Greater Manchester Archaeology Federation
Newsletter
Volume 1 Issue 8
March 2012
Dig Greater Manchester
Dig Greater
Manchester
is go!
1-2
GM Archaeology Day 2011 7-9
Society Reports
4-6,
11,17
Discoveries
10-13
GM Past Revealed
14-15
CfAA Report
16
GMAU Report
21-22
Obituary—
Obituary—Ben Edwards
1818-20
New Society!
The Federation welcomes another new member, the Middleton Archaeological Society.
There will be a piece about
the Society in a future issue of
the newsletter.
Introduction
Dig Greater Manchester (DGM) is an archaeologically based project funded by the Association of Greater
Manchester Authorities (AGMA) and the borough of Blackburn with Darwen. The project will build on the success of community heritage engagement projects such as ‘Dig Manchester’ and other successful community
projects established by the Centre for Applied Archaeology (CfAA), the now closed University of Manchester
Archaeology Unit (UMAU) in conjunction with the Greater Manchester Archaeology Unit (GMAU) and local authorities and politicians from the Greater Manchester area. The five year project will be led by staff from the
CfAA and managed by members of all project partners. Although professionally led its overall aim is to involve
the highest number of people from the local communities in the investigation of their Heritage.
The project will have dedicated personnel including the lead archaeologist, dealing with the overall management and organisation of the project, and a dedicated educational/outreach archaeologist whose main task
will be to organise the educational aspects.
The Project
The project will include an archaeological evaluation in every one of the participating boroughs each lasting
for a two week period. In the culminating year of the project two of the sites evaluated will be chosen to conduct a full scale archaeological excavation over an extended period.
Greater Manchester Archaeology – Strength Through Diversity and Co-operation.
Editorial
Volume 1 Issue 8
Dear All
This will be the penultimate Federation newsletter delivered by GMAU. The next issue will be an indulgence on
our part, where 32 years of GMAU will be celebrated.
It has been a pleasure to serve as editor for this publication. I’m sorry that you’ve had to wait so long for this
issue. It gives me great satisfaction that the Centre for Applied Archaeology have agreed to take on the Newsletter. Contact details for the new editor will be included in the next issue. My thanks to all who have contributed,
keep the articles coming in!
Editor
Dig Greater Manchester (cont)
A short list of sites has been drawn up based on an earlier pilot project that incorporated the findings of a DeskBased Assessment carried out by Dr Pete Arrowsmith. The short listed sites were chosen using a set of criteria
such as archaeological potential, accessibility and land ownership (all sites chosen were in the ownership of the
local authority).
One of the main aspects of the project was the element of education both formal and informal. It is intended to
provide an opportunity for local schools to participate in the evaluations. This would not be a simple case of organising on site tours of the evaluation sites. Organised classes from the schools involved will spend a period of
time on site participating in the archaeological investigations. This participation will be preceded by arranged
visits to the schools as preparation for their visit and a follow up visit at the end of each evaluation.
Also included in the educational aspect of the project will be a series of ‘workshops’ designed to introduce and
teach certain archaeological techniques such as excavation techniques, building surveys, geophysical surveys,
historical research etc. These workshops will be mainly directed at adults with the immediate intention of equipping them with the necessary skills and information in order to get the most out of their involvement in the project. It is also anticipated that these workshops will encourage future self motivated historical and archaeological research.
A final educational aspect will involve seminars/lectures on the archaeology and history of Greater Manchester
tailored according to the borough in which they are held. These will be used as a foundation to inform the local
communities about the results of the project, local history and heritage and to encourage further self motivated
investigations.
Cllr Paul Murphy said: “This is a fantastic project that will get thousands of young people across Greater Manchester involved in something hands-on, educational and exciting. It will also provide them with a vital opportunity to learn about the history of their local community and obtain new skills that they may want to develop into
a future career. This has all been made possible by AGMA and Salford University working together and highlights what effective partnership working can achieve. I look forward to hearing about the progress of the project.”
Norman Redhead said ‘Dig Greater Manchester will build on the long tradition of community engagement with
the area’s archaeology. The project has already identified a range of archaeological sites with exciting potential
and I suspect local communities will be amazed at what they uncover on their doorstep. We know from previous
community digs that the people of Greater Manchester have a tremendous enthusiasm for getting involved with
their local heritage. I can’t wait to see what the project unearths!’
Watch out for updates of where and when the work will be carried out and how to get involved.
Federation members
The following groups are members of the Federation:
Bolton Archaeology and Egyptology Society, Bury Archaeological Group, Darwen Local History Society, Glossop and Longdendale Archaeological Society, Holcombe Moor Heritage Group, Littleborough Historical and Archaeological Society, Manchester Region Industrial Archaeology Society, Mellor Archaeological Trust, Middleton Archaeological Society, Moston Archaeology Group, Prestwich Heritage Society, Royton Lives Through the Ages, Saddleworth Archaeological Trust, South
Manchester Archaeological Research Team, South Trafford Archaeological Group, Tameside
Archaeological Society, Wigan Archaeological Society.
Page 2
Beacon Award
Volume 1 Issue 8
The Federation won a prestigious Beacon Award late in autumn 2011! ‘The Manchester Beacon is one of six
Beacon partnerships across the UK. It facilitates staff, students and community groups to create a culture that
encourages public and community engagement to become a valued part of everyday university life. The Beacons explore and support the many ways that the activity and benefits of higher education and research can be
shared with, and informed by, the public. The Manchester Beacon is a partnership between the University of
Manchester, Manchester Metropolitan University, the University of Salford, The Museum of Science and Industry and Manchester: Knowledge Capital’.
Adam Thompson, Principal Archaeologist at Salford University’s Centre for Applied Archaeology, put in an application for the Beacon Recognition Award on behalf of the CfAA, GMAU and the Federation. It was time well
spent and means that the Federation’s success as a model of partnership working has received formal recognition by the Universities.
Page 3
Littleborough History Centre
Volume 1 Issue 8
The Littleborough Historical and Archaeological Society Ltd (LHAS) has been around for over 30 years during which time it
has become a thriving society with extensive archives including an extensive collection of many thousands of documents,
indentures, ephemera, memorials etc., and photographic images, many thousands of archaeological artefacts recovered
from the surrounding hills some of national importance together with some war memorials and other large objects.
For a short period the Society operated a small but popular museum in the town centre but this was closed when funding
ceased. Subsequently the archive has been located within increasingly inaccessible storage facilities. LHAS has been involved in numerous proposals for a new facility but all came to nothing until the rail industry offered the Society the underused station building at Littleborough for use as a Research and Interpretation facility – now to be known as
Littleborough’s History Centre.
Centre
Three railway stations have been built in Littleborough.
The first was officially opened on Wednesday the 3rd July
1839 when, directors, guests, ladies and gentlemen totalling some 550 boarded a train at Oldham Road Station,
Manchester and left for Littleborough at 12:22pm. This
station was located under the viaduct adjacent to Ealees
Brook. In the 1870s the present station building comprising of a booking office and waiting rooms were constructed and in the 1890s a new ticket office and subway
was provided. Over time the buildings became less available to passengers being used by engineering personnel
until even that function ceased.
Whilst much has been changed over the years - the canopy being removed, original doors changed and windows
modernised, many external and internal features remain.
On completion of our works, the restored station will be a
building of historical value in its own right.
The converted buildings will, once more enable the Society to make local history more accessible to residents and
visitors alike. The centre will include a fairly large exhibition space and other rooms available to the public. These
will offer internet access as well as access to our electronic archive. We believe that the setting will also be of
interest to others perhaps forming a unique venue for
family or cultural functions.
Using railway buildings bring their own challenges. There
are necessary restrictions when working in close proximity
to an operational railway station platform and a building located on a high embankment is something else. When surrounded on near three sides with unplanned tree and shrubbery growth, some encroaching on the building, it brings new
meaning to voluntary labour and encouraging other partners and funding. It isn’t until you take on rooms some 4 metres in
height with 3 large missing windows, no glass in any window, all with ancient plaster, that you realise just how much paint
and materials are involved such that the task sometimes appears daunting. All of the work has to be to a standard approved by Network Rail.
The Society will undertake the improvements over the next two years. Our first task was to concentrate on making the
building waterproof and secure. Now that that has been achieved we are working on the internals including a fully accessible toilet. Replacement windows and doors will ensure that the building will quickly become usable as an important resource for the town but some internal restorations will necessarily take longer. However, all of the rooms will be brought
into use as soon as the Society is able and we have to have it largely complete by November 2012
The project is fully supported by Rochdale MBC and its councillors and officers, as it meets their objectives for regeneration and an increase in tourism. The Railway Heritage Trust will be involved in the restoration and we have received support from the Rail Industry including Network Rail and Northern Rail
Progress is regularly reported on our website: www.littleboroughshistory.org
Bernard Pratt - Project Manger
Page 4
South Manchester Archaeological Research Team
Volume 1 Issue 8
MUCK AND MELONS—
MELONS—STYAL QUARRY BANK DIG
South Manchester Archaeological Research Team undertook an evaluation at the recently acquired kitchen
garden at Styal Quarry Bank Mill, in conjunction with the volunteer gardeners, members of STAG and WAG,
who all teamed up with the National Trust and Oxford Archaeology North to establish what archaeological remains were still in situ of the melon house circa 1814. The dig ran for a period of 9 days and was run in conjunction with the Festival of Archaeology from 23rd July 2011 to 31st July 2011, and was advertised as part of
the garden tours offered by the Mill during the festival.
Over the period of the dig over 72 volunteers were involved. These ranged from professional and semi professional archaeologists, complete beginners, and garden volunteers who had been involved in the refurbishment of the garden itself to one of the original designs recorded on the 1841 tithe map and the subsequent
Ordnance Survey maps. All participants took part in recording, photographing, planning and obviously digging
the site. Training was provided by OAN and those on site who had previous experience of archaeological sites.
This was set against the back drop of the remains of what is perceived to be a very early cast iron designed
glass house, with a domed centre piece and two linear wings. This house was for the production and growing
of vines and tropical plants, and had a fish scale design glazing as seen in the image (fig 1). The research
work carried out by SMART members Laurence Wyche and Margaret Wells, combined with OAN and the National Trust, have not proven conclusive in identifying the specific timeline for the glass house as many records refer only to materials being
ordered and not directly to the
structure. Further investigations
are to continue and will hopefully
uncover hidden documents similar to ones found in the archives
which assist in establishing a
more specific date for the construction of the glass house.
There was a second trench
opened by garden volunteers to
run concurrent with the primary
trench, this was opened to establish if there were any footpath remains still evident leading to the
main door of the glass house,
which have been depicted on
many of the plans dating from
1836. This proved successful,
1—
Fig 1
—The former glass house
although it did open up various
suggestions as to the age and date of the remains, due to the finds that were collected. They included high
status ceramic pots and shards of pottery from the gardener’s cottage.
The primary objective of the dig however was to establish the archaeological remains of the melon house
which we understood from the records had taken several forms and shapes; the photograph circa 1960 (fig
2) shows the final phase of the building almost in plan form following its demolition.
Overall the dig proved to be very successful and did indeed demonstrate the many phases of building and
(Continued on page 6)
Page 5
South Manchester Archaeological Research Team (cont)
Volume 1 Issue 8
redesign, which have been outlined in greater detail in the final report produced by Oxford Archaeology North. In
addition the dig showed the Trust the value of community archaeology by virtue of the enthusiasm of the volunteers and the visitor’s feedback. It is hoped that this evaluation will support a HLF bid which is hopefully to be
submitted for the restoration of the
glasshouse, which will be further
encouraged by the proposed restoration of the alpine house which you
can also see on the photograph
above. This is to be carried out in
house by the mill using the skills of
the volunteer garden staff. It is also
hoped that further archaeological
investigations will be funded either
in house or as part of National Trust
funded schemes to be carried out in
several other areas of interest
around the site of the mill.
Fig 2—
2—After demolition.
In conclusion I have included the
final aerial shot of the site (fig 3)
showing the extent of excavation
and indeed the final archaeology on
which the report has been based.
Andy Coutts
Fig 3—
3—aerial view of excavations
Page 6
Greater Manchester Archaeology Day 2011
Volume 1 Issue 8
One of the key aims of the Federation is to hold an annual archaeology day to showcase recent archaeological projects across
Greater Manchester. GMAU, with
the help of John Hearle and Sue
Mitchell, took on the role of identifying a venue, programme of
speakers and administering the
event. On Saturday 19th February
the inaugural Greater Manchester
Archaeology Day took place at The
Friend’s Meeting House in central
Manchester. No food was provided
and the organisers were able to
keep the costs down to £9 per
ticket. As space at the venue was
limited, it was decided that Federation Members should have first
call on the tickets. 110 people came to the event which saw a diverse range of speakers, academic,
professional, and volunteer, give 11 illustrated talks. Additionally, during intervals it was possible for
audience members to look at geo-rectified historic mapping and archaeological sites near their
houses, by consulting the live Greater Manchester Historic Environment Record database, managed
by Lesley Mitchell of GMAU.
The event was deemed to be a success and there is a demand for it to be repeated. There were some
technical problems with the microphone system which could be improved on next time. It was felt that
with wider advertising the audience size could be doubled.
The morning session was chaired by Andrew Myers, Assistant County Archaeologist, and the afternoon by Norman Redhead, County Archaeologist. They have prepared a short summary of the talks for this newsletter.
AM (on the am)
The morning session provided an excellent opportunity to discover how significant work is being undertaken by
Greater Manchester’s archaeological community on the archaeology of widely different periods. In particular,
the papers highlighted the important and varied contributions being made by academics, voluntary societies
and commercial units.
Alison Sheridan before her talk. (Editor trying to give the
impression he understands the computer technology).
To start the proceedings Dr Alison Sheridan, Head of
Early Prehistory with the National Museums of Scotland, offered an account of her work on the remarkable and, by common consent, extremely important
amber spacer necklace discovered during recent excavations by Mellor Archaeological Trust at Shaw
Cairn. The excavations of this much disturbed site,
ably led by Peter Noble, identified the in situ but truncated remains of a double-cist burial in the fill of
which were found the remains of the necklace. Dr
Sheridan is the acknowledged authority in the study
(Continued on page 8)
Page 7
Greater Manchester Archaeology Day 2011
Volume 1 Issue 8
of items of Bronze Age personal ornamentation in Britain. We learned something of her detailed study of the
necklace and how this is shedding light upon the unique combination of northern stylistic traits and material,
how and where it may have been produced, and even something of the woman who may have worn this remarkable artefact 4000 years ago. We gained a clear impression, conveyed by the evident enthusiasm of Dr
Sheridan’s presentation, of the national importance of this discovery.
For the next presentation we were truly fortunate in hearing from Professor Julian Thomas of the University of
Manchester’s archaeology department. He provided an account of the department’s involvement with The
Stonehenge Project, one of the largest and most important archaeological projects to be conducted in Britain.
Professor Thomas is a recognised leading authority on the archaeology of the Neolithic period and he shared
with us some of his thoughts concerning the early phases of ritual and ceremonial activity at Stonehenge. In
particular we were invited to consider the evidence for the evolution of a ritual landscape in which separate
monuments were constructed for the living and the dead.
In his detailed and challenging account a division was
seen between those for the living, constructed using timber, and the stone-built monuments that related to the
dead. The talk served to demonstrate, despite the established international significance and iconic status of
Stonehenge, just how little we previously understood of
this monument and its surrounding landscape. Further, it
showed how academic research is transforming our understanding, benefitting from the detailed investigations
undertaken as part of the project.
The final presentation of the morning session dramatically
shifted the focus to recent developer-funded excavations
in Manchester and to the archaeology of the last 200
years. Phil Wood of Northern Archaeological Associates
provided an entertaining, detailed and highly informative
account of the large-scale excavations undertaken along
Pollard Street, Ancoats, during 2009. The work was undertaken in connection with GMPTE’s Metrolink East project, and particularly with the construction of a tramway gradient approach to a tunnel under Great Ancoats
Street. The construction works threatened the deeply buried remains relating to Pollard Street Cotton Mill (c.
1805) and associated canal arm, in its day one of the largest and most celebrated textile mills in the region,
and those of Soho Iron Foundry (c. 1820). The line of the tramway construction was archaeologically excavated
and cleared in a series of 50m sections. This exposed the
well preserved basement of the mill, its engine house, boiler
house and coal stores, the latter including the feed chute
from the canal arm. Soho Iron Foundry’s remains were found
to be less deeply buried, but no less well preserved. The complex included water channels, wells, casting floors, machine
beds, a large winch or crane base and, somewhat appropriately, a small tramway. Amongst the star finds were a massive iron actuator wheel for a steam powered tilt hammer and
an equally large iron anvil from a steam hammer – both of
which are now housed in the Museum of Science and Industry. Nationally, only a handful of iron foundries of this period
have been investigated archaeologically. The discoveries at
Soho Iron Foundry provide important information on a key
period of technological and industrial change in Manchester’s
history
NR (on the pm)
The first half of the afternoon session was dedicated to the
(Continued on page 9)
Page 8
Greater Manchester Archaeology Day 2011
Volume 1 Issue 8
work of a selection of Federation groups. All presenters did really well in keeping to a tight timetable and providing enjoyable and diverse accounts of their projects.
Bill Aldridge of Wigan Archaeology Society spoke first. He presented our only Roman topic of the day in the form
of the work that has been undertaken in recent years by his Society on Roman roads in the Wigan area and by
Oxford Archaeology North on excavations ahead of town centre developments. The story is a extraordinary one
of transforming our understanding of Roman Wigan. The remarkable remains of a substantial Roman bath
house were described and the Society’s important work on understanding the character and location of Roman
routes into Wigan. The 3rd volume in Greater Manchester’s Past Revealed, ‘Roman Wigan’, was prepared jointly
by WAS and OAN, was announced on the Archaeology Day and published afterwards (see review in this issue).
Peter Bone of the Manchester Region Industrial Archaeology Society took us forward in time to describe his society’s recent field work. This included the survey of a 19th century steam crane on the Manchester, Bolton &
Bury Canal, the importance of which has been recognised through a listing designation. Peter also described
the survey of Adswood Brick Works in Stockport Borough, prior to demolition, and of Mayfield Station in Manchester, next to Piccadilly.
Tameside Archaeological Society gave a presentation of their work on the moors above Mossley, where they
have discovery significant remains, including possible structures from an early Mesolithic occupation site. Kevin
Wright demonstrated the commitment of TAS volunteers by showing a video of work being undertaken in arctic
conditions! The timing of investigations is restricted by the landowners to the winter months outside hunting
season. Ron Cowell has kindly provided the academic lead on this project and he rounded off the presentation
by discussing the character, context, significance and potential of the remains.
Jean Fildes stepped into the breach to talk about recent community archaeology projects undertaken by the
South Manchester Archaeological Research Team. Two projects have been remarkable for engaging large numbers of people. In July last year SMART carried out a dig in partnership with the National Trust at the site of a
17th century dairy house at Dunham Massey in Trafford. The excavation was characterised by a large number of
finds within demolition layers, and by nearly 3,000 people visiting the dig. In September, during Heritage Open
Weekend, SMART and CfAA carried out a weekend exploratory dig at the site of the mid-18th century Cheadle
Hall at the Village Green in Cheadle. This was part of the bicentary celebrations of the Green being given to the
people of Cheadle. Around 800 people came to view the dig and have guided tours, and dozens of children had
a go at trowelling.
SMART are one of newest archaeology societies, but next up was one of our oldest; this being South Trafford
Archaeology Group. Derek Pierce took us through the long history of archaeology at the Timperley Moated site
near Altrincham. Work over many years has revealed a wealth of information from the later medieval and post
medieval periods, but also included a few surprises such as a Saxon hearth. A regionally significant assemblage
of finds has come from the site, and some of the highlights of these were described by Derek.
John Hearle and Don Reid reviewed the most recent project for Mellor Archaeological Trust, this being the site
of Mellor Mill at Roman Lakes, near Marple, The late 18th century mill was erected by Samuel Oldknow, a renowned industrialist, and represented the apogee of water powered textile mill construction. It was severely
damaged by fire in 1892 and became part of a popular Victorian leisure destination. MAT are looking to carry
out a major exploration and presentation project but in the meantime have been undertaking some exploratory
trenching to determine the extent and character of the remains.
After tea break Ian Miller described Oxford Archaeology North’s excavation of the Co-operative’s new HQ site off
Miller Street in Manchester. At one time this was an area of poor quality workers’ housing and lodging famously described by Engels in the 1840s as ‘Hell on Earth’. The archaeological remains were on the whole well
preserved and told the story of changing fortunes, from relative prosperity in the late 18th century, to abject
squalor in the first of the 19th century, then gradual improvement through better sanitation and living conditions, finishing with extensive damage from the 1940 Blitz. It is hoped that a Greater Manchester’s Past Revealed volume will be produced for this site.
Finally, and fittingly, Mike Nevell was invited to summarise 20/21 years of the Tameside Archaeology Survey.
Sadly, this long running project came to end, through budget cuts, last year. Mike was able to provide an astonishing array of figures to demonstrate how much had been achieved over the life of the project, to the benefit of
the people of Tameside and beyond. There is a considerable legacy of technical reports and an amazing range
of publications, which all helped to provide a sense of place and history to the people of Tameside.
Page 9
The Manchester Museum
Volume 1 Issue 8
Figure 1: Black and white photographs of the find-spot
taken by Frank Willett. Note the triangular cavity in the
image on the left.
Archaeological ReRe-Discoveries at the Manchester Museum
Last autumn Ina Berg of the University of Manchester Archaeology section organized a conference on
prehistoric pottery at the Manchester Museum. I had the pleasure of showing society members the
base of an unprovenanced Iron Age pot from the Manchester Museum archaeology collection. A note
mentioning Christopher Hawkes dated 21st August 1958, and two tiny black and white photographs,
apparently showing the locality where the pot was discovered, were also found in the box. The exhibit
excited some interest amongst the members and there was much speculation as to where the pot
might have been found and how one might go about locating the find-spot using the associated photographs. Some more cautious people questioned whether the pot and the photographs were linked at
all.
There the matter rested until I happened to be looking through the Transactions of the Lancashire &
Cheshire Antiquarian Society in the John Rylands library recently. I came across a reference to an article by C.E.P.Rosser about recent fieldwork carried out in Lancashire and Cheshire in 1958:‘Early in the year some small boys brought to the Manchester Museum the greater part of a pot which had been
found in natural cavity beneath a large boulder in the
screes above Longdendale … some further fragments
were recovered on a later visit by Mr F.Willett. The pot had
stood on a small shelf at the end of the cavity, which was
barely large enough for a man to enter; there was no evidence to show whether or not it had accompanied a burial but the nature of the site was such that any evidence
of that sort would probably have disappeared. The pot
has been indentified by Prof C.F.C.Hawkes as native ware
of the late 1st century AD and could be paralleled at the
Brigantian site of Stanwick. It was purchased from the
boys and is now in the Manchester Museum’ (Rosser
1958: 140) - my italics.
Figure 2: Photograph of the incomplete
The pot is accompanied by an enigmatic note saying ‘This is from
pot from Longdendale in the ManchesProf. Hawkes and will be collected shortly by a gentleman' which
ter Museum (Accession number 22859)
confirms that this is the pot in Rosser’s article. C.F.C. or Christopher Hawkes (1905-1992) was one of the great figures of British
archaeology who, during the course of his career, worked in the
Department of British and Medieval Antiquities at the British Museum, held the Chair of European Archaeology at the University of Oxford, founded the Institute of Archaeology at Oxford and helped set up
the Oxford laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art; he was also author of many authoritative
papers and books (Jope 1992).
(continued on following page)
Page 10
Volume 1 Issue 8
The Manchester Museum (cont).
(continued from previous page)
The two tiny black and white photographs found alongside the pot in the box in the archaeology store
were presumably taken during the follow-up visit to the site by the late Frank Willett (1925-2006), who
was Keeper of the Department of Ethnology and General Archaeology at the Manchester Museum
1950-58 (Anon. 2006) . The site where the pot was found is just off the Woodhead Pass and close to
the Pennine Way. The photos were probably taken near the old quarry, of which there are plenty in the
vicinity (pers.comm., Malcolm Chapman). It would be interesting to compare the photographs with the
appearance of the site today.
In conclusion, I don’t think there can be any doubt that this discovery is Manchester Museum’s object
accession number 22859 and I have updated the documentation records accordingly. Gill Stroud at
the Derbyshire Historic Environment Record kindly informed me that this pot is HER 14258.
Bibliography
Anon., 2006. ‘Obituaries: Professor Frank Willett’, The Daily Telegraph 26/7/2006, p.19.
Jope, M. 1992. ‘Obituaries: Professor Christopher Hawkes’, The Independent 1/4/1992
Rosser, C.E.P. 1959. ‘Notes on field work in Lancashire and Cheshire,1958’, Transactions of the Lancashire and Cheshire Antiquarian Society 68: 139-142.
Acknowledgements
The writer would like to thank Peter Leeming and Gill Stroud of the Greater Manchester and Derbyshire Historic Environment Records respectively; Malcolm Chapman, formerly of the Manchester Museum, and colleague Phyllis Stoddart for helping to research and document this discovery.
Bryan Sitch
Saddleworth Archaeological Trust
Remains of World War II defences in Greenfield
Situated in front of the Clarence Hotel in Greenfield
are scant remains of a WW2
Machine Gun Post. A short
length of stone walling is all
that remains of the Pill Box.
The position of the Post
guards the road entering
Saddleworth (A635) which
crosses the Pennines from
Yorkshire. Some distance
along this road, just before it
crosses Saddleworth Moor,
is another Pill Box, hidden in
the hillside on the right hand
side of the road.
On the opposite side of the road is a WW2 Air Raid Shelter, now converted in a bus shelter with toilets
at each end. The condition of the building is not good and needs protection from demolition.
Source of information is from a resident of Greenfield who can remember both sites during WW2.
Ken Booth
Page 11
Roman lose their heads in York
Volume 1 Issue 8
Your editor placed a note on the CfAA article about the Roman period burials from Besthorpe, where he revealed that he
watches too much television and in particular had watched the Timewatch special on the comparable burials from York,
the so-called ‘Deviant’ burials. However, the real picture about these burials, as determined archaeologically, is much
more interesting. Kurt Hunter-Mann of YAT, has kindly supplied the following:
During 2004 and 2005, York Archaeological Trust found the remains of 80 individuals on two sites at
Driffield Terrace, about 1km (0.6miles) from the centre of York. Pottery and other finds indicated that
they dated to the Roman period. The discovery of these skeletons was not surprising, as they lay close
to the main Roman road between York and London and Roman burials are often located alongside
roads. Hundreds if not thousands of Roman burials have been found in this area over the years, forming a major cemetery extending alongside the road for perhaps 2km (1.2miles). On a prominent slope
leading up to the Roman fortress and civilian settlement at York, the Driffield Terrace area would have
been a prestigious location for burials.
What was surprising about these burials was that the majority had been decapitated, and the heads
placed in various positions in the graves. This is very unusual, as decapitations usually form around
1% of burials in Roman Britain. Furthermore, the decapitations found in Roman Britain are usually
from the front, suggesting an almost surgical operation undertaken some time after death; whereas
those from Driffield Terrace are all from the back, and often involve more than one heavy blow (indeed
as many as eleven) that probably occurred around the time of death.
In addition to the decapitations, a large number of skeletons displayed signs of injuries caused by
sharp and blunt weapons. Another unusual feature of these burials is that, apart from a handful of
youngsters and one female, all of the burials were adult males. Of the adult males, almost every one
that survived sufficiently complete to determine whether or not they had been decapitated had some
kind of trauma around the time of death – an unprecedented level of inter-personal violence, even for
Roman Britain. The males were generally larger and more muscular, an average of 2cms (1“) taller
than the general Romano-British male population. Also remarkable was that one individual wore heavy
iron rings round each ankle – certainly painful and probably symbolic, but of what remains uncertain.
Several interpretations of these burials have been put forward. An initial suggestion is that they were the result of a massacre, instigated by Caracalla on
his elevation to Emperor in AD211. However, it is quite clear from the number
Continued on next page
Page 12
Roman lose their heads in York (cont)
Volume 1 Issue 8
(Continued from page 12)
of inter-cutting graves that the burials took place over a long period of time. The pottery suggested
that the cemetery was in use for much of the Roman period, and this is supported by radiocarbon dating of some of the skeletons.
Another possibility is that the decapitations were a form of religious rite. The Romans feared being
haunted by ghosts of the dead, and may have decapitated certain people to prevent them from finding
their way to haunt. However, as has already been mentioned, such decapitations appear to have been
carried out carefully from the front some time after death. In addition, as many women as men seem
to have been decapitated for this reason; this is in contrast with the strongly adult male population
found at Driffield Terrace.
Execution is another possibility, as it documented that Roman citizens were executed by beheading.
One difficulty with this idea is that the bodies of executed people were usually disposed of unceremoniously, such as by being thrown into rivers. However, most of the burials at Driffield Terrace had been
interred with a degree of care, often in coffins; and with grave goods, such as pottery vessels and animal burials. It has also been suggested that these were soldiers who had been executed as a form of
punishment, or who had been the victims of an ambush. If this were the case, it would mean that this
part of the cemetery had been reserved for this type of person for much of the Roman period.
The study of the skeletons is continuing, and some intriguing results have been obtained recently. Isotopic study of the bone, which can provide information on such aspects as geographical origins and
diet, indicates that these individuals are more cosmopolitan that the typical population of Roman Britain. A number come from the Mediterranean area, some apparently from Africa; and others originated
from central Europe, outside the Roman Empire.
More remarkably, tooth marks visible on the bones of one individual suggest that this person had
been killed by a large carnivore (a lion, tiger or bear) as well as having been decapitated. This circumstance is difficult to reconcile with any of the theories already discussed. It is known that people could
be executed by being thrown to animals in the arena, but the high frequency of other wounds is difficult to explain in this context, and there is the problem already mentioned that the bodies of executed
people were not usually treated with respect. Consequently, another theory has been put forward –
that these people were gladiators. A certain type of gladiator, known as a venator, is known to have
fought animals in the arena, either in set-piece fights or in re-enactments of hunts. It is possible,
therefore, that we are looking at several types of gladiator, with some suffering wounds from fights
with other gladiators, but at least one having fought an animal. There is sculptural evidence that losing
or dying gladiators could be dispatched by a knife or sword thrust to the throat or the back of the
neck. The decapitations could represent a local form of this gladiatorial coup de grace. Finally, the fact
that these people had generally died violently but been buried with a degree of care could also reflect
the contradictory status of gladiators in Roman society - admired as sporting heroes, but despised due
to their association with death.
It may not be possible to identify these burials as gladiators with confidence, never mind with certainty; but this theory fits the evidence as well as any other at the moment. In any case, the evidence
from Driffield Terrace is absolutely fascinating, and will offer many insights into the ways of life and
death in Roman York.
Kurt HunterHunter-Mann
Page 13
Book Reviews Greater Manchester’s Past Revealed
Volume 1 Issue 8
“Spreading the word on Manchester’s fascinating but relatively unrecognised archaeology is challenging. One
of the ways to do this is through publication in the form of ‘popular’ booklets. I have considerable pleasure
therefore in introducing you to this publication, which is Volume 1 in a new archaeology series covering not
only Manchester city’s wonderful archaeology, but also that of the whole of the Greater Manchester area: Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside, Trafford and Wigan.
This new series is called ‘Greater Manchester’s Past Revealed’. It provides a format for publishing significant
archaeology from developer-funded, research or community projects in an attractive, easy to read, wellillustrated style. The idea is to produce a short print run with copies being given to local schools, libraries and
other institutions, as well as the local community and wider public.”
Norman Redhead (from his Foreword to Vol 1)
Greater Manchester’s Past Revealed
Vol 1 Piccadilly Place—
Place—Uncovering Manchester’s Industrial Origins
By Ian Miller, Chris Wild and Richard Gregory
Published by Oxford Archaeology North. ISBN 978978-1-907686907686-0000-9. £5.00 cover price
Vol 2 The Rock Triangle, Bury: The Archaeology of an Industrial Suburb
By Ian Miller and Richard Gregory
Published by Oxford Archaeology North. ISBN 978978-1-907686907686-0101-6. £5.00 cover price
Vol 3 Discovering Coccium: The Archaeology of Roman Wigan
By Ian Miller and Bill Aldridge
Published by Oxford Archaeology North. ISBN 978978-1-907686907686-0303-0. £5.00 cover price
Vol 4 Rediscovering Bradford: Archaeology in the Engine Room of Manchester
By Ian Miller
Published by Oxford Archaeology North. ISBN 978978-1-907686907686-0404-7. £5.00 cover price
Page 14
Book Reviews Greater Manchester’s Past Revealed
Volume 1 Issue 8
The first four volumes of this series have now been published. Due to circumstances beyond our control, number 2
appeared before number 1, but now normal numbering sequence has been restored. These are small square booklets,
produced on high quality paper with a glossy cover.
Piccadilly Place
Number 1 in the series showcasing archaeological recording
ahead of development, by Oxford Archaeology North. In particular, this booklet rescues an important site from the footnotes of history. Drinkwater’s 1789 mill is of huge importance as the first mill in Manchester solely powered by
steam and deserves to be commemorated. This is achieved
by the booklet putting it in its context, illustrated by drawings
of the engine and other remains within the development
area. A second mill within the area was also investigated
and well preserved areas of this were discovered. Also covered is the excavation of the remains of workers’ housing
centred on Syon Court. These too are placed in their historical context. Significantly remains of cellar
dwellings were recorded, a type of housing which gained notoriety for Manchester through the writings
of Engels and others. The 3-D isometric reconstructions of these dwellings are splendidly illustrated.
Finally, the latter part of the career of Piccadilly Mill was its use as a printing works and the booklet
has a selection of the lithographic stone plates discovered on the site. These, for parts of labels of
everyday products such as soap and drinks, are a very powerful and immediately comprehensible link
with the past.
The Rock Triangle, Bury
The second booklet deals with the works completed ahead of the redevelopment of a large area of
Bury town centre. This involved both building survey and below ground excavation, again carried out
by OAN. Many of the larger towns in Greater Manchester had industrial suburbs, such as Ancoats in
Manchester and Portwood in Stockport. In Bury, the former industrial community of Freetown lay in
the area for redevelopment. The excavations and the booklet add greatly to the wider history of Bury.
The note on pg 27 that the industrial site had its own shippon is both illuminating and characteristic of
the booklet (and the series). The second booklet tells the story, not only of the great industrialists such
as Peel, but the lives of the ordinary workers are brought into focus as well.
Discovering Coccium
The third in the series is a collaborative volume between OAN and the Federation’s very own Wigan
Archaeological Society. The focus is on Roman Wigan, which not only covers the OAN Grand Arcade
excavations which discovered the remains of the bath-house, but also a reinterpretation of the GMAU
excavations at the Wiend in the 1980s. What makes this volume a delight is that the researches of
the Wigan Archaeological Society into the wider landscape of Roman Wigan and its associated roads
adds a dimension often lacking even in the best report of developer funded work—that of investigation
of areas not threatened by development. Also refreshing is the claim to have solved the problem of
where was the ‘Coccium’ mentioned in the Antonine Itinerary. The title of the booklet should leave
readers with no doubt.
Rediscovering Bradford
The fourth (so far) of the booklets also is deliberately titled, to rediscover the former community of
Bradford, in the area now known as Eastlands, mainly occupied by Manchester City FC. This booklet
also incorporates the unpublished 2002 excavations by UMAU on Bradford Old Hall. The further explorations into the site and its history pay homage to the colliery and the ironworks of Richard Johnson &
Nephew. A fitting memorial for the former ‘engine room’ for Manchester.
Page 15
CfAA Excavating a Tannery: Kitchen Street, Rochdale
Volume 1 Issue 8
Of the many lesser urban industrial sites the tannery is one particular site that every 19th and early 20th century
town had, but until 2011 none had been looked at within the Manchester city region. Tanning sites have often
been encountered in medieval and early post-medieval towns, and the processes from this date are well
known, but despite the survival of standing leather finishing works few tanneries have been excavated from the
Industrial Period. In January and February 2011 CfAA undertook the excavation of just such a tannery on the
north-eastern side of the centre of Rochdale. Terraced into a hillside the area looked, initially, somewhat unpromising but desk-based research showed that the tannery was founded around 1831, later being known as
the Roch Leather Works and then the Ramsey Street Tanning and Currier Company, and went out of use between 1894 and 1908.
The excavations revealed that the site had been terraced into the hillside and its position reflected the existence of a number of small springs in this area. These had been channelled through a series of ponds into a
row of at least five large clay-floored stone vats, with several smaller ones around the site as well. A flagged
floor on softwood timbers immediately to the west of the vats marked the position of an open-sided process
shed. Between the two was a clay-lined drainage channel. The vats would have been used to soak the hides in
a mixture that included oak bark (wooden twigs were founding at the bottom of the Kitchen Street vats). The
hides were then hand-scrapped to remove the hair and fat, probably in the open-sided shed to the west, with
the excess hair and fat being thrown into the clay-lined drain. All of this would have been done by hand. The
next process was to dry the hides although there was no evidence for this on the site. What there was, on the
eastern edge of the excavations, were the fragmentary remains of a pair of brick cottages (later extended to
three) which were associated the tannery. The original owner of the tannery, William Cunliffe, appears to have
lived in one of these buildings. These were later turned into a laundry and an iron water boiler was found in one
room.
When the tannery closed the whole site was levelled and sealed by a large clay deposit. The area was used for
a chapel and later a nursery during the 20th century.
Amongst the finds from the tannery site were off-cuts of cork, leather shoes, clumps of animal hair, clay pipes,
glass, and lots and lots of cockle, mussel and oyster shells. There were also a few pieces of 19th and 20th century pottery and two tin signs relating to the later laundry. Most surprising of all was the discovery that the site
was built over a small pond that
had filled with peat in antiquity –
presumably this was where the
springs were emptying into before
the arrival of industry.
The excavation thus revealed a
short lived, family-owned, urban
tannery of the type that was once
very common in Greater Manchester. Perhaps significantly, this site
lay down-wind of the Victorian civic
centre of Rochdale!
Michael Nevell
The Kitchen Street site aerial view
(actually just taken by Adam Thompson
standing at ground level).
Page 16
Bury Archaeological Group
Volume 1 Issue 8
GRISTLEHURST 2010
During the group's excavation of
Gristlehurst Hall in 2010 we found
a very corroded copper disc. The
disc was roughly 30mm in diameter, thin and traces of design could
be seen on the obverse and reverse surfaces. After cleaning and
conservation we attempted to identify the disc. We found that it was
not a coin nor a 17C or 18C token
but a jeton.
The jeton was French of the 14C 15C, probably produced during the
reign of Charles VI (1388- 1422) or
in the period just after. The obverse
design is probably a heater shield
with 3 fleur de lys enclosed in a
granulated circle. The inscription
outside the circle is very corroded
but possibly reads " AVE MARIA
GRATIA PLENA ". Variations of this
legend are possible. This design of
shield appears regularly on jetons
of that period. The reverse design
is less clear but I believe it to show
a bowed cross with a fleur de lys at the end of each terminal. Cross designs are common on jetons. The bowed
cross, where the strands are concave arcs, are less common. Jetons are unearthed fairly frequently and are
legion in varieties.
The Portable Antiquities Scheme Database has nearly 1500 entries under "JETTON--MEDIEVAL". The included
images are the Gristlehurst jeton and PAS jeton --- HAMP-725093.
Jetons are not coins although they were produced by the coin minters. They had no monetary value and where
used as counters on counting boards/clothes/tables. A set of jetons was usually 100 identical discs. Before the
introduction of arabic numerals, numbers and dates were written in Roman numerals. Using a counting board,
an operator could add, subtract etc. and would not need to be able to read or write. It is thought that some of
the "gaming" counters found on roman sites are jeton type counters. A counting table had a series of lines on
which the jetons were placed to represent numbers almost like the beads on an abacus.
A counting table was a substantial piece of furniture and wills and inventories of the period using the word
"counter" referred to a table and not the modern shop counter. Early jetons were made for royal/noble households for their accounting. French kings made New Year gifts of sets of jetons to their household heads. As
trade increased the merchants used jetons and the minters produced 'stock' jetons of poorer design.The production and use of jetons lasted longer on the continent than in England. Later jetons were more of the commemorative and decorative designs.
I gratefully acknowledge the help given by the coin enthusiasts Bill McKivor, Michael Dickinson and Howard
Simmons. Photos are due to the expertise of BAG member, Bob Huddart.
Standard books on jetons are Mitchiner M, Jetons, Medalets and Tokens vol I (1988) and Barnard F P, The
Casting-Counter and the Casting-Board (1916 rep 1981).
Puls, J (2004) HAMP-725093 A MEDIEVAL Jetton Webpage available at: http://www.finds.org.uk/database/
artefacts/record/id/67412
Colin Taylor
Page 17
Obituary
Volume 1 Issue 8
B.J.N. Edwards, B.A., F.S.A.
Pioneering County Archaeologist who became
Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries aged 31.
Ben Edwards, former County Archaeologist for
Lancashire, died in February from complications arising after a severe stroke. Tributes to
him from local societies and many personal
friends and acquaintances emphasised the
respect and affection in which he was held.
Chiefly, these arose from the breadth and
depth of his knowledge and from his genuine
interest in people and what they had to say to
him.
Benjamin James Nicholas Edwards was born
in Colchester in 1934. After his mother’s early
death, Ben was brought up by his father Harold (a dental technician and amateur archaeologist), and his Aunt. From Colchester Royal
Grammar School, Ben went up to Durham University in 1953 as an Open Exhibitioner, to
read Geography.
He became a member of Hatfield College, where Eric Birley was the Master. Ben played a full part in college life,
being active in the Union, and, although not a sportsman, often running a touchline or supporting teams. Ben
became involved in archaeology there through his friendship with Mike Jarrett (later Professor of Archaeology at
Cardiff University) and the kindly guidance of Eric. This was to lead to involvement in excavation, and an invitation to draw finds for Mike when Mike was working towards his doctorate.
After graduating with Honours, Ben was commissioned into the Royal Army Service Corps as Second Lieutenant. After leaving the army (and while holding what he viewed as stop-gap jobs, including teaching) he focused
on archaeological work (although he retained his interest in geography and found it useful when assessing
landscapes). It was this work which formed the basis of his application for the Sir James Knott Fellowship at
King's College in Newcastle, then still in the University of Durham. He was appointed to the Fellowship in 1961
and became part of the Department of History, where Geoffrey Barrow was Professor of Mediaeval History.
Ben's first formal archaeological publication, a paper produced jointly with Mike Jarrett on the mediaeval and
other pottery from Finchale Priory, appeared in Archaeologia Aeliana for that year. It was at King's College that
Ben met Margaret, a post-graduate student who was to become his wife.
Ben's work for his M.A. was not complete by the end of the Fellowship. He applied in 1963 for the newly-created
position of Lancashire County Archaeologist (the first such post in the country), and was appointed. Setting up
from scratch a framework in which to operate, while having no supporting facilities of any kind at first (indeed,
though this situation in general greatly improved with time, he had no secretarial support throughout his entire
career), proved extremely time-consuming and his thesis was never presented.
There was little funding for digging and publication. Based in the Lancashire Record Office (then near the Harris
Museum in the centre of Preston) Ben had a desk in a map room for the first few years. The situation improved
when the new LRO was built at its present site on Bow Lane, with facilities for shelving finds and books, and
sinks for washing finds, etc.; but there was still little resource for exploratory excavation and survey. Notable
excavations which were carried out included excavations from 1968-80 of Roman Ribchester which were jointly
directed by Ben and Dr. Peter Webster, (then a member of staff at Cardiff University), and the prehistoric Elk
found in 1970 at Poulton le Fylde (which was named ‘Horace’ by the small daughter of the finder). In the 1970s
(Continued on page 19)
Page 18
Obituary
Volume 1 Issue 8
and 80s and working with the late Dr. Mary Higham, Ben also directed 11 seasons of excavation by the Pendle
Archaeology Group of an Elizabethan manor house at Easington near Newton in Bowland. His more exuberant
side was often displayed at the close-of-season ‘Dig Do’, and I cherish a memory of him with pith helmet and
string ‘whip’, acting the traditional archaeological director.
His work was held in high regard and at the age of 31 he had been successfully proposed for Fellowship of the
Society of Antiquaries of London by the late Miss Clare Fell and the late Professor Terence Powell, two of the
many well known archaeologists of the day with whom he was in regular contact, some of them becoming personal friends. He always cherished his election as an honour.
Later parallel county posts created in England were to be placed on the staff of museums or, more usually,
planning departments; but placing the Lancashire post in the Record Office proved to be an inspiration. Ben
was in his element extracting archaeological material from the archives and was regarded as a pioneer in making cogent use of historical records in the study of archaeology, being invited to lecture to archivists' meetings
and conferences on the subject. Ben became an authority on many well-known antiquaries involved in archaeological matters in the north of England. He became noted for his general archaeological scholarship, meticulous research of a high order, and his cordial and helpful relations with local societies and all he dealt with.
His breadth of interest led to links with a wide variety of different practitioners. In the days before the Portable
Antiquities Scheme he advised the public and others on finds, and was firmly in favour of encouraging metal
detectorists to work within the archaeological fold. He was also prepared to be open minded when confronted
with the theories of dowsers and the like, concentrating on whether the evidence supported their mooted sites
of interest and not on the means of identifying them. His great interest in buildings inspired my own, and he
carried out much research on standing buildings not necessarily considered the province of archaeologists at
the time, but now understood as part of the historic environment continuum identified in PPS5 - he and Lancashire’s Conservation Officer John Champness shared much information on the County’s buildings. A glance
through a recent (but slightly inaccurate) bibliography (http://www.lancsarchsoc.org.uk/bensbibliog.html) of his
publications (now running to around 100 items) reveals subjects including mediaeval pottery, pre-conquest
sculpture and metalwork, prehistoric bone and antler tools, Roman roads and the logistics of the occupation, a
late mediaeval corn mill, seventeenth century almshouses, a Lancaster pipe-maker, and various antiquaries.
He had a particular interest in Roman cavalry tombstones and was delighted to be asked to advise on the
‘Insus’ slab in Lancaster, and was also an authority on the Vikings in NW England.
With his wife Margaret, Ben was joint editor of the Lancashire Archaeological Bulletin, established privately in
order to overcome the reluctance of LCC to undertake any archaeological publishing ventures; it ran for over
fourteen years. Ben provided most of the archaeological material, while, in addition to making her own archaeological contributions, Margaret was responsible for reports of meetings and conferences and for all editorial
comment, an arrangement which avoided compromising Ben's position as an employee of LCC. Many years
later, when publication of a Lancashire Archaeological Journal was at last permitted by LCC, it ran for only two
issues, as producing it without secretarial help and back-up could not be fitted in with the broad demands of
Ben's regular work. He was also active in the Council for British Archaeology’s ‘Group 5’ covering the North
West of England.
Ben was the prime mover in the setting up of the Lancashire Archaeological Society. Of course, Lancashire became a very much reduced area as a result of the 1974 revision of local government boundaries (I remember a
cartoon on his wall showing the crocodiles of Cheshire, Merseyside, Greater Manchester and Cumbria taking
their respective bites, and captioned ‘The April Feast’!), and the Society has tended to draw its members from
the central region of the old Lancashire, focused on Preston. It is still active and in good heart, and Ben was its
President up to his death. He was also a member of the Ribchester Museum Trust, an Honorary Research Fellow of Lancaster University and an Honorary Fellow of the Cumberland & Westmorland Antiquarian & Archaeological Society.
Ben served Lancashire as its County Archaeologist from 1963 until his retirement in 1995. Retirement brought
with it more scope for studies and an independence of voice not available to him when he was a Senior Officer
in the employment of the County Council. He was able to enjoy his final fifteen and a half years to the full, maintaining his studies and publishing, and also his lecturing to a very wide range of audiences, which he always
found a special pleasure. In the two weeks after his stroke, Ben showed considerable interest in the world outside the hospital window, and in the contents of the morning of the first Greater Manchester archaeology day
(Continued on page 20)
Page 19
Obituary
Volume 1 Issue 8
when I related these to him.
13 years ago Ben had a heart episode which resulted in open heart surgery to install an artificial valve and
carry out a triple bypass. I feel lucky to have had the benefit of his extra years since, and the tributes paid to
him by many others show that they do, too. This I feel is more important to dwell on than his untimely death at
the age of 76. He is survived by his wife and two sons, Nicholas and Crispin, and took great pleasure from getting to know his first Granddaughter after her birth in December 2010.
Crispin Edwards
Crispin Edwards is Conservation Officer for Stockport Council.
As a footnote to what Crispin says about Ben Edwards above, the following comes from the now defunct magazine Popular Archaeology (vol 1 no 9, pg 33) from c1980. It seemed fitting to us to include this excerpt from an
article about the Pilling excavations.
“Without the help of the Pilling Society I’d be well and truly sunk,” said Mr Edwards. “I depend heavily upon the
help of amateur archaeologists. They make a tremendous contribution to my work in Lancashire. And their enthusiasm is a delight to watch.
“Archaeology, when all is said and done, really IS about people. We professionals tend to lose sight of that fact
when busy classifying and processing what we find. We forget that the joy of actually finding something, of holding something which might once have been possessed by ancient man, is quite indescribable.
“Amateur archaeologists,
like the Pilling group –
help keep me in touch
with that feeling. They not
only do an excellent job
under supervision, but
they also help remind people like me why I’m involved in this line of work.
If I had a larger department at County Hall I’d
probably get bogged down
with the organisation and
administration of it. I’d
probably never get the
chance to get on to an
excavation site, to dirty my
hands. And that’s what it
is all about.”
Page 20
GMAU report (cont).
Volume 1 Issue 8
GMAU have been involved in two interesting projects in the Pennine watershed areas of Oldham and
Rochdale. One of these involves Castleshaw Roman Forts, a Scheduled Monument near Delph, Saddleworth. Here GMAU have been helping the Castleshaw Working Party prepare 4 new information panels to
replace the 22 year old existing ones which are worn out from the extreme weather of the exposed forts
site. Graham Sumner, an artist who specialised in archaeological reconstruction images, has been commissioned to prepare new interpretive artwork for the early second century AD fortlet and earlier Agricolan
fort. I am pleased to announce that English Heritage and the Saddleworth District Partnership have provided substantial grants to fund a Conservation Management Plan which will set out recommendations for
future management and research at this important site. More on this in the next issue. GMAU have also
helped prepare information relating to proposed heritage trails connecting reservoirs at Castleshaw, Denshaw, Piethorne, Chelburn and Blackstone Edge. The 19th century Oldham Corporation Waterworks engineering was first class and has left a remarkable architectural legacy as well as having a huge social and
landscape impact. This work is being undertaken as part of the HLF supported Watershed Landscape
Project, being run by Pennine Prospects. http://www.pennineprospects.co.uk/watershed-landscape
Highlights of recent commercial work include from Salford University, CfAA’s excavation of well preserved
early 19th century tanning works in Kitchen Street, Rochdale, and a cotton mill site at Werneth, Oldham.
Another highlight has been the extensive industrial remains in the form of a water powered cotton mill,
chemical works and workers’ housing and cottages uncovered at Openshaw West in Clayton, east Manchester, by OAN.
Finally, the first four volumes of the new archaeology series ‘Greater Manchester’s Past Revealed’, and
they are presented in this newsletter. The third volume, on Roman Wigan was prepared jointly by OAN
and Wigan Archaeology Society. The most recent publication, by OAN, was on the archaeology and history of the ‘forgotten’ township of Bradford in east Manchester, which was once Manchester’s industrial
power house. Other volumes in the pipeline include the archaeology of printworks in Bury District, the archaeology of Clayton in east Manchester (particularly the very significant historical chemical industry), the
Co-operative HQ site excavation at Angel Meadow, also in Manchester, and the Greater Manchester Urban Historic Landscape Characterisation project.
Finally, it is with great sadness that I have to report that GMAU will be closing down at the end of March,
after 32 years at Manchester University. Therefore, this will be the last GM Archaeology Federation newsletter produced by GMAU. There is a commitment by AGMA to maintain the archaeological planning service and Historic Environment Record, albeit with reduced funding, but this will no longer be delivered with
Manchester University as the host organisation. I am confident that the Federation will go from strength to
strength, and that the newsletter will be produced by another party. GMAU would like to thank you all for
your support over the years.
Norman Redhead
County Archaeologist
The Dowry Reservoir complex, near Denshaw in Saddleworth.
Page 21
News from GMAU
Heritage and planning are still very much in a state of flux, with the full extent of cuts to local government archaeology and conservation services still not known. All we do know is that these are very difficult and uncertain times for heritage protection. There is a real danger that all the good work of the last
two decades in getting heritage assets properly protected and recognised in the planning system could
be undone by changes to policy documents and reductions in specialist staffing. Metropolitan authorities appear to be at the forefront of cuts. Areas such as Merseyside and Sandwell have been allowed to
remove funding for archaeological planning services, which makes it hard for other archaeological services to argue their case for survival. Unless the Government provides a firm reminder to authorities
such as these about their planning duties it is clear that other services will be lost. When the dust settles
from the Local Authority and central government funding cuts it will be interesting to see what shape
heritage services are in. I am certain that it will become increasingly important for local communities to
take an active role in safeguarding their heritage.
GM Archaeology Federation Newsletter Issue 5 was dedicated to the new Planning Policy Statement
No. 5 ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’. This document is generally accepted as a good thing for
archaeology, recognising as it does the importance of non-designated heritage assets (including the
97% of archaeological sites with no statutory protection) and community participation. PPS5 was only
released in March 2010 and seems destined to be short lived as it is likely to be replaced by the National Planning Policy Framework in April this year. This is a shame as, in applying PPS5 policies to the
planning process, it is clear to GMAU staff that we now have the tools for appropriate recognition and
protection of archaeological remains. The NPPF sets out to combine all existing PPS documents into
one streamlined planning policy document. There has been considerable media coverage of the draft
NPPF, particularly in relation to the emphasis on allowing development as the default answer to a planning application. There are one to two important policies from PPS5 that have not been translated to the
draft NPPF, especially the conflict between heritage protection policies and permissive development;
but on the whole, archaeological interests are quite well represented. There are likely to be significant
changes to the final version of the NPPF, particularly in relation to the balance between economic, social and environmental roles in the planning process, and the definition of ‘sustainable development’.
We await with interest to see how the final version shapes up.
The Greater Manchester Archaeology Federation appears to be working well. On 19th February we had
the inaugural Greater Manchester Archaeology Day at the Friends Meeting House in Manchester, organised and hosted by GMAU on behalf of the Federation. It was very much a ‘taster’ event, due to the
uncertainty of GMAU’s position and limited staff time. Therefore advertisement was fairly limited beyond
the members of the Federation, for whom it was mainly intended. However, 120 people attended the
event and it is likely this number could be doubled through wider advertising. There were 11 speakers,
from academic, professional and voluntary
backgrounds, demonstrating the diversity and
quality of Greater Manchester’s archaeology. 6
of the Federation societies showcased their
work in the session after
lunch, covering periods
from the Mesolithic to
the 19th century. The
event seems to have
been well received and
we will try to build on it in
the future. A review is
enclosed in this news
letter. The most recent
Federation event was a
certificated First Aid day
for members, focusing
on potential situations
that might arise during
A wintry Castleshaw Roman Fortlet, which is the subject of a Conservation Management Plan.