Pub Date : 2020-09-02DOI: 10.22599/sheffieldcastle.e
{"title":"‘Long before Castles Were Thought of’: Sheffield Castle and Deep History","authors":"","doi":"10.22599/sheffieldcastle.e","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22599/sheffieldcastle.e","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":297482,"journal":{"name":"Sheffield Castle: Archaeology, Archives, Regeneration, 1927–2018","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129610397","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-02DOI: 10.22599/sheffieldcastle.b
A. Armstrong
The rediscovery of Sheffield Castle commenced in earnest in 1927, with the construction of the new city-centre store of the Brightside and Carbrook Co-operative Society and (shortly afterwards) of Sheffield Corporation’s Castle Hill Market just to the north. The paper Leslie Armstrong published in the Transactions of the Hunter Archaeological Society in 1930 was based on observations made during this construction work. This seminal paper has been the principal source for all subsequent understanding of Sheffield Castle (e.g. Walton 1949, 21–2; Fine 2003, 36, 41; Jones 2004, 27; Hey 2010, 15; Hallam 2015) but has been subject to little critical scrutiny, and few have considered the inevitable shortcomings of efforts to record the remains of the castle in the pressurised circumstances of commercial construction. Nor has the role and influence of Armstrong’s collaborator Joseph Himsworth been adequately assessed or, indeed, acknowledged. In this chapter we use unpublished sources in the Museums Sheffield archive including correspondence, diaries, lecture notes and excavation records, as well as contemporary newspaper articles, to situate Armstrong and Himsworth’s work (both on site and in publication) in the context of the personalities involved, the prevailing intellectual climate, archaeological practice, and understandings of the past and of its value in contemporary society. In this first part of the story of the uncovering of Sheffield Castle, it is the amateur enthusiasts, local heroes battling against the odds, who take centre stage, the man from the Inland Revenue supported, aptly for Sheffield, by the son of a cutler. In their work we see a narrative emerging around the castle, we feel the excitement and thrill of discovery that shines through the manuscript sources – and the myth making commences.
谢菲尔德城堡的重新发现始于1927年，随着Brightside和Carbrook合作社的新市中心商店的建设，以及(不久之后)谢菲尔德公司的城堡山市场就在北部。莱斯利·阿姆斯特朗(Leslie Armstrong) 1930年在《猎人考古学会学报》(Transactions of The Hunter Archaeological Society)上发表的论文就是基于在这项建设工作中所做的观察。这篇开创性的论文是后来对谢菲尔德城堡的所有理解的主要来源(例如Walton 1949, 21-2;罚款2003,36,41;琼斯2004,27;嘿，2010,15;Hallam 2015)，但很少受到严格的审查，很少有人考虑到在商业建筑的压力环境下记录城堡遗迹的努力不可避免的缺点。阿姆斯特朗的合作者约瑟夫·希姆斯沃思的作用和影响也没有得到充分的评估或承认。在本章中，我们使用谢菲尔德博物馆档案中未发表的资料，包括信件、日记、课堂笔记和挖掘记录，以及当代报纸文章，将阿姆斯特朗和希姆斯沃思的作品(现场和出版)置于所涉及的人物、主流知识氛围、考古实践以及对过去及其在当代社会价值的理解的背景下。在揭开谢菲尔德城堡的故事的第一部分中，成为中心人物的是一群业余爱好者，他们是与困难作斗争的当地英雄。这位来自国内税务局的人得到了一个樵夫的儿子的支持，这对谢菲尔德来说很合适。在他们的作品中，我们看到一种围绕城堡的叙事，我们感受到通过手稿来源发现的兴奋和激动——神话开始了。
{"title":"Archaeological Practice in the Inter-War Years","authors":"A. Armstrong","doi":"10.22599/sheffieldcastle.b","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22599/sheffieldcastle.b","url":null,"abstract":"The rediscovery of Sheffield Castle commenced in earnest in 1927, with the construction of the new city-centre store of the Brightside and Carbrook Co-operative Society and (shortly afterwards) of Sheffield Corporation’s Castle Hill Market just to the north. The paper Leslie Armstrong published in the Transactions of the Hunter Archaeological Society in 1930 was based on observations made during this construction work. This seminal paper has been the principal source for all subsequent understanding of Sheffield Castle (e.g. Walton 1949, 21–2; Fine 2003, 36, 41; Jones 2004, 27; Hey 2010, 15; Hallam 2015) but has been subject to little critical scrutiny, and few have considered the inevitable shortcomings of efforts to record the remains of the castle in the pressurised circumstances of commercial construction. Nor has the role and influence of Armstrong’s collaborator Joseph Himsworth been adequately assessed or, indeed, acknowledged. In this chapter we use unpublished sources in the Museums Sheffield archive including correspondence, diaries, lecture notes and excavation records, as well as contemporary newspaper articles, to situate Armstrong and Himsworth’s work (both on site and in publication) in the context of the personalities involved, the prevailing intellectual climate, archaeological practice, and understandings of the past and of its value in contemporary society. In this first part of the story of the uncovering of Sheffield Castle, it is the amateur enthusiasts, local heroes battling against the odds, who take centre stage, the man from the Inland Revenue supported, aptly for Sheffield, by the son of a cutler. In their work we see a narrative emerging around the castle, we feel the excitement and thrill of discovery that shines through the manuscript sources – and the myth making commences.","PeriodicalId":297482,"journal":{"name":"Sheffield Castle: Archaeology, Archives, Regeneration, 1927–2018","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115861709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-02DOI: 10.22599/sheffieldcastle.d
A new opportunity to record the remains of Sheffield Castle emerged at the end of the 1950s in the wake of post-War rebuilding. The Brightside and Carbrook Co-op’s store at the corner of Waingate and Exchange Street was destroyed during the bombing of Sheffield on the night of 12th/13th December 1940 (Figure 4.1). In 1949, following the compulsory purchase of their bombed headquarters by the City Council, the Co-op moved their city-centre store to temporary prefabricated premises on nearby Angel Street, before receiving planning permission for a new, more imposing, headquarters in 1958 (Figure 4.2).17 While the Castle Hill Market buildings to the north of the Co-op store ‘largely escaped damage’ (Himsworth 1927–42, 20), and temporary structures (socalled Bailey bridges) were used to ensure continued access to them (Zasada 1996, 32), parts of the Castlegate area remained derelict into the late 1950s (Butcher 1972c, 5). In 1958 the Sheffield Corporation began construction of Castle Market on the site of the former Co-op, with the intention of incorporating the Castle Hill Market into a single market-complex (Butcher 1972a, 5; Richardson and Dennison 2014a, 36; see their fig. 3 for the main elements of this complex). The new Castle Market building was intended to rehouse traders from the 100-year-old Norfolk Market Hall to the south of Exchange Street, and Castle Hill Market was refurbished and provided with new access from Castlegate (see Figure 1.15). New buildings were constructed or rebuilt fronting onto Waingate from the junction of Exchange Street to the Bull & Mouth public house at the corner of Castlegate (Zasada 1996, 32; Butcher 1972a, 10). As in the late 1920s, a formal programme of archaeological investigation was not required in advance of this regeneration of the area, but the castle remains encountered in the course of construction works were recorded by Leslie Butcher from Sheffield City Council’s Architect’s Department and John E. Bartlett, Deputy Director of the City Museum. In this chapter we discuss the nature of the recording undertaken and the resulting archive, which is an essential prelude to analysing what was found in the next chapter.
{"title":"Post-War Rebuilding: A New Battle for the Castle","authors":"","doi":"10.22599/sheffieldcastle.d","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22599/sheffieldcastle.d","url":null,"abstract":"A new opportunity to record the remains of Sheffield Castle emerged at the end of the 1950s in the wake of post-War rebuilding. The Brightside and Carbrook Co-op’s store at the corner of Waingate and Exchange Street was destroyed during the bombing of Sheffield on the night of 12th/13th December 1940 (Figure 4.1). In 1949, following the compulsory purchase of their bombed headquarters by the City Council, the Co-op moved their city-centre store to temporary prefabricated premises on nearby Angel Street, before receiving planning permission for a new, more imposing, headquarters in 1958 (Figure 4.2).17 While the Castle Hill Market buildings to the north of the Co-op store ‘largely escaped damage’ (Himsworth 1927–42, 20), and temporary structures (socalled Bailey bridges) were used to ensure continued access to them (Zasada 1996, 32), parts of the Castlegate area remained derelict into the late 1950s (Butcher 1972c, 5). In 1958 the Sheffield Corporation began construction of Castle Market on the site of the former Co-op, with the intention of incorporating the Castle Hill Market into a single market-complex (Butcher 1972a, 5; Richardson and Dennison 2014a, 36; see their fig. 3 for the main elements of this complex). The new Castle Market building was intended to rehouse traders from the 100-year-old Norfolk Market Hall to the south of Exchange Street, and Castle Hill Market was refurbished and provided with new access from Castlegate (see Figure 1.15). New buildings were constructed or rebuilt fronting onto Waingate from the junction of Exchange Street to the Bull & Mouth public house at the corner of Castlegate (Zasada 1996, 32; Butcher 1972a, 10). As in the late 1920s, a formal programme of archaeological investigation was not required in advance of this regeneration of the area, but the castle remains encountered in the course of construction works were recorded by Leslie Butcher from Sheffield City Council’s Architect’s Department and John E. Bartlett, Deputy Director of the City Museum. In this chapter we discuss the nature of the recording undertaken and the resulting archive, which is an essential prelude to analysing what was found in the next chapter.","PeriodicalId":297482,"journal":{"name":"Sheffield Castle: Archaeology, Archives, Regeneration, 1927–2018","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134148173","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：