Contrebis 2020 v38

A LATE BRONZE AGE HOARD FROM , LANCASTER

Dot Boughton

Abstract Since the launch of the Portable Antiquities Scheme in 1997 our knowledge of prehistoric metalwork in North West England – traditionally an area with low numbers for prehistoric metalwork – has vastly improved. This Late Bronze Age hoard was discovered in 2016 at Scotforth near Lancaster. Luckily, a team of archaeologists was excavating nearby and experts were available to excavate the hoard professionally and record the context. This paper discusses the Scotforth Hoard, its discovery and sets it in context with a comparison to other local hoards

Introduction The Scotforth Hoard consists of sixteen, well-preserved, copper-alloy artefacts dating from the Late Bronze Age (Figure 1). They are all part of the British Ewart Park metalwork assemblage and therefore date from c.1150–800BC. The hoard contains four socketed axes, one large socketed chisel, three spearheads, two penannular armrings, four larger plain rings and two harness rings which may be terrets (Figures 2–4). There are also several significant organic fragments that were found in the same context and are considered part of the hoard: a fragment of wood which was possibly part of the haft of one of the axes, several hazelnut shells and two pressed flowers. The two flowers had been deposited complete inside two sockets (Items 2 and 4 below). The hoard contents were discovered deposited in a purpose-dug pit with some large sub-rectangular sandstones, perhaps used to weigh down the objects.

Figure 1. The Scotforth Hoard

The Scotforth Hoard qualifies as Treasure under the 2002 Amendment to the Treasure Act (1996), in which it is stated that any two or more objects of Prehistoric or Roman date found in the same

54

Contrebis 2020 v38 context constitute potential Treasure and need to be reported to the local coroner within fourteen days of recovery. All items of non-precious material found within the hoard contexts (such as pottery, stone, wood and other organics) are potential Treasure by proxy. The Scotforth Hoard was given Treasure Number 2016T518 and is recorded on the Portable Antiquities Scheme’s database under Find-ID LANCUM-A5AF1B (Endnote 1). The same findspot as the hoard (but not exactly the same context) yielded two potsherds, potentially Roman, one fragment of vitrified glass and one lithic [stone] implement, probably a microlith. They are residual and not part of the hoard.

Discovery and Context The Scotforth Hoard was discovered in June 2016 by two local metal detectorists between and the A6 west of at Bailrigg (SD473578). They had a very good working relationship with the local Finds Liaison Officer at the time, Stuart Noon, and reported the discovery of the hoard to him right away. Mr Noon, who was then excavating an Early Bronze Age barrow near Bolton-le-Sands with DigVentures, came out with a small team of archaeologists to investigate the hoard findspot and lift the individual items. He confirms that all the hoard items were found in the same context, clearly deposited together. He reports further that the objects were deposited as follows: at the bottom of the depositional pit the three spearheads were laid out in a line with the two harness rings or terrets adjacent to the left. One of the socketed axeheads had been wedged between two sandstones. The thinner, larger rings and the penannular armrings were sandwiched between two socketed axeheads, which lay underneath. The fourth socketed axehead was deposited on top of the heavier socketed chisel. Mr Noon also reports that the hoard deposition appears to have been in the side of a large burnt mound around 10m in diameter.

Figure 2. Socketed axes and chisel

55

Contrebis 2020 v38

Contents The sixteen items which will be discussed here in turn are: four socketed axeheads, one large socketed unlooped chisel, three spearheads, two harness fittings, two penannular bracelets, one ring (possibly an annular bracelet) and three larger rings (possibly upper armrings) (Figures 1–4). Please note that the numbering of the individual objects differs from that in the Treasure Report. The identifications have been corrected and updated from that Report. So far, the items have not been cleaned or conserved – there is still dirt adhering to the surfaces and inside the sockets of the axeheads and spearheads. Therefore the identifications, descriptions and weights are preliminary.

Figure 3. Harness rings Figure 4. Socketed chisel

1. Cast copper-alloy socketed looped axehead of Type Yorkshire Length: 87mm; Width (blade): 49mm; Width (socket, inner-outer): 24–40mm; Length (socket, inner-outer): 24–38mm; Weight: 108g

The axehead is short with almost parallel sides and a not very widely splayed blade (Figure 2). The socket is rectangular in shape, which means that it is aligned with the blade. There is one small loop on the side of the axe, just below the second, thinner mouth moulding. The surface is rough with concretions and the blade appears jagged and damaged. There are signs of wear and resharpening directly above the cutting edge, which strongly suggests heavy use prior to deposition. The casting seams on either side of the axehead’s body and along the ridge of the loop have been smoothed down. The axehead’s front and back faces are decorated with three thin, widely-spaced short ribs. Therefore, the axehead can be identified as a Late Bronze Age axehead of Type Yorkshire (Schmidt and Burgess 1981, 223ff; Plates 89–99).

2. Cast copper-alloy socketed looped axehead of Type Yorkshire Length: 84mm; Width (blade): 48mm; Width (socket, inner-outer): 31–42mm; Length (socket, inner-outer): 25–39mm; Weight: 219g

56

Contrebis 2020 v38

The axehead is short with almost parallel sides and a not very widely splayed blade (Figure 2). Its body is slightly wider and shorter than that of the other Yorkshire Type axehead (Number 1 above). The socket is rectangular in shape, which means that it is aligned with the blade. There is one small loop on the side of the axe, just below the second, thinner, lower mouth moulding. The larger upper mouth moulding is cracked in two places, as if something larger than a haft has been forced inside the socket, hence expanding and tearing the mouth in the process. The axehead’s surface is rough with concretions and the blade is jagged and damaged. There are signs of wear and resharpening directly above the cutting edge, which strongly suggests heavy use prior to deposition. The casting seams on either side of the axehead’s body and along the ridge of the loop have been smoothed down. There is a small bulge, potentially a casting flaw, just beneath the loop. The axehead’s front and back faces are decorated with three, thin, widely-spaced short ribs. Therefore, the axehead can be identified as a Late Bronze Age axehead of Type Yorkshire (Schmidt and Burgess 1981, 223ff; Plates 89–99). The excavators report that there was a fragment of a pressed flower in the bottom of the socket and suggest that it was attached to the loop (cf Treasure Report). Unfortunately, the flower has as yet not been transferred to Lancaster City Museum and was not available for study.

3. Cast copper-alloy socketed looped axehead of Type Gillespie (Variant Leith) Length: 95mm; Width (blade): 59mm; Width (socket, inner-outer): 25–36mm; Length (socket, inner-outer): 26–38mm; Weight: 260g

The axehead is large and heavy, with diverging sides and a comparatively widely splayed concentric cutting edge. The cutting edge is damaged, with a narrow sliver missing in the centre. The axehead’s body is faceted, resulting in a flat octagonal cross-section: the front and back faces are wider than the side and diagonal facets. It has a long, moulded collar, but no pronounced mouth moulding. The loop is large and semi-circular suggesting that, even though it looks very similar to Meldreth Type axes (see below), it is an axehead of Type Gillespie, Variant Leith (Schmidt and Burgess 1981, no. 1129, Plates 77–8).

4. Cast copper-alloy socketed looped axehead of Type Meldreth Length: 98mm; Width (blade): 51mm; Width (socket, inner-outer): 23.5–33.5mm; Length (socket, inner-outer): 22–31mm; Weight: 148g

The axehead has a much narrower body than the others. It has three facets on each face and with a similar sized side-facet it has an almost octagonal cross-section. The sides are almost parallel, but expand in the lower part into a widely splayed cutting edge. The upper part is decorated with a tall splayed collar without a mouth moulding. There is a thinner, lower mouth moulding at the bottom of the collar. The loop is small and narrow suggesting that this is a socketed axe of Type Meldreth (Schmidt and Burgess 1981, Plates 82–3). There are clear tool marks on the lower part of the body and above the cutting edge. There is a small hole in one side of the collar. This may be a casting flaw or have been intentionally drilled: we will know more after conservation and cleaning. The excavators reported that inside the axehead a complete pressed flower was found. They suggested that it is a type of thistle (cf. Treasure Report). Unfortunately, the flower has not yet been transferred to Lancaster City Museum and was not available for study.

5. Cast copper-alloy socketed tool, probably a broad chisel Length: 110mm; Width (blade): 53mm; Width (socket, inner-outer): 24–33mm; Length (socket, inner-outer): 21–30mm; Weight: 152g

This is a socketed, unlooped tool, which could be identified as a broad chisel (Figures 2 and 4). It has a long faceted socket and is octagonal in cross-section. Its mouth is circular and slightly flared. There is no pronounced collar or mouth moulding and it lacks a side loop, which suggests a shorter 57

Contrebis 2020 v38 wooden handle that was not tied to the head. Unlike with socketed axeheads, the socket of this tool narrows towards the blade section, then expands at a right angle into a set of small shoulders from which the blade extends. The blade itself looks very similar to that of a socketed axe. It is crescent shaped and shows marks of wear and resharpening. Remains of the calcinated haft are still inside the socket.

There are not many known British parallels for this tool, and none are mentioned in Schmidt and Burgess’s corpus of socketed axes from Northern England and Scotland (1981). One much more worn and probably not faceted parallel was recently reported to the Scottish Treasure Trove Team at National Museums Scotland (Edinburgh), where it was given the Treasure Number TT.188/16 (personal communication Brendan O’Connor). Amongst the Irish material, Eogan highlights 39 examples of these ‘hatchet-shaped axes’ (2000, 188–91; Plates 101–2). Only twelve of them have a recorded findspot, but seven of these come from the Northern Irish counties of Antrim, Armagh and Londonderry or Down (Eogan 2000, 190). This would make our example from Scotforth most likely a part of an Irish Sea group of hatchet-shaped, socketed tools.

6. Complete cast copper-alloy spearhead Length: 153mm; Width (blade): 42mm; Socket diameter (inner-outer): 22–26mm; Weight: 131g

The spearhead is complete and survives in three fragments (Figure 1). It is plain with a barrel- shaped socket and leaf- or flame-shaped head. There are two circular peg holes on opposite sides of the socket to secure the wooden haft, some of which is still present inside the socket. The peg holes are c.6mm in diameter. The spearhead has a pronounced midrib and the bevelled edges surround the blade. With its barrel-shaped socket, this spearhead is potentially a Group II F (Davis 2015, Plates 81, nos. 796–805) and so is part of the Later Bronze Age Ewart Park metalworking assemblage.

7. Complete cast copper-alloy spearhead Length: 124mm; Width (blade): 46mm; Socket diameter (inner-outer): 22–26mm; Weight: 92g

The spearhead is complete and undamaged (Figure 1). It is plain with a broad socket which has two peg holes on opposite sides for securing the haft. Each peg hole is about 6mm in diameter. There is a short moulding connecting the bottom of the blades with the top of the peg holes. The blade itself is broad and leaf-shaped, with pronounced bevelled edges and a socket that reaches to the tip. On the surface, the socket displays a sharp angle. There is some damage to the bottom of the socket. The spearhead is probably best classified as a Group II, Generic Type II C leaf-shaped spearhead (Davis 2015, Plate 67, nos. 631-635).

8. Complete cast copper-alloy spearhead Length: 151mm; Width (blade): 42mm; Socket diameter (inner-outer): 21–25mm; Weight: 130g

The spearhead is complete and undamaged (Figure 1). It is plain with a circular socket which had two peg holes on opposite sides for securing the haft. Each peg hole is about 6mm in diameter. The blade is flame-shaped, with a bevelled edge. The spearhead is in good condition with blades still sharp. There are remains of the wooden haft still inside the socket. The spearhead is probably a Group II, Generic Type II A flame-shaped spearhead (Davis 2015, Plates 6–7).

9 and 10. Two cast copper-alloy harness rings (terrets) 9. Diameter: 65mm; Height: 10.5mm; Weight: 57g 10. Diameter: 63mm; Height: 10.5mm; Weight: 85g

Two hollow-cast broad annular rings that are possibly part of a horse harness, perhaps terrets (Figure 3). They are identical in form and shape, but whilst one has damage to the surface on the 58

Contrebis 2020 v38 reverse, the other is intact and markedly heavier than the damaged one. It may have a lead or ceramic interior. They are both flat-oval/D-shaped in cross-section, with rounded edges and smooth surfaces. There is a bundle of three ridges on the obverse side of each ring, grouped in one section. The two rings are identical and probably form a pair. They were likely made from the same template or even in the same mould. No exact parallels for these rings have been found in contemporary Late Bronze Age assemblages, but they resemble terret rings of the Later Iron Age and early Roman periods which is why the identification as terrets seems most appropriate here (cf. PAS database IDs NMS-014C82, LIN-354A23, SF-A74A71, SUR-265AA3). However, hollow-cast harness rings and similarly ridge-decorated items of horse gear can be found in the contemporary hoards from Parc-y-Meirch (Denbighshire, National Museums Wales), Green End Road (University of Cambridge Museum for Anthropology and Archaeology Nos. 31.395 and 31.396) and Horsehope Manor, Peebleshire (Schmidt and Burgess 1981, Plate 146, nos. 3–9).

11 and 12. Cast copper-alloy penannular bracelets 11. Diameter: 48–55mm; Height: 3.5mm; Weight: 7g 12. Diameter: 58–65mm; Height: 7.5mm; Weight: 20g

The two bracelets are solid-cast with slightly expanded terminals (Figure 1). Both are broken in two, but neither fragment joins, so each bracelet is missing at least one fragment of the hoop. They are both finished, but the larger one displays a clear flattened casting seam on the inside of the armlet and there are file marks on the terminals. These penannular bracelets are common in British Late Bronze Age contexts, e.g. Auchtertype, Morayshire; Glentanar, Aberdeenshire; Balmashanner, Forfar, Angus (Schmidt and Burgess 1981, Plates 143C, 144C and 152B).

13– 16. Cast copper-alloy annular rings 13. Diameter: 85–92mm; Height: 3mm; Weight: 18g 14. Diameter: 81–89mm; Height: 3mm; Weight: 14g 15. Diameter: 82–89mm; Height: 3mm; Weight: 15g 16. Diameter: 60–68mm; Height: 3.5mm; Weight: 14g

Four annular rings (Figure 1) that can possibly identified as upper or lower armrings (no. 16 has a smaller diameter and was probably worn on the lower arm). All were circular in plan (though slightly bent out of shape now) and one is broken into four fragments (no. 15). Each was made from one solid copper alloy rod and they were completely undecorated. Similar to penannular bracelets (nos. 11 and 12), plain copper-alloy rings are not uncommon in Bronze Age contexts. Found without context, they are difficult to date. In this particular context and having been discovered with socketed axes and spearheads belonging to the Ewart Park metalwork assemblage, it is clear that these rings are also Late Bronze Age.

17. Organic fragments Dimensions of the wooden haft fragment: Length: 52mm; Width: 15mm; Thickness: 6mm; Weight: 2.96g.

The excavator reported that amongst the metalwork they also discovered organic material, namely a wood fragment, hazelnut shells and two pressed flowers (see Items 2 and 4). The excavator suggested that these may relate to a potential container and potential haft fragments. None of the organic fragments have yet been deposited with Lancaster City Museum and the author could not study them.

Depositional Context The Scotforth Hoard is a significant addition to our corpus of Late Bronze Age metalwork hoards from North West England. It is particularly important for North which has not produced 59

Contrebis 2020 v38 as much prehistoric metalwork as the Furness peninsula (Boughton 2018). However, it is in Furness that we find (albeit possibly slightly earlier) parallels to the Scotforth hoard – the Late Bronze Age hoards from Roosecote and Rampside (Boughton 2019). These hoards were discovered in 2013 and 2014 not far from the shore of Bay. They included socketed axes, other wood-working tools and potentially Irish Sea material (Rampside) and a large, broken spearhead (Roosecote) (Boughton 2019, Figures 1 and 2). These findspots close to Morecambe Bay underline the importance of the sea and suggest that the Irish Sea and Morecambe Bay connected rather than divided Ireland and North West England. As in other parts of Britain, contexts near water were preferred for Late Bronze Age metalwork deposition: that is, places that were neither completely wet nor completely dry. This means, for example, that in East Anglia the Fen edges were preferred to the Fens, and a cliff overlooking a coast or river was preferred to the sea or the river itself. Like the East Anglian Fens, the marshy areas around the Thames and the Trent as well as the Yorkshire Carrs, and the coastlines of South Cumbria and North Lancashire may have been considered ideal places for metalwork deposition. Morecambe Bay was not only a dangerous place with its strong tides and changing channels; it also connected Furness with North Lancashire, the Isle of Man and Ireland. It was both a connection and a boundary between places. For the Thames, which is of similar character, York has suggested that it may have served as a natural boundary between two territories and the repeated depositions of weapons and tools there were a way of staking a claim to territory (York 2002, 90). Bradley has argued that the deposition of weapons in the Thames may have been a statement about ownership and control (Bradley 1990, 139–40). This too could have been the reasoning behind the deposition of Late Bronze Age metalwork around Morecambe Bay. Like Morecambe Bay for the Irish Sea, the Thames still serves as the gateway to England and is the main access into the centre of the country from the North Sea. Allen, Hey and Miles (1997, 115) see the Thames as having the potential to be both a channel of communication and a defensive barrier, but mainly as a political and cultural boundary. This may also have been true for Morecambe Bay.

Conclusion The Scotforth Hoard is undoubtedly a significant addition to our growing corpus of Late Bronze Age metalwork from North West England. The present article introduces the individual objects and their dating and suggests possible identifications. It is hoped that the hoard will be scientifically analysed in more depth after cleaning and conservation. The two enigmatic rings – potentially harness rings, tugs or terrets – as well as the unlooped socketed tool are unique items which certainly require further study. The chisel is part of an Irish Sea tradition and some of the socketed axes have come from Yorkshire, therefore the Scotforth Hoard fits neatly into our group of North West coastal hoards.

Endnote 1. The website of the Portable Antiquities Scheme is at: https://finds.org.uk The items are stored in Lancaster City Museum.

Acknowledgements I would like to thank the finder for reporting the hoards so quickly to the Finds Liaison Officer, Stuart Noon, after their discovery and also, Ben Roberts and the team of DigVentures for excavating and recording it. I am indebted to Carolyn Dalton and Charlotte Howsley for granting me access to record and study the hoard contents which are now on display at Lancaster City Museum and to Brendan O’Connor, Adam Gwilt, Matthew G Knight and Rena Maguire for their help with the individual object identifications.

Author profile Dot Boughton originates from Germany and completed her undergraduate studies at the Freie Universität Berlin in 1999. She then moved to England, following the trail of her fore-bears, the Anglo-Saxons. Thus,

60

Contrebis 2020 v38 between 1999–2001, she studied Anglo-Saxon metalwork during the Migration Period (AD 375–520) at Oxford and completed an MSt and an MPhil. In 2015 she completed her PhD on British Early Iron Age socketed axes (800–600 BC) at the University of Central Lancashire. She currently works as a freelance small-finds specialist and translator. Email: [email protected]

References Allen T, Hey G and Miles D 1997 A line of time: approaches to archaeology in the Upper and Middle Thames Valley, England. World Archaeology 29 (1), 114–29 Boughton D 2018 Earliest Iron Age socketed axes: discoveries and rediscoveries in Furness. Contrebis 36, 59–66 Boughton D 2019 Two new Late Bronze Age hoards from Rampside and Roosecote, Furness. Contrebis 37, 46–52 Bradley R 1990 The Passage of Arms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Davis R 2015 The Late Bronze Age Spearheads of Britain. Prähistorische Bronzefunde. Abteilung V, 7. Band. München: CH Beck Eogan G 2000 The Socketed Bronze Axes in Ireland. Prähistorische Bronzefunde, Abteilung IX, 22. Band. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Schmidt PK and Burgess C 1981 The axes of Scotland and Northern England. Prähistorische Bronzefunde Abteilung IX, 7. Band. München: CH Beck York J 2002 The Life Circle of Bronze Age metalwork from the Thames. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 21 (1), 77–92

61