An anacdotal account of 'tanning' waste - I once chanced upon a deer poachers cache, it containing
the skull, skin, metapodials and feet (nicely articulated) of a single red deer hidden in the long
grass of the machair. Obviously once reduced to joints the meat could be moved around without too
much suspicsion. Now if only I had had a camera with me at the time.
So a Roman poachers dump?
or a post-modern head and hooves deposit?
I am sure I have more sensible examples - but its been a long day.
Jacqui
>>> "WORLEY, Fay Louise" <[log in to unmask]> 08/05/2008 12:45 >>>
Dear Sue (and zooarchers),
The archaeological context for the cattle bones is interpreted as a
"demolition/decay layer" infilling a room in Groundwell Roman Villa. The
current phasing places the context in period where the villa was
destroyed prior to the construction of a post built building. Happily,
one of the cattle bones is being C14 dated so I should know fairly soon
whether it is Roman or later (very little other dating evidence was
recovered).
The context contained 104 (NISP) identifiable animal bones, 36 of these
were from the cattle deposit. The remaining bones were five additional
cattle bones from a different individual, five pig bones, one hare bone,
one horse tooth, five bird bones (all wild: pigeon, duck and
indeterminate), eleven medium mammal bones (may be sheep) and the
remaining 40 fragments were sheep and sheep or goat (MNI= 4).
From an archaeozoological point of view it is certainly an interesting
deposit. I'm leaning towards industrial waste. I have phalanges from at
least three feet, carpals and tarsals from all feet (and both distal
radii) but only one metapodial (and two additional unfused condyles). My
current hypothesis is that deposit represents tanning waste and the
missing metapodials have been taken elsewhere, perhaps for bone working.
I'm waiting for a copy of the context sheet to see if the excavator made
any comment about grouping of bone in this deposit.
Fay
Fay Worley
Zooarchaeologist
English Heritage
Fort Cumberland
Fort Cumberland Road
Eastney
Portsmouth
PO4 9LD
tel: 02392 856789
fax: 02392 856701
-----Original Message-----
From: Analysis of animal remains from archaeological sites
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stallibrass, Susan
Sent: 08 May 2008 11:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH] Roman tanning, sacred or profane?
Dear Fay,
We had a head, hide and hoofs deposit in Cumbria. Peat cutting in the
Solway Moss disturbed the remains of two cattle represented only by
skin, skull (with hair), foot bones and hooves. They had been deposited
in a pool within the moss (bog). No accompanying artefacts were found,
but the small size and the shape of the bones, skull and horncore were
compatible with the small, unimproved cattle common throughout Europe
during the Iron Age and Roman periods (although they did continue later
into the Medieval and post-medieval periods) . We thought we had an Iron
Age 'head and hooves' deposit similar to those described by Stuart
Piggott in his 1962 'Heads and hooves' review of European evidence in
Antiquity 36: 110-118. We obtained radiocarbon dates on three body
tissues: bone, hoof and soft tissue (?skin?). The concordance was
excellent and they all came out as Early Medieval with a combined date
of cal AD 684 - 947. The moral is: if you have a site with Roman
artefacts on it, get independent dates for your animal bones. Your
example may well be the remains of a hide awaiting secular processing,
but it might also have had a very different significance, and I suggest
that you try to get funding for dating it (important whatever it's past
use since it relates to a specific activity). Were your bones mixed in
with general rubbish or on their own?
The full discussion of the 'Solway Cow' is published in pages 120 - 135
in the Medieval and post-medieval [in the North Cumbrian Plain]
section in Hodgkinson, D., Huckerby, E., Middleton, R. & Wells, C.E.
(Eds.) 2000 The lowland wetlands of Cumbria. Lancaster: Lancaster
Imprints. North West Wetlands Survey Vol. 6.
Bw
Sue
Dr Sue Stallibrass
English Heritage Archaeological Science Adviser for North-West England,
Department of Archaeology (SACE),
Hartley Building, Brownlow Street,
University of Liverpool,
LIVERPOOL
L69 3GS
email: [log in to unmask]
direct phone: 0151 794 5046
departmental FAX: 0151 794 5057
________________________________
From: Analysis of animal remains from archaeological sites
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sue Millard
Sent: 07 May 2008 18:28
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH] Roman tanning, vellum and grades of leather from
different aged animals?
Another interpretation might be that a cow hide could provide straps, or
even harness for cattle or horses in draught work - though older beasts
are preferred for harness, on account of the greater strength and length
of their hides.
18 months would be a bit young for this kind of strength to have
developed.
Bags? Shoes? Belts?
Sue
(former harnessmaker)
-------------- Original message ---------------
Dear Fay: Looking a bit earlier: Kate Clark interpreted the single cow,
represented by a skull and distal elements in a Neolithic Grooved Ware
pit full of butchered piglets and lambs, as a hide, probably for
wrapping or carrying:
Clark, K, 2003. 'Animal bone from the Neolithic Grooved Ware pit', pp.
237-240 in Miles, D, Palmer S, Lock G Gosden C and Cromarty AM,
Uffington White Horse and its Landscape: Investigations at White Horse
Hill, Uffington, 1989-95, and Tower Hill, Ashbury, 1993-4 (Oxford
ARchaeology Thames Valley Monograph 18).
She notes that Roberson-Mackay reviews the evidence for late prehistoric
'skull and hooves' burials:
Roberston-Mackay, M E 1980. 'A 'head and hooves' burial beneath a round
barrow, and other Neolthic and Bronze Age sites on Hemp Knoll, near
Avebury, Wiltshire', Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 46, 147-8.
So maybe your calf was a smart leather bag complete with skull.
Greg Campbell
----- Original Message ----
From: "WORLEY, Fay Louise" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wednesday, 7 May, 2008 5:22:41 PM
Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH] Roman tanning, vellum and grades of leather from
different aged animals?
Just a quick e-mail to thank everyone who replied to my post, how
frustrating that I missed the leather conference!
Thanks,
Fay
Fay Worley
Zooarchaeologist
English Heritage
Fort Cumberland
Fort Cumberland Road
Eastney
Portsmouth
PO4 9LD
tel: 02392 856789
fax: 02392 856701
-----Original Message-----
From: L J Gidney@durham ac uk [mailto: [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> ]
Sent: 22 April 2008 17:16
To: WORLEY, Fay Louise
Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH] Roman tanning, vellum and grades of leather from
different aged animals?
How about enquiring of www.hewit.com, a firm in Edinburgh who still
produce traditional vellum & parchment.
However, bear in mind that an 18 month old beast is hardly a calf in
terms of the live animal.
WORLEY, Fay Louise wrote:
> Dear All,
>
>
>
> I have a deposit containing only the four feet, horncores and attached
> frontal bones of a calf, approximately 1.5 years of at death. I'm
> confident that they represent the same individual. Butchery marks
> (disarticulation of feet, removal of the rest of the skull) together
> with element representation suggest to me that this is either tanning
> waste or the remains of a hide prior to tanning. My bones are
probably
> late Roman, although there is some post-Roman activity on the site.
The
> site is in southern England.
>
>
>
> Serjeantson (1989) has quoted Schmidt (1974), suggesting that the
> horncores may be retained with the skin to allow tanners to ascertain
> the age of the animal. I know that the best quality vellum is from the
> foetal individuals but that lower grade vellum can be produced from
calf
> skin.
>
>
>
> Can anyone offer any suggestions as to the oldest calves which can be
> used to produce vellum (I presume that mine is too old?) and whether
the
> hide of a 1.5 year old calf would be of a higher quality or finer
grade
> than that of an older individual? I'm guessing that the older the
> cattle the tougher the leather - is this correct? Of course leather
> production was probably not the reason to the calf was slaughtered at
> that particular age, but I'm just interested in whether its hide would
> have been of particular value/utility?
>
>
>
> Thanks for any help or suggestions,
>
>
>
> Fay Worley
>
>
>
> Albarella, U 2002 'Tawyers, tanners, horn trade and the mystery of the
> missing goat' in Murphy, P and Wiltshire, P (eds) The Environmental
> Archaeology of Industry. Oxford: Oxbow, 71-86
>
> Serjeantson, D 1989 'Animal remains in the tanning trade' in
> Serjeantson, D and Waldron, T (eds) Diet and Crafts in Towns. BAR
> British 199, 129-146
>
> Schmidt, E 1974 'Als das Gerben noch ein langweriges Geschaft war'
> CIBA-Geigy-Zeitschrift 1/74, 8-11
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Fay Worley
>
> Zooarchaeologist
>
> English Heritage
>
> Fort Cumberland
>
> Fort Cumberland Road
>
> Eastney
>
> Portsmouth
>
> PO4 9LD
>
> tel: 02392 856789
>
> fax: 02392 856701
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
> personal views which are not the
> views of English Heritage unless specifically stated. If you have
> received it in error, please delete it
> from your system and notify the sender immediately. Do not use, copy
or
> disclose the information in
> any way nor act in reliance on it. Any information sent to English
> Heritage may become publicly available.
________________________________________________________________________
_________
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
personal views which are not the
views of English Heritage unless specifically stated. If you have
received it in error, please delete it
from your system and notify the sender immediately. Do not use, copy or
disclose the information in
any way nor act in reliance on it. Any information sent to English
Heritage may become publicly available.
Sue in the English Lakes (\^/)
Intelligence is no defence against stupidity
http://www.suemillard.f9.co.uk/hoofprints.shtml
http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=813242
_________________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the
views of English Heritage unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please
delete it
from your system and notify the sender immediately. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in
any way nor act in reliance on it. Any information sent to English Heritage may become publicly
available.
|
