Charting the Effects of Plough Damage Using Metal-Detected Assemblages

This is a repository copy of Charting the effects of plough damage using metal-detected assemblages.

White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/42708/

Article: Haldenby, D. and Richards, Julian D. (2010) Charting the effects of plough damage using metal-detected assemblages. Antiquity, 84 (326). pp. 1151-1162. ISSN 0003 598X

Reuse Unless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version - refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher’s website.

Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request.

[email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ r cietlyls rrpeetdlbrt eoiin ae ntecmoiino the assemblage. of excavated composition the the with on comparison in based England deposition, southern deliberate over assemblage represent detected or lost accidentally are fhwaal giutr a eutdi hne nteceia tblt fojcsadhas and issue objects the of from stability chemical started (Fjaestad the damage been has in mechanical work at changes have most looked in metalwork not resulted attrition for has agriculture while such arable bone, how cases, plough of of Boismier few 1989; of a 1988, studies in (Reynolds effects pottery and, previous the to 1997) damage into most chemical or research mechanical although with some concerned artefacts, been has on There Archaeology disturbance Oxford 2010). to 2006; University damage Archaeology Cranfield the Oxford lessening & (e.g. on assemblages focused Schadla- than have & rather however, deposits Hinchliffe monuments strategies, archaeological 2004; mitigation stratified 1980, Most 1977, to 1980). Lambrick done Hall (e.g. damage practices the agricultural of modern aware by well artefacts. of past are history on archaeologists depositional light and the throw on also demonstrate, can to seeks which the however, paper basis ignore, this day-to-day as not a and, should on We societies Wales. reported reporting and objects the England facilitating mundane in in in more antiquities Editorial Act Treasure portable (see the of of hoard finds importance Staffordshire of the the highlighted of has 295–6) wealth 84: and quality exceptional The Introduction them? retrieve and to locate safer to it hobby is widespread plough’: a of the Keywords: advantage under take contains. ‘archive to it the or material there, about ancient objects the questions the senior on important leave inflicting a some is Here raises context it hostile material? work damage accelerating the Their this the scientifically of and demonstrate ploughsoil to discovery status the together casual the of get by is year, metal-detectorist What a every and fields metal-detectors. archaeologist arable with from treasure-seekers retrieved by are or objects metal of thousands Many .Haldenby D. assemblages metal-detected damage using plough of effects the Charting eevd 8Jnay21;Rvsd ue21;Acpe:3Jl 2010 July 3 Accepted: 2010; June 2 Revised: 2010; January 18 Received: tal. et 2 1 ANTIQUITY cenadRcado 20)hv icse hte eetdAgoSxnbrooches Anglo-Saxon detected whether discussed have (2007) Richardson and McLean h rhelg ftepogzn sa motn rao td eg coed1991) Schofield (e.g. study of area important an is ploughzone the of archaeology The Eal [email protected]) (Email: eateto rhelg,Uiest fYr,Kn’ ao,Yr,Y17P UK 7EP, YO1 York, UK Manor, King’s 1NQ, York, HU1 of Hull, University Street, Archaeology, High of 36 Department Museum, Riding East & Hull Volunteer, 97 ewn&Buhue 00 Pollard 2000; Baumhauser & Gerwin 1997; 4(00:15–12http://antiquity.ac.uk/ant/084/ant0841151.htm 1151–1162 (2010): 84 ea-eetn,pogzn,AgoSxnartefacts Anglo-Saxon ploughzone, metal-detecting, 1 uinD Richards D. Julian & tal. et 1151 2 97 caf usan19;Wagner 1997; Huesmann & Scharff 1997; tal et 04 Ull 2004; . en ´ tal et 2004). . Antiquity

Method Charting the effects of plough damage using metal-detected assemblages

Chester-Kadwell (2009: 76–7) has compared excavated and detected brooches in Norfolk and reviewed the literature on aspects of ploughzone taphonomy as it relates to metal- detected artefacts. Metal-detecting is often portrayed as an activity which destroys archaeology (Dobinson & Denison 1995; Oxford Archaeology 2009; Thomas & Stone 2009). However, comparison of the condition of stratified excavated and metal-detected artefacts recovered from the ploughsoil allows us to chart the effects of plough damage on portable antiquities. Instead of being a cause of damage to archaeology, metal-detecting has the potential to provide new data to help us understand the processes at work in the agricultural destruction of the archaeological record. Anglo-Saxon pins and strap-ends Copper-alloy artefacts comprise the majority of finds made by detector users although they are frequently recovered in a fragmentary state. The VASLE project identified that 85 per cent of Anglo-Saxon finds recorded in the Portable Antiquities Scheme database were copper alloy (Richards et al. 2009: 3.2, fig. 61). In the present study, attrition to two groups of Anglo-Saxon copper-alloy dress fittings, namely pins and strap-ends, was quantified and demonstrated to result largely from farming practices. The choice of pins and strap-ends rests, on the one hand, from them being ubiquitous and numerous finds on Middle Saxon sites across the country and also through the availability of comprehensive records of long- standing detector surveys of several sites of the period in the East Riding of Yorkshire and one in West Yorkshire. In the case of the pins, the process was found to be observable on two sites over two to three decades. The pins studied here date from the later Middle to Late Anglo-Saxon periods (c. AD 800–1000), and divide into the following broad categories of head form: faceted, biconi- cal, globular and flat (largely disc or rhomboid) (Haldenby & Richards 2009). Other groups of Anglo-Saxon pins are not included, each predating the study group and being far less numerous. These comprise those from early burials, often with plain disc or spiral heads, and the large eighth-century chip-carved and gilded forms. Suggestions as to the function of Anglo-Saxon pins largely derive from the presence of the earlier types around the upper torso of early Anglo-Saxon female inhumation buri- Figure 1. Cottam B Anglo-Saxon pin, bent as a result als and include their possible use in the pinning of plough damage (length: 76mm). of veils, lightweight scarves, shawls and head- bands, or for holding up plaited hair (Figure 1).

1152 Yr ohr’wihi aticue ta-nsfo ubro xaain nta city. breakage? that or in Loss excavations site, of excavated number sixth a a from strap-ends on in includes information fact included further with in is a along which this from (other)’ condition, reason), ‘York pins) strap-end same described not the of be (but for comparison strap-ends simply unidentified the (also on will York’ available ‘Near which is site, and metal-detected data nighthawks, Since Pocklington’. unauthorised ‘Near from as it preserve to secret olm(Richards Cowlam icetr(ide19) ihrae ok(oes19) otmB(Richards metal-detected five (Richards B with B compared and Cottam were A Cottam 2009), 1993), assemblages: Loveluck 1996), & (Rogers (Evans (Hinton York Flixborough Hamwic and Fishergate, 1999) assemblages: 1990), excavated (Biddle Five Winchester deposits. undisturbed to reference straps. terminals satchel the and included bag probably or uses is garters Function summarises, and 2). (2003) girdles (Figure a of Thomas terminal this; the as below at and, motif head uncertain leaf animal a again modelled strap; a the and receive panel; to central end decorated split double-pierced a including: features, iue2 otmBAgoSxnsrped(length: strap-end Anglo-Saxon B Cottam 50.5mm). 2. Figure hnbigtrw wydet raae lhuhmtldtcoswr sdt enhance to used were metal-detectors Although breakage. to rather due objects, complete away of thrown discard the being or loss than accidental of result a as occurred deposition not, oetbihteoealdge faydmg omtra ntepogzn requires ploughzone the in material to damage any of degree overall the establish To certain share all and century ninth be to considered widely are studied strap-ends The OA 0 6 OA 3 81% 86% 432 7 77% TOTAL 238 B Cottam 16% Flixborough 17% 308 26% 23 41 TOTAL Pocklington’ ‘Near Cowlam ot ebl 144 Newbald South otmA2 0 awc1583% 155 Hamwic Number 10% 2 Excavated 79 1 21 complete % Number B Cottam A Cottam Detected al .Pncniin oprsno eetdadecvtdsites. excavated and detected of comparison condition: Pin 1. Table ae nfid o hc mgswr available were images which for finds on Based siae hr nla rmpbihdreport published from unclear where Estimated tal. et npe)adafit iewoelcto scretybigkept being currently is location whose site fifth a and prep) in 1 1 .Hleb uinD Richards D. Julian & Haldenby D. 4 ok(ihrae 191% 21 (Fishergate) York 14% 5 icetr1 100% 11 Winchester 15% tal. et 1153 99 npe) ot ebl Lay2000), (Leahy Newbald South prep), in 1999, hc eosrtsta,mr fe than often from more that, demonstrates accelerated pins complete, which relatively of are contrast, contexts excavated result By a environment. aerated increased the as in corrosion chemical leads failure this and to disturbance their mechanical susceptible of highly to are virtue pins entry By shanks, following most slender ploughzone. occurs the that pins into shows to and damage pins excavation, of and number metal-detection from the shanks complete with compares 1 Table complete % 2 2 tal. et

Method Charting the effects of plough damage using metal-detected assemblages

Table 2. Bent pins: comparison of detected and excavated sites (complete pins only). %with> 10◦ Overall average No. bend Average % Average bend bend

Detected Cottam B 11 46% 90◦ South Newbald 18 78% 64% 59◦ 81◦ ‘Near Pocklington’ 13 62% 127◦

Excavated and Hamwic1 47 21% 47◦ in context Flixborough 120 32% 34% 45◦ 47◦ (York) Fishergate1 17 76% 52◦ Cottam B 6 67% 31◦

1 Measurements based upon published illustrations rather than actual pins or photographs

Table 3. Strap-end condition: comparison of detected and excavated sites. Detected Number 95% complete Excavated Number 95% complete

Cottam A 11 55% Hamwic 12 83% Cottam B 37 53% Winchester 10 90% South Newbald 31 33% York (Fishergate) 4 75% Cowlam 8 50% York (Other) 12 75% ‘Near Pocklington’ 11 73% Cottam B 3 100% ‘Near York’ 27 16% Flixborough 14 50% TOTAL 125 42% TOTAL 55 76% recovery levels at two of the excavated sites (Cottam B and Flixborough) this will only have increased the recovery of smaller broken pieces, rendering the comparison even more striking. During early ploughing episodes pins may become bent as a prelude to snapping. Therefore there is a higher proportion of bent pins and a greater degree of bending in complete detected pins compared with complete excavated examples (Table 2). In the case of many of the metal-detected examples, cracked patina at the bend further points to modern damage which, due to metal fatigue, represents a point of weakness at which breakage is more likely to occur upon subsequent agricultural disturbance. Strap-ends are more robust and the results are not as clear-cut, although as Table 3 demonstrates they also show varying degrees of plough damage, as evidenced once again by the relatively intact nature of the excavated material. Since it is clear from repaired examples that strap-ends sometimes remained in use following damage, the comparison here between detected and excavated ﬁnds was of the percentages of examples that were at least 95 per cent complete. As with the pins, it would appear that the frequently intact nature of excavated strap-ends is evidence of their loss, more often than discard due to breakage. One can easily envisage the loss of large numbers of pins having resulted from their insecure means of attachment but the mechanism by which, consistently across Middle Saxon sites, the loss of large numbers of securely attached strap-ends occurred is less obvious. This is unless, as Hinton envisaged (1996: 37), many were in fact stitched, perhaps following the loss or removal of the rivets (after strap breakage probably at the junction with the strap- end) or even from the outset. Evidence of this can be seen in the majority of strap-ends,

1154 trto a,o cain ese obgna ona oshsocre Lmrc 1984; (Lambrick occurred has loss as soon as begin to seen be occasion, on can, attrition whilst damage damage. that more less ﬁnd show relatively we groups show example, both groups for have Newbald Hence, artefact South to extent. both at appear similar Cowlam factors a and Pocklington’ these to ‘Near sites strap-ends at and individual agricultural pins On particular below. the or both explored type affected be soil site’s will a these including and factors history, various on depending terms. doubt percentage no in completeness average the shank calculating remaining average by the strap-ends calculating for by and pins for length undertaken was This examined. loosening also gradually was whose button a time. the of in make that to would attended than not scenario understandable was This less stitching no 3). (Figure strap-end rivets a of no loss having excavated, or detected whether iue3 ta-ns h rsneo rivets. of presence the Strap-ends: 3. Figure repcieo giutrlcrusacs h rcs fps-eoiinlartefact post-depositional of process the circumstances, agricultural of Irrespective sites, between damage plough of levels in variations are there demonstrates 4 Table As detector by surveyed site each on strap-ends and pins the of fragmentation of degree The Na Pocklington’ ‘Near Cowlam 1 Newbald South B Cottam A Cottam al .Dtce ie:aeaepnsaklnt n ta-n completeness. % strap-end and length shank pin average sites: Detected 4. Table siae rprinbsdo ers 0 o ahstrap-end each for 10% nearest on based proportion Estimated .Hleb uinD Richards D. Julian & Haldenby D. ubrsaklnt ubrcompleteness Number length shank Number 4 4m 174% 31 147mm 147 320m879% 8 250mm 23 012m3 75% 77% 37 11 192mm 167mm 90 21 121m1 87% 11 251mm 41 isStrap-ends Pins 1155 vrg vrg % Average Average 1

Method Charting the effects of plough damage using metal-detected assemblages

Table 5. Flixborough: excavated pins. Where found Number % complete1 Average shank length1

In context 162 83.3% 494mm Unstratiﬁed 76 64.5% 415mm

1Estimated where unclear from published report Needham & Spence 1996). Immediate breakage may result from trampling by people or larger domestic animals, as well as when an object is displaced from its original context (by subsequent habitation; the action of burrowing animals, wind or water action etc.), whether in antiquity or more recently. When the unstratified pins from Flixborough (Evans & Loveluck 2009) are compared with those recovered in context the latter are seen to be, on average, more complete with significantly longer surviving shanks than the unstratified pins. The unstratified finds include those recovered from the spoilheap and the ploughsoil and the proportion of complete pins reflects a position which is partway between a stratified and a metal-detected assemblage (Table 5).

Damage through time So far this study has drawn on total numbers within groups of objects and does not rely on the sequence in which they were recovered. Full finds records, including approximate dates of recovery, exist for sites Cottam B and South Newbald, surveyed for 23 years and 30 years respectively. For these sites it is therefore possible to observe whether fragmentation has increased over time. In both cases the same detector users, using the same machines, have been involved from the outset, removing one possible source of bias, as there will have been no increase over time in the ability to find smaller fragments. It might still be argued, however, that strong signals are more easily discerned and at greater depth than smaller ones and so larger, complete artefacts are generally found before fragments. This could, mistakenly, give the impression of incremental plough damage but cannot easily be separated out. Perhaps uniquely, one class of object, once again the humble dress pin, does make this possible by virtue of the fact that the pin shank which, as we have seen, is a sensitive indicator of plough damage, does not greatly add to a pin signal which is produced largely by the head with its relatively concentrated mass. This arises out of the fact that slender copper alloy rods (i.e. shanks) emit a very weak signal in the case of most detectors. Personal experience of detector users and the recovery of very few detached pin shanks demonstrates this well, although there has been no quantified published study into this and other related phenomena. Various people have investigated (Crowther 1981; Barber 1990; Garrett 1991) or speculated about (Gregory & Rogerson 1984: 180; Pestell 2005: 171, n. 22) the efficacy of different detector machines and the experience of metal-detectorists in picking up particular sizes and shapes of object at different depths. Metallic artefacts from wet-sieved topsoil have also been compared with those from metal-detecting (Watt 2006: 145) to inform an understanding of the processes of recovery, but there is a pressing need for more up-to-date and comprehensive research into recovery bias. With the above collecting bias in mind only pin heads of a similar order of size were included in this part of the study. Disc headed and flattened faceted head forms (mallet

1156 hno opeepn,i h as fti ieadsget neioeo eprploughing deeper of episode an rather suggests (20–40mm), and damage rise less this the of slightly during cause average with Newbald the (albeit shanks South is apparent of pins, at complete number increase is of An the Newbald than levels). in South original phase at to survey Newbald 2b return South ﬁnal phase not and B in do Cottam lengths decline both shank at in this reversal illustrate the a 5 do and although too 4 Figures so damage. size plough in from increase results. fragmentation artefacts increased so as and surprisingly, and experience not they resistance which that, compaction. forces more and/or evidence mechanical ploughing as presenting experiencing taken heads soil experience is through larger probably This moving they their from on pin to moment the due preventing this stresses from relatively ploughzone, remain mechanical these the greater Whilst entering remainder. the until than up shorter average, intact on are, larger that that and shanks have assumed with, again been once have interfering damage. could shanks, plough it surviving of meant better and indications have most so any like’ would inﬂating, to and with inclusion stouter led ‘like have Their indeed would comparing sequence. had heads recovery size not head the were larger in we their earlier that that found observed being was these it of as omitted were heads) time. over length shank pin average B: Cottam 4. Figure ot Newbald South B Cottam al .Cta n ot ebl:aeaesaklength. shank average Newbald: South and B Cottam 6. Table tflosta n bevberdcini vrg i hn eghoe iehsresulted has time over length shank pin average in reduction observable any that follows It Newbald South and B Cottam at heads larger with pins demonstrates, 6 Table as fact, In ubrAeaelnt ubrAeaelnt ubrAeaelength Average Number length Average Number length Average Number 4 4m 3 5m 095mm 10 151mm 137 147mm 147 012m6 0m 2166mm 22 202mm 68 192mm 90 isLrehasecue ag ed only heads Large excluded heads Large Pins .Hleb uinD Richards D. Julian & Haldenby D. 1157

Method Charting the effects of plough damage using metal-detected assemblages

Figure 5. South Newbald: average pin shank length over time. down into levels previously disturbed, albeit less frequently than the uppermost layers. The initial pin lengths at Cottam B suggest that at this site an even deeper (‘para ploughing’) episode disturbed archaeological deposits not long before survey began. That ploughing on parts of the Yorkshire Wolds might only as late as the mid 1980s have disturbed large amounts of material from archaeological deposits is not surprising. The historical avoidance there of deep-ploughed potato crops and a shallow ploughing tradition (around 150mm) will have left much of the archaeology of the region relatively undisturbed well into the twentieth century (Harwood Long 1969: 32). Despite the high initial figure at Cottam B the average pin shank length on this site during the final survey phase is significantly lower than at South Newbald and since there is no obvious difference between how each has been continuously cultivated the explanation is likely to have more to do with varying soil types. Pins moving during ploughing in the sandy soil of South Newbald would certainly experience less resistance and consequent leverage than those in the chalk-laden boulder clay of Cottam B and greater fragmentation on the latter site is the likely outcome. Although this paper has focused upon mechanical damage one might also note, however, that an acid sand is more likely to attack metal than an alkaline chalk. Table 7 summarises the main factors, including those mentioned above, that have affected the extent and rate of fragmentation of pins and straps-ends on the detected sites included in this study.

Conclusion With the recent burgeoning of studies into metal-detected artefacts in Britain, Scandinavia and elsewhere, there is a need for work on how metal artefacts enter the ploughsoil from archaeological deposits, and how changes in composition, condition and movement

1158 Table 7. Comparative ploughing histories and geology. Strap-ends: Pins: average average % Location & Ploughing Recent shank length completeness topography Soil history events

Cottam A 167mm 77% High Wolds; flat Boulder clay; thin; Long duration; Excavated 1996; and adjacent to uniform depth; historically deep ploughing deep valley chalk beneath ploughed damage visible in <150mm dig; frequent potato crop in .Hleb uinD Richards D. Julian & Haldenby D. recent years Cottam B 192mm 75% High Wolds; flat Boulder clay; thin; Long duration; Excavated 1993–95; and adjacent to uniform depth; historically deep ploughing deep valley chalk beneath ploughed damage visible in <150mm dig; frequent 1159 potato crop in recent years South 147mm 74% Lowland; S of Sandy; depth Long duration; Unexcavated; Newbald Wolds; flat & unknown; plough probably not intensively farmed adjacent broad brings up gravel restricted to stream & village 150mm Cowlam 250mm 79% High Wolds; gently Boulder clay; Recent; first Excavated 2003; undulating & variable depth; ploughing early some plough adjacent to deep chalk beneath 1970s; historically damage visible; valley ploughed auger survey <150mm showed variable soil depth ‘Near 251mm 87% High Wolds; valley Boulder clay; depth Long duration; Unexcavated Pock- bottom; on village unknown; chalk historically lington’ outskirts beneath ploughed <150mm

Method Charting the effects of plough damage using metal-detected assemblages occur. These and other aspects of attrition in the ploughzone have long generated a considerable literature for pottery and flint, but there is a dearth of artefact analysis and experimental research for metal finds. This paper has attempted to make a contribution to the quantification of attrition caused by ploughing. We have demonstrated that quantitative comparison of metal-detected and excavated assemblages of Anglo-Saxon pins and strap-ends can illuminate depositional, post- depositional and recovery processes. It is evident that these artefacts suffer most damage in the ploughzone, which suggests that rather than having been deliberately discarded because they were broken, they were lost when intact and still functional. In the case of strap-ends this indicates that they were commonly stitched to clothing and belts, not riveted. This does not necessarily mean that a similar depositional biography applies to all artefact types, as other objects may have been less prone to casual loss, although it is likely that a similar process applies to Roman or early Saxon dress artefacts which are of a similar function and form. Furthermore, this methodology could be applicable to other periods and places in the world where ploughing and metal-detecting occur, in order to establish if the same patterns arise. We have also quantified damage in the ploughzone and shown that differences in damage are dependent upon the soil type and agricultural history of the individual sites included in the study. Crucially, the results show that the level of fragmentation of recovered artefacts increases through time. Ploughing eventually causes metallic artefacts to degrade completely, and therefore recovery by metal-detection (although considered by some to be destruction) is preferable to the alternative of doing nothing.

Acknowledgements D. Haldenby, co-author and finder of many of the objects concerned from Cottam A, Cottam B, Cowlam and South Newbald, acknowledges the integral contributions to the metal-detector surveys of the first three of these sites made by colleagues: D. Hirst and S. Foster. Acknowledgement of finds information concerning ‘Near Pocklington’ and ‘Near York’ goes respectively to Barry Freeman (Chairman of the National Council for Metal Detecting, Yorkshire Region) and Stephen Pickles (independent detectorist). Paula Gentil, Keeper of Archaeology at the Hull and East Riding Museum, where much of the material from the East Riding sites is now archived and displayed, is thanked for access to the same; Rose Nicholson, Keeper of Archaeology at Scunthorpe Museum, kindly provided access to the Flixborough pins. Finally, the authors would like to thank George Lambrick and one other anonymous referee for their guidance on existing literature on ploughzone taphonomy; the remaining shortcomings are our own responsibility.

References CHESTER-KADWELL, M. 2009. Early Anglo-Saxon communities in the landscape of Norfolk (British BARBER, L. 1990. Metal detecting for archaeology. Archaeological Reports British series 481). Oxford: Unpublished BA dissertation, Institute of Archaeopress. Archaeology, University College, London. CROWTHER, D. 1981. Metal detectors at Maxey. BIDDLE, M. 1990. Object and economy in medieval Current Archaeology 77: 172–6. Winchester. Oxford: Clarendon. DOBINSON,C.&S.DENISON. 1995. Metal detecting BOISMIER, W.A. 1997. Modelling the effects of tillage and archaeology in England. London: English processes on artefact distributions in the ploughzone: a Heritage & Council for British Archaeology. simulation study of tillage-induced pattern formation (British Archaeological Reports British series 259). Oxford: Archaeopress.

1160 G 90 h fet fmdr utvto equipment cultivation modern of effects The 1980. – L H H 04 h aaeeto rhelgclstsin sites archaeological of management The 2004. – pottery Age Iron in possibilities and Pitfalls 1984. – F H E H G G JAESTAD AMBRICK VANS REGORY ERWIN ARRETT INTON ALDENBY INCHLIFFE ARWOOD nacaooia ie,i .Hnhif T. & (ed.) Hinchliffe Schadla-Hall J. in sites, archaeological on Oxford Unit. & Archaeological Archaeology British for Council London: archaeological to sites damage plough assessing the of and problems methods cultivation modern of survey oorp ) tod lnSutton. Alan Stroud: 6). Monograph Archaeology 2/Southampton Volume Finds evidence the metalworking and non-ferrous Hamwic, from objects alloy non-ferrous eivlArchaeology Medieval pins. the copper-alloy and Anglo-Saxon Yorkshire, of of chronology Riding East Cottam, at shift odnAcaooia Service. Archaeological London situ? in sites archaeological (ed.) Nixon T. in landscapes, arable Archaeology. of Institute for Archaeology, Committee University Oxford Oxford: 162–77. 2): Monograph Archaeology for Committee Britain southern central in Age (ed.) Miles D. in & Valley, Cunliffe Thames B.W. Upper the in experiences studies: Environment. the of Department London: 18–21. xod Oxbow. Oxford: the 600–1000: evidence AD artefact c. Flixborough, medieval early at ulig ) odn eateto the Environment. of Department London: 3). Historic Buildings and Monuments Ancient of Directorate plough the under past Antiquity excavation. archaeological in Metal–detecting oa giutrlSceyo England. of Society Agricultural Royal Yorkshire metal archaeological finds. of corrosion the on parameters T) Ram. (TX): ae ae cec Publishers. Science James & James Conservation Metals on Conference Robbiola L. & Pennec (ed.) S.L. Macleod, I.D. in in soil, artefacts copper-alloy archaeological of decay ,D.H.&C.L ,W.&R.B Ofr rhelgclUi uvy4). Survey Unit Archaeological (Oxford .. 1996. D.A., , . ..N A.G. M., , .1991. C. , ea 5 rceig fteInternational the of Proceedings 95, Metal .&AJG R A.J.G. & T. , .1977. G. , Geoderma ,D.&J.D.R L ,J.&T.S ONG Cut giutrlSres6.London: 6). Surveys Agricultural (County 8 179–84. 58: .1969. W. , oenmtldetectors metal Modern AUMHAUSER Ecvtosa lxoog 2). Flixborough at (Excavations 6 63–80. 96: OVELUCK rhelg n giutr:a agriculture: and Archaeology CHADLA ORD h od ivradother and silver gold, The h atudrteplough the under past The ICHARDS OGERSON Ocsoa aeso the of Papers (Occasional 3 309–315. 53: &K.T uvyo h giutr of agriculture the of survey A odn uemof Museum London: 2009. . -H 00 feto soil of Effect 2000. . 09 Settlement 2009. . ALL 1984. . Ofr University (Oxford RONNER set fteIron the of Aspects e..1980. (ed.). 25 London: 32–5. : ieadeconomy and Life (Southampton .Hleb uinD Richards D. Julian & Haldenby D. Preserving Dallas . 97 The 1997. . : The 1161 xodAcaooy&Cafil nvriy 2010 University. Cranfield & Archaeology Oxford P L 2009. – M xodAcaooy 2006. Archaeology. Oxford N 99 hr oeeti h ploughsoil. the in movement Sherd 1989. – R P R ESTELL OLLARD EAHY ICHARDS EYNOLDS EEDHAM C L DFApoetN:BD1705) sites No: archaeological project on (DEFRA impact the minimise to practices forthcoming. 2010). August 19 (accessed NIGHTHAWKS2.pdf?1265982894 antiquities. http://www.helm.org.uk/upload/pdf/ of at: removal Available and searching Dependencies illegal Crown by & caused UK the in sites archaeological ulse thttp://randd.defra.gov.uk. at published number 3874). Project (EH archaeology on cultivation Wolds. Yorkshire the on settlement Anglo-Scandinavian &ProjectID 9Ags 2010). August 19 hnmnni okhr,i .Gae&J Kenny J. & Geake (ed.) H. in Yorkshire, in site’phenomenon ‘productive the and Newbald South iigi h orht it etre AD centuries Oxbow. ninth Oxford: to fourth the in Riding Module randd.defra.gov.uk/Default.aspx?Menu No: BD1704) project (DEFRA cultivation in monuments Press. Museum British London: 2). Volume Excavations, Research Runnymede, East 16 Area at ofrne 71 pi 07 London. 2007, April Scheme 17–18 Antiquities conference, Portable the at given Scheme. Paper Antiquities Portable the of the contribution England: southern in brooches Anglo-Saxon Archaeology pottery. :363–75. Sites 6: Archaeological of experiment. Management field and 1: Part Conservation land. the arable in of corrosion zone copper Vadose of rate the on agrochemicals leso:Ashgate. Aldershot: Europe medieval early and medieval S. & Spicer (ed.) A. Hamilton in Project, Bromholm the space: &R.S EAN .20.Mdl nl-ao eawr from metalwork Anglo-Saxon Middle 2000. K. , .20.Uigmtra utr odfieholy define to culture material Using 2005. T. , ihhws&ngtakn:dmg to damage nighthawking: & Nighthawks ,L.&A.R .. ..W A.S. A.M., , al er:acaooia tde fteEast the of studies archaeological Deira: Early ,J.D. ,S.P.&T.S .18.Tepogzn n prehistoric and ploughzone The 1988. P. , HIEL ER nls eiaedet be to due Heritage English & DEFRA rhelgclJournal Archaeological = rts Archaeology British vial t http:// at: Available . More&Location 04 sesn h nuneof influence the Assessing 2004. . 3 24–7. 13: = tal. et rast dniysi cultivation soil identify to Trials 28#Rltdouet (accessed RelatedDocuments 12084# enn h oy ardsaein space sacred Holy: the Defining ICHARDSON 99 otm nAginand Anglian an Cottam: 1999. PENCE ILSON osraino scheduled of Conservation 1996. . ,L.W = 2 24–6. 12: 07 Early 2007. . RnyeeBridge (Runnymede None&Completed 5:1–110. 156: and eueaddisposal and Refuse ILSON 161–86. : fet farable of Effects ..H A.J. , = British 1–82. : Menu& ALL = 0 ,

Method Charting the effects of plough damage using metal-detected assemblages

RICHARDS, J.D., J. NAYLOR &C.HOLAS-CLARK. 2009. THOMAS, G. 2003. Late Anglo-Saxon and Viking-Age Anglo-Saxon landscape and economy: using strap-ends 750–110. Part 1 (Finds Research Group portable antiquities to study Anglo-Saxon and Datasheet 32). Lincolnshire: Finds Research Group Viking Age England. Internet Archaeology 25: AD 700–1700. http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue25/richards THOMAS,S.&P.STONE (ed.). 2009. Metal detecting index.html (accessed 19 August 2010). and archaeology. Woodbridge: Boydell. RICHARDS,J.D.et al. in prep. Cottam, Cowlam and ULLEN´ ,I,A.G.NORD,M.FJAESTAD,E.MATTSSON, environs: an Anglian estate on the Yorkshire Wolds. G.CH.BORG &K.TRONNER. 2004. The ROGERS, N.S.H. 1993. Anglian and other finds from degradation of archaeological bronzes underground: Fishergate (The Archaeology of York 17/9). evidence from museum collections. Antiquity 78: London: Council for British Archaeology. 380–90. SCHARFF, W. & I.A. HUESMANN. 1997. Accelerated WAGNER,D.,F.DAKORONIA,C.FERGUSON,W.R. decay of metal soil finds due to soil pollution: first FISCHER,C.HILLS,H.KARS &R.MEIJERS. 1997. report,inI.D.Macleod,S.L.Pennec&L.Robbiola Soil archive classification in terms of impacts of (ed.) Metal 95, Proceedings of the International conservability of archaeological heritage, in I.D. Conference on Metals Conservation: 17–20. London: Macleod, S.L. Pennec & L. Robbiola (ed.) Metal James & James Science Publishers. 95, Proceedings of the International Conference on SCHOFIELD, A.J. (ed.) 1991. Interpreting artefact scatters: Metals Conservation: 21–6. London: James & James contributions to ploughzone archaeology (Oxbow Science Publishers. Monographs in Archaeology 4). Oxford: Oxbow. WATT, M. 2006. Detector sites and settlement archaeology on Bornholm: a survey of ‘productive sites’ from the Iron Age and the Viking Age 1996–1999. Journal of Danish Archaeology 14: 139–67.

1162