Other settlements developed into what might be called small towns, at least by the Norman Conquest. At Steyning (West Sussex) there was an extensive agricultural settlement and market. The settlement must already have been important by 858 when Ælfred’s father Æthelwulf was buried in the minster church. Continental imports reached the town by river, with Pingsdorf and Beauvais ware vessels. Excavations have revealed a large part of an enclosed settlement dated to the tenth and eleventh centuries, with a gateway and two post-built halls. It appears that across the whole site buildings were loosely scattered in a number of similar enclosures, representing a number of independent farm units, but with no evidence of formal planning. By Domesday there were 123 substantial houses but although the occupants were labelled as town dwellers their lives would have been indistinguishable from those of a rural farmer (Gardiner 1993; Gardiner and Greatorex 1997).
Within the upland zone of the north and west of England there was a vigorous upturn in the rural economy during the Viking Age (see chapter 6). In Cumbria there was a major settlement expansion into the under-utilised wastelands of the central Lakeland massif and other marginal areas. This is unlikely to have been common ground which could be easily colonised. On a multiple estate even the most barren land would still have been put to some use, and would have belonged to someone, even if it was not inhabited. Nevertheless there was apparently a considerable Scandinavian takeover in the tenth century, probably following the historically recorded expulsion of the Hiberno-Norse Vikings from Ireland in 902. Nine out of ten place-names in the central Lake District show Scandinavian influence, although Gaelic elements suggest that settlers from the Hebrides, Faroes and Iceland, as well as Dublin and Man may also have been involved. Cumbria was exposed to seaborne attack along a considerable coastline and the topography made defence difficult. It has been suggested that the Anglo-Saxon aristocracies survived, but were deprived of much of their land and were now in competition with the colonists. There was an immigrant hierarchy of mixed British, Gaelic or Scandinavian extraction at the apex of society, with little sign that it was distinctively Viking.
In Northumbria the place-names associated with the upland clearances are as much Anglo-Saxon as Scandinavian. In some areas of Durham and Cleveland, it has been suggested that significant numbers of Danish immigrants filled the crucial middle and lower ranks of land ownership, and were able to consolidate their position by exercising patronage in favour of their fellow countrymen. By the early tenth century, however, all the evidence suggests a community moving towards cultural and ethnic integration.
Extensive survey work within the uplands has led to the identification of increasing numbers of abandoned farms, but such sites are notoriously difficult to date, and even when excavated rarely yield any material which allows us to say that they are the farmsteads of Viking settlers. One such settlement has been excavated at Ribblehead (North Yorkshire), set on bare limestone pavement at an altitude of 340m above sea level (8). The farmstead comprised three buildings set in an enclosed farmyard with an associated field system of over 1.2ha (3 acres). The main building was a longhouse; the others comprised a bakery with a grindstone and limestone oven and a poorly built smithy with a central sandstone slab for a hearth, and remains of iron scale and cinders. The few artefacts recovered suggested a mixture of agricultural and simple craft activities. They included an iron cow bell, a horse bit, a spear head, two iron knives and a stone spindlewhorl. Local materials were used for most needs and the site was largely self-sufficient, although four Northumbrian stycas found within the wall suggest small-scale monetary transactions, and date the construction of the site to some time after the late ninth century (King 1978).
A similar range of artefacts has been recovered at Bryant’s Gill (Cumbria) where a farmstead has been located at the centre of a 20ha (50 acre) field system at 290m above sea level, in the north-west fells of Kentmere (Dickinson 1985). The finds from in and around the longhouse included charcoal and iron slag, stone spindlewhorls and over 20 honestones (plate 10).
8 An artist’s reconstruction of Ribblehead. A flagged pathway leads from the main house to the kitchen. The third building was probably a workshop. Courtesy Yorkshire Museum
At Simy Folds (Durham) three sites have been examined. Each consists of the stone foundations of a single long narrow building with one or two subrectangular buildings at right angles to it, arranged to enclose a yard. The site lies within an extensive field system of prehistoric origin. The pollen evidence suggests that cereals were being cultivated during the Viking Age, as well as the keeping of livestock, including sheep, cattle and pigs. The finds once more include a stone spindlewhorl and honestone and a quernstone. The quantities of iron slag suggest that iron-working was being undertaken on a large scale, presumably based on the local iron ore (Coggins et al. 1983).
Despite the notorious Viking raid it appears that the island of Lindisfarne (Northumberland) was occupied throughout the ninth century. At Green Shiel a large farmstead comprising a group of buildings linked by enclosing walls and yards has been investigated adjacent to the beach (O’Sullivan and Young 1995). The site was first noticed in the middle of the nineteenth century when stone from the walls was robbed in the course of constructing a waggonway from lime kilns in the dunes. At least three longhouses and a number of ancillary structures have been identified (plate 29). Although there is no clear association with the monastery, the large quantities of cattle bones mean it is possible that this was a lay farm supplying vellum to the monastic scriptorium. Two ninth-century Northumbrian stycas were found during the nineteenth-century work; subsequently a further 16 copper alloy stycas and a silver penny of Æthelred of Wessex (866-71) have been recovered during the excavation. The finds also include an Anglo-Saxon spear-head, a large iron key, a fragment of bone comb and an amber bead.
Similar ninth- and tenth-century farmsteads have also been recognised in the south-west, at Gwithian, Tresmorn and Treworld (Cornwall) and at Hound Tor and Hutholes (Devon). The latter sites may have been the equivalent of Norse shielings, occupied by herdsmen who grazed their stock on the open moorland pastures during the summer months (Beresford 1971; 1979; Dudley and Minter 1966).
At Mawgan Porth (Cornwall) excavations have revealed a coastal hamlet of three or more farmsteads with groups of long-houses and ancillary buildings terraced into the hillside, and its own cemetery set uphill and to the west. Each farmstead may have represented a single extended family. The most completely excavated farmstead consisted of four major buildings set around a central courtyard. The largest building could have housed some four or five people. The settlement was probably occupied from the mid-ninth to the mid-eleventh centuries, but this settlement form continued in use into the Middle Ages. The inhabitants were pastoralists, shellfish gatherers and fishermen. They had virtually no iron tools and used stone, bone and pottery extensively. A coin of Æthelred II, c.990-5, shows that they maintained some contact with Wessex (Bruce-Mitford 1997).
In summary, there is little evidence for a mass peasant migration of new settlers, clearing land. Rather, a Scandinavian elite presided over the fragmentation of great estates, establishing manorial centres and accelerating the market in the buying and selling of land. Many settlements were named during the Viking Age, and concentrations of place-names indicate the adoption of Scandinavian terms into local speech in many areas. Taken together with the great variety of Scandinavian personal names in use by the eleventh century they indicate communities maintaining aspects of a Scandinavian identity in some parts of the Danelaw. Archaeology cannot help us to discover Viking farmsteads, but it does reveal new settlement forms associated with people using artefacts, as well as language, to proclaim an Anglo-Scandinavian ethnicity.
4
THE GROWTH OF TOWNS
The Viking Age witnessed an explosion in the development of towns (Clarke and Ambrosiani 1991). At the start of the period there may have been less than a dozen places, all trading sites, which we would r
egard as urban centres. By 1066 there were more than 100 places with some claim to be regarded as towns (9). Nevertheless, they still contained only a fraction of the population, perhaps some 10 per cent. They included a great diversity of forms, from those that were little more than fortified royal estate centres such as Stafford, to massive cosmopolitan emporia such as York. Nonetheless, most had a Domesday population of more than 1000, with the larger towns such as Lincoln and Norwich with over 5,000 townsfolk.
How far was the growth of trading and market sites a result of Viking stimulus, and how far was the development of fortified towns a reaction to the Viking threat? Did the Scandinavian settlers establish any towns of their own? Would towns have developed anyway, if there had been no Scandinavian influence? Was there anything particularly Scandinavian about the character of the towns or their defences? Excavations within many English towns and cities over the last three decades mean that we are now closer to answering these questions.
WICS
In Middle Saxon England most trade was conducted at large wics or camps, such as Hamwic (Southampton) and Eoforwic (York), on the south and east coasts. These sites apparently developed under royal patronage, so that the traders could be protected, and controlled, and taxes levied. At Hamwic there is evidence for a 45ha (110-acre) site of c.700-850, sheltering a population of at most 2000-3000 people, enclosed by a bank and ditch (probably to define the trading zone as much as for defence), with properties laid out on a regular street system. A number of sites have been excavated within the Saxon town. At the Six Dials some 68 houses and workshops, 21 wells and 500 pits have been recorded (Andrews 1997). A major north-south road about 14m wide which was regularly resurfaced was constructed first, followed by the digging of the boundary ditch 3m wide and 1.5m deep, before the houses and properties were laid out. Hamwic had trading contacts with northern France and the Rhineland; many of its inhabitants made their living from processing imports and exports, and by manufacturing goods from imported raw materials (Morton 1992).
Settlement at Gippeswic (Ipswich) began in the early seventh century with an adjacent cemetery, waterfront and pottery industry to the north-east. This expanded rapidly in the early ninth century to cover an area of about 50ha (125 acres) on both sides of the river Gipping. Metalled roads were established, one which ran over the former cemetery, with buildings set out along the street frontage. Imports of Frankish pottery demonstrate the trading links (Atkin 1985; Scull 1997;Wade 1988).
9 Map of Viking Age towns
In London trade was actually transacted on the waterfront, probably from boats pulled up on the shore. Initially there was no need for storage or warehouse facilities, and trading sites may have left few archaeological traces. The location of such markets along the Thames is indicated by wic place-names, such as Chiswick, Greenwich, Woolwich and Twickenham.
Some trading sites may have been no more than periodic beach markets, such as Meols, near the mouth of the Dee Estuary. The name is derived from the Old Norse word for sandbank, melr, and it has been suggested that a pre-Viking beach market may have been taken over by Norse traders. Finds include some 20 Anglo-Saxon pennies of the late tenth and eleventh centuries, and a variety of metalwork, including Hiberno-Norse-style copper alloy ringed pins, and a mount with Scandinavian-style animal ornament (Bu’lock 1960).
At most wic sites, however, the threat of attack in the Viking Age led the traders to seek protection within walled towns, and may also have disrupted trade. At almost every site occupation declines or ceases during the ninth century. At Hamwic it has been argued that the coin finds indicate that it was already in decline before the Viking raids, although others have concluded that it was increased Viking activity which disrupted its trading networks. The site appears to have been gradually depopulated from c.850; there was occasional pitdigging up to 900, but no new buildings can be identified (Morton 1992; Andrews 1997).
At Fishergate, York, where an area of Anglo-Saxon Eoforwic has been excavated, a single coin of the 860s is the latest find, compared with some 40 of the eighth and early ninth centuries; the site was then abandoned until the eleventh or twelfth centuries.
In London, the extensive Saxon settlement of Lundenwic was located in the Strand area. The coin finds from this area are mainly eighth- and early ninth-century; the latest are a hoard of c.840 from the Middle Temple and a second of c.870 from the Thames, found during repairs to the south side of Waterloo Bridge. Both hoards have been linked with documented Viking raids on London. The latest pottery from the Strand area has been dated to the ninth century. By the late ninth century there is little evidence for trade, and virtually no imported pottery. A hoard of Northumbrian stycas found in the defensive ditch around Lundenwic suggests that the ditch had been filled in by 867, implying that the wic had been abandoned.
At Hamwic, Eoforwic and Lundenwic, the Viking raids seem to have disrupted trade but protection was sought within a defended area, and new sites were established after some delay. In Southampton, c.900, the focus of occupation shifted to higher more defensible ground some 0.5km to the southwest of Hamwic where it was possible to control both sides of the estuary. Ditches outlined an area of Viking Age occupation with regularly laid out streets within the medieval walled town. The new site had different trading contacts, and a reduced role in long distance international trade; tenth-century pottery from Normandy is one of the few identifiable Viking age imports. It has also been suggested that a short-lived fortified burh was established on the site of the Roman town of Clausentum, upriver of Hamwic, but it was probably the important urban centre at Winchester that inherited many of the functions of Hamwic (Andrews 1997).
In London, occupation within the walled area of the Roman city does not appear to start before the late ninth century, perhaps reflecting its re-establishment as a fortified burh by Ælfred in 886 (10). The names used to refer to London also show a change from Lundenwic in the early ninth century to Lundenburh in the later ninth century, with a short period of overlap in the 850s. All coin finds are now from the City area, indicating that the exposed Strand site between the river Fleet and Westminster was abandoned, and the old Roman fortress was reoccupied. There is little evidence for tenth-century occupation outside the City walls. The Roman walls must still have survived as foundations at least; the ditch may have been recut, and the gates reused. A pit-free zone either side of the wall may indicate the position of a rampart. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records that London successfully held out against the Vikings in the 990s.
10 Plan of Viking Age London (after Vince 1990). The majority of the archaeological finds marked on this map are potsherds of the late ninth to early eleventh centuries
Fragments of over 40 buildings have been excavated within the walled city. A regular street plan determined by the position of the Roman gates was established, with gravelled surfaces. Timber halls were erected along the street frontages, and set back from the street, mostly along the back and sides of properties, there were sunken workshops and storage buildings (see chapter 5). Along the tenement boundaries there were numerous latrine pits, some over a metre in diameter and several metres deep. Layers of cess alternate with tips of garden soil, domestic refuse and floor sweepings. By the eleventh century such pits were often provided with plank and wattle linings, suggesting that their contents were regularly cleared out.
Ælfred’s policy of urban renewal is illustrated by grants of plots of land adjoining the trading shore in Queenhithe to the bishop of Worcester and archbishop of Canterbury, along with the exclusive right to moor ships. In effect Ælfred was establishing a partnership with trusted clerics whereby they were responsible for running the port, in return for a share in the profits (Steedman et al. 1992). Nonetheless, London only began to prosper again as a port in the late tenth century, with the erection of wharves of clay, timber and rubble against which vessels could be moored. Access to boats would have been by means of cobbled or planked walkways laid out over the embankment down onto the foreshore,
as seen at the Thames Exchange site, or by jetties represented by pile clusters, as seen at Billingsgate. London’s international trade was only revived in the eleventh century, but then expanded rapidly; by 1050 there was probably an almost continuous artificial bank running in front of the wall in the eastern half of the city. By the mid-eleventh century there was a considerable settlement within the walled city and further settlements in Southwark and Whitehall, although there may still have been some areas which were unoccupied (Milne 1989; Milne and Goodburn 1990;Vince 1990).
A similar picture is emerging from York (Hall 1988; Moulden and Tweddle 1986; Radley 1971). By the eleventh century York was described as a populous city to which merchants came from all quarters, especially from the Danish people (plate 27). In the ninth century, however, there is evidence for a hiatus in trade after the decline of Eoforwic. The exposed trading site, beyond the confluence of the rivers Ouse and Foss, appears to have been abandoned in favour of a more easily defended area between the two rivers and closer to the Roman legionary fortress (11). The walls of the Roman fort survived sufficiently for York to withstand attack in the ninth century. Although breached in several places, much of the fortress wall stood more than 3m high, and the insertion of the so-called Anglian tower into a gap in the walls, at some date before the Viking Age refurbishment of the ramparts, has been taken as evidence for continued maintenance of the defences. Around 900, York’s Viking rulers apparently renovated the defences so as to enclose an area bounded by the Roman walls to the north and west and the rivers Ouse and Foss to the south and east, thereby enclosing the riverside area to the east of the Roman fortress. An earthen bank surmounted by a palisade was constructed along the northeast and north-west sides of the fortress, and was probably extended down to the rivers, in the same manner as Viking Age defences at Chester (plate 28) and elsewhere. There may also have been a defended bridgehead east of the river Foss; although no trace of a Viking Age defensive line has been found beneath the medieval city walls in the Walmgate area, there was occupation and industrial activity in this area. Even excluding this settlement east of the Foss, the total enclosed area of Viking York was some 36ha (87 acres), making it larger than the major Scandinavian towns at Hedeby and Birka.
Viking Age England Page 6