Ancrum buckle
Geoff Parkhouse takes a look at what post-excavation research can tell us about the story of a medieval buckle found at the Mantle Walls field in Ancrum, Scottish Borders
Post-excavation report on a medieval buckle found in Ancrum
In September 2019, Ancrum and District Heritage Society (ADHS) were involved in a two-week archaeological dig in the Mantle Walls field at Ancrum, Scottish borders. The dig was part of a long-term quest to investigate the site of what was suspected to be a medieval palace of the bishops of Glasgow. ADHS had nurtured the project from the start, gathering permissions, raising the funding and the volunteers, and appointing the archaeological company AOC to lead the excavation. Large-scale trenches were opened near the top of the field ridge, which allowed archaeologists to examine the substantial wall foundations that were exposed.
In general, the finds from the dig pointed to the Mantle Walls having being an important medieval site. In particular, the large pieces of carved masonry at the site were taken as evidence of a wealthy complex. One of the finds, however, was simply a small, twisted piece of worked metal with a greenish tinge. The metal fragment was half-buried in a small clod of brownish silty clay in the western end of trench 2.This area may have been part of a courtyard associated with the complex of large buildings that appear to have been part of the bishop’s palace. The find was passed to Martin Cook, trench supervising archaeologist for AOC, who had it bagged and tagged for later examination.
This paper follows the post-excavation process and looks at how the buckle may have been used. I cannot, of course, give this tarnished, broken piece of metal a personal history, but I can help to give it some background, putting it into its human context and into its historical landscape. It is one of many untold stories that lay beneath the soil of the Mantle Walls field.
Post-excavation examination
The small metal object was taken to the AOC offices and was catalogued as SF2008, one of a total of 45 metal finds from the field, obtained both from the dig itself and previous seasons’ field-walking conducted by ADHS. After initial examination and as part of the community participation strand of the project, AOC presented a small finds workshop, to allow volunteers to see some of the conservation work that goes on behind the scenes at the post-excavation stage. We were fortunate to have Gretel Evans ACR MA BA to present the talk; Gretel has worked as a conservator
on projects such as Mons Meg, Glasgow School of Art Library, Shackleton and Scott’s huts in Antarctica, and the Cramond Lioness.
Amongst other finds from the field, Gretel showed us object SF2008, explaining that it had been identified as part of a buckle and was made of copper alloy. It was one of only four copper alloy finds from the site. We were also able to see x-ray slides, showing the details of part of the pattern stamped into the buckle plate.
The cleaning of the buckle plate allowed more detailed examination and identification. I quote directly from Andrew Morrison in the AOC Artefacts and Ecofacts Archive Report 2020:
The most significant find within this group is the buckle fragment (SF2008), consisting of a decorated top plate and plain back plate with two copper alloy rivets in situ.The top sheet plate is decorated with an elaborate stamped dot motif, stamped from both sides of the plate to create a border around the edge of the plate that frames what can be described as a repeating fish or whale tail pattern. The plates would likely have been part of an oval frame buckle with composite rigid plates, where a forked spacer that is integral to the buckle frame would have been soldered to the top and backplates to create a hollow for a strap that would have been secured in place by two rivets.
The strap could have been leather or fabric, but no traces of it now survive. Buckles of this type are usually particularly well-finished and are known from contexts dating from around the mid14th to early 15th centuries; it has been suggested that they are a distinctly English form, with very few examples having been identified on the continent.
Andrew goes on to state that other examples of this type of buckle plate have been found, noteably one in London and two in Yorkshire. However, though these examples are similar, there are apparently none known with this particular style and motif.
Examining the evidence
What information can we glean from this small, copper alloy buckle plate? Well, firstly, it’s broken. The fork loops that held the buckle ring and pin in place have been lost. When first found, one of the plates was bent back at an angle, perhaps pointing to a fairly violent end to the buckle’s working life, as if the buckle ring itself had been torn away, although the damage may have occurred after it was lost.
The buckle plate is narrow, so it would not have taken a thick, heavy leather belt. This suggests it was not, for instance, a buckle for a knight’s sword belt, or one designed to take the weight of tools or a heavy purse and dagger. This type of belt could have carried something like a pomander, a small personal knife for food, a key or a light purse.
The buckle top plate carries a stamped design, which appears to be stamped from the both sides. If you look at the post conservation photograph at the top of page 23, you can see that the border edging the buckle is raised, but the fish-tail design is indented. Some considerable time has been taken to decorate the buckle plate, using probably a hammer and very small punches. So, with a complete stamped border visible around the edge of the remaining part of the buckle plate, I would suggest that the part of the buckle we can still see is the complete decorated part of the buckle and it is just the ‘moving parts’, i.e., the buckle ring and pin, that have been lost. Therefore, after viewing similar examples, I deduced that the buckle plate was quite short, like similar examples in the Portable Antiquities Scheme.
Analysis of the vitrified material
amongst field-walking finds by Dawn McLaren allows us to speculate on a possible scenario. There were two items of slag, identified as copper alloy casting waste, found by field-walking in the topsoil of the Mantle Wall fields. She states: ‘Also recognised is a small run of copper alloy casting waste (8g) and an unshaped fragment of shale or stone (6.9g) incidentally coated on the surfaces with a dark purple-red to grey coloured molten-looking waste which may well be residues from copper alloy casting’.
Is it possible that the Ancrum buckle was actually made at the Mantle Walls? I must concede that the casting waste was not found in any archaeological context. It could have come from anywhere or have been dropped by accident, at any time, into the topsoil. Could there have been workshops at the Mantle Walls, away from the main buildings, which serviced the household’s needs?
Andrew Morrison suggests that the buckle is late 14th to early 15th centuries. That indicates that the buckle is probably over 600 years old. It would have been worn during a time of great upheaval in the Scottish borders.
The palace had once been a place of some importance in the borders, visited by bishops and kings. Alexander II signed royal charters here in 1238, for instance. Pottery finds from Mantle Walls suggest a site occupied mainly in the late 12th to 13th centuries.
This changed when the wars of independence began in 1296. Edward I launched his invasion to assert his domination of Scotland after John Balliol refused to bend to his will. Teviotdale became a battleground. Castles changed hands, different officials and clergy were appointed to the same places by rival kings, as each side in turn held sway.
Perhaps the battered buildings of the palace at Ancrum became a place of refuge in time of strife. Stone walls and barred doors would have provided better shelter and security than the turf walled or cruck construction cottages of the locals.
After almost a century of warfare, perhaps one day in the late 1380s, standing on the Mantle Walls, looking south, you may have been able to see the mounted English patrols from Jedburgh, against the skyline on the bare Lanton moor ridge. Once more the smell and smoke of burning thatch hung over the bishop’s palace in the crook of the Ale Water.You may have heard a clatter and commotion to the north and looked up past over Ancrum, to see the rising dust cloud of an approaching Scots column. Caught between the two forces, anguish was palpable amongst the refugees huddled behind the walls. Was the owner of the Ancrum buckle amongst them?
The author’s grateful thanks go to the following: Dr Chris Bowles for his advice, guidance and encouragement down the years; Jessica Lowther, Gretel Evans and the staff of AOC Archaeology for their help, knowledge and forbearance, during the Mantle Walls dig and afterwards; Sian Parkhouse for gently steering the text into a technically-approved state; Richard Strathie and the members of Ancrum and District Heritage Society for their much valued friendship and support.