Francis Pryor

The first time I encountered Pryor was when he appeared on Time Team (of which I am an unashamed fangirl) so full of enthusiasm and ideas and energy about his work that the television practically shorted. To my delight he writes as he talks, I have rarely encountered a person more able to explain niggly details of archaeology as well as ponder the big picture in way that resonates with profound and always open-minded thinking. This is a person who, literally and figuratively, will always show more pick up a rock, no matter how sure he might be of what it signifies, and turn it over and over examining every angle. He begins with the Neolithic (post glacial period, Doggerland still connecting Europe to Great Britain) and so lots more coastal areas, thoroughly drowned now and moves up the centuries and millenia into the 'proto-historic' period of the Roman occupation (about the ultimate value of which for British cultural development he is skeptical, except maybe for drains), stopping there. Pryor's thesis is that a separate culture developed for thousands of years that had far less tendencies to tilt vertically with the elite at the top and a greater respect for individual freedoms and communal decision-making. (Albeit he makes it clear that the Euro was and still is a better idea than the pound.) Along the way he shows what changes from the Neolithic to the Bronze and Iron Ages, and more importantly what does not change, what lasts and lasts, even through the Roman era -- certain ritual customs (tossing votive objects in rivers and lakes), living in round houses in communities that show little to no sign of having a 'big man' in charge or any particular hierarchy whatsoever, fairness in allocation of arable land (everybody in a community appeared to get a bit of wet, a bit of very good for crops, a bit of higher land for grazing). Too, there is little evidence of fighting amongst each other, indeed, boundaries are made sacred in all areas of life, between individuals, communities, the living and the dead. Arts and artifice (as in making weapons, tools) were excellent and often sublimely good, clothing was brightly dyed and well-woven. The Romans had to make up reasons to trash the British, so they cooked up the savage story, just as 'we' folk from Europe did to the native people here, and the English did to Ireland, India etcetera. Pryor does find it hard to fathom the British (although he propposes it was to justify their own empire building) swallowed the Romans schtick that they were civilized and no one else. Oh well, I'm babbling and giving the wrong impression because a huge amount of the book is about specific discoveries, the neolithic chambers, the henges, the hill forts, and lake houses, the brochs and burial practices, the field systems and the treasure, the glorious finds! For me this was a ten-pages-a-night read so I feel a little bereft! ***** show less

Pryor's first foray into fiction-mystery writing and while there are some clunky moments, his marvellous energy and voice, so familiar from his books about archaeology, and deep knowledge of his field thrum through the pages. Nor does Pryor shy away from hurling himself and his characters (Alan Cadbury being a barely disguised Francis Pryor) into a complex story--both socially and literally--not to mention a fabulously disgusting finale. He is, clearly, a born storyteller--his lectures and show more books on his field demonstrate that as well as his persona on Time Team. I am such a fan of Pryor that I'm not sure you can completely trust my judgement, but I think he's done very well for a first mystery and will read the second. ***1/2 show less

It looks like a textbook but isn’t. Francis (I think we’re all on first name terms here) wants to have a chat with you about prehistoric Fenland farmers. Probably over tea and a Garibaldi biscuit, though it’ll be tea from a flask because I think he wants you to put your wellies on and go out into the field with him.

Consistently interesting and nothing too technical. Would appeal to farmers and naturalists as much as historians, I suspect. Badly proof-read, well illustrated. Good show more analysis of the archaeological discoveries. Who knows if he’s right, but his suggestions are sensible and engaging. Helps that he farms the area as it gives him an insight that others might lack. show less

It took me a while to figure out what was going on in Francis Pryor’s Britain in the Middle Ages. The book seemed disorganized, wandering over topics like medieval town layouts, the provenance of Byzantine coins found by metal detectorists, and the details of notched tally sticks. Eventually, however, I did get Pryor’s point (not his fault; he made it clear what he was about in the Introduction); this, as the subtitle says, is an archaeological history. It deals with what you can deduce show more from physical objects, not from documents. Pryor runs a farm when he’s not archaeologicizing, and he mentions a personal anecdote to make his point. It’s now illegal for a farmer to bury dead livestock in England; instead you call a local official who makes arrangements for the deceased cow. Unfortunately, the local officials are overwhelmed and it sometimes takes weeks for them to get around to Elsie’s funeral. Thus Pryor found himself taking things in his own hands and illegally burying dead cattle. The point of this little story is that, to some future historian, documentary research would turn up the law, which might then make it into a history of English agriculture in the 20th century as a footnote. However, an archaeological dig on Pryor’s farm would uncover livestock skeletons datable to the period when the law was in effect. Thus, when confronted with a code of livestock regulations on one hand and a cow skeleton with eartags on the other, trust the physical evidence.


Therefore, unless you are already familiar with medieval English history, the book would seem disorganized and a difficult read – there’s no conventional historical chronology with kings and battles and such. Instead, there’s selections from the archaeological evidence that throw light on history. In the examples I mentioned, Pryor notes it’s been assumed that Roman era towns were set out with regular street grids, while in Dark Ages towns the streets were haphazard. However, the Anglo-Saxons weren’t stupid, and when it was advantageous to lay out a rectilinear street plan, they did so – leading to misdating to the Roman period.


England’s taken an amazingly reasonable attitude to metal detectors – as long as metal detectionists take their finds to a local archaeological officer and report the find location, they get to keep them (with a State option to buy at the appraised value). This has lead to a plethora of sites with Dark Ages coins – from all over Europe – turning up without much evidence of anything else. The assumption is that these were open air trading sites, sometimes corroborated by nearby town names ending in “wic”, the Old English word for “market”.


The tally sticks provided one of those “Aha” moments. Traders would use a notched stick to indicate possession of so many bales of wool or bundles of hides or whatever they wear dealing in, to be delivered at a later date. The two parties would split the stick, each retaining one half as security – it being pretty hard to forge a broken stick. The larger part of the stick was called the “stock”, and the smaller part the “foil”. If you got tired of waiting for you hides or wool or whatever to show up, you could sell your half to somebody else – leading to a “stock exchange”.


The book’s major flaw is Pryor’s incessant name dropping. Every few pages some “famous” or “outstanding” archaeologist gets named; couldn’t this have been done in the Acknowledgements? I suppose because Pryor’s own specialty is prehistoric archaeology, he had to have a lot of help putting the book together and is rightly grateful, but it gets tedious after a while.


The archaeological history theme made me give some though to our own times. Suppose, somehow, all documentary history of the 20th century was lost; could an archaeologist 1000 years hence figure out that there had been (for example) a Second World War? Probably in Europe, North Africa, and the Pacific, but would you be able to deduce that the United States was involved? Or that there even was such an entity as the United States? Time will, I suppose, tell. show less