Toby F. Martin
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
IDENTITY AND THE CRUCIFORM BROOCH IN EARLY ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND: AN INVESTIGATION OF STYLE, MORTUARY CONTEXT, AND USE Toby F. Martin The results, discussions and conclusions presented herein are identical to those in the printed version. This electronic version of the thesis has been edited solely to ensure conformance with copyright legislation and all excisions are noted in the text. The final, awarded and examined version is available for consultation via the University Library. A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Sheffield, Department of Archaeology, December 2011 VOLUME III Appendix 1: Dress Reconstruction and Textiles The following data tables contain all available information concerning the position of brooches on the body in the grave, the textile remains associated with dress-fastening brooches, and the suggested reconstructed dress ensembles that were extrapolated through the research outlined in Chapter 6. The tables are organised according to the order of analysis in this chapter: 1. Cruciform brooches used singly to fasten cloaks over peplos dresses fastened by matching pairs of brooches (Tables A1.1 through A1.4) 2. Cruciform brooches used in pairs to dual-fasten cloaks (Table A1.5) 3. Cruciform brooches used in pairs to fasten peplos dresses (Table A1.6) 4. Cruciform brooches used to fasten various garments, but worn with one other different type of brooch, or with pairs of non-matching brooches (Tables A1.7 through A1.10) 5. Cruciform brooches worn singly (Table A1.11) The organising principle therefore is the combination of brooches with which each cruciform brooch was worn. These data have been gathered from published reports, and checked against the online database of early Anglo-Saxon textiles hosted by the Archaeological Data Service.1 The publication of most early Anglo-Saxon cemeteries that have yielded cruciform brooches has included an examination of the textile remains (Quarrington and Tallington in Lincolnshire, Oakington in Cambridgeshire, and Brunel Way in Norfolk are exceptions). All publications used here include grave plans and record the positions of brooches accurately within them, although in some regrettable cases textile remains have been cleaned-off brooches before an analysis could take place. Such exceptions include Broughton Lodge in Nottinghamshire and Empingham II in Rutland. For the sake of convenience and reference, the textile reports that have contributed to the data in the tables below are here listed, and full details can be found in the general bibliography. They are as follows: 1 Available from http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/clothing_eh_2007/ (accessed November 2011). 404 Barrington A (Edix Hill), Cambridgeshire (Crowfoot 1998) Bergh Apton, Norfolk (Crowfoot 1978) Broughton Lodge, Nottinghamshire (no textile analysis) Brunel Way, Norfolk (no textile analysis) Castledyke South, Lincolnshire (Walton Rogers 1998) Cleatham, Lincolnshire (Coatsworth et al 1996) Easington, County Durham (Henry 1995) Empingham II, Rutland (no textile analysis) Great Chesterford, Essex (Crowfoot 1994) Morning Thorpe, Norfolk (Crowfoot 1987) Mucking (I and II), Essex (Crowfoot 2009) Norton, Tees (Walton 1992) Oakington, Cambridgeshire (no textile analysis) Sewerby, Yorkshire (Crowfoot 1985) Snape, Suffolk (Crowfoot 2001) Spong Hill,Norfolk (Crowfoot and Jones 1984) Springfield Lyons, Essex (Crowfoot 2005) Swaffham, Norfolk (Crowfoot 1976) Tallington, Lincolnshire (no textile analysis) Wasperton, Warwickshire (Walton Rogers 2009a) West Heslerton, Yorkshire (Walton Rogers 1999) Westgarth Gardens, Suffolk (Crowfoot 1988) There are some problems with presenting these various textile reports in a standard format, the foremost being that detail is not given consistently in these reports. For instance, some will detail exactly where on the brooch the textile remains were recovered, others do not. Another major hindrance is that very few of these reports attempt to reconstruct costume in the manner that has been done in Chapter 6. Most of these specialist reports are sadly only given space to list the raw data. The reports from Mucking (Crowfoot 2009), Wasperton (Walton Rogers 2009a; 2009b) and West Heslerton (Walton Rogers 1999) are exceptions and have been extremely useful in reconstructing dress ensembles from the other cemeteries. There are some problems with the Cleatham textiles, which have been transcribed as accurately as possible. Because the 405 textile report was published separately and earlier than the full publication, they do not correspond in terms of small find numbers. Efforts have been made to identify the items mentioned in both, but some caution should be exercised reading these results from the following tables. Locations in the grave are generally straightforward, but some problems were encountered where only a schematic plan was provided, such as with the Norton report. Frustratingly, because the location of grave goods was indicated only by a circular point, and not an accurate drawing of the grave itself, the locations were not always clear. In addition, the orientations of brooches were not consistently described in the published catalogue. On the whole, however, these specialist textile reports provide a wealth of information that is rarely utilised. Though frequently the conclusions drawn from it can be ambiguous, its full presentation here is a reiteration of its potential utility. In the following tables, grave contexts are listed alphabetically in each column, and are named by the single kind of garment-fastening brooch being considered. Consequently, a grave with three cruciform brooches may be listed in more than one table as one of them will have been used to fasten a cloak, while the other two will have fastened a peplos dress. The second column provides the type of the cruciform brooch under consideration, and details other brooches in the grave: their type and their position on the body. The term ‘centre’ refers to brooches found in the throat area down to the centre of the upper chest. ‘Left’ and ‘right’ are used as abbreviations for the left and right shoulders or left and right upper chest. The terms ‘left chest’ and ‘right chest’ distinguish a location further down around the mid-chest region. The third column offers a suggested list of all the garments for which there is evidence, and the brooches that fastened each one. The fourth and fifth columns provide all the textile information associated with each brooch, along with its precise location object if this has been given. The fourth column specifically lists textiles that the brooch is more likely to have fastened as they have been found on the reverse of the brooch. Note that this does not necessarily mean these textiles were pinned by the brooch. Where the pin can be seen to pierce the textile this has been noted, though this is rare. The fifth column provides other associated textiles, generally from the front of the brooch. 406 Table A1.1: Single Cruciform Brooches Worn with Pairs of Annular Brooches Name of Type and Garments Textile on Other cruciform position on body brooch pin or associated brooch reverse textiles Bergh Apton 4.7.1 (centre) Cloak (fastened by ZS 2/2 twill ZZ twill on G18 cruciform), peplos front Annular (left) (fastened by None None Annular (right annulars) ZZ tabby ZS twill (probably associated) Bergh Apton 2.1.2 (centre) Cloak (fastened by ZS twill over a ZZ tabby on G37 cruciform), peplos ZZ tabby front Annular (left) (fastened by None None Annular (right) annulars), sleeved None Z, S, Z tablet dress weave Broughton 4.7.1 (centre) Cloak (fastened by None None Lodge G3 Annular (left) cruciform), peplos None None Annular (right) (fastened by None None Annular (centre) annulars), sleeved None None garment. Extra annular brooch fastening peplos to undergarment? Broughton 4.6.2 (centre) Cloak (fastened by None None Lodge G8 Annular (left) cruciform), peplos None None Annular (right) (fastened by None None annulars), sleeved dress Broughton 3.2.1 (centre) Cloak (fastened by None None Lodge G112 Annular (left) cruciform), peplos None None Annular (right) (fastened by None None annulars), sleeved dress Castledyke 3.2.1 (centre) Cloak (fastened by ZZ tabby None South G29 Annular (left) cruciform), peplos Traces None Annular (right) (fastened by ZZ ?2/2 twill None annulars) Castledyke 3.2 (centre?) Cloak (fastened by Traces Traces on front South G43 Annular (left) cruciform), peplos ZZ 2/2 twill, AA tabby on (fastened by ?wool front Annular (right) annulars) ZZ tabby ZZ tabby on front Castledyke 3.2.2 (centre) Cloak (fastened by Z?Z ?2/2 twill ZZ tabby on South G74 cruciform), peplos front, flax Annular (left) (fastened by ZZ 2/2 twill, flax ZZ 2/2 twill on annulars) front Annular (right) None Z?, wool, associated Castledyke 3.2.4 Cloak (fastened by Z threads None South G115 Annular (left) cruciform), peplos ZZ ?twill, wool None Annular (right) (fastened by None Hemp braid or annulars), sleeved cord 407 dress Empingham II 3.2.1 (centre) Cloak (fastened by None None G37 Annular (left) cruciform), peplos None None Annular (right) (fastened by None None annulars), sleeved dress Empingham II 3.2.1 (centre) Cloak (fastened by None None G69 Annular (left) cruciform), peplos None None Annular (right) (fastened by None None annulars), sleeved dress Empingham II 4.7.1 (centre) Cloak (fastened by None None G100 Annular (left) cruciform), peplos None None Annular (right) (fastened by None None annulars), sleeved dress Empingham