Artifact Term One 2013 ARCHAEOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY MAGAZINE
ARTIFACT IS... Editor-in-Chief Ruthy Mason
Editors
Eve Hoon Katie Barry
Creative Director Ruthy Mason
Contributors
Alex Bliss Jimm Hunt Ruthy Mason Claire Wood Ashley Kruger Vicky Bubmann Holly Brentnall Lawrence Rees Isa Benedetti-Whitton
Cover Photography Front Cover: Claudia da Lanca Shows an abandoned crusader castle at sunset in Syria Back Cover: Jack Massie Shows a student taking buckets to a spoil heap during sunrise at Tel Bet Yerah Bronze Age excavation in Israel Many thanks to... Stephen Shennan Bill Sillar Judy Medrington Eugenia Ellanskaya
Artifact is an Archaeology and Anthropology magazine based in the institute of Archaeology, UCL, London. If you have any comments, queries or would like to us, email the address below: artifact.ucl@hotmail.com Copyright Artifact 2012. All rights reserved,
Contents
ISSUE 8, TERM ONE 2013 NEWS 3 Recent Archaeological Finds REVIEWS 4 Archaeology themed movies BLADES, BROKEN THINGS 5 Alex Bliss MUSEUMS AND MODERN 7 Lawrence Rees HADRIAN’S WALL Jimm Hunt
9
SUNGHIR Claire Wood
11
EL DORADO REVIEW Vicky Bubmann
15
MAURICE BLOCK Holly Brentnall
19
MA FIELDWORK Ashley Kruger Isa Benedetti-Whitton
21
NEWS
IN ARCHAEOLOGY
Brazil’s Killer Cave Art Kitties
A series of cave art images recently found in Brazil depict scenes from thousands of years ago. The discovery was made by a team of researchers from Pantanal and Cerrado biomes, with a Wildlife Conservation Society and Instituto Quinta do Sol. A IMAGE: a cave art image of a cat hunting prry from Brazil. Sourced from pasthorizons.com regional specialist in cave art confirmed that the images were genuine, and dated to around 4,000-10,000 years ago. The paintings show a number of different animals, including deer, birds, large cats, reptiles and armadillos as well as groups of humans. Geometric shapes and patterns can also be seen in the drawings. A group of huntergatherer people who lived in and near the caves are thought to be the creators of the images. Two artistic styles from the Planalto tradition and the Nordeste tradition appear to be evident, although the latter style seemed to be based in areas in North-Eastern Brazil, a long distance from the location of the cave art. Further studies on the work, through excavation and geological dating, are hoping to help archaeologists fully interpret the art and reveal more about Brazil’s hunter-gatherer past.
Polish Cremations and Child Burials Excavations have revealed a series of 2,500 year old burials in Łęgowo, Poland. They are believed to have belonged to a group of people in the Lusatian culture. 151 graves were examined, with common burial practices including inverted vessels, urns with bowl shaped lids and cups placed sideways in larger containers. Other vessels could be found within the graves, with as many as 40 other other containers found within some of the burial pits. As well as adult cremations, there were a number of child graves on the site. These also contained objects, such as small carved spoons and toys. The people of this culture lived at the end of the Bronze Age, and are believed to be cereal farmers, who also bred animals for food such as cattle and goats. The culture is TOP LEFT: graves thought to cover a large part of Europe, including the of cremations Czech Republic, Saxony and Lusatia. These areas are BOTTOM also associated with precious finds, such as bronze RIGHT: Toy rattle jewellery and tools. The excavation finished in from a child grave September 2013, and was conducted by the Regional was found during excavation Museum of Wagrowiec. All images and information sourced from pasthorizons.com
ARCHAEOLOGY MOVIES
Rapa Nui (1994)
Unclear as to whether this film is at all accurate, as little is still known about the civilization at Rapa Nui (Easter Island) or its collapse. The film, whilst historically ambiguous, does provide some thought provoking themes on the environment, and a very bleak view on societal collapse. Watch if you want a sad ending, or if you are willing to play a waiting game with the end of a world.
The Clan of the Cave Bear (1986)
Braveheart (1995)
REVIEWS Completely unrealistic, with CGI six-packs and never-ending fight scenes. I spent a fair amout of the film wondering why there were blizzards in Ancient Greece, and the rest of it very glad that I wasn’t a Spartan. The film is entertaining though, especially as battles get more and more bizarre. Watch if you want blood, guts, gore and to shout ‘THIS IS SPARTA’ at the top of your lungs.
Set in the Upper Palaeolithic, this film follows the struggles of Ayla, a human girl who loses her tribe and instead becomes a member of a Neanderthal group, the Clan of the Cave Bear. The film loosely considers archaeological issues, such of language ability but was deemed a box office flop and I can see why. Watch if you want a average, ancient romp, but really you should read the book.
Not necessarily archaeological at all, but it is vaguely based on Ancient Greek mythology. Disney at its very best, the film is filled with bold characters, bright colours and some amazing tunes sang by the muses. The film is not to be taken seriously at all historically, but it is still great fun. Watch if you want a cheerful, uplifting movie that will make you wish you had a winged horse.
A classic case of Hollywood twisting history, this film takes a battle of the past and embellishes the events and those involved until there is little left of the original story. However, it is an uplifting film, and provides an unconventional halloween costume through the medium of blue woad. Watch if you want to feel proud of your celtic roots or if you want see Mel Gibson butchering a Scottish accent.
Based on the life of a female philosopher in a period of political, social and religious unrest in Alexandria. I wept through this film- it is beautifully filmed, acted and explores themes on human nature, societal collapse and the cyclical, repetitive nature of events. A must watch for anyone interested in the past, people and politics.
300 (2007)
Hercules(1997)
Agora(2009)
Scrapers, Blades and Broken Things SOME THOUGHTS ON A LITHIC ASSEMBLAGE
Ashwell today is a very pretty “typical” English village; three pubs, a village shop, a cricket ground and a striking 14th century church containing racy medieval graffito on the walls that give it a quirky edge. Having moved here over a year and a half ago now, I have quickly fallen in love with it. However, as much as I enjoy a nice bit of medieval ecclesiastical architecture or a row of leaning half-timbered cottages, my real interest lies in the complexity of the prehistoric landscape that still manifests itself in the hills and valleys of this area of northern Hertfordshire. It is in this spirit that I present what I hope will be an interesting article (or preliminary report, if you like) on a reasonably small flint assemblage from a field around half a kilometre to the north-west of the main villag. All flints in this assemblage were collected over a week with intensive walking and re-walking of the entire field. A total of around 21 hours walking for the entire week was logged, and this resulted in a total of 149 worked pieces. I employed a line-walking strategy in which every tool and flake was logged on a handheld GPS system. This spatial data was then uploaded to a GIS package, allowing for a spatial map to be constructed. I took into account biases that might affect clusters within the lithic scatters,
and concluded that the flatness of the site, combined with infrequent shallow ploughing that only began in the last three years, certainly wouldn’t have affected the assemblage as much as other more intensively ploughed sites in the area. Despite possible post-depositional biases, I maintained my strategy of field walking at a detailed level, believing that concentrations might just be picked up, and these are the results of those efforts.
The Prehistoric context
The population of the Hertfordshire area in prehistory was fairly low, due to soil that was heavy, poorly drained, and clay based, which restricted intensive agriculture in certain areas. However, evidence suggests that activity increases in the Neolithic and Bronze Age, especially in the transitional period with construction of monuments such as the newly discovered “henge” monument at Stanford. Other important monuments in the more immediate area of Ashwell include the Bronze Age burial mound at Highley Hill, ring-ditches located to the east of the village, and the later Bronze Age/ Iron Age transitory enclosure of Arbury Banks. Inventories for most these sites are visible on the English Heritage Historic Environmental
Record (HER) online database.
The Geology in context
North Hertfordshire has a somewhat complex geology, and it is clear that this has contributed both in the nature of the surrounding landscape and in providing access to raw materials for flint tools. The parish of Ashwell is essentially cut in two by the boundary of the Middle Chalk (in the south of the parish) and the Lower Chalk/Gault clay in the north. Whereas the Lower chalk is composed more or less entirely of calcium carbonate (as a result of microscopic marine organisms), the middle chalk contains large amounts of flint nodules in its upper layer. The differences in geology certainly affected the lives of people in prehistory; on the hilly sides of the valley where the Middle Chalk predominates, the soil is saturated with pieces of flint and lumps of ploughed-up chalk (in comparison to the relative sparseness of it down in the valley). The geology around Ashwell has also been instrumental in the formation of the natural spring, this natural resource a possible factor in attracting people to the area on a subsistence and perhaps even spiritual basis.
The raw materials
By and large, the type of flint being utilised in the valley is very uniform. Probably mostly brought down into the valley base from the hills arrayed to the southeast of the modern village, it is primarily of plain white colour with tinges of light blue. Some pieces demonstrate light blue and grey/white mottling, while one particularly striking flake exhibits very stark banding of dark blue with plain white. It is likely that these eccentrics derive from clay-with flints deposits, but this is a rough approximation only, and subject to local variations and exceptions. The hypothesis that some pieces originally came from clay with flints context would be interesting, as the nearest deposits occur near the villages of Lilley and Cockernhoe, some 19 miles away.
Blades and Bladelets
Only two pieces in this assemblage could be counted as blades, by which I mean showing evidence of previous removals as well as parallel lateral edges. While one appears to show no secondary modification, the other retains cortex along and a retouched mesial edge (possibly representing a scraping or cutting tool). Judging by the facets it is likely that a previous removal occurred towards the distal end of this piece during the core-reduction process. There are a few flints in the assemblage that consist blade-like morphology, but lack the necessary dorsal ridges or evidence of previous removals to be classified as “true� blades. The other example can be seen on the PAS database (ID: BH-7460C7). All three of the bladelets from the assemblage are incomplete, but for different reasons. While two have broken during their time in the plough-soil, one appears to have fractured as a result of a flaw in the flint, probably during the knapping process. One appears to have been extremely finely retouched on the mesial edge, but retains cortex on the other, possibly left intact to facilitate grip. This example also appears to have been struck with a soft-hammer. Although these demonstrate an uncharacteristically good skill for most Early Bronze Age knapping (as do the blades), it is impossible to theorise multi-phasal activity off only 5 pieces out of 149, and more will need to be recovered to evidence this hypothesis.
Knives
The one example from this assemblage appears to be an invasively retouched knife. Manufactured on a long flake with a single dorsal ridge, and retaining cortex on the lateral edge of the proximal end, this example demonstrates a retouched cutting edge and a partial notch. An invasively retouched edge made for a sharper, more durable knife, which could easily be re-sharpened with little effort. This type of tool is characteristic of Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age assemblages.
Scrapers
Four scrapers were recovered; three end scrapers and one crude side scraper (not pictured). All probably date from the late Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age, characterised by the utilisation of large, thick flakes and abrupt edge retouch. Interestingly, one appears to have broken during the knapping process, as the large re-patinated hinge fracture on the proximal end seems to indicate. This may have occurred as a result of attempting to remove the bulb of percussion, but would not have affected its usefulness as a tool.
Cores
The single multi-platform core retrieved shows clear evidence of very heavy working, showing evidence of numerous removalsright down to the point where it became completely unworkable. Much of the surface has re-cortified since its discard, but it is still possible to see most of the original facets. There are too few to distinguish between this between a blade or flake core, but it seems likely to be the latter. Comparison with similar examples on the PAS database suggests a late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age date. The position of this piece firmly within the main scatter could imply that fairly intensive core reduction was taking place in this area.
Retouched Flakes
There has been some difficulty in differentiating retouched flakes, as a large proportion of the assemblage shows signs of recent damage. Some of this is undoubtedly due to ploughing and mixing in the soil over a long period of time. Recently damaged pieces exhibit a darker blue or grey colour as opposed to white and light blue, but distinction becomes more difficult where the damage has begun to patinate. Only a few flakes appear to have any original secondary working, which stimulates an interesting question. Does the lack of retouched flakes as compared to waste flakes indicate that instead of quickly producing items that could be utilised as tools, the people inhabiting this site were putting their efforts into producing tool forms of a reasonable quality that would last longer and serve their purpose to a better degree?
Waste Flakes
There are 121 hard hammer pieces, and 9 soft hammer pieces. This difference is interesting, especially since one of the bladelets was also made with a soft hammer. Early Bronze Age assemblages demonstrate a gradual phasing out of soft hammer utilisation , and this assemblage seems to echo this pattern. This small proportion of soft-hammer flakes could instead relate to the wellknapped blades and bladelets, , and in the case of one example (not pictured) possibly an axe thinning waste-flake, perhaps representing earlier presence on the site More
flintwork of this ilk will need to be recovered to be sure of any conclusions for now.
Conclusions
Based on the evidence presented from the assemblage, it seems clear that a clear concentration of flint tools and waste within a distinct area can be seen. So, what can we say about this? Would it even be right to offer an interpretation of this scatter, when all the biases are taken into account? What can be said with certainty is that at some point between around 3000-2000BCE (during the late Neolithic or Early Bronze Age), an individual or a group of people spent time in a forested valley bottom in northern Hertfordshire, leaving behind knapping waste and some of their tools. With no geophysical survey, no crop-marks, and ultimately no excavation, nothing more can be said about the nature of the occupation here. The poor preservation conditions will not attest to the presence of any ceramic or organic remains, so to infer social activities from these would be both inaccurate and presumptuous. It is entirely possible to say that the lithic material recovered could represent both manufacture of tools (some of which were removed at abandonment) as well as subsistence activities (blades and knives for processing meat, scrapers for processing hide). However, to connect tools to activities, we must look to other aspects of evidence, which are currently unavailable. Surface scatters collected by fieldwalking clearly represent the death of an object’s life history (its discard by the people who manufactured it), and therefore it is clear that analysing the lithic assemblage of this site is helpful only up to a point. As Schiffer would argue, the archaeological record by no means represents the remains of a dead society, but rather a palimpsest of objects discarded, abandoned or lost, constantly replaced and recycled over time, and this assemblage is just as subject to those principles. Nevertheless, I am hopeful that with additional future collection, plotting and analysing of this assemblage, more information will be discerned about the people who inhabited the area, and the ways in which they interacted with the environment they lived in.
Acknowledgements
Many thanks go out to Ginger Drage and Professor Mike Parker-Pearson, whose thoughts on the material greatly aided the writing of this article.
Alex Bliss
TOP LEFT: Dorsal face of the knife, showing the notch and invasive retouch. TOP RIGHT: The three end scrapers; the middle example has had its bulb of percussion partially removed. BOTTOM LEFT: One face of the core, showing intensive working and the final removal. BOTTOM RIGHT: A worked blade
The British Museum is one of my favourite places in the world. Set in a lovely Norman Foster and Georgian Hybrid; a plethora of things from any culture you care to mention. Yet in representing every culture in the world, it is increasingly representing the present, too. The Galleries of Africa are striking in the large amount of contemporary art, or else objects from its more recent history. Room 24 has a remarkable artwork showing the average number of pills a Western citizen will consume in their lifetime, surrounded by large decorations from modern Mexican ‘Day of the Dead’ celebrations. The trend to represent modern societies in museums is not just something confined to the British Museum. My last visit to the Museum of London found an iphone in the same case as some Samian Ware, and indeed most museums of local history now include a case or two of more modern artefacts. The most extreme example of this is perhaps the
world renowned museum Den Gamle By in Denmark, which has recently departed from solely displaying restored medieval buildings and early 19th Century life, and has now built an entire replica town set in the year 1974, complete with everything from a television shop to a gynaecologist’s clinic. My initial response to this was that it seemed a bit irrelevant. Most people visit museums to see the remains of past societies, not the present or very recent past which can be seen all around us. In the case of something like Den Gamle By, there is a very pressing question of whether we are sufficiently different from the people of the 1970s for a day trip to the period to be valuable, and whether it is possible to justify building such a large exhibit that is so expensive to maintain. In presenting the tableaus of Roman Life at the Museum of London, is it actually helpful to fill them with modern objects to help us to compare our lives with the those of the Romans, or will school chil-
MUSEUMS
dren simply leave thinking the Romans had carpets remarkably similar to those you can buy in IKEA today? But these curators do have a point in preserving the material culture of our time. We are currently in a very important and interesting period in world history. Globalisation is having a massive impact, with communications linking people from all over the world. Social attitudes, technologies, industries, and migration are all changing at a remarkable pace and look set to change humanity for centuries, if not millennia to come. Our civilisation will be responsible for climate change, with far reaching effects we can only nervously suggest. It therefore seems likely that those in the future will want to study the late 20th century and the early 21st century, and material culture will be vital for this. A large proportion of our written records will probably be lost in the abyss of cyberspace, and will be out of reach of historians; it seems unlikely that the emails and text
and the modern
messages of today will ever be published in the same way as the letters of the past. Our methods of waste disposal, with centralised landfill or recycling our waste in places like China, combined with the fact that practically everything we use is treated as short term and disposable, (be it architecture, furniture, technology or tools), means that there is a serious risk that artefacts with any meaningful context will be rare. It is therefore not surprising that the collecting of the modern, with the opportunity to collect more detailed information about provenance, use and the significance of the object’s former owner, is something that a number of museums are doing. However, recent artefacts that are still commonplace, are surely not the most valuable use of often limited display space, and are not necessarily what the public go to a museum to see. It might therefore be worth collecting the modern, but with a lag until artefacts and the cultures they represent are sufficiently unusual and interesting to visitors before displaying it, not unlike a communal attic from which objects are occasionally retrieved. Of course, the present can be useful for contextualising the past in museum displays. There is no point in cutting off narratives in museum displays simply because the artefacts don’t look old enough, and it is often useful to use modern examples as analogies for the past. The Citi Money Gallery at the British Museum is a good example of this, showing the story of money from ingot origins to credit cards. Collecting the present is nonetheless
challenging and quite difficult to do well, and it is not uncommon for displays covering the modern world in local museums to fail to represent the reality of the present and very recent past, and not just nostalgic popular culture. Naturally, it is a harder job than presenting a past society with a wealth of academic study to back up displays with. We lack the hindsight to truly judge what will be significant from our time, and what artefacts people in the future will value. The other problem is the enormity of material that modern societies use; the huge amounts of possessions and waste which have become a hallmark for Western societies means that even a representative sample means a large commitment to museum stores. Equally, whereas artefacts from past societies have been narrowed down by preservation, collecting the present means that we have a much broader selection of materials to potentially collect and curate. I was struck when visiting the Tyne and Wear Museum stores by a car made in the Nissan factories at Sunderland in 2009, which had gone straight from the factory to the museum store. Now, collecting the latest outcome from a long history of industry in the North East is fair enough, but collecting a new example surely means that it lacks any meaningful context. Surely, if you wanted to use it as a resource for future study, a five or ten year old example with a few dents and a detritus of fast food wrappers in the back seats would be far more useful? I reminded me of when I was eight, and me and my Dad broke down on a bleak moor about 6 miles from the nearest vil-
lage. We utterly failed in scouring the car for anything with which to make a makeshift repair; instead the boot produced an African cooking pot, a pair of German Naval binoculars (broken) and some books on engineering. As a complete assemblage, this would have been far more valuable for a museum than the car in its factory condition. It would be possible to learn, for example, not just about its construction, but also how the car was used, how it was valued by its owners and what sort of social status it represented. So, just as we continually collect artefacts from the past, we should also bear in mind the value the artefacts of today may have in the future. Displays like the Victorian shops at the Museum of London, whilst no doubt considered rubbish when they were collected, are now wonderful places to visit and learn from. But collection of the modern needs to be given a lot of careful thought, lest we end up with a deluge of rubbish in our museum stores.
Lawrence Rees TOP LEFT: Dorsal face of the knife, showing the notch and invasive retouch. TOP RIGHT: The three end scrapers; the middle example has had its bulb of percussion partially removed. BOTTOM LEFT: One face of the core, showing intensive working and the final removal. BOTTOM RIGHT: A worked blade
Frontier Archaeology EXCAVATING NEAR HADRIAN’S WALL
The small town of Maryport on the north-west coast is home to some of the most exciting Roman frontier archaeology England has known. You may be under the preconception that the frontier was Hadrian’s Wall or the Antonine Wall, and after a fashion, you would be right. Indeed the walls were built across the landscape delineating the Roman Empire’s limit, but in the case of Hadrian’s Wall, the actual defensive system extended in the west beyond the course of those stones. From the end of the western part of the Wall at Carlisle, a series of defensive forts and signal towers ran down a considerable portion of the coast of Cumbria, all the way to (as far as we are currently aware) Ravenglass. Maryport, home to both a stone fort and an extensive extramural settlement, was part of this system. It is also where I excavated earlier this year. The Roman Maryport Settlement Project conducted by Oxford Archaeology North, is funded by philanthropist Christian Levett and under the management of Hadrian’s Wall Trust. The focus was to investigate the extramural settlement outside the fort. Previous geophysical surveying had shown there to be a high presence of remains lying just under the surface of a field currently full of sheep – and not just any sheep. Docility is not a trait common to these sheep, as shall be examined later. By the time I got to the excavation, upto-date geophysical surveying had been
undertaken across part of the field. It was decided to open four test trenches over four Roman strip-building plots to determine which one would yield the best results through open excavation of the entire plot. After about a week of uncovering the surface of the archaeology and having various representatives of The Good and The Great come to ponder over it all, one of the trenches was selected. It wasn’t mine and apparently bribery is an artform I haven’t mastered as I was unable to persuade them otherwise. Before the digger moved in I was kitted out with GPS hardware – a backpack with batteries and antennae and a pole with a receiver on top of it. Thus equipped I strode across the field like some modernday wizard, staff in hand and calling upon the knowledge of the gods to place me in the landscape. The fact that I was trailing two metal detectorists was beside the point. The detectorists were locating and digging up near-surface metal finds that would otherwise be geographically lost when the mechanical digger opened up the area of excavation and deposited them on the spoil-heaps. The majority of these were modern coins with the odd random piece of farm machinery or a Roman nail thrown in for good measure. When the digger had done its work, a mass of archaeology was immediately apparent. The lines of walls could be seen and possible flagstones peeked tantalisingly out of the ground. The first trowel line soon cleared up the mess left by the
machine and features started to become visible. We certainly had a building. A building with three rooms, one of which had a beautiful, large flagstone floor with evidence of working on the stones suggesting they were re-used. The trowel line also picked up some wonderful finds such as glass beads, a piece of a glass ring and stamped ceramic sherds. It’s 8:30am and bleary-eyed volunteers bear down upon the site pushing wheelbarrows laden with equipment. A keen eye spots a white form against the backdrop of bright orange netlon fencing that had been put up around the site. As we near it, the shape starts to become animated, shaking the long orange barricade with a vehemence alien to our tired selves. A voice wise and weary utters, “It’s a bloody sheep stuck in the fence.” Armed with knife and scissors, three of us peel away from the main body and descend upon the now frantic sheep. It seems to think head-butting the spoil-heap beyond the fence will free it. It is wrong. It takes judicious use of a knife on the netlon in order to free the sheep, at the cost of a gap in our previously stable defences. The next morning arrives and the same happens again. It’s decided to take the plastic fencing down and order sturdier, metal fencing to replace it. Explaining dead sheep to the tenant farmer is bad enough, but our supplies of mint sauce are running low as well. Once again it’s 8:30am, only this time it’s the next day. The site comes into view as
we round a wall and trudge across the field. The now-familiar white blobs of woolly idiocy greet our eyes, except this time they aren’t in the field, oh no. With casual carelessness they’ve festooned themselves across the site, draping themselves over archaeology and perching themselves upon the tiny peaks of the spoil heap like fleecy eagles in their aeries. There’s nothing we can do until the new fencing arrives. We must learn to live side by side with the sheep in harmony and peace; to cherish their presence and their ability to keep the archaeology warm for us through the application of certain bodily functions. We must also learn how to bulk-order kebab skewers. Sheep aside, the archaeology was magnificent. Bit by bit we uncovered the incredibly well-preserved Roman road that lead to and from the fort, with multiple layers of metalled surfaces present. Walking across this road, one couldn’t help but smile. Word filtered down that it was one of the best examples of a Roman road this side of Burgundy. Of the building itself, directly next to the road, we found
evidence of walls being robbed out piecemeal – seemingly not by more modern people needing stone for their buildings, but during Roman times, as in the robber trench I worked in I discovered two possible Roman coins. Between myself and a fellow volunteer, we also uncovered plenty of amphorae sherds and other assorted ceramic pieces from that period. In another robber trench a metal ring was discovered with the setting for a stone or perhaps a cameo – alas both possibilities were absent. Inside the first room we found strong evidence for burning – a large portion of the clay floor had turned bright orange by intense heat, in places completely black, like the souls of our sheepy brethren. Possible evidence of a stairwell was also found in this room, along with a complete pot and evidence of partitioning within the three walls. There was no wall directly next to the road, this is indicative of a timber frontage for the building, strengthened by the possible post hole situated near the corner of one wall and the road. Towards
the back of the plot we found a large boundary ditch with multiple re-cuts, one of which was a well that auguring showed to be around 2 metres deep. A number of other ditches and pits dotted the backland area, too. Overall this project has started off incredibly promisingly, with a wide range of volunteers helping out, guided by the wonderful staff of Oxford Archaeology North. With one more 8-week excavation of the building left to go next year, it promises to get even better. The dig runs 7 days a week and, if you’re interested in joining next year, it’d be worthwhile to keep an eye on the Roman Maryport Settlement Project website for applications to open at: www.visithadrianswall.co.uk/ empires-edge/excavations-in-hadrianswall-country/roman-maryport-romansettlement-project.
Jimm Hunt
SUNGHIR The Pearl of Palaeolithic Human History Over 20,000 years ago, modern humans were living in northern Russia, just 150km from the enclosing ice sheet of the Last Glacial Maximum. These people were not simply surviving in this hostile environment, they were thriving in it. Captured beneath the permafrost was the evidence of a highly advanced, complex society at this unparalleled Upper Palaeolithic site.
Sunghir is situated near Vladimir in northwest Russia at nearly 50⁰ N.L, on the left bank of the left bank of the Klyasma River. The site is an exceptional example of the early expansions of modern humans to high latitudes. It was discovered during clay extraction works and subsequently excavated by Otto Bader between 1955 and 1977. Bader’s son Nikolai has continued his father’s work on the site since 1986. Over 4,500m have been excavated so far and over 68,000 artefacts have been found. In addition, the remains of nine human individuals have been discovered, three of which, an adult male and two children had clearly been deliberately interned. These burials have been described as the most spectacular funerary examples of the Upper Palaeolithic. The majority of published work on Sunghir is devoted to the burials and is elusive in original format. Although a great deal can be learnt from the study of the graves, the rest of this huge site has been largely ignored. Despite the obvious significance of Sunghir it remains largely a mystery, and much of the publically accessible information is secondary at best. Peter Zolin,
a Russian writer has attempted to gather information on the site, which he refers to as “the pearl of Palaeolithic human history”. He writes that Sunghir is “…now largely silenced in most countries. Or at least, indicated very briefly without a major focus [on] its real meaning”. From what is known of this site, it should be considered as one of the most important archaeological discoveries of the middle Upper Palaeolithic. Why then are so few people, including archaeologists, aware of Sunghir? This article will not provide an answer to that question but aims to introduce Sunghir to a wider audience in the hope of encouraging future research. Little is known about funerary practices of the Middle Upper Palaeolithic, especially in this area of the world. The burials at Sunghir have provided an outstanding insight into the world in which these people lived and died. The first burial was discovered in 1964. The shallow grave was found beneath the main settlement area and had been cut in to the permafrost. It contained the remains of a mature adult male in supine position, clad in
literally thousands of mammoth ivory beads as well as perforated arctic fox teeth, polished mammoth ivory bracelets and a small schist pendant at his neck. Directly above the grave, the fragmented cranium of an adult female was found in association with a stone slab and red ochre. The use of red ochre was common in burials of the Middle Upper Palaeolithic and is often indicated as evidence of ritual behaviour. In 1969, 3 metres away from the first grave, a second burial was discovered and was found to be even more spectacular. In the middle of what appeared to have once been a circular dwelling structure, a long narrow grave had been cut in to the permafrost. It contained the remains of two children, a boy aged 12-13 and a girl aged 9-10, laid head to head. They were surrounded by an astounding array of grave goods including two ivory shafts; three discs of carved mammoth ivory - one of which was inserted onto the end of one of the ivory shafts, akin to the basket on the end of a ski pole; carved and polished mammoth ivory zoomorphic figurines; two pierced
and decorated antler batons and a straightened mammoth tusk lance which was over 2.5m long and weighed more than 20kg. The children were adorned with thousands of mammoth ivory beads which were identical to those on the man, only 30% smaller; animal-shaped and discshaped pendants and polished mammoth ivory bracelets and pins. The male child also had perforated arctic fox teeth about his waist which appeared to have once decorated a belt. Lying beside the boy was a human femur which had been filled with red ochre. There remains some discrepancy over the dates for the burials which range from 29,000 -20,000 BP, but the older is considered more likely. It has been speculated that the burial of the adult male came after that of the children, but by how long is unclear. However, there are several indications that the burials were made within a fairly close time frame. The positioning of the beads suggests they were once strung together and sewn onto clothing which was nearly identical on all three individuals, indicating parallels in style. Sunghir is thought to have been a seasonal settlement occupied by people of the Kostenki – Streletskaya culture. Dozens of hearth pits have been found, as well as evidence of dwelling structures of mammoth bone frame, wood-
en walls and skin roofs. They were rectangular in shape and varied in size from 9 x 6m to 15 x 7m. Sites associated with this culture are concentrated in the Middle Don region of northwest Russia and are characterised by bifacial leaf-point stone tools. Sunghir is considered the youngest Kostenki – Streletskaya site. Subtle changes in tools indicate the beginnings of a shift from classic Kostenki – Streleskayan features. Of the 2000 stone tools found at Sunghir, a great deal less bifacial tools and lot more blades featured in the assemblage than would be expected from a Kostenski – Streletskayan site. The incredible wealth of grave goods and ornamentation of the bodies provide a great deal of insight on this culture. The abundance of beads around the ankles and feet has led to suggestions that they ornamented footwear; indeed, skeletal studies have suggested that they were wearing some form of shoes. Of course, without adequate clothing humans would not have survived in this harsh environment. Indications of gender appropriate adornment is apparent in both burials; the fox teeth that adorn the man and the boy are not present on the girl, and unlike both males she does not have a pendant associated with her neck. Interestingly, skeletal analysis revealed several indications of social gender divisions. Some researchers have suggested
that certain skeletal markers and strong muscle attachments found on the right-hand side of both males is indicative of years of strenuous physical activity that fits the profile of spear throwing. The girl also showed signs of physical activity from a young age; not of spear-throwing but of carrying heavy weights on her head. It is often assumed that during the Palaeolithic humans led lives of hand-to-mouth existence, but the beads alone from this site represent over 2,500 hours of work. More beads have been found on the three Sunghir individuals than in the rest of the world for the entire Palaeolithic. This does not suggest that the people of Sunghir were cognitively or culturally superior to other humans alive at the time, but demonstrates the problem of taphonomic processes. It is highly likely that the behaviours echoed in the material culture at Sunghir were present in all humans at this time and long before but unfortunately have not survived as well elsewhere. Not only do beads and other jewellery provide evidence of cognitive evolution the beads from the burials represent several thousand hours of work- a clear sign that life was not spent struggling to survive. Not only do beads and other jewellery provide evidence of cognitive evolution the beads from the burials
represent several thousand hours of work- a clear sign that life was not spent struggling to survive. Not only do beads and other jewellery provide evidence of cognitive evolution the beads from the burials represent several thousand hours of work- a clear sign that life was not spent struggling to survive. The cold arid environment of the Russian tundra may have driven social evolution through cultural adaption to the environment under the pressures of selection. Although Sunghir is remarkable, it is only unique in its fantastic preservation and should be interpreted as a representation of the complexity of all human cultures of the Upper Palaeolithic. What is most remarkable about Sunghir is the lack of attention it receives. The pearl of Palaeolithic human
history is of great importance to the world in understanding the behavioural evolution of our species; Sunghir should not remain as another Russian enigma.
Claire Wood
BRITISH MUSEUM Beyond El Dorado A review of the recent British Museum exhibition
Upon their return to Spain the Conquistadors told unimaginable stories of wealth and gold in the New World. For many centuries our understanding of ancient Colombia has been shaped by these stories and especially the myth of El Dorado. During the initiation ceremony the new ruler would be covered in gold dust and placed on a boat on Lake Guatavita. Upon reaching the middle of the lake masses of gold and jewels were thrown into the depths of the lake. This ritual fuelled the myth of el dorado, literally ‘the golden one’, supposedly a lost city of gold in the Andean mountains. The myth was the result of a collision between two fundamentally different worlds and it diverted attention from the original purposes of the ancient Colombian gold. A new exhibition held at the British Museum organised with the Museo del Oro attempts to change the common view of the mythological land of El Dorado
and presents the ancient Colombian gold in the light of recent archaeological discoveries.
people of enormous wealth. Nowadays, we see gold only for its economic value and personal adornment to mark status. In ancient CoDark, cave-like rooms with lombia, the shine, brilliance many corners and unexand shimmering effects pected doorways, foreign of the metal had symbolic music and animal sounds value, associated with the – and gold wherever you colour, energy and unlook: This is “Beyond El changing creative powers of Dorado – power and gold the sun. Gold was used for in ancient Colombia”. It rituals and ceremonies to feels like entering an aban- communicate with the sudoned mine and one is im- pernatural. This is the focus mediately captured by the of the exhibition. The curasheer amount and beauty of tors are trying to underline gold artefacts. The exhibithe importance of gold for tion is split into three parts purposes other than sorepresented through black, cial organization because blue and brown walls. The mythological stories such as first part focuses on the the tale of El Dorado have mining and forging of gold diverted attention away and the kinds of techniques from the original purpose used to create different of ancient Colombian gold artefacts. The second part artefacts. explores the importance of communicating with the The glass cases are filled universe in ancient Colom- with gold objects of all sizes bia and the final focus is set presented on a background on death and burials. of red velvet, enhancing the beauty of the artefacts. The items on display are They range from diadems clearly the products of a to elaborate necklaces and highly civilized and skilled tunjo figures and often
“Gold is the most exquisite thing (…) Truly, for gold (a man) can gain entrance for his soul into paradise.” – Christopher Columbus, 1503 combine human and animal forms. During rituals and ceremonies the elites of the tribes would adorn themselves with the glittering gold pieces and wear cloaks of animal skin to resemble certain animals. By making themselves look like a particular animal the ancient Colombians believed that they could see the world differently and assume the powers of that animal. Then they consumed intoxicating substances and danced to induce a stage of trance in
which they could communicate with the supernatural. Just imagine the decadence and show of such ceremonies. The colours, smells and sounds must have been overwhelming. The exhibition successfully enables the visitor to experience a part of these ancient Colombian rituals. For just an hour you enter a mystical world where gold is a means to experience the universe differently. The
ancient Colombians lived with and through gold. Let yourself be captivated by the skill and perfection of the craftsmen; be amazed by the ancient Colombian perception of the universe and the supernatural and be intrigued by their treatment of death. Look beyond El Dorado! Vicky Bubmann
The exhibit will be on display until 23 March 2014. All images were taken from the British Museum website: www.britishmuseum.org
Interview- Maurice Bloch THE MAVERICK ANTHROPOLOGIST
Maurice Bloch, one of the world’s most distinguished anthropologists, knows well the accuracy of calling himself a maverick. The pointless war between culturalist and universalist scholars wages on. Meanwhile, Professor Bloch stands out invincible, as he wanders peaceably between the two. He proffers a more forward-thinking anthropology, the only ticket there is to the free ride of proving to those outside the discipline of the importance of culture. Among his students, there is a comparison drawn between him and Bilbo Baggins of the ‘Lord of the Rings.’ As follows, it seems apt to claim that Bloch holds the Anthropological one ring to rule them all. Professor Bloch has published widely on his research interests, largely based on his fieldwork among the Zafimaniry and Merina people of Madagascar. Having held a number of positions at universities around the world, he is currently based at the London School of Economics and is an associate member of the Institut Jean Nicod of the Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris. Having admired him from afar, Holly Brentnall now treats us by delving into the unorthodox mind of the man himself.
For those who don’t know you describe yourself in three words. Maverick. Lazy. Creative You originally studied history. What made you decide to transfer to Anthropology? Because I wanted a discipline which saw as its subject matter mankind as a whole unlike the history of the time which was euro centric and refused to be from the point of view of ordinary other people such as Asians or Africans. My desire to find a subject which redressed the balance by pushing Europeans and Americans in the background and ordinary people in Asia and Africa to the fore ground was motivated by my involvement in anti-colonial activism in a time of colonial wars. Who has been of greatest inspiration to you throughout your life so far? Not a single person but a combination of many Marx, Darwin, Malinowski, E.M. Foster, my step father J.S.Kennedy, Leach, Firth, Fortes, and so many others including several of my research students. Your mother was the great niece of Emile Durkheim and your grandmother was the first cousin of Marcel Mauss. Did you hear stories about Durkheim from your mother or ever meet Mauss? My mother spent almost all her childhood holidays with Mauss and Durkheim in Normandy. The Durkheims, Mauss and my grandmother all came from a small provincial town in eastern France. Like many provincial immigrants to the capital they first moved to the same suburb and from there to the same part of Paris within a few streets of each other. They therefore all remained very close. I remember Mauss very well since he lived in the same block of flats as my grandparents and I often accompanied my grandmother as she took cooked food to Mauss when he was old and widowed. His flat was full of books and looked as if it had been hit by a tornado. My mother remembered Durkheim as a forbidding figure to whom children were not meant to speak unless they were spoken to. I believe this was not the impression his own children had of him. What was your time like as an undergraduate at the London School of Economics? It was a time of liberation from an awkward family situation. The anthropology degree was still a four field one so we were taught together with students from University college and SOAS and for the first and second years much, if not most, of our teaching took place in these
other institutions. I spent a great deal of time in political activities but these were focused on what was happening in France, particularly the colonial wars about which I felt strongly. I also spent a lot of time acting, mainly in French plays. As a result of all this my ties to LSE were fairly loose but I liked the place precisely because it allowed for this. You have published over a hundred articles and many books. What of your work so far are you most proud of? Three papers: ‘Property and the end of affinity’, ‘People into places: Zafimaniry concepts of clarity’ and ‘Going in and out of each other’s bodies’. What made you decide to study in Madagascar? I first wanted to do research in Asia, especially in India, but at that time Fortes was hoping to start a research programme with French anthropologists on West Africa. He offered me a grant if I would join it as he thought I could be a kind of interpreter within the group. The project fell through and so he was landed with me. He told me I could go anywhere so long it was in ex French Africa. Madagascar seemed the most Asian place in Africa so I chose it. I have never ever regretted it. Madagascar is the most interesting place in the world. Its people are the most profound, cheerful and generous group of people I have known. The possibility being close to a few Malagasy, who on the face of it were people with a very different life to my own, is an extraordinary privilege which anthropology has offered me. It is said that on the one hand you criticize anthropologists for exaggerating the particularities of specific cultures whilst on the other hand you criticize cognitive scientists for underestimating it. How can we get the balance right? I don’t think this is the right way of putting things. It sounds caught up within the old discussion about whether a certain aspect of people’s behavior is “natural” or “cultural”. What I study are representative of the species Homo Sapiens and, like other animals, these representatives can be seen as made by what seems a number of distinct processes that can be isolated. This isolation is only true for the sake of making explanation easier for a moment, but these distinctions must then be set aside as they are misleading. This is because those processes are always together; they are one. The phenomenon “a human being” is but a moment in the simultaneous occurrence of processes. Human beings are special, but not totally unique, in that one aspect of the
single human process is history, this can crudely be called culture. The historical process is a constitutive part of the single human process which makes people, just as much as the process of natural selection or ontogeny does. So nothing is less helpful than trying to ask what are the “natural” bits or “cultural” bits of people. Anthropologists have tended to just look at that side of single process which can be labeled “the historical/cultural process” as though it stood alone. Some cognitive scientists have tended to look at the non-historical sides of the process as though it stood alone. Doing either of these things forgets the difficult phenomenon that we study. As I write this I am aware that it is difficult to explain my point in a few words. If you are interested you should read my book: ‘Anthropology and the Cognitive Challenge’. Are there any areas of your work that you would want to revise? There revisions would often be concerned with ethnography. I think they will not usually interest you unless you are particularly interested in Madagascar. One I can mention is that I feel I have underestimated the significance of trade for the Zafimaniry. As far as theory is concerned I have never stopped modifying my positions as I have learnt more, thought more, have read more and met new people. This process has been continuous. What I feel about my earlier work is that it is theoretically very incomplete and I am trying to make it more complete. What are your most recent areas of interest and plans for the future? A few years ago I wrote a paper entitled “Why religion is nothing special but is central”. That article was programmatic and I stuffed many ideas in it. I plan to expand it into a book. What should be a quote for your students to live by? “Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history” said by Darwin in 1859 – it’s a wonderful understatement. Finally, are you aware that there is a rumor going around LSE that the character of Bilbo from the film of the Lord of the Rings, was based upon you likeness. Do you know if there is any truth in it? It seems a suitable comparison since you both go off on adventures. What are your thoughts on this? It is not a rumor! It is a fact! I am Bilbo and, damn, my cover has been blown.
In July 2013, after many appeals to the director of the Institute of Archaeology, the first MA fieldwork course took place. As a prototype venture the group was fairly small but appropriately diverse. Students from various archaeologically focused degrees participated, from straight-up Archaeology to Comparative Art and Archaeology to Managing Archaeological Sites. The course was aimed at those with minimal-to-no field experience, so those from any historical or archaeological or other relevant backgrounds were [and are!] welcome to be involved. Spread over two weeks the field-
work course covered a range of information, training and practical experiences of excavation and recording. The group of July 2013 were lucky enough to encounter two weeks of unbroken sunshine, and topographical walks across the South Downs and West Sussex coast. These walks and introductory talks provided an overview of the various landscape types in even a small region of the UK, and how this may have influenced the settlement patterns and the economy of pre-historic Britain. Accommodation was based at Boxgrove in West Sussex, itself an archaeological site. Prior
excavation at Boxgrove revealed a Middle Pleistocene Stone-Age settlement, with evidence of animal processing; adjacent to this are suspected Roman fortifications, which demonstrate the rich archaeological history of the region. The majority of the fieldwork course centred on the excavation of a suspected Bronze-Age Barrow, believed to have been destroyed during World War II when the Downs were farmed to cultivate food. During the first few days of digging this hypothesis turned out to be incorrect and the suspected Barrow in fact an early Saxon burial, complete with human skeleton; a testament to the at
Sun, Sea and Skeletons MA FIELDWORK TRIP
animal processing; adjacent to this are suspected Roman fortifications, which demonstrate the rich archaeological history of the region. The majority of the fieldwork course centred on the excavation of a suspected Bronze-Age Barrow, believed to have been destroyed during World War II when the Downs were farmed to cultivate food. During the first few days of digging this hypothesis turned out to be incorrect and the suspected Barrow in fact an early Saxon burial, complete with human skeleton; a testament to the at times unpredictable and exciting nature of archaeology in the UK.
Topographical survey training and introductions to recording techniques were also valuable aspects of the course, particularly for those who wished to continue careers in the practical, explorative side of archaeology. At least one participant received a job offer following the training course, but beyond the employability factor all those who partook will attest to the fact it was not only enjoyable but a valuable and informative experience that helped to contextualise many of the theoretical elements of their MA courses.
The fieldwork course will take place again in July of 2014, and any interested MA students are strongly encouraged to register their interest as soon as possible. Accommodation will again be based at Boxgrove and further information will be circulated as soon as it becomes available. Isa Benedetti-Whitton, MA Archaeology 2013, assistant co-ordinator of MA Fieldwork course.
We are an organisation formed in order to represent masters students at the IoA in both admistrative and academic matters. The second annual SAMS committee met at the beginning of this academic year and have selected a number of representatives to work on your behalf. We aim to run a number of social events as well as workshops and an end of year conference open to all masters students in the coming year. More recently the committee has run an incredibly successful bake sale, helping to raise funds to aid in the running of such future events and we at SAMS would like to thank all the staff and students of the IoA for your support. If you wish to contact the committee please email us at ioamsociety@gmail.com or approach any of our representatives. We welcome new members at any point, so if you would like to join, feel free to come along to one of our meetings. Ashley Kruger, GIS and Spatial Analysis in Archaeology, Chair of the SAMS committee 2013-2014