A STROLL THROUGH THE PARK: EVALUATING THE USEFULNESS OF PHYTOLITH AND STARCH REMAINS FOUND ON MEDIEVAL SHERDS FROM WICKEN, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE, ENGLAND ________________________________________________________________________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri, Columbia ________________________________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts ________________________________________________________________________ By THOMAS CHESLEY HART Supervisor: Dr. Deborah M. Pearsall AUGUST 2007 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are a great number of people without whose help, this project would not have been possible. I’d like to start off by thanking my wonderful adviser here at the University of Missouri, Dr. Deborah Pearsall. Throughout this experience she has provided guidance, support, and expert knowledge about everything related to the world of phytolith and starch grain analysis. I would like to thank my friends here at the university, Amanda Logan, Meghann O’Brien, Neil Duncan, Nicole Little, and Jason Fenton who not only provided sound advice but endured any manner of discussions related to phytoliths, starch grains, and this thesis. Thanks to my other committee members Dr. Reed Wadley and Dr. Lois Huneycutt for their insightful comments and advice about my thesis. Thanks to Ryan Reusch for helping to process many of the materials used in this study as well as being a great friend. Many thanks to Dr. Martin Jones, Dr. Carenza Lewis, and Dr. Marco Madella, who during my visit to Cambridge University, helped develop the idea for the project while enjoying fine cups of coffee. In addition Dr. Martin Jones helped devise a comparative medieval plant lists while Dr. Carenza Lewis provided the medieval artifacts from Durley Cottage, Wyton, Cambridgeshire. A special thanks goes to Dr. Richard Jones and his family for their wonderful hospitality while I conducted my research in England. Dr. Richard Jones also provided many of the artifacts and resources related to the Whittlewood Project and Glebe Cottage, Wicken, Nothamptonshire. Thank you Dr. Richard Jones for letting me wander the fields of central England looking for freshly churned artifacts. Thank you Brett Thorn of the Bucks County Museum for providing most of the Whittlewood Project ceramics used in this study. Dr. Robin Kennedy of the University of Missouri herbarium ii provided the comparative samples for this project. Finally, I am deeply grateful for the unending love and support provided by my family and friends. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………….ii LIST OF TABLES...…………………………………………………………………......vii LIST OF FIGURES...………………………………………………………………….....ix ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………….xiii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Introduction and research questions……………………………………………….1 Research design and methods Comparative phytolith and starch grain study…………………..…….......5 Evaluating survey artifact usefulness for residue analysis…….………….7 Three part design…………………………………………………............10 Comparisons to historical record………………………………………...12 Significance…………………………………………………………........12 Structure of Thesis……………………………………………………………….13 2. BACKGROUND Phytolith and starch grain analysis in archaeology History of phytolith analysis……………………………………………..14 History of starch grain analysis…………………………………………..16 Culture history of the Anglo-Saxons and medieval England Introduction……………………………………………………………....18 Brief history of the Anglo-Saxons and their environment…………….....18 Food Production and Consumption Patterns in Medieval England Food production……………………………………………………….....23 Shift from Celtic to open field systems………………………………......26 Manuring hypothesis…………………………………………………......31 Crops grown……………………………………………………………...33 Grains………………………………………………………………….....34 Fruits and vegetables…………………………………………………......35 Processing………………………………………………………………..37 Cooking…………………………………………………………………..38 Consumption……………………………………………………………..39 General Background Archaeology and history of Wicken……………………………………..42 Archaeology and history of Wyton……………………………………...44 iv 3. METHODS Introduction……………………………………………………………………....45 Collection of samples………………………………………………………….....45 Ceramic types collected……………………………………………….....47 Processing of archaeological samples……………………………………………48 Soil samples……………………………………………………………...48 Artifact samples……………………………………………………….....49 Slide mounting and scanning………………………………………….....50 Processing of comparative plant samples……………………………………......52 4. COMPARATIVE COLLECTION RESULTS Introduction……………………………………………………………………....57 Phytoliths………………………………………………………………………...58 Diagnostic Food plants producing diagnostic phytoliths…………………….59 Diagnostic weeds………………………………………………...71 Summary………………………………………………………....77 Limited…………………………………………………………………...80 Non-diagnostic…………………………………………………………...82 Starch Grains……………………………………………………………………..83 Diagnostic Food plants……………………………………………………….84 Weed plants………………………………………………………98 Discussion of how to distinguish between diagnostic starch grains in this study……………………………………………………..104 Limited………………………………………………………………….105 Non-diagnostic………………………………………………………….105 5. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Are the survey artifacts contaminated by their environment?.............................107 Phytolith results………………………………………………………...108 Phytolith discussion…………………………………………………….114 Starch grain results……………………………………………………...120 Starch grain discussion…………………………………………………124 Conclusions……………………………………………………………..125 Further discussions……………………………………………………...126 Absent sediment 3 residues……………………………………………..127 Phytolith and starch grain contamination pathways……………………129 Are there differences between archaeological and freshly plowed phytolith assemblages?..................................................................................................130 Phytolith results………………………………………………………...131 v Phytolith discussion…………………………………………………….137 How do the archaeobotanical results compare with the historical record for each county? What can these results tell us about the medieval food patterns in Wicken and Wyton?.......................................................................................140 Wicken excavated artifacts results……………………………………...141 Durley Cottage artifact results………………………………………….141 Wicken excavated soils results…………………………………………141 Discussion………………………………………………………………148 Glebe Cottage, Wicken, Northamptonshire…………………….149 Durley Cottage, Cambridgeshire……………………………….150 Limitations and Further Research……………………………………………...151 6. CONCLUSIONS..…………………….…………………………………………….152 WORKS CITED………………………………………………………………………158 APPENDICES IA: Raw starch comparative results………………………………………….....166 IB: Phytolith raw comparative results……...……………………………….......167 IIA Soil phytolith raw count………………………………………………........170 IIB: Survey phytolith artifact raw count……………………………………......171 IIC: Durley cottage raw phytolith count……………………………………......172 IID: Excavated artifact phytolith raw counts……………………………….......173 II E: Excavated, survey, and durley cottage artifact raw starch counts………...174 II F: Soil starch grain raw count………………………………………………..175 ENDNOTES………………………………………………………………...…………176 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 3.1. Comparative food species………………………………………………….………..52 3.2. Comparative wild species…………………………………………………………...53 4.1. Diagnostic phytolith species…………………………………………………….…..59 4.2. Diagnostic non-wavy long cell and non-papillae types……………………………..77 4.3. Diagnostic wavy long cell and papillae measurements……………………………..78 4.4. Kaplan et al (1992) diagnostics included in this study ……………………………..80 4.5. Limited diagnostic food phytolith species……………………………………….….81 4.6. Limited diagnostic weedy phytolith species………………………………………...81 4.7. Non-diagnostic food phytolith species………………………………………………82 4.8. Non-diagnostic weedy phytolith species…………………………………………....83 4.9. Diagnostic starch grain species……………………………………………………...83 4.10. Limited diagnostic food starches…………………………………………............105 4.11. Limited diagnostic wild starches…………………………………………............105 4.12. Non-producing food plants……………………………………………………….105 4.13. Non-producing weedy plants……………………………………………………..106 5.1. Presence vs. absence of economic phytoliths found on Potterspuryware and in the soil from Wicken field 13…………………………………………………………..110 5.2. Presence vs. absence of economic phytoliths found on two early medieval Shellyware ceramics from Wicken field 13 and Durley Cottage…..……………....112 vii 5.3. Presence vs. absence of economic phytoliths found on two Early Medieval Sandyware ceramics from Wicken field 13 and Durley Cottage …………………114 5.4. Potterspuryware starch grain comparison…………………………………………119 5.5. Medieval Shellyware starch grain comparison…………………………………….121 5.6. Early Medieval Sandyware starch grain comparison………………………………123 5.7. Diagnostic phytoliths and starch grains found in excavated soils…………............141 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 2.1. Iron age ard plow…………………………………………………………………....26 3.1. Counties of England ………………………………………………...………………45 3.2. Field WI-13 and the village of Wicken in Northamptonshire ……………..……….46 4.1. Diagnostic phytoliths; Avena sativa wavy long cells (Z1248)…………..……….…62 4.2. Diagnostic phytoliths; Hordeum vulgare A) wavy long cells (Z1232), B) trichomes (Z1237), and C) papillae (Z1263)……………………...…...………………………..65 4.3. Diagnostic phytoliths; Triticum spelta wavy long cells (Z1264)………...………….67 4.4. Diagnostic phytoliths; Secale