|
Date: |
|
Description: | The hoard comprises both items of Viking jewellery and coins recovered from a field near to the site of the discovery of a separate, coinless hoard of seven Viking-period brooches in 1989 (which was subsequently acquired by the British Museum in 1991; it is possible that two other silver brooches in the museum found in 1785 and 1830 originally formed part of this second hoard). There are: one complete ingot and nine ingot fragments, two brooch fragments, pieces of five or more neck-rings, at least three arm-rings, and possibly a fragment of a finger-ring. The numbers in brackets below refer to the ID nos. on the finds list compiled by North Pennines Archaeology. Surface metal analysis conducted on three of the artefacts (1, 11, and 19/3 below) at the British Museum indicated an approximate silver content of respectively 95% (the rest being copper/lead), 98%, and 97%. The total weight of the silver pieces, other than coins, is 326 grams. The total weight for the coins is 59.9 grams, giving a combined total for the silver of 385.9 grams, of which the coins represent 15.5% of the total.a) PRECIOUS METAL: COINSThe hoard contained an indeterminate number of coins, most of which are broken, and many of them are fragmentary. A number of the fragments are either completely blank, or show features (individual letters, crosses, etc.) which are not sufficiently diagnostic to identify particular types, although the fabric and patination of all the fragments are similar, indicating that all of the fragments come from coins within the hoard, rather than including fragments of later intrusive coins from the same site. Work on the smaller fragments is ongoing, and it is possible that some of these may prove to be fragments from coins already listed. It is also possible that a few of the coins listed may be re-attributed, as many of these are also in fragmentary condition. However, since further identifications would not alter the case for the hoard being considered Treasure, there seems no justification for delaying the Treasure process until every detail has been completed, as this work can continue alongside the later stages of the process. The list provided here is thus a provisional one, reflecting the current state of knowledge. In some cases individual fragments were numbered by North Pennines Archaeology, while in others groups of fragments were numbered together. Rather than produce an itemised list, as for the non-numismatic items below, the coins are therefore listed in summary, as follows: Edward the Elder (Horizontal) 29; Edward the Elder (Portrait) 4; Edward the Elder (Flower) 2; Edward the Elder (Uncertain) 12; Archbishop Plegmund 6; St Edmund Memorial (late) 1; St Peter (Swordless) 2; St Peter (Sword) 4; Sihtric (Sword) 2; Anonymous Sword 3; Islamic fragments 11; Uncertain fragments 60 (from up to 44 different coins). This gives a total of 76 coins which have been provisionally identified, and a total of up to 120 coins in total, with a combined weight of 59.9 grams. The fragmentary condition of the coinage largely appears to be the result of damage in the ground, although it is likely that all of the Islamic pieces were deposited in the form of cut fragments. The metal content of the coins has not been analysed, since enough coins of this period have previously been analysed to establish that they were routinely made of high quality silver, well in excess of the threshold of 10% required by the Treasure Act (1996). b) PRECIOUS METAL: SILVER (OTHER THAN COINS) 1. (1) flattened, cigar-shaped ingot, the base and sides pitted from the open mould of stone or sand in which it would have been cast; there is a deeply nicked testing-mark on one side and abrasions and a casting scar on the smooth top face; length: 84 mm; weight, 64.21 grams. 2.(2) section of a large, thick ingot cut from side to side, of rounded, sub-triangular section; length: 23 mm; weight, 23.3 grams. 3. (6) short section of an ingot cut from side to side; plano-convex; length: 12 mm; weight, 3.4 grams. 4. (7) short section of an ingot cut half way across and from side to side; rounded, sub-rectangular cross-section; length: 9 mm; weight, 2.6 grams. 5. (14) short section of an ingot cut from side to side; plano-convex; length: 13 mm; weight, 5.3 grams. 6. (23) one end cut off a cigar-shaped ingot; rounded, sub-triangular section; length: 10 mm; weight, 2.7 grams. 7. (36) one end of a cigar-shaped ingot, cut off with a chisel; sub-triangular section; length: 18 mm; weight, 9.0 grams. 8. (67) fragment of cigar-shaped ingot, cut off at both ends; ovoid section; length: 27 mm; weight, 15.9 grams. 9. (137) one end of a flattened, cigar-shaped ingot, cut off with a chisel; nicked testing-marks along the sides; length: 30 mm; weight, 20.9 grams. 10. (155) sub-rectangular fragment cut from an ingot of flattened, ovoid section; length: 9 mm; weight, 1.7 grams. 11. (5) one end cut from the hoop of a large 'thistle brooch', with the terminal missing. It is in the form of a thick rod, half of which is of circular and the other half of slightly narrower rectangular section, with a slight flange round the point where they meet; the rectangular section is pierced through towards each end by two holes at right angles to each other and there is a nicked testing-mark on one side of the round section; length: 43 mm; weight, 24.78 grams (cf. example from Newbiggin Moor, Cumbria: J. Graham-Campbell, 1980, Viking Artefacts. A select catalogue, London, no. 195). 12. (145) length of thick, curved rod, cut across each end from the hoop of a brooch (possibly the same one as no. 11 above according to Professor J. Graham-Campbell); length: 73 mm; diameter: 8 mm; weight, 37.4 grams. 13. (82) terminal of a neck-ring in the form of a slightly curved bar, of square section at the narrow end, where the hook has been cut off, and expanding at the other to secure the inserted ends of six thin rods, which would have been plaited to form a cable hoop; length: 50 mm (surviving); also four small fragments of twisted rods; weight, 12.5 grams (cf. examples from the Cuerdale Hoard, Lancs: E. Hawkins, 1847, 'An account of coins and Treasure found in Cuerdale', Archaeological Journal 4, pp. 111-130, figs. 58-60). 14. (160) hook-ended terminal of thin rod from a neck-ring; length: 13 mm; weight, 0.6 grams (cf. Cuerdale example above). 15. (13) short length of plaited cable of thin rods from hoop of a neck- ring of six strands; length: 40 mm; weight, 8.3 grams. 16. (108) short length of cable hoop from a neck-ring of five thin, plaited rods; length: 49 mm; weight, 11.3 grams. 17. (131) two short lengths of cable hoop from a neck-ring composed of five thin, plaited rods; lengths: 37 mm and 35 mm; also seven fragments of rods, two of which are of double strands; weight, 23.6 grams. 18. There are also 25 packets of twisted rod fragments from plaited or twisted rings: (20) fragment of rod; length: 9 mm. (33) fragment of rod cut across at one end and concave at the other; length: 6 mm. (48) fragment of twisted rod; length: 19 mm. (63) curved fragment of rod; length: 21 mm. (76) S-shaped fragment of twisted rod; length: 19 mm. (87) fragment; length: 7 mm. (91) fragment of twisted rod; length: 14 mm. (95) fragment of double-stranded, twisted rod; length: 30 mm. (109) fragment of twisted rod; length: 13 mm. (112) fragment of rod with broken ends; length: 5 mm. (114) length of twisted rod; length: 34 mm. (123) fragment of twisted rod; length: 19 mm. (126) two fragments of twisted rod; length: 14 mm (each). (128) five fragments of twisted rod; length: 10 mm - 22 mm. (129) fragment of twisted rod; length: 15 mm. (136) fragment of rod; length: 13 mm. (139) six fragments of twisted rod; lengths: 10 mm - 21 mm. (140) two fragments of twisted rod; lengths: 15 mm; 13 mm. (141) two fragments of twisted rod; lengths: 22 mm; 21 mm. (144) fragment of twisted rod; length: 19 mm. (161) fragment of twisted rod; length: 17 mm. (164) fragment of twisted rod; length: 12 mm. (174) fragment of twisted rod; length: 12 mm. (175) fragment of twisted rod; length: 22 mm. (176) fragment of twisted rod; length: 12 mm. (188) fragment of twisted rod; length: 18 mm. Total weight, 29.5 grams. 19. Arm-ring fragments: (3) long loop of lozenge-sectioned rod broken across at one end and half cut/half broken at the other with a second cut part way through; three of the corners are closely punched along their length with triangular nicks; length: 47 mm (weight, 9.93 grams). (37) fragment of lozenge-sectioned rod with faint 'milling' on surfaces; length: 19 mm. (46) fragment of rod of sub-circular section; length: 6 mm. (86) fragment of rod of sub-circular section, cut off at both ends; length: 9 mm. (143) length of curved rod of slightly faceted round section with several nicked testing-marks and cut across both ends; length: 49 mm. (168) fragment of wire link; length: 14 mm. (55) curved fragment of double-stranded twisted rod; length: 22 mm. (111) fragment of double-stranded, twisted rod; length: 13 mm. Total weight, 26.43 grams. 20. Fragment of an arm- or finger-ring (142) of double-stranded, twisted rod; length: 21 mm; weight, 2.3 grams. c) NON-PRECIOUS METAL OBJECTS COPPER ALLOY 21. (22) corner fragment of post-medieval buckle-loop of flat section and decorated with circles, trefoils, median row of bosses, etc.; length: 38 mm 22. (169) domed head of post-medieval tack; diameter: 8 mm IRON 23. (24) modern hexagonal nut; width: 13 mm 24. (25) curved fragment of modern casing; length: 49 mm 25. (26) modern plough tine of square section; length: 153 mm 26. (27) discoid lump (head of nail?); diameter: 40 mm (max) 27. (28) hand-made nail; length: 78 mm (surviving) 28. (29) hand-made nail; length: 108 mm 29. (30) hand-made nail of square section; length: 58 mm (surviving) 30. (144) fragment of corrosion product; length: 16 mm 31. (160) rectangular fragment of strip; length: 36 mm 32. (103) lump; length: 19 mm LEAD - 33. (185) strip pierced by iron rivet; length: 57 mm; width: 18 mm ALUMINIUM - 34. (16) modern clip; length: 13 mm STONE - 35. (81) triangular chipping (flint?); length: 9 mmDATING AND INTERPRETATIONThe precious-metal items in the find appear to represent a mixed hoard of coins and bullion, typical of the mixed economy of the Danelaw in the early 10th century. Of the other items, only the lead strip seems at all likely to be associated. Even that association is uncertain, but it is of note that the silver hoards from Cuerdale, Dean, Bossall, Huxley and possibly Goldsborough all seem to have been deposited in lead or lead-lined containers, and it is possible that this represents a fragment of such a container. The clearest dating evidence comes from the coins, which can be dated to individual reigns. Islamic coins can normally be date to a particular year, but their fragmentary condition means that this is not the case in this instance. None of these has a fully legible date, but all are Samanid, and one has a legible al-Shash mint signature, while another is legibly in the name of Ahmed b. Ismail (AH 295-301/ AD 907-13). There are clear parallels with the Islamic component of a number of hoards from the Danelaw, including Goldsborough and Bossall/Flaxton (North Yorks), Warton (Lancs) and Thurcaston (Leics). All of these were deposited in the 920s. There is a general pattern in dateable mixed hoards from the Danelaw that there is an interval of around 10-15 years between the issue of the latest Islamic coin and the deposition of the hoard, and this would place the hoard in the mid-920s. This is consistent with the rest of the coinage. All three of the Sword types represented in the hoard are attributed to the 920s, and the coinage of Edward the Elder (AD900-924/5) is well represented. Furthermore, the absence of coins of Alfred, and the low representation of the Danelaw coinage from the beginning of the reign also points to a date at the end of Edward's reign. However, in the absence of any identifiable coins of Athelstan, it would be rash to say that this hoard was quite as late as Bossall/Flaxton, deposited c. 927, but it does seem reasonable to assign a date of c. 925. The range of coinage is also comparable with Bossall/Flaxton and Thurcaston (c. 925), and sits somewhere between the two in size, with Thurcaston containing only twelve coins, and Bossall 270+. Further confirmation of a deposition date late in the reign of Edward comes from the fact that none of the coins show evidence of testing by pecking. Pecking was common in the Danelaw in the earlier part of Edward's reign, but seems to have been falling out of use in the 920s. This contrasts with the use of test marks on some of the non-numismatic material, as noted above. This is common in Viking hoards, and there are other examples, e.g. Warton and Bossall/Flaxton, in which unpecked coins were hoarded together with pecked hack-silver or jewellery. The ingots are of typical Viking form, with parallels in several hoards from Croydon, c. 875, through to Bossall/Flaxton, c. 927. A number of single finds of silver ingots, dating to the late 9th and 10th centuries particularly, have been reported as potential Treasure finds in recent years, e.g. from Eccleston, Cheshire, Sandhurst, Glos., and two fragments from Hindringham, Norfolk (DCMS Treasure Annual Reports, 2001, nos. 66 and 68; 2002, no. 37). The hack-silver shows particular affinities with some of the jewellery and hack-silver from the Cuerdale (Lancs) hoard, deposited c. 905. In particular, the neck-ring fragments of multiple rods, plaited or twisted have parallels in Cuerdale, as does the hook-ended terminal (no. 14). However, a similar hook-ended terminal is recorded on an arm-ring from the later Warton hoard, and several other elements in Cuerdale have parallels in the hoards of the 920s, so that affinities with Cuerdale do not necessarily indicate a hoard of exactly the same date. The thistle-brooch fragment (no. 11) is from a type of brooch represented in Cuerdale but also in intact form from Goldsborough and from the earlier Penrith finds. The non-numismatic material from the hoard is therefore entirely compatible in dating with the coins, and a date of c. 925 seems acceptable for the hoard as a whole. It should be noted that this is also compatible with the dating of the earlier hoard from the same area, which has previously been dated to the 920s or 930s on stylistic grounds (J. Graham-Campbell, 'The Northern hoards, from Cuerdale to Bossall/Flaxton', Edward the Elder 899-924, ed. N. J. Higham and D. H. Hill (London and New York 2001), 212-29). There are two possible interpretations of the hoards. One is that these are two (or more) contemporary but completely distinct silver hoards of differing character, with the 1989 find (and possibly the earlier finds) representing a hoard of intact jewellery (with parallels in Ireland)and the current find representing a mixed bullion/coin hoard (with parallels in both Britain and Ireland). The alternative is that the two finds represent a single mixed hoard containing intact jewellery, ingots, hack-silver and coins. This combination has parallels in northern England in Cuerdale, Goldsborough and Bossall/Flaxton. Since the new find is the result of detailed archaeological excavation, and contains only small fragments, it is possible that the find does represent a single hoard, with these smaller pieces having been missed on previous occasions. However, the absence of any smaller finds of this type with the earlier find does suggest that this was not found in exactly the same place, especially since fragments of more recent metal debris were discovered with the brooches in 1989, suggesting that the sort of material represented in the new hoard would have been discovered if it had been there. The new find from the Penrith area is most probably a separate deposit from the 1989 brooch hoard and would qualify as Treasure under the stipulated criteria of the Treasure Act (1996): the silver items in the hoard are more than 300 years old, with a precious metal content of over 10%, and the original ownership of the hoard can not be traced. However, the objects of copper alloy, iron, aluminium and stone, and possibly the lead strip, all itemised above, should not be considered to be Treasure as associated finds, but rather as intrusive material that happened to be found in the same place. B Ager and G Williams, BM
Original Image | Publisher: | http://finds.org.uk | Source: | Portable Antiquities | Identifier: | http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/r... | Go to resource |
|
More Like this...
-
HOARD
British Museum Report to HM…
-
-
-
-
-
HOARD
TREASURE CASE : 2012 T373.Discovery…
-
INGOT
Treasure Case 2005 T83British Museum…
-
HOARD
~~The ingots are all silver…
-
INGOT
Treasure case No: 2004 T484…
-
INGOT
Treasure case No: 2004 T484Surface…
|