Tuesday, 30 June 2009

Binchester Day Seventeen

Another muggy day! Whereas yesterday was dominated by large-scale cleaning of the northern area of the trench, today was mainly more selective cleaning. A number of people were back in the southern area of the trench working on defining the edges of the cobble spreads around the bow-sided building. This is helping to resolve this complex area, although there is still much to do. Elsewhere we had given up using the hoes and were on our knees troweling trying to remove the final outstanding islands of topsoil and related layers. This is very instructive and we are now starting to define various stretches of walls within the northern part of the trench. Obviously the main walls of the barrack are appearing, but also there are also some smaller stretches of certain or probable wall making an appearance. Some are clearly related to the barrack structure (although at this early stage they appear to be of a slightly different construction- what does this mean?). Other stretches are appearing in the north-eastern part of the stretch and seem to be overlying the putative intra-vallum roadway, which may indicate they are relatively late.

Monday, 29 June 2009

Binchester Day Sixteen

Busy day today as our partners from Stanford arrived on site (although thanks to the baggage breakdown at Terminal 5 yesterday much of their luggage is not yet here). They had an introductory talk by David Mason (County Archaeologist) and then a site tour. We then got them working! You may remember that much of the northern part of our site has only had a superficial clean following the initial topsoil strip, so we decided to return to this area and give it a more thorough cleaning. This will allow us to get a sense of what is happening on this part of the site. It is clear that the barrack block extends into this area, but it is not clear how much activity there is in the north-east quadrant of the trench. Despite rather muggy conditions, the Stanford students and students from Durham were able to get about half of the area cleaned (though as elsewhere on the site, this is likely to be an on-going process we will return to regularly).

I’m aware that I didn’t do a ‘finds catch-up’ last week; as soon as I’ve enough new photographs I’ll post an overview. However, this is a good chance to flag up two nice discoveries. There is a nice fragment of jet or shale bracelet decorated with a distinctive ring-and-dot; very similar examples are known from South Shields where they may have been manufactured. We’ve also had a small lead sealing (probably for sealing bales of cloth, foodstuffs or even official documents); it bears the letter DEC and AR[I]? (last letter not quite clear). I’ll see if I can find any parallels.

Lead sealing

Matthew is this month's Mr Binchester. He describes himself as a 'top history boffin' and likes nothing better than drinking pina coladas and taking walks in the rain

Friday, 26 June 2009

Binchester Day Fifteen

We've come to the end of week three; this is also the point at which the initial workforce of Durham 1st year archaeology students leaves. They will be replaced on Monday by a new team, consisting of a contingent from Stanford (US) and a motley group of Durham undergraduates and post-graduates. They will be taking work on the site forward over the next three weeks. The final day's work for the first years was marred slightly by persistent drizzle in the afternoon, nonetheless work continued apace. There were no major developments. We began to take out the second section of the late/sub-Roman feature- this produced two coins and an iron buckle in the space of about two hours. Work continued on the med/post-med feature though we're still not certain of the relationship it has with the stretch of wall that has appeared within it. The bow-sided building is now even clearer, which is pleasing. Finally, over by the rampart, a thorough cleaning and the cutting of a section confirmed that the rubble/wall line cuts the clay of the rampart and is clearly a later pahse of activity (perhaps a late Roman/post-Roman refortification?) and is not integral with the construction of the initial rampart phase. A really big thank you must go to this initial team, most of whom had no experience on an archaeological site before they arrived. However, thanks to the fantastic and profoundly tolerant (!) supervision of the team from Archaeological Services have done a really good job from a standing start.


The rubble/wall/revetment cutting the rampart material (on left of picture). Looking south.













I've also realised that so far, although I've talked about daily progress I've not provided much information about the position of our trench within the fort or given a plan of the trench. So here goes....


The position of our trench is marked (not to scale). You can see it lies in the eastern corner of the fort, to the north of the Via Principalis. The excavated site of the commandant's house and bath-house lies to the south-west of us. The map shows clearly how much of the west of the fort is overlain by Binchester Hall Farm and Binchester Hall. It is also easy to see the damage to the fort caused by landslips, as the scarp slope of the plateau collapsed into the River Wear (though this stabilised in the 20th century).


This is a very approimate plan of our trench I've knocked up this evening. It shows the broad configuration of the site at the moment. The northern half of the trench has been stripped but will require further cleaning before we can see much of what is happening. In the southern half of the trench is a building running more or less n-s (this is using site north, which is to the top of the plan). This is presumably a late Roman barrack block. The walls are less well preserved than the plan suggests, with some stretches robbed out entirely and other areas containing dumps of rubble, presumably the rubble core from walls dumped after the facing stones have been robbed. Within this building are two major features. To the north is the roughly oval feature containing cattle bones and late Roman pottery. This has either built up on an area of subsided floor surface or is in a pit/scoop lined with re-used flag stones from the surrounding floor. To the south of this and the other side of an internal wall is the larger feature which has contained large chunks of late medieval pottery and a little post-medieval material, including clay pipe. Not shown on the plan, within this feature is a stretch of north-south wall parallel to the long walls of the building. In the south-east corner of the trench is the bow-sided building on a different alignment to the barrack block. This is surrounded and possibly partly overlain by cobble surfaces. There is a particularly large cobble dump at its east end, which has yet to be removed. We've not found any floor surfaces connected with this building yet. Finally, to the north, is the stretch of rubble and wall, which we believe forms a revetment cut into the clay rampart. This appears to be robbed out in places; a fragment of medieval pottery from the rubble associated with this robbing is medieval giving us a rough idea of when this robbing took place. Just to the west of this (Not shown)are two stretches of rubble that could either be the ephemeral traces of a building or just two stretches of rubble. This is obviously a very simpliefied overview; the key thing to remember, is that running around, and in places over, both buildings are large areas of very heterogenous cobbled surfaces. Some of these may be collapse or demolition material, others may be proper occupation/activity surfaces. Time will tell. Hopefully though, this rough plan will help readers get a better understanding of the broad contours of the site and better understand my blog postings.

Thursday, 25 June 2009

Binchester Day Fourteen

A very constructive day! After the doldrums of planning the site we are really back into the swing of digging again. We seem to be making progress in all key areas of the trench. The large medieval feature has now turned into a large post-medieval feature, as we found a fragment of clay tobacco pipe in it. This is actually very helpful; I’m happier having a big post-med pit than a medieval pit. If it had been the latter, there might have been a real possibility that many of the other features in the immediate vicinity could also have been medieval in date. However, it’s very unlikely that they are of post-medieval date. I think we have an isolated later feature here, rather than a series of medieval features. This gets rid of my nagging worries that the ‘barracks’ were actually a medieval building.

Just to the north, the other feature within the building has continued to produce bone and Roman pottery. We had a site visit from some of my colleagues from the Department of Archaeology today, and Peter Rowley-Conwy gave the bone a quick once over; it’s all small cattle, which is useful to know. There are still questions about this feature, however, as its construction is not quite clear. It could be a deposit that grew up on a scoop caused by an area of collapse or subsidence of the floor of the structure, as its base and sides consist of the same kind of stones that comprise the surrounding area. Alternatively, it might be a scoop deliberately cut into the floor and then lined with stones from the disturbed floor area. At the moment I’m inclined to feel that it’s a hollow caused by subsidence, as the stones around it appear to slump into it (see photograph below). The date is still uncertain, though it’s clearly very late or sub-Roman (l.4th century or later date). The trouble is there is virtually no diagnostic material culture of the 5th-7th century AD from the north-east. We may have to get a C14 date on some of the bone.

In the rampart area, we appear to have defined an area of stone revetment; there is also a possible irregular rubble wall nearby; it could be traces of a simple structure built against the rampart or simply a spread of rubble (we’ve got lost of those!). Finally, to the south, large areas of rubble have been removed to reveal more of the possible out-of-alignment stone building; we now have stretches of all four walls (see photo above). Interestingly the long walls appear to be slightly bowed out. This is a feature found in later first millennium AD structures (and we’re happy its certainly post-Roman), but I would have no problem it being of later date (11th-14th century). Hopefully, we’ll get some stratified artefactual material that will help us date it more precisely.


The probable late/sub-Roman feature; it is possible to see the stones slumping into it.

Wednesday, 24 June 2009

Binchester Day Thirteen

Unfortunately, not much to report today, as once again I was stuck in meetings. We did have a visit from Suzie Thomas, the CBA (Council for British Archaeology) Community Archaeology Support Officer. She came to talk to us about our plans for developing the community involvement element of the project. We spoke about our plans for a phase of public participation on the excavation following the end of the imminent Stanford visit; we were pleased to report that we were already fully booked up for this. There is clearly a real local thirst for the chance to get involved in archaeological excavation. We also discussed our plans for integrating local people into the post-excavation process (funding permitting). Otherwise I was back in the Department sorting out the last minute arrangements for the arrival of the US contingent and getting ready for tomorrow’s visit to the site by my colleagues in the Dept. of Archaeology.

Tuesday, 23 June 2009

Binchester Day Twelve

Today was the first properly hot day we’ve had on site this season; although the timely provision of ice lollies at lunch time helped keep the diggers cool! Now that the planning is finally complete (more or less) we’ve been able to commence digging features. The scoop containing animal bone has continued to produce Roman pottery (no medieval) and large pieces of animal bone; is it Roman or perhaps a bit later? Its relationship with the structure it lies within is still unclear. It may well have been related to some industrial activity as it contained fragments of charcoal. Excavation today also revealed a post-hole cut into the fill; this is officially the sites first ‘cut’ feature! (and we’ve been on site for over two weeks…). We also resumed work on the large medieval feature; removing further spits has revealed a distinct wall-line; this appears to be overlain by medieval material, but it’s not clear whether it is also medieval or whether it relates to the (presumed) Roman building.

Over by the rampart the situation is still unclear. Further cleaning is revealing a distinct line of stone, parallel to the edge of the fort. However, it varies considerably in nature along its course; to the south it appears to be a definite stone wall, but further north it becomes a rubble dump. This feature is unlikely to be the remains of the fort wall, but it could be the traces of the rear wall of a revetment; time will tell.

I also found a chance to get off site and explore the surrounding area this afternoon. Following the footpath along the edge of the field to the east of the field we are working in, it was possible to see a distinct bank running along the eastern edge. This appeared to be made up of earth and rubble. It is most likely to be the remains of the headland of an area of medieval ridge and furrow, though it might conceivably be related to Roman activity in the area. Further along, there are also a number of hollow ways leading down the slope to a low-lying marshy area; again the question arises, are these related to medieval activity at the site? Looking at the area on Google Earth, a large number of ridge and furrow like earthworks are visible all around this area; I am not entirely convinced they are medieval however. They vary in width and many are straight rather than exhibiting the sinuous S-curve associated with medieval r&f. Also there are areas of the bottom of the valley which show signs of these features which must have been too marshy for medieval ploughing. Are some of these features of medieval or post-medieval date and linked to drainage or the management of water meadows? I need to get hold of some of the estate plans for this area that are held in the archives in Durham.

Earth and rubble bank; medieval or Roman?

Possible hollow ways

Monday, 22 June 2009

Binchester Day Eleven

Today the majority of the planning was completed which will allow us to crack on tomorrow with further exploring the barrack block, which is where we anticipate moving most of the excavators. Today, the large dark feature which had produced the bone and fragment of antler produced more late Roman looking pottery, which was very encouraging (and crucially, no medieval material); so far this is our best candidate for a late/sub-Roman feature. Elsewhere, work continued on defining what was happening closer to the rampart. Evidence for stretches of walling continue to appear, though the alignments of each individual stretch varies, so its not clear whether they are part of a single feature or fragments of a series of building built close to the edge of the fort (possibly of late date).