Chapter 17 - Necklace and beads (Must Farm pile-dwelling settlement: Volume 2. Specialist reports)
Name
NecklaceAndBeads.pdf
Description
visibility:open
Size
104.65 MB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum (CRC64NVME)
5Los+vvBsBM=
Resource type
Book chapter
Date published
2024
Abstract
Over 56 beads, all but seven of them of glass, plus a curious teardrop-shaped glass object, were found during the 2006 and 2015 phases of excavation; it will be explained below why it is difficult to give a precise total for the number of glass beads present. The beads were the subject of four separate specialist investigations. The first was by Simon Timberlake, who examined a bead that is very likely to be of Kimmeridge shale (<5337>) and another that is of tin (<5386>), analysing both using a NITON portable X-ray fluorescence (pXRF) spectrometer. He also examined a bead of faience (<1759>), but as this bead turned up late in the course of finds processing, in one of the environmental samples (Sample no. 71), it was not possible for him to analyse it. Those beads were subsequently passed to Alison Sheridan, who also examined three further non-glass beads: one of amber (SF3557), one
that may well also be of Kimmeridge shale (SF3572) and one of siltstone (SF3573). Lore Troalen analysed the last two of these beads, along with the faience and tin beads, at the National Museums Collection Centre (NMCC), Edinburgh using a static X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometer and (for the faience and tin beads) using energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy in the Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM-EDX). (Neither Timberlake nor Sheridan examined a fragment of amber bead, <4174>, found in Structure 2, as it had initially been batched with the glass beads; notes on this bead have been provided by Rob Wiseman.) The third and fourth specialist investigations focused on the glass beads. An initial study of six beads was carried out by Andy Towle who, along with Matt Ponting,undertook SEM-EDX analysis at Liverpool University. Subsequently Julian Henderson, working alongside Simon Chenery and Jane Evans, undertook a largerscale study featuring 46 finds of glass (of which 34 produced meaningful analytical results). Four analytical techniques were employed in that study: scanning electron microscopy, electron probe microanalysis (EPMA), laser-ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) and (for one speci men) thermal ion mass spectrometry (TIMS). This chapter reproduces Henderson’s (2019) report in close to its original form and Towle’s (2016) report as an abridged version, while combining the other reports and synthesizing the overall results from all four studies in its final discussion section. The chapter begins by considering the beads’ findspot locations and contexts, and their likely original deployment. The condition and taphonomy of the beads are then reviewed. The following section deals with the non-glass beads, offering descriptions and an initial discussion. After that, the glass beads are described (using information collated by Mark Knight and Rob Wiseman), along with the teardrop-shaped glass object, and the reports on the analytical investigations are presented. The chapter ends with an overall discussion of the likely provenance and significance of the beads.
that may well also be of Kimmeridge shale (SF3572) and one of siltstone (SF3573). Lore Troalen analysed the last two of these beads, along with the faience and tin beads, at the National Museums Collection Centre (NMCC), Edinburgh using a static X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometer and (for the faience and tin beads) using energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy in the Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM-EDX). (Neither Timberlake nor Sheridan examined a fragment of amber bead, <4174>, found in Structure 2, as it had initially been batched with the glass beads; notes on this bead have been provided by Rob Wiseman.) The third and fourth specialist investigations focused on the glass beads. An initial study of six beads was carried out by Andy Towle who, along with Matt Ponting,undertook SEM-EDX analysis at Liverpool University. Subsequently Julian Henderson, working alongside Simon Chenery and Jane Evans, undertook a largerscale study featuring 46 finds of glass (of which 34 produced meaningful analytical results). Four analytical techniques were employed in that study: scanning electron microscopy, electron probe microanalysis (EPMA), laser-ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) and (for one speci men) thermal ion mass spectrometry (TIMS). This chapter reproduces Henderson’s (2019) report in close to its original form and Towle’s (2016) report as an abridged version, while combining the other reports and synthesizing the overall results from all four studies in its final discussion section. The chapter begins by considering the beads’ findspot locations and contexts, and their likely original deployment. The condition and taphonomy of the beads are then reviewed. The following section deals with the non-glass beads, offering descriptions and an initial discussion. After that, the glass beads are described (using information collated by Mark Knight and Rob Wiseman), along with the teardrop-shaped glass object, and the reports on the analytical investigations are presented. The chapter ends with an overall discussion of the likely provenance and significance of the beads.
Series name
CAU Must Farm/Flag Fen Basin Depth & Time Series – Volume II
Book title
Must Farm pile-dwelling settlement Volume 2. Specialist reports
Editor
Ballantyne, Rachel
Cooper, Anwen
Gibson, David
Knight, Mark
Robinson Zekin, Iona
Publisher
McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research
Official URL
Related URL
Rights statement
In Copyright
Additional information
Full text available via the official URL