Dead Man’s Tools;

A speculative analysis of
Anglo-Saxon tool burials
_______________________________
Dennis Riley

©Dennis Riley, 2011

Introduction
Tools represent a stepping stone between man’s ideas and there creation, the
transition from abstract to the concrete, tools are an extension of his mind and
as such have given rise to a multitude of variant forms for all the tasks that can
be imagined. The primary function of this paper is to give some clarity to the
relationship (if any exist) between the Anglo-Saxon peoples and their tools, the
relationship is complex as is everything human formed and this paper includes
the tools of both men and women, both sexes highly dependent in their use of
artefacts to maintain their daily life. The main thrust outlined here is the rela-
tionship between tool and user in death and beyond- the use of tools as part of
the funerary rite.

Our primary source comes from the burial itself and from these burials the au-
thor here puts forward a number of speculative ideas as to put forward more de-
fined opinion will lead the observer along a false path. The relationship between
burial and tool finds is disperate and complex and no obvious relationship pre-
sents itself, there are regional variations and also variations between both male
and female finds, but from these finds, by region, period and gender we are
forced along the path of speculation and generalisation .

The primary interest in producing this paper was an analysis of the smiths grave
at Tattershall Thorpe 1 in Lincolnshire and to place this large burial hoard in
some sort of context or relationship between the find and the tools of the general
populace, this is a necessity as it is somewhat impossible- or at the least very
improbable to produce a meaningfull analysis of tool deposition on the basis of
one spectacular find. In the case of Tattershall Thorpe the overriding factor here
is that it is the grave of a smith.

The crossing of the barrier between life and death is governed by fear, hope, be-
lief and many other emotions all of which generally defy logic which is unfor-
tunate in that it is all we can safely apply to the problem as to why someone is
buried with one object in preference to another, the only starting point we have
– our point of reference is that it must have held some meaning in life to both
user and their family to ensure its use beyond death itself.

1
Hinton. A. A smith in Lindsey, 2000

©Dennis Riley, 2011

To further understand the nature of the relationship between the burial and the
items it contains the author here includes a section on Anglo-Saxon funerary
practice. The finds themselves are grouped by cemetery with minimal statistical
analysis as in most cemeteries there are insufficient tool finds to produce any
meaningfull statistical results.

The vast majority of Anglo-Saxon burials are those of workers as any ancient
social structure by necessity can only maintain a small social ruling elite, con-
siquently most individuals would have used tools in some form and would have
possessed multiple skills even though they may have had but one main profes-
sion. The only craft not open to the general population was metal working and
in the context of this paper we mean the blacksmith in all his manifestations,
anecdotal evidence suggests that the smith is treated differently in death as op-
posed to other members of society and an aim here is to give some clarity (alt-
hough as ever –speculative) as to why this may be so, consequently a section of
the position of the smith in Anglo-Saxon society has been included to aid the
reader in this.

Tools versus dress artefacts

In cataloguing finds; archaeologists make a decision as to what constitutes a
tool, in most cases the decision is easy, however in others the distinction is less
clear, there is a tendency to classify a nondescript or unusual iron object as a
tool on the basis that it defies definition, in collating the tool finds here the au-
thor has discounted any item that is nondescript in form. Preliminary analysis
shows that female graves are more likely to contain a tool, usually spindle
whorls or shears, the reasoning behind this is expanded upon later, it can be said
here that the inclusion of those items in the burial act as a “definer” for the indi-
vidual concerned as they are both dress and tool and may also indicate status or
skill at the point of death, all these points will be discussed in detail further in
this Paper. In analysing the finds we also have to consider local fashion as re-
gional variations point to this in a broad sense, some graves contain nails with-
out any real context, these may be tools but have been discounted here as they
may have served as charms and protectors, many are damaged or used
©Dennis Riley, 2011
And generally too small to be used as awls or punches2. The finds are analysed
by cemetery with a breakdown and analysis: which is not always easy as the
tool related finds within cemeteries only account for a small percentage of the
inhumations containing grave goods, however in those cemeteries- notably
Blacknall Field, Alton and Finglesham with a higher than average number of
tool related grave goods it is possible to undertake some minimal statistical
analysis. Some evidence is the “lack of evidence” and here it contributes to the
overall picture, the conclusions are as ever speculative and broad in brush
strokes as to apply any greater analysis and answer courts disaster. The data
from the cemetery sites are analysed first with notes and remarks on each site
and at the end of the cemeteries data an appraisal of the observations noted, fol-
lowing this is an analysis of the smiths grave from Tattershall Thorpe in Lin-
colnshire with a conclusion based on the research garnered.

The Anglo-Saxon smith

Before we start the author can do no better than to quote Motz;

The craftsman who works in metal holds in certain cultures a very special po-
sition. The act of forging tools and weapons which held men in their survival
is viewed in certain stages of social development in awe and fear and mystery,
and the artisan in metal appears to be able, in surpassing human powers, to
release the secret springs of creativity. It is therefore not surprising that the
figure of the blacksmith found entrance into the fairy tales, folktales and my-
thologies of many lands, and that he plays a role in the rites of folk tradition.3

-And from this first paragraph the world of the Anglo-Saxon smith is laid open
to us, in a world of craftsmen ; as everyone required craft skills for the bare ne-
cessities of daily life (except the ruling class, removed from the problems of
physical toil) the smith stands alone for in a world of simple energies the power
of spark and starlight rested in his hands, a gift of the gods to be wielded and
guarded for any man with such power surely stands astride both worlds, the
mundane and godly. The smith therefore can be at first viewed as a liminal fig-
ure inhabiting the boundaries of middle earth and the nether world

2
Riley
3
Motz, wise one of the mountains (refer to bibliography)
©Dennis Riley, 2011
From what can be gathered of the early Anglo-Saxon period the smith was a
peripatetic figure- a local itinerant travelling from one village to the next in a
never ending circle, perhaps half a dozen villages in his fiefdom , all too small
to keep him stocked with work but may have a main village with a family as a
base and would throughout the year (until winter puts paid to movement) travel
around staying a week may be two before moving on. The very act of being a
traveller sets the smith apart from his clients- a bringer of news and gossip and
no doubt dark stories of the long road a man required by the village but separate
from it: an outsider , a half trusted traveller especially with his power over iron
capable of his talents and wielder of power as the village is dependent upon him
much more than he is dependent upon a single village which only adds to the
darkness of his profession.

A smith would usually have an apprentice for the smiths work is hard and a
dangerous road is best travelled in pairs, the find from Tattershall Thorpe al-
ludes to an apprentice4 and there are times when injury requires a helper , in
every village there would be a site for the smith to work, his fuel and shelter
provided ready for his return. The status of a smith is more difficult to ascertain,
the itinerant smith would be highly valued and a freeman to go where he choos-
es a much valued and cunning man (searuman in old English), in larger villages
he may have been retained by the lord who’s requirement for iron dictated a full
time smith and it is entirely possible that the movement of a smith was restricted
as his ability to forge weapons would make him a valuable weapon of war so
his movements may well have been restricted to his own tribal areas as a neces-
sity .

There is some evidence to suggest that smiths were generally left handed- that is
to say that they struck the hammer with the left hand, various finds allude to this
including Tattershall Thorpe as the tools have either been designed left handed
or used left handed5.we have no way of telling if the Anglo-Saxons had any
aversion or social significance in handedness, it is quite feasible that handedness
was looked upon as a random event, We do not know of any “sinister” connota-
tions with being left handed at this time but the number of left handed tools
could suggest that left-handedness was a requirement of the job, however more
research is required to prove or disprove this theory.

4
Discussed later
5
As indicated by the wear patterns- see later
©Dennis Riley, 2011
In death it seems the smith may be treated different from other “normal “ men,
this evidence is based on limited finds however- the lack of tool finds from
cemetery sites and that from Tattershall Thorpe at least the smith was buried
outside the cemetery confines, however one find does not prove a belief sys-
tem!.

In summation we can say then that the smith seems to have been an outsider, a
powerful and dark figure possessed of arcane knowledge, part man, part magi-
cian and partly feared for his unworldly skills.

Dead man’s tools

An artisan has a relationship with his tools that transcends death (in a loose
sense) and in a modern context may help explain the lack of tool finds within
burials of the general Anglo-Saxon population, there has been a long if some-
what informal tradition amongst tool users to pass on their tools after death to
those who may make good use of them, the author, hailing from Sheffield is
well familiar with the practice of “dead man’s tools” used in the steel works
and engineering workshops of the don valley (the author himself possesses a
fine collection of dead man’s files of supernatural strength!), these tools are
much prized down to two main reasons- they are a gift and secondly; usually of
the finest quality as an old engineer has honed his skills and collected the best
over his life so they are treated with reverence, however with the demise of
heavy traditional industries this practice is no longer wide spread but does show
a tradition of passing on tools from one generation to the next and in an Anglo-
Saxon context may have had a strong heirloom association,

Anglo-Saxon Burial practice

It is not intended here to delve into the complex world of burial practice for we
shall cover only the bare bones of what we know; The Anglo-Saxons mourned
their dead as shown in the care taken in the burial, mock beds were made for the
dead, even the graves lined with reeds and grasses in some cases.
©Dennis Riley, 2011
And of course in the pagan period the dead were buried with artefacts (grave
goods) which suggests a belief in the afterlife where the deceased was provided
with much that they had in life so that they may walk another land without want
or need, and that the burial reflected their status in life so it would after death,
However the burial artefacts are shaped also by the living that preformed the
burial. We can presume some sort of will existed (albeit verbal)on the division
of personal items so the living must have made provision to replace an item re-
quired in the afterlife either as the deceased insisted or convention dictated: a
fathers sword swapped for a sons , a mothers jewels for her daughters - to some
or lesser extent. Also the age of death does seem to play a part in the funerary
rite with the status within the family at the point of death reflected in the grave
goods, here the work of Halsall, Härke and Stoodly 6 has been invaluable in the
analysis of acquisition and use of artefacts and in a broad sense this authors
work backs up their findings albeit on a different tack.

The Evidence
The evidence here comes from a number of sites outlined in table 17, knives and
fire steels have been omitted as they are not tools in the sense outlined here as
virtually every burial contains a knife even though it would have been used as a
multi-purpose tool should be considered a dress and also a status item, also
omitted are: iron bars of unknown use (even though some may have had some
sort of tool function), Nails- usually bent and most likely some sort of lucky
charm (although it could be argued had some sort of possible tool use), flint
flakes and indeterminate pieces of iron and non-ferrous strip on the basis that
they fit no known tool form or have any conceivable tool function.

6
The work of Hallsal and Härke will be expanded upon later as their results fit with some aspects of those
found by the author in relation to spindle whorls, although a tool these whorls also seem to have had some
sort of social implication as well as a purely tool use within the family
7
The full site information is listed in the bibliography and is not expanded upon in table 1

©Dennis Riley, 2011

Cemetery Area Date
Bergh Apton Norfolk 5th -6th
Finglesham kent 6th-8th
Castledyke South Lincolnshire 5th-7th
Fonaby Lincolnshire 6th
Carlton Coleville Suffolk 6th-8th
Westgarth gardens suffolk 6th-7th
Worthy park hampshire 6th-7th
Alton hampshire 6th-7th
Butlers field gloucestershire 6th-8th
Blacknall field wiltshire 5th-6th
Empingham ii rutland 5th-6th
Mucking essex 5th-7th
Morning thorpe norfolk 7th
Springfield lyons essex 5th-7th
Harford farm nsb norfolk 7th
Winnall ii hampshire 7th
Spong hill norfolk 5th-6th

Table 1; cemetery sites investigated

In addition to these sites an in depth analysis was undertaken of the smiths

grave 8 from Tattershall Thorpe in Lincolnshire.

Note; the application of statistical analysis has in most cemetery investigations

not been undertaken due to a lack of results to work with, there is also a slight
skewing of results with regards to tool finds per age group as some graves are
termed “adult” with no date range, these results have been omitted giving an ar-
tificially higher spread of tools per date range group, however in theory this will
not alter the ratio of spread between age groups, the analysis of finds per ceme-
tery are in the sequence outlined in table 1, at the end of each results there is an
analysis of the results from that cemetery with likely reasoning or observation.

8
Hinton, A. A smith in Lindsey,2000

©Dennis Riley, 2011

Bergh Apton
No tool finds were found – either male or female from 63 graves

Finglesham
From an investigation of 216 inhumations, both male and female the following
results were obtained (table 2);

grave find gender age remarks

6 5 m 50-60 Awl, broken
6 7 m 50-60 Tool blade fragment
9 3 m 13-15 awl
8 4 f 25-30 shears
8 10 f 25-30 Clay spindle whorl
8 11 f 25-30 Clay spindle whorl
8 13 f 25-30 Bone pin beater
16 3 f 30-40 Clay spindle whorl
25 6 m adult awl
25 7 m adult Tool, unknown function
31 5 f adult Chisel or steel
57 9 f 35 shears
62a 1 m 18 Tool unknown function
62b 1 f 20 shears
67 1 m 25 awl
67 2 m 25 awl
69 2 f 20 Spindle whorl yellow clay
82 8 m 20-25 Gouge/awl
82 9 m 20-25 Gouge/awl
115 2 m 40-45 tool
117 3 m 17 Tool/awl
117 4 m 17 Tool/awl
138 7 f 25 shears
150 3 f 25-30 shears
163 4 f 25-30 Clay spindle whorl
170 5 m 19 awl
202 7 f 30+ Bone spindle whorl
213 4 m 35-40 tool

©Dennis Riley, 2011

213 5 m 35-40 Tool/awl
213 6 m 35-40 Tool fragment (rod)
213 7 m 35-40 Tool fragment (rod)
213 8 m 35-40 Tool fragment

Table 2; finglesham tool finds

As can be seen from the results in table 2 there are individual graves with mul-
tiple tool finds, the grave finds for both male and female can be broken down
further as shown in table 3 (female) and 4 (male).

total [ grave number of datable female graves

13 216
12 200 205a
11 197 169 203
10 192 162 187
9 190 150 185
8 178 127 163 202 215
7 174 89 138 180 175 182
6 166 69 113 148 156 164
5 157 65 87 124 151 161
4 101 63 64 57 112 139 121
3 98 62b 53 54 84 38b 78
2 76 61 32 35 43 34 47b
1 12 21b 8 16 40 11 20b
Age; To 20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45+

1 62b 8 16
2 69 138 57
3 150 163 202
total [ datable female graves with a tool find

Table 3 age group spread of finds (female)

From these female grave results it can be seen that a cluster of finds occur in the
date range 20 to 35 years of age- the prime manufacturing years for an Anglo-
©Dennis Riley, 2011
Saxon female, simple analysis shows that in this date range a female is likely to
be buried with a tool related artefact in 28% of datable burials- this does how-
ever not take into account those burials that cannot be dated to a specific age
group, the reasoning for this will be put forward later in this report as an overall
analysis of finds- in this respect creating a contextual overview. For female
grave finds tools are confined to either spindle whorls or shears, it is worthy of
note that grave 8 is particularly rich in weaving related tooling containing a pair
of shears, two spindle whorls a pin beater and a work box (not listed) whereas
most graves with a tool usually contain just one item, this could indicate that the
occupant was most skilled in weaving.

Total [grave number of datable male graves

10 208
9 193 204 213
8 145a 199 196 168
7 170 144 133 134 165 198 215
6 152 129a 110 97 158 183 179
5 135 116 105 83 129b 115 160
4 117 86 67 26a 125a 106 140
3 95 82 52 21a 123 33 118
2 62a 73 50 18 102 28 55
1 9 48 30 13 94 15 6
Age; To 20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45+

1 9 82 67 213 115 6
2 62a
3 117
4 170
Total [datable male graves with a tool find

Table 4; age group spread of finds (male)

From the results in table 4 the tool spread is much greater than in those from the
female graves spreading amongst most age groups with a particular concentra-
tion in the under 20’s- this in part may be due to it being a cheap tool to poses,
however this is purely speculative, the majority of finds are of awls a multi-
purpose tool of inexpensive construction with the spread of tools across the
©Dennis Riley, 2011
social structure giving rise (as ever speculatively) that male tools are not status
markers unlike the possibility with female tool items- this will be elaborated on
later. It is interesting to note that grave 213 contains a large number of awls and
tools (somewhat ill defined ) and that the user evidently looked upon them as
personal items for whatever reason. Tool concentrations in datable graves are
roughly equal- in datable burials is for female graves 14.25% and male graves
slightly higher at 15.75% effectively equal- the caveat as ever is that in these
results undatable graves; those of “adults” have not been included.

Castledyke south
From an investigation of 227 inhumations in 196 graves of which 153 are of
adults, the following results were obtained (table 5);

grave find gender age remarks

11 7 f 35-45 Chalk spindle whorl
11 6 f 35-45 shears
17b 1 f 25-35 Iron sword beater (spear head)
17b 3 f 25-35 Stone spindle whorl
46 1 f unk Bone pin beater or weaving tool
180 1 m 35-45 Iron implement
183 10 f 17-25 Iron implement-sharpening steel?
206 1 f? unk Iron shears presumed female grave

Table 5; Castledyke South tool finds

Across the board and including both male and female graves only 3.8% of
graves contained a tool related item. As can be seen most are from female
graves , there is insufficient data to speculate any further, but it does seem there
was little social need in the burial ritual to add weaving tools to the grave and it
also seems that virtually all male graves contain no tool artefacts, not even awls.
Grave 17b contains a rare find of a so called Iron sword beater even though it is
a converted spear!. It can also be seen that the spread of weaving finds is in the
25 to 35 age range but the sample is small (only 2) and too much should not be
read into that.

©Dennis Riley, 2011

Fonaby
Fonaby rendered only two results:
Grave 28, female, spindle whorl
Grave 39, female, spindle whorl

Both of unknown age from 46 mixed male and female inhumations, other than
the indicator that females are buried with spindle whorls no other information
can be drawn as grave sexing information is not present and the author has
wisely avoided trying to sex the graves from grave goods.

Carlton Coleville
The results from a total of 29 inhumations give only two finds, both female
Grave 11, find 10, female; shears
Grave 11, find 1, female; shears

However the attendant settlement at Carlton Coleville (rare in being in close

proximity to the cemetery) has yielded a number of “lost “ tools which have
been included here (table 6) for the sake of completeness.
Find Find number(s)
Adze 318, 319, 320
Paring chisel 321, 322, 323, 324, 325
Chisel 326
Mortice chisel 327
Firmer chisel 328, 329
Chisel 330, 331, 332
U shave 333
Unknown tool 334
Modelling chisel 335
Masons pick 336
Leatherworking awl 337, 338
punch 339
Awl/punch 340
shears 351, 352, 353, 354, 355 all left handed9
Spindle whorls 18 fired,10 worked stone, 2 lead, 1 cannel coal

Table 6; tool finds from Carlton Coleville Settlement

9
Riley, D. predominance of left handed shears from spong hill , 2010
©Dennis Riley, 2011
Westgarth gardens
From a total of 69 inhumations only one inhumation yield tools;
Grave 5, find D, male adult; iron shears
Grave 5, find 7, possible awl

It is rare to find a male grave containing shears and is currently the only one
known to the author at this time

Worthy Park
From a total of 94 inhumations and 46 cremations only three tools have been
found , all are from the cremations and presumed to be female, however find
C31 may be a chatelaine complex but has still been included here.

Cremation 2, adult; iron shears

Cremation 23, adult; complex of miniature iron tools
Cremation 31, adult; complex of iron tools suspended from an iron ring

Alton
No finds of tools either male or female from 47 inhumations and 46 cremations.

Butlers Field
The finds from butlers field are outlined in table 7 below and are from a total of
219 inhumations from 199 graves and 29 cremations, as there are a larger num-
ber of finds a breakdown has been included of tool spread (table 8 for female
graves), since there has been only two male finds there was insufficient infor-
mation to produce a breakdown by age spread. As can be seen from the female
graves it does seem to re-enforce a pattern in artefact burial amongst female
burials with spindle whorls, as previously stated this will be discussed in detail
later in this paper.

©Dennis Riley, 2011

grave find gender age remarks
14 1+2 f 14-16 Iron wool comb/card
14 10 f 14-16 Iron shears
18 29 f 25-30 Bone spindle whorl
40 12 m 30-35 Spatulate iron tool
54 2 f 20-25 Bone spindle whorl
54 3 f 20-25 Bone weaving pick
54 4 f 20-25 Iron cold shisel
57 2 m 30-35 awl
66.1 1 f 14-16 Clay spindle whorl
81.1 8 f 18-20 Shale spindle whorl
81.1 9 f 18-20 2x bone/antler spindle whorls
89.2 1+2 f 13-14 2x stone spindle whorls
138 7 f 25-30 2x bone/antler spindle whorls
150 2 f 45+ Lead spindle whorl

Table 7; tool finds from Butlers Field

These results bring to light a few curiosities; the female grave 54 contains three
grave items, the unusual one being an iron cold chisel- a tool not associated
with any female profession, certainly not weaving; the possibility exists that it
was an Heirloom piece of her fathers or husband or even brother, this is purely
speculative , the woman herself may have had metalworking craft experience,
the rest of the finds in the grave tend to suggest otherwise as they are all tradi-
tional weaving implements. Multiple spindle whorls in graves are rare and at
butlers field there are four graves that contain multiple spindle whorls;

Grave 54, finds 2+3

Grave 81.1, finds 8 + 9
Grave 89.2, finds 1+2
Grave 138, find 7

©Dennis Riley, 2011

Total [ grave numbers of datable female graves

15 197
14 194 188.1 187 193
13 167.2 159 186 174
12 164 144 184 111
11 160 191 138 163 101
10 157 180 127 156 101
9 133 169 107.1 90 162 86
8 97 165 99 79 185 152 76
7 89 136 78 68 179 103 62
6 81.1 130 70 61 175 85 60
5 66.1 123 66.2 42 147 71 59
4 50 73 45 37 95.1 55 41
3 22 67 19 33.2 77 20 31
2 14 56 18 30 47 15 25
1 1.1 54 10 6 3 7 24
Age; To 20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45+

1 14 54 18 150
2 66.1 138
3 81.1
4 89
Total [ datable female graves that contain a tool find

Table 8; age group spread of finds (female)

From these results it appears from female graves that the spread of weaving ar-
tefacts is concentrated in the 20 to 30 year age group , the reasoning for this will
be outlined later with the results taken as a whole.

Blacknall field
The results from blacknall field are based on the analysis of 102 inhumations
and 4 cremations in 109 graves. Only one male grave (68, find 9) yielded a tool,
a possible awl belonging to a 28-30 year old individual.

©Dennis Riley, 2011

Empingham ii
Empingham II cemetery yielded 135 inhumations and 1 cremation producing
five graves; all female and all containing spindle whorls, the breakdown by age
group is consistent with the other grave sites so analysed and does therefore
tend to indicate a pattern forming at least for female inhumations.

grave find gender age description

24 9 f 12-14 Bone spindle whorl
37 11 f 25-35 Bone spindle whorl
67a 11 f 17-25 Bone spindle whorl
73 18 f 25-35 Shale spindle whorl
80 6 f 16-21 Bone spindle whorl

Table 9; Tool finds from Empingham II

Total [grave numbers of datable female graves

20 131
19 127
18 122
17 117
16 115
15 106
14 91
13 85b
12 83
11 80
10 79a 130
9 67a 109
8 64 107
7 58 95
6 52 73
5 50 62
4 49a 61 90
3 48 89 40 81 85a
2 25 37 39 63 69
1 24 22 17 27 6 42
Age; To 20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45+

©Dennis Riley, 2011

1 24 37 73
2 67a
3 80
Tool [datable female grave with a tool find

Table 10, age group spread of finds (female)

As can be seen the clustering of tool finds in the under thirties is self evident.

Mucking
The finds from mucking includes the finds from sites I and II, cemetery I con-
tains 63 inhumations with mucking II containing a maximum of 282 inhuma-
tions and 463cremations, the breakdown is as follows;

From mucking I containing 63 inhumations only one grave contained a tool ar-
tefact; grave 99, find 12; a pair of left handed iron shears

From Mucking II the following artefacts were recovered;

grave find gender age remarks

534 2 m adult Iron throwing axe
546 4a f adult Pointed iron tool, possible awl
546 4b f adult Pointed iron tool ,possible awl
583 4 m adult Iron throwing axe
823 5 m adult awl
933 10 m Old adult Small sandstone pocket hone
976 2 m adult Throwing axe
Table 11; tool finds from mucking II inhumations
As can be seen from mucking II inhumations; very little female artefacts but
more male ones, however although included finds 534/2, 583/4 and 976/2 are
throwing axes and generally thought of as personal equipment and not for gen-
eral day to day use, also find number 933/10 –a small sandstone pocket hone
has been included but this may be considered as personal equipment so as an
overview the finds from mucking II inhumations show minimal tool burials

©Dennis Riley, 2011

Of the cremation burials the following tools were found, however many of these
are stylised cremation artefacts more than likely specifically manufactured for
the funerary rite, however they have been added to the cremation in imitation of
the real item, possibly as the original may not fit into the cremation urn.

cremation find gender age remarks

314 1 x x Miniature iron shears right handed
318 1b x x Miniature iron shears left handed
338 2 x x Part of an iron sickle or reaping hook
476 1b x x Miniature iron shears right handed
486 1a x x Miniature iron shears left handed
705 1a x x Miniature iron shears right handed

Table 12; tool finds from mucking II cremations

There is minimal gender and age information from cremations presumption can
only be based on grave goods

Morning Thorpe
From a collection of 365 inhumations and 9 cremations the following infor-
mation was collated;

grave find gender age remarks

37 b m - awl
100 eiii m - awl
132 biii m - awl
293 k f - Spindle whorl
369 q f - Spindle whorl (fragment)
Table 13; tool finds from Morning Thorpe
Given the large number of inhumations the tool finds from Morning Thorpe are
effectively insignificant .

©Dennis riley, 2011

Springfield lyons
Of 143 cremations and 114 definite inhumations and 25 possible inhumations
there were no tool based finds at all.

Harford Farm, Norwich southern bypass

From the 46 inhumations at this site the following finds were collated;

grave find gender age remarks

11 6 f - shears
18 3c f - awl
27 1 f - shears
28 4 f - Sandstone spindle whorl
28 5 f - Fired clay spindle whorl
33 4 f - shears
Table 14; tool finds from Harford Farm
All the finds were from female graves with grave 18 producing an awl- quite
rare in a female context.

Winnall II
From winnall II 46 inhumations were investigated, of which only two yielded
tool finds;

grave find gender age remarks

11 1 f 30-35 Bone spindle whorl
31 2 f 20-25 Clay spindle whorl
Table 15; tool finds from winnall II
All the tool finds were in female grave and contain spindle whorls in the 20-35
age range which are consistent with results from other sites.

©Dennis Riley, 2011

Spong hill
The results from spong hill are taken from report number 6 and cover the cre-
mations from number 20 to 1690 (not a continuous list) and covers 715 crema-
tions and 17 inhumations at this site, the tools recovered are either spindle
whorls or shears presumably from female cremations due to the grave goods
deposited, the numbers in the category refer to the cremation urn listing;

Spindle whorls shears

1014, 1099, 1161, 1182, 1188, 1213 1052, 1064, 1100, 1109, 1151, 1167
1349, 1352, 1363, 1450, 1474, 1492 1170, 1183, 1184, 1212, 1227, 1256
1526, 1559, 1579, 1645 1265, 1270, 1271, 1285, 1329, 1336
1341, 1380, 1384, 1429, 1433, 1447
1454, 1471, 1498, 1502, 1529, 1544
1545, 1548, 1605, 1610, 1656, 1661
1682, 1688
Table 16; tool finds from spong hill
As can be seen from these results a high percentage of female related tooling in
the cremations; some 38 shears and 16 spindle whorls clearly showing some
burial ritual regarding these tools, the possibility being they are the only items
either to fit in the cremation urn to mark the owners “existence”- possibly a sort
of cremation indicator, we are unfortunately unable to date the occupants due to
the destruction of the skeletal remains.

Interpretation of cemetery finds;

The acquisition and use of artefacts
The artefacts contained in a burial are of importance to someone otherwise they
would have nor been included in the burial, they are of importance to either the
internee, their family or society as a whole or a combination of these factors,
likewise items not included are important for a number of other reasons- this is
more speculative and more difficult to ascertain. Halsall10 in his research of the
cemeteries of Merovingian Gaul noted that specific female grave goods are

10
Halsall,G. 1996, 17-20
© Dennis Riley, 2011
more visible and at their most obvious from puberty to the early forties- in the
context of dress items. The work of Härke11 also shows in his study of Anglo-
Saxon burials that similar trends exist for male graves; although the relationship
is more complex.

As can be seen from the research here on tool burials a marked cut off seems to
present itself around the thirty five years age group in female tool depositions-
specifically in spindle whorls and shears, although they cannot be viewed (or
may be should be viewed!) as dress items in the normal sense this research puts
forward the contention that they are at the very least female status markers and
indicate the female to which they belong is in her peak productive years and by
implication higher status within the family and community as a provider of
cloth. As with other markers after this time the tools are omitted from burials
with the possible implication of loss of status within the community due to a de-
teriation in her ability to manufacture cloth and by implication more dependent
upon those who can; in this respect it is an “ability to do work” marker, this is
however a speculative assumption. Not all female graves contain spindle whorls
and shears in the under thirty fives, reasoning for this is endless- passed on as
heirlooms is an immediate presumption, however results between cemetery sites
hint at regional variations as some are tool rich and some devoid of any artefacts
(in a tool context). Not every inhumation contains a spindle whorl or shears; this
does not preclude these being a status marker as with every type of artefact
there is never a “set” pattern of artefacts buried but variations upon a theme, as
with every burial the family of the deceased has to make a decision on what is
included based on tradition, expectation of society and immediate need of the
living to preserve as much as is socially acceptable of the belongings of the de-
ceased to be used by the living.

Tool deposition in male graves are effectively non existant with the exception of
awls, whose distribution is not wide spread and in all probability was looked
upon as a personal item with its inclusion in the grave inventory a random
event. From the evidence here it is plain to see that tool finds proper; timber ax-
es, hammers, chisels and the like are not included in the grave inventory, why is
this so?, here the author quotes directly from Hirst and Clarke12;

11
Härke, 1992,a 158
12
Hirst ,S. Clarke,D., excavations at mucking
©Dennis Riley, 2011
Tools are vanishingly rare in migration period Anglo-Saxon graves, though
present in migration period settlements and geake13has suggested that the in-
creased frequency of tools in conversion period graves may indicate a change
in the social importance of the skills of certain craftsmen, leading to their tools
being seen as useful funerary signalling devices.

This statement cannot be totally ruled out for the evidence shows no tool depos-
its in early period cemeteries, however the author puts forward for consideration
an alternative scenario for the paucity of tool deposits;

Tools are not seen as personal or status markers because they were not classed
in the early Anglo-Saxon period as personal effects but the property of the fami-
ly who used them; in this context they are used as “dead man’s tools” and
passed on from father to son- one generation to the next. The principle reason
may be due to the intrinsically high value of tools during this period, in a burial
context (as in life0 a man requires only one knife and one spear but his require-
ment for tools runs into many, even dozens of separate items for even the most
basic of professions. All such tools were hand made to the users requirements
and possibly designs; each individual tool represented therefore a high invest-
ment in those most expensive of materials, iron and Steel to such an extent that
the value of a household was tied up in the tooling it collectively owned. Plac-
ing a spear or knife in a grave is no great loss, it may even have been socially
acceptable for a son to replace the fathers with a lesser one of his own, but with
the burial of the tools a family required immediate use of on a daily basis, the
loss would render the family impoverished overnight; this idea is speculative
but there is support (albeit of a later period) for this theory; the tool hoard from
Nazeing14 in Essex;

The nazeing hoard consists of some fifteen iron and two copper alloy artefacts-
presumed to be the scrap collection of a metalworker with a depositon date
somewhere in the 11th century, the salient points of the find are; axe number 1,
presumed to be a late roman period axe showing extensive reworking of the
blade over a number of years and a number of 7th/8th century knives, given the
deposition date of the 11th century it does tend to suggest that the roman period
axe has seen a service life of nearly half a millennia before being rendered for

13
Geake, 1997, 9
14
Morris, C.A. pdf report (see bibliography)
©Dennis Riley, 2011
Scrap, suggesting that tools were well looked after, used and repaired for literal-
ly centuries which backs up to a degree the hypothesis that tools were too ex-
pensive or valuable to bury.

The increase in tool burials in the conversion period may reflect the status of the
user as Geake has speculated, equally however the author puts forward here that
it may be a product of the increased availability of iron and its products which
would now facilitate the availability of “spare tooling” for burial. Lastly as
Geake noted; early Anglo-Saxon cemeteries are poor in finds but their attendant
settlements are not; the addition of Carlton Coleville in this paper attests to this
statement, the reason however for the difference in tool deposition is down to
avoidance in the cemeteries versus loss in the settlement with the settlement
finds representing decades of lost tools.

The smiths grave from Tattershall Thorpe15

This paper set out to quantify tool depositions from the general cemetery popu-
lation of early Anglo-Saxon England as a comparison with the smiths grave
from Tattershall Thorpe in Lincolnshire, the part pertaining to the general popu-
lation now completed; we focus on the smiths grave and the analysis this now
entails, there is little reason to delve in to extensive details of the individual
tools (except where pertinent) and also of the non tool finds (the total number of
finds is in excess of 130), at this stage we will say that the grave contained the
remains of a skeleton, bone, iron, glass and Romano-British coins. Some tools
appear to have been in boxes whilst others were probably wrapped in textiles or
leather,. Dating of the grave by Hinton puts it in the region of 660-670 AD on
the basis of datable finds and at first glance seems to be a burial of a metal-
worker and his tools, the author here will also put forward in the discussion the
nature of the metalworker and his craft which is still open to speculation as to
both role and function. Table 17 outlines the principle tool finds with the brief-
est of descriptions.

15
Hinton, 2000
©Dennis Riley, 2011
Find Tool Remarks
number type
1 Hammer head Rectangular construction 450g, heavily burred
2 Hammer head Square section, slightly burred 150g
3 Hammer head Rectangular section slightly burred 33g
4 anvil Rectangular top with perforation in one corner
5 tongs Snub nosed jaws with wooden covered handles
220mm long (iron work)
6 Metalworkers 300mm long, riveted construction with tapering
clips arms
7 snips Asymmetrical Scandinavian pattern
8 Draw plate Containing 5 holes of varying diameter with
Slotted back
9 punch 180mm long, 25mm diameter at the top tapering
To a point
10 punch Tapering rectangular bar 91mm long x (12x4mm
Section)
11 punch Tapering rectangular section, 53mm long x
(9x3mm top)
12 Punch? Tapering bar, rectangular at top, 46mm long
X (9x4mm top)
13 punch 50mm long, max width 7mm, possibly socketed
14 file Rectangular section, transverse teeth on all 4 sides
164mm long including tang (46mm) 14mm wide
x8mm thick, attributed to a metalworker due to its
size
15 file Transverse teeth on all 4 sides, file length 26mm x
8mm wide x 4mm thick
16 file Rectangular section, tang encased in wood with a
slight bolster between tang and file, extant length
37mm x5mmwide x 1mm thick
17 burin Length 32mm projecting from bulbous wooden han-
dle
18 graver Flat faced with projecting spike
19-21 Knife blades In various states
24 Soldering Surviving section is boat like with 2 projecting feet
lamp
25-26 cones Made of iron and possibly small cupolas for the melt-
ing of precious metal (unproved)
Table 17; tool finds from Tattershall Thorpe
©Dennis Riley, 2011
Discussion
As Hinton states;

Although some of the tools in the Tattershall Thorpe assemblage could have
been used in more than one craft, The anvil, tongs and snips are things that only
a metalworker would have needed…… The tattershall Thorpe assemblage is
ambivalent, on the one hand the absence of some equipment that might be ex-
pected may be because the assemblage comprises items gathered from a work
bench to represent their owner’s craft, not because they were all he owned. On
the other hand it may be all that an itinerant smith happened to have with him
when he met his death.

Hinton further states that there would have been a limit to what he could have
carried if he did not have a cart and a traveller may have been prepared to keep
his kit to a bare minimum. If the smith was a bond-man the presumption is that
he was removed from his village for burial outside the gravely confines of all
the other villagers and inhumed in a remote spot (if just an itinerant; the same
applies). The burial was conducted with some reverence given the structure of
the grave; so was not the actions of disinterested individuals. Hinton goes on to
say; a smith was an outsider- in the sense of a wanderer (if itinerant) and in the
spiritual sense- the burial may therefore represent a sentiment that he should be
isolated in death and most of his equipment not used by others. Given Hinton’s
analysis of the grave the author here puts forward a number of notes based on
his own experience on smithing which in most part adds to the debate on this
extraordinary find;-

Finds 1 and 7,the 450g hammer (1) and snips (7) indicate that the deceased was
left handed, the deformation in the hammer face in the top right corner and
overall deformation of the face attests to this, the snips are of left handed con-
struction and will be very difficult to use right handed.

The weight of hammer 1 is sufficiently heavy for the manufacture of forged

items commonly found in Anglo-Saxon graves so is entirely feasible that it is a
smithing hammer. Hammers 2 and 3 are much lighter and show no left handed
use- which in use they would not as they are designed for light striking and
used with more precision so generally used “flatter” on the work piece, hammer
©Dennis Riley, 2011
3 at 33g is too light for any forging application (hammer 2 at 150g is suitable
for hot forging work as the author uses a 200g hammer of similar construction
for small finishing applications) and is likely to be used for stamping and peign-
ing work on non ferrous alloys, as again the author uses a similar design and
weight for this application.

The tongs (number 5) are on the small side for use with hot worked material due
to the danger of burning the hand, however they appear to have had wooden
handle covers which could extend its length, even so it would make them un-
wieldly for hot working, it is more likely that the wood was for a soft feel hard
grip on cold materials- either ferrous or non ferrous .

Hinton states that the punches numbered 10, 11, 12 and 13 may have been metal
stamping punches, given the authors own research 16 this is not only feasible but
probable unfortunately no stamp impression now exists

Find number 18, the graver is a contentious piece, if we take the projecting
spike as being original and not the product of corrosion it is possible that it is a
cold drill used for punching a hole in metal, it is a difficult tool to use but with
the addition of the spike it could act as a locator in a centre punch mark making
for the accurate siting of a hole, holes punched by this method give a very clean
round flat hole but are limited in the depth of metal that can be punched, usual-
ly 1.5mm maximum.

Now turning our attention to the grave; it is well constructed with up to four
boxes and additional wraps of tools, considerably more than one itinerant smith
could possibly carry, he would have required a horse at least or a cart. The in-
teresting thing about the burial is not what is in it but what is missing from it,
here the Author puts forward the idea that the smith had an apprentice as is
more than likely and that given the state of tooling- it must be said not in the
best condition at the point of burial that it is the apprentices tools or the smiths
second set (as smiths generally have), therefore we have a possible scenario at
the point of burial where the dead man’s tools pass by tradition to the apprentice
and also by tradition some tools are required to accompany the smith in to the
realm of the blessed dead that he may continue his dark profession under the
gaze of the gods. The evidence from the cemetery sites listed in this report

16
Riley, D pdf report, 2010
©Dennis Riley, 2011
Clearly show no tool burials in male graves as either a matter of policy or tradi-
tion and that we can infer that these cemetery sites contain no smiths as the bur-
ial contain no smithing tools, given the large number of graves investigated it is
not unreasonable that we must have come across at least one smith in these in-
vestigations, the evidence shows the contrary giving credence to the belief that
smiths were not afforded the same burial rite as ordinary men, they were obvi-
ously not treated as criminals but it does seem that burial with the general popu-
lation posed a threat to them, the presumption being from their supernatural
powers.

From other sites with tool hoards- notably flixborough17 in Lincolnshire, the
westley waterless hoard and the small hoard from Santon Downham, Suffolk;
all of which were buried in cauldrons or vessels of metal and without any at-
tendant inhumation it would suggest that the burial of tools were made in con-
tainers for some reason (as with the Tattershall Thorpe finds), possibly-though
contentious to negate any residual forces in the tools thus protecting the earth
from harm as the tools may contain or harbour remnants of the spirit of the de-
ceased, all the depositions designed to remove the tools from circulation for
whatever reason.

Conclusion
Outlined in this paper are a number of observations and statistics along with
much speculation, on the basis of the evidence and most likely explanation the
following assumptions and observations can be made, they are by the very na-
ture of the evidence limited in what can safely be said with speculation kept to a
minimum;

1, in some cemeteries spindle whorls and shears are likely to have been included
in the burial as female status markers. Those cemeteries that show such markers
are not geographically distinct from those that have no markers.

2, male graves of the 5th to 7th centuries contain no tooling, three explanations
are possible for this-; that tools were not looked upon as personal effects and
therefore not considered for burial.

17
Evans,D.H. & Loveluck,C. 2009
©Dennis Riley, 2011
Secondly, that the tools were the property of the family due to their intrinsic
high value and therefore for use by the living, passed on from one generation to
the next- in this context true “dead man’s tools” and thirdly that the tools con-
tained some residual “force” of unknown nature that may cause problems for
the dead in the next world- it is possible that a man buried with his tools may by
implication be forced to work in the afterlife, whereas those who do not have
tools are given over to an eternity of leisure, if this is so it is bad news for the
women folk who are buried with a spindle whorl and shears!.

3, smiths in death are considered differently to other mortals, this in all likely
hood stems from their dark knowledge of the working of metals and by implica-
tion their tools hold some residual power and that burial with the tools ensure
they will work in the afterlife.

4, the change to an increase in burials containing tools in the later conversion

period (although the research here has not covered this aspect) may be due to
the reduction in cost of tools therefore allowing the burial of tools without dam-
aging the prosperity of the living. If there is some social restriction in burying
tools due to some supernatural phenomenon it would infer that such a restriction
diminishes as the Anglo-Saxon period progresses.

©Dennis Riley, 2011

Bibliography
Annable, F.K. & Eagles, B.N. ;The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Blacknall Field,
Pewsey, Wiltshire, Trowbridge, 2010

Boyle, A. Jennings, D. Miles, D. & Palmer, S. ;The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at

Butlers Field, Lechlade, Gloucestershire, Oxford, 1998

Cook, A.M. ;The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Fonaby, Lincolnshire, Sleaford,

1981

Drinkall, G. & Foreman, M ; The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Castledyke South,

Barton on Humber, Sheffield, 1998

Evans, D. H. Loveluck, C. :Life and economy at early medieval Flixborough

cAD 600-1000, Oxford, 2009

Evison, V.I. :An Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Alton, Hampshire, Gloucester, 1988

Geake, H. :The use of grave goods in conversion period England, c600-c850,

BAR Brit Ser 261, Oxford, 1997

Green, B. & Rogerson, A.:The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Bergh Apton, Norfolk,

Gressenhall, 1978

Green, B. Rogerson, A. and White, S.G. : the Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Morn-

ing Thorpe, Norfolk , Gressenhall, 1987

Halsall, G.: Early medieval cemeteries, Skelmorlie, 1996

Härke. H. Angelsächisische waffengräber des 5. Bis 7 Jahrhunderls, Zeitschrift

fűr Archäologie des mittelalters Beiheft 6. Cologne 1992.

Hawkes, S.C & Grainger, G.: The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at finglesham, Kent,
Oxford, 2006.

Hawkes, S, C & Grainger, G, ; The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Worthy Park,

Kingsworthy, near Winchester, Hampshire, Oxford, 2003

Hills, C.: The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Spong Hill,North Elmham, part 1,

Gressenhall, 1977.
©Dennis Riley, 2011
Hinton, D.A. : A smith in Lindsey, The Anglo-Saxon grave at Tattershall
Thorpe, Lincolnshire. London, 2000

Hirst, S. & Clarke, D. : Excavations at Mucking, Volume 3, The Anglo-Saxon

cemeteries, London, 2009

Lucy, S. Tipper, J. & Dickens, A. : The Anglo-Saxon settlement and cemetery

at Bloodmoor Hill, Carlton Coleville, Suffolk. Cambridge 2009

Meaney, H.L. & Hawkes, S.C. :Two Anglo-Saxon cemeteries at Winnall,

London 1970

Morris, C.A.: a Late Saxon Hoard of iron and Copper-Alloy Artefacts from
Nazeing, Essex. PDF document

Motz, L. :The wise of the Mountain, Form, Function and Significance of the
Subterranean Smith, a study in folklore. Göpinger, 1983

Penn, K.: Norwich southern Bypass, part II: Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Harford
farm, Caistor St Edmund, Gressenhall, 2000

Riley, D. : A qualitative analysis of early Anglo-Saxon non-ferrous Metalwork-

ing punches- Metallurgy and performance. PDF document, 2010

Timby, J.R. : The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Empingham II, Rutland,

Oxford, 1996

Tyler, S. & Major, H.: The early anglo-Saxon cemetery and later Saxon set-
tlement at Springfield Lyons, Essex. Chelmsford, 2005

West, S.k.: WestgathGardens Anglo-Saxon cemetery, Suffolk. Bury St Ed-

munds, 1988.

©Dennis Riley 2011