 2
Passeriformes - - - - - 1 - - 1
Turdus sp. - 1 - - - - - - 1
Rat sp. - 1 - - - - - - 1
Fish - 1 - - - 44 - - 45
Common frog - - - - - 1 - - 1
Total 54 1538 68 594 1 1162 1 242 3659

Table 5.14 Quantity of Anglo-Saxon bone (POSACs only) by feature type

287
115
Site County Type Period/Publication %B % Oc %S Reference
Phase
Brandon Suffolk Rural MS 25.8 56.6 17.5 Crabtree and Campana in
prep.
Burystead Northants Rural ES/MS 48.3 36.2 15.4 Davis 1992b
Burystead Northants Rural LS 44.5 38.7 16.7 Davis 1992b
Caister-on-sea Norfolk Urban MS 62.2 22 15.7 Harman 1993
Castle Cement Works Bucks Rural ES 42 42.4 15.6 Hambleton 2005
Chicheley Bucks ?Rural MS 36.6 56.5 6.8 Jones 1980
Droitwich, Friar Street Here./Worcs Urban LS/SN phase 4ii 41.6 30.6 27.6 Locker 1992
Eckweek Somerset Village LS 25.6 65.7 8.6 Davis 1991
Ely, West Fen Road Cambs Urban MS 42 46.3 11.5 Higbee forthcoming
Ely, West Fen Road Cambs Urban MS phase 5 26.6 68.7 4.5 Higbee 2005
Ely, West Fen Road Cambs Urban LS phase 7 45.6 39 15.3 Higbee 2005
Flixborough Lincs Rural MS phase 2-3a 41 32.3 26.5 Dobney et al. 2007
Flixborough Lincs Rural MS phase 3b 43.9 32.3 23.6 Dobney et al. 2007
Flixborough Lincs Rural LS phase 4-5b 29.8 40.2 29.9 Dobney et al. 2007
Flixborough Lincs Rural LS phase 6 39.2 34.7 26 Dobney et al. 2007
Flixborough Lincs Rural LS phase 6iii 40.6 37 22.3 Dobney et al. 2007
Hartigans Bucks Rural SA 85.6 14.3 Burnett 1993
Hatton Rock Warwicks Elite LS 52.7 18.4 28.8 Noddle 1973
Hay Green Norfolk Rural MS 44.2 50.4 5.3 Baker 2002 and in press
Hereford, Berrington St Here./Worcs Urban SA 62.5 18.8 18.6 Noddle 1985
Heybridge, Elms Farm Essex Rural LR/ER phase VI 82.8 8.9 8.1 Johnstone and Albarella
2002
Higham Ferrers Northants Rural ES phase 1 50 30 20 Albarella and Johnstone
2000
Higham Ferrers Northants Rural MS phase 2-3a 48 25 27 Albarella and Johnstone
2000
Higham Ferrers Northants Rural LS phase 3 44 38 17 Albarella and Johnstone
2000
Ipswich Suffolk Urban MS 45.2 22.7 31.9 Crabtree 1994b
Ipswich Suffolk Urban LS 37.6 30.4 31.8 Crabtree 1994b
Ipswich Suffolk Urban MS 44.4 29.7 25.7 Jones and Serjeantson
1983
Lincoln Lincs Urban LS 58.9 29.5 11.5 Dobney et al. 1996
Lincoln, Flaxengate Lincs Urban LS phase PreT-T6 57.7 31.1 11.1 O’Connor 1982
Lowestoft, Suffolk Rural ES/MS 60 18.5 21.3 this report
Bloodmoor Hill
Maxey Cambs Rural ES 43.6 13.2 43 Seddon 1965
Mucking Essex Rural ES 74.9 9.7 15.2 Done 1993
Nettleton Top Lincs Rural SA 84.4 6 9.5 Berg 1993
North Elmham Park Norfolk Religious MS phase 1 32.6 37.8 29.4 Noddle 1980
North Elmham Park Norfolk Religious LS phase 2 30.9 44.5 24.4 Noddle 1980
Northampton, Northants Urban LS 39.8 42.3 17.7 Harman and Baker 1985
Black Lion Hill
Northampton, Northants Urban MS 33.8 47.6 18.4 Harman 1979
St Peters Street
Northampton, Northants Urban LS 30.4 58.5 11 Harman 1979
St Peters Street
Northampton, The Green Northants Urban LS 35.2 49.6 15 Harman 1996
Norwich, Alms Lane Norfolk Urban SA phase 1 50.8 28.8 20.3 Cartledge 1985
Norwich, Castle Mall Norfolk Urban LS phase 1i-1iii 57.4 20.4 22.1 Albarella et al. 1997
Norwich, Fishergate Norfolk Urban LS/SN 61.5 19.7 18.6 Jones 1994
Norwich, Whitefriars St Norfolk Urban LS 38.9 37 24 Cartledge 1983
Orton Hall Farm Cambs Rural ES 65.1 31.1 3.7 King 1996
Pennyland Bucks Rural ES/MS 48.8 37.3 13.7 Holmes 1993
Porchester Castle Hants Elite ES/MS 54.2 27.8 17.8 Grant 1976
Porchester Castle Hants Elite LS 50.4 30.6 18.8 Grant 1976

288
119
Site County Type Period/Publication %B % Oc %S Reference
Phase
Quarrington Lincs Rural ES 69.6 29.1 1.1 Rackham 2003
Quarrington Lincs Rural MS 57.8 35.9 6.1 Rackham 2003
Rose Hall Farm Norfolk Rural MS 40.8 54.6 4.5 Baker 2002 and in press
Southampton, Hants Urban MS 52.5 32.1 15.2 Bourdillon and Coy 1980
Melbourne St
Spong Hill VII Norfolk Rural ES 83.6 12.2 4 Bond 1995
Stonea Cambs Rural SA 40.2 50.8 8.9 Stallibrass 1996
Thetford, Brandon Road Norfolk Urban LS 48.2 35.4 16.3 Jones 1993
Thetford, Norfolk Urban ES 60.7 29.2 10 Powell and Clark 2002
Melford Meadows
Thetford, Mill Lane Norfolk Urban LS phase 3 48.6 23 28.2 Albarella 2004
Thetford, Norwich Road Norfolk Urban ES 35.6 35.6 28.7 Higbee 2006
Thetford, Redcastle Furze Norfolk Urban ES phase 2 47.3 37 15.6 Wilson 1995
Thetford, Redcastle Furze Norfolk Urban LS phase 4ii 42.2 44.4 13.3 Wilson 1995
Thetford, Redcastle Furze Norfolk Urban LS/SN phase 4iii 36.6 51.6 11.7 Wilson 1995
Thetford, Site 1092 Norfolk Urban LS 45.4 35 19.4 Jones 1984
Walton Bucks Rural SA 41.7 35.3 23 Noddle 1976
Walton Lodge Bucks Rural MS 37.2 45.6 17 Sadler 1989
West Stow Suffolk Rural ES phase 1 33 45.1 21.8 Crabtree 1989
West Stow Suffolk Rural ES phase 2 35.2 50.8 13.9 Crabtree 1989
West Stow Suffolk Rural ES phase 3 33.6 46.5 19.7 Crabtree 1989
Wicken Bonhunt Essex Rural ES 20.7 18.9 60.3 Crabtree and Stevens
unpublished
Wicken Bonhunt Essex Rural MS 16.8 14.4 68.6 Crabtree 1994a; Crabtree
and Stevens unpublished
Wroxeter Shrops Urban ES 6thC 54.9 19.4 25.6 Hammon 2005
Wroxeter Shrops Urban ES late 5th-early 6thC 65.1 17 17.7 Hammon 2005
Wroxeter Shrops Urban ES/MS early 6th-late 58.9 17.7 23.2 Hammon 2005
7thC

B – cattle; OC – sheep/goat and S – pig

Table 5.15 List of sites plotted in tripolar graphs (Figs 5.4 and 5.5). Samples with less than 150 bones excluded.
Mucking data includes only bones from Grubenhäuser with over 100 fragments

or raw materials (e.g. antler), others may be purely inci-
dental, forming part of the general ‘background noise’
to the site, and some (e.g. rabbit and mole) are definitely
intrusive.
A detailed breakdown of the Anglo-Saxon assemblage
by recovery methods is given in Table 5.12. It is clear that
the vast majority of bone (92%) was recovered by hand
and that this proportion of the assemblage is most varied
in terms of species range. Indeed, very few bones were
recovered by sieving and only mole and fish bone were
added to the list as a result of this strategy. Hand recovery
is usually biased in favour of large bone fragments and
the bones of larger species so, in order to assess the effects
of recovery on the types of taxa and skeletal elements
recovered, the ratio between the number of small bones
(e.g. astragalus, calcaneum, navicula-cuboid, phalanges
and loose teeth) and large bones (e.g. long bones and
mandibles) was calculated for the three main species
(Table 5.13). This reveals that, although a large number
of small bones and loose teeth were recovered by hand,
the ratio between large and small bones is greater for
the sieved material. Thus one might expect that if bones
from small taxa (e.g. birds and small mammals) were
present then sieving would have recovered them; it is
therefore assumed that preservation and fragmentation
are responsible for diminishing the proportion of small
taxa recovered from the site.
A detailed breakdown of the Anglo-Saxon assem-
blage by feature type in given in Table 5.14. The majority
of identified bone comes from SFBs (42%), pits (c.32%)
and surface deposits (16%), and SFB and pit assemblages
are the most varied in terms of species range. It is also
apparent from these results that SFB and surface deposits
have been subjected to greater levels of disturbance, as
they include significant numbers of bones from burrowing
animals. In relation to the relative frequency of the three
main livestock species, all three of these feature types
have similar frequencies of cattle (58–61% by NISP:
Fig. 5.1) to the assemblage as a whole. However, SFBs
are characterised by slightly higher proportions of sheep
(21% by NISP) and surface deposits and pits by slightly
higher proportions of pig (23–26% by NISP) than for the
assemblage as a whole. Analysis of the relative frequen-
cies of these three species by area, for areas with over
150 bones, reveals a similar pattern, with frequencies of

289
118
 Figure 5.4 Triplot of relative frequencies of main livestock species (by NISP) by type of site for sites
listed in Table 5.15

Figure 5.5 Triplot of relative frequencies of main livestock species (by NISP) by date range for sites
listed in Table 5.15

cattle by area similar to the assemblage as a whole and
variability by area in the relative frequency of sheep and
pig (Fig. 5.2). Area B is characterised by a higher propor-
tions of sheep while areas A, E and H are characterised by
higher proportions of pig. The reasons for this variability
are uncertain but the areas with high proportions of pig
are also areas covered by surface deposits and, as already
indicated above, these deposits have higher frequencies
of pig bones.
Looking more specifically at the relative importance
of the three main livestock species by NISP and minimum
number of individuals (or MNI) for the assemblage as a
whole, cattle is the most abundant species, accounting for
60% of NISP and 50% of MNI (Fig. 5.3). Pig bones are
2% more abundant (at 21% of NISP) than sheep bones,
but the reverse is true for MNI. Loose teeth provide the
highest MNI for all three species, suggesting that pres-
ervation and recovery methods play a significant part
in the calculation of these figures. For example, species
frequencies by NISP for the hand-recovered assemblage
are similar to those for the assemblage as a whole, but the
assemblage recovered by sieving has higher proportions
of sheep and pig: in fact, pig accounts for 52% by NISP
of the assemblage recovered by wet sieving. However,

290
taking this into account, the main pattern that emerges is
a clear predominance of cattle.
The relative frequency of the three main livestock
species (by NISP) has been plotted against similar data
from a range of other sites (Table 5.15) and the results
are presented in Figs 5.4 and 5.5 by site type (e.g. village,
urban and castle) and broad date range (e.g. Early, Middle
and Late Saxon). Sites with similar species proportions
to Bloodmoor Hill, with its high proportion of cattle
and near-equal proportions of sheep and pig, include
Early/Middle Saxon Wroxeter, Shropshire; Middle
Saxon Caister-on-Sea, Norfolk; Late Saxon Fishergate,
Norwich; Late Saxon Castle Mall, Norwich and the
rural Saxon site at Nettleton Top, Lincolnshire (Harman
2005; Harman 1993; Jones 1994; Albarella et al. 1997;
Berg 1993). While most of these sites are located in
East Anglia, assemblages from other sites in the region,
including the large early Anglo-Saxon assemblage from
West Stow, Suffolk (Crabtree 1989), have higher propor-
tions of sheep, suggesting a degree of regional variation
in animal husbandry. Furthermore, the sites listed include
rural, urban and high-status sites and cover a broad range
of dates, suggesting that species ratios are not determined
purely by site type or chronology. The closest parallels
in terms of species proportions are with urban sites in
the region. However, detailed analysis of the skeletal
element distribution and kill-off rates of the main live-
stock species should indicate whether the assemblage has
more in common with urban consumer assemblages than
merely species proportions.
Cattle
Body part distribution
The skeletal element distribution for Anglo-Saxon cattle is presented
in Table 5.16. The frequencies of skeletal elements have been
calculated using MNI values rather than NISP, in order to eliminate
the bias from elements that occur more frequently in the body. All
parts of the beef carcass are represented in the assemblage and there
are no peaks suggestive of specialised waste disposal of, for example,
primary butchery waste, or bone-working or food refuse. The highest
MNI values were calculated for the first and second molars; on this
basis at least 161 individual cattle are represented. Third molars are
also relatively common and they represent at least 89 individuals or
c.55% of the most common element. All other elements, including
mandibles retaining teeth, are under-represented relative to molars. As
already discussed above, this bias is probably the result of differential
preservation and fragmentation between teeth and bones. Of the post-
cranial elements, the pelvis, scapula, tibia, astragalus and calcaneus
are moderately common (over 25%), while all other elements are
grossly under-represented. Some of this variation may be accounted
for by differential preservation and fragmentation, although recovery is
thought to have less of an effect because of the relatively large number of
loose teeth recovered. Astragali and calcanei are small, compact pieces
of bone that generally survive well in most archaeological animal bone
assemblages, as do distal tibiae. Pelves and scapulae do not generally

Period
Roman Anglo-Saxon
Anatomical element NISP MNI % NISP MNI %
Deciduous and permanent incisors 2 1 25 44 6 3.7
Deciduous and permanent premolars 3 1 25 188 31 19.2
M1/2 13 4 100 644 161 100.0
M3 7 4 100 177 89 55.2
Skull - - - 20 12 7.4
Horncore - - - 11 6 3.7
Mandible 2 1 15 111 56 34.7
Scapula 3 2 50 85 43 26.7
Humerus 1 1 25 73 37 14.2
Radius - - - 40 20 12.4
Metacarpus 3.5 2 50 46 23 14.2
Pelvis 3 2 50 138 69 42.8
Femur - - - 18 9 5.5
Tibia - - - 85 43 26.7
Astragalus 3 2 50 124 62 38.5
Calcaneus 3 2 50 102 51 31.6
Navicular-cuboid - - - 22 11 6.8
Metatarsus - - - 44 22 13.6
Phalanx 1 2 1 25 103 13 8.0
Phalanx 2 - - - 53 7 4.3
Phalanx 3 - - - 21 3 1.8
Total 45.5 2149

Each individual tooth within mandibles has been counted, hence the total is greater than the total NISP in Table 5.10. The MNI has been calculated as
follows: incisors and phalanges have been divided by 8, deciduous and permanent premolars by 6, M1/2 by 4, all other elements, except metapodia and
skulls, by 2. Metacarpus = (MC1 + MC2/2 + MP1/2 + MP2/4) / 2 and metatarsus = (MT1 + MT2/2 + MP1/2 + MP2/4) / 2. Where: MC1 = complete
distal metacarpus; MC2 = half distal metacarpus; MT1 = complete distal metatarsus; MT2 = half distal metatarsus; MP1 = complete distal
metapodium; MP2 = half distal metapodium. Anatomical position taken into account when calculating the number of skulls represented. % =
frequency of an element expressed in relation to the most common one (by MNI).

Table 5.16 Cattle: skeletal elements by number of fragments identified to species (or NISP) and minimum number of
individuals (or MNI) by period/phase

291
Anatomical element SFBs Pits Surface Deposit F1 Other
NISP MNI % NISP MNI % NISP MNI % NISP MNI %
Deciduous and permanent incisors 19 3 4 16 2 4 5 1 5.2 4 1 5
Deciduous and permanent 93 16 21.6 61 11 22 16 3 15.7 18 3 15
premolars
M1/2 295 74 100 198 50 100 73 19 100 78 20 100
M3 82 41 55.4 45 23 46 22 11 57.8 28 14 70
Skull 9 6 8.1 5 4 8 3 3 15.7 3 2 10
Horncore 2 1 1.3 7 4 8 1 1 5.2 1 1 5
Mandible 52 26 35.1 37 19 38 13 7 36.8 9 5 25
Scapula 40 20 27 23 12 24 13 7 36.8 9 5 25
Humerus 31 16 21.6 29 15 30 10 5 26.3 3 2 10
Radius 21 11 14.8 12 6 12 4 2 10.5 3 2 10
Metacarpus 22 11 14.8 14 7 14 5.5 3 15.7 4.5 3 15
Pelvis 43 22 29.7 55 28 56 35 18 94.7 5 3 15
Femur 13 7 12.7 2 1 2 1 1 5.2 2 1 5
Tibia 31 16 21.6 24 12 24 20 10 52.6 10 5 25
Astragalus 57 29 39.1 32 16 32 21 11 57.8 14 7 35
Calcaneus 44 22 29.7 26 13 26 20 10 52.6 12 6 30
Navicular-cuboid 13 7 12.7 2 1 2 5 3 15.7 2 1 5
Metatarsus 17.5 9 12.1 18 9 18 5.75 3 15.7 4.5 3 15
Phalanx 1 32 4 5.4 32 4 8 34 5 26.3 5 3 15
Phalanx 2 23 3 4 13 2 4 13 2 10.5 4 2 10
Phalanx 3 5 1 1.3 13 2 4 1 1 5.2 2 1 5
Total 944.5 664 321.25 221

Each individual tooth within mandibles has been counted, hence the total is greater than the total NISP in Table 5.10. The MNI has been calculated as
follows: incisors and phalanges have been divided by 8, deciduous and permanent premolars by 6, M1/2 by 4, all other elements, except metapodia and
skulls, by 2. Metacarpus = (MC1 + MC2/2 + MP1/2 + MP2/4) / 2 and metatarsus = (MT1 + MT2/2 + MP1/2 + MP2/4) / 2. Where: MC1 = complete
distal metacarpus; MC2 = half distal metacarpus; MT1 = complete distal metatarsus; MT2 = half distal metatarsus; MP1 = complete distal
metapodium; MP2 = half distal metapodium. Anatomical position taken into account when calculating the number of skulls represented. % =
frequency of an element expressed in relation to the most common one (by MNI)

Table 5.17 Cattle: skeletal elements by number of fragments (or NISP) and minimum number of individuals (or MNI)
for each main feature type of Anglo-Saxon date

Period Fusion category Anatomical element N fused N unfused % fused

Roman Early Humerus d 1 - 100
Early Pelvis a 1 - 100
Early Phalanx 1 2 - 100
Intermediate Metacarpus d 2 1 67
Intermediate Calcaneus 1 - 100
Anglo-Saxon Early Scapula p 26 - 100
Early Humerus d 67 3 96
Early Pelvis a 13 - 100
Early Phalanx 1 94 6 94
Early Phalanx 2 49 4 92
Intermediate Metacarpus d 30 4 88
Intermediate Tibia d 67 17 80
Intermediate Calcaneus 10 12 45
Intermediate Metatarsus d 26 5 84
Late Radius d 30 9 77
Late Femur d 15 2 88
Final Vertebra 64 81 44

Fused and fusing epiphyses are amalgamated. Only unfused diaphyses, not epiphyses, are counted. N = total number of fused/fusing epiphyses; % =
percentage of fused/fusing epiphyses out of the total number of fused/fusing epiphyses and unfused diaphyses. D = distal, a = acetabulum.

Table 5.18 Cattle: number and percentage of fused epiphyses by period/phase

292
121
survive well since they include thin flat areas of bone (i.e. the ilium
and blade) which tend to fragment easily; however, the acetabulum and
glenoid portions of these bones are relatively robust and these areas had
to be present for the bone to be counted.
Analysis of skeletal element distribution by feature type (Table 5.17)
shows a similar pattern to that observed for the Anglo-Saxon assemblage
as a whole, with the highest MNI values calculated for molar teeth.
Pit and surface deposits stand out since they have greater proportions
of pelves than other feature types; this is particularly true for surface
deposits, which also have higher proportions of tibiae, astragali and
calcanei than other feature types. The proportional representation of
this last group of anatomically associated elements is very close and
may indicate the disposal of waste from primary butchery.
Butchery
Butchery marks were recorded on a small proportion of bones, with the
majority on cattle bones. Chop, cut and saw marks were recorded on
7% of cattle bones (Table 5.9) and chop marks were more frequently
observed than cut or saw marks. Chop marks were consistently
observed in the mid- or distal shaft region of tibiae and metapodials
and, to a lesser extent, the acetabulum and scapula glenoid. These
are areas of primary carcass dismemberment (i.e. removal of limb
extremities) and the reduction of the carcass into individual cuts or
joints (i.e. foreshank and hindshank). Two horncores exhibit evidence
of having been removed from the skull — one by chopping and the
other by sawing — presumably for further working of the outer horny
sheath. In addition, a small number of metapodials (c.3% of all cattle
metapodials recovered, or 16% of metapodials recorded with butchery
marks) had been split axially, presumably to extract marrow-fat. Higher
frequencies of this type of butchery have been recorded for other
assemblages (e.g. Hamwic and Porchester Castle) but at West Stow the
longitudinal splitting of long bones was conspicuously absent, leading
Crabtree (1989, 104) to suggest that ‘there are real chronological and/or
regional variations in Anglo-Saxon butchery practices’. In summary, the
butchery evidence is limited but displays a consistent pattern indicative
of primary and secondary butchery, with limited processing for other
products, such as marrow and horn.
Ageing
Epiphyseal fusion data (Tables 5.18 and 5.19) indicates that the majority
of Anglo-Saxon cattle lived to reach skeletal maturity. Eighty per cent
of post-cranial bones in the late fusion category are fused and 44% of
vertebrae (final category) are fused. Thus, on the basis of the fusion
evidence alone, just under half of the cattle from Bloodmoor Hill were
mature adults over five years of age and only 5% were under one year.
Fusion category N fused N unfused % fused
Early 249 13 95
Intermediate 133 38 78
Late 45 11 80
Final 64 81 44
Table 5.19 Cattle: epiphyseal fusion (categories after
O’Connor 1989) for Anglo-Saxon assemblage
Mandibular wear stage Roman Anglo-Saxon
N N % flaring) of the distal medial condyle. The other metatarsal was recorded
Juvenile - - - with spavin ― a condition that involves the whole joint surface and
Immature - 11 16
Subadult - 10 14
Subadult/adult - 4 6 et al. 1993).
Adult 2 29 42
Elderly - 15 22
See archive for complete list of individual mandibles. Only mandibles
with two or more teeth (with recordable wear) in the dp4/p4-M3 row are
considered.
Table 5.20 Cattle: mandibular wear stages (categories
after O’Connor 1989) by period/phase.
Tooth wear stage data are given for mandibles retaining two or
more teeth with recordable wear (Table 5.20); a complete list of
mandibular wear stage data can be found in the archive. The data largely
confirm the results from epiphyseal fusion: that is, the majority of cattle
remains from Bloodmoor Hill are from adult (42%) and elderly (22%)
individuals. No mandibles from neonatal or juvenile individuals were
recovered; however, the proportion of immature cattle is significantly
higher (at 16%) than suggested by the epiphyseal fusion data while
the proportion of subadults is slightly lower (at 14%). Mandibles from
very young individuals are fragile and more likely to fragment under
unfavourable preservation conditions; for this reason, wear stage data
for individual teeth were also examined, but this did not significantly
alter the kill-off pattern outlined above.
This kill-off pattern suggests that cattle were not intensively
exploited for either beef or milk, but may have been used primarily
for traction, with beef production a secondary consideration. It stands
in contrast to the kill-off pattern recorded for early Anglo-Saxon West
Stow, Suffolk (Crabtree 1989, 69–75), where less than half of cattle
survived into adulthood. Small numbers of neonatal and young juveniles
were also recorded, but most of the West Stow cattle were culled in their
first and second years of life. Crabtree (1989, 75) suggests that this is
typical of a self-sufficient rural site operating under a mixed economy,
although she further suggests that the West Stow pattern could be
seen as a producer pattern, in which many of the market-age animals
were sent elsewhere (1994, 46–7). Sites with similar kill-off rates to
Bloodmoor Hill include the early Anglo-Saxon assemblage from
Melford Meadows, Brettenham, Norfolk (Powell and Clark 2002); the
Middle Saxon assemblages from Flixborough, Lincolnshire (Dobney
et al. 2007, 126–7, 140–44), Wicken Bonhunt, Essex, Ipswich, Suffolk
(see Crabtree 1994a, 46–7), and Melbourne Street, Southampton, Hants
(Bourdillon and Coy 1980); and the Late Saxon assemblages from
Brandon Road and Mill Lane, Thetford, Norfolk (Jones 1993; Albarella
2004), Castle Mall, Norwich (Albarella et al. 1997), and Flaxengate,
Lincoln (O’Connor 1982). It has been suggested that high frequencies
of adult cattle and an absence of very young animals is characteristic
of an ‘urban’ consumer economy (Crabtree 1990; O’Connor 1994).
Therefore, the presence of significant numbers of adult cattle within
the Bloodmoor Hill assemblage would seem to suggest that the local
economy was supplemented by cattle brought into the village on the
hoof for slaughter, distribution and consumption. Alternatively, if the
herd was being managed for milk, the majority of young (primarily
male) calves was not being consumed locally.
Pathology and non-metric traits
Pathological conditions were noted on only nine cattle bones (or
0.05% of the total); this is an extremely low incidence but reflects the
generally healthy condition of Anglo-Saxon cattle at Bloodmoor Hill.
Of the nine cases, two are oral pathologies: one case of irregular wear
recorded on a third molar (or m3) and one case of inter-dental attrition
between premolar teeth. These conditions are probably the result of
misalignment between the upper and lower jaws, and malocclusion of
adjacent teeth. Most of the other pathologies affect the lower extremities
of the limbs; the only exception to this is a small area of eburnation
recorded on one acetabulum (hip joint). Three out of 103 first phalanges
were recorded with splayed proximal articular facets and/or arthritic
remodelling around the periphery of one or both articulations. The last
three cases affect metatarsals but, again, the incidence is extremely low,
at three out of forty-four. A small lesion was recorded on the lateral
mid-shaft region of one metatarsal while two other metatarsals were
recorded with degenerative joint disease. One metatarsal was recorded
with arthritic changes in the form of eburnation (pitting and grooving)
and peripheral lipping to the proximal joint surface, and splaying (or
results in the fusion of articulating skeletal elements (e.g. tarsal bones).
Both of these conditions have generally been associated with the use
of cattle as draught animals; however, a direct link to traction has not
yet been proven for the splaying of metapodial condyles (Bartosiewicz
Seven out of 177 (c.4%) lower m3s were recorded with a reduced
or absent hypoconulid (or third cusp). The trait is thought to be genetic
in origin but its significance is as yet little understood and generally low
instances of this trait have been recorded for a number of Anglo-Saxon
sites.
Biometry
As reported in the archive report, the Bloodmoor Hill cattle are smaller
than late Roman cattle from the region, but compare well with those
from early Anglo-Saxon West Stow. They are also similar in length to
those from Hamwic, but more slender, and they are significantly longer

293
and wider than those from late Saxon sites in the region. The biometric
information generally supports the view that East Anglian types (or
breeds?) of cattle are represented (Crabtree 1994a, 50).
Sheep/goat
Sheep or goat
The identification of caprine bones to species was attempted on a
limited number of skeletal elements (see methods), and the majority
were identified as sheep (Table 5.10). Only five countable and four non-
countable bones were identified as goat. This equates to under 1% of
all caprine bones or a little under a third of caprine bones that could be
positively identified to species. Such a low incidence is common for
British sites of all periods; indeed, Crabtree (1989) recorded similar
frequencies for the West Stow Anglo-Saxon assemblage. However,
Noddle (1994) draws attention to the substantial numbers of goats
recorded in the Domesday survey for Suffolk, where their numbers
were equivalent to 11% of the number of sheep. For the purposes of
this report, all undifferentiated caprine bones are assumed to be sheep
rather than goat.
Body part distribution
The skeletal element distribution for sheep is given in Table 5.21. As
was the case for cattle, the highest MNI value was calculated for m1/
m2s and at least eighty-three individuals are represented. By contrast,
post-cranial bones and, in particular, small bones such as phalanges, are
grossly under-represented. This suggests that, once again, differential
preservation and fragmentation, and to some extent recovery methods,
have influenced the skeletal element distribution. Analysis of skeletal
element distribution by feature type (Table 5.22) shows a similar trend;
however, a wider range of skeletal elements was recovered from SFBs
and pits than from surface deposits and other feature types.
Butchery
Only 1% of sheep bones were recorded with butchery marks
(Table 5.9), mainly chop marks, which were recorded only on long
bones, particularly tibiae, that were chopped through the distal shaft
to detach the limb extremity from the rest of the carcass. At West Stow
(Crabtree 1989, 103) the most common point of butchery was the tibia
mid-shaft. Cut marks were recorded on only four bones: a scapula, an
astragalus, a pelvis and a tibia. The overall low incidence of butchery
evidence recorded on sheep bones may reflect their smaller size and
preservation condition. Sheep carcasses do not require the same
degree of reduction to obtain manageable joints of meat as do cattle,
for example; furthermore, smaller carcasses can be disjointed using a
sharp knife — a technique which would leave very few marks on bone
if carried out by a skilled butcher. Add to this the generally poor state
of preservation of post-cranial elements and it is not too surprising that
such a low incidence of butchery marks was recorded.
Ageing
The epiphyseal fusion data for sheep is given in Tables 5.23 and 5.24.
This indicates that a small proportion (c.10%) of sheep were culled
as lambs but most reached about eighteen months to two years of age
(intermediate 2 category), although the numbers surviving to skeletal
maturity were relatively small: only half of late fusing and 38% of
final fusing elements are fused. Only two bones, an articulating radius
and ulna from Structure 21, were from a neonatal individual. Overall,
the kill-off pattern derived from epiphyseal fusion suggests that the
Bloodmoor Hill sheep were primarily managed for mutton.
Tooth wear data for mandibles retaining two or more cheek teeth
are given in Table 5.25 and a complete list of mandibular wear stage

Period
Roman Anglo-Saxon
Anatomical element NISP MNI % NISP MNI %
Deciduous and permanent incisors - - - 18 2.2 2.6
Deciduous and permanent premolars 1 1 50 76 13 15.6
M1/2 8 2 100 329 83 100.0
M3 3 2 100 136 68 81.9
Skull - - - 2 2 2.4
Horncore - - - 1 1 1.2
Mandible 1 1 50 52 26 31.3
Scapula 2 1 50 8 4 4.8
Humerus 4 2 100 25 13 15.6
Radius - - - 8 4 4.8
Metacarpus 2 1 50 1 1 1.2
Pelvis 2 1 50 21 11 13.2
Femur 1 1 50 13 7 8.4
Tibia 2 2 100 25 13 15.6
Astragalus - - - 10 5 6.0
Calcaneus 1 1 50 5 3 3.6
Navicular-cuboid 2 1 50 2 1 1.2
Metatarsus - - - 1 1 1.2
Phalanx 1 3 1 50 7 1 1.2
Phalanx 2 3 1 50 3 1 1.2
Phalanx 3 2 1 50 - - -
Total 37 743

Each individual tooth within mandibles has been counted, hence the total is greater than the total NISP in Table 5.10. The MNI has been calculated as
follows: incisors and phalanges have been divided by 8, deciduous and permanent premolars by 6, M1/2 by 4, all other elements, except metapodia, by
2. Metacarpus = (MC1 + MC2/2 + MP1/2 + MP2/4) / 2 and metatarsus = (MT1 + MT2/2 + MP1/2 + MP2/4) / 2. Where: MC1 = complete distal meta-
carpus; MC2 = half distal metacarpus; MT1 = complete distal metatarsus; MT2 = half distal metatarsus; MP1 = complete distal metapodium; MP2 =
half distal metapodium. Anatomical position taken into account when calculating the number of skulls represented. % = frequency of an element
expressed in relation to the most common one (by MNI).

Table 5.21 Sheep/goat: skeletal elements by number of fragments identified to species (or NISP) and minimum number
of individuals (MNI) by period/phase

294
data is presented in the archive. The results stand in contrast to the
results obtained from epiphyseal fusion, with greater numbers of adults
represented. The majority of mandibles are from three- to six-year-old
animals (stages F and G), suggesting that secondary products such as
milk and wool were important. It is not uncommon for there to be a
marked difference between the results obtained via these two methods,
since preservation and fragmentation are likely to have affected post-
cranial bones and teeth in different ways. In order to overcome these
problems, tooth wear data for individual teeth were also taken into
consideration (Tables 5.26–5.27). This suggests that approximately a
third of sheep were culled under the age of two years, less than 10%
at two to three years (the optimum age for mutton: Payne 1973), and
the majority were culled as adult and elderly individuals at three to ten
years of age. This polymodal distribution pattern therefore suggests that
sheep were managed for a range of commodities, with slightly more
emphasis on wool.
Similar kill-off rates have been recorded at a number of Anglo-Saxon
sites in Britain, including both rural settlements (e.g. Wicken Bonhunt
and Flixborough) and urban sites (e.g. Brandon Road, Thetford), but in
most instances mortality patterns largely reflect the husbandry regimes
from a wide supply area (Bourdillon 1994, 122; Crabtree 1994a, 46;
Jones 1993, 185; O’Connor 1994, 139). The predominance of older
sheep at most of these sites has led to the suggestion that large-scale
wool production became important during this period, and that wool
production may have had its origins in the early Anglo-Saxon period
(Maltby 1981, 178). However, the kill-off pattern at West Stow does
not conform to this general trend (Crabtree 1989, 87): here the majority
(62%) of sheep was culled under two years of age, with a minor peak of
mortality among older individuals, a pattern which Crabtree likens to
that seen at Iron Age sites in Britain. This long-term continuity in sheep-
rearing practices is seen as an indication that West Stow was inhabited
by Saxonised Britons who were not influenced by new husbandry
practices from the continent (Crabtree 1989, 94). The kill-off pattern
for Bloodmoor Hill therefore appears to have had more in common
with later ‘urban’ consumer sites than it did with the contemporary
self-sufficient site of West Stow. However, the sample of sheep bones
from Bloodmoor Hill is small by comparison with West Stow, so this
apparent difference must be treated with caution.
Pathology
Two oral pathologies were recorded: one incidence of irregular wear
affecting the m1 and m2, which probably results from misalignment
between upper and lower jaws, and one incidence of ante-mortem tooth
loss affecting the anterior teeth. No pathological conditions were noted
on post-cranial bones.
Biometry
In terms of absolute size, as reported in the archive, Bloodmoor
Hill sheep are similar in teeth width and depth measurements to
Shetland ewes, displaying a normal distribution around the standard
(cf. Davis 1996), although both width and depth of teeth are slightly
skewed towards lower values and some large width values are also
represented.
Withers height estimates based on only three bones (a femur,
metacarpal and radius) suggest that the mean size of the Bloodmoor
Hill sheep is 54.9cm, with a range of 51–57cm. These values are
towards the lower end of the range of withers heights recorded from
early Anglo-Saxon West Stow (Crabtree 1989, 48), Middle Saxon
Hamwic (Bourdillon and Coy 1980) and Late Saxon Flaxengate,
Lincoln (O’Connor 1982).

SFBs Pits Surface Deposit F1 Other

Anatomical element NISP MNI % NISP MNI % NISP MNI % NISP MNI %
Deciduous and permanent 7 1 2.5 7 1 4.3 3 1 7.1 1 1 12.5
incisors
Deciduous and permanent 37 7 17.9 26 5 21.7 12 2 14.2 1 1 12.5
premolars
M1/2 155 39 100 92 23 100 54 14 100 28 7 87.5
M3 66 33 84.6 35 18 78.2 19 10 71.4 16 8 100
Skull - - - 2 2 8.6 - - - - - -
Horncore - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mandible 31 15 38.4 16 8 34.7 4 2 14 1 1 12.5
Scapula 2 1 2.5 5 3 13 - - - 1 1 12.5
Humerus 15 8 20.5 4 2 8.6 4 2 14 2 1 12.5
Radius 2 1 2.5 1 1 4.3 3 2 14 2 1 12.5
Metacarpus 1 1 2.5 - - - - - - - - -
Pelvis 13 7 17.9 6 3 13 1 1 7.1 1 1 12.5
Femur 8 4 10.2 5 3 13 - - - - - -
Tibia 14 7 17.9 5 3 13 5 3 21.4 1 1 12.5
Astragalus 7 4 10.2 3 2 8.6 - - - - - -
Calcaneus 3 2 13.1 1 1 4.3 1 1 7.1 - - -
Navicular-cuboid 2 1 2.5 - - - - - - - -
Metatarsus 1 1 2.5 - - - - - - - - -
MP - - - - - - - - - - - -
Phalanx 1 2 1 2.5 4 1 4.3 1 1 7.1 - - -
Phalanx 2 1 1 2.5 2 1 4.3 - - - - - -
Phalanx 3 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total 367 214 107 54

Each individual tooth within mandibles has been counted, hence the total is greater than the total NISP in Table 5.10. The MNI has been calculated as
follows: incisors and phalanges have been divided by 8, deciduous and permanent premolars by 6, M1/2 by 4, all other elements, except metapodia, by
2. Metacarpus = (MC1 + MC2/2 + MP1/2 + MP2/4) / 2 and metatarsus = (MT1 + MT2/2 + MP1/2 + MP2/4) / 2. Where: MC1 = complete distal meta-
carpus; MC2 = half distal metacarpus; MT1 = complete distal metatarsus; MT2 = half distal metatarsus; MP1 = complete distal metapodium; MP2 =
half distal metapodium. Anatomical position taken into account when calculating the number of skulls represented. % = frequency of an element
expressed in relation to the most common one (by MNI).

Table 5.22 Sheep/goat: skeletal elements by number of fragments (or NISP) and minimum number of individuals (or
MNI) for each main feature type of Anglo-Saxon date

295
Period Fusion category Anatomical element N fused N unfused % fused
Roman Early Scapula p - 2 0
Early Humerus d 1 2 33
Intermediate 1 Phalanx 1 3 - 100
Intermediate 1 Phalanx 2 3 - 100
Intermediate 1 Metacarpus d 1 - 100
Intermediate 2 Tibia d - 3 0
Intermediate 2 Calcaneus 1 - 100
Final Vertebra 1 1 50
Anglo-Saxon Early Scapula p 6 - 100
Early Humerus d 22 1 96
Early Pelvis a - 2 0
Intermediate 1 Phalanx 1 5 2 71
Intermediate 1 Phalanx 2 3 - 100
Intermediate 1 Metacarpus d 1 - 100
Intermediate 2 Tibia d 20 5 80
Intermediate 2 Calcaneus 1 2 33
Intermediate 2 Metatarsus d 1 1 50
Late Radius d 4 3 57
Late Femur d 6 7 46
Final Vertebra 11 18 38

Fused and fusing epiphyses are amalgamated. Only unfused diaphyses, not epiphyses, are counted. N = total number of fused/fusing epiphyses; % =
percentage of fused/fusing epiphyses out of the total number of fused/fusing epiphyses and unfused diaphyses. D = distal, a = acetabulum.

Table 5.23 Sheep/goat: number and percentage of fused epiphyses by period/phase

Mandibular wear stage Roman Anglo-Saxon

N N %
A - - -
B - - -
C - - -
C/D - 1 2.5
D - - -
Fusion category N fused N unfused % fused D/E - 5 12.8
Early 28 3 90 E - 5 12.8
Intermediate 1 9 - 100 F - 10 25.6
Intermediate 2 22 8 73 G 1 16 41
Late 10 10 50 H - - -
Final 11 18 38 I - 2 5

Table 5.24 Sheep/goat: epiphyseal fusion (categories See archive for complete list of individual mandibles. Only mandibles
with two or more teeth (with recordable wear) in the dp4/p4-M3 row
after O’Connor 1989) for Anglo-Saxon assemblage are considered.

Table 5.25 Sheep/goat: mandibular wear stages

(categories after Payne 1973) by period/phase

296
127
 Period C V E H 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 *
dp4 Roman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - -
Anglo-Saxon - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 8 - 3 3 - - - 1 - 1 7
p4 Roman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anglo-Saxon - - - - 6 - - - - 1 3 5 3 11 - 3 5 - 5 6 - - - - - - - - 2
M1 Roman - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anglo-Saxon - - - - - - 2 - - - - - 1 46 5 1 11 1 2 10 - - - - - - - - 9
M1/2 Roman - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anglo-Saxon - - 1 - 2 - 3 2 2 1 4 5 5 38 5 3 - 3 3 3 - - - - - - - - 61
M2 Roman - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anglo-Saxon 1 - - - - - 5 - 1 3 11 12 11 40 2 2 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - 8
M3 Roman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 2
Anglo-Saxon - - - - 3 1 6 2 5 4 2 4 7 10 2 49 - - 2 1 - - - - - - - - 38

Both teeth in mandibles and isolated teeth are included. Unworn isolated teeth which could have been in one of the eruption stages (C, V, E, H) are coded as ‘0’.

Table 5.26 Sheep/goat: wear stages of individual teeth (following Payne 1973 and 1987) by period and phase

297 128
Period Age range Tooth Wear stage % killed within Cumulative Age
age range % killed
Anglo-Saxon 0–2 years 26 dp4 - 34 34 c.2 years
>2 years 50 p4 - 66 - -
2–3 years 13 m3 2-4 9.1 43.1 c.3 years
3–5 years 29 m3 5-10 20.4 63.5 c.5 years
6–10 years 49 m3 11G 34.4 97.9 c.10 years
>10 years 3 m3 >11G 2.1 100 -

Table 5.27 Sheep/goat: kill-off pattern based upon single teeth (dp4/p4 and m3) and teeth (dp4/p4 and m3) in mandibles (following Payne 1973 and 1987) for Anglo-Saxon assemblage

133
Anatomical element Period
Roman Anglo-Saxon
NISP MNI % NISP MNI %
Deciduous and permanent incisors 1 1 50 80 14 18.6
Deciduous and permanent premolars 1 1 50 70 12 15.9
M1/2 4 1 50 189 48 63.9
M3 4 2 100 150 75 100
Skull - - - 13 8 10.6
Mandible 1 1 50 117 59 78.6
Scapula - - - 62 31 41.3
Humerus 1 1 50 47 24 31.9
Radius - - - 11 6 7.9
Metacarpus - - - 13.5 7 9.3
Pelvis - - - 37 19 25.3
Femur - - - 22 11 14.6
Tibia - - - 33 17 22.6
Astragalus - - - 14 7 9.3
Calcaneus - - - 11 6 7.9
Metatarsus - - - 4.5 3 4
Phalanx 1 - - - 4 1 1.3
Phalanx 2 - - - 3 1 1.3
Phalanx 3 - - - 4 1 1.3
Total 12 885

Each individual tooth within mandibles has been counted, hence the total is greater than the total NISP in Table 5.10. The MNI has been
calculated as follows: phalanges have been divided by 8, deciduous and permanent premolars and incisors by 6, M1/2 by 4, all other elements,
except metapodia, by 2. Metacarpus = (MC/2 + MP/4) / 2 and metatarsus = (MT/2 + MP/4) / 2. Where: MC = complete metacarpus; MT =
complete metatarsus; MP = complete metapodium. % = frequency of an element expressed in relation to the most common one (by MNI).

Table 5.28 Pig: skeletal elements by number of fragments (NISP) and minimum number of individuals (or MNI) by
period/phase

Pig males surplus to breeding requirements being culled first. Furthermore,

Body part distribution
The skeletal element distribution for pig is given in Table 5.28. Once
again, the highest MNI figures were calculated for molar teeth, although
in this instance m3s are more common than m1/2s and at least seventy-
five individuals are represented. In comparison with the skeletal element
distribution recorded for cattle and sheep, a large number of pig teeth
are retained within mandibles (see preservation, fragmentation and
taphonomy above). Post-cranial elements are largely under-represented,
with the slight exception of bones from the upper fore limb (i.e. scapula
and humerus). This pattern is similar to that recorded for sheep and,
again, probably reflects differential preservation, fragmentation and
recovery. Analysis of skeletal element distribution by feature type
(Table 5.29) shows that a wider range of skeletal elements was recovered
from SFBs and pits and that m3s are the most common element from
all feature types with the exception of surface deposits, which include
larger numbers of mandibles. The common post-cranial elements,
scapulae and humeri, are reasonably well represented from the three
main feature types and no concentrations of particular elements were
noted between feature types.
Butchery
Butchery marks were recorded on less than 1% of pig bones (Table 5.9)
and the majority are chop marks. Common sites of chop marks include
the distal and mid-shaft region of the humerus and the proximal and
mid-shaft region of the tibia. Chop marks were also noted on the mid-
shaft region of a radius and the ascending ramus of a mandible. Cut
marks were observed on the shafts of a humerus and tibia and probably
result from filleting meat off the bone.
Sexing
The ratio of male to female pigs established from the size and shape of
canine teeth is given in Table 5.30. This indicates that the vast majority
of pigs were female (c.65%), while males account for just over a third.
This ratio is a little surprising since one would expect to find young
the larger size of male canines means that they should be better
represented in the assemblage than female canines, given the usual bias
resulting from recovery methods. Unfortunately the number of canines
retained within mandibles is too small to establish the kill-off pattern
of pigs of each sex, and so the possible reasons for this aberration from
the expected remain uncertain. However, of the mandibles retaining a
female canine, most are adult animals, suggesting that breeding sows
are represented.
Ageing
Epiphyseal fusion data for pigs is presented in Tables 5.31 and 5.32.
Almost all bones in the early fusion category are fused and almost all
bones in the late and final fusion category are unfused, suggesting that
the majority of pigs were killed off between the ages of one and two
to three years. This kill-off pattern is common and has been recorded
for many sites from the Iron Age onwards. It largely reflects the fact
that pigs are essentially fecund meat animals that reach their full body
weight relatively quickly. The recovery of a small number of isolated
bones and two partial skeletons (Table 5.11) from neonatal individuals
suggests that the breeding of pigs was carried out locally, either on
the site or in the immediate vicinity. The presence of partial skeletons
suggests that these were natural mortalities rather than animals killed
at a tender age.
Tooth wear data for pig mandibles retaining two or more cheek teeth
are given in Table 5.33 and a complete list of mandibular wear stage
data is presented in the archive. A little over half of all pig mandibles
are from adult individuals, a further 35% are from subadult individuals
and the rest are either immature or juvenile. No mandibles from elderly
individuals were recovered. These data confirm the pattern suggested
by epiphyseal fusion: that the majority of pigs were killed between the
ages of one and three years. The large number of adult mandibles may
go some way to explaining the relatively large ratio of female to male
canines discussed above. Analysis of tooth wear for individual teeth
(Table 5.34) suggests the presence of very young pigs no more than a

298
132
 SFBs Pits Surface Deposit F1 Other
Anatomical element NISP MNI % NISP MNI % NISP MNI % NISP MNI %
Deciduous & permanent 22 4 14.8 35 6 22.2 17 3 21.4 6 1 10
incisors
Deciduous & permanent 26 5 18.5 27 5 18.5 13 3 21.4 4 1 10
premolars
M1/2 66 17 62.9 74 19 70.3 35 9 64.2 14 4 40
M3 54 27 100 54 27 100 22 11 78.5 20 10 100
Skull 6 4 14.8 4 3 11.1 1 1 7.1 2 2 20
Mandible 35 18 66.6 47 24 88.8 28 14 100 7 4 40
Scapula 22 11 40.7 26 13 48.1 12 6 42.8 2 1 10
Humerus 12 6 22.2 23 12 44.4 8 4 28.5 4 2 20
Radius 5 3 11.1 5 3 11.1 1 1 7.1 - - -
Metacarpus 9 5 18.5 4.5 3 11.1 - - - - - -
Pelvis 12 6 22.2 16 8 29.6 6 3 21.4 3 2 20
Femur 8 4 14.8 9 5 18.5 6 3 21.4 1 1 10
Tibia 10 5 18.5 14 7 25.9 9 5 35.7 2 1 10
Astragalus 3 2 7.4 3 2 7.4 6 3 21.4 2 1 10
Calcaneus 3 2 7.4 4 2 7.4 2 1 7.1 2 1 10
Metatarsus 4 2 7.4 4.5 3 11.1 - - - - - -
Phalanx 1 1 1 3.7 3 1 3.7 - - - - - -
Phalanx 2 2 1 3.7 1 1 3.7 - - - - - -
Phalanx 3 1 1 3.7 3 1 3.7 - - - - - -
Total 301 357 166 69

Each individual tooth within mandibles has been counted, hence the total is greater than the total NISP in Table 5.10. The MNI has been calculated as
follows: phalanges have been divided by 8, deciduous and permanent premolars and incisors by 6, M1/2 by 4, all other elements, except metapodia, by
2. Metacarpus = (MC/2 + MP/4) / 2 and metatarsus = (MT/2 + MP/4) / 2. Where: MC = complete metacarpus; MT = complete metatarsus; MP =
complete metapodium. % = frequency of an element expressed in relation to the most common one (by MNI).

Table 5.29 Pig: skeletal elements by number of fragments (or NISP) and minimum number of individuals (or MNI) for
each main feature type of Anglo-Saxon date

Female Male Total

N % N % N
Loose canines 25 61 16 39 41
Mandibles 13 76.4 4 23.6 17
All canines 38 65.5 20 34.5 58

Table 5.30 Pig: sex ratio determined from canine teeth for Anglo-Saxon assemblage

few weeks or months old and a slightly higher incidence of subadult
individuals than is indicated by other methods.
As previously indicated, pigs provide no secondary products
so their management is geared towards meat production, which
is reflected in the kill-off pattern. Significant numbers of subadult
animals, probably surplus males, were culled, but most pigs survived
into early adulthood and were culled once they had reached full body
size. The presence of a few neonates and very young animals suggest
that pigs were raised in close proximity to the site. By contrast, the
West Stow (Crabtree 1989) assemblage includes a higher proportion of
neonatal and young juvenile individuals and it has been suggested that
the limited availability of pannage in the immediate vicinity of the site
forced the West Stow farmers to kill off excess piglets early in their first
year (Crabtree 1994a, 47).
Pathology
Three pathological conditions were noted. The first, a lesion surrounded
by irregular new bone, was recorded on the lateral distal shaft of a
radius, and is of uncertain aetiology. The other two cases both affect
teeth and include one misaligned m3 and a carie on the distal cusp of
an m1. Both of these cases also display a degree of inter-dental attrition
with adjacent teeth.
Biometry
Biometric measurement, reported on fully in the archive, suggests that
Bloodmoor Hill teeth are smaller than those from late Roman sites in
the region, but similar to those from other Saxon sites.
Withers heights were calculated for six complete long bones, five
astragali and a humerus: these gave a mean withers of 68cm, with a
range of 64–74cm. The range of values is similar to those from Hamwic,
at 63cm–c. 78cm (Bourdillon and Coy 1980), and the upper value is
similar to the single complete long bone recovered from West Stow, at
c.73cm (Crabtree 1989, 56).

299
133
Period Fusion category Anatomical element N fused N unfused % fused
Roman Early Humerus d 1 - 100
Anglo-Saxon Early Scapula p 11 4 73
Early Humerus d 35 4 90
Early Pelvis a 8 4 67
Intermediate 1 Phalanx 2 3 - 100
Intermediate 1 Metacarpus d 6 4 60
Intermediate 1 Tibia d 16 16 50
Intermediate 2 Phalanx 1 4 - 100
Intermediate 2 Calcaneus 6 - 100
Intermediate 2 Metatarsus d 1 3 25
Late Radius d 1 6 14
Late Femur d 6 16 27
Final Vertebra 2 57 3

Fused and fusing epiphyses are amalgamated. Only unfused diaphyses, not epiphyses, are counted. N = total number of fused/fusing epiphyses;
% = percentage of fused/fusing epiphyses out of the total number of fused/fusing epiphyses and unfused diaphyses. D = distal, a = acetabulum.

Table 5.31 Pig: number and percentage of fused epiphyses by period/phase

Mandibular wear stage Roman Anglo-Saxon

N N %
Juvenile - 1 1.5
Fusion category N fused N unfused % fused Juvenile/immature - 1 1.5
Early 54 12 82 Immature - 6 9.5
Intermediate 1 25 20 56 Subadult - 22 35
Intermediate 2 11 3 79 Subadult/adult - 1 1.5
Late 7 22 24 Adult 1 32 51
Final 2 57 3 Elderly - - -

Table 5.32 Pig: epiphyseal fusion (categories after See archive for complete list of individual mandibles. Only mandibles
O’Connor 1989) for Anglo-Saxon assemblage with two or more teeth (with recordable wear) in the dp4/p4-M3 row are
considered.

Table 5.33 Pig: mandibular wear stages (categories after

O’Connor 1989) by period/phase

Period C V E H a b c d e f g h j k l m n o p *
dp4 Roman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anglo-Saxon - 1 - - - 1 - 1 1 - - - - 2 3 2 - - - 5
p4 Roman - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anglo-Saxon - 2 11 1 2 11 6 5 - 6 3 3 - - - - - - - 4
M1 Roman - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - 1
Anglo-Saxon - 1 - - - - 5 3 7 11 3 5 2 11 4 3 3 - - 13
M1/2 Roman - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - -
Anglo-Saxon - 1 - - 5 - 2 - 1 5 2 - 1 - - - 1 - - 14
M2 Roman - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - -
Anglo-Saxon - 4 - - 2 5 8 2 23 13 5 5 2 6 - - - - - 11
M3 Roman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4
Anglo-Saxon - 4 16 6 31 21 31 12 - 5 - 1 - - - - - - - 23

Both teeth in mandibles and isolated teeth are included. Grant’s stage ‘U’ is considered equivalent to stage ‘a’. Unworn isolated teeth which could
be in one of the eruption stages (C, V, E, H) are coded as ‘a’.

Table 5.34 Pig: wear stages of individual teeth (following Grant 1982) by period/phase

135
300
Horse Period
Roman Anglo-Saxon
Body part distribution
A total of 244 countable equid bones was recovered from the Anglo- Anatomical element N N
Saxon assemblage (Table 5.10); they account for approximately 11% Loose teeth - (1) 89 (95)
of the total number of large mammal (e.g. cattle and equid) bones
recovered from the site and this figure is higher than that recorded for Skull - - 5 (6)
West Stow (4.5%). The skeletal element distribution for horse is given Mandible - - 7 -
in Table 5.35 and indicates that, once again, loose teeth are common;
this is probably a reflection of preservation and fragmentation. Over Vertebra - - - (3)
half of the loose teeth recovered are ‘non-countable’ upper premolars Scapula - - 7 (1)
and molars or teeth that could not be assigned to either jaw because they
Humerus - - 3 (1)
were too fragmented. Of the loose lower teeth recovered, the majority
(c.57%) are cheek teeth and incisors (37%), although canine teeth Radius - (1) 16 (7)
were also recovered. Canine teeth are usually rudimentary or absent in Ulna - - - -
females (Hillson 1986, 87) so it seems likely that horses of both sexes
are represented. Most parts of the post-cranial skeleton are represented Carpal - - - (1)
and the pelvis and astragalus are slightly more common than other Metacarpus - - 4 (5)
elements. Most horse bones occur as isolated elements from individual
contexts but a few associations of possible articulating elements were Pelvis 1 - 21 -
noted among bones from the same context: these tended to be bones Femur - - 1 (6)
from the ankle and lower leg. Most horse bones were recovered from Tibia - - 16 -
SFBs and pits (Table 5.14).
Astragalus - - 20 -
Ageing Calcaneus - - 8 -
Almost all horse bones have fused epiphyses and the majority of teeth
are permanent, suggesting that most horses were adult individuals. Navicular - - - (1)
Exceptions include two unfused calcanea, two unfused distal tibiae Metatarsus - - 4 (7)
and an unfused distal radius. In addition, a recently fused distal radius
Metapodial - - 12 (2)
and metacarpal were also recorded. These bones are from individuals
under three and a half years of age, the youngest being under fifteen Phalanx 1 - - 14 -
to eighteen months (Silver 1969). The tooth eruption and wear data Phalanx 2 - - 14 -
also indicate the presence of immature horses. Loose deciduous upper
and lower premolars were recorded and the eruption sequence recorded Phalanx 3 - - 3 -
for two maxillae suggests that individuals aged seven to fourteen Total 1 (2) 244 (135)
months and two to two and a half years are represented. The majority of
permanent incisors are worn and have an oval or circular infundibulum,
suggesting that they are from animals aged between around three and Non-countable bones and teeth (loose uppers) in brackets. Non-count-
twelve years (Levine 1982). The ageing data therefore suggests that able skull fragments includes five maxillae and one cranial vault
horse breeding was taking place at the site but that most horses were
working animals in their prime. Both adult and immature horses were Table 5.35 Horse: skeletal element distribution by
recorded from the West Stow assemblage and a similar interpretation period/phase
put forward (Crabtree 1989, 95).

Butchery
Butchery marks were recorded on only 1% of horse bones (Table 5.9)
and the majority are chop marks. Common sites of butchery are the
proximal and distal shaft of the metapodial and the proximal and mid-
shaft of the radius. Other sites of butchery include the scapula glenoid,
proximal humerus, acetabulum and ilium of the pelvis and distal tibia.
The evidence is limited but has some similarities with the butchery
noted on cattle bones, suggesting that horse carcasses were processed
in a similar way. Comparable butchery evidence was recorded on a
small number of horse bones from West Stow and it has been suggested
that they are associated with butchery for food (Crabtree 1989, 104).
Butchery noted on one metapodial further suggests that horse bones
were also utilised for the manufacture of bone objects and parallels
the large number of ‘sawn ends’ of cattle metapodials recovered from
Hamwic (see MacGregor 1985, 46). In addition to the above, two
phalanges primae were recorded with cut marks, the location and
direction of which suggest that they occurred as a result of skinning.
Pathology
Two pathological cases were noted on horse bones: the first is a tarsal
bone displaying changes associated with joint disease in the form of
new bone formation around the proximal articular surface and pitting
of the proximal surface. The condition is probably stress-related,
resulting from the use of the animal for traction. The second case,
which is not strictly pathological but more of an aberration, takes the
form of irregular wear on an upper p2. The tooth is retained within the
maxilla and none of the surrounding teeth are affected. Irregular wear
can result from misalignment between the upper and lower jaws but in
this instance it may be due to the wearing of a bit (pieces of which were
found among the metalwork assemblage from the site; see Chapter
4). Lower p2s with a similar wear pattern have been recorded from
Towcester, Northamptonshire (Payne 1983), and post-medieval levels
at Castle Mall, Norwich (Albarella et al. 1997, 42).
Biometry
A complete list of measurements of horse bones and teeth can be found
in the archive. Withers height estimates based upon three metacarpals
and three metatarsals suggest that the Anglo-Saxon horses from
Bloodmoor Hill ranged in size from 1268mm to 1407mm (or c.12.2hh–
13.3hh) with a mean height of 1315mm (13hh). In other words, the
Bloodmoor Hill equids are similar in stature to Welsh Mountain ponies
and New Forest ponies. The mean and range compare well with West
Stow and other Anglo-Saxon sites, such as the middle Saxon sites of
Hamwic, Hampshire, and Ramsbury, Wiltshire (Coy 1980), and the
late Saxon sites of Castle Mall, Norwich, and Thetford (Jones 1994;
Albarella 2004).
Other mammals
Dog
A single fragment of distal humerus was recovered from Structure 29.
The distal epiphysis is fused, suggesting that an adult dog is represented,
but no further information is available from the specimen. By way of
contrast, dog bones were ubiquitous at West Stow, where withers height
estimates range from 50cm to 67cm (Crabtree 1989, 62), which is larger
than those from the Romano-British period at this site and larger than
the typical Anglo-Saxon dog described by Harcourt (1974, 172).
Deer
Both red deer (Cervus elaphus) and roe deer (Capreolus capreolus)
have been positively identified from the assemblage. To confirm
identifications, measurements of astragalus distal breadth (Bd) and
lateral length (Gli) were plotted against those for cattle (Fig. 5.6).
The scatter plot shows a clear separation of astragali based upon these
measurements, with a slight degree of overlap between large red deer
astragali and small cattle astragali.
All of the seven countable red deer bones recovered are from
the hock (e.g. astragalus and calcaneus). Cut marks consistent with

301 139
 Figure 5.6 Scatter plot of measurements of astragalus Gli and Bd for cattle and deer from the Anglo-Saxon
assemblage
skinning were observed on one astragalus. Non-countable bones
include fragments of antler and a proximal radius. One of the antler
fragments bears clear signs of utilisation, having been sawn through at
the junction of the brow tine.
Roe deer bones are slightly more common than those from red deer
and a wider range of skeletal elements are represented. Of the countable
elements, radii are common and, in general, bones from the forelimb
are better represented, suggesting perhaps that dressed cuts of venison
were selectively procured. Antler fragments are common among the
non-countable bones. Butchery marks consistent with reduction of the
carcass and utilisation of antler were observed on some fragments.
Of the basal fragments of roe deer antler recovered, at least two were
collected after having been shed.
In addition to the antler fragments identified to species, a few small
‘non-countable’ fragments of antler were also recovered but could not
be determined to species. It is clear that antler from both red and roe
deer was a valuable resource for the manufacture of objects, in particular
combs (see ‘Combs’, Chapter 4).
Rabbit, mole and rat
Bones from all three of these species have been identified and are almost
certainly intrusive, a conclusion based upon their burrowing habit and
the fact that both rabbits and the brown rat (Rattus norvegicus) are fairly
late introductions into Britain. It has long been thought that rabbits were
introduced to Britain by the Normans but probably not before the 12th
century (Corbet and Harris 1991; Veale 1957). However, recent research
suggests that the introduction of rabbits to Britain has more to do with
'a growing interest in nature and exotic animals' during the later 12th
century than the importation of specific animals by invading people
(Sykes 2007, 84–5). The brown rat was introduced much later, probably
in the early 18th century (Hart-Davis 2003, 92). Of the relatively large
number of rabbit bones recovered, the majority are partial skeletons or
articulating limbs (see Table 5.11).
Cetacea
Four whale bones were recovered from Anglo-Saxon features. All
are vertebrae centra and some bear signs of utilisation (see Riddler,
Chapter 4). Two were from Structure 12 (contexts [205] and [216]); the
first centrum has unfused epiphyses, suggesting an immature individual,
although it is worth noting that some of the larger whale species can be
as old as twenty or thirty years and still have unfused vertebra (Tinker
1988). The second centrum from this feature has fused epiphyses and
bears butchery marks consistent with its use as a chopping block/board
(see also Household furnishings and equipment, above): there were
chop marks on the sides of the centrum, cut marks across both articular
surfaces and a small area of charring on one articular surface. It is
clear from the distribution of these marks that one surface was more
frequently used than the other. Vertebrae with similar signs of utility
that have been interpreted as chopping or sawing blocks/boards include
examples from the Saxon sites of Botolphs, Sussex (see Gardiner 1997,
189); Hamwic, Hampshire (Bourdillon and Coy 1980, 114; Morton
1992, 144, 146, 182–3); and West Hythe, Kent (see Gardiner 1997,
191). Medieval examples also exist and are typically associated with
302
high-status sites such as Launceston Castle, Cornwall (Albarella and
Davis 1996). Centra were also recovered from pits F12 [267] and Pit
Group E [1126]: the former example has a small charred area just below
the junction of one of the transverse processes and a small circular
depressed fracture on the dorsal aspect of the centum. The depression
is clearly ancient and may result from the use of a hook, although this
is purely speculative. In addition to the above, two unfused vertebrae
epiphyses were recovered from F167 [1422], an undated pit.
The vertebrae were identified by R. Sabin as belonging to sperm
whale and beaked whale. Whale bones have been recorded from a
number of Anglo-Saxon sites; their distribution is clearly coastal and
they have generally been selected for their utility (Gardiner 1997, 188).
Whale carcasses provide meat, blubber and skins and the bone itself
has in the past been used to manufacture a wide range of artefacts and
as architectural material (Gardiner 1997; MacGregor 1985; Mulville
2002; Savelle 1997). There is even some suggestion that, due to its high
oil content, whale bone can be burnt as fuel (Clark 1947; Mulville 2002,
43). The important question as to whether the whale bone recovered
from Anglo-Saxon sites in Britain is from hunted or stranded animals is
still under discussion (Mulville 2002, 45). Contemporary sources such
as Bede, writing in 731, suggest that whales and other sea mammals
(e.g. seals and dolphins) were ‘captured’ (Colgrave and Mynors 1969),
while the inscription on the Franks Casket, dated to around AD 700 and
constructed of whale bone, suggests that the animal ‘swam onto the
shingle’ (Gardiner 1997).
Birds
Domestic birds
Of the small number of bird bones recovered from the Anglo-Saxon
assemblage the majority (84%) are domestic species. Chicken is
the most common avian species and most recovered bones are from
adult individuals; the only exception to this is a single unfused femur.
Isolated chicken bones were recovered from some SFBs and associated
skeletal elements were recovered from pits F255 and F350. Cut marks
were observed on the proximal articulation of one humerus and
probably relate to removal of the wing to provide a single meat portion.
Seven goose bones were recovered: most occur as isolated finds from
separate contexts, although a notable exception is several articulating
wing bones from Structure 35. Two duck bones were recovered: a pair
of coracoids from Pit F255, one of which has a cut mark across the
acrocoracoid process. Chicken and goose are the most numerous avian
species recorded from West Stow, while wild duck is slightly more
common than domestic duck at that site (Crabtree 1989, 27). Overall,
the low incidence of domestic bird bones suggests that they played a
very minor role in the diet at Bloodmoor Hill, although this does not
mean that they were not valued for their eggs, or in the case of geese,
their feathers.
Wild birds
Four different wild birds are represented in the assemblage; all are
considered to be chance finds of non-anthropogenic origin. They include,
from Pit F255, the ulna from a small corvid (probably carrion crow
Corvus corone) and an ulna from an unidentified bird of the passeriforme
order; from Structure 22, the tibio-tarsus from a thrush (Turdus c.f.
philomelos) and, from Pit F372, two bones from a bird of prey. These
bones include a fragment of distal femur and distal tarso-metatarsus
from an immature individual, and could not be positively identified to
species. The bones from some raptors can be difficult to determine to
species (Polydora Baker, pers. comm.; Mulkeen and O’Connor 1997,
445) and it is acknowledged that poorly preserved specimens from
immature individuals will not provide a definitive identification. On the
basis of the angle of the lateral distal condyle and shape of the fossa
located on the anterior aspect of the lateral distal condyle, the raptor
femur from Bloodmoor Hill was considered more similar to buzzard
(Buteo sp.) and harrier (Circus sp.) than other accipitridae reference
material consulted. Buzzards are fairly general feeders and may have
been attracted to the refuse accumulating in nucleated settlements,
since their bones have been recovered from a number of urban sites.
A single bone from a common buzzard (Buteo buteo) was identified
from West Stow (Crabtree 1989, 27). Harriers, however, are highly
specialised feeders that favour wetland environments and are unlikely
to be attracted to human settlements (O’Connor 1993; Mulkeen and
O’Connor 1997). Birds of prey have been identified from a small
number of sites of this period (Crabtree 1996, 72); these include the
complete skeleton of a peregrine falcon from Middle Saxon Brandon
and marsh harrier (Circus aeruginosus) from the Middle Saxon site of
Mornington House, Gosberton, in Lincolnshire (Baker 2002; Baker in
press; Polydora Baker, pers. comm.). The presence of a peregrine falcon
at Brandon is thought to reflect the high status of the site’s inhabitants.
Amphibian and fish bone
A single frog (Rana sp.) bone and forty-five fish vertebrae were
recovered from wet sieved bulk samples. The frog bone is from Pit F255
and probably represents the remains of an individual that had fallen into
the open feature. All of the fish vertebrae are from small species and
are further discussed below. The vast majority were recovered from pit
contexts, in particular F521. Bone recovered from pits was generally
better preserved than from other feature types so it is likely that the low
frequency of fish bone reflects the generally unfavourable preservation
conditions over much of the site. From the available evidence, however,
it would seem that, despite the site’s proximity to coastal resources, fish
did not form a significant portion of the diet. A similar low frequency
of fish bone was noted from the West Stow assemblage (Crabtree
1989, 27): both freshwater and marine species were identified and it is
suggested that, given its distance from the coast (c.50km), it saw some
long-distance trade in marine fish.
Discussion
Provisioning and diet
Domestic livestock species account for c.88% of the
assemblage and there is very limited evidence for the
exploitation of other species. Cattle predominate (c.60%
of NISP or 50% of MNI) and the high frequency of adult
and elderly individuals suggests that they were primarily
used for traction, with beef a secondary consideration.
The type of pathological conditions recorded on a small
number of cattle bones supports the notion that at least
some cattle were used for traction. An alternative expla-
nation is suggested by the limited information on the
sex ratio of the Bloodmoor Hill herd: this indicates that
mostly females and castrates are represented. Thus, if
milk production was the main aim then it is clear that
excess calves were not consumed locally. The lack of
neonates and low frequency of younger cattle could
suggest that the settlement was supplemented with cattle
from elsewhere. The range of values recorded for the
width of the m3 tentatively suggests that cattle were
drawn from different populations, although the effects of
sexual dimorphism cannot be ruled out. The kill-off rate
for cattle therefore suggests that Bloodmoor Hill may
have been both a producer and consumer site, concen-
303
trating on dairying and arable cultivation (see Murphy
2002), marketing young cattle and supplementing its
main source of protein with older, less productive cattle
from elsewhere.
Pigs and sheep were also important to the economy;
the kill-off pattern for pigs suggests that they were reared
locally and killed at the optimum age for pork. Sexing
information further suggests that the majority of pigs
were sows, making it probable that the breeding and
rearing of pigs was an important aspect of the Bloodmoor
Hill economy. A bimodal mortality profile was recorded
for sheep, which were mainly culled as adult and elderly
individuals, with a minor peak of mortality among
animals under two years of age. Excess lambs and juve-
nile individuals were culled for meat, while the majority
were kept for their wool and as breeding stock. Sheep,
therefore, appear to have been managed for a range of
commodities but with most emphasis on wool produc-
tion. Sheep were probably reared locally, as suggested
by the small number of bones from neonates, and there is
considerable evidence in the form of loomweights, spin-
dlewhorls, pin-beaters, shears and a pair of wool-combs
that wool was processed into textiles on the site, although
this is not considered to have been at a level of specialist
commodity production (see Chapter 6).
A small range of other species was occasionally
exploited for food, including horse, deer, chicken, goose,
duck, fish and possibly whale. Horse bones were reason-
ably common among the large vertebrate assemblage and
butchery marks similar to those observed on cattle bones
suggest that horsemeat was occasionally eaten. The
main function of horses, however, appears to have been
for traction and this is substantiated by the presence of
horses of working age and the type of pathological condi-
tions recorded on some bones. The presence of foals and
immature horses further suggests that they were bred and
reared in close proximity to the site.
Venison played a minor role in the diet and there is
some suggestion in the skeletal element distribution that
only certain joints were procured. Antler was a valued
raw material and there is evidence that it was collected
and manufactured into objects at the site.
Very few bird bones were recovered from the site.
Domestic species dominate and most were killed as
adults. This suggests that eggs were more important than
meat and the overall low frequency of bird bones indi-
cates the limited role of poultry in the diet. No wild bird
species appear to have been exploited for food.
Small numbers of fish vertebrae were recovered,
suggesting the limited exploitation of freshwater and
marine resources. The presence of a few whale vertebrae
does not necessarily mean that whale meat and blubber
were consumed, or indeed that whales were actively
hunted; whale bone may simply have been collected from
the rotting carcasses of animals washed or stranded on
local beaches. It is clear, however, that the bones them-
selves represent more than mere curiosities and appear to
have been selected for their utility.
Disposal patterns
Very little can be gleaned from the distribution of taxa
and skeletal elements between different areas of the site
or different feature types and deposits. Preservation,
fragmentation and to a lesser degree recovery have signif-
icantly biased the assemblage, particularly in terms of the
types of skeletal element represented. Cattle bones are
common from all areas of the site and all feature types,
and the proportion is similar to the assemblage as a whole.
The proportions of sheep and pig show some variation
between areas and feature types, but the differences are
marginal. The skeletal element distribution for the three
main species is biased by differential preservation and
fragmentation between teeth and post-cranial elements;
thus, teeth are common from all areas of the site and
all feature types. However, there is a slight suggestion
that surface deposits include more waste elements from
primary butchery while SFBs and pits are characterised
by a wider range of elements.
Significance of results
The general characteristics of the Bloodmoor Hill
animal bone assemblage, with its low species diversity,
overwhelming reliance on domestic sources of meat,
especially cattle, and mortality profiles suggestive of
complex economic strategies, have more in common
with later Middle Saxon villages and ‘urban’ wic sites
than they do with the contemporary rural site of West
Stow, Suffolk. The large early Anglo-Saxon animal bone
assemblage from West Stow reveals a diverse and well-
balanced self-sufficient economy, with little evidence
for economic specialisation, not too dissimilar from late
Iron Age sites in the region (Crabtree 1989; 1994, 50;
1996, 72–3). By contrast, the assemblages from middle
Saxon rural sites in the region, such as Wicken Bonhunt
and Brandon, suggest increasing specialisation in certain
animal products. The assemblage from Wicken Bonhunt,
Essex, is dominated by pig (c.70% of NISP) and the
mortality profile and body-part distribution strongly
suggest that pork production was taking place on a
very large scale. At Brandon, Suffolk, in contrast, sheep
predominate and the mortality profile strongly suggests
that wool production was the main economic aim. The
rise of these specialised rural producer sites is thought to
reflect the integral relationship between the development
of wic or emporia sites, such as Ipswich, as centres of
craft production and trade (Crabtree 1996). At Ipswich
cattle was the predominant species and it is clear that the
consumers in Ipswich were being supplied with cattle and
sheep primarily kept for other purposes. A similar pattern
of supply has been noted for other ‘urban’ sites around
the country, as at, for example, Hamwic, Hampshire
(Bourdillon 1988, 184; 1994, 123), and Fishergate, York
(O’Connor 1991, 248–9; 1994, 139). The evidence from
Bloodmoor Hill seems to suggest that the site may have
acted as both a producer and consumer of some animal
products, while being self-sufficient in others.
The mortality profile for cattle from Bloodmoor Hill
cannot easily be explained in terms of exploitation, as
there is no marked concentration upon either meat or
milk. The absence of neonates and low frequency of
young cattle could suggest that breeding was not a local
pursuit or that younger animals were marketed elsewhere,
but this is largely speculation. It seems more likely, given
the evidence, that the settlement acted as consumer of
beef from herds kept primarily for traction and dairying.
By contrast, the mortality profile for sheep indicates that
sheep were locally reared and that wool production was
important to the settlement’s economy. Furthermore, the
processing of wool into textiles on site is substantiated by
evidence from other artefacts, although this craft activity
304
is likely to have been fairly small-scale, producing cloth
for domestic use. The most basic but nevertheless impor-
tant aspect of the economy is self-sufficiency in pork
production. This complex economic pattern is signifi-
cantly different from contemporary rural sites such as
West Stow and suggests that the move towards speciali-
sation seen at later Middle Saxon rural sites may have
had its roots in the early Anglo-Saxon period.
III. Fish bone
by Rachel Parks and James Barrett
Introduction
A small number (189) of fish bones were recovered from
seven Anglo-Saxon contexts. Forty-four specimens were
identified. The taxa represented included eel (Anguilla
anguilla), herring (Clupea harengus), smelt (Osmerus
eperlanus), cod (Gadus morhua), Atlantic horse mack-
erel (Trachuras trachuras), Atlantic mackerel (Scomber
scombrus) and species from the ray (Rajidae), halibut
(Bothidae) and carp (Cyprinidae) families.
Methods
Fish bone was recovered by hand collection, wet sieving
and flotation. Material from the greater than 1mm mesh
fraction was retained during wet sieving and flotation.
Due to the small amount of material recovered, fish bone
from all three methods is combined in the following
analysis.
Recording followed the York protocol as outlined
by Harland et al. (2003). All specimens are counted
and weighed and are classified as either ‘diagnostic’ or
‘non-diagnostic’ elements. The diagnostic elements are
identified to species level where possible and are further
divided into three groups: quantification codes (QC) 1,
2 and 4. For a suite of eighteen QC1 elements, criteria
including estimation of fish size, element completeness,
bone modification (such as butchery) and metric data are
recorded. Unless modified in some way, vertebrae (QC2
elements) are not recorded in detail beyond taxonomic
identification. Special elements such as otoliths (quanti-
2207 4642
Crushed (all specimens) - -
Eel 2 -
Plaice or flounder 1 -
Element completeness (QC1 elements only) - -
0–20% - 1
41–60% 1 1
61–80% - 2
Surface texture (QC1 elements only)* - -
Excellent - 2
Good - 1
Fair 1 1
*Assessment of surface texture based on the following criteria (Harland
et al. 2003): excellent — majority of surface fresh or even slightly
glossy; very localised flaky or powdery patches; good — lacks fresh
appearance but solid; very localised flaky or powdery patches; fair —
surface solid in places, but flaky or powdery on up to 49% of specimen.
Table 5.36 Fish bone preservation by context
fication code 4) are recorded in a similar level of detail
as the QC1 elements. Under the York protocol all other
(QC0) elements are usually recorded as unidentified. For
all quantification codes the number of burnt specimens
is recorded.
Preservation
Due to the small size of the Bloodmoor Hill assemblage,
only a brief note can be made on bone preservation. Three
specimens from [2207] F225 had been crushed while
the bone was fresh: two eel vertebrae, and one plaice or
flounder vertebra. All three specimens were from small
(151–300mm in total length) fish, and such crushing is
likely to have been caused by trampling or mastication.
Too few QC1 elements were recorded to comment on
element completeness and surface texture. All data is
provided in Table 5.36.
Taxonomic abundance and element representation
A total of 189 specimens, of which forty-four were iden-
tified, were recovered from seven contexts: Pit F255
[2207], Pit F307 [3206], Structure 35 [3274], Pit F368
[3469], Pit F513 [4600], Pit Group C [4642] and [4719]
(F500): Table 5.37). The majority of bones (twenty-nine
diagnostic, 140 unidentified) were from context [4642].
Despite the small number of identified elements, a surpris-
ingly large number of taxa were recorded, including
marine, migratory and freshwater fish (discussed below).
Species belonging to the halibut family were most abun-
dant: fifteen specimens were recorded, three of which were
identified to either plaice or flounder (and are probably
flounder). In order of abundance, the following taxa were
also identified: smelt (ten), eel (six), herring (four), cod
(two), unidentified carp family (two). In addition, single
vertebrae of Atlantic horse mackerel, Atlantic mackerel
and ray family were recorded. The element representa-
tion of all species is shown in Table 5.37, but as there are
few elements, no further discussion is merited.
The estimated fish total length of the QC1 and QC4
elements is provided in Table 5.38. All of the recorded
specimens are from small (151–300mm estimated total
length) eel and flatfish. The crushed specimens described
above are from context [2207], an artefact-rich fill within
pit F255.
Discussion
The Bloodmoor Hill assemblage includes fish from
several habitats. Truly freshwater fish are represented
by the two Cyprinidae vertebrae. Cod and herring are
marine fish. However, the young (and therefore small)
fish of these species, like the ones recovered from this
site, are found close to the shore. The two cod vertebrae
represent fish of less than 300mm total length (TL), and
the herring bones are from fish of 150–300mm TL. The
bones of horse mackerel, Atlantic mackerel and ray could
also have been caught from or close to the shore. Turning
to the migratory taxa, young eels migrate and mature in
freshwater sources accessible from the sea, and the small
specimens from the site are consistent with this stage.
Smelt have the reverse migration: they spawn in fresh
water but mature in the sea. The halibut family speci-
mens are all likely to be plaice or flounder. The plaice is
a marine species, but the flounder can spend time in both
fresh and salt water. It is commonly found in estuaries
(Maitland and Campbell 1992; Whitehead et al. 1989;
305
Whitehead et al. 1986a and b). In sum, this assemblage
indicates some strictly freshwater fishing (the cyprinids),
but is most consistent with the use of a coastal estuarine
environment.
In addition to the fish bones, several fish-hooks have
been recovered from the site (see below). These are
important in providing additional evidence for the size
of fish caught (Owen 1994).
Anglo-Saxon fish bone assemblages from rural sites
are rare, and those that are known produce few bones
from marine fish (Barrett et al. 2004). Flixborough,
a high-status Middle to Late Saxon settlement on the
river Trent in Lincolnshire, provides one of the largest
non-urban comparative assemblages available (Barrett
2002). The predominant species through all phases (7th
to early 11th century AD) were migratory or freshwater:
smelt, pike, flatfish (probably flounder) and perch. A
small assemblage which does include marine species
has been recovered at the coastal Anglo-Saxon monas-
tery of Hartlepool (Locker 1988a), while a possible
beach market site at Sandtun in Kent produced a large
Middle Saxon assemblage including marine fish. It was
dominated by cod, whiting and flatfish (Hamilton-Dyer
2001). Middle Saxon urban (or ‘wic’) assemblages,
often further inland, tend to produce migratory (espe-
cially eel) and freshwater fish (e.g. cyprinids), along
with some herring (e.g. Bourdillon 1993; Jones 1988;
Locker 1988b).
Bloodmoor Hill has produced a small collection that
combines the characteristics of these comparative sites
— possibly because its location provided easy access
to coastal, estuarine and freshwater resources (see
Boreham, Chapter 1). The presence of marine species is
notable, given their poor representation in most Saxon
assemblages, but, as noted above, a few coastal sites
do share this characteristic. Moreover, migratory taxa
that were probably caught in an estuarine or freshwater
environment dominate the Bloodmoor Hill collection.
IV. Botanical evidence
by Rachel Ballantyne
(Fig. 5.7)
Introduction
This report discusses charred remains, the only form of
plant macrofossils preserved within the well-drained sandy
soil at Bloodmoor Hill. Despite the intensive settlement
activity identified, very low quantities of plant remains
were recovered from many of the sampled contexts. Twelve
Romano-British contexts (total sample volume 125 litres)
produced only fine wood charcoal and two indeterminate
cereal grains. Accordingly, the following analysis exam-
ines only the richer Anglo-Saxon data.
Two assessment reports by different authors have
been drawn upon: Fryer and Murphy (1999) analysed
samples from the 1998 excavations, which covered
Areas A to H (evaluation stage), and Ballantyne (2000a
and b) analysed samples from all later phases of exca-
vation, covering Areas H (full excavation stage) to O. A
number of extra samples from the later phases of excava-
tion have been studied during the writing of this report,
but no further examination of the 1998 assemblage has
taken place.
Taxon Element 2207 3206 3274 3469 4600 4642 4719 Total
Ray family Mineralised - 1 - - - - - 1
vertebral centrum
Eel Parasphenoid 1 - - - - 1 - 2
Abdominal 2 - - - - - - 2
vertebra
Caudal vertebra 1 - - - - 2 - 3
Vertebra - - - - - - 1 1
Herring Abdominal - - - - - - 2 2
vertebra
Caudal vertebra - - - - - 2 - 2
Smelt Abdominal - - - - - 9 - 9
vertebra
Caudal vertebra - - - - - 1 - 1
Cod Abdominal - - - - - 1 - 1
vertebra 3
Caudal vertebra 1 - - - - - 1 - 1
Atlantic horse Caudal vertebra - - - 1 - - - 1
mackerel
Atlantic Caudal vertebra - - - 1 - - - 1
mackerel
Plaice or Caudal vertebra 1 - - - - 2 - 3
flounder
Halibut family Cleithrum - - - - - 1 - 1
Maxilla - - - - - 1 - 1
Opercular - - - - - 1 - 1
Abdominal - - - - - 1 1 2
vertebra
Caudal vertebra - - - - - 3 1 4
First vertebra - - - - - 1 - 1
Vertebra - - - - - 1 - 1
1st anal - - - - - 1 - 1
pterygiophore
Carp family Caudal vertebra 2 - - - - - - 2
Total diagnostic 7 1 - 2 - 29 5 44
Unidentified 1 1 3 140 145
fish
Total fish 8 1 1 2 3 169 5 189

Table 5.37 Number of identified specimens and element representation

Clear differences in the ‘richness’ of the two result sets

Size Taxon 2207 4642 are apparent (Table 5.39) and are addressed within the
QC1 and 4 elements discussion section of this report. It has been established
151–300mm Eel 1 - that the differences are partly due to the 1998 targeting
Halibut - 4 of ‘richer’ contexts, and to different recording practices.
family However, the SFB and pit fills from Area E are richer in
Crushed QC2 elements charred plant remains than those in other areas, and this
151–300mm Eel 2 -
seems to be an archaeological pattern, rather than a by-
product of the different specialists’ analyses.
Plaice or 1 -
flounder
Methodology
All samples were processed by hand using bucket flota-
Table 5.38 Estimated fish total length (based on tion. The flots were collected with a 500µm sieve, and the
comparison with reference specimens of known length) heavy residues washed over 1mm mesh. Both flots and
residues were dried prior to sorting under a low-power
(x6–x40) binocular microscope. Full results may be found
within the site archive. Tabulated records of the richer
contexts are presented in Tables 5.40 and 5.43, while
other results are listed by frequency (defined below). All
plant nomenclature follows Stace (1997).

306
139
 The majority of flots were scanned, rather than
fully quantified, due to the very low amounts of plant
macrofossils present: usually only one or two items in
each context. As a result, the following analysis has been
based on the frequency with which taxa occur (number of
different samples) rather than their overall quantity (total
count), which is less reliable as an indicator when there
is such a low incidence of material.
Formation processes and preservation
As previously noted, poorly preserved charred plant
macrofossils exist in very low numbers within most
samples. Cereal grains are frequent, but are often
deformed and pitted from intense charring conditions (cf.
Boardman and Jones 1990). Furthermore, the sandy soil
has abraded the surface of these grains, making identi-
fication beyond genus very rare (e.g. to type of wheat
or barley). In contrast, wood charcoal is ubiquitous and
frequently in good condition, if fragmented, particularly
within Surface Deposit F1 and the SFBs.
The limited plant macrofossil assemblage is char-
acteristic of Anglo-Saxon settlements upon the sandy
soils of East Anglia; West Stow (Murphy 1985) and
Kilverstone (Ballantyne 2006), particularly, are similar
to Bloodmoor Hill. However, abrasive sandy soils cannot
account entirely for the poor preservation noted here,
for two reasons. Firstly, richer contexts do occasionally
survive, as discussed below for Structure 39. Secondly,
at Kilverstone many Roman contexts exhibited better
preservation than Anglo-Saxon ones, both in quality and
quantity of charred macrofossils. Such patterns suggest
that the Anglo-Saxon patterning of daily activities (and
thus context formation) at these settlements may have not
favoured the archaeological preservation of charred plant
remains.
Results
Wall-post structures
Wall-post Structure 39 in Area H was extensively sampled after on-site
flotation revealed quantities of charred grain to be present. In total, 179
litres from fifteen post-hole fills were collected (thirteen in F508, and
two in F511). Of these, three have provided good charred remains (fills
[4519], [4520] and [4529]; see Table 5.40).
There are significant differences in composition between the three
richer post-holes. Within [4519] all the identified grain is of rye (Secale
cereale), which is confirmed by three rye chaff fragments (rachis
internodes). The only other crop present is a hulled wheat (Triticum
spelta/dicoccum), represented by one chaff fragment (a glume base).
In contrast, [4520] contains numerous barley grains which, from one
hulled, twisted grain, are probably of the six-row hulled type Hordeum
vulgare L. There are a small number of rye and indeterminate grains,
and chaff is absent.
The post-holes [4519] and [4520] (Fig. 5.7) lie 3.5m apart, on the
same side of the structure. The third grain-rich post-hole, [4529], lies
directly in between and contains relatively equal quantities of barley
and rye grain. It thus appears that two separate charred sources of grain
are represented, one rich in rye, the other in barley.
Post-hole fills are notoriously difficult to assign to a particular
formation sequence since packing material or slumped surface debris
from rotting/removal of the post may be linked to any recovered
artefacts. However, the spatial separation of the rye- and barley-rich
post-holes, with the more mixed post-hole between, suggests that these
fills do represent slumped accumulations of a surface spread. If so, the
low amounts of chaff suggest that cleaned grain products were charred,
possibly in association with cooking. One Celtic bean (Vicia faba var.
minor), a small type of broad bean, in [4520] also suggests cooking.
Other sampled post-holes in Structure 39 and the adjacent
Structure 40 are either empty, or contain one or two grains, usually
of barley. In several cases the barley grains had germinated before
charring, as had a small number of grains in both [4520] and [4529],
and this tentatively links the source material of the post-holes. Although
germinated barley may sometimes indicate malting, the very low
quantities present cannot address this.
A small number of samples were collected from two post-holes
from Structure 44 and a single post-hole in Structure 45. A low amount
of grain of no clear significance was recovered.

Year of excavation 1998 1999 2000 2001 Total

Area A B C D E F H H J K M N O
No. samples 30 18 8 17 16 2 2 66 9 27 6 1 5 207
No. contexts 29 17 8 17 14 2 2 54 6 17 6 1 4 177
Total volume of soil/ 362 189 80 273 217 26 23 795 104 376 65 6 55 2571
litres
Actual volume studied/ 232 146 41.5 120 109.25 11.5 23 795 104 376 65 6 55 2084.3
litres
No. samples ‘empty’ 8 5 2 2 - - - 26 8 15 6 1 3 76
No. samples with 1–2 - - - - - - - 19 1 9 - - 1 30
items
No. samples with <10 15 12 5 9 10 2 2 14 - 2 - - 1 72
items
No. samples with 10–50 7 1 1 6 6 - - 4 - 1 - - - 26
items
No. samples with >50 - - - - - - - 3 - - - - - 3
items
Samples from SFBs 12 5 2 10 8 1 2 16 2 16 1 - 4 79
Samples from pits 8 9 4 4 7 1 - 19 3 11 4 1 1 72
Samples from post-holes 5 2 - 1 - - - 15 1 - - - - 24
Samples from SD F1 2 - - - - - - 12 - - - - - 14
Other samples 3 2 2 2 1 - - 4 3 - 1 - - 18
(layer/trackway spread)

Table 5.39 Summary of bulk sampled Anglo-Saxon contexts

307
 Sample number <617> <618> <619> <620> <621> <622> <623> <624> <625> <626> <627> <628> <629> <630> <631>
Context 04519 04520 04529 04538 04541 04547 04545 04551 04552 04553 04555 04556 04534 04570 4568
Feature F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F511 F511
Structure 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 40 40
Area H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
Feature type Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole
Flot fraction examined 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Sample volume/litres 30 40 20 4 9 2 10 3 7 10 10 10 10 4 10
Hulled, twisted 6-row hulled - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Hordeum sp. grain barley grain
Hulled Hordeum sp. Hulled barley - 12 (2 6 (1germ) - - - - - - 1 germ - - 1 germ - -
grain grain germ)
Hordeum sp. grain Barley grain - 30 6 - - - - - - - 1 1 1 - -
Triticum aestivum sensu Free-thresh- - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - -
lato grain ing wheat
grain
Triticum/Hordeum sp. Wheat/barley - 3 2 - - - - - - - - - - - -
grain grain
Secale cereale grain Rye grain 21 8 4 1 - - - - - - - - - - -
Secale cereale /Triticum Rye/wheat 4 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

308
144
sp. grain grain
Cereal grain indet. 2 10 2 1 - - - - - 2 - - - 1 -
Cereal tail grain indet. 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Triticum Spelt/emmer 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
spelta/dicoccum glume chaff
base
Secale cereale rachis Rye chaff 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
internode
Avena sp. awn fragment Oat chaff 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Cereal indet. culm node Cereal straw 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Phragmites sp. culm Reed stem 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
node
Corylus avellana Hazelnut 1 - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - -
nutshell
Atriplex Common/ - - - 2 - - - - - - - - - - -
patula/prostrata spear-leaved
orache
Stellaria sp. Stitchwort - 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Persicaria maculosa Redshank - 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Gray
 Sample number <617> <618> <619> <620> <621> <622> <623> <624> <625> <626> <627> <628> <629> <630> <631>
Context 04519 04520 04529 04538 04541 04547 04545 04551 04552 04553 04555 04556 04534 04570 4568
Feature F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F508 F511 F511
Structure 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 40 40
Area H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
Feature type Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole Post-hole
Flot fraction examined 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Fallopia Convolvulus Black 2 6 2 - - - 1 - - - - - 1 - -
(L.) Á Löve bindweed
Rumex acetosella Sheep’s sorrel 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rumex Small-seeded - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - -
sanguineus/conglome- dock
ratus/obtusifolius
Vicia faba var. minor Celtic bean - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Small Vicia/Lathyrus sp. Vetch/wild 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
pea
Poa sp. Meadow- - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
grass
Avena sp. Cultiv./wild - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
oat

309 147
Avena fatua type floret Wild oat - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
base chaff
Bromus spp. Brome 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Poaceae indet. culm Grass stem - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
fragment
Nutshell indet. 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Small kernel indet. 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Large charcoal (>4mm) + + + * ++ ++ + * + + ++ + + - -
Med. charcoal (2–4mm) +++ ++ ++ ++ +++ +++ ++ + ++ +++ +++ ++ +++ * *
Small charcoal (<2mm) +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ ++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ ++ ++
Vitreous charcoal - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Concretion fragments + - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Spheroid + + - * - * - * - * + - * - -
Hammerscale * - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bone fragments + burnt - ++ - - - - - - - - - - - -
Burnt bone fragments - - + - - - - - - - - - - - -
Small bone - - - - - - - - - - - - - * -

* – 1 or 2 items; + – less than 10 items; ++ – 10–50 items; +++ – more than 50 items; ‘germ’ – germinated

Table 5.40 Charred plant remains within post-built Structures 39 and 40

Surface Deposit F1 SFBs
Fourteen bulk samples were collected, representing contexts [107], The seventy-seven samples, totalling 1138 litres, comprise the most
[2390], [4041] (two spits), [4055] (two spits), [4096] (two spits), extensively sampled feature type from the excavations. Many SFBs had
[4098] (three spits) and [4219] (three spits). A summary of the results is pairs of samples collected from opposing quadrants of fill (e.g. north-
displayed within Table 5.41. east and south-west), but this has not revealed any spatial patterning.
All the samples contained moderate to large amounts of charcoal, Most samples contain few charred plant remains, although, as in Surface
often with numerous uncharred bone fragments — a clear indication of Deposit F1, charcoal and uncharred bone fragments are numerous. It
the mixture of deposited material. Where plant macrofossils are present seems likely that the macrofossils within the SFB fills may represent
in a sample, there are no more than one or two items for any taxon. As debris from the same activities represented in Surface Deposit F1. The
can be seen from Table 5.41, cereal grains and hazelnut shell are most results are summarised by area and taxon frequency in Table 5.42.
frequent. Although such items suggest debris from food preparation, As with the surface deposit, the most frequently charred items are
the quantity and quality of charred plants is so poor that it may be their cereal grains (barley, wheat and rye) and hazelnut shells. The range of
archaeological durability, compared to other seeds and cereal chaff, taxa is much broader than in the surface deposit contexts and cereal
which caused them to predominate. chaff is also present, indicating slightly better preservation, or charred
plants from sources additional to those in F1. The economic plants
include fragments of a wild apple in [4867], Structure 32, and five to
No. samples 14 ten concreted flax seeds in [4588], Structure 10. The remaining wild
plants are generally characteristic of disturbed soils, and probably
Total soil volume/litres 200 represent weeds of the cereal crop (discussed later).
Hulled Hordeum sp. grain Hulled barley grain 1
Pits
Hordeum sp. grain Barley grain 3
Overall, the results from seventy-seven pit features have been extremely
Triticum aestivum sensu lato Free-threshing wheat 5 varied, with many containing either just a few charred macrofossils,
grain grain or none at all. As a result, no clear patterning has emerged across the
Triticum sp. grain Wheat grain 1 excavation areas, or in terms of different pit ‘types’. Many pit fills,
although recorded as charcoal-rich during excavation, do not include
Triticum/Hordeum sp. grain Wheat/barley grain 1 charred cereals or seeds. The four ‘richer’ pits are discussed below and
Secale cereale grain Rye grain 1 summarised in Table 5.43.
Pit F368 in Area D is exceptional for its abundant charred cereal
Cereal grain indet. Cereal grain 6
chaff. No other context studied at the settlement clearly has chaff
Corylus avellana L. Hazelnut shell 4 outnumbering grain. The major taxa present are barley and free-
Chenopodium album L. Fat-hen 1 threshing wheat. There is a possibility that rye chaff is also present,
but this was not determined during scanning (Fryer and Murphy 1999).
Rumex sp. Dock 1 Given that only 10% of the flot was examined, it is clear that this context
Bromus spp. Brome grass 1 is extremely rich in cereal chaff and represents a crop-processing by-
product. The chaff may have been waste, or was used as a resource in
Small Poaceae indet. Small-seeded grass 1 its own right.
Pit F315 in Pit Group K and Pit F374 in Pit Group L are less chaff-
rich than Pit F368, but still contain a range of chaff items. The number
Table 5.41 Frequency (no. of samples where present) of of taxa is slightly more limited, but includes wheat and rye/barley
charred plants in Surface Deposit F1 types.

Figure 5.7 Plan of post-built Structures 39 and 40, showing the sampled post-holes, and those with richer botanical
remains

310
 Year of excavation 1998 1999 2000 2001 Total
No. samples 12 5 2 10 6 number of
1 2 16 2 16 1 4
samples
No. contexts 11 5 2 10 4 1 2 11 1 5 1 3 with taxon
No. SFBs 6 3 2 6 3 1 2 3 1 3 1 1
Area A B C D E F H H J K M O
Total soil volume collected (litres) 188 72 24 149 100 20 23 205 20 278 12 47
Actual volume examined (litres) 118 54 8.5 66.3 50 10 23 205 20 278 12 47
Cereals
Hulled, twisted 6-row hulled barley - - - - - - - 2 - - - - 2
Hordeum sp. grain
Hulled Hordeum sp. Hulled barley grain 3 1 4
grain
Hordeum sp. (grains) Barley grain 4 1 - - 2 - - 2 - 7 - - 16
Triticum Spelt/emmer wheat - - - - - - - 1 - - - - 1
spelta/dicoccum grain grain
Triticum aestivum sensu Free-threshing wheat - - - - - - - 5 - - - - 5
lato grain grain
Triticum sp. Wheat grain 3 1 - - 2 - - 2 - - - - 8
Triticum/Hordeum sp. Wheat/barley grain 1 2 3
grain

311
149
Secale cereale L. Rye grain 1 1 - 1 1 - - 2 - 2 - - 8
Secale cereale /Triticum Rye/wheat grain - - - - - - - 1 - 2 - - 3
sp. grain
Cereal indet. 6 2 1 6 4 1 2 6 - 5 - - 33
T. aestivum/compactum Breadwheat chaff - - - - 1 - - 1 - - - - 2
type internodes
T. spelta L. glume base Spelt wheat chaff - 1 - - - - - - - - - - 1
Secale cereale/Hordeum Rye/barley chaff 1 1 - 1 2 - - - - - - - 5
sp. internodes
Non-cereals
Ranunculus Buttercup - - - - - - - - - 1 - - 1
acris/bulbosus/repens
Ranunculus c.f. Lesser spearwort - - - - - - - 1 - - - - 1
flammula
Corylus avellana L. Hazelnut 3 - - 4 5 1 - 3 - - - 1 17
Chenopodium album L. Fat-hen - - - 1 1 - - 1 - - - - 3
Atriplex sp. Orache 1 - - - - - - - - - - - 1
Chenopodiaceae indet. Goosefoot Family 1 - - - 1 - - - - - - - 2
Silene sp. Campion - - - - - 1 - - - - - - 1
 Year of excavation 1998 1999 2000 2001 Total
No. samples 12 5 2 10 6 number of
1 2 16 2 16 1 4
samples
No. contexts 11 5 2 10 4 1 2 11 1 5 1 3 with taxon
No. SFBs 6 3 2 6 3 1 2 3 1 3 1 1
Area A B C D E F H H J K M O
Total soil volume collected (litres) 188 72 24 149 100 20 23 205 20 278 12 47
Actual volume examined (litres) 118 54 8.5 66.3 50 10 23 205 20 278 12 47
Stellaria sp. Stitchwort 1 1
Persicaria maculosa Redshank - - - 1 - - - - - 1 - - 2
Gray
Fallopia convolvulus Bindweed 2 - - - 2 - - - - 2 - - 6
(L.) Á Löve
Rumex acetosella L. Sheep’s sorrel - - - - 1 - - - - - - - 1
Rumex sp. Dock 1 1 - 2 - - - - - 4 - - 8
Rumex/Carex sp. Dock/sedge - - - 1 - - - - - - - - 1
Polygonaceae indet. Dock Family - - - 1 - - - - - - - - 1
Malva sp. Mallow - - - - - - 1 - - - - - 1
Prunus spinosa L. Sloe - - - - 1 - - - - - - - 1
Malus sylvestris. (L.) Wild apple - - - - - - - - - 1 - - 1

312
150
Mill
Vicia/Lathyrus sp. Vetch/wild pea 1 - - - 1 - - - - - - - 2
Fabaceae indet. Pea Family - 1 - - - - - - - - - - 1
Linum usitatissimum L. Cultivated flax - - - - - - - 1 - - - - 1
concreted seeds
Plantago lanceolata L. Ribwort plantain 1 - - - - - - - - - - - 1
Anthemis cotula L. Stinking mayweed - - - 1 - - - - - - - - 1
Eleocharis sp. Spike-rush - - - - 1 - - - - - - - 1
Avena sp. grain Wild/cultivated oat - - - 2 2 - - - - - - - 4
Avena sp. awn Wild/cultivated oat - - - - - - 1 - - - - - 1
chaff
Bromus sp. Brome grass - 1 - 2 1 - - - - - - - 4
Large Poaceae indet. Large-seeded grass - - - 1 1 - - 1 - - - 3
Total number of non-cereal taxa present 7 3 - 11 11 2 2 5 - 5 - 1 -

Table 5.42 Frequency (no. of samples where present) of charred plants in SFBs
 Year 1998 1999
Sample number <534> <551> <552> <646> <647> <649>
Context 3469 3460 3536 04598 04600 04604
Feature F368 F315 F374 F513 F513 F513
Structure Pit Group K Pit Group L
Area D E E H H H
Feature type Pit Pit Pit Pit Pit Pit
Sample volume/ litres 20 10 11 10 10 20
Flot fraction examined 10% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Actual soil volume examined/ litres 2 5 5.5 10 10 20
Hordeum sp. grain Barley grain - + cf + - 5 -
Triticum c.f. dicoccum grain Emmer wheat grain - - - - 3 16 (1 germ)
Triticum spelta/dicoccum grain Spelt/emmer wheat - - - - 10 (1 germ) 5
Triticum sp. grain Wheat grain - - - - - 63
Triticum/Hordeum sp. grain Wheat/barley grain - - - - 11 -
Secale cereale L. grain Rye grain + cf - - - - -
Cereal grain indet. Indeterminate grain + + + - 10 -
Hordeum vulgare sensu lato rachis Barley chaff + cf - - - - -
internode

313
149
Triticum aestivum sensu lato rachis Free-threshing wheat + + - - - -
internode
Triticum sp. rachis internode Wheat chaff + - + - - -
Triticum spelta glume base Spelt wheat chaff - - - - 1 -
Hordeum sp./ Secale cereale rachis Rye/barley chaff ++ + + - - -
internodes
Cereal indet. rachis internode Indeterminate chaff - + + - - -
Corylus avellana L. Hazelnut shell + - + - - -
Chenopodium album L. Fat-hen + + + - - -
Chenopodiaceae indet. Goosefoot Family + - - - - -
Fallopia convolvulus (L.) Á Löve Black bindweed - + + - - -
Rumex acetosella L. Sheep’s sorrel - + - - - -
Rumex Dock + - - - - 1
sanguineus/conglomeratus/obstutifolius
Brassica/Sinapis sp. Cabbage/mustard - - - - - 2
Small trigonous Carex sp. True sedge - - - - 1 -
Avena sp. Wild/cultivated oat - - + cf - - -
Avena/Bromus sp. Oat/brome grass - - - - - 8
 Year 1998 1999
Sample number <534> <551> <552> <646> <647> <649>
Context 3469 3460 3536 04598 04600 04604
Feature F368 F315 F374 F513 F513 F513
Structure Pit Group K Pit Group L
Area D E E H H H
Feature type Pit Pit Pit Pit Pit Pit
Sample volume/ litres 20 10 11 10 10 20
Flot fraction examined 10% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Actual soil volume examined/ litres 2 5 5.5 10 10 20
Bromus spp. Brome grass - - + cf - 2 3
Small kernel indet. Seed kernel - + - - 1
Rhizome fragment Underground stem - - - - 1 -
Med. charcoal (>2mm) ++ +++ ++ ++ +++ +++
Small charcoal (<2mm) +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++
Vitreous charcoal - + - - - -
Concretion fragments + + - - * *
Spheroid + - - - - -

314
150
Slag/fly ash + - - - - -
Bone fragments ++ ++ ++ *burnt - -
Burnt bone fragments + ++ + - - -
Small bone - + - - - -

* – 1 or 2 items; + – less than 10 items; ++ – 10–50 items; +++ – more than 50 items; ‘germ’ – germinated

Table 5.43 Charred plant remains within Pits F315, F368, F374 and F513
 Year 1998 Years 1999–2001
No. samples 93 Number of samples 114
Actual volume of soil examined/ litres 683.3 Actual volume of soil examined/ litres 1401
Cereals Cereals
Cereal indet. grain 48 Cereal indet. grain 29
Triticum sp. grain 21 Hordeum vulgare sensu lato grain 18
Hordeum vulgare sensu lato grain 18 Triticum aestivum sensu lato grain 12
Secale cereale/Hordeum sp. rachis internode 13 Secale cereale grain 11
Secale cereale grain 12 Hulled Hordeum vulgare sensu lato grain 8
T. aestivum sensu lato rachis internode 6 Triticum/Hordeum sp. grain 7
Cereal indet. rachis internode 3 Triticum sp. grain 6
Secale cereale /Triticum sp. grain 5
Hordeum vulgare L. grain 4
Triticum cf. dicoccum grain 3
Non-cereals Non-cereals
Corylus avellana L. nutshell 37 Corylus avellana L. nutshell 11
Rumex sp. 13 Fallopia convolvulus (L.) Á. Löve 6
Fallopia convolvulus (L.) Á. Löve 12 Rumex sp. 4
Avena sp. 11 Bromus spp. 4
Chenopodium album L. 9 Persicaria maculosa Gray 3
Chenopodiaceae indet. 9 Rumex acetosella 3
Large Poaceae indet. 8 Rumex sanguineus/conglomeratus/obstutifolius 3
Bromus spp. 7
Vicia/Lathyrus sp. 6
Polygonaceae indet. 5
Small Poaceae indet. 5
Rumex acetosella L. 3

Table 5.44 Most frequently charred plant taxa (numbers of samples where present)

In contrast, fills [4600] and [4604] of Pit F513 contain numerous
grain, and lack chaff other than one spelt wheat (Triticum spelta) glume
base. A small number of grains are of a barley type, but the remainder
are of wheat. Where preservation is good, the wheat is clearly a hulled
variety, sometimes of emmer (Triticum dicoccum), sometimes either of
spelt or emmer. The role of emmer wheat in Saxon England has been
discussed recently for the Thames valley (Pelling and Robinson 2000)
and Ely (Ballantyne 2005). These two contexts within Pit F513 suggest
that the cereal may have been used at Bloodmoor Hill.
1999–2001 analyses. The apparent lack of cereal chaff
within these later analyses may be ascribed specifically
to the chaff-‘rich’ pits discussed above for Areas D and E
of the 1998 excavations. Greater crop-processing activity
and associated charring may have been undertaken in
these two areas, or preservation conditions may simply
have been better.

Discussion
The distribution of charred plant remains at the settle-
ment provides little evidence for the structuring of past
activities. It may be suggested that much of the surviving
material derives from surface debris, and that only where
incorporation into contexts occurred relatively quickly
(for example, into some pits and post-holes) has preser-
vation been good. In addition, abundant wood charcoal,
including vitrified and concreted items, with occasional
spheroids and fly ash, indicates that many charring events
were intense and may have been more ‘industrial’ in
nature, rather than related to domestic or crop-processing
activities.
Although there are differences in recording between
the two specialist analyses, a similar pattern favouring
grain and hazelnuts is present when the frequency of taxa
in each report is compared (Table 5.44). This suggests
that the ‘richer’ contexts within Areas D and E are due
to greater quantities of material surviving, rather than
the repeated overlooking of particular items during the
Cereal farming
From the limited evidence available it is clear that barley
(probably the hulled six-row Hordeum vulgare L.), a
free-threshing wheat and rye were all of importance at
the settlement. The few accompanying wild taxa are
largely of arable weeds and acidic-loving species such as
sheep’s sorrel (Rumex acetosella) do suggest that at least
some of the cultivation was local. However, many of the
taxa can be found widely in arable crops of this date in
southern Britain. The very few weed taxa present, and the
fact that many are of larger-seeded types such as brome
grasses (Bromus spp.) and black bindweed (Fallopia
convovulus), suggests that the seeds were charred as
contaminants of a cleaned grain product. Large seeds are
difficult to remove by sieving and have to be picked out
by hand. If this was the case, then the predominance of
grain over chaff in most contexts may be real, rather than
due to preservation bias.
Although oats (Avena sp.) are present in a few
contexts, they cannot be identified as wild or cultivated
without accompanying chaff. One floret base in post-

315
151
hole [4520] of Structure 39 was of a wild variety (Avena
fatua type), suggesting that many of the oats are weeds
of the charred cereals, rather than a crop in their own
right. The two contexts of Pit F513 containing hulled
wheat grain (probably emmer) may indicate reuse of this
wheat, which was largely absent from southern Britain
during the Iron Age and Roman periods. However, the
predominance of barley, free-threshing wheat and rye
grain is similar to the remains at West Stow (Murphy
1985) and Kilverstone (Ballantyne 2006) and indicates
a consistent Anglo-Saxon arable strategy upon the East
Anglian sands.
Other plant resources
Few non-cereals are represented, as is often the case
where only preservation by charring exists. Two contexts,
[4588] in Structure 10, and particularly oven/hearth
[2230], contain charred flax seeds. This may represent
use of the seeds for oil, and/or the plant itself for fibre.
The only other identified cultivar is Celtic bean (Vicia
faba var. minor), an early type of broad bean, of which
one example was recovered from post-hole [4520] of
Structure 39.
A number of the charred economic plants are wild,
and indicate that use of the surrounding environment
extended beyond agriculture. Hazelnut shells are the
most frequent of all wild species, and while this may
be linked to their woody, durable composition, their
ubiquity is compelling. A crab apple (Malus sylvestris)
in Structure 32, and a sloe stone (Prunus spinosa) in
Structure 36 provide evidence for fruit consumption,
while reed-type (Phragmites sp.) stem joints in [4519]
of Structure 39, and mineralised in [2520] Pit Group G,
show they were being gathered, probably as a thatching
or strewing material.
Conclusions
Despite being poor in quality and quantity of charred
plant remains, the assemblage does indicate that a
mixture of barley, free-threshing wheat and rye was prob-
ably grown locally. Flax was also used, for its oil and/or
fibre, and Celtic beans were present. Collected wild food
was of importance, as hazelnut shells have frequently
been recovered, as well as single items of crab apple and
sloe. The survival of reeds in two contexts (one charred,
one mineralised) suggests they were used for thatching or
strewing. This assemblage compares well to other Anglo-
Saxon settlements on the East Anglian sands.
Figure 5.8 Illustrations of selected agricultural equipment. All at 1:1
316
V. Associated material culture
(Fig. 5.8)
Items associated with agriculture comprised querns
and a sickle fragment within a scrap metal assemblage
in Structure 14, and nine more or less securely identi-
fied fish-hooks (eight of iron and one of copper alloy),
most of which were found in more typically ‘domestic’
rubbish deposits. A fragment of sickle blade similar to
that found here was found in the north enclosure ditch at
Mucking (Hamerow 1993, 291, fig. 180.7). There is also
a later example from Anglo-Scandinavian Coppergate
(Ottoway 1992, 556, fig. 224), and a similar fragment
from Goltho (Goodall 1987, fig. 156.32). Numerous
fish-hooks were recovered from later 7th- to 8th-century
contexts at Flixborough (Loveluck 2001, 93), and small
barbed fish-hooks were found at Fishergate in York,
where they would have been used in line fishing (Rogers
1993, 1319, fig. 637). Not all the items detailed here may
actually have been fish-hooks; some may have served
other purposes, as the forms represented here are very
simple. If they are fish-hooks, they fall into the smallest
category of hook size (Owen 1994), though this does not
necessarily mean that larger fish could not have been
caught with them.
Fragments of quernstones of different types were
recovered from settlement contexts. The majority (2488
fragments weighing 16,608g) were small, degraded frag-
ments of lava quernstone, the forms of which could not
be reconstructed (not individually catalogued), but they
were presumably all once part of rotary querns. Only
twenty-four fragments had two preserved surfaces; their
thickness ranged from 22mm to 60mm, with the vast
majority being less than 31mm thick. Only one frag-
ment preserved part of the central hole. Presumably these
querns were only discarded when worn too thin to perform
grinding effectively. Their distribution is analysed below
(see Chapter 6). Detailed below are those identifiable
quernstone fragments of other stone (though presumably
much of the unidentifiable worked stone would also have
once formed parts of querns): while the majority are of
medium- or fine-grained sandstones (some possibly
of Millstone Grit), there are also two of Hertfordshire
Puddingstone, one of granite and one of metamorphic
schist (these last two probably imported to the site
from afar, like the lava stone; all identified by Steven
Laurie). Together, these all represent strong evidence for
crop-processing on the site; location and chronological
patterning are explored further in the following chapter.
*423. Sickle fragment, Fe. Blade tip only remains. L: 49mm;
W: 18mm; Th: 5mm.
392 (F41)/6160/Structure 14, SW quad.
424. Fish-hook, Fe. Fine, plain hook, no barb; round-sectioned.
L: 14mm; Diam: 1.1mm.
1100 (F126)/6013/Structure 22.
*425. Probable fish-hook, Fe. Plain; round-sectioned. L: 18mm;
Diam: 1.5mm.
1489 (F134)/9467/Structure 20, SW quad.
426. Possible fish-hook, Fe. Square-sectioned shaft, plain rounded
hook, unbarbed. L: 20mm; Diam: 3.4mm.
1479 (F182)/6318/Surface Deposit F159/F182.
427. Possible fish-hook, Fe. Round-section shaft leading to broken
hook. L: 24mm; Diam: 5.6mm.
1625 (F200)/6058/Structure 19, NE quad, spit 1.
*428. Fish-hook, Fe. Fine, plain hook, no barb; round-sectioned.
L: 25mm; Diam: 2.5mm.
1764 (F212)/6040/Structure 17, SW quad, spit 2.
429. Possible fish-hook, Fe. Square-sectioned shaft, plain rounded
hook, unbarbed; slightly bent. L: 26mm; Diam: 4.6mm.
1850 (F237)/6350/Pit Group G.
*430. Fish-hook, copper alloy (not analysed). Plain hook, round-
sectioned shank. L: 14mm; W: 5mm; Th: 1.4mm.
5115 (F626)/13239/Structure 24, NW quad.
*431. Fish-hook, Fe. Fine plain hook. L: 18mm; Diam: 1.5mm.
3268 (F333)/6194/Structure 35, SW quad.
*432. Fish-hook, Fe. Round-section shaft with pointed top; simple
rounded hook, tip broken. L: 21mm; Diam: 1.2mm.
3139 (F334)/6471/Anglo-Saxon pit.
433. Quernstone fragment, fine sandstone, burnt. L: 51mm;
W: 38mm; Th: 43mm; Wt: 94g.
294 (F19)/4671/Structure 4, SW quad.
434. Quernstone fragment, granite, very weathered (Scotland/
Scandinavian/erratic in origin). L: 165mm; W: 113mm;
Th: 50mm; Wt: 1454g.
205 (F5)/4517/Structure 12, NW quad.
435. Quernstone fragment, metamorphic schist (Scotland/
Scandinavian origin). L: 245mm; W: 129mm; Th: 73mm;
Wt: 3250g.
205 (F5)/4558/Structure 12.
436. Quernstone fragment, medium sandstone. L: 46mm;
W: 40mm; Th: 21mm; Wt: 65g.
1764 (F212)/4324/Structure 17, NE quad.
437. Quernstone fragment, fine sandstone, possibly burnt.
L: 58mm; W: 52mm; Th: 25mm; Wt: 130g.
1100 (F126)/4122/Structure 22, NW quad.
438. Quernstone fragment, fine sandstone. L: 133mm; W: 72mm;
Th: 85mm; Wt: 1327g.
2492 (F335)/5492/Structure 25, SW quad.
439. Quernstone fragment, porous sandstone (probably Millstone
Grit). L 400mm; W: 300mm Th: 30mm; Wt: 5000g.
3340 (F343)/7693/Structure 31.
440. Quernstone fragments, medium sandstone (possibly North
Midlands millstone grit). L: 74mm; W: 68mm; Th: 33mm and
L: 95mm; W: 52mm; Th: 23mm; combined Wt: 429g.
3536 (F374)/7948/Pit Group L.
441. Quernstone fragment, fine sandstone. Approximately 50% of
the quern survives, of radius 200mm, central hole Diam: 55mm.
L: 360mm; W: 190mm; Th: 65mm.
4035 (F1)/10672/Surface Deposit F1.
442. Quernstone fragment, medium sandstone (possibly Millstone
Grit). L: 42mm; W: 39mm; Th: 23mm; Wt: 55g.
2231 (F256)/2430/Grave 25.
443. Quernstone fragment, Hertfordshire puddingstone. Semi-
spherical, central hole Diam: 63mm. L: 140mm; W: 147mm;
Th: 132mm; Wt: 4000g.
0001/8205/Subsoil.
444. Quernstone fragment, Hertfordshire puddingstone. Semi-
spherical, central hole Diam: 50mm (min). L: 230mm;
W: 141mm; Th: 120mm; Wt: 5000g.
6221/14096/Unstratified.
317
VI. Stable isotope analysis of human and
faunal remains
by T. C. O’Connell and A. Lawler
(Figs 5.9–5.11)
Carbon and nitrogen stable isotopic analyses were carried
out on the human remains excavated from the cemetery
of Bloodmoor Hill (see Chapter 7) to gain information on
the dietary habits of this population, and thus contribute
to our knowledge of daily life in Anglo-Saxon Britain.
The poor preservational condition of human bone
at Bloodmoor Hill has hindered analytical potential to
some degree, since ageing and sexing of the skeletons
were difficult. From the twenty-eight graves identified
in total (one of which has been interpreted as a double
inhumation), only seventeen bone samples were taken
(both sample CC2 and CC3 were taken from the skeleton
found in Grave 3). Fifteen of the graves in the main group
contained sufficient surviving bone for provisional ageing
and eight for sexing. Both sexes and a range of ages from
infant to mature adult were represented. As at Berinsfield
(Privat et al. 2002), faunal samples were also taken to
provide a baseline against which the human results could
be compared. Among the sample of twenty specimens,
a variety of mammalian species are included, as well as
one bird, Gallus gallus, or domesticated chicken.
Stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes and their
relation to diet
The use of stable isotopes for dietary analysis has been
applied to studies of human and animal subsistence
in various geographic locations and prehistoric time
periods. The foundation of isotopic research is based on
the principle that ‘you are what you eat’ — that is, the
various tissues in an animal’s body are derived from its
dietary intake. Laboratory experiments have shown that
the composition of an animal’s body protein primarily
reflects that animal’s dietary protein intake (Ambrose
1993; 2000), with bone collagen reflecting the average
isotopic composition of an individual’s dietary protein
intake over a period of years (Stenhouse and Baxter,
1979). Carbon stable isotope analysis is generally used to
reveal information about the ecological foundation of an
individual’s diet — for example, marine versus terrestrial
ecosystems or C3 versus C4 ecosystems. Nitrogen stable
isotopes reflect the position of an individual in the food
chain, since body tissues show a ≈3–4‰ enrichment in
δ15N relative to diet. Nitrogen isotope ratios can also be
used to identify the consumption of aquatic (marine and
freshwater) foods, since the nitrogen isotope values of
most aquatic animals exhibit significantly enriched δ15N
values relative to terrestrial animals — a phenomenon
that is probably due to the considerably longer length of
aquatic food chains relative to land-based food chains.
Although various protein sources can be differentiated
using stable isotopic analysis, it is impossible to distin-
guish between dietary protein sources derived from the
same animal (e.g. cow meat and milk); nor is it possible
to assess the quality of the protein consumed, since all
secondary products derived from an animal have the
same isotopic profile as the meat of that same animal
(O’Connell and Hedges 1999; Minagawa 1992).
Materials and methods
Bone sampling
Human and animal bones were obtained from the
Cambridge Archaeological Unit. For humans, where
available and appropriate, the femoral shaft, preferably
the right, was sampled from each individual. If neither
femur was present then the humerus shaft was sampled.
A small piece of bone was removed from each individual
selected for analysis, preferably from the back of the
shaft or a broken edge. Faunal samples were identified to
species by Chris Swaysland, and samples selected so as to
ensure that different individuals were sampled from bags
of similar contexts. As many different species as possible
were sampled in an attempt to get a representative spread
of possible food sources, and those analysed were: bos,
sus domesticus, ovis and one sample of Gallus gallus.
Materials and methods for collagen isotope analysis
Collagen was extracted from the samples following
the method described in Privat et al. (2002). Pieces of
bone approximately 0.5–1.0g in weight were obtained
from each individual sample using a diamond-edged
drill wheel, which was cleaned before each sample was
taken. The surfaces of the bone pieces were then cleaned
by shot blasting and demineralised in 0.5 M aq. HCl at
4°C until all mineral had dissolved (3–6 days). Samples
were rinsed with distilled water and then gelatinised in
acidic solution (pH 3) at 75–83°C for forty-eight hours.
The liquid fraction containing the gelatinised protein was
frozen and lyophilised to produce the final ‘collagen’
product. Approximate 0.8mg portions of this ‘collagen’
were used for each analysis. Samples were run in tripli-
cate, and analyses were performed using an automated
elemental analyser coupled in continuous-flow mode to
an isotope-ratio-monitoring mass-spectrometer (Costech
elemental analyser coupled to a Finnigan MAT253 mass
spectrometer). Stable isotope concentrations are meas-
ured as the ratio of the heavier isotope to the lighter
isotope relative to an internationally defined scale:
VPDB for carbon, and AIR for nitrogen (Hoefs 1997).
Isotopic results are reported as δ values (δ13C and δ15N)
in parts per 1000 or ‘permil’ (‰) values, where δ15NAIR
= [(15/14Nsample / 15/14NAIR) - 1] × 1000. Based on replicate
analyses of international and laboratory standards, meas-
urement errors are less than ±0.2‰ for δ13C and δ15N.
The isotopic standards used are: IAEA standards of
ammonium sulphate and potassium nitrate for nitrogen;
oxalic acid for carbon. The in-house laboratory standards
of nylon and alanine are used for carbon, nitrogen and
atomic C/N ratios.
Results and discussion
Sample preservation
The isotopic results of all human and faunal samples,
together with relevant contextual detail, are shown in
Table 5.45. All samples were analysed in triplicate. Two
samples failed at the extraction stage (one of sus, one
of ovis), and are not considered further. The atomic C/N
ratios calculated for all of the samples in this study were
all within the 2.9–3.4 range considered to be indicative
of excellent collagen preservation (Ambrose 1990). A
‘collagen’ yield of about 5% (by mass) from the initial
bone sample indicates good sample preservation, while
318
samples that are less than 1% of the initial bone mass
should not be considered as valid (Ambrose 1993). All
of the sample measurements used in this study exhibited
a mass per cent yield of greater than 5%, well above the
desired minimum. Modern collagen contains approxi-
mately 40% carbon and 16% nitrogen. Well-preserved
archaeological samples should produce carbon yields of
>13% and nitrogen yields of >4.8% (Ambrose 1990), and
all of the carbon and nitrogen percentage yields obtained
during mass spectrometry surpass these figures. This,
combined with the results obtained from the calculations
of mass percentage yield of collagen and the calcula-
tions of C/N ratios suggests that the collagen is well
preserved.
Isotope data
Fauna
Results from both humans and fauna are shown in
Fig. 5.9. The δ13C values of all faunal bones tested ranged
from -23.1‰ to -20·3‰, within the range expected for
animals in a temperate terrestrial C3 ecosystem typical
of north-west Europe (Katzenberg and Krouse 1989).
The herbivore (bos and ovicaprid) bones yielded δ15N
values of +1·4‰ to +6.7‰. Although pigs are sometimes
considered omnivores, the pig samples cluster with the
other herbivores, although to the higher end of the carbon
isotope scale. This suggests that the pigs were not kept in
a domestic setting where they would be fed household
waste. Hagen reports the herding of pigs in woodland
areas as common practice in Anglo-Saxon Britain
(Hagen 1995), and the isotopic values observed here are
concomitant with this suggestion.
The bovid, ovicaprid and sus samples all show a
fairly wide range in carbon and nitrogen isotopic values:
in particular, the nitrogen isotopic values range about
3‰. These spreads of both carbon and nitrogen isotopic
values are the results of one or two outliers in each case
(bos CC23 and CC27, ovis CC35, sus CC28). There is
no obvious explanation for this result. It could be natural
variation, or potentially due to trade and exchange. These
animals may have been brought from an area with totally
different landscape conditions, which resulted in a differ-
ence in dietary isotopic values for these individuals. This
explanation is in a similar vein to the interpretation by
Privat et al. (2002) of particularly low carbon and nitrogen
isotopic results from horse bones found at Berinsfield.
The single sample of chicken (Gallus gallus) analysed
is very interesting, as it is very enriched in δ15N relative
to the herbivore samples (+10·3‰), clustering with the
humans in both carbon and nitrogen isotopic values.
Such an elevated nitrogen isotopic value (which we have
checked is not a result of sample confusion or misiden-
tification) most probably reflects the omnivorous diet of
these birds, which is likely to be a result of the chicken
living within the settlement and eating waste food and
scraps. Similar isotopic results have been observed for
other Anglo-Saxon chicken remains (B. D. Hull, pers.
comm.).
Humans
The δ13C of the humans (mean adult δ13C of -20.5±0.2‰,
with a narrow range of -20.9 to -20.0‰) indicates that they
consumed a diet based entirely upon temperate terrestrial
C3 and possibly freshwater resources (Schoeninger and
Grave Lab code Species Sex Age Element Mass % yield Mean  13C Mean  15N Mean C/N ratio
(‰) (‰)
G4 CC1 Homo F? 46+ R arm 3.5 -20.7 10.0 3.39
G3 CC2 Homo M? 19–35 R arm 4.8 -20.5 9.7 3.32
G3 CC3 Homo M? 19–35 L humerus 4.2 -20.5 10.1 3.37
G5 CC4 Homo M? 26–45 L ulna 15.9 -20.4 9.8 3.20
G2 CC5 Homo M? 19–25 R fibula 6.4 -20.3 9.3 3.25
G22 CC6 Homo ? 25–35 L humerus 6.6 -20.8 9.2 3.32
G15 CC7 Homo ? 19–25 L femur 17.2 -20.5 10.0 3.18
G8 CC8 Homo F? 26–35 L leg unident frag 6.4 -20.7 9.2 3.36
G7 CC9 Homo ? 15–45 L femur 2.8 -20.5 10.3 3.42
G11 CC10 Homo ? 13–45 R fibula 10.9 -20.6 10.5 3.23
G6 CC11 Homo ? 13–45 L femur 14.6 -20.0 8.6 3.23
G27 CC12 Homo ? 5–12 ? 2.7 -20.9 8.5 3.51
G28a CC13 Homo M 26–35 R ulna 9.4 -20.5 10.4 3.25
G28b CC14 Homo ? 5–15 R femur 12.2 -20.3 9.7 3.22
G24 CC15 Homo M? 36–45 R humerus 9.7 -20.4 10.1 3.21
G12 CC16 Homo F? 26–35 vertebra, lumbar frag? 9.3 -20.5 10.2 3.27
G25 CC17 Homo F? 19–25 R tibia 10.1 -20.2 8.9 3.23
CC21 Bos Metatarsal 7.1 -21.7 2.9 3.35
CC22 Bos Humerus 5.9 -22.3 3.8 3.29
CC23 Bos Radius 8.4 -22.8 1.4 3.15
CC24 Bos Astragalus 10.8 -22.9 4.2 3.23
CC25 Bos Metatarsal 9.7 -22.3 3.5 3.34
CC26 Bos Metatarsal 10.9 -22.8 4.5 3.34
CC27 Bos Metacarpal 9.8 -23.0 6.5 3.31
CC28 Sus Dom Radius 7.5 -21.5 2.5 2.97
CC29 Sus Dom Ulna 6.3 -22.0 4.1 3.17
CC30 Sus Dom Radius 11.5 -21.4 4.5 3.14
CC31 Sus Dom Scapula 9.8 -21.3 4.7 3.33
CC33 Sus Dom Radius 17.1 -21.4 6.1 3.14
CC35 Ovis Tibia 8.7 -23.1 3.5 3.24
CC36 Ovis Humerus 17.8 -21.7 4.8 3.12
CC37 Ovis Scapula 23.2 -21.8 6.7 3.11
CC38 Ovis Humerus 17.2 -21.3 5.8 3.12
CC39 Ovis Tibia 8.3 -22.0 5.6 3.11
CC40 Gallus gallus Humerus 19.5 -20.4 10.3 3.14

Table 5.45 Human and faunal isotopic results

DeNiro 1984; Katzenberg and Krouse 1989). The differ-
ence in δ13C between the fauna and humans (0.5‰) is
typical of the observed carbon trophic level effect, and
indicates no significant consumption of marine foods
(δ13C of approximately -14‰ to -10‰: Richards and
Hedges 1999) among the individuals tested.
The δ15N values covered a range of ~2.0‰, from
+8.5 to +10.5‰, indicating a reasonably homogenous
dietary intake, at least isotopically. All adult human
δ15N values were enriched by at least 2.5‰ relative to
the herbivore δ15N values, indicating that all consumed a
significant amount of animal protein on a regular basis.
As discussed earlier, the nature of the animal protein
(i.e. meat of secondary animal products such as milk and
cheese) consumed cannot be distinguished in the isotopic
signal. Individuals who consume meat and those who
are ovo-lacto vegetarians both have similar δ15N values
(O’Connell and Hedges 1999), as all secondary products
derived from an animal have the same isotopic profile as
the meat of that animal.
The large difference of +5‰ between the mean
nitrogen isotopic values of fauna and humans indicates
that protein other than that from herbivores must have
been consumed regularly. The high δ15N of the chicken
sample provides strong evidence for domestic fowl as
such a source, although more bird samples should be
isotopically analysed to provide stronger evidence for
this idea. Another likely candidate is freshwater fish, as
substantial numbers of fish bones were found during the
excavation, and freshwater fish typically have similar
carbon isotopic values but higher nitrogen isotopic values
relative to C3 terrestrial herbivores (Dufour et al. 1999).
Unfortunately, none of the fish samples was large enough
for isotopic analysis, and without actual fish isotopic
values we cannot say more than that this is a strong prob-
ability.

319
152
 Figure 5.9 Carbon and nitrogen isotopic values of faunal and human samples
Figure 5.10 Comparison of carbon and nitrogen
isotopic values of males, females and unsexed humans
We conclude that the diet of the residents of Bloodmoor
Hill comprised protein from herbivores (potentially as
both meat and dairy products), domestic fowl and, prob-
ably, freshwater fish.
Bone preservation at the site at the site was poor,
but ten of the seventeen samples could be osteologically
sexed. Examining isotopic values by sex (Fig. 5.10) does
not show any obvious patterns. The four females have a
wider range of carbon and nitrogen isotopic values than
the six males. However, this observation is of limited
value owing to the even greater distribution of the seven
unsexed individuals in comparison.
320
The wider context: comparisons with Berinsfield and
Butler’s Field
The results from Bloodmoor Hill can be compared with
two previous isotopic studies of Anglo-Saxon cemeteries:
Berinsfield (Oxon) and Butler’s Field (Glos: Privat et al.
2002; O’Connell and Wilson forthcoming). Individuals
from both cemeteries showed similar carbon isotopic
values to those from Bloodmoor Hill, suggesting a
similar reliance on C3 crops at the base of the food chain,
and little contribution from marine resources. However,
the Bloodmoor Hill carbon isotopic values are slightly
but significantly different to those of the two Oxfordshire
sites (one-way ANOVA, F(2233)=22.370, p<0.001;
post-hoc pair-wise Bonferroni correction significant at
the 0.05 level against both Berinsfield and Butler’s Field)
(Fig. 5.11). Such an offset is possibly due to environ-
mental differences between the areas (Van Klinken et al.
2000), rather than to dietary differences, since the fauna
analysed from Bloodmoor Hill are also slightly lower in
carbon isotopic values relative to those analysed from
Berinsfield (Privat et al. 2002).
Both Berinsfield and Butler’s Field showed a wider
spread of nitrogen isotopic values than Bloodmoor Hill.
Individuals from Berinsfield had a range of 4.4‰ in
nitrogen isotopic values within the large population of
118 individuals, with dietary variation correlating with
status and/or wealth (based on correlation between δ15N
and grave-goods). Butler’s Field also showed a large
spread in nitrogen isotopic values within the 127 indi-
viduals analysed (3.5‰), but no patterning with wealth.
Individuals from Bloodmoor Hill show the tightest
clustering of nitrogen isotopic values (range of 2‰),
most probably as a result of greater dietary homogeneity
within a smaller community, but it may also possibly be
an effect of the smaller sample size.
Similarly to Bloodmoor Hill, no significant isotopic
differences between males and females were observed
at either Berinsfield and Butler’s Field. This leads us to
conclude that gender-based dietary differences were not
 Figure 5.11 Comparison of mean human carbon and nitrogen isotopic values from Bloodmoor Hill, Berinsfield
and Butler’s Field
large in Anglo-Saxon populations, although one must
emphasise that isotopic values indicate the protein source
(animal, plant, etc.) and cannot distinguish between
primary and secondary animal products, nor between
quality of protein (the best cuts as opposed to the less
valued parts).
Conclusions
This brief study has shown that the population at
Bloodmoor Hill consumed a diet based primarily on
terrestrial resources, both from herbivores and omnivo-
rous fowl, with a possible contribution from aquatic foods.
Similar isotopic results have been found at two other
Anglo-Saxon sites in Oxfordshire and Gloucestershire.
No differences with sex were observed.
VII. Discussion
Overall, the economic evidence from Bloodmoor Hill
reflects a complex pattern, with elements both of self-
sufficiency and also of engagement in markets. The
botanical remains are perhaps the most straightfor-
ward, with the pattern of reliance on barley, rye and a
free-threshing wheat that is consistent with other sites
located on the East Anglian sands, such as West Stow
and Kilverstone. There is some evidence that these crops
were being processed on-site (both botanical, and in the
form of quernstone fragments), although whether any
were marketed elsewhere is hard to judge, given the
poor levels of preservation. Other utilised resources were
flax, Celtic beans, crab apples, sloe, hazelnuts and reeds
(presumably the last for thatching or fuel). All of these
were presumably obtained from the immediate area,
rather than from further afield.
Although the fish remains show a wide variety, with
freshwater, migratory and marine species all represented,
these are generally low in number (despite systematic
sampling and sieving across the site which might have
been expected to improve recovery rates), and all species
represented are those which may have been caught, again,
in close proximity to the site. In addition, the presence of
321
a number of fish-hooks suggests that the population may
have been catching the fish themselves, rather than their
being traded in.
The animal bone evidence, however, presents a more
complex picture. Some species representation clearly
suggests self-sufficiency, such as the pigs, which were
presumably being bred nearby, pannaged in the woodland
on the hilltop to the south, and utilised for meat (as pigs
always are). The sheep/goat displays a similar pattern,
with evidence of rearing for mutton, but also some culling
of lambs and some management of the flock for milk and,
especially, wool. Horses, too, appear to have been bred
locally and used primarily for traction (although there is
also some associated butchery, implying a role in food
production). It is the cattle, however, which suggest
a different pattern, firstly in their high representation
within the domestic animals, and also in their mortality
and sex profiles: Higbee (above) suggests a herd which is
being managed primarily for traction and dairying, with
meat production a secondary consideration (evidence of
primary butchery being particularly located around the
surface deposits). This would imply that young males
were being marketed elsewhere. The evidence of selected
cuts of venison implies trade in the other direction.
Overall, the evidence suggests a site whose economic
perspective was more outward-looking than the contem-
porary site at West Stow (animal bone at Mucking was,
unfortunately not well preserved enough for it to be used
as a comparison). While there is obviously a high degree
of self-sufficiency in terms of crops, fishing and some
of the animal species (as also reflected in the isotopic
data), the site also seems to have been engaged in wider
producer and consumer networks. This is in line with
the material culture from the site, which suggests self-
sufficiency in terms of aspects such as textile production,
but specialised production in terms of metalworking (see
Chapters 4 and 6).
The following chapter goes on to examine the phasing
of the site, using archaeological and radiocarbon anal-
yses, before attempting to assess the distributional and
chronological patterning within the activities connected
with the settlement.
 6. Phasing, Analysis and Site Organisation
I. Introduction
The previous chapters have described the structures and
other features constituting both the early Anglo-Saxon
settlement and its Romano-British predecessor, and have
given details of their associated material culture assem-
blages. As has become apparent, this material culture
was not distributed randomly across the site and certain
concentrations, such as the metalworking assemblages
and the textile-associated assemblages, are focused on
particular features and areas. The changing nature of
the Anglo-Saxon settlement through time remains to be
addressed; this was clearly a settlement with more than
one phase, given its dense nature and occasional overlap-
ping structures.
A key aspect of the post-excavation design was the
involvement of English Heritage in a programme of
radiocarbon dating of both the cemetery and carbonised
residues on Anglo-Saxon pottery sherds. Although other
Anglo-Saxon cemeteries have seen radiocarbon dating
(particularly the large corpus of 7th-century burials now
dated in the English Heritage-funded project ‘Anglo-
Saxon England c.570–720: The chronological basis’:
Scull and Bayliss 1999b), this is the first time that the
technique has been applied to an early Anglo-Saxon
settlement. Although early Anglo-Saxon grave-goods are
generally well dated, the most common types of mate-
rial recovered from settlement contexts — loomweights,
lava quernstone, undecorated pottery and animal bones
— tend either to be stylistically undatable or to have very
broad chronological ranges. Moreover, one of the key
characteristics of these settlements is the general lack of
intercutting features: useful stratigraphic relationships
are rare.
While some attempts have been made to establish a
chronology for Anglo-Saxon pottery fabric and types (cf.
Hamerow 1993 and Tipper 2004), establishing whether
any of the differences had a chronological basis was a
key aim of this part of the project. Bloodmoor Hill had
an additional advantage in its wealth of metalwork; this
could be used as a separate strand within the validation
process for the radiocarbon dating, which employed
Bayesian statistical modelling in order to refine its
results. It is these two aspects of the project that have
enabled the phased models below to be presented, and
in turn allowed detailed analysis of the site’s formation
processes and settlement history.
This chapter will first attempt to establish the Anglo-
Saxon settlement phasing, using modelling of radiocarbon
dates obtained from carbonised residues on pottery
sherds, and from the human remains in the cemetery (see
Chapter 7), as well as relative stratigraphy and date ranges
of typologically distinct artefacts. This phasing will then
be used to explore changes in the settlement though time,
both in terms of spatial concentrations of activities and
of how waste material was disposed of: was it placed
directly into pits, or was middening extensively used, for
example? The extensive excavation of the settlement at
Bloodmoor Hill offers an almost unparalleled opportu-
nity to explore early Anglo-Saxon settlement dynamics
322
of foundation, occupation and abandonment. The abso-
lute dating will be reported on first, before moving onto
the site phasing and further discussions.
II. Absolute dating
by P. Marshall, J. Tipper, A. Bayliss, F. G. McCormac,
J. van der Plicht, C. Bronk Ramsey and
N. Beavan-Athfield
Methods
Fifty-nine radiocarbon age determinations have been
obtained on samples of human bone, animal bone and
charred residues on the interior of pottery sherds from
Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville. Samples of human
bone from ten skeletons and from one animal burial
were dated in 2003–4 at the Queen’s University, Belfast,
according to methods outlined in Longin (1971), Pearson
(1984), and McCormac (1992). Carbon and nitrogen
stable isotope measurements on these samples were
carried out at the Rafter Radiocarbon Laboratory, New
Zealand, as described by Beavan Athfield et al. (2001).
Thirty-one samples were processed at the Oxford
Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit at the University of Oxford
by Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) between 2003
and 2005. The samples comprised carbonised residues
adhering to the interior of twenty-seven pottery sherds,
which were prepared as described by Hedges et al. (1989),
and four animal bone samples, which were prepared
using the revised gelatinisation protocol outlined in
Bronk Ramsey et al. (2004a). All samples were converted
to graphite and dated by AMS as described by Bronk
Ramsey et al. (2004b), except for OxA-14004–14008,
which were carbon dioxide and were dated as described
by Bronk Ramsey and Hedges (1997).
Seventeen samples were submitted to the Centre for
Isotope Research of the University of Groningen, The
Netherlands, for Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS)
radiocarbon dating in 2003. The samples — fifteen
carbonised residues on pottery sherds and two animal
bones — were processed according to the procedures set
out in Aerts-Bijma et al. (1997; 2001) and van der Plicht
et al. (2000). All three laboratories mentioned above
maintain continual programmes of quality assurance
procedures, in addition to participation in international
inter-comparisons, which indicate no laboratory offsets
and demonstrate the validity of the precision quoted.
Results
The radiocarbon results are given in Table 6.1, and are
quoted in accordance with the international standard
known as the Trondheim convention (Stuiver and Kra
1986). They are conventional radiocarbon ages (Stuiver
and Polach 1977).
Calibration
The calibrations of the results, relating the radiocarbon
measurements directly to calendar dates, are given in
Table 6.1 and in Fig. 6.1. All have been calculated using

Figure 6.1 Probability distributions of dates from
Bloodmoor Hill. Each distribution represents the
relative probability that an event occurred at a particular
time. These distributions are the result of simple
radiocarbon calibration (Stuiver and Reimer 1993)
323
the calibration curve of Reimer et al. (2004) and the
computer program OxCal (v3.10) (Bronk Ramsey 1995;
1998; 2001). The calibrated date ranges cited in the text
are those for 95% confidence. They are quoted in the
form recommended by Mook (1986), with the end points
rounded outwards to ten years if the error term is greater
than or equal to twenty-five radiocarbon years, or to five
years if it is less. The ranges quoted in italics are posterior
density estimates derived from mathematical modelling
of archaeological problems (see below). The ranges in
plain type in Table 6.1 have been calculated according
to the maximum intercept method (Stuiver and Reimer
1986). All other ranges are derived from the probability
method (Stuiver and Reimer 1993).
Methodological approach
A Bayesian approach has been adopted for the inter-
pretation of the chronology from this site (Buck et al.
1996). Although the simple calibrated dates are accurate
estimates of the dates of the samples, this is usually not
what archaeologists really wish to know. It is the dates of
the archaeological events represented by those samples
which are of interest. In the case of Bloodmoor Hill, it is
the chronology of the use of the settlement/cemetery and
the start of the use of various pottery types that is under
consideration, not just the dates of individual burials or
pottery residues. The dates of this activity can be esti-
mated not only by using the absolute dating information
from the radiocarbon measurements on the samples, but
also by using the stratigraphic relationships between
samples and the relative dating information provided by
ceramic typologies.
Fortunately, methodology is now available which
allows the combination of these different types of infor-
mation to produce realistic estimates of the dates of
archaeological interest. It should be emphasised that the
posterior density estimates produced by this modelling
are not absolute. They are interpretative estimates, which
can and will change as further data become available and
as other researchers choose to model the existing data
from different perspectives.
The technique used is a form of Markov Chain Monte
Carlo sampling, and has been applied using the program
OxCal (v3.10) (http://www.rlaha.ox.ac.uk/), which uses
a mixture of the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm and the
more specific Gibbs sampler (Gilks et al. 1996; Gelfand
and Smith 1990). Details of the algorithms employed by
this program are available from the on-line manual or in
Bronk Ramsey (1995; 1998; 2001). The algorithm used
in the models described below can be derived from the
structures shown in Figs 6.3–6.8.
Objectives and sampling strategy
The radiocarbon programme was designed to achieve the
following objectives:
• To provide overall estimates of the start, end, and
duration of the settlement activity
• To refine the dating of the cemetery and to under-
stand its development
• To date the isolated group of burials to the east of the
site
• To understand the process of filling disused SFBs
• To provide absolute dating for the ceramic typolo-
gies

Figure 6.2 13C and 15N values of bone collagen
from Bloodmoor Hill related to the values expected
for archaeological populations consuming pure C3 and
marine diets (after Mays 1998)
The first stage in sample selection was to iden-
tify short-lived material which was demonstrably not
residual in the context from which it was recovered.
The taphonomic relationship between a sample and its
context is the most hazardous link in this process, since
the mechanisms by which a sample came to be in its
context are a matter of interpretative decision rather than
certain knowledge. All samples consisted of single enti-
ties (Ashmore 1999). Material was selected only where
there was evidence that a sample had been put fresh into
its context. The main category of material meeting these
taphonomic criteria was articulating bone from inhu-
mations and animal disposals. Articulated animal bone
deposits must have been buried with tendons attached
or they would not have remained in articulation, and
so were almost certainly less than six months old when
buried (Mant 1987, 71).
Other submitted samples with a less certain tapho-
nomic origin were charred residues adhering to the inside
of ceramic vessels. Sherds were initially selected from
vessels identified as fresh disposals (i.e. several sherds
from the same vessel, deposited together and probably
directly or very soon after vessel breakage). These were
followed by those that cross-joined with other fragments
from the same context or that were large and unabraded,
suggesting that the residue/sherd had not been exposed to
weathering for a long period of time.
The sampling strategy adopted for the dating of the
cemetery was severely constrained by the degree to
which bone survived in the graves. This was extremely
variable, and all skeletons which produced the c.250g of
bone necessary for high-precision dating were used.
Once suitable samples had been identified, a model
was devised which incorporated the archaeological infor-
mation along with simulated radiocarbon results. The
324
radiocarbon results were simulated using the R_Simulate
function in OxCal, with errors based on the material to
be analysed and the type of measurement required (e.g.
single run AMS/high precision). This was used to deter-
mine the number of samples that should be submitted in
the dating programme.
Stable isotopes
The isotopic measurements from the human bones
(Table 6.1 and Fig. 6.2) suggest a terrestrial-based diet
with a negligible marine input, although the δ15N values
are too enhanced to be explained by the consumption
of terrestrial herbivore protein alone (see O’Connell,
Chapter 5). The C:N ratio suggests that bone preserva-
tion was sufficiently good for us to have confidence in
the accuracy of the radiocarbon determinations (Masters
1987; Tuross et al. 1988).
The samples and sequence
The following section concentrates on describing the
archaeological evidence which has been incorporated
into the chronological models, explaining the reasoning
behind the interpretative choices made in producing the
models presented. These archaeological decisions funda-
mentally underpin the choice of statistical model.
The structural sequence
Direct stratigraphic relationships between structures in the
settlement were for the most part lacking, although where
they did exist and suitable samples could be located these
were preferentially targeted. The majority of the samples
come from stratigraphically ‘isolated’ individual struc-
tures, although within some of these relative sequences
could be exploited by, for example, submitting samples
from basal/upper fills. Samples were thus chosen from
structures across the site in order to obtain an adequate
spatial/temporal spread of datable material from the use
of the settlement, a strategy which relies on the under-
lying assumption of a uniform rate of activity within
the settlement (Buck et al. 1992; i.e. that once activity
starts it continues at approximately the same rate until
it stops).
Structure 9
Structure 9 is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole derivative
SFB. Two samples (carbonised residues) came from the fills of
this structure. From the lower fill ([4618]) came sample 12060AA
(OxA-13727; 1474±29 BP), an apparently fresh disposal (V298;
calcitic-tempered), while sample 12045AC (OxA-13882; 1559±29 BP),
from fresh disposal V178 (biotite-tempered), came from the middle fill
([4616]). The fill sequence was sealed by the Surface Deposit F1.
Structure 10
Sample 11843AA (GrA-25949; 1445±45 BP), a carbonised residue
on a biotite-tempered sherd, came from the upper fill ([4588]) of
Structure 10, which is interpreted as a two-post-hole SFB located in the
central-north part of the site.
Structure 12
Structure 12 is interpreted as the remains of a six-post-hole derivative
SFB located within the central part of the site. Sample 00211AA
(GrA-25923; 1400±35 BP), a carbonised residue from fresh pottery
disposal V7 (quartz-tempered), came from the eastern gable post-hole
fill ([237]). Sample 00182AA (OxA-14004; 1166±38 BP), a carbonised
residue from fresh disposal V165 (organic-tempered), came from the
upper fill ([204]) of the SFB, which stratigraphically overlay the post-
hole from which the first sample came.
Structure 17
Structure 17 is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole SFB.
Three samples (all carbonised residues on pottery sherds) came from
the upper fill [1764] of the SFB: 09528AA (OxA-13708; 1481±26 BP)
from fresh disposal V106 (quartz-tempered); sample 01826AA (GrA-
25935; 1505±40 BP) from fresh disposal V282 (biotite-tempered); and
sample 00425AA (OxA-13728; 1579±29 BP) from a quartz-tempered,
stamped and incised sherd. The three measurements are not statistically
consistent (T’=6.5; ν=2; T’(5%)=6.0; Ward and Wilson 1978).
Structure 18
Structure 18 is interpreted as the remains of a six-post-hole derivative
SFB located in the central part of the site. Sample 08302AA (OxA-
13753; 1501±28 BP), a carbonised residue from a sherd (chaff-tempered)
forming part of fresh pottery disposal V267, came from the lower fill
([1670]) of the SFB.
Structure 24
Structure 24 is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole SFB,
which contained two fills. The lower fill ([5116]) provided three
samples from carbonised residues: 13187AB (OxA-13752; 1502±27
BP) from V99 (quartz-tempered; a probable fresh disposal); 13198AA
(GrA-25927; 1610±40 BP) from fresh disposal V352 (biotite); and
13187AF (OxA-14018; 1635±40 BP) from a biotite-tempered sherd.
The three measurements are not statistically consistent (T’=9.7; ν=2;
T’(5%)=6.0; Ward and Wilson 1978). Two samples, both carbonised
residues, from the upper fill ([5115]) comprised 13141AA (GrA-25950;
1710±50 BP) from fresh disposal V143 (sandstone sand-tempered) and
13153AA (GrA-25926; 1505±40 BP) from an organic-tempered sherd.
The two measurements are also not statistically consistent (T’=10.3;
ν=1; T’(5%)=3.8; Ward and Wilson 1978).
Structure 25
Structure 25 is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole SFB. Two
samples, 00490AB (OxA-13710; 1316±25 BP) and 00490AA (GrA-
25925; 1305±40 BP), carbonised residues on sherds of fresh disposal
V28 (organic-tempered), were recovered from the upper fill ([3248])
of the structure. The two measurements are statistically consistent
(T’=0.1; ν=1; T’(5%)=3.8; Ward and Wilson 1978).
Structure 26
Structure 26 is interpreted as the remains of a possible SFB or working
hollow, and is located in the central part of the site. Sample 02267AA
(OxA-14016; 1489±24 BP), a carbonised residue from fresh pot
disposal V257 (organic-tempered), came from the fill ([3643]) of a
gable post-hole forming part of the structure.
Structure 30
Structure 30 is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole derivative
SFB, the pit of which was characterised by a complex fill sequence.
Sample 2167AA (GrA-25936; 1480±40 BP), a carbonised residue on a
calcitic-tempered sherd, probably part of a fresh disposal, came from fill
[3339], the western gable post-hole that was sealed below the lowest fill
([3333]). Two samples (carbonised residues) from the upper fill [3311]
of the pit comprised 2130AC (OxA-13707; 1398±25 BP) from fresh
disposal V77 (calcitic-tempered), and sample 2131AH (OxA-14008;
1615±65 BP) from a grog-tempered sherd. The two measurements are
not statistically consistent (T’=9.9; ν=1; T’(5%)=3.8; Ward and Wilson
1978)
Structure 35
Structure 35 is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole SFB
located in the north-east part of the site. Two measurements from
carbonised residues on separate fragments of an excavated single sherd
of organic-tempered pottery 00480AA from the upper fill ([3268]) of
the structure (GrA-25563; 1375±35 BP and OxA-13755; 1449±28 BP)
are statistically consistent (T’=2.7; ν=1; T’(5%)=3.8; Ward and Wilson
1978).
Structure 38
Structure 38 is interpreted as the remains of a two-post-hole SFB. A
single sample, 02171AB (OxA-14244; 1598±30 BP) came from the
middle fill ([3002]), and consisted of a carbonised residue on a quartz-
tempered, stamped and incised sherd. The two samples from the upper
fill ([3001]) were also carbonised residues: sample 00457AC (OxA-
13883; 1559±26 BP) came from a quartz-tempered, stamped and
incised sherd, and sample 00457AT (OxA-13711; 1515±26 BP) from
a biotite-tempered sherd. The two measurements from the upper fill
are statistically consistent (T’=1.4; ν=1; T’(5%)=3.8; Ward and Wilson
1978).
325
Surface Deposit F11/F503
Sample 11471AC (OxA-14007; 1614±33 BP), a carbonised residue
on a quartz-tempered, stamped and incised sherd, came from context
[4353], part of a surface spread deposit located in the remains of an
east–west Roman trackway that extended for c.78.0m (F503).
Pit Group C
Pit Group C consisted of four inter-cutting pits sealed by Surface Deposit
F1 and located in the central-north part of the site. F500 consisted of
two inter-cutting pits, [4715] and [4717]. Sample 13416, an articulated
neonatal pig (OxA-13756; 1490±26 BP), came from lower fill [4719]
of [4717]. The latest pit, F521, was located on the northern edge of
the pit group, cutting [4715] and [4717]. Two samples from its fills
comprised 12147AC (OxA-14017; 1697±26 BP), a carbonised residue
from V298, a probable fresh disposal (organic-tempered) from the upper
fill ([4642]), and 13429 (OxA-13757; 1510±26 BP and GrA-26357;
1500±35 BP), from an articulated sheep. The two measurements from
the sheep (13429) are statistically consistent (T’=0.1; ν=1; T’(5%)=3.8;
Ward and Wilson 1978) and so allow a weighted mean to be calculated
(1506±21 BP). However, all three measurements from the upper fill
([4642]) are not statistically consistent (T’=32.9; ν=2; T’(5%)=6.0;
Ward and Wilson 1978).
Pit Group G
Pit Group G was located in the central part of the site, where the
cemetery was subsequently located, and a number of its pits have been
truncated by graves. Pit F232 was a sub-circular or sub-ovate pit that
appeared to cut the northern edge of Pit F235 but had been cut away
by grave F440. 01860AB (OxA-14006; 2015±60 BP), a carbonised
residue on a quartz-tempered sherd, came from the upper fill of the pit
([1831]).
Pit Group I
Pit Group I consisted of seven pits located immediately to the north-
east of Structure 25. Samples 02234AB (OxA-14019; 1559±24 BP) and
02234AC (GrA-25590; 1425±35 BP) came from carbonised residues
on two sherds (sandstone/sand-tempered, decorated with bosses) of
fresh disposal V89. They both came from the upper fill ([3521]) of pit
[3520]. The two measurements are not statistically consistent (T’=9.9;
ν=1; T’(5%)=3.8; Ward and Wilson 1978), indicating that material of
two different ages was dated.
Pit Group J
Sample 02175AC (GrA-25931; 1530±40 BP), a carbonised residue on
a sherd of chaff-tempered pottery, came from a probably fresh disposal
(V83) recovered from the initial cleaning layer ([3363]) across the top
of Pit Group J; [3363] is probably analogous with the upper fill ([3365])
from F350, which consisted of two intercutting sub-ovate shaped pits
that had a very large finds assemblage, including significant quantities
of animal bone, pottery and CBM.
Pit Group L
Pit Group L was located immediately east of Structure 30 and consisted
of at least ten pits. Sample 02100AH (OxA-14232; 1477±27 BP), a
carbonised residue on a sandstone sand-tempered bossed sherd, came
from the lower fill ([3087]) of the earliest and westernmost ([3088]) of
the pits that comprised F321.
Pit F10
Sample 01692AB (OxA-13967; 1510±26 BP), a residue on an organic-
tempered pottery sherd, came from an individual sub-circular-shaped
pit (F10) located in the north-west part of the site. Sample 01692AB
was recovered from context [01215], which comprised all three fills of
the pit. The sherd comes from a possible fresh disposal (V45).
Surface Deposit F1
Surface Deposit F1 [4040] was a dark grey-brown to black silty
sand deposit concentrated within the remains of the earlier Roman
trackway. It was distinct from other surface deposits in that it appeared
to have been a particular concentration of material, rather than simply
the remains of a buried soil or ground surface which had survived
in a hollow as a result of differential preservation. The deposit may,
therefore, have accumulated over a short period with rapid deposition
or it may possibly have been the result of smaller repeated dumping
events.
Eight samples, all carbonised residues, came from Surface Deposit
F1. 10509AA (GrA-25937; 1490±40 BP), 11963AB (GrA-25929;
1505±40 BP) and 10481AA (OxA-13754; 1530±26 BP) all came
from a possible fresh disposal V178 (biotite-tempered). These three
measurements are statistically consistent (T’=0.8; ν=2; T’(5%)=6.0;

For each of the radiocarbon dates two distributions have been plotted,
one in outline, which is the result of simple radiocarbon calibration,
and a solid one, which is based on the chronological model used. A
question mark (?) indicates that the result has been excluded from the
model. The large square brackets down the left hand side along with
the OxCal keywords define the model exactly
Figure 6.3 Probability distributions of dates from
Bloodmoor Hill: each distribution represents the relative
probability that an event occurs at a particular time.
326
Ward and Wilson 1978). 10449AA (OxA-13709; 1459±29 BP) came
from V114, a possible fresh disposal (biotite). 11990AE (OxA-13726;
1509±27 BP) and 11990AD (GrA-25589; 1385±35 BP) came from a
possible fresh disposal V128 (organic-tempered). The two measure-
ments are not statistically consistent (T’=7.8; ν=1; T’(5%)=3.8; Ward
and Wilson 1978). 11983AA (OxA-13966; 1425±27 BP) and 11976AD
(GrA-25592; 1440±35 BP) came from fresh disposal V125 (calcitic-
tempered). The two measurements are statistically consistent (T’=0.1;
ν=1; T’(5%)=3.8; Ward and Wilson 1978). The eight measurements
from Surface Deposit F1 are not statistically consistent (T’=17.9; ν=7;
T’(5%)=14.1; Ward and Wilson 1978).
Structure 44
Sample 13251 (OxA-13892; 1842±26 BP), a sheep neonate, came from
the fill ([2564]) of a post-hole or small pit that is cut by a post-hole
([1903]) forming part of Structure 44. Sample 01894AA (OxA-14005;
1515±40 BP), a carbonised residue on a quartz-tempered sherd,
and [7250], an articulated sheep skeleton packed within the fill of a
post-hole (OxA-14044; 1851±28 BP, GrA-26355; 1805±35 BP and
UB-6185; 1787±17 BP) (weighted mean 1804 ± 13 BP; T’=3.8; ν=2;
T’(5%)=6.0; Ward and Wilson 1978), came from two of the twenty-six
post-holes that appear to make up the building.
The articulated sheep R_combine 7250, however, clearly relates to
an earlier Roman episode of activity. The sample comes from a post-
hole within the area of Structure 44 and it seems to have been fortuitous
that this structure was located over a number of earlier post-holes. Such
an explanation also explains the Roman date of OxA-13892 (part of a
neonatal sheep burial within a small post-hole/pit that was cut by a post-
hole ([01903]) of Structure 44). The measurements from both samples
from these sheep-packed post-holes are in fact statistically consistent
(T’=6.0; ν =3; T’(5%)=7.8; Ward and Wilson 1978) and so could be
of the same actual age. Given that the two samples do not relate to
the Anglo-Saxon phase of activity at Bloodmoor Hill, they have been
excluded from further analysis.
The cemetery
The cemetery of twenty-six west–east aligned graves lies within
the settlement, with two further graves lying some 50m to the east,
though still within the main area of occupation. The limits of the main
cemetery group are defined by two rows: the ‘east’ and ‘west’ (see
Fig. 7.1). Four samples of human bone were submitted from graves of
the ‘west’ row: Grave 5 (UB-4911; 1401±21 BP), the most northerly
of the row, which contained some possible grave-goods; Grave 4 (UB-
4909; 1368±20 BP); Grave 3 (UB-4908; 1331±21 BP); and Grave 2
(UB-4907; 1271±19 BP), from its southern extent. The three samples
of human bone from the ‘east’ row came from Grave 25 (UB-4912;
1326±16 BP); Grave 24 (UB-4913; 1371±15 BP), which contained
grave-goods including an iron knife, rod and nails; and Grave 22 (UB-
4910; 1365±15 BP) which contained a wide range of goods including
a gold pendant with glass settings. Two samples of human bone from
the main cemetery group, although not aligned to any row, came from
Grave 8 (UB-4916; 1372±19 BP) and Grave 12 (UB-4914 1397±18)
which contained a number of grave-goods.
The satellite group of burials to the east of the main cemetery
comprised a double burial (Grave 28) from which a sample of human
bone (UB-4915; 1364±19 BP) was dated.
Results
The model shown in Fig. 6.3 shows poor agreement
between the radiocarbon results and stratigraphy
(Aoverall=1.8%) as presented in the previous section.
If the individual index of agreement for a sample falls
below 60% (Bronk Ramsey 1995; 1998), the radiocarbon
result is regarded as inconsistent with the sample’s
calendar age, if the latter is consistent with the sample’s
age relative to the other dated samples. This can indicate
that the radiocarbon result is a statistical outlier (more
than two standard deviations from the sample’s true
radiocarbon age), but a very low index of agreement may
be indicative of the sample that is residual or intrusive
(i.e. its calendar age is different to that implied by its
stratigraphic position).
Fig. 6.3 contains a number of samples with very
low index of agreements (i.e. <6%): OxA-14006, OxA-
14017 and GrA-25950 were measurements made on a
For each of the radiocarbon dates two distributions have been plotted,
one in outline, which is the result of simple radiocarbon calibration,
and a solid one, which is based on the chronological model used. A
question mark (?) indicates that the result has been excluded from the
model. The large square brackets down the left hand side along with
the OxCal keywords define the model exactly
Figure 6.4 Probability distributions of dates from
Bloodmoor Hill: each distribution represents the relative
probability that an event occurs at a particular time
327
For each of the radiocarbon dates two distributions have been plotted,
one in outline, which is the result of simple radiocarbon calibration,
and a solid one, which is based on the chronological model used. A
question mark (?) indicates that the result has been excluded from the
model. The large square brackets down the left hand side along with
the OxCal keywords define the model exactly
Figure 6.5 Probability distributions of dates from
Bloodmoor Hill: each distribution represents the relative
probability that an event occurs at a particular time

Figure 6.6 Probability distribution of the number of
years during which the settlement was in use. The
distribution is derived from the model defined in
Fig. 6.5
Figure 6.7 Probability distribution of the number
of years during which the cemetery was in use. The
distribution is derived from the model defined in
Fig. 6.5
carbonised residue adhering to the inside of sherds of
identifiable Anglo-Saxon pottery, which give Roman
ages. The carbonaceous fractions extracted physically
and chemically from the inside of the sherd are assumed
to represent organic-rich food remains, and thus should
date the last use of the vessel in question. However,
in this case the residue is clearly much too old for the
pottery type in question. It has been suggested that clays
may contain appreciable amounts of carbon which may
remain in pottery even after firing (Nakamura et al.
2001). Such a mechanism as this would introduce ‘old’
carbon and may therefore provide an explanation for the
apparent erroneous measurements.
OxA-14004 has produced a late Saxon date from a
residue on what appears to be an early Anglo-Saxon sherd.
In this case the contamination may be due to absorption
of humic or fluvic acids or lipids from the surrounding
soil (Hedges et al. 1992).
Thus the model in Fig. 6.4 excludes the four meas-
urements discussed above (OxA-14006, OxA-14017,
OxA-14004, and GrA-25950) and this increases the
overall index of agreement to (Aoverall=66.8%), showing
agreement between the radiocarbon evidence and stratig-
raphy. Only one sample in this model has relatively poor
agreement with its stratigraphic position (OxA-14008)
(A=27.8%); it could be a statistical outlier, however,
given the extremely small sample size (reflected in the
error on the measurement), or could be an inaccurate
result due possibly to a very small amount of contamina-
tion. We have therefore chosen to exclude OxA-14008
from the model shown in Fig. 6.5. The model (Fig. 6.5)
shows good agreement between the radiocarbon evidence
and stratigraphy (Aoverall=82.5%) and provides estimates
for the start of the settlement (start) of cal AD 500–530
(68% probability) or cal AD 480–540 (95% probability)
and for the end of settlement activity of cal AD 670–700
(68% probability) or cal AD 660–710 (95% probability;
end). Further analysis shows that there is only a 15%
probability that the start of the settlement dates to before
cal AD 500. The span of use of the settlement is estimated
328
at 150–190 years (68% probability) or 140–210 years
(95% probability) (see Fig. 6.6): that is, approximately
three to five generations.
The results show that all of the purported mecha-
nisms by which the pit of an SFB becomes infilled were
probably in use at Bloodmoor Hill. For example, the
consistency shown in radiocarbon measurements from
the same fills of some structures (e.g. Structures 25, 35
and 38) would indicate that they were not infilled by the
deliberate but gradual dumping of waste material over
time, but rather infilled as a result of deliberate episodes
of major dumping over a short period of time; in contrast,
the statistically inconsistent results from the fills of some
structures (e.g. Structures 17, 24 and 30) would indicate
material being incorporated more gradually over a period
of time.
Cemetery
Dating of the cemetery is discussed in detail in Chapter 7.
The model shown in Fig. 6.5 also provides an estimate for
the start of burial in the cemetery of cal AD 600–660 (95%
probability; cemetery_start) and an end of cal AD 660–
700 (95% probability; cemetery_end). The results show
no chronological differentiation between rows within the
main cemetery area, and the outlier burial is also shown
to be contemporary with the rest of the dated burials. The
distribution shown in Fig. 6.7 provides an estimate for
the span of the use of the cemetery of 20–80 years (95%
probability).
Pottery
As well as contributing to dating of the structural features,
the dating of charred residues on ceramic sherds from
the site can also be used to date the ceramic sequence.
Ceramic analysis provided three specific objectives to
be addressed by the radiocarbon dating programme with
respect to the ceramic sequence. These were to determine
whether:
• ‘biotite/granite’, ‘calcareous’, and ‘grog’ fabrics are
early (i.e. 6th century);
• ‘organic’ fabrics are predominantly later (i.e. later
6th–7th century);
• decoration is early (i.e. 6th century).
The model shown in Fig. 6.8 assumes no chronolog-
ical relationship between the ‘late’ and ‘early’ ceramic
traditions but treats each as a more or less constant phase
of activity with a beginning and an end. Measurements
on carbonised residues from those samples excluded in
Fig. 6.5 have also been treated in the same way in the
model shown in Fig. 6.8. The model shows good agree-
ment with the hypothesis that each ceramic tradition
represents a single phase of activity (Aoverall=122.1%
for early ceramics and Aoverall=97.2% for late ceramics).
The model also provides estimates for the start and end
of both the early and late ceramic phases. The results,
however, show that differentiation between the end of the
use of early fabrics and the start of the use of late fabrics
is not possible. Thus from the dated examples it would
seem that organic-tempered pottery is not predominantly
late: at Bloodmoor Hill, it appears to be in use from at
least the mid-6th century onwards (in accordance with
the date ranges suggested by Hamerow et al. 1994).
Biotite/granite fabric can clearly be differentiated as
early and definitely 6th-century in date, although four
measurements from fresh disposal V178 (T’=2.4; ν=3;
T’(5%)=7.8; Ward and Wilson 1978) (OxA-13882, OxA-
13754, GrA-25937 and GrA-25929) make up 40% of the
sample from this fabric group. We do not have enough
information to be certain that calcareous fabrics date
exclusively from the 6th century; however, the results
do hint at the possibility that decorated sherds might be
early, but this cannot be definitively stated in the absence
of further data.
Conclusions
The radiocarbon dating programme has been successful
in achieving most of the aims outlined above. The results
provide an estimate for the start of settlement activity at
Bloodmoor Hill of cal AD 480–540 (95% probability;
Fig. 6.5) with it being more likely (85% probability) that
activity started after cal AD 500. The end of activity is
estimated at cal AD 660–710 (95% probability; Fig. 6.5).
The site was in use for a relatively short period of time,
estimated at 140–210 years (95% probability; Fig. 6.5).
For each of the radiocarbon dates two distributions have been plotted,
one in outline, which is the result of simple radiocarbon calibration,
and a solid one, which is based on the chronological model used. A
question mark (?) indicates that the result has been excluded from the
model. The large square brackets down the left hand side along with
the OxCal keywords define the model exactly
Figure 6.8 Probability distributions of dates from
Bloodmoor Hill pottery fabrics: each distribution
represents the relative probability that an event occurs at
a particular time
329
The cemetery was in use for one or two generations
(20–80 years at 95% probability; Fig. 6.7) in the 7th
century AD and the results show that the isolated burials
to the east of the site were part of the same single phase
of burial activity.
The results do not conclusively refute any of the main
processes by which the infilling of SFBs is thought to
take place.
The absolute dating of the ceramic typologies
remains the one original aim that has not been completely
fulfilled. The reasons for this are threefold. Firstly, inac-
curate measurements on carbonised residues are still
apparent in the results described above, with results that
are both too old and too young for the pottery types from
which they come. This suggests that we still do not have
an adequate understanding of precisely what is being
dated chemically from carbonised residues. This is not a
problem specific to Bloodmoor Hill, but a methodolog-
ical problem inherent in the dating of carbonised residues
from any site or period. Secondly, our archaeological
understanding of chronological changes in fabric types
might be flawed, although this might in part be due to a
paucity of excavated sites with large assemblages from
the early–middle Anglo-Saxon period in this part of the
country. Thirdly, at Bloodmoor Hill it is probable that the
sample of carbonised residues on different fabric types
was not large enough to adequately test the hypothesis
provided by the ceramic analysis.
III. Site phasing
Introduction
The spatial distribution of buildings and other features
clearly demonstrates that the Anglo-Saxon settle-
ment at Bloodmoor Hill saw multiple phases. The
infilled Structure 14 was cut through by post-in-trench
Structure 42 and, in a number of cases (for example,
Structures 21 and 22), buildings were simply too close
to each other to have been contemporary. However,
actual stratigraphic evidence for phasing the structures
was limited and there were no intercutting SFBs on the
site. Nevertheless, it was felt important to attempt the
site phasing in order to assess potential areas of zoned
activities, patterns of waste disposal and change in the
settlement pattern over time. A two-pronged approach
was therefore adopted. Using the dating evidence avail-
able, an initial phasing was carried out, phasing only
those structures and other features which were felt to
have relatively secure and internally consistent dating
(these mainly being the SFBs and some of the pits). The
associated assemblages were employed to investigate
changes in the settlement sequence through time, particu-
larly with regard to how material was moved around the
site and the formation of surface deposits. The results
of these analyses were then used to establish a series of
potential models for the settlement sequence as a whole,
which are presented towards the end of this chapter and
which try to assign undated features and structures to
phase by using methods such as structure alignment and
by identifying which buildings were too close to have
been contemporary. Another technique used, in order to
identify features which had been infilled from the same
source, was comparison of assemblage composition.
 Laboratory Sample no. Structure Material and context Radiocarbon 13C (‰) 13C (‰) 15N (‰) C:N ratio Weighted mean Calibrated date range Posterior density
no. age (BP) (95% confidence) estimate (95%
radiocarbon probability)
OxA-13727 12060AA Structure 9 Carbonised residue on calcitic-tempered pottery 1474 ± 29 -27.8 - - - - cal AD 540–650 cal AD 520–580
sherd from lower fill [4618]
OxA-13882 12045AC Structure 9 Carbonised residue on biotite-tempered pottery 1559 ± 29 -26.4 - - - - cal AD 420–570 cal AD 530–590
sherd from middle fill [4616]
GrA-25949 11843AA Structure 10 Carbonised residue on biotite-tempered pottery 1455 ± 45 -28.7 - - - - cal AD 530–670 cal AD 540–660
sherd from upper fill [4588]
GrA-25923 00211AA Structure 12 Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered pottery 1400 ± 35 -27.3 - - - - cal AD 580–680 cal AD 590–680
sherd from fill [237] of eastern gable post-hole
OxA-14004 00182AA Structure 12 Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1166 ± 38 -28.5 - - - - cal AD 770–980 -
sherd from upper fill [204]
GrA-25935 01826AA Structure 17 Carbonised residue on biotite-tempered pottery 1505 ± 40 -29.6 - - - - cal AD 430–650 cal AD 520–650
sherd from upper fill [1764]
OxA-13728 00425AA Structure 17 Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered pottery 1579 ± 29 -27.6 - - - - cal AD 410–550 cal AD 490–570
sherd, stamped and incised from upper fill [1764]
OxA-13708 09528AA Structure 17 Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered pottery 1481 ± 26 -27.6 - - - - cal AD 540–640 cal AD 540–640
sherd, stamped and incised from upper fill [1764]
OxA-13753 08302AA Structure 18 Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1501 ± 28 -26.3 - - - - cal AD 440–640 cal AD 530–630
sherd from lower fill [1670]
GrA-25950 13141AA Structure 24 Carbonised residue on coarse sandstone-tempered 1710 ± 50 -28.5 - - - - cal AD 210–440

153
330
pottery sherd from lower fill [5116]
OxA-13752 13187AB Structure 24 Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered pottery 1502 ± 27 -27 - - - - cal AD 440–640 cal AD 530–610
sherd from lower fill [5116]
OxA-14018 13187AF Structure 24 Carbonised residue on biotite-tempered pottery 1635 ± 40 -27.5 - - - - cal AD 260–540 cal AD 490–560
sherd from lower fill [5116]
GrA-25926 13153AA Structure 24 Carbonised residue on grog-tempered pottery sherd 1505 ± 40 -27.8 - - - - cal AD 430–650 cal AD 550–650
from upper fill [5115]
GrA-25927 13198AA Structure 24 Carbonised residue on biotite-tempered pottery 1610 ± 40 -27.9 - - - - cal AD 340–550 cal AD 490–570
sherd from upper fill [5115]
GrA-25925 00490AA Structure 25 Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1305 ± 40 -30.3 - - - - cal AD 640–780 cal AD 640–700
sherd from upper fill [3248]
OxA-13710 00490AB Structure 25 Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1316 ± 25 -30.4 - - - - cal AD 650–770 cal AD 650–690
sherd from upper fill [3248]
OxA-14016 02267AA Structure 26 Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1489 ± 24 -27.1 - - - - cal AD 540–635 cal AD 540–625
sherd from fill [3643] of gable post-hole
GrA-25936 02167AA Structure 30 Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered pottery 1480 ± 40 -29.6 - - - - cal AD 440–660 cal AD 530–640
sherd from fill [3339] of western gable post-hole
OxA-14008 02131AH Structure 30 Carbonised residue on grog-tempered pottery sherd 1615 ± 65 -27.9 - - - - cal AD 250–590
from upper fill [3311]
OxA-13707 02130AC Structure 30 Carbonised residue on calcitic-tempered pottery 1398 ± 25 -28.8 - - - - cal AD 600–670 cal AD 600–670
sherd from upper fill [3311]
 Laboratory Sample no. Structure Material and context Radiocarbon 13C (‰) 13C (‰) 15N (‰) C:N ratio Weighted mean Calibrated date range Posterior density
no. age (BP) (95% confidence) estimate (95%
radiocarbon probability)
GrA-25563 00480AA Structure 35 Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1375 ± 35 -30 - - - - cal 590–770 cal AD 600–680
sherd from upper fill [3268]
OxA-13755 00480AA Structure 35 Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1449 ± 28 -29 - - - - cal AD 560–650 cal AD 560–660
sherd from upper fill [3268]
OxA-14244 02071AB Structure 38 Carbonised residue on decorated pottery sherd 1598 ± 30 -27.7 - - - - cal AD 390–550 cal AD 490–550
(stamp impressions) from middle fill [3002]
OxA-13711 00457AT Structure 38 Carbonised residue on biotite-tempered pottery 1515 ± 26 -27.6 - - - - cal AD 430–620 cal AD 530–610
sherd from upper fill [3001]
OxA-13883 00457AC Structure 38 Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered pottery 1559 ± 26 -28.5 - - - - cal AD 420–600 cal AD 500–590
sherd, stamped and incised from upper fill [3001]
GrA-26355 7250 Structure 44 Animal bone: sheep, articulated skeleton 1805 ± 35 -21.7 - - - -
OxA-14044 7250 Structure 44 Animal bone: sheep, articulated skeleton 1851 ± 28 -21.7 - - - 1804 ± 13 BP cal AD 130–250
(T’=3.8; ν=2;
T’(5%)=6.0; Ward
and Wilson 1978)
UB-6185 7250 Structure 44 Animal bone: sheep, articulated skeleton 1787 ± 17 -21.2 ± 0.2 -21.7 6.5 3.3 -
OxA-13892 13251 Structure 44 Animal bone: sheep neonate, humerus and femur 1842 ± 26 -21.4 - - - - cal AD 80–240 -
OxA-14005 01894AA Structure 44 Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered pottery 1515 ± 40 -26.5 - - - - cal AD 430–630 cal AD 510–630

331
sherd

156
OxA-14007 11471AC F11/F503 Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered pottery 1614 ± 33 -26.5 - - - - cal AD 380–550 cal AD 490–550
sherd, (stamped and incised) from surface spread.
GrA-26357 13429 Pit Group C Animal bone: sheep, metatarsal (Amanda Grieve) 1500 ± 35 -21.8 - - - 1506 ± 21 BP cal AD 460–615 cal AD 540–585
from upper fill [4642] of F521 (T’=0.1; ν=1;
T’(5%)=3.8; Ward
and Wilson 1978)
OxA-13757 13429 Pit Group C Animal bone: sheep, fibula (Amanda Grieve) from 1510 ± 26 -21.1 - - - -
upper fill [4642] of F521
OxA-14017 12147AC Pit Group C Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1697 ± 26 -28.5 - - - - cal AD 250–420 -
sherd from upper fill [4642] of F521
OxA-13756 13416 Pit Group C Animal bone: pig (articulated neonate) from lower 1490 ± 26 -20.1 - - - - cal AD 530–640 cal AD 530–580
fill [4719] of pit [4717] part of F500
OxA-14006 01860AB Pit Group G Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered pottery 2015 ± 60 -28.3 - - - - 180 cal BC–cal AD -
sherd from upper fill [1831] 130
GrA-25590 02234AC Pit Group I Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered bossed 1425 ± 35 -29.2 - - - - cal AD 560–670 cal AD 570–670
pottery sherd from upper fill [3521] of pit [3520]
OxA-14019 02234AB Pit Group I Carbonised residue on quartz-tempered pottery 1559 ± 24 -27.4 - - - - cal AD 425–560 cal AD 500–575
sherd, bossed from upper fill [3521] of pit [3520]
GrA-25931 02175AC Pit Group J Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1530 ± 40 -28.5 - - - - cal AD 420–610 cal AD 500–620
sherd from cleaning layer [3363]
 Laboratory Sample no. Structure Material and context Radiocarbon 13C (‰) 13C (‰) 15N (‰) C:N ratio Weighted mean Calibrated date range Posterior density
no. age (BP) (95% confidence) estimate (95%
radiocarbon probability)
OxA-14232 02100AH Pit Group L Carbonised residue on decorated pottery sherd 1477 ± 27 -28.6 - - - - cal AD 540–650 cal AD 540–640
(small hollow vertical boss) from lower fill [3087]
OxA-13967 01692AB F10 Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1510 ± 26 -28.2 - - - - cal AD 430–620 cal AD 530–620
sherd from fill [01215]
GrA-25589 11990AD F1 Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1385 ± 35 -28.1 - - - - cal AD 590–690 cal AD 600–680
sherd from surface deposit
OxA-13726 11990AE F1 Carbonised residue on organic-tempered pottery 1509 ± 27 -27.8 - - - - cal AD 430–630 cal AD 550–630
sherd from surface deposit
GrA-25592 11976AD F1 Carbonised residue on calcitic-tempered pottery 1440 ± 35 -29.6 - - - - cal AD 560–660 cal AD 570–660
sherd (combed?) from surface deposit
GrA-25929 11963AB F1 Carbonised residue on biotite-tempered pottery 1505 ± 40 -27.5 - - - - cal AD 430–650 cal AD 550–640
sherd from surface deposit
GrA-25937 10509AA F1 Carbonised residue on biotite-tempered pottery 1490 ± 40 -29.7 - - - - cal AD 430–650 cal AD 550–650
sherd from surface deposit
OxA-13709 10449AA F1 Carbonised residue on biotite-tempered pottery 1459 ± 29 -28 - - - - cal AD 550–650 cal AD 560–650
sherd from surface deposit
OxA-13754 10481AA F1 Carbonised residue on biotite-tempered pottery 1530 ± 26 -27 - - - - cal AD 430–600 cal AD 550–610
sherd from surface deposit
OxA-13966 11983AA F1 Carbonised residue on calcitic-tempered pottery 1425 ± 27 -28.3 - - - - cal AD 580–660 cal AD 580–660

155
332
sherd (combed?) from surface deposit
UB-4907 Grave 2 Cemetery Human bone: left and right femora, and tibias 1271 ± 19 20.1 ± 0.5 -19.9 10.5 3.3 - cal AD 670–780 cal AD 660–695
(Natasha Dodwell).
UB-4908 Grave 3 Cemetery Human bone: left and right femora (Natasha 1331 ± 21 20.5 ± 0.5 -20.3 10.6 3.4 - cal AD 650–765 cal AD 650–685
Dodwell).
UB-4909 Grave 4 Cemetery Human bone: left and right femora and tibias 1368 ± 20 -20.6 ± 0.5 -20.3 10.7 3.4 - cal AD 640–675 cal AD 635–675
(Natasha Dodwell).
UB-4911 Grave 5 Cemetery Human bone: left and right femora tibias and left 1401 ± 21 -20.4 ± 0.5 -20.1 11.1 3.4 - cal AD 605–665 cal AD 605–665
humerus (Natasha Dodwell).
UB-4916 Grave 8 Cemetery Human bone: left femur, right arm and skull 1372 ± 19 -19.9 ± 0.5 -19.6 10.6 3.2 - cal AD 640–670 cal AD 635–675
humerus (Natasha Dodwell).
UB-4914 Grave 12 Cemetery Human bone: left and right femora, tibias and feet 1397 ± 18 -20.5 ± 0.5 -20.3 11.8 3.3 - cal AD 610–665 cal AD 610–665
(Natasha Dodwell)
UB-4910 Grave 22 Cemetery Human bone: left and right femora, tibias and 1365 ± 15 -20.5 ± 0.5 -20.2 10.7 3.1 - cal AD 645–670 cal AD 640–675
fibulas (Natasha Dodwell)
UB-4913 Grave 24 Cemetery Human bone: left and right femora and tibias 1371 ± 15 -21.0 ± 0.5 -20.7 11.8 3.8 - cal AD 640–670 cal AD 640–670
(Natasha Dodwell)
UB-4912 Grave 25 Cemetery Human bone; left and right femora, and left tibia 1326 ± 16 -20.7 ± 0.5 -20.5 11.1 3.2 - cal AD 655–760 cal AD 655–685
(Natasha Dodwell)
UB-4915 Grave 28 Cemetery Human bone: left and right femora, tibias and 1364 ± 19 -20.4 ± 0.5 -20.1 9.7 3.2 - cal AD 645–675 cal AD 640–675
humerii (Natasha Dodwell)

Table 6.1 Radiocarbon results

 Feature Datable artefacts Biotite pottery Sherd links Posterior Density Stratigraphy Justification Phase
Estimate
(a) SFBs
Structure 2 7th-century knife No. 207 - - - - Artefact date, no biotite pottery 2
Structure 3 Nail-making plate No. 282 - - - - Metalworking-associaSted material, no biotite pottery 2
Structure 4 6th-century wrist-clasp No. 101 3 (59g) Pit group K - - Artefact date, biotite pottery 1
Structure 5 - 2 (51g) Structure 17, Pit F520 - Under Surface Deposit F11/503 Biotite pottery and stratigraphy 1
and F525
Structure 9 Pin of AD 500–550 No. 56 7 (194g) Structure 10 and cal AD 520–580, Under Surface Deposit F1 Artefact date, biotite pottery, C14 dates and 1
Pit F226 cal AD 530–590 stratigraphy
Structure 10 - 6 (146g) Structure 9 cal AD 540–660 - Biotite pottery, sherd link and C14 date 1
Structure 11 Pin of AD 580–650 No. 59 - - - Artefact date, no biotite pottery 2a
Structure 12 Pins of AD 650+ No. 50 and AD - - cal AD 590–680 Cuts Structure 43 Artefact dates, no biotite pottery, C14 date 2b
650–750 No. 62
Structure 13 Later 7th- to 8th-century bead No. 29 - - - - Artefact date, no biotite pottery 2b
Structure 14 7th-century knife No. 194 among - - - Cut by Structure 42 Artefact date, almost no pottery 2
scrap metal assemblage
Structure 16 - 23 (314g) Structure 17 Under Surface Deposit F1 Biotite pottery, sherd link and stratigraphy 1
Structure 17 Later 6th-century beads Nos 38–9 64 (1092g) Structure 16, cal AD 490–570, Under Surface Deposit F1 Artefact date, biotite pottery, sherd links, C14 dates, 1
(later finds from overlying spread) Structure 5 cal AD 540–640, cal AD stratigraphy

333
158
520–650 all from
overlying spread
Structure 18 Pin of AD 500–550 No. 55 2 (12g) - cal AD 530–630 - Artefact date, low amount biotite pottery, C14 date 2a
Structure 19 Pins of AD 650+ No. 48 and AD 625+ - - - - Artefact date 2b
No. 66 among scrap metal assemblage
Structure 20 7th-century brooch No. 19 - Pit F255 - - Artefact date, no biotite pottery and sherd link 2b
Structure 21 7th-century onwards hooked tag No. - - - Cut by Pit F141 Artefact dates, no biotite pottery 2b
106, pin of ?AD 650–700 No. 60
Structure 22 Pin of AD 580–650 No. 57, 1 (6g) - - - Artefact dates, almost no biotite pottery 2a
7th-century knives (Nos 186, 211),
fragment of 6th to 7th-century glass
claw beaker No. 168
Structure 24 ?7th-century knife No. 213 but worn 15 (280g) - Upper fill: cal AD - Biotite pottery, uncertain artefact date, C14 dates 1
550–650, 490–570;
lower fill: cal AD
530–610, 490–560
Structure 25 7th-century knife No. 208 and buckle - Pit F392 cal AD 640–700, - Artefact dates, no biotite pottery, C14 dates 2b
No. 112 and mid 7th- to 8th-century 650–690
comb fragment No. 133
Structure 26 Series B sceat of AD 685–700 (No. 1 (18g) - cal AD 540–625 - Contradictory dates from C14, but artefact dating 2b
399), continental pot sherd, mid 7th- strong
to mid 8th-century comb fragment No.
132 and pin No. 65
 Feature Datable artefacts Biotite pottery Sherd links Posterior Density Stratigraphy Justification Phase
Estimate
Structure 27 ?7th-century knife No. 203, later 7th- - - - - Generally later artefact dates, no biotite pottery 2
to 8th-century bead No. 28 and later
6th- to 7th-century glass vessel
fragment No. 171
Structure 29 Pin of AD 650–690 No. 64, mid to - Pit group L - - Mixed artefact dates, no biotite pottery, sherd link 2a
late 6th-century bead No. 23
Structure 30 7th-century knives (Nos 181, 197), 7 (141g) Pit group L cal AD 600–670 - Mixed artefact dates, biotite pottery, sherd link and 2a
6th-century wrist-clasp No. 102; two C14 dates
Ipswich Ware sherds are probably
intrusive
Structure 31 - - - - - No biotite pottery 2
Structure 32 7th-century knife No. 190, fragment 1 (20g) - - - Artefact date, small amount biotite pottery 2a
of 6th- to early 7th-century claw
beaker No. 169
Structure 33 ?7th- to 8th-century glass bead No. 34 - - - - Probable later artefact date, no biotite pottery 2
Structure 35 Fragments of two mid 7th- to mid 6 (57g) - cal AD 600–680, - Later artefact dates, some biotite pottery, C14 dates 2a
8th-century antler combs (Nos 130–1), 560–660
7th-century knife No. 187
Structure 36 - - - - - No biotite pottery 2
Structure 38 Bead of AD 580+ No. 26 in upper fill 37 (354g) - Upper fill: cal AD - Biotite pottery, C14 dates 1

159
334
530–610, 500–590;
middle fill:
cal AD 490–550
Structure 44 - - - cal AD 510–630 - Radiocarbon date 1
(b) Other features
Pit Group B 6th- to early 7th-century annular 1 (22g) - - - Artefact dates, low amount of biotite pottery 2a
brooch No. 10, 7th-century knife No.
206
Pit Group C - - - cal AD 530–580, Under Surface Deposit F1 C14 dates, stratigraphy 1
540–585
Pit Group D - 5 (98g) Pit F519 and F520 - Under Surface Deposit Biotite pottery, sherd links, stratigraphy 1
F1/F503, cuts Structure 9
Pit Group G - 2 (36g) - - Under Surface Deposit Small amount of biotite, stratigraphy 2
F159/182, number of pits cut by
graves and vice versa
Pit Group H 7th-century knife No. 188 1 (2g) - - Cuts Structure 48 Artefact date, stratigraphy 2
Pit Group I - 8 (56g) - cal AD 570–670, - Biotite pottery, C14 dates 1/2a
500–575
Pit Group J - 5 (64g) - - Under surface spread Biotite pottery, stratigraphy 1/2a
Pit Group K - 6 (40g) - - - Biotite pottery 1/2a
Pit Group L - 11 (84g) - cal AD 540–640 - Biotite pottery, C14 date 1/2a
 Feature Datable artefacts Biotite pottery Sherd links Posterior Density Stratigraphy Justification Phase
Estimate
Pit Group 7th-century knife No. 182 1 (3g) Pit F345 - - Artefact date, sherd link 2a
M
Pit F10 - - - cal AD 530–620 - C14 date 1
Pit F66 7th-century onwards hooked tag No. - - - - Artefact date 2b
105
Pit F226 - - Structure 9 - - Sherd link 1
Pit F255 7th-century knives (Nos 196, 212), - Structure 20 - - Artefact dates, sherd link 2b
early 7th- to mid 8th-century bone pin
No. 100, mid 7th- to mid 8th-century
comb No. 129
Pit F324 Late 6th-century cruciform brooch - - - - Artefact date 2a
No. 15
Pit F345 6th-century amber bead No. 41 1 (19g) Pit Group M - - Artefact date, sherd link 2a
Pit F392 - - Structure 25 - - Sherd link 2b
Pit F519 - 4 (25g) Pit Group D - - Biotite pottery, sherd link 1
Pit F520 6th- to early 7th-century annular 2 (33g) Structure 5, Pit Group - - Artefact date, biotite pottery, sherd links 1
brooch No. 11, 7th-century knife No. D
198
Pit F525 - - Structure 5 - - Sherd link 1

335
160
Hollow - 11 (91g) Structure 38 - - Biotite pottery, sherd link 1
F301
Surface 6th-century amethyst pendant No. 42, 94 (1268g) Structures 9, 10, 16, cal AD 600–680, Overlies Structure 9, Pit group Biotite pottery, range of artefact dates, sherd links, 1–2b
Deposit F1 7th-century amethyst bead No. 36, 17 550–630, 570–660, C C14 dates, stratigraphy
6th- to early 7th-century annular 550–640, 550–650,
brooch No. 9, 7th- to 8th-century 560–650, 550–610,
lace-tag No. 107, 7th-century knives 580–660
No. 184–5, 191)
Surface Later 7th- to 8th-century glass bead 30 (292g) Structure 5, 16, 17 - Overlies Structures 16 and 17 Biotite pottery, range of artefact dates, sherd links, 1–2b
Deposit No. 27 stratigraphy
F8/275
Surface 6th-century wrist-clasp No. 103, 14 (123g) - cal AD 490–550 - Biotite pottery, range of artefact dates, C14 date 1–2b
Deposit 7th-century knives Nos 193, 209
F11/503
Surface ?later 7th-century pin No. 61 2 (24g) - - Overlies Structure 44, part of Artefact dates, stratigraphy 1–2b
Deposit Pit Group G and part of
F159/182 cemetery

Table 6.2 Dating justifications for (a) SFBs and (b) other features
Site phasing: methods
Site phasing is based on four different sources of infor-
mation: relative stratigraphy, where one feature cuts, or
is cut by, another, and the two therefore cannot have been
in use at the same time; radiocarbon dating of carbon-
ised residues on pottery sherds; date ranges assigned
to typologically distinctive artefacts within the feature
fill; indications of date given by the pottery assemblage
associated with the feature fill, particularly the presence
of quantities of probably 6th-century biotite-tempered
pottery, but also vessel links between different features.
There are obvious problems with all of these sources.
While relative stratigraphy may be reliable in itself
(assuming good recording and reasonably distinctive
fills), assigning any of the features involved to a phase
involves having absolute dating evidence available.
When using radiocarbon dates derived from carbonised
residues on pottery, it must be borne in mind that as
well as there being the usual margin of error which must
be taken into account (refined here through the use of
Bayesian modelling), the date obtained is for the use of
the pottery (at the time of the charring event), rather than
its deposition. Similar provisos apply to the typological
dating of associated artefacts, where issues of longevity
may also play a role, with certain items probably kept
in use for considerable lengths of time. This particularly
applies to those items from the ‘scrap metal’ assem-
blages, which may have been collected over a number
of years, and items such as brooches, which might have
had long use-lives, or been kept as heirlooms. The use
of pottery fabrics as a dating tool is in its infancy, and
should have the same reservations attached to it as the
radiocarbon dates from residues, particularly as it is from
these that the early dating of biotite-tempered fabrics
derives. Likewise, the use of sherd links to argue for
certain features being contemporary may not always be
foolproof, because of the potential for redeposition of
material around the site.
Nevertheless, when the different types of informa-
tion are tabulated by structure, surface deposit and pit
group, many do, in fact, have consistent dates offered
by different dating sources (Table 6.2). Structure 9, for
example, has radiocarbon dates of cal AD 520–580 and
AD 530–590 from two pottery sherds in the lower and
middle fills, seven sherds of biotite-tempered pottery
(194g) overall, and a pin dating to the earlier 6th century
from the upper fill/overlying surface deposit. Overall, the
impression is that individual SFB and pit fills are reason-
ably consistent in date, whereas the surface deposits tend
to contain material with a much wider range of dates.
In using the associated material assemblages to help
phase the settlement, one main assumption has therefore
been made, which is that the material redeposited within
an SFB is mainly material which had been deposited in the
vicinity of the building during its use; when the building
went out of use, the resulting depression is assumed to have
been filled in by the redeposition of surface material from
its near surroundings. While it cannot be said for certain
that activities carried out within that structure during its
use are directly reflected by the material it contains (as
argued in Chapter 3; other material may have become
incorporated from nearby structures, and some waste may
have been taken elsewhere for disposal, as evidenced by
sherd links between distant features, and the redeposition
of material, for example, from Surface Deposit F159/182
336
to Structure 14, which lay some 30m away), the date of the
redeposited Anglo-Saxon material is assumed to broadly
reflect the phase of use of the structure. This assumption
also means that pits can be dated by their fills, although,
if these were functionally intended to receive waste mate-
rial, the associated assemblage may not have spent time
on the surface before deposition, but, rather, may have
been placed in the pits directly. This model appears to be
supported by a number of structures which are closely
associated (sometimes through sherd links) with nearby
pits or pit groups, and which are placed into the same
phase through their associated assemblages (see below;
for example Structure 20 and Pit F255, and Structures 29,
30 and Pit Group L). This may be a complex relationship,
however, as sherd links between the two would indicate a
pit being infilled after the associated structure had gone out
of use, if the pit had been dug for a reason other than waste
disposal (see Pits discussion in Chapter 3). It should be
emphasised that this is an assumption relating to dating the
use of the structures, and it is not assumed that all the mate-
rial redeposited within a structure was actually produced
within it, during its occupation; it should be regarded as a
modelling tool.
Structures and other features have therefore been
placed, where possible, into Phase 1 (AD 500–580) and
Phase 2 (AD 580–700); it has often been possible to
further subdivide Phase 2 features into 2a (AD 580–650)
and 2b (AD 650–700). While this is obviously a ‘snap-
shot’ approach to phasing the site, and it is recognised that
the use of structures and other features would sometimes
have bridged these phase divisions, it serves as a useful
perspective from which to analyse the site.
Site phasing: patterning
Phasing outline
When Phase 1 features are plotted (Fig. 6.9), their distri-
bution is striking. Structures 4, 5, 9, 10, 16, 17, 24 and
38 can be assigned to this phase. With the exception of
Structure 24, the outlier to the far south of the settlement
core, these all lie in a broad swathe along the northern
boundary of the settlement, and several were actually dug
into the ditches of the former Romano-British trackway.
Pits and pit groups assigned to this phase comprise Pit
groups C and D, near Structures 9 and 10; Pit F10, near
Structure 4; and Pit Group N, around Structure 5; while Pit
groups I, J, K and L all have some indications of earlier
date, and either belong to this phase and/or the subsequent
Phase 2a. The overall impression is therefore of a linear
arrangement of SFBs to the north of a large ‘empty’ area;
the question of whether this area was occupied by contem-
porary post-hole buildings will be returned to towards the
end of this chapter.
Features which can be assigned to Phase 2a comprise
Structures 11, 18, 22, 29, 30, 32 and 35, Pit Group M (and
possibly I, J, K and L), and pits F324 and 345 (Fig. 6.10).
A very different, but equally striking, pattern is apparent
here, with these features forming a loose ring around the
central core of the site containing the majority of the post-
built buildings. Again, which of these post-hole buildings
should be assigned to this phase is discussed towards the
end of the chapter.
Features of Phase 2b comprise Structures 12, 13, 20,
21, 25 and 26; and pits F66, F255 and F392 (Fig. 6.11).
The structures form a more linear arrangement across the
337
Figure 6.9 Initial settlement phases: Phase 1
338
Figure 6.10 Initial settlement phases: Phase 2a
339
Figure 6.11 Initial settlement phases: Phase 2b
 Figure 6.12 Distribution plot of contexts with more than ten Roman pot sherds, shown against the Roman
settlement plan
central core of the settlement, and partly surround the
small associated cemetery, which belongs in the earlier
part of this phase.
Although a rather crude method has been used to
assign these structures and pits into broad phases, the
results do seem to suggest that some fundamental changes
in settlement organisation took place over the 200 or
so years of the site’s occupation. These broad phases
will therefore be used in the next section to investigate
changes over time in the way that material was deposited,
and to analyse changes in settlement activity through the
associated material culture. The first question that needs
to be addressed, given the density of finds within them
and their apparent effect on the structuring of the settle-
ment organisation, is how and when the surface deposits
were generated.
The formation of surface deposits
The first question that arises is whether any of these
spreads (which all contain material of unequivocal Anglo-
Saxon date) have their origins in the Romano-British
period. Fig. 6.12 shows the distribution of all contexts
containing over ten sherds of Roman pottery, against a
backdrop of the Roman enclosure system. It is apparent
that this distribution defines the core of the underlying
settlement, being largely confined within the two large
inner enclosures containing the Romano-British struc-
tures. Although a large proportion of this pottery has
obviously been moved from its original location, as it was
recovered from the fills of Anglo-Saxon features, dense
clusters can still be defined within what later become
Surface Deposits F159/182 and F342, though the latter
is smaller and less dense (the surface deposits within the
340
trackway area have less dense distributions of Roman
pottery, and lower mean sherd weights, suggesting that
this material was probably moved there during the Anglo-
Saxon period).
Mean sherd weights can be helpful here in identi-
fying whether Roman pottery is in a primary context or
not. Only one deposit on the site, the assemblage from
Pit F232, was identified during specialist work as a poten-
tial primary deposit; with a mean sherd weight of over
18g, it certainly exceeded that from any other feature.
It was also a large, coherent assemblage, comprised
predominantly of mid-2nd- to mid-3rd-century wares.
While this pit was originally assigned to Anglo-Saxon
Pit Group G, the evidence seems to suggest that it may
have been a Roman feature; only three sherds of appar-
ently Anglo-Saxon pottery were recovered from its fill,
and one of these produced an outlier radiocarbon date of
the 1st century BC. It also produced a large collection of
ceramic building material (2.5kg) including the largest
assemblage of imbrices from the whole site. However,
it should be noted that the upper fill of the pit had been
partly removed during the evaluation, and that this
closely resembled the nearby Surface Deposit F159/182;
it was from this upper fill that the majority of finds were
recovered (although the pottery from the lower fill had
an even higher mean sherd weight, of over 22g). Also
originally assigned to Pit Group G was nearby Pit F237,
which directly underlay the Surface Deposit F159/182.
While superficially its fill looks similar to that of F232,
it too comprised the surface deposit, with quantities of
slag and pot decreasing with depth. Thus, while there
are certainly Roman features in the vicinity of these pits,
and Pit F232 may be a Roman pit partly infilled with the
Figure 6.13 Roman pot by mean sherd weight (top) and weight (bottom) in Surface Deposit F159/182

341
 Figure 6.14 Distribution of flint (by weight) in Surface Deposit F159/182
surface deposit, these are thought not to contain solely
primary fills.
The question remains, therefore, whether Surface
Deposit F159/182 had its origins in the Roman period.
Looking at the distribution of Roman pottery by metre-
square seems to suggest that this is indeed the case
(Fig. 6.14). There appear to be two discrete clusters of
Roman pottery: one directly over (and partly infilling)
F237 and one just to the east (in the interior of what
becomes Structure 44). A third is postulated over
(and partly infilling) F232, further to the east again.
The numbers of sherds involved are comparable with
Roman surface deposits from the shrine at Snows Farm,
Haddenham (Evans and Hodder 2006, 353–4). The mean
sherd weights suggest that these concentrations have seen
some movement, as the highest weights per metre square
do not correspond with the highest mean weights. The
original core of the postulated Roman dump seems to lie
somewhat to the south, over the Roman ditches (and to
the west of the area in which Structure 44 and the ceme-
tery are later situated). This can be shown very clearly by
mapping the flint distribution (accepting that the presence
of flint is indicative of the movement of soil): Fig. 6.14
shows a very clear cluster of flint in this very spot, which
must represent the original Roman mound. This original
core of material, then, seems to have been moved around
(decreasing in mean sherd weight as it did so), to form
the high weight concentrations that were later visible.
Reasons for this movement of material are not clear,
but may have included a desire to level off the ground
surface or, more tentatively perhaps, an attempt to mark
the site of the cemetery with a build-up of material, for
material is definitely moved in this direction, probably
342
following the cessation of burial. Surface Deposit F342,
to the east, does, however, see these high mean weight
and mean sherd weight values coincide, suggesting that
the original core of the Roman dump here remained in
situ until excavation (although again there is evidence of
movement of material).
The distribution of the chronologically distinct
Roman pot types (Fig. 6.15) indicates that there was
probably a strong focus on these two main dumping areas
throughout, if one can ignore the ‘penumbra’ effect given
by the redeposition of material into later Anglo-Saxon
features. It is difficult to discern any change over time
in the locations of these areas, and it seems likely that
deposition began around the foundation of the Roman
settlement in the early to mid-2nd century and continued
until its abandonment. These midden areas seem to have
been placed away from the main structure in the central
enclosure, and we can suggest a functional division
between this area and the surrounding enclosures.
The distribution of CBM may help clarify this picture,
as this, too, is presumed to be of Roman date (although
its reuse within Anglo-Saxon settlements is well docu-
mented). Its distribution through the surface deposits
by metre-square (Fig. 6.16) is very similar to that of the
Roman pottery: dense clusters in F342 and F159/182
(especially, again, in the area above Pit F237), with a more
scattered distribution in the surface deposits within the
trackway area. This impression is reinforced by looking
at total weights of CBM: between them, F232, F237 and
Surface Deposit F159/182 contain in excess of 9kg of
CBM, compared with 3.5kg from F1, and 1.5kg apiece
from F11/503 and F8/275. The smaller Surface Deposit
F342 contains just 600g of CBM. Within the CBM itself,
Figure 6.15 Distribution plots of Roman pottery by phase

343
 Figure 6.16 CBM in surface deposits by weight (top) and mean weight (bottom)
some interesting patterns are seen. Imbrices, for example,
are clustered around F232 (which alone contains ten
pieces) and surrounding pits and structures, and in the
eastern half of Surface Deposit F8/275. Flanged tegulae,
in contrast, are found in Surface Deposit F159/182 and
pits F232 and F237, in adjacent Structure 20, and further
away in Structures 15, 30 and 31, as well as, again, in
the eastern half of Surface Deposit F8/275. Box flue tile
fragments have a more widespread and less concentrated
distribution, although those features with more than one
piece comprise Pit F232 and Structures 14, 15, 19 and
30. This patterning, taken together with the evidence of
burning detailed in the specialist report (see Chapter 2)
suggests that although some CBM may have still been
contained within Roman assemblages at the core of
344
Surface Deposits F159/182 and F342, many examples
had been subjected to further use during the Anglo-
Saxon-period occupation, and subsequently become
incorporated in structure and pit fills, and within the
surface deposits within the trackway area.
The other category of material that appears to be
correlated with the presence of Roman pottery and CBM
within the surface deposits is metalworking slag. The first
issue to be tackled in relation to this, therefore, is whether
some, or all, of this material could also be of Roman
origin, or whether this represents waste being deposited on
surface dumps that were already in existence. The distri-
bution of slag in the surface deposits (Fig. 6.17) appears
to be more dispersed than that of the Roman pottery and,
especially, that of the CBM. Like these other materials, it
 Figure 6.17 Slag in surface deposits by weight (top) and mean weight (bottom)
too displays a concentration above Pit F237, but, unlike
them, only a solitary fragment of slag was recovered
from the (potentially primary Roman) deposit in F232.
The slag deposit from F159/182 is also distinguished by
its low mean weight, at just 7.94g, which contrasts with
the other surface deposits: 13.47g from F1, 18.42g from
F11/503 and 33.29g from F8/275 (these figures repre-
sent the unsieved material only). The impression from
the distribution of mean unsieved slag weights by metre
square through the surface deposits (Fig. 6.17) is not one
of Roman material being spread out from an original
core, but of material being newly dumped in the Anglo-
Saxon period: the highest slag weight values are seen in
the area of the surface deposit which partially overlies
the cemetery. It is certainly one of the largest slag assem-
345
blages from the site, consisting of over 38kg of slag (with
a further 6kg from underlying Pit F237), as against 11kg
from Surface Deposit F1, nearly 6kg from F11/503 and
just over 1kg from F8/275 (F342 produced just two pieces
weighing 14g). Aside from the characteristics of the slag
assemblage itself, which strongly suggest it to be Anglo-
Saxon in date (see Cowgill, Chapter 4), the way in which
it is distributed through the surface deposits and the lack
of slag from the more coherently Roman assemblages
within Surface Deposit F342 and Pit F232 suggest that
this is material generated during the Anglo-Saxon period
and then dumped on pre-existing surface deposits.
Thus, while some of the surface deposits, particularly
F159/182 and F342, can be demonstrated to have Roman
dumps at their core, which seem to have consisted
particularly of Roman pottery and CBM (animal bone
does not form a major part of either assemblage), the
majority of surface dumping belongs to the Anglo-Saxon
settlement occupation. Material was added to the tops
of these former Roman deposits, particularly slag and
metal fragments in the case of F159/182, with the surface
deposits in the former trackway area being formed solely
during the Anglo-Saxon period. The next question to be
addressed is what prompted the formation of the surface
deposits within the trackway area.
Of fundamental importance here is the coincidence
of their distribution with that of the Phase 1 SFBs: both
sit within this broad swathe of landscape. Is it possible
that the origins of these multi-phase surface deposits lie
within the general practice of dumping material near to
structures during the latter’s use (as was assumed during
the initial phasing)? One method of investigating this is
to map the distribution of 6th-century material recovered
from the surface deposits themselves: can it be seen to
concentrate in areas between the structures, thus implying
that these deposits have discrete 6th-century cores? The
obvious material to plot initially is biotite-tempered
pottery, as this has been clearly shown by the radiocarbon
analyses to be 6th-century (Fig. 6.18). This pottery has
a strong presence in the Phase 1 Structures 5, 9, 10, 16,
17, 24 and 38, and clusters are also visible within the
surface deposits. This is particularly true for the eastern
half of F1, but also to a lesser extent the eastern half of
F8/275 and the eastern half of F11/503. Small numbers
of these sherds were also recovered from F159/182 and
F342. This does indeed suggest that parts of these surface
deposits had been established during the 6th century, and
that these parts were contemporary with the occupation
of the Phase 1 structures. It is also notable that all the
Figure 6.18 Distribution plot of biotite-tempered pottery in surface deposits
346
(probably 6th-century) annular brooch fragments from
the site were recovered from the same area, with two
found within surface deposits next to Phase 1 structures.
The plotting of the finds distributions through the
various spits of F1 gives a very clear picture of the
gradual build-up of a surface deposit (Colour Pl. VII).
Figs 6.19–22 show the spitted distributions of animal
bone, slag, Anglo-Saxon pottery and Roman pottery. In
all cases, a central core to the north-east of Structure 9 is
added to over time. The effect is seen particularly clearly
in the case of the animal bone. Dense distributions are
also seen in the area of Structure 9 itself, and may repre-
sent the blurring of the distinction between the infill of
the SFB and the surface deposit itself. In upper spits, the
distribution of material is increasingly widespread, but
the differential density throughout the surface deposit
suggests that it may have had a heaped appearance. Of
interest are the low numbers of Roman pot sherds in
the lower spits (which contrasts with, for example, the
slag and animal bone weights); this suggests that small
amounts of Roman pottery were being moved around,
presumably with other material, or caught up in soil, and
strongly suggests that no Roman-period dumping took
place in this area.
We can therefore conclude that Surface Deposits
F159/182 and F342 were already in existence by the
end of the Romano-British occupation of the site, and
that they remained visible two centuries later, when
the Anglo-Saxon-period occupation began. Perhaps the
existence of extant surface deposits of material prompted
further surface dumping onto those existing deposits,
and also the foundation of new deposits in the area of the
trackway where the Phase 1 SFBs were predominantly
located. One question that cannot be answered is whether
Figure 6.19 Finds by spit in Surface Deposit F1: bone

Figure 6.20 Finds by spit in Surface Deposit F1: slag

347
Figure 6.21 Finds by spit in Surface Deposit F1: Anglo-Saxon pottery

Figure 6.22 Finds by spit in Surface Deposit F1: Roman pottery

348
349
Figure 6.23 Distribution plot of flint across the site, showing those flints recovered from Roman ditches
 Figure 6.24 Distribution of flint by spit in Surface Deposit F1
these surface deposits represent the surviving remains of
the original ground surface, differentially preserved, or
whether they were, in fact, discrete features in the past.
The growth of surface deposits
A further question to be addressed is precisely how the
surface deposits were formed over time: was it purely
with the additional dumping of waste material, or were
earth mounds being deliberately created by the scraping
up of soil (perhaps to create a physical boundary to the
north of the site). Moreover, was the dumped material
being deliberately selected, or was it representative of
the total waste from the site? Finally, were all surface
deposits being added to at the same time, or can some be
demonstrated to pre-date others?
When looking at the assemblage composition and
dating information available for the surface deposits,
some fundamental differences can be seen. In general, the
central spread within the trackway area, F1, has the largest
total amount of material: 139kg overall, compared with
64kg from F159/192 to the south, 29kg from F11/503 to
the west, 20kg from F8/275 to the east, and just 7kg from
the smaller spread F342 to the south-east. It should be
borne in mind, however, that different amounts of each
surface deposit were excavated: F1, for example, was
almost completely excavated in one-metre squares, while
those to east and west were more selectively sampled.
This differential sampling was, however, due to visible
differences in the field: F1 seemed denser with finds, and
so was more intensively excavated. The first step, there-
fore, in establishing the nature of the deposits — whether
350
they are composed primarily of waste material, or repre-
sent movement of soil around the site, for example — is
to look in more detail at finds densities.
Some terminology needs outlining first. Previous
studies of the movement of waste material on archaeolog-
ical sites have specified that the term ‘midden’ should only
be used to describe a particular type of occupation waste:
one that is relatively rich in occupation refuse (though
this can include decayed organic material) and has been
deliberately and sequentially deposited in a particular
location, with a significant component of material from
early on in the refuse cycle (Needham and Spence 1996,
25); they are not, however, necessarily intended for use
in manuring, and they do not need to be located on the
settlement site itself (ibid., 26). In order to assess whether
any of the surface deposits at Bloodmoor Hill meet these
criteria, it is therefore necessary to demonstrate episodic
dumping (although the material being dumped may vary
over time), and then investigate the nature of the material
being dumped.
One of the main characteristics of all the surface
deposits at Bloodmoor Hill is the wide date range
displayed by their datable artefacts. Leaving aside the
issue of Roman material (discussed above), all contain
material that can be dated to the 6th and 7th centuries.
In analysing the chronology of the growth of surface
deposits the distribution of biotite-tempered pottery is
again useful. As mentioned above, its main concentra-
tions within the trackway surface deposits lie over and
to the east of Structure 9 in F1 and, to a lesser extent,
over and to the east of Structure 17 in F8/275. It might
be suggested, therefore, that F1 originated first, followed
by F8/275 and then by F11/503, with correspondingly
decreasing amounts of this earlier pottery type incorpo-
rated. Seeing F1 as having a longer depositional history
may therefore account for its vastly larger amount of
incorporated material when compared with the spreads
to either side. This is also supported by its associated
radiocarbon dates, which range from cal AD 550–610
to cal AD 600–680, and by its datable metalwork, which
includes a presumably 6th-century amber pendant and
annular brooch, three 7th-century-type iron knives, a
7th-century amethyst bead and a 7th- to 8th-century lace
tag. This argument is slightly undermined, however,
by the early radiocarbon date of cal AD 490–550 from
F11/503, which also has material with a range of dates: a
6th-century wrist-clasp and two 7th-century knives (the
only datable item from F8/275 was a later 7th- to 8th-
century-type glass bead). It may be the case, therefore,
that there was simply a tendency to deposit more material
on F1 than on the other surface deposits; this may relate
to how material was being moved around the site.
It can be confidently stated, therefore, that these were
deposits that were being added to over time. What was
their nature though? Was primary refuse being dumped,
or do they represent the movement of soil (perhaps repre-
senting the deliberate stripping of the topsoil from the
area immediately to the south, where the majority of the
post-built structures were located)? Two methods can
be used to explore whether it was soil, rather than waste
material, that was being moved. First, we can look at
the overall distribution of (prehistoric) flint. While the
distribution plot of flint in Roman ditch fills (Fig. 6.23)
suggests that the core of any prehistoric activity lay
predominantly in the southern half of the excavated area,
the distribution of all flint shows strong clustering in the
area of Surface Deposit F1, and to a lesser extent in the
surface deposits to east and west along the trackway area;
particular concentrations are also seen in the western
part of Surface Deposit F159/182 (possibly representing
Roman-period mounding), and in surrounding infilled
structures. Fig. 6.24 shows the distribution of flint
through F1 by spit. While some of the material in the
lowest two spits may originate from soil excavated from
the SFBs themselves, the upper spit shows a wider distri-
bution, suggesting that soil from elsewhere on the site
continues to be added.
Second, we can look at the patterning of residual
Romano-British material within the trackway surface
deposits. While the majority of the pottery produced
by the Romano-British settlement may have originally
been deposited through surface dumping, a settlement of
this type would also have produced a scatter of material
(as evidenced by the handful or so of pottery from each
of the sieved test-squares running up the centre of the
site). Is there evidence that some of this pottery had also
been caught within scraped-up soil and deposited within
the trackway area? Reference back to the plot of mean
sherd weight of Roman pottery in the surface deposits
(Fig. 6.13) shows that the mean weights of this material
are indeed very low in general, and may well represent
inadvertently redeposited artefacts. There thus seems to
be evidence which supports the argument that soil was
being levelled off and redeposited on nearby surface
deposits, particularly on F1, but also on parts of F159/182
and F8/275. This may have been in advance of laying out
351
post-built structures in the central core of the site; the
spread of flint around this central core would seem to add
further weight to this. In addition, the very digging out of
an SFB would have generated a large volume of soil; this
is another potential source for some of the soil forming
the surface deposits.
Having examined the potential origins of the surface
spreads, we now turn to the second issue — whether
certain types of material were deliberately selected for
deposition on the trackway surface deposits. This entails
comparing the characteristics of these assemblages with
those infilling SFBs and pits. Tables 6.3a and b detail
the breakdown of finds by feature type, showing, for
example, the relative percentage of animal bone, by both
number and weight, to be found in surface deposits and
SFB and pit fills. Overall, SFB fills generally contain
higher proportions of each material type than both
surface deposits and pits, with the exception of burnt flint
(by number and weight, a greater proportion is found in
surface deposits), flint (by weight, a greater proportion
comes from surface deposits; this may reflect differen-
tial soil movement), animal bone, lava quernstone and
Roman pottery (by weight, greater proportions are found
in pits). Proportionally more fired clay, slag, metal,
stone, unfired clay, worked stone and Anglo-Saxon
pottery are found in SFB fills than would be expected,
suggesting that there is an element of selection occurring.
The different patterns, depending on whether weight or
number is examined, are interesting, as this is evidence
for different depositional histories of material; the mean
weight of material in the various feature types (Table
6.4) indicates that animal bone, CBM, fired clay, burnt
flint, lava quernstone, pottery (both Roman and Anglo-
Saxon) and slag are all less fragmented in pits than they
are in other features; only flint, metal, stone (worked and
unworked) and unfired clay are less fragmented in SFB
fills and (to a lesser extent) surface deposits. This adds
further weight to the argument that material entered into
pits more quickly than it did into other features (with
some exceptions), and will be explored further below.
Although there is evidence for the movement of soil
onto the areas of the surface deposits (suggested by the
movement of prehistoric flint and Roman pottery), it is
possible that these areas were subsequently used for the
deposition of more primary refuse: i.e. that they became
middens. An examination of relative densities of mate-
rial can help resolve this issue. To accomplish this, each
surface deposit had its excavated volume approximately
calculated by multiplying the number of metre-squares
excavated by the maximum height of the feature and then
dividing by two to compensate for the levelling off of these
deposits towards the edges. Total weights of various mate-
rials within each surface deposit could then be expressed
as densities (g/m3: see Table 6.5). What this demonstrates
is that it is not, in fact, F1, which was the trackway deposit
densest in finds, but the deposit to the east, F8/275. This
is true for animal bone, Roman and Anglo-Saxon pottery,
and CBM. The only materials for which this does not
hold true are metal and slag, where F11/503 and F1 (for
slag) have greater densities. F159/182, to the south, is
different again, with even greater densities of all these
materials except Anglo-Saxon pottery and animal bone.
There thus appear to be significant differences between
F159/182 and the trackway deposits, with the former
having a much more ‘industrial’ quality to it. There are
also, however, differences between the trackway deposits
themselves, with apparently more waste being deposited
in the eastern areas than the central or western ones. This
does not, however, take the role of organic waste into
account. During excavation, the material which made
up F1 was noted to be more ‘organic’ in nature than the
deposits to either side; its lower densities of surviving
finds may therefore indicate originally higher levels of
organic waste.
However, it is still doubtful whether any of these
deposits can properly be termed middens. While F1 and
F8/275, in particular, show concentrations of animal bone,
overall bone densities were generally low, at less than
2kg/m3, compared with the later Bronze Age middens
identified at Runnymede Bridge, which had values over
10kg/m3 (Needham and Spence 1996, table 7). The latter
site also produced pot densities around 100 times higher
than those seen at Bloodmoor Hill (ibid.). While propor-
tions of animal bone surviving may have been affected
by aggressive soil conditions, the same cannot be said
for the pottery.
The movement of material from surface deposits to
negative features
It has already been noted in Chapters Three and Four
that the fills of certain abandoned SFBs were distinctly
different from others. The fills of Structures 14 and 19,
for example, are remarkable for the large amounts of
slag and scrap metalwork contained within them, while
those of Structures 20, 21 and 22 have large quantities

Finds type Total no. SD no. SFB no. Pit no. Other no. Total wt SD wt SFB wt Pit wt Other wt
(a) by weight (g)
Bone 68438 18222 23936 23179 3101 280170 54450 101414 113449 10857
CBM 752 200 233 171 148 48053 11601 13471 13327 9654
FC 28530 8707 12476 5037 2310 176727 31486 86797 38166 20278
BF 1469 639 511 210 109 25331 13649 6120 3459 2103
Charcoal 3885 318 2754 763 50 2731 211 2039 457 24
Flint 1571 394 469 250 458 26413 8038 5856 4029 8490
Lava 2488 704 787 662 335 16608 3368 5058 5203 2979
Metal 2896 416 1167 470 843 19044 2450 6862 2689 7043
Pottery 13929 3796 5534 2835 1764 103973 25182 36632 25388 16771
Shell 169 2 6 149 12 1012 3 6 996 7
Slag 25948 6107 16904 2217 720 161192 56937 71668 23423 9164
Stone 2948 880 1228 736 104 178244 47378 93712 31282 5872
UFC 6375 1 5682 656 36 141816 35 129285 11246 1250
Worked st 154 35 61 51 7 52975 4996 31758 6448 9773

AS pot 6772 2036 2852 1544 340 58332 14560 25795 15010 2967
Roman pot 6374 1587 2341 1299 1147 42413 9779 11014 11333 10287
Totals 159552 40421 71748 37386 9997 1234289 259784 590678 279562 104265
(b) by percentage
Finds type SD no. SFB no. Pit no. Other no. Finds type SD wt SFB wt Pit wt Other wt
Bone 26.63 34.97 33.87 4.53 Bone 19.43 36.20 40.49 3.88
CBM 26.60 30.98 22.74 19.68 CBM 24.14 28.03 27.73 20.09
FC 30.52 43.73 17.66 8.10 FC 17.82 49.11 21.60 11.47
BF 43.50 34.79 14.30 7.42 BF 53.88 24.16 13.66 8.30
Charcoal 8.19 70.89 19.64 1.29 Charcoal 7.73 74.66 16.73 0.88
Flint 25.08 29.85 15.91 29.15 Flint 30.43 22.17 15.25 32.14
Lava 28.30 31.63 26.61 13.46 Lava 20.28 30.46 31.33 17.94
Metal 14.36 40.30 16.23 29.11 Metal 12.86 36.03 14.12 36.98
Pottery 27.25 39.73 20.35 12.66 Pottery 24.22 35.23 24.42 16.13
Shell 1.18 3.55 88.17 7.10 Shell 0.30 0.59 98.42 0.69
Slag 23.54 65.15 8.54 2.77 Slag 35.32 44.46 14.53 5.69
Stone 29.85 41.66 24.97 3.53 Stone 26.58 52.58 17.55 3.29
UFC 0.02 89.13 10.29 0.56 UFC 0.02 91.16 7.93 0.88
Worked st 22.73 39.61 33.12 4.55 Worked st 9.43 59.95 12.17 18.45

AS pot 30.06 42.11 22.80 5.02 AS pot 24.96 44.22 25.73 5.09
Roman pot 24.90 36.73 20.38 17.99 Roman pot 23.06 25.97 26.72 24.25
Total % 25.33 44.97 23.43 6.27 Total % 21.05 47.86 22.65 8.45

Table 6.3 Finds totals: (a) number and weight (g) by feature type; (b) by percentage

352
Finds type SD mean wt SFB mean wt Pit mean wt Other mean wt
Bone 2.99 4.24 4.89 3.50
CBM 58.01 57.82 77.94 65.23
FC 3.62 6.96 7.58 8.78
BF 21.36 11.98 16.47 19.29
Charcoal 0.66 0.74 0.60 0.48
Flint 20.40 12.49 16.12 18.54
Lava 4.78 6.43 7.86 8.89
Metal 5.89 5.88 5.72 8.35
Pottery 6.63 6.62 8.96 9.51
Shell 1.50 1.00 6.68 0.58
Slag 9.32 4.24 10.57 12.73
Stone 53.84 76.31 42.50 56.46
UFC 35.00 22.75 17.14 34.72
Worked st 142.74 520.62 126.43 1396.14

AS pot 7.15 9.04 9.72 8.73

Roman pot 6.16 4.70 8.72 8.97

Table 6.4 Finds totals: mean weight (g) by feature type

Surface Deposit Structure Roman pot AS pot wt/m3 Bone wt/m3 Slag wt/M3 CBM wt/m3 FC wt/m3 Metal wt/m3
volume wt/m3
F1 54.4 39.26 148.82 716.93 225.72 63.86 375.50 12.41
F8/275 6.6 52.88 381.36 1151.82 171.52 235.91 335.00 18.33
F11/503 21.9 31.96 111.78 146.58 260.68 68.08 182.69 24.66
F342 2.3 659.13 76.09 67.83 6.09 264.35 134.78 45.22
F159/182 8.9 528.31 25.28 260.56 4305.28 453.60 485.39 96.85

Table 6.5 Surface deposits: finds densities

Figure 6.25 Assemblage profiles of Surface Deposit 159/182, Structure 14 and Structure 19

353
162
of textile-related equipment. The question that now
arises, therefore, is whether certain pits and SFBs were
being filled with material from specific surface deposits.
One way of addressing this is to characterise the fills of
nearby surface deposits and SFBs by calculating the rela-
tive percentages of different types of material contained
within them (in all cases, percentages have been calcu-
lated against the site total for that category of material,
whether by weight or number; for slag, numbers and
weights before sieving have been used, unless otherwise
stated).
The first set of features that it seems obvious to
compare are those with very high slag and Roman pottery
weights, but little Anglo-Saxon pottery: Surface Deposit
F159/182 and Structures 14 and 19. Could the sunken
features of these structures have been filled by redeposi-
tion of material from the surface deposit? Before looking
at the comparisons, it is worth considering the effect that
sampling strategies had on the finds totals from these
three features. The surface deposit was not systemati-
cally sieved, whereas the fill of Structure 14 had the spoil
from two of its four quadrants sieved (i.e. a 50% sample)
Figure 6.26 Close-up plan of the potential metalworking area
354
and the spoil from Structure 19 was 100% sieved. The
effect on, for example, the slag assemblage was dramatic.
Structure 14 saw a 100% increase in number and a 20%
increase in weight after sieving, while Structure 19 saw a
500% increase in number and a 65% increase in weight.
Even before sieving, Structure 19 had produced over
three times as much slag as Structure 14, suggesting real
differences between these features, not least among them
that the slag from Structure 19, although more plentiful,
was also more abraded than that from Structure 14, once
the sieved fractions were taken account of. As a note of
caution, however, the cindery and fragile nature of the
material must be taken into account. By sieving the slag
it was inevitable that the pieces would become more frac-
tured and some would disintegrate further, even with the
greatest care being taken.
The non-sieved assemblage profiles (Fig. 6.25) from
the surface deposit and Structure 19 are very similar,
although the numbers and weight profiles are slightly
lower overall from the structure (see Fig. 6.26 for loca-
tion); this strongly suggests that the fill of Structure 19
represents material redeposited from the surface deposit
Figure 6.27 Finds by spit: Structure 14

355
Figure 6.28 Finds by spit: Structure 19

356
 Figure 6.29 Assemblage profiles of Structure 31, Pit group M and Surface Deposit F342
nearby (and also that the surface deposit did not subse-
quently have substantial amounts of fresh material added
to it). The assemblage from Structure 14, though, has
lower quantities (and weights) of all categories, with
the exception of metal, where it has a higher metal
weight than Structure 19 and Surface Deposit F159/182
combined (indeed, this feature contains over 13% of the
total unsieved metal weight from the entire site and over
25% of the total metal weight). It should be remembered
that Structure 14 produced an unusual number of tools,
including chisels and punches, along with fragments of
iron including knife-blade and sickle fragments, shears
loops, a spearhead fragment and other items. It may be
that the fill from Structure 14 comprised material from
F159/182, but with the addition of part of a metal-
working tool kit and associated material for recycling.
It is tempting to argue that the infilling of Structures 14
and 19 coincided with the cessation of metalworking
on the site (hence the abandonment of tools and mate-
rial that had recycling potential), if not the cessation of
occupation itself. Such an act of deposition may fall into
the category of ‘placed deposit’ (see Hamerow 2006 for
related discussions; deposition of metalworking tools is
known from both late Roman and later Saxon contexts).
The infilling of these structures can also be examined in
more detail, owing to their excavation in metre-squares
and spits. Figs 6.27 and 6.28 compare the amount of
material deposited in the central excavated squares; while
Structure 19 has its highest material densities in its north-
west and south-west quadrants, suggesting that material
was perhaps being dumped in from the west (where
Surface Deposit F159/182 lies), Structure 14 suggests
infilling from the north or east in relation to Surface
Deposit F159/182. This adds support to the idea that this
surface deposit was the source of the infill material.
In a similar manner, it can be strongly argued that
the abandoned Structure 31 was infilled directly from
the adjacent Surface Deposit F342 (Fig. 6.29), and that
357
Pit Group M was infilled from the same source, with
the addition of animal bone. Other adjacent pits and
structures which display similar profiles are detailed in
Figs 6.30–6.31. Three other structures closely resemble
the surface deposits under which they were located
(these deposits may therefore represent the continued
build-up of material once these structures were aban-
doned): Structures 16 and 17 resemble Surface Deposit
F8/275 (Fig. 6.32), and Structure 5 resembles F11/503
(Fig. 6.33). Two other pairs of structures display very
similar fills, but can no longer be associated with a pit
group or surface deposit: Structures 9 and 10 (Figs 6.33
and 6.34) and Structures 21 and 22 (Fig. 6.33), all of
which seem to have been infilled from the same source,
presumably Surface Deposit F1. That these various fills
have a common source is further supported by a number
of sherd links (see Chapter 4): these have been identified
between Structure 38 and Hollow F301; Structures 16,
17 and Surface Deposit F8/275; Structure 29 and Pit
Group L; and Surface Deposit F1 and Structures 9 and
10. There is thus strong evidence that certain pit groups
were associated with the occupation of certain structures
(and can therefore be placed into the same phase: see
below).
IV. Site modelling
Having considered the mechanisms by which the surface
deposits were built up around the site, and established
dating links between different groups of features, a final
attempt can now be made at establishing phase models
for the site, before turning to questions of activity and
patterns of change over time. As outlined on Figs 6.35–
6.37 (phase justifications given in Table 6.2), further
structures and pit groups have been tentatively assigned to
phases. Added to Phase 1 are the outlying Structures 23,
33, 34, 36 and 37, Pit groups B and H, post-built build-
Figure 6.30 Assemblage profiles of Structure 4 and Pit Group B; Structure 23 and Pit Group H;
and Structure 25 and Pit Group I

358
Figure 6.31 Assemblage profiles of Structure 35 and Pit Group J; Structure 29, Structure 30 and Pit Group L; and
Structure 38 and Hollow F301

359
 Figure 6.32 Assemblage profiles of Structure 16, Structure 17 and Surface Deposit F8/275; and Structure 5,
Pit Group N and Surface Deposit F11/503
ings Structure 40, Structure 44 and Structure 46, and
six tentative post-built structures indicated on the plan.
The picture presented by this model is an intriguing one,
as it suggests a degree of organisation, with a central
core of post-built structures in a possibly levelled area,
surrounded by a penumbra of SFBs. To the north, these
are constructed within the former Roman trackway (indi-
cating that this communication route was no longer in
operation). One possibility is that these two types of struc-
ture were used for different functions during this phase.
The central post-built structures have very few pits and
only one possible surface deposit associated, while the
SFBs are linked more strongly to the build-up of occu-
pation deposits. These SFBs form the cores of surface
deposits along the trackway (next to Structures 5, 9, 10,
16 and 17: the Surface Deposits perhaps even arising
from the infilling of SFBs in the case of Structures 16
and 17), while Structure 38 is associated with the build-
up of material in Hollow F301, Structure 4 with that in
Pit Group B and Structure 23 with that in Pit Group H.
The outer ring of structures may therefore have been
associated with a range of ‘dirty’ activities, particularly
360
metalworking in the case of Structure 5 (and possibly
Structure 4), but also perhaps butchery (with high densi-
ties of animal bone in Structures 4, 10, 16, 24 and 37,
as well as in the central and eastern trackway deposits).
These areas also seem to have been seen as more suitable
for the deposition of more domestic ‘rubbish’, in the form
of broken pottery and potentially organic waste as well.
A major reorganisation is in evidence between Phase 1
and Phase 2. As well as the securely dated features
described at the start of the chapter, added to Phase 2a
are Structures 2, 3, 27 and 31, post-built Structures 41,
43, 45 and 47 and Pit groups A, F, J and L. Three further
possible post-built structures are also indicated on the
plan. These post-built structures almost form a ‘street’
through the central core of the site, running parallel to
the major landscape feature now present in the form
of surface deposits within the trackway area (though
access to the eastern end of this ‘street’ would have been
blocked by the building of Structure 27). This central
core of structures is still surrounded by a ‘ring’ of SFBs,
but, with the exception of Structures 1, 2 and 3 isolated
to the north-west of the trackway area, these are much
 Figure 6.33 Assemblage profiles of Structure 9, Structure 10, Pit Group C and Pit Group D; and Structure 21
and Structure 22
more tightly clustered around the post-built structures.
Perhaps this indicates a more ‘backyard’ role for these
SFBs, rather than the distinct physical separation seen in
Phase 1.
Use of the cemetery probably starts towards the end
of Phase 2a, and reflects a fundamental breakdown in
this structural ordering. While the cemetery is in use
the settlement seems to undergo a contraction. Further
buildings which can be assigned to this sub-phase are
Structures 14, 15, 19 and 28, post-built Structures 39 and
42 and Pit groups E, G (except for earlier pits F232, 235
and 237) and I. A further two possible post-built struc-
tures are also indicated. Inverting the pattern previously
seen, it now seems to be the cemetery which lies at the
heart of the settlement, tightly contained within a cluster
of SFBs, which themselves are surrounded by a smaller
number of post-built structures. This may represent a
functional change for the SFBs, or, more radically, a
dramatic shift in the role of the settlement. It is in this
sub-phase that the bulk of the metalworking and other
craft evidence seems to belong (see below), and this may
361
represent a settlement undergoing economic specialisa-
tion, with concomitant social effects.
Having established the phasing, examination of
change through time with regard to other features, such
as the buildings, is now possible. While the post-built
structures are too tentatively phased for any discernible
patterns to be reliable, it is of interest that the only post-
in-trench building, Structure 42 (Fig. 6.38), belongs to the
final phase of the settlement, towards the end of the 7th
century or even the start of the 8th century; this accords
with the accepted development of this building type
(Marshall and Marshall 1993). Of perhaps more interest
are the developments seen within the SFBs. When seen
by phase, an intriguing pattern emerges (Figs 6.39–6.41).
Within Phase 1, of the thirteen SFBs, ten (77%) are of
two-post or two-post derivative form, with two being
post-hole-less and one being of one-post-hole type. A
similar pattern is seen in Phase 2b, where nine of twelve
SFBs (75%) are likewise of two-post-hole or derivative
form. In this phase, however, we see the first examples
of four-post-hole, six-post-hole and hollow types (one of
Figure 6.34 Close-up plan of Structures 9, 10 and related features

362
363
Figure 6.35 Final site phase plots: Phase 1
364
Figure 6.36 Final site phase plots: Phase 2a
365
Figure 6.37 Final site phase plots: Phase 2b
 Figure 6.38 Close-up plan of Structures 11 to 15 and 41 to 43, and related features
each). In Phase 2b, though, much more variation in type
is seen, with (of ten SFBs in total) a single post-hole-less
type, three of one-post-hole type, two of two-post-hole
type (none of which are of derivative form), two of six-
post-hole type and two of hollow type. There is also
an impression from the data that the structures tend to
become more rectangular, more consistently oriented and
slightly larger through the three phases.
The morphology of the buildings at Bloodmoor Hill is
therefore more varied than at Mucking, where over 90%
were of two-post or two-post derivative form (Hamerow
1993, 10), but not quite as varied as at West Stow, where
only 50% were of two-post or derivative type, but 36%
(twenty-three of sixty-four) were of six-post type (Tipper
2004, 69, tab. 23).
366
V. The organisation of activities within the
settlement
Having established above the overall phasing for the
Anglo-Saxon settlement, addressed questions relating
to the formation and growth of the distinctive surface
deposits, and outlined the nature of the economic and
environmental evidence, questions of settlement organi-
sation and change over time can now be addressed.
The location of different occupational activities such
as animal butchery, crop processing, textile manufac-
ture and metalworking, will be examined. A central
question is whether any spatial organisation of activity
— for example, of different craft activities, of domestic
occupation, of burial, of rubbish disposal — can be
discerned by phase. It should be emphasised that what
is offered here is a working model, which looks at the
distribution of activities at a more general level than in
previous chapters. It must be remembered that, while the
material recovered from SFBs does not necessarily have
a relationship with the function of the original building
itself (see Chapter 3), an examination of the broad distri-
butional patterning of the material across the site, and its
Figure 6.39 Phase 1 SFBs, arranged by type

367
Figure 6.40 Phase 2a SFBs, arranged by type

368
Figure 6.41 Phase 2b SFBs, arranged by type

369
relationship with structures and features assigned to the
different phases, is still a worthwhile exercise.
Animal butchery, crop processing and food
preparation
Animal butchery
While the specialist report (see Higbee, Chapter 5) found
little patterning evident in the distribution of different
species, there was a suggestion that the surface deposits
were more likely to contain waste from primary butchery,
while other features contained a greater range of skel-
etal elements. Overall, pits contained more bone (by
comparison with total material weight) than might be
expected, while SFBs contained less; this might reflect
that animal bone waste, when it was not being removed
to more distant surface deposits, was being buried in
nearby below-ground features more quickly than other
categories of material. The distribution of animal bone in
features by weight certainly shows clustering (Fig. 6.42).
With the exception of the mass of bone found in Surface
Deposit F1 (over 35kg), all features containing over 7kg
of bone fall firmly into the eastern half of the site: those
containing in excess of 10kg are Structures 24 and 35,
Pit F255 and Pit Group H, while those with between
7kg and 10kg comprise Structures 17 and 20, Pit groups
I and L and Surface Deposit F8/275. It may be signifi-
cant that the distribution of cut and chopped bone also
focuses on this area of the site (Fig. 6.42), and on these
features in particular, especially Surface Deposit F1 and
other features along the trackway area. Thus it can be
argued that butchery was mainly taking place away from

Figure 6.42 Plot of animal bone by weight in surface deposits (top) compared with distribution of cut and chopped
bone (bottom)

370
the core of the site, perhaps even in open areas or further
structures to the north of the trackway surface deposits,
with the resultant waste material being deposited on the
pre-existing surface deposits. Secondary processing may
have taken place closer to the core of the settlement, but
with waste material from this being incorporated into
negative features, particularly pits and disused struc-
tures, more quickly than was the case for many other
materials.
There may also be a chronological dimension.
The quantities of animal bone which were recovered
from Surface Deposits F1 and F8/275 suggest that
these remained a focus for the deposition of possibly
primary butchery waste throughout the occupation of
the settlement. In addition, in each phase there appears
to be a secondary focus. In Phase 1 this is centred on
Structure 24; in Phase 2a the focus shifts to the area
around Structures 29 and 30, including Pit Group L, and
the area around Structure 35, including Pit Group H,
while in Phase 2b it seems to be Structure 25, Pit F255
and Pit Group I which see the largest quantities of bone
deposited. What is particularly interesting is that, with
the exception of Pit F255, these features represent the
easternmost (and southernmost in the case of Phase 1)
structures and pits in use at the time, and may be indicating
that possibly ‘unclean’ practices such as the processing
of animal carcasses were taking place essentially behind
the public face of the settlement, until this pattern breaks
down towards the end of occupation.
Crop processing
As outlined by Ballantyne (see Chapter 5), the rela-
tively poor preservation of charred plant remains at
Bloodmoor Hill somewhat restricts the conclusions
which can be drawn about the importance and location
Figure 6.43 Distribution of non-lava quernstone fragments
371
of crop-processing activities. While three post-hole fills
from Structure 39 have produced evidence for the use of
cleaned rye and barley in cooking in the near vicinity,
other features, particularly F368, F315 in Pit Group K
and F374 in Pit Group L, have produced more evidence
for actual crop processing itself. This was thought by
the specialist to represent a real archaeological pattern,
rather than resulting from preservational bias: there may
thus have been a specialised crop-processing area in this
eastern area of the site. The distribution of identified
quern fragments and of lava stone (presumably all of
which once formed part of querns) does not display any
clear-cut patterning, although large Millstone Grit quern
fragments were recovered from Structures 25 and 31 and
from Pit Group L (Fig. 6.43), and concentrations of lava
quernstone (over 1kg) were found in Structure 25, on
Surface Deposit F342, and on Surface Deposit F1. Aside
from F1, these features cluster in the same area to the east
of the site, and add some support to the above argument.
Cooking and baking
At the Anglo-Saxon settlement at Bloodmoor Hill, cooking
in vessels would have taken place on open fires (these
sometimes directly represented by remains of hearths),
while baking and roasting would have taken place in
ovens, of which some evidence also remains. Three
oven bases have been positively identified at Bloodmoor
Hill, along with two smaller features identified as oven
bases or hearths. Several large deposits which appeared
to represent oven domes were also identified within the
fired clay (Fig. 6.44). The definite oven bases, which all
appeared to be in situ, were F338, which lay just to the
east of Phase 1 Structure 17; F372, just to the north of Pit
Group I; and F259, which lay to the east of Structure 19,
within the area of one of the tentatively identified wall-
 Figure 6.44 Distribution of oven remains and fired clay clusters
post structures. These all consisted of a foundation layer
of stones below a layer of burnt clay, and were of a
reasonable size: F338 measured c.1.55m by 1.35m; F372
measured c.1.10m in diameter (this destroyed by metal-
detectorists before detailed excavation and recording had
taken place); and F259 measured c.0.75m in diameter. The
two possible oven bases/hearths were both sub-circular
features comprised of burnt clay: F254 lay within the
area of Structure 44 and measured 0.75m by 0.40m (also
destroyed by illicit metal-detectorists before recording),
while F379 lay on the base of Structure 26 and measured
c.0.40m in diameter. In addition to these in situ deposits,
oven dome material has also been identified from the fills
of Structure 17 (where it can be argued to have originated
from adjacent F338), Structure 25 (perhaps originating
from F372), Pit Groups K and L and Structures 29 and 30
(origin unclear). Structure 25 also produced the remains
of what has been interpreted as a hearth edge or ‘fender’,
as did Structure 34 (see Anderson, Chapter 3).
While Anderson suggests that the settlement may
have originally seen between ten and twenty ovens
(based on overall quantities of fired clay), those which
can definitely be identified cluster in the eastern part of
the site, as does the bulk of the weight of fired clay. As
far as their distribution by phase is concerned, F338 can
be placed in Phase 1 (if it did produce the oven dome
fragments in Structure 17), while, if F254 and F259 are
in fact contemporary with the wall-post structures within
whose area they lie (although this is unlikely), these are
also of this phase. The unidentified oven producing the
remains identified in Structures 29 and 30 and Pit Group L
presumably belongs to Phase 2a, while F372 (with asso-
ciated remains in Structure 25) and F379 in Structure 26
both seem to belong to Phase 2b. There is thus, as would
372
be expected, evidence for cooking and baking from all
phases of the settlement, although it does appear to have
a limited distribution, with the bulk of it found just to
the east of the central core of the site. Intriguingly, this
partly coincides with the concentration of evidence for
cereal cleaning and animal processing (see above) and
may indicate the location of a partly specialised indus-
trial area.
Craft and industrial activities
Metalworking
with Jane Cowgill
One of the distinctive aspects of the finds assemblage from
Bloodmoor Hill is the very large quantities of slag and
metalwork recovered. As detailed in the specialist report
(see Chapter 4), 153kg of slag and associated material
was found. This includes iron-smithing slags which could
be identified as hearth bottoms and proto-hearth bottoms,
smithing slag lumps, iron-rich cinder, hammerscale and
the unusual platelets, as well as other metalworking
debris including crucibles, moulds, tuyeres and vitrified
clay fragments. Only very general patterns can now be
identified because the dataset is not suitable for complex
spatial analysis or for looking at subtle patterns within
the individual features. A very rapid recording system
had to be adopted for this material owing to a signifi-
cantly restricted budget, making it impossible to include
the detail that would have been required for these types
of analyses.
The nature of the industrial activity represented by
this waste has been discussed above (‘Metalworking
debris’, Chapter 4), and this section will explore how the
material is distributed across the site, and whether any
localised iron smithing or non-ferrous metalworking areas
can be identified. The following issues will therefore be
addressed: was the slag being deposited near to where
it was being generated (as has been argued for much of
the domestic waste generated by the site’s occupants); do
these locations change over time; is there any evidence
for further movement of the slag around the site; were
iron and non-ferrous metalworking focused in the same
location at the same time?
When considering these distributions the fragile and
crushable nature of many of these finds is pertinent,
because only a very small percentage of much of the
material is likely to have survived. The quantity of, espe-
cially, crucibles and moulds recorded here is probably a
mere fraction of what was actually produced and used at
the settlement.
Table 6.6 details those features and feature groups
containing over 500g of slag (both sieved and non-
sieved). These comprise Structures 4, 5, 9, 14, 17, 19, 20
and 22, and Pit groups F, G, L and N, along with all the
central and western surface deposits. The main clusters of
slag therefore seem to concentrate in two locations: to the
north-west of the site, around Structures 4 and 5 and the
more central Structure 9 (all belonging to Phase 1), and in
the central core of the site, in the structures surrounding
Surface Deposit F159/182. This latter deposit is consid-
ered as a single entity in the text but there are differences
in the quantity and range of material the two parts of it
received. F182, to the west, was clearly being used as
a dump (primary?) by at least one smithy. It contained
26.5kg of slag, a large amount of hammerscale with a
few ‘plates’, crucibles, and a high number of tuyere frag-
ments. In contrast, F159 had only 6.5kg of slag with very
little hammerscale and no identifiable crucible fragments.
The western part of this surface spread was evidently in
receipt of far more metalworking debris than the eastern
part, unless all the material on or in F159 was redeposited
in Structure 19, one of the closest structures.
When the locations of material recorded as type
‘HBs’ (i.e. that considered to be definitely by-products
of iron smithing — see the introduction to the specialist
report) are plotted (Fig. 6.45), it is striking how the vast
majority were recovered from Anglo-Saxon features:
multiple examples mainly come from surface deposits
(particularly F1 and F159/182) and the remains of SFBs
(Structures 5, 14, 19, 20 and 22), but also occasional pits
(particularly Pit groups G and N). The largest assem-
blages, which stand out from all the others due to the
sheer quantity of slag, are — in order of size — Surface
Deposit F159/182 (c.32.8kg), Structure 19 (c.15.5kg)
and Surface Deposit F1 (c.10.1kg), followed closely by
Structure 14 (c.9.1kg). The remainder of the HBs were
found in much smaller quantities in features scattered
across the site, including other Anglo-Saxon features, and

Phase Group Feature Iron-smithing Quantity of Probable Iron-smithing Crucible and

slags hamm’s and iron-smithing slags with mould fragments
plates slags copper-alloy
droplets
1 Structure 4 19 9/1452 89/1160 3/206 3/30
1 Structure 5 523 21/889 x 124/2180
1 Pit Group N 519 5/126 x 290/3619 1/4 2/12
1 Pit Group N 520 6/217 64/599 3/5
1 Structure 9 514 7/294 x 24/474
1 Structure 17 212 4/169 35/293 1/1
2a Structure 22 126 30/261 67/310
2a Pit Group F 168 10/183 74/417 4/3
2a Pit Group L 374 6/748 37/322 1/24
2a–b SD11/503 11 34/1133 227/2270 2/22 3/7
2a–b SD11/503 503 27/1618 43/624 1/2
2a–b SD1 1 142/5568 x 503/4572 5/92
2a–b SD8/275 275 7/508 14/188 1/46
2a–b SD159/182 159 64/1767 x 626/4639
2a–b SD159/182 182 223/7917 xxx# 3592/18526 1/2 8/27
2a–b Grave 5 241 30/677 xx 201/1358 1/15
2a–b Grave 15 252 18/400 x 25/176
2b Pit Group G 242 10/514 xx 114/799
2b Pit Group G 237 27/513 xx 2153/5223 2/2
2b Structure 14 41 99/2601 xxx 1618/6524 5/218 68/359
2b Structure 19 200 751/10550 xxxxx 14691/34671 5/440 33/68
2b Structure 20 134 15/329 74/328

Very approximate hammerscale and plate counts: x = 25–50; xx = 51–150; xxx = 151–300; xxxxx = 500+
# = All the hammerscale was recovered in environmental soil samples
The following features also contained crucibles (count and weight of slag in brackets). F22 1/1g (99/99g); F35 1/1g (6/191g); F500 1/3g (4/35g); F508
5/7g (6/134g); F527 1/8g

Table 6.6 The main features that contained evidence for metalworking (count/weight in g). Unsieved plus sieved
weights are given in the table

373
 Figure 6.45 Distribution plot of hearth bottoms and tuyeres
were residual in post-medieval ditches, or intrusive in the
tops of Roman ditches (into which they had presumably
slumped from over-lying Anglo-Saxon deposits as the
Roman fills compacted). Some of the more robust slag
found within or near Roman features could, however, be
of Roman date. The distribution of the material recorded
as type ‘SLAG’ (probable iron-smithing slags but may
include some non-specific types) generally reflects that
of the HBs: it has a slightly wider distribution but this can
be seen as a dropping away from the same foci.
Unfortunately only the presence or absence of
hammerscale in the environmental sample residues was
recorded, rather than the quantity; however, when this
distribution is plotted (Fig. 6.46), a more widely distrib-
uted pattern is seen. This is still focused on Structures 4
and 5 (but not Surface Deposit F1), Surface Deposit
F159/182 and its surrounding Structures 14, 19, 22 and
45, but it also spreads to structures in the eastern part
of the site (Structures 25, 27, 29 and 31), from which
little other evidence of metalworking has been recov-
ered. It is assumed that these are only small amounts of
hammerscale, a material that is easily windborne, and
with so much iron smithing having been undertaken at
the site, a wide distribution is not unexpected. The larger
concentrations (Table 6.6), not unsurprisingly mirror
the distribution of the HBs. The distribution of the large
‘plates’ identified during specialist work, and assumed to
be a type of hammerscale, is however, far more localised
(Fig. 6.46), being found only in Structures 5 (and asso-
ciated pits), 14, 19 (from where the vast majority were
recovered) and Surface Deposits F11 and F159/182. The
recovery of multiple examples of these would seem to be
a good indication of the area in which smithing actually
took place: so for Phase 1 this would be around (or within)
374
Structure 5, and in Phase 2b Structure 19. Although it
has been argued above that Structures 14 and 19 were
infilled from Surface Deposit F159/182, there are some
subtle differences which suggest that Structure 19 was
receiving additional material. Fewer than five ‘plates’
were recovered from both Structure 14 and the surface
deposit, but the fill of Structure 19 contained over 500
pieces, suggesting that more smithy by-products were
going into this SFB. Smiths often pile their slag with
floor sweepings ‘around the back’ of the forge, to get
them out of the way if no further use for them can be
found (for example, surfacing paths and trackways). It
is therefore tempting to suggest that Structure 19, or a
building very close by, functioned as a smithy and the
slag heap was swept into the hollow left by the SFB
with the redeposited material from F159/182 to level the
ground. Alternatively, a smith elsewhere in the settlement
may just have been opportunistic and chose to dispose
of his smithing debris when there was a hole to be filled
up and levelled. There can be no doubt that Structure 19
contained primary smithing debris, albeit redeposited
from a smith’s slag heap. Because an SFB was backfilled
with slag does not automatically imply that it could not
have functioned as a smithy; the slag could have come
either from its own dump, or from a relocated smithy
elsewhere on the site.
The distribution of the c.138 crucible fragments is
similarly restricted (Fig. 6.47). These are recorded from
Structures 4, 14, 17, 19 and 20; Surface Deposits F1, F11
and F159/182; Pit Group N, to the north of Structure 5;
Pit Group C and Pit F527 to the north of Structure 9;
and from a small pit just outside the north-west corner
of Structure 39. None was recovered from contexts pre-
dating the Anglo-Saxon occupation. The largest numbers
 Figure 6.46 Distribution plot of hammerscale (top) and ‘plates’ (bottom)

of crucible sherds (70% by count, 101 examples) were
recovered from the fills of Structures 14 and 19, with
only eight from Surface Deposit F159/182 (Table 6.6).
This, again, suggests that the fills of these structures
were receiving additional material from a source other
than F159/182. Structure 14, however, has twice as many
crucibles as Structure 19 (in which the ‘plates’ were so
common), suggesting that the source of the additional
material may either have been totally different or that
there may have been a temporal difference (although,
again, a survival factor may be involved). The mean
weights of the fragments reinforces this: the crucibles

375
 Figure 6.47 Distribution plot of crucibles
from F159/182 and Structure 19 have a mean weight of
3.4g and 2.6g respectively, while the generally bigger
fragments from Structure 14 have a mean weight of 6g.
The highest mean weight for crucibles is, incidentally,
18g for the five pieces from Surface Deposit F1, with
many mean weights for other deposits being closer to
1g.
In addition, three mould fragments were identi-
fied: two from Structure 4 and one from Pit F519 in Pit
Group N, all Phase 1 contexts. Those from Structure 4 had
been used to cast annular brooches, and both had traces
of copper alloys identified by EDXRF (Table 4.18). The
lack of recorded moulds probably reflects a survival and
identification problem, rather than a lack of their original
existence, given the number of crucible sherds found. No
ingot moulds were recovered, whether of clay or other
materials.
Fragments of vitrified clay have a remarkably similar
distribution to crucibles, with multiple examples from
Structures 4, 5, 14, 19 and Surface Deposits F1, F11 and
F159/182, along with a number of pit groups. This should
not be surprising, as the two categories were almost
indistinguishable (particularly when only ‘crumbs’ in
size). Most of the vitrified clay is probably either totally
vitrified crucible sherds or luting that was once attached
to them, although some could be ‘cinder’.
Tuyeres, which were used to protect the nozzle of a
pair of bellows from the heat of the fire, would have been
used by both iron smiths and non-ferrous metal casters,
as the high temperatures needed by both processes would
have required the use of bellows. The tuyere fragments
are slightly more scattered than either the iron-smithing
slags or the crucibles (Fig. 6.45) and they form a much
higher percentage of the metalworking assemblage
376
than is usual. Some are fairly robust, which may in part
account for their high survival rate but why they should
have a wider distribution than the other, generally more
common forms of metalworking debris, is unclear.
Finally, comparison with the distribution of other
possible metalworking evidence, such as tools (Fig. 4.45)
and overall metal weights, again supports this idea of
a clustering of activity, both to the north-west of the
trackway and in the central core of the site. It is also worth
mentioning here the worked stones which were originally
associated with this metalworking activity, which were
characterised as ‘gritstones with grooves’ during cata-
loguing (Table 6.7) although Steven Laurie, who carried
out the petrological analyses, thought that the grooves
might be natural. Their distribution, however, suggests
otherwise, and contrasts with that of the hones, which are
scattered right across the site (Fig. 4.45) and evidently
functioned as part of the ‘domestic’ assemblage and not
specifically as an item associated with metalworking,
although the smiths may have used them to complete the
final sharpening of an edged tool.
The imposed speed of recording, with the resultant
simplified dataset (see Chapter 4), did not allow rigorous
statistical analysis or the calculation of a standard devia-
tion, when using means, for any of these groups. Any
means given in the text, therefore, may give an over-
simplified (or possibly misleading) impression of what
may be a more complex assemblage structure. However,
it is still true to say that the majority of the unsieved slag
recovered from the site is exceptionally low in weight
and small in size compared with slag assemblages from
other sites. With many of the more amorphous types (for
example smithing-slag lumps and cinder) it is also impos-
sible to judge whether the surviving piece is ‘complete’
or a mere fragment of a once larger entity.
Catalogue no. Context Group Number Weight (g)
2680 56/57 SD1 1 80
4080 384 Structure 14 1 251
4085 384 Structure 14 1 239
4093 384 Structure 14 1 112
4100 392 Structure 14 1 109
7432 2262 SD159/182 2 603
3982 1545 SD159/182 1 182
6952 1639 SD159/182 1 61
6960 1641 SD159/182 1 224
6971 1643 SD159/182 2 386
7061 1750 SD159/182 2 285
8229 860 SD159/182 1 378
5260 1625 Structure 19 2 494
5279 1625 Structure 19 1 879
5301 1625 Structure 19 2 857
5314 1625 Structure 19 1 141
5325 1625 Structure 19 1 1
2513 2412 Grave 20 1 31
7185 1851 Pit F237 1 53
7316 1975/1977 Pit F237 1 279
7322 1976 Pit F237 1 139
2439 2233 Grave 24 1 130

Table 6.7 Contexts with ‘grooved gritstones’

Figure 6.48 Logarithmic plot of sieved and unsieved HBs and slag, showing mean and range of count and weight

377
163
Phase Group Feature % HB Sieved SLAG Sieved Hamm’s Plate Sieved Slag and Sieved Crucibles Sieved Sieved % of total
Sieved HB SLAG plate Cu alloy slag and crucibles moulds weight
droplets Cu alloy recov-
ered by
sieving
1 Structure 19 14% 1376 76 802 358 - - - 206 - 6 - 24 17%
4
1 Structure 514 50% 198 94 436 38 x 2 - - - - - - 17%
9
1 Structure 212 50% 162 7 63 230 - 2 - - - - 1 - 51%
17
2a Structure 126 25% 214 47 165 145 - - - - - - - - 34%
22
2a Pit Group 168 40% 71 112 110 307 - 2+ - - - - 3 - 70%
F
2a–b SD 1 1 11% 5125 436 4028 544 x 3+ - - - 89 3 - 10%
2a–b SD 159 2% 1767 - 4582 57 xxx 1+ - - - - - - 1%
159/182
2b Structure 41 50% 2575 12 5122 1402 xxx 1+ 3+ 218 - 258 101 - 15%
14
2b Structure 134 50% 194 135 152 176 - - - - - - - - 47%
20
2b Structure 200 100% 9955 376 17046 17625 x 7+ 215 438 2 11 57 - 40%
19

Table 6.8 The quantity by weight (g) of metalworking debris hand recovered and sieved (shaded) from the main
Table 6.8 The quantity
contexts bysieved
that were weight (g) of metalworking debris hand recovered and sieved (shaded) from the main contexts that were
sieved

Phase Group Feature Iron-smithing slags (HBs) Probable iron-smithing Total slag Unsieved
slags (SLAG) mean slag mean
Count Weight Hamm’s Plates Count Weight (unsieved
and sieved)
2b Pit G F237 27 513g xx 2 2153 5223g 3g
2a Structure 22 F126 30 261g - - 67 310g 6g 6g
2a–b SD 159/182 F182 223 7917g xxx# 4 3592 18526g 7g
2b Structure 14 F41 99 2601g xxx 3+ 1618 6524g 5g 8g
2a–b Grave 5 F241 30 677g xx - 201 1358g 9g
2a–b SD 159/182 F159 64 1767g x 1 626 4639g 10g 9g
2b Structure 19 F200 751 10550g xxxxx 550 14691 34671g 3g 10g
2b Structure 20 F134 15 329g - - 74 328g 7g 10g
2a Pit F F168 10 183g - 2 74 417g 7g 11g
2b Pit G F242 10 514g xx - 114 799g 11g
1 Pit N F520 6 217g - - 64 599g 12g
2a–b SD 11/503 F11 34 1133g - - 227 2270g 13g
2a–b Grave 15 F252 18 400g x - 25 176g 13g
1 Pit N F519 5 126g x 1 290 3619g 13g
2a–b SD 1 F1 142 5568g x 2 503 4572g 16g 18g
1 Structure 5 F523 21 889g x 1 124 2180g 21g
1 Structure 17 F212 4 169g - 1 35 293g 12g 22g
1 Structure 9 F514 7 294g x 1 24 474g 25g 25g
2a Pit L F374 6 748g - - 37 322g 25g
2a–b SD 11/503 F503 27 1618g - - 43 624g 32g
2a–b SD 8/275 F275 7 508g - - 14 188g 33g
1 Structure 4 F19 9 1452g - - 89 1160g 27g 47g

* This category includes all the generally lighter slags, for example the iron cinder, cinder, vitrified clay and some tuyeres.
#All the hammerscale was recovered in sample residues

Table 6.9 The total weight of slag recovered from the key features with the unsieved slag mean. The quantity of
hammerscale and plates have been added as supporting evidence. All, or part of, the shaded features were sieved (see
Table 6.8)

378
166
 A number of complex factors will affect the mean
weights of these various slag assemblages, from their
history of deposition and redeposition on site to the
method of recovery and, indeed, recording. The more
robust hearth bottoms and ‘proto’ versions are the least
likely to be affected by any stage, whether it be trampling
underfoot in the smithy or while on a surface deposit or
during sieving. The more cindery the slag and vitrified
the crucibles the greater the damage that is likely to have
been incurred at every stage. The surface deposits may
have been walked over as more waste was added to them
and if the SFBs were being purposely back-filled to level
them, rather than receiving occasional rubbish as and
when it was generated, the fills may have been trampled
down to deliberately compact them. In theory, therefore,
the surface deposits and SFBs should have the smallest
pieces of slag with the lowest mean weights. However, it
is immediately clear from a plot of the size and count of
the sieved and unsieved slag (Fig. 6.48) that caution must
be applied when using the mean weights because of the
recovery methods used.
Fig. 6.48 clearly shows, not surprisingly, that the
average weights of sieved and unsieved assemblages
are very different, and care will be taken to distinguish
between the two types in analysis. The figure also reveals
that the sieved HBs are smaller and considerably fewer
by count. Although the sieved catalogue numbers and
contexts are known and can be isolated, the fact that
different percentages of, but an unknown volume of soil
from, the various features were sieved (Table 6.8) still
makes this problematical (not least because it may have
influenced the mind-set of the original excavator when
recovering finds). Having stated this, the mean weights
have been estimated for the non-sieved slag element
from the main features producing metalworking debris
(Table 6.9), but these will be used with caution and only
a few general comments will be made.
If slag was indeed being deposited near where it was
being created (Fig. 6.17), one would expect both high
concentrations of slag and high mean weights. Focusing
on the larger slag assemblages given in Table 6.9, it is
immediately noticeable, however, that the mean weights
from all the large groups appear consistently small for
slag. At Flixborough, where the majority of the slag is
post-9th-century in date, the mean for the hearth bottoms
is 166g, which Starley states is ‘untypically small for
Saxon smithing debris’ (1999, 5). All the assemblages at
Bloodmoor Hill that weigh over 5kg have unsieved mean
weights of 7–18g, while all with counts of over 500 pieces
have mean weights of 3–18g. Four of the assemblages with
the highest mean weights (Structure 4, Surface Deposits
F8/275 and F11/503 and F374 Pit Group L) are all small
and, unlike most of the others, the material recorded as
HBs outweighs that listed as SLAG. These groups have
all been skewed by the presence of just one or two unusu-
ally large hearth bottoms. In contrast, Surface Deposit F1
has a genuinely high input of iron-smithing debris, which
includes a few of the unusual ‘plates’. The source of this
material is uncertain, but particular concentrations are
seen in the metre-squares overlying Structure 9 (which
has a high unsieved mean weight of 25g). The Phase 1
features tend to have higher means than those of Phase 2,
possibly reflecting a less complex history of deposition
and redeposition of these slags.
379
The presence of copper alloy droplets in some of
the iron-smithing slags suggest that both iron and non-
ferrous metalworking, were undertaken to some extent
in the same workshop/smithy. The counts and weights
given in Table 6.6 are minimum numbers, for the reasons
given in Chapter 4. The droplets are present both within
and on the surface of HBs and SLAGs, indicating that
a range of metals was worked within the same hearth.
Iron smithing and the casting of copper alloys (perhaps
also silver and gold) are both high-temperature processes
which require a good understanding of fire management
and control. Although the metals have very different
properties, a skilled smith who had a thorough grounding
in his trade could easily have worked both. Indeed, there
is some indication that the possible Tattershall Thorpe
smith may have worked a whole range of metals (Hinton
2000). Iron and copper alloys (mainly leaded bronzes?)
were being worked throughout the duration of the occu-
pation at Bloodmoor Hill and the by-products appear to
have been discarded together, although in some features
(for example, Structures 4 and 14) the quantity associated
with non-ferrous metalworking is greater than in others,
where a more dominantly iron-smithing assemblage
appears to exist (e.g. Structures 5 and 19).
The HBs and other slags from Bloodmoor Hill are
consistent in density, colour, morphology and vesicu-
larity regardless of the site phase; few ‘normal’ smithing
slags are present among the assemblage. Regardless of
where found on the site or from which period, most
pieces are exceptionally small, cindery and sandy
compared to other sites, and many are cream to mid-
grey in colour or cream to a mid-brown, although some
of the HB assemblage is darker in colour and denser. No
satisfactory explanation can be found for the appearance
and cindery nature of these slags; the smiths must have
successfully forged iron but many of these are far from
standard by-products. Very skilled smiths will lose little
metal into their slags (hammerscale is an unavoidable
by-product), with the result that they are more light-
weight and slightly cindery, but not to the extent of the
Bloodmoor Hill examples. An explanation or parallel for
the ‘plates’ has also yet to be found, despite extensive
consultations with colleagues and modern blacksmiths.
No change or development in smithing techniques can
be identified from this material.
Similarly, there appears to be no development or
change in the forms of crucibles used during the duration
of non-ferrous metalworking at Bloodmoor Hill. Both
bowls and beakers have been identified from Phase 1
deposits (Table 4.18) and also from Phase 2b, although it
is possible that the beakers become more common in the
later phase (sherd size is, as always, the problem in iden-
tifying the vessel forms). All the mould fragments are
from Phase 1, but this may merely result from a survival
and identification problem, rather than be a reflection of
what was deposited in the past.
Overall, there is considerable evidence for at least
two main areas of metalworking activity of two different
phases, although smiths may have been present on the
site, or regularly visited it, for the duration of its main
occupation phase. A permanent smithy structure may
not always have been required if the smith was capable
and prepared to work with a ground-level hearth, as the
tools required are fairly portable. In Phase 1, the concen-
tration is represented by the fills of Structure 5 and the
associated Pit Group N, with a further concentration
within Structure 4, 40m to the north. There is a notice-
able drop-off in quantity in the more eastern features. It
is probable that both iron smithing and non-ferrous metal
casting were undertaken in their environs, as indicated
by the concentration of hearth bottoms and proto-hearth
bottoms that were found here, as well as the hammer-
scale and plate present in Structure 5 and Pit F519 (Pit
Group N). All of the moulds identified from the site
and most of the Phase 1 crucibles also come from these
features. Compared with the evidence from the central
core of the site (Phase 2), this earlier activity is much
less well represented in terms of quantity, but it must
be remembered that the amount found in the Phase 2
deposits is exceptional for sites of this date. The scale
of metalworking represented in Phase 1 is now impos-
sible to discern as it is no longer possible to establish
the smiths’ disposal strategy; in addition, because the site
was truncated, any slag reused for surfacing trackways
and so on would have been in the plough soil. The iron
smithing and non-ferrous casting could represent short-
lived episodes of metalworking, perhaps on a contingent
basis, to make and repair essential items needed within
the settlement. We do know, however, that the metal-
worker who cast the annular brooches was skilled in
their trade, because it is actually quite difficult casting
such small amounts of metal into a thin object without
the metal cooling down too much in the process.
The evidence from Structures 19 and 14, and
F159/182, in contrast, suggests activity on a more
‘industrial’ scale, with these features alone producing
(by non-sieved weight) around fifteen times more slag
Figure 6.49 Distribution of all finds (by weight) in Surface Deposit F159/182 against grave location and other
underlying features
380
and associated debris. The total quantity from these
three features alone accounts for more than half of the
slag found on the entire site (c.81.5kg). The morphology
of the surface deposit, moreover, suggests a longer
history of metalworking activity in this area. Neither
iron smithing nor copper alloy casting on this scale
have been identified on any contemporary English site
although its presence has long been suspected (see, for
example, Hamerow 2002a, 190). The sheer quantity of
debris found, although it must represent a fraction of the
actual number of by-products produced, suggests that this
activity had an economic significance for the occupants.
Whether a smithy would have had such a central location
within the settlement and been located in such proximity
to the cemetery may be debatable, but slag was certainly
being discarded over the graves, albeit in relatively small
quantities. Plotting the total weight of finds from Surface
Deposit F159/182 against the graves (Fig. 6.49) very
much gives the impression that the graves largely respect
the deposit (or vice versa). Smithies are not fire hazards:
fire control is fundamental for a smith’s work, they emit
no noxious fumes and are not particularly dusty (unlike
smelting sites) and, although myths abound about the
noise that issues forth, most smithing is fairly quiet and
almost rhythmic. On the grounds of hazards, therefore,
there is no reason for it not to have been in the core of the
settlement, and its location may even have reinforced the
significance it had to the community.
To summarise, it is evident that both iron smithing and
non-ferrous metal casting were occurring at Bloodmoor
Hill at a scale not previously recorded on a site of this
date in England. All of this material is relatively brittle
and fragile and the extant material is likely to represent
only a small fraction of the debris generated at the site.
This needs to be borne in mind when considering the
scale of the metalworking activities undertaken there. The
iron-smithing slags are very unusual, being small, light in
weight and generally cindery, but can still be confidently
identified as a by-product of this process. Associated
with these slags are varying quantities of hammerscale
and the unusual ‘plates’. The casting of copper alloys
(mainly leaded bronzes?) was also an important part of
the economy of the settlement, judging by the number
of crucible sherds identified, and probably produced a
range of object types, but whether silver and gold were
also being cast is debatable given the current evidence. A
variety of forms of crucibles made from low-firing local
clays were being used, including the fairly large beaker
types (Fig. 4.47). Very few crucibles are found on similar
sites: there are only five from Flixborough, for example
(L. Wastling, pers. comm.), and none from Brandon (A.
Tester, pers. comm.), although both sites are slightly later
in date.
Little is known about the role played by, or status of,
an Anglo-Saxon smith or metalworker. Much like today,
however, these probably depended on their level of skill
and artistic ability. Of great significance then, however,
would have been the ability to access the raw materials
required. This would have included a full range of irons,
particularly if pattern welding iron knives and weapons.
Whether a designated smithy building was a permanent
element of the settlement is not known. When a smith
was in residence a specialised hearth would probably be
built for their use, whether at ground level or, perhaps
more likely, at waist height, particularly if large pieces of
iron were to be forged. A smith’s tool kit is portable, but
the anvil would be heavy and the bellows are likely to
have been cumbersome. The evidence from Bloodmoor
Hill suggests that the copper alloy casting was sometimes
(possibly always?) undertaken in the same hearth as the
iron smithing, perhaps by the same person. Certainly
an understanding of fire management would have been
needed for both processes, although the metals have very
different properties. Charcoal was probably the sole fuel
used.
Although the discussions so far have focused on the
two major concentrations of metalworking debris, there
are actually up to four possible locations for smithies. A
post-built structure, or lean-to attached to one, is more
likely to have been a smithy than an SFB. For practical
purposes it is more sensible to build a hearth on an earth
floor rather than a wooden one and the very hot irons and
slags would be a fire risk if placed on or discarded onto
wood. That more than one smithy would have functioned
at the same time seems improbable.
The largest assemblages of slag come from some of
the surface deposits and SFB fills. It is probable that the
smithies were located close to these dumps, unless there
was an active policy of keeping the areas close to them
clear of slag. In Phase 1 the iron smithing and copper alloy
casting probably occurred near Structures 4 and 5, in the
north-west part of the site. The focus then seems to move
to the centre of the site, to Surface Deposit F159/182
and the fills of nearby Structure 19, and to Structure 14,
which is about 50m to the south-west. This is enough
of a distance to suggest these may be two different foci:
there is certainly a difference in the ?primary smithing
381
waste being deposited within them, with Structure 14
also receiving large numbers of crucible sherds. While
it is possible that either Structure 14 or Structure 19 may
have been the smithy building it is equally possible that it
was located in Structure 44. After this building had gone
out of use, metalworking waste was still being dumped in
this area. Indeed, the metalworking appears to partly post-
date use of the cemetery, which itself encroaches into the
area of that structure. Structure 45, the nearby wall-post
structure, is also a possibility, perhaps as the relocated
smithy, particularly as an environmental sample from its
north-east corner produced some hammerscale. (The best
way to have resolved which structures had functioned
as a smithy would have been to sample the post-holes
and tested the fills with a magnet for hammerscale). The
fourth possible location is the central northern surface
spread F1, from which the third-largest slag assemblage
was recovered. This could in part have been produced in
Structure 9, if it was back filled with its own waste, or
in a structure nearby that failed to retain any trace of it
(although hammerscale was recovered from an environ-
mental sample taken from nearby Structure 18). It seems
unlikely that the slag was moved here from the metal-
working area in the central core of the site, a distance
of c.60m. A possible scenario, although this is purely
conjectural, is that the first smithy was established on the
periphery of the site, in the north-west corner, perhaps
because of fears regarding fire hazards or a feeling of
suspicion regarding the iron-workers. Perhaps then there
was a relocation to somewhere close to the F1 spread,
again a location that may have been close to the edge of
the site. Finally (and perhaps unexpectedly) it may have
been given a central site within the core of the settle-
ment, very close to the cemetery, perhaps emphasising
the significance it had for the community.
A large and important iron-smithing and copper-alloy
casting assemblage has been recovered from Bloodmoor
Hill. The by-products were probably being discarded
close to where they were produced, and there were prob-
ably a number of smithies built at the site. These may
have moved through time to different locations within
the settlement, with possibly an increasingly more central
location being allowed, as the metalworking became of
greater importance to the community.
Textile manufacture
As in many other early Anglo-Saxon settlements, mate-
rial associated with textile manufacture is abundant,
comprising loomweight fragments (both fired and
unfired), spindlewhorls fashioned from a variety of mate-
rials, bone pin-beaters, metal needles and sets of shears.
Virtually every structure, pit group and surface deposit
has produced at least some evidence connected with this
craft, the only exceptions being Structures 16, 34 and 37
and Pit groups B, D and N from Phase 1; Structures 2,
3 and 31 from Phase 2a and Pit groups E and G from
Phase 2b. Nevertheless, despite this ubiquity, some
concentrations of material are apparent, and may possibly
represent craft specialisation within a particular area.
Of those structures and feature groups with ten or
more loomweights in evidence, three structures in Phase 1
stand out: the outlying Structures 24, 33 and 38, each of
which also produced at least one spindlewhorl, plus, in
the case of Structure 38, a needle. It is particularly inter-
esting that this evidence for both spinning and weaving
coincide, and may suggest that these activities were
being carried out by certain members of the population in
specific areas. It may be, therefore, that in Phase 1 textile
manufacture is focused on the structures to the south and
east of the central site core (an interesting contrast with
the metalworking areas identified to the north-west). In
Phase 2a, Structures 22, 27, 30 and 35 are predominant
in this respect, containing large numbers of loomweights,
and either spindlewhorls (four in Structure 22 and two
in Structure 30) or pin-beaters (one in Structure 25 and
two in Structure 35). It is in Phase 2b that the greatest
numbers of loomweights are deposited in structure fills:
at least eighty-six, in the case of Structure 20, which also
produced three needles, five spindlewhorls and a pin-
beater. Other structures with ten or more loomweights
from this phase are Structures 12, 21 and 25. It is thus
apparent that textile equipment is not randomly distrib-
uted through the settlement, but that this activity seems
to focus in particular areas: to the south and east of the
settlement in the initial phase, with a shift to the central
core of the site in the later 6th and 7th century, with the
structures producing the most textile-related equipment
forming tight clusters: Structures 20, 21 and 22, and
Structures 25, 27 and 30 just to the west. It may be signif-
icant that these clusters continue to predominate across
the transition from Phase 2a to Phase 2b: one possibility
is that certain families specialised in this craft, a speciali-
sation that was passed down from one generation to
the next. The large numbers of loomweights present in
Structures 20 and 21 in particular may just indicate that
these were probably two of the latest structures on the
site to be in occupation: on their abandonment, unwanted
equipment such as unfired loomweights may have been
dumped into the base of the feature, it not being worth
the effort of transporting it to a new structure, or perhaps
even a new settlement.
Other craft activity
Identification of other types of craft activity are ultimately
dependent on how well the evidence for them survives;
even where associated tools have been recovered,
however, they may well have been removed from where
they were put to use. In the case of woodworking, for
example, the majority of the associated tools were recov-
ered from Surface Deposit F159/182 and Structures 14
and 19, where they presumably formed part of scrap
metal assemblages, rather than indicating workshops.
While, taken as a whole, the associated tools indicate
occupants well versed in carpentry (with various types of
chisel, gouges, an adze-hammer, an adze-blade fragment
and a draw-knife all recovered from settlement contexts);
presumably the tools were taken to the wood to use,
rather than vice versa. The three leatherworking tools,
in contrast, were recovered from contexts which seemed
to represent more ‘normal’ rubbish disposal, and perhaps
indicate that leatherworking was taking place in or near
Structures 29, 30 and 35 (from which the two awls and
a punch were recovered), all on the eastern side of the
settlement. The end products of both these crafts have,
of course, not been preserved, although they would have
been important for the site’s inhabitants.
There is some evidence for bone- and antler-working
on the site, albeit at a small scale. While single fragments
of antler were found in a range of pits and SFBs, the only
multiple deposit came from the fill of Structure 19, where
382
eight fragments of antler, mainly tines, were found.
Indeed, antler constituted the vast majority of the animal
bone from this feature, and at least two examples had
the brow tines removed by sawing. This, therefore, seems
to represent a waste deposit from antler-working, which
presumably was taking place nearby. A fragment of sawn
cattle horn-core from Structure 9 also suggests that some
bone-working was taking place on site. Overall, though,
the relatively low numbers of worked bone and antler
artefacts recovered from settlement features suggests
that this material did not play as important a role here
as at some other contemporary settlements, such as West
Stow.
Activity zones
The above overview of craft and industrial processes has
thrown up some interesting locational patterns, which
now need setting into context. Looking first at the Phase 1
settlement (Fig. 6.50a), as outlined above, a clear layout
is observable, with a central core of wall-post structures
surrounded by a penumbra of SFBs. It was suggested
above that this may have represented a functional divi-
sion, with a ‘clean’ occupational core, surrounded by
‘dirty’ craft and industrial activities. Certainly, this
seems to be supported by the evidence outlined above.
In Phase 1 there is a metalworking area to the north-west
(in the trackway area), with a butchery/cooking zone to
the north (also in the trackway area), crop-processing
to the east, and evidence for textile manufacture in the
more far-flung structures to the east and south (along
with further animal-processing evidence in the southern
Structure 24). No human burials are associated with this
phase of the settlement, but there would have been a pre-
existing surface deposit next to the wall-post Structure 44,
and similar surface deposits would have started to build
up next to the trackway SFBs.
In the following phase, this tight patterning seems
to start to break down (Fig. 6.50b). While the surface
deposits in the trackway area continue to grow, and start
to amalgamate, some structures are still in use to the
north, although these cannot be associated with particular
activities. Within the trackway area at the eastern end,
Structure 35 and Pit Group J are associated with animal
butchery, textile manufacture and possibly leather-
working, as are the structures directly to the south, which
also have some evidence for crop processing. Again, the
central core of wall-post structures seems to be surrounded
by a ring of SFBs but is much more tightly focused than
in the preceding phase. A significant change comes with
the locations both of metalworking activity and of burial.
The actual location of the metalworking is unclear, but
its waste products start to accumulate on the originally
Roman Surface Deposit F159/182, and it may even have
taken place here, using some of the earlier pits within Pit
Group G. The precise chronological relationship between
this and the cemetery is unclear, but the sheer quantity of
metalworking waste represented in this area suggests that
metalworking activity probably preceded the foundation
of the cemetery. That the cemetery should be located
next to an area of probable metalworking is interesting in
itself, and will be explored more below.
Use of the cemetery continues on into Phase 2b
(Fig. 6.50c), but burial there had obviously ceased by the
time that Surface Deposit F159/182 spread out over some
of the graves. It is not impossible that this was a delib-
Figure 6.50 Activity zones by phase: (a) Phase 1; (b) Phase 2a; (c) Phase 2b

383
erate act, perhaps even an attempt to ‘barrow’ some of the Phase 1 Phase 2a Phase 2b SDs
burials, creating a more permanent marker for them. By Number
this time, all structures north of the trackway had prob- Bone 15686 12552 9278 17811
ably been abandoned, and the deposits building up within
AS pot 1849 1310 633 1891
the trackway itself had become substantial, particularly
in the central area, F1. While primary butchery waste Roman pot 258 702 1729 1409
was presumably still being deposited here, Structure 25 CBM 69 79 124 182
and Pit Group I to the south become a secondary focus FC 6151 3648 4755 8647
for the disposal of butchery waste. Immediately to the Slag 671 218 3404 5989
south, the oven base F379 in Structure 26 relates prob- Metal 314 212 1465 396
ably to cooking activity, while to the west, evidence for
Wt
antler-working becomes incorporated into Structure 19.
It has been argued previously that Structures 14 and 19 Bone 64746 63855 42071 52132
were infilled from Surface Deposit F159/182 after aban- AS pot 17244 12444 5029 13286
donment, suggesting that the waste from antler-working Roman pot 1318 4286 8051 7887
originated from the same surface deposit. CBM 5787 5085 6069 10359
The pattern of settlement has changed fundamen- FC 35650 31396 21265 30960
tally: now, the inner core of the settlement is comprised
Slag 12386 3905 41208 56385
of SFBs, which are surrounded by a smaller number
of wall-post structures (one of which was post-in- Metal 1407 2393 8333 2198
trench construction). At the heart of the SFB cluster is Mean wt
the (former) cemetery area. Even the tight clustering Bone 4.1 5.1 4.5 2.9
of burial starts to break down, with the two outlying AS pot 9.3 9.5 7.9 7
graves placed on what is now the south-eastern edge Roman pot 5.1 6.1 4.7 5.6
of the settlement. The timing of the settlement’s aban-
CBM 83.9 64.4 48.9 56.9
donment is not definite, but occupation appears to carry
on, at least to some extent, beyond the abandonment of FC 5.8 8.6 4.5 3.6
the cemetery, and probably also beyond the cessation of Slag 18.5 17.9 12.1 9.4
metalworking activity, for the infilling of Structure 14 Metal 4.5 11.3 5.7 5.6
(and presumably Structure 19) from Surface Deposit
F159/182 was followed by the construction of the Table 6.10 Finds categories by phase: (top) number;
post-in-trench Structure 42. Structures 25 and 26 also (middle) weight (g); (bottom) mean weight (g)
have dating evidence which places them in the very
final decades of occupation. Thus, we may be seeing a
settlement in decline, with the cessation of specialised cially slag: this drops slightly from Phase 1 to Phase 2a,
metalworking and the relocation of burial elsewhere. but then increases dramatically in Phase 2b (largely
This pattern of decline is supported by the patterning the effect of Structure 14 and 19’s fills). Again, this
of rubbish disposal by phase (Table 6.10). Quantities suggests a move away from a solely domestic settle-
of animal bone, Anglo-Saxon pottery and fired clay ment to one which is probably smaller in scale but more
all decline dramatically from Phase 1 to Phase 2b, and specialised in function. The next chapter will examine
especially from Phase 2a to Phase 2b, suggesting a drop the associated cemetery, detailing the human remains,
in settlement intensity. The only types of material which grave-goods and associated burial practice, assessing
do not display this pattern are Romano-British pottery, the dating evidence and examining the implications for
which increases steadily through the phases, and espe- the interpretation of the settlement.

384 168
 7. The Human Burials
by Christopher Scull
I. Introduction
Twenty-eight graves or probable graves were recorded in
two locations (Figs 7.1–7.2). All may be dated to the 7th
century. The majority (Graves 1–26) belonged to a small
formal cemetery in excavation Area A (Pl. XII), with two
further contemporary graves (27 and 28) some 50m east
of this cemetery in Area D. One of these outlying graves
(28) contained two individuals but there is no evidence
that any other grave contained more than one burial.
Human bone was recovered from eighteen individuals
of whom eleven were adult, three sub-adult or adult, and
four juvenile or sub-adult. Of the adult individuals five
were male or probably male and four female or probably
female. It is possible to identify a further six individuals
as probably or possibly female on the basis of the accom-
panying grave-goods, and a further five graves have been
identified as those of juveniles on the basis of size. Material
culture items which had been deliberately deposited with
the deceased were recovered from ten graves, but the
number of furnished inhumations may have been greater.
Many burials had suffered animal disturbance and some
(notably Graves 5 and 23) may have suffered deliberate
attempts at robbery in antiquity. In addition, considerable
quantities of residual or intrusive material were recov-
ered from the backfill of most graves and in some cases it
is possible that material interpreted as residual had in fact
been deliberately deposited with the deceased. Evidence
for a coffin or some other form of organic container or
cover was recorded from three graves, and there is one
instance of evidence for a possible grave marker.
In this chapter a catalogue of the inhumations is
followed by consideration of the grave-goods, dating
evidence, burial practice, demography, social identity,
and the organisation and development of the cemetery;
the conclusion discusses what might be inferred from
the burials about the community or communities burying
here.
II. Stratigraphy: relationships with
Structure 44 and Surface Deposit F159/182
Individual stratigraphic relationships between grave pits
and earlier or later features and deposits are detailed
in the grave catalogue (below). In two cases (Graves 1
and 21) such relationships support the interpretation as
graves of features from which no human remains were
recovered. However, because material culture items and
high-precision radiocarbon dating of human bone provide
a tight absolute chronology for the burials, stratigraphic
relationships are of greater importance in establishing
the date of other structures and deposits against the
narrow chronological horizon represented by the graves
than for the dating of the burials themselves. Two such
relationships are of particular importance for the wider
385
interpretation of the settlement site: those between the
cemetery and Structure 44, and between the cemetery
and Surface Deposit F159/F182.
Structure 44 is a rectangular array of post-holes
which may represent an earthfast timber building (see
Chapter 3). Because of its proximity to the cemetery,
and the fact that some graves appear to respect its
eastern post alignment, the possibility that this may be a
mortuary structure associated with the cemetery must be
considered. It is clear, however, that at least four graves
(6–9) must post-date the demolition of this structure and
a further five (1–5) must either post-date it or have been
dug within it. If Structure 44 is to be considered contem-
porary with at least some of the burials then all or some of
Graves 10–26 (and in particular Graves 10–16) must be
considered contemporary with the standing structure and
two possible sequences of development for the remaining
graves may be proposed: either Graves 1–5 represent a
subsequent phase of burial within the structure, with
Graves 6–9 being later still, or Graves 1–9 all post-date
the demolition of Structure 44. However, the spatial
relationship between Graves 10–16 and the eastern post
alignment of Structure 44 is not close enough to provide a
compelling argument that the graves were dug to respect
the structure and there is no direct evidence that burials
overlying the structure or within it are later than those to
the east of it (the radiocarbon date from Grave 1 is statis-
tically indistinguishable from those for Graves 12, 22
and 24). In view of this, and given the degree of special
pleading needed to make a case for Structure 44 being
contemporary with at least some of the graves, this inter-
pretation is rejected and the cemetery is seen as wholly
later than Structure 44, which may therefore be assigned
to a period before cal AD 630–660 (68% probability) and
cal AD 600–660 (95% probability), when the cemetery
came into use (Marshall et al. above; below).
Surface Deposit F159/F182, a dark layer containing
much occupation refuse, metalworking debris, and
Roman detritus, overlay the very western part of the
cemetery (see Chapters 3 and 6). The cuts of some graves
and other features were not recognised until this deposit
had been removed and it is clear from the observed strati-
graphic relationships and the character of the pit fills and
grave fills that some pits were dug in the cemetery area
after burial had ended and that deposit F159/F182 was
then spread across part of the area as accumulated dumps
were levelled (see Chapter 6). This levelling may have
been associated with a remodelling of part of the late
settlement. It is also possible that it marks a deliberate
sealing of the cemetery area, formally closing it as burial
space and returning it to the sphere of the living. Neither
of these possibilities, of course, is mutually exclusive. It
does seem to be the case, however, that use of the ceme-
tery was contemporary with metalworking activity in its
immediate area (see Chapter 6).
Figure 7.1 Cemetery location and plan

386

Figure 7.2 Key for grave catalogue illustrations
III. Post-depositional disturbance and grave
robbery
Twelve graves (2, 4, 5, 6–9, 11, 14–15, 22 and 24) had
evidence of post-depositional disturbance by animals
which in some cases, as with the casket remains in
Grave 15, appears to have displaced elements of the
grave assemblage.
The burial in Grave 12 had been disturbed in the area
of the chest and torso by Pit F263 and it is possible that
this represents an attempt to rob the grave in antiquity.
Three more graves (5, 22 and 23) also have evidence
of disturbance severe enough to suggest that they were
subject to deliberate attempts at robbery in antiquity. In
Grave 22, disturbance of the burial resulted in different
elements of the necklace, and the frame and setting of the
gold pendant, being found as far apart as the head and the
right knee. While it is possible that this may have been a
result of animal burrowing the possibility that the grave
was robbed, and that other jewellery was taken, cannot be
ruled out. Disturbance to the area of the torso in Grave 5
Plate XII The main cemetery area under excavation
387
was also severe enough to suggest that the grave had
been deliberately violated and in Grave 23 a recut of the
grave fill in the area of the torso also suggests an attempt
at robbery, although in this case the silver gilt disc brooch
was left in the grave. Any analysis must therefore take
into account the possibility that these excavated grave
assemblages were incomplete when recovered.
Evidence suggesting grave robbery in antiquity is far
less common in 6th- and 7th-century burials in England
than in contemporary cemeteries on the continent (Roth
1977) but has been observed at, for example, Finglesham
(Kent) and Buttermarket, Ipswich (Suffolk) (Hawkes and
Grainger 2006, 28; Scull forthcoming).
IV. Catalogue of inhumations
by Sam Lucy (stratigraphy), Natasha Dodwell (human
bone) and Christopher Scull (grave-goods), incorporating
identifications and results of analysis and investigative
work by David Dungworth, Glynis Edwards, Steven
Laurie, Tarik Moujoud, Penelope Walton Rogers, Ulrika
Schaeder, Lucy Skinner and Jacqui Watson
Catalogue conventions
Grave orientations are given as bearings from OS Grid
North along the long axis of the grave pit from the foot
to the head, established or presumed. Dimensions are
maximum length and breadth at the highest level at
which the cut was identified; depth is given from this
level. Detailed descriptions are given only for mate-
rial culture items which are interpreted as having been
deliberately deposited as part of the burial. For consist-
ency and ease of presentation these have been numbered
sequentially by burial. Small-find numbers and site
catalogue numbers are given at the end of each catalogue
entry but in some cases a single item may have more than
one small-find or site catalogue number or a single small-
find number or catalogue number may apply to more than
one recognisable item: this has arisen where separated
components of a single item recognised as such during
detailed analysis were given individual numbers during
excavation and immediate post-excavation, and where
groups of items recovered together or corroded together
were given single numbers. Information on human bone
and organic materials is taken from the relevant specialist
reports; where mineral-preserved organic remains cannot
be identified more precisely the term ‘organic material’ is
used. Analysis of the copper alloys allows precise iden-
tification in many cases but the term ‘copper alloy’ has
been retained in the catalogue for brevity and consist-
ency. Where grave-good location is not indicated on the
illustrations, these finds were recovered from the grave
fill or grave surface.
Human bone
The condition of the bone
The condition of the bone and, as importantly, which skel-
etal elements survive affect the potential for determining
the age and sex of individuals and of recognising any
pathological conditions. The preservation of the human
(and faunal: see Higbee, above) remains is extremely
variable but generally poor, and this is undoubtedly the
result of the acidic soil in which these individuals were
buried. Nine features interpreted as graves and excavated
contained no bone or only unidentifiable scraps of bone.
The preservation of the surviving skeletal material varies
considerably and ranges from graves where only frag-
Plate XIII Graves 3 and 4, after excavation
388
ments of long-bone shafts, or teeth and fragments of
skull, survive to those with near-complete skeletons. In
general, there is poor survival of the torso, the extremi-
ties and the articulating facets/epiphyseal ends, and all
the cortical bone surfaces are heavily abraded.
Methodology
All the human bone was scanned to produce an inven-
tory of surviving skeletal elements, to age and sex each
individual where possible and to record any patholo-
gies observed. Detailed recording sheets are held in the
archive. The age of immature individuals was assessed
from the stage of tooth development (Ubelaker 1989).
The age of adults was assessed primarily from the degree
of dental attrition (Brothwell 1981), although the stage of
epiphyseal union (McMinn and Hutchings 1993; Steele
and Bramblett 1988) and the appearance of the auricular
surface of the ilium (Lovejoy et al. 1985) were also used
where possible. The age categories used are:
Juvenile 5–12 years
Subadult 13–18 years
Young adult 19–25 years
Middle adult 26–45 years
Mature adult 46 years+
There may be overlaps between categories, or a broad
category, such as adult, may be used where insufficient
evidence is present. Sex of the adults was ascertained
where possible from sexually dimorphic traits on the
pelvis and skull and from metrical data. The living
stature of two skeletons could be calculated from the
long bone lengths using the equations devised by Trotter
(1970).
Pathological changes
The preservation of the skeletal material not only restricted
the aging and sexing of the individuals; it may also have
masked or destroyed many pathologies. For example, the
abraded nature of the bone will prohibit any observations
of changes to the cortical bone resulting from infection.
Degenerative joint disease and dental disease are the
most commonly observed pathologies in the archaeo-
logical record. Given that very few articulating surfaces
could be examined, it is unsurprising that no instances
of degenerative joint disease, other than the Schmorl’s
nodes in skeleton [1440] in Grave 3, were recorded.
Few teeth survived, and, of those, the majority that were
recovered were loose, the jaw not surviving in the acidic Figure 7.3 Plan of Grave 2
burial environment. Calculating prevalence rates for
dental disease is therefore of little significance although
several general comments regarding the dentition can be
made. Defects in the enamel, known as enamel hypopla-
sias, were recorded in the dentition of two individuals,
skeletons [1440] in Grave 3 and [2259] in Grave 25.
They are indicative of episodes of physiological stress,
such as starvation or severe feverish illness in early child-
hood. Skeleton [1440] also exhibits porotic hyperostosis
on the vault of the skull suggestive of anaemic episodes.
Dentine was exposed on much of the anterior dentition
even among the younger adults and this could be due to
a gritty diet or just the sandy environment in which they
lived. Of slight concern is that the primary method for Figure 7.4 Plan of Grave 3
aging these individuals was the degree of dental wear
on their molars. Given the sandy nature of the site this
method may have exaggerated the ages at death. missing (three loose teeth were recovered); sexed by the sciatic notch
and metrical data. The body had been carefully laid out in a supine
Grave catalogue position, with the legs fully extended and the arms by the sides with
the hands over the hips. The head would have been in the west end
Grave 1 F249 of the grave had it still been present. The grave fill consisted of light
Sub-oval grave with flat base and sloping sides, 1.40 x 0.70m and 0.19m and dark brown sandy loam, with much evidence of human and animal
deep, W–E (262 degrees). No human remains were identified. The fill disturbance, especially in the western half of the grave: some animal
([1978]) was a mixed white/grey sand, and contained some probably gnawing was visible on the long-bones (and a number of rabbit bones
residual material: four sherds of pottery (one Roman, two Anglo- were identified in the fill). A number of chalk lumps were found in
Saxon and an intrusive post-medieval); two animal teeth and other the upper fill. Most of the other material recovered from the grave fill
bone fragments; two pieces of slag, one of burnt stone; one brick/tile should probably be considered residual (fragments of animal bone,
fragment; and a small fragment of fired clay. Despite the lack of human including some with butchery marks; four fragments of fired clay;
remains or recognisable grave-goods, this feature was identified as a single pieces of slag and brick/tile), including the sole metal find, a
grave by its size, alignment, and place in the stratigraphic sequence: it fragment of flattened iron rod <06378>.
cut post-holes F250 and F248, and was itself truncated by F238 (this
being one of a series of pits of possibly industrial function which cut Grave 3 [1440] F173, young/younger middle adult ?male
through the area of the cemetery) and by post-hole [1859]. (Fig. 7.4; Pl. XIV)
Elongated rectangular grave with rounded corners, steep sides and
Grave 2 [2304] F165, young adult ?male flattish base, 2.10 x 0.75m and 0.46m deep, WSW–ENE (256 degrees).
(Fig. 7.3) Supine extended inhumation with head propped up so that it looked east;
Oval grave, 1.65 x 0.57m and 0.11m deep, WSW–ENE (247 degrees). hands on or over upper thighs; feet together. Skeleton well preserved
Skeleton generally well preserved although the torso and skull are although the majority of the skull did not survive; judged male from

Figure 7.5 Plan of Grave 4

389
metrical data and the mandible but the pelvis displayed both male and
female characteristics. Schmorl’s nodes were recorded on the bodies of
several of the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae. All the teeth were present;
enamel hypoplasias were recorded on the incisors, which were heavily
worn, and slight deposits of calculus were noted. The backfilled grave
was cut by two pits, F166, and then F167; the depth of the grave saved
the skeleton from any major disturbance, although this may account for
the disruption to the head area. The finds recovered from the greyish-
brown silt fill of the grave appear to be residual rather than deliberate
elements of the grave deposit: six sherds of pottery (five Roman, one
Anglo-Saxon); fragments of fired clay; one piece of slag and numerous
fragments of animal bone (some burnt).
Grave 4 [1520] F185, mature adult ?female
(Fig. 7.5; Pl. XIV)
Elongated oval grave with steep sides and flat base, 1.80 x 0.65m
and 0.22m deep, WSW–ENE (256 degrees). Supine inhumation with
head to the west and slightly inclined so that it looked south; left leg
extended and right leg slightly flexed at the knee so that the feet would
have lain together; left arm extended (the hand would have rested on
the upper thigh) and right arm bent at the elbow with the hand resting
on the pelvis. Skeleton moderately preserved with skull, mandible
and fragments of the pelvis, upper and lower limb bones and several
vertebrae surviving; judged female from the pelvis (particularly the
sciatic notch), male from metrical data and the skull displayed both
male (supraorbital ridges) and female (anterior mandible and orbital
rims) characteristics. At least one tooth was lost prior to death and a
further four were rotten. A carious lesion was observed and flecks of
calculus were recorded on the surviving dentition, which was heavily
worn. There was also a possible abscess. A bipartite inca bone (a non
metric trait in the skull) was recorded. The grave fill of silty sandy loam
displayed signs of disturbance, as well as rodent activity. No grave-
goods were recovered, the only finds being residual animal bone and
a fragment of fired clay. Some disturbance may also have been caused
when the medieval ditch F156 cut through the grave, along its central
axis.
Grave 5 [2283] F241, middle adult ?male
(Fig. 7.6)
Rectangular grave with rounded corners, steep to vertical sides and flat
base, 2.16 x 0.92m and 0.55m deep, WSW–ENE (256 degrees). Supine
Figure 7.6 Plan of Grave 5, and illustrations of associated grave-goods (all at 1:2)
390
extended inhumation with head to the west, left arm extended with hand
on pelvis. Skeleton moderately preserved with the long bone shafts and
fragments of the pelvis, sacrum and vertebrae surviving; the skull did
not survive but two loose teeth were recovered. Pelvis displays both
male and female characteristics but the metrical data suggest a male
individual. An area of black staining over the surviving parts of the
skeleton may indicate some form of organic covering. The rest of the
torso had, however, been badly disturbed; there was evidence that the
grave had been robbed. The original grave fill ([1905]) was a greyish-
brown/black silty sand, itself disturbed, which produced animal bone
fragments (including portions of a cow skull), seven Roman pot sherds,
eleven fragments of slag, some unfired clay and an iron fragment
(<06219>) as well as the tool (1) which was probably deliberately
deposited with the burial. Above this lay a secondary fill ([1894]),
which contained an admixture of human and animal bone (including
butchered cow bone and remains of sheep/goat), as well as five sherds
of Roman pottery, slag, fired clay, a flint flake and an iron knife (2),
which had presumably been disturbed from the body. Into the top of this
fill was a further deposit ([1961]) mainly of animal bone, but which also
incorporated a sherd of Roman pottery, a crucible fragment, slag, fired
and unfired clay and a metamorphic quartz pebble which may have
been used as a hone (<02373>). In addition to the robbing, the grave
had been later cut by Pit F240 in the north-western corner, and been
disturbed by animal burrowing in the eastern half.
Associated objects
1. Iron tool, possibly a sharpening steel or firesteel, broken
and incomplete: flat bar with double inward-spiral terminal,
tapering at the other end, which is broken, as though towards
a tang. Mineral-preserved organic may be leather or crushed
textile. Length 88mm. SF 130 <06220>
2. Iron knife, traces of possible mineral-preserved leather on
blade. Length 88mm, blade length 56mm. <06218>
Grave 6 [2388] F282, subadult/adult
Sub-oval grave, with steep sides and flat base, 1.81 x 1.07m and 0.35m
deep, W–E (259 degrees). Skeleton poorly preserved: only scraps of the
lower limbs, some skull fragments and four loose teeth were recovered.
The grave did not look long enough for the body, whose legs were
flexed slightly, with the head originally placed in the west of the grave.
The sandy fill had been much disturbed by animals. Finds recovered

Figure 7.7 Plan of Grave 7
included animal bone, pottery (nine Roman and three Anglo-Saxon
sherds), eight pieces of slag and a fragment of brick/tile, but none of
these represent deliberate grave-goods.
Grave 7 [2272] F266, older subadult/adult
(Fig. 7.7)
Rectangular grave with rounded corners, 1.99 x 0.57m and 0.34m
deep, WSW–ENE (246 degrees). Skeleton very poorly preserved: only
fragments of the shafts of the lower limbs and two loose premolars were
recovered, these suggesting that the body had been placed in the grave
with the head to the west and the legs extended. The dark brown fill was
very mottled and disturbed, with indications of rabbit-burrowing at both
the east and west ends of the grave. All associated finds are considered
to be either residual in the fill, or to have been brought in by this animal
activity; these comprise fragments of animal bone, three pottery sherds
(two Roman and one Anglo-Saxon) and a piece of slag.
Grave 8 [2269] F265, younger middle adult ?female
(Fig. 7.8)
Sub-rectangular grave widening at head end, steep-sided and flat-
based, 1.77 x 0.85m and 0.42m deep, WSW–ENE (245 degrees).
Skeleton poorly preserved: only the skull and fragments of long bone
were recorded; the skull, although fragmentary, is nearly complete
and the right arm and left leg survive as fragments of shaft. The skull
displays mainly female characteristics. The dentine is exposed on all
the surviving teeth and slight to moderate deposits of calculus were
recorded on the dentition. The body was placed supine and extended
in the grave, with the head at the west end, looking north. The mid-
brown sand fill was loose and disturbed in places, with some evidence
of animal activity. It produced a range of residual material comprising
unidentifiable fragments of animal bone, three sherds of Roman pottery,
two fragments of slag and pieces of flint and burnt flint. The grave was
truncated on the north side by medieval ditch F156.
Figure 7.8 Plan of Grave 8
391
Figure 7.9 Plan of Grave 9
Grave 9 [2278] F262, juvenile (9 years ± 24 months)
(Fig. 7.9)
Irregular sub-rectangular grave with poorly defined sides (concave
in places) and a flat base, 1.65 x 0.72m and 0.22m deep, WSW–ENE
(253 degrees). Only fragments of the skull, including teeth (a mix of
deciduous and permanent) survived, indicating burial with the head
to the west, perhaps supine. The loose dark sand fill showed signs of
animal and root disturbance, and it produced residual finds consisting
largely of unidentifiable animal bone fragments and two Roman pottery
sherds. There were no grave-goods. The grave was later truncated by
medieval ditch F156.
Grave 10 F253
Rectangular grave with steep sides and flat base, 1.27 x 0.54m and
0.23m deep, W–E (263 degrees). No human remains were identified
but this is interpreted as a child’s grave on the basis of its size,
shape, alignment and location. The mixed sand and occasionally silt
fill produced a range of material which was all probably residual or
intrusive: unidentifiable animal bone fragments, a fragment of iron
plate with a central rivet (<06232>), seven sherds of Roman and one
sherd of Anglo-Saxon pottery, eighteen pieces of slag and a substantial
deposit of chalk (over 1kg).
Grave 11 [2302] F268, subadult/adult
(Figs 7.10 and 7.11; Colour Pl. IXa and e)
Sub-rectangular grave with rounded corners, steep sides and a flat base,
1.90 x 0.87m and 0.12m deep, WSW–ENE (249 degrees). Skeleton
very poorly preserved: scraps of the lower limbs, a petrous bone and
five loose teeth were recovered and their positions indicate that the
body was laid out with the head in the west of the grave, although the
position of the legs is unclear: the left femur lay next to the right fibula,
suggesting that the left leg may have been extended and the right leg
drawn up. The grave was heavily truncated by later medieval ditch F156
and Pit F167 and would originally have been c.0.60m deep. There was
also some animal/root disturbance. A small quantity of residual material
(unidentifiable animal bone, brick/tile, slag and flint) was recovered
from the mid to dark brown fill. Grave-goods were recovered from the
left-hand side of the body, with assemblages at the head (1–8) and by
the waist (9–18), and single finds by the presumed location of the pelvis
(19) and feet (20). The group at the head represents a necklace of silver
pendants, with the silver pin probably attaching a head-dress or other
item of clothing near the neck. At the waist were a knife, shears, and
a comb, and a chatelaine complex and girdle hanger, all of which may
have been worn suspended from an iron girdle ring.
Associated objects
1–7. Necklace of silver pendants. Items 6 and 7, although broken
and incomplete, are linked by joins and appear to be the front
and back of a single cross made of silver sheet over a thin
organic core. Item 6 has a rivet and the edges of 7 curve back
as though lapping over a core which has now disappeared.
Small areas of gilding have been identified visually on the
inside of hemispherical pendant (1) and on elements of the
cross but this has not been confirmed by scientific analysis.
1. Silver hemispherical pendant, broken and incomplete, back-
plate missing. Diameter 10mm. SF 186 <06890>
2. Silver hemispherical pendant, backplate detached and incom-
plete. Diameter 10mm. SF 187 <06891>
3. Silver hemispherical pendant, backplate detached and incom-
plete. Diameter 10mm. SF 188 <06892>
4. Silver hemispherical pendant; possible traces of mineral-
Figure 7.10 Plan of Grave 11, and illustrations of associated grave-goods 1–19 (all at 1:1, except Nos 9–15 at 1:2)

392

Figure 7.11 Grave 11, x-ray and reconstruction of
associated grave-good 20 (at 1:2)
preserved thread through loop. Diameter 10mm. SF 189
<06893>
5. Silver hemispherical pendant, broken and incomplete. Diam-
eter 10mm. SF 192 <06896>
6. Cruciform silver sheet, broken and incomplete, with a silver
rivet at the end of one arm. Length >14mm. SF 191 <06895>
7. Cruciform silver sheet, broken and incomplete. Length
>16mm. SF 191 <06895>, SF 192 <06896>
8. Silver pin, lower shaft and point missing. Flattened globular
head with three incised lines around top of shaft. Length
>24mm. SF 190 <06894>
9. Iron rivet; three layers of mineral-preserved organic material
on shaft, probably antler or bone, suggest that this is from a
composite comb. Length 9mm.
10. Iron shears; mineral-preserved textile over mineral-preserved
leather, probably calf, on blades and handle; the leather appears
to derive from a bag, sheath or case in which the shears were
buried. Length 180mm. SF 195 <06245>, SF 200a <06249a>
11. Iron knife, mineral-preserved remains of horn handle on
tang and leather sheath on blade; sheath possibly scalloped
along cutting edge from stitching. Length 74mm, blade length
55mm. SF 196 <06246>
12. Copper alloy girdle hanger; looped head with remains of
copper alloy wire slip-knot ring; face decorated with punched
dots and three incised transverse lines at each terminal; on
back are three punched dots at base of shaft; possible mineral-
preserved textile traces on ring. Length 110mm. SF 199
<06906>
13–18. Chatelaine and girdle rings. The disposition of the items
in complex (13), which has mineral-preserved textile on the
outside, may indicate that the chatelaine was wrapped in
textile before burial but the evidence would also be consistent
with the items being in contact with clothing in the grave. Item
(14) appears to be part of an iron ring with a diameter in the
order of 80–120mm on which other iron rings or links were
looped: this may well represent a girdle ring from which the
chatelaine and other suspended items were hung.
13. Complex of iron and copper alloy objects corroded together;
mineral-preserved textile and ?other mineral-preserved organic
material. SF 200b <06249b>
The complex includes a number of iron rods or links as well as
the following individual elements which have been identified
through visual examination and X-radiography:
i) Iron ring, incomplete. Diameter c.35mm.
393
ii) Copper alloy wire slip-knot ring. Diameter 25mm.
iii) Copper alloy wire slip-knot ring. Diameter 14mm.
iv) Copper alloy wire slip-knot ring. Diameter 14mm.
v)–vii) Three copper alloy chatelaine links, loop-ended rods,
apparently suspended from wire ring (ii). Lengths 47mm.
viii) Cylindrical mount of copper alloy sheet suspended on a
copper alloy wire slip-knot ring: probably the mount for an
organic pendant.
14. Length of curved iron rod, probably part of a larger iron ring,
running through two iron rings or loops with a diameter of
c.12mm. Length 42mm. SF 197 <06247>
15. Length of iron rod, broken at both ends, possibly from a key,
pin, or chatelaine rod. Mineral-preserved textile. Length
>57mm. SF 193 <06243>
16. Two fragments of curved iron rod recovered with shears (10);
these are probably from the chatelaine rather than having any
direct functional association with the shears. Lengths 25mm,
27mm. SF 200a <06249a>. Not illustrated.
17. Three fragments of curved iron rod, probably from rings;
corroded to one is a copper alloy wire slip-knot ring; mineral-
preserved textile, wood and possible leather. <06242> Not
illustrated.
18. Mineral-preserved textile. SF 198 <06248> Not illustrated.
19. Silver bar with silver disc corroded to it. Strip: rounded at
one end, cut with a chisel and snapped at the other to separate
it from a larger strip; length 51mm, width 10.4mm tapering to
8.8mm, thickness varying between 1.4mm and 1.7mm. Disc:
exposed side is plain; diameter 9.3mm, thickness 1.8mm.
SF 185 <06889>
20. Fragmentary remains of a pair of wood and iron woolcombs.
The best-preserved comb has two staggered rows of at least
nine iron teeth, set into a rectangular iron-bound comb head
c.18mm thick: the two rows are 11–14mm apart, the teeth are
set at 2 per cm and the iron plate is 2mm thick. The iron teeth
have a rounded-polygonal cross-section, 5–6mm across, and
may be reconstructed as c.100mm long, of which c.14mm is
set into the comb head. The teeth of the two combs lie together,
facing in opposite directions. Mineral-preserved remains of
the wooden stock have been preserved inside the iron binding,
the grain running across the line of the teeth. The wood has
been identified by S. J. Allen, Archaeological Wood Technolo-
gist at York Archaeological Trust, as ‘Fraxinus excelsior L., a
ring porous hardwood native to the British Isles, commonly
called English ash’ (archive report). Mineral-preserved textile
was recorded on the back of one comb and on one face of the
teeth (Textiles, below). Further unidentified organic remains
are present on the opposite face of the teeth. SF 201 <06379>
Grave 12 [2261] F261, younger middle adult ?female
(Fig. 7.12)
Irregular elongated oval grave with steep sides and undulating base,
1.85 x 0.76m and 0.30m deep, WSW–ENE (255 degrees). Skeleton
poorly preserved: skull fragmentary and mandible missing, the lower
limb shafts survive, feet fragmentary, small fragments of vertebrae and
pelvis recovered. The possible female sexing is suggested by just two
traits on the skull and the size of the femoral head; the grave-goods
would be consistent with a female burial. The grave was truncated and
the burial disturbed by Pit F263 in the chest area and by medieval ditch
F156 on the south side; it is likely that any grave-goods in the area of
the chest have been lost and possible that Pit F263 represents robbery
of the burial in antiquity. The surviving bone indicated that the body
had been placed head to the west, supine, but with the legs flexed left
and the feet together; arm position could not be determined. An animal
tooth found in the grave fill may conceivably have been a deliberate
deposit but was probably residual, like the fragments of Roman pottery
and brick/tile, and daub fragments <02472>. Grave-goods were by the
upper left thigh: shears (1) in a leather case, and a chatelaine with an
iron key (2–5).
Associated objects
1. Iron shears, blades broken and incomplete; mineral-preserved
textile over leather; leather has incised linear decoration and
almost certainly derives from a case in which the shears were
buried. Length >148mm. SF 172 <06239>
2. Iron key or latchlifter, looped head with remains of iron wire
slip-knot ring. Length 175mm. SF 177 <06240>.
3. Iron chatelaine components, corroded together, recovered
with latchlifter; X-radiography identifies at least three iron
rings and an iron rod with a looped terminal linked to one of

Figure 7.12 Plan of Grave 12, and illustrations of
associated grave-goods (all at 1:2)
the rings. Mineral-preserved textile and fibrous organic traces.
Ring diameters c.30mm, rod length >45mm. SF 177 <06240>
4. Fragments of least five iron chatelaine rings, recovered with
shears (1). Diameters c.30mm. SF 172 <06239>
5. Two fragments of curved iron rod; mineral-preserved textile.
<06238>
394
Grave 13 F234
(Fig. 7.13)
Irregular elongated sub-oval grave with sloping sides and uneven
base, 2.00 x 0.79m and 0.54m deep, W–E (269 degrees). No human
remains identified but a darkened stain in the reddish-pink sandy
natural suggested the former presence of a burial. Size, shape and
alignment, and the presence of a glass bead (1) also support interpreta-
tion as a grave. Other finds recovered (two Roman pottery sherds and
unidentifiable fragments of animal bone) were probably residual.
Associated object
1. Glass bead; wound spiral, opaque green. Diameter 7mm,
internal diameter 4mm, length 5mm. SF 94 <06927>
Grave 14 [2420] F233, juvenile (5 years ± 16 months)
(Fig. 7.14)
Rectangular grave with rounded corners, almost vertical sides and flat
base, 1.96 x 0.93m and 0.70m deep, W–E (260 degrees). The buried
individual is represented only by seven permanent tooth crowns in the
western half of the grave. There was evidence for a coffin, in the form
of lines of dark staining in a rectangular shape [1836/1848] visible
both within and underneath the mid-brown silty sand grave fill [1835].
The base of the coffin was observed to fit neatly into the confines of
the grave, although higher up in the fill it appeared to be placed at an
angle to the southern side of the grave, suggested perhaps its uneven
collapse; further evidence for this was seen in the slumping of material
in from the sides of the grave pit. The coffin lining was 0.05m thick,
and occupied an area of 1.60m N–S by 0.74m E–W, although there
was some animal disturbance at the western end. All the finds were
probably residual; these comprise a fragment of fired clay, three pieces
of slag, animal bone fragments and eight sherds of Roman pottery from
the grave fill or slumping; the only metal finds <06215> — two pieces
of slag — were recovered from [1834], which was a layer of infill over
both this grave and Grave 13, following collapse of the fill, and cannot
be considered deliberate grave-goods.
Grave 15 [2428] F252, young adult
(Figs 7.15 and 7.16; Colour Pl. IXb–d, f–h)
Sub-oval grave with steep sides and a flat base, 2.35 x 1.04m and
0.44m deep, W–E (262 degrees). The surviving human remains suggest
a supine extended inhumation towards the southern side of the grave.
The skeleton was represented only by very abraded femur shafts, a
small fragment of pelvis and skull, and fourteen loose permanent teeth.
The morphology of the anterior mandible is possibly female, but no
other sexing evidence survives. There was evidence for considerable
disturbance at both head and foot of the grave.
There was considerable evidence for a coffin. Surrounding the
main grave fill ([2201]), both to the sides and below, were distinct lines
of dark staining ([2202/2429]) encompassing an area c.2.38 x 0.92m,
which appear to represent the decomposed wood (this was disturbed
in parts). Surrounding the staining was a deposit of backfilled material
([2430]) which had collapsed into the coffin interior in places.
A considerable amount of residual material was recovered both
from the grave fill (presumably material incorporated into the material
with which the grave was backfilled, which later collapsed into the coffin
space), and from a later deposit into the top of the subsequently slumped
grave ([2200]). The former consisted of eighteen pieces of slag, twelve
pottery sherds (nine Roman and three Anglo-Saxon), fragments of fired
clay, brick/tile and animal bone; and the latter of larger quantities of
animal bone (with some butchery evidence), twenty-two pieces of slag,
nine sherds of Roman pottery, fired clay, burnt flint, burnt stone and
brick/tile and an iron fragment (<06221>).
The main artefact assemblage (1–20) represents the fittings and
contents of a wooden casket placed at the feet, apparently inside the
coffin, at its south-east corner, and objects placed within or immediately
adjacent to the casket. The relative positions of the casket fittings
suggest some post-depositional disturbance beyond the simple collapse
of the casket. Animal activity is the most likely explanation, and this
would also explain the position of items which were probably deposited
within the casket (8–20) but which were recovered with the casket’s
padlock and in some cases (9, 12 and 14) corroded to it. The lace tag
(21) does not appear to have been within the casket, and the possible pin
(22) was recovered from an area of disturbance. The iron rivet (23) may
be a coffin fitting. It is not clear that fragments of copper alloy sheet and
iron or iron concretion are grave-goods rather than residual material.
Associated objects
1–5. Metal fittings from a maplewood box or casket. Rivet
shanks show that the wood of the casket was 10–15mm thick
and the presence of a fine calcium carbonate paste between
 Figure 7.13 Plan of Grave 13, and illustrations of associated grave-good (at 1:1)
6–20. Items presumed to have been deposited against the casket.
Figure 7.14 Plan of Grave 14
the wood and the metal of hinge (1) indicates that the casket
was covered with gesso. The casket was locked with a barrel
padlock (5). When excavated, items interpreted as having been
deposited within the casket were corroded to the padlock. This
may be explained by these coming to rest together as a result
of post-depositional disturbance.
1. Copper alloy hinge with an iron pin; each strap has three
rivets, one at the terminal with a small washer at the end of the
shank, two at the pin end fastened at the end of the shank with
a copper alloy strip. Mineral-preserved wood on the underside
and around the rivet shanks, Acer sp. (maple). Between the
wood and the metal of the hinge is a thin layer of white mate-
rial identified as a dried paste of fine calcium carbonate (chalk)
powder. Length when flat 92mm. SF 216 <06899>
2. Copper alloy hinge with an iron pin; each strap has three rivets,
one at the terminal with a small washer at the end of the shank
(one is incomplete), two at the pin end fastened at the end of
the shank with a copper alloy strip. Mineral-preserved wood
on the underside and around the rivet shanks, Acer sp. (maple).
Length when flat 92mm. SF 237 <06900>
3. Copper alloy hinged hasp with iron pin; the hinge strap has
three rivets, that at the terminal with a small circular washer,
those at the pin end fastened at the end of the shank by a copper
alloy strip; within the opening of the hasp is a copper alloy
loop, probably the head of a looped split pin, within which is a
length of iron rod from the bolt of barrel padlock (5). Mineral-
preserved wood on front and back, Acer sp. (maple). Length
when flat 88mm. SF 215 <06901>
4. Copper alloy handle; looped strip secured by two loop-headed
split pins. Mineral-preserved wood on rivet shanks, Acer sp.
(maple); mineral-preserved textile. Handle width 40mm, pin
length 28mm. SF 211 <06898>
5. Iron barrel padlock, bolt broken and incomplete; X-radiog-
raphy shows the double leaf spring of the bolt inside the barrel,
395
demonstrating that the padlock was locked when buried; part
of the bolt is corroded to the hasp (3). Length > 48mm. SF 224
<06897>
These are a shell, a comb, an iron padlock key, an iron ring
(9–11) with beads and pendants suspended or mounted on it,
and a second iron ring. A fragment of lignite or coal (20) was
recovered with these items and identified during investigative
conservation. Mineral-preserved textile remains probably
derive from a pleated veil folded and placed in the casket
(Textiles, below).
6. Shell fragment, probably Ormer (Haliotis). This was probably
the complete upper shell reduced to this fragment by aggres-
sive soil conditions. SF 239 <06903> Not illustrated.
7. Two iron rivets; three layers of mineral-preserved antler on the
shafts indicate that these are from a composite comb. Lengths
10mm, 11mm. SF 239 <06903> Not illustrated.
8. Iron padlock key, end of shaft missing; bit has single rectan-
gular hole, mineral-preserved textile. Length >82mm. SF 218
<06226>, SF 220 <06227>
9–15. These represent an iron ring on which were suspended the
chalcedony bead (12) and two organic pendants (14, 15); the
jet or lignite bead (13) was looped on this ring, and the annular
glass bead (16) may also have been.
9. Fragment of an iron ring with an original diameter of c.90mm;
corroded to padlock (5). Length 53mm. SF 224 <06897>
10. Fragment of iron ring, joins (9). Length 54mm. SF 217
<06225>
11. Fragment of iron ring, probably from same item as (9) and
(10). Length c.10mm. SF 224 <06897> Not illustrated.
12. Barrel-shaped chalcedony bead, mounted on a copper-wire
slip-knot ring suspended from and corroded to iron ring frag-
ment (9). (Identification of the material as chalcedony is by
Steven Laurie, Sidgwick Museum of Geology, University of
Cambridge.) Bead diameter 23mm, internal diameter 8mm,
length 30mm. SF 224 <06897>
13. Annular jet or lignite bead, mounted on and corroded to iron
ring fragment (11). Diameter 29mm, internal diameter 12mm.
SF 224 <06897>
14. Cylindrical mounting of copper alloy sheet suspended from
copper alloy wire slip-knot ring; suspended from and corroded
to iron ring fragment (9); mineral-preserved wood (species
unidentifiable) within mount. This appears to have been a
wooden pendant mounted in a copper alloy mount. Ring diam-
eter 11mm. SF 224 <06897>
15. Cylindrical mounting of copper alloy sheet suspended from
copper alloy wire slip-knot ring; suspended from and corroded
to iron ring fragment (11); mineral-preserved wood (species
unidentifiable) within mount. This appears to have been a
wooden pendant mounted in a copper alloy mount. Ring diam-
eter 11mm. SF224 <06897>
16. Annular bead of transluscent pale green glass. Diameter
29mm, internal diameter 10mm. SF 224 <06897>
17. Fragment of curved iron rod from a ring with a diameter of
c.80mm; mineral-preserved textile traces. The rod is thinner
than fragments 9, 10 or 11 and no joins are identifiable. This
joins (18) and therefore appears to represent a second iron
ring. Length 40mm. SF 221 <06228>
Figure 7.15 Plan of Grave 15, and illustrations of associated grave-goods Nos 8, 10–17, 21–23, (all at 1:2, except
Nos 12, 13, 15, 16 and 21 at 1:1)

18. Fragment from an iron ring, joins (17); X-radiography shows
iron wire wrapped around the ring, suggesting either a slip-
knot ring or a looped terminal. Mineral-preserved textile.
Length 12mm. SF 223 <06230>. Not illustrated.
19. Fragments of an iron loop; mineral-preserved textile. SF 223
<06230>. Not illustrated.
20. Fragment of ?coal or lignite. Length 10mm. SF 224 <06897>
not illustrated.
21. Copper alloy lace tag; flattened terminal, split head with rivet
hole; two bands of three incised lines around shaft. Length
20mm. SF 238 <06858>
22. Iron rod with flattened spatulate end, other end broken;
possible the head of a pin. Length 41mm. SF 212 <06223>
23. Iron rivet with circular head or washer, broken and incom-
plete. Diameter 10mm. SF 222 <06229>
24. Two fragments of copper alloy sheet. <06830>. Not illus-
trated.

396
Figure 7.16 Grave 15, illustrations of associated grave-goods 1–5 (Nos 1–4 at 3:4, No. 5 at 1:2)

397
25. Two fragments of iron or iron concretion. SF 214 <06224>,
SF 235 <06231>. Not illustrated.
Grave 16 F251
Small rectangular grave with vertical sides and flat base, 1.12 x 0.60m
and 0.20m deep, W–E (260 degrees). No human remains were identified
and no grave-goods recovered but this is interpreted as a child’s grave
on the basis of size, shape, location and alignment. The very dark grave
fill produced only the usual residual finds, consisting in this case of
eight sherds of Roman pottery, seventeen pieces of slag, fired clay
fragments, largely unidentifiable animal bone and a piece of brick/tile.
Grave 17 F270
Rectangular grave with steep sides and rounded base, 1.00 x 0.60m and
0.25m deep, W–E (262 degrees). No human remains were identified but
this is interpreted as a child’s grave on the basis of size, shape, location
and alignment. Residual material, consisting of four sherds of Roman
pottery, twenty-two pieces of slag, a lump of iron or iron concretion
(<06250>), an iron ingot (<06251>), fragments of an iron spike or nail
(<06252>) and an iron nail (<06253>) were recovered from the fill.
Grave 18 F273
Rectangular grave with steep sides and rounded base, 1.18 x 0.63m and
0.20m deep, W–E (257 degrees). No human remains were identified but
this is interpreted as a child’s grave on the basis of size, shape, location
and alignment. The dark black sand fill of the grave produced only
residual material (thirteen sherds of Roman pottery, thirty-six pieces of
slag, some fragmentary animal bone and some fired clay).
Grave 19 F285
Rectangular grave with sloping sides and flat base, 1.18 x 0.49m and
0.12m deep, W–E (257 degrees). No human remains were identified but
this is interpreted as a child’s grave on the basis of size, shape, location
and alignment. Residual material (five sherds of Roman pottery, seven
pieces of slag and fragmentary animal bone) was recovered from the
brown sand fill.
Grave 20 F214
Sub-rectangular grave with rounded corners, steep sides and flat base,
2.00 x 0.70m and 0.60m deep, W–E (270 degrees). No human remains
Figure 7.17 Plan of Grave 21, and illustration of
associated grave-good (at 1:2)
398
were identified but this is interpreted as a grave on the basis of size,
shape, location and alignment. The grave was filled with a black sand
deposit ([1769]) with a slightly darker grey and more compact deposit
at the base ([2412]). A post-hole (F215) had been cut into the eastern
end of the grave, which had a possible stake-hole impression: a circular
stain 0.08m in diameter and 0.11m deep, with a pointed base. This may
represent a grave marker. Residual material was recovered from the
grave fill: fragments of unidentifiable animal bone, twenty-six sherds
of Roman pottery and a single Anglo-Saxon sherd, large quantities of
slag and single pieces of flint, burnt flint, fired clay and worked stone
(a grooved piece).
Grave 21 F440
(Fig. 7.17)
Sub-oval grave with steep sides and flattish base, 1.60 x 0.49m and
0.30m deep, W–E (261 degrees). No human remains were identified.
The grave cut earlier pits F232 and F235 and was itself severely
truncated by medieval ditch F156. This grave appears to have been
furnished, as a lift-key was recovered from the dark brown silt fill
[1840], as well as probably residual finds consisting of a quantity of
animal bone (including cow and sheep/goat), a sherd of Roman pottery,
some fired clay and fragments of flint and burnt stone.
Associated objects
1. Iron key or latchlifter; flattened shaft with looped head.
Length 104mm. SF 92 <06347>
Grave 22 [2280] F236, middle adult (25–35 years)
(Fig. 7.18; Colour Pl. Xa–c, e)
Sub-oval grave with steep sides and flat base, 1.79 x 0.78m and 0.30m
deep, WSW–ENE (250 degrees). Supine extended inhumation with
the head propped against the end of the grave so that it looked east.
Skeleton moderately preserved, with the jaw present and the lower
limb shafts, feet, left arm and lower vertebrae surviving as scraps. The
morphology of the mandible is male, but no other sexing evidence
survived. One tooth had been lost ante-mortem and another was rotten.
The dentine was exposed on all the incisors and premolars and wear
was more prevalent on the left side of the jaw.
The grave-goods suggest a female burial. Items 1–10 are interpreted
as belonging to a necklace originally worn or deposited at the throat.
Most of these finds were recovered from the area of the head (the
gold pendant frame was recovered from the skull cavity itself during
cleaning) but a slip-knot ring (7) and the glass setting from the pendant
(2) were found by the right knee, indicating that the burial had been
disturbed. A pair of linked pins (11–14) recovered from the area of the
chest also appears to have been disturbed. Between the upper femurs
were a knife, comb and chatelaine complex (15–22), and a lace tag (23)
was recovered from below the lower left leg. The iron plate fragment
(24) and piece of copper alloy sheet (25) recovered from the fill — the
latter from the upper fill — may be from disturbed grave-goods or may
be residual. The other recovered material appears to have been residual
in the grave fill: a fragment of Roman tegula, six sherds of pottery (four
Roman and two Anglo-Saxon), animal teeth fragments and a piece of
slag and unfired clay.
Associated objects
1–10. Necklace of glass beads, silver rings and a gold pendant.
1. Gold pendant, damaged and incomplete: part of the back has
been torn away, the setting (2) is detached and incomplete, and
the front of the frame is bent and crushed. The front has two
beaded borders, the inner finer than the outer; the ribbed loop
has a triangular terminal at the back. Length 21mm. <06888>
2. Fragment of glass setting from gold pendant (1), made from
light blue-and-white twisted rod trailed over a dark blue glass
backing. Width >11mm. SF 179 <06885>
3. Glass bead, wound spiral, opaque green. Diameter 9mm,
internal diameter 4mm, length 6mm. <06887>
4. Glass bead, wound spiral, opaque green. Diameter 7mm,
internal diameter 4mm, length 6mm. SF 181 <06934>
5. Glass bead, wound spiral, opaque red. Diameter 8mm, internal
diameter 4mm, length 6mm. SF 181 <06934>
6. Glass bead, wound spiral, opaque red. Diameter 8mm, internal
diameter 4mm, length 6mm. SF 181 <06934>
7. Silver wire slip-knot ring. Diameter 25mm. SF 179 <06885>
8. Silver wire slip-knot ring; possible mineral-preserved organic
traces. Diameter 23mm. SF 180 <06886>
9. Silver wire slip-knot ring. Diameter 25mm. <06887>
10. Silver wire slip-knot ring. Diameter 25mm. <06887>
11–14. Pair of silver linked pins, each originally suspended by a
silver-wire slip-knot ring from a chain of at least eight silver
 Figure 7.18 Plan of Grave 22, and illustrations of associated grave-goods (all at 1:1, except
Nos 16, 17, 20, 22 at 1:2)
wire links; each link appears to have been made by flattening a
silver wire slip-knot ring and then bending it double.
11. Silver pin, broken but complete; looped head with silver wire
slip-knot ring suspended from two silver wire chain links
and fragments of a third; transverse moulding below head.
Pin length 50mm, ring diameter 10mm, link lengths 12mm.
SF 178 <06882>. Not illustrated.
12. Silver pin with looped head and transverse moulding; associ-
ated with mineral-preserved fibrous organic material and frag-
ment of a silver chain link. Length 50mm. SF 178 <06884>
13. Three silver wire chain links; associated with mineral-
preserved fibrous organic material. Lengths 12mm. SF 178
<06881>. See reconstruction.
399
14. Silver wire slip-knot ring and two silver wire chain links. Ring
diameter 10mm, link lengths 12mm. SF 178 <06883>. See
reconstruction.
15. Two iron rivets; three layers of mineral-preserved organic
material on the shafts, probably antler or bone, suggest that
these are from a composite comb. Lengths 14mm. SF 182
<06857>. Not illustrated.
16. Iron knife, broken and incomplete; mineral-preserved leather
from sheath on blade, possibly scalloped along cutting edge
from stitching; traces of mineral-preserved organic material,
possibly horn, on tang. Length >82mm, blade length >78mm.
SF 182 <06217>
17. Iron rod with looped head, broken and incomplete; mineral-
preserved textile. This is probably from a key or other hanging
item. Length >67mm. SF 182 <06217>
 Figure 7.19 Plan of Grave 23, and illustrations of associated grave-goods (all at 1:1, except No. 2 at 1:2)

18. Iron lozengiform fitting; mineral-preserved textile. Length 20. Two fragments of curved iron rod from a ring with an orig-
22mm. SF 182 <06217> inal diameter of c.40mm; mineral-preserved textile. SF 182
19. Iron chatelaine links, corroded together; mineral-preserved <06217>
textile and cordage. Diameters c.8mm. SF 182 <06217>. Not 21. Iron lozengiform fitting; central hole through which passes a
illustrated. fragment of curved iron rod; mineral-preserved textile. Length
40mm. SF 182 <06217>

400
22. Iron rod with flat ovoid head, broken and incomplete; visual
examination of the head, confirmed by X-radiography, shows
that it is pierced and that a length of curved iron wire, presum-
ably from a suspension ring, survives in the hole; mineral-
preserved textile. Length >77mm. SF 182 <06217>
23. Copper alloy lace tag made of rolled sheet with a split end;
mineral-preserved organic material within split. Length 17mm.
SF 183 <06859>
24. Triangular fragment of iron plate, broken along one edge.
Length 22mm. <06216> not illustrated
25. Piece of copper alloy sheet with copper alloy rivet. Length
28mm. SF 93 <06857> not illustrated
Grave 23 F260
(Fig. 7.19; Colour Pl. Xd)
Sub-rectangular grave with steep sides and flat base, 1.90 x 1.00m and
0.37m deep, WSW–ENE (250 degrees). No human remains identified.
The fill of this grave appears to have been disturbed, possibly robbed,
as a large recut (fill [2242]) was visible in section, reaching its lowest
point at the place in the grave where the torso would probably have lain.
This fill, of very dark grey silty sand, contained material which had been
incorporated from elsewhere (fragments of animal bone, brick/tile, fired
clay, flint, slag, burnt stone and eight sherds of pottery (two Roman,
one prehistoric and five Anglo-Saxon). This fill cut through the original
grave backfill ([2243]), light brown sand with animal disturbance which
contained residual animal bone and slag, just to the top of the darker
underlying layer ([2245]) of very dark grey compacted silty sand which
is interpreted as the area in which the body had decayed (some residual
pottery, animal bone and slag was also found in this layer). It was in this
lowest layer that the grave-goods were found: the keystone garnet disc
brooch (1), furthest to the west and face up in the middle of the grave;
the knife (2), 0.25m to the east; and the chatelaine and complex (3–5),
0.35m to the east of that. On an adult buried with head to the west, and
assuming that these grave-goods have not been displaced, this would
imply that the brooch had lain near the neck or shoulders, the knife at
the waist and the chatelaine between the legs or just to one side.
Associated objects
1. Silver-gilt keystone garnet disc brooch. Face: central
circular setting with a collar of beaded silver-gilt wire contains
a domed boss of white organic material, probably shell, within
which is a circular garnet backed by cross-hatched gold foil
within a silver cell surrounded by a niello inlay (now incom-
plete). Around the central boss in the second field are four
wedge-shaped garnets backed by cross-hatched gold foil in
a cruciform array (one now detached) alternating with four
circular settings, each with a collar of beaded silver gilt wire
and a domed boss of white organic material, probably shell,
one of which is now fragmentary; three bosses have central
circular silver cells with cross-hatched gold foil but the garnets
Figure 7.20 Plan of Grave 24, and illustrations of associated grave-goods (all at 1:2, except No. 4 at 1:1)
401
are now missing; around each boss is a cast high-relief border;
the domed heads of the two rivets which secure the catch plate
are visible on either side of one of the garnet settings. The rim
has four rectangular garnets set over cross-hatched gold foil
(one garnet is now missing), aligned with the keystone garnet
settings, and between these are panels of cast linear ornament.
The border is plain with beaded panels alongside the outer
garnet settings. Back: border of double row of punched dots,
with traces of gilding, around outside; double pin lug, cast inte-
grally; pin shouldered with rectangular head, incised diagonal
cross on head and line at shoulder; catch plate is secondary,
made from a strip of silver sheet with serrated ends which
has been riveted to the brooch; mineral-preserved leather or
skin; mineral-preserved pupa cases. Diameter 46mm. SF 210
<06902>
2. Iron knife, broken and incomplete; mineral-preserved remains
of horn handle on tang and leather or hide sheath on blade.
Length >103mm, blade length >63mm. SF 208 <06904>
3–5. These three groups of iron and copper alloy objects, corroded
together and swathed in mineral-preserved textiles and other
organic material, are interpreted as a chatelaine complex.
SF 209 <06905>
3. Mineral-preserved textile on surface. Within this stereo X-
radiography allows the identification of:
i) Iron ring and two linked iron rods. Ring diameter c.42mm,
rod length c.35mm.
ii) Copper alloy loop. Max diameter 42mm.
iii) Copper alloy wire slip-knot ring: stereo X-radiography
shows that this loops through the perforation in (iv). Diameter
c.23mm.
iv) Miniature copper alloy purse mount; triangular with spiral
terminals and pierced at the apex. Length 58mm.
4. Mineral-preserved textile and bone on surface. Within this X-
radiography shows two iron rings and three iron chain links.
Ring diameters c.25mm, link lengths c.35mm. Not illustrated.
5. Mineral-preserved textile on surface. Within this visual exami-
nation and X-radiography allow the identification of:
i) at least two iron rings with diameters of c.25mm and iron
chain links.
ii) Copper alloy wire slip-knot ring. Diameter 19mm.
iii) Copper alloy wire slip-knot ring. Diameter 19mm.
Grave 24 [2260] F257, older middle adult ?male
(Fig. 7.20)
Sub-rectangular grave with rounded corners, sloping sides and flat base,
1.97 x 0.73m and 0.18m deep, WSW–ENE (255 degrees). Extended
supine inhumation bent slightly sideways at waist with head slightly
propped against north side of the grave so that it looked south-east; arms
extended by sides. Skeleton moderately preserved: skull fragmentary
and limb bones survive only as fragments of shaft; pelvis and torso are
missing. The skull displayed male characteristics. Moderate deposits
of calculus were recorded on one of the five loose teeth which were
recovered. Residual material recovered from the grave fill ([02233])
consisted of fragments of flint, burnt flint, slag, burnt stone, animal
bone, brick/tile, a grooved worked stone and six Roman and four
Anglo-Saxon pottery sherds. Grave-goods were a knife (1) and iron
object (2) by the upper left arm, and a nail (3) between the thighs. The
lace tag (4) was recovered from the surface of the grave and may have
been disturbed from it (there was considerable evidence of burrowing
and even a rabbit skeleton in section).

Associated objects
1. Iron knife; mineral-preserved horn on tang, mineral-preserved
leather and textile traces on blade. Length 200mm, blade
length 135mm. SF 175 <06235>
2. Iron object, broken or abraded at both ends, tapers from a
rectangular cross-section to a narrower triangular cross-section. Figure 7.21 Plan of Grave 25
This is probably from a large nail or spike but may possibly be
from a metalworker’s punch. Length 40mm. SF 175 <06236>
3. Iron nail, bent through 90 degrees. Length 70mm. SF 176 extended inhumation with head turned to look north; left arm bent
<06237> with hand resting on right shoulder, right hand on pelvis; feet slightly
4. Copper alloy lace tag with split end. Length 22mm. splayed. Skeleton well preserved although all of the elements were
<06829> fragmentary and the majority of the ribs and vertebrae did not survive.
The skull possessed female characteristics and the pelvis a mixture of
Grave 25 [2259] F256, young adult ?female male and female, while the metrical data was ambivalent. Post-mortem
(Fig. 7.21; Pl. XIV) breaks were seen on all the long-bone shafts but the stature can still be
Sub-rectangular grave with rounded corners, steepish sides and flat calculated from the femurs (1.64–1.65m if female and 1.68 if male).
base, 1.84 x 0.73m and 0.32m deep, WSW–ENE (255 degrees). Supine All permanent teeth were present, flecks of calculus were recorded and

Plate XIV Unfurnished Grave 25, a young adult ?female, after excavation

402
enamel hypoplasias were observed on the incisors and canines. Pitting,
characteristic of porotic hyperostosis, was observed on the parietal
bones. Material recovered from the grey loose sand grave fill was all
probably residual. This included four fragments of iron, one possibly
a nail head <06233>, the others apparently fragements from a single
large staple <06234, 06236, 06237>, as well as of fragments of animal
bone, brick/tile, burnt flint, flint, slag, a quern fragment and thirteen
sherds of pottery (twelve Roman and one Anglo-Saxon).
Grave 26 F258
Sub-rectangular grave with steep to vertical sides and flat base,
1.53 x 0.93m and 0.38m deep, W–E (258 degrees). No human remains
were identified and this is interpreted as a grave on the basis of shape,
size, orientation and location. Dark grey sand fill [2238] overlay
slightly pinky brown sand fill [2240]. All finds recovered were residual
in the upper fill of the grave, and comprised fragments of brick/tile,
fired clay, slag, burnt stone and four sherds of pottery (three Roman and
one Anglo-Saxon).
Grave 27 [2549] F363, juvenile
(Fig. 7.22)
Sub-oval grave tapering from head to foot with sloping sides and a
flat base, 1.11 x 0.60m and 0.20m deep, WSW–ENE (241 degrees).
Probably supine inhumation with the head propped up against the west
end of the grave; knees flexed and leaning against the south side of the
grave. Skeleton very poorly preserved with just fragments of the lower
limb bones, some very thin skull fragments and four loose permanent
tooth crowns surviving. While there were probably no grave-goods, the
two flint flakes to the right of the head and the sheep jaw which lay to
the left of the upper legs could conceivably have been grave-offerings;
these isolated graves did not have the amount of residual material found
Figure 7.22 Plan of Grave 27
Figure 7.23 Plan of Grave 28, and illustration of associated grave-good (at 1:2)
403
in the cemetery proper. Aside from these, the only other finds from
the grave fill were a single sherd of Roman pottery and three further
fragments of animal bone from the grave fill above.
Grave 28 F364
(Fig. 7.23)
Sub-rectangular grave with rounded corners, steep sides and flat base,
1.78 x 0.83m and 0.40m deep, WSW–ENE (247 degrees). This grave
contained two skeletons: an adult male (28a) at the northern side and
a juvenile or sub-adult (28b) at the southern side. It is unclear whether
the two burials were contemporaneous; while the adult burial partly
overlies the younger one, and appears to have been placed in the grave
in a position which respects that burial, there was a possible secondary
grave cut recorded during excavation, which may indicate that the adult
burial was a later (but possibly not much later) insertion into the large
grave. Only the adult burial was furnished, with an iron knife (1) placed
point downwards under the left elbow. Otherwise, the remainder of the
finds from the grave were probably residual, and consisted of a small
amount of animal bone, burnt flint and chalk, and fourteen sherds of
pottery (nine Roman and four Anglo-Saxon), although the substantial
amount of both fired and unfired clay loomweights, and of large pieces
of lava quernstone at the surface of the grave, may indicate a deliberate
deposit.
28a [3417], younger middle adult male
Supine extended inhumation inclined slightly onto the right side with
head bent to look south-east; arms bent at elbows so that hands would
have rested on chest; left leg slightly flexed at both the hip and knee,
and raised in the grave, leaning over towards the right knee. Skeleton
moderately preserved but very abraded, with large portions of the skull,
upper and lower limb bones, and a small fragment of pelvis, surviving.
The skull and pelvis each had male attributes and the metrical data
conformed to this. Dentine is exposed on all the surviving teeth, one
of the maxillary molars is rotten and slight deposits of calculus were
recorded on the molars. The femur length gives an estimated stature
of 1.75–1.76m.
Associated object
1. Iron knife; X-radiography suggests three rivet holes on
tang; mineral-preserved remains of probable horn on tang
and possible leather on blade. Length 186mm, blade length
122mm. <06241>
28b [3419], juvenile/younger subadult
Supine extended inhumation with head inclined to look north. Skeleton
very poorly preserved with fragments of the skull, right humerus and
left and right femurs surviving. The largest surviving fragment, the
right femur, appears very slim and gracile but the cortical bone is very
abraded.
V. Material culture: dating and comparanda
Disc brooch
(Grave 23)
The silver gilt keystone garnet disc brooch from Grave 23
belongs with examples of Avent’s classes 5 and 6 (Avent
1975) but cannot be assigned unequivocally to either
class. The type 11 ornament between the garnet settings
and bosses is characteristic of class 5 brooches, but other
class 5 brooches have type 4.1 garnet settings rather than
the type 2.1 settings on this example, and nielloed inner
bands to the rim; the diameter, at 46mm, falls between
the maximum recorded by Avent for class 5 brooches and
the minimum for class 6.
The closest formal parallel for this piece is a gilded
copper alloy disc brooch from the cemetery at Edix Hill
(Cambridgeshire), Grave 37 (Malim and Hines 1998).
This has been convincingly interpreted as a simplified
local copy from a Kentish model now best represented
by a class 6.1 brooch from Faversham (Kent) (Avent
1975, no. 11), in which the zoomorphic interlace motifs
between the keystone garnet settings and the bosses,
characteristic of the Kentish brooches, have been lost or
translated into a simpler relief border (Malim and Hines
1998, 205). The Bloodmoor Hill brooch is so similar to
that from Edix Hill as to make it very likely that both
are the work of the same craftsman: the only significant
difference between the decorative design of the two is
in the position of the beaded panels on the rim which
are aligned with the garnet settings on the Bloodmoor
Hill brooch but with the bosses on the brooch from Edix
Hill. The East Anglian provenance of two such similar
brooches supports the interpretation that these are local
copies from a Kentish model and adds to the evidence for
such copies in eastern England (Avent 1975, 64–5). The
occurrence of two pieces very probably from the same
hand in graves as far apart as Cambridgeshire and the
Suffolk coast may be explained by an itinerant craftsman,
exchange, gift-giving or exogamy and indicates the
distance over which networks of social or economic
contacts might extend.
Brooches of Avent’s classes 5 and 6 are securely dated
to the later 6th and earlier 7th centuries (Avent 1975,
62; Evison 1987, 39–44; Brugmann 1999; Brugmann
2004, 58–70). It is argued that the brooch from Edix Hill
Grave 37 was made early in the 7th century and buried
before the middle of the century (Malim and Hines 1998,
282). The similarity of the Edix Hill and Bloodmoor Hill
brooches argues contemporary or near-contemporary
manufacture for them and later rather than earlier burial
is suggested for the Bloodmoor Hill brooch because of
the evidence for damage and repair. Deposition in the
second quarter of the 7th century is therefore a strong
possibility.
The brooch lay right-side-up in the grave and its posi-
tion relative to the other grave-goods would be consistent
with it having fastened an outer garment at the neck or
chest of the corpse, very much in line with the wider
pattern of use observed for keystone garnet disc brooches
(Avent 1975, 2–3). Against this interpretation, however,
is the fact that no mineral-preserved textile was associ-
ated with the brooch and that mineral-preserved leather
or skin (not human) survived over its face. It is possible,
therefore, that the brooch was not worn but was depos-
ited at or near the chest or neck in a leather pouch. The
404
position of the brooch from Edix Hill Grave 37, at the
right-hand side of the torso within a crook of the arm,
may suggest that this was also not worn on the corpse at
burial (Malim and Hines 1998, fig. 3.73); the composite
disc brooch from the late 7th-century Grave 93 at Boss
Hall, Ipswich (Suffolk), was deposited in a container with
other jewellery near the head of the corpse (Scull forth-
coming), and the disposition of the items may suggest
something similar for the composite disc brooch from the
later 7th-century Grave 11 at Harford Farm, Caistor St
Edmund (Norfolk) (Penn 2000, 14, fig. 18). Deposition
in a bag, if this is true of the brooch from Grave 23,
might therefore be argued as conforming to a regional
characteristic of burial practice in the second quarter and
second half of the 7th century.
Technical examination shows that the brooch from
Grave 23 was mercury gilded and has identified the mate-
rial of the bosses as shell; it is possible, though impossible
to demonstrate, that this originally had a mother-of-pearl
surface (Skinner et al. 2005).
Pins
(Graves 11, 22, ?15)
The simple silver pin from Grave 11 was found at the
neck and probably fastened a garment or head covering.
Single pins of this form are known from other mid to
late 7th-century burials at, for example, Polhill (Kent)
Grave 38; Shudy Camps (Cambridgeshire) Grave 95;
and Buckland, Dover (Kent) Grave 107 (Hawkes 1973,
107, fig. 54; Lethbridge 1936, 24, fig. 24; Evison 1987,
83, fig. 48).
The silver linked pins from Grave 22 are a dress-
accessory well known from female graves of the later 7th
century, occurring elsewhere in East Anglia at Harford
Farm, Caistor-St-Edmund (Norfolk) Grave 18 (Hyslop
1963, 198; Meaney and Hawkes 1970, 30–1; Ross 1991;
Geake 1997, 35–6; Penn 2000, 53–4, fig. 88). The suite
from Grave 22 is one of the plainest examples known,
with simple loop-headed pins very similar to those from
Harford Farm and a simple chain made from flattened
slip-knot rings. The pins from Grave 22 were in the area
of the upper chest. It has been argued from their loca-
tion at the neck or upper chest in other burials, notably
Butler’s Field, Lechlade (Gloucestershire) Graves 14
and 138, and Chamberlain’s Barn II, Leighton Buzzard
(Bedfordshire) Graves 39 and 55, that linked pins were
used to fasten a long veil or head covering, perhaps
fastening it to the main garment at the front (Ross 1991,
403–6; forthcoming).
A fragment of iron rod with a spatulate end (22)
recovered from the disturbed fill of Grave 15 may be part
of an iron pin.
Beads, pendants and necklaces
(Graves 11, 13, 15, 22)
Four wound spiral glass beads, two opaque red and two
opaque green, were recovered from Grave 22, where they
appear to have been part of a necklace with silver rings
and pendants; a single glass wound spiral bead, opaque
green, was also recovered from Grave 13. Wound spiral
glass beads are a form characteristic of Brugmann’s bead
group C and may be dated to the middle and second half
of the 7th century (Brugmann 2004, 58–70). The only
other glass bead from a burial at Bloodmoor Hill is the
large annular bead in pale green or clear transluscent
glass from Grave 15. In size and form this is identical to
examples of annular twist beads, a type also character-
istic of Brugmann’s group C, and may be similarly dated.
It was part of the casket contents which also included
the remains of an iron ring on which was threaded an
annular jet or lignite bead and from which the chalcedony
bead was suspended by a slip-knot ring. It is possible,
though undemonstrable, that the glass annular bead was
also threaded on this, but perhaps equally likely that it
was on the second, slightly smaller, ring. Jet or lignite
beads are relatively infrequent in 5th- to 7th-century
Anglo-Saxon burials and when they do occur are most
commonly small facetted or discoid forms (Meaney
1981, 73–4; Hirst 1985, 70; Evison 1987, 60). There is,
however, an annular jet bead from the settlement at West
Stow (Suffolk), and a ‘small thick ring’ of jet from a
probable 7th-century grave at Seamer (North Yorkshire)
may well be a similar bead (West 1985, 71, fig. 275.2;
Meaney 1964, 300; 1981, 74). The large chalcedony bead
is hard to parallel from 5th- to 7th-century contexts in
England but very close parallels can be cited from 6th-
century Alammanic and Bavarian graves at, for example,
Altenerding (Upper Bavaria) Grave 146 and Neresheim
(Baden-Württemberg) Grave 49, where they are inter-
preted as pendants (Sage 1984, 58, taf. 15; Knaut 1993,
65, 263, taf. 11). The occurrence of such similar items
in south German graves of the 6th century emphasises
that the bead from Bloodmoor Hill is both an import and
likely to have been old when buried.
Also suspended from the larger iron ring in Grave 15
by slip-knot rings were two cylindrical copper alloy collars
with mineral-preserved wood, very probably the mounts
of wooden pendants. Another such mount was found
with components of the chatelaine complex in Grave 11.
The mounts are similar to those of beaver tooth pendants
known from, for example, Wigber Low (Derbyshire) and
Butler’s Field, Lechlade (Gloucestershire) Grave 14, a
burial which also contained a silver mount of the same
form which appears to have formed part of a necklace
(Meaney 1981, 136; Collis 1983, 73, fig. 40; Boyle et al.
1998, 58–9, figs 4.39–50).
The silver slip-knot rings and gold pendant from
Grave 22, and the silver pendants from Grave 11, are all
components of the suite of dress jewellery known from
richly furnished female burials of the middle and later
7th century (Geake 1997, 36–40, 48). The combina-
tion of cabochon pendant, silver wire rings and wound
spiral beads seen in Grave 11 is known elsewhere from,
for example, burials at Lower Brook Street, Winchester
(Hants) (Hawkes 1990) and Finglesham (Kent) Grave 139
(Hawkes and Grainger 2006, 101, fig. 2.118); at Harford
Farm, Caistor St Edmund (Norfolk) (Grave 22), a cabo-
chon pendant was found at the throat while a necklace
including silver wire rings and wound spiral beads was
deposited separately in a bag (Penn 2000, 31–4). The use
of glass settings in cabochon pendants may be seen in
Finglesham Grave 138; Sibertswold (Kent) Grave 172;
Risely, Horton Kirby (Kent) Grave 56, and Cow Low
(Derbyshire), those from Sibertswold and Risely also
having twisted trails (Hawkes and Grainger 2006, 97–
101, fig. 2.117; Fausset 1856, 130–1, pl. 4; Cumberland
1940; Hilton 1980; Ozanne 1962–63, 28–9). There is a
detached setting with twisted trails from Butler’s Field,
Lechlade (Gloucestershire) Grave 148 (Boyle et al.
1998).
405
The hemispherical pendants (or ‘bullae’) from
Grave 11 were found with the fragments of the silver
cross and were presumably worn as part of the same neck-
lace. Visual examination suggests that the hemispherical
pendants and cross may have been gilded. Two embossed
silver gilt pendant crosses were found as part of a neck-
lace in Kingston Down (Kent) Grave 142 (Faussett 1856,
66, pl. 4; Campbell 1982, 49). Butler’s Field, Lechlade
(Gloucestershire) Grave 187 provides an example from a
later 7th-century grave of a plain silver sheet cross worn
as part of a necklace (Boyle et al. 1998, fig 5.106). The
combination of ‘bullae’ and a pendant cross can be seen
most famously in the gold necklace from Desborough
(Northamptonshire) (Baker 1880), but the example from
Bloodmoor Hill, while clearly of the same tradition, is a
more modest piece of jewellery.
The question arises as to whether any of the beads or
pendants from burials at Bloodmoor Hill might be consid-
ered amuletic. Meaney (1981, 71–103) has discussed the
possible amuletic significance of jet, lignite and other
mineral substances and it is quite possible that the jet or
lignite and chalcedony beads from Grave 15 carried an
amuletic charge. It is equally possible, though equally
undemonstrable, that this is also true of the wooden
pendants. The silver pendant cross from Grave 11
was surely intended as an explicitly Christian symbol
(MacGregor 2000a, 221–2; Blair 2005, 230–3).
Iron circlets
(Grave 15)
The assemblage deposited with the casket in Grave 15
included at least one, and probably two, iron rings. The
larger of these threaded the jet or lignite bead and had
suspended from it two wooden pendants and the chal-
cedony bead. One piece of the smaller ring has an iron
rod wrapped around it, suggesting either a slip-knot
form or a looped terminal (perhaps for a hook-and-eye)
made by looping the end of the ring and wrapping it back
around itself. It is possible that the glass annular bead
was threaded on this ring.
With diameters of c.80mm and c.90mm, these rings
are too small to be necklets for an adult. By comparison
the silver necklet with hook-and-eye fastening and an
annular bead from Hadleigh Road, Ipswich (Suffolk)
Grave 12 has an internal diameter of 150–160mm (Layard
1907, 339; Plunkett 1994, 437–9; West 1998, fig. 58).
They also appear a little large to be bracelets unless
worn over clothing. Copper alloy arm-rings or bracelets
from Finglesham (Kent) Graves 34 and 180, both found
on the forearms of adult female skeletons, have internal
diameters of 67mm and 70mm respectively. It has been
suggested that the copper alloy circlet with hook-and-
eye from Grave 13 of the small inhumation cemetery at
Caistor-by-Norwich (Norfolk), from which were hung
at least four copper alloy slip-knot rings, was used as a
chatelaine component (Myres and Green 1973, 212–13,
223–4, fig. 61) and it is possible from their positions in
the grave that the copper alloy hook-and-eye circlets from
Harford Farm, Caistor-St-Edmund (Norfolk) Graves 18
and 20, interpreted as bracelets, were reused in this way,
although the large annular twist bead threaded on the
circlet from Grave 20 suggests jewellery and burial in
a bag at the waist would explain the positioning (Penn
2000). Use or reuse as chatelaine components is not a
convincing explanation for the circlets from Bloodmoor
Hill, which were probably (although not certainly)
placed within a casket and were not associated with other
common chatelaine elements (this is discussed further
below). Very similar items from a settlement context
at Shakenoak Farm (Oxfordshire) and from Harrold
(Bedfordshire) Grave 8 have been interpreted as amulet
rings (Brown 1972, 109, fig. 53; Eagles and Evison 1970,
40; Meaney 1981, 176–7), but the possibility that the
circlets from Bloodmoor Hill Grave 15 were bracelets or
necklets cannot be ruled out; if the latter, perhaps they
were pieces retained from childhood by a young adult.
Bags, pouches or purses
(Grave 23)
The possibility that the brooch in Grave 23 may have
been deposited in a leather pouch rather than worn is
discussed above, and the ?wool tabby repp associated
with the chatelaine complex may also be from a bag
(Textiles, below). There is otherwise little evidence for
bags, pouches or purses in graves at Bloodmoor Hill.
Mineral-preserved textile associated with the girdle and
chatelaine complexes in Graves 11 and 12 derives from
clothing (Textiles, below) and there are no fittings which
need be associated with a bag or purse: the lozengiform
iron fittings from Grave 22 are as likely to be associated
with the girdle or chatelaine as a bag (below). The posi-
tion of the silver bar and pellet (19) in Grave 11 may
suggest that they were deposited in a bag or pouch, but
there is no direct evidence for this. The miniature copper
alloy mount (3.iv) in the girdle and chatelaine complex
from Grave 23 is clearly a skeuomorph of larger contem-
porary iron purse mounts or firesteels, such as those
from Buckland, Dover (Kent) Grave 139; Polhill (Kent)
Grave 68; Burwell (Cambridgeshire) Grave 42; and
Harford Farm, Caistor St Edmund (Norfolk) Grave 18
(Evison 1987; Hawkes 1973; Lethbridge 1931; Penn
2000). Similar but smaller examples from Boss Hall,
Ipswich (Suffolk) Grave 93 are interpreted as mounts
sewn to a bag or purse (Scull forthcoming). The possi-
bility that the piece from Grave 23 did function as a
bag or purse mount cannot be absolutely discarded but
against this interpretation are its size and the fact that it is
mounted on a wire slip-knot ring, suggesting that it hung
from the chatelaine as a decorative miniature.
Girdle and chatelaine complexes
(Graves 11, 12, 22, 23, ?15)
Suspension complexes — chatelaines — were recovered
from Graves 11, 12, 22 and 23 and it is possible that
elements of the assemblage from Grave 15 may have
been used in this way. Chatelaines are a type fossil of
furnished 7th-century female burials (Geake 1997, 57–8)
and examples may be cited, for example, from Boss Hall
(Suffolk) Grave 93 (Scull forthcoming); Harford Farm,
Caistor-by-St Edmund (Norfolk) Graves 22, 27 and
28 (Penn 2000); Burwell (Cambridgeshire) Graves 42
and 83 (Lethbridge 1931); and Water Lane, Melbourn
(Cambridgeshire) graves SG67 and SG 82 (Duncan et al.
2003).
At Bloodmoor Hill, the simplest, from Grave 12,
consisted of iron links and chain which were recovered
with the shears and latchlifter, indicating that all three
hung together. The more complex assemblage in Grave 11
was deposited at the left-hand-side of the waist with the
knife, shears, comb and girdle hanger, and it is likely that
406
all these were suspended from an iron girdle ring (14).
Individual elements of the chatelaine which can be iden-
tified include both iron and copper alloy links and iron
rings, copper alloy slip-knot rings of different sizes, and
the copper alloy setting for an organic pendant, possibly
an animal tooth. The position of the assemblage from
Grave 23 would be consistent with placement by the hip
or thighs of the corpse. Identifiable elements include iron
links and rings, a copper alloy loop and slip-knot rings,
and the miniature purse mount or firesteel in copper alloy
(Bags, pouches or purses, above).
In Grave 22 the chatelaine complex had been depos-
ited between the thighs with the knife and comb, and
included two lozengiform fittings and an oval-headed
implement as well as iron links and ring fragments. Iron
lozengiform fittings commonly occur in female burials
in association with girdle groups and so are interpreted
as bag or girdle fittings, but their exact function remains
obscure; one was associated with the chatelaine in Boss
Hall (Suffolk) Grave 93 (Evison 1987, 118; Drinkall and
Foreman 1998, 286; Scull forthcoming). The oval-headed
implement superficially resembles the iron spoons with
shallow bowls identified in chatelaine assemblages at
Buckland, Dover (Kent) Grave 75, Finglesham (Kent)
Grave 180 and Garton Slack (East Riding of Yorkshire)
Grave 7 (Evison 1987, 118, fig. 38; Hawkes and Grainger
2006; Mortimer 1905, 250, pl. 85) but the head is flat, not
dished, and has been pierced for suspension.
Elements of the chatelaines from Graves 11 and 23
appear to have been bundled together and bear mineral-
preserved textile remains, raising the possibility that they
were buried in bags or wrapped in textile, as may have
been the case at Boss Hall (Suffolk) Grave 93 (Scull
forthcoming) and has been suggested for chatelaine
components from a late 7th- or early 8th-century grave
at Orsett (Essex) (Webster 1985). Textile remains associ-
ated with the chatelaine in Grave 23 may well be from
a bag (Bags, pouches or purses, above) but those from
Grave 11 are from clothing (Textiles, below), the evidence
therefore suggesting that the chatelaine was attached to
the girdle on the corpse and the links placed in a heap in
contact with clothing. In Grave 22 folds of textile were
twisted around one of the chatelaine components (17).
The suggestion that some bracelets may have had a
secondary use as chatelaine rings and that this may have
been true of the circlets from Grave 15 has been discussed
above. It is possible that the iron rings from Grave 15
were used as chatelaine or girdle rings and buried in the
casket rather than worn at the waist, but although there
are similar pendant mounts associated with the rings from
Grave 15 and the chatelaine from Grave 11, the absence
of any other common chatelaine element rules against
this interpretation.
Casket and contents
(Grave 15)
The maplewood casket is represented by copper alloy
hinges, hasp, handle and the iron barrel padlock, and by
mineral-preserved wood on the copper alloy fittings.
The casket was closed and fastened with a padlock
when buried: X-radiography shows that the padlock was
locked, and part of the bolt is corroded to the hasp. The
length of the rivet shanks which secured the hinges and the
hasp indicate that the sides of the casket were 14–15mm
thick and the lid 13–15mm thick at its base, thinning to
11–12mm at the top of the straps. The split pins which
secured the handle each passed through 10–11mm of
wood. No details of the carpentry survive.
Post-depositional disturbance and the absence of
corner brackets preclude any exact estimate of size, but
the relative positions of the hinges and padlock suggest
that they were mounted approximately 20cm apart and
the distance between the hinges, if they were mounted
equidistant from each other and the ends of the casket,
or closer to the ends of the casket than to each other,
would suggest a length of approximately 25–30cm. The
hinges and hasp are angled at around 30 degrees and
show a curvature on the upper strap which suggests that
the lid was curved. If the casket was 20cm wide this
would indicate a curved lid 8–10cm high at its apex. The
only indication as to the height of the sides is provided
by the hasp and padlock: if the padlock were to hang
vertically then the sides must have been at least 6–7cm
high. An outline reconstruction of the casket is offered
in Fig. 7.16.
A thin layer of fine calcium carbonate paste has been
identified between the wood and the metal of one of
the hinges (1). The paste was first recognised during
assessment of mineral-preserved organic material
in 1998, by which time the other hinge and hasp had
already undergone cleaning which removed deposits
concreted to their surfaces; subsequent examination
has, nonetheless, identified traces of the paste on the
exterior surfaces of mineral-preserved wood associ-
ated with the other copper alloy fittings (Skinner et al.
2005). This may represent an adhesive or filler intended
to help secure the fittings to the wood but this seems
unlikely as they would have been securely riveted. The
paste survives best in contact with the metal fittings but
is present on surviving wood surfaces which were not
covered by fittings and it therefore seems likely that the
casket was covered with gesso, very probably in prepa-
ration for painting (Skinner et al. 2005).
Wooden boxes and caskets are characteristic grave-
goods of the middle and later 7th century and are most
often found buried with women, commonly though not
exclusively at the foot of the grave (Speake 1989, 24–30;
Geake 1997, 81–2; Penn 2000, 64). Fittings are most
commonly of iron and in the majority of cases where
there is no positive evidence to the contrary a simple
flat lid is usually assumed (Speake 1989, 24–30; Evison
1987, 100–3; Geake 1997, 81–2). The casket from
Bloodmoor Hill, with copper alloy fittings and a curved
lid, is therefore unusual and is best compared with
the small number of more elaborate examples known
from contemporary burials. The triangular copper alloy
hinges and hasp plate from Bloodmoor Hill find their
best parallels in the casket fittings from Swallowcliffe
Down, Wiltshire (Speake 1989, 24–30), and Cow Lowe,
Derbyshire (Bateman 1848, 94–5; Ozanne 1962–63,
28–9), both outstandingly rich female graves. The
Swallowcliffe casket, which was made of maple, had
a more elaborate hasp and locking mechanism, but the
Cow Lowe casket, like that from Bloodmoor Hill, was
fastened with a padlock. Another maple casket with a
curved lid and copper alloy fittings, from the earlier 7th-
century male burial at Finglesham (Kent), Grave 95,
has the same arrangement of a backplate securing the
paired rivets on the hinge plates and the same closing
mechanism of hasp fastening over loop (Speake
407
1989, 29–39, fig. 26; Hawkes and Grainger 2006, 78,
figs 2.103–104).
Caskets with copper alloy fittings are rare, and are
known elsewhere from richly furnished graves which
must be those of individuals of high status. This indi-
cation that the casket from Bloodmoor Hill Grave 15
was an item of greater value or social significance than,
for example, the alder casket with a curved lid and
iron fittings from Harford Farm, Caistor St Edmund
(Norfolk) Grave 7 (Penn 2000, 65, fig. 72), is reinforced
by the suggestion that copper alloy, which is very much
rarer in graves of the middle and later 7th century than
those of the 6th, had a scarcity value by this time which
made it in effect a precious metal (Penn and Brugmann
2007, 90–1). The evidence that it may have been painted
is currently unparalleled but it is worth noting that the
casket from Harford Farm Grave 7 had a leather covering
(Penn 2000, 65) which may have borne decoration, and
that there is evidence for incised linear decoration on
wooden boxes or caskets from Castledyke South, Barton-
on-Humber (North Lincolnshire) Grave 183, Finglesham
(Kent) Grave 124 and St Peter’s Tip, Broadstairs (Kent)
(Drinkall and Foreman 1998, 296; Hawkes and Grainger
2006, 92).
Their positions in the grave indicate that the comb
and Ormer shell from Grave 15 were deposited within
the casket. It is likely that the iron circlets, beads and
pendants, and padlock key were also deposited within
the casket and that their final position adjacent to the
padlock was the result of the same process of post-depo-
sitional disturbance that displaced one of the hinges and
separated the hasp and padlock after the bit of the latter
had corroded to the former. Such disturbance would also
explain why the circlets are fragmentary and incomplete.
Textile remains on the padlock key are identified as
deriving from a pleated veil (Textiles, below) and it is
inherently more probable that this was within rather than
outside the casket. The possibility that these items were
in fact placed outside but adjacent to the casket cannot be
dismissed absolutely but is considered very unlikely.
The range of items found in association with the
casket fittings from Grave 15 is consistent with casket
or box assemblages from other contemporary burials;
these include jewellery, beads and other valuables,
personal items such as combs and shears, tools, shells,
and sometimes other containers. The possible identifica-
tion of a pleated veil from textile remains associated with
the padlock key is a reminder that clothing and other
textiles were also components of such assemblages. At
one end of the spectrum are the rich assemblages from
Cow Lowe and Swallowcliffe Down, and from Boss
Hall, Ipswich (Suffolk) Grave 93, where an assemblage
including a composite disc brooch, gold pendants and a
silver toilet set appears to have been deposited in an oak
box (Webster and Backhouse 1991, 51–3; Scull forth-
coming). Less elaborate assemblages are exemplified by
those from Butler’s Field, Lechlade (Gloucestershire)
Grave 14, where shears, a cowrie shell and a copper alloy
‘work box’ were deposited in a wooden box (Boyle et al.
1998); and Burwell (Cambridgeshire) Graves 42 and 121,
where the boxes contained respectively comb, shears,
and spindlewhorl; and a comb, whorls, pointed iron tool,
pyrites lump and silvered openwork disc (Lethbridge
1931). At Castledyke South, Barton-on-Humber (North
Lincolnshire) Grave 183, and Harford Farm, Caistor St
Edmund (Norfolk) Grave 7, the box or casket contained
a comb (Drinkall and Foreman 1998, 29; Penn 2000,
10–12). Where shells occur in box or casket assemblages
these are most commonly cowries which are interpreted
as having value as amulets and exotica (Meaney 1981,
124–8; Huggett 1988; Geake 1997, 62–3). The shell frag-
ment from Bloodmoor Hill Grave 15 has been identified
as probably Ormer (Haliotis): this is a mother-of-pearl
shell and as well as being visually pleasing may have had
a value as a source of inlay for jewellery (Skinner et al.
2005). The small piece of lignite or coal corroded to the
padlock recovered from the assemblage during investiga-
tive conservation is probably a deliberate deposition. A
piece of lignite with a copper alloy mount from Shudy
Camps (Cambridgeshire) Grave 31 has been interpreted
as amuletic (Lethbridge 1936, 12, fig. 6B; Meaney 1981,
75).
The casket was fastened with an iron barrel padlock
when buried and the assemblage associated with the
casket included a padlock key. Barrel padlocks are also
known in association with casket fittings from burials at
Cow Lowe; Harford Farm, Caistor St Edmund (Norfolk)
Graves 7 and 18; Sibertswold (Kent) Graves 24 and
151; Chartham Down (Kent) Grave 44; and Kingston
Down (Kent) Grave 299 (Bateman 1848, 94–5; Ozanne
1962–63, 28–9; Penn 2000, 10; Fausset 1856, 106, pl.
10, 8–10). Recorded instances of padlock keys from 7th-
century burials are few (Geake 1997, 83) but this may
simply be a function of survival and recognition.
The burial of items in a locked casket may be read
as symbolising an affirmation of ownership or the right
to own property (Geake 1997, 82–3) but locking the key
inside the casket, if this is the case at Bloodmoor Hill,
would transform it from a secure place from which valu-
ables might be retrieved to a place from which retrieval
or return is neither possible nor envisaged. The finality
of the symbolic charge carried by this transformation
of meaning would be strengthened if the contents were
items bound to the personality or social identity of the
deceased. It is not, however, certain that the key from
Bloodmoor Hill Grave 15 was placed inside the casket.
In Harford Farm, Caistor St Edmund (Norfolk) Grave 18
one element of the girdle and suspension complex may be
a padlock key (8f). This assemblage, which includes two
copper alloy bracelets (see above) and beads on metal
rings, was at the left-hand side of the body, away from
the casket and padlock, which were at the head (Penn
2000, 18–19, 54–5, 66, fig. 87). The items adjacent to the
padlock in Bloodmoor Hill Grave 15 may therefore repre-
sent a similar assemblage placed outside the casket.
Girdle hanger and keys or latchlifters
(Graves 11, 12, 15, 21)
The copper alloy girdle-hanger (symbolic latchlifter or
lift key) found with the girdle and chatelaine assem-
blage in Grave 11 is a type common in the more richly
furnished female inhumations of the late 5th to mid-6th
centuries in eastern England and the Midlands but rare in
later burials (Smith 1982; MacGregor and Bolick 1993,
228–31; Geake 1997, 57–8). This piece, however, is
slighter than most 6th-century examples and is securely
associated with a later 7th-century assemblage: it may
therefore be explained either as a rare 7th-century
example or a curated item. If the latter, it may have
been as much as a century old when it was used and
408
buried. Simple iron keys or latchlifters, like those from
Graves 12 and 21, are part of the suite of items commonly
found in richer female burials of the mid- or late 7th-
century, where they most commonly occur as part of
girdle or chatelaine assemblages. Examples may be cited
from broadly contemporary burials at Harford Farm,
Caistor-St-Edmund (Norfolk) Graves 11 and 22; Burwell
(Cambridgeshire) Grave 83; and Water Lane, Melbourn
(Cambridgeshire) SG 82 (Penn 2000; Lethbridge 1931;
Duncan et al. 2003).
The assemblage from Grave 15 included an iron
padlock key, the bit having a singular rectangular hole,
almost certainly belonging to the padlock which fastened
the casket (see above).
Combs
(Graves 11, 15, 22)
Combs are represented by iron rivets in three graves (a
singleton in Grave 11 and two each in Graves 15 and 22).
The comb plates have not survived the aggressive soil
conditions except by mineral-replacement on the rivet
shafts, but this provides clear evidence that the rivets
passed through three layers of organic material, posi-
tively identified as antler in Grave 15, which correspond
to the three plates of a composite comb.
The combs in Graves 11 and 22 were deposited with
the girdle and chatelaine complexes, while that from
Grave 15 formed part of the casket contents. All three are
from feminine assemblages and so from graves consid-
ered female on the basis of the grave-goods.
Shears
(Graves 11, 12)
Iron shears were associated with the girdle and chatelaine
assemblages in Graves 11 and 12. Mineral-preserved
leather suggests that in both graves the shears were
buried in leather cases or sheaths, which in Grave 12 had
incised linear decoration. Leather containers for shears
are known from 7th-century burials elsewhere at, for
example, Harford Farm, Caistor St Edmund, Graves 11
and 29 (Penn 2000) and St Peter’s Tip, Broadstairs (Kent)
(Cathy Haith, pers. comm.).
Full-sized iron shears are known from both male and
female inhumations of the 5th and 6th centuries, but are
relatively uncommon. They occur more frequently in
7th-century graves, where they are predominantly, but
not exclusively, associated with women and children
(Geake 1997, 96–7; Stoodley 1999, 33; Scull forth-
coming). Shears are known from 7th-century female
graves at Burwell (Cambridgeshire) Graves 2, 42 and
83 (Lethbridge 1931); Shudy Camps (Cambridgeshire)
Grave 76 (Lethbridge 1936); Harford Farm, Caistor St
Edmund (Norfolk) Graves 11, 18 and 29 (Penn 2000);
and Caistor-by-Norwich (Norfolk) Grave 16 (Myres and
Green 1973, 61).
The shears from Bloodmoor Hill are from graves
considered female on the basis of the grave-goods. The
burial of shears with women has been linked symboli-
cally to textile production and midwifery (Evison 1987,
113; Geake 1997, 97; Stoodley 1999, 33).
Knives
(Graves 5, 11, 22, 23, 24, 28a)
Knives were recovered from six burials and in no case
was an individual buried with more than one knife.
Where evidence survives, all handles were of horn and
all sheaths of hide or leather; the sheath remains on the
knives from Graves 11 and 22 show possible scalloping
along the cutting edge from stitching of the seam.
All but one can be classified according to Evison’s
typology of blade forms (Evison 1987, 113–16). Those
from Graves 11, 22 and 24 are type 1; that from Grave 5
is type 4 (curved back); and that from Grave 28a, with
the back incurving towards the tip, is type 6. (The knife
from Grave 23, missing the end of the blade, could be
type 1 or type 4.) Type 1 is a long-lived form known
from burials of the 5th to 8th centuries (Evison 1987,
115). Types 4 and 6 are later forms, occurring respec-
tively in burials of phases 4–7 (625–750) and phase 6
(675–700) at Buckland, Dover (Kent) and elsewhere in
graves of the 7th and early 8th centuries at, for example
Polhill (Kent), Castledyke South, Barton-on-Humber
(North Lincolnshire), Harford Farm, Caistor St Edmund
(Norfolk) and Buttermarket, Ipswich (Suffolk) (Evison
1987, 115; Hawkes 1973; Drinkall and Foreman 1998,
279–83; Penn 2000, 55–6; Scull forthcoming).
Härke (1989) has shown a correlation between blade
length and sex and age at death of the deceased. The
blades from Graves 5, 11, 22 and 23 fall into his size
group 1 (small: 45–99mm), that from Grave 28a into
his size group 2 (medium: 100–129mm) and that from
Grave 24 into his size group 3 (large: 130–175mm). In all
cases blade size is consistent with the age and sex corre-
lations observed by Härke in his national sample. The
occurrence of a large blade in Grave 24 would support
the probable osteological sexing of this individual, as in
Härke’s sample blades of size group 3 were found exclu-
sively in the graves of male adults (Härke 1989, 146–7).
In Graves 24 and 28a, the burials of male adults, the
knives were found by the left upper arm or elbow in posi-
tions which suggest that they were deliberately deposited
here and were not worn from a belt at the waist of the
corpse. In Graves 11 and 22, presumed female because
of the feminine grave-goods, the knives were recovered
with girdle and chatelaine assemblages and were presum-
ably worn suspended from the waist with these items
(even if, as is possible, these assemblages were deposited
beside the corpse rather than worn from a girdle in the
grave). In Grave 23, also presumed female on the basis
of the grave-goods, the knife was separate from the girdle
and chatelaine assemblage in a position consistent with
deposition at the waist.
X-radiography suggests that the tang of the knife
from Grave 28a may have three rivet holes although the
presence of rivets has not been confirmed by visual exami-
nation. This is, however, clearly a whittle-tang rather than
a scale-tang and rivets, if present, must therefore have
been inserted to strengthen a whittle-tang handle. Scale-
tang knife handles are not known from England before
the 13th century (Cowgill et al. 1987, 24–32; Goodall
1990, 835; Ottaway and Rogers 2002, 2751).
Tools
(Graves 5, ?24)
The flat iron bar with spiralled terminal from Grave 5
may originally have had a tang, now broken away. Flat-
tanged bars or spatulate tools are known from both male
and female burials of the 7th century and have commonly
been interpreted as sharpening steels although an interpre-
tation as firesteels has also been advanced (Evison 1987,
409
110; Geake 1997, 92–3). The piece from Bloodmoor Hill
would be an unusually elaborate example of the type but
one from Wigber Low (Derbyshire) burial 3, interpreted
as a firesteel, has a single-spiral terminal (Collis 1983,
80, fig. 41), and examples from Kent at Buckland, Dover
Grave 144, Bekesbourne Grave 31 and Kingston Down
Grave 8 have semi-circular expanded terminals (Evison
1987, 110, fig. 59; Faussett 1856, 44, pl. 15 ; Geake 1997,
92).
A piece of stout iron rod, broken or abraded at both
ends, which tapers from a rectangular cross section to a
narrower triangular point, was recovered from a position
adjacent to the knife from Grave 24. This is probably
from a large nail or spike and may be residual, but may
possibly be from a metalworker’s punch.
Woolcombs
by Penelope Walton Rogers
(Grave 11)
The two woolcombs at the foot of Grave 11 had been
placed pointing towards each other so that the teeth inter-
locked. They are the flat-backed, two-row type which
was current in England from the 7th to the 13th or 14th
century, in contrast with the cylinder-headed one-row
combs used by the Norse and the longer-toothed form of
the 14th century onwards (Walton Rogers 1997, 1720–1).
There are similar examples from the 7th-century burial
of a young woman in Grave 14 at Lechlade, Glos. (Miles
and Palmer 1986, 17; Boyle et al. 1998, 58–9, figs 5.39–
40), the Middle Saxon settlements at Wicken Bonhunt,
Essex (Edwards 1975), and Flixborough, Lincs. (Walton
Rogers 2007a and forthcoming a), and late 10th- or 11th-
century Coppergate, York (Ottaway 1992, 538–9). The
same combs were used on the Continent (Cardon 1999,
170–7, figs 48–9, 52), and the method by which they
were manipulated is illustrated in a 12th-/13th-century
sculpture at Chartres Cathedral, where a seated woman
holds one in either hand and draws the fibre between the
two, in the manner that a modern domestic spinner uses
‘cards’ to prepare the wool for spinning (Walton Rogers
2007b, 16, fig. 2.7).
Re-enactors find these combs more difficult to make
than any other form of woolcomb and it is possible that
when first introduced they had some prestige value, which
would explain their limited distribution and their appear-
ance in well-furnished graves at Bloodmoor Hill and
Lechlade. Iron woolcomb teeth are, however, increasingly
common in settlements from the Middle Saxon period
onwards, when they cluster in and around buildings in a
way that suggests that this was an indoor craft (Walton
Rogers 1997, 1797–9; unpublished). Within the archaeo-
logical literature woolcombs are often confused with flax
heckles, the latter being blocks of sharp spikes set upright
in a post or board. An object from Grave 3 at Harrold,
Beds, described as thirty-nine or more spikes ‘set into a
wooden board … bunched together in an upright position’
(Eagles and Evison 1970, 39, 42; dated to the 7th or first
half of the 8th century in Geake 1997, 61–2) is most like
a flax heckle and since it was from a man’s grave, it may
be compared with illustrations of later farming commu-
nities in which male labourers helped women with the
largely outdoor tasks of flax preparation (Born 1939, 777;
UFTM 1977, plates II, III and IV; Walton Rogers 1997,
fig. 799). All the archaeological and historical evidence,
however, indicates that from the end of the Roman period
to the 14th or 15th century, woolcombing was regarded as
a woman’s craft (Cardon 1999, 170–84; Walton Rogers
2007b, 15–17, 45–7).
Lace tags
(Graves 15, 22 and 24)
Single lace tags were recovered from the east end of
Grave 15, and so probably by the feet, and by the lower
left leg in Grave 22; the single tag from the upper fill
of Grave 24 was probably disturbed from the burial. The
tags from Graves 22 and 24 are of rolled copper alloy
sheet and plain, while that from Grave 15 is cast with
moulded decoration.
There was evidence for disturbance in all three
graves and so it is possible that all the tags originally
had pairs, but single lace tags by the lower legs or feet
are known from enough 7th-century burials, both male
and female, to suggest that the absence of a pair cannot
always be explained by loss or oversight during excava-
tion: examples include Milfield South (Northumberland)
Grave 1977/B3 (Scull and Harding 1990); Castledyke
South, Barton-on-Humber (North Lincolnshire)
Grave 134 (Drinkall and Foreman 1998); Harford Farm,
Caistor St Edmund (Norfolk) Grave 28 (Penn 2000); and
Buttermarket, Ipswich (Suffolk) Grave 968 (Scull forth-
coming).
Lace tags found in pairs by the lower legs or feet may
be interpreted convincingly as belonging to the fasten-
ings of shoes or leggings (Lethbridge 1931, 65; Evison
1987, 90–1; Geake 1997, 64–5) but this interpretation
need not necessarily hold good for all single examples.
Single tags may have had a different purpose, or a variety
of functions, but it is also likely that in some cases the
tag from one of a pair of shoes or leggings had been lost
before burial.
Silver bar and disc
with Mark Blackburn
(Grave 11)
The silver bar and disc, clearly buried together as the
disc has corroded to the bar, are difficult to parallel from
burial contexts. The bar, rounded at one end, has clearly
been cut from a longer piece, and invites comparison
with the hacksilver of Viking-period hoards or the scrap
pieces from the 7th-century smith’s grave at Tattershall
Thorpe (Lincolnshire) (Hinton 2000, 75, fig. 52). It is
tempting to interpret the disc as a coin flan, an interpreta-
tion which, if correct, would raise interesting questions
about the contexts of minting (cf. Metcalf 1993, 10–25).
It is clear, however, that this represents a deposition of
portable wealth. The weight of silver in these two pieces,
at 8.12g, is equivalent to six or seven Primary sceattas
weighing around 1.25g each.
Compositional analysis of the silver bar and disc was
undertaken by David Dungworth (English Heritage) using
energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence analysis based on
Ag Au Cu Zn Pb
Bar 92.2 1.5 5.1 0.2 1 material which is probably residual, deriving from Surface
Disc 91.8 2.1 4.7 0.2 1.3
Table 7.1 Results of energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence
analysis of the silver bar and disc from Grave 11 (weight
%)
410
locally cleaned surfaces. The results are presented in
Table 7.1. Both pieces were made from identical alloys,
which is consistent with the conclusion that the disc had
been prepared from the hack silver.
The diameter of the disc (9.3mm) is slightly smaller
than that of a sceat, which would typically measure
between 10.5mm and 11.5mm. However, it is slightly
thicker, at 1.8mm, compared with 1.3–1.5mm for
sceattas. The process of striking could spread the flan to
comparable dimensions, for in terms of volume the disc
(122mm3) is equivalent to a coin measuring 10.5mm and
1.4mm thick.
The metallic composition is similar to that of some
specimens of sceattas of the Primary phase, as indicated
by the EPMA analyses of Peter Northover published by
Metcalf (1994, 660–79). The perceived ‘silver’ content
(Ag + Au + Pb) of 94.7% for the bar or 95.2% for the
disc is typical of Primary sceattas, and while the gold
content of 1.5–2.1% is at the high end of the range it is
acceptable, particularly given experimental variations in
analysis results. A copper composition of 4–5% and a
zinc content of 0.2% are both within the normal range.
On the generally accepted dating of Primary sceattas,
if this were a coin blank it would be for a coin struck
between c.675 and c.720.
Interestingly, there are no coins of the Primary phase
that are attributed to a mint in East Anglia. Minting is
thought to have taken place briefly around 660 with base
gold shillings of the so-called Constantine type, but there
is then a gap of some fifty years before the next East
Anglian series are recognised: the runic coins of Series R
and the more pictorial coins of Series Q. It is possible that
there was some small-scale minting in east Suffolk that
we are not aware of in the later 7th century and for which
this disc represents our first evidence. On the other hand,
it is perhaps more likely that if this disc were intended
to have a monetary function, it was as an unstruck blank
that could serve as a substitute for a coin. Such blanks
are occasionally found in gold, the classic example being
that in the Sutton Hoo purse (Rigold 1975), but others
have been reported from time to time, including one from
the so-called ‘South Lincolnshire productive site’ with a
gold content of c.37% (Bonser 1997, 41–2). Blanks from
the silver phase of sceattas have not been published, but
that may be because they have not been recognised and
recorded by numismatists. Here we have a rare example
of one from a securely dated context.
In summary, the disc was probably never intended to
be struck, but was prepared as a substitute coin of compa-
rable size and fineness to contemporary silver sceattas of
the last quarter of the 7th century. It was included in the
grave with a piece of silver bar that may well have been
the one from which the disc was cut, and together they
represented a portable store of wealth.
Nails, other iron and copper alloy objects, and other
possible grave-goods
(Graves 5, 15, 17, 22, 24, 25)
The assemblages recovered from these burials include
Deposit F159/F182, but for which deliberate deposition
as part of the burial cannot be ruled out absolutely.
A piece of iron with a triangular section (<06219>)
from Grave 5 may just possibly be a fragment from a
heavy single-sided blade such as a seax. If so, the only
possible explanation would be that the weapon was
broken and the fragments dispersed during a disturbance
of the burial long enough after deposition for the blade to
have thoroughly rusted. A rounded piece of fine-grained
metamorphic quartzite (<02373>) from the upper layers
of the same grave may possibly have been used as a hone
(cf. Evison 1975) and if so it is not impossible that it too
was deliberately deposited with the burial and displaced
by later disturbance.
It is possible that the iron rivet from Grave 15 (23)
came from the coffin or from another otherwise unrec-
ognised container. An iron bar or ingot (<06251>), an
iron nail or spike (<06252>), a bent iron nail (<06253>)
and a lump of iron (<06250>) were recovered from the
fill of Grave 17, which is interpreted as the burial of a
child. A bent iron nail was also recovered from Grave 24
(3), along with the possible tool (2) discussed above.
The amount of clearly residual material from the fills of
both of these graves would suggest that some or all of
these items are also residual but it is important to note
that single nails do occur elsewhere in 5th- to 7th-century
burials as deliberate deposits, for example at Edix Hill
(Cambridgeshire); Great Chesterford (Essex); and Boss
Hall (Suffolk) (Malim and Hines 1998, 227; Evison
1994, 24–5; Scull forthcoming). Residual material in
the fill of Grave 25 included fragments of an iron staple.
There is no way of telling whether fragments of copper
alloy sheet from Graves 15 (24) and 22 (25) are residual
or deliberately deposited items of scrap.

Textiles
by Penelope Walton Rogers
(Fig. 7.24; Pl. XV)
Textile remains were recovered from five graves (11, 12,
15, 22 and 23), all burials with female-gender accesso-
ries. The textiles were preserved only where clothing and
covers had been in contact with corroding metalwork,
most commonly the chatelaine equipment in the region
of the hip and upper legs. The remains are all fully or
partially mineralised (that is, replaced by metal salts),
but modern optical microscopy techniques have made it
possible to identify the fibres in at least five and possibly
eight of the eleven different textiles recorded. The textiles
are mostly the standard types found in other 7th-century
burials (Crowfoot 1987; 2000; Walton Rogers 1998;
2005; 2007b, 104–7), but a corded selvedge and some
tentatively identified tapestrywork, both from Grave 11,
are of particular interest. The textile remains are cata-
logued in Table 7.2.
Plain ZZ tabby
The main textile type is plain linen tabby with Z-spun yarn
in warp and weft, of which there are two examples from
Grave 11, one from Grave 15 and two from Grave 22,
and a less certain example from Grave 12 (Fig. 7.24a).
The fibre could not be identified with confidence in two
tabbies, but the others were clearly plant-stem fibres. Two
examples (Graves 11 and 22) displayed the narrow diam-
eter range, fine lumen and well-spaced cross-marking
which almost certainly indicate flax, from Linum usitatis-
simum L., while one textile from Grave 11 had the more
variable diameter, wide lumen and close cross-markings
which suggest hemp, Cannabis sativa L., or perhaps low-
grade flax (Textile Institute 1975, 16, 78, 244; Catling
and Grayson 1982, 12–17, 73, 77). Because hemp is more
Figure 7.24 Types of textile recorded: (a) tabby weave
(b) corded selvedge (c) tabby repp (d) 2/2 twill with
warp-faced border
difficult to process than flax, it is nowadays regarded as
useful only for coarse textiles such as canvas, and yet
with extra effort it can be processed into good-quality
fibre. Hemp has previously been identified in seventeen
early Anglo-Saxon textiles, mostly in the eastern counties
(Walton Rogers 2007b, 14–15) and it continued to be the
chief source of fibre for the late medieval East Anglian
linen industry (Evans 1985, 12–35).
Several different weights of fabric are present, ranging
from medium (12 x 12 threads per cm) to fine (22–
24 x 22 threads per cm); the probably hempen example
from Grave 11 is one of the finer ones, with a count of
18–22 x 14 threads per cm. The edge of this fabric had
been preserved where it ran across the shank of the shears
(10), and it proves to be a corded selvedge — that is, a
plied cord twisted at each return of the weft (Fig. 7.24b).
This same textile has a band within the fabric, visible on
the chatelaine links (13) and an iron ring (18), in which
a thick thread alternates with a thin one. It is possible
that this is a deliberately textured pattern effect, but more
probably it is the weaver’s trick for using up yarn of

411
different qualities within one cloth: the old bobbin and
the new are alternated ‘pick and pick’ so that one grades
into the other, without the line of weakness caused by an
abrupt change.
Plain linen ZZ tabby can appear in Anglo-Saxon
burials as early as the 5th century, but the start of the 7th
century saw a marked increase in its use and in graves
dated post-600 it represents over 50% of all burial textiles
(Walton Rogers 2007b, 104–7). A similar rise in ZZ tabby
occurs elsewhere in northern Europe, most noticeably in
Denmark, where it jumps from 5% to 33% at the start
of the late Germanic Iron Age, rising eventually to 55%
(Bender Jørgensen 1992, 136–7). This seems to form
part of the flow of Mediterranean fashions into the North
and it is significant that the corded selvedge is a Roman-
style border previously absent from the 168 records of
borders in Early Anglo-Saxon textiles (Walton Rogers
2007b, 86–8). Single-cord selvedges (side borders) were
commonly in use in the Roman empire (Wild 1970, 56)
and the same structure appears in starting borders in the
eastern empire (Wild 2003, 89; Sheffer and Granger-
Taylor 1994, 183), although the Bloodmoor Hill example
is more likely to be a selvedge because it runs parallel
to the closer-set system of threads (the thread-count is
18–22/Z x 14/Z per cm). Early Anglo-Saxon selvedges
were usually tubular-woven, or tablet-woven on multiple
tablets (Walton Rogers 2007b, 86–8). To make the single-
cord selvedge, the Anglo-Saxon weaver would only have
to use one tablet instead of multiples, but that she chose
to do so in the 7th century is probably a further sign of the
pervasiveness of Mediterranean culture.
ZZ tabby repp
ZZ tabby repp (Fig. 7.24c) was recorded in only one
instance, on the chatelaine objects (3, 4, 5) from Grave 23,
and it, too, was almost certainly made from flax. In tabby
repp, one system of threads lies flat while the other curves
round it, which produces a firmer fabric than the ordinary
tabby. Tabby repp is most common in 6th-century burials
(Walton Rogers 2007b, 67–8), where it appears repeat-
edly on the backs of buckles in both men’s and women’s
graves, but by the 7th century it was used more broadly,
appearing in, for example, a pillow case at Sutton Hoo
Mound 1 (Crowfoot 1983, SH11) and probable bed linen
at Sutton Hoo Mound 5 (Walton Rogers 2005, 262). The
function of the example from Grave 23, which is present
on only one face of the chatelaine equipment, is unclear.
Wool textiles
Three textiles from Graves 22 and 23 are almost certainly
made from wool. The fibres were only tentatively identi-
fied from the wide range of their diameters, but the Z
x S spin in the examples from Grave 23 is usually an
indicator of wool (Walton Rogers 1999, 145). One of the
textiles from Grave 23 was a particularly coarse 2/2 twill
(Fig. 7.24d), 5/Z x 5/S threads per cm, with a wide warp-
faced tabby-woven border which would be conveniently
worked on tablets. Clothing fabrics, even for the heaviest
cloaks, were rarely fewer than 9 x 9 threads per cm and
it is therefore likely that this represents the edge of a rug
or blanket.
The second probably wool textile from Grave 23
is a repp, 14–16/Z x 12/S per cm. It is densely woven
and lies in close contact with the chatelaine objects in
the region of the legs. Such textiles are not common, but
412
two similar examples have been recorded, one with metal
purse fittings in Grave 82, Finglesham, Kent (Crowfoot
2006, 260, 359, 364), the other with a chatelaine group
and belt fittings in Grave 22 at West Heslerton, N. Yorks.
(Walton Rogers 1999, 147, 159), and both may be inter-
preted as the fabric or lining of a purse. The third textile,
from Grave 22, was a medium-weight fabric of uncertain
weave, which was consistently on the opposite side of the
metalwork from a fine linen tabby and was possibly the
material of the woman’s dress (see below).
Possible tapestrywork
The textile preserved in small areas on one side of the
woolcomb complex in Grave 11 is clearly not one of the
standard Anglo-Saxon clothing fabrics (Pl. XV). One
system of close-set Z-spun threads almost covers the
other S-spun system (12/S x 32/Z per cm), and in some
places the Z-spun yarn forms curving lines across the
textile in a manner that suggests tapestrywork. When a
sample of the whole textile was crushed on to a micro-
scope slide, linen and wool fibres were both observed,
but when the Z-spun yarn was mounted on its own, only
wool was present (it was impossible to isolate the S-spun
yarn). It may be tentatively concluded that this is a fine
piece of tapestry worked in Z-spun wool on an S-spun
linen warp.
Tapestry has been found in only a few Anglo-Saxon
graves, mostly well-furnished ones such as Grave 11.
There are several different types, which were probably
made in different places. A wool tapestry weave, 7/? x 18/
S-ply, in a 6th-century grave (152) at West Heslerton, N.
Yorks, formed the lining of a leather bag mounted on an
ivory ring (Walton Rogers 1999, 147, 168) and the whole
bag was probably an import from the Mediterranean
world (Walton Rogers 2007b, 82–3, 236). A finer kilim-
style tapestry weave laid over the feet of a man buried
at Banstead Down, Surrey, has a plant-fibre warp and
wool weft, 4/? x 48–52/Z, and may originate in the same
region (Crowfoot 1976, 69–70). Tapestry with soumak
(weft-wrapping) decoration of the form termed ‘Oseberg-
technique’, at Sutton Hoo Mound 1, ? x 26/S-ply, is
more probably an import from Scandinavia (Crowfoot
1983, SH14), and can be compared with an example
from Vendel Period Sweden (Valsgärde 8: Arwidsson
1954, 96–7), although there are also insular derivatives
at Sutton Hoo Mound 1, 18–22/S-ply x 10–11/S-ply +
10/S-ply (Crowfoot 1983, SH7) and Taplow, Bucks,
Plate XV Possible tapestrywork on one of the
woolcombs from Grave 11, No. 20 (photo: Jennifer
Jones, Archaeological Services, University of Durham)
 Burial details Dress fittings and other Fibre Weave Count/spin Position of textile Interpretation
Grave Sex and (gend) Age accessories
11 (F) - With textile Flax/hemp, Tabby 18-22/Z x 14/Z On shears (10), chatelaine links (13), and objects Tentatively: a dress of plain linen tabby; a long
10 fe shears probably hemp (17) and (18) in region of left waist/chest. In sharp veil or lightweight mantle of finer ?hempen
12 cu/a girdle hanger (or waste flax) folds or pleats. Corded selvedge runs across material, with a loose fold of the front border
13 cu/a chatelaine links shears, horizontal to body. On (13) and (18) there draped over the shears at the level of waist; a
15 fe rod are alternating thick and thin threads piece of tapestrywork with the woolcombs by the
Poorly preserved skeleton 17 and 18 fe ?ring frags Flax/hemp, Tabby ?12/Z x 12/Z On iron rod (15), sandwiched between rod and feet
20 pair woolcombs probably bone in region of left waist. Possibly also at
Other accessories flax suspension end of girdle hanger (12), in same
Necklace of bullae and cross place
pendant, short pin
Flax/hemp and ?Tapestry 12/S x 32/Z On fe casing and on one side of teeth of
wool woolcomb (20), at feet
12 ?F (F) - With textile Not ident. ?Tabby 12/Z x ? On object (5) by left thigh Similar to the linen tabby thought to be the dress
Supine, legs flexed; possibly robbed 5 fe curved rod, chatelaine fabric in Grave 11
group
Other accessories
Shears and chatelaine group
15 ?F (F) - With textile ?Flax/hemp Tabby 16/Z x 14/Z In tight folds or pleats running length of key (8), Possibly a pleated veil folded up inside the casket
Coffined 8 fe key in casket complex at feet
Other accessories
Aglet by feet; casket
containing beads and
pendants; shell
22 ?M (F) Adult With textile Not ident. Tabby 16/Z x 16/Z In folds twisting around shank of rod (17) Objects sandwiched between two layers, one fine

413
17 fe looped rod between upper legs linen tabby in folds, the other coarser and with the
Supine 18 fe small diamond-shaped Flax/hemp, Tabby 22-24/Z x 22/Z In folds over one face of diamond fitting (18) and appearance of decayed wool, possibly
fitting probably one face of lozenge-shaped fitting (21) between representing a wool dress and fine veil/mantle.
21 lozenge fitting The function of the second tabby twisted around

166
flax upper legs
22 rod with ovoid head the looped rod (17) is unclear
Other accessories Not ident. ? 12/Z x ? Flat layer on one face of pin head (22) and back
Bead and wire necklace (orig. (wool?) and sides of lozenge fitting (18), also between
neck) legs
Linked ag pins on chest
(disturbed)
23 (F) - With textile ?Wool Tabby repp 14-16/Z x 12/S Over 40–50 mm wide, on chatelaine objects 3–5, The ?wool tabby repp may be from a bag or purse
3, 4, 5 chatelaine complex in region of leg The coarse twill with woven border is likely to be
No skeletal remains Other accessories ?Wool 2/2 Twill 2/2 = 5/Z x 5/S; Border of coarse ?wool twill, on chatelaine a rug or blanket placed over the grave
Keystone garnet disc brooch with tabby border = objects 3–5, interfolded with metalwork The function of the linen tabby repp is not known
repp 12/Z x 4-5/S
border
Flax/hemp, Tabby repp 18/Z x 6/Z On chatelaine objects 3–5, only on one side
probably flax
Sex/gender: the biological sex is given first (where known) and the gender of the accessories appears in brackets
Fibres were identified by optical microscopy, using transmitted and incident light
The ‘count’ is the number of threads per cm in warp and weft
Z and S indicate the lie of fibres in a yarn, when the yarn is held vertically: Z = / and S = \
For weaves see Fig. 7.22
The clothing has been described as if the person were alive and standing upright
‘Left’ and ‘right’ indicate the body’s left and right
Where bones are absent, ‘in region of’ is used for the estimated position on the body, based on the position of the object in the grave

Table 7.2 Bloodmoor Hill: textiles and their use in costume

16–22/S-ply x 9–10/Z + 10/Z (ibid., TB4). Finally, there
are two examples of ordinary tapestry of uncertain origin
at Sutton Hoo Mound 1, one with a linen warp and wool
weft, 5–7/? x 34–40/Z, lying over a shield (ibid., SH17),
and the other all wool, 5–7/S or S-ply x 36–44/Z, part of
a wall hanging (ibid., SH18).
In technical terms, the S-spun linen warp and Z-spun
wool weft of the Bloodmoor Hill tapestry have parallels in
Roman and Byzantine Egypt, where S-spin was standard
for wool and linen yarn, but Z-spun wool might be used
in the finer pieces (Pritchard 2006, 29–31, 62–3); and an
Egyptian tapestry, 7/S x 46/S per cm, has already been
recorded in a 6th-century burial at Cologne Cathedral,
where it formed the lining of a young prince’s helmet
(Bender Jørgensen 1987). The weft of the Bloodmoor
Hill piece, however, is not as densely packed as most
Egyptian tapestries and, visually, it has more in common
with the Sutton Hoo soumak tapestries (see, for example,
Crowfoot 1983, fig. 309), although no soumak wrap-
ping weft could be found. If the textile’s exact identity
and origin are unclear, it nevertheless belongs in the
same generic group as the other tapestries and as such
is a unique find for a female grave of the 7th century. A
recent survey has shown that the occurrence of valuable
textiles such as patterned coverlets, piled weaves, tapes-
tries and gold-brocaded bands shift from predominantly
women’s graves in the 6th century to exclusively men’s
graves in the 7th century (Walton Rogers 2007b, 240–1).
The Bloodmoor Hill example suggests that there were
sometimes exceptions to this rule.
The function of the textiles
In the late 6th and 7th centuries, women’s costume
required fewer metal garment fasteners than previously
and, as pins, brooches and necklaces were now often
buried in containers rather than fastened on the body
(Scull, this volume), it is increasingly difficult to identify
costume styles from the burial evidence. Nevertheless,
the layering of different fabric types on metalwork indi-
cates that bodies were still being buried in clothing rather
than a shroud. The chatelaine/girdle groups in two graves
at Bloodmoor Hill were sandwiched between two layers,
in Grave 11 between a fine linen tabby and a coarser
one, and in Grave 22 between a fine linen tabby and a
medium-weight, possibly wool, fabric. It has not been
recorded which was uppermost in the grave, but at other
sites the finer textile usually proves to be on top. It can
be arranged in folds, as at Bloodmoor Hill, or in tight
pleats, as at Harford Farm, Caistor St Edmund, Norfolk,
Graves 1, 19B, 22 and 28 (Penn 2000, 117, 119; Crowfoot
2000, 89) and Ipswich, Buttermarket Graves 2962 and
4275 (Crowfoot in Scull forthcoming); and at Buckland
II, Kent, in Graves 250, 255, 409 and 443, the edge of
the garment passes diagonally over metalwork at the left
waist and hip (Walton Rogers forthcoming b). This outer
garment may be identified as a long veil or lightweight
mantle reaching to the hip or thigh, and the thicker textile
on the opposite face of the metalwork is most probably
from the dress. Veils or mantles of this kind appear in
early Carolingian manuscripts and pleated variants are
worn by Mary and Elisabeth in an 8th-century ivory
book cover from St Martin’s Church, Genoels-Elderen,
Belgium (Webster and Backhouse 1991, 180–1, cat.
no. 141).
414
As noted above, the wool tabby repp in Grave 23 may
be from a bag in association with the chatelaine and the
coarse wool twill with wide border is likely to represent
the edge of a blanket or cover. The textile from the key in
Grave 15 resembles the pleated fabrics at Harford Farm
and it is possible that this was from a veil folded up and
placed with the key in the casket at the foot of the grave.
Finally, the tapestrywork from Grave 11 is too fine for a
rug or coverlet and may be the cover of a cushion, as was
the Valsgärde example of soumak tapestry (Arwidsson
1954, 104), or a small hanging folded up alongside the
woolcombs at the foot of the grave.
VI. Dating and phasing
The burials at Bloodmoor Hill may be dated to the period
of the 7th and early 8th centuries by a combination of
stratigraphy, the broad termini post quos established by
residual material in the grave fills, the character of the
grave assemblage and the absence from the burials of
any material culture items which need be earlier than
the turn of the 7th century. However, only a minority of
burials contain grave-goods which would allow dating
with any degree of precision within this period. In order
to address the problems of interpretation arising from
this a programme of high-precision radiocarbon dating
has been undertaken on the burials from Bloodmoor Hill
which established an independent chronology and serves
to test and refine the conclusions of artefact dating. In
what follows, material culture dating and radiocarbon
dating are discussed in detail with a summary integrated
chronological model presented in conclusion.
Material culture dating
Material culture items interpreted as deliberately depos-
ited with the deceased were recovered from ten of the
burials recorded at Bloodmoor Hill, nine in the main
cemetery (Graves 5, 11–13, 15, 21–24) and one in the
separate burial group (Grave 28a). Seven of these are
female or presumed female on the basis of the grave-
goods (11–13, 15, 21–23) and three are male (5, 24,
28a).
Grave 23 is potentially the earliest of the female
or presumed female burials. The keystone garnet disc
brooch suggests burial no later than the second quarter of
the 7th century and there is nothing about the rest of the
assemblage which would necessarily require a later date.
It is worth noting, though, that the miniature copper alloy
pursemount or firesteel from the chatelaine complex
is a skeuomorph of forms known from middle or later
7th-century burials and that the copper alloy miniatures
from Boss Hall (Suffolk) Grave 93 were buried at the
end of the 7th or the beginning of the 8th century (Scull
forthcoming). As noted above (‘Girdle and chatelaine
complexes; casket and contents’), burial of the chatelaine
in a bag or wrapped in cloth and deposition of a single
brooch in a bag or box are also observed features noted in
burials of the later 7th century. It is therefore possible that
the disc brooch is not only the oldest item in Grave 23 but
was a curated piece buried in the middle or second half
of the 7th century.
The assemblages from Graves 11 and 22 (in particular
the silver pendants from Grave 11 and the gold pendant,
silver slip-knot rings, linked pins and wound spiral beads
from Grave 22) allow them to be dated with confidence
to the middle or second half of the 7th century and
this is confirmed by a high-precision radiocarbon date
from Grave 22. The silver disc from Grave 11, on the
currently accepted dating of Primary sceattas, suggests
burial no earlier than c. AD 675 (‘Silver bar and disc’,
above). Grave 12, with a chatelaine and shears, is a 7th-
century burial and is likely to be broadly contemporary
with other burials at Bloodmoor Hill containing similar
assemblages: again, a high-precision radiocarbon date
confirms burial in the second or third quarter of the 7th
century.
Grave 15 may also be dated to the middle or second
half of the 7th century on the basis of the large annular
glass bead and the general similarity of the casket fittings
to those from Swallowcliffe Down and Cow Lowe. The
single wound spiral bead from Grave 13 dates the burial
to the middle or second half of the 7th century. The latch-
lifter or lift key from Grave 21 would be consistent with
burial from the 6th to early 8th centuries, but it would be
perverse to argue that this burial is not broadly contem-
porary with the other furnished graves.
Of the osteologically male burials with grave-goods,
the knife from Grave 24 could have been buried at any
time from the later 5th to the 8th century but the lace
tag indicates a 7th- or 8th-century date. The knives from
Graves 5 and 28a would, on the basis of Evison’s Dover
Buckland chronology (‘Knives’, above), indicate burial
in the last three-quarters of the 7th century or the first half
of the 8th century for Grave 5, and in the later 7th or 8th
century for Grave 28a. High-precision radiocarbon dates
from all three graves confirm that these are 7th-century
burials.
The size of the formal burial group at Bloodmoor Hill
would argue for a shorter rather than a longer chronology
for the furnished burials, which on the basis of the mate-
rial culture items could be accommodated within the
period c. AD 625/50–675/700. Although the disc brooch
from Grave 23 could, in principle, indicate burial as early
as the second or third decade of the 7th century there are
elements of the grave assemblage that suggest a later date
and the absence of beads of Brugmann’s Phase B would
also support the view that none of the furnished female
burials is much earlier than the middle of the 7th century.
Beyond noting the possibility that Grave 23 was the
earliest of the furnished female graves, and that Grave 11
may be among the latest, it is impossible to attempt any
Laboratory number Sample number Radiocarbon age (BP)
UB-4911 Grave 5 1393 ± 20
UB-4914 Grave 12 1373 ± 17
UB-4909 Grave 4 1368 ± 19
UB-4916 Grave 8 1358 ± 18
UB-4913 Grave 24 1380 ± 14
UB-4910 Grave 22 1363 ± 14
UB-4915 Grave 28 1328 ± 18
UB-4908 Grave 3 1335 ± 20
UB-4912 Grave 25 1326 ± 15
UB-4907 Grave 2 1273 ± 18
Table 7.3 Bloodmoor Hill Cemetery radiocarbon results (for full details see Table 6.1)
415
phasing of burials on the basis of the material culture
evidence.
Artefacts provide only indirect evidence for the date
of unfurnished graves. While it would seem likely in
so small a burial group that furnished and unfurnished
inhumation were contemporary burial practices, the
possibility that unfurnished burials were for the most part
later than those with grave-goods has to be considered.
This was one of the questions that the radiocarbon dating
programme was designed to address.
Radiocarbon dating
by P. Marshall, J. Tipper, C. Scull, A. Bayliss, F. G.
McCormac, J. van der Plicht, C. Bronk Ramsey and N.
Beavan-Athfield
Questions
Radiocarbon dating of the human burials was designed to
address the following questions, none of which could be
fully answered by artefact dating alone:
• When did the cemetery come into use, how long was
it in use, and when did burial end?
• Is any chronological trend apparent in the spatial
development of the cemetery, and more specifically
is the westernmost row of graves (2–5) earlier or
later than the easternmost (22–26)?
• Were furnished and unfurnished burials broadly
contemporary, or do unfurnished inhumations repre-
sent a later phase of burial?
• A further objective was to test and refine, where
possible, conventional material culture dating.
Samples
Samples from ten inhumations were submitted for radio-
carbon dating (see Table 6.1). These included furnished
and unfurnished inhumations and, in order to provide
the necessary spatial control within the main cemetery,
four samples were submitted from burials in the most
westerly row of graves (Graves 2–5), three from the
most easterly row (Graves 22, 24 and 25), and two from
burials in the central groups (Graves 8 and 12). A final
sample (Grave 28a) was from the two graves to the east
of the main cemetery.
Calibrated date range Posterior density estimate
(95% confidence) (95% probability)
cal AD 605–665 cal AD 605–665
cal AD 610–665 cal AD 610–665
cal AD 640–675 cal AD 635–675
cal AD 640–670 cal AD 635–675
cal AD 640–670 cal AD 640–670
cal AD 645–670 cal AD 640–675
cal AD 645–765 cal AD 640–675
cal AD 650–765 cal AD 650–685
cal AD 655–760 cal AD 655–685
cal AD 670–780 cal AD 660–695
 Figure 7.25 Radiocarbon results: cemetery start and end date. Probability distributions represents the relative
probability that an event occurred at some particular time. Details of how these estimates have been calculated are
shown in Fig. 6.5
Results
The results are shown in Table 7.3 and Fig. 7.25. These
provide an estimate for the start of burial in the cemetery
of cal AD 630–660 (68% probability) or cal AD 600–660
(95% probability) and an end of cal AD 670–690 (68%
probability) or cal AD 660–700 (95% probability). The
results show no chronological differentiation between
rows within the main cemetery area, and the outlier burial
is also shown to be contemporary with the rest of the
dated burials. The distribution shown in Fig. 6.7 provides
an estimate for the span of the use of the cemetery of
20–50 years (68% probability) and 20–80 years (95%
probability).
Summary
There is excellent agreement between conventional arte-
fact dating and the estimates derived from radiocarbon
modelling, both for the date range of the main cemetery
as a whole and for the dating of individual burials with
chronologically diagnostic artefacts and assemblages
(Graves 5, 12, 22, 24 and 28a). Radiocarbon dating has
also shown that furnished and unfurnished burial were
contemporary practices in the 7th century at Bloodmoor
Hill, as at Buttermarket, Ipswich (Suffolk) (Scull and
Bayliss 1999a; Scull forthcoming). The main cemetery
was short-lived, being in use for perhaps as little as
20–50 years (68% probability), and neither artefact
dating nor radiocarbon dating offers the precision needed
to discriminate between earlier and later graves within
such a timescale. The three isolated burials (27, 28a, 28b)
were contemporary with the main cemetery.
As noted above, the size of the burial group may be
taken to support a short rather than a long chronology for
the use of the cemetery. The radiocarbon estimate for the
end of activity at the settlement as whole is cal AD 660–
710 (95% probability) (see Chapter 6), and the need to
accommodate within this timescale phases of activity
after the cemetery went out of use (see Chapter 6) may
also argue for a short chronology for the burial sequence
with an end to burial earlier rather than later.
VII. Burial practice
The excavated burial deposit is a fossil of human actions,
transformed by natural processes of degradation and in
some cases by physical intervention or disturbance. It
is possible to recognise in the excavated evidence three
stages of the burial process: the excavation and prepa-
ration of the grave pit; the deposition of the corpse and
accompanying items; and the backfilling and construction
416
of any features above ground, such as grave markers. We
can infer a limited amount about the preparation of the
corpse but many aspects of burial practice which leave
no tangible evidence are wholly lost to us.
Grave orientation, size and shape
All graves were orientated within the arc 241–270
degrees from OS Grid North. All but four of the main
burial group fall within the arc 250–270 degrees, with
nineteen falling within the arc 255–270 degrees, clearly
indicating that the preferred orientation was a little to the
south of west. The two isolated graves (27 and 28) show a
slightly more southerly trend than the main cemetery but
this is better explained as variation arising from physical
distance than as a deliberate attempt to express distinction
or liminality in burial practice. The broadly west–east
orientation conforms to the pattern widely observed in
contemporary cemeteries (Boddington 1990; Boyle et
al. 1998, fig. 40; Penn 2000, 69; Scull forthcoming). It
is also worth noting, though, that in this the graves also
conform to the predominant alignment of buildings in the
settlement.
Even allowing for a degree of imprecision in the
original digging of the grave and the archaeological
recording, the orientation of some adjacent graves in the
main cemetery is close enough to suggest that they were
deliberately aligned on each other. Graves 3, 4 and 5 have
the same alignment, as do Graves 18 and 19, Graves 22
and 23, and Graves 24 and 25, and the recorded align-
ments of Graves 7 and 8 differ by only 1 degree. It is also
the case that graves in the same rows (for example, 2–5,
6–9 and 22–25) show a tighter range of orientations than
is seen in the cemetery as whole. This point is further
developed in the discussion of cemetery morphology and
development below.
Length of grave cut varies from 1.0m to 2.35m,
breadth from 0.49m to 1.07m, and depth (from the level
at which the cut was identified) from 0.11m to 0.7m.
The shape of the cut varies from rectangular to an elon-
gated oval, with the great majority of burials classifiable
as rectangular or sub-rectangular. No grave structures
were identified. There does not appear to be any simple
correlation between grave size and shape and any other
aspect of identity or burial practice beyond the fact that
the smallest graves are likely to be those of children and
that there is some relationship between grave size and
shape and the presence of a container or cover. None
of the graves containing osteologically identified adults
were shorter than 1.6m and on this basis six graves in
which human bone did not survive (1, 10, 16–19) may be
convincingly interpreted as those of children although it
is worth noting that of the four osteologically identified
juveniles (Graves 9, 14, 27 and 28b) only one (Grave 27)
was buried in a grave pit shorter than 1.6m. The largest
(Grave 15) and deepest (Grave 14) grave pits both
contained inhumations in a coffin or chest; Grave 5, with
evidence for an organic cover over the body, was also one
of the longest and deepest graves.
Coffins or containers, coverings and linings
Four graves (5, 14, 15 and 23) had evidence for an
organic container, covering or lining. In Graves 14 and
15 organic staining suggests that the corpse had been
deposited in a substantial rectangular wooden chest or
coffin. In Grave 5, organic staining over the surviving
skeleton suggests an organic cover of some sort, possibly
a wooden plank or board, or a textile or leather covering,
as have been recorded at Snape and Buttermarket,
Ipswich (Suffolk) (Filmer-Sankey and Pestell 2001, 239;
Scull forthcoming). In Grave 23 textile remains on the
chatelaine complex are likely to derive from a rug or
blanket placed over the burial (Textiles, above). There
is no correlation between the provision of containers,
linings or coverings and the age or sex of the deceased:
Grave 5 was the burial of an adult male, Grave 14 the
burial of a juvenile, and Graves 15 and 23 the furnished
burials of women.
Plate XVI The double burial, Grave 28, after excavation
417
Grave markers and packing
The regularity and proximity of graves in the main burial
group, the close proximity of Graves 27 and 28, and the
possibility that Grave 28 was reopened to insert the upper
burial, all indicate that graves were visibly marked and
their location known. The only possible direct evidence
for a grave marker, however, is the post-hole in the east
end of Grave 20. There is no unequivocal evidence for
a stone packing or lining in any of the graves but it is
possible that the chalk lumps recovered from the upper
fills of Graves 2 and 10 may have been deliberately
incorporated as part of the backfill.
Body position
Because of the variable preservation of human bone it
is impossible to get a complete picture of body position
but in all cases where sufficient human bone survived,
the evidence indicates supine inhumation with the head
to the west and it is reasonable to infer that this was true
of all or the great majority of burials for which no bone
survives. Three individuals (in Graves 4, 12 and 27) had
been laid out with the legs flexed but in all other cases the
legs were extended. Evidence for the position of the arms
survived in only eight graves. In four of these (2, 3, 4 and
5) the arms were extended with the hands over the pelvis,
in two cases (24, 28b) the arms were extended by the
sides, in Grave 28a the arms were folded over the chest
and in Grave 25 the left hand rested on the right shoulder
and the right hand lay on the pelvis. There is no apparent
correlation between body position, other aspects of burial
practice and sex or age at death, beyond the fact that two
of the bodies with flexed legs (Graves 4 and 12) were
probably female.
Food offerings and animal remains
Animal remains were recovered from all but two graves
(17 and 26). In most instances these are associated with
other residual material and are clearly refuse incorporated
in the grave fill but it is possible, in principle, though
virtually impossible to demonstrate in practice, that in
some cases these remains include material deliberately
deposited as part of the burial. The most plausible candi-
date for a deliberate deposit, perhaps as a food offering,
is the sheep jaw found by the area of the upper left leg
in Grave 27.
Double burial
(Pl. XVI)
Grave 28 contained two individuals, an adult male (28a)
and a juvenile or sub-adult (28b). It is not clear whether
this was genuinely a double burial or whether the adult
male was a later insertion (Catalogue of Inhumations,
above). Both double burial and the reuse of a grave for
a subsequent interment fall within the normal range of
contemporary burial practice in England and in genuinely
contemporary double burials the combination of adult
and sub-adult, as at Bloodmoor Hill, is most common
(Stoodley 2002). Stoodley has argued against the assump-
tion that double burial need necessarily imply a family or
kinship link between the deceased, suggesting that double
or multiple burial was a wider community response to
unusual death and that the frequent association of adults
and sub-adults represents a belief that the responsibility
of older individuals towards younger extended into the
realm of the dead (Stoodley 2002, 120–1). Recent anal-
yses of these same phenomena on the continent, on the
other hand, would emphasise the importance of family or
kinship links in such treatment of the dead (Martin 1990;
Lüdemann 1994). If the two individuals in Grave 28
were linked by circumstances of death this might help
explain why they were buried away from the formal
cemetery. However, this would not preclude a family link
and if burial of the dead was undertaken by the nuclear
family or kin group (albeit within constraints of custom
and community sanction) the probability must be that
deliberate insertion of a later burial into an existing grave
expresses a kin relationship.
Provision of grave-goods: sex, gender and age at
death
Grave-goods were associated with ten of the twenty-nine
inhumations excavated at Bloodmoor Hill. Poor skeletal
preservation constrains the interpretation of correlations
between the provision of grave-goods and biological
information on age at death and sex, but clear distinc-
tions which indicate a concern to signal age and gender
differentiations are nonetheless apparent in the provision
of grave-goods.
Seriation by correspondence analysis of the grave
groups using the KVARK programme developed by
Torsten Madsen at Århus University (Madsen 1989a–c;
1990; Høilund Nielsen 1995, 114–15; Jensen and Høilund
Nielsen 1997, 37–43) identifies two distinct groups of
418
furnished burials at Bloodmoor Hill: one characterised
by dress jewellery, chatelaines and girdle assemblages, or
components of these; the other characterised simply by a
knife or knife and tool. Fig. 7.26 shows the sorted matrix
resulting from the correspondence analysis.
Graves 5, 24 and 28a, with a knife or knife and tool,
are all of individuals identified biologically as male or
probably male. The only burial to be biologically sexed
from the other group, Grave 12, is probably female. In
osteologically sexed inhumation burials of the 5th to
7th centuries dress jewellery and girdle assemblages are
very strongly associated with females, and weapons with
males. While recognising the distinction to be drawn
between biological sex and gender — the latter defined
as the cultural values inscribed on biological sex (Hays-
Gilpin and Whitley 1998) — these links are so strong as
to demonstrate convincingly that the expression of gender
through the provision of grave-goods was constructed
around and correlates with biological sex (Stoodley
1999). It is therefore possible to propose with a high
degree of certainty that the clearly feminine gendered
burials at Bloodmoor Hill which cannot be assigned a
biological sex (Graves 11, 15, 22 and 23) are those of
females. Graves 11 and 21, which contained single items
normally to be found in feminine assemblages, may be
considered probably female.
There is strong expression of feminine gender
through provision of grave-goods in some burials at
Bloodmoor Hill but this does not at first sight appear true
of masculine gender. There is no shield, spear, sword or
seax, and through most of the course of the 5th to 7th
centuries the provision of knives in burials appears to
be gender-neutral (Stoodley 1999, 24–39; Lucy 1998,
32–50). There is evidence, though, that by the later 7th
century weapon burial had become a social symbol
restricted to elite groups and had been replaced outside
this segment of society by the provision of large knives
as a signal of adult male status or masculine identity
(Härke 1992b; Stoodley 1999, 39). It has been argued
for the contemporary cemetery at Harford Farm, Caistor-
St-Edmund (Norfolk), where no human bone survived
to allow biological sexing, that burials with only a knife
and buckle are those of male individuals (Penn 2000,
55–6). In this respect it is worth noting that the blade of
the knife from Grave 24 is of a length only found with
adult males in Härke’s national sample (‘Knives’ above)
and that provision of this item may therefore be taken
as an expression of masculine identity. However, smaller
knives are also part of three of the most strongly feminine
assemblages at Bloodmoor Hill (Graves 11, 22 and 23) as
well as male burials 5 and 28a, the only apparent differ-
ence being that in the female graves they formed part of
the chatelaine or girdle assemblage, or were worn at the
waist, whereas in the male graves they were deposited by
the upper arm. Any deliberate expression of masculine
identity in the provision of grave-goods at Bloodmoor
Hill would therefore appear to be undemonstrative and
defined as much by the absence of material culture items
(in contrast to gendered female burials) as by the provi-
sion of clearly male-linked or masculine items. The
possible implications of this are explored below (‘Burial
and community’).
Clear links have been established between age at death
and the provision of grave-goods in 5th- to 7th-century
burial practice, expressing age categories which cut
 Figure 7.26 Sorted matrix of grave assemblages from Bloodmoor Hill generated by correspondence analysis.
Presence or absence is indicated. Values in the margins are correspondence analysis co-ordinates
across other social identities (Härke 1989; 1992a, 182–95;
Stoodley 1999, 105–18). In male burials the provision of
weapons appears to have been strictly constrained by age
at death (Härke 1992a, 182–95; Stoodley 1999, 106–8)
and there is evidence that provision of grave-goods in
female burials was linked to thresholds at the ages of
c.10–12 years and in the later teens (Stoodley 1999,
108–11). At Bloodmoor Hill all seven of the individuals
buried with grave-goods for whom age at death could
be determined were adult or subadult/adult, and none of
the graves which may be identified as those of juveniles
contained grave-goods. The strong expression of feminine
gender in the assemblage from Grave 23 would therefore
suggest that this was the burial of an older subadult or
adult. There is, however, evidence that in the middle and
later 7th century age constraints on the expression of
feminine gender in burial became less important and that
girls might be buried with the same assemblages as adult
women (Geake 1997, 128–9; Stoodley 1999, 113).
VIII. Summary and overview
The community burying at Bloodmoor Hill in the middle
and later 7th century inhumed their dead in separate
grave pits. There is only one instance of double burial or
reuse of a grave, in the small isolated burial group away
from the main cemetery. The bodies were typically laid
supine with their heads to the west. There is evidence for
burial in a container, or for some form of cover within
the grave, in three cases. Graves were almost certainly
marked and visible at the surface but in only one case has
possible evidence for a grave marker survived.
The evidence is consistent with the deceased being
laid out clothed and a minority were buried with acces-
sories or personal items, the provision of which may be
419
seen as an expression of social identities linked to age,
sex and socio-economic status (‘Provision of grave-
goods: sex, gender and age at death’; ‘Social identities
and social structures’, above). Furnished and unfurnished
inhumation were contemporary practices at Bloodmoor
Hill but it is important to emphasise that organic grave-
goods and grave furnishings may have been lost without
trace where they were not in contact with metal objects,
and that our sample may be skewed as a result. It may,
therefore, be unrealistic to draw too hard-and-fast a
distinction between furnished and unfurnished inhuma-
tion and the provision of items which have survived to
be viewed as grave-goods should perhaps be seen instead
as representing one threshold in a matrix of symbolic and
social expression focused on the burial of the dead. It
would appear that at Bloodmoor Hill masculine identities
were expressed less emphatically than feminine identities
through the use of material culture items in burial.
The laying-out of the body fully clothed with dress
jewellery and other accoutrements would suggest that
the viewing of the burial tableau was an important aspect
of burial, and such social theatre provides a convincing
context for the use of material culture items to express
and reinforce in public the social identities of both the
deceased and the kin. This raises the possibility that the
burial containers in Graves 14 and 15 were brought to
the grave and placed in it while uncovered in order to
show the body, or even that they were placed in the grave
before the body and any accompanying items were laid
out. The placing of a cover over the body before back-
filling, as may be inferred in Grave 5, would protect the
burial tableau and lessen the impact upon the mourners
of backfilling the grave directly onto the corpse.
It is overwhelmingly likely that all of the graves
excavated at Bloodmoor Hill were those of individuals
who died and were buried after Christianity had become
 Osteologically determined Inferred from burial assemblage and/or grave size
Burial Age Sex Age Sex
1 ?Adult
2 Young adult ?Male
3 Young/younger middle adult ?Male
4 Mature adult ?Female
5 Middle adult ?Male
6 Subadult/adult
7 Older subadult/adult
8 Younger middle adult ?Female
9 Juvenile (9 years ± 24 months)
10 Juvenile/subadult
11 Subadult/adult Female
12 Younger middle adult ?Female
13 ?Female
14 Juvenile (5 years ± 16 months)
15 Young adult Female
16 Juvenile/subadult
17 Juvenile/subadult
18 Juvenile/subadult
19 Juvenile/subadult
20
21 ?Female
22 Middle adult Female
23 ?Adult Female
24 Older middle adult ?Male
25 Young adult ?Female
26
27 Juvenile
28a Younger middle adult Male
28b Juvenile/younger subadult

Table 7.4 Summary of sex and age at death of individuals buried at Bloodmoor Hill

firmly established in East Anglia (Blair 2005, 8–10,
49–78) and so the cemetery may be considered an early
Christian-period burial ground. The silver pendant
cross from Grave 11 is best interpreted as an explicitly
Christian symbol and, while it is impossible to demon-
strate conclusively that any other grave was that of a
professing Christian or a person buried by Christian
kin, there is nothing about the range of burial practice
seen in the main cemetery which need be at odds with
Christian belief and it is unlikely, given the date and
context, that the community or communities burying
here did not profess Christian belief at some level. If so,
these graves reinforce the ample evidence that burial
with grave-goods was an acceptable practice within
lay communities professing Christianity in 7th-century
England, just as it had been on the Merovingian conti-
nent since the 5th century (Young 1975; Bullough 1983;
Geake 1997; Blair 2005, 228–34).
IX. Demography and population size
The poor preservation of human bone constrains inter-
pretation but it is nonetheless possible to draw some
conclusions about the contributing population and the
community or communities which buried their dead
here.
The excavated inhumations represent twenty-nine
individuals, of whom twenty-six were buried in the
formal cemetery. Of the eighteen individuals represented
by the excavated human bone, eleven were adult, three
sub-adult or adult, and four juvenile or sub-adult. Of the
adult individuals, five were male or probably male and
four female or probably female. A further six individ-
uals may be identified as probably or possibly female on
the basis of the accompanying grave-goods and, as the
probability is that those buried with grave-goods signal-
ling a clear masculine or feminine identity were adults,
it is likely that the individual buried in Grave 23 was an
older subadult or adult. Five graves from which no bone
was recovered may be identified as those of juveniles on
the basis of size, but it is possible, as Grave 14 shows,
that juveniles could be buried in graves large enough to
accommodate an adult, and so this should be seen as a
minimum number. The absence of neonates and infants
from the excavated sample is most plausibly explained
by their poor survival or burial elsewhere rather than

420
170
 Number of. Artefact Types
Grave 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Female
11 X
22 X
15 X
12 X
23 X
13 X
21 X
4 X
8 X
25 X
Male
5 X
24 X
28a X
2 X
3 X
24 X
Child/juvenile
9 X
14 X
16 X
17 X
18 X
19 X
27 X
28B X
Others
1 X
6 X
7 X
20 X
26 X

Table 7.5 Ranking of inhumations by number of categories of artefact types

as a direct reflection of past mortality (Molleson 1991;
Mays 1998, 21–5).
Table 7.4 summarises information on sex and age
at death of individuals buried at Bloodmoor Hill, both
that determined osteologically and inferred from grave-
goods or grave size. Aggregating this information, with
due caution, allows us to say with some confidence that
of the twenty-nine individuals buried here at least nine
(31%) died before reaching adulthood and that of the
subadults/adults at least four were male and at least
eight (probably ten) female. This imbalance between
adult males and females may be more apparent than
real. The feminine gender is strongly signalled in the
provision of grave-goods at Bloodmoor Hill and the
masculine gender is not; men are therefore less likely
to be recognised from grave-goods alone when bone
preservation does not allow osteological sexing. Five
graves (1, 6–7, 20, 26) which cannot be sexed osteo-
logically and contained no grave-goods may be those of
subadult/adult males.
Estimating the size of the population burying at
Bloodmoor Hill is fraught with difficulty. It is possible
to estimate the average size of the contributing popula-
tion to a cemetery using the formula P=[e(0)B]/t where
P = size of population, e(0) = life expectancy at birth in
the population (or, for archaeological populations, esti-
mated mean age at death), t = the period of use of the
cemetery, and B = the number of burials in the whole
cemetery. Boddington has summarised the uncertainties
surrounding such calculations and the range of poten-
tial sources of error; the under-representation of infants
and the inability to age adults accurately are major
constraints (Boddington 1987; Mays 1998, 23–5; 33–
73). At Bloodmoor Hill, unusually for early medieval
cemeteries, the entire burial ground has been excavated
and there are reliable estimates for the period of use but

421
171
unfortunately skeletal preservation is too poor to allow
any useful estimate of mean age at death.
Purely as a heuristic exercise, however, and accepting
that any such calculation comes with unknown and
unknowable error terms, it is worth noting that the
twenty-year life expectancy at birth proposed for the
early medieval population at Raunds (Northamptonshire)
(Boddington 1987; 1996) would give figures for the
contributing population at Bloodmoor Hill of between
eight and twenty-nine if the cemetery was in use for
20–80 years (95% probability) and twelve to twenty-
nine if the cemetery was in use for 20–80 years (68%
probability). As noted above, the range of artefacts and
number of burials are consistent with a shorter rather than
a longer chronology for the cemetery. These figures are
consistent with the results of simpler calculations based
on the number of reproductive generations of 16–17
years represented in the cemetery population (Dierkens
1981, 37–9). The possible implications of such indica-
tive figures for an understanding of the community or
communities burying here are discussed below.
X. Social identities and social structures
Social identity may have many dimensions and the
ways that these are expressed in burial may transform
rather than simply reflect their importance in life (Ucko
1969; Leach 1979; Pader 1982). Nonetheless, consisten-
cies in the provision of grave-goods and other aspects
of mortuary practice in the 5th to 7th centuries demon-
strate a concern to express aspects of the identity of the
deceased, and argue at some level for common symbolic
vocabularies (Shephard 1979; Pader 1982; Richards
1987; Härke 1992a; Brush 1993; Stoodley 1999).
Evidence that the provision of grave-goods was
intended to express age and gender identities has been
reviewed above. Other aspects of social identity, condi-
tioned by social and economic inequalities, may also be
discerned in burial. Variations in the quantity and quality
of grave-goods may express either what was deemed
appropriate to the deceased, or differences in the portable
wealth at the disposal of those who buried the dead, or
both. There can be no simple direct correlation between
burial wealth and position on a scale of social status, but if
it was appropriate to articulate identity through the depo-
sition of portable wealth then clear differentials between
burials must be taken as evidence for inequality at the
level of the individual, or of the kin group or household.
Other aspects of investment in the burial which should
also be taken into account are the presence or absence of
burial containers and the size and complexity of graves,
grave structures and monuments.
A number of quantitative methods and statistical
approaches have been used to rank burial assemblages of
the 5th to 7th centuries, notably wealth scores (Shephard
1979, 52–8; Arnold 1980), cluster analysis (Shephard
1979, 58–63), and the Socistat programme (Hodson 1977;
Brennan 1985; 1991; 1998). Unfortunately the sample
of furnished graves at Bloodmoor Hill is too small for
any of these techniques to be applied usefully. A simpler
approach, which does not go beyond the sensititivities of
the data and which has been used successfully in social
analysis of early medieval mortuary data, is ranking by
the number of functional categories present in an assem-
422
blage, or Number of Artefact Types (Hedeager 1992,
83–179; Hines 1997, 280–310).
NAT analysis based on the artefact categories defined
in Table 7.5 suggests that Graves 11 and 22 should be
seen as the outstanding female burials, followed by
Graves 15, 23 and 12. This accords with the presence
of precious metal jewellery in Graves 11 and 12 and the
hacksilver in Grave 11, but any assessment of disparities
in the level of disposal wealth between these burials must
take into account the possibility that Graves 22 and 23
were robbed in antiquity, that the brooch from Grave 23
represents a considerable greater weight of silver than
the necklace components from Graves 11 and 12, that the
casket from Grave 15 may have been an elaborate and
valuable artefact, and that, as noted above (‘Casket and
contents’), copper alloy may have had a scarcity value
in the middle and later 7th century which in effect made
it a precious metal; Grave 15 was also a coffined burial.
Graves 13 and 21, however, were very poorly furnished,
as were the male Graves 5, 24 and 28a, although it must
be borne in mind that Grave 5 may have been robbed.
The concentration of portable wealth in a few burials
at Bloodmoor Hill argues for ranking within the commu-
nity or communities burying here and indicates that
Graves 11, 12, 15, 22 and 23 are those of higher-status
individuals. It is unusual, however, that the main axis
of distinction should lie so strongly between furnished/
gendered female burial and all other groups, and so
the close and exclusive association at Bloodmoor Hill
between the signalling of a feminine gender identity in
burial and the expression of status through the deposition
of portable wealth is worth more detailed consideration.
As noted above, one possible explanation for the
apparently weak expression of masculinity in burials at
Bloodmoor Hill is that this is more apparent than real.
Decline in the frequency of weapon burial because of its
changing symbolic content combines with the nature of
female assemblages to give female burials and feminine
identities a higher visibility than their male or mascu-
line counterparts in the archaeological record of the 7th
century (Härke 1992a; 1992b; Geake 2002) but it need
not follow that this was also the case to contemporary
eyes. If, therefore, the provision of knives alone was a
strong expression of masculine identity then the men
buried in Graves 5, 24 and 28 might be seen as the
equivalents of the strongly gendered female burials. It is
also entirely possible that the disparity in status between
men and women who were accorded gendered burial, as
expressed in burial wealth, may also be more apparent
than real if, for example, the status of husbands or male
kin was expressed through the investment of portable
wealth in women’s graves.
Against this, though, is the fact that other contem-
porary cemeteries in southern England with comparably
furnished female graves typically also have male weapon
burials, as at, for example, Buttermarket, Ipswich and
Coddenham (Suffolk); Harford Farm, Caistor-St-Edmund
(Norfolk); Shudy Camps and Burwell (Cambridgeshire);
Chamberlains Barn II, Leighton Buzzard (Bedfordshire);
Butlers Field, Lechlade (Gloucestershire); and St Mary’s
Stadium, Southampton (Hampshire) (Scull forthcoming;
Penn forthcoming; Penn 2000; Lethbridge 1931; 1936;
Hyslop 1963; Boyle et al. 1998; Birbeck et al. 2005).
This indicates strongly that in other contemporary
communities weapon burial was still appropriate to the
male equivalents of the women accorded richly furnished
burial at Bloodmoor Hill. The most likely explanation
for the absence of weapon burial is therefore that men of
commensurate status and identity were not buried here:
either because they were buried elsewhere, or because the
disparity apparent in mortuary expressions of gender and
social status is genuine and that within the community
burying here were women who enjoyed a higher social
rank than anyone else.
Among the more richly furnished female burials there
is a distinction to be drawn between the assemblages from
Graves 11, 12, 22 and 23, on the one hand, and Grave 15,
on the other. Individuals in the former group were all
buried with chatelaines and girdle groups which included
items such as lift keys and shears. Three (Graves 11, 22
and 23) were also buried with dress jewellery, and it is
a strong possibility that this was also true of Grave 22.
Dress jewellery, chatelaines, girdle articles and items
associated with textile production are the material culture
items primarily used to express a feminine identity in
burial (Stoodley 1999, 24–49, 136). It has been argued
that the provision of chatelaines, keys, shears and items
associated with textile production, such as the woolcombs
from Grave 12, were symbolic of feminine gender roles
and authority within the female sphere (above, ‘Provision
of grave-goods: sex, gender and age at death; Hawkes
1973, 195–6; Meaney 1981, 178–9; Fell 1984, 59–60;
Leyser 1995, 14; Geake 1997, 57–62; Stoodley 1999,
77–9). It seems likely, therefore, that similar identities
are expressed in Graves 11, 12, 22 and 23 and that these
are linked by age, marital status or descent to authority in
the nuclear family (primary descent group) or household.
By contrast, the assemblage from Grave 15, although it
contains female-linked items and, in the casket, an item
found in high-status female burials of the middle and
later 7th century, lacks a chatelaine and dress jewellery.
It is also differently laid out, in that items which are else-
where worn at the waist, such as the comb, were buried
in a casket, and it is one of only two burials in a chest
or coffin. It is difficult not to conclude that a different
female or feminine identity is being expressed here,
perhaps one linked to a status transcending, or outside of,
the gradations of social identity within the nuclear family
or household.
The location of burial may be a strong statement of
identity and it is possible that the location of Graves 27
and 28 burial, away from the formal cemetery, may have
been intended to signal an unusual or liminal status. As
noted above, double burial may have been a response to
unusual death and so these three graves may be those of
individuals linked by circumstance rather than kinship
or other aspects of identity. Other explanations may be
possible, though (below, ‘Burial and community).
XI. Cemetery organisation and development
There is no direct evidence for a physical boundary to
the cemetery but the compact layout and use of space
strongly indicates that burial was confined to an area
which was understood and identified, if not physically
demarcated. It is possible that there may have been a
physical boundary, such as a hedge, of which no traces
survived.
423
The layout of the cemetery is highly structured. There
is a tight west–east orientation and five spatial groupings
of burials (A–E) may be proposed, as shown in Fig. 7.1.
These are three regular north–south rows (A, B and D),
a less regular north–south alignment (C), and a looser
grouping at the north of the cemetery (E). Within rows
A, B and D the alignments of the graves show a tighter
range of orientation than is seen in the cemetery as whole,
suggesting that burials were aligned on previous graves
within each row. As noted above, the very similar orien-
tation of a number of adjacent graves further supports
this argument. Thus the four graves in row A are orien-
tated between 247 and 256 degrees, with three of these
(Graves 3, 4 and 5) on the same alignment. The four graves
in row B are orientated between 245 and 259 degrees,
with two (Graves 8 and 9) differing by only one degree,
and the four graves in row D are orientated between 250
and 255 degrees, with two pairs of adjacent graves sharing
the same alignment (22 and 23, and 24 and 25). Row C
shows a greater range of orientations (between 249 and
269 degrees) and the attribution of graves to this row is
on the basis of proximity along a north–south axis. The
graves assigned to group E are orientated between 257
and 270 degrees, with four (16–19) orientated between
257 and 262 degrees and the adjacent Graves 18 and 19
on the same alignment as each other. There are, therefore,
good grounds for thinking that throughout the lifetime
of the cemetery burials were deliberately laid out within
recognised areas. Graves 1, 21 and 26 might be assigned
to rows A and D respectively but, as argued below, there
may be a good reason to consider them separate from the
other groupings.
Poor skeletal preservation precludes full analysis of
spatial patterning by sex and age at death, but aggre-
gating osteological information and inference from grave
size and burial assemblages allows some observations
to be made. Most striking is the clustering of juveniles
or presumed child graves in Area E and the north of
row C, along with the fact that row C appears to be
entirely composed of the graves of women and chil-
dren. Furnished and gendered burials are concentrated
in rows C and D. Of these, the four female burials with
the strongest conventional expressions of gender identity
form two adjacent pairs: 11 next to 12 in row C, and 22
next to 23 in row D. The two burials in chests or coffins
are adjacent in row C.
Where people were buried within this very small area
therefore appears to have been strongly constrained by
rank and social identity. The apparent zoning by age, sex,
status and identity in turn supports the view that some
initial structuring principles governed the development
of the cemetery from the outset, and this in turn argues
either for the exercise of authority by a group or individual
or for strong community sanction over the way that the
burial place was used. Rows A, B and D may plausibly
be proposed as family burial plots, with A and B perhaps
representing subsequent generations of the same primary
lineage. This would not, however, be a convincing inter-
pretation of areas C and E, with their very much more
constrained range of age and of sex and gender expres-
sion. The apparent status distinctions between rows A and
B, on the one hand, and rows C and D, on the other, also
require explanation. How the cemetery structure might
relate to the living community or communities burying
here is considered in more detail below.
 Neither artefact dating nor radiocarbon dating offer
sufficient precision to discriminate between earlier
and later graves within the cemetery, and radiocarbon
dating shows that there is no chronological significance
to be attached to burial with or without grave-goods.
Nonetheless, unless everyone interred here died and was
buried at the same time, the excavated burials repre-
sent a palimpsest which accrued over years or decades.
Radiocarbon dating gives an estimate that the graves
represent burial over a period of 20–50 years (68% prob-
ability) and 20–80 years (95% probability): assuming a
constant death rate, the 95% probability estimate would
indicate between four and fourteen burials in any decade
and the 68% probability estimate a figure of between
six and fourteen. The weight of evidence suggests that
the cemetery was ordered into areas or plots which were
in use at the same time, rather than developing from a
single initial focus or consisting of demarcated areas
that were brought into use sequentially. Candidates
may be suggested for the earliest burials in rows A and
D (below), and it may be possible purely as a heuristic
to propose Grave 15 as the earliest burial in row C on
the grounds of its unusual character. It is important to
remember, however, that all the burials may have been
made within less than the span of a single adult lifetime
and that, without direct stratigraphic relationships or
any other way of testing the relative chronology of the
burials, it is possible to propose almost as many models
of detailed spatial development as there are combinations
of rows or graves.
The place of the cemetery in the settlement sequence
and the wider cultural landscape, and its relationship to
evidence for other burials to the west of the excavated
area, is considered below and in Chapters 6 and 8. It is,
however, relevant to the cemetery’s use and development
to consider why it was established and why abandoned.
Burying within the settlement area represents a radical
change in the use of space. The decision to establish a
new cemetery also implies the abandonment, at least by
those burying here, of an earlier burial site. It is likely,
therefore, that reordering the settlement space in this
way was linked to a significant ideological or social
realignment. A number of possibilities, none mutually
exclusive, present themselves. One possibility, alluded to
above, is that this was established as the burial ground
of a Christian community or a segment of the population
professing Christianity; another is change of ownership
or lordship, perhaps involving some change in popula-
tion; a third might be a change in status, and a desire to
signal this, among a segment of the community living at
Bloodmoor Hill. Reasons for abandonment, also a radical
change in the use of space, may equally be complex and
diverse: it may signal a change in the character and status
of the settlement, with the relocation of a majority of its
population or of that segment represented in the cemetery.
One possible explanation for the location of Graves 1, 21
and 26 is that these are among the latest burials and were
the first graves in what would have become rows had the
cemetery not been abandoned. Similarly, Graves 27 and
28, which are as plausibly interpreted as the burials of
kinsfolk as not, may have been the first in what would
have become a larger group. Both single graves and small
isolated burial groups are a feature of the burial record in
the 7th and 8th centuries (Scull 2001, 73).
424
XII. Burial and community
Moving from the burial evidence to models of the living
community or communities which it represents is prob-
lematic, as is integrating the information derived from
analysis of the cemetery with the excavated settlement
evidence. Indicative figures for the average size of the
contributing population will vary with the parameters
chosen for the calculation, and can never be more than
an approximation, based upon the assumptions that there
is a close or exclusive relationship between the settle-
ment community and the burial community, and that all
segments of the population are buried in the same place.
As average figures they cannot accommodate fluctuations
arising from episodes of high mortality or from social
processes such as exogamy which may lead to individuals
or groups joining or leaving a community or settlement.
At Bloodmoor Hill it is a reasonable assumption that a
small cemetery in use for a short time was in fact the
main or single burial ground for those living in buildings
nearby, especially if the establishment of the burial ground
was linked to an ideological or social realignment and its
structure and use governed by authority or community
sanction. At least three individuals, though, were buried
away from the formal cemetery. It is possible, too, that
neonates and infants were disposed of elsewhere, and
that higher-status men may have been buried at a separate
site: the cemetery at Bargates, Christchurch (Hampshire)
is an example of this latter phenomenon (Jarvis 1983,
102–33).
Having noted these caveats it is nonetheless fair to
say that the likely size of the contributing population and
the evidence for social distinctions suggest that a small
community encompassing marked degrees of social
differentiation was burying at Bloodmoor Hill in the
middle and later 7th century. As noted above, artefact
dating and the size of the cemetery favour a shorter rather
than a longer period for burial. If we take the estimate
that burial continued for 20–50 years (68% probability)
as a heuristic then calculation based on a mean age at
death of twenty years would give an indicative figure
for the contributing population of between twelve and
twenty-nine; calculation based on reproductive genera-
tions of 16–17 years would give a figure of between
ten and twenty-four individuals. In order to consider in
more detail what this might mean for an understanding
of the community burying here it is useful to look briefly
at how changes in settlement and burial evidence may
reflect changing social structures over the 6th and 7th
centuries.
The pattern of evidence from burials of the early
and middle 6th century in southern and eastern England
indicates a much greater degree of social differentiation
within cemeteries than between cemeteries, suggesting
broadly equal but internally ranked communities
(Sherlock and Welch 1992, 73–102; Scull 1993, 72–5).
The apparent lack of any marked differentiation within
contemporary settlements and the absence of any clear
evidence for a settlement hierarchy before the end of the
6th century supports the model that the social differentia-
tion observed in the burial record is internal to the basic
social units of the community (Hamerow 1993, 86–98;
Scull 1993, 72–5). The household has been proposed as
the basic social unit at this time (Woolf 1997; Stoodley
1999, 126) and settlements such as West Stow (Suffolk)
and Mucking (Essex), taken with the associated cemetery
evidence, may be convincingly interpreted as consisting
of the farm units, or ancestral farms, of individual house-
holds consisting of a nuclear family, dependents and the
unfree. In this sense, however, the household is as much
an economic as a social unit, and would not stand outside
the other ties and structures of kinship and descent. It
is not inconceivable that a household might include
more than one nuclear family of the same lineage, and
it is likely that the immediate focus outside the nuclear
family and household was the lineage and descent group.
Indeed, these relationships and the dynamics of descent
and inheritance may have structured the geography of
settlement and landholding (Scull 1993).
If the distinction between gendered and ungendered
burial, which coincides with the investment of portable
wealth in burial, is to be seen as expressing the social
distance between the primary family of the household,
on the one hand, and the dependent or unfree on the
other (Stoodley 1999, 126–35), then the replication of
this pattern across much of the country clearly implies a
widespread social distinction which is likely to have been
linked to, and reproduced through, descent. Inequalities
might also be expected within this higher-status group,
arising from a variety of circumstances including posi-
tion within a ranked lineage. One explanation for some
of the most wealthy or elaborate burials of this period
may be that they are those of individuals in the direct
line of descent within a ranked lineage or descent group:
in effect, clan chiefs (Scull 1993). This is one of the
axes along which more permanent social, economic and
political differentiation developed during later 6th and
7th centuries (Scull 1992; 1993).
By the middle and late 7th century strong archaeolog-
ical evidence for permanent and so reproducible social,
economic and political differentiation on a different
scale from that seen in the 6th century is complemented
by documentary evidence for social and political elites
(Arnold 1988; Scull 1992; 1993; Yorke 1990). Provision
of grave-goods is very much more restricted and changes
are apparent in their symbolism. Gendered burial is
less frequent (Stoodley 1999, 80–8). As already noted,
weapon burial appears to have become a social symbol
restricted to elite groups and had been replaced outside
this segment of society by the provision of large knives
or knives and buckles as a signal of adult male status
or masculine identity (Härke 1992b; Stoodley 1999,
39). Among female burials the overall reduction in the
frequency of furnished burial, coupled with the increasing
coincidence of gender expression and the investment of
portable wealth, also argues for a conscious signalling of
increased social distance by a minority of the population.
This is consistent with the emergence of hereditary socio-
economic differentiation. Indeed, it has been suggested
that the burial of immature females with adult kit may
reflect a change in the social identity of female kin
members in a society where rank has become heredi-
tary and women are the key to both physical and social
reproduction (Geake 1997, 129). Fundamental kinship
structures are unlikely to have changed but a greater
social distance had been placed between kin groups and
other segments of society and these distinctions were
becoming institutionalised. We might legitimately expect
an aristocratic household to be very different from that of
a family farm.
425
The status of the richer families or households burying
at Bloodmoor Hill was not, on the evidence of the grave-
goods, equal to those of the aristocratic women buried
at, for example, Swallowcliffe Down and Roundway
Down (Wiltshire); Desborough (Northamptonshire)
or Cow Lowe (Derbyshire) (Speake 1989; Meaney
1964, 273–4; Robinson 1978, 191–5; Bateman 1848,
94–5; Ozanne 1962–63, 28–9), or indeed to those of the
women buried at Boss Hall, Ipswich (Suffolk) Grave 93;
Shrublands Corner, Coddenham (Suffolk) Grave 308 or
Harford Farm, Caistor-St-Edmund (Norfolk) Grave 11
(Scull forthcoming; Penn forthcoming; Penn 2000).
Nonetheless, some of the items buried at Bloodmoor Hill
would not look out of place in the most richly furnished
contemporary burials (above) and Graves 11, 15, 22 and
23 do not compare unfavourably with the burial at Brook
Street, Winchester (Hants), which has been interpreted
as aristocratic (Hawkes 1990, 627). It is clear that these
women belonged to a segment of society which enjoyed
a status well above that of subsistence-level farmers.
They and their kin had access to specialist craft skills and
commodities such as precious metal, and to the network
of social and exchange relationships through which such
things could be obtained, and so must have been in a
position to extract and exploit an agrarian surplus.
The burials at Bloodmoor Hill are therefore open
to more than one possible social interpretation. One
model would be that this cemetery represents a commu-
nity made up of a small number of equal households. It
would be possible to propose rows A, B and D as family
or household burial plots and the three isolated burials
might also be interpreted as those of members of the
same family. If gendered burial is taken to indicate heads
of household and members of their family then the man
and woman buried in the adjacent Graves 23 and 24 may
perhaps be seen as husband and wife (and perhaps the
first burials in this plot) and the other burials those of
household or family members. Similarly, Grave 5 might
be identified as a head of family or household and the
woman in Grave 4 beside him his wife, and the adjacent
burials in Graves 11 and 12 as two members of another
primary family.
The zoning of the cemetery by aspects of status and
social identity, however, runs counter to the idea that it is
structured by household plots. If this is the burial ground
of a small number of equal households this zoning would
suggest instead a concern to signal or accommodate
common identities which cut across household divisions,
as might perhaps be expected if the primary families of
the households were linked by marriage, descent, or both.
An alternative interpretation, and one which is perhaps
more consistent with the implication of authority in the
cemetery structure, would be that the formal cemetery
is the burial ground of a single establishment, perhaps
a large farm or small estate centre. The higher-status
element of such a population might include kin or affines
as members of the immediate domestic household as
well as the primary family, and among the subordinate
element it would be reasonable to expect married couples
and children as well as single men and women.
Ultimately, when dealing with a cemetery population
of this size, and with incomplete biological data, over-
interpretation becomes self-defeating or strays into the
realm of historical fiction. However, in order to illustrate
the range of possibilities, and to introduce a human
scale and dimension to an appreciation of the mortuary
evidence, three possible narratives are now offered. These
are by no means wholly exclusive and admit alternative
readings of the evidence.
Purely as an interpretative model it is proposed that
the cemetery and isolated graves at Bloodmoor Hill repre-
sent the population of a single establishment burying over
a few decades. The higher-status segment of the popula-
tion (ten individuals, including two juveniles) was buried
in rows C and D, towards the east of the cemetery, and
the subordinate population in the other areas. Among the
subordinate population were adult males who received
gendered burial, and across the cemetery as a whole prox-
imity may indicate marriage ties or kin relationships.
The main question raised by this model is the
apparent discrepancy in numbers and status between men
and women in the higher-status segment of the popula-
tion. If genuine, this may be explained by the men being
buried elsewhere. It is also entirely possible, however,
that this genuinely reflects the structure of the higher-
status element. Possible explanations might be that the
establishment was headed by a woman, perhaps a widow
with a predominantly female domestic household. It
is entirely within the bounds of possibility that all the
individuals buried here died and were interred within
the span of a single adult lifetime, and that the cemetery
may have been established under the authority of such a
woman and have been abandoned with the dispersal of
the household at her death.
Another alternative might be that this was the ceme-
tery of a short-lived establishment housing a small female
religious community. Although this suggestion might be
dismissed as pure speculation, the possibility must be
considered. The population that might be expected of such
an establishment, a predominantly or exclusively female
higher-status element and a normal subordinate popula-
tion, fits the pattern at Bloodmoor Hill very closely. The
objection that the higher-status women were buried here
with grave-goods may be countered by the observation,
already noted above, that this was wholly compatible
with a profession of Christianity in 7th-century England.
Burials with grave-goods broadly contemporary with
those from Bloodmoor Hill are known from minster
cemeteries at Peterborough (Cambridgeshire), Faversham
and Minster-in-Thanet (Kent) and it has been suggested
that a monastic or ecclesiastical rather than a lay context
may be an appropriate interpretation of the burial at
Brook Street, Winchester (Hampshire) (Blair 2005, 273
n. 126). Whatever distinction may have existed in the
minds of contemporaries it is not clear that there was
always a great physical difference between some aris-
tocratic family minsters and secular magnate residences
of the later 7th or earlier 8th centuries. It may also be
argued that there were close coherences and symbolic
links between the roles of higher-status women in early
monastic communities and lay society, structured by the
expectations of kin and class for whom the establishment
of a family minster was one of a suite of strategies for
dynastic advancement (cf. Blair 2005, 100–8; 230–3).
Seen in this context, furnished burial in a style which
has been characterised as one of ‘self-conscious restraint’
(Blair 2005, 233) need not seem impossible or even
implausible in a very early minster. It may also be rele-
vant that the cemetery is unusually tightly structured by
426
comparison with other contemporary burial grounds, and
that it is within the settlement area. Burials are uncommon
on excavated settlement sites of the 5th and 6th centuries
but ordered burial groups within the settlement area itself
are a feature of a number of excavated settlements of the
7th to 9th centuries, perhaps indicating a change in percep-
tions of the relationship between the living and the dead.
Some of these settlement sites, such as Staunch Meadow,
Brandon, Burrow Hill, Butley (Suffolk), and Flixborough
(N. Lincs.) have been interpreted as monastic, or as having
a monastic phase, and the burials have been viewed in
this light (Carr et al. 1988; Fenwick 1984; Loveluck
1998; 2001; Blair 2005, 204–10). Elsewhere, though, as
at Yeavering (Northumberland) and White House Farm,
Ipswich (Suffolk), there is no reason to consider burials
within the settlement as anything other than those of a
secular community (Hope-Taylor 1977, 70–4, 245; Scull
and Harding 1990, 23; Lucy 2005; Martin et al. 1996,
476–9).
Finally, setting the excavated cemetery at Bloodmoor
Hill within its immediate cultural landscape provides
another possible reading of the evidence. The barrow
burial excavated in 1758 was probably located 250m
south-west of the excavated settlement area, and both
antiquarian records and metal-detector finds indicate
further burials in the vicinity (Douglas 1793, 8; Newman
1996; West 1998). The location and sequence of these
burial sites is considered in more detail below, but it
is clear from the metal-detector finds, which include a
plain gold pendant, a coin pendant made from a solidus
of Clothar II, and part of the gold-and-garnet front-plate
from a plated disc brooch, that these included high-status
burials of the earlier 7th century: the plated disc brooch
could have come from a burial of as late as the third decade
of the 7th century (West 1998, 40–1, fig. 47; Avent 1975,
62). One interpretation of the excavated cemetery, there-
fore, is that it represents a mid-7th-century abandonment
of an earlier elite cemetery for a range of possible reasons
which have been rehearsed above. It is entirely possible,
however, that the barrow burial, almost certainly that of
an aristocratic woman, should be dated to the middle
or later 7th century, making it contemporary with the
excavated cemetery. Indeed, the evidence that barrow
burial for aristocratic women enjoyed a brief vogue in
the middle and later 7th century, as seen in graves such
as Swallowcliffe Down and Roundway Down (Wilts.),
and Cow Low (Derbys.), may provide a context for
the Bloodmoor Hill grave and support this later dating
(Speake 1989; Meaney 1964, 273–4; Robinson 1978,
191–5; Bateman 1848, 94–5; Ozanne 1962–63, 28–9;
Geake 1997, 76, 124–7; Blair 2005, 230).
A feature of 7th-century burial practice, seen in the
barrow cemetery at Sutton Hoo and in isolated aristo-
cratic barrow burials, is the expression of social distance
through monumentality and physical separation of
the dead (Carver 2005, 496–7) If the Bloodmoor Hill
barrow and the excavated burials in the settlement area
are contemporary the possibility is raised that the latter
are those of lesser kin or family members, the domestic
household, and the other social subordinates of an
aristocratic establishment whose apex family is buried
separately. This possibility is considered further in the
following chapter, which discusses the settlement as a
whole in its local, regional and national contexts.
 8. Local, Regional and National Contexts
I. The Anglo-Saxon settlement: a summary
The previous chapters have demonstrated that the Anglo-
Saxon settlement at Bloodmoor Hill was probably in use
from sometime after AD 500 until shortly after AD 700,
but underwent several transformations during that time.
Planned as a single entity at its inception, the Phase 1
settlement was characterised by a central core of post-
built structures, aligned both east–west and north–south,
with little in the way of domestic debris associated with
them. Like several other contemporary settlements, this
(presumably occupation) zone appears to have been kept
clean, and was not obviously associated with the build-
up of rubbish heaps next to the buildings (although it
is possible that one of the extant surface heaps associ-
ated with the preceding Roman farmstead may have
been added to). Rather, activities which generated large
amounts of waste — particularly metalworking and
animal butchery, but also more domestic activities, which
produced material such as oven debris, broken pottery
and other unidentifiable organic waste — seem to have
been largely confined to the surrounding zone of SFBs,
or sunken-featured buildings, most of which lay to the
north, in the area of the former Roman trackway, and
probably to the north of that, with some isolated examples
to east, south-east and south. It is next to these structures
that significant deposits of material accumulated, and,
after those structures had gone out of use, their empty
sunken features served as receptacles for some of that
accumulated debris. Also associated with several of those
surrounding structures were isolated pits and groups of
pits, which, after perhaps being used for other purposes
(storage and sand extraction are possibilities) were used
to deposit some of the material heaps.
We can speculate about the relationship between post-
built structures and SFBs, given this seeming functional
difference, and their division into two relatively clear
size categories. One possibility is that the establishment
was comprised of a number of separate households, each
of which had the use of one or more post-built structures
in the core of the settlement and one or more SFBs in
the surrounding area. Given the lack of material from the
settlement core, however, such ties are very difficult to
demonstrate. If this model is a valid one, it would suggest
that those households may have specialised in different
crafts and activities: this phase sees metalworking activity
in or around the SFBs to the north-west, textile production
and crop processing on the opposite side of the settle-
ment in the south-east, and possibly primary butchery (in
open areas?) to the north. Again, this suggests an element
of centralisation, and perhaps some social control, or at
least some task division between the site’s inhabitants.
The ‘zoning’ of this activity is of particular interest, as it
seems in part to relate to the surroundings of the settle-
ment as depicted by Boreham (above, Chapter 1), with
arable to the east of the site on the plateau edge, and
pasture to the north on the downslope.
Shortly before the end of the 6th century, this
settlement pattern underwent slight adaptation, with a
427
‘tightening up’ of the occupation zone and surrounding
SFBs, these now being compressed into a smaller area,
with the exception of the three structures to the north-west
of the trackway (to which a specialist role cannot now be
assigned). Those structures formerly in the trackway area
were largely abandoned (except for those constructed
at its far eastern end), and the surface deposits that had
started to accumulate during the Phase I occupation
continued to grow (with waste from iron smithing and
from animal butchery particularly in evidence, but also
more domestic rubbish and presumably organic waste).
These surface deposits started to amalgamate and form
a landscape feature in their own right, clearly demar-
cating, if not the northern edge of the settlement, then
a substantial feature to the north of its core. While crop
processing and cooking activity seem to have a continued
focus on the eastern side of the settlement, the focus of
metalworking activity shifted more into the settlement
core, with associated material starting to be dumped
on the western side of Surface Deposit F159/182 (this
activity is presumed to start this early, because of the
vast quantities of metalworking debris found both in this
feature, and taken from this feature and dumped into the
former Structures 14 and 19). The metalworking waste
deposited on the central trackway deposit was presum-
ably generated nearby.
Towards the end of this phase, human burial is seen
within the settlement for the first time, with the start of
inhumation within the cemetery area next to F159/182
(which eventually spreads over it, after the cemetery
itself goes out of use). There may have been a relocation
from a more remote burial area around the barrow to the
south-west, and this may represent a change in religious
affiliation, given the suggestion of Christian conversion
offered by the cross-shaped pendant associated with one
of the graves. Alternatively, the two cemetery areas may
have been in use at the same time, perhaps representing
different status or religious affiliations. Indeed, the ceme-
tery then becomes the core of the settlement, as buildings
are constructed to its south and west; metalworking in
its vicinity also continues, adding to the accumulation of
material on the adjacent surface deposit. The picture of
the end of settlement activity is less clear. The deposition
of metalworking tools along with the redeposition of part
of Surface Deposit F159/182 into Structure 14 would
seem to indicate the cessation of this activity on the site:
this deposit (and that in Structure 19, which is presum-
ably contemporary), also includes large amounts of scrap
and broken metal artefacts, material that had obviously
been collected together for potential recycling. That
it should be abandoned perhaps indicates the death or
departure of specialised workers (both are possible: the
closest modern analogy for abandonment on departure is
clearing out the loft when moving house, and disposing
of all those items kept ‘just in case’). This would be an
obvious marker of sudden site abandonment, were it not
for the fact that post-in-trench Structure 42 cuts through
the infill of Structure 14. This suggests a more gradual
abandonment, and a dwindling of occupation towards
the end of the 7th century and into the early years of the
8th century. Perhaps the cessation of burial on the site
(probably around AD 670–680) indicates that the bulk of
the population moved away at this point, with just a few
inhabitants remaining. The death of the head of a house-
hold may therefore have been a key cause.
II. The local context
(Fig. 8.1)
There is no evidence for any continuity with the preceding
farmstead: that seems to have gone out of use during the
mid to later 3rd century AD, to judge from the pottery,
while the Anglo-Saxon settlement did not see activity
until around 250 years later. While Roman pottery and
other material did eventually end up in Anglo-Saxon
features, this was largely due to the later redeposition of
extant Roman surface heaps (probably towards the end of
the life of the Anglo-Saxon settlement). There was little
evidence for deliberate curation of Roman material such
as pottery (unlike other contemporary settlements, some
of which display unusually high proportions of distinctive
Samian and colour-coated sherds, for example: Hinton
2005, 35). Some Roman material, such as tile fragments,
may have been reused in Anglo-Saxon hearths, but this
seems to have been a pragmatic use of available material,
rather than anything more significant. Likewise, some
Roman artefacts, particularly metal items, seem to have
become incorporated into Anglo-Saxon deposits, but
these are often those assemblages which appear to have
been intended for recycling: again, a pragmatic collection
of material. The way in which the Anglo-Saxon settle-
ment was laid out also argues against any element of
© Crown Copyright and/or database right. All rights reserved. Licence number 100048686.
Figure 8.1 Bloodmoor Hill in its historical landscape, showing the meeting point of the parish boundaries and the
suggested location of the barrow cemetery (after Newman 1996, fig. 1)
428
continuity. Although the trackway obviously remained a
significant feature in the landscape, and seems to influence
the overall alignment of the Anglo-Saxon settlement, the
fact that structures were constructed along its length from
the start of Anglo-Saxon occupation indicates clearly that
it was no longer actually in use: its earthworks must have
remained, but its utility had not. Likewise, several of
the structures in the core of the settlement, both SFBs
and post-built, cut across the line of Roman ditches and
hedge-banks, again indicating that the structuring features
of the former farmstead were no longer active.
The Anglo-Saxon settlement seems, therefore, to
have been a de novo foundation, but its clear layout indi-
cates a degree of organisation and perhaps an element of
centralised authority. We can speculate, though, that its
location directly over a former Roman farmstead was not
a coincidence, but a reflection of long-term patterns of
landholding (other sites where Anglo-Saxon settlements
are coincident, but not necessarily continuous, with
their Roman predecessors include Barton Court Farm,
Oxon, Orton Hall Farm, Cambs., and Melford Meadows
and Kilverstone, Norfolk (Miles 1984; Mackreth 1996;
Mudd 2002; Garrow et al. 2006)). The slight indications
of spelt usage (see Ballantyne, Chapter 5) provide a
strong indication of the continuous cultivation of fields
since the Roman period (Murphy 1994, 37), while from
a wider perspective there appears to have been no wood-
land regeneration at this time in East Anglia and Essex,
although there may have been a shift in emphasis from
arable to pasture (ibid., 35–6).
That the Anglo-Saxon settlement appears to have been
founded as a single entity must reflect on its status from
the start: it appears not to have origins in a shifting farm-
stead, but rather is organised as a single functioning unit.
Although activities such as metalworking appear to inten-
sify through time, they are also in evidence in Phase I of
the settlement (with evidence for annular brooch moulds);
presumably something which would have distinguished
it from contemporary self-sufficient farmsteads such as
West Stow. The sheer amount of metalworking activity
highlights its distinction from many contemporary sites.
It is even possible that the animal bone evidence reflects
on these differences: the high percentage of cattle may
reflect renders from subordinate landholdings.
The Anglo-Saxon settlement appears to have had at
least two cemetery areas associated: that dating from
the mid-7th century, within the settlement itself, and the
more dispersed cemetery area evidenced by antiquarian
and metal-detector finds stretching west from the barrow
to the south-west of the settlement. Recorded finds
suggest that the barrow burial was 7th-century in date
(perhaps mid to later 7th-century, which would make it
contemporary with the intra-site cemetery), although a
more tempting scenario is to see this ‘pagan’ cemetery
being abandoned with the decision to establish the
‘Christian’ cemetery within the settlement. Other finds
from this southern cemetery area are generally 6th-
century in date (see Chapter 1); this would be supported
by the antiquarian reports of amber and polychrome
beads and spearheads and other ‘armour’. A dispersed
flat-grave cemetery located around a barrow is by no
means unusual (Lucy 2000, 126–8): parallels include the
cemetery at Mill Hill, Deal, Kent (Parfitt and Brugmann
1997), and Dover Buckland (Evison 1987).
The settlement appears to sit within a landscape of
dispersed hamlets: evidence of one such site has been
recovered c.950m to the north, but, in general, evidence
for Anglo-Saxon settlement within the local area is
sparse (see Chapter 1). There is no doubt, however, that
landholdings were rearranged soon after this settlement’s
abandonment: the locations of nearby parish churches
suggest that Bloodmoor Hill became a marginal area
(marginal enough that the hill actually saw the meeting
of three parish boundaries, and was felt appropriate for
use as a hundred meeting point: Fig. 8.1). Perhaps the
abandonment of the Anglo-Saxon settlement came with
the decision to relocate settlement around the newly
founded manor and parish church of Carlton Colville, to
the north-west.
III. The regional context
(Fig. 8.2)
There is considerable evidence that the Anglo-Saxon
population of Bloodmoor Hill was integrally involved
with contemporary trading (and thus social) networks
(Fig. 8.2). Specialist work has revealed, for example, that
one of the bone combs from the site is remarkably similar
to one from the 7th-century cemetery at Burwell in
Cambridgeshire (see Riddler, Chapter 4), while the disc
brooch from the cemetery has close stylistic links with
that from Edix Hill, Barrington, also in Cambridgeshire
(see Chapter 5). This suggests either that itinerant craft-
workers were moving around the region, or that such
artefacts were being manufactured in one location and
then traded across considerable distances. It is, in fact,
possible, that Bloodmoor Hill was the location for such
workshops: there is some evidence of bone- and antler-
429
working at the site, in the form of offcuts and butchery
marks (although the worked bone assemblage itself is
not large, and production of hair-combs is thought to
have been carried out by specialists: MacGregor 1985,
46–7, 73–7), and there is considerable evidence for
metalworking, both of iron and copper alloys. Ingots for
the production of these copper alloy products must have
been traded in, either as ingots, or as scrap to be recast;
similarly, iron bars may also have been traded in (J.
Cowgill, pers. comm.). This movement of goods would
also have involved the movement of individuals and the
fostering of social relationships with distant communi-
ties.
Other material from the site also indicates longer-
distance contacts. Some of the worked stone must have
been imported, either from overseas (the lava quern-
stone), or from remoter parts of Britain (the dolerite,
greywhacke and limestone examples, if these are not
Scandinavian). Likewise, while much of the pottery
was probably produced domestically, there is a small
amount of imported ware, which must have been traded
for. The sheer extent of metalworking at the site indi-
cates that trade also took place in the other direction: the
undoubtedly huge quantities of metal products from the
workshops at Bloodmoor Hill must have been traded out,
perhaps in return for other less available commodities.
This is also reflected in the animal bone evidence, which
indicates that the settlement specialised in cattle produc-
tion, probably trading out younger animals and trading in
older beasts. Selected cuts of venison also seem to have
been procured. Lebecq (1997) discusses the flourishing
of North Sea trade routes from the 7th century onwards
— trade routes which must have been accessible via the
natural harbour at Lowestoft.
It is particularly interesting to note the differences
seen between the Bloodmoor Hill animal bone assem-
blage and the contemporary assemblage from West Stow,
Suffolk (Crabtree 1990). West Stow saw an increasing
emphasis on sheep over cattle, with high numbers of pigs
in the earlier phases: this contrasts with the picture from
Bloodmoor Hill, where the proportion of cattle remains
high in every phase. While West Stow seems, therefore,
to have practised a relatively balanced and diverse animal
economy, suggesting a high degree of self-sufficiency,
what can be inferred about the economy of Bloodmoor
Hill in its regional context?
Middle Saxon wic sites are noteworthy for the
predominance of cattle (often of advanced age) and the
lack of diversity of other meat sources that characterise
them, suggesting that they may have been provisioned
by a system of food renders, at least in part (Hamerow
2002b, 149). This has been cited as the cause of the move
away from self-sufficiency towards more specialised
strategies, geared towards supplying various other types
of site, such as the trading towns, royal and aristocratic
centres and monasteries (ibid., 150). Perhaps in the animal
husbandry practices at Bloodmoor Hill we are seeing
a forerunner of this arrangement: organised as a single
establishment and geared towards producing surpluses
of some material, being dependent on the trading in of
other commodities, this settlement may itself have been
an aristocratic, perhaps even religious, establishment, at
least in its latter phases. While the settlement was self-
sufficient in terms of pig production, excess sheep were
culled for meat when young, with the remainder used for
 © Crown Copyright and/or database right. All rights reserved. Licence number 100048686.
Figure 8.2 Map of potential trade contacts with the site
wool production. With regard to the cattle, in contrast,
there was an emphasis on dairying and traction, with
excess young males probably exported elsewhere. The
evidence from Bloodmoor Hill may, therefore, support
Moreland’s assertion that intensification of production
in rural settlements did indeed precede the foundation of
emporia (Moreland 2000).
IV. The wider context
The patterning evident in Phases 1 and 2a also has an
intriguing social and symbolic interpretation. As Ware
(2005) has outlined, the ‘hall’ building in Anglo-Saxon
England, as described in poetic texts such as Beowulf,
is portrayed as the heart of social, legal and political
discourse, and is pictured as a circle of light and peace
surrounded by darkness, discomfort and danger (after
Hume 1974, 65). Although rather playful, it is tempting
to see these ideas physically expressed in the initial
layout at Bloodmoor Hill. Although the structures here
are not ‘halls’ as such, the settlement does seem initially
430
to have a central occupation core with a surrounding craft
and industrial area. Later, though, this layout changes,
and eventually it is the cemetery which is placed at the
core of the settlement: this may reflect a fundamental
realignment of the relationship between the dead and
the living here during the 7th century: the dead are no
longer removed outside the occupation zone, but become
integral to it. This could easily be seen as a shift in
perspective brought about by conversion to Christianity
(cf. Reynolds 2002 and Thompson 2002 for discussion of
the creation of Christian central foci for parish communi-
ties in the Middle to Later Saxon period).
Unlike other contemporary settlements in Anglo-
Saxon England, Bloodmoor Hill cannot be interpreted as
a ‘wandering settlement’ (cf. Hamerow 2002a, 104–6).
In contrast with a site such as Mucking, where the core
settlement area is seen as moving over 500m to the north
between the 5th and 7th centuries (Fig. 8.3), the core of
the Bloodmoor Hill settlement remains in the same place
for over 200 years, with the main change over that time
being an inward contraction towards the centre. This
might imply something about contemporary landholding
 Figure 8.3 Plan of Bloodmoor Hill, compared with contemporary settlement sites at Mucking (Essex), Chalton
(Hants), Catholme (Staffs.) and West Stow (Suffolk) (after Losco-Bradley and Kinsley 2002, figs 3.100–101 and
West 1985, fig. 299). On comparative sites, bold rectangles are wall-post buildings, SFBs are hatched and cemetery
areas stippled

431
and agricultural arrangements. The phenomenon of the
shifting settlement is often associated with the exploita-
tion of extensive field systems within a fixed territorial
area: as soils in certain fields become exhausted, new
areas had to be brought under the plough (ibid.). Other
considerations may have affected the relocation of farms:
the death of the household head may have prompted
rebuilding, as may the need to move to a different settle-
ment site to avoid humans and animals being affected by
parasites. The enhanced fertility of a farmstead may also
have been beneficial in the creation of new arable areas
(ibid.). Such considerations do not seem to have played a
role at Bloodmoor Hill. One reason for this may be that
the existing fields saw regular manuring, and did not need
rotating in the same way. The creation of manure may
be one of the reasons for the establishment and mainte-
nance of the surface deposits (several of which had their
‘organic’ nature noted during excavation), and repeated
removal of parts of these surface deposits to the fields
may account for the high proportion of material which
was not recovered during excavation: Tipper (above,
Chapter 4) estimated that only 12.4% of the pottery
vessels in use during the site’s occupation were recov-
ered — manuring may account for the other 87.6%. The
lack of byres at Bloodmoor Hill and other contemporary
Anglo-Saxon settlements predicated against the efficient
collection of animal dung for use as manure, and would
have made the use of domestic refuse for manure more
important (Tipper 2004, 158).
Table 8.1 and Fig. 8.3 show Bloodmoor Hill in
comparison with other major early Anglo-Saxon settle-
ments. In terms of settled area, it compares well with
West Stow, Catholme and Chalton (with Mucking and
West Heslerton being of a different order of magnitude);
finds numbers on the whole are also comparable with
these smaller sites, with the notable exception of the
metalworking evidence: with 153kg of smithing waste,
Bloodmoor Hill has produced twice the amount recov-
ered from the much larger (and longer-lived) site at West
Heslerton, and over three times that recovered from
Mucking.
The death of a household head may well have
prompted rebuilding on the site, but this appears to have
taken place in nearby locations, to judge by the conti-
nuity shown in the location of craft activities. The only
apparent settlement ‘shift’, then, is that which takes place
at the end of the occupation of the settlement, when the
current population presumably moved elsewhere.
This latter shift may therefore relate to wider settle-
ment changes seen in East Anglia at this time. Moreland
(2000, 86–7) has used evidence from the East Anglian
Kingdom Survey to argue for a ‘major dislocation in
settlement patterns’ by the end of the 7th century, which
Hamerow (2002a, 122–3) is correct to revise (on the
basis of Blinkhorn’s redating of the start of Ipswich
Ware pottery production) to a process of shift and expan-
sion onto heavier soils which began sometime (early?)
in the eighth century. She argues that the shift seems to
have been associated with a need for an intensification
of production to meet the demands of new secular and
ecclesiastical landlords for surplus; others have invoked
soil erosion (Welch 1985, 21–2); outbreaks of bubonic
plague causing population decline (Maddicott 1997, 37–
45); population growth (Unwin 1988, 93–4), and even
climatic change caused by asteroid or comet impact (e.g.
432
Arnold 1997, 65). Moreland (2000, 84–5) argues that
such explanations lack real explanatory depth; that they
fail to engage with the fundamental reordering of social
and symbolic worlds that is evident at just this point in
time with, alongside the settlement shift, the introduc-
tion of new building techniques (Marshall and Marshall
1993, 40; and seen here with the solitary post-in-trench
building in the final phase of occupation) and the aban-
donment of the traditional ‘folk’ cemeteries (Geake 1997,
18). Moreland (2000, 71) argues that emporia stand out
as exceptional in the Anglo-Saxon archaeological record
because they are assumed to emerge abruptly from a
society focused on near-subsistence-level economic
activity (with the exception of some gift-exchange in the
higher echelons of society). By focusing on production,
he questions whether emporia were, in fact, not the cause
of ‘economic growth’ in the eighth century but rather the
consequence of (earlier?) developments (ibid., 80).
We might argue that the settlement at Bloodmoor
Hill was already in pursuit of such surplus production,
with its focus on cattle husbandry and specialisation in
metalworking. It can therefore be identified as a smaller-
scale forerunner of the higher-status Middle Saxon sites
such as Brandon (Carr et al. 1988), Burrow Hill, Suffolk
(Fenwick 1984), and Wicken Bonhunt (Wade et al. 1980),
which all see high-status imports, including styli, quanti-
ties of Ipswich Ware and sceattas, evidence for specialised
craft production (wool production in the case of Brandon,
metal and leatherworking at Burrow Hill and specialised
meat production at Wicken Bonhunt). Moreland (2000,
87–94) argues that, while such ‘productive’ sites share
some of the basic characteristics of emporia — evidence
for craft production, long-distance and regional trade,
presence of coinage — they are not (as Newman 1999 and
Hodges 1982 have suggested) seasonal trading places,
but represent permanent settlements integrally involved
in the same economic systems, albeit at different levels
within a social hierarchy. Intriguingly, Moreland (2000,
94) says of such sites, being centres in and through
which elites controlled at a regional level the production
and distribution of goods, and which were integrated
into wider-scale economic systems through links with
emporia, that ‘we might even call them estate centres’
(for a continental example of such an ‘estate centre’ at
Lauchheim in Merovingian south-west Germany, see
Damminger 1998, 63–4).
It can be no coincidence that the settlement at
Bloodmoor Hill is abandoned at the same time that these
higher-status production/distribution (estate) centres are
coming into being, and which is also the time that Blair
(1995) has proposed the creation of a system of minster
churches (which quickly attracted commercial activity
themselves) — assuming, of course, that there is in fact
a difference between these two types of site. Perhaps the
key reason behind the abandonment of the settlement at
Bloodmoor Hill was not the need to intensify, but rather
a desire to be nearer the heart of a religious community.
The most interesting aspect, though, is that throughout
its occupation, it displayed exactly those characteristics
(aside from the presence of quantities of coinage and
Ipswich Ware) shown by the later elite centres (estate
centres). While Moreland (2000, 104) would tentatively
tie the settlement changes seen in the early eighth century
to the ‘ideological/ cosmological’ foundations of the
minster-based structure, the evidence from Bloodmoor
433
Hill would suggest that the very adoption of such a
structure must have its origins in the existence of social
conditions favourable to it, and that there was already
an elite which was engaged in the control of agricultural
and craft production and distribution: the introduction
of a minster-based system must have suited their social
and economic needs and desires for it to have been a
success.
Hamerow (2002a, 123) speculates over whether the
establishment of ‘Final Phase’ cemeteries (such as we
have at Bloodmoor Hill) has more to do with the forma-
434
tion of estates, rather than with religious conversion.
At Bloodmoor Hill, the centralised layout pre-dates the
foundation of the cemetery by over a century: if this does
represent estate foundation, it is occurring at a very early
date. We find the model of Bloodmoor Hill as an early
estate centre a particularly attractive one; its abandonment
only comes at the point when more formalised centres of
Christianity, and the introduction of the minster-based
system, make residence closer to a Christian structure
more attractive than continued occupation of an existing
property.
 Bibliography
Anon, 1806 History of the Hundred of Mutford (manuscript in
Suffolk Records Office: SRO 193/3/1)
Aerts-Bijma, A. T., ‘AMS sample handling in Groningen’, Nuclear
Meijer, H. A. J. and Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B
van der Plicht, J., 123, 221–5
1997
Aerts-Bijma, A. T., ‘Automatic AMS sample combustion and CO2
van der Plicht, J. collection’, Radiocarbon 43 (2A), 293–8
and Meijer,
H. A. J., 2001
Ager, B. M., 1985 The smaller variants of the Anglo-Saxon quoit
brooch’, Anglo-Saxon Stud Archaeol Hist 4, 1–58
Albarella, U., 2004 ‘Mammal and bird bones’, in Wallis, H.,
Excavations at Mill Lane, Thetford 1995, E
Anglian Archaeol 108, 88-99
Albarella, U. and ‘Mammals and birds from Launceston Castle,
Davis, S. J. M., Cornwall: decline in status and the rise of
1996 agriculture’, Circaea, J Ass Envir Archaeol 12
(1996 for 1994), 1–156
Albarella, U. and The Early to Late Saxon animal bones excavated
Johnstone, C., 2000 in 1995 from Kings Meadow Lane, Higham
Ferrers, Northamptonshire, Ancient Monuments
Laboratory Report No. 79/2000
Albarella, U. and The Pigs from Durrington Walls, a Neolithic
Payne, S., 1993 Database (unpublished manuscript)
Albarella, U., Saxon, Medieval and Post-Medieval Mammal
Beech, M. and and Bird Bones Excavated 1989–91 from Castle
Mulville, J., 1997 Mall, Norwich, Norfolk (Ancient Monuments
Laboratory Report No. 72/97)
Ambrose, S. H., ‘Preparation and characterization of bone and
1990 tooth collagen for isotopic analysis’, J Archaeol
Sci 17, 431–51
Ambrose, S. H., ‘Isotopic analysis of palaeodiets: methodological
1993 and interpretive considerations’, in Sandford,
M. K. (ed.), Investigations of Ancient Human
Tissue: Chemical Analysis in Anthropology
(Langhorne, PA, Gordon and Breach Science
Publishers), 59–129
Ambrose, S. H., ‘Controlled diet and climate experiments on
2000 nitrogen isotope ratios of rats’, in Ambrose, S. H.
and Katzenberg, M. A. (eds), Biogeochemical
Approaches to Paleodietary Analysis (New York,
Kluwer Academic/Plenum), 243–59
Anderson, S., 2001 ‘Other finds’, in Tester, A. and Anderson, S.,
Staunch Meadow, Brandon (Site BRD 018).
Assessment Report and Updated Project Design
(SCCAS Report No. 2001/7)
Andrews, P., 1995 Excavations at Redcastle Furze, Thetford,
1988–9, E Anglian Archaeol 72 (Dereham)
Arnold, C., 1980 ‘Wealth and social structure: a matter of life and
death’, in Rahtz, P., Dickinson, T. and Watts, L.
(eds), Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries 1979, Brit
Archaeol Rep British Ser 82 (Oxford), 81–142
Arnold, C., 1982 The Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries of the Isle of Wight
(London, British Museum Press)
Arnold, C., 1988 An Archaeology of the Early Anglo-Saxon
Kingdoms (London, Croom Helm)
435
Arnold, C., 1997 An Archaeology of the Early Anglo-Saxon
Kingdoms (2nd edition, London)
Arwidsson, G., Valsgärde 8, Die Gräberfunde von Valsgärde 2
1954 (Uppsala & Stockholm)
Arwdisson, G. and The Mästermyr Find. A Viking Age Tool Chest
Berg, G., 1983 from Gotland (Stockholm, Almqvist and Wiksell
International)
Ashmore, P., 1999 ‘Radiocarbon dating: avoiding errors by avoiding
mixed samples’, Antiquity 73, 124–30
Atfield, R., 2004 Anglo-Saxon timber buildings from Ipswich: a
comparative study of local, national and
continental contexts (unpubl MA thesis, Univ
East Anglia)
Atkins, R., and Prehistoric, Roman and Anglo-Saxon Settlement
Connor, A., in prep. at Land near Brandon Road, Thetford, Norfolk,
2002
Avent, R., 1975 Anglo-Saxon Disc and Composite Brooches, Brit
Archaeol Rep, British Ser. 11 (Oxford)
Baker, P., 2002 The Vertebrate Remains from Six Saxon Sites in
the Lincolnshire and Norfolk Fenlands (Saxon
Fenland Management Project) (Ancient
Monuments Laboratory Report No. 46/2002)
Baker, P., in press ‘The Saxon Fenland Management Project: sites in
Lincolnshire and Norfolk’, in Crowson, A., Lane,
T., Penn, K. and Trimble, D., Anglo-Saxon
Settlement on the Siltland of Eastern England.
Lincolnshire Archaeol and Heritage Rep No 7
Baker, R., 1880 ‘On the discovery of Anglo-Saxon remains at
Desborough, Northamptonshire’, Archaeologia
45, 466–71
Baldwin Brown, G., The Arts in Early England. Saxon Art and
1915 Industry in the Pagan Period. Vol IV (London,
John Murray)
Ballantyne, R. M., ‘Plant remains’, in Mortimer, R. W., Bloodmoor
2000a Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk: Excavation of the
Early Anglo-Saxon Settlement: An Interim
Statement 1998–2000 (CAU Internal Report)
Ballantyne, R. M., ‘Plant remains’, in Mortimer, R. W., Excavation
2000b at Swallowfields, Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton
Colville, Suffolk (Cambridge Archaeological Unit
Report No. 386)
Ballantyne, R. M., ‘Plants and seeds’, in Mortimer, R., Regan, R. and
2005 Lucy, S., The Saxon and Medieval Settlement at
West Fen Road, Ely: The Ashwell Site, E Anglian
Archaeol 110 (Cambridge), 100–12
Ballantyne, R. M., ‘Environmental remains’, in Garrow, D., Lucy, S.
2006 and Gibson, D., Excavations at Kilverstone,
Norfolk, E Anglian Archaeol 113 (Cambridge),
198–9
Barford, P. M., ‘Objects of iron’, in Blockley, K., Blockley, M.,
1995 Blockley, P., Frere, S. and Stow, S., The
Archaeology of Canterbury Vol. 5, Excavations in
the Marlowe Car Park and Surrounding Areas
(Canterbury, Canterbury Archaeological Trust)
Barrett, J. H., 2002 The Fish Bone from Excavations at Saxon
Flixborough, Lincolnshire (unpublished report,
Department of Archaeology, University of York)
Barrett, J. H., ‘Dark Age economics revisited: the English fish
Locker, A. M. and bone evidence AD 600–1600’, Antiquity 78
Roberts, C. M., (301), 618–36
2004
Bartel, A. and ‘Spindel, Wirtel, Topf. Ein besonderer
Codreanu- B e i g a b e n k o m p l e x a u s Pf a kof e n, L kr.
Windauer, S., 1995 Regensburg’, Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter
60, 251–72
Bartosiewicz, L., ‘Metapodial asymmetry in draft cattle’, Int J
Van Neer, W. and Osteoarchaeol 3, 69–75
Lentacker, A., 1993
Bateman, T., 1848 Vestiges of the Antiquities of Derbyshire (London)
Beavan Athfield, ‘Environmental influences on dietary carbon and
N., McFadgen, 14C ages in modern rats and other species’,
B. D. and Sparks, Radiocarbon 43, 7–41
R. J., 2001
Becker, C., 1989 Die Geweihfunde vom Spandauer Burgwall’, in
von Müller, A. and von Müler-Muci, K.,
Ausgrabungen, Funde und Naturwissen-
schaftliche Untersuchungen auf dem Burgwall in
Berlin-Spandau (Berlin), 101–274
Behrensmeyer, ‘Taphonomic and ecological information from
A. K., 1978 bone weathering’, Paleobiology 4, 150–62
Bell, M., 1977 ‘Excavations at Bishopstone, Sussex’, Sussex
Archaeol Collect 15, 192–241
Bell, M., 1990 ‘Sedimentation rates in the primary fills of
chalk-cut features’, in Robinson, D. E. (ed.),
Ex p e ri m e n t a t i o n a n d Re s t or at i on i n
Environmental Archaeology. Symposia of the
Association for Environmental Archaeology
No. 9, Roskilde, Denmark, 1988 (Oxford,
Oxbow), 237–48
Bender Jørgensen, ‘A Coptic tapestry and other textile remains from
L., 1987 the royal Frankish graves of Cologne cathedral’,
Acta Archaeologica 56, 85–100
Bender Jørgensen, North European Textiles until AD 1000 (Aarhus,
L., 1992 Denmark, Aarhus University Press)
Berg, D., 1993 ‘Animal bones from Anglo-Saxon deposits’, in
Field, N. and Leahy, K., ‘Prehistoric and
Anglo-Saxon remains at Nettleton Top,
Nettleton’, Lincolnshire Hist and Archaeol 28,
9–38, at 30–4
Binford, L. R., 1981 Bones: Ancient Man and Modern Myths (New
York, Academic Press)
Birbeck, V., Smith, The Origins of Mid-Saxon Southampton.
R., Andrews, P. and Excavations at the Friends Provident St Mary’s
Stoodley, N., 2005 Stadium 1998–2000 (Salisbury, Wessex
Archaeology)
Blackmore, L., ‘Aspects of trade and exchange evidenced by
1999 recent work on Saxon and medieval pottery from
London’, Trans London Middlesex Archaeol Soc
50, 38–54
Blackmore, L., ‘Pottery: trade and tradition’, in Hill, D. and
2001 Cowie, R. (eds), Wics: The Early Mediaeval
Trading Centres of Northern Europe, Sheffield
Archaeol Monogr 14 (Sheffield), 22–42
Blackmore, L., ‘The pottery’, in Malcolm, G. and Bowsher, D.
2003 with Cowie, R., Middle Saxon London.
Excavations at the Royal Opera House 1989–99,
MoLAS Monogr 15 (London), 225–41
436
Blair, J., 1995 ‘Ecclesiastical organisation and pastoral care in
Anglo-Saxon England’, Early Medieval Europe
4, 193–212
Blair, J., 2005 The Church in Anglo-Saxon Society (Oxford,
Oxford University Press)
Blakelock, E., 2005 Qualitative Analysis of the Crucibles from
Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk
(English Heritage, Centre for Archaeology
Report No. 22/2005)
Blinkhorn, P., 1993 ‘Early and Middle Saxon pottery from
Pennyland’, in Williams, R. J., Pennyland and
Hartigans: Two Iron Age and Saxon Sites in
Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire Archaeol Soc
Monogr 4 (Aylesbury), 246–60
Blinkhorn, P., 1999 ‘Of cabbages and kings: production, trade and
consumption in Middle Saxon England’, in
Anderton, M. (ed.), Anglo-Saxon Trading
Centres: Beyond the Emporia (Glasgow, Cruithne
Press), 113–24
Blockley, K., The Archaeology of Canterbury Vol. 5,
Blockley, M., Excavations in the Marlowe Car Park and
Blockley, P., Frere, Surrounding Areas (Canterbury, Canterbury
S. S. and Stow, S., Archaeological Trust)
1995
Boardman, S. and ‘Experiments on the effects of charring on cereal
Jones, G., 1990 plant components’, J Archaeol Sci 17, 1–11
Boddington, A., ‘From bones to population: the problem of
1987 numbers’, in Boddington, A., Garland, A. N. and
J a na w a y, R . ( e ds ) , D e at h, D e c a y a n d
Reconstruction: Approaches to Archaeology and
Forensic Science (Manchester, Manchester
University Press), 180–97
Boddington, A., ‘Models of burial, settlement and worship: the
1990 Final Phase reviewed’, in Southworth, E. (ed.),
Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries: a Reappraisal (Stroud,
Alan Sutton), 177–99
Boessneck, J., 1969 ‘Osteological differences between sheep (Ovis
aries) and goat (Capra hircus)’, in Brothwell, D.
and Higgs, E. S. (eds), Science in Archaeology
(2nd edition, London, Thames and Hudson),
331–58
Bond, J., 1995 ‘Animal bone from early Saxon sunken-featured
buildings and pits’, in Rickett, R., The
Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Spong Hill, North
Elmham, Part VII: the Iron Age, Roman and Early
Saxon Settlement, East Anglian Archaeol 73,
142–6
Bonser, M. J., 1997 ‘Fifteen years of coin finds from productive sites’,
Yorkshire Numismatist 3, 39–45
Born, W., 1939 ‘Crafts and the zodiac’, CIBA Review 22, 766–89
Boulter, S., 1995 Bloodmoor Hill Carlton Colville/Gisleham (CAC
013) (Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk County Council
Planning Department)
Boulter, S., 1996 Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Collville (sic)
(CAC014) (Suffolk County Council Field
Projects Division Report No. 96/4)
Boulter, S., 2005 H andf ord R oad, I ps w i c h ( I P S 2 8 0 ) ,
Archaeological Assessment Report (Suffolk
County Council Archaeological Service Report
2004/87 (Oasis Report Suffolk 1–2986))
Bourdillon, J., 1988 ‘Countryside and town: the animal resources of
Saxon Southampton’, in Hooke, D. (ed.),
An g l o - S a x o n Settlements ( O xf or d,
Blackwell),17–95
Bourdillon, J., 1993 ‘Animal bones’, in Garner, M. F., ‘Middle Saxon
evidence at Cook Street, Southampton’ (SOU
254), Proc Hampshire Fld Club Archaeol Soc 49,
77–127, at 116–20
Bourdillon, J., 1994 ‘ Th e a n i m a l p r o v i si o n i n g of S a xon
Southampton’, in Rackham, J. (ed.), Environment
and Economy in Anglo-Saxon England, Counc
Brit Archaeol Res Rep 89 (London),120–5
Bourdillon, J. and ‘The animal bones’, in Holdsworth, P.,
Coy, J., 1980 Excavations at Melbourne Street, Southampton,
1971–76, Counc Brit Archaeol Res Rep 33
(London), 79–121
Boyle, A., Dodd, Two Oxfordshire Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries:
A., Miles, D. and Berinsfield and Didcot, Thames Valley
Mudd, A., 1995 Landscapes Monogr 8 (Oxford)
Brothwell, D., 1981 Digging up Bones (London, British Museum
(Natural History))
Brown, B. J. W., ‘Excavations at Grimstone End, Pakenham’, Proc
Knocker, G. M., Suffolk Inst Archaeol 26, 189–207
Smedley, N. and
West, S. E., 1954
Brown, J., 2004 ‘The fired daub’, in Leary, J., Tatberht’s
Lundenwic. Archaeological Excavations in
M i ddl e Sax on L ondon, P r e - C o n s t r u c t
Archaeology Limited Monogr No. 2 (London)
Brown, P. D. C., ‘The ironwork’, in Brodribb, A. C. C., Hands,
1972 A. R. and Walker, D. R., Excavations at
Shakenoak Farm, near Wilcote, Oxfordshire. Part
III: site F (Oxford, privately printed), 86–117
Brugmann, B., 1999 ‘The role of continental artefact-types in
sixth-century Kentish chronology’, in Hines, J.,
Høilund Nielsen, K. and Siegmund, F. (eds), The
Pace Of Change: Studies In Early Medieval
Chronology (Oxford, Oxbow)

Boyle, A., Jennings, The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Butler’s Field, Brugmann, B., 2004 Glass Beads From Early Anglo-Saxon Graves
D., Miles, D. and Lechlade, Gloucestershire Volume 1: Prehistoric (Oxford, Oxbow)
Palmer, S., 1998 and Roman Activity and Anglo-Saxon Grave
Catalogue, Thames Valley Landscapes Monogr Brush, K., 1993 Adorning the Dead: The Social Significance of
10 (Oxford) Early Anglo-Saxon Funerary Dress in England
(fifth to seventh centuries AD) (unpubl PhD
Brandt, J., 1960 Das Urnengräberfeld von Preetz in Holstein, thesis, Univ Cambridge)
Offa-Bücher Band 16 (Neumünster, Karl
Wachholtz) Buck, C. E., Litton, ‘Calibration of radiocarbon results pertaining to
C. D. and Smith, related archaeological events’, J Archaeol Sci 19,
Brennan, J., 1985 ‘Assessing status in the Anglo-Saxon cemetery at A. F. M., 1992 497–512
Sleaford’, Bull Inst Archaeol London 21–2,
125–31 Buck, C. E., B ay e s i an A pproac h t o I nt e r p re t i n g
Cavanagh, W. G. Archaeological Data (Chichester, Wiley)
Brennan, J., 1991 Hanging Bowls and Their Contexts: An and Litton, C. D.,
Archaeological Survey of their Socio-Economic 1996
Significance from the Fifth to the Seventh
Centuries, Brit Archaeol Rep, British Ser 220 Bullock, P., Handbook for Soil Thin Section Description
(Oxford) Fedorof, N., (Wolverhampton, Waine Research Publications)
Jongerius, A.,
Brennan, J., 1998 ‘Social structure’, in Drinkall, G. and Foreman, Stoops, G., Tursina,
M., The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Castledyke T. and Babel, U.,
South, Barton-on-Humber (Sheffield, Sheffield 1985
Academic Press), 341–53
Bullough, D., 1983 ‘Burial, community and belief in the early
Brodribb, A. C., Excavations at Shakenoak Farm, Near Wilcote, medieval West’, in Wormald, P., Bullough, D. and
Hands, A. R. and Oxfordshire. Part III: Site F (privately printed) Collins, R. (eds), Ideal and Reality in Frankish
Walker, D. R., 1972 and Anglo-Saxon Society: Studies Presented to
J. M. Wallace-Hadrill (Oxford, Blackwell),
Brodribb, A. C., Excavations at Shakenoak Farm, Near Wilcote, 177–201
Hands, A. R. and Oxfordshire. Part IV: Site C (privately printed)
Walker, D. R., 1973 Burnett, D. P., 1993 ‘Animal bone from MK19’, in Williams, R. J.,
Pennyland and Hartigans: Two Iron Age Sites in
Bronk Ramsey, C., ‘Radiocarbon calibration and analysis of Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire Archaeol Soc
1995 stratigraphy: the OxCal program’, Radiocarbon Monogr Ser 4, 199–205
37, 425–30
Burnham, B. C., ‘Roman Britain in 2002’, Britannia 34, 293–382
Bronk Ramsey, C., ‘Probability and dating’, Radiocarbon 40, Hunter, F.,
1998 461–74 Fitzpatrick, A.,
Hassall, M. W. C.
Bronk Ramsey, C., ‘Development of the radiocarbon program and Tomlin,
2001 OxCal’, Radiocarbon 43 (2A), 355–63 R. S. O., 2003

Bronk Ramsey, C. ‘A gas ion source for radiocarbon dating’, Cameron, E., 2000 Sheaths and Scabbards in England AD 400–1000,
and Hedges, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics British Archaeol. Rep. British Ser. 301 (Oxford)
R. E. M., 1997 Research B 29, 45–9
Campbell, J. (ed.), The Anglo-Saxons (London, Phaidon)
Bronk Ramsey, C., ‘Improvements to the pre-treatment of bone at 1982
Higham, T., Oxford’, Radiocarbon 46, 155–63
Bowles, A. and Cardon, D., 1999 La Draperie au Moyen Age: Essor d’une Grande
Hedges, R. E. M., Industrie Européenne (Paris, CNRS)
2004a
Carr, R., 1997 Brief for Archaeological Excavation at Carlton
Bronk Ramsey, C., ‘Towards high precision AMS: progress and Colville, Suffolk (Suffolk County Council)
Higham, T. and limitations’, Radiocarbon 46 (1), 17–24
Leach, P., 2004b

437
Carr, R., Tester, A. ‘The Middle Saxon settlement at Staunch
and Murphy, P., Meadow, Brandon’, Antiquity 62, 371–7
1988
Cartledge, J., 1983 ‘Mammal bones’, in Ayers, B. and Murphy, P., A
Waterfront Excavation at Whitefriars Street Car
Park, Norwich 1979, E Anglian Archaeol 17,
1–60, at 30–2
Cartledge, J., 1985 ‘The animal bones’, in Atkin, M., Carter, A. and
Evans, D., Excavations in Norwich 1971-1978,
Part II, East Anglian Archaeology 26 (Dereham),
220–22
Carver, M., 1979 ‘Three Saxo-Norman tenements in Durham city’,
Medieval Archaeol 23, 1–81
Carver, M., 2005 Sutton Hoo: A Seventh-Century Princely Burial
Ground and its Context, Rep Res Comm Soc
Antiq London 69 (London)
Catling, D. and Identification of Vegetable Fibres (London,
Grayson, J., 1982 Chapman and Hall)
Chambers, R. A. Ex c a v a t i o n s a t Ba r ro w H i l l s , R adl e y,
and McAdam, E., O x f o rd sh i re , 1 9 8 3 – 5 . Vo l um e 2: T he
2007 Romano-British Cemetery and Anglo-Saxon
Settlement, Thames Valley Landscapes
Monograph 25 (Oxford Archaeology)
Chester-Kadwell, ‘Metal-detector finds in context: new light on
M., 2005 ‘Dark Age’ cemeteries in the landscape of
Norfolk’, Archaeol Rev Cambridge 20.1, 70–96
Clark, A., 1993 Excavations at Mucking. Volume 1: The Site Atlas
(London, English Heritage)
Clark, G., 1947 ‘Whales as an economic factor in prehistoric
Europe’, Antiquity 21, 214–32
Clarke, G., 1979 Pre-Roman and Roman Winchester Part II: The
Roman Cemetery at Lankhills, Winchester
Studies 3 (Oxford, The Clarendon Press)
Cnotliwy, E., 1958 ‘Wczesnosredniowieczne przedmioty z rogu i
kosci z Wolina, ze stanowiska 4’, Materialy
Zachodnio-Pomorskie 4, 155–240
Cohen, A. and A Manual for the Identification of Bird Bones
Serjeantson, D., from Archaeological Sites (revised edition,
1996 London, Archetype Publications Ltd)
Colgrave, B. C. and Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of The English
Mynors, R. A. B., People (Oxford, Clarendon Press)
1969
Collis, J., 1983 Wigber Low Derbyshire: A Bronze Age and
Anglian Burial Site in the White Peak (Univ
Sheffield, Dept of Archaeology and Prehistory)
Cook, J. M., 2004 Early Anglo-Saxon Buckets: A Corpus of Copper
Alloy- and Iron-Bound, Stave-Built Vessels (ed.
Birte Brugmann), Oxford University School of
Archaeology Monogr 60 (Oxford)
Cook, J. M. and ‘The bucket from Grave 92(a)’, in Parfitt, K. and
Cameron, E., 1997 Brugmann, B., The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery on
Mill Hill, Deal, Kent, Soc Med Archaeol Monogr
Ser 14 (London), 246–8
Cool, H. E. M., ‘Other Roman objects of copper alloy’, in Rickett,
1995 R., Spong Hill, Part VII: The Iron Age, Roman
and Early Saxon Settlement, E Anglian Archaeol
73 (Dereham), 72–4
Corbet, G. and The Handbook of British Mammals (3rd edition,
Harris, S., 1991 Oxford, Blackwell)
438
Courty, M. A., ‘Ancient people — lifestyles and cultural
Goldberg, P. and patterns’, in Wilding, L. and Oleshko, K. (eds),
Macphail, R., 1994 M i c rom or phol ogi c al I ndi c at o r s of
Anthropogenic Effects on Soils, 15th World
Congress of Soil Science, Acapulco, Volume 6a
(Acapulco, Mexico), 250–69
Cowgill, J. and ‘The slags and other metalworking debris’, in
McDonnell, J. G., Powlesland, D., West Heslerton: The Anglian
forthcoming Settlement (Yedingham, Landscape Research
Centre)
Cowgill, J., de Medieval Finds From Excavations In London 1:
Neergaard, M. and Knives And Scabbards (London, HMSO)
Griffiths, N., 1987
Cowgill, J., ‘Ironworking technology’, in Ashwin, T. and
McDonnell, G. and Tester, A. (eds), A Roman Settlement in the
Mills, J. M., Waveney Valley: Excavations at Scole,
forthcoming 1993–1994
Cowie, R., ‘Two Middle Saxon occupation sites: excavations
Whytehead, R. L. at Jubilee Hall and 21–22 Maiden Lane’, Trans
and Blackmore, L., London Middlesex Archaeol Soc 39, 47–164
1988
Coy, J., 1980 ‘The animal bone’, in Haslam, J., ‘A Middle
Saxon iron smelting site at Ramsbury, Wiltshire’,
Medieval Archaeol 24, 41–51
Crabtree, P., 1989 We s t St ow : E ar l y A ngl o- Sax on A n i m a l
Husbandry, E Anglian Archaeol 47 (Ipswich)
Crabtree, P., 1990 ‘Zooarchaeology and complex societies: some
uses of faunal analysis for the study of trade,
social status, and ethnicity’, in Schiffer, M. B.
(ed.), Archaeological Methods and Theory 2,
(Tucson, AZ, University of Arizona Press),
155–205
Crabtree, P., 1994a ‘Animal exploitation at East Anglian villages’, in
Rackham, J. (ed.), Environment and Economy in
Anglo-Saxon England, Counc Brit Archaeol Res
Rep 89 (London), 40–54
Crabtree P., 1994b The Animal Bone Remains from Ipswich, Suffolk
Recovered from Sixteen Sites Excavated between
1974–1988, unpublished report
Crabtree, P., 1996 ‘Production and consumption in an early complex
society: animal use in Middle Saxon East Anglia’,
World Archaeology 28 (1), 58–75
Crabtree, P., and The Mammal and Bird Remains from Brandon
Campana. D., in
prep.
Crabtree P. and Animal Bones Recovered from Wicken Bonhunt,
Stevens P., Essex, unpublished manuscript
unpublished
Cramp, R. J., 1957 ‘Beowulf and Archaeology’, Medieval Archaeol
1, 57–77
Crowfoot, E., 1976 ‘Appendix I, The textiles and leather’, in Barfoot,
J. F. and Price-Williams, D., ‘The Saxon Barrow
at Gally Hills, Banstead Down, Surrey’, Res Vol
Surrey Archaeol Soc 3, 59–76, at 68–71
Crowfoot, E., 1983 ‘The textiles’ in Bruce-Mitford, R., The Sutton
Hoo Ship Burial, 3, I (London, British Museum),
409–79
Crowfoot, E., 1987 ‘The textiles’, in Evison, V. I., Dover: The
Buckland Anglo-Saxon Cemetery, Historic
Buildings and Monuments Commission for
England Archaeol Rep 3 (London), 190–5
Crowfoot, E., 2000 ‘The textiles’, in Penn, K., Excavations on the
Norwich Southern Bypass, 1989–91. Part II: The
Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Harford farm, Caistor
St Edmund, Norfolk, E Anglian Archaeol 92
(Dereham), 82–91
Crowfoot, E., 2006 ‘Textiles’, in Chadwick Hawkes, S. and Grainger,
G., The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Finglesham,
Kent, Oxford University School of Archaeology
Monogr 64 (Oxford), 357–69
Crummy, N., 1983 The Roman Small Finds from Excavations in
Colchester 1971–9, Colchester Archaeological
Report No. 2 (Colchester)
Crummy, N., 1988 The Post-Roman Small Finds from Excavations in
Colchester 1971–85, Colchester Archaeological
Report No. 5 (Colchester)
Cumberland, A., ‘Risely Saxon cemetery’, Archaeol Cantiana 53,
1940 152
Curle, C. L., 1982 Pictish and Norse Finds from the Brough of
Birsay 1934–74, Soc Antiq Scotl Monogr 1
(Edinburgh)
Curnow, P., 1985 ‘The Roman coins’, in West, S., West Stow: The
Anglo-Saxon Village, E Anglian Archaeol 24
(Ipswich), 76–81
Dallas, C., 1993 Excavations in Thetford by B. K. Davison between
1964 and 1970, E Anglian Archaeol 62
(Dereham)
Damminger, F., ‘Dwellings, settlements and settlement patterns in
1998 Merovingian south-west Germany and adjacent
areas’, in Wood, I. (ed.), Franks and Alamanni in
the Merovingian Period. An Ethnographic
Perspective (Woodbridge, The Boydell Press),
33–106
Darling, M. J. and Caister-on-Sea. Excavations by Charles Green
Gurney, D., 1993 1951–1955, E Anglian Archaeol 60 (Dereham)
Davis, S., 1987 ‘The dentition of an Iron Age pony’, in Ashbee, P.,
‘Warsash, Hampshire excavations, 1954’, Proc
Hampshire Fld Club Archaeol Soc 43, 52–5
Davis, S., 1991 Faunal Remains from Late Saxon–Medieval
farmstead at Eckweek in Avon, 1988–1989
Excavations (Ancient Monuments Laboratory
Report No. 35/91)
Davis, S., 1992a A Rapid Method for Recording Information about
Mammal Bones from Archaeological Sites
(Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report
No. 19/92)
Davis, S., 1992b Saxon and Medieval Animal Bones from
Burystead and Langham Road, Northants:
1984–1987 (Ancient Monuments Laboratory
Report No. 71/92)
Davis, S., 1996 ‘Measurements of a group of adult female
Shetland sheep skeletons from a single flock: a
baseline for zooarchaeologists’, J Archaeol Sci
23, 593–612
Day, K. J., ‘Reconstructing the West Heslerton Anglo-Saxon
forthcoming settlement structures’, in Powlesland, D., West
Heslerton: The Anglian Settlement (Yedingham,
Landscape Research Centre)
Dickens, A. and Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk: Post
Mortimer, R., 2002 Excavation Analysis Project Design (Cambridge,
Cambridge Archaeological Unit)
Dickens, A., Tipper, ‘Bloodmoor Hill Carlton Colville, Suffolk: A
J. and Mortimer R., Preliminary Report’, Anglo-Saxon Stud Archaeol
2006 Hist 13, 63–79
439
Dickinson, T. M., ‘An Anglo-Saxon ‘cunning woman’ from
1993 Bidford-on-Avon’, in Carver, M. (ed.), In Search
of Cult: Archaeological Investigations in Honour
of Philip Rahtz (Woodbridge, Boydell Press),
45–54
Dickinson, T. M. Early Anglo-Saxon Shields (London, Society of
and Härke, H., 1992 Antiquaries of London)
Dierkens, A., 1981 ‘Cimetières mérovingiens et histoire du haut
moyen âge: chronologie, société-relgion’, Acta
Hist Bruxellensia 4, 15–70
Dijkerman, J. C., ‘Properties and genesis of textural subsoil
Cline, M. G. and lamellae’, Soil Science 104 (1), 7–16
Olson, G. W., 1967
Dixon, P. W., 1982 ‘How Saxon is the Saxon House?’ in Drury, P.
(ed.), Structural Reconstruction: Approaches To
The Interpretation Of The Excavated Remains Of
Buildings, Brit Archaeol Rep British Ser 110
(Oxford), 275–87
Dixon, P. W., 2002 ‘The reconstruction of the buildings’, in
Losco-Bradley, S. and Kinsley, G., Catholme: An
Anglo-Saxon Settlement on the Trent Gravels in
St af f ords hi re , N ot t i ngha m St u d i e s i n
Archaeology 3 (Nottingham), 89–98
Dobney, K., F ar m e r s , M onk s and A r i s t oc r a t s : T h e
Jacques, D., Barrett, Environmental Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon
J. and Johnstone, Flixborough. Excavations at Flixborough Volume
C., 2007 3 (Oxford, Oxbow Books)
Dobney, K., Of Butchery and Breeds: Report on the Vertebrate
Jacques, D. and Remains from Various Sites in the City of Lincoln,
Irving, B., 1996 Lincoln Archaeological Studies 5
Dobney, K. and ‘A method for recording archaeological animal
Reilly, K., 1988 bones: the use of diagnostic zones’, Circaea 5 (2),
79–96
Dodwell, N., Lucy, ‘Anglo-Saxons on the Cambridge Backs: the
S. and Tipper, J., Criminology site settlement and King’s Garden
2004 Hostel cemetery’, Proc Cambridge Antiq Soc 93,
95–124
Done, G., 1993 ‘Animal bone from Anglo-Saxon contexts’, in
Hamerow, H., Excavations at Mucking, Volume 2:
The Anglo-Saxon Settlement, Engl Heritage
Archaeol Rep 21 (London), 74–9
Douglas, J., 1793 Nenia Britannica: or, a Sepulchral History of
Great Britain (London, B. and J. White)
Drinkall, G. and The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Castledyke South,
Foreman, M., 1998 Barton-on-Humber, Sheffield Excavation
Reports 6 (Sheffield)
Dufour E., ‘Palaeodietary implications of isotopic variability
Bocherens, H. and in Eurasian lacustrine fish’, J Archaeol Sci 26,
Mariotti, A., 1999 617–27
Duncan, H., Duhig, ‘A late Migration/Final Phase cemetery at Water
C. and Phillips, M., Lane, Melbourn’, Proc Cambridge Archaeol Soc
2003 92, 57–134
Dungworth, D., ‘A note on the analysis of crucibles and moulds’,
2000 Historical Metallurgy 34, 83–7
Dungworth, D. and ‘Spherical hammerscale and experimental
Wilkes, R., 2005 blacksmithing’, Historical Metallurgy Society
News 59
Eagles, B. and ‘Excavations at Harrold, Bedfordshire, 1951–3’,
Evison, V., 1970 Bedfordshire Archaeol J 5, 17–55
Edwards, G., 1975 Wicken Bonhunt: Iron Woolcombs (Ancient
Monuments Laboratory Report No. 1993)
English Heritage, Management of Archaeological Projects
1991 (London)
Evans, C., 2003 Power and Island Communities: Excavations at
the Wardy Hill Ringwork, Coveney, Ely, E
Anglian Archaeol 103 (Cambridge)
Evans, C. and M a r sh l a n d C o m m u n i t i e s and C ul t ur al
Hodder, I., 2006 Landscapes. The Haddenham Project Volume 2,
McDonald Institute Monographs (Cambridge)
Evans, N., 1985 The East Anglian Linen Industry: Rural Industry
and Local Economy, 1500–1850, Pasold Studies
in Textile History 5 (Aldershot, Gower)
Evison, V., 1956 ‘An Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Holborough,
Kent’, Archaeol Cantiana 70, 84–141
Evison, V., 1975 ‘Pagan Saxon whetstones’, Antiq J 55, 70–85
Evison, V., 1979 A C o r p u s o f W h e e l - Th ro wn P ot t e r y i n
Anglo-Saxon Graves (London, The Royal
Archaeological Institute)
Evison, V., 1980 ‘Iron objects’, in Haslam, J., Biek, L. and
Tylecote, R. F., ‘A middle Saxon iron smelting
site at Ramsbury, Wiltshire’, Medieval Archaeol
24, 35–9
Evison, V., 1982 ‘Anglo-Saxon glass claw beakers’, Archaeologia
107, 43–76
Evison, V., 1987 Dover: Buckland Anglo-Saxon Cemetery,
Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission
for England Archaeol Rep 3 (London)
Evison, V., 1988 An Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Alton, Hampshire,
Hampshire Fld Club Archaeol Soc Monogr 4
(Gloucester)
Evison, V., 1994 An Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Great Chesterford,
Essex, Counc Brit Archaeol Res Rep 91 (York)
Faussett, B., 1856 Inventorium Sepulchrale (London)
Fell, C., 1984 Women in Anglo-Saxon England (Oxford,
Blackwell)
Fenwick, V., 1983 ‘The chainwork’, in Bruce-Mitford, R. L. S., The
Sutton Hoo Ship-Burial. Vol.3, Late Roman and
Byzantine Silver, Hanging-Bowls (ed. Angela
Care Evans) (London, British Museum
Publications), 511–53
Fenwick, V., 1984 ‘Insula de Burgh: excavations at Burrow Hill,
Butley, Suffolk, 1978–1981’, Anglo-Saxon Stud
Archaeol Hist 3, 35–54
Filmer-Sankey, W. Snape Anglo-Saxon Cemetery: Excavations and
and Pestell, T., 2001 Surveys 1824–1992, E Anglian Archaeol 95
(Ipswich)
FitzPatrick, E. A., Soil Microscopy and Micromorphology
1993 (Chichester, John Wiley & Sons)
Folks, H. C. and ‘Physical and chemical properties of some Iowa
Riecken, F. F., 1956 soil profiles with clay-iron bands’, Soil Science
Society of America Proceedings 20, 575–80
Foster, S. M., 1990 ‘Pins, combs and the chronology of Later Atlantic
Iron Age settlement’, in Armit, I. (ed.), Beyond
the Brochs: Changing Perspectives on the
Atlantic Scottish Iron Age (Edinburgh, Edinburgh
University Press), 143–74
Fox, A., 1955 ‘Some Evidence for a Dark Age trading site at
Bantham, near Thurlestone, South Devon’, Antiq
J 35, 55–67
Fox, G. E., 1900 ‘Roman Suffolk’, Archaeol J 57, 89–165
440
French, C. A. I., ‘Micromorphological analysis of the fill deposits
1996 of two Grubenhäuser at Bourn Bridge,
Cambridgeshire’, in Pollard, J., Excavations at
Bourn Bridge, Pampisford, Cambridgeshire:
P ar t 2, R om an and Sax on ( C a m b r i d g e
Archaeological Unit Report 165)
Fryer, V. and ‘Charred plant macrofossils and other remains
Murphy, P., 1999 from Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk
(CAC 016): An assessment’, in Mortimer, R. W.,
Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk:
Excavation of the Early Anglo-Saxon Settlement:
An Interim Statement 1998–2000 (CAU Internal
Report)
Gardiner, M., 1997 ‘The exploitation of sea mammals in medieval
England: bones and their social context’,
Archaeol. J. 154, 173–95
Garrow, D., Lucy, Excavations at Kilverstone, Norfolk, 2000–02, E
S. and Gibson, D., Anglian Archaeol 113 (Cambridge)
2006
Gdaniec, K., A Line across Land: Survey and Excavation on the
Edmonds, M. and Isleham-Ely pipeline 1993. E Anglian Archaeol
Wiltshire, P. 2008 121 (Cambridge)
Gé, T., Courty, ‘Sedimentary formation processes of occupation
M. A., Matthews, surfaces’, in Goldberg, P., Nash, D. T. and
W. and Wattez, J., Petraglia, M. D. (eds), Formation Processes in
1993 Archaeological Context, Monographs in World
Archaeology No. 17 (Madison, WI, Prehistory
Press), 149–63
Geake, H., 1997 The Use of Grave-Goods in Conversion-Period
England, c.600–c. 850, Brit Archaeol Rep, British
Ser 261 (Oxford)
Geake, H., 2002 ‘ P e r s i s t e nt pr obl e m s i n t he s t u d y o f
conversion-period burials in England’, in Lucy, S.
and Reynolds, A. (eds), Burial In Early Medieval
England and Wales, Soc Medieval Archaeol
Monogr 17 (London), 144–55
Gelfand, A. E. and ‘Sampling approaches to calculating marginal
Smith, A. F. M., densities’, J Amer Stat Assoc 85, 398–409
1990
Germany, M., 2003 Excavations at Great Holts Farm, Boreham,
Essex, 1992–94, E Anglian Archaeol 105
(Chelmsford)
Gibson, C. with ‘An Anglo-Saxon settlement at Godmanchester,
Murray, J., 2003 Cambridgeshire’, in Griffiths, D., Reynolds, A.
and Semple, S. (eds), ‘Boundaries in early
medieval Britain’, Anglo-Saxon Stud Archaeol
Hist 12, 137–217
Gile, L. H., 1979 ‘Holocene soils in eolian sediments of Bailey
County, Texas’, Soil Science Society of America
Journal 43, 994–1003
Gilks, W. R., Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Practice (London)
Richardson, S. and
Spiegelhalter, D. J.,
1996
Goffin, R., 2003 ‘The daub’, in Malcolm, G. and Bowsher, D.,
Middle Saxon London. Excavations at the Royal
Opera House 1989–99, MoLAS Monogr 15
(London)
Going, C. J., 1987 The Mansio and Other Sites in the South-Eastern
Sector of Caesaromagus: The Roman Pottery,
C he l m s f or d A r c ha e ol ogi c a l Tr u s t
Report 3.2/Counc Brit Archaeol Res Rep 62
(London)
Goldberg, P. and Practical and Theoretical Geoarchaeology
Macphail, R.I., (Oxford, Blackwell)
2006
Goodall, I., 1980 ‘The iron objects’, in Wade-Martins, P.,
Excavations in North Elmham Park, 1967–1972
E Anglian Archaeol 9, Vol 2 (Dereham), 509–16
Goodall, I., 1984 ‘Iron objects’, in Rogerson, A. and Dallas, C.,
Excavations in Thetford 1948–59 and 1973–80, E
Anglian Archaeol 22 (Dereham), 77–106
Goodall, I., 1987 ‘Objects of iron’, in Beresford, G., Goltho: The
Development of an Early Medieval Manor
c.850–1150, Engl Heritage Archaeol Rep No. 4
(London), 177–87
Goodall, I., 1990 ‘Knives’, in Biddle, M., Object and Economy in
Medieval Winchester (Oxford, Oxford University
Press), 835–60
Goodall, I. and ‘Iron objects’, in Dallas, C., Excavations in
Ottaway, P., 1993 Thetford by B. K. Davison between 1964 and
1970, E Anglian Archaeol 62 (Dereham), 96–112
Grant, A., 1976 ‘The animal bones’, in Cunliffe, B., Excavations
at Porchester Castle, Volume II: Saxon, Rep Res
Comm Soc Antiq London 33 (London), 262–87
Grant, A., 1982 ‘The use of tooth wear as a guide to the age of
domestic animals’, in Wilson, B., Grigson, C. and
Payne, S. (eds), Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones
from Archaeological Sites, Brit Archaeol Rep,
British Ser 109 (Oxford), 91–108
Gray, F., Meksopon, ‘Study of some physical and chemical properties
B. and Peschel, D., of an Oklahoma soil profile with clay-iron bands’,
1976 Soil Science 122 (3), 133–8
Green, B., 1973 ‘The grave-goods from the cremations’, in Myres,
J. N. L. and Green, B., The Anglo-Saxon
Cemeteries of Caistor-by-Norwich and
Markshall, Norfolk, Rep Res Comm Soc Antiq
London 30 (London), 77–113
Green, B. and The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Bergh Apton,
Rogerson, A., 1978 Norfolk, E Anglian Archaeol 7 (Dereham)
Green, B., The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Morning Thorpe,
Rogerson, A. and Norfolk, E Anglian Archaeol 36 (Dereham)
White, S. G., 1987
Green, M. J., 1976 A Corpus of Religious Material from the Civilian
Areas of Roman Britain, Brit Archaeol Rep,
British Ser 24 (Oxford)
Guido, M., 1999 The Glass Beads of Anglo-Saxon England
c .AD 4 0 0 – 7 0 0 : a p re l i m i n ar y v i s ual
classification of the more definitive and
d i a g n o s t i c t y p e s ( e d . M a r t i n We l c h)
(Woodbridge, Boydell Press)
Gurney, D., 1995 ‘The Roman pottery’, in Rickett, R., The
Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Spong Hill, North
Elmham. Part VII: The Iron Age, Roman and
Early Saxon Settlement, E Anglian Archaeol 73
(Dereham), 94–126
Hagen, A., 1995 Second Handbook of Anglo-Saxon Food and
Drink: Processing and Distribution (Frithgarth,
Norfolk, Anglo-Saxon Books)
Hallén, Y., 1994 ‘The use of bone and antler at Foshigarry and Bac
Mhic Connain, two Iron Age sites on North Uist,
Western Isles’, Proc Soc Antiq Scotl 124, 189–232
Hambleton, E., ‘Animal bone’, in Philips, M.,‘Excavation of an
2005 Early Saxon settlement at Pitstone’, Records of
Buckinghamshire 45, 1–32, at 20–4
441
Hamerow, H., 1993 Excavations at Mucking, Volume 2: The
Anglo-Saxon Settlement, Engl Heritage Archaeol
Rep 21 (London)
Hamerow, H., Early Medieval Settlements: The Archaeology of
2002a Rural Communities in North-West Europe
400–900 (Oxford, Oxford University Press)
Hamerow, H., ‘Catholme: the development and context of the
2002b settlement’, in Losco-Bradley, S. and Kinsley, G.,
Catholme. An Anglo-Saxon Settlement on the
Trent Gravels in Staffordshire, Nottingham
Studies in Archaeology 3 (Nottingham), 123–9
Hamerow, H., 2006 ‘“Special deposits” in Anglo-Saxon settlements’,
Medieval Archaeology 50, 1–30
Hamerow, H., ‘Migration Period settlements and ‘Anglo-Saxon’
Hollevoet, Y. and pottery from Flanders’, Medieval Archaeol 38,
Vince, A., 1994 1–18
Hamilton-Dyer, S., ‘Bird and fish remains’, in Gardiner, M., Cross,
2001 R., MacPherson-Grant, R. and Riddler, I.,
‘Continental trade and non-urban ports in
mid-Anglo-Saxon England: excavations at
Santun, West Hythe, Kent’, Archaeol J 158,
255–61
Hammon, A., 2005 L at e R om ano- B r i t i s h–E ar l y M e d i e v a l
Socio-Economic and Cultural Change: Analysis
of the mammal and bird bone assemblages from
the Roman City of Viroconium Cornoviorum,
Shropshire (unpubl PhD thesis, Univ Sheffield)
Harcourt, R. A., ‘The dog in prehistoric and early historic Britain’,
1974 J Archaeol Sci 1, 151–75
Harden, D. B., 1956 ‘Glass vessels in Britain and Ireland, A.D.
400–1000’, in Harden, D.B. (ed.), Dark-Age
Britain: studies presented to E.T. Leeds (London),
132–67
Harden, D. B., 1972 ‘Ancient glass, III: post-Roman’, Archaeol J 128,
78–117
Härke, H., 1989 ‘Knives in early Saxon burials: blade length and
age at death’, Medieval Archaeol 33, 144–8
Härke, H., 1992a Angelsächsische Waffengräber des 5 bis 7
Jahrhunderts, Zeitschrift für Archäologie des
Mittelalters B e i he f t 6 (Cologne,
Rheinland-Verlag)
Härke, H., 1992b ‘Changing symbols in a changing society’, in
Carver, M. (ed.), The Age of Sutton Hoo: The
Seventh Century In North-Western Europe
(Woodbridge, Boydell Press), 149–63
Harland, J. F., ‘ T he Yor k S ys t e m : a n i n t e g r a t e d
Barrett, J. H., zooarchaeological database for research and
Carrott, J., Dobney, t e a c hi ng’ , I nt e r ne t A rc hae ol o g y 1 3
K. and Jaques, D., http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue13/harland_
2003 index.html. Accessed 28 January 2008
Harman, M., 1979 ‘The mammalian bones’, in Williams, J. H., St
Peter ’s Street Northampton, excavations
1973- 1976, N or t ha m pt on D e ve l o p m e n t
Corporation Archaeol. Monogr 2, 328–32
Harman, M., 1993 ‘The animal bones’, in Darling, M. and Gurney,
D., Caister-on-Sea: Excavations by Charles
Green 1951–5, E Anglian Archaeol 60
(Dereham), 233–8
Harman, M., 1996 ‘The mammal bones’, in Shaw, M., ‘The
excavation of a late 15th- to 17th-century tanning
c om pl e x a t T he G r e e n, N or t ha m p t o n ’ ,
Post-Medieval Archaeol 30, 63–127, at 89–102
Harman, M and ‘The animal bones’, in Shaw, M.,‘Excavations on Hills, C., 1977 The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Spong Hill, North
Baker, J. R., 1985 a Saxon and Medieval site at Black Lion Hill, Elmham. Part I, E Anglian Archaeol 6 (Dereham)
Northampton’, Northants Archaeol 20, 113–38, at
135–6 and fiche 86–93 Hillson, S., 1986 Teeth (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press)

Hart-Davis, D., Fauna Britannica: The Practical Guide to Wild Hilton, S., 1980 The Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries at Horton Kirby,
2003 And Domestic Creatures of Britain (London, Kent (unpubl BA dissertation, University College
Weidenfeld and Nicolson) London)

Hawkes, C. F. and Camulodunum, Rep Res Comm Soc Antiq Hinchliffe, J. and Excavations at Brancaster 1974 and 1977, E
Hull, M. R., 1947 London 14 (London) Sparey Green, C., Anglian Archaeol 3 (Dereham)
1985
Hawkes, S., 1973 ‘The dating and social significance of the burials
in the Polhill cemetery’, in Philp, B., Excavations Hines, J., 1984 The Scandinavian Character of Anglian England
in West Kent 1960–1970 (Dover, KARU) in the Pre-Viking Period, Brit Archaeol Rep
British Ser 124 (Oxford)
Hawkes, S., 1990 ‘The Anglo-Saxon necklace from Lower Brook
Street’, in Biddle, M., Object and Economy in Hines, J., 1993 Clasps, Hektespenner, Agraffen, Anglo-
Medieval Winchester (Oxford, Clarendon Press), Scandinavian clasps of classes A-C of the third to
621–7 sixth centuries AD. Typology, diffusion and
function (Stockholm, Almquist and Wiksell)
Hawkes, S., and The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Finglesham, Kent,
Grainger, G., 2006 O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y S c h o o l of A r c ha e ol Hines, J., 1997 A N e w C or pus O f A ngl o- Sax o n G re a t
Monogr 64 (Oxford) Square-Headed Brooches (Woodbridge, Boydell
Press)
Hays-Gilpin, K., Reader in Gender Archaeology (London,
and Whitley, D., Routledge) Hinton, D. A., 1990 ‘Tubes, ferrules and binding strips’, in Biddle, M.,
1998 Object and Economy in Medieval Winchester.
Part II (Oxford, Clarendon Press), 1091–4
Heathcote, J. L., Soil Micromorphological Analysis of the Fills of
1999 Two Saxon Sunken-featured buildings at Hinton, D. A., 1996 The Gold, Silver and Other Non-ferrous Alloy
Sherbourne House, Lechlade, Gloucestershire Objects from Hamwic, and the Non-ferrous
(unpubl report for the Cotswold Archaeological Metalworking Evidence, Southampton Finds
Trust) Vol. 2 (Stroud, Alan Sutton Publishing)

Hedeager, L., 1992 Iron Age Societies: from Tribe to State in Northern Hinton, D. A., 2000 A Smith in Lindsey: The Anglo-Saxon Grave at
Europe, 500 BC to AD 700 (Oxford, Blackwell) Tattershall Thorpe, Lincolnshire, Soc Medieval
Archaeol Monogr Ser 16 (London)
Hedges, R. E. M., ‘The Oxford Accelerator Mass Spectrometry
Law, I. A., Bronk, facility: technical developments in routine Hinton, D. A., 2005 Gold and Gilt, Pots and Pins. Possessions and
C. R. and Housley, dating’, Archaeometry 31, 99–113 People in Medieval Britain (Oxford, Oxford
R. A., 1989 University Press)

Hedges, R. E. M., ‘Results and methods in the radiocarbon dating of Hinton, D. and ‘Iron and bronze’, in Cunliffe, B., Excavations in
Tiemei, C. and pottery’, Radiocarbon 34, 906–15 Welch, M., 1975 Porchester Castle. Vol. II: Saxon, Rep Res Comm
Housley, R. A., Soc Antiq London 33 (London), 195–218
1992
Hirst, S., 1985 An Anglo-Saxon Inhumation Cemetery at
Hegarty, C. and Suffolk’s Defended Shore, Coastal Fortifications Sewerby, East Yorkshire, York Univ Archaeol
Newsome, S., 2007 from the Air (Swindon, English Heritage) Publ 4 (York)

Henderson, A. M., ‘Small objects in metal, bone, glass, etc’, in Hirst, S. and Clark, Mucking: The Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries
1949 Bushe-Fox, J. P., Fourth Report on the D., in prep.
Excavations of the Roman Fort at Richborough,
Kent, Rep Res Comm Soc Antiq London 16 Hodges, R., 1982 Dark Age Economics: the origins of towns and
(London), 106–59 trade (London, Duckworth)

Henry, P., 1999 ‘Development and change in late Saxon textile Hodson, R., 1977 ‘Quantifying Halstatt’, American Antiquity 42,
production: an analysis of the evidence’, Durham 394–411
Archaeol J 14–15, 69–76
Hoefs, J., 1997 Stable Isotope Geochemistry (London, Springer)
Hey, G., 2004 Yarnton. Saxon and Medieval Settlement and
Landscape. Results of Excavations 1990–96, Høilund Nielsen, ‘ F r om a r t e f a c t t o i nt e r pr e t a t i o n u s i n g
Thames Valley Landscapes Monogr 20 (Oxford) K., 1995 correspondence analysis’, Anglo-Saxon Stud
Archaeol Hist 8, 111–43
Higbee, L., 2005 ‘Large vertebrates’ in Mortimer, R., Regan, R.
and Lucy, S., The Saxon and Medieval Settlement Holmes, J. M., 1993 ‘Animal bones’, in Williams, R. J., Pennyland
at West Fen Road, Ely: The Ashwell Site, East and Hartigans: Two Iron Age Sites in Milton
Anglian Archaeology 110 (Cambridge), 89–96 Keynes. Buckinghamshire Archaeol Soc Monogr
Ser 4, 133–54
Higbee, L., 2006 ‘The mammal and bird bone’, in Garrow, D.,
Lucy, S. and Gibson, D., Excavations at Hope-Taylor, B., Yeavering: An Anglo-British Centre of Early
Kilverstone, Norfolk: an Episodic Landscape 1977 Northumbria (London, HMSO)
History, E Anglian Archaeol 113, 72; 150–60;
198 and 206 Huggett, J. W., ‘ I m por t e d gr a ve - goods a nd t h e e a r l y
1988 Anglo-Saxon economy’, Medieval Archaeol 32,
Higbee, L., ‘Animal bones’, in Mudd, A., Iron Age and 63–96
forthcoming Middle Saxon Settlements at West Fen Road, Ely,
Cambridgeshire: Excavations 1999–2000, E Hull, M. R., 1963 The Roman Potters’ Kilns of Colchester, Rep Res
Anglian Archaeol Comm Soc Antiq London 21 (London)

442
Hume, K., 1974 ‘The concept of the hall in Old English poetry’,
Anglo-Saxon England 3, 51–62
Hurst, J., 1959 ‘Middle Saxon pottery’, in Dunning, G. C., Hurst,
J. G., Myres, J. N. L. and Tischler, F.,
‘Anglo-Saxon pottery: a symposium’, Medieval
Archaeol 3, 13–31
Hyslop, M., 1963 ‘Two Anglo-Saxon cemeteries at Chamberlain’s
Barn, Leighton Buzzard, Bedfordshire’, Archaeol
J 120, 161–200
James, S., Marshall, ‘An early medieval building tradition’, Archaeol
A. and Millett, M., J 141, 182–215
1984
Jarvis, K., 1983 Excavations in Christchurch 1969–1980, Dorset
N a t u r a l H i st A r c h a e o l So c M onogr 5
(Dorchester)
Jensen, C. K., and ‘Burial data and correspondence analysis’ in
Høilund Nielsen, Jensen, C. K. and Høilund Nielsen. K. (eds),
K., 1997 Burial And Society. The Chronological And
Social Analyis Of Archaeological Burial Data
(Århus, Århus University Press), 29–61
Johnson, S., 1983 Burgh Castle: Excavations by Charles Green
1958–61, E Anglian Archaeol 20 (Dereham)
Johnstone, C. and The Late Iron Age and Romano-British mammal
Albarella, U., 2002 and bird bone assemblage from Elms Farm,
Heybridge, Essex, Ancient Monuments
Laboratory Report No. 45/2002
Jones, A. K. G., ‘Provisional remarks on fish remains from
1988 archaeological deposits at York’, in Murphy, P.
and French, C. (eds), The Exploitation of
Wetlands, Brit Archaeol Rep British Ser 186
(Oxford), 113–27
Jones, G., 1980 ‘The animal bones’, in Farley, M.,‘Middle Saxon
occupation at Chicheley, Bucks’, Records of
Buckinghamshire 22, 92–104, at 99-102
Jones, G., 1984 ‘Animal bones’, in Rogerson, A. and Dallas, C.,
Excavations in Thetford 1948–59 and 1973–80, E
Anglian Archaeol 22 (Dereham), 187–92
Jones, G., 1993 ‘Animal and bird bone’, in Dallas, C.,
Excavations in Thetford by B. K. Davison between
1964 and 1970, E Anglian Archaeol 62
(Dereham) , 176–91
Jones, G., 1994 ‘Mammal and bird bone’, in Ayers, B.,
Excavations at Fishergate, Norwich, 1985, E
Anglian Archaeol 68 (Dereham), 37–42
Jones, R. T. and The Animal Bones from Five Sites at Ipswich
Serjeantson, D., (Ancient Monuments Laboratory Rep. No. 3951)
1983
Jones, M. U., 1974 ‘Excavations at Mucking, Essex: an interim
report’, Antiq J 54, 183–99
Katzenberg, M. A. ‘Application of stable isotope variation in human
and Krouse, H. R., tissue to problems in identification’, Canadian
1989 Society of Forensic Science Journal 22, 7–19
Kavánová, B., 1995 ‘Knochen- und Geweihindustrie in Mikulcice’, in
Daim, F. and Polácek, L., Studien zum Burgwall
von Mikulcice. Band 1 (Brno), 113–378
King, J., 1996 ‘The animal bones’, in Mackreth, D. F., Orton
Hall Farm: A Roman and Early Anglo-Saxon
Farmstead, E Anglian Archaeol 76, 216–18
Knocker, G. M. and ‘Excavations at Red Castle, Thetford’, Norfolk
Wells, C., 1967 Archaeol 34, 119–86
443
Layard, N., 1907 ‘An Anglo-Saxon cemetery in Ipswich’,
Archaeologia 60, 325–52
Leach, R., 1979 ‘Summary’, in Burnham, B. and Kingsbury, J.
(eds), Space, Hierarchy and Society, Brit
Archaeol Rep Int Ser 59 (Oxford), 119–24
Leahy, K., 2003 Anglo-Saxon Crafts, Stroud, Sutton
Lebecq, S., 1997 ‘Routes of change: production and distribution in
the west (5th to 8th century)’, in Webster, L. and
Brown, M. (eds), The Transformation of the
Roman World AD 400–900 (London, British
Museum Press), 67–78
Leeds, E. T., 1923 ‘A Saxon village at Sutton Courtenay, Berkshire’,
Archaeologia 73, 47–192
Leeds, E. T., 1927 ‘A Saxon village at Sutton Courtenay, Berkshire:
Second Report’, Archaeologia 74, 59–80
Leeds, E. T., 1936 Early Anglo-Saxon Art and Archaeology (Oxford,
Clarendon Press)
Leeds, E. T., 1949 A Corpus Of Early Anglo-Saxon Great
Square-Headed Brooches (Oxford, Oxford
University Press)
Lethbridge, T. C., Recent Excavations in Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries
1931 in Cambridgeshire and Suffolk, Camb Antiq Soc
Quarto Pub New Series 3 (Cambridge)
Lethbridge, T. C., A Cemetery at Shudy Camps, Cambridgeshire,
1936 Camb Antiq Soc Quarto Pub New Series 5
(Cambridge)
Levine, M., 1982 ‘The use of crown height measurements and
eruption wear sequences to age horse teeth’, in
Wilson, B., Grigson, C. and Payne, S. (eds),
Ageing And Sexing Animal Bones From
Archaeological Sites, Brit Archaeol Rep British
Ser 109 (Oxford), 223–50
Leyser, H., 1995 Medieval Women: A Social History Of Women In
England 450–1500 (London, Weidenfeld and
Nicholson)
Locker, A., 1988a ‘Fish bones’, in Daniels, R., ‘The Anglo-Saxon
Monastery at Church Close, Hartlepool,
Cleveland’, Archaeological J 145, 200–1
Locker, A., 1988b ‘The fish bones’, in Cowie, R., Whytehead, R. L.
and Blackmore, L. (eds), ‘Two Middle Saxon
occupation sites: excavations at Jubilee Hall and
21–22 Maiden Lane’, Trans London Middlesex
Archaeol Soc 39, 149–50
Locker, A., 1992 ‘Animal bone’ in Woodiwiss, S., Iron Age and
Roman Salt Production and the Medieval Town of
Droitwich: Excavations at the Old Bowling Green
and Friar Street, London: Council for British
Archaeology 81, 85–92 and 172–81
Longin, R., 1971 ‘New method of collagen extraction for
radiocarbon dating’, Nature 230, 241–2
Losco-Bradley, S. Catholme: An Anglo-Saxon and Settlement on the
and Kinsley, G., Trent Gravels in Staffordshire, Nottingham
2002 Studies in Archaeology Monogr 3 (Nottingham)
Lovejoy, C. O., ‘Chronological metamorphosis of the auricular
Meindl, R. S., surface of the ilium: a new method for the
Pryzbeck, T. R. and determination of age at death’, American Journal
Mensforth, R. P., of Physical Anthropology 68, 15–28
1985
Loveluck, C., 1997 ‘Flixborough — the character and economy of a MacGregor, A., ‘A seventh-century pectoral cross from
high status Middle Saxon settlement in northern 2000a Holderness, East Yorkshire’, Medieval Archaeol
England’, in De Boe, G. and Verhaeghe, F. (eds), 44, 217–22
Rural Settlements in Medieval Europe: Papers of
the ‘Medieval Europe Brugge 1997 Conference MacGregor, A., ‘Bone and antler objects’, in Stamper, P. A. and
Volume 6 (Zellick, Belgium), 179–94 2000b Croft, R. A. (eds), Wharram. A Study of
Settlement on the Yorkshire Wolds, VIII. The
Loveluck, C., 1998 ‘A high-status Anglo-Saxon settlement at South Manor, York Univ Archaeol Publ 10
Flixborough, Lincs.’, Antiquity 72, 146–61 (York), 148–54

Loveluck, C., 2001 ‘Wealth, waste and conspicuous consumption:
Flixborough and its importance for mid and late
Saxon settlement studies’, in Hamerow, H. and
MacGregor, A. (eds), Image And Power In The
Archaeology Of Early Medieval Britain: Essays
In Honour Of Rosemary Cramp (Oxford,
Oxbow), 78–130
Lowry, B. (ed.), 20th Century Defences in Britain (York, Council
2002 for British Archaeology)
MacGregor, A. and A Summary Catalogue Of The Anglo-Saxon
Bolick, E., 1993 Collections (Non-Ferrous Metals), Ashmolean
Museum, Brit Archaeol Rep British Ser 230
(Oxford)
MacGregor, A., Bone, Antler, Ivory and Horn from Anglo
Mainman, A. and Sc andi nav i an and M e di e v al Yo r k , T h e
Rogers, N. S. H., Archaeology of York. Volume 17, Fasc. 12, The
1999 Small Finds (York, York Archaeological
Trust/Council for British Archaeology)

Lucy, S., 1998 The Early Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries of East Macphail, R.I., ‘Scanian pithouses: interpreting fills of
Yorkshire: An analysis and reinterpretation, Brit Linderholm, J. and Grubenhaüser: examples from England and
Archaeol Rep British Ser 272 (Oxford) Karlsson, N., 2006 Sweden’ in Engelmark, R. and Linderholm, J.
(eds), Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference
Lucy, S., 2000 The Anglo-Saxon Way of Death: Burial Rites in on the Application of Scientific Methods in
Early England (Stroud, Sutton) Archaeology in Umeå 2001, Archaeology and
Environment 21 (Umeå, University of Umeå),
Lucy, S., 2005 ‘Early medieval burial at Yeavering: a 119–27
retrospective’, in Frodsham, P. and O’Brien, C.
(eds), Yeavering: People, Power and Place Mackreth, D. F., O r t on H al l F ar m : a R om an a n d e a r l y
(Stroud, Tempus), 127–44 1996 Anglo-Saxon farmstead, E Anglian Archaeol 76
(Manchester)
Lüdemann, H., ‘Mehrfachtbelegte Gräber im frühen Mittelater’,
1994 Fundberichte aus Baden-Württemberg 19.1, McMinn, R. M. H. A Colour Atlas of Human Anatomy (London,
421–589 and Hutchings, Wolfe)
R. T., 1993
Lyman, R. L., 1994 Vertebrate Taphonomy (Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press) Maddicott, J., 1997 ‘Plague in seventh-century England’, Past
Present 156, 7–54
McCormac, F. G., ‘Liquid scintillation counter characterisation,
1992 optimisation, and benzene purity correction’, Madsen, H. J., 1975 Århus of the Vikings (trans. G. Bibby) (MoesgÅrd,
Radiocarbon 34, 37–45 Forhistorisk Museum)

MacDonald, K. C., ‘The domestic chicken (Gallus gallus) in Madsen, T., 1989a ‘Seriation — en grundlaeggende arkaeologisk
1992 sub-Saharan Africa: a background to its arbejdsmetode’, KARK –Nyhedsbrev 3, 8–19
introduction and its osteological differentiation
from indigenous fowls (Numidinea and Madsen, T., 1989b ‘Fra data til faerdigt arbejde’, KARK –Nyhedsbrev
Francolinus sp)’, J Archaeol Sci 19, 303–18 3, 26–8

McDonnell, J. G., ‘Ore to artefact: a study of early ironworking’, in Madsen, T., 1989c ‘KVARK’, KARK –Nyhedsbrev 3, 44
1988 Slater, E. and Tate, J. (eds), Science and
Archaeology, Glasgow 1987 Brit Archaeol Rep Madsen, T., 1990 ‘‘ P ubl i c dom a i n’ s of t w ar e for
British Ser 196 (Oxford) kulture-historikere’, KARK –Nyhedsbrev 4, 12

McDonnell, J. G., ‘Iron and its alloys in the fifth to eleventh Mainman, A., 1993 Pottery from 46–54 Fishergate, The Archaeology
1989 centuries AD in England’, World Archaeol 20 of York. Volume 16, Fasc. 6, The Pottery (York,
no. 3, 373–81 York Archaeological Trust)

McDonnell, J. G., The Identification and Analysis of the Slags from Maitland, P. S. and Freshwater Fishes of the British Isles (London,
1992a Burton Dassett, Warwickshire (Ancient Campbell, R. N., Harper Collins Publishers)
Monuments Laboratory Report 46/92) 1992

McDonnell, J. G., Th e I d e n t i f i c a t i o n a n d An a l y s i s of t he Malcolm, G. and Middle Saxon London. Excavation at the Royal
1992b H a m m e rsc a l e f ro m Bu r t on D as s e t t Bowsher, D. with Opera House 1989–99, MoLAS Monogr 15
(Warwickshire Ancient Monuments Laboratory Cowie, R., 2003 (London)
Report 47/92)
Malim, T. and The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Edix Hill
MacGregor, A., ‘The Broch of Burrian, North Ronaldsay, Hines, J., 1998 (Barrington A), Cambridgeshire, Counc Brit
1974 Orkney’, Proc Soc Antiq Scotl 105, 63–118 Archaeol Res Rep 112 (London)

MacGregor, A., Anglo-Scandinavian Finds from Lloyds Bank,
1982 Pavement, and Other Sites, The Archaeology of
York. Volume 17, Fasc. 3, The Small Finds
(London, York Archaeological Trust/Council for
British Archaeology)
Maltby, M., 1981 ‘Iron Age, Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon
animal husbandry: a review’, in Jones, M. and
Dimbleby, G. (eds), The Environment Of Man:
The Iron Age to The Anglo-Saxon Period, Brit
Archaeol Rep, British Ser 87 (Oxford), 155–203

MacGregor, A., Bone, Antler, Ivory and Horn. The Technology of Manning, W. H., Catalogue of the Romano-British Iron Tools,
1985 Skeletal Materials since the Roman Period 1985 Fittings and Weapons in the British Museum
(London, Croome Helm) (London, British Museum Publications)

444
Mant, A. K., 1987 ‘ K n o w l e d g e a c q u i r e d f r o m pos t - w a r
exhumations’, in Boddington, A., Garland, A. N.
and Janaway R. C. (eds), Death, Decay and
Reconstruction: Approaches to Archaeology and
Forensic Science (Manchester, Manchester
University Press), 65–80
Margeson, S., 1993 Norwich Households: The Medieval and
Post-Medieval Finds from Norwich Survey
Excavations 1971–1978, E Anglian Archaeol 58
(Norwich)
Marshall, A. and ‘Differentiation, change and continuity in
Marshall, G., 1993 Anglo-Saxon buildings’, Archaeol J 150,
366–402
Martin, E., ‘Archaeology in Suffolk’, Proc Suffolk Inst
Pendleton, C. and Archaeol Hist 38, 457–86
Plouviez, J., 1996
Martin, M., 1990 ‘Bemerkungen zur Ausstattung der Frauengräber
und zur Interpretation der Doppelgräber und
Nachbestattungen im frühen Mittelater’, in
Affeldt, W. (ed.), Frauen in Spätantike und
Frühmittelalter. Lebensbedingungen —
Lebensnormen — Lebensformen (Sigmaringen),
89–103
Marzinzik, S., 2003 Early Anglo-Saxon Belt Buckles (Late 5th to
Early 8th Centuries AD): Their classification and
context, Brit Archaeol Rep British Ser 357
(Oxford)
Masters, P. M., ‘Preferential preservation of non-collagenous
1987 protein during bone diagenesis: implications for
chronometric and stable isotope measurements’,
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 51, 3209–14
May, J., 1996 Dragonby. Report on Excavations at an Iron Age
and Romano-British Settlement in North
Lincolnshire, Oxbow Monogr 61 (Oxford)
Mays, S., 1998 The Archaeology Of Human Bones (London and
New York, Routledge)
Meaney, A., 1964 A Gazetteer of Early Anglo-Saxon Burial Sites
(London, George Allen and Unwin)
Meaney, A., 1981 Anglo-Saxon Amulets and Curing Stones, Brit
Archaeol Rep British Ser 96 (Oxford)
Meaney, A. and Two Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries at Winnall,
Hawkes, S., 1970 Winchester, Hampshire, Soc Medieval Archaeol
Monogr 4 (London)
Metcalf, D. M., Thrymsas and Sceattas in the Ashmolean Museum
1993 Oxford, Volume 1, Roy Numis Soc Spec Publ 27a
(London)
Metcalf, D. M., Thrymsas and Sceattas in the Ashmolean
1994 Museum, Oxford, Volume 3, Roy Numis Soc and
Ashmolean Museum Oxford (London)
Milek, K., 1997 ‘Micromorphology and the medieval urban
environment’, in De Boe, G. and Verhaeghe, F.
(eds), Environment and Subsistence in Medieval
Europe. Papers of the Medieval Europe Brugge
1997 Conference Volume 9 (Zellik, Belgium),
155–68
Miles, D. 1984 Archaeology at Barton Court Farm, Oxon: An
Investigation of Late Neolithic, Iron Age,
Romano-British and Saxon Settlements, Counc
Brit Archaeol Res Rep 50 and the Oxford
Archaeological Unit (Oxford)
Miles, D. and Invested in Mother Earth: The Anglo-Saxon
Palmer, S., 1986 Cemetery at Lechlade (Oxford, Oxford
Archaeological Unit)
445
Miller, D. E. and ‘Water infiltration into stratified soil’, Soil
Gardner, W. H., Science Society of America Proceedings 26,
1962 115–19
Millett, M. and ‘Excavations at Cowdery’s Down, Basingstoke,
James, S., 1983 Hampshire, 1977–1981’, Archaeol J 140,
151–279
Milne, G. and Wharram, a Study of Settlement on the Yorkshire
Richards, J. D., Wolds, Volume VII: Two Anglo-Saxon Buildings
1992 and Associated Finds, York Univ Archaeol Publ 9
(York)
Minagawa, M., ‘Reconstruction of human diet from ä13C and ä15N
1992 in contemporary Japanese hair: a stochastic
method for estimating multi-source contribution
by double isotope tracers’, Applied Geochemistry
7, 145–58
Molleson, T., 1991 ‘Demographic implications of the age structure of
early English cemetery samples’, Actes des
Journées Anthropologiques 5, 113–21
Mook, W. G., 1986 ‘Business meeting: recommendations/resolutions
adopted by the Twelfth International Radiocarbon
Conference’, Radiocarbon 28, 799
Moreland, J., 2000 ‘The significance of production in eighth-century
England’, in Lyse Hansen, I. and Wickham, C.
(eds), The Long Eighth Century (Leiden, Brill),
69–104
Morris, C., 1993 ‘Iron tools’, in Hamerow, H., Excavations at
Mucking, Volume 2: The Anglo-Saxon Settlement,
Engl Heritage Archaeol Rep 21 (London), 69–71
Morris, C., 2000 Craft, Industry and Everyday Life: Wood and
Woodworking in Anglo-Scandinavian and
Medieval York, The Archaeology of York.
Volume 17, Fasc. 13, The Small Finds (York,
Council for British Archaeology for the York
Archaeological Trust)
Mortimer, C., 1990 Some Aspects of Early Medieval Copper Alloy
Technology, as Illustrated by A Study of the
Anglian Cruciform Brooch (unpubl DPhil thesis,
Oxford Univ)
Mortimer, J., 1905 Forty Years’ Researches In British And Saxon
Burial Mounds Of East Yorkshire (London,
Brown)
Mortimer, R. W., Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk:
2000 Excavation of the Early Anglo-Saxon Settlement:
An Interim Statement 1998–2000 (CAU Internal
Report)
Morton, A. D., Excavations at Hamwic. Volume 1: Excavations
1992 1946–83, Excluding Six Dials and Melbourne
Street, Counc Brit Archaeol Res Rep 84 (London)
Mudd, A., 2002 Excavations at Melford Meadows, Brettenham,
1994: Romano-British and Early Saxon
Occupations, E Anglian Archaeol 99 (Oxford)
Mulkeen, S. and ‘Raptors in towns: towards an ecological model’,
O’Connor, T. P., Int J Osteoarchaeol 7, 440–9
1997
Mulville, J., 2002 ‘The role of Cetacea in prehistoric and historic
Atlantic Scotland’, Int J Osteoarchaeol 12, 34–48
Murphy, C. P., 1986 Thin Section Preparation of Soils and Sediments
(Berkhamsted, A. B. Academic)
Murphy, P., 1985 ‘The cereals and crop weeds’, in West, S., West
Stow. The Anglo-Saxon Village Vol. 1, E Anglian
Archaeol 24 (Ipswich), 100–8
Murphy, P., 1994 ‘The Anglo-Saxon landscape and rural economy:
some results from sites in East Anglia and Essex’,
in Rackham, J. (ed.), Environment and Economy
in Anglo-Saxon England, Counc Brit Archaeol
Res Rep 89 (London), 23–39
Murphy, P., 2002 ‘Charred plant macrofossils and other material’,
in Dickens, A. and Mortimer, R., 2002,
Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville, Suffolk: Post
Excavation Analysis Project Design (Cambridge,
Cambridge Archaeological Unit)
Musty, J., 1969 ‘The excavation of two barrows, one of Saxon
date, at Ford, Laverstock, near Salisbury,
Wiltshire’, Antiq J 49 (1), 98–117
Myres, J. N. L., A Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Pottery of the Pagan
1977 Period (Oxford, Clarendon Press)
Myres, J. N. L. and The An g l o - S a x o n Cemeteries of
Green, B., 1973 Caistor-by-Norwich and Markshall, Norfolk, Rep
Res Comm Soc Antiq London 30 (London)
Nakamura, T., ‘Radiocarbon dating of charred residues on the
Taniguchi, Y., Tsuji, earliest pottery in Japan’, Radiocarbon 43,
S. and Oda, H., 1129–38
2001
Needham, S. and Refuse and Disposal at Area 16 East, Runnymede.
Spence, T., 1996 Runnymede Bridge Research Excavations, Vol. 2
(London, British Museum Press)
Newman, J., 1996 ‘New light on old finds — Bloodmoor Hill,
Gisleham, Suffolk’. Anglo-Saxon Studies in
Archaeology and History 9, 75–79
Newman, J., 1999 ‘Wics, trade and the hinterlands - the Ipswich
region’ in Anderton M. (ed.) Anglo-Saxon
Trading Centres and their Hinterlands, 32–47
(Glasgow)
Newman, J., 2004 ‘Summary of projects 2003/2004: Suffolk’,
Medieval Settlement Research Group Annual
Report 19, 17
Noddle, B., 1973 ‘The animal bones’, in Hirst, S. and Rahtz, P.,
‘Hatton Rock 1970’, Trans Birmingham and
Warwickshire Archaeol Soc, 85, 160–77, at 175–7
Noddle, B., 1976 ‘Report on the animal bones from Walton,
Aylesbury’, in Farley, M., ‘Saxon and Medieval
Walton, Aylesbury: excavations 1973–4’,
Records of Buckinghamshire 20(2), 153–290, at
269–87
Noddle, B., 1980 ‘Identification and interpretation of the mammal
bones, in Wade-Martin, P., North Elmham Park,
Volume II, E Anglian Archaeol 9 (Dereham),
377–409
Noddle, B., 1985 ‘The animal bones: Berrington St sites 1, 2 and 3’,
in Shoesmith R., Hereford City Excavations.
Volume 3: The Finds, Coun Brit Archaeol Res
Rep 56, fiche M8 and D9
Noddle, B., 1994 ‘The under-rated goat’, in Hall, A. R. and
Kenward, H. K. (eds), Urban-Rural Connections:
Perspectives from Environmental Archaeology,
Symposium of the Association for Environmental
Archaeology No.12, (Oxford, Oxbow), 117–28
O’Brien, C. and ‘The early medieval settlement of Thirlings,
Miket, R., 1991 Northumberland’, Durham Archaeol J 7, 57–91
O’Connell, T. C. ‘Investigations into the effect of diet on modern
and Hedges, human hair isotopic values’, American Journal of
R. E. M. 1999 Physical Anthropology 108, 409–25
446
O’Connell, T. C. ‘Stable isotope analysis of human remains from
and Wilson, E. J., the Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Butler’s Field,
forthcoming Lechlade, Gloucestershire: dietary and social
implications’, in Boyle, A. and Jennings, D. (eds),
The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Butler’s Field,
Lechlade, Gloucestershire Volume 2, Thames
Valley Landscapes Monogr (Oxford, Oxford
Archaeological Unit)
O’Connor, T., 1982 Animal Bones from Flaxengate, Lincoln
c.870–1500, The Archaeology of Lincoln 18 (1)
(London, Council for British Archaeology)
O’Connor, T., 1989 Bones from Anglo-Scandinavian Levels at 16–22
Coppergate, The Archaeology of York. Volume
15, Fasc 3, The Animal Bones (London, Council
for British Archaeology)
O’Connor, T., 1991 Bones from 46–54 Fishergate, The Archaeology
of York. Volume 15, Fasc. 4, The Animal Bones
(London, Council for British Archaeology),
137–207
O’Connor, T., 1993 ‘Birds and the scavenger niche’, Archaeofauna 2,
155–62
O’Connor, T., 1994 ‘8th–11th century economy and environment in
York’, in Rackham, J., Environment and Economy
in Anglo-Saxon England, Council for British
Archaeology Research Report 89 (London),
136–47
Orton, C., Tyers, P. Pottery in Archaeology (Cambridge University
and Vince, A., 1993 Press)
Ottaway, P., 1992 The Anglo-Scandinavian Ironwork from
Coppergate, The Archaeology of York. Volume
17, Fasc. 6, The Small Finds (London, Council for
British Archaeology for the York Archaeological
Trust)
Ottaway, P. and Craft, Industry And Everyday Life: Finds From
Rogers, N., 2002 Medieval York, The Archaeology of York.
Volume 17, Fasc. 15, The Small Finds (York,
Council for British Archaeology for the York
Archaeological Trust)
Owen, J. F., 1994 ‘Analysis of coastal middens in south-eastern
Australia: selectivity of angling and other fishing
techniques related to Holocene deposits’, J
Archaeol Sci 21, 11–16
Ozanne, A., ‘The Peak dwellers’, Medieval Archaeol 6–7,
1962–63 15–52
Pader, E. J., 1982 Sy m bol i s m , Soc i al R e l at i ons a n d t h e
Interpretation of Mortuary Remains, Brit
Archaeol Rep Int Ser 130 (Oxford)
Pantos, A., 2006 ‘The location and form of Anglo-Saxon assembly
places’, in Pantos, A. and Semple, S. (eds),
Assembly Places and Practices in Medieval
Europe (Dublin, Four Courts Press), 155–80
Parfitt, K. and The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery on Mill Hill, Deal,
Brugmann, B., 1997 Kent, Soc Medieval Archaeol Monogr 14
(London)
Payne, S., 1973 ‘Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: the
mandibles from Asvan Kale’, Anatolian Studies
23, 281–303
Payne, S., 1983 ‘Towcester St Lawrence Road: the animal bone’,
in Brown, A., Woodfield, C. and Mynard, D.,
‘Excavations at Towcester, Northamptonshire:
the Alchester Road suburb’, Northamptonshire
Archaeol 18, 43–140
Payne, S. B., 1985 ‘Morphological distinctions between the Rahtz, P., 1976 ‘Buildings and rural settlement’, in Wilson, D. M.
mandibular teeth of young sheep, Ovis, and goats, (ed.), The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England
Capra’, J Archaeol Sci 12 (2), 139–47 (London, Methuen & Co Ltd.), 49–98

Payne, S., 1987 ‘Reference codes for wear states in the Reimer, P. J., ‘IntCal04 Terrestrial radiocarbon age calibration,
mandibular cheek teeth of sheep and goats’, J Baillie, M. G. L., 26–0 ka BP’, Radiocarbon 46, 1029–58
Archaeol Sci 14, 609–14 Bard, E., Bayliss,
A., Beck, J. W.,
Payne, S., 1992 Some Notes on Sampling and Sieving for Animal Bertrand, C.,
Bones (Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report Blackwell, P. G.,
No. 55/92) Buck, C. E., Burr,
G., Cutler, K. B.,
Payne, S. and Bull, ‘Components of variation in measurements of pig Damon, P. E.,
G., 1988 bones and teeth, and the use of measurements to Edwards, R. L.,
distinguish wild from domestic pig remains’, Fairbanks, R. G.,
Archaeozoologia 2, 27–65 Friedrich, M.,
Guilderson, T. P.,
Pearson, G. W., The Development of High-Precision 14C Hughen, K. A.,
1984 M e a s u re m e n t s a n d i t s Ap p l i c at i on t o Kromer, B.,
Archaeological Timescale Problems (unpubl PhD McCormac, F. G.,
thesis, Queen’s Univ, Belfast) Manning, S., Bronk
Ramsey, C.,
Pelling, R. and ‘Saxon emmer wheat from the upper and middle Reimer, R. W.,
Robinson, M., 2000 Thames valley, England’, Environmental Remmele, S.,
Archaeol 5, 117–19 Southon, J. R.,
Stuiver, M.,
Pendleton, C. E., Bronze Age Metalwork in East Anglia: A Study of Talamo, S., Taylor,
1999 its Distribution and Interpretation, Brit Archaeol F. W., van der
Rep British Ser 279 (Oxford) Plicht, J. and
Weyhenmeyer,
Penn, K., 2000 Excavations on the Norwich Southern Bypass, C. E., 2004
1989–91 Part II: The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at
Harford Farm, Caistor St Edmund, Norfolk, E Reynolds, A., 2002 ‘Boundaries, burials and charters in Anglo-Saxon
Anglian Archaeol 92 (Dereham) England: a reassessment’, in Lucy, S. and
Reynolds, A. (eds), Burial in Early Medieval
Penn, K., The Coddenham Anglo-Saxon Cemetery, E England and Wales, Soc Medieval Archaeol
forthcoming Anglian Archaeol Monogr Ser 17 (London), 174–94

Penn, K. and Aspects of Anglo-Saxon Inhumation Burial:
Brugmann, B., 2007 Morning Thorpe, Spong Hill, Bergh Apton and
Westgarth Gardens, E Anglian Archaeol 119
(Dereham)
Philp, B., 2003 The Discovery and Excavation of Anglo-Saxon
Dover, Kent Monogr Ser 9 (Dover)
Plunkett, S., 1994 Guardians of the Gipping. Anglo-Saxon
Treasures from Hadleigh Road (Ipswich)
Pollard, J., 1996 Excavations at Bourn Bridge, Pampisford,
Cambridgeshire: Part 2, Roman and Saxon
(Cambridge Archaeological Unit Report No. 165)
Powell, A. and ‘Animal bones’, in Mudd, A., Excavations at
Clark, K. M., 2002 M e l f o rd M e a d o w s, Bre t t e n ham , 1994:
Romano-British and Early Saxon Occupations, E
Anglian Archaeol 99 (Oxford), 101–8
Richards, J., 1987 The Significance of the Form and Decoration of
Anglo-Saxon Cremation Urns, Brit Archaeol Rep
British Ser 166 (Oxford)
Richards, M. P. and ‘Stable isotope evidence for similarities in the
Hedges, R. E. M., types of marine foods used by Late Mesolithic
1999 humans at sites along the Atlantic coast of
Europe’, J Archaeol Sci 26, 717–22
Rickett, R., 1995 Spong Hill, Part VII: The Iron Age, Roman and
Early Saxon Settlement, E Anglian Archaeol 73
(Dereham)
Riddler, I. D., 1986 ‘Appendix 4: Single- and double-sided composite
combs from Bantham’, Proc Devon Archaeol
Soc 44, 52–7
Riddler, I. D., 1990 ‘Saxon handled combs from London’, Trans
London Middlesex Archaeol Soc 41, 9–20

Powlesland, D. J., ‘The West Heslerton Assessment’, Internet
1998 Archaeology 5, http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/
issue5/index.html. Accessed 29 January 2008
Powlesland, D. J., West Heslerton: The Anglian Settlement
forthcoming (Yedingham, Landscape Research Centre)
Pritchard, F., 2006 Clothing Culture: Dress in Egypt in the First
Millennium AD (Manchester, Manchester
University)
Riddler, I. D., 1993 ‘Saxon worked bone’, in Williams, R. J. (ed.),
Pennyland and Hartigans. Two Iron Age and
Saxon Sites in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire
Archaeol Soc Monogr 4 (Aylesbury), 107–19
Riddler, I. D., 1996 ‘The antler waste’, in Williams, R. J., Hart, P. J.
and Williams, A. T. L., Wavendon Gate. A Late
Iron Age and Roman Settlement in Milton Keynes,
Buckinghamshire Archaeological Society
Monograph Series 10, Aylesbury, 130–6

Privat, K. L., ‘Stable isotope analysis of human and faunal
O’Connell, T. C. remains from the Anglo-Saxon cemetery at
and Richards, M. P., Berinsfield, Oxfordshire: dietary and social
2002 implications’, J Archaeol Sci 29, 779–90
Rackham, J., 2003 ‘Animal bones’, in Taylor, G., ‘Early to Middle
Saxon settlement at Quarrington, Lincolnshire’,
Antiq J 83, 231–80, at 258–73
Riddler, I. D., 1998 ‘Worked whale vertebrae’, Archaeol Cantiana 118,
205–15
Riddler, I. D., 2001 ‘The spatial organisation of bone and antler
working in trading centres’, in Hill, D. and Cowie,
R. (eds), Wics: The Early Medieval Trading
Centres of Northern Europe, Sheffield Archaeol
Monogr 14 (Sheffield), 61–6

Radford, C. A. R., ‘The Saxon house: a review and some parallels’,

1957 Medieval Archaeol 1, 27–38

447
Riddler, I. D., 2004 ‘Production in Lundenwic: antler, bone and horn
working’, in Leary, J., Tatberht’s Lundenwic.
Archaeological Excavations in Middle Saxon
London, Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited
Monogr No. 2 (London), 145–8
Riddler, I. D., ‘The antler combs’, in Penn, K. (ed.), The
forthcoming Coddenham Anglo-Saxon Cemetery, E Anglian
Archaeol
Riddler, I. D., An Early Medieval Craft. Objects and Waste of
Trzaska-Nartowski, Bone, Antler and Ivory from Ipswich Excavations,
N. I. A. and Hatton, 1974–1994, E Anglian Archaeol
S., forthcoming
Rigold, S. E., 1975 ‘ Th e Su t t o n H o o c o i n s i n t he l i ght of
contemporary background coinage in England’,
in Bruce-Mitford, R., The Sutton Hoo Ship Burial,
I, 653–77 (London, The British Museum)
Robertson, D., 2003 ‘A Neolithic enclosure and Early Saxon
settlement: excavations at Yarmouth Road,
Broome, 2001’, Norfolk Archaeol 44 (2), 222–50
Robinson, P., 1978 ‘The Merovingian Tremissis from ‘near Devizes’:
a probable context’, Wiltshire Archaeol Natur
Hist Mag 72–73, 191–5
Rogers, N. S. H., Anglian and other Small Finds from 46–54
1993 Fishergate, The Archaeology of York. Volume
17, Fasc. 9 (London, Council for British
Archaeology for the York Archaeological Trust)
Ross, S., 1991 Dress Pins from Anglo-Saxon England: Their
Pro d u c t i o n a n d Ty p o - C hronol ogi c al
Development (unpubl DPhil thesis, Oxford Univ)
Ross, S., ‘Pins’, in Boyle, A., Clarke, D., Miles, D. and
forthcoming Palmer, S., The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Butler’s
Field, Lechlade Volume 2: Discussion and
Synthesis
Roth, H., 1977 ‘Archäologische Beobachtung zum Grabfrevel
im Merowingerreich’, in Jankuhn, H., Nehlsen,
H. and Roth, H. (eds), Zum Grabfrevel in vor- und
frühgeschichtlicher Zeit. Untersuchungen zu
Grabraub und ‘haugbrot’ in Mittel- und
Nordeuropa, Abhandlungen der Akademie der
Wissenschaften im Göttingen, Philologisch-
Historische Klasse: Folge 3, 113 (Göttingen,
Vandenhoeck & Rupprecht), 53–84
Rumbelow, P. E., ‘Finds on a Roman site at Caistor-on-Sea’,
1937 Norfolk Archaeol 26, 178–82
Sadler, P., 1989 ‘The animal bone’, in Dalwood, H., Dillon, J.,
Evans, J. and Hawkins, A., ‘Excavations in
Walton, Aylesbury, 1985–1986’, Records of
Buckinghamshire 31, 137–85, at 178–84
Sage, W., 1984 Das Reihengräberfeld von Altenerding in
Oberbayern 1, Germanische Denkmäler der
Völkerwanderungszeit A14 (Berlin, Gebr Mann)
Savelle, J. M., 1997 ‘The role of architectural utility in the formation
of zooarchaeological whale bone assemblages’, J
Archaeol Sci 24, 869–85
Schaetzl, R. J., ‘Texture, mineralogy, and lamellae development
1992 in sandy soils in Michigan’, Soil Science Society
of America Journal 56, 1538–45
Schiffer, M., 1972 ‘Archaeological context and systemic context’,
American Antiquity 37, 156–65
Schiffer, M., 1976 Behavioural Archaeology (New York, The
Academic Press)
448
Schiffer, M., 1987 Formation Processes of the Archaeological
Record (Albuquerque, University of New Mexico
Press)
Schmid, E., 1972 Atlas of Animal Bones (Amsterdam, Elsevier)
Schoeninger, M. J. ‘Nitrogen and carbon isotopic composition of
and DeNiro, M. J., bone collagen from marine and terrestrial
1984 animals’, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 48,
625–39
Scull, C., 1992 ‘Before Sutton Hoo: structures of power and
society in early East Anglia’, in Carver, M. (ed.)
The Age of Sutton Hoo: The Seventh Century in
North-Western Europe (Woodbridge, Boydell),
3–23
Scull, C., 1993 ‘Archaeology, early Anglo-Saxon society and the
origins of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms’, Anglo-Saxon
Stud Archaeol Hist 6, 65–82
Scull, C., 2001 ‘Burials at emporia in England’, in Hill, D. and
Cowie, R. (eds), Wics: The Early Medieval
Trading Centres of Northern Europe, Sheffield
Archaeol Monogr 14 (Sheffield), 67–74
Scull, C., 2002 ‘Ipswich: development and contexts of an urban
precursor in the seventh century’, in Hårdh, B.
and Larsson, L. (eds), Central Places in the
Migration and Merovingian Periods, papers from
the 52nd Sachsensymposium, Lund, August
2001, Uppakrastudier 6. Acta Archaeologica
Lundensia 8, 39 (Stockholm, Almquist and
Wiksell), 303–16
Scull, C., Early Medieval (late 5th century AD-early 8th
forthcoming century AD) Cemeteries at Boss Hall and
Buttermarket, Ipswich, Suffolk. Society for
Medieval Archaeology Monograph 27
Scull, C. and ‘Dating burials of the seventh and eighth
Bayliss, A., 1999a centuries: a case study from Ipswich, Suffolk’, in
Hines, J., Høilund Nielsen, K. and Siegmund, F.
(eds), The Pace of Change: Studies in Early
Medieval Chronology (Oxford, Oxbow), 80–8
Scull, C. and ‘Radiocarbon dating and Anglo-Saxon graves’, in
Bayliss, A., 1999b von Freeden, U., Koch, U. and Wieczorek, A.
(eds), Völker an Nord- und Ostsee und die
Franken. Akten des 48 Sachsensymposiums in
Mannheim vom 7 bis 11 September 1997 (Bonn,
Rudolph Habelt), 39–50
Scull, C. and ‘Two early medieval cemeteries at Milfield,
Harding, A., 1990 Northumberland’, Durham Archaeol J 6, 1–29
Seddon, D., ‘Fauna’, in Addyman, P. V., ‘A Dark-Age
Calvocoressi, D., settlement at Maxey, Northants’, Medieval
Cooper, C. and Archaeol 8, 20–73, at 69–71
Higgs, E. S., 1965
Sheffer, A., and ‘Textiles from Masada, a preliminary selection’,
Granger-Taylor, H., in Masada IV: The Yigael Yadin Excavations
1994 1963–1965: Final Reports (Jerusalem, Israel
Exploration Society, Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem),
153–282
Shephard, J., 1979 ‘The social identity of the individual in isolated
barrows and barrow cemeteries in Anglo-Saxon
England’, in Burnham, B. and Kingsbury J. (eds),
Space, Hierarchy and Society, Brit Archaeol Rep
Int Ser 59 (Oxford), 47–80
Sherlock, S. and An Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Norton, Cleveland,
Welch, M., 1992 Counc Brit Archaeol Res Rep 82 (York)
Silver, I. A., 1969 ‘The ageing of domestic animals’, in Brothwell,
D. R. and Higgs E. S. (eds), Science in
Archaeology: A Survey of Progress and Research
(London, Thames and Hudson), 283–301
Skinner, L., Investigative Conservation of Early Anglo-Saxon
Schaeder, U. and Finds from Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville,
Moujoud, T., 2005 Suffolk (English Heritage Centre for Archaeology
Rep 51/2005)
Smith, M., 1982 A Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Girdle Hangers
(unpubl BA dissertation, University College
London)
Speake, G., 1989 A Saxon Bed Burial on Swallowcliffe Down, Engl
Heritage Archaeol Rep 10 (London)
Spence, C., 1990 Archaeological Site Manual (London, MoLAS)
SSEW, 1983 Soils of England and Wales: Sheet 4: Eastern
England (1:250,000) (Harpenden, Soil Survey of
England and Wales)
Stace, C., 1997 New Flora of the British Isles (2nd edition,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press)
Stallibrass, S., 1996 ‘Animal bones’, in Jackson, R. P. J. and Potter, T.
W., Excavations at Stonea, Cambridgeshire
1980–5 (London, British Museum), 587–612 and
Pl. XXXI
Starley, D., 1995 Hammerscale, Archaeology Datasheet 10, Hist
Metall Soc
Starley, D., 1999 The Analysis of Middle Saxon Ironwork and
I ro n w o r k i n g D e b r i s f ro m F l i x borough,
Humberside (Ancient Monuments Laboratory
Report No. 35/99)
Steele, D. G. and The Anatomy and Biology of the Human Skeleton
Bramblett, C. A., (College Station, Texas A&M University Press)
1988
Stenhouse, M. J. ‘The uptake of bomb 14C in humans’, in Berger, R.
and Baxter, M. S., and Suess, H. E. (eds), Radiocarbon Dating
1979 (Berkeley, CA, University of California Press),
324–41
Stoodley, N., 1999 The Spindle and the Spear: a critical enquiry into
the construction and meaning of gender in the
Early Anglo-Saxon burial rite, Brit Archaeol Rep
British Ser 288 (Oxford)
Stoodley, N., 2002 ‘ M u l t i p l e b u r i a l s, m u l t i p l e m e a ni ngs ?
Interpreting the early Anglo-Saxon multiple
interment’, in Lucy, S. and Reynolds, A. (eds),
Burial in Early Medieval England and Wales, Soc
Medieval Archaeol Monogr 17 (London), 103–21
Stoops, G., 2003 Guidelines for the Analysis and Description of
Soil and Regolith Thin Sections (Madison, Soil
Science Society of America)
Stuiver, M. and ‘Editorial comment’, Radiocarbon 28 (2B), ii
Kra, R. S., 1986
Stuiver, M. and ‘Reporting of 14C data’, Radiocarbon 19, 355–63
Polach, H. A., 1977
Stuiver, M. and ‘A computer program for radiocarbon age
Reimer, P. J., 1986 calculation’, Radiocarbon 28, 1022–30
Stuiver, M. and ‘Extended 14C data base and revised CALIB 3.0
Reimer, P. J., 1993 14C age calibration program’, Radiocarbon 35,
215–30
Suckling, A., 1846 The History and Antiquities of the County of
Suffolk (London)
Swanton, M. J., The Spearheads of the Anglo-Saxon Settlements
1973 (London, Royal Archaeological Institute)
Swanton, M. J., A Corpus of Pagan Anglo-Saxon Spear Types,
1974 Brit Archaeol Rep British Ser 7 (Oxford)
449
Sykes, N., J. 2007 The Norman Conquest: A Zooarchaeological
Perspective. Brit Archaeol Rep Int Ser 1656
(Oxford, Archaeopress)
Tester, C., ‘Late Iron Age and Roman pottery’, in Boulter, S.,
forthcoming a Archaeological Assessment Report, Handford
R oad, I ps w i c h ( unpubl S C C A S R e p o r t
No. 2004/87)
Tester, C., ‘Late Iron Age and Roman pottery’, in Meredith,
forthcoming b J., Archaeological Assessment Report, Carlton
Colville Bypass, Carlton, Colville (SCCAS
Report)
Textile Institute, Identification of Textile Materials (7th edition,
1975 Manchester, The Textile Institute)
Thompson, V., 2002 ‘Constructing salvation: a homiletic and
penitential context for late Anglo-Saxon burial
practice’, in Lucy S. and Reynolds A. (eds) Burial
in Early Medieval England and Wales, Soc
Medieval Archaeol Monogr 17 (London), 229–40
Timby, J., 1996 The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Empingham II,
Rutland, Oxbow Monogr 70 (Oxford)
Tinker, S. W., 1988 Whales of the World (New York, E. J. Brill)
Tipper, J., 2000 Grubenhäuser: pit fills and pitfalls (unpubl PhD
thesis, Department of Archaeology, Cambridge
Univ)
Tipper, J., 2004 The Grubenhaus in Anglo-Saxon England
(Yedingham, Landscape Research Centre)
Trotter, M., 1970 ‘Estimation of stature from intact limb bones’, in
Stewart, T. D. (ed.), Personal Identification in
Mass Disasters (Washington DC, Smithsonian
Institution), 71–83
Tuross, N., Fogel, ‘Variability in the preservation of the isotopic
M. L. and Hare, composition of collagen from fossil bone’,
P. E., 1988 Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta 52, 929–35
Tylecote, R., 1986 The Prehistory of Metallurgy in the British Isles
(2nd edition, London, The Institute of Metals)
Ubelaker, D. H., Human Skeletal Remains: Excavation, Analysis,
1989 and Interpretation (Washington D.C., Taraxacum
Press)
Ucko, P., 1969 ‘Ethnography and archaeological interpretation
of funerary remains’, World Archaeol 1, 262–77
Ulbricht, I., 1978 Die Geweihverarbeitung in Haithabu, Die
Ausgrabungen in Haithabu 7 (Neumünster)
Unwin, T., 1988 ‘Towards a model of Anglo-Scandinavian rural
settlement in England’, in Hooke, D. (ed.),
Anglo-Saxon Settlements (Oxford, Blackwell),
77–98
Van der Plicht, J., ‘Status report: the Groningen AMS facility’,
Wijma, S., Aerts, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics
A. T., Pertuisot, Research B 172, 58–65
M. H. and Meijer,
H. A. J., 2000
van Es, W. A., 1967 ‘Wijster: a native village beyond the imperial
frontier’, Palaeohistoria 11
Van Klinken, G. J., ‘An overview of causes for stable isotopic
Richards, M. P. and variations in past European human populations:
Hedges, R. E. M., environmental, ecophysiological, and cultural
2000 effects’, in Ambrose, S. H. and Katzenberg, M. A.
( e ds ) , B i oge oc he m i c al A pproa c h e s t o
Paleodietary Analysis (New York, Kluwer
Academic/Plenum)
Veale, E., 1957 ‘The rabbit in England’, Agri Hist Rev 5, 85–90
Vierck, M., 1972 ‘Pferdegräber im Angelsächsischen England’, in
Müller-Wille, M., Pferdegrab und Pferdeopfer im
Frühen Mittelalter, Berichte van de Rijksdienst
voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoe,
189–98
Vince, A. G., 2003 Characterisation Studies of the Anglo-Saxon
Pottery from Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville,
Suffolk (AVAC Report No. 2003/124)
Vince, A. G., 2005 Characterisation Studies of the Anglo-Saxon
Pottery from Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville,
Suffolk: b) Comparison with the Underlying
Geology (AVAC Report No. 2005/052)
Von den Driesch, ‘A guide to the measurement of animal bones
A., 1976 from archaeological sites’, Peabody Museum
Bulletin 1 (Harvard)
Von den Driesch, A. ‘ K r i t i s c h e anmerkungen z ur
and Boessneck, J., widerristhohenberechnung aus Langenmassen
1974 vor- und fruhgeschichtlicher Tierknochen’,
Saugetierkundliche Mitteilungen 22, 325–48
Wade, K., 1980 ‘A settlement site at Bonhunt Farm, Wicken
Bonhunt, Essex’, in Buckley, D. (ed.),
Archaeology in Essex to AD 1500 (London), 96–9
Wade, K., 1988 ‘Ipswich’, in Hodges, R. and Hobley, B., The
Rebirth of Towns in the West AD 700–1050,
Counc Brit Archaeol Res Rep 68 (London),
93–100
Wade, K., 1997 ‘Anglo Saxon and medieval rural’ in Glazebrook,
J. (ed.), Research and Archaeology: A
Framework for the Eastern Counties 1: Resource
Assessment, E Anglian Archaeol Occ Pap 3
(Dereham)
Walton Rogers, P., Textile Production at 16–22 Coppergate, The
1997 Archaeology of York. Volume 17, Fasc. 11, The
Small Finds (York, Council for British
Archaeology)
Walton Rogers, P., ‘Textiles and clothing’, in Drinkall, G. and
1998 Foreman, M., The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at
Castledyke South, Barton-on-Humber, Sheffield
Excavation Rep 6 (Sheffield, Sheffield Academic
Press), 274–9
Walton Rogers, P., ‘The textiles’, in Haughton, C. and Powlesland,
1999 (printed 2001) D., West Heslerton, The Anglian Cemetery Vol. I,
The Excavation and Discussion of the Evidence
(West Heslerton (N. Yorks), The Landscape
Research Centre), 143–71
Walton Rogers, P., ‘The re-appearance of an old Roman loom in
2001 medieval England’, in Walton Rogers, P., Bender
Jørgensen, L. and Rast-Eicher, A., The Roman
Textile Industry and its Influence (Oxford),
158–71
Walton Rogers, P., ‘The textiles from Mounds 5, 7, 14 and 17’, in
2005 Carver, M., Sutton Hoo: a seventh-century
princely burial ground and its context (London,
The British Museum), 262–8
Walton Rogers, P. ‘The importance and organisation of textile
2007a production’, in Loveluck, C., Excavations at
Flixborough 4: Rural Settlement, Lifestyles and
Social Change in the Later First Millennium AD:
Anglo-Saxon Flixborough in its wider context
(Oxford, Oxbow)
Walton Rogers, P., Cloth and Clothing in Early Anglo-Saxon
2007b England, AD 450–700 (York, Council for British
Archaeology)
450
Walton Rogers, P., ‘The evidence for textile production’, in
forthcoming a Loveluck, C., Excavations at Flixborough, 2
(Oxford, Oxbow)
Walton Rogers, P, ‘Costume and textiles’, in Parfitt, K. and
forthcoming b Anderson, T., Buckland Anglo-Saxon Cemetery,
Dover: Excavations (London, British Museum)
Ward, G. K. and ‘Procedures for comparing and combining
Wilson, S. R., 1978 radiocarbon age determinations: a critique’,
Archaeometry 20, 19–31
Ware, C., 2005 ‘The social use of space at Ad Gefrin’, in
Frodsham, P. and O’Brien, C. (eds), Yeavering:
People, Power And Place (Stroud, Tempus),
153–60
Waugh, H. and ‘Non-ferrous objects’, in Frere, S., Verulamium
Goodburn, R., 1972 Excavations Vol. I, Rep Res Comm Soc Antiq
London 28 (London), 115–62
Webster, L., 1985 ‘The grave-goods’, in Hedges, J. and Buckley, D.,
‘Anglo-Saxon burials and later features
excavated at Orsett, Essex, 1975’, Medieval
Archaeol 29, 1–24
Webster, L., 2000 ‘Carlton Colville, Suffolk: Anglo-Saxon
part-gilded silver pendant figure (M&ME 211)’,
in Treasure Annual Report 2000, 45–6
Webster, L. and The Making of England: Anglo-Saxon Art and
Backhouse, J., 1991 Culture AD 600–900 (London, British Museum)
Welch, M., 1985 ‘Rural settlement patterns on the early and middle
Anglo-Saxon periods’, Landscape Hist 7, 13–25
West, S. E., 1969 ‘The Anglo-Saxon village of West Stow
(Suffolk): an interim report on the excavations,
1965–8’, Medieval Archaeology 13, 1–20
West, S. E., 1985 West Stow. The Anglo-Saxon Village, 2 vols, E
Anglian Archaeol 24 (Ipswich)
West, S. E., 1998 A Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Material from Suffolk,
E Anglian Archaeol 84 (Ipswich)
West, S. E., 2001 West Stow Revisited: An Early Anglo-Saxon
Village from Excavation to Reconstruction
1965–2000 (Bury St Edmunds, Bury St Edmunds
Borough Council and West Stow Anglo-Saxon
Village Trust)
White, R. H., 1988 Roman and Celtic Objects from Anglo-Saxon
Graves. A Catalogue and an Interpretation of
Their Use, Brit Archaeol Rep British Ser 191
(Oxford)
Whitehead, P. J. P., Fishes of the North-Eastern Atlantic and the
Bauchot, M. L., Mediterranean, Volume 2 (Paris, United Nations
Hureau, J. C., E duc a t i ona l , S c i e nt i f i c a nd C u l t u r a l
Nielsen, J. and Organization)
Tortonese, E. (eds),
1986a
Whitehead, P. J. P., Fishes of the North-Eastern Atlantic and the
Bauchot, M. L., Mediterranean, Volume 3 (Paris, United Nations
Hureau, J. C., E duc a t i ona l , S c i e nt i f i c a nd C u l t u r a l
Nielsen, J. and Organization)
Tortonese, E. (eds),
1986b
Whitehead, P. J. P., Fishes of the North-Eastern Atlantic and the
Bauchot, M. L., Mediterranean, Volume 1 (Paris, United Nations
Hureau, J. C., E duc a t i ona l , S c i e nt i f i c a nd C u l t u r a l
Nielsen, J. and Organization)
Tortonese, E. (eds)
1989
Wild, J. P., 1970 Textile Manufacture in the Northern Roman Wilson, P. R., ‘Early Anglian Catterick and Catraeth’, Medieval
Provinces (Cambridge, Cambridge University Cardwell, P., Archaeol 40, 1–61
Press) Cramp, R. J.,
Evans, J.,
Wild, J. P., 2003 ‘The Romans in the west, 600 BC–AD 400’, in Taylor-Wilson,
Jenkins, D. (ed.), The Cambridge History of R. H., Thompson,
Western Textiles (Cambridge, Cambridge A. and Wacher,
University Press), 77–93 J. S., 1996

Williams, R. J., Pennyland and Hartigans: Two Iron Age and Wilson, T., 1995 ‘Animal bones’, in Andrews, P., Excavations at
1993 Saxon Sites in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire Redcastle Furze, Thetford, 1988–9, E Anglian
Archaeol Soc Monogr 4 (Aylesbury) Archaeol 72 (Dereham), 121–28

Wilson, D., 1976 (2nd edition 1981) ‘Craft and industry’, in
Wi l so n , D . ( e d .) , Th e Arc h ae ol ogy of
Anglo-Saxon England (Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press), 253–81
Wilson, M. G., 1968 ‘Other objects of bronze, silver, lead, iron, bone
and stone’, in Cunliffe, B. (ed.), Fifth Report on
t h e Ex c a v a t i o n s o f t h e Ro m an F or t at
Richborough, Kent, Rep Res Comm Soc Antiq
London 23 (London), 93–109
Woolf, A., 1997 ‘At home in the long Iron Age: a dialogue
between households and individuals in cultural
reproduction’, in Moore J. and Scott E. (eds),
Invisible People And Processes (London,
Leicester University Press), 68–74
Yorke, B., 1990 Kings and Kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon
England (London, Seaby)
Young, B., 1975 ‘Paganisme, christianisation et rites funéraires
mérovingiens’, Archéologie Médiévale 7, 5–81

451
 Index

Illustrations are denoted by page numbers in italics or by distribution 177, 177

illus where figures are scattered throughout the text. glass
antiquarian finds 11
adze-hammer 265, 266, 266 cemetery: catalogue 170, 394, 395, 395, 396, 398, 399
adzes 265, 266, 266 discussion 404–5
aerial survey 4, 5 settlement 176, 176, 177, 178
pre-medieval 4–5 jet/lignite 395, 396, 405
medieval and ?medieval 5 Bede 302
World War 2 defences 5–6, 6 belt-fittings
other features 6–7 description 185–7, 185
agriculture distribution 186, 186
animal husbandry 303, 321, 429–30 belt-mount 185, 187
manuring 432 Beowulf 107, 430
plant husbandry 315–16, 321 Bergh Apton (Norfolk) 10
tools associated with 316–17, 316 Berinsfield (Oxon) 317, 320, 321
zoning 4, 427 Bestwall Quarry (Dorset) 127
animal bone binding, iron 201; see also scabbard binding
aims and objectives 279 bit fragments 275–6, 275
assemblage 279, 280 blade 198, 198
discussion 321 bolt 245, 245
disposal patterns 303–4 bolt-plate 245, 245
provisioning and diet 303–4 bone see animal bone; antler-working; bone-working; fish bone; human
significance of results 304 bone
distributions bone-working 382, 429
SFBs 45, 46, 47 Bourn Bridge (Cambs) 160
surface deposits 347, 351, 352 Bovis Homes 1, 12, 15
methodology bracelets
ageing and sexing 281 description 171
biometry 281–4 copper alloy 35, 172, 173
identification 279–81 iron and copper 172, 172
preservation, modification and pathology 281 distribution 171, 173
quantification 281 Brandon (Suffolk)
preservation, fragmentation and taphonomy 282, 283, 284–6 animal bone 288, 304
results by species buildings 104, 105, 107
amphibian and fish 303 combs 189, 190
birds, domestic 302 metalworking 381
birds, wild 302–3 settlement 7, 9–10, 16, 432
cattle: ageing 292, 293; biometry 293–4; body part distribution surface deposits 116
291–3; butchery 293; pathology and non-metric traits 293 brick/tile, Romano-British 33–5
cetacea 302 brooches
deer 301–2 Romano-British 35, 36, 173
dog 301 Anglo-Saxon
horse: ageing 301; biometry 301; body part distribution 301; description 173–5; annular 172, 173, 175; bow 167, 172,
butchery 301; pathology 301 173–5; cruciform 167, 173, 174, 175; disc frontispiece, 170,
pig: ageing 298–9, 300; biometry 299; body part distribution 174, 176, 400, 401, 404; safety-pin 174, 175, 176
298, 299; butchery 298; pathology 299; sexing 298, 299 distribution 173, 173, 175
rabbit, mole and rat 302 manufacture of 173, 264, 265
sheep/goat 294; ageing 294–5, 296, 297; biometry 295; body metal-detector and stray finds 9, 11–12
part distribution 294, 295; butchery 294; pathology 295 Broome (Norfolk) 102, 124
species occurrence and relative importance 280, 285, 286–91 bucket mounts 191–3, 192
stable isotope analysis 317 buckles 11, 185–7, 185
compared 320–1 buildings
diet, relation to 317 Romano-British
materials and methods 318 Building I 25–6, 26, 28
results and discussion 318–19, 320 Building II 26, 27, 28
see also antler-working; bone-working; fish bone Building III 26–7, 28, 28
animal husbandry see under agriculture Anglo-Saxon, research aims 16; see also sunken-featured
anti-invasion defences, WW2 5–6, 5, 6 buildings; wall-post buildings
antler-working 302, 382, 383, 384, 429 Burgh Castle (Norfolk) 10
appliqué, copper alloy 192, 193 burial practice 416
arrowheads 276, 276 body position 417–18
awls 267, 268, 268 coffins, containers, coverings and linings 417
axe, Neolithic 22 double burial 417, 418
food offerings and animal remains 418
bags, pouches and purses 406; see also purse mount grave markers and packing 417
baking see cooking and baking grave-goods 418–19, 419
bar and disc, silver 169, 392, 393, 410 orientation, size and shape 416–17
bar fragments, iron 277, 277 Burrow Hill (Suffolk) 432
barn, Romano-British 28 Burwell (Cambs) 187, 189, 429
barrow burial, Bloodmoor Hill 11, 426, 429 Burystead (Northants) 288
beads 176–7 butchery
amber 11, 176–7, 176, 178–9 distribution 360, 370–1, 370, 382, 383, 384, 427
amethyst 176, 177, 178 recording 281, 286
chalcedony 169, 395, 396, 405 cattle 293

452
 deer 302 Anglo-Saxon 274, 275, 275
horse 301 combs
pig 298 cemetery 393, 395, 399, 408
sheep/goat 294 settlement
description 187–90, 188
Caister-on-Sea (Norfolk) 10, 288, 291 distribution 189
Cambridge (Cambs) 124 trade 190, 429
Cambridge Archaeological Unit 12 see also woolcombs
Carlton Colville (Suffolk) community, model of 424–6
bypass 10–11, 33 cooking and baking, distribution 371–2, 372, 382, 383, 384, 427
Carlton Hall 10 copper alloy fragments 252, 254
church 429 copper alloy working 254, 259, 260–4, 376, 379, 380–1
parish 11, 429 Cowdery’s Down (Hants) 104, 105
St Peters Road, excavations 10 craft/industry, distribution of activities 366–70
casket 169, 394–5, 397, 406–8 activity zones 382–4, 383
Castle Cement Works (Bucks) 288 butchery 370–1, 370
Catholme (Staffs) cooking and baking 371–2, 372
buildings 102, 105, 107 crop processing 371, 371
pits 38, 121–3, 127–8 metalworking 372–81, 374, 375, 376
settlement compared 431, 432, 433 research aims 17
Celtic beans 316 textile manufacture 381–2
cemetery other craft activity 382
activity zones, relationship with 382–4 cremations
antiquarian evidence 11 prehistoric 22
burial and community 424–6 Romano-British 27, 28, 32
context 10–11, 429 Cresswell Field (Oxon) 47
dating and phasing 414 crop-processing, distribution 371, 371, 382, 383, 427
material culture 414–15 crucibles
radiocarbon dating 322–4, 326, 328, 328, 329, 332, 415–16 catalogue 262, 263, 264–5
demography and population size 420–2 description 259–64
discussion and summary 419–20 distribution 374–6, 376, 379, 380, 381
excavation 385, 386, 387 EDXRF analysis 261, 264
catalogue of inhumations (illus) 387–403 quantification 247, 254, 257
methodology 17 recording methodology 255, 258
post-dispositional disturbance and grave robbery 387 cylinder, bone 277, 278
research aims 17
stratigraphy 385 dark earth, micromorphological analysis 153, 158, 159, 160, 161
material culture, dating and comparanda 404–14, 411, 412 dating see phasing; radiocarbon dating
organisation and development 423–4 daub 246–7, 248
site modelling 361, 427, 428, 430 Davidson, Mr 11
social identities and structures 422–3 diet
see also burial practice; graves; human bone livestock 303–4
ceramic building material plants 315–16
description, Romano-British 33–5 stable isotope analysis 317, 318–21
distribution 342–4, 344, 346, 351 disc, clay 209; see also bar and disc, silver
see also fired clay ditches
chain/chain links excavation methodology 17
copper alloy 185, 186, 187 Romano-British see enclosure system; trackway
iron 201, 201 door, window and furniture fittings 244, 245
silver 398–9, 399 Douglas, Revd James 11
Chalton (Hants) 1, 431, 432, 433 Downing, Mr 11
charcoal 127, 259; see also plant remains dress fasteners, distribution 184, 184; see also hooked tags; lace-tags;
chatelaines wrist-clasps
cemetery Droitwich (Worcs) 288
catalogue 392, 393–4, 394, 400, 400, 401 Duane, Matthew 11
discussion 406
settlement ear-scoops 190–1, 191
description 185, 186, 187 Eckweek (Som) 288
distribution 186 Edix Hill (Cambs) 404, 429
Chicheley (Bucks) 288 Elsham (Lincs) 216
chisels Ely (Cambs) 37, 288
metalworking 249, 250, 250 emporia 224, 430, 432
miniature, Romano-British 36, 36 enclosure system, Romano-British 23–5, 23, 37
woodworking 265, 266–7, 266 English Heritage 1, 12, 15
chopping boards, whalebone 199–201, 199 estate foundation 426, 432–4
Christianity evaluation 12–15
establishment of 419–20, 427, 429, 430 Evison, Vera 8
religious community 426 excavations
symbol of 405, 420, 427 archive 20
see also minster system background 1
chronology see phasing; radiocarbon dating evaluation and history 10, 12–15, 13, 14
circlets, iron 405–6 evidence
cleaver 198, 198 prehistoric 22
clips, metalworking 249, 250, 250 Roman (illus) 22–37
coal/lignite fragment 396, 408 Anglo-Saxon see under cemetery; settlement, Anglo-Saxon
Coddenham (Suffolk) 7, 9, 189, 190 methodology 15, 17–20, 18, 19, 21
coffins, evidence for 385, 394, 411, 417 research aims 15–17
coin pendants 11
coins fender 151, 246, 247, 372
Roman 36–7, 274–5 ferrules 201, 201

453
field systems 4–5 dating 415
figurine, copper alloy 277, 277 grave-goods 404, 405–6, 406–8, 410, 411
file 249, 250, 250 Grave 16 398
finger-rings Grave 17 398, 411
description 171–2, 172 Grave 18 398
distribution 171, 173 Grave 19 398
fire bars 151, 247, 248 Grave 20 398
fire-pits 127 Grave 21 398, 398, 408, 415
fired clay Grave 22
Romano-British 35 catalogue 170, 398–401, 399
Anglo-Saxon dating 414–15, 416
assemblage 246 grave-goods 404, 405, 406, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412
discussion 248–9 Grave 23
fabrics 246 catalogue 170, 400, 401
by feature and phase 247–8 dating 414, 415
structural 246–7, 246 grave-goods 404, 406, 409, 411, 412
uncertain function 247 Grave 24
see also ceramic building material catalogue 401–2, 401
firesteel? 390, 390, 409 dating 415, 416
fish bone grave-goods 409, 410, 411
assemblage 303, 304 Grave 25 402–3, 402, 411, 415
discussion 4, 305, 321 Grave 26 403
methodology 304–5 Grave 27 403, 403, 416
preservation 305 Grave 28
taxonomic abundance and element representation 305, 306 catalogue 403, 403
fish-hooks 305, 316, 316, 317 dating 415, 416
fishing 4, 305 double burial 417, 418
fittings grave-goods 409
lozengiform 399, 400 graves
miscellaneous 201, 201 catalogue (illus) 389–403
see also belt-fittings; door, window and furniture fittings; furniture marker 385, 398, 417
fittings robbing 387, 390, 401
flax 316, 411 see also burial practice
flint Great Holts Farm (Essex) 37
assemblage 22 gritstones with grooves 376, 377
distribution 349, 350, 351 Grubenhäuser see sunken-featured buildings
Flixborough (Lincs)
animal bone 288, 293, 295 Haddon (Cambs), pottery 37
buildings 107 Hamerow, H. 16
fish bone 305 Hamwic (Hants) 293, 295, 301, 302, 304
fish-hooks 316 handles
metalworking 379, 381 casket 169, 395, 397
surface deposits 116 iron 192, 193
Flixton (Suffolk) 42, 102, 107 hanging bowl escutcheon 192, 193
four-post structures 22 harness fragment 275, 275, 276
furniture fittings 191, 191; see also door, window and furniture fittings Hartigans (Bucks) 288
Hatton Rock (Warks) 288
Gardner, Mr 11 Hay Green (Norfolk) 288
geology 1, 3, 3 hayrick, Romano-British 26, 28
geophysical survey 12 hearth/oven bases
gesso 395, 407 description 150–1
girdle-hanger 169, 392, 393, 408 F254 151, 151
Gisleham (Suffolk) 11 F259 151, 151, 164
glass setting (pendant) 170, 398, 399 F338 151, 152
glass vessels 194, 194 F372 152
Godmanchester (Cambs) 47 F379 42, 84, 152
Gotlandkessel 193 distribution 371–2, 372
gouges 265, 266, 267 excavation methodology 18
Grave 1 389 finds associated with 150
Grave 2 389, 389, 415 location 149
Grave 3 388, 389–90, 389, 415 see also fired clay
Grave 4 388, 389, 390, 415 hearth/oven lining, Romano-British 35
Grave 5 390, 390, 409, 410–11, 415, 416 hemp 411
Grave 6 390–1 Hereford (Herefs) 288
Grave 7 391, 391 Heybridge (Essex) 288
Grave 8 391, 391, 415 Higham Ferrers (Northants) 288
Grave 9 391, 391 hinge fragments 244, 245
Grave 10 391 casket 395, 396, 406–7
Grave 11 hobnails 191
catalogue 169, 391–3, 392, 393 holdfasts 243, 244, 244
dating 414–15 hones 251–2, 252, 390, 411
grave-goods 404, 405, 406, 408, 409–10, 411, 412 hooked plates 244, 245, 275, 275, 276
Grave 12 hooked strip 191, 191
catalogue 393–4, 394 hooked tags 183, 184
dating 415, 416 hooks
grave-goods 406, 408, 411 belt-fitting 185, 186, 187
Grave 13 394, 395, 404 cooking equipment 232
Grave 14 394, 395 miscellaneous 201, 201
Grave 15 see also fish-hooks; hooked strip; hooked tags; pot hook; wall-hook
catalogue 169, 394–8, 396–7 horse equipment 275–6, 275

454
human bone Mercury 179
condition 388 metal-detector finds 8, 9, 11–12, 426
description see graves, catalogue metalworking
methodology 388 context 429
pathology 389 distribution 372–81, 374, 375, 376, 382, 383, 384
stable isotope analysis 317 fuel 259
compared 320–1 location 354, 360
diet, relation to 317 metals, source of 259
materials and methods 318 tools
results and discussion 318–20, 320, 324 description 249–54, 250
hundred meeting point 11, 429 distribution 251
Hundred River 3 see also crucibles; moulds; slag
micromorphological analysis see site formation processes
industry see craft/industry middens see surface deposits
Ipswich (Suffolk) mill 11
animal bone 288, 293, 304 minster system 426, 432–4
brooch 172 moated site 5
buildings 42, 102 modelling tool 265–6, 266, 267
combs 189 Morning Thorpe (Norfolk) 10, 172
emporium 10, 224 Mortimer, Richard 1
pottery 10, 33, 224 moulds
settlement 7, 10 description 263, 264, 265
iron fragments 252, 398, 401, 402 distribution 376, 379, 380
EDXRF analysis 261, 264
Jones, Margaret and Tom 7 quantification 254
mounts
keys copper alloy
cemetery 393, 394, 395, 396, 398, 398, 408 cemetery 395, 396, 405
settlement 245, 245 settlement 191, 191
see also latchlifters iron 191, 191
Kilverstone (Norfolk) 8–9, 37, 307, 316, 321 see also belt-mount; bucket mounts; purse mount; shield mounts
knives Mucking (Essex)
Romano-British 35, 36 animal bone 288
Anglo-Saxon beads 177
cemetery: catalogue 390, 390, 392, 393, 399, 399, 400, 401, buildings 106, 107, 366
401, 402, 403, 403; SFBs 38, 41, 42, 45, 160, 248
discussion 408–9 wall-post buildings 102, 105, 107
settlement 194–8, 195, 196 cemetery 1, 7, 38
coins 274–5
lace-tags knives 196
cemetery nails 244
catalogue 169, 396, 396, 399, 401, 401, 402 pits 121, 124
discussion 410 pottery 171, 202, 206, 216, 217
settlement 184, 185 settlement 7, 16, 424–5, 430, 431, 432, 433
Lake Lothing 3, 4 surface deposits 116
land use 3–4, 3, 7 textile tools 270–1, 272, 273
landholding 430–2 Mutford Hundred 11
Langdale Hale (Cambs) 37
latchlifters nail-making plate 249, 250, 250
cemetery 393, 394, 398, 398, 408 nails 243–4, 401, 402, 411
settlement 245 necklaces
lead fragments 252, 254 description
leather, mineral-preserved 390, 393, 399, 401, 402, 403, 408 composite 398–9, 399
leatherworking silver 391–3, 392
distribution 267, 268, 382, 383 discussion 405
tools 267–8, 268 needles 268, 269, 269
Lechlade (Glos) 160, 320, 321 Nettleton Top (Lincs) 288, 291
Leeds, E.T. 38 North Elmham Park (Norfolk) 288
lid, clay 209 Northampton (Northants) 288
Lincoln (Lincs) 288, 295 Norwich (Norfolk) 288, 291, 293, 301
links, chatelaine 185, 186, 187; see also chain/chain links
location 1, 2 Orton Hall Farm (Cambs) 37, 191, 288
lock, casket 169, 395, 396, 406, 407, 408 Oulton Broad 3
lock furniture 245–6, 245 oven bases see hearth/oven bases
lock-plate 35–6
London, Royal Opera House site 105 padlock case 245–6, 245
loomweights Pakefield (Suffolk) 11
Romano-British 35 pendants 177–8
Anglo-Saxon amber 176, 177, 179
description 272–3, 273 bucket 176, 177–8, 179
distribution 45, 47, 274, 381, 382 coin 11
loops distribution 177
copper alloy 400, 401 gold 170, 398, 399, 405
iron 201, 396 organic 395, 396, 405
Lowestoft (Suffolk) 3, 5–6, 5, 288, 429 silver 12, 178, 178, 391–3, 392, 405, 420
Pennyland (Bucks) 217, 288
Markshall (Norfolk) 216 perlrandbecken 192, 193
mason’s pick 265, 266, 267 Pewter Hill (Suffolk) 10
Maxey (Cambs) 288 phasing 329
Melford Meadows, Brettenham (Norfolk) 8, 293 cemetery 414–15

455
 methods 336 finds 137, 359, 382
settlement patterning pottery 204, 207, 209
movement of material 352–7, 353, 355–6 Pit Group K
phasing outline 336–40, 337–9 dating/phasing 334, 336
surface deposits formation 340–50, 340–9 description 121, 124, 137–41, 138
surface deposits growth 350–2 finds 139, 248, 371, 372
summary 330–5 pottery 204, 207, 220, 222
see also radiocarbon dating; site modelling Pit Group L
pin-beaters 268, 273–4, 275 butchery waste 370, 371
pins 179–82, 182 dating/phasing 325, 332, 334, 336, 360
bone/antler 180, 181–2, 184 description 124, 125, 127, 140, 141–2
copper alloy 179–80, 180, 181, 182–3 finds 140, 248, 357, 359, 372, 373, 378, 379
distribution 181 pottery 204, 207, 208, 213, 222, 223
iron 179, 180, 180, 181, 182, 183 Pit Group M
silver dating/phasing 335, 336
cemetery 170, 392, 393, 398–9, 399, 404 description 121, 124, 127, 141, 142
settlement 167, 179, 180, 182 finds 142, 357
pits pottery 204, 207, 222
prehistoric 22 Pit Group N
Romano-British 27, 29 dating/phasing 336
Anglo-Saxon description 123, 127, 142–4, 143
dating/phasing 325, 331–2, 334–5, 336, 340, 357, 360, 361 finds 144, 244, 254, 360, 373, 374, 376, 380
description 128; individual pits 124, 144–50, 145; pit groups plant husbandry see under agriculture
see Pit Groups A–N plant remains 305–6
discussion 121–8 discussion 315, 321
excavation methodology 17, 128 cereal farming 315–16
location 122 other resources 316
plant remains 310–15 formation processes and preservation 307
Pit Group A methodology 306–7
dating/phasing 360 results 315
description 121, 123, 128, 128 pits 310–15, 313–14
finds 128 SFBs 310, 311–12
pottery 204, 207 surface deposit F1 310
Pit Group B wall-post structures 307–9, 310
dating/phasing 334, 357, 360 plate fragments
description 123, 124, 127, 128–31, 129 copper 277, 277
finds 129, 358 iron 401
pottery 204, 207 Porchester (Hants) 216, 288, 293
Pit Group C post-holes 44; see also SFBs; wall-post buildings
dating/phasing 325, 331, 334, 336 pot hook 198, 198
description 125, 127, 130, 131 pottery, Bronze Age 22
finds 130, 361, 374 pottery, Romano-British
fish bone 305 assemblage 29
pottery 204, 207, 220 deposition and phase 32
Pit Group D discussion 32–3
dating/phasing 334, 336 distribution 342, 343, 346, 348, 351
description 131, 131 fabrics 29, 30
finds 130, 361 imports 30–1
pottery 204, 207, 220, 222 local/regional 31–2
Pit Group E methodology 29
dating/phasing 361 pottery, Anglo-Saxon
description 121, 131–4, 132 assemblage 202
finds 132, 248 catalogue 224–43, 228–38
pottery 204, 207, 220 by context type 202
Pit Group F decoration 209
dating/phasing 360 bossed 209–12; distribution 210
description 121, 127, 133, 134 incised 212–13
finds 133, 373, 378 stamped 213–16; distribution 211
micromorphological analysis 153, 158–60, 161 discussion 203–8, 223, 429
pottery 204, 207 continental pottery 223–4
Pit Group G Ipswich ware 223
dating/phasing 325, 331, 334, 340, 361 distribution in surface deposits 346, 346, 348, 351
description 121, 127, 134–5 fabrics 202
finds 134, 373, 378 biotite granite 202–3
pottery 204, 207, 220 calcareous 203
Pit Group H distribution 204, 205, 206
butchery waste 370, 371 grog 203
dating/phasing 334, 357, 360 organic 203
description 121, 127, 135, 136 quartz 203
finds 136, 358 sandstone sand 203
pottery 204, 207 forms 208
Pit Group I bases 208
butchery waste 370, 371, 384 lid 209
dating/phasing 325, 331, 334, 336, 361 lugged and pierced vessels 208–9
description 127, 135–7 rims 208
finds 137, 358 fragmentation 217
pottery 204, 207 rims 217–20
Pit Group J manufacturing method 216–17
dating/phasing 325, 331, 334, 336, 360 radiocarbon dating 207–8, 326–8, 328–9, 329
description 127, 137 surface treatment and use 216

456
 vessel links wider 430–4
between features 220–3 dating 322–9, 328; see also phasing
distribution 221 discussion 162
refitting analysis 220 distribution of activities 366–70
within features 218–19, 220 activity zones 382–4, 383
see also ceramic building material; crucibles; fired clay; moulds butchery 370–1, 370
pottery making, sand used in 128 cooking and baking 371–2, 372
pouches see bags, pouches and purses crop processing 371, 371
Powlesland, D.J. 16 metalworking 372–81, 374, 375, 376
punches textile manufacture 381–2
?cemetery 401, 402, 409 other craft activity 382
settlement 249, 250, 250, 267–8, 268 economic resources, discussion 321; see also animal bone; fish
purse mount 400, 401, 406 bone; plant remains
purses see bags, pouches and purses excavation background 1
excavation evidence 38
Quarrington (Lincs) 289 site formation processes 152
querns micromorphological analysis 152–61
description 316–17 stratigraphic case study 161–2
distribution 371 see also hearth/oven bases; pits; sunken-featured buildings;
trade 429 surface deposits; wall-post buildings
finds 278
radiocarbon dating agricultural 316–17, 316
calibration 322–3 craft and industry, associated with (illus) 249–75
cemetery 415–16 dress and personal possessions (illus) 171–91
discussion 329 fired clay and daub 246–9, 246
methodological approach 323 horse equipment and weaponry 275–8, 275, 276, 277
methodology 322 household furnishings and equipment (illus) 191–201
objectives and sampling strategy 323–4 pottery (illus) 202–43
results 322, 323, 326–8, 326–7 structural ironwork 243–6, 244, 245
cemetery 326, 328, 415–16 phasing 329
pottery 207–8, 326–8, 328–9, 329 dating justifications 330–5
structural sequence 324–6 methodology 336
Ramsbury (Wilts) 301 phasing outline 336–40, 337–9
Raunds (Northants) 422 surface deposits formation 340–50, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344,
religious community 426 345, 346, 347–8
render 247, 248 surface deposits growth 349, 350–2, 350
Reynolds, Mr 11 surface deposits, movement of material from 352–7, 353, 354,
ridge and furrow 5 355–6, 357
ring-ditch see round barrow/ring-ditch research aims 15–16, 17
rings site modelling 357–66, 363–5
copper 277, 278 summary 427–8
iron SFBs see sunken-featured buildings
cemetery: catalogue 392, 393, 394, 394, 395, 396, 396, 400, shears
401; discussion 405 cemetery 392, 393, 394, 408
settlement 172 settlement 268, 269, 269, 270
see also finger-rings; slip-knot rings sheaths 408, 409
rivets sheet fragments
copper alloy 191 copper alloy 396, 401, 411
iron iron 193
catalogue 392, 393, 395, 396, 396, 399 shell fragment 395, 407, 408
discussion 408, 411 shield boss fragments 276, 276, 277
rods, iron shield mounts 276, 276, 277
catalogue 394, 394, 395, 396, 396, 399, 399, 400, 400, 401 shoe accessories 191
discussion 404 sickle fragment 316, 316, 317
Rose Hall Farm (Norfolk) 289 sieving 19, 20, 21
round barrow/ring-ditch 4 site formation processes 152
round-shave 265, 266, 267 micromorphological analysis 152–3
roundhouses, Bronze Age/Iron Age 22 contexts sampled 153, 154
roves 243, 244, 244 discussion 160–1
method 156
sampling 20 objectives 153–6
sand extraction 127–8 results 156–60, 166
Sandlings 1 stratigraphic case study 161–2, 161
scabbard binding 276, 276, 277 research aims 16–17
scrap metal assemblages 171, 252–4, 278 site modelling 357–66, 363–5
seax fragment? 390, 410–11 skewer 198, 198
settlement, Romano-British skinning, evidence for 302
discussion 37, 428 slag
excavation evidence 22–8, 23, 26, 27, 28 assemblage 171
finds classification 255
ceramic building material 33–5 mean weights 257
fired clay 35 other types 256
glass 35 smithing by-products 255–6
metalwork 35–7, 36 description 256
pottery 29–33 associated with copper alloys 259
research objective 17 fuel 259
settlement, Anglo-Saxon HB 258
context 7–12, 7, 8 SLAG 256–8
local 428–9, 428 distribution
regional 429–30, 430 settlement 47, 372–4, 374, 375, 377–81

457
 surface deposits 344–5, 345, 346, 347, 351 slag 254, 257
recording methodology 254–5 textile tools 268
sleeve clasp 11 micromorphological analysis 153, 154–5, 156–7, 160, 166
slip-knot rings stratigraphic case study 161–2, 161
copper 392, 393, 395, 396, 400, 401 Structure 5
iron 185, 186, 187 activities 373, 374, 376, 378, 379–80, 381
silver 170, 398, 399, 399, 405 dating/phasing 333, 336, 360
smith 381 description 52, 54, 168
smithies 374, 381 dimensions 41
Snape (Suffolk) 10, 216 pits associated with 123
Society of Antiquaries 11 summary 43
soils 1, 3–4, 3 finds 52
Southampton (Hants) 289, 293; see also Hamwic assemblage profile 357, 360
spangles pottery 204, 206, 209, 213, 218–19, 222
description 179, 180, 182 scrap metal 252, 253
distribution 181 slag 254, 257
spearheads 11, 276, 276, 277 textile tools 268
special deposits 47, 127, 357 Structure 6 43, 52–5, 55, 204
spindlewhorls Structure 7 43, 52–5, 204
description 268, 270–2, 270, 275 Structure 8 43, 52–5, 204
distribution 381, 382 Structure 9
spinning 268, 381–2 activities 373, 378, 379, 381, 382
Spong Hill (Norfolk) dating/phasing 324, 330, 333, 336, 360
animal bone 289 description 55–9, 56, 168, 362
nails 244 dimensions 41
pottery 37, 216 pits associated with 125
textile tools 270, 271, 273 post-holes 44
staples 243, 244, 245, 411 summary 43
steelyard fragment, Romano-British 36, 37 finds 55
Stonea (Cambs) 289 assemblage profile 357, 361
stoneworking tools bead 177
description 265–6 fired clay 248
distribution 267 pin 179
strap-clasp 187 pottery 204, 206, 208, 216, 218–19, 220, 222
strap-end 187 scrap metal 252, 253
Stratton (Beds) 160 slag 257
‘street’ 360 textile tools 268
strips, copper alloy 192, 193, 277, 277 Structure 10
structural ironwork 243–4, 244 dating/phasing 324, 330, 333, 336, 360
Structure 1 description 57, 59, 362
dating/phasing 360 dimensions 40
description 48, 49 form 41
dimensions 38, 41 summary 43
pits associated with 123, 123 finds 55
summary 43 assemblage profile 357, 361
finds fired clay 248
pottery 204 pottery 204, 206, 218, 220, 222
scrap metal 253 scrap metal 253
Structure 2 textile tools 268
dating/phasing 333, 360 Structure 11
description 49, 50 dating 333, 336
pits associated with 123 description 58, 59, 366
summary 43 post-holes 44
finds 49 summary 43
pottery 204 finds 59
Structure 3 pottery 204, 207, 208
dating/phasing 333, 360 scrap metal 253
description 49, 51 Structure 12
form 41 activities 382
pits associated with 123, 124 dating/phasing 107, 109, 324, 330, 333, 336
post-holes 44 decay and infilling 46
summary 43 description 59–61, 60, 61, 164, 366
finds 49 form 42
crucibles/moulds 261 pits associated with 123
pottery 204 post-holes 44
scrap metal 253 summary 43
Structure 4 finds 62
activities 373, 374, 376, 378, 379, 380, 381 daub 246
dating/phasing 333, 336, 360 fired clay 248
decay and infilling 46 pin 180
description 49–52, 53 pottery 204, 207, 218, 220
form 42 scrap metal 253
pits associated with 123, 124 textile tools 268
summary 43 Structure 13
finds 52 dating 333, 336
assemblage profile 358 decay and infilling 47
crucibles/moulds 261 description 62, 63, 366
fired clay 248 form 42
pottery 204, 206, 209, 213, 220, 222 post-holes 44
scrap metal 253 summary 43

458
 finds 62 post-holes 44
pottery 204, 207, 208 summary 43
scrap metal 253 finds 71
Structure 14 assemblage profile 353, 354–7, 356
activities 373, 374, 375–6, 377, 378, 379, 380, 381 crucibles/moulds 261
dating/phasing 107, 333, 336, 361 fired clay 248
decay and infilling 47 metalworking tools/scrap metal 249, 251, 252–4
description 62–5, 64, 366 pin 181
form 42 pottery 204, 207, 208
post-holes 44 sieved fraction results 21
summary 43 slag 257
finds 65 structural ironwork 243, 244
assemblage profile 353, 354–7, 355 textile tools 268
crucibles/moulds 261 woodworking tools 265
fired clay 248 function 45
leatherworking tools 268 Structure 20
metalworking tools/scrap metal 249, 252–4 activities 370, 373, 374, 378, 382
pottery 204 dating/phasing 107, 333, 336
sieved fraction results 21 decay and infilling 46
slag 254, 257 description 71–4, 73
structural ironwork 244 dimensions 41
textile tools 268 form 42
woodworking tools 265 post-holes 44
function 45 summary 43
Structure 15 finds 74
dating/phasing 361 brooch 174, 175, 176
description 65, 66, 366 pendant 189
post-holes 44 pottery 204, 206, 218–19, 220, 222
summary 43 scrap metal 252, 253
finds 67 slag 257
pottery 204 textile tools 268
scrap metal 253 function 45
Structure 16 Structure 21
dating/phasing 109, 333, 336, 360 activities 382
description 65, 68 dating/phasing 107, 333, 336
dimensions 41, 121 description 74–5, 76
pits associated with 125, 126 dimensions 38
post-holes 44 form 41, 42
summary 43 post-holes 44
finds 67 summary 43
assemblage profile 357, 360 finds 75
pottery 204, 206, 218, 220, 222 assemblage profile 357, 361
Structure 17 pin 179, 179–80
activities 370, 371, 372, 373, 374, 378 pottery 204, 206, 208, 219, 220
dating/phasing 109, 324–5, 330, 333, 336, 360 scrap metal 252, 253
decay and infilling 46, 47 sieved fraction results 21
description 65–7, 69 textile tools 268
dimensions 38, 40, 41 function 45
pits associated with 125, 126 Structure 22
post-holes 44 activities 373, 374, 378, 382
summary 43 dating/phasing 107, 109, 333, 336
finds 67 decay and infilling 46
assemblage profile 357, 360 description 75–9, 77
beads 177 dimensions 38, 40
fired clay 151, 248 form 42
pottery 204, 206, 209, 212, 213, 218–19, 220, 222 post-holes 44
scrap metal 253 summary 43
slag 257 finds 79
textile tools 268 assemblage profile 357, 362
Structure 18 pin 181
dating 325, 330, 333, 336 pottery 204, 206, 218, 220
description 67–9, 70 scrap metal 253
dimensions 38, 40, 41 slag 257
pits associated with 126 textile tools 268
post-holes 44 micromorphological analysis 153, 154–5, 157–8, 160, 166
summary 43 stratigraphic case study 161–2, 161
finds 71 Structure 23
pin 179 dating/phasing 357, 360
pottery 204, 207, 219, 220 description 78, 79
scrap metal 253 pits associated with 123
textile tools 268 post-holes 44
Structure 19 summary 43
activities finds 79
antler-working 382, 384 assemblage profile 358
cooking and baking 371 fired clay 248
metalworking 373, 374, 375–6, 377, 378, 379, 380, 381 pottery 204
dating/phasing 107, 333, 361 Structure 24
decay and infilling 47 activities 370, 371
description 69–71, 72 dating/phasing 325, 330, 333, 336, 360
form 42 description 79–80, 80

459
 dimensions 41 post-holes 44
orientation 106 summary 43
post-holes 44 finds 90
summary 43 assemblage profile 359
finds 81 fired clay 248
pottery 204, 206, 208, 218, 220 pottery 204, 206, 208, 218–19, 222, 223
scrap metal 253 scrap metal 253
textile tools 268 textile tools 268–9
Structure 25 Structure 31
activities 371, 372, 374, 382, 384 activities 374
dating/phasing 107, 325, 330, 333, 336 dating/phasing 334, 360
description 80–4, 82 description 90, 91
dimensions 41 dimensions 38
form 42 form 42
pits associated with 124 pit associated with 124
post-holes 44 summary 43
summary 43 finds 93, 357
finds 81 pottery 204
assemblage profile 358 Structure 32
fired clay 151, 246, 247, 248 dating 334, 336
pottery 204, 207, 208, 222 description 90–3, 92
scrap metal 253 dimensions 41
textile tools 268–9 oven base 151
Structure 26 pits associated with 123, 124
activities 372, 384 post-holes 44
dating/phasing 107, 325, 330, 333, 336 summary 43
description 83, 84 finds 93, 245
dimensions 41 fired clay 247–8
form 42 pottery 204, 206
hearth 150–1, 152 scrap metal 253
orientation 106 Structure 33
pits associated with 124 dating/phasing 334, 357
summary 43 description 93, 94
finds 81 pit associated with 123
fired clay 248 post-holes 44
pottery 204, 206, 208 summary 43
spangle 179 finds 96
Structure 27 beads 177
activities 374, 382 fired clay 248
dating/phasing 107, 334, 360 pottery 204
description 84, 85 scrap metal 253
pits associated with 124 textile tools 268
summary 43 Structure 34
finds 86 activities 372
fired clay 248 dating/phasing 357
pottery 204, 219 description 93, 95
textile tools 268–9 dimensions 41
Structure 28 pit associated with 123
dating/phasing 107, 361 summary 43
description 84, 87 finds 96
form 42 fired clay 248
pits associated with 124 pottery 204
summary 43 Structure 35
finds 86 activities 370, 371, 382
pottery 204, 207 dating/phasing 325, 331, 334, 336
scrap metal 253 decay and infilling 47
Structure 29 description 93–6, 97
activities 371, 372, 374, 382 form 42
dating/phasing 107, 334, 336 post-holes 44
description 84–6, 88 summary 43
dimensions 41 finds 96
form 42 assemblage profile 359
pits associated with 123, 124 fish bone 305
post-holes 44 pottery 204, 219
summary 43 scrap metal 252, 253
finds 86 Structure 36
assemblage profile 357, 359 dating/phasing 334, 357
fired clay 248 description 96–100, 98
pin 180, 181 post-holes 44
pottery 204, 222 summary 43
scrap metal 253 finds 101
Structure 30 pottery 204
activities 371, 372, 382 Structure 37
dating/phasing 107, 325, 330, 334, 336 dating/phasing 357, 360
decay and infilling 46 description 99, 100
description 86–90, 89 form 42
construction 45 oven base 151
dimensions 38, 40, 41 post-holes 44
form 42 summary 43
pits associated with 123, 124 finds 101

460
 fired clay 248 iron 243
pottery 204, 222 stylus head 190, 191
Structure 38 Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service 12
dating/phasing 325, 331, 334, 336, 360 sunken-featured buildings (SFBs) 38
description 100, 101 construction 44–5
form 42 description 49; see also Structures 1–38
post-holes 44 dimensions 38–41, 40, 41
summary 43 distribution of pottery by fabric type 204, 205, 206
finds 101 excavation methodology 17, 18, 20
assemblage profile 357, 359 form 41–2
pottery 204, 206, 209, 212, 213, 218, 222 function 45–6, 107
textile tools 268 location 39
Structure 39 micromorphological analysis 153, 154–5, 156–8, 160–1
activities 371 stratigraphic case study 161–2
dating/phasing 361 orientation 106
description 108, 109, 163 pits, association with 123–6, 123, 124
dimensions 102 post-holes 44
entrance 105 ratio to wall-post buildings 106
summary 102 site modelling 360–6, 427
tie-beams 106 structural decay and infilling 46–7
walls 102, 104 summary data 43
finds 109 types 361–6, 367–9
plant remains 307, 308–9, 310 surface deposits
Structure 40 butchery waste 370–1
dating/phasing 360 dating/phasing
description 108, 109 dating summary 332, 335
dimensions 102 formation 340–50, 341, 342, 343, 345, 346, 347–8
summary 102 growth of 349, 350–2, 350, 353
walls 104 methodology 336
plant remains 307, 308–9, 310 modelling 359, 360, 427
Structure 41 movement of material 352–7, 353, 355–6, 360
dating/phasing 107, 360 radiocarbon dates 325–6
description 109, 110, 366 description 116–18
dimensions 102 F1 118–20, 119, 120, 165, 168
floors and internal features 105 F8/275 120, 165
summary 102 F11/503 119, 120, 120, 163, 168
tie-beams 106 F159/182 119, 121, 385
finds 112 F342 120–1
Structure 42 Hollow F301 121, 121
dating/phasing 107, 109, 361 finds associated with 118, 359
description 109–12, 111, 366 location 117
dimensions 102 metalworking evidence 373, 374, 375–6, 377–8, 379, 380, 381
entrance 105 plant remains 310
floors and internal features 105 pottery 204, 207, 218–19, 220, 222, 223
summary 102 suspension loop 185, 187
wall-trenches 104–5 Sutton Courtenay (Berks) 38
finds 112 Svågertop Malmö (Sweden) 160
Structure 43
dating/phasing 107, 109, 360 tags see spangles
description 112–14, 112, 366 Tattershall Thorpe (Lincs) 249
dimensions 102 textile manufacture
floors and internal features 105 distribution 381–2, 383, 427
summary 102 tools associated with
Structure 44 description 268–74, 269, 270, 273, 275
activities 372, 381 distribution 268–9, 272, 274
dating/phasing 107, 326, 331, 334, 360 textiles 411
relationship with cemetery 385 assemblage summary 413
description 113, 114 catalogue 390, 393, 394, 395, 396, 399, 400, 401
floors and internal features 105 description
orientation 106 plain ZZ tabby 411–12, 411
summary 102 tapestry work 412–14, 412
finds 114 wool 411, 412
pottery 220 ZZ tabby repp 411, 412
Structure 45 107, 115, 360, 374, 381 function 414
Structure 45A 102, 105, 106, 114–15, 114 thatching material 316
Structure 45B 102, 114–15, 114 Thetford (Norfolk)
Structure 46 animal bone 289, 293, 295, 301
dating/phasing 107, 360 buildings 42
description 115–16, 115 settlement 8, 16
orientation 106 tile see brick/tile
summary 102 Tipper, J. 16
tie-beams 106 tongs 249, 250, 250
Structure 47 tools, miscellaneous
dating/phasing 107, 360 cemetery 390, 390, 409
description 116, 116 settlement 250–1
pits associated with 124 topography 1–3, 2
summary 102 trackway, Romano-British 23, 23, 37
tie-beams 106 trade 425, 429, 430
studs crucibles 264
copper alloy 191 livestock 318, 321, 429

461
 ores 259, 429 West Stow (Suffolk) 7, 8, 16, 431, 432, 433
stone 251, 429 animal bone 289, 291, 304, 429
tuyeres birds 302, 303
description 247, 258, 262, 263, 264 cattle 293
distribution 373, 374, 376 fish 303
EDXRF analysis 261 horse 301
function 255 pig 299
recording 254 sheep/goat 294, 295
tweezers 190, 191 bone-working 382
buildings 1, 106, 366
vessels SFBs 38, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 160
metal 191, 192, 193–4 wall-post 102, 104, 104, 107
wooden 191–3 community 424–5
see also glass vessels; pottery finds
assemblage 171
wall-hook 243, 244, 244 beads 176, 177
wall-post buildings 101–2 coins 274
description 109; see also Structures 39–47 combs 187, 189, 190
dimensions 102, 104 fasteners 184
entrances 105 fired clay 247
floors and internal features 105 knives 196
location 103 pins 181
orientation 106 pottery 202, 206, 209, 217
pits, relationship with 124 textile tools 270–1, 273
ratio to SFBs 106 metalworking 429
reconstruction 105, 106 pits 124
settlement pattern (dating, phasing and function) 106–9 plant remains 307, 316, 321
site modelling 357–61, 427 surface deposits 38, 116
summary data 102 whalebone see chopping boards
wall-trenches 104–5 wic sites 429
walls 102–4 Wicken Bonhunt (Essex) 289, 293, 295, 304, 432
Walton (Bucks) 289 Wijester (Neths) 107
Wandersliedlungen 16, 430–2 Wimpey Homes 1, 12
wattle and daub 246–7, 248–9 window fittings see door, window and furniture fittings
Waveney, river 1–3 wood fragments 393, 395
wealth 422 woodland 4
weaponry 276–7, 276 woodworking tools 265, 266
weaving 268, 381–2 distribution 265, 267, 382
weights 275 wool production 303, 304
West, Stanley 8, 16, 38, 41, 42, 46 woolcombs 268, 393, 393, 409–10
West Heslerton (N. Yorks) wrist-clasps 183, 184–5
buildings 38, 107, 160 Wroxeter (Shrops) 289, 291
cemetery 1
pins 181 Yarnton (Oxon) 127
pottery 202, 217 York (Yorks) 304
settlement 15, 16, 432, 433

462
East Anglian Archaeology
is a serial publication sponsored by ALGAO EE and English Heritage. It
is the main vehicle for publishing final reports on archaeological
excavations and surveys in the region. For information about titles in the
series, visit www.eaareports.org.uk. Reports can be obtained from:
Oxbow Books, 10 Hythe Bridge Street, Oxford OX1 2EW
or directly from the organisation publishing a particular volume.
Reports available so far:
No.1, 1975 Suffolk: various papers
No.2, 1976 Norfolk: various papers
No.3, 1977 Suffolk: various papers
No.4, 1976 Norfolk: Late Saxon town of Thetford
No.5, 1977 Norfolk: various papers on Roman sites
No.6, 1977 Norfolk: Spong Hill Anglo-Saxon cemetery, Part I
No.7, 1978 Norfolk: Bergh Apton Anglo-Saxon cemetery
No.8, 1978 Norfolk: various papers
No.9, 1980 Norfolk: North Elmham Park
No.10, 1980 Norfolk: village sites in Launditch Hundred
No.11, 1981 Norfolk: Spong Hill, Part II: Catalogue of Cremations
No.12, 1981 The barrows of East Anglia
No.13, 1981 Norwich: Eighteen centuries of pottery from Norwich
No.14, 1982 Norfolk: various papers
No.15, 1982 Norwich: Excavations in Norwich 1971–1978; Part I
No.16, 1982 Norfolk: Beaker domestic sites in the Fen-edge and
East Anglia
No.17, 1983 Norfolk: Waterfront excavations and Thetford-type
Ware production, Norwich
No.18, 1983 Norfolk: The archaeology of Witton
No.19, 1983 Norfolk: Two post-medieval earthenware pottery
groups from Fulmodeston
No.20, 1983 Norfolk: Burgh Castle: excavation by Charles Green,
1958–61
No.21, 1984 Norfolk: Spong Hill, Part III: Catalogue of Inhumations
No.22, 1984 Norfolk: Excavations in Thetford, 1948–59 and 1973–80
No.23, 1985 Norfolk: Excavations at Brancaster 1974 and 1977
No.24, 1985 Suffolk: West Stow, the Anglo-Saxon village
No.25, 1985 Essex: Excavations by Mr H.P.Cooper on the Roman
site at Hill Farm, Gestingthorpe, Essex
No.26, 1985 Norwich: Excavations in Norwich 1971–78; Part II
No.27, 1985 Cambridgeshire: The Fenland Project No.1:
Archaeology and Environment in the Lower Welland
Valley
No.28, 1985 Norfolk: Excavations within the north-east bailey of
Norwich Castle, 1979
No.29, 1986 Norfolk: Barrow excavations in Norfolk, 1950–82
No.30, 1986 Norfolk: Excavations at Thornham, Warham, Wighton
and Caistor St Edmund, Norfolk
No.31, 1986 Norfolk: Settlement, religion and industry on the
Fen-edge; three Romano-British sites in Norfolk
No.32, 1987 Norfolk: Three Norman Churches in Norfolk
No.33, 1987 Essex: Excavation of a Cropmark Enclosure Complex
at Woodham Walter, Essex, 1976 and An Assessment
of Excavated Enclosures in Essex
No.34, 1987 Norfolk: Spong Hill, Part IV: Catalogue of Cremations
No.35, 1987 Cambridgeshire: The Fenland Project No.2: Fenland
Landscapes and Settlement, Peterborough–March
No.36, 1987 Norfolk: The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at
Morningthorpe
No.37, 1987 Norfolk: Excavations at St Martin-at-Palace Plain,
Norwich, 1981
No.38, 1987 Suffolk: The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Westgarth
Gardens, Bury St Edmunds
No.39, 1988 Norfolk: Spong Hill, Part VI: Occupation during the
7th–2nd millennia BC
No.40, 1988 Suffolk: Burgh: The Iron Age and Roman Enclosure
No.41, 1988 Essex: Excavations at Great Dunmow, Essex: a
Romano-British small town in the Trinovantian
Civitas
No.42, 1988 Essex: Archaeology and Environment in South Essex,
Rescue Archaeology along the Gray’s By-pass 1979–80
No.43, 1988 Essex: Excavation at the North Ring, Mucking, Essex:
A Late Bronze Age Enclosure
No.44, 1988 Norfolk: Six Deserted Villages in Norfolk
No.45, 1988 Norfolk: The Fenland Project No. 3: Marshland and
the Nar Valley, Norfolk
No.46, 1989 Norfolk: The Deserted Medieval Village of Thuxton
No.47, 1989 Suffolk: West Stow: Early Anglo-Saxon Animal
Husbandry
No.48, 1989 Suffolk: West Stow, Suffolk: The Prehistoric and
Romano-British Occupations
No.49, 1990 Norfolk: The Evolution of Settlement in Three
Parishes in South-East Norfolk
No.50, 1993 Proceedings of the Flatlands and Wetlands Conference
No.51, 1991 Norfolk: The Ruined and Disused Churches of
Norfolk
No.52, 1991 Norfolk: The Fenland Project No. 4, The Wissey
Embayment and Fen Causeway
No.53, 1992 Norfolk: Excavations in Thetford, 1980–82, Fison
Way
No.54, 1992 Norfolk: The Iron Age Forts of Norfolk
No.55, 1992 Lincolnshire: The Fenland Project No.5: Lincolnshire
Survey, The South-West Fens
No.56, 1992 Cambridgeshire: The Fenland Project No.6: The
South-Western Cambridgeshire Fens
No.57, 1993 Norfolk and Lincolnshire: Excavations at Redgate Hill
Hunstanton; and Tattershall Thorpe
No.58, 1993 Norwich: Households: The Medieval and Post-Medieval
Finds from Norwich Survey Excavations 1971–1978
No.59, 1993 Fenland: The South-West Fen Dyke Survey Project
1982–86
No.60, 1993 Norfolk: Caister-on-Sea: Excavations by Charles
Green, 1951–55
No.61, 1993 Fenland: The Fenland Project No.7: Excavations in
Peterborough and the Lower Welland Valley 1960–1969
No.62, 1993 Norfolk: Excavations in Thetford by B.K. Davison,
between 1964 and 1970
No.63, 1993 Norfolk: Illington: A Study of a Breckland Parish and
its Anglo-Saxon Cemetery
No.64, 1994 Norfolk: The Late Saxon and Medieval Pottery
Industry of Grimston: Excavations 1962–92
No.65, 1993 Suffolk: Settlements on Hill-tops: Seven Prehistoric
Sites in Suffolk
No.66, 1993 Lincolnshire: The Fenland Project No.8: Lincolnshire
Survey, the Northern Fen-Edge
No.67, 1994 Norfolk: Spong Hill, Part V: Catalogue of Cremations
No.68, 1994 Norfolk: Excavations at Fishergate, Norwich 1985
No.69, 1994 Norfolk: Spong Hill, Part VIII: The Cremations
No.70, 1994 Fenland: The Fenland Project No.9: Flandrian
Environmental Change in Fenland
No.71, 1995 Essex: The Archaeology of the Essex Coast Vol.I: The
Hullbridge Survey Project
No.72, 1995 Norfolk: Excavations at Redcastle Furze, Thetford, 1988–9
No.73, 1995 Norfolk: Spong Hill, Part VII: Iron Age, Roman and
Early Saxon Settlement
No.74, 1995 Norfolk: A Late Neolithic, Saxon and Medieval Site at
Middle Harling
No.75, 1995 Essex: North Shoebury: Settlement and Economy in
South-east Essex 1500–AD1500
No.76, 1996 Nene Valley: Orton Hall Farm: A Roman and Early
Anglo-Saxon Farmstead
No.77, 1996 Norfolk: Barrow Excavations in Norfolk, 1984–88
No.78, 1996 Norfolk:The Fenland Project No.11: The Wissey
Embayment: Evidence for pre-Iron Age Occupation
No.79, 1996 Cambridgeshire: The Fenland Project No.10:
Cambridgeshire Survey, the Isle of Ely and Wisbech
No.80, 1997 Norfolk: Barton Bendish and Caldecote: fieldwork in
south-west Norfolk
No.81, 1997 Norfolk: Castle Rising Castle
No.82, 1998 Essex: Archaeology and the Landscape in the Lower
Blackwater Valley
No.83, 1998 Essex: Excavations south of Chignall Roman Villa 1977–81
No.84, 1998 Suffolk: A Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Material
No.85, 1998 Suffolk: Towards a Landscape History of Walsham le
Willows
No.86, 1998 Essex: Excavations at the Orsett ‘Cock’ Enclosure
No.87, 1999 Norfolk: Excavations in Thetford, North of the River,
1989–90
No.88, 1999 Essex: Excavations at Ivy Chimneys, Witham 1978–83
No.89, 1999 Lincolnshire: Salterns: Excavations at Helpringham,
Holbeach St Johns and Bicker Haven
No.90, 1999 Essex:The Archaeology of Ardleigh, Excavations
1955–80
No.91, 2000 Norfolk: Excavations on the Norwich Southern Bypass,
1989–91 Part I Bixley, Caistor St Edmund, Trowse
No.92, 2000 Norfolk: Excavations on the Norwich Southern Bypass,
1989–91 Part II Harford Farm Anglo-Saxon Cemetery
No.93, 2001 Norfolk: Excavations on the Snettisham Bypass, 1989
No.94, 2001 Lincolnshire: Excavations at Billingborough, 1975–8
No.95, 2001 Suffolk: Snape Anglo-Saxon Cemetery: Excavations
and Surveys
No.96, 2001 Norfolk: Two Medieval Churches in Norfolk
No.97, 2001 Cambridgeshire: Monument 97, Orton Longueville
No.98, 2002 Essex: Excavations at Little Oakley, 1951–78
No.99, 2002 Norfolk: Excavations at Melford Meadows,
Brettenham, 1994
No.100, 2002 Norwich: Excavations in Norwich 1971–78, Part III
No.101, 2002 Norfolk: Medieval Armorial Horse Furniture in
Norfolk
No.102, 2002 Norfolk: Baconsthorpe Castle, Excavations and Finds,
1951–1972
No.103, 2003 Cambridgeshire: Excavations at the Wardy Hill
Ringwork, Coveney, Ely
No.104, 2003 Norfolk: Earthworks of Norfolk
No.105 2003 Essex: Excavations at Great Holts Farm, 1992–4
No.106 2004 Suffolk: Romano-British Settlement at Hacheston
No.107 2004 Essex: Excavations at Stansted Airport, 1986–91
No.108, 2004 Norfolk: Excavations at Mill Lane, Thetford, 1995
No.109, 2005 Fenland: Archaeology and Environment of the Etton
Landscape
No.110, 2005 Cambridgeshire: Saxon and Medieval Settlement at
West Fen Road, Ely
No.111, 2005 Essex: Early Anglo-Saxon Cemetery and Later Saxon
Settlement at Springfield Lyons
No.112, 2005 Norfolk: Dragon Hall, King Street, Norwich
No.113, 2006 Norfolk: Excavations at Kilverstone
No.114, 2006 Cambridgeshire:Waterfront Archaeology in Ely
No.115, 2006 Essex:Medieval Moated Manor by the Thames
Estuary: Excavations at Southchurch Hall, Southend
No.116, 2006 Norfolk: Norwich Cathedral Refectory
No.117, 2007 Essex: Excavations at Lodge Farm, St Osyth
No.118, 2007 Essex: Late Iron Age Warrior Burial from Kelvedon
No.119, 2007 Norfolk: Aspects of Anglo-Saxon Inhumation Burial
No.120, 2007 Norfolk: Norwich Greyfriars: Pre-Conquest Town and
Medieval Friary
No.121, 2007 Cambridgeshire: A Line Across Land: Fieldwork on
the Isleham–Ely Pipeline 1993–4
No.122, 2008 Cambridgeshire: Ely Wares
No.123, 2008 Cambridgeshire: Farming on the Edge: Archaeological
Evidence from the Clay Uplands west of Cambridge
No.124, 2008 Wheare most Inclosures be, East Anglian Fields:
History, Morphology and Management
No.125, 2008 Bedfordshire: Life in the Loop: a Prehistoric and
Romano-British Landscape at Biddenham
No.126, 2008 Essex: Early Neolithic Ring-ditch and Bronze Age
Cemetery at Brightlingsea
No.127, 2008 Essex: Early Saxon Cemetery at Rayleigh
No.128, 2009 Hertfordshire: Four Millennia of Human Activity along
the A505 Baldock Bypass
No.129, 2009 Norfolk: Criminals and Paupers: the Graveyard of St
Margaret Fyebriggate in combusto, Norwich
No.130, 2009 Norfolk: A Medieval Cemetery at Mill Lane, Ormesby
St Margaret
No.131, 2009 Suffolk: Anglo-Saxon Settlement and Cemetery at
Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Colville