Dear all,
Thanks for the suggestions, but malting doesn't seem to quite fit with this assemblage.
The sample is dominated by grain with very little chaff (some glume bases are present) and very few weeds. The grains are well developed and show no signs of germination. The detached items I'm finding are embryos rather than developed sprouts/coleoptiles. Any alternative suggestions would be welcome!
The context is the lower fill of an early Iron Age pit, and there is some suggestion that the grain might have been cointained in a ceramic vessel, though we're working with old (1970s) site records that are not entirely clear on this point.
Kate Nichoson
PhD Candidate,
Dept. of Archaeology and Ancient History
University of Leicester
-----Original Message-----
From: Merryn Dineley [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 16 April 2008 22:15
To: The archaeobotany mailing list; Nicholson, K.E.
Subject: Re:
Probably indicative of malted grain.
What is the context?
Merryn
Dear Kate,
An assemblage with a high proportion of detached embryos and hulled wheat glumes can be malting waste from the rubbing of sprouted grain after drying and before rough milling. Roman corndriers sometimes contain sprouts and spelt glumes as at the Bancroft Villa, Milton Keynes. You should however have a few sprouted and somewhat depleted looking grains in your assemblage if this is the case.
Best wishes,
Mark
Nicholson, K.E. wrote:
> Dear all,
> Does anyone know the significance (if any) of large numbers of
> detached embryos in an assemblage of carbonised emmer wheat?
> Kate Nicholson
|