The life expectancy of timber buildings generally appears to have been fairly short. From Cheddar, Lincoln, London and York there are consistent estimates for a lifespan of between 5 and 25 years, although one London example was still in use after 40. Floors could be resurfaced every 5-10 years, but wall posts set in earth may have quickly rotted. Fire seems to have been the major cause of destruction in towns, sweeping along rows of thatched houses and resulting in simultaneous redevelopment across a whole site. At Coppergate the positions of structures remain static for some 50 years, even though individual buildings were gutted by fire and totally rebuilt on several occasions. Developments in construction techniques appear to occur contemporaneously from tenement to tenement, suggesting that all four Coppergate tenements were under the control of one landlord, or that professional builders were hired to replace the street. At Saddler Street, Durham, and other sites, the primitive nature of wattle construction has suggested that these buildings were DIY affairs (Carver 1979). At aristocratic sites, however, where sophisticated stave and other techniques were employed we can assume that skilled craftsmen were responsible.
STONE BUILDINGS
In the upland zone of England, and in the south-west, stone was generally used as the basic building material, with wood reserved for the structural timbers and roof beams. In some areas this may have been determined by the shortage of suitable building timber compared with the availability of building stone, but this is not a full answer, and the reasons for the preference for stone may have been culturally as much as environmentally determined. Norse Vikings generally built their residences in stone, but the use of stone cannot be seen as a Viking trait in itself, as the native population in each of these areas also preferred stone.
The principal building at Ribblehead is in many respects a typical Norse dwelling, although in the absence of comparable sites it is impossible to determine if it is distinguishable in any way from pre-Viking buildings in the area (King 1978). The hall is some 19m long by 4m wide, with walls 1.5-1.8m thick (8). The outer wall faces were marked with a line of boulders and the inner ones constructed of coursed limestone slabs, with limestone rubble and earth used to provide the wall filling and insulation against draughts. A wicker lining could have been used to provide extra protection. Sandstone was used for the hearth and oven. There was a low bench against the west wall in the lower half of the building. The roof timbers apparently came all the way down to the ground at the outer edges of the wall. The roofs may have been thatched or covered with turves, and extended down to the ground. The gable ends were provided with central paved doorways, and the buildings were linked by stone pathways. A walled porch gave the kitchen building extra protection against the wind. Similar foundations of low stone walls were excavated at Simy Folds, although it was suggested that the walls may have been heightened with turf. Within the hall central paving would have provided footings for vertical posts which supported the ridge post for the rafters. The longhouses were the dwellings, with the smaller sub-rectangular buildings used for storage, as dairies or as workshops (Coggins et al. 1983).
At Green Shiel, Lindisfarne, two of the longhouses were each divided into two areas. One end may have been used for animals, and the other as a dwelling place, mirroring the divisions of later medieval peasant houses, but without the cross-passages which are typical of the later buildings. A third building was entered by a passage in the gable wall, leading directly into a series of compartments, each of which were probably individual byres (plate 29). Some of the rooms were paved with large flat slabs. The nearby beach seems to have been the source of the building stone; the walling is made from limestone which could have been quarried along the foreshore, with some large rounded beach pebbles. The ready availability of stone, rather than preference for a Scandinavian building tradition, is the obvious explanation for the choice of stone at Green Shiel instead of the more usual timber. The walls were crudely faced with irregular blocks with rubble infill; there is no trace of clay or mortar bonding. What the builders lacked in technique they made up for in stolidity; the outer walls were broad (up to 2m thick). In one of the buildings a line of post holes running down the centre provides the best indication of how the structures were roofed, suggesting a pitched thatched roof supported by central posts (O’Sullivan and Young 1995).
In the south-west a number of turf-walled houses have been excavated on Dartmoor. At Hound Tor and Hutholes small houses with turf walls and sunken floors were found beneath later longhouse settlements. The walls were up to 1.5m thick and had been faced with wattles. The roofs were turf beneath wattle and thatch. The houses had opposed doorways and central hearths, but there was no indication of stalling for animals. They may have been occupied by herdsmen or women who grazed their stock on the open moorland pastures during the summer. Such structures would probably have a life span of 25-30 years on Dartmoor (Beresford 1979).
At Mawgan Porth the houses were built by stripping the hillside of its turf (which could then be used for roofing) and then terracing the house platforms into the hill to provide level foundations. On the uphill side of the site some of the rock was left upstanding to provide a base for the walls, which were on average 0.75m thick. The walls were built of facing stone with a rubble core, without mortar, although clay may have been used as a bonding material. The roofs were supported by timber uprights set in post-holes. The buildings were arranged around four sides of an open courtyard, with their doors opening off it. The principal buildings were of a shortened longhouse type, with both byre and living quarters under the same roof separated by a timber partition. The byre section had a drain in the floor. In Courtyard House 1 the living area was furnished with box beds set in the corners either side of the door, with further beds or benches along the walls. There was a hearth pit with four small stake-holes, possibly for an iron pot-support. The courtyard also had a roofed recess, possibly a dog kennel (Bruce-Mitford 1997).
In conclusion, it is difficult to recognise anything specifically Viking about the Viking Age buildings of England. In general the Scandinavian incomers appear to have adopted native building styles, as there was no reason for them to import their own, although the peculiar class of bow-sided halls might have been a result of Scandinavian influence. Rather the social and economic changes of the Viking Age led to rapid developments in building technology, with the introduction of new foundation methods, such as sill-beams, and new types of structure, such as cellared buildings.
6
FEEDING THE PEOPLE
It has been estimated that the population of England may have doubled between the time of Ælfred and the Domesday Book, increasing from less than one million to almost two million. At the same time a larger proportion of people became less self-sufficient, with increasing numbers living and working in towns. Substantial agricultural expansion would have been necessary to support these changes.
Evidence from throughout England shows that during the Viking Age there was a massive increase in the area farmed, with marginal land being taken under cultivation. These changes were aided by improved climatic conditions in the late ninth and tenth centuries, with shorter milder winters, and longer warmer summers. The Cambridgeshire Fens were first farmed in the tenth and eleventh centuries, and in Warwickshire there was clearance of woodland from marginal land which in many cases had lain deserted since the Roman period. Both the Peak District and the Yorkshire Dales were re-colonised with upland farms such as Ribblehead (see chapter 3), and there is pollen evidence for vigorous clearance on Fellend Moss and Steng Moss in the mid- and late tenth century. On Dartmoor farming was being undertaken at sites such as Holne Moor; at Gwithian a heavy plough capable of turning a furrow was in use by the tenth century (Fowler 1976; 1981).
The lowland zone continued to be intensively farmed. The area around York, for instance, was already extensively deforested and had become largely agricultural by the start of the Viking Age, with a mixture of arable and pastureland and areas of woodland, some exp
loited for timber or as coppice for wattle hurdles and fences. Areas of woodland and marsh, some quite close to the town, may have been used primarily for hunting.
The degree to which new farming practices were introduced by Scandinavian settlers remains uncertain. The origins of the open field system of agriculture is a complex question, and one to which there may be no single answer for the whole country. It was certainly in use by the twelfth century, but may have been introduced in the Anglo-Saxon or Viking Age, or after the Norman Conquest. It has been argued that the medieval open field system was introduced in parts of eastern England in the ninth and tenth centuries. As we have seen (see chapter 3), this was the period in which great estates were being broken up over much of the country, new settlements were being formed, and village tenements were being laid out, although the Vikings were just part of this process.
PLANTS AND CEREALS
The four main cereals grown over much of Viking Age England appear to have been wheat, barley, oats and rye. Wheat was grown for flour for bread, barley for brewing, and oats may have been used for animal fodder, as well as porridge. There were some changes from the Roman period in species grown, with the more primitive spelt wheat being less popular. Various legumes, and flax and hemp were also cultivated. In York there are also a number of species likely to have been exploited as herbs or spices, including coriander, dill, opium poppy, and summer savoury. Apples, sloes, plums, cherries, bilberries, blackberries and raspberries were the main fruits consumed; a ninth-century pit from Gloucester full of a residue of apple pips from cider-making suggests that apples were not only eaten. Hazelnuts and walnuts were also consumed; linseed and hempseed were probably used for oil. In York the presence of large quantities of bees suggests that beeswax and honey were both available. In London figs and grapes were imported in small quantities, although hops, presumably brought in for brewing, were relatively abundant.
Most houses, even in towns, seem to have had a quern stone with which to grind their own grain to make bread. The degree of tooth wear common in the period suggests that this was fairly coarse! There is no evidence for windmills before the twelfth century, but earlier watermills have been excavated at Old Windsor and Tamworth. At Old Windsor (Berkshire), there was a large and sophisticated watermill with three vertical wheels by the early ninth century, although this could have been built much earlier. Traces of a stone building with glazed windows and a tiled roof nearby may represent the remains of the royal manor. The mill was totally destroyed by fire in the late ninth or early tenth century. The site was devastated and the mill leat filled in; a second mill with a smaller leat and a horizontal wheel was constructed later in the tenth century, and continued in use until the early eleventh. At Tamworth (Staffordshire) a horizontal-wheeled mill was constructed in the mid-ninth century or earlier, just outside the south-east corner of the burh defences, where it could draw water from the river Anker. It was rebuilt in the mid- to late ninth century, with a millpool at a higher level, fed by a reconstructed new leat. Millstones of local and imported stone have been found, as well as grain impressions of oats and possibly barley. Such mills would have been used to process the rents of royal and manorial estates. The second mill at Tamworth was also destroyed by fire, and although it is tempting to attribute the burning down of Old Windsor and Tamworth to Viking raiders, mills often caught fire for more prosaic reasons, notably the heat generated by the milling process itself (Rahtz and Meeson 1992).
ANIMALS
It is unlikely that the Vikings had much effect upon animal husbandry. There is nothing particularly Scandinavian about the bone assemblage at Coppergate, for example, and nothing to suggest the introduction of Scandinavian stock. Nevertheless, there were developments in animal husbandry during the Viking Age in response to general economic trends, and changes, in particular, in the relative importance of various farm animals (Clutton-Brock 1976).
Cattle
Cattle bones are predominant on all Viking Age sites, within and outside the Danelaw, and beef and dairy products would have been the dietary mainstays throughout England. A particularly high proportion of cattle bones has been observed in excavated Viking settlements, namely York, Dublin and Lincoln. We know that the keeping of cattle was culturally important to Viking settlers, and immigrants in Greenland and Iceland stubbornly hung on to their cattle herds, despite the climatic and environmental difficulties. Nevertheless, variations in stock-breeding strategies in England are more likely to have been dictated by local agricultural and economic circumstances than by ethnic affiliations.
Cattle provided most meat in the diet at sites as far apart as Mawgan Porth, Portchester, Cheddar, North Elmham and York. At Flaxengate it has been calculated that cattle provided over 75 per cent of the meat diet. At Coppergate cattle appear to have been brought in on the hoof as required and slaughtered on site, whereas in Durham and Cheddar meat was obtained ready-butchered.
In York the cattle were killed by a blow to the head and butchered in a clumsy and unsystematic fashion which is inconsistent with specialist butchers, in contrast to the Roman period. Evidence from Lincoln suggests that the carcasses were butchered on the floor; they were only hung from timber beams from the eleventh century onwards. There was no careful selection of cattle of a particular age; most were youngish adults, suggesting that cattle had a multipurpose role as milk producers and draught animals as well as sources of meat. On rural sites oxen would also have been important for pulling the heavy plough.
Sheep and goats
Sheep farming was England’s major industry during the Viking Age, but sheep were kept mainly as a source of wool and only secondarily for their meat. Woollen cloth had been a major export from early times. A famous letter of complaint from Charlemagne to Offa of 796 mentions the import of woollen cloaks to France: ‘Our people make a demand about the size of the cloaks, that you may order them to be such as used to come to us in former times.’
At North Elmham more sheep bones were found than anything else, but most were from mature animals, indicating that they were being kept for their wool. At Portchester there was a steady increase in the importance of sheep throughout the Saxon period, with animals also being kept until they were older. During the tenth-century sheep coming to slaughter at Flaxengate were drawn from stock being kept for their milk and wool, but during the eleventh century younger animals being bred for their meat were slaughtered.
In York sheep were mainly selected for slaughter between the ages of 18 months and 4 years. In other words, some were being killed after one year’s woolclip whilst others were kept for breeding. There is a similar range of fleeces from London and York. Most are from sheep of fairly primitive character with ‘hairy’ or ‘hairy medium’ fleeces. There is a higher proportion of ‘hairy’ sheep in the Viking Age than in Roman Britain and earlier Anglo-Saxon England, but it is not clear that these were introduced by the Vikings, as they are not limited to the Scandinavian area of influence. Nevertheless, in London there was a lower percentage of ‘hairy’ sheep in the tenth and eleventh centuries than in York, where the proportion was closer to that observed on Norse sites in Scotland.
Viking Age sheep mainly had white fleeces, although the wool was frequently dyed.
In Lincoln there was a marked increase in the proportion of sheep after the mid-tenth century, and a corresponding decline in the number of cattle. This change was not observed in York, where the percentage of sheep is generally lower. The Vale of York is a flat, low-lying area subject to flooding, whereas Lincoln is on a limestone escarpment with rolling chalk hills a few miles to east. Thus the Vale would have been good cattle country in the Viking Age, with sheep being important on the thinner drier chalk and limestone soils of the Wolds, 20km (12 miles) from the city. Sheep would have been important in the more immediate hinterland of Lincoln, and the development of settlement in the Wolds in the Viking Age (see chapter 3) may reflect the growing significance of sheep farming. On the assumption that there were some 4000 adults in
Lincoln, O’Connor (1982) calculates that flocks totalling 5000 sheep would be needed to supply the amount of mutton consumed, and that these required between 5000 and 10,000 of acres of grazing. This was a considerable area of farmland to produce only 7 per cent of the meat supply.
Small numbers of goats were also kept in the York area, but formed a minor part of the diet and were principally bred for dairying. The lack of goat bones at Coppergate implies that dairy production was not carried out on a house-by-house basis, but rather that a few suppliers traded milk and cheese in quantity (O’Connor 1989).
Pigs
Viking Age pigs were small dark-skinned hairy beasts with relatively long legs. They were the only animals which could be kept in towns, and so played a significant part in the urban diet. They were well suited to being fattened and bred in wattle pens in the backyards of urban tenements, although households probably often obtained a pregnant sow from rural farmers. At Coppergate there was a relative increase in the number of pig bones through the Viking Age, and a corresponding decline in cattle bones. At Flaxengate the proportion of pig is fairly constant throughout, unlike cattle and sheep which fluctuate in the tenth century. In Durham it has been suggested that the town residents allowed their pigs to forage in nearby woodland. In the countryside huge herds of pigs may have roamed free-range. In a ninth-century will Ealdorman Ælfred of Surrey bequeathed 2000 pigs to his wife. At Portchester, pigs provided 20 per cent of the diet.
Horses and other animals
Horses were considered to be particularly valuable animals during the Viking Age. They provided only an occasional minor part of diet (at Portchester less than 2 per cent), but were a high-status means of transport and warfare, as attested by the number of spurs and harness fittings from graves and other ritual deposits (see chapter 10).
Viking Age England Page 10
