Though widely regarded as poor in early Anglo-Saxon (5-7th century) burial archaeology, the West Midlands is home to some spectacularly furnished burials, most of which, excavated prior to modern archaeology and with finds not on public display, remain obscure even to specialists. During this series we have explored a particular zone -- the Warwickshire Avon Valley — which is unusually rich in cemetery archaeology, representing an 'Anglo-British' community at a crossroads between different cultural zones, and living at a time when, in surrounding kingdoms, early medieval kingdoms were beginning to form.
Previous chapters have explored the archaeology of the particularly fascinating and well-studied cemetery at Wasperton, which was in continuous use by the local community from the late Roman period until the 7th century, and presented two costumed reconstructions based on particular graves; of a high status mid 6th century woman buried with elaborate brooches and textiles (grave 24; "The Woman from Wasperton") and an early 6th century man buried with a limited set of grave-goods including some typical pieces of warrior-gear (grave 91; "Wasperton 'Warrior'"). Compensating for limited survival by drawing on inferences from wider early Anglo-Saxon archaeology, better preserved items of clothing from adjacent periods and cultures, and iconography, these reconstructions provide the opportunity to come 'face-to-face' with individuals who lived in this region over 1400 years ago, and also provide the opportunity to see better preserved finds from these graves presented functioning and in context. These reconstructions have heavily relied upon insights from the thorough modern archaeological analysis of the cemetery of Wasperton, but other cemeteries along the Avon excavated in earlier times -- some yielding far more spectacular finds -- are much less well understood, having been haphazardly excavated and poorly recorded.
We began this series by revisiting the fascinating site of Bidford-on-Avon; the historically most important crossing of the navigable river Avon, traversed by a Roman road linking the Fosse Way to the south, Watling Street and what would become the Mercian core of the Trent Valley to the north, this 'productive site' (Richards & Naylor, 2010) was perhaps a nexus for trade in the region in late antiquity and supported a prosperous and well-connected community, represented by a large cemetery of cremations and furnished burials on the north bank. This is the largest such cemetery in the region (Tompkins, 2019) but has suffered from piecemeal excavation and patchy reporting, beginning in the early 1920s, resulting in a severely incomplete understanding of the site, its national significance, and under-appreciation of the finds, many of which have never been placed on public display and remain obscure even to specialists.
In 2014 we attempted to raise the profile of this cemetery by re-creating the then-obscure but quite remarkable decorated early 6th century shield from Bidford grave 182, the remains of which are now displayed at the Ad Gefrin centre in Wooler, Northumberland, and have worked with custodians of the 1920s finds from Bidford -- the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust — to make sense of some of the other finds. In the first instalment of this series (here) we discussed the Bidford-on-Avon cemetery and (due to improper record-keeping during the 1920s excavations) the tricky detective-work required to reconstruct the contents of one particular burial; grave 88.
As the finale of this series, here we present a costume reconstruction of the lady from Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 based on this research, incorporating replicas of her accoutrements presented in context, and drawing on insights from related burials at Wasperton. The results of this project by team member Julia Ward, with contributions by Æd Thompson, early medieval jewellery specialist Andrew Mason, were (together with the previous two reconstructions) unveiled as part of a special event at Sutton Hoo in summer 2023.
Previous chapters have explored the archaeology of the particularly fascinating and well-studied cemetery at Wasperton, which was in continuous use by the local community from the late Roman period until the 7th century, and presented two costumed reconstructions based on particular graves; of a high status mid 6th century woman buried with elaborate brooches and textiles (grave 24; "The Woman from Wasperton") and an early 6th century man buried with a limited set of grave-goods including some typical pieces of warrior-gear (grave 91; "Wasperton 'Warrior'"). Compensating for limited survival by drawing on inferences from wider early Anglo-Saxon archaeology, better preserved items of clothing from adjacent periods and cultures, and iconography, these reconstructions provide the opportunity to come 'face-to-face' with individuals who lived in this region over 1400 years ago, and also provide the opportunity to see better preserved finds from these graves presented functioning and in context. These reconstructions have heavily relied upon insights from the thorough modern archaeological analysis of the cemetery of Wasperton, but other cemeteries along the Avon excavated in earlier times -- some yielding far more spectacular finds -- are much less well understood, having been haphazardly excavated and poorly recorded.
We began this series by revisiting the fascinating site of Bidford-on-Avon; the historically most important crossing of the navigable river Avon, traversed by a Roman road linking the Fosse Way to the south, Watling Street and what would become the Mercian core of the Trent Valley to the north, this 'productive site' (Richards & Naylor, 2010) was perhaps a nexus for trade in the region in late antiquity and supported a prosperous and well-connected community, represented by a large cemetery of cremations and furnished burials on the north bank. This is the largest such cemetery in the region (Tompkins, 2019) but has suffered from piecemeal excavation and patchy reporting, beginning in the early 1920s, resulting in a severely incomplete understanding of the site, its national significance, and under-appreciation of the finds, many of which have never been placed on public display and remain obscure even to specialists.
In 2014 we attempted to raise the profile of this cemetery by re-creating the then-obscure but quite remarkable decorated early 6th century shield from Bidford grave 182, the remains of which are now displayed at the Ad Gefrin centre in Wooler, Northumberland, and have worked with custodians of the 1920s finds from Bidford -- the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust — to make sense of some of the other finds. In the first instalment of this series (here) we discussed the Bidford-on-Avon cemetery and (due to improper record-keeping during the 1920s excavations) the tricky detective-work required to reconstruct the contents of one particular burial; grave 88.
As the finale of this series, here we present a costume reconstruction of the lady from Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 based on this research, incorporating replicas of her accoutrements presented in context, and drawing on insights from related burials at Wasperton. The results of this project by team member Julia Ward, with contributions by Æd Thompson, early medieval jewellery specialist Andrew Mason, were (together with the previous two reconstructions) unveiled as part of a special event at Sutton Hoo in summer 2023.
Bidford-on-Avon, Recap
The cemetery was discovered during the cutting of the new road in 1921, when workers unearthed a number of disturbed Anglo-Saxon finds. This was followed by a more systematic excavation of the ‘gravel plateau’ 150 yards from the Roman road and 200 yards from the old ford (Humphreys et. al. 1923) in the summer of 1922, uncovering approx. 112 graves including around 80 inhumations and a not-precisely-recorded number of cremations. Further excavations in the summer of 1923 (Humphreys et. al. 1924) brought the total number of graves to 214; again, a mixture of inhumations and cremations. Most of the finds from these excavations ended up in the collections of the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust in Stratford-on-Avon.
Although the 1920s excavators were confident they had found the limits of the cemetery, more burials emerged during development in 1971 necessitating multiple rescue excavations from 1971 to 1994, the results of which are yet to be published, save for a discussion of the enigmatic 'Cunning Woman' burial (Dickinson, 2013). The finds from these excavations are in the keeping of the Warwickshire County Council, with a small number of star items displayed at the Market Hall Museum in Warwick alongside some items from Wasperton.
Although the 1920s excavators were confident they had found the limits of the cemetery, more burials emerged during development in 1971 necessitating multiple rescue excavations from 1971 to 1994, the results of which are yet to be published, save for a discussion of the enigmatic 'Cunning Woman' burial (Dickinson, 2013). The finds from these excavations are in the keeping of the Warwickshire County Council, with a small number of star items displayed at the Market Hall Museum in Warwick alongside some items from Wasperton.
Early Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Bidford-on-Avon. Cemetery plan from Humphreys et. al. (1924) showing extent of the graves found up to the end of the 1923 excavations.
Over all Bidford-on-Avon is the largest Anglo-Saxon cemetery in the region but badly suffers from its history of piecemeal excavation and patchy reporting. An effort to produce a unified report on the cemetery spearheaded by Tania Dickinson and MOLA’s Sue Hirst was announced in October 2012 but has yet to be forthcoming (Tompkins, 2017). The divided responsibility for the finds (and lack of a local or regional centre for displaying such material) has led to these finds, together with those from neighbouring cemeteries, remaining mostly out of public view.
With the possible exception of the spectacular Bidford-on-Avon 182 shield boss, the most eye-catching objects found at Bidford are the particularly diverse array of womens brooches, particularly those found during the 1920s excavations, but the practice at the time of grouping finds from cemeteries into types and discussing them as collections, in reports, without noting which objects were found together in graves, has challenged efforts to reconstruct burial assemblages and costumes. In particular it has hitherto not been known to which burial the spectacular, richly gilt great square-headed brooch from this cemetery belonged, nor which other dress items were found with it. Through a lengthy process of deduction (discussed in more detail in chapter 1) we were able to associate this brooch with grave-88 (1922 excavation) from the north-east part of the cemetery, and identify which other objects were found with it.
With the possible exception of the spectacular Bidford-on-Avon 182 shield boss, the most eye-catching objects found at Bidford are the particularly diverse array of womens brooches, particularly those found during the 1920s excavations, but the practice at the time of grouping finds from cemeteries into types and discussing them as collections, in reports, without noting which objects were found together in graves, has challenged efforts to reconstruct burial assemblages and costumes. In particular it has hitherto not been known to which burial the spectacular, richly gilt great square-headed brooch from this cemetery belonged, nor which other dress items were found with it. Through a lengthy process of deduction (discussed in more detail in chapter 1) we were able to associate this brooch with grave-88 (1922 excavation) from the north-east part of the cemetery, and identify which other objects were found with it.
The Lady from Bidford G88
Grave 88 sat among neat rows of burials aligned approximately east-west, in the northeast corner of the cemetery. We have no image or clear illustration of the grave-plan, but the tiny sketch of the skeleton in the cemetery plan lacks lower legs or arms, suggesting there was a degree of disturbance here. A photograph of the related grave 79, however, with a similar array of grave-goods, shows their arrangement precisely as we would expect, with paired brooches on the shoulders, great brooch and bead swag between, and this is likely to have also been the case for Bidford-88. The occupant of grave 88 was recorded as female by the excavators (though it is unclear if this was based on osteology, or merely the character of the grave-goods). The grave goods included;
(Items for which no more information exists beyond this brief description, which we have been unable to track down, match, or find photographs of, are shown above in grey.) (*Paste —This term is today regarded as inaccurate, but was historically used to refer to polychrome glass beads now known to have been made by lampwork).
A more detailed discussion of the exercise by which we pieced together this burial assemblage, and (where not precisely identified) what clues are available to inform our impression of each find, can be found in chapter 1 (here), but we will hitherto focus on the significance of these finds, what they tell us, what other evidence can be drawn on to fill gaps in our impression of the costume from this burial, and the process of recreating it.
- A richly gilt Great Square-Headed brooch (most likely worn horizontally, central on the chest).
- 2x richly gilt Applied Brooches (most likely on each shoulder, pinning a peplos-style dress).
- Swag(s) of beads including amber, ‘paste*’ and glass
- A knife (probably at the waist)
- A silver strip spiral finger-ring (worn on the right hand)
- A bronze girdle-buckle (waist) and another in 2 pieces
- ‘1 saucer brooch between the femora’
- A bronze-banded ‘situla’ / bucket (5-6’’ above & to the right of the skull)
(Items for which no more information exists beyond this brief description, which we have been unable to track down, match, or find photographs of, are shown above in grey.) (*Paste —This term is today regarded as inaccurate, but was historically used to refer to polychrome glass beads now known to have been made by lampwork).
A more detailed discussion of the exercise by which we pieced together this burial assemblage, and (where not precisely identified) what clues are available to inform our impression of each find, can be found in chapter 1 (here), but we will hitherto focus on the significance of these finds, what they tell us, what other evidence can be drawn on to fill gaps in our impression of the costume from this burial, and the process of recreating it.
The Great Square-Headed Brooch
Like the example previously discussed, from Wasperton grave 24 and recreated for the 'Woman from Wasperton' impression (chapter 2, here) this cast-bronze brooch dates to the early 6th century and (based on position and textile adhesions on similar finds from other graves) was almost certainly worn centrally on the chest, pinning a heavier wool cloak or shawl. Elaborate ‘third brooches’ occur in a minority of furnished womens graves, usually found in positions suggesting they were worn centrally on the chest (Walton-Rogers 2007, Owen-Crocker 2004) and as their inclusion in a grave represented a significant sacrifice of wealth during the burial rite (as such items could otherwise be kept in use) their occurrence is taken to be an indicator that the grave occupant was an individual of high status. Great Square Headed brooches also occur in Scandinavia, and have a widespread distribution across lowland Britain, but Portable Antiquities Scheme data suggests they were most common in traditionally termed ‘Anglian’ regions including, particularly, Norfolk, Cambridgeshire and Lincolnshire (Geake & Webley, 2018).
The brooch from Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 was the only true 'great brooch' recovered from the 1920s excavations but other great-square-headed brooches were found during subsequent rescue excavations from 1971 and 1994 (Tompkins, 2017), and identification of a number of very similar brooches from other sites in the region might open the possibility that these may have been manufactured relatively locally. One, on display in the Market Hall Museum in Warwick & also shown on signage in Bidford itself (pictured) is a close (but not exact) match and easily confused for the brooch from Wasperton g24 and may have originated from the same workshop. Another great square-headed brooch noted to be very similar to those found in inhumations at Bidford (Tompkins, 2017) was recovered from a well-furnished female burial in a small cemetery of five burials at Blockley, 14 miles south at the edge of the Cotswolds, and one of a number of great square-headed brooches from the 6th century cemetery at Bagington, Coventry (beside Lunt Roman fort at the crossing-point of the the Fosse Way and Watling Street) was identified as an exact match to one of the Bidford brooches, likely having been cast from the same mould (Tompkins, 2017). Near the watershed with the Tame and Trent valleys, the cemetery material at Bagington is much more 'Anglian' in character, with a preponderance of items like small-long and annular brooches instead of the saucer brooches characteristic of cemeteries further down the Avon. Consequently the community buried at Bagington is regarded as having belonged to a different cultural network in the early 6th century, primarily facing east, rather than the south. Nevertheless the presence of a great square headed brooch originating from the same mould, in graves either side of this apparent tribal boundary, suggests that circulation of goods between these neighbouring networks did occur.
Like the example previously discussed, from Wasperton grave 24 and recreated for the 'Woman from Wasperton' impression (chapter 2, here) this cast-bronze brooch dates to the early 6th century and (based on position and textile adhesions on similar finds from other graves) was almost certainly worn centrally on the chest, pinning a heavier wool cloak or shawl. Elaborate ‘third brooches’ occur in a minority of furnished womens graves, usually found in positions suggesting they were worn centrally on the chest (Walton-Rogers 2007, Owen-Crocker 2004) and as their inclusion in a grave represented a significant sacrifice of wealth during the burial rite (as such items could otherwise be kept in use) their occurrence is taken to be an indicator that the grave occupant was an individual of high status. Great Square Headed brooches also occur in Scandinavia, and have a widespread distribution across lowland Britain, but Portable Antiquities Scheme data suggests they were most common in traditionally termed ‘Anglian’ regions including, particularly, Norfolk, Cambridgeshire and Lincolnshire (Geake & Webley, 2018).
The brooch from Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 was the only true 'great brooch' recovered from the 1920s excavations but other great-square-headed brooches were found during subsequent rescue excavations from 1971 and 1994 (Tompkins, 2017), and identification of a number of very similar brooches from other sites in the region might open the possibility that these may have been manufactured relatively locally. One, on display in the Market Hall Museum in Warwick & also shown on signage in Bidford itself (pictured) is a close (but not exact) match and easily confused for the brooch from Wasperton g24 and may have originated from the same workshop. Another great square-headed brooch noted to be very similar to those found in inhumations at Bidford (Tompkins, 2017) was recovered from a well-furnished female burial in a small cemetery of five burials at Blockley, 14 miles south at the edge of the Cotswolds, and one of a number of great square-headed brooches from the 6th century cemetery at Bagington, Coventry (beside Lunt Roman fort at the crossing-point of the the Fosse Way and Watling Street) was identified as an exact match to one of the Bidford brooches, likely having been cast from the same mould (Tompkins, 2017). Near the watershed with the Tame and Trent valleys, the cemetery material at Bagington is much more 'Anglian' in character, with a preponderance of items like small-long and annular brooches instead of the saucer brooches characteristic of cemeteries further down the Avon. Consequently the community buried at Bagington is regarded as having belonged to a different cultural network in the early 6th century, primarily facing east, rather than the south. Nevertheless the presence of a great square headed brooch originating from the same mould, in graves either side of this apparent tribal boundary, suggests that circulation of goods between these neighbouring networks did occur.
At 140mm long this brooch is slightly smaller than the Wasperton example previously discussed but is much more finely worked, with deeper Salin-Style-I friezes, and particularly unusually, an elaborate and delicate openwork border around the headplate for which the best comparanda are perhaps the famous Danish square-headed brooches from Hove Mølle and Gummersmark. Such openwork borders are rare on great square-headed brooches found in Britain and suggest this example may have particularly strong Scandinavian affinities, as do the very 3D sculptural 'masks' down the midline of the brooch, also seen on the famous silver-gilt square headed brooch from Chessel Down, Isle of Wight, but which otherwise tend to be degenerate, flattened, or absent on great square headed brooches from Britain. These aspects of the Bidford-on-Avon g88 brooch suggest it might be a Scandinavian import, yet, with its lack of wear it is unlikely to have been an heirloom. The brooch was noted at the time of excavation to be remarkably richly gilt, and even today appears extremely bright, so may have been re-gilded or even freshly made at the time it was added to the burial. This is contrast to the previously discussed great brooch from Wasperton g24 (see chapter 2) which showed signs of heavy wear so appears to have been old / well-used at the time of burial (Carver et. al. 2009).
Applied Brooches
In contrast to the flawless state of preservation of the great-square-headed brooch, the applied brooches which probably sat at the shoulders and pinned the woman's peplos-style dress were less well preserved, with both decorated foils, but only one brooch superstructure extant (Humphreys et. al. 1923).
In contrast to the flawless state of preservation of the great-square-headed brooch, the applied brooches which probably sat at the shoulders and pinned the woman's peplos-style dress were less well preserved, with both decorated foils, but only one brooch superstructure extant (Humphreys et. al. 1923).
Remains of two gilt copper-alloy applied brooches from Bidford-on-Avon grave 88. (Humphreys et. al. 1923)
A form of saucer-brooch, applied brooches were soldered together from sheet metal and decorated with a die-impressed (pressblech) foil (Leahy, 2011) rather than cast (though to make things more confusing a rare 'Applied saucer brooch' subtype -- a hybrid in which a cast saucer is augmented by a partial foil insert — is known, for example from Beckford B, Worcestershire (Evison & Hill, 1996)). These were usually found at the shoulders (pinning the 'peplos style dress') and together with saucer brooches, in about 80% of undisturbed cases are found in matching or nearly-matching pairs (Dickinson, 2002).
Applied brooches were generally assembled from thin copper-alloy sheet, with a dish either beaten from one piece of formed by soldering a hoop of copper-alloy strip onto a backplate (Evison, 1973). The backplate was pierced with slots, through which pin-catches and hinges were inserted from the front, such that they would emerge neatly on the backs of the brooch, and these were soldered into place on the inside of the dish (in a way which would then be entirely hidden by the decorated foil insert). Although these brooches were predominantly held together by silvery-coloured (presumably tin or sometimes silver-based) soldering, traces of which tend to be visible on remains, mineralised organic traces (often leading to a strong contrast in colour between the obverse and reverse of applied brooch backplates) suggest that organic glues or pastes may have often played a role in fixing the decorative foil inserts, and further explain why foils and brooch backplates are so often found dissociated.
The delicate nature of their construction together with the effects of bimetallic / galvanic corrosion (due to the association of the copper-alloys and the tin or silver-based solders) mean that applied brooches are usually very poorly preserved and consequently have attracted less attention and study than other brooch types, despite being far from rare *.
* In the influential typology and chronological framework for early Anglo-Saxon grave-goods developed by Bayliss et. al. (2013), for example, applied brooches are disregarded as a distinct type and instead folded into BR2-a ('saucer brooch'); a subtype of BR2 (disc brooches), which also must include 'button brooches' (which despite superficial resemblance to cast saucer brooches are known to have a distinct distribution and different cultural affinities). In contrast the uncommon 'keystone disc brooch', a short-lived fashion of the late 6th century is afforded four subtypes within the typology (BR2-b1 to b4). The failure of this typology to grapple with the diversity of saucer brooches, to distinguish button or applied brooches from cast saucers, or to differentiate the easily-distinguished decorative schemes described by Evison (1973) is a major shortcoming of this framework.
The effective omission of applied brooches from this study may be justified by only a single example occurring across their sample of cemeteries, but this is arguably indicative of shortcomings in the representativeness of that sample to cemetery archaeology across all regions of lowland Britain, and consequently the validity of this typology and framework outside of regions represented in their sample.
Applied brooches were generally assembled from thin copper-alloy sheet, with a dish either beaten from one piece of formed by soldering a hoop of copper-alloy strip onto a backplate (Evison, 1973). The backplate was pierced with slots, through which pin-catches and hinges were inserted from the front, such that they would emerge neatly on the backs of the brooch, and these were soldered into place on the inside of the dish (in a way which would then be entirely hidden by the decorated foil insert). Although these brooches were predominantly held together by silvery-coloured (presumably tin or sometimes silver-based) soldering, traces of which tend to be visible on remains, mineralised organic traces (often leading to a strong contrast in colour between the obverse and reverse of applied brooch backplates) suggest that organic glues or pastes may have often played a role in fixing the decorative foil inserts, and further explain why foils and brooch backplates are so often found dissociated.
The delicate nature of their construction together with the effects of bimetallic / galvanic corrosion (due to the association of the copper-alloys and the tin or silver-based solders) mean that applied brooches are usually very poorly preserved and consequently have attracted less attention and study than other brooch types, despite being far from rare *.
* In the influential typology and chronological framework for early Anglo-Saxon grave-goods developed by Bayliss et. al. (2013), for example, applied brooches are disregarded as a distinct type and instead folded into BR2-a ('saucer brooch'); a subtype of BR2 (disc brooches), which also must include 'button brooches' (which despite superficial resemblance to cast saucer brooches are known to have a distinct distribution and different cultural affinities). In contrast the uncommon 'keystone disc brooch', a short-lived fashion of the late 6th century is afforded four subtypes within the typology (BR2-b1 to b4). The failure of this typology to grapple with the diversity of saucer brooches, to distinguish button or applied brooches from cast saucers, or to differentiate the easily-distinguished decorative schemes described by Evison (1973) is a major shortcoming of this framework.
The effective omission of applied brooches from this study may be justified by only a single example occurring across their sample of cemeteries, but this is arguably indicative of shortcomings in the representativeness of that sample to cemetery archaeology across all regions of lowland Britain, and consequently the validity of this typology and framework outside of regions represented in their sample.
Applied brooch from Great Chesterford grave 133 (Evison, 1973) with partially preserved foil of 'floriate cross' type, and vertical rim formed from a seperately applied strip of bronze closed by a rivet (right).
With applied brooches going under-studied in recent decades the most comprehensive discussion remains two papers by Vera Evison (1973) which described a wide range of examples from both the continent (which she attributed to the "Saxons, Franks and possibly Thuringians") and lowland Britain respectively, and it is this paper which is still cited by Portable Antiquities Scheme FLO's guidance as the main resource for interpreting these brooches (Geake & Webley, 2018).
Evison (1973) regarded her British and continental sample (primarily from Lower Saxony, Germany, along the Elbe and Rhine valleys, with an additional concentration in Friesland) as largely indistinguishable from each-other, except that English examples were more likely to have vertical rims formed of strip and soldered to form the saucer rather than raised from one piece as on the continent, and that a particular design of concentric circle decoration (likely in dialogue with similarly-made bracteates) common in the upper Elbe Valley in the 4th century then appeared not to have made it to Britain (but for which there are now a growing number of examples).
Evison (1973) regarded her British and continental sample (primarily from Lower Saxony, Germany, along the Elbe and Rhine valleys, with an additional concentration in Friesland) as largely indistinguishable from each-other, except that English examples were more likely to have vertical rims formed of strip and soldered to form the saucer rather than raised from one piece as on the continent, and that a particular design of concentric circle decoration (likely in dialogue with similarly-made bracteates) common in the upper Elbe Valley in the 4th century then appeared not to have made it to Britain (but for which there are now a growing number of examples).
Distribution of early applied brooches (from Evison, 1973); ⨀ Concentric Circles; ▲ Star; ■ Cruciform; ⬤ Scrolls; ◯ Zoomorphic.
The overall similarity (with most styles of decoration seen on both sides of the North Sea) is suggestive of strong contacts between the regions where these brooches occur, possibly involving the trade of brooches and/or the movement of craftspeople who made them, such that no obvious divergence in styles between Britain and the continent occurred. Distribution in Evison's British sample is extremely widespread, from Hampshire to Yorkshire, though they were most common in the West Midlands (including the upper Thames Valley). With Evison (1973) regarding most styles of applied brooches' decoration as expressions of the 'Quoit Brooch Style' otherwise associated with 5th century 'Roman' military belt-sets it was speculated that brooch style was seeded into lowland Britain by the earliest phase of migration of 'Germanic' families liked to foederati; "The brooches must clearly be connected with the Germanic mercenaries invited to help defend Britain" (Evison, 1973). However, the notion that particular aspects of material culture can be used to infer population movement is now treated with more scepticism.
Seemingly based largely on the discontinuation of occurrence of applied brooches on the continent by the mid 5th century, Evison argued that applied brooches in Britain likewise "must have been made in the 5th century" arguing that a later date-window which had been suggested was a consequence of an "ingrained habit" of dating nothing to the early 5th century due to the "mesmeric effect of the Chronicle invasion date" (Evison, 1973). It is likely to be Evison's earlier emphasis on a 5th century origin for most applied brooches (in contrast to most discussion of saucers) which has led to an erroneous impression that applied brooches predate cast saucer brooches. However, Evison appears to have herself amended the date-window she put forward for the manufacture of British applied brooches, dating those from Beckford, Worcestershire to the first half of the 6th century (Evison & Hill, 1996) and other authors have tended to ascribe a late 5th to early 6th century date for most applied brooches from cemeteries (Boyle, Jennings et. al. 2011; Carver et. al. 2009; Andrews, Last et al. 2019). In particular the 'colonisation' of the saucer brooch and applied brooch by Salin Style-I animal art spreading from Scandinavia, although likely to have begun by the end of the 5th century on the continent, in Britain only truly proliferated in the early 6th century, and so brooches featuring Salin Style-I (approximately half of the corpus, and noted to be overwhelmingly most well-represented in cemeteries at the western fringe of lowland Britain) most likely belong to the first half of the 6th century (Dickinson, 2003).
For the avoidance of doubt, at least in Britain, applied brooches appear to have coexisted with cast saucer brooches; they are found in similar contexts, from similar graves within the same cemeteries, most motifs and styles are represented across both brooch types, they have similar geographic distributions within Britain, and although (like cast saucer brooches) some subtypes involve an expression of Quoit-broooch style (Evison, 1978) or perhaps schemes derived from it, those featuring Salin Style-I decoration can usually be expected to belong to the 6th century. It would therefore be incorrect to regard applied brooches as an earlier or prototypical form of saucer brooch, or to regard cast saucer brooches as their successors. Instead they appear to represent two contemporaneous approaches for manufacturing dress fittings of essentially the same shape, decoration and function.
Seemingly based largely on the discontinuation of occurrence of applied brooches on the continent by the mid 5th century, Evison argued that applied brooches in Britain likewise "must have been made in the 5th century" arguing that a later date-window which had been suggested was a consequence of an "ingrained habit" of dating nothing to the early 5th century due to the "mesmeric effect of the Chronicle invasion date" (Evison, 1973). It is likely to be Evison's earlier emphasis on a 5th century origin for most applied brooches (in contrast to most discussion of saucers) which has led to an erroneous impression that applied brooches predate cast saucer brooches. However, Evison appears to have herself amended the date-window she put forward for the manufacture of British applied brooches, dating those from Beckford, Worcestershire to the first half of the 6th century (Evison & Hill, 1996) and other authors have tended to ascribe a late 5th to early 6th century date for most applied brooches from cemeteries (Boyle, Jennings et. al. 2011; Carver et. al. 2009; Andrews, Last et al. 2019). In particular the 'colonisation' of the saucer brooch and applied brooch by Salin Style-I animal art spreading from Scandinavia, although likely to have begun by the end of the 5th century on the continent, in Britain only truly proliferated in the early 6th century, and so brooches featuring Salin Style-I (approximately half of the corpus, and noted to be overwhelmingly most well-represented in cemeteries at the western fringe of lowland Britain) most likely belong to the first half of the 6th century (Dickinson, 2003).
For the avoidance of doubt, at least in Britain, applied brooches appear to have coexisted with cast saucer brooches; they are found in similar contexts, from similar graves within the same cemeteries, most motifs and styles are represented across both brooch types, they have similar geographic distributions within Britain, and although (like cast saucer brooches) some subtypes involve an expression of Quoit-broooch style (Evison, 1978) or perhaps schemes derived from it, those featuring Salin Style-I decoration can usually be expected to belong to the 6th century. It would therefore be incorrect to regard applied brooches as an earlier or prototypical form of saucer brooch, or to regard cast saucer brooches as their successors. Instead they appear to represent two contemporaneous approaches for manufacturing dress fittings of essentially the same shape, decoration and function.
This leads inevitably to the question; why did both forms exist? Bronze casting is an intensive and somewhat more wasteful process than sheet fabrication and soldering. Yet, while it's conceivable that some simpler foil designs could have been beaten over a directly-carved die of hard wood or bone, generally, production of the foil inserts for applied brooches would require the casting of an intricate die in bronze (Leahy, 2011), equivalent to a cast saucer brooch itself (this has recently been confirmed, with examples of such dies being identified by the Portable Antiquities Scheme), to say nothing of the additional labour involved in fabricating the brooch and producing useable foil for stamping.
Bronze die for making applied brooch foils (left & digital reconstruction, centre) from Haddenham, Bucks (CC-SA Portable Antiquities Scheme) and detached applied brooch foil of similar design from Dorchester, Oxon (CC-SA Oxfordshire County Council).
It's tempting to imagine a single die being reused again and again to 'mass produce' applied brooches of identical design, but (beyond matching pairs in graves) no clusters of identically decorated brooches have been identified; each pair appears to have been bespoke. The 'applied brooch' approach therefore does not offer significant economies with respect to bronze-casting. Despite the poor state of preservation of many examples, their rich gilding, incorporation of silver or tin alloys, glass or garnet cabochons, and (particularly in the West Midlands) their occasionally very large size, caution us against treating applied brooches as poorer cousins of the cast saucer brooch, and although Dickinson (2003) has observed instances where applied brooch foils appear to more crudely ape designs of cast brooches from the same cemetery, At Broadway Hill, Worcestershire (Cook, 1956), Beckford, Worcestershire (Evison & Hill, 1996), and at Wasperton, Warwickshire (Carver et. al. 2009) elaborately decorated applied brooches were found among the grave-goods of the most lavishly furnished feminine 6th century burials, as appears to have been the case at Bidford-on-Avon.
Rather than economy of manufacture then, we must look to its design to explain why the applied brooch coexisted with the more robust saucer, and was particularly favoured by high status women. Fabrication allows for a more delicate and sophisticated appearance than would be possible with (necessarily thicker / heavier) cast brooches, which might have been prized, but so too might the associations of the pressblech technique, which was otherwise used to produce bracteates (pendants aping Roman military medallions) and decoration for elite drinking vessels and helmets. At a time when cast copper-alloy dress items of various designs and qualities were commonplace, versions instead produced by more delicate techniques associated with the accoutrements of martial elites might likewise have been worn to communicate an individual's elite status.
As we discovered with the costume reconstruction of Wasperton g24 discussed in Chapter 2, the raised rim of saucer-shaped brooches (including cast saucers, applied, and button brooches) casts shadows which move across the decorated surface within, as the wearer's body moves, increasing the impression of depth in the relief and providing an enhanced glittering effect, but would also have served to provide some protection of the gold-plated decoration within the saucer against mechanical wear, such as from cloaks worn over them. This is demonstrated by the many instances of saucer brooches where gilding has survived on the decorated centre despite having partly worn off the outer rim. Applied brooches could be entirely gilded, or gilded only on their foils, with the superstructure allowed to tarnish providing a bichrome effect. In the case of Bidford grave 88 it is unclear whether the outer brooch was gilded.
At approx 65mm diameter, the Bidford-on-Avon g88 brooches are considerably larger than any in Evison (1973)'s sample, but approximately match that of the largest pair from Beckford, Worcestershire (Evison & Hill, 1996) and from Wasperton (Inhumation 85, Carver et. al. 2009). The particularly thick gilding (noted by Humphreys et. al. 1923) which these share with the great square-headed brooch has served to help preserve the decorative foils, which are of an uncommonly elaborate design featuring a notched outer border, central sunburst motif with a gem bezel at its centre, and an intricate frieze of Salin Style-I animals surrounding it. Importantly, idiosyncrasies present on the foils of both brooches indicate they were stamped from the same die.
Both foils, but only one of the brooch superstructures is extant, with a flat back, sharply angled wall which nevertheless appears to be a continuous hoop and non-perpendicular to the backplate, so is likely to have been hammer-formed from the backplate rather than soldered on separately. Usually pin-hinges and catches were pierced through the backplate and soldered onto the front (in turn hidden by the foil) providing a neat appearance on both sides. Cabochon gems which once filled the bezels were not recovered, and although blue or green glass cabochons have been found in situ in central bezels of applied brooches from other sites (including Wasperton, below) Humphreys et. al. (1923) seemed confident they would've been garnet. Three cast saucer brooches from other burials at Bidford had garnet cabochons in their centre, with a larger oval cabochon garnet (presumed to be from an entirely disintegrated silver ring or pendant) found loose in one grave further evidencing the availability of these exotic gemstones for this community, at least half a century prior to conversion-period craze for garnet cloisonne.
Rather than economy of manufacture then, we must look to its design to explain why the applied brooch coexisted with the more robust saucer, and was particularly favoured by high status women. Fabrication allows for a more delicate and sophisticated appearance than would be possible with (necessarily thicker / heavier) cast brooches, which might have been prized, but so too might the associations of the pressblech technique, which was otherwise used to produce bracteates (pendants aping Roman military medallions) and decoration for elite drinking vessels and helmets. At a time when cast copper-alloy dress items of various designs and qualities were commonplace, versions instead produced by more delicate techniques associated with the accoutrements of martial elites might likewise have been worn to communicate an individual's elite status.
As we discovered with the costume reconstruction of Wasperton g24 discussed in Chapter 2, the raised rim of saucer-shaped brooches (including cast saucers, applied, and button brooches) casts shadows which move across the decorated surface within, as the wearer's body moves, increasing the impression of depth in the relief and providing an enhanced glittering effect, but would also have served to provide some protection of the gold-plated decoration within the saucer against mechanical wear, such as from cloaks worn over them. This is demonstrated by the many instances of saucer brooches where gilding has survived on the decorated centre despite having partly worn off the outer rim. Applied brooches could be entirely gilded, or gilded only on their foils, with the superstructure allowed to tarnish providing a bichrome effect. In the case of Bidford grave 88 it is unclear whether the outer brooch was gilded.
At approx 65mm diameter, the Bidford-on-Avon g88 brooches are considerably larger than any in Evison (1973)'s sample, but approximately match that of the largest pair from Beckford, Worcestershire (Evison & Hill, 1996) and from Wasperton (Inhumation 85, Carver et. al. 2009). The particularly thick gilding (noted by Humphreys et. al. 1923) which these share with the great square-headed brooch has served to help preserve the decorative foils, which are of an uncommonly elaborate design featuring a notched outer border, central sunburst motif with a gem bezel at its centre, and an intricate frieze of Salin Style-I animals surrounding it. Importantly, idiosyncrasies present on the foils of both brooches indicate they were stamped from the same die.
Both foils, but only one of the brooch superstructures is extant, with a flat back, sharply angled wall which nevertheless appears to be a continuous hoop and non-perpendicular to the backplate, so is likely to have been hammer-formed from the backplate rather than soldered on separately. Usually pin-hinges and catches were pierced through the backplate and soldered onto the front (in turn hidden by the foil) providing a neat appearance on both sides. Cabochon gems which once filled the bezels were not recovered, and although blue or green glass cabochons have been found in situ in central bezels of applied brooches from other sites (including Wasperton, below) Humphreys et. al. (1923) seemed confident they would've been garnet. Three cast saucer brooches from other burials at Bidford had garnet cabochons in their centre, with a larger oval cabochon garnet (presumed to be from an entirely disintegrated silver ring or pendant) found loose in one grave further evidencing the availability of these exotic gemstones for this community, at least half a century prior to conversion-period craze for garnet cloisonne.
Applied brooches from Wasperton (Carver et. al. 2009); brooches from grave 82 feature green glass gems still in situ.
Applied brooch from Mucking grave 249 (after Evison, 1973) with decorated foil removed, brooch superstructure (right) shows how functional elements (hinge and pin-catch) have been inserted through the backplate from the front, pressed & soldered on the front/inside of the saucer.
The almost perfect preservation of the foils of the Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 applied brooches (in contrast to almost all other examples of applied brooches) attributable to the especially thick gilding provides a unique opportunity for reconstruction, allowing us to see what this overlooked class of brooches would've looked like before 1500 years of decay took its toll.
Over all, once again, with this most lavishly furnished feminine burial at Bidford-on-Avon we see a juxtaposition of dress items with different regional (possibly cultural) affinities within lowland Britain, antecedents from different parts of Northern Europe and Scandinavia, and possibly different origins. The g88 great square-headed brooch -- a type most associated with nominally 'Anglian' regions in Britain --is especially Scandinavian in style and may actually be an import, or else made by a craftsperson of recent Scandinavian heritage, and might have been worn by this individual to visually communicate that they, their tribe or family had Scandinavian connections. On the other hand, the applied brooches worn at the shoulders, more associated with west / south-western lowland Britain belong to a style which developed in lower Saxony and Friesland and might be interpreted as communicating 'Saxon' heritage. Yet even these themselves show signs of identity transformation, with the decorative surfaces of these brooches which once would have borne decoration resembling sub-Roman jewellery now replaced by intricate Salin Style-I animal art again originating from Scandinavia.
Ring
The first report (Humphreys et. al. 1923) lists a single ring (silver) in the contents of grave 88, worn on the right hand, and Grave 88 is one of two graves from which silver finger rings were recovered. From the other (grave 28), three spiral-rings formed from silver strip had been found adhering to various preserved finger-bones of the same hand. Unfortunately these are the only silver rings pictured and described. A bronze ring, and a small fragment of one (of twisted wire) are pictured and described, these appear to have come from graves 12 and 13 and so cannot be the grave 88 ring simply inconsistently recorded. It therefore appears that the grave 88 ring was never described and so we can only guess its design. Rings are relatively uncommon finds from early Anglo-Saxon graves, and rings formed from coiled silver strip are represented elsewhere in the Avon Valley (for example three graves from Wasperton (Carver et. al. 2009) two of which also contained applied brooches). A correlation between rings of this type, and saucer (or applied) brooches has been observed (Boyle et. al. 2011). More elaborate variants of this simple design are also known, such as the example found during excavations of the Wendover cemetery in 2021 (unpublished).
Over all, once again, with this most lavishly furnished feminine burial at Bidford-on-Avon we see a juxtaposition of dress items with different regional (possibly cultural) affinities within lowland Britain, antecedents from different parts of Northern Europe and Scandinavia, and possibly different origins. The g88 great square-headed brooch -- a type most associated with nominally 'Anglian' regions in Britain --is especially Scandinavian in style and may actually be an import, or else made by a craftsperson of recent Scandinavian heritage, and might have been worn by this individual to visually communicate that they, their tribe or family had Scandinavian connections. On the other hand, the applied brooches worn at the shoulders, more associated with west / south-western lowland Britain belong to a style which developed in lower Saxony and Friesland and might be interpreted as communicating 'Saxon' heritage. Yet even these themselves show signs of identity transformation, with the decorative surfaces of these brooches which once would have borne decoration resembling sub-Roman jewellery now replaced by intricate Salin Style-I animal art again originating from Scandinavia.
Ring
The first report (Humphreys et. al. 1923) lists a single ring (silver) in the contents of grave 88, worn on the right hand, and Grave 88 is one of two graves from which silver finger rings were recovered. From the other (grave 28), three spiral-rings formed from silver strip had been found adhering to various preserved finger-bones of the same hand. Unfortunately these are the only silver rings pictured and described. A bronze ring, and a small fragment of one (of twisted wire) are pictured and described, these appear to have come from graves 12 and 13 and so cannot be the grave 88 ring simply inconsistently recorded. It therefore appears that the grave 88 ring was never described and so we can only guess its design. Rings are relatively uncommon finds from early Anglo-Saxon graves, and rings formed from coiled silver strip are represented elsewhere in the Avon Valley (for example three graves from Wasperton (Carver et. al. 2009) two of which also contained applied brooches). A correlation between rings of this type, and saucer (or applied) brooches has been observed (Boyle et. al. 2011). More elaborate variants of this simple design are also known, such as the example found during excavations of the Wendover cemetery in 2021 (unpublished).
Additional Saucer Brooch
The problematic grave-contents table from Humphreys et. al. (1923) notes under additional contents that Grave 88 had '1 saucer brooch between the femora'. Although we considered the possibility that this was simply to note the unusual position of one of the applied brooches within the grave (perhaps having slipped down or been disturbed), in this table applied brooches and saucer brooches are carefully recorded as separate categories.
The 1923 report, documenting graves 1-112 plus finds haphazardly collected by labourers when the cemetery was initially discovered in 1921, records that five graves contained pairs of saucer brooches (graves 10, 35, 79, 82 and 90) with grave 21 containing a single saucer brooch; a total of eleven brooches. Meanwhile, its discussion of finds includes description of twelve saucer brooches (four matching pairs, and four of unique design). With one brooch too many, it seems more likely that the description from the grave catalogue is accurate; that grave 88 did contain a fourth brooch (of cast saucer type) found between the femora. At a depth (at excavation) of 3ft and not intercut by other burials it seems unlikely this brooch travelled to the position it was found from another grave as a result of disturbance. Why should a single saucer brooch be found between the legs?
In Kent, from the mid 6th century onwards, a shift to positioning brooches down the midline of the body, and their associated textile remains have been used to reconstruct a series of alternative (likely Frankish-inspired) costumes which gradually replaced the peplos-style dress and mantle (Walton-Rogers, 2007; Owen-Crocker, 2004) but, both within and beyond cemeteries in Kent, a number of peculiar cases have emerged where brooch position and associated textiles have evidenced unusual costume arrangements (Walton-Rogers, 2007). This includes the wearing of a bow-brooched 'Kentish Coat' over an annular-brooched peplos dress (Mill Hill g86), Compton Apple Down (Sussex) G14 where a pair of saucer brooches were worn at and below the waist with textile remains suggesting they clasped a Kentish coat, and Scorton g80 where annular and penannular brooches were worn in a vertical line down the body from lower chest to waist, again likely closing a coat, or deep keyhole-neckline gown (Walton-Rogers, 2007).
Of particular relevance, however, are graves from early cemeteries at the western fringe of the nominally 'early Anglo-Saxon' furnished burial rite, where brooch types more typically associated with the peplos dress have been found in alternative positions on the body. These include Beckford B, Worcestershire, graves 38 and 89, where paired brooches (saucer and disc respectively) were found at neck and femur (Evison & Hill, 1996). From these Walton-Rogers (2007) tentatively suggested a fashion for clasping cloaks with two brooches in this region - perhaps reflecting a Brythonic fashion (which she compared to a depiction on a late Irish reliquary appearing to show the same; Walton-Rogers, 2007). Other tentative instances of a possible 'four brooch costume' worn by elite women in the 6th century Avon Valley -- both not formally published and instead only recorded in obscure grey literature — include;
With respect to Bidford-on-Avon it is not possible to determine which of the various unpaired saucer brooches recovered during the initial 1922 excavation and described by Humphreys et. al. (1923) was the fourth brooch from Grave 88. While we should not necessarily expect the fourth brooch to match the quality or style of the others, brooch 9d (Humphreys et. al. 1923, p102) is perhaps the most tempting candidate, bearing a central garnet setting matching the applied brooches, deeply carved Salin-style-1 decoration reflecting that of the other brooches, and again like them, being described in the report as particularly richly gilt.
The problematic grave-contents table from Humphreys et. al. (1923) notes under additional contents that Grave 88 had '1 saucer brooch between the femora'. Although we considered the possibility that this was simply to note the unusual position of one of the applied brooches within the grave (perhaps having slipped down or been disturbed), in this table applied brooches and saucer brooches are carefully recorded as separate categories.
The 1923 report, documenting graves 1-112 plus finds haphazardly collected by labourers when the cemetery was initially discovered in 1921, records that five graves contained pairs of saucer brooches (graves 10, 35, 79, 82 and 90) with grave 21 containing a single saucer brooch; a total of eleven brooches. Meanwhile, its discussion of finds includes description of twelve saucer brooches (four matching pairs, and four of unique design). With one brooch too many, it seems more likely that the description from the grave catalogue is accurate; that grave 88 did contain a fourth brooch (of cast saucer type) found between the femora. At a depth (at excavation) of 3ft and not intercut by other burials it seems unlikely this brooch travelled to the position it was found from another grave as a result of disturbance. Why should a single saucer brooch be found between the legs?
In Kent, from the mid 6th century onwards, a shift to positioning brooches down the midline of the body, and their associated textile remains have been used to reconstruct a series of alternative (likely Frankish-inspired) costumes which gradually replaced the peplos-style dress and mantle (Walton-Rogers, 2007; Owen-Crocker, 2004) but, both within and beyond cemeteries in Kent, a number of peculiar cases have emerged where brooch position and associated textiles have evidenced unusual costume arrangements (Walton-Rogers, 2007). This includes the wearing of a bow-brooched 'Kentish Coat' over an annular-brooched peplos dress (Mill Hill g86), Compton Apple Down (Sussex) G14 where a pair of saucer brooches were worn at and below the waist with textile remains suggesting they clasped a Kentish coat, and Scorton g80 where annular and penannular brooches were worn in a vertical line down the body from lower chest to waist, again likely closing a coat, or deep keyhole-neckline gown (Walton-Rogers, 2007).
Of particular relevance, however, are graves from early cemeteries at the western fringe of the nominally 'early Anglo-Saxon' furnished burial rite, where brooch types more typically associated with the peplos dress have been found in alternative positions on the body. These include Beckford B, Worcestershire, graves 38 and 89, where paired brooches (saucer and disc respectively) were found at neck and femur (Evison & Hill, 1996). From these Walton-Rogers (2007) tentatively suggested a fashion for clasping cloaks with two brooches in this region - perhaps reflecting a Brythonic fashion (which she compared to a depiction on a late Irish reliquary appearing to show the same; Walton-Rogers, 2007). Other tentative instances of a possible 'four brooch costume' worn by elite women in the 6th century Avon Valley -- both not formally published and instead only recorded in obscure grey literature — include;
- Bennetts Hill, Offenham, Grave 1. Disturbed but almost uniquely well furnished female burial from a very limited salvage excavation (Dalwood & Ratkai, 1998), where a huge necklace of no less than 371 amber and rock-crystal beads was found, together with a massive florid cruciform brooch (Leeds type V(I)) and three saucer brooches (comprised of a matching pair with stud-and-star design, and one with a zoomorphic design) among skeletal remains of a young female. Finds displayed at the Almonry Museum, Evesham.
- Alveston Manor, Stratford-on-Avon, Grave 5. (Unpublished; Exc.1934). Burial of elderly female, with grave goods including finger rings, swag of beads, a pair of hybrid saucer brooches, bronze penannular brooch (Warwickshire County Council, 1999) and a massive jewelled great-square-headed brooch with garnets and recycled Roman intaglio. (Shakespeare Birthplace Trust collection, currently displayed at the Ad Gefrin Centre, Wooler, Northumberland).
With respect to Bidford-on-Avon it is not possible to determine which of the various unpaired saucer brooches recovered during the initial 1922 excavation and described by Humphreys et. al. (1923) was the fourth brooch from Grave 88. While we should not necessarily expect the fourth brooch to match the quality or style of the others, brooch 9d (Humphreys et. al. 1923, p102) is perhaps the most tempting candidate, bearing a central garnet setting matching the applied brooches, deeply carved Salin-style-1 decoration reflecting that of the other brooches, and again like them, being described in the report as particularly richly gilt.
Buckles
Humphreys et. al. (1923) records that Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 contained decayed remains of two bronze buckles, but these were not photographed or further described, so little can be said about their designs, except that, even in fragmentary state, if they had been at all elaborate they would not have escaped description in the report, so were most likely plain and utilitarian. One of these is likely to have belonged to a waist-belt / girdle, from which the knife is likely to have hung, and which could also have sometimes suspended other accessories (not found in this burial) including toiletry sets or a purse. The presence of a second buckle in a female burial is unusual and might represent the wearing of a buckle-fastened garment (see 'Textiles') represented in a number of other burials, including at Bidford.
Humphreys et. al. (1923) records that Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 contained decayed remains of two bronze buckles, but these were not photographed or further described, so little can be said about their designs, except that, even in fragmentary state, if they had been at all elaborate they would not have escaped description in the report, so were most likely plain and utilitarian. One of these is likely to have belonged to a waist-belt / girdle, from which the knife is likely to have hung, and which could also have sometimes suspended other accessories (not found in this burial) including toiletry sets or a purse. The presence of a second buckle in a female burial is unusual and might represent the wearing of a buckle-fastened garment (see 'Textiles') represented in a number of other burials, including at Bidford.
Beads
As discussed in Chapter 1 while it has been possible to track down which specific brooches belonged to this burial, no such specificity was possible with respect to the bead set, as they had only been described by Humphreys et. al. (1923) as a collection, with some swags photographed but with the burials they belonged to not identified. The summary of grave contents records that Grave 88 was one of four graves (as of 1923) to contain swags of "amber, paste [polychrome glass], and glass" beads (Humphreys et. al. 1923). Those pictured and/or described in more detail which fit this specification, included large swags of semi-polished / irregular amber beads (Neilsen BE3; Bayliss et. al. 2013) interspersing small monochrome toroidal/doughnut and larger monochrome melon beads (Neilsen BE1-Melon) of green and ultramarine blue glass (likely of recycled Roman cullet), with the pictured polychrome beads featuring trailed guilloche (Neilsen BE1-Koch34) / dotted guilloche or 'eye' decoration (Neilsen BE-Dot34) - colours unrecorded- and in two cases, degraded pierced bronze discs (almost certainly adapted Roman coins, BE7-b). Together, these are largely associated with earlier phases for female assemblages within the Bayliss et. al. (2013) framework so consistent with a probable date for this burial in the first half of the 6th century.
As discussed in Chapter 1 while it has been possible to track down which specific brooches belonged to this burial, no such specificity was possible with respect to the bead set, as they had only been described by Humphreys et. al. (1923) as a collection, with some swags photographed but with the burials they belonged to not identified. The summary of grave contents records that Grave 88 was one of four graves (as of 1923) to contain swags of "amber, paste [polychrome glass], and glass" beads (Humphreys et. al. 1923). Those pictured and/or described in more detail which fit this specification, included large swags of semi-polished / irregular amber beads (Neilsen BE3; Bayliss et. al. 2013) interspersing small monochrome toroidal/doughnut and larger monochrome melon beads (Neilsen BE1-Melon) of green and ultramarine blue glass (likely of recycled Roman cullet), with the pictured polychrome beads featuring trailed guilloche (Neilsen BE1-Koch34) / dotted guilloche or 'eye' decoration (Neilsen BE-Dot34) - colours unrecorded- and in two cases, degraded pierced bronze discs (almost certainly adapted Roman coins, BE7-b). Together, these are largely associated with earlier phases for female assemblages within the Bayliss et. al. (2013) framework so consistent with a probable date for this burial in the first half of the 6th century.
Selection of 'necklaces' / bead swags from the Bidford-on-Avon 1922 excavation (Humphreys et. al. 1923); arrangements shown via re-stringing likely to be conjectural. It is unknown which of these if any belonged to grave 88 which was noted to contain beads of "amber, glass and paste [polychrome glass]".
Rods required to produce these often colourful and sometimes intricately patterned beads were likely traded long distances and from diverse sources, including the near East (Peake, 2013), while the innumerable often large amber beads found in burials from this cemetery were likely sourced from the Baltic, again emphasising exchange between this region and late antiquity Scandinavia. Many necklaces from Bidford included drilled bronze coins which in most cases were too degraded for their portraits to be decipherable, but in one case (from the 1923 excavation, Humphreys et. al. 1924) was identifiable as a coin of Emperor Constantine II (316-340) which therefore could have been as much as two centuries old when it was drilled, added to a 6th century woman's necklace, and reburied with her. These coins (together, in all likelihood, with the fashion for beads of recycled ultramarine blue Roman glass) represents an engagement by folk in the 6th century Avon Valley with more ancient archaeology which they were surrounded by, and perhaps too, the visual expression or advertisment of a persisting Romano-British component to their identity.
Clothing
Reconstruction of Scorton G31, painting by Graham Sumner. Fur cape shown based on Scorton G112 (Walton-Rogers, 2007)
Frustratingly the reports from the 1920s excavations make almost no mention of textile remains and it is likely that most which did survive were scrubbed from the metal dress items at or shortly after recovery, as was generally the practice at the time. With the many subsequent excavations of the wider Bidford-on-Avon cemetery throughout the latter half of the 20th century having not been published, it is difficult to track down any information concerning the sorts of textiles worn by this community. However, the invaluable 'Cloth and Clothing in Early Anglo-Saxon England' by Penelope Walton Rogers (2007) occasionally refers to otherwise unpublished analysis of textile traces from Bidford-on-Avon by the author, and earlier, by Elizabeth Crowfoot. A probable woolen shawl was clasped by a large pin, high on the chest of the so-called 'cunning woman' from Bidford-on-Avon grave HB2 which otherwise contained a simple small-long brooch and an odd array of small 'spangle' and 'bucket' amulets which appeared to have been embroidered onto a garment; an assemblage over all tentatively (but not conclusively) dateable to the mid or late 6th century (Dickinson, 1993).
Of particular relevance to this project however, while discussing the types of textiles (probable cloaks) clasped by elaborate great brooches, Walton-Rogers (2007) provides the example of a textile preserved on the back of the great square headed brooch from Bidford-on-Avon G13 (perhaps the one displayed at Warwick Market Hall Museum pictured above) -- a twill of naturally pigmented wool which would have been brown or grey in appearance (Walton-Rogers, 2007) which was compared to traces on the back of another great-square headed brooch from Wasperton (grave 43, Carver et. al. 2009 p84) where light and dark naturally pigmented yarns (possibly spun from goat hair) had been used to produce a contrast twill of overall grey colour. Though 6th century communities in lowland Britain certainly had access to dyes capable of producing bright colours (ideally on fine white wool from 'elite' Roman breed sheep) there is substantial evidence from burials that wools from Iron Age sheep -- coarser and more weatherproof but often naturally pigmented, and so less suitable for dyeing — continued to be used, and the occurrence of these on the backs of great brooches suggests these may have been favoured for outerwear even for wealthy individuals.
Finally, Walton Rogers (2007) notes that traces of fine mammal-fur were found on an ornamented metal strip at the throat area of 'Bidford-on-Avon grave 4' (later excavations) likely to represent a buckled fur cape or cowl worn over the cloak, evidenced in various graves including Barrington B g110 (Cambridgeshire) and Scorton g80 & g112 (Yorkshire), depicted in an illustrated reconstruction of Scorton G31 (which also had a buckle at the neck possibly from such a garment). It is possible that the second fragmented copper-alloy buckle from Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 might likewise have belonged to such a garment.
Although no further information is available concerning textile traces from burials at Bidford other finds from these graves and the surrounding area evidence this community's textile-working culture. They include bone needles, whorls from spindles used for hand-spinning of yarn, a bone 'netting needle' or beater, and a cylindrical box 2 inches in diameter by 2 inches in height was inferred to be a needle case, on which 'extremely fine fabric' had been preserved. (Humphreys et. al., 1923). Investigations of the area surrounding the cemetery have identified both earlier Romano-British, and early medieval post-built structures, along with ditches and animal enclosures, and with finds including sherds of Anglo-Saxon pottery, quern stones and clay loom weights indicating everyday activities associated with village life in this location (Richards & Naylor, 2010) which appears to have continued uninterrupted through late antiquity . Judging by the loom weights it seems that the classic 'Anglo-Saxon' warp-weighted loom had been used here, which lends itself well to producing tabby/plain weaves and 2/2 twills, but more unusual fabrics including 2/1 twills may also have been produced here, continuing Romano-British textile working, as was evidenced at Wasperton (Carver et. al. 2009). With the wealth and trade-connections of this community in the 6th century evidenced by the diversity of grave goods (at least equal to that of Wasperton) the textiles worn here should have been of at least similar quality and variation.
With respect to grave 88, we can infer from the presence of the pair of applied brooches that a peplos-style dress was worn, which was most likely of finer twill wool -- perhaps patterned and/or dyed. This may have sometimes been worn over a sleeved gown / underdress* of finer wool or possibly (usually tabby) linen (Walton Rogers, 2007). On top of all of these garments a mantle of coarser wool (most likely naturally pigmented to be brown or grey, like Bidford g13 and Wasperton g43) was pinned by the great brooch.
* In the absence of textile remains representing this, the wearing of the sleeved gown by women in this community is evidenced by the discovery of various designs of so-called 'Anglian' wrist clasps in graves at Bidford (Humpreys et. al. 1923 & 1924). The slightly mismatching pair (ie. four elements) from disc-brooch-bearing grave 103, are of the well-made Hines type B18, whereas sets uncovered in 1923 include type B7 (fabricated from thin bronze sheet), one piece (grave 200) of a the intricately cast type C type (bearing Style-I decoration mirroring that of the great-square-headed brooches) and another cast and gilt example bearing a stylised human face flanked by predatory birds (probably g187). While such clasps are usually only found in graves in nominally 'Anglian' regions (East Anglia, the North and Midlands) they occur in the Avon Valley alongside a wide diversity of dress items traditionally associated with both Anglian and Saxon identities and are therefore another example of how this cemetery blends features of cemetery archaeology from different cultural zones, indicating trade & possibly mixed heritage or affiliations of individuals in this community.
Of particular relevance to this project however, while discussing the types of textiles (probable cloaks) clasped by elaborate great brooches, Walton-Rogers (2007) provides the example of a textile preserved on the back of the great square headed brooch from Bidford-on-Avon G13 (perhaps the one displayed at Warwick Market Hall Museum pictured above) -- a twill of naturally pigmented wool which would have been brown or grey in appearance (Walton-Rogers, 2007) which was compared to traces on the back of another great-square headed brooch from Wasperton (grave 43, Carver et. al. 2009 p84) where light and dark naturally pigmented yarns (possibly spun from goat hair) had been used to produce a contrast twill of overall grey colour. Though 6th century communities in lowland Britain certainly had access to dyes capable of producing bright colours (ideally on fine white wool from 'elite' Roman breed sheep) there is substantial evidence from burials that wools from Iron Age sheep -- coarser and more weatherproof but often naturally pigmented, and so less suitable for dyeing — continued to be used, and the occurrence of these on the backs of great brooches suggests these may have been favoured for outerwear even for wealthy individuals.
Finally, Walton Rogers (2007) notes that traces of fine mammal-fur were found on an ornamented metal strip at the throat area of 'Bidford-on-Avon grave 4' (later excavations) likely to represent a buckled fur cape or cowl worn over the cloak, evidenced in various graves including Barrington B g110 (Cambridgeshire) and Scorton g80 & g112 (Yorkshire), depicted in an illustrated reconstruction of Scorton G31 (which also had a buckle at the neck possibly from such a garment). It is possible that the second fragmented copper-alloy buckle from Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 might likewise have belonged to such a garment.
Although no further information is available concerning textile traces from burials at Bidford other finds from these graves and the surrounding area evidence this community's textile-working culture. They include bone needles, whorls from spindles used for hand-spinning of yarn, a bone 'netting needle' or beater, and a cylindrical box 2 inches in diameter by 2 inches in height was inferred to be a needle case, on which 'extremely fine fabric' had been preserved. (Humphreys et. al., 1923). Investigations of the area surrounding the cemetery have identified both earlier Romano-British, and early medieval post-built structures, along with ditches and animal enclosures, and with finds including sherds of Anglo-Saxon pottery, quern stones and clay loom weights indicating everyday activities associated with village life in this location (Richards & Naylor, 2010) which appears to have continued uninterrupted through late antiquity . Judging by the loom weights it seems that the classic 'Anglo-Saxon' warp-weighted loom had been used here, which lends itself well to producing tabby/plain weaves and 2/2 twills, but more unusual fabrics including 2/1 twills may also have been produced here, continuing Romano-British textile working, as was evidenced at Wasperton (Carver et. al. 2009). With the wealth and trade-connections of this community in the 6th century evidenced by the diversity of grave goods (at least equal to that of Wasperton) the textiles worn here should have been of at least similar quality and variation.
With respect to grave 88, we can infer from the presence of the pair of applied brooches that a peplos-style dress was worn, which was most likely of finer twill wool -- perhaps patterned and/or dyed. This may have sometimes been worn over a sleeved gown / underdress* of finer wool or possibly (usually tabby) linen (Walton Rogers, 2007). On top of all of these garments a mantle of coarser wool (most likely naturally pigmented to be brown or grey, like Bidford g13 and Wasperton g43) was pinned by the great brooch.
* In the absence of textile remains representing this, the wearing of the sleeved gown by women in this community is evidenced by the discovery of various designs of so-called 'Anglian' wrist clasps in graves at Bidford (Humpreys et. al. 1923 & 1924). The slightly mismatching pair (ie. four elements) from disc-brooch-bearing grave 103, are of the well-made Hines type B18, whereas sets uncovered in 1923 include type B7 (fabricated from thin bronze sheet), one piece (grave 200) of a the intricately cast type C type (bearing Style-I decoration mirroring that of the great-square-headed brooches) and another cast and gilt example bearing a stylised human face flanked by predatory birds (probably g187). While such clasps are usually only found in graves in nominally 'Anglian' regions (East Anglia, the North and Midlands) they occur in the Avon Valley alongside a wide diversity of dress items traditionally associated with both Anglian and Saxon identities and are therefore another example of how this cemetery blends features of cemetery archaeology from different cultural zones, indicating trade & possibly mixed heritage or affiliations of individuals in this community.
Recreating the Costume
Work began in spring 2020, during the first Coronavirus pandemic lockdown, with a full-scale model of the great square-headed brooch, and of the die needed for the applied brooch foils, hand-carved by Æd Thompson under the guidance of expert early-medieval jeweller and bronze caster Andrew Mason. These pieces were produced using the same process described in Chapter 2 (for a more thorough discussion of the process used to produce cast bronze jewellery in antiquity, and the process used to produce these replicas see Folk of the Avon Valley 2: The Woman from Wasperton). These 'masters' were passed to Andrew Mason who produced negative moulds, wax positives, added functional elements, and ultimately cast them in bronze using his own carefully honed process.
Æd meanwhile worked on the superstructures of the applied brooches. Discs of copper-alloy sheet were hammer-formed over a circular steel block of the correct size, producing smooth flat-bottomed dishes with integral, angled walls. Three slots were cut into the backplates by drilling and filing, allowing the insertion of pin-catches and hinges protruding from the back of the brooches. These were fixed onto the front / inside of the dishes by silver-soldering. For these replicas the hinge was made with two brackets piercing the backplate and attaching to the hinge axle for additional stability - an approach which is evidenced on an example of a preserved applied brooch backplate from a cremation urn from the cemetery at Stapenhill, Burton-on-Trent, Staffordshire (Andrew Mason, personal comm.); this was a conscious choice made to improve durability of these replicas, deviating from the more common construction of applied brooches which involved a more fragile single-bracket hinge.
These were polished up following soldering, sprung pins were formed from copper-alloy wire (both copper-alloy and iron pins are known among historic examples), stiffened, and installed with a copper-alloy rivet fixed through the hinge brackets, thus functioning as an axle.
As the design of the silver ring from grave 88 cannot be known, we chose to re-create one of the silver spiral rings from grave 28. This was formed from a narrow strip of silver tapered at both ends by file-work, annealed, wound around a mandrel, subsequently hardened by heat-treatment and re-polished.
As the design of the silver ring from grave 88 cannot be known, we chose to re-create one of the silver spiral rings from grave 28. This was formed from a narrow strip of silver tapered at both ends by file-work, annealed, wound around a mandrel, subsequently hardened by heat-treatment and re-polished.
Wax positive model of the Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 great square-headed brooch, produced by early medieval jewellery specialist Andrew Mason based on model carved by Æd Thompson
|
Replica early Anglo-Saxon spiral / strip finger-ring (silver) based on examples from Bidford-on-Avon, by Æd Thompson
|
Following casting of the great brooch and the foil die, both were carefully inspected for any casting imperfections, and cleaned up, primarily using abrasives and wire-brushes.
To make the applied brooch foils, the die was placed onto a steel bench-block with decoration face-up, annealed copper foil was placed directly onto it, and a sheet of lead was placed directly on top. Hammering directly onto the lead sheet, being careful not to allow any of the layers to shift (which would cause 'ghosting' of the design), presses the foil onto the die, which picks up the design (Leahy, 2011). Interestingly lead residues have been identified on the reverse of some applied brooch foils suggesting that the complimentary-patterned lead sheet which results from this process might sometimes have been cut down and inserted as an interfacing material (to provide further support for the design) but this appears to be an uncommon feature (Evison, 1973). Lead sheet appears to provide the optimal combination of malleability and firmness for this process, but our experiments have shown that wet, thick veg-tan leather works reasonably effectively as a non-toxic alternative for demonstrations.
The resulting foils were cut to size, with the bezel for the central gem cut & further shaped using a sharp punch. All pieces; the brooch superstructures, foils, and gems, were then test-fitted together.
To make the applied brooch foils, the die was placed onto a steel bench-block with decoration face-up, annealed copper foil was placed directly onto it, and a sheet of lead was placed directly on top. Hammering directly onto the lead sheet, being careful not to allow any of the layers to shift (which would cause 'ghosting' of the design), presses the foil onto the die, which picks up the design (Leahy, 2011). Interestingly lead residues have been identified on the reverse of some applied brooch foils suggesting that the complimentary-patterned lead sheet which results from this process might sometimes have been cut down and inserted as an interfacing material (to provide further support for the design) but this appears to be an uncommon feature (Evison, 1973). Lead sheet appears to provide the optimal combination of malleability and firmness for this process, but our experiments have shown that wet, thick veg-tan leather works reasonably effectively as a non-toxic alternative for demonstrations.
The resulting foils were cut to size, with the bezel for the central gem cut & further shaped using a sharp punch. All pieces; the brooch superstructures, foils, and gems, were then test-fitted together.
It became clear at this stage that aspects of the design of these brooches (confirmed by examination of the original pieces) imposed certain constraints concerning the sequence of final assembly. The central gemstone -- be it glass or garnet — almost certainly would not have been added until after all hot processes (soldering, gilding) were complete, as high temperatures would very likely damage the gem. The neatly domed bezel formed as a 'blister' in the original foil, likely thanks to a boss in the centre of the original die suggested that the central gem had probably been fitted from behind the foil prior to its fixation, rather than placed in from the front into a vertical-walled bezel subsequently clenched over, as a final step in the assembly. It thus follows that the fixation of the foil into place is likely to have been a low temperature process rather than soldering.
An earlier attempt with a prototype of these replicas, to solder a foil into an applied brooch resulted in the foil melting at the bezel. This is a consequence of the difficulty of bringing both foil and brooch to the same high temperature necessary for the solder to flow between the two, without the foil (of much lower thermal mass) becoming excessively hot and either oxidising or melting, which is made especially difficult as the design of the brooch naturally denies direct access to the contact-area between both parts. Heating entirely from below (thus avoiding direct heating of the foil and reducing risk of damage) brings other risks, particularly, the un-soldering of pin-catch, hinge and (in many cases) separately applied side-wall, destroying the brooch. It is possible that tin-based solders of much much lower temperature were used for this final stage of assembly, particularly on smaller applied brooches. However the difficulty of soldering a foil to a brooch of this size without causing damage, combined with the need to insert the central gem before final assembly, suggested to us that the foils of the original brooches are unlikely to have been fixed by soldering.
Instead it seemed more likely that the brooch superstructure had been soldered together, that and the foil insert were then gold-plated separately, and subsequently fixed together (with the gem added) using a glue / paste. Though weaker than solder, such a bond would be amply sufficient given the large surface area of contact, and that the edge of the foil insert which might otherwise begin to peel away, was tightly fitted and protected by the raised rim of the saucer.
An earlier attempt with a prototype of these replicas, to solder a foil into an applied brooch resulted in the foil melting at the bezel. This is a consequence of the difficulty of bringing both foil and brooch to the same high temperature necessary for the solder to flow between the two, without the foil (of much lower thermal mass) becoming excessively hot and either oxidising or melting, which is made especially difficult as the design of the brooch naturally denies direct access to the contact-area between both parts. Heating entirely from below (thus avoiding direct heating of the foil and reducing risk of damage) brings other risks, particularly, the un-soldering of pin-catch, hinge and (in many cases) separately applied side-wall, destroying the brooch. It is possible that tin-based solders of much much lower temperature were used for this final stage of assembly, particularly on smaller applied brooches. However the difficulty of soldering a foil to a brooch of this size without causing damage, combined with the need to insert the central gem before final assembly, suggested to us that the foils of the original brooches are unlikely to have been fixed by soldering.
Instead it seemed more likely that the brooch superstructure had been soldered together, that and the foil insert were then gold-plated separately, and subsequently fixed together (with the gem added) using a glue / paste. Though weaker than solder, such a bond would be amply sufficient given the large surface area of contact, and that the edge of the foil insert which might otherwise begin to peel away, was tightly fitted and protected by the raised rim of the saucer.
Replicas of the Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 applied brooches, by Æd Thompson & Andrew Mason, shown prior to gold-plating and final assembly.
Both the great square-headed brooches and the applied brooches had been thickly gold-plated, almost certainly by ‘mercury-‘ / ‘fire-gilding’; a process in which an amalgam of gold and mercury is painted onto the surface, which is then fired, causing most of the mercury to evaporate (producing highly toxic fumes) leaving the gold bonded to the surface (Leahy, 2009). For safety we chose to send these replicas for gold-plating by a modern electrolytic process.
Meanwhile, Julia focused her attention on recreating the clothing and other accessories suggested by the archaeology of this grave.
As it was not possible to determine which (if any) of the necklaces described in the original report (Humphreys et. al. 1923) belonged to Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 it is not possible to reproduce it to the precision seen, for example, with Lindsey's recreation of the beads from Wasperton g24. Instead it was decided to produce a swag or necklace representing the sorts of beads found among these graves overall, and faithful to the general impression of the necklaces pictured and described in 1923.
Replicas of the polychrome glass beads featuring trailed guilloche and dotted guilloche / eye patterns were produced by historic bead expert Mike Poole / Tillerman Beads together with a small number of melon beads of clear, and pale transparent blue glass, and a handful of simple small ultramarine blue donut beads.
Faithfully representing the large quantities of semi-polished amber beads proved more of a challenge. Today, we predominantly see amber either sold inexpensively in the form of necklaces and bracelets of unpolished sharp chip / shards (a format not used historically) or else worked down into near perfectly regular round beads - closer to the style of beads popular in the Viking Age but also a poor fit for what we see in the 6th century Avon valley burials, where large pieces were worked into irregular, semi-rounded dice-like beads, striking a balance between efficient use of the material and striving for rich, glossy surfaces. Acquiring the sheer mass of amber necessary to faithfully represent the almost preposterously opulent necklaces seen at Bidford (and also in graves from Bennets Hill, Offenham) in the UK seemed nigh impossible.
In spring 2022, Julia found herself travelling to the Polish-Ukrainian border to help evacuate family following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. During the many weeks stranded, waiting for VISAs to be processed, assisting other displaced people and battling to get home, a side-quest for amber for this project provided a small comforting distraction; something positive and creative to cling to in the direst of circumstances. Prior to the war, Ukraine was a fast-growing producer of amber, typically exported via eastern Poland, and the amber swags procured for this impression during that time, for British-Ukranian Julia, represent something of her family's homeland brought to safer shores, and used to shed light on and share stories of our interconnected heritage. The war in Ukraine is rooted partly in a wish to deny, loot or otherwise destroy the distinctive heritage and culture of the Ukrainian people, evidenced not just by the rhetoric of the aggressors (Duben, 2023; Zygar, 2024) but the widespread sacking of cultural sites and of the nation's ancient treasures from museums since the onset of the war, on a scale almost unprecedented in modern times (Georgiou, 2023). It is all the more important, therefore, that we find ways to raise awareness of Ukraine's ancient heritage, in part using opportunities where there are connections and parallels in our more locally-focused work to raise awareness of heritage under-represented, suppressed or under threat. These items will therefore be used to tell stories not only of the cultural complex this article principally concerns, but also the trade and cultural connections across Europe they represent, the journey these modern items took, and the rich heritage in the land from which they originated which is currently threatened by cultural genocide.
Meanwhile, Julia focused her attention on recreating the clothing and other accessories suggested by the archaeology of this grave.
As it was not possible to determine which (if any) of the necklaces described in the original report (Humphreys et. al. 1923) belonged to Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 it is not possible to reproduce it to the precision seen, for example, with Lindsey's recreation of the beads from Wasperton g24. Instead it was decided to produce a swag or necklace representing the sorts of beads found among these graves overall, and faithful to the general impression of the necklaces pictured and described in 1923.
Replicas of the polychrome glass beads featuring trailed guilloche and dotted guilloche / eye patterns were produced by historic bead expert Mike Poole / Tillerman Beads together with a small number of melon beads of clear, and pale transparent blue glass, and a handful of simple small ultramarine blue donut beads.
Faithfully representing the large quantities of semi-polished amber beads proved more of a challenge. Today, we predominantly see amber either sold inexpensively in the form of necklaces and bracelets of unpolished sharp chip / shards (a format not used historically) or else worked down into near perfectly regular round beads - closer to the style of beads popular in the Viking Age but also a poor fit for what we see in the 6th century Avon valley burials, where large pieces were worked into irregular, semi-rounded dice-like beads, striking a balance between efficient use of the material and striving for rich, glossy surfaces. Acquiring the sheer mass of amber necessary to faithfully represent the almost preposterously opulent necklaces seen at Bidford (and also in graves from Bennets Hill, Offenham) in the UK seemed nigh impossible.
In spring 2022, Julia found herself travelling to the Polish-Ukrainian border to help evacuate family following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. During the many weeks stranded, waiting for VISAs to be processed, assisting other displaced people and battling to get home, a side-quest for amber for this project provided a small comforting distraction; something positive and creative to cling to in the direst of circumstances. Prior to the war, Ukraine was a fast-growing producer of amber, typically exported via eastern Poland, and the amber swags procured for this impression during that time, for British-Ukranian Julia, represent something of her family's homeland brought to safer shores, and used to shed light on and share stories of our interconnected heritage. The war in Ukraine is rooted partly in a wish to deny, loot or otherwise destroy the distinctive heritage and culture of the Ukrainian people, evidenced not just by the rhetoric of the aggressors (Duben, 2023; Zygar, 2024) but the widespread sacking of cultural sites and of the nation's ancient treasures from museums since the onset of the war, on a scale almost unprecedented in modern times (Georgiou, 2023). It is all the more important, therefore, that we find ways to raise awareness of Ukraine's ancient heritage, in part using opportunities where there are connections and parallels in our more locally-focused work to raise awareness of heritage under-represented, suppressed or under threat. These items will therefore be used to tell stories not only of the cultural complex this article principally concerns, but also the trade and cultural connections across Europe they represent, the journey these modern items took, and the rich heritage in the land from which they originated which is currently threatened by cultural genocide.
Necklace / bead swag inspired by finds from early 6th century graves at Bidford-on-Avon; amber, with fewer glass beads by TillermanBeads. Assembled by Julia Ward.
The necklace as presented may appear ostentatious but is significantly scaled back compared to the examples from the more richly furnished graves from Bidford-on-Avon and elsewhere in the Avon Valley, but may be added to over time.
As no traces or details survive of the fabric from which the grave 88 occupant's peplos-style dress (evidenced by the pair of applied brooches) was constructed it was decided to follow general themes from 6th century burials. A 2/2 broken diamond twill wool (of a type extremely common among traces of textiles from early Anglo-Saxon womens graves, Walton-Rogers 2007) was chosen, undyed, but with a contrast between warp and weft (white and grey, naturally pigmented) partly inspired by the fabric from Wasperton g43. Many variations of the peplos-style dress are possible and consistent with the available evidence, including both narrower and wider tubes, and the wearing of the garment with or without a fold-down flap (Walton-Rogers, 2007). In this instance Julia chose to hand-sew the peplos into a continuous tube, cut extra wide to allow for additional draping, and extra long to allow for a fold-down flap (represented by a double-layer of the same fabric found on the backs, and sometimes pierced by the pins of, some brooches).
As no traces or details survive of the fabric from which the grave 88 occupant's peplos-style dress (evidenced by the pair of applied brooches) was constructed it was decided to follow general themes from 6th century burials. A 2/2 broken diamond twill wool (of a type extremely common among traces of textiles from early Anglo-Saxon womens graves, Walton-Rogers 2007) was chosen, undyed, but with a contrast between warp and weft (white and grey, naturally pigmented) partly inspired by the fabric from Wasperton g43. Many variations of the peplos-style dress are possible and consistent with the available evidence, including both narrower and wider tubes, and the wearing of the garment with or without a fold-down flap (Walton-Rogers, 2007). In this instance Julia chose to hand-sew the peplos into a continuous tube, cut extra wide to allow for additional draping, and extra long to allow for a fold-down flap (represented by a double-layer of the same fabric found on the backs, and sometimes pierced by the pins of, some brooches).
For the cloak, Julia sourced a large bolt of 2/2 chevron twill Herdwick wool. Herdwicks are hardy "hill breed" with a coarse weather-proof naturally pigmented fleece, which can be traced by documentary evidence at least as far back as the 12th century, and by Lake District local tradition to the Viking Age, so are a plausible analogue to (and perhaps partly descended from) the 'Iron Age British' sheep breeds whose wool was favoured by folk of late antiquity for outerwear. This cloak was carefully finished, with a short fringed edge representing the warp ends which attached to loom weights.
The impression was first assembled and unveiled to crowds at a special event themed around exploring the lives, stories and archaeology of Anglo-Saxon women -- "Queens of the Gold Age" — at Sutton Hoo in August 2023.
Discussion
Recreating and wearing this costume has yielded a number of experimental insights. First, the faithful replicas of the applied brooches demonstrate that this overlooked form of brooch could be extremely impressive, providing a far more powerful visual expression of status and wealth than might have hitherto been appreciated given the extremely poor state of preservation in which they are typically found. The ingenious method in which they were constructed, with functional elements pierced through, fixed on the front, and with these fixings then covered and hidden from view by the decorative foil produces an illusion of having been made in one piece, despite being far more delicately constructed than would be possible by casting, with the backs of these brooches entirely smooth, like their cast counterparts, avoiding snagging or damage to fabrics on which they were pinned.
Despite their impressive appearance, however, like the saucer brooches in the previous costume reconstruction (Wasperton g24) it appears these brooches were often covered up and hidden from view by the mantle pinned by the great brooch, which by extension (like in the photographs above) probably were rarely visible being worn simultaneously. As suggested by Martin (2015) they thus imply the presentation of a different image -- with focal dress items accentuating different parts of the body and through their design and affinities, sending different cultural signals -- to different audiences; a 'public face', to be seen, for example, by the wider community while this noblewoman was outdoors, and a quite strongly contrasting presentation when the great brooch and mantle was removed, such as within a hall with her family and/or social peers.
In the case of Bidford-on-Avon grave 24 (and also grave 1, Bennets Hill, Offenham, discussed earlier) however, the contrast between the 'cloaked' and 'uncloaked' presentation is somewhat lessened by the presence of an additional saucer brooch most likely pinning the lower mantle, which thus carried the theme of the concealed saucer brooches onto the outside of the ensemble, and with it, any social signals those brooches were intended to convey. It is important to caveat, however, that all of these interpretations depend on the assumption that the arrangement of clothing and dress items seen in the furnished burial rite faithfully represents costume worn in life, and this is not always certain.
What is more certain, is that both configurations of the costume represented in the burial are likely to have been seen by mourners during the burial rite. It would be difficult, clumsy, and undignified to attempt to lay an adult body in a grave with a cloak already fastened by a brooch otherwise swinging free, and ultimately resting haphazardly beneath the body, and indeed, this may be part of the reason why males in early Anglo-Saxon graves appear to have been buried not wearing cloaks, but with them instead spread out as grave liners (and thus preserved on non-dress items in the grave, like spears and shield handles). In the case of womens burials containing 'third brooches' then, the most likely sequence for the funeral rite involved the mantle being spread over the floor of the grave, the body laid out upon it with their indoor dress visible, and finally, the mantle being wrapped around the body and fastened with the remaining brooch (or brooches). It is tempting to connect the fastening of the outer garment — a 'travelling cloak' -- around the deceased late in the sequence of the burial rite as preparing them for a journey to the beyond, mirroring the symbolism of the ship burial rite or perhaps even of contemporaneous horse-burial.
As regards to the practicality of the arrangements we see in burials as a costume for the living, our experiments have shown that contrary to our expectations, the wearing of a heavy cloak over the top of saucer or applied brooches is perfectly comfortable, and does not cause their functional elements to dig into the shoulders as might be expected. Further, it appears that the raised rim which defines saucer and applied brooches may have evolved to protect the decorated and gold-plated interior from wear from mantles or even coats worn over the top, as wools tend to stretch across the walls of the saucer like a drum-skin rather than abrading the decorated surface within.
That many applied brooches appear to have lacked gilding on their outer structure suggests the makers of these brooches anticipated wear to their outer surfaces. By not gold-plating the outer parts of the brooch, but only the protected interior, such brooches would maintain a consistent appearance for a longer period without the need for re-gilding. No such adaptations were made in anticipation of the wearing of gilding on great brooches (despite the heavily worn state of some examples from graves, including Wasperton g24) most likely due to the expectation that they would always be worn outermost on any costume. As these replica items continue to be worn it will be interesting to see whether patterns of inevitable wear highlighted by the loss of the thin layer of gilding and the tarnishing of the bronze beneath will reproduce those seen on extant finds.
Over all the image presented here (particularly due to lack of textile information from this cemetery) is broadly consistent with wider themes of early Anglo-Saxon dress, drawing on insights from the analysis of countless other graves from cemeteries mostly concentrated to the east and south, but the suite of dress items presented here are quite remarkable for their quality, sophistication and ostentation, challenging misconceptions about late antiquity / early medieval furnished burial archaeology from the West Midlands being relatively poor. Judging by the expensive items taken out of circulation in order to honour her at death, the individual from Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 was clearly someone greatly respected within their community, and was buried in a cemetery at the heart of a chain of interconnected communities which in turn, far from being peripheral to the 'Anglo-Saxon' cultural complex, or isolated by its inland location, sat at a crossroads between different cultural zones and fledgeling kingdoms. The exotic materials found in these cemeteries -- including garnets, silver, gold and coloured glass -- suggest far flung trade connections, while the great diversity of high quality dress-items are indicators of trade, cultural, and perhaps familial connections between the folk who inhabited this region, and many others both within Britain and elsewhere in Europe.
Despite their impressive appearance, however, like the saucer brooches in the previous costume reconstruction (Wasperton g24) it appears these brooches were often covered up and hidden from view by the mantle pinned by the great brooch, which by extension (like in the photographs above) probably were rarely visible being worn simultaneously. As suggested by Martin (2015) they thus imply the presentation of a different image -- with focal dress items accentuating different parts of the body and through their design and affinities, sending different cultural signals -- to different audiences; a 'public face', to be seen, for example, by the wider community while this noblewoman was outdoors, and a quite strongly contrasting presentation when the great brooch and mantle was removed, such as within a hall with her family and/or social peers.
In the case of Bidford-on-Avon grave 24 (and also grave 1, Bennets Hill, Offenham, discussed earlier) however, the contrast between the 'cloaked' and 'uncloaked' presentation is somewhat lessened by the presence of an additional saucer brooch most likely pinning the lower mantle, which thus carried the theme of the concealed saucer brooches onto the outside of the ensemble, and with it, any social signals those brooches were intended to convey. It is important to caveat, however, that all of these interpretations depend on the assumption that the arrangement of clothing and dress items seen in the furnished burial rite faithfully represents costume worn in life, and this is not always certain.
What is more certain, is that both configurations of the costume represented in the burial are likely to have been seen by mourners during the burial rite. It would be difficult, clumsy, and undignified to attempt to lay an adult body in a grave with a cloak already fastened by a brooch otherwise swinging free, and ultimately resting haphazardly beneath the body, and indeed, this may be part of the reason why males in early Anglo-Saxon graves appear to have been buried not wearing cloaks, but with them instead spread out as grave liners (and thus preserved on non-dress items in the grave, like spears and shield handles). In the case of womens burials containing 'third brooches' then, the most likely sequence for the funeral rite involved the mantle being spread over the floor of the grave, the body laid out upon it with their indoor dress visible, and finally, the mantle being wrapped around the body and fastened with the remaining brooch (or brooches). It is tempting to connect the fastening of the outer garment — a 'travelling cloak' -- around the deceased late in the sequence of the burial rite as preparing them for a journey to the beyond, mirroring the symbolism of the ship burial rite or perhaps even of contemporaneous horse-burial.
As regards to the practicality of the arrangements we see in burials as a costume for the living, our experiments have shown that contrary to our expectations, the wearing of a heavy cloak over the top of saucer or applied brooches is perfectly comfortable, and does not cause their functional elements to dig into the shoulders as might be expected. Further, it appears that the raised rim which defines saucer and applied brooches may have evolved to protect the decorated and gold-plated interior from wear from mantles or even coats worn over the top, as wools tend to stretch across the walls of the saucer like a drum-skin rather than abrading the decorated surface within.
That many applied brooches appear to have lacked gilding on their outer structure suggests the makers of these brooches anticipated wear to their outer surfaces. By not gold-plating the outer parts of the brooch, but only the protected interior, such brooches would maintain a consistent appearance for a longer period without the need for re-gilding. No such adaptations were made in anticipation of the wearing of gilding on great brooches (despite the heavily worn state of some examples from graves, including Wasperton g24) most likely due to the expectation that they would always be worn outermost on any costume. As these replica items continue to be worn it will be interesting to see whether patterns of inevitable wear highlighted by the loss of the thin layer of gilding and the tarnishing of the bronze beneath will reproduce those seen on extant finds.
Over all the image presented here (particularly due to lack of textile information from this cemetery) is broadly consistent with wider themes of early Anglo-Saxon dress, drawing on insights from the analysis of countless other graves from cemeteries mostly concentrated to the east and south, but the suite of dress items presented here are quite remarkable for their quality, sophistication and ostentation, challenging misconceptions about late antiquity / early medieval furnished burial archaeology from the West Midlands being relatively poor. Judging by the expensive items taken out of circulation in order to honour her at death, the individual from Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 was clearly someone greatly respected within their community, and was buried in a cemetery at the heart of a chain of interconnected communities which in turn, far from being peripheral to the 'Anglo-Saxon' cultural complex, or isolated by its inland location, sat at a crossroads between different cultural zones and fledgeling kingdoms. The exotic materials found in these cemeteries -- including garnets, silver, gold and coloured glass -- suggest far flung trade connections, while the great diversity of high quality dress-items are indicators of trade, cultural, and perhaps familial connections between the folk who inhabited this region, and many others both within Britain and elsewhere in Europe.
Bidford-on-Avon grave 88 is one of many burials, among many cemeteries in this zone with rich and fascinating archaeology which has so much to teach us about this pivotal time in our island's history. But with excavations of this important cemetery & settlement which have taken place within living memory largely unpublished, and with no overarching synthesis or review yet available, this, the largest and perhaps the most important cemetery in the region remains little known and poorly understood. It joins many others from the West Midlands to have largely evaded publication or modern scholarly attention.
The obscurity of late antique / early medieval archaeology in the West Midlands has arguably become self-perpetuating, and has hindered the ability of the wider public to engage with this heritage, or for it to be harnessed for public good. Vanishingly few of this region's 'treasures' have made it to public display; the most spectacular finds from the Avon Valley have remained out of sight in a vault, for decades, and only now are being displayed, for the first time, albeit 260 miles away from their home.
The relative obscurity of early medieval archaeology in the very heart of lowland Britain is harmful not just locally, but arguably negatively impacts the development of narratives for this period of history across Britain as a whole (Tompkins, 2017); its themes of continuity and change, and the careful dance of nuanced and layered identities forged by the collision and coalescence of people from different origins leading to the emergence of Britain's kingdoms.
This series represents multiple years of effort by our team to raise awareness of this archaeology and attempt to break the cycle of obscurity which has hindered its study, and access to heritage within the region. These articles, and the display of these physical reconstructions / costumed impressions at public educational events will hopefully provide at least some opportunity for people to see and learn about finds which have otherwise gone uncelebrated and away from public view.
The obscurity of late antique / early medieval archaeology in the West Midlands has arguably become self-perpetuating, and has hindered the ability of the wider public to engage with this heritage, or for it to be harnessed for public good. Vanishingly few of this region's 'treasures' have made it to public display; the most spectacular finds from the Avon Valley have remained out of sight in a vault, for decades, and only now are being displayed, for the first time, albeit 260 miles away from their home.
The relative obscurity of early medieval archaeology in the very heart of lowland Britain is harmful not just locally, but arguably negatively impacts the development of narratives for this period of history across Britain as a whole (Tompkins, 2017); its themes of continuity and change, and the careful dance of nuanced and layered identities forged by the collision and coalescence of people from different origins leading to the emergence of Britain's kingdoms.
This series represents multiple years of effort by our team to raise awareness of this archaeology and attempt to break the cycle of obscurity which has hindered its study, and access to heritage within the region. These articles, and the display of these physical reconstructions / costumed impressions at public educational events will hopefully provide at least some opportunity for people to see and learn about finds which have otherwise gone uncelebrated and away from public view.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank historic metalwork and Anglo-Saxon jewellery expert Andrew Mason for his guidance and help with making reproductions of the brooches from Wasperton. Without his expertise and patient help, spanning over three years, completing this project would not have been possible.
We would also like to thank Rosalyn Sklar, acting Head of Collections at the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust for helping us investigate a number of these finds and providing high quality images for us to study.
We would also like to thank Rosalyn Sklar, acting Head of Collections at the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust for helping us investigate a number of these finds and providing high quality images for us to study.
References
Bayliss, A., Hines, J., Nielsen, K.H., McCormac, G. and Scull, C., 2013. Anglo-Saxon graves and grave goods of the 6th and 7th centuries AD: a chronological framework. London: Society for Medieval Archaeology.
Boyle, A., Jennings, D., Miles, D., Palmer, S. 2011. The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Butler's Field, Lechlade, Gloucestershire: The Anglo-Saxon Grave Goods Specialist Reports, Phasing & Discussion (Vol. 2). Thames Valley Landscapes Monograph No.33. Oxford Archaeology.
Andrews, P., Last, J., Osgood, R., and Stoodly, N. 2019. A prehistoric burial mound and Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Barrow Clump, Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire. English Heritage and Operation Nightingale excavations 2003-14. Wessex Archaeology Monograph 40. Salisbury
Carver, M., Hills, C. and Scheschkewitz, J., 2009. Wasperton: a Roman, British and Anglo-Saxon community in central England. Anglo-Saxon Studies. Boydell Press. Woodbridge.
Warwickshire County Council (1999). Information for record number WA51 62. Warwickshire Historic Environment Record. [Online] Url= https://timetrail.warwickshire.gov.uk/detail.aspx?monuid=WA5162] Accessed 29/05/2024
Dalwood, H. and Ratkai, S. 1998. ‘Salvage Recording at Bennett’s Hill Anglo-Saxon Cemetery, Offenham. Interim Report – Project 1356, Report 539. HWCM 24394. Field Section, County Archaeological Service, Hereford and Worcester County Council.
Dickinson, T.M. 2002, 'Translating animal art: Salin’s Style I and Anglo-Saxon cast saucer brooches', Hikuin, vol. 29, pp. 163-186.
Dickinson, T.M., 2013. An Anglo-Saxon “cunning woman” from Bidford-on-Avon. In The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England (pp. 359-373). Routledge.
Düben, B.A. (2023) ‘Revising History and ‘Gathering the Russian Lands’: Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian Nationhood’, LSE Public Policy Review, 3(1), p. 4. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31389/lseppr.86.
Evison, V.I., 1978. Early Anglo-Saxon applied disc brooches. Part II: in England. The Antiquaries Journal, 58(2), pp.260-278.
Evison, V.I. and Hill, P., 1996. Two Anglo-Saxon cemeteries at Beckford, Hereford and Worcester (Vol. 103). Council for British Archaeology.
Geake, H., 1995. The use of grave-goods in conversion-period England c. 600-c. 850 AD (Doctoral dissertation, University of York).
Geake, H. and Webley, R. 2018. Brooches - Finds Recording Guide. Portable Antiquities Scheme. [Online] Url=https://finds.org.uk/counties/findsrecordingguides/brooches-2/ [Accessed 01/09/2023]
Georgiou, A. (2023). ‘Catastrophic’: Putin’s war is wiping out Ukraine’s ancient history. [online] Newsweek. Available at: https://www.newsweek.com/catastrophic-putin-war-wiping-out-ukraine-recent-history-1771314 [Accessed 28 May 2024].
Humphreys, J., Ryland, J.W., Barnard, E.A.B., Wellstood, F.C. and Barnett, T.G., 1923. V.—An Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Bidford-on-Avon, Warwickshire. Archaeologia, 73, pp.89-116.
Humphreys, J., Ryland, J.W., Wellstood, F.C., Barnard, E.A.B. and Barnett, T.G., 1925. XII.—An Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Bidford-on-Avon, Warwickshire: Second Report on the Excavations. Archaeologia, 74, pp.271-288.
Leahy, K., 2011. Anglo-Saxon Crafts. The Oxford Handbook of Anglo-Saxon Archaeology, pp.440-59.
Martin, T.F., 2015. The Cruciform Brooch and Anglo-Saxon England (Vol. 25). Boydell & Brewer Ltd.
Owen-Crocker, G.R., 2004. Dress in Anglo-Saxon England. Boydell Press.
Peake, J.R.N., 2013. Early Anglo-Saxon glass beads: composition and origins based on the finds from RAF Lakenheath, Suffolk (Doctoral dissertation, Cardiff University).
Richards, J.D. and Naylor, J., 2010. A 'Productive Site' at Bidford-on-Avon, Warwickshire: Salt, Communication and Trade in Anglo-Saxon England. In A Decade of Discovery: Proceedings of the Portable Antiquities Scheme Conference 2007 (No. 520, pp. 193-200). Archaeopress.
Tompkins, A., 2017. The Avon Valley in the fifth to mid-seventh centuries: contacts and coalescence in a frontier polity? (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oxford).
Walton-Rogers, P, 2007. Cloth and clothing in early Anglo-Saxon England, AD 450-700.
Zygar, M. (2024). Putin’s Myths About Ukraine, Debunked. [online] TIME. Available at: https://time.com/6693504/vladimir-putin-history-myths-russia-ukraine-debunked [Accessed 28 May 2024].
Boyle, A., Jennings, D., Miles, D., Palmer, S. 2011. The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Butler's Field, Lechlade, Gloucestershire: The Anglo-Saxon Grave Goods Specialist Reports, Phasing & Discussion (Vol. 2). Thames Valley Landscapes Monograph No.33. Oxford Archaeology.
Andrews, P., Last, J., Osgood, R., and Stoodly, N. 2019. A prehistoric burial mound and Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Barrow Clump, Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire. English Heritage and Operation Nightingale excavations 2003-14. Wessex Archaeology Monograph 40. Salisbury
Carver, M., Hills, C. and Scheschkewitz, J., 2009. Wasperton: a Roman, British and Anglo-Saxon community in central England. Anglo-Saxon Studies. Boydell Press. Woodbridge.
Warwickshire County Council (1999). Information for record number WA51 62. Warwickshire Historic Environment Record. [Online] Url= https://timetrail.warwickshire.gov.uk/detail.aspx?monuid=WA5162] Accessed 29/05/2024
Dalwood, H. and Ratkai, S. 1998. ‘Salvage Recording at Bennett’s Hill Anglo-Saxon Cemetery, Offenham. Interim Report – Project 1356, Report 539. HWCM 24394. Field Section, County Archaeological Service, Hereford and Worcester County Council.
Dickinson, T.M. 2002, 'Translating animal art: Salin’s Style I and Anglo-Saxon cast saucer brooches', Hikuin, vol. 29, pp. 163-186.
Dickinson, T.M., 2013. An Anglo-Saxon “cunning woman” from Bidford-on-Avon. In The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England (pp. 359-373). Routledge.
Düben, B.A. (2023) ‘Revising History and ‘Gathering the Russian Lands’: Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian Nationhood’, LSE Public Policy Review, 3(1), p. 4. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31389/lseppr.86.
Evison, V.I., 1978. Early Anglo-Saxon applied disc brooches. Part II: in England. The Antiquaries Journal, 58(2), pp.260-278.
Evison, V.I. and Hill, P., 1996. Two Anglo-Saxon cemeteries at Beckford, Hereford and Worcester (Vol. 103). Council for British Archaeology.
Geake, H., 1995. The use of grave-goods in conversion-period England c. 600-c. 850 AD (Doctoral dissertation, University of York).
Geake, H. and Webley, R. 2018. Brooches - Finds Recording Guide. Portable Antiquities Scheme. [Online] Url=https://finds.org.uk/counties/findsrecordingguides/brooches-2/ [Accessed 01/09/2023]
Georgiou, A. (2023). ‘Catastrophic’: Putin’s war is wiping out Ukraine’s ancient history. [online] Newsweek. Available at: https://www.newsweek.com/catastrophic-putin-war-wiping-out-ukraine-recent-history-1771314 [Accessed 28 May 2024].
Humphreys, J., Ryland, J.W., Barnard, E.A.B., Wellstood, F.C. and Barnett, T.G., 1923. V.—An Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Bidford-on-Avon, Warwickshire. Archaeologia, 73, pp.89-116.
Humphreys, J., Ryland, J.W., Wellstood, F.C., Barnard, E.A.B. and Barnett, T.G., 1925. XII.—An Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Bidford-on-Avon, Warwickshire: Second Report on the Excavations. Archaeologia, 74, pp.271-288.
Leahy, K., 2011. Anglo-Saxon Crafts. The Oxford Handbook of Anglo-Saxon Archaeology, pp.440-59.
Martin, T.F., 2015. The Cruciform Brooch and Anglo-Saxon England (Vol. 25). Boydell & Brewer Ltd.
Owen-Crocker, G.R., 2004. Dress in Anglo-Saxon England. Boydell Press.
Peake, J.R.N., 2013. Early Anglo-Saxon glass beads: composition and origins based on the finds from RAF Lakenheath, Suffolk (Doctoral dissertation, Cardiff University).
Richards, J.D. and Naylor, J., 2010. A 'Productive Site' at Bidford-on-Avon, Warwickshire: Salt, Communication and Trade in Anglo-Saxon England. In A Decade of Discovery: Proceedings of the Portable Antiquities Scheme Conference 2007 (No. 520, pp. 193-200). Archaeopress.
Tompkins, A., 2017. The Avon Valley in the fifth to mid-seventh centuries: contacts and coalescence in a frontier polity? (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oxford).
Walton-Rogers, P, 2007. Cloth and clothing in early Anglo-Saxon England, AD 450-700.
Zygar, M. (2024). Putin’s Myths About Ukraine, Debunked. [online] TIME. Available at: https://time.com/6693504/vladimir-putin-history-myths-russia-ukraine-debunked [Accessed 28 May 2024].
RSS Feed