Fieldwork opportunity: Zamartze Mortuary Archaeology Field School

When? June 6-30; July 6-30; August 6-30; September 6-30. 2014

How much is it?
June session: €1750; July session: €1950; August session: €1950; September session: €1750

The Zamartze Mortuary Archaeology Field School is a research project investigating human burials at the medieval monastic complex of Zamartze in the municipality of Uharte-Arakil (Navarre, Spain).

The main element in the site is a 12th century Romanesque church assumed to have been built on top of an earlier Roman mansio. Restoration works to the complex in 2005 revealed medieval graves and Roman structures.

The primary goal of the project is to gain knowledge of the population of this part of Navarre during the medieval period. Graves are thought to date between the 9th and the 14th century, and over 100 individual burials have been uncovered in the last years. The project aims at using the individuals recovered from this cemetery to perform a thorough study of the diet, pathology and bioprofile (age, sex, stature) of this Medieval site’s population that could be extrapolated to the region, as little is known in the area about its Medieval population. Additional details of funerary practices may also be gained from the position of the skeletons, burial orientation and grave goods. Stone tombs (as well as later intrusive burials) surrounding the church will be excavated.

The field school is aimed at students or graduates of archaeology and physical or forensic anthropology who wish to gain hands-on experience in the excavation of human remains.  There will be daily lectures and lab classes on skeletal anatomy,excavation techniques and Basque archaeology, although the major component of the school is fieldwork, with students spending an average of 7-8 hours per day on site. Throughout the course, students will become proficient in carrying out all aspects of osteological analysis, including the determination of age, sex, stature and identification of pathologies.

The focus of the fieldwork will be on burial excavation techniques and documentation methods. Students will participate in all stages involved in the exhumation of human remains in archaeological contexts.

Visit the Project Website for more information.

Digging deeper: The Personal Carriage of Arrows from Hastings to the Mary Rose

It's time to dig deep in the archives again and this week we will be looking at 'The Personal Carriage of Arrows from Hastings to the Mary Rose', the most popular article published in Arms & Armour.

The article is written by Jonathan Waller and John Waller and focuses on the often overlooked aspect of archery in the Middle Ages - how one transports one's arrows. It details the variety of manners in which this was done over the centuries - quivers, girdles, and cases all feature - and uses the specific (and fascinating) example of arrows used in King Henry VIII's campaign in France and the sinking of the Mary Rose in 1545.

The authors explain that "Certainly by the late fifteenth and early sixteenth century, English arrows were fitted with smaller heads on lighter shafts. But how did Henry VIII’s principal archers carry their lighter sheaf arrows? We are very fortunate to have many illustrations of Tudor archers in the Cowdray Engravings. These engravings were copies of the original paintings in Cowdray House at Midhurst in Sussex. This was the home of Sir Anthony Browne, Master of Horse to Henry VIII. In this capacity he accompanied the King on his expedition of France in 1544. Sir Anthony commissioned five large paintings which accurately portrayed the king’s campaign in France and the events in the Solent in 1545 including the sinking of the Mary Rose. In 1785, these paintings were copied, at the behest of the Society of Antiquities of London, as engravings. These were published in 1788. This was very fortunate as Cowdray House was largely destroyed by fire in 1793 and the paintings with it. This left the engravings as the only detailed pictorial source of reference of Henry’s campaign and the sinking of his flagship the Mary Rose."

They go on to conclude that "When the principal archers, each with his bow in its case and a sheaf of arrows in their soft quiver, were about to embark they would cover the fletchings with its soft leather cover and close the top with its drawstring. Then tying their girdles around the middle of their quivers with a constrictor knot, to hold the arrows more firmly, they would wrap the remaining ends of the girdle around the soft body of the quiver and loosely tie the ends together. This would ensure the protection of their arrows by the collective strength created. It would also make it easier for them to carry both their bow and arrows on board and stow them in any space the archers were given for their berths on the ship. If and when they were called to action it would be a matter of seconds to release the girdle from around their quivers, uncover the arrows, sling the girdles over their shoulders, string their bows and they were ready for action. Associated with some spacers found on the Mary Rose, were traces of woven material, pieces of soft leather and what are described as strips of leather, some of which were tied around of the remaining arrows in spacers.

These are probably the remains of some Cowdray quivers and similar in construction to the ‘lost quiver’ examined by Grose. If the quivers were full and still tied at both ends, which we shall never know, this could perhaps mean that some of the archers on board the Mary Rose, never readied their arrows for combat. Records tell us that at no time before her sinking during the battle, was the Mary Rose at a fighting distance close enough to the French ships, during the battle, which would have allowed for advantageous deployment of her archers. We shall never know how many archers were standing to, bows in hand, arrows in their quivers at the ready, when the ship went down. What we do know is that some archers left their arrows in their quivers unused when the Mary Rose sank to the bottom of the Solent on that fateful day in 1545. Now, after 500 years, however, perhaps we have gone some way in shedding some light on the connection between Mr Grose’s ‘Ancient Quiver’ and the remains of the quivers on the Mary Rose, and helped explain the practicalities of the ways in which arrows could be carried and drawn."

>> Read the full article for free

Digging Deeper: Magic for the Dead? The Archaeology of Magic in Later Medieval Burials



Female burial at St Helen's Fishergate, York

Every now and then 'Can you dig it?' digs deep into the Maney Publishing online archive to highlight articles from past issues that proved to be very popular with our subscribers. In light of next week's International Medieval Congress in Leeds, I chose 'Magic for the Dead? The Archaeology of Magic in Later Medieval Burials', published in Medieval Archaeology (Volume 52, 2008) it was the winner of the 2008 Martyn Jope Award. This paper examines patterns in the placement of apotropaic objects and materials in high- to late-medieval burials in Britain (11th to 15th centuries). It was written by Professor Roberta Gilchrist, Head of the School of Human and Environmental Sciences at the University of Reading.

It develops an interdisciplinary classification to identify: (1) healing charms and protective amulets; (2) objects perceived to have occult natural power; (3) 'antique' items that were treated as possessing occult power; and (4) rare practices that may have been associated with the demonic magic of divination or sorcery. Making comparisons with amulets deposited in conversion-period graves of the 7th to 9th centuries it is argued that the placement of amulets with the dead was strategic to Christian belief, intended to transform or protect the corpse. The conclusion is that material traces of magic in later medieval graves have a connection to folk magic, performed by women in the care of their families, and drawing on knowledge of earlier traditions. This popular magic was integrated with Christian concerns and tolerated by local clergy, and was perhaps meant to heal or reconstitute the corpse, to ensure its reanimation on judgement day, and to protect the vulnerable dead on their journey through purgatory.

The following is an excerpt from the article's introduction:

Silver half penny of Edward III

"Archaeologists have been reluctant to consider how medieval people expressed supernatural and spiritual beliefs through the material practices of life and death. A rare contribution on this theme was Ralph Merrifield’s The Archaeology of Ritual and Magic, in which he diagnosed a ‘ritual phobia’among historical archaeologists. With the advent of a more scientific, processual archaeology in the 1970s and 1980s, the study of magic — with its superstitious and folkloric connotations — was relegated to the archaeological fringe. The topic has retained some currency in the study of conversion-period burials of the 7th to 9th centuries, although even in this context magic has been dismissed as superstitious ritual, rather than examined in relation to sacred beliefs."

>> Read the full article for free