Norwich, Castle Mall

Norfolk Archaeological Unit, 2009. https://doi.org/10.5284/1000173. How to cite using this DOI

Digital Object Identifiers

Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are persistent identifiers which can be used to consistently and accurately reference digital objects and/or content. The DOIs provide a way for the ADS resources to be cited in a similar fashion to traditional scholarly materials. More information on DOIs at the ADS can be found on our help page.

Citing this DOI

The updated Crossref DOI Display guidelines recommend that DOIs should be displayed in the following format:

https://doi.org/10.5284/1000173
Sample Citation for this DOI

Norfolk Archaeological Unit (2009) Norwich, Castle Mall [data-set]. York: Archaeology Data Service [distributor] https://doi.org/10.5284/1000173

Data copyright © Norfolk Archaeological Unit unless otherwise stated

This work is licensed under the ADS Terms of Use and Access.
Creative Commons License


English Heritage logo
Norfolk Archaeological Unit logo

Primary contact

Dr Elizabeth Popescu
Head of Post-Excavation & Publications
Oxford Archaeology (Cambridge)
15 Trafalgar Way
Bar Hill
Cambridgeshire
CB23 8SQ
Tel: 01954 01223-850552
Fax: 01954 273376

Send e-mail enquiry

Resource identifiers

Digital Object Identifiers

Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are persistent identifiers which can be used to consistently and accurately reference digital objects and/or content. The DOIs provide a way for the ADS resources to be cited in a similar fashion to traditional scholarly materials. More information on DOIs at the ADS can be found on our help page.

Citing this DOI

The updated Crossref DOI Display guidelines recommend that DOIs should be displayed in the following format:

https://doi.org/10.5284/1000173
Sample Citation for this DOI

Norfolk Archaeological Unit (2009) Norwich, Castle Mall [data-set]. York: Archaeology Data Service [distributor] https://doi.org/10.5284/1000173

Overview

The Digital Archive

Contents

For the purposes of digital dissemination, a new relational database has been created, incorporating each of the excavated cemetery groups at Castle Mall. This integrates data from the original site context database with data from relevant specialists, cross-referring to illustrations. The data consists of the following elements, each of which is accompanied by an appropriate health warning.

  • Cemetery plans
  • Context data by grave
  • Skeletal catalogue
  • Skeletal data
  • Diagrams
  • Scans
Skeletal Catalogues

Methods of age and sex determination are generalised to give an idea of the bones used. Sexing based on the pelvis used more traits than entries might suggest. "DF" stands for discriminant function, a statistical method of determining sex, where +2.0 is very male, -2.0 very female (WEA 1980).

Teeth are recorded in the form illustrated below.

Maxilla R.    8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1  1 2 3 4 5 X 7 U  L.
Mandible     O 7 6 5 4 - - - / / 3 4 5 6 7 C
                            A  C

CodeMeaning
1 2 3 etc.Tooth present in jaw.
XTooth lost ante-mortem.
/Tooth lost post-mortem.
U, uTooth unerupted.
O, oTooth in process of erupting.
CTooth congenitally absent.
- - -Jaw missing.
AAbscess present (above/below tooth number).
CCaries present (above/below tooth number).

Lower case letters a-e and u/o are used for deciduous teeth. Attrition patterns are coded according to the scores suggested by Bouts and Pot (1989, modified version of Brothwell's original tooth wear chart).

A few abbreviations have been used in the catalogue for commonly occurring pathological conditions and anatomical regions. These are as follows:

OAosteoarthritis, eburnationMTmetatarsal
OPosteophytosis, osteophytesMCmetacarpal
Ccervical)L.left
Tthoracic) vertebraeR.right
Llumbar)  

Any other abbreviations should be self-explanatory, since they are simply shortened forms of bone names or anatomical areas (prox = proximal, etc.).

The bones present for each burial are quickly assessable from the skeletal forms. Bones not belonging to the main inhumation are noted under each burial ('Additional Bones' field).

Tables of measurements for the skull and major long bones are included, along with tables of non-metric trait scores.

Methodologies

On-Site Methodologies

Each skeleton was assigned a separate context number, with an NAU Skeleton Record sheet being completed. Skeletons were not planned but were photographed in situ with two 3D co-ordinates taken, one at the skull and one at the feet; images produced for publication were recreated from TST points on the heads and feet, used in conjunction with photographs and the diagrams made on site. Where possible, each skeleton was bagged in three separate bags, one containing the stem, one the left side and one the right side. Each skeleton was washed and dried on site and none of the bones were marked.

Along with modern overburden, some 0.30m of graveyard deposits was machined off above graves at St John's cemetery (particularly to the east), leaving only the base of graves to be recorded. Elements of the resultant stratigraphic sequence in this area are therefore tentative. Numerous graves were not planned due to time constraints and had to be reconstructed during analysis from TST data.

Skeletal Analysis

Measurements were taken using the methods described by Brothwell (1981), together with a few from Bass (1971) and Krogman (1978). Sexing and ageing techniques follow Brothwell (1981), and the Workshop of European Anthropologists (1980), with the exception of adult tooth wear scoring which follows Bouts and Pot (1989). Stature was estimated according to the regression formulae of Trotter and Gleser (Trotter 1970). All systematically scored non-metric traits are listed in Brothwell (1981), and grades of cribra orbitalia and osteoarthritis can also be found there. Pathological conditions were identified with the aid of Ortner and Putschar (1981) and Cotta (1978). Additional details are provided in AML Reports 56/96 and 73/96. Note that the latter AML report (for St John's) was written before radiocarbon dates were available, and a medieval date was assumed for the cemetery.

Bone Preservation

Preservation

Soil conditions had obviously affected bone preservation in various areas of the site. The geology of the site is chalk capped with clay, sand and gravel. Grave fills were generally of redeposited natural or reworked from earlier features/deposits. Some contained frequent pebbles, charcoal or chalk, apparently disturbed from underlying deposits. Local soil conditions had clearly affected many skeletons, some of which had largely decayed and survived as little more than stains. There was often differential preservation within a single skeleton, for instance one example at St John's cemetery (sk.11402) had a marked decay variation coinciding with a change in character of the surrounding natural sand.

Having been partially sealed by a castle rampart graves in the Farmer's Avenue cemetery had suffered relatively little intercutting or truncation by later features. Those at St John's, however, were badly damaged by intercutting in antiquity and by the insertion of medieval and later features: following contraction of this area of the cemetery, which began in the late 13th century, it developed into tenements. Two apparently blank areas in the plan of this graveyard are the result of later activity.

A brief summary of the condition of the human remains is given below, with further details in the monographs (Shepherd Popescu forthcoming a).

Cemetery 2: Disturbed cemetery, beneath barbican

The bones recovered from this part of the site were often in poor condition, very fragmentary or eroded. Most of the bones were clearly redeposited in rubbish pits, but it is also possible that a number had been moved around more than once. The single 'articulated' burial (sk.45210) is difficult to explain as it had clearly been disturbed. The most likely explanation is that the burial had been redeposited, but it is possible that a body with empty space around it (such as within a large coffin or chamber) could be moved around either during transportation and lowering into the grave, or whilst in the ground by animal scavengers. If it were redeposited this must have occurred within a few years of its original burial, before soft tissue decay was complete.

Cemetery 3: Farmer's Avenue, beneath south bailey rampart

A macroscopic assessment of the condition of the bone from this cemetery indicates that, in general the skeletal material from this site is in average or below average condition in comparison with the ideal, but other local sites tend to produce bone in a similar or worse state of preservation (see caveats in Anderson in Shepherd Popescu forthcoming a).

Comparison with similar data from other sites suggests that the Farmer's Avenue skeletons were better preserved and more complete than those from the Ipswich (Mays 1989; 1991) and Brandon (Anderson 1990) sites, in a similar condition to those from Norwich Timberhill, and less well-preserved than the material from Thetford (Stroud 1993), Burgh Castle (Anderson & Birkett 1991; 1993), Caister (Anderson 1991; 1993) and North Elmham (Wells 1980).

Cemetery 4: St John at the Castle Gate (de Berstrete/Timberhill)

The assessment of condition is again based on a macroscopic examination, and as such is very subjective. On this basis, very little of the skeletal material excavated from Timberhill was in good condition. The majority was average or below average. The Timberhill skeletons were less complete than the Farmer's Avenue group, but were in slightly better condition. Similar data from other sites suggests that the skeletons from The Hirsel (Anderson 1994) and Ipswich Blackfriars (Mays 1991) were generally more complete and in slightly better condition than those from Timberhill, whilst those from Rivenhall (O'Connor 1993), Barton Bendish (Stroud 1987) and St Helen's, York (Dawes 1980), were in similar or worse condition.

Cemetery 5: Castle Mound

All bones recovered from the mound were in fair or good condition, presumably reflecting their recent date. Once reunited, the skeletons were fairly complete, although two lacked skulls, one lacked the pelvis and one lacked the lower legs. One individual consisted of fragments of upper torso only.

Description of Database Fields

(NB: only includes main table: Burial data)

FieldDescription
CemeteryIndicates which cemetery a particular burial is from, drawn from the following list:

Beneath barbican (Cemetery 2)
Farmers Avenue (Cemetery 3)
Prison (Cemetery 5)
St John (Cemetery 1)
St John (Cemetery 4)
AreaSite area from which the burial came.
Burial IDA unique identifier for each grave/feature, or for skeletons without visible grave cuts. These numbers were generated within the database for the purposes of digital dissemination and are not used in the project archive or publication.
Grave/feature cut noContext number of grave cut; also used for other features containing skeletal remains (such as pits).
Grave detailsDescription of grave cut.
Grave fill noContext number of grave fill: also used for fill of other relevant features.
Grave fill detailsDescription of grave fill.
Grave fill (2) noContext number of secondary grave fill.
Grave fill (2) detailsDescription of secondary grave fill.
Additional skullsContext number and position within grave of any additional skulls.
Burial typeDetails of the grave/burial type, including evidence for coffins etc. 22 categories defined.
No of burialsNumber of burials within grave (eg. single, double). 13 categories defined.
Arm positionsPosition of the arms. 21 positions defined.
Leg positionsPosition of the legs. 7 positions defined.
PhotographLink to on-site photograph of skeleton in situ.
CAD planLink to research archive CAD plan.
Cemetery planLink to publication plan.
Additional bone/notesSummarises any additional bone from grave fill and provides any relevant notes.
Skeleton noContext number of skeleton.
Equates withIndicates any equated skeleton, either as a result of staged excavation or when equations made during skeletal analysis.
Skeleton detailsDescription of skeleton as excavated.
Secondary skeleton noContext number of second skeleton within same grave: NB exceptions are where there are particular issues of metrical or pathological data in relation to the secondary burial, in which case they are entered individually.
Secondary skeleton detailsDescription of second skeleton.
Tertiary skeleton noContext number of third skeleton within same grave.
Tertiary skeleton detailsDescription of third skeleton.
Bone conditionSummary statement of condition of bone.
Bone descriptionBasic summary of bones present.
Bone diagramLink to skeletal diagram showing surviving bones (from AML report).
Sex Sex group.7 categories defined.
Age group14 categories defined, qualified broadly as follows (NB: the stated ages in years are approximate only).

Adult >18 years
Child <18 years
Infant <2 years
Juvenile c.2-12
Mature >35 years
Middle Aged c.25-35
Middle Aged?
Middle Aged +
Middle Aged/Old c.35-50
Neonate late pre-term foetal to 3months
Old 50+
Sub-adult 12-18
Young c.18-25
Young/Middle Aged 18-35
Age (years)Age in years, as indicated by osteological analysis.
Determin of sexMeans used to determine sex.
Determin of ageMeans used to determine skeletal age.
HeightHeight cm.
Height estim fromSpecific bones used to estimate height.
Cranial indexCranial index measurement in cm.
Cranial typeCranial type. 4 categories defined.
Leper?Relates to burials from St John's (Cemetery 4). 3 categories defined.
DNATick indicates DNA studied.

Data Health Warnings

Calculating Totals

Any discrepancies in the data included have been addressed in the published material. Some discrepancies in totals for burial type and various data by male/female graves result from the fact that burials are recorded under the context number for the main burial (e.g. where additional bones, particularly skulls, were reburied within later graves). The published skeletal analysis calculates totals from all excavated remains, including disarticulated remains from the relevant cemeteries where appropriate.

For double/multiple burials, skeletons are usually recorded as secondary or tertiary burials in the same database entry. Exceptions are where there are particular issues of metrical or pathological data in relation to the secondary burial, in which case they are entered individually.

Most burials are assigned individual skeleton numbers, although in instances where additional individuals were identified by the osteologist during post-excavation analysis, these have a letter suffix (e.g. 10208a).

As a result of the complexities of the excavation programme in separate areas, some graves were excavated in stages, resulting in two or more skeleton/grave numbers being assigned. Such graves are equated in the database (as above, where there are particular issues of metrical or pathological data in relation to the secondary burial, skeletal data is entered individually).

Cemetery Plans

The CAD images included here originated as on-site drawings which developed throughout the analytical process to form drafts for the illustrated plans. These have not been revised prior to dissemination and may therefore contain errors of labelling etc.: should any anomalies arise the published plans should be consulted.

Context Data by Grave

Outputted data from the skeletal/grave sections of the project's context database (produced in Foxbase; this complex relational database is no longer accessible) was formatted during post-excavation analysis into word-processed tables for each cemetery by area group. This data has been copied into the new database presented here, with only minimal editing. It may therefore contain errors. In particular, the finds concordance for each grave has not been re-checked and some finds may have been omitted. All major items are, however, included.

Skeletal Catalogue

The skeletal catalogues produced by Sue Anderson which form part of the research archive (AML Reports 56/96, 68/96 and 73/96) have been translated into the new cemeteries database without editing.

Skeletal Data

The skeletal data files (produced in Excel) are those from the project archive; again, these have not been edited.

Diagrams

Skeletal diagrams from the relevant archive reports have been scanned from the originals included in the AML Reports: occasionally, elements of the drawings have not reproduced well or were not included in the original copies.

Slide/Photograph Scans

Photographs of each grave have been included wherever possible. These are site record shots, most of which were not intended for publication. The quality is therefore very variable. Many of the images demonstrate various site conditions, including excavation after heavy rainfall, speed of excavation being essential to the successful achievement of project targets.


ADS logo
Data Org logo
University of York logo